Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Tone deaf

An extremely tepid Obama voter I am, and extremely tepid I remain:

A Thursday afternoon meeting between Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus grew tense and emotional for a moment -- perhaps illustrating that weeks after Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., suspended her presidential campaign, some nerves [well, you know how women are] remain frayed.

Sources at the meeting said that Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, a Clinton supporter, expressed the desire that Obama and his campaign would reach out the millions of women still aggrieved [well, you know women get bitter] about what happened in the campaign and still disappointed [emotional, and all] that Clinton lost.

Obama agreed that a lot of work needs to be done to heal the Democratic Party, and that he hoped the Clinton supporters in the room would help as much as possible.

According to Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., Obama then said, "However, I need to make a decision in the next few months as to how I manage that since I'm running against John McCain, which takes a lot of time."

And a man has his priorities.....

"If women take a moment to realize that on every issue important to women..."

Translation: You've got no place to go.

".... John McCain is not in their corner, that would help them get over it."

Constructive suggestion, here:

Can't Obama hire a coach, or something?

He's got more money than God, right, so what's the problem?

And sheesh. Fat Tony's not good company to be in....

0
No votes yet

Comments

Submitted by lambert on

But the reporting is from CBC "sources," plural, present at the meeting.

And somehow, I think that Lee, Clarke, at all would have done everything they could to make sure they were quoted accurately, including writing the quote down in Tapper's notebook, if necessary.

[x] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Submitted by Paul_Lukasiak on

exactly how far is that from "well, you might as well relax and enjoy it?"

FrenchDoc's picture
Submitted by FrenchDoc on

the mad negotiations skillz that Obama is supposed to have that made him so great in the Illinois Senate?

And here I thought once the primary was over, we were all gonna have make up sex and all that stuff (or did I miss the make-up sex?)!

He's really, REALLY bad when it comes to women, isn't he?

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

So for me that's a 90% discount from reliable right there.

Buried down in the next-to-last graf:

Everyone involved agreed that most of the meeting was cordial, and that there is unanimity on the need to work hard to elect Obama.

Which sounds a whole lot less inflammatory. Tone and context are everything, and very little of either is present in this report.

Tapper; not my favorite for accuracy and fairness. If these women, none of whom are shy, have something to say for the record they'll be able to do that on their own, through many vehicles and not just Jake Tapper. I believe I'll wait for confirmation about both the words and the responses before I let my blood pressure increase.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Didn't say "just words" anywhere. Why the quotation marks?

Context is everything, and in verbal communication tone of voice and expression are also crucial. The same clutch of words can mean a dozen different things, or more, depending on context, tone and expression.

Tapper has a bad habit of - nasty disposition towards, take your pick - manipulating words and events out of their proper context and making them out to be more inflammatory than they really were. He's a liar. I don't trust him

Seeing a lot of this here now, quotes from Tapper and Brooks and dipsticks at Politico and others who normally would be dismissed out of hand, but if they are derogatory or negative or cast a doubt upon Obama they get lapped up like honey. Disturbing, to me; YOMV.

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

is a famous Obama/Deval Patrick trope. Just riffing on the idea that the words themselves don't matter.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Given that Cass Sunstein is reportedly an advisor to Obama, I hope Obama isn't expecting this woman to just assume that he's going to appint Supreme Court justices that will protect Roe.

Obama talks about reproductive rights like he does everything else, so I see no reason to believe he'd fight any harder to protect them than he has the Fourth Amendment. While he's got a pro-choice voting record, he's never actually done anything I'm aware of to actively protect reproductive rights or women's rights.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

The entire narrative of telling women to "fall in line" is damaging to Obama and the Democrats. If it's not true, then they need to come out and say that.

If it is true, then Obama and the DNC need to pull their heads out of their asses. Women - at least Democratic women - wouldn't be voting against Obama because they think McCain is better on women's issues. They'd be voting against Obama because they're tired of the half-assed job Democrats do defending and advocating women's rights because and of having their votes taken for granted because, hey, Democrats might be shitty, but they aren't as shitty as the GOP. It would be about punishing the Democrats in hopes it will get them to do a better job, not because McCain would be awesome for women. These kinds of stories, if undisputed, only feed the idea that a strong message needs to be sent to the Democratic Party that women have choices.

Submitted by gob on

If you read the rest of the story, you'll see this:

"Obama then said[,] two sources at the meeting said[,] that he'd held his tongue many times during the campaign against Clinton in the interest of party unity and sensitivity. Clinton and her allies had suggested he was a Muslim, had said he wasn't qualified to be president."

(My emphasis)

It seems he either believes his own campaign's smear (or did I miss something? I never saw Clinton or her people suggest he's a Muslim), or he's still fighting the last war in spite of his protestations.

The more I reflect on it, the more puzzled I am by this incident, if the report is accurate. Every time I think I have an idea of what kind of person Obama is, something happens to overturn it.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

trying to spin it away from his own failings--as usual.

Whenever he's attacked, he immediately either dismisses it, lies about it, or changes the subject--always.

