Just How Soft has Obama's Coverage Been?

by Taylor Marsh

Marshmallow soft.

Down pillow soft.

Baby's bottom soft.

So no one should be surprised that Obama had a a nightmare night. He finally got real questions for which he should have had ready answers. Over the last year Barack Obama has gotten a complete pass on his record, his life and everything associated to his political rise. In fact, if Senator Obama had been subjected to the scrutiny that Hillary Clinton has been subjected to he would have turned to ash by now.

So forgive me if all the blogospheric bellyaching permeating Democratic circles is not impressing me much. In fact, it's a laugh out loud moment.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm more than willing to blame the traditional media for piling on a Democrat, which they do often. But do these progressives now crying fowl really believe they could protect Mr. Obama, as his Democratic challengers did all last year, throughout the rest of this campaign? Asking a question about Rev. Wright? A question about William Ayers? The horror! Seriously, is Senator Obama so frail that he shouldn't be subjected to questioning that should have come a long time ago and will inevitably come in the general election? If nothing else and at the very least, everyone in the Democratic party should want to know how he's going to handle this stuff if he's our nominee. Because there can be no doubt that the wingnuts will lock and load Barack's greatest hits, then share them with the electorate in a cascade of negative gifts.

Mind you, this is questioning I've been doing for a year and getting excoriated for it. So I feel Charlie and George's pain. Going for substance isn't easy amidst the Political Idol crowd.

The facts are that the progressive community and Obama supporters have done their candidate no favors by the kid glove treatment they've applied to all things having to do with him and his record, including his associations. What happened last night is a result of one year of people ignoring reality. That's right, reality. Because the closer Obama got to the nomination and the general election, the curtain would eventually be pulled back on every event in his life, good, bad and horror show, which includes Rev. Wright.

This is the reason we lose elections.

What, did Obama's adoring fans think they could hermetically seal him and protect him from the meanies out there, then simply deliver him to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue because "he's the one?" Good grief.

If Obama would have been put through his paces last fall, he might have been past this by now. If his own campaign had faced up to his associations long ago, head on, he wouldn't be dealing with this now.

Again, I'd blame Gibson and Stephanopoulos, but it's not their fault that someone, anyone finally asked questions that have been out there for months and months. It's not tabloid to ask about Ayers any more than it was tabloid to question Bill Clinton about his past. Hillary's been asked about everything more than once, as they reload to ask it all over again.

Oh, and as for Keith He's No Edward R. Murrow Olbermann, don't send a sportscaster to do a political analyst's job. Talking to Howard Wolfson, with Olbermann whining about the questions about Ayers, isn't doing us any favors either. He's just giving Obama fans a false sense of security. It's as if the only people dealing with reality and preparing for the Republican attack machine is the Clinton campaign. Olbermann is on planet Zen if he thinks that Ayers won't be part of the dialogue come September. (You know, because you never roll out a new campaign in August.)

We need a nominee that can walk through fire. Whoever we offer up should be able to withstand anything, and I do mean anything. Because that's what always comes at Democrats, with the traditional press inevitably having a thing for the guy on the other side. Considering that guy will be John McCain, the hero worship will be out in force.

No Democratic politician in the last 20 years has gotten a softer introduction onto the national stage than Barack Obama. Nobody has gotten an easier ride to the top step of presidential politics either. He paid for it last night.

Follow Taylor Marsh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/taylormarsh

Comments

[nazardesign]

Um, that's a cream puff. Not a marshmallow.

[EyeWantOneNation]

Obviously from Taylor's article, she doesn't know the difference on a lot of things...a­nd apparently could care less !!!

She thinks Obama supporter's are whinning about those "tough, hard-hitting questions" Obama got nailed with. Obviously, she doesn't have a clue as to what a serious debate is all about. We WANTED issue pointing, hard questions !!! What we got was National Inquirer type gossip and trivia !!!

Cream puff / marshmallo­w.......

Taylor Marsh "Journalis­t"...Taylo­r Marsh "Air-Head"­....you choose !!!!

[PrdAmerican]

This debate was bad for Clinton and Obama....w­orse for clinton...­if you watched the internet feed, you could see Hilliary's real-time numbers, several times, drop below the median...m­eaning she was pissing off the independen­t/un-decid­ed voters.

[cuchulain]

Are you serious? You think questions about flag lapels, Ayers, and bittergate are even REMOTELY relevant to the job of president? So, in your opinion, a good debate should be devoted to the most inane, tabloidish, irrelevant nonsense possible? The abject trivialization of the political process is a danger to this country, and you seem to be cheering for more.

