For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Obama thinks his wife should be off-limits during the campaign:
But I do want to say this to the GOP. If they think that they're going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful. Because that I find unacceptable.
Is Obama right? Should spouses and family members be exempt from campaign attacks? Or, if they're going to be out there on the stump, are their words and deeds fair game?
On a related note, Obama seems to want to dictate what things are allowed to be discussed during this campaign, and what's verboten. Isn't this fairly obvious, or are media so in the tank for this guy that they're going to support all of his demands?
Comments Policy
Only the spouses and family
May 19, 2008 - 10:20 ET by taterOnly the spouses and family of Democrats should not be not be attacked...if they have that nasty "Bush" as a last name though...all bets are off. /sarc
"They need to have a course in college called common sense and everyone should take it. Problem is there isn't too many people that could pass or teach it." -my grandfather
"Liberalism"/socialism/communism
May 19, 2008 - 10:49 ET by iveseenitallAfter all the abuse the Bush family has had to endure, this boy threatens anyone who would dare to citicize his America-hating, white-hating wife. And what is the threat, Barry? Marshall law? Censorship? A knock on your door in the middle of the night? The communists limit free speech---humm.
BTW, in the rest of that speech, Barry implied criticism of Americans for driving their SUVs while the rest of the world is suffering. Sounds like a George Soros world view---humm.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Liberalism,socialism,communism.
May 19, 2008 - 11:10 ET by merlin61Michelle's fair game if she's out there stumping
for him. Also, Obams not only knocked the
SUV's, he said we eat too much and heat our
houses too much. Jimmy Carter rerun.
America
May 19, 2008 - 11:39 ET by iveseenitallYes, Merlin61. Sounds quite like his paster, Rev. Wrong. Neither Michelle, nor Barry, nor Wrong seem to like America very much. But I guess they can criticize it all they want to. Just don't do it back to them. Typical "liberalism" at its best (or worst).
NEVER,NEVER trust a"liberal"
Jimmy Carter rerun
May 19, 2008 - 12:45 ET by ThisnThatAll we need to add is Obama saying this, while sitting next to a fireside, in a sweater.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
"this boy" ; do you know how racist you sound?
May 19, 2008 - 13:15 ET by Daniel Bakerhttp://www.ornery.org/
Only to those who are
May 19, 2008 - 14:12 ET by Dan The Man 2Only to those who are racist. I use the term boy and son all the time, its a colloquism in the south. Its just some are sensitive to this and should move on.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Of course.
May 19, 2008 - 10:21 ET by WhoIsJohnGaltthey should be fair game, if they participate in the campaigning, to the extent that they participate.
If Michelle Obama claims that she is/isn't proud of her country, she should be called on to defend those remarks.
If she wants to redistribute the wealth of this nation (remember the "pie" comments), then she and Obama should be pressed on that issue.
However, if she just plays First Lady-like, then the press should be easy on her. It all depends on how she starts the ball rolling. And she already did...
Presidential campaign war
May 19, 2008 - 12:05 ET by JDWMichelle My Belle is campaigning for her husband for the presidency of the country which she disdains. And Obama cannot understand why a voter would rebuke anything she promotes.
Not only is McCain supporting much of the lib agenda, promising to create bi-partisan committees, going green..., but refusing to address the lib assaults.
What's wrong?
JDW
If you mention ANWR it means you don't care about the environment but when congress says ANWR it means you don't care about the gasoline prices
On the Stump - Not Off Limits!
May 19, 2008 - 10:23 ET by ChasvsIf she's going to be on the Stump for her Marxist hubby.. She's not off limits to critics!
Of course since he's the messiah, he can remake the rules whenever he wants!
We are SO SCREWED!
I am just not understanding
May 19, 2008 - 10:24 ET by BruzillaI am just not understanding my own party this go around. Here we are, going up against the most liberal senator in the land, and what are we challenging him on? Flag pins, his church, a comment his wife made, etc. Should Michelle Obama be a valid campaign issue? I sure as hell hope not because if she is then Cindy McCain becomes a valid campaign issue and she has done far more than just make some comments. She was McCain's bookkeeper during the K-5 scandal and "lost" the records that dealt with the money he was getting from Keating, she became addicted to prescription drugs and stole drugs from a children's health foundation she had started. Plus if she becomes an issue then her Dad will likely become an issue, and this guy had a ton of skeletons in his closet.
It's Easy to Understand
May 19, 2008 - 11:09 ET by TinianI'm sure Cindy McCain will be an issue -- just one that won't resonate.
Why?
Because we've been through it all before: Betty Ford, Kitty Dukakis, Whitewater, cattlegate, missing Rose Law firm billing records, Joe Kennedy.
A potential first lady dissing America? That will resonate. It's also a legitimate issue. It's too bad McCain won't have the cajones to use it.
The minute that the K-5
May 19, 2008 - 11:20 ET by BruzillaThe minute that the K-5 floodgates get opened, Cindy McCain's involvement, which unlike those other "scandals" was very well documented, is going to be front and center in the debate.
Snxxxx...
May 19, 2008 - 11:31 ET by TinianK-5 is old news. It won't resonate with the average voter. Yawn.
Tinian.... doesn't matter if
May 19, 2008 - 15:23 ET by Tim the EnchanterTinian.... doesn't matter if it's old news or not. When the LSM get a hold of this, they'll "macaca" it to death.
Is this OK?
May 19, 2008 - 10:25 ET by SamCNN spends more time these days covering what is fair to ask Obama than it does asking the man questions. Since I'm a white conservative I'm not sure if I am even allow to bring up the fact that CNN was discussing it. :-)
If I had a mean bitter angry
May 19, 2008 - 10:27 ET by dboIf I had a mean bitter angry unpatriotic wife I'd probably try and hide her from the public too.
If I had a wife that was
May 19, 2008 - 10:29 ET by taterIf I had a wife that was like that I wouldn't married her in the first place ;).
"They need to have a course in college called common sense and everyone should take it. Problem is there isn't too many people that could pass or teach it." -my grandfather
When Elizabeth Edwards
May 19, 2008 - 10:30 ET by ricklailWhen Elizabeth Edwards started running her mouth, that meant to me that she had injected herself into the campaign. The same goes for Michelle O'bama.
“A debate is a conflict which clarifies a position. A dialogue is a conversation which compromises a position.” –John E. Ashbrook, The New Neutralism II, P. 7
Not to mention ...
May 19, 2008 - 11:04 ET by KC Mulville... Bill Clinton
Say what?
May 19, 2008 - 10:28 ET by BarkerYeah, only Obama can "attack" his family members (read 'my own white grandmother').
Ya gotta love this guy!
May 19, 2008 - 10:28 ET by connorinHis minions have already been all over Cindy McCain (her wealth, her tax returns, her recipies, her views on the "scandalous" non-affair of John). However, people try to bring up stuff about what she says on the stump for her husband and that's out of bounds?
And what about all the stuff that all those wonderful left wing hate sites have said about Laura Bush and the twins for all of these years?
Just another example of its ok for us, but not for you...the mantra of the Liberals
But here's what hasn't been
May 19, 2008 - 10:46 ET by BruzillaBut here's what hasn't been brought up... the Keating 5 scandal and Cindy's drug addiction. The Dems seem to be holding back on the K-5 scandal until after the convention, and when the open up you're going to hear all about how McCain got off largely because Cindy, who kept his books at the time, "lost" all the receipts and other paperwork needed to track the money between Keating and McCain. You're also going to hear all about she became addicted to pain killers and stole drugs from her own children's health charity.
The more Republicans make spouses an issue now, the more it's going to hurt when that comes back around in the Fall. There's no way Republicans can say "wives shouldn't be an issue" when they were attacking Michelle Obama all spring and summer.
As long as we focus on what
May 19, 2008 - 11:45 ET by QueenMumAs long as we focus on what Mrs. Obama has said in her various speeches, I think it's fair game. To compare the points Mrs. Obama has made in various campaign venues to any personal issues related to Mrs. McCain is to compare apples to oranges.
