How Cory Booker Deflated the Obama Team’s Main Campaign Issue
Much has already been written about Mayor Cory Booker’s faux pas on the Sunday edition of NBC’s Meet the Press. Appearing on the program as a surrogate spokesman for the Obama campaign, Booker spent the first part of his time in support of the president’s re-election. He told viewers that during Obama’s first term they received a tax cut, that he saved the auto industry while a Romney presidency would have let them fail, and that Obama has put forth a bi-partisan plan for real tax reform. It was standard Obama boilerplate, and Axelrod and company were undoubtedly smiling. Had Romney or a surrogate for his side been on, he could have undoubtedly engaged Booker in an interesting conversation on the relative merit of Booker’s claims.
But then, the bombshell fell. The issue of Bain Capital, the key issue that the Obama team is using to demonize Governor Romney, came up. Undoubtedly, the panel and journalists expected more of the same from the mayor of Newark, New Jersey. And then Booker spoke the words that would come to haunt him:
I have to just say from a very personal level I’m not about to sit here and indict private equity…this kind of stuff [referring as well to conservative attacks on Rev. Jeremiah Wright] is nauseating to me on both sides.
No one should have been surprised. As the mayor of Newark, a town desperately in need of new business to rebuild a dying city and help it recreate itself, he knows that equity funds invested in potential business is a mechanism for economic growth and jobs. Like Steven Rattner, Obama’s former auto czar and billionaire investor who said as well last week, “Bain Capital’s responsibility was not to create 100,000 jobs or some other number. It was to create profits for his investors, most of whom were pension funds, endowments and foundations. It did it superbly, acting within the rules and acting very responsibly and was a leading firm. So I do think to pick out an example of somebody who lost their job unfortunately, this is part of capitalism, this is part of life. And I don’t think there’s anything Bain Capital did that they need to be embarrassed about.” Booker found himself inadvertently making arguments for Romney.
Both Booker and Rattner, not surprisingly, found themselves on quickly delivered team Romney videos meant for broadcast in swing states like Ohio and Wisconsin. Within minutes, a fuming David Axelrod was on the phone, and probably texting a nasty message to Booker that he could read before he got off the air.
Axelrod should not have been very surprised. As TNR’s Alec MacGillis points out, Booker represents hedge fund and equity fund managers in Wall Street who four years ago saw Obama as a New Democrat who stood fast in their corner and who poured a fortune into the Obama campaign. Now they are heavily disappointed in the president, and opposed to the left-wing populism he is now basing his campaign on. For that reason, many of the traditional Wall Street types who flocked to the president’s side in 2008 are now drifting away from him, and towards Romney instead.
Much is now being written about the Booker blab. But who will flesh out the antisemitism in both left-wing and right-wing populism? I tried to do that here, by quoting the immensely influential author J. A. Hobson, who was important to Lenin. See http://clarespark.com/2009/09/18/bad-sex-in-the-new-york-times/. Underneath the hatred of Romney and the money power is at least several hundred years of antisemitic drivel, pushed by both Left and Right, and all fearful of the modern world and its mass education, wealth creation, and everything else that we value in this world.
I don’t understand your response to Ron’s article. You do not discuss or comment on Booker and Bain, but antisemitism.
Looks like the grown ups have crashed your party. Mr. Radosh is at least a news cycle behind the curve. The Bain issue will continue to haunt Romney not because of anything Booker said (he has since clarified what he meant) but what Romney’s primary rivals have said about him and Bain:
“[They] loot companies, leave behind broken families, broken towns.” —Newt Gingrich
“It’s the ultimate insult when Mitt Romney comes to South Carolina and tells you he feels your pain—because he caused it. [...] There is something inherently wrong when getting rich off failure and sticking it to someone else is how you do your business. I happen to think that is indefensible.” —Rick Perry
“Governor Romney has claimed to have created over 100,000 jobs at Bain, and people are wanting to know: is there proof of that claim? And was it U.S. jobs created for United States citizens? [...] And that’s fair, that’s not negative campaigning.” —Sarah Palin
“Governor Romney enjoys firing people.” —Jon Huntsman
“While Mitt Romney was at Bain Capital, almost one out of every four companies they were involved with went bankrupt or went out of business.” —John Brabender, Rick Santorum campaign manager
How’s that party now? Team Obama already has a new ad up today and it’s devastating:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2fJhF6uctfM
Its a fly turd in a sack of black pepper compared to the devastation Zero your Hero has left in his wake. When are you lefties going to wake up and see whats becoming of our country? Or is this really plan A all along? Which by the way is my suspicion.
all one needs to know is that a large bundler for obozo, our failure in chief and economic dunce, is from Bain.
So obozo will be happy to take the money from those that he attacks, but it astounds me that people that are attacked will continue to give money to this clown.
Obama takes money from the job killers. Ohh my.
Just ask the workers in domestic energy production.
“What really inflamed the President’s reelection team is that by his few words about equity funds, Booker destroyed the Obama campaign’s chief issue in their current effort to demonize Mitt Romney and destroy his chances for gaining the White House.”
If only this were true. Obama will keep up this line of attack and use more class warfare rhetoric as the election moves on encouraging his militant protest wing, OWS, to riot and rampage through the country.
Tell everything you just said to the Republicans in the new ad that just went up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2fJhF6uctfM
Call me crazy, but I have a suspicion that cultivating envy, rensentment, and class prejudices just might not be the key to American renewal…
Well, again, I would say that you need to take that up with the many republicans in the cited ad. So, Sarah Palin is inciting “class prejudices?” Good one …
The bottom line is that Romney is touting his record at Bain as his rational for being president. President Obama is saying that the President’s job is about more than maximizing profit for the select few. It is about how to create an environment where everyone can succeed. Obama is not attacking private equity, however. He’s attacking the record of a man who claims to be a business wiz and job creator extraordinaire when what he really was was a man whose only business was to found a company who purchased up other businesses, sucked out all the equity and spit them out. Does that make him qualified to be President? No.
“President Obama is saying that the President’s job is about more than maximizing profit for the select few.”
Apparently the President’s job is to actively prevent as much profit as he can.
He was passionate about subsidizing Solyndra even though many in the administration warned him it was doomed.
He was passionate about preventing energy exploration and blocking gas and oil drilling in every way he could. He was passionate about killing coal-fired power plants.
In the long term, business cannot continue to exist without profit. I think President Obama believes that profit, on the whole, is not an acceptable goal for members of society.
I think that if you live as part of the private economy, or appreciate what it gives you, you simply cannot vote for Obama.
D
“It is about how to create an environment where everyone can succeed.”
That’s a wonderful sentiment. But (unless you’re a 5 year old t-ball player) not very realistic. Not every one can win. And the more that line is pushed the more people will be disappointed when they graduate from Columbia with a degree in Anthropology and no hope for a job.
“…..a man whose only business was to found a company who purchased up other businesses, sucked out all the equity and spit them out.”
That is a flat-out lie. If you are going to make that statement then offer proof. Not the opinion of some left-wing hack but actual proof. You know that you can’t. A lie like that may sell in liberal circles and even with the uninformed public but it can’t cut it here. Back that statement up. Were is your proof?
Don’t wait for Cynical Wonder to come up with any proof – he/she is too busy making wild accusations – something he/she excels at.
@yooper The proof is in the ad I gave you the link to. And it is in the words of the republican candidates themselves, so your argument isn’t with me it is with the likes of Rick Perry who likened Romney’s Bain tactics as something akin to ‘picking the carcass clean and spitting out the rest.’
I imagine it hurts when it is those in your very party that give the left their material. Nothing is better than the words out of their own mouths …
Meanwhile Obama’s OWS is raping and murdering their own protestors while threatening violence against those who disagree with their desire for the grand socialist revolution. That is when they are not plotting to blow things up. Obama uses the same languqge as OWS and he rallies them with cries of “Forward!”
