Here’s a Candidate Who Has Never Before Run a Truly Contested Campaign for Public Office
Posted by WLS:
I’ve said here many times that Obama is going to suffer in this campaign because he has never been involved in a contested election with opponents who truly disagree with him on a broad range of policy issues.
Here’s a video of Obama being unable to civilly deal with a Nevada reporter’s questions that put him on the spot about conflicting positions he has taken on different issues over time. He’s nearly incoherent and when cornered he resorts to attacking the questioner, calling him a “proxy” for McCain’s campaign. All the guy did is ask him to explain the conflicting positions he has taken on things that are important to Nevada voters.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/06/obama-really-doesnt-like-a-debate/
[NOTE: Updated link here. — DRJ]
(Your link doesn’t work, W. Copy & paste does.)
[Thanks for the heads up, Manly Dad. I’ve added an updated link above. — DRJ]
ManlyDad (22e85d) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:13 amSounds like the BHO bumper sticker is accurate. Obey.
Vermont Neighbor (a066ed) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:14 amObama’s contest against Clinton was pretty much his first real test. He got to the Illinois State Senate through lawsuits to clear the primary ballot, and to the US Senate via the amazing coincidence of his original opponent’s divorce records getting themselves unsealed.
And even against Hillary there was some rules gaming and back-room dealing. It’s also not clear who one, Obama or “Anyone But Hillary.”
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:19 amerr … “won”
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:19 amDo not dare attempt to predict my future actions based on my past positions. How dare you question me.
JD (75f5c3) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:32 amThat reporter is one of the most vile racists I have encountered.
JD (75f5c3) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:32 am“Here’s a video of Obama being unable to civilly deal with a Nevada reporter’s questions that put him on the spot about conflicting positions he has taken on different issues over time.”
Ira (28a423) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:33 amI viewed the video, and yes, Obama’s reference to the interviewer as a McCain proxy was low, as was Obama’s comment that the interviewer should not anticipate what Obama might say in the future (the latter being low because of Obama’s own anticipation of the Republican’s pointing out that Obama wears his hair different from George Washington’s wig). However, overall, Obama’s responses were civil and coherent. (Whether or not they are factually correct, I do not know.) Let’s be objective in our observations about both candidates lest we lose credibility.
Boy, Obama looks bad here. He said he voted for the Energy Policy Act of 2005 because of the alternative fuel incentives but criticized the tax breaks for oil companies. If only he’d introduced a bill in January 2007 “[t]o suspend royalty relief, to repeal certain provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal certain tax incentives for the oil and gas industry,” he wouldn’t look so silly now.
SEK (64b2fe) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:36 am“Here’s a video of Obama being unable to civilly deal with a Nevada reporter’s questions that put him on the spot about conflicting positions he has taken on different issues over time.”
What was uncivil about that? A fine performance.
afall (ae4236) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:37 amRemember the flap about McCain not being eligible for the Presidency because he was born in the Canal Zone? Wasn’t that a feeble shot by Obama to disqualify his opponent, like Obama sued his way into to the Illinois Senate?
PCD (5c49b0) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:39 amLink fixed.
nk (e38352) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:39 amYes, that is exactly what he was suggesting.
He wasn’t suggesting that we would point out “Hey, those guys are white, this guy is black” at ALL…
Scott Jacobs (425810) — 8/6/2008 @ 11:45 am“He wasn’t suggesting that we would point out “Hey, those guys are white, this guy is black” at ALL…”
Nope. It’s all about the ears.
He’s inexperienced, wrong on Iraq, has poor judgement, oh, and by the way, did I mention he has big ears?
But what do I know, I’m just a bigotted TypicalEaredPerson afraid of EarDiversity on our money.
What Barack is hiding on his fake COLB? His real middle name is “Dumbo”. The Name “Hussein” is just a cover.
Travis Monitor (9e3371) — 8/6/2008 @ 12:15 pm“I viewed the video, and yes, Obama’s reference to the interviewer as a McCain proxy was low”
Egads … that’s enough! It tells you this guy has had it waaaay too easy. He’s got the Obamedia wind behind his sails, got almost NO serious questions in his campaign until March/April, and then when he did get a few tough questions in a debate, he and his minions whined about the unfairness of it all. Or the time in Texas in March when he whined about ‘hey I answered 8 questions, lay off’.
Same deal here. Very thin skin. YMMV as to whether his excuses are enough, but its clear he’s not comfortable getting challenged.
Travis Monitor (9e3371) — 8/6/2008 @ 12:20 pmSo, declaring that someone who asks an inconvenient question must be a proxy for your adversary is now a proper and accepted part of civil discourse? Every inquiry that dares to veer off the script can be assumed as a plant by the opposition and should be treated as such?