When Mrs. Obama speaks, she clearly claims to be speaking for her husband. Well, if his comments are subject to criticism and/or debate, then so are hers.
What a whiner Obama has become.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
But here's what hasn't been
May 19, 2008 - 10:47 ET by BruzillaAnd don't forget Cindy McCain's dad either!
Look Above
May 19, 2008 - 11:15 ET by TinianSee what I replied to your first post. I think you over estimate tha damage that could be done by attacking Cindy and under estimate the potential damage that can be done to Obama by pointing out what Michelle has said.
A MUCH bigger story is:
May 19, 2008 - 10:29 ET by In Excess"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes
on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other
countries are going to say OK," Obama said.
Who needs his wife when he continues to make comments like this?
In Excess
May 19, 2008 - 10:46 ET by iveseenitallRight on, In Excess. I also mentioned this above. My wife said that the thousands at that event reminded her of the Hitler rallies prior to WWII. This boy, who has come out of nowhere, is not only a poor candidate; he is a grave danger to this nation. He is a useful idiot for his masters.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Obama the Useful Idiot
May 19, 2008 - 10:59 ET by CT"...He is a useful idiot for his masters..."
Like maybe NANCY PELOSI???
FINALLY a solid
May 19, 2008 - 11:01 ET by balboaFINALLY a solid Obama=Hitler post!
Bal
May 19, 2008 - 12:12 ET by iveseenitallNot so much Obama=Hitler... more Obama = Lennin, or Obama = Stalin!
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Bal... never underestimate
May 19, 2008 - 12:11 ET by Tim the EnchanterBal... never underestimate the power of Godwin's Law.
"This boy, who has come
May 19, 2008 - 11:09 ET by celator"This boy, who has come out of nowhere, is not only a poor candidate; he is a grave danger to this nation."
Agree. Someone or some group is funding him, pushing him, clearing the path to the White House for him. Something very strange going on here.
I don't give a flying...
May 19, 2008 - 10:31 ET by cjbreisch<CENSORED>What Obama finds unacceptable.
I find it unacceptable that a candidate with such a suspicious background and no real qualifications is about to be nominated by one of our two major parties, and has already been virtually crowned Emperor by the press.
The last several days this man has shown himself to be a real whiner and entirely too thin-skinned to be President of the United States.
If family stays in the background, then the other side should keep them in the background. If they're going to push themselves into the foreground, then the other side has every right to keep them there.
And when you say things like "I've never been proud of my country", I'm entitled to wonder how in the world I can possibly anoint you as U.S. Ambassador to the World? Because, that is, let us not forget, one of the primary roles of the First Spouse.
Obama is acting like a child who's suddenly learned that he can't win everything every time. My four year old behaves better.
"If family stays in the
May 19, 2008 - 12:00 ET by amber"If family stays in the background, then the other side should keep them in the background. If they're going to push themselves into the foreground, then the other side has every right to keep them there."
However, we need to look at who Obama associates with, no matter if they are in the background or not. It speaks to his true character and we really do not have enough information about him without that. McCain has a long record that we can look at to see where he stands, Obama does not.
Poor Baby!
May 19, 2008 - 10:33 ET by MeanderingAh, the poor little baby. Someone said something about his wifey-poo, now he's going to cry. Give me a Break! Fine if he wants spouses off limits, then stop talking smack about Bill Clinton. I say that whoever is on the campaign trail giving speeches saying whatever they want for their spouse, parent, whatever, then they are subject to scrutiny, end of story. She has said some horrible things about this nation and I’m not going to let her or her baby of a husband off the hook. Sorry. If you don’t want her as part of the issue, then she should stop talking.
OK your "high and
May 19, 2008 - 10:34 ET by MassConservativeOK your "high and Mightiness" we will make you a deal. As long as she doesn't make stupid statements that need to be defended she will be off-limits. If you would prefer we focus on you let's start with this statement:
"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said."
http://afp.google.co...
Call me crazy but isn't that called freedom or is your grand plan to do away with that as well all in the name of the bogus global warming boogy man?
Obama '08 - He has the Wright stuff...and that is WRONG for America
M Obama said what she said
May 19, 2008 - 10:47 ET by DelsaI heard this AD and cannot for the life of me can't see what all the fuss is about.
By her own words, His wife is not proud of her country, by his own words, he doesn't wear a flag pin, wait, oops he all of a sudden does wear a Flag Pin.
57 States?
These two should never get any where near the White House.
I guess I'm a racist because I see the O's for who they are.
American Hating Socialists!!! Who just happen to be Black!
Talking Points Memo
May 19, 2008 - 10:50 ET by BayshoremanAll of these Obama defined verboten subjects are really just the sub-text. The main story (and the Talking Points Memo) is just as NB describes, i.e. "Obama seems to want to dictate what things are allowed to be discussed during this campaign."
Ironicly, Hillary's camp developed the template during the discussion about Obama's admitted past cocaine use. They kept bringing up the issue with the caveat that they weren't going to talk about his past drug use which, had the result of doing just that.
GOP'ers on the talking head circut should constantly bring up those subjects with the by-line that Obama has imposed censorship rules, e.g. "Obama has asked the American public, politicians, and media not to talk about his wife saying that when Obama entered the presidential race, it was the first time she was ever proud in her adult life that she was an American. I respect that and we can move on to another subject unless of course Obama has issued censorship rules on that as well."
The fact that Osama Obama,
May 19, 2008 - 15:34 ET by Tim the EnchanterThe fact that Osama Obama, in his hubris, thinks he can decide what is fair to ask him and what isn't- is there no more clear indicator that he is unfit for this office? Wer're talking about the Presidency of the United States- the most powerful political position in the world. What the US of A does (or doesn't do) has a profound impact on the rest of the world- like it or not. For this position, NO questions are off limits. NO detail is too unimportant to be left unscrutinized. You run for this office, we have a right (and duty) to know and learn as much about you as we possibly can. The consequences for not doing so are far too great. Just who the hell do you think you are Mr. Obama?
Idiots on display
May 19, 2008 - 10:46 ET by ScrapironNow the dhimmi's have Bob Bechel (the lap dog (literally) of the democrat party) on FOX calling anyone who mentions the truth about the loud mouth slut M Obama a racist. I can't wait until the 'real' truth about her comes out. At least a few of her classmates at Liberal haven Harvard should talk, eventually. All of them weren't in bed with her, maybe.
Old, Retired and glad of it.
So how are Republicans going
May 19, 2008 - 10:49 ET by BruzillaSo how are Republicans going to deal with the truth about Cindy McCain when it comes out? There's no we can argue that spouses should not be an issue.
Now we have another "Obama
May 19, 2008 - 10:48 ET by celatorNow we have another "Obama Rule": don't comment on his wife, even when she publically attacks the country, presents her bizarre, subjective views, insults conservatives, or lies about what others say about her.
Hang on, Michelle. If you insist on insulting my country in the way you have, we are not going to let you get away with it. We are going to make you accountable for your own words. We will not take your left wing, socialist, insulting comments passively. You have the right to say what you want and, if we disagree with you, you better believe we will challenge you.
You better hang on, Michelle, you're in for a rough ride if you think you can keep denigrating my country.
If he dont want her talked
May 19, 2008 - 10:52 ET by bassndudeIf he dont want her talked about, keep her off the stage and her mouth shut.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Emperor Barack Obama selling out America
May 19, 2008 - 10:54 ET by CT"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.
"That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added.
So Obama plans to take away our SUVs, tell us what we can eat and what temperature to set our thermostats (ala Jimmy Carter).
Probably not before he takes away our guns!
Well, the Obama has laid
May 19, 2008 - 11:23 ET by motherbeltWell, the Obama has laid down another marker for what the GOP may and may not do in the campaign.
Allowing his wife to act as his surrogate and say hateful things about this country, and then expect people to leave her alone because she is not the candidate, is what a lot of us find unacceptable!
This is just as bad as John Edwards sending his wife out to attack Hillary Clinton. Candidates for the most powerful office in the free world, hiding behind their wives' skirts.
What a bunch of girly-boys.
And you're right, NB staff, the MSM will go along with all of his "rules" and duly castigate anyone who "steps over the line."
The only thing missing here is the statement from John McCain that he intends to run a campaign "respectful" of all parties, and he has no intention of criticizing, nor will he allow anyone on his campaign to criticize Mrs. Obama.
The Ugly Face of ODS Appears Again
May 19, 2008 - 11:01 ET by BruzillaI wrote a couple days ago about how Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS) was destroying the Republican party, and this is another perfect example of it. The question is asked "Should Michelle Obama and her comments be an issue?" and the answer is universally "Yes!" I have to wonder why that is. Does anyone in the Republican party use their heads anymore? Why would any Republican in their right mind want spouses to be an issue? We've always denounced such attacks when they were made against our folks, but now they're okay becuase we can make them? Also, the more we make Michelle Obama an issue, the more the Dems can make Cindy McCain and her laundry list of illegal activity an issue. And how will we counter those attacks? There's no way we can then make the case that spouses are out because we led the charge to bring them into the debate.
Once again, ODS has a lot of people acting like a bunch of short-sighted Democrats!
Don't worry Osama
May 19, 2008 - 11:05 ET by jefflebowskiThe Republican Party (the Mr. Wussypants party) won't say anything about your wife's anti-American attitudes lest they certainly be accused of being racists.....ooooohhhhhh.
Also, they might lose the black vote if they accurately show that your wife, like you, deep down doesn't like the USA. Oh, that's right, the Wussypants don't have the black vote.
I don't think we should make
May 19, 2008 - 11:14 ET by KarmaI don't think we should make the case that spouses of candidates, for any party, are off limits if they choose to be active in the campaign.
Cindy McCain and her
May 19, 2008 - 11:18 ET by motherbeltCindy McCain and her laundry list of illegal activity -Bruzilla
And those "illegal activities" would be........?
If she does indeed have some, they should be brought to light; in fact should have been before now.
Having two sides agree to "hide" things is not a solution.
motherbelt
May 19, 2008 - 11:22 ET by candanceI'm really getting scared at this atmosphere of protecting our own at any cost. Hiding illegal activity to get a Republican in office? How is that any better than the Clintons?
Where do we draw the line? If the McCains had a Chappaquidick in their past, would we also cover that because the "stakes were just too high"?
This country has officially become morally bankrupt no matter who is in the White House.
You may be right about the
May 19, 2008 - 11:31 ET by BruzillaYou may be right about the moral issue, but more importantly... how can Republicans counter attacks on McCain about his wife it we've sacrificed all our political capital on the wife issue? When teh big guns open up on the McCains, and all the talk is about Cindy's involvement in the K-5 scandal and losing key records being what got John off, and her stealing drugs from poor kids, how are Republicans going to counter those attacks? By yelling "Michele Obama is un-American!"?
I'm sure that when the spouse doodoo hits the fan, far, far, more of it is going to stick to McCain than Obama.
candance, please don't
May 19, 2008 - 11:57 ET by motherbeltcandance, please don't misunderstand me...I did say that if Cindy McCain has dirty laundry it should be aired. I just don't know what Bruzilla is talking about with her "illegal activities" remark. I haven't heard of Cindy McCain being connected to anything illegal; have you?
They have been brought to
May 19, 2008 - 11:27 ET by BruzillaThey have been brought to light before, except when they were her husband was just the junior Senator from AZ and no one cared. Now that situation has changed. I've just done a superficial review of the AZ newspapers and found where she kept McCain's financial records during the K-5 scandal and claimed to have somehow "lost" all the financial records for that period, she got prescription drugs illegally, she stole drugs from her own children's health foundation, she illegally fired the guy who blew the whistle on her... and I'm guessing there's probably more stuff out there.
What's worse is that unlike the Rose Law Firm, cattlegate, or similar past issues that were largely based on speculation, all of McCain's problems were well investigated and she was found guilty. All of this is going to come out and when it does Republican will have no defense because we sold out to get a few headlines about Obama's comments.
Bru?????
May 19, 2008 - 11:30 ET by candanceI can't believe what I'm hearing from you. Our possible future president is married to a known criminal and you're telling us all to shut up about it???
No, what I am saying is
May 19, 2008 - 11:35 ET by BruzillaNo, what I am saying is that by attacking Michelle Obama now, and making the conduct of spouses an issue, there will be no way for Republicans to fire back at Democrats this fall when they start ripping the McCains to pieces. Obama will gladly trade discussions of Michelle's "proud" comments for stories of misleading government investigations and stealing drugs from poor kids. And when this happens, there will be no way for Republicans to claim the attacks are off base because we opened the door for those attacks.
Bruzilla, I repeat what I
May 19, 2008 - 12:02 ET by motherbeltBruzilla, I repeat what I said before: if she was engaged in illegal activity it should be brought out. And no doubt will be.
That is a whole different ball game from saying "you can't criticize my wife for what she says during the campaign."
Even if McCain were to agree to "leave our spouses out of it" there is no way the Democrats would let something illegal slide.
Candance... Sounds like a
May 19, 2008 - 13:06 ET by Clear thinkerCandance...
Sounds like a sure fire way to win an election</sarc>
Why in the world would we hush-up a story about a candidates wife that was involved in illegal behaviour? If it turns out to be no big deal, then so be it. But in the meantime, people should know.
"Abstain from McCain"
They're Going to...
May 19, 2008 - 11:40 ET by TinianThey're going to get out anyway!
The thing is these are all well trodden acts -- tons of movie stars, politicians and other famous people have engaged in them and not been ruined publicly.
A potential first lady dissing America, in comparison, is a real shocker.
Spread it far and wide.
She was found guilty?
May 19, 2008 - 12:57 ET by cjbreischSo, she's serving her jail time now?
Look, I'm not trying to be difficult. I admit to knowing very little about Cindy McCain's past. But when you say something like "all of McCain's problems were well investigated and she was found guilty", I need some more details.
Ok, I've done my own research
May 19, 2008 - 13:21 ET by cjbreischAnd, you're mostly correct. Cindy McCain seems very much on a level playing field with Hillary Clinton, although her problems appear to be more self-destructive than destructive of others (with the exception of the lost K-5 records, which compares very well with Hillary). On the whole, based on just what I've read and not having seen much of her in person, I would say that she's not someone I would want as a First Lady.
She hasn't been found guilty of all of those things, though. The wrongful termination suit was dismissed, and she was not ever charged with anything related to the K-5 situation. (Note: I'm not trying to excuse her, just clarify statements made here). In fact, it appears that she wasn't found guilty of anything, in that she agreed to do certain things in exchange for the investigation being terminated. Nowhere can I find any statements that she was even charged with anything.
On the whole, though, it was obviously a very sleazy and sordid situation and one would be foolish to think that she did nothing wrong.
I'm sure that Barbara Walters or someone like her could interview her and make her look like the victim and garner sympathy for her though. Actually, let's be honest with ourselves. If her husband was running for President on the Democrat ticket, it would've already happened.
Bruzilla wrote:
May 19, 2008 - 13:26 ET by Par for the CourseBruzilla, my question is, why would anybody "intentionally" lose records that could help resolve the ethical charges made against the Senator.
An excerpt from an article in The Arizona Republic:
It appears that when the records were found months later, the matter was resolved.
Quick Question
May 19, 2008 - 11:15 ET by candanceDid Obama criticize Elizabeth Edwards when she ambushed Ann Coulter on live TV to defend her husband? Did he criticize the Daily Kos for attacking Jenna Bush's wedding?
If your spouse is giving public speeches on your behalf, you should be responsible for what those speeches say. Michelle is not some timid housewife watching the kids back at home. She has put herself in the public square. I'm tired of politicians letting a friend or family member say something controversial so they can act like it doesn't really reflect their personal feelings. You answer for your entire campaign.
If that ends up embarrassing Cindy McCain then so be it. If she did something wrong, she should explain it to voters before she's allowed to be the first lady. She shouldn't get her dirt swept under the rug just because she's a Republican.
