Welcome to October presidential politics!
Mary Katharine Ham spells out that Barack Obama wants to have it both ways.
He claims it's fitting to bring up John McCain's past associations while at that same time he calls discussions about his relationship to Bill Ayers to be a detestable, desperate attack.
From the Weekly Standard:
Pivoting from his customary "distraction" protestations, Obama is now going after McCain's connection to the Keating Five scandal of 1989.Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Monday will launch a multimedia campaign to draw attention to the involvement of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the “Keating Five” savings-and-loan scandal of 1989-91, which blemished McCain’s public image and set him on his course as a self-styled reformer.
Retaliating for what it calls McCain's “guilt-by-association” tactics, the Obama campaign is e-mailing millions of supporters a link to a website, KeatingEconomics.com, which will have a 13-minute documentary on the scandal beginning at noon Eastern time on Monday. The overnight e-mails urge recipients to pass the link on to friends.
The Obama campaign is using the economic situation to justify the attacks: “The current economic crisis demands that we understand John McCain's attitudes about economic oversight and corporate influence in federal regulation. ... The Keating scandal is eerily similar to today's credit crisis, where a lack of regulation and cozy relationships between the financial industry and Congress has allowed banks to make risky loans and profit by bending the rules.”
But he opened the door for this tactic long before the current crisis' culmination, in May of this year:Senator Barack Obama said today that a scandal from Senator John McCain’s past – the Keating Five – was just as relevant to the presidential campaign as questions about who Mr. Obama has associated with over the years.
In a news conference here, Mr. Obama was asked whether his campaign intended to raise the banking scandal from the 1980s, which Mr. McCain has apologized for. Every piece of every candidate’s public record, Mr. Obama said, is “germane to the presidency.”
“I was just asked previously about a whole host of issues and associations that are a lot more flimsy than John McCain’s relationship to Keating Five,” Mr. Obama said. “What I said, I can’t quarrel with the American people wanting to know more about that and me having to answer questions about it.”
While, in true Obama fashion, he simultaneously distanced himself from the exact argument he's making today, which at the time was delivered by superdelegate Rep. Peter DeFazio introducing him at a rally:Obama today was asked if he believes McCain’s association with Keating Five is fair game.
“Congressman DeFazio obviously delivered a speech that wasn’t my speech,” Obama said instantaneously, trying to separate DeFazio’s comments from his own.
Mary Katharine Ham notes the hypocrisy of the slippery Obama and calls him on it.
As long as he "can't quarrel with the American people wanting to know more about that" and him "having to ask questions about it," Bill Ayers sounds like a dandy topic for the debate Tuesday.
The McCain campaign should offer Obama a deal. They'll stop talking about Bill Ayers as soon as Barack Obama apologizes for associating with him, the Nexis search for Ayers reaches "more than 3000 results," and he offers 20 years of public and legislative penance for perceived misdeeds. 'Round about 2028, he'll be free and clear.
Obama will release a mini-documentary of the scandal, here, at noon today.
I'm guessing it won't emphasize the fact that only McCain and John Glenn were found not guilty of violating any Senate rules.
That's a critical point. McCain was found NOT GUILTY of violating any Senate rules. This is a cut and dried issue. Obama's attacks are baseless.
The transcendent Obama has redefined "double standard." Apparently, he believes that the sort of thing that's fair game in regard to an opponent should be off limits when it comes to that opponent scrutinizing him.
Such justifications for his own actions should be termed the "Obama standard." They defy all reason.
9 comments:
There's a difference.
McCain's attacks on Obama, as you said, is for guilt-by-association. An exaggerated association at that.
With the Keating Five connection, McCain is guilty by being guilty, as he himself admitted in his book.
There is no comparison between the two.
Define "guilty."
I don't say Obama is guilty of conspiring with Ayers to make war on the government, but Obama does/did hang out with the most radical of radicals. To this day, Ayers believes in his cause and his methods. He was a founder of a group designed to overthrow the American government.
McCain didn't admit to being "guilty" in a legal sense. Declaring an action to be a mistake can't be compared to a declaration of guilt.
The Ethics Committee cleared McCain of any wrongdoing. All charges against him were dropped.
Cleared. NOT guilty.
You're attempting to muddy the waters. I can understand why.
Obama's supporters are terrified of Ayers. I think they're justified in their fears.
I think the Ethics Committee actually admonished McCain for "poor judgement". So not guilty of a crime just guilty for having a bad head on his shoulders when it came to what resulted in a financial fiasco and unprecedented bailout??? I'm getting deja vu all over again.
You really don't want to talk about Obama and poor judgment, do you?
I'll spare you the embarrassment. Though if you insist, I'll be glad to give you a laundry list of Obama's poor judgment calls.
Your first commenter is correct. there is no comparison.
Barack's documented associations with Bill Ayres, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, his idolization of Marxist Saul Alinsky, his working for a community activist organization, who's members are under indictment or in jail for voter fraud, his wife's pronouncement that she she hasn't until recently been prpoud of America, and his plans for socializing America and America's health care system do not compare with McCain's questionable involvement (and finding of not guilty) in a scandal which was neither proved nor was it a serious threat to America, such as Obama's many nefarious connections are.
One wonders how long into an Obama administration will the terrorists attack again. Before or after he dismantles our military?
True.
As you so clearly lay out, there is absolutely no comparison between the two.
Poor old John, he can't catch a break, now being associated with his past, not once but twice being the pawn in a negotiation; being admonished for his lack of judgement in association with the Keating con-game.
And prior to that for being a Prisoner of War who would still be in Hanoi if it wasn't for the skillful US & French negotiaters who dealt with the North Vietnamese, to gain all of the POW's freedom.
Negotiation is a skill, just like flyng a jet.
Apparently, Obama has a tie to the Keating Five as well! Read this: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/a-different-mem.html
That's right. John Glenn is active in the Obama campaign.
Post a Comment