Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ABC News' Tapper: What else is there about Obama that we don't know about?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Metric System Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:18 PM
Original message
ABC News' Tapper: What else is there about Obama that we don't know about?
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 07:19 PM by MetricSystem
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/obama-in-2001-r.html

****Obama in 2001: Rumsfeld in the Mainstream

January 30, 2008 1:57 PM

It was January 17, 2001, and Illinois state senator Barack Obama was on WTTW11’s “Chicago Tonight."

Discussing his opposition to Attorney General nominee John Ashcroft, Obama praised newly-elected President Bush's new nominee for Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld.

“The proof in the pudding is looking at the treatment of the other Bush nominees," Obama said. "I mean for the most part, I for example do not agree with a missile defense system, but I dont think that soon-to-be-Secretary Rumsfeld is in any way out of the mainstream of American political life. And I would argue that the same would be true for the vast majority of the Bush nominees, and I give him credit for that.

"So I don’t want to be pegged as being far left simply because I find certain aspects in John Ashcroft’s record to be divisive or offensive," Obama continued. "I think it’s legitimate for me to raise that. As I said before, if he brought before us a nominee who didn’t agree with me on affirmative action and yet said that, you know, I do think that and showed a history for showing regard and concern for racial justice, if he came before us and said I oppose a woman’s right to choose, or I oppose abortion, I find it religiously offensive, and yet I do respect, for example, the notion that we shouldn’t be solving these things with violence, historically, if that had been what was said, then I don’t think I would object. And I think that’s a fair position to take.”

You can watch the specific part about Rumsfeld HERE ….which some Democrats may not particularly care for….

Rumsfeld danced through his confirmation hearings and was confirmed by the Senate in a voice vote, meaning no one -- including then-newly elected Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY -- objected.

But some liberal voices opposed him from the get-go.

"Rumsfeld is a throwback to Reagan- era approaches to defense policy and spending," editorialized The Capital Times & Wisconsin State Journal "'Donald Rumsfeld is a dyed-in-the-wool hawk,' says John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World. The record confirms that assessment. Rumsfeld's unquestioning support of the Star Wars national missile defense plan; his support for flawed weapon systems such as the B-1 bomber, the Trident nuclear missile and the MX missile; and his history of opposition to the SALT II nuclear arms treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and other attempts to reduce the risk of nuclear war mark him as a primitive Cold Warrior.

Concluded the liberal newspaper, "Rumsfeld belongs in the history books, not in the Cabinet."

I should note that this video clip did not come to me from the Clinton campaign or anyone affiliated with her operation -- though I suspect it may be something her campaign tries to use against Obama, to paint him as insufficiently Democratic.

The underlying question that this clip raises with me is -- what else is there about Obama that we don't know about? What other clips? What other comments?

Obama is on the cusp of doing well on Super Duper Tuesday and has still never had a negative TV ad run against him, and it seems clear that Hillary Clinton is correct in her implication -- he has not been fully "vetted."

There's a lot voters -- and the media -- do not know about him.


- jpt****

Well, at least some in the media are beginning to ask questions and doing some investigating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well, there are the known unknowns, the unknown unknowns and
then there are the unknowables.

Or something like that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheDebbieDee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. I love hearing that Rumsfeldian bull$hit!
Any variation of that basic "known/unknowns" phrase always cracks my $hit up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. You're reaching there. I'd have to admit my opinions have changed
about people significantly since 2001. And Rumsfeld is one of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. dam i`m going to put you on ignore! lol
you actually admit to have changed your mind! my, my don`t you know we are supposed to stay the course-never admit that you made a mistake?

and i had high hopes for you :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Good information to know
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. for me...boxers or briefs...?
Duke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
6. Obama has had negative ads run against him before
and Chicago media have vetted and investigated him thoroughly. In fact, the dirt being thrown at Obama now is all stuff his opponents found during the Senate campaign so its nothing new.
Obama didn't just magically appear from nowhere when he gave the DNC speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
7. do you think that smears like this or a handshake are going to defeat Change and Hope?
you are sadly mistaken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. what is "smear" about it?
IT's a fucking video of what the guy said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. you know what is being implied. we have seen this before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
30. The insinuation that Obama approves of Rumsfeld is a lie and a smear.
In 2001, the entire US Senate, including Hillary Clinton, approved of Rumsfeld.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metric System Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Smears?!? Oh, I forgot, the media isn't allowed to write anything remotely negative about Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Because it's racism. Don't forget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #7
18. I think you are very naive
Negative campaigns work- and they've defeated hope and change countless times in American politics on every level.

Particularly when there's an inexperienced candidate involved, who tries to "take the high road."

When it gets going, the GOP machine will chew them up and spit them out-


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. so I'll put you down for the anti-'Hope and Change' Campaign
Way to dream big!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #26
33. Put me down as a pragmatist
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 08:19 PM by depakid
or perhaps- a practical idealist.

Someone who's watched Republicans win contests like these all of his adult life (and, unlike many Dems, or their "strategists," learned from the mistakes).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
11. Rumsfeld's tenure at DoD under Ford wasn't all that bad.
The man acquired a lot of baggage between 1976 and 2000. Even so, in 2000 he had some good ideas about a leaner, more flexible military. He was a disaster of a SecDef, but that was hardly the consensus expectation 7 years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
12. "it seems clear that Hillary Clinton is correct in her implication - he has not been fully "vetted."
That is a political understatement. It goes to the core of why I chose not to be an Obama supporter initially. Obama ran for a State legislative seat in Chicago and then he had a waltz into the U.S. Senate when his real Republican opponent withdrew because of a sex scandal, leaving Obama to run all over carpet bagger Allan Keyes who got dragged into the State at the last second so the Republicans could win some style points by also running an African American male since they had no one else to run anyway.

Since then Obama has gotten the rock star celebrity treatment, and the only reason why news stories actually started popping up about Rezko now during the primaries is because Clinton managed to work his name into a debate answer. The connections between the two men go back a long time and are well known and Rezko has been in trouble for a long time now, but hardly anyone bothered to seriously report on it until Clinton mentioned his name in public with a multi million audiance listening in.

Obama hasn't been vetted and he is potentially on the verge of carring the Democratic PArty's hopes to regain the White House into the fall contest against the National Republican Party. But that is OK because the race will be about "The Past" Vs "The Future" and the future sounds so much sexier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. the rezko story has been in the news both locally and nationally
for almost a year. there is no "wrong doing" by obama other than poor judgement in believing a guy that conned a lot of intelligent people in chicago. your statement about his senate run is more complicated than what you said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. Almost everything gets reported somewhere
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 08:29 PM by Tom Rinaldo
But some things are under reported while others are over reported. The vast majority of DU readers had never heard of Rezko before it was leaked that Obama was the un-named politician mentioned in Rezko's indictment. Further no one can deny that attention to whatever connection the two men have has soared since Rezko's name was mentioned in a Presidential debate. Had that happened during the Presidential campaign for the first time with Obama as our nominee, at the very least it would have dominated quite a few news cycles forcing Obama to go on the defensive and blocking his own message from being heard.

"Vetting" involves more than proving that someone is guilty of something. It also means checking for "smoke" to see if it's worth looking for "fire". And it involves seeing how well a candidate handles having inside pitches thrown at him or her by an opposing pitcher during real competition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
13. I would love to find quotes from any candidate a month after 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Go for it, you sweet thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
15. Someone should visit Hawaii.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. Chicago Trib did.
<http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070325obama-youth-story,1,4006113.story>

It also has pictures of him as a kid and you get to see his parents and grandparents. Also his sister and stepfather. I didn't even know he had a sister.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. i would but i don`t have any money....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
19. Everything prior to 2004 is off limits
:) I'm sure we can dig up shit on every candidate prior to that point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Hillary had Kenneth Starr. What did Obama have?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
24. OH THERE IS MORE..JUST WAIT........EOM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soundguy Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
27. Let me tell ya a little story,
I remember now why I was so upset when I read that earlier. That was about the time I was getting fired from my job (govt job), well more like ridden out on rails because I was telling everyone what a real fucking we were in for. So while Barry was making politically correct speech I was living the nightmare of speaking the truth in a local Republican govt.

It takes balls to lead, and Hillary has more balls than Barry will ever have. I am true blue and will go down in flames before I will ever pull the lever for a politically correct shit. The Clintons tried to tell us, but no....At every turn the corporations were there to slander them. They set Bill up with the intern,,,,good one...Broke an ancient oath... Stalled them, litigated them till it was a friggen joke. They and we have had more shit poured down on our heads it is a wonder we even bother.

Funny, if one would have cared enough to write down what I had to say then, you would call me prophetic.

You read what Barry says and it sounds, well like he is more worried about what he says. Screw that, Politics is a contact sport. Just ask Gaius Ceasar....

That's my rant and I'm sticken to it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DS1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
28. Oh LOOKIE! Two Obama re: Rumsfeld quotes from 2001 within minutes
You Clinton people are a fucking disgrace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
29. Obama would have GOTTEN that impression from corpmedia coverage of Rummy.
Just like most Americans did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
31. And so it begins. Is he next?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
32. How did your candidate vote on Rummy confirmation?
Oh yes.

Another RUBBER STAMP for Chimpy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC