[tomder55]

One of Barack Obama's Middle East policy advisers disclosed yesterday that he had held meetings with the militant Palestinian group Hamas – prompting the likely Democratic nominee to sever all links with him.

Barack Obama sacks adviser over talks with Hamas - Times Online

Obama's campaign went to great lengths to try to spin a story that he was not an adviser . But , the New York Slimes a few weeks ago identified him as a Middle East Policy adviser regardless of the campaign's story.

Helene Cooper - On Foreign Policy - Election 2008 - Politics - New York Times


Malley's relationship with Hamas really should come as no surprise to Obama .No doubt it did not come as a surprise. But a Hamas spokesman has endorsed Obama ;and John McCain has made it an issue. So Obama AGAIN cut bait.

The victim list is growing .

Just like Rev, Wright and all the other advisors that held (wink wink nod nod ) different positions than Obama's stated ones; once they were exposed, Obama had to cut the ties. The pattern continues regarding Barack Obama's judgment. He seems to choose advisors and associates who engage in conduct and hold positions contrary to his meme . When their views and actions come to light by other's digging and reporting , he goes into the stage of denial claiming that the advisers are not really advisers ;or minor players in the grand scheme of things When the political problems persist he is compelled to do the politically expedient thing publiclyand throw them under the bus .The question remains ;if Obama has such superior judgment, why does he choose his advisors so poorly in the first place?

[NeedKarma]

Can't wait until we all start McCain threads ad nauseum!
Except that we have lives.

[ordinaryguy]

But , the New York Slimes a few weeks ago identified him as a Middle East Policy adviser regardless of the campaign's story.

Wow! So even though you always call it the "Slimes", you DO believe what it reports, when it suits you. Cool!

[SkyGem]

Barack Obama sacks adviser over talks with Hamas - Times Online

The question remains ;if Obama has such superior judgment, why does he choose his advisors so poorly in the first place?

The pied piper brings them in and then sacks them as is convenient. How telling! And the rhetoric he uses to cover up what happened continues to tell the story on this man who wants to lead the world's biggest superpower nation. I'm afraid the "superior judgment" is all in his head, Tom. Too bad his flock is swallowing the bait hook, line and sinker no questions asked! As I said before, this will come back to haunt them if he gets in the WH and we told 'em so!

[tomder55]

Wow! So even though you always call it the "Slimes", you DO believe what it reports, when it suits you. Cool!

I have seen no evidence to refute their claim.

[tomder55]

Can't wait until we all start McCain threads ad nauseum!
Except that we have lives

Yup as I suspected ///to the cult following of the man ,he can do no wrong .

[speechlesstx]

yup as I suspected ///to the cult following of the man ,he can do no wrong .

No, he's untouchable, Teflon man, and he doesn't pander like the others:



You remember how the left went ballistic over the cross in Huckabee's book case? What's the rule on this?

[ordinaryguy]

yup as I suspected ///to the cult following of the man ,he can do no wrong .

Yeah, like the 15% of the populace who "strongly approve" of the way George Bush is doing his job.

[Skell]

I wonder who that 15% who strongly approve will vote for in the general election considering McCain is doing everything in his power to distance himself from Bush and his many of his policies. Except the war of course. I suppose though that his Iraq policy will be enough for the 15% considering it is most probably what they approve most of during Bush's presidency.

[speechlesstx]

How did this get to be about Bush? Nothing ad nauseum about Bush bashing is there?

[Skell]

When Tom accused Obama of having one eyed supporters some here may have seen the comparison to some die hard Bush men here and elsewhere. Surely you can see the comparison steve..

[BABRAM]

Tom, I see the Republicans are getting a jump-start on the witch hunt. But you wouldn't do that... nah, not you.

Obama Pledges Support for Israel, Blasts McCain Hamas Comments - Yahoo! News

The pied piper brings them in and then sacks them as is convenient. How telling! And the rhetoric he uses to cover up what happened continues to tell the story on this man who wants to lead the world's biggest superpower nation. I'm afraid the "superior judgment" is all in his head, Tom. Too bad his flock is swallowing the bait hook, line and sinker no questions asked! As I said before, this will come back to haunt them if he gets in the WH and we told 'em so!

Sky you flip-flop more than any of the candidates, Republican or Democrat. You do realize that the candidate you've supported, "Hillary Clinton," has chastised McCain for his Hamas exaggerations concerning this smear campaign?!

Obama Hamas Smear: Clinton Says It Shouldn't Be Taken Seriously - Politics on The Huffington Post

[inthebox]

No, he's untouchable, Teflon man, and he doesn't pander like the others:



You remember how the left went ballistic over the cross in Huckabee's book case? What's the rule on this?

Yeah this will play well in KY - along with his NARAL endorsement - is abortion rights really God's work?

As to "clean coal" eastern coal has been declining due to its sulfur content compared to western coal. Companies are already retrofitting new ca limestone scrubbers to meet 2010 rules.

Obama can believe and hope all he wants but what he does contradicts this.

Nice link Speech.

[tomder55]

Bobby
McCain told the truth . I was listening the night the Hamas spokesperson was interviewed on the John Batchelor show.

Steve ;yeah when the Huckster made a Christmas message and had the audacity to have a cross appear in the ad that set off a clarion call of the dangers of theocracy. But as you know in the meme of the left ,politics from the pulpit is acceptable for certain groups and not for others .

Skell I do not count myself in with the 15% hardcore Bush supports . Unfortunately he is losing support from his core by making bad decsions like putting Polar Bears on the endangered species list when in fact their population is growing .

Look ; Obama has extreme positions that he will have a hard time defending in the general election . The Dems picked another McGovern and I think the election results will show that . Not that it will matter . McCain is just this side of a Democrat and it looks like the Dems. Will achieve a veto proof majority in the House and Senate unless the Republicans get their heads out of their butts in a hurry.

I will continue throughout the campaign to expose whenever possible the dangerous path Obama would take this country on. He tries to hide the fact by dumping advisors who let the cat out of the bag but the evidence is there if the NY Slimes and the MSM were willing to actually look under the rock.

[ordinaryguy]

McCain is just this side of a Democrat and it looks like the Dems. will acheive a veto proof majority in the House and Senate unless the Republicans get their heads out of their butts in a hurry.

I'd be curious to know how you define getting their heads out of their butts. The way they've managed to earn the disapproval of 82% of the electorate is by following the policies that you advocate. They've lost three special elections this spring by trying to tie the Democratic candidate to Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Exactly what do you think they should change to turn the tide?

[tomder55]

No ;it has been by NOT sticking to principles . They came in in 1994 with a mandate based on the "Contract with America" .
Republican Contract with America

They did not live up to it once they became the majority party. Bush's biggest fault was not using the veto pen on some of the legislation that came to his desk by the Republicans .
Had they stuck to conservative principles and not tried to outspend Democrats they would've held on to their majority.

Since they have become a minority party again they have not done enough to stop the Dems who ran a trojan horse campaign to gain power in 2006.It will do them no good to become a mirror image of the Dems. That is how they got in trouble in the 1st place.

[speechlesstx]

When Tom accused Obama of having one eyed supporters some here may have seen the comparison to some die hard Bush men here and elsewhere. Surely you can see the comparison steve...

Skell, the thing is I really haven't found that many die hard Bush men. I have seen many that others have proclaimed as die hard Bush supporters that actually haven't been shy about sharing their criticism of the president. The criticisms of Bush - right or wrong - have not only stuck, they're advanced by the very people who see no wrong in Obama. One person here seems to complain of every post on Obama without even entertaining the possibility of a flaw in this man who would be president.

Obama himself is taking the DNC's lead and running against what has now grown to "eight more years" of Bush. Isn't 8 years of Bush bashing "ad nauseum" enough? We have to elect the next president, not the guy who's leaving office at the end of the year.

[ordinaryguy]

Had they stuck to conservative principles and not tried to outspend Democrats they would've held on to their majority.

Well, yes, their fiscal irresponsibility is truly appalling, but there is also their warmongering, their contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution, their trashing of human rights, their inept and corrupt governance, their dismantling of environmental protections, their subversion of science-based policy by religious and political orthodoxy, their misguided energy policy, their xenophobic immigration policy, and their arrogant diplomatic failures.

Since they have become a minority party again they have not done enough to stop the Dems who ran a trojan horse campaign to gain power in 2006.

Besides spending less money, what else do you think they should have done to "stop the Dems"?

It will do them no good to become a mirror image of the Dems. That is how they got in trouble in the 1st place.

No, they got in trouble in the first place by letting the neo-cons hijack their party and run it into the ground.