You, along with ABC news should be ashamed.

Now, I do agree that Obama didn't handle these stupid, moronic questions well. He actually should have blasted the moderators. He should have been angry and showed his anger. I think that would have gotten a standing ovation. Ask the moderators, what exactly do flag pins have to do with anything. Will wearing one or NOT wearing one effect even one single life? Will wearing them or NOT wearing them save a soldier's life in Iraq, or feed the hungry, or fix our crumbling infrastructure, reform our schools, slow climate change, etc.?

He also should have added some good snark: Charlie, while you're at it, why not ask me something else of profound importance to humanity, such as what I ordered to drink at the diner . . . .

[frustratedinohio]

You don't get a second chance in life. Learning how to handle tough situations comes with experience. Your candidate doesn't have what it takes.

[cuchulain]

So, you think it's a good measure of a future president to be able to handle the most inane, ridiculous and irrelevant questions in a supposedly serious debate format?

And that would prove . . . what? That one pol is better at dealing with the totally trivial and absolutely irrelevant . . . . better than another?

Hmm. Yep. That's how I want to pick our presidents. See which candidate handles questions about orange juice, bowling and flag pins the best.

[IndependentJones]

He was FINALLY asked real questions?

Honestly, Taylor, unless you are being willfully ignorant you cannot honestly believe that Obama has not been asked about Reverend Wright, about flag pins or about his bitterness statement. These questions have been asked and answered repeatedly. The only "real" question he hadn't addressed before was the William Ayers question, which he shouldn't have had to answer anyway. I'm surprised they didn't ask him to answer for having served in the same government as George W. Bush. Guilt by association is the name of the game, right?

[AntonBursch]

Hillary lost any last hopes of the nomination last night by silencing her only remaining arguement, that Obama is unelectable, by firmly answering the question about whether she thinks he can beat McCain in the General Election, with a resounding "Yes, Yes, Yes".

And thank God she ended her last hopes after hearing what she said about Iran.

"We will let the Iranians know, that, yes, an attack on Israel would trigger massive retaliation, but so would an attack on those countries that are willing to go under the security umbrella and forswear their own nuclear ambitions.­"

We don't need to trade a Republican Imperialist for a Democratic Imperialist.

[OwenScottIII]

The questions Sen. Obama asked were on irrelevant matters and he handled them just fine. If Rev. Wright, Ayers, and the "bitter" controversy (and let's throw in Rezko and the middle name "Hussein" for good measure) are the worst things anyone can come up with, Sen. Obama has little to worry about in the Fall. John McCain has much worse things to be concerned about, for example, his support of the failed Iraq War and tax cuts for the super-rich. He can only win if the public is truly as stupid and he and Sen. Clinton seem to think they are.

[TheRebel82]

Taylor Marsh = Clinton acolyte

LOL you have zero credibility.

[Marrob]

The name calling will only get you a seat in timeout. Grow up please.

[jungpatawan]

Not as soft as your logic.

Not as soft as the focus in all of Hillary's offical photos.

Not as soft as her support among superdelegates.

JP

[follyeoa]

For once Obama was put under pressure on a national network and he folded.

[Lindy222]

The Hillary shills seem to think they smell blood in the water, which proves two things: (1) they’ve been breathing the fumes of Hillary’s own sputtering campaign for so long now, they think last night’s “gotcha” moderators brought up “real” issues that voters care about; and (2) history – even recent history – is no guide for them.

But here’s what I’m wondering right now: I’d never heard of Taylor Marsh or read anything by her until the last month or so. And my question is: Was she ever an actual Democrat? Or has she always been just a Clintonian tool?

[frustratedinohio]

What last night did was prove that your candidate can't think on his feet. That's really bad. How could he run a nation or converse with a foreign leader? Bad, bad, bad. But don't worry. Most people won't make that connection.

[SteveClements]

I still don't get it. They jump all over Obama because of the bitter word, Rev Wright, flag pins, and what someone he may loosely be associated with has said or done years ago. Has anybody noticed that her nuclear umbrella over the whole Mid-East has made her more of a hawk than even McCain and the neo-cons? That she has staked the ground of fighting for those "average" Americans making over $100,000 a year, or has anyone even commented on her praising "the great American Drug companies" at the so-called compassion forum? Those are real issues, real gaffes, and real examples of eltism, but not one pundit has yet commented on them. The media establishment sure seems to be in cahoots in taking Obama and his people's campaign down.

[loungestar]

Right now, the buttons of the Democratic Party are being pushed by the Republican Party. They have pushed for Obama in every news media available, they have crossed over in droves to vote for him in primaries (that won't happen again in the general election) and they have forced the earlly voting in Florida, knowing it would hurt democrats in the end. They, so badly, want Obama as Mc Cain's opponent. Once they bring out all the dirt on Obama and, on top of it, play the fear card (and don't doubt that they will) with a war hero telling us that our country's security is at risk, they will walk away with the prize once again and we WILL have at least four more years of the same old politics. You know, a wise man once said that nothing ever changes. I guess you might say that this is a good example.

[JoeCHI]

It's shocking to see how poorly Obama performs when the playing field is level.

[todayslies]

How is a 45-minute nonstop barrage of attacks by the debate moderators a "level" "playing field"?

[SamThornton]

Taylor Marsh is no stranger to Obama bashing, even to the point of indulging in what some have characterized as invention and others have called outright lies. For example, she was called out by the Las Vegas Sun in a January 17, 2008 story http://tinyurl.com/65u8fxx) exposing her inventions regarding what turned out to be a bogus report of voter intimidation by an Obama supporter. She refused to respond to the Sun's charges, according to the story.

If this were the only instance of Ms. Marsh's "mis-speaking," or whatever putting down obvious fabrications in black and white is called these days, one might dismiss it as a momentary lapse. Sadly, this doesn't seem to be the case. Do a Google search on "Taylor Marsh" and article after article comes up documenting Ms. Marsh's wild tales for what they are.

I think it might be reasonable, therefore, to take this latest Marsh missive with a grain of salt and to request of her something beyond her bare assertions.

[jfor]

Taylor could you please document Hilary Clinton's thirty five years experience?
Taylor could you please provide evidence that Hillary was sniped at in Bosnia, then explain how her husband would have allowed her and his daughter to go into a hot combat zone?
Taylor could you please explain how a "goldwater girl" can be a democrat?
Taylor can you provide evidence that Bill Clinton woke up Hillary at 3am and asked her what to do?
Taylor can you explain how someone worth over 100 million dollars can call anyone else an eliist?
Taylor why isn't it relevant the last time Hillary went to church and/or shot a gun
Taylor can you explain how Hillary is not pimping our her daughter Chelsea this election cycle?
Taylor how many shots of whiskey do you think Hillary has thrown back in the last six months?
Taylor when was the last time Hillary went Negative against her fellow democrats?
Taylor why does Hillary feel she is entightled to the Presidency?

Taylor you dengrate Obama every chance you get while glossing over or outright ignoring Hillarys many many gaffes. Why?

[Mollye]

jfor...ext­remely childish comments.

[jvarga]

Somebody thinks his or her candidate deserves a free pass :o

[jfor]

Mollye extremely childish actually would be more like using the word extremely before the word childish. Capiche?

[amblush617]

I knew there'd be alot of angry comments, but yours, takes the cake, lol ...
Hillary's experience has be documented for years!! If you really want to know .. you can find it, it's there .. what? you thought everything should be presented to you, all typed up neatly?? naww .. do your own research on these matters instead of whining about them if you really want to know, or maybe you just like posting all these questions on boards to bring up the subject again ... Strange... whenever anyone keeping Bringing up stuff about Obama, you call fowl ..
As far as an being an elistist .. It's got nothing to do with how much money you've got ... it's your attitude/f­eeling/sta­te of mind that you have for people who do not have it ... that's the difference ...

[jfor]

Nice spin. No anger in my post, never asked for typed answers, am not whining, have done the research(did you happen to notice the questions?) I think the word you wanted to use was FOUL but then again maybe not cock a doodle doo.

Funny you posted two paragraghs and did not answer one question. hahahahahaahahhaha do I really need to know anything more about you?

[wm1066]

Good points! .... rock on jfor.

[efranklin]

The difference between the Obama and Clinton campaigns is that the Clinton campaign cries about the media as a means of gathering pity votes.

"It's as if the only people dealing with reality and preparing for the Republican attack machine is the Clinton campaign."

Preparing for the Republican Attack Machine? Do you mean *parroting* the Republican Attack Machine? That's not something that generally garners support from Democrats, which is why the superdelegates that Clinton desperately needs are trickling over to Obama one by one.