Obama appeared on Fox and the far left is upset he didn’t take them on but rather was quite accommodating.
The interview itself brought forth a few nuggets especially this head scratcher:
WALLACE: But, Senator, if I may, I think one of the concerns that some people have is that you talk a good game about, let’s be post-partisan, let’s all come together — just a couple of quick things, and I don’t really want you to defend each one, I just want to speak to the larger issue.
The gang of 14, which was a group — a bipartisan coalition to try to resolve the nomination — the issue of judicial nominations. Fourteen senators came together, you weren’t part of it. On some issues where Democrats have moved to the center, partial-birth abortion, Defense of Marriage Act, you stay on the left and you are against both.
And so people say, do you really want a partnership with Republicans or do you really want unconditional surrender from them?
OBAMA: No, look, I think this is fair. I would point out, though, for example, that when I voted for a tort reform measure that was fiercely opposed by the trial lawyers, I got attacked pretty hard from the left.
During the Roberts –
WALLACE: John Roberts, Supreme Court.
OBAMA: John Roberts nomination, although I voted against him, I strongly defended some of my colleagues who had voted for him on the Daily Kos, and was fiercely attacked as somebody who is, you know, caving in to Republicans on these fights.
In fact, there are a lot of liberal commentators who think I’m too accommodating. So here is my philosophy. I want to do what works for the American people. And both at the state legislative level and at the federal legislative level, I have always been able to work together with Republicans to find compromise and to find common ground.
So he did NOT vote for the confirmation of Roberts but he did defend those who did vote FOR him.
This is bipartisanship in Obama’s world.
As for the Tort Reform stuff Ted Frank at PointofLaw.com isn’t convinced that Obama is willing to cross the aisle on this one:
So Obama may have annoyed the lunatic left with his vote for CAFA. As a reform supporter, I’m far from convinced that this makes him someone willing to cross the plaintiffs’ bar. Eighteen other Democrats also voted for CAFA. CAFA would have passed the previous Congress, except for its unfortunate timing arising just as Edwards had been named the vice-presidential nominee; Democrats fell into line and filibustered the bill to avoid having a civil justice reform pass at the same time, which might remind people of Edwards’s unsavory means of acquiring his fortune on the backs of pregnant mothers and obstetricians. Obama didn’t participate in the negotiations to get Democratic support, and he voted for every Democratic attempt to eviscerate the bill with amendments (Vote Record Numbers 5 through 8, February 9, 2005). Obama didn’t break with the Democrats on any seriously contested tort reform measures: he filibustered medical malpractice reform, and was one of the votes to kill the asbestos reform bill (which effectively failed by one vote). (I was not a great fan of the flawed asbestos reform bill, either, but Obama’s opposition does not seem to have been based on the grounds that the bill did not go far enough to rein in abusive litigation.) Obama claimed to support medical malpractice reform in his Senate campaign (or, at least, made pro-reform swing voters think that he did), but, then, so did Kerry and Edwards in their 2004 presidential campaign.
Obama co-sponsored the MEDiC bill with Hillary Clinton; it was a federally-funded variation of the so-called “Sorry Works” proposal that the plaintiffs’ bar has elsewhere proposed as an alternative to medical malpractice reform. Data is limited on the question of whether this would be an effective reform on either the question of liability expense or patient safety (much less taxpayer expense), but, so long as state governments are deadlocked on issues of substantive reform, a pilot program such as MEDiC may be worth trying, as its success or failure would provide answers on the legitimacy of measures such as caps. But it’s hardly the move of someone daring to flout the trial lawyers who dominate the Democratic Party these days.
Nope…Obama is going to have to do better then those examples to portray himself as a bipartisan candidate. Problem is, he has no other example….hell, his entire legislative record is pretty small:
See author page
NO change you can believe in — sorry, Obama is not ready, and may never be ready, for president.
Do you really believe those Whites in Red States Obama won in the primary that never voted Democratic in fourty years, are, just on Obama’s slogan management campaign, going to vote for him. Nope I don’t think so. Please if anything Obama is riding off the road with that said and Mainstream Media knows it.
Do you really think when the electorate all of a sudden realize it would be possible to open up National Security Secrets to a Black with absolutly no experience in life or national leadership plus lingering connections to extremists, gives that likely hood of a political and cultural paralysis way beyond comprehention or creates the edge of an insane social order that propels chaos to bitter ends.
Obama is more than ready!!! hang on right wingers… All you have is McCain and he is NOT going to be our next president!!!
And the Rev is back in thanks to Obama’s answers.. hehe.. well played.
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/04/27/mccain-obama-has-opened-door-on-wright-as-political-issue/
Sky55110 – Since you’re so chuffed about BHO and Jeremiah Wright, why don’t you volunteer for the “Would an Obama/Wright supporter please explain to me the following:” thread back on April 26th? It’s right up there with the top viewed posts for the day, so I think it’s safe to say that we’re all waiting for someone “ready enough” to respond.
The Rev is the gift that keeps on giving.. he just gave his speech at NAACP dinner in Detroit.
Yes he did… great Speech!!! I did not hear ONE thing offensive in that speech.
It was plain and straight forward… Hopefully you got it in it’s entirety without taking one line out of context to complain about… but something tells me you will.
Oh yeah, Sky, great speech. That bit about our methods of schooling are simply wrong for blacks, and that we need to come up with a way to teach law, chemistry, and quantum physics to them in a way acceptable to their “right-side-dominated brains”, like mixing the subject in with Hip-hop lyrics or something.
Sorry, but Wright just dug himself an even deeper hole by saying that blacks are incapable of learning such subjects the way they have been taught for centuries. So much for equality! The irony was that he gave this speech at the NAACP (and got a rousing ovation for it) while sending blacks back to the back of the bus.
I watch his whole speech, wanting to be fair to the man. We have been told that he is not so radical, that his words were taken out of context. Well, I saw the whole context, and Wright is very much a radical leftist – and indeed he showed that by barely saying anything about the old issues (9/11, Iraq, AIDS etc), but on an entirely new list of crazy ideas.
I will say one thing. He is an ASTONISHINGLY good speaker, and I can understand how so many people seem mesmirized by him. But being a good speaker is not always a good thing. Hitler was a great orator as well.
Sky55110 is the gift that keeps on giving!
Skye55110, You’re still around? Yes, it was plain and straight forward and broadcast in it’s entirety so it wouldn’t be “taken out of context”. I’m sure there will be one hour loops of it playing for a few days. First, I would like to start with a quote because I think it is quite appropriate:
“There is (a) class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. … There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well, because as long as the disease holds out they have not only an easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to make themselves prominent before the public.” – Booker T. Washington
How fitting that Wright chose to give his speech at an NAACP fundraiser. Dreadnaught, I was taken by the same thing you touched on above. Are we to believe that all blacks are right-brained? Oral and aural? That might explain why people believe the bile he spews. I suspect that he is basing his spew off of Learner-Centered Psychology. http://www.cdl.org/resource-library/articles/learner_centered.php I just can’t help but wonder why it is there are still so many problems in the black community with children learning. You go into prominently black areas, and they have black students and black teachers and yet still we have these problems. It couldn’t be something else, say, their home life, leaders and environment could it?! Detroit has suffered with years of fine black leadership. Currently Kwame and Coleman Young before him. It boggles me to understand why both of my nephews, who were born in Japan and have grown up in Detroit, can say Jingle Bells without replacing the “L’s” with “R’s”. The same kids who are honor roll students and working on Eagle Scout badges. (I guess it is because they are of asian descent and we all know they are inherently smarter). But many blacks can yet to say “ask” correctly. Funny, my parents grew up the children of immigrants, they spoke two languages yet managed to succeed. (It must have been because they were white). They did this without the schools adjusting to their “differences” and making excuses for them. It was instilled in them that there are two things to succeed in America. Learn the language and get an education.
Wright proceeds to mock and joke dialects as opposed to language. I’m sure the examples of Kennedy and the Irish will go over big with the rest of the country but it was good for a laugh. Maybe we should be teaching Gullah in the public school systems.
What was his phrase, “Different not deficient”. On it’s face, that is true. But, different can be deficient as well.
Change? No, same old bullsh*t.
It was far from the same old bullsh-t… and yes “Different not deficient”…. to add the rest of what you spewed is unnecessary.
Change… yes… get ready right wingers… Obama will be YOUR next president too!!!
Underchaos: ‘Learn the language and get an education’. Great post. So true.
So Sky55110, you demand we bow to Obama since he will be “YOUR next (P)resident too” but never would extend the same to a republican, or a conservative President?
Not surprising of from the left.
Sorry, my family ran Underground RailRoads, never owned slaves, died to liberate them, and thus, owes nothing (but in a just world should be owed something). I am not going to be guilted by the left into ignoring the racism of Wright nor the many disturbing associations Obama has.
As much as I despise McCain (especially after his idiotic actions this past week), he is FAR better than the coming race war, economic ruin, and military losses (meaning we face more terror attacks within the US and Europe) the left is bringing.
>>Are we to believe that all blacks are right-brained? Oral and aural?>>
Same old same old. “It’s not your fault” liberal garbage.
So how did Booker T.Washington succeed? He was a lot closer to Africa than these guys…what about _his_ brain????
An online copy of, Up From Slavery: An Autobiography Booker T. Washington, can be found here:
http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/washington/washing.html
It’s part of a digital publishing effort at UNC-CH documenting the American South. I haven’t finished reading the whole thing yet but it has been fascinating to read so far.
@suek
Booker T. was exactly the fellow I thought of when I heard that nonsense. Maybe he’s the exception that proves the rule?
But, remember, different is NOT deficient, ….unless, of course, you don’t mind the lack of any of the infrastructure that’s built, maintained and kept organized by those who are more inclined to abstract thought (“left-brainers”). I mean, what would a hot summer evening be without boom-boxes blaring from every “right-brainer’s” shoulder?
Sheesh. I would have thought that would be a “no-brainer!”
@uDder-k
Thanks for that link.
I am under the impression that right after the Civil War there were a lot of talented Blacks, some of whom even held political office, and one who almost became Vice-President. What ever happened to them? Were the Dems really that effective in stamping out any vestige of a rise in Black fortunes so effectively from the start – you know, like Islam has been really effective at stamping out qualities necessary for social, intellectual, scientific, artistic, etc., advancement? Just wondering.
Very funny, Mike’s A… but really now. Don’t you think it’s a tad risky to use the word “cracker” when addressing an Obama supporter in this heightened PC times of renewed racism??
ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“your edited comment was marked as spam…”
Oh, well, at least it was a short one.
MataH: I wondered when someone would pick up on the “cracker” reference. I award you the Mike’s America Pin for Blog Commenting Excellence:
Noticed it *immediately*, Mike’s A… the more subtle joke within the joke had me roaring!
Very kewl MAPBCE you have awarded me. Many thx. Tho the belly laugh was reward enuf. What is the story of that pin? I don’t recognize it.
” Don’t you think it’s a tad risky to use the word “cracker” when addressing an Obama supporter in this heightened PC times of renewed racism??”
Not if you’re Bob Beckel… amazing.
http://wonkette.com/356787/fox-news-covers-black+hating-woman+hating-cracker-vote