Wow. Every day really is a brand-new voyage of discovery.
Indeed, a fine performance … for Triumph to poop on.
PCachu (e072b7) — 8/6/2008 @ 12:26 pmIra, I disagree. Obama was way out of line. Just because he smirks when he accuses a reporter of being stooge doesn’t make that attack any less ridiculous and aggressive.
The reporter asked a very simple question, and one that ought to be asked often. Obama has shifted positions a lot, and has voted present much of his very short legislative career, so people need to actually know what the hell Obama’s positions are and how Obama arrived at them.
Mccain opened up to questions from the audience at the NAACP and many other less than friendly forums. Because Mccain knows every tough question will be asked, he gets to them quickly and doesn’t act offended that he’s asked a tough question. Obama does the opposite, refusing even to debate (as he agreed to).
The only tough election he won was against Hillary, and Hillary was hardly going to attack him for high taxation and high spending and promising too much and any other general left policy, so this really is Obama’s first true election. Obama isn’t thick skinned enough for this stuff.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 8/6/2008 @ 12:29 pmI’m an S.F. resident, and I can tell you your title for this thread applies tenfold to Nancy Pelosi. She got the gig without campaigning (designated as heir apparent by the late Sala Burton, widow of Philip Burton, whose Congressional seat Sala filled when he died of cancer), and she’s NEVER been in a debate as a candidate. According to Wikipedia, she’s never received less than 75% of her district’s vote.
L.N. Smithee (b048eb) — 8/6/2008 @ 12:31 pmI watched that video. Your definition of civil apparently differs from my definition. Unless you think John McCain is evil, calling the guy a proxy for McCain really isn’t an insult, is it?
Which begs the question…why do you hate John McCain?
slag (f9da94) — 8/6/2008 @ 12:59 pmNormally you would be right.
but when the label is used to attempt to deflect a valid question and call into question the integrety of the person posing said question, it is quit un-civil.
It is the insult to the man’s profesional integrety that is the insult, not that he would work with McCain. Do you see the difference?
Scott Jacobs (425810) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:07 pmDo not dare attempt to predict my future actions based on my past positions. How dare you question me.
Comment by JD — 8/6/2008 @ 11:32 am
Exactly. The arrogance (albeit covered by the noblesse oblige smile) would be amusing if it weren’t so overweening.
no one you know (1f5ddb) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:09 pmPreening arrogance would be my choice of descriptors, but overweenie is pretty good too.
JD (75f5c3) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:10 pm“but when the label is used to attempt to deflect a valid question and call into question the integrety of the person posing said question, it is quit un-civil.”
But he answers the question. He doesn’t deflect.
afall (50c79e) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:26 pmDoes he now… Does he actually answer the whole thing?
Scott Jacobs (425810) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:28 pmHe didn’t deflect the question. He gave a reasonable answer to the question.
The dude’s a pundit. And since he was emitting McCain’s talking points, Obama just took a moment to call him on it. Then, he answered the question. I thought Obama was actually quite nice given the guy’s attitude at the beginning of the video.
slag (f9da94) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:41 pmSo we can call Olberman et al “proxies” for the Obama Campaign?
Scott Jacobs (425810) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:43 pmLol, clueless. So asking Obama why he’s tying McCain’s energy policy to Cheney, when it is Obama who voted for it, not McCain, is emitting McCain’s talking points? Gotcha, nice circular logic you got there.
G (722480) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:44 pmG – It is like when they call someone a racist. If you defend yourself, it is proof you are a racist.
Racists
JD (5f0e11) — 8/6/2008 @ 1:48 pmBoy
Isn’t that Obama one bold lawmaker… proposing somthing soooooooo bold based on:
(4) the chief executive officers of the top 5 oil companies stated at a November 9, 2005, joint hearing of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resource of the Senate and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate that their companies did not need the Federal tax incentives provided in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801 et seq.);
(5) the Statement of Administration Policy of June 14, 2005, on the energy bill that would become the Energy Policy Act of 2005 states, `The President believes that additional taxpayer subsidies for oil-and-gas exploration are unwarranted in today’s price environment, and urges the Senate to eliminate the Federal oil-and-gas subsidies and other exploration incentives contained in the bill.’
So Obama goes along with Bush and 5 Oil CEO’s recommendations, which is neat and all, but hardly scintillating leadership.
SteveG (71dc6f) — 8/6/2008 @ 2:24 pmWhat happened to such a fine piece of groudbreaking work?
Nothing?
Why? Did someone else do a better job?
It’s amazing to me that anyone would think this question was a Mccain talking point, and not just an obvious question. Obama voted for something he is condemning, and anytime he says “How dare you” to a polite reporter, or claims that such a question as this was mere partisan proxy, Obama is calling the reporter a dishonest hack who isn’t asking fair questions.
And no, Obama didn’t fully answer the question. Jeez. Those defending him are the die-hards. They aren’t really relevant. It’s the center that is getting sick of Obama, as polls show Obama is losing them fast.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 8/6/2008 @ 2:25 pmObama says how dare you right before he pulls the racist card. It’s like a little warning bell.
Vermont Neighbor (a066ed) — 8/6/2008 @ 2:39 pmIt is like when Kerry would pull the “how dare you question my patriotism” card when someone disagreed with him.
JD (712926) — 8/6/2008 @ 2:41 pmIf “The One” is like this now, how trustworthy do you think he will be in dealing with foreign leaders.
davod (5bdbd3) — 8/6/2008 @ 2:50 pmHow dare you think this empty suit has what it takes to be President! ROTFLOL
Mike Myers (31af82) — 8/6/2008 @ 4:14 pmWhenever someone trots out Obama’s Senate record to defend him it exposes Obama as “thin”.
SteveG (71dc6f) — 8/6/2008 @ 6:05 pmI don’t think they even read their links… I could have interpreted that as “Obama rehashes Bush Cheney Haliburton Oil Cabal’s talking points and try to pass them off as his own”
The coming debates will be verrrry interestink. Quite a different situation from when he ‘debated’ people whose positions were by and large the same as his own.
Icy Truth (383bff) — 8/6/2008 @ 7:26 pmWhat’s interesting is that while Obama is no doubt a smart guy, he is not really a very knowledgeable one. Weird dynamic.
I suspect that it will make the debates interesting if the format allows. ( I am pretty confident that the moderators of the debates will do their best to get in the way of a revealing debate. )
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/6/2008 @ 7:40 pmHe is as deep as a puddle, SPQR.
JD (712926) — 8/6/2008 @ 7:46 pmJD, he really is. Evidently, that was the conclusion of his colleagues at the Univ of Chicago too.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/6/2008 @ 8:01 pmIt had all the signifying words and wink wink disrespect of the McCain talking point. Ralston even intimates as much. He could’ve asked the question, pointedly and even skeptically, but instead he had to go for derision. Why is that necessary? Is it because the McCain campaign is pushing that derisive meme as forcefully as it can?
At any rate, I and others here thought, Obama was perfectly civil and forthcoming.
Hot Air is one of the most appropriately named political blogs on the internet. The non-stories just keep on-a-comin’.
It’s like it’s been decided that if Obama can’t be beaten on the issues, he’ll be bled to death from a thousand cuts…
Give me a break.
Peter (e70d1c) — 8/6/2008 @ 8:04 pmPeter,
Obama is thin skinned. He can’t stand up to the thousand questions that lead to the thousand cuts…. which is the point…
SteveG (71dc6f) — 8/6/2008 @ 9:09 pmPeter: I’ve got an idea–an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I’m talking about.
Icy Truth (383bff) — 8/6/2008 @ 9:31 pmObama – sponsored by Holiday Inn.
davod (5bdbd3) — 8/7/2008 @ 4:57 amOMG, we’re gonna bold one sentence out of everything he said and stir up the pot some more!
I’ll even say that Obama had a right to get frustrated with a question because, clearly, the reporter wanted to stick the senator with a spear instead of trying to flush out his position. Obama said that the initial bill included provisions for alternative energy. Now that the bill had been in enactment and that oil companies were getting more of a break than the alternative energy movements, he supported a repeal of that bill. McCain slept on this too! He didn’t vote this time or the one hundred plus other occasions despite lying through teeth about it.
But, hey, I wonder if this commentator would be as harsh on McCain. Or if some other reporters would do the same. Makes you think, huh?
Dee (fa88d9) — 8/7/2008 @ 9:15 pmThere is no evidence that it made you think.
JD (712926) — 8/7/2008 @ 9:22 pmdavod, more like Archer Daniels Midland.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/7/2008 @ 9:25 pmThe ADM factory in Decatur, on a hot summer day, is one of the most vile smelling places you will ever encounter.
JD (712926) — 8/7/2008 @ 9:27 pmJD:
Just because Dee does not think the way you would prefer for him or her to think, does not mean there was no thinking involved.
In fact, I would say the opposite is true. 😉
Peter (e70d1c) — 8/7/2008 @ 11:39 pm