Obama has been attacking business both rhetorically and in action for the last 3 years. Romney presents the perfect target for him, a rich successful white male businessman. But attacking Romney for being successful will go over just as well as OWS.
It is worthless to try and teach you about VC or PE because you do not want to understand how either works. Instead you will cling to your crackerjack box economic philosophy.
Will see you and your OWS buddies in November.
Gee, when have you liberals started taking anything Gingrich and Perry said at face value?
Is there anything else they ever said that you agree with? Maybe this:
“We have a president that’s a socialist”
— Rick Perry
Or this:
“All of you should be very deeply concerned about national security. Barack Obama is the most dangerous president in modern American history”
— Newt Gingrich
See, Perry and Gingrich can be right about some things and wrong about other things.
(In contrast to you, who are never right about anything.)
Key politicians in the Democratic Party are making two bets right now:
1.) Barack Obama has a good chance of losing in November;
2.) In the run-up to 2016 and even after that, the place to be politically in the party if you want to advance to higher office is to the right of Barack Obama, and roughly where Bill Clinton was after the 1994 midterm elections.
Clinton (with Dick Morris’ help) got the message of the voters in ’94, moved to the middle and actually worked out deals with the Republicans, and as a result won re-election in 1996. Obama has no Dick Morris — he’s got David Alexrod, who has decided to double-down on satisfying the party’s special interest base, in conjunction with the candidate, who in all honesty is terrified of following Clinton’s lead 16 years ago, since that would mean directly telling your special interest groups to pound sand on at least a couple of their pet issues.
Booker may be in trouble right now with some of his party’s leaders, but if Romney wins in November, he’s as vindicated and reborn as anyone in the Democratic Party (with the possible exception of Hillary if she’s planning a 2016 bid). And when you look at someone like Andrew Cuomo in New York — quieter than Booker but hitting some of the same pro-business, anti-big government notes as Corey, the smart money even in the Democratic Party seems to be that Obama’s gone too far to the left, and it’s not safe to be seen as being out there with him in the run-up to this year’s election.
The purpose of the Democratic party is to funnel money to the bureaucracy. Democrats want a gold-plated all powerful bureaucracy with fantastic benefits. Everything else is just spin.
Booker: I have to just say from a very personal level I’m not about to sit here and indict private equity…this kind of stuff [referring as well to conservative attacks on Rev. Jeremiah Wright] is nauseating to me on both sides.
Who is attacking Wright? People are instead still trying to understand and reveal Obama as a sub-par thinking Socialist/Communist, etc., ideologue via his 20 year association with the anti-America, anti-capitalist, anti-white racist, Black Liberation Theology [Socialist/Communist] preaching Wright. Even Wright is attacking Obama for losing what principles he allegedly had once he began his run for the Presidency and then becoming a crass “politician”, which imo is actually more of a complement compared to Obama’s overall rigid pre-Enlightenment mentality which we have now seen expressed in his obsessively destructive policies and in his similarly anti-rational campaign tactics.
As long as WAPO seems to think that windy pieces on the evils of the Church of JC/LDS are fair game, so is TUCC.
If Mr. Booker is smart (well its what I would do so its probably not too smart) would be to push back at David Axelrod. Axelrod is clearly trying to make angry and selfish left-wing whites the center of the new Democratic party and that simply does not leave much hope for the Newarks of the world.
The Occupier heaven is to be paid to be a lifetime student by the taxpayers and spend life smoking dope on campus. Their preference would be to be surrounded by a ghetto and not a suburban community so that they can piss on everyone and everything in site and not get hounded by cops. Then if they are really smart they can lie about their heritage get to be the token affirmative action whatever and live in rich communities after they get tired of the people they have been using.
