Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
This MIGHT belong in humor, but here goes.
Hillary attacks Obama as unelectable, wait for it, for wanting to ban all handguns.
http://www.nysun.com/article/67905
Ok, do we call this flip floppin, vote whoring, or some other term? |
IMO, nothing to see here folks, move along....
<h3>Why is it always reflexive discussion for discussion's sake? Why is it so rare for anyone here to research the background of a new thread presentation, before assembling it, reacting to it, and posting it all, followed by comments of those who have taken it all at face value?
I see very little concern for knowing about what we are about to post about. Why is that the norm?
</h3>
Right "leaning" politico.com "distorter", Mike Allen (I have enough citations of his flawed "reporting" to fill a few "too long"posts)....writes a "non-story", that he admits is a "non-story"....
Clinton's campaign STAFF turns it into a negative press release aimed at Obama, something that campaign staffs are paid to do....
Right "leaning" nysun.com editorializes on the hypocrisy of Clinton, while at the same time, using the incident to stress the extreme views of Obama.
All of it is sourced from decisions by campaign staff...Obama's campaign manager in 1996, and Clinton's campaign staff yesterday, and supplied to the "sleuth", politico's Mike Allen, and dksuddeth "serves it up", here.
So what is there to discuss?
Quote:
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.c...7DE179B9A5D1D5
Liberal views could haunt Obama
By: Mike Allen and Ben Smith
December 12, 2007 06:43 AM EST
When Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was seeking state office a dozen years ago, he took unabashedly liberal positions: flatly opposed to capital punishment, in support of a federal single-payer health plan, against any restrictions on abortion, and in support of state laws to ban the manufacture, sale and even possession of handguns.
Filling out a 12-page questionnaire [part 1 of questionnaire, part 2 of questionnaire] from an Illinois voter group as he sought a state Senate seat in 1996, Obama answered “yes” or “no” — without using the available space to calibrate his views — on some of the most emotional and politically potent issues that a public official can confront.
“Do you support … capital punishment?” one question asked.
“No,” the 1996 Obama campaign typed, without explaining his answer in the space provided.
“Do you support state legislation to … ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns?” asked one of the three dozen questions.
“Yes,” was Obama’s entire answer.
Obama said he would support a single-payer health plan for Illinois “in principal” [sic], “although such a program will probably have to be instituted at a federal level; the long-term objective would be a universal care system that does not differentiate between the unemployed, the disabled, and so on.” The campaign says Obama has consistently supported single payer health care in principle.
Under single-payer health care, a government system would replace private health insurance. Obama’s campaign said he has always supported the idea in concept, but thinks it is not currently practical because of the existing health care infrastructure.
<h3>The questionnaire, which was provided to Politico with assistance from political sources opposed to Obama’s presidential campaign</h3>, raises questions of whether Obama can be painted as too liberal and whether he is insufficiently consistent.
A week after Politico provided the questionnaire to the Obama campaign for comment, <h3>an aide called Monday night to say that Obama had said he did not fill out the form, and provided a contact for his campaign manager at the time, who said she filled it out. It includes first-person comments such as: “I have not previously been a candidate.”</h3>
The campaign said his views have been consistent, and points out that his positions have always been more nuanced than can be conveyed in yes-or-no answers.
Obama, who makes an issue of his opponents’ consistency in the presidential race, has tempered many of those 1996 views during his quick rise to the pinnacle of American politics. He now takes less dogmatic positions many of those hot-button issues — in the view of some Democrats, he abandoned the stands as he rose through the ranks. ....
|
Notice that politico admitted verifying whether Obama Barak had even filled out the "smoking gun" 1996 questionnaire, i.e., by contacting his "campaign manager at the time"....either Obama or his campaign manager, in 1996 could have truthfully written, "I have not previously been a candidate."
politico's reporters did not verify that Obama filled out the eleven years old questionnaire, admitted it, but posted the report anyway, slanted as if Obama had personally supplied the views that it goes on to criticize.
Clinton's campaign staff reacted to Mike Allen's misleading garbage very much as dksuddeth, Ustwo, and crompsin (so far.....) have reacted to it....as if it said something.....it doesn't !!!!!!!!!!!
The only basis to justify the intent of this thread as a vehicle to stress hypocrisy, would be if Obama and Clinton were both accurately quoted espousing the opinions that the NY Sun editorial credits each with. Otherwise, it seems that it was a slow day at the Clinton campaign opposition research department, and they "took the bait" from politico/Mike Allen:
Quote:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/r.../view/?id=4655
12/11/2007
Obama Forced to Defend Electability in Face of New Poll & Discovery of Questionnaire
Barack Obama’s campaign is on the defensive about his electability today in the face of a new CBS/New York Times poll showing voters find Hillary Clinton far more electable and a news report showing Sen. Obama previously held positions - such as banning all handguns - that he no longer claims to espouse.
The new CBS/NYT poll released yesterday reveals that voters -- by wide margins -- think Hillary Clinton is the Democrat with the best chance of winning the general election. Nearly two-thirds of voters (63 percent), more than four times the number chose Obama (14 percent), believe Hillary is the best bet for taking back the White House. The poll comes on the heels of others showing very similar findings: a CNN poll from last week shows Hillary more than doubling Obama (53-25) on who has the best chance to beat the Republican nominee, LA Times/Bloomberg has Hillary leading 54-17 on the same question, and a Time poll from mid-November shows Hillary is by far the most likely to win the general election (76-23 versus 61-38 for Obama).
And a revealing new report today in the Politico uncovers a 1996 voter questionnaire that then-state senate candidate Obama filled out that raises questions about "whether he is insufficiently consistent."
Specifically, the article says that while Obama was previously "flatly opposed to capital punishment, in support of a federal single-payer health plan, against any restrictions on abortion, and in support of state laws to ban the manufacture, sale and even possession of handguns," he has since been criticized for "abandon[ing] the stands as he rose through the ranks." The article notes that "Obama, who makes an issue of his opponents’ consistency in the presidential race, has tempered many of those 1996 views during his quick rise to the pinnacle of American politics."
In response, the Obama campaign has found itself on the defensive about its candidate’s general election viability.
|