Republican senator disowns a bit of GOP slime
May 19th, 2008 at 06:07pm Pat Cunningham
U.S. Sen. Bob Corker, a Republican from Tennessee, has chastised his state party organization for its stupid effort to impugn the patriotism of Michelle Obama.
Corker makes the practical point that Republicans, who by their own admission are facing prospects of a bloodbath in November, would do better to avoid “negative personal campaigning.”
HERE’s the story.
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
18 Comments Add your own
1. Kaus | May 19th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I’m still waiting for the Mrs. Mccain drug stories to arise from the ashes AGAIN (I’m sure it will come) ..if you speak in public, you are fair game. This isn’t unfair, improper, or out of the norm. If Michelle wants to stump…then take the lumps.
2. Henry | May 20th, 2008 at 5:43 am
Kaus - This time you are right. In fact, any attacks against Mrs. McCain are unfair, since I believe addiction is a disease. Mrs. Obama\’s comments are fair game and fodder for political debate. I think Harry Truman addressed this issue, \’If you can\’t stand the heat, …..\’
3. Pat Cunningham | May 20th, 2008 at 6:11 am
Michelle Obama’s mistake was in misstating herself. But she’s not the candidate, anyway. I’m so sick of Republicans (especially Southern Republicans) pretending to be more patriotic than thou. Why can’t we all stipulate that the major-party candidates for president all love their country? These pseudo-patriotic attacks by right-wingers are nauseating.
4. Mike Carroll | May 20th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Pat-there is a double standard at play here. If a Cindy McCain or a Laura Bush had said the US was a mean country or that the first time they were proud of their country in their adult life was when their husband was running for President you could be absolutely assured that the Democratic party and their affiliates (Kos, Moveon, Huntington et al) would be in full throated pursuit.Come on.
If a spouse of a candidate makes a stupid statement they can and should be called on it. I do seem to recall the MSM and the Democrats (there I go repeating myself again) having a great deal of fun at Nancy Reagan’s expense.
The Messiah should stop whining. Its not becoming.
5. Dan Campbell | May 20th, 2008 at 7:10 am
I believe the candidates families are off limits until they decide to activly campaign for the candidate. Then and only then do they become fair game. I have noticed that Michelle Obama is not on TV or radio as much since the infamous “First time in my life I am proud of my country” interview. To be fair both parties will use any and all means to win. The politics of personal destruction.
6. Pat Cunningham | May 20th, 2008 at 7:21 am
C’mon, Mike: These attacks against Michelle Obama are part and parcel of the effort to convince the booboisie in places like Tennessee that the Obamas are somehow not real Americans. This stuff feeds the notion that this exotic, mixed-race candidate is somehow an alien who’s trying to undermine true Americanism. It plays well among the nitwits who still think Obama is a Muslim and that he took his oath of office on the Koran. This is typical Republican gutter stuff. The GOP can’t win on the real issues, so they’ll resort to this kind of nonsense. Well, I can’t deny that they understand their base.
7. Mike Carroll | May 20th, 2008 at 7:55 am
Pat-as usual you have rightly put me in my place. You were no doubt expressing these same opinions on gutter politics back when Bob Dole asked the question “Where’s the outrage” regarding Bill Clinton’s lies distorting Dole’s record during that campaign. Please forward your editorial comments from the RRS to refresh my recollection. You have my email address.
8. Pat Cunningham | May 20th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Gosh, it pains me to do this, Mike, but I have to correct you with regard to Bob Dole’s cry of “Where’s the outrage?” It was not a reference to Clinton’s distorting of Dole’s record. Rather, it was Dole’s frustration with what he perceived as the media’s failure to make a big fuss over Clinton’s ethical lapses. It was about Clinton’s record, not Dole’s record. By the way, I find it amusing that you often refer to Obama as “messiah” when it’s George W. Bush who has the real messianic complex. I recall when he once said: “God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East.” Sounds pretty messianic to me.
9. Mike Carroll | May 20th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Pat-thanks for the correction but I think that is a distinction without a difference or something like that. I have never seen that W quote-are you willing to bet your first born that it is accurate? If it is accurate BTW, I would agree with you.