There is very little hope of urban revitalization if those people get their wish. Booker is being asked to sell out Newark (and ultimately his own career)in favor of slobs like Elizabeth Warren. The half-white but all red Obama can do it but Corey has tried to be of a little more substance.
I see that a couple of leftwing media types are pretending to do their object reporting job by bringing up how Obama and other Dems take money from Blackstone Group, another private equity company. The truly devastating indictment is that they take money from a Bain vice president, and I only see that mentioned at conservative web sites.
The Dems are using their typical attack tactic of trotting out some victim (in this case, a laid off worker) to guilt/shame the opposition. They point out that these innocents were victimized while Bain made money. The problem is this. Once Bain decides the business is not viable and needs to be liquidated, it is absolutely their responsible to minimize losses to their investors. Of course, they try to wring as much as they can out of the failed company’s assets. The workers are going to lose their jobs no matter what. But the Dems try to make it sound like the investors got rich at the workers’ expense.
In the dog eat dog world of the Obama administration, “staying on message” gets you a bone.
Getting “off message” teaches you that they believe sparing the Axelrod spoils the childlike minions and lackeys.
This week the narrative is “the Bain of our existence” and everyone from the sniveling Matt Lauer with the frenetic Jim Cramer…and all the other toadies lining up to attack Romney through his time at Bain and capitalism…”not that there’s anything wrong with it” is “message and inversion narrative” flavor of the month.
Romney the bully gave some workers an “employee haircut” and doesn’t that just make him a rich guy we can hate…with all our class warfare gear on?
Uh…no.
Trying to sell clean living, diet and exercise to s slobbering entitlement crack peddler is a waste of breath. But trying to sell entitlement crack dependency by tearing down fiscal clean living, diet and exercise is pure idiocy.
The small c communists are so in love with the smell of their own crack, they don’t realize that they have to hide the stench to get anyone to buy into it.
You can’t sell addiction as addiction. You have to sell the high….and work toward free fall crumbling, cratering, crashing… dependency.
The Pusher Party wants that needle in your vein. Trying to meld in a Workers Party lament against “the rich white man’s capitalistic world” doesn’t do the trick. It gives a peek under the tent of the overthrow. Bad move. Need to keep the overthrow hidden until after you’re their junkie.
Love it! I especially like the “you can’t sell the addiction, you have to sell the high” parallel.
I had a mini epiphany about debt and the ever-increasing money supply the other day. When we borrow money we dont have and especially when we just print money from thin air adding to the pool not only does it dilute the value of the money, it is actually worse.
Lets say there are 10 people and 100 dollars total in circulation. One of the people is “rich” and the other people are..lets say.. “average”. The rich person has..lets say.. 1/2 the money.. $50. That leaves the other 9 people to split the rest.. $5.55 or so.. quick math says the “average” have 5.5% of the pool.
What happens as this scales up is not that the rich stays at %50 and the average at 5.5%.. what happens is the value not only goes down in purchasing power due to dilution, but the perception of having more allows the “rich” person to actually have a larger percentage. Say the pool grows to $200 over time. $7 looks like a good deal compared to $5.55 but in reality the illusion of having more allows the rich to steal even more from the poor. In this little example the $7 turns into 3.5% and the “rich” guy ends up with 68.5%
The numbers of course are arbitrary..its the concept that hit me.. that even as we have more money we have less not only by dilution but by the illusion of more money in our pockets as the pool and the rich..continue to grow.
Just add Cory Booker to the long list of fools who are willing to damage their own reputation to save Obama.
I really thought Cory Booker was different.
I even wished he could have been the first AA president. He could have been someone we could all be proud of. Unlike Obama who wants us at each other’s throats as long as it helps him get reelected.
What a stupid mistake to damage your own integrity and honor for a president who has none.
Don’t be fooled by Booker. He’s a part of the same New Jim Crow cabal that produced Obama. Their theory is simple: the main problem blacks face in America is whites.
He just Tweeted May 23: “Drug war is a failure…plus it has a glaring racial component.”
Same day: “In NJ blacks are about 15% of population but over 60% of prison population…” He feels that unfair drug laws purposefully target black folks because fearful whites need a replacement for the old Jim Crow. This is the thesis of “The New Jim Crow,” a book by Michelle Alexander the black Left drinks like holy water. Apparently simply not breaking the law never occurs to men like Booker.
It’s the same old story from the black Left: the solution to black crime is for whites to stop being racists – it’s that simple. Booker, like Obama, is incapable of looking at the world through a lens devoid of race. Obama’s own wife wrote her college thesis on naughty white people. Newark is only a quarter white and going down the same path as Detroit: electing and trusting by skin color. It’ll be the same result.
This is why immigration is so dangerous for America. New immigrants, 90% from the Third World in the last 10 years, almost invariably vote Dem, become radicalized and politicized by the Dem Party, and don’t vote by issues, but by blame when Third World failure, predictably, doesn’t really do all that well in America.
It’s a vicious cycle. 100 years from now, America will have much the same demographic as Newark, and I expect will look much the same: dregs of exceptionalism hanging on in a sea of failure.
This is an example of poor party discipline.
From now on, those who are allowed to speak publicly, should be forbidden from expressing their private thoughts (if they still indulge in them). They can only read party approved answers to party approved questions, exclusively. This will present an effective, unified, and unambiguous front to the masses.
The core problem here is, of course, the persistence of private thought in certain elements of the party. All thought (and emotion) is to follow that of the vanguard. This is the only way forward
I believe Rasmussen has done some polling of independents on this issue and the Bain attack resonates with his base, but not independents. Independents are actually more likely to support Romney because of his Bain experience as they think it qualifys him to fix the economy.
Once the Euro unravels and Europe pitches back into recession the headwinds are going to increase in velocity. If the Supreme Court knocks the mandate out of Obamacare and upholds Arizona’s immigration enforcement the negative narrative is going to substantially multiply. Feckless is not a quality independents are going to find attractive in November. They are going to wonder why they threw their lot in with this miserable failure who has produced nothing to show for his 3 1/2 years in office.
Obama had a chance to be something different, he advertised himself as such. He is increasingly being seen for what he is, a Marxist ideologue who can’t produce growth and a better tommorow. His record shows that he is a loser. That is less and less likely to be tolerated.
I am expecting a desperate act on his part; a military confrontation, or putting Hilary on the ticket and getting rid of Colonel Klink, Joe Biden. Something like that.
This video might give you a better handle on why Obama is the way he is. Very interesting.
Samizdat: I agree with all your points:Don’t put anything past this Castro wannabe!
Sure it’s fun, but if you think this will discourage the Bain attacks, you’re smokin something.
There’s no question that the leftists will be full-bore on it for six months, and that it is going to persuade some, probably a lot, of people.
It isn’t so much that Romney did anything wrong, but that his choice of careers is right up there with pornography as one that is simple to demonize. Few people will even know, no matter defend him for saving or ultimately creating a job for them, but everybody who ever got laid off when Bain was in their neighborhood will jump up and down to point the finger of blame at the big bad ogres. It takes adults to see through the shiny objects. Betting on adults is bad gambling if you ask me.
Another intersting thing is that numerous people have proposed better lines of defense than the Romney camp has used. The new one about the enormous destuction government has done to jobs should be close to the top of the list, but I also like the one that came out recently claiming that Romney probably gave the steel workers an additional eight years of income. Without Bain, that company would have gone bellyup far earlier than it did.
The Romney camp needs to get agressive, but I’m afraid they won’t. They are much too fearful of losing their place at the federal feeding trough to ever risk proudly defending the country or our economic system.
Yeah, but he’s back in the plantation now.
The Booker incident is the clearest indication of what is wrong with Romney. Plain and simple…the guy is just uncomfortable with his extraordinary wealth. He should be touting the American Dream as a person who worked hard, invested his own money, time and education to give otherwise failing companies a new lease on life. Amazing that it takes a Black Inner City Mayor like Booker or a Black Congressman like Ford to make the point. This election is really about what kind of country the US wants to be. A bunch of dependant helpless losers feeding of the nanny state, or a nation of movers and shakers who get stuff done. Romneys timidity will be his undoing.
Well, Booker may be smarter than the average Democrat, but that ain’t saying much. Anyone who actually has any brains cleared out of that party by about 1998 or when they turned 25 years old, whichever came first.
Cory Booker got a little too uppity to suit Obama and his #1 overseer, David Axelrod. So Booker had to be slowjammed.
fine: its fair game. but since obama has made, “hop, change, social justice etc” the main platform of BOTH campains then obamas definitions of these terms and how he developed these definitions are also fair game. The biggest threat I see, is not obamas critisism of romney bain capitol, but romney being too nice and failing to address the SEVERE character issues in obama as well as policys. “i dont want to sink to that level” sounds really neato in an after school special, but in a presidential campaign sounds cowardly and passive agressive. I dont want civility in my presidential elections, I want the truth to be told and told BOLDLY AND WITHOUT EXCEPTION OR APOLOGY. we have way too many conservatives hamstringing there own by being more concerned with our enemy liking us instead of defeating them. Simply put if we cannot grow a set of balls and tell them to shut up when they are continuously lying and harrasing us, then we have no business being in charge. hate to disappoint ya conservatives, but being in charge of the govt or your own life means that many times you have to be rude. this aint tea and crumpets.
I live in Newark, and let me tell you, Booker is a weak person. He is not willing to stand his ground. He makes sudden tactical moves that are viewed as weird by sane people. He can’t handle being on he defensive, nor does he stand his ground when attacked by either Democrat radicals or Conservatives. His positions float with the political winds that happen to be the strongest at the time. After condemning a Democrat TV commercial associating RINO Romney with Bain, Booker says he stands fore square behind Obama. He took heat from his own party, but now wants back onto the Democrat plantation.
Let’s face it, Booker had no right to comment on Bain.
Obama’s wonderful commercials pointing out so impactfully that Romney’s goal was mainly to fire people hit the nail on the head.
Mitt Romney never ate dog like Obama, but he does like to see living things suffa like when he shipped his dog on the top of his car once. The fact that Obama’s job plans haven’t worked really upsets Barack. Many nights Michelle holds her gallant President head in her lap as Obama cries himself to sleep reading passages from the Koran.
By the way, Obama’s attack on the Catholic Church is much deserved. They’re anti abortion stance fries my butt. A million abortions in the U.S. a year to me is about right. No, they’re not human beings. Just fetuses. The Republicans have no right to control women’s bodies except for the first two trimesters of a pregnancy. You just watch. What Obama wants he gets, and Obama wants to have the Pope begging on his knees for mercy from the anointed one, the masterful Barack Obama. The conscience and rules of the Catholic Church mean nothing to Democrats for Obama.
Now back to Obama’s attack on Bain Capital.
The fact that Obama’s commercials cite companies as examples that lost business years after Romney left Bain is of no consequence to me. To me, the fact that Romney once worked there, albeit, years before, makes it close enough. Try sitting 20 feet from a grenade blast. Get my point?
What’s more, you commenters fail to realize that only in governmental commercials is it against the law to lie in commercials. Congress years ago specifically made it legal to lie in them. Just like Congress says it’s okay to use insider knowledge to buy stock when they hear about some important event on the horizon.
Only commercial makers for products and services done outside the government are punished if they don’t tell the truth. Don Draper knows this. Just ask him.
Something else that really galls me is what they’re trying to do to that poor black woman teacher who fought for Obama’s dignity in that classroom when some rude, rich white boy, Hunter Rogers, tried to criticize and slander our President.
The white school board suspended her when they should have had a parade for her. I laughed so hard I almost whet myself when I read that a white woman today was beaten up at a drive through at a McDonalds in Utah. Suggests that if you look like you plan to vote for Romney, the Black Panthers might just wallop you good. Nowadays, if you’re white, you better either stay home or be ready to fight. Obama sets the tone. White people better know not to roam. If you got a white face, these days, you’d better know your place. Disrespect us and Obama’s brothers’l throw you under the bus.
Now back to the classroom.
Without a doubt, if it’s not actually against the law to disrespect President Obama, it should be. If Obama feels the need to run up a five trillion dollar debt with money borrowed from our grandchildren, that’s fine. After all, Obama’s a brilliant mind and economically a genius. No child in school should be able to question the President’s decisions. Even if they end up having to pay off the debt.
Then there’s the matter of Obama’s transparency and test scores and whole school history.
If Obama wants to keep his SAT grades a secret, that’s his business. How degrading and humiliating it would be for Obama’s entire family if his SAT scores were hundreds of points below those of George Bush?
And I’m not finished. Those idiots who tried to make it a big thing when the hot mike caught Obama telling the Russian President that he’ll turn over a few missile defense secrets after his re-election was a mountain made out of a molehill. How do you think the Russians or the Chinese feel about a country that refuses to share its technology? After all, we’re all in this together. Aren’t we? Obama says it’s a global world. Obama’s only giving everybody a fair shake at survival in case of a missile attack.
One thing that made me very proud.
I’m sure you, too. Today in Chicago the Occupiers battled the Chicago police to a stand still. One Chicago cop who must have been racially insensitive was stabbed. I hope he learned his lesson. Obama called it a teaching moment as a joke during dinner at a snazzy Washington restaurant. Not everybody knows it but Obama has a hilarious sense of humor.
I’m aware that some of you bigots don’t admire Obama for vocally supporting the Occupiers since they began taking their fairness message to New York. Obama said how proud he was of them; of people who peacefully protest the corrupt actions of Wall Street. The fact that Obama criticizes the fat cats and then gets millions in donations from them doesn’t bother me at all. Obama needs all the money he can get to get us through the recession Bush got us into.
Which reminds me of the wars Bush started.
Thank goodness Obama suggested the “Surge” strategy that for all intents and purposes, won the war in Iraq. Then Obama showed his military acumen and leadership ability by applying the same strategy in Afghanistan. Of course, I hear nitwit Republicans say it was a mistake to give a exit date in Afghanistan, which is just a way to make sure the Afghan army knows they had better be ready when we bug out.
The only other comment I’ll make is about Time magazine that outed Obama as being gay. From what I heard, his sexual activities at Columbia were only on the experimental level. I get really upset when Republicans claim Obama married Michelle because she has so many manly mannerisms. Actually, I think it’s a perfect balance because I can’t think of a single manly mannerism Obama possesses. Sometimes he looks so dainty I almost believe in could sprout wings and fly.
Incidentally, the rumors about Obama’s sleepovers at the Rev. Wright’s home were a sheer fabrication for the most part.
Well, I started with Booker and I’ll end with him. Cory should know better. You gumshoe Republicans are going to find out after Nov. 6 that, when it comes to running a Chicago style political campaign, Obama knows best.
Current and former lefties being enmeshed in doctrinal knowledge, lose seeing the political realities. Lumping together Booker’s and Rattner’s speeches misses the point that Booker is a Mayor. And as such his statement was calculated – the way that here in New York the former Democratic Mayor Ed Koch, supported a Republican for Wiener’s Congressional seat, and made it clear in public that the Administration’s treatment of Israel was the reason.
Booker’s statements were intended to put pressure on Obama and his Democrats, and did so.
Rattners comments, however welcome – and they are – were perhaps Rattner distancing himself personally, or mending fences.
Completely different statements. Utterly.
I saw a lot of website but I conceive this one holds something special in it. “No.” by Amy Carter.