The Swiftboating Of Barack Obama Begins?
Tweet
It’s got to be the first time that a youthful mistake revealed long ago by the candidate himself is all of a sudden fodder for the front page of MSNBC.com and The Washington Post.
For some reason, the standards have changed. Luckily, people are actually smarter than the opposition media and their political pals on issues like this. Still, worth noting for what the mainstream press has in store in the next two years versus Democrats, continuing their old pattern since the Clinton administration.
20 Responses to “The Swiftboating Of Barack Obama Begins?”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
It’s interesting that you use “Swiftboating” in the context of writing the truth about a candidate: Good for you!
His candor will be seen as a positive change from normal politics. This will be a big bonus for him among most independents.
I don’t think that anyone who’s ever followed politics will assume that an unblemished past is a true indicator of the ethical/moral character of a candidate once they reach office. That’s why tales of politicians with “integrity” are so high-profile.
I commend Obama for his candor and openness– it shows a lack of fear of the hypocrisy of his opponents.
Obama is smart. Chances are, this would have somehow come up, but by writing about it already, it essentially becomes a non-issue. In addition, his candor is a welcome relief from the viewpoint that people who run for President should be saints.
And Oliver, let’s not pretend that this is somehow limited to Democrats. Accusations of cocaine use by Bush were carried by the mainstream press and lets not forget that magical drunk driving arrest that just happened to surface days before the election and just happened to be given to a flaky Democratic partisan (Tom Connolly) by a Democratic public official.
George Bush never denied boozing and using drugs and it didn’t hurt him.
Of course, he’s a Republican’t and the rules don’t apply to them.
Call me old fashioned but I think there’s a big big difference between smoking a little weed and blowing coke up your nose…All this talk about Obama in ’08 is silly anyway–there is no way, shape, or form that he will be elected president yet–VP, maybe. http://www.minor-ripper.blogspot.com
I think Jay and JWG represent the rational Republican* response to this.
Some really stupid nutters might try to make some hay with this, but most will not, I think.
It’s not the hypocrisy of critizing Obama while supporting alcoholic Bush that will deter them. They’ve never shrunk from hypocrisy before.
What will stop them is the realization, finally, that nobody gives a toss any more if someone dabbled a bit with pot or cocaine in college.
*to the extent, of course, that “rational Republican” is not a contradiction in terms.
I am not a Republican, so I cannot represent any of their rational thoughts!
I’ll also add that Bush was not completely straight forward with all of his drinking problems (hence the DUI bombshell).
Oliver, “swiftboating” would be if they got somebody from Obama’s old neighborhood to tell lies about him, then ran ads trumpeting that. This is just criticism.
I think you really miss the big picture here. This is a very good development. His drug use is out there (as you note, by his own admission) and it is inevitably going to be mentioned in a campaign. Everything about a candidate is discussed in a campaign.
The best possible thing for a candidate is to have stories like this discussed fully, two years before the election. Long before even Iowa comes round, his drug use will be “old news”.
Would you rather this become an issue only when the Repbulican candidate brings it up two months before the election?
I strongly object to your dilution of the term “swiftboating”. Why on earth would you want to redefine the word to mean something that is a perfectly normal examination of a candidates life?
“Accusations of cocaine use by Bush were carried by the mainstream press”
I missed those.
I only saw those accusations in places that were clearly NOT mainstream, and the writers were quickly denounced as suffering from BDS.
Maybe you can give an old man a little help with his failing memory, Jay?
Quaker, let me rephrase before we start getting into another semantics game.
While a direct “accusation” may not have come from the mainstream press, the discussion over whether or not Bush used cocaine did take place in the mainstream media which came as a direct result of the accusation leveled by somebody else.
You can read about citations here.
There’s more here. Ignore Bozell & Co’s. discussions about media hypocrisy. I’m merely providing it as a source to show that alleged cocaine use by Bush was discussed in mainstream media circles.
Maybe CNN can help:
I don’t know if Salon is considered “mainstream”: Did Bush drop out of the National Guard to avoid drug testing?
Maybe Quaker’s mind is beginning to clear some?
Here are some more pics of your soon GF to be
http://thesuperficial.com/2007/01/jessica_albas_butt_looks_terri.html
Accusations of cocaine use by Bush were carried by the mainstream press
What’s your point, Jay? If George, like Obama, had been honest about doing blow, the issue would have disappeared in one or two news cycles…
unless, of course, he were still doing it….
Same goes for…
that magical drunk driving arrest that just happened to surface days before the election…
Typical moral buck-passing from everyone’s favorite “values” party: George is less than honest about his DWI, and the one to blame is not him but the filthy democrat who dug it up. Who cares when it was put out and why? If George had told the whole truth from the beginning it would have been even less of an issue than it was.
Wilbur, the point was that such information being dug up and revealed to the public does not only happen to Democrats as Oliver appears to allege. I don’t disagree with you on those points about him being better off revealing it sooner on his own, but that’s not the point I was making.
I believe that most people are generally forgiving except for two things:
1) Lying about or attempting to cover up your past, and
2) “Repenting” for past sins, and then continuing to repeatedly indulge in the same behaviors.
Obama no longer has a drug problem, and since it appears that he has truly repented and turned his life around (like President Bush) then I would suspect that most people would not hold his past against him.
Obama’s biggest hurdles will come from the present, not his past; specifically his foes will target his inexperience as a leader and a politician. Once Hillary unleashes the Clinton political machine against Obama, all hell will break loose.
It’s good the drug question has been addressed this early, I think, and it’s a treat to watch the FOX News pundits run away from comparisons to President Bush.
The interesting thing is that the article itself, while claiming the drug use “could be an issue,” went on to quote folks all of whom said it wouldn’t be. More extensive analysis here: http://tinyurl.com/yb6xw2
This week we have: CNN, WAPo and Fox licking up the wapo article and now, yahoo is doing a CNN style hit.
sounds to me like someone is doing a full on attack this week. It cannot be just so happens…
Wilbur, the point was that such information being dug up and revealed to the public does not only happen to Democrats as Oliver appears to allege.
Sorry Jay, but wrong. There’s a big difference between making an issue of something the candidate is allegedly hiding (Bush) and trying to make an issue out of something the candidate has been honest about for years (Obama).
I definitely prefer Democrats over Republicans. However, we Democrats lately have been getting drunk and high with idealism and media hype. We’re so drunk and high with idealism and media hype, we may make a foolish mistake and vote for Obama. A guy, who doesn’t stand a snowball chance in hell of ever getting elected. If we Democrats, make such a dumb decision and select Obama to represent us, we shouldn’t expect to win in ’08. In fact, we should expect to lose and lose big.
Obama is pure media hype. After listening to him, he sounds like he would make a much better preacher, than he would be a president. His speeches or should I say sermons are full of hot air nothing tangible and nothing specific.
Hillary Clinton, by far is the most realistic chance we Democrats have of winning the White House in 2008. My fellow Democrats, we must be careful that our foolish idealism doesn’t cause us to choose youthful inexperience. Let’s go with Hillary, someone who knows how to win. More importantly; someone who deserves to win.