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

unless anyone goes on the record, I would just disregard it. Seems to be a case of let's you and him fight

Submitted by lambert on

And no, this is not flame bait (Nedra).

The story read to me like Tapper was fed those quotes, and he wrote them up.

[x] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

The problem is that there aren't many that are better. We end up being tempted to rely on and quote from these manipulative fickwits because they are not the worst of the lot, which is completely not the same as considering them credible.

Tapper is part and parcel of the VRWC/MSM conspiracy to demonize the Democratic presidential nominee - who ever that may be in any given year - and so for my purposes in trying to understand Obama he is an unreliable source. I don't care how many quotes he has, who he says he got them from, or what designs others may have had in feeding them to him. In Tapper's hands, it will be transformed into something bad for progressives and democracy.

I take his intentions as never being neutral and as always being against my own interests. He went after Clinton with all the finess of a rabid pit bull, and now he's getting after Obama in the same ham-handed way. YOMV, but if you give him any credence eventually you'll be sorry.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

and the spate of stories specifically referencing Bush and Rove regarding Obama--ABC, NYT, and others-- all matter and are influencing many people.

Tapper is far far more credible tho-- precisely because he never bought into "tingles up the leg" that others--on the right and left-- did.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

actually not a negative--it means that he has an open position against which he bases his stories--as opposed to mere what-Broder-said or Hillary-hate or Obama-crush or GOP-is-always-right, or bipartisan-is-best, etc.

Submitted by gob on

I don't want to front-page this issue.

Much much later, The Hill confirms part of what Jake Tapper reported about Obama's meeting with the CBC. They have the "I bit my tongue" quote, but not the one claiming that Clinton suggested he was a Muslim.

It's a short report and may be worth comparing to what Tapper wrote, if you care about this sort of thing. My own sense is that some pretty sharp things got said, and people are upset that any of it leaked out. Tapper's most inflammatory quotes may have been exaggerations or outright lies; if not, whoever provided them thought better of it.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

while he painted both Clintons as racists and trashed all Democratic victories and principles and did every single thing he accused his opponents of? he's a total ass--Dubya 2.0. (and he's trying the same thing against McCain by preemptively painting him as a racist too)

on Tapper--i bet it's the "thought better of it"--he wouldn't have made it up--it would have been something told to him along with the other details that he passed on because it's Clinton-bashing which they all love (and we don't know from who or why--sadly--and as usual)

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

YOMV here.

Do try and keep up. With texting the language as we know it is doomed. In a few short years it will all be acronyms and emoticons; Those who cling bitterly to the old vocabulary and grammar will be increasingly shunted aside and ignored.

McLuhan, to the nth degree.

Now, aren't you glad you asked? I know how I feel about it all.

:-(

or is it

;-O

Hell, I can't keep them straight; probably I should just

:-X

Sarah's picture
Submitted by Sarah on

cut me a little slack maybe I can read / write comments (one tomcat per shoulder creates a difficulty).

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Why don't I just wait until someone at Shakesville posts and then all I have to write is "ditto"?

So, if we can assume that Tapper has reported Clarke's comments correctly, and Clarke has reported Obama's comments correctly, then where does that leave us?

With a candidate who's STILL Not Quite Getting It. Here's what he's not getting: the women who are angry about the way that Clinton was treated during the campaign, and about Obama's silence -- what one British writer aptly termed the "malign acceptance" of misogyny -- are not under any illusions that John McCain is better on women's issues than Obama would be. The relative positions of the parties is beside the point. What they don't want to hear is what Obama's saying here: I don't have to deal with your silly issues, which I don't consider to be important or central, because where else are you going to go?

I've been paying attention to the people who are fed up with that line, and I can say one thing: that's just not going to work anymore. They've heard this for decades now, and nothing gets any better, because the party knows they have nowhere else to go. It's not about McCain being some champion for women's rights; they know he's not. What it *is* about is Obama, and the Democratic Party, and the fact that Obama is running to be President on the ticket of the Democratic Party, which is ostensibly supposed to champion women's rights. But this year, that was revealed to be an expedient lie. And the people who are fed up with the lies want to give the Party a wakeup call, and to let the party -- and Obama -- know that they expect action, not just promises and lies.

Because really, what has the Democratic Party done for women lately? It hasn't stood firm on Roe; instead, it's allowed our reproductive rights to be chipped away so far that even contraception is threatened now. Roe has had only one use for the Democratic Party in the past 25 or so years -- as a club to beat women with every four years. Because they have nowhere else to go, right?

Fair pay? Health care? Domestic violence? Where has the Party been on those issues?

In a way, it doesn't matter what Obama has said and whether Tapper got it right or not. Because it's not his words I'm interested in. They are a waste of my time even if he's telling me what I want to hear.

I'm more interested in what Obama and the DNC have done to try to reassure women and what they've done is jack shit.

BTW, the photo zuzu uses at Shakesville - fabulous.

Submitted by hipparchia on

and you're right about the photo. thanks for the tip!

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Hard drive crashed on new computer (along with my Emily's List post, argh!). Old computer has sticky keys. Sorry.