NY US REP Jerrold Nadler: Obama Didn’t have the Political Courage to make a Statement and Walk out (of Wright’s Racist Church)


CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN … Obama, no political courage.

Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden says that Obama will be tested in first 6 months and will initially get response wrong. Now Democrat Representative Jerrold Nadler says that Obama does not have political courage and a spine.

Question: How could someone sit through 20 years of hate?

Answer: Obama didn’t have the political courage to make a statement and leave. So how could that lack of courage be a good thing and a requirement to be President.

Jerry Nadler, Democratic US House Rep from the 8th district New York had some rather interesting things to say over the weekend as he stumped for Barack Obama. Nadler’s comments are hardly anything complimentary or a trait for a President of the United States and Commander and Chief. Did Nadler just call Obama a coward? Is this the kind of leader that America needs in a post 9–11 world and an economically challenged world? A CHANGE is supposed to be for the better … not spineless!!!

Obama didn’t have the political courage to make a statement and walk out.” [of Reverend Wright's racist church]


 Nadler is asked how Obama could sit in Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church for 500 Sundays listing to the anti-semitic, anti-American diatribes

“This is not going to be complimentary to Senator Obama ….. he didn’t have the political courage to make a statement and walk out.”

I have much more ………….. but I had to get this up. I have much devastating video including Nadler professing that if “that there really were phone banks in Gaza, that would be a major campaign issue”. He sid it would be all over the media and be a major problem for the campaign. And laughed at the idea of the Gaza campaign contributions – a story Atlas broke in July.

UPDATE I: Nadler Criticizes Obama’s ‘Courage’

He searches for the word. Rejects a couple suggestions.

“…not particularly complimentary towards Sen. Obama,” he says.

“Think of the history here,” says the six-term New York congressman. “You have a guy who’s half-white, half-black. He goes to an Ivy League school, comes to Chicago … to start a political career. Doesn’t know anybody.

“Gets involved with community organizing — why? Because that’s how your form a base.  OK. Joins the largