Bob Herbert freeloads his disillusionment.
Silly op-ed writer!
By Moe Lane Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | Obamafiles | The Audacity Of Hype — Comments (18) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Bob Herbert is subbing for David Brooks today in the NYT Op-Ed, and his plaintive lament for the way that Senator Barack Obama's running away from his base is well worth the perusal (H/T: Hot Air). It's also meaningless, for the simple reason that the only way that Obama's going to even remotely care about Blue-on-Blue criticism is if it's accompanied with a torn-up check; and as near as I can tell, Bob Herbert's never given any money to Barack Obama at all.
Of course, people who have already given the maximum to the junior Senator from Illinois are (oddly enough) pretty much in the same boat as Mr. Herbert. Ah, the perils of premature infatuation...
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Scratch Webb from the VP list. — Comments (15) »
Bob Herbert freeloads his disillusionment. 18 Comments (0 topical, 18 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Here's what they are saying about our side in today's Times.
Senator John McCain’s campaigns have long been defined by internal squabbling and power plays, zigzagging lines of command and a penchant by the candidate for consulting with former advisers without alerting current ones, always a recipe for disquiet.
After a period of relative calm on that score, it is becoming clear that his campaign is once again a swirl of competing spheres of influence, clusters of friends, consultants and media advisers who represent a matrix of clashing ambitions and festering feuds. The cast includes the surviving members of Mr. McCain’s 2000 campaign, led by Rick Davis and Mark Salter; a new camp out of the world of Karl Rove, led by the recently ascendant Steve Schmidt; and on the periphery, the ever-present Mike Murphy, Mr. McCain’s strategist in the 2000 presidential race who has been dispensing advice to the candidate to the annoyance of the other camps, and is the subject of intensifying rumors in Republican circles that he is about to re-enter the campaign.
Mr. McCain is uncomfortable firing people or banishing them."
Sounds like the Times is trying to destroy MCain's reputation as a military style commander in chief and make him sound like a "screw your friends" win at all costs pragmatist.
I...am...SHOCKED
Not.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
Do not reference articles without a link, if one is available. I understand that doing so would have made it obvious that you were responding to a comment made about Obama's campaign supporters with one that went after McCain's campaign staffers; I simply do not care.
I need to make sure that you have read and understood this directive from a site moderator, so please do so in your next post.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
"Bill D Fence". Clever one.
Impeach the 5 usurpers
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
RedState username remains: Nauti Nurse
Can't touch that.
Impeach the 5 usurpers
His phrase "Obama two-step", and at the end of the piece, "David Brooks if off today".
I remember talking to a left-wing lunatic at a dinner right after Bill Clinton took the oath of office. I told him flat out, in front of other likeminded guests, that I believed Bill Clinton was a liar. He admitted that he ran right during the campaign then swung hard left after he won, then he looked at me condescendingly and said "He had to lie." When I asked why, he said, "To get elected."
Looks like Barry got that memo, but he is a little more awkward at it than Bill. I am not even sure he *knows* what he really believes. His minions think he is shifting positions, but I truly wonder if he is just now beginning to think about issues in a serious way.
Heh.
I love how Herbert cannot bring himself to describe what the crime at issue in Kennedy v Louisiana actually was.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
I needed a good laugh, and I had one hell of a laugh reading that article.
I think McCain is doing the right thing at this time. He's lying low and shoring up money/base. At the same time letting Obama digg his own hole. The time for McCain to to come back into the spotlight, is when the hole is big enough to bury Obama within... permanently!
"The measure of a man is the way he bears up under misfortune." -Plutarch
Perhaps he is, but if so, he isn't doing it loudly enough. He should be pounding on the California homosexual decision and the close 5-4 vote on the 2nd Amendment issue in the SCOTUS and the death penalty for raping a child case and reiterating the fact that those on the "wrong" side of that vote are the justices that Obama claims to admire the most and that Obama would most definitely nominate someone even to the left of Souter and his gang.
Well, maybe not perfect for The Obamessiah. But perfect for us to describe him and his strategy.
"And I get on my knees and pray... We don't get fooled again!"
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
W actually used that as his campaign theme song in 2000.
---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.
It really is the other way around. It should be McCain and not Obama who uses it. Mea culpa.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
He bemoans Obama's "move to the middle" and names church-state and death penalty. He could have named gun rights and homosexual "rights", but refrained. But that is crying wolf. Hebert and the rest of the left knows good and well that these are matters to be decided in the Courts. And they know even better that Obama's judicial nominees, particularly if he makes a SCOUTUS nominee with a Democratic majority in the Senate will hoist nominees to the left of even Souter on gun, homosexual, death penalty and church-state issues. So, Obama can "claim" to support the Court's gun decision, support "faith based" funding, oppose homosexual marriage and favor the death penalty while nominating judges who will do his "dirty work".
Methinks Hebert protests too much and Obama's posturing on these important issues will be taken care of by Obama's judicial nominees. For us to be giggling at the discomfort of leftwing pundits and the "netroots" is playing right into Obama's game of claiming to support or oppose conservative values, while he knows good and well that is just lip service, his judicial nominees and they will be on the far-left will produce the actual results Obama desires.
Obama's recent conservative "repositionings" on FISA, Gun Control and the Death Penalty for rapists and his talk about "refining" his Iraq views have been so transparently insincere that I doubt they are gaining him any traction with conservative leaning voters.
I wouldn't put it past someone like Herbert to decide that a little ginned-up lefty wailing and gnashing of the teeth was in order to give Obama some semblance of sincerity on these positions ("wow- look how much heat Obama is taking from his base. He must be really courageous and have strong convictions on these issues"). I'm still not buying any of it.
They're stuck. Totally beclowned.
"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill