…I need to weigh in on the Obama/anti-Semetic web page brouhaha. The critics need to chill before they badly embarrass themselves on this one.While there are legitimate grounds to poke Obama on his issues wrt Israel and Jews (and in response to being poked, he’s made pretty much all the right noises – enough that it’s not a Top Ten issue for me), this is absolutely, unqualifiedly not one of them.
Here’s why. Any registered user of mybarakobama.com can post a blog – which this was. There’s no advance moderation, because – I imagine – they can’t afford it, and they want to keep the site ‘spontaneous’.
I could post something bizarre and controversial, and it’d stay up until someone saw it and complained. People saw it, made noise, it was pulled.
Now a few things about that – it could be a RF (dirty trick) or just a nutty poster. Doesn’t matter – it tarnishes the brand.
But how much? Look the fact that McCain has a few obnoxious supporters is not reason I wouldn’t support him. The same is absolutely true of Obama. It’s becoming ridiculous that someone who simply self-identifies as a supporter (as opposed to an adviser, ally, or someone one of the candidates has actively worked with) makes one iota of difference in my views – and why should they matter to yours?
Now since I design systems and the business processes like this for my clients, I’ll make a few suggestions for the campaign.
1. Get moderation on text postings – doesn’t have to be in advance, you can have a ‘new content’ queue and have someone go through it. With my commercial clients, I often suggest offshoring this to another English-speaking country – India or the Philippines where someone can look for simple pornography or otherwise inappropriate content, and flag questionable things to be reviewed by a local staff with domain knowledge. That won’t work for Obama (for obvious reasons) but he could build a volunteer pool big enough that no post would be up for more than a few hours before someone had eyes on it.
2. Moderate image postings in advance. Sorry, gotta have some eyes on those in advance – today ‘Jew Senator Lieberman’ – tomorrow kiddie porn or snuff images. As above, build a moderation queue and have volunteers or low-wage employees moderate them.
3. Use mojo or some other rating system to allow users to build ‘trust’ – i.e. identify the posters who are trusted by the campaign because they have been valuable posters and identify their content. Let users know who has some credibility in the community and steer new readers to their content.
Well, it matters more or less depending on the number of “someones”, and there have been quite a number of anti-Semitic and/or Socialist blogs put up on the site. There was a notorious “Jews for Obama, or Else” blog that was put up by some flake who runs his own Scientology-like mini-religion, for example.
Of course Obama-watchers jump on these things – it would be ridiculous to expect them not to. And once they draw fire and come to the attention of adult persons, they are usually promptly deleted. So good for Obama and Charles Johnson both.
Now the question – which remains questionable but is too serious to dismiss – is whether a significant number of Jew-haters feel “empowered” by Barack Obama. Besides the blogs, there was the incident where “Dapha Ziman”:http://www.standwithus.com/app/iNews/view.asp?ID=350 was subjected to an anti-Semitic tirade at a Kappa Alpha Psi award ceremony, by someone who invoked Obama as justification.
You can protest that it’s unjust to associate Obama with this. But the possibility of injustice to Obama (who is being interviewed for an important job) does not justify remaining silent about such things.
The truth is that many of Obama’s detractors and supporters believe that he has a hidden agenda. They were told as much by Reverend Wright. Belief in the hidden agenda of Democratic candidates has become routine for some leftists, who like to imagine a president who will disarm the military, put apartheid sanctions on Israel, and nationalize the oil industry. They fully approve of any lies such a person has to tell to get elected.
What Armed Liberal said. This is not a real issue, it’s a technical problem with some simple technical solutions.
#1 from Glen Wishard:
Signifying what? I don’t think it has anything to do with Barack Obama if Jew-haters feel “empowered” by him. He’s answerable for him, they’re answerable for them.
Some would-be Tim McVeigh might feel “empowered” by John McCain, since John McCain might be a fellow veteran, but that wouldn’t signify anything either.
You can’t be answerable for who might feel “empowered” by you. That’s a glue that will stick any Candidate A to any kind of hateful nutcase B.
#1 from Glen Wishard:
I believe he has a hidden agenda too, on all sorts of issues including gun control.
For one thing, he says he never wrote on that document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. He’s lying, or let’s say the person who really wrote on that form will show up some time after the real killer of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman does.
I think what we see of Barack Obama is about as real is the amiable and harmless OJ Simpson white people thought they knew before the white Ford Bronco chase. And this is normal. In a society they feel is racist, Black guys feel they need to be taken for someone other than who they are to get ahead. So I think we just have to accept that.
Believing the guy is a phony – as phony as the Silky Pony, and that’s being harsh – I still think there isn’t a legitimate rope that’s long enough to tie Barack Obama to the ravings of some people who posted ugly stuff on his site till the junk was noticed and gotten rid of. Nobody has to be answerable for what wandering loons choose to feel “empowered” by.
How silly – a post goes up, and comes down less than a day later(the april stamps were from the original, copied post). And yet, manufactured outrage. How hard is that to do, day in and day out?
_Of course Obama-watchers jump on these things – it would be ridiculous to expect them not to._
No, it isn’t. If the criticism was “sheesh, an open posting system? that’s just looking for problems”, sure. Instead we got things like this from – Instapundit ‘OBAMA: How the Jewish Lobby Works.’ (Later changed)
Especially given that unmoderated comments are about as equal to something like this, of which various conservative sites reveled in Kennedy’s diagnosis.
_You can protest that it’s unjust to associate Obama with this. But the possibility of injustice to Obama (who is being interviewed for an important job) does not justify remaining silent about such things._
Is it just to associate groups like Stormfront with the Republican party, when both aim for common goals(say, immigration controls)?
Should we ask if any number of white separatists have been “empowered” by what they have heard over the past few years?
_They fully approve of any lies such a person has to tell to get elected._
I thought comments were closed on the lies that people told to get elected? Ah well, some lies good, some lies bad.
If this were a single instance, I’d have to agree with Armed Liberal, however, this seems to be just one of many data points.
Charles has done everyone a favor…
Obama.
Friend of Rashid Khalidi? Check.
Supported by Hamas? Check.
Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger? Check.
Samantha Powers and Zbigniew Brzezinski? Check.
Trinity United Church, affinity to Lewis Farahkan? Check.
Ayers and Dohrn? Check.
Virulently anti-Semitic posters on his website as Mr. Johnson has factually pointed out? Check.
Who’d a thunk it?
Seems like more of the same.
At what point is there enough smoke here to safely declare a fire has broken out?
(I don’t accept the argument that he has no control over these posting, he’s running a presidential campaign , not Best Blogger, 20 mill a month can surely pay the salary of a couple of moderators.)
What Bongo said. With BO it’s always the fault of some subordinate never Barry. He has never taken personal responsibility for the choices he has made in terms of the people he has associated with for the past 20 years or more. This is all part of the same pattern. Besides, the poster of the “Jew Lobby” post is a regular poster for “Socialists for BHO”. They did not ban his account or remove any of his other rantings.
This is a great opportunity for everyone to see how a zealot works and how so many people are anxious to find dirt where there is none. The board where this garbage was posted is a community board and anyone can post there and it sometimes takes a while to police every single entry. Someone named Brother Nathanael Kapner who left his screed at the Senator’s web community runs his own web site called Real Jew News – http://www.realjewnews.com/
Some of the stories over there include the following,
“McCain Bought By Jews Via Rothschilds!â€
“OBAMA PANDERS TO THE JEWS
By Brother Nathanael Kapner – Copyright © 2008 ”
“BIG BROTHER JEW is watching you my fellow Americans. And Big Brother Jew resides at US Homeland Security.”
“JEWS DESPISE CHRISTIANS. Now that the Christian candidate, Mike Huckabee, Governor of Arkansas, has won the Republican Iowa caucuses, the Jews have fired up their propaganda machine against him.”
“THE JEWISH STRANGLEHOOD ON THE MEDIA HAS GOT TO STOP!†said Billy Graham in a 1972 conversation with President Nixon.
“Will Hilary Clinton Be The Next Jewish Presidentâ€
If anyone cares about the truth you might want to visit this guys site. he is not exactly playing with a full deck. To blame Obama or anyone that runs a community board for everything a passing nut says is a little unfair don’t you think.
How silly – a post goes up, and comes down less than a day later(the april stamps were from the original, copied post).
Really? That’s the first I’ve heard of that. I thought they had been up a month.
There’s no necessity for them to be moderating posts in advance, but presumably someone’s reading them after they go up. If they need to wait for Charles to point out something’s not right, what are the locals thinking when they saw it? At best they thought it was no big deal, at worst they said “right on”.
There’s also the question of the frequency. Why makes all the haters think Obama is their kind of man?
The Obama campaign cannot be credited with what some idiot posts on their website, but they would be wiser to have full moderation.
IMO this is a distraction from the real serious flaws in this candidacy
No public figure is responsible for the crimes of every eelbrain who supports him, though he’s open to fair judgment if he accepts their support in silence and seems unwilling or unwilling to explain how their worldview conflicts with his. (Here it’s best to go beyond “that’s not what I’m about” and specifically condemn the eelbrain’s view; empty words will get treated a lot like silence.)
To return to the related discussion of civility that closed the recent thread, there’s a dangerous trend in identity-style arguments, both in the wage they’re waged and in the way they’re avoided in consequence. Anti-Semitism is filthy; criticizing Israel’s policies is not. Racism is filthy; criticizing Black Liberation Theology is not. Assuming that every member of a race, religion, or broad philosophy is fair game for the obloquy that some members of the race, religion, or philosophy may deserve is sloppy and dangerous.
On the other hand, there is no excuse for invoking the defense of “racism” or its equivalents to deflect criticism of the practical results of persistent, remediable, and individual behavior that is attributable to or frequently displayed by a particular philosophy or culture. Nor is it necessarily fair to cry “straw man” every time someone points out what he believes to be the inevitable trend of an argument that is commonly made by adherents to a philosophy. Abstract thought requires some generalization; justice requires that it be tempered by particularization and a willingness to look at data that contradicts theory. Civility requires addressing the person you’re speaking to, not people “just like him” who believe an exaggerated version of what he just said.
I have to agree with AL on this one. It’s one thing to criticize Obama for his embracing of people like Ayers and Wright over the last 20 years but it’s patently unfair to criticize a candidate for the sorts of people who apparently* embrace him. We’re all responsible for our own choices and actions and not the choices or actions other people make.
Obama’s utter failure to understand that central truth however is one reason I would never vote for him.
* I say “apparently†because trolls don’t just live under bridges and mobys aren’t just found in the ocean.
Ask Mark Stein if public figures are responsible for trolls spouting trash on the net in response to something they write, at least in Canada.
I do blame the Obama campaign. They were responsible how they set up their website and allowed the community blog and then they do not check it. The previous case was the Black Panther page.
Why does it take the conservative blogs to check the trash in Obama’s backyard? Obama’s people should have been doing that. Obama should never allowed this type of abuse of their website to occur.
Now I do not believe that he agrees with the bigots who put up the page, but he is tarnished. Any leader is responsible for what he allows his followers to do. If a bunch of Obama supporters burn buildings and riot in his name and he does not dissaociate himself then he has condoned it. He better get control but this has happened several times. McCain has shut down or spoke against ads he this are demeaning.
Obama has had to address the issue of Rev Wright hate speech. Associations with Ayers and Dohrn. Relationship with Palestinian supporter Khalidi.
This is a sign of poor leadership and organization.
#11 from Mark Buehner:
I thought of the same comparison. Instead of making me think “then Barack Obama is responsible” the Canadian example made me think “holding people responsible for what others say the way the Canadian Human Rights Commission does is bad. I won’t behave like that.”
David Blue:
You mean, shouldn’t be? Because leaders are called to answer for their followers every day – sometimes without justification, sometimes with.
When politicians appeal to emotional qualities, do they only get credit for the good emotions that are aroused? Do good intentions mean no responsibility?
Obama is an unabashed practitioner of charismatic politics. The whole point of being inspirational is to inspire people to believe and do things. Often those things are left deliberately undefined – emotional minds hate definitions, and they hate limits. It would be an irresponsible view of human nature to think that you can appeal to irrational qualities and get only good results.
I’m not saying that Obama has done this. I certainly don’t believe that he created the poisons that are hatching out in the mud, because the rise of anti-Semitism on the left has been well noted for a long time. Leaders like Obama could strike a mighty blow against it, if they wanted to. Or they can just ignore it, and hold themselves above it.
BTW, what I do hold Obama 100% responsible for is his approach to politics, which hardly even pretends to rise above demagoguery. It is deeply elitist to think that people in a free society are ruled by appeals to their hearts and guts, and that they are waiting for a Great Leader to tell them who they are and what they should do. What is shocking is how small an exaggeration that is.
_It is deeply elitist to think that people in a free society are ruled by appeals to their hearts and guts, and that they are waiting for a Great Leader to tell them who they are and what they should do._
Did you just summarize the Bush doctrine?
Look, its totally unfair to tar someone for idiotic stuff nutballs leave on an open blog. No matter what you do or how careful you are, someone like Obama draws a lot of attention, often not of the variety they’d like. So be it… welcome to Presidential-level politics.
What’s *not* unfair is ask what’s being done about it. Letting it sit there unchallenged for weeks or months does seem to imply, if not agreement with it, at least a certain acceptance of it. And once it’s left there for awhile, the graffiti effect takes hold… even more nutballs feel emboldened / empowered to vent their spleens, too.
Does any of it in and of itself mean Obama is a jew-hating / socialist / Black Panther himself? No. It’s more of a judgement thing. You can’t tell me that Obama can’t afford a moderator or two to keep tabs on it, and these are the kinds of details a Presidential candidate simply has to get right. The fact that neither Obama nor anyone in his campaign felt the need to address it — until Charles Johnson blew the whistle — just highlights that’s here’s another judgment issue on Obama’s part that needs to be critically examined.
I should also point out that the left’s rather hysterical reaction to this is kind of absurd. They’ve been cherry-picking moronic stuff out of LGF’s comments for years and holding it up as representative of Charles himself — despite his emphatic denunciations of it and vigorous efforts to patrol and discourage it as much as one guy who gets thousands of comments a day possibly can. Hello Pot? This is Kettle. You’re black.
#2 from David Blue:
bq. _”You can’t be answerable for who might feel “empowered” by you.”_
#14 from Glen Wishard:
bq. _”You mean, shouldn’t be? Because leaders are called to answer for their followers every day – sometimes without justification, sometimes with.”_
Yes I mean “shouldn’t be”. It was a normative statement.
It wasn’t a statement about what politicians can try to hold other politicians responsible for. You can indict a ham sandwich, or try to hold a rival responsible for solar activity. (Actually, global warming activists do seem to be trying to hold political opponents responsible for rising temperatures that solar activity may be responsible for.)
That doesn’t make holding people responsible for things that aren’t their fault right.
#14 from Glen Wishard:
bq. _”It would be an irresponsible view of human nature to think that you can appeal to irrational qualities and get only good results.”_
I think you can appeal to irrational qualities and get mainly good results.
I think people need inspiration. I don’t think inspiring them is blameworthy.
The issue here is that Obama tends to attract extremists; some might say moonbats. Consider the case of Maria Isabel, co-chair of the Houston Obama Leadership Team, who hung a Che flag at Obama headquarters. Here is a photo of Maria Isabel with Obama, taken at the exclusive Houston restaurant Tony’s : she isn’t chopped liver. What is interesting about this Che lover is that she also has very strong feelings against zoning requirements. (photo link) One would think that a Che-lover would not also dislike government regulation and be in favor of individual ownership rights.What was that about a foolish inconsistency being the hobgoblin of little minds?
#15 from Glen Wishard:
bq. _”It is deeply elitist to think that people in a free society are ruled by appeals to their hearts and guts, and that they are waiting for a Great Leader to tell them who they are and what they should do.”_
#16 from Alchemist:
bq. _”Did you just summarize the Bush doctrine?”_
No, and as well as being off topic this is silly.
#17 from BooPear:
bq. _”Look, its totally unfair to tar someone for idiotic stuff nutballs leave on an open blog.”_
I think so.
#17 from BooPear:
bq. _”Does any of it in and of itself mean Obama is a jew-hating / socialist / Black Panther himself? No. It’s more of a judgement thing.”_
Aren’t there much more serious and better examples to use in questioning Barack Obama’s judgment?
#17 from BooPear:
bq. _”I should also point out that the left’s rather hysterical reaction to this is kind of absurd. They’ve been cherry-picking moronic stuff out of LGF’s comments for years and holding it up as representative of Charles himself — despite his emphatic denunciations of it and vigorous efforts to patrol and discourage it as much as one guy who gets thousands of comments a day possibly can.”_
So, since this is rotten behavior, one wants to steer clear of behaving like that, right?
#21 “Aren’t there much more serious and better examples to use in questioning Barack Obama’s judgement”
Yes. But I think when you’re building a case it doesn’t hurt to examine all of the relevant data points. This is one of a growing list.
#21 “So, since this is rotten behavior, one wants to steer cleer of behaving like that, right?”
This is politics, and it is what it is. My pointing out the hypocrisy should not be taken as approval of the behavior itself. I merely mean to note that if one is willing to dish it out, one should should also be willing to take it.
David: I just find what you say funny, because that’s one of the biggest critiques I have
[…followed a bunch of stuff about Bush that might be worth discussing on this blog but not in this thread. Redacted, see next comment. –NM]
Top of the entry by AL says
bq. …I need to weigh in on the Obama/anti-Semetic web page brouhaha. The critics need to chill before they badly embarrass themselves on this one.
Alchemist, you’re OT for this thread. Do you really want action taken on that basis, or can you possibly stop humming that tune here?
Listen folks, Obama is running for President not top blogger or running a college facebook activist organization.
This show poor executive ability to allow this type of stuff to get attached to an official campaign website. Just bad management and that does indicate a flaw for Obama.
Besides he is running for our votes our judgement is what counts. This is fatal for a serious campaign.
To allow an enemy and LGF is a political enemy of Obama, to find this stuff and wait for your enemy to find your weakness is just plain stupid.
If he runs his website this poorly do you want to trust him with running the entire federal government?
Generalized Obamabashing is also going to be treated as OT for this thread. Or at least that’s my intention. I’m not perfect.
Verb. sap.
RAH, if this is fatal then the US is populated by fools. Oh wait. /snark
Nowadays it’s always hard to know how much attention to pay to anything — one hones one’s intuitions and one tries to pay attention to consequences.
In an environment as noisy as present-day media, I don’t think that thoughtful people are going to make too much of what’s happened on these mybarakobama blogs unless there’s a lot more consistent objectionable content.
Good luck Nm
*Gerg at 7*
_Really? That’s the first I’ve heard of that. I thought they had been up a month._
Nah – if you look at the timestamps, you see the April ones are from where it was originally copied, the comments are not in the MyBarackObama format until far on the bottom. It was a mistake – either unwilling or unable to own up to it though.
The post in question came up on June 7 in the evening, down within 24 hours.
_There’s no necessity for them to be moderating posts in advance, but presumably someone’s reading them after they go up. If they need to wait for Charles to point out something’s not right, what are the locals thinking when they saw it? At best they thought it was no big deal, at worst they said “right on”._
Quite possibly, no one did see it – it was quite a long post, and often enough people skip long posts. And, how many people are going to be hovering on a social media site for a presidential candidate on a Saturday evening?
You’re also leaving out the very real possibility that it was flagged by those who did see it – 1, 10, dozens of times – only there was no admin left to take it down.
_There’s also the question of the frequency. Why makes all the haters think Obama is their kind of man?_
Because they don’t care – they go to the point of least resistance. As with white supremacists with the Southern Strategy. Take a look “here”:http://www.jedreport.com/mccainscreencaps.html – unmoderated comments are as easy as unmoderated blog comments, there is no difference in what can appear.
Don’t forget Roger Stone’s ‘Young Socialists Alliance’, either.
David Blue:
Enlightened minds are also inspired by appeals to facts, sound principles, and shared values. The public is not stupid, though politics is a good way to become stupid.
Let’s face it – good-looking people who sound good behind a podium are a dime a dozen. We have a Congress full of these people already, and half of them aren’t worth the space they park their cars on.
We don’t need inspiration in this country. We need some more old-fashioned civic virtue.
We need both. Gotta have charisma to be heard widely. But charisma without any specific platform is a recipe for disaster.
NM
I do not expect this incident will be fatal. But this plus all the other radical associations of Obama leads into a narrative that Obama is a Marxist black liberation communist. The murmur that I heard while working the primary elections was surprising how many said they thought he was a Muslim, which he definitely is not. Any candidate wants to promote his own narrative and not to be defined by the opposition. Obama’s narrative is that he is above race but his campaign had been quick to call Geraldine Ferraro a racist. This tactic is so notable that Hillary’s supporters started bring it up as an excuse why their candidate was losing.
The tactic for years among Democrats was to use the race card. Speeches in black churches and the implied suggestion that Republicans want to put blacks back on the plantation. Barak himself avoids that but his campaign is quick to accuse others that any criticism is being racist. This creates resentment with people who do not consider they are racist and that Barak has an unfair advantage.
Barak’s also is the change candidate, that he is not corrupted by Washington since he is new. His associations with Rezko damage this narrative and Obama’s changing story on how much Rezko had contributed to Barak’s campaign. Obama indicated that he was not close to Rezko, but Rezko is his neighbor and helped with the purchase and adjoining land. Not to go into everything but his narrative is damaged that he is not the man he indicates he is. Wright and Khalidy damaged his position that he is friendly to Jews and Israel. There is fear among the Jewish community that he is a Palestinian sympathizer and not a supporter of Israel. He allowed, regardless that he was unaware, this anti Semitic blog on his official website. This feeds that narrative that he is against Jews and Israel. His verbal changes allows doubt on whether he really believes what he says or secretly agrees with the opinion and beliefs of his associates and supporters.
Allowing the abuse of his website and have it seen several times is damaging, this constantly cast doubts on his honesty and character and what are his core beliefs.
Obama has been helped a lot by MSM blatantly promoting him. It got so bad some were getting uncomfortable with the messiah theme. But now this is a race between two opposing political philosophies and the distinction will be drawn. Now the general campaign is just starting and these issues will be brought out to define Barak as radical, liberal, and anti Semitic. The evidence will be what he allowed on his website, the fact that our enemies support him like Hamas. This will be used by 527’s and RNC. Not by McCain but political advertising is only partially by the candidate.
The sub theme will be that he is a poor executive and manager. He has very little experience in governing.
Now this may sound like Obama bashing but this is a critical assessment of his mistakes and continual mistakes. A campaign allows voters to see if the candidate can be a good manager and use the campaign as example. So far his campaign has been excellent. He locked up the caucus states and got a large lead in delegates from that. That was Hillary’s critical error and why she fell behind.
The campaign tried to get into using the bloggers and advocates and used the template like Daily Kos of open community blogs. But the candidate needs to manage his message carefully and should not allow his supporters to damage him in this manner.
An example is a captain leading troops into battle and getting shot at by enemy troops and then getting shot by his own inept troops.
I thought McCain was clueless about blogosphere and if his website is similar he will have the same problem. I really though Barak and his people would be smarter about this.
Like I said this is a sign of poor management.
“Obama’s narrative is that he is above race but his campaign had been quick to call Geraldine Ferraro a racist.”
When did Obama’s campaign call her this?
Here’s his statement:
“I don’t think Geraldine Ferraro’s comments have any place in our politics or in the Democratic Party. They are divisive. I think anybody who understands the history of this country knows they are patently absurd,†Mr. Obama told the Allentown Morning Call. “And I would expect that the same way those comments don’t have a place in my campaign they shouldn’t have a place in Senator Clinton’s either.â€
“Barak’s also is the change candidate, that he is not corrupted by Washington since he is new. His associations with Rezko damage this narrative…”
Rezko is not from Washington, the land deal that took place between them happened in Chicago. There’s no evidence of any other associations between the two men.
“There is fear among the Jewish community that he is a Palestinian sympathizer and not a supporter of Israel. He allowed, regardless that he was unaware, this anti Semitic blog on his official website. This feeds that narrative that he is against Jews and Israel.”
This is an idiotic assertion that even many of the righties here have disavowed. It is meaningless and provided evidence of absolutely nothing.
“the fact that our enemies support him like Hamas. “
Guess you missed this: “Hamas Undendorses Obama.”http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/8992
“Now this may sound like Obama bashing but this is a critical assessment of his mistakes and continual mistakes.”
With the emphasis on “critical”, in light of the numerous errors, misstatements, exaggerations and slanders.
*Glen at 30*
_We don’t need inspiration in this country. We need some more old-fashioned civic virtue._
In order to have civic virtue, you need civility. In the past 10 years, we’ve seen a veteran transformed into a terrorist, a man with Purple Hearts diminished by people wearing band-aids with crayon Purple Hearts, and the screeching of any number of people who are outraged by whatever event is going on at the time.
And as long as the people on either extreme, or continue to be readily embraced, this will not happen.
Tyler
Read a little better please. I said that Rezko was his neighbor so that it was obvious this is a Chicago relationship. Obama originally said that Rezko only contributed 50K then it up to 150K. Obama had to correct his previous misstatement. This was a pattern of being vague and then the specifics were different. Rezko helped Obama get his home and the second piece of property at less than market value. Obama is not involved in the corruption but his past association with Rezko is not helpful.
It is not the righties that say Obama is anti Semitic. It is a fear of many Jews and that question is being raised because of Obama’s associations with Khalidy and Trinity Church. Obama whatever his personal opinions does not matter. It what voters fear and that fear is fed by the information that anti Semitic blogs are on his site.
Obama needs to control his message so the opposition does not define him. That is why this open blog is foolish.
Maximus wondered how much these would affect voters. I said tried to say that it could be very damaging because Obama is now facing Republicans who are not afraid of offending the net roots.
OK, RAH, I think we get your point of view pretty clearly. Care to actually contribute something of substance to *this thread*, like whether or not AL’s suggestions for improving the blog oversight make sense?
Otherwise, bashing or not, I don’t see a whole lot of value added by repeated posts about how bad an indicator this is, or how deficient Obama is.
I’m not being partisan here.
It’s a matter of OT or not OT.
@ #9:
bq. …though he’s open to fair judgment if he accepts their support in silence and seems unwilling or unwilling to explain how their worldview conflicts with his.
Hrghumph! Sounds a tad like his dealings with TUCC. TUCC was okay until folks around the blogosphere found out that just maybe they were not. THEN Obama dumps on the connection.
Personally I would have had more respect for him if he had stayed the course with TUCC AND made statements to the effect that he did not agree with everything that was said there but they did have some good things going on. Instead he chucks the whole 20 YEAR relationship out with the bath water. It does not say a whole lot about his loyalty.
AL is perfectly right. The Obama team SHOULD be patrolling their own backyard. It does appear that they are not. Bad on them. But until BHO shows up at one of the nuttier threads and joins in the conversation on the side of the nutters, I do not see much here. Bad form, maybe, but not much of substance.
Kind of like why WoC has Mr. Marshall (NM). To keep the worst impulses of us commenters on subject and under control.
Maximus,
I thought I made it pretty clear that keeping an open community blog was asking for trouble and gave my reasons why that was bad for the candidate. I emphasized that any candidate should keep control of their message. Community blogs do not do that. It is different for a candidate than a blogger. A blogger can state clearly that the comments do not reflect clearly the opinions of the blogger. That is understood and accepted. A candidate can be tarred justly or not with associations since the voters are trying to judge a candidate that may effect their lives. A blogger is not going to effect someone’s personal life.
From a technical aspect A.L is correct that this can be fixed.
I believe that is OT and the rest was just responding to Tyler.
Just by the way, RAH, “OT” by convention means “off topic” most places. I agree it is exactly the same abbreviation as “on topic” would have. Rather pesky, that. 🙂
‘Hobo, I’m conscious that I’ve been showing a heavier hand of late. I’ll try to keep myself a bit more in check. Please don’t forget to credit Mr Blue and the Founders as well.
Not that we please everyone.
Nort
Sorry NOrt, I thought my end point brought it withing the fold, my example was off topic, but I digress.
What David is accusing Obama of is being a “citizen kane”. Well, all politicians bear that persona to some effect. They talk about wanting change, while claiming to be the necessary “leader” of that change. Their campaign basically claims that both sides of this MUST be true, or else the world can’t get any better.
Is it elitist? Yes. But every politician does it, wether it’s Bush, McCain, or Schwarzeneger. It’s how they get elected. It isn’t a phenomenon that merely rests in the democratic party.
Let’s comment on this web page. I’ve added emphasis to the section most redolent of something very unattractive.
The difference? This isn’t something left by a anonymous/pseudonymous assclown (or agent provocateur) on an undermoderated blog. This is, AFAIK, a real conservative pundit.
In election season we’re going to see a lot of nonsense, a little of it emanating from the candidates and most from people who attach themselves to the campaign, or even its blog, to increase the meaning in their lives.
From RAH;
” Tyler Read a little better please. I said that Rezko was his neighbor so that it was obvious this is a Chicago relationship.”
Here’s your comment:
“Barak’s also is the change candidate, that he is not corrupted by Washington since he is new.”
You seem to miss my point that your accusation of “Washington corruption” has nothing at all to do with Rezko, who lives in Chi town.
So your comment is meaningless.
And I’m still waiting for that citation on his campaign calling Ferraro a “racist”.
Or your retraction of the Hamas claim.
Yes, but Andrew – did they stampede our cattle?
A.L.
AL, mark my word — Hedley Lamarr is behind this. “You will be risking your lives, whilst I will be risking an almost-certain Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor.“