I agree, candance...they
May 19, 2008 - 11:21 ET by motherbeltI agree, candance...they can't have it both ways. She is either his "spouse" or a co-campaigner. He can't have her saying the kind of controversial things she does ("America is downright mean!" for the milder of them) and expect to get a free pass on it.
And candance, you forget the Elizabeth Edwards not only attacked Ann Coulter, she attacked Hillary Clinton too.
Well, at least now we're
May 19, 2008 - 12:01 ET by Hero SquadWell, at least now we're getting a view of Barack Obama when things don't go 100% his way.
Make sure he's not the one who brings the only ball to the playground.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
Attack Cindy
May 19, 2008 - 12:05 ET by iveseenitallI don't think that if we say nothing about Michelle Obama, the press will remain silent about Cindy McCain. They are waiting in the wings to attack her. Trusting them to play fair is like trusting the New England Patriots. Naive.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Ooooooooh! We're sooo
May 19, 2008 - 11:20 ET by mattmOoooooooh! We're sooo afraid.
Careful, schmareful - your wife, your pastor and your Hamas brethren all hate America - your association with them is definitely an issue - in fact, it could be the most important one.
Front page on Soldier using Quoran for target practice, but no
May 19, 2008 - 11:20 ET by PawpawNFront page on Soldier using Quoran for target practice, but no where did we ever have front page for terrorists beheading people!! These news types are so biased that in trying to take PRES BUSH and the Repubs down, they are destroying everything that is good about the USA! They use their pens to bring forth anything that would make Pres Bush, military, etc., look bad, but don't think of the consequences of their writings. Of course it is terrible that a soldier did use it for target practice, but that is in no way as bad as BEHEADING people!
If you campaign, you shan't complain.
May 19, 2008 - 11:30 ET by CrashHEY BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA! HEADS UP! You are in politics running for the biggest glass house on the planet ... stones are not for throwin'. You might want to take lessons from W; instead of the middle eastern philosophy or their method of jurisprudence, after all, he's taken more crap than any president in recent history and we don't hear him bawling over it! Even when he does exactly what you and your ilk know to be right you're still contrarians.
I think a better fit for
May 19, 2008 - 11:40 ET by dboI think a better fit for Michelle Obama's "talents" would be sitting beside Joy Behar on "The View" rather than sitting in the White House.
No you don't! Like I said
May 19, 2008 - 15:40 ET by Tim the EnchanterNo you don't! Like I said before, "The View" is already dangerously close to idiot critical mass!
Bottom line: If you go out
May 19, 2008 - 11:43 ET by balboaBottom line: If you go out and stump for your husband's campaign, you're fair game.
NOW, that being said, I think in practice Republicans should attack Obama on things that matter, such as his lack of experience, actual ideas, etc. In theory, yes, attack Michelle all you want.
They should also keep in mind
May 19, 2008 - 11:46 ET by sarcasmoThat too much attention on one wife is likely to focus some unwanted attention on the other wife.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
sarc, I said above,
May 19, 2008 - 12:22 ET by motherbeltsarc, I said above, responding to Bruzilla,We're not talking about illegal activity; we're talking about criticizing what a spouse says in a campaign speech. Whole different issue.
If BHO is embarrassed by his wife...
May 19, 2008 - 11:45 ET by Ten7sIf BHO is embarrassed by his wife, my advice for him is to send her to a 'secret bunker'. Mrs. BHO's anti-American comments aren't off limits, especially those made during political campaigns. Maybe things like her appearence and family life ought to be, but for some reason the MSM constantly comments on such things.
So this weekend I've
May 19, 2008 - 11:58 ET by Hero SquadSo this weekend I've learned that Sen. Obama doesn't want an American to:
1. Criticize a fundraiser/representative of Obama's campaign (his wife).
2. Eat until he's full.
3. Drive the car of his choice.
4. Control the climate of his own home.
5. Do anything that might be objectionable to someone in another country.
What is he going to proclaim next? When I should turn off my TV? Go to bed? Drink an alcoholic beverage? Eat a cheeseburger with bacon?
Forget about hating America. Does Barack Obama even know America?
I hope the McCain campaign is taking good notes.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
Ann Coulter Has Addressed This
May 19, 2008 - 12:05 ET by GothampcAnn Coulter has addressed this type of thing already when she spoke out against the 9/11 wives. It's a trick that liberals pull. Liberals will allow someone to speak regarding policy (in this case Michelle) but will not allow anyone to respond. It's as if the person has the right to speak out without any rebuttal. It allows liberals to build a hedge around the person and get their agenda pushed forward. It also happened with Cindy Sheehan. She could comment on the Iraq War all she wanted, but if someone countered that her facts were wrong, they were criticized with "She lost a son in the war and you didn't."
If Obama doesn't want his wife commented on, then she shouldn't be on tv or stumping with him and giving her comments on policy.
Freedom of speech
May 19, 2008 - 12:32 ET by iveseenitallIt's called freedom of speech, Barry. No one-way streets when it comes to that "right" in America. Michelle has a right to hate America, and to say it and write it. But all others have a "right" to respond. BTW, some Muslim nation's don't allow free speech. I guess you'll "discuss" your agreement with that when you meet, unconditionally, with them. Right Hus.?
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
She's Fair Game......But.......
May 19, 2008 - 12:23 ET by OldSailor88They may not need criticism of Michelle to put the brakes on the ObamaTrain.
With gems like.....
"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.
"That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added.
The Husseinster just opened himself up to criticism every time he touches a thermostat and a Big Mac.
Now, I think this NASCAR loving guy is going to jump into his Bronco and head to Golden Corral to hit the trough. Then it's off to my 65 degree air conditioned trailer for a much needed nap.
Noli habere bovis, vir!
Barry, please
May 19, 2008 - 12:26 ET by Mike BrattonYou're not even in charge of your own home.
Michelle tells you the kids are getting a dog, you don't even have the wherewithal to A) make sure she doesn't go down that petty little road on national television, B) table the puppy-related discussion until after the interview, or C) make it clear to her that you've made up your mind on the matter, and the discussion is concluded. (Unless, of course, the whole "puppy talk" was staged, which wouldn't be at all surprising.)
So, please, spare us the "leave my wife alone" junk. This is the first time in her life she's been proud to be an American? And no one is allowed to observe the idiocy in such a remark?
Tell you what, Barack--you keep your wife off the stump, and perhaps the Republicans will leave her alone.
Oh, but that's right... You're not even in charge of your own home, so I guess Michelle will just hop up and make anti-American pronouncements any time she feels the need. I mean, who's going to stop her? You?
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport.com
Barry and Michelle... what
May 19, 2008 - 15:48 ET by Tim the EnchanterBarry and Michelle... what can one say? What a pair of spoiled little p!$$pots!
Let's Be Fair
May 19, 2008 - 12:41 ET by Gat New YorkWhy don't we have a week long truce in politics and give Barry Hussein Obama a chance to put together a guide so that the media and the GOP know what questions we are permitted to ask him and what questions we cannot. Afterall the annointed one should be allowed to dictate what is fair and unfair.
Once that is done we can get a 527 group to do a commercial on those guidelines and why this guy is the most unqualified person, in either party (including Kucinich), to ever run for President.
GAT... Your subject line
May 19, 2008 - 12:52 ET by Clear thinkerGAT...
Your subject line (let's be fair) really caught my eye. I'm sick to death of playing fair. We conservatives need a fighter, an ass kicker, and most of all... a LEADER!
"Abstain from McCain"
Another reason Republicans keep losing "safe" seats
May 19, 2008 - 12:57 ET by sarcasmo"Port security." We can't trust 'em to leave us the hell alone when it comes to gambling, because we know they're in the pockets of non-internet gambling (cue Godfather music) & various control freaks who'd like to legislate their own religions' moral provisions into laws that apply to everyone else. Various people here went nuts when the Republicans lost in 2006, but the Reason link proves they richly DESERVED to lose. It's just that the Democrats didn't deserve to win, but that's the fault of the "2 party system," not the people.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
Port S