Any truth to the rumor that, if elected, Obama is replacing Hail to the Chief with Handel’s Messiah?
I tend towards snarky on Tuesdays.
10. Pat Cunningham | May 20th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Mike: Regarding the Bush quote, there’s this from the July 23, 2003 edition of the British paper the Guardian:
“The Israeli newspaper Haaretz was given transcripts of a
negotiating session between US President George Bush, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, and the Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas and faction leaders from Hamas and other groups. Haaretz quoted him as saying: “God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me, I will act, and if not, the [US 2004] elections will come and I will have to focus on them.”
Also, you can find some truly scary stuff about Bush’s messianic complex in this piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html?ex=1255665600en=890a96189e162076ei=5090
11. Mike Carroll | May 20th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Pat-In a court of law that would be called hearsay and thus inadmissible. Hold on to your first born. Now, if you want to see real gutter politics read the following-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121124225725805517.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
12. CR | May 20th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Women have fought for equality in the workplace and the public square for decades, and now that they have achieved it, two men believe that women have to be protected from big, bad men who criticize their political speeches. B.O.’s motives come as no surprise - he wants to minimize the political damage from the speech M.O. gave at the beginning of February. Corker has no such excuse.
Anyone who delivers speeches at campaign events had better grow a thick enough skin to take criticism for their statements, and that includes the spouses of candidates. No one suggested that Bill Clinton’s statements on the stump should get excepted from criticism, and the Obama campaign didn’t follow that policy when decrying Bill’s divisiveness when Bill called Obama’s story on his Iraq policy a “fairy tale”. Why didn’t they observe the spousal exemption then? Is it because Bill’s a man and not a poor woman who requires the protection of her men?
When spouses become campaign surrogates, as Michelle Obama, Bill Clinton, and Cindy McCain have, then their statements on the stump are completely fair game for criticism. The Tennessee GOP should continue to run this ad, and Corker should worry less about protecting women from themselves and more about whether he can carry his state for John McCain in the fall.
FWIW, I don’t see Cindy making campaign speeches, yet the Dems have been blasting her.
13. Pat Cunningham | May 20th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Corker’s point, CR, is that crap like this often doesn’t work. It didn’t work last week in a special congressional election in Mississippi where a Democrat won a previously safe Republican seat. The GOP tried to characterize the Democrat as tight with Obama, but most voters rightly saw it as irrelevant garbage. In the case of Obama’s wife, her misstatement has absolutely nothing to do with the real issues facing America. The only people who buy into this pseudo-patriotic nonsense are people who weren’t going to vote for Obama anyway. When are the Republicans who push this crap going to wake up and address REAL issues?
14. Kaus | May 20th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
It truly is gutter politics….I say let Fox news and NYT do the dirty work….much more subversive and sanitary for Dems and Republicans to stay away from such activity. I think EVERY candidate’s spouse gets some bashing in every election on both sides.
15. CR | May 20th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Michelle Obama’s “Misstatement” Pat!?! Has nothing to do with the real issues facing America? Have you read the woman’s thesis? Was that misspoken too? I don’t think the “real issues facing America” can be dealth with in a thoughtful, realistic way by someone who’s closest confidant is a complete radical.
16. equalityrkfd= | May 20th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Have you read her thesis? If so where do you find it?
17. Millard Fillmore | May 21st, 2008 at 7:20 am
Pat - while I would agree that this doesn’t exactly rank as the nation’s highest priority…you’re off-base to suggest it’s a product of the radical right or the racist class. Those of us who are independent in our thinking would simply like to know more - more about why she said what she said and what she meant by it; more about how 20 years in Rev. Wright’s church influenced their thinking (see I am having a hard time believing the Obamas just discovered in the last month that their pastor is a fire-breathing radical.) Will these issues determine my vote? No. Are they part of the narrative? You bet.
18. Henry | May 26th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
CR -
I’m still waiting for information on where I might find Mrs. Obama’s thesis. Makes me think you are just making things up, don’t know what you are talking about. You know, sort of a fascist at heart. Don’t believe as CR believes, and watch out for the name calling and lies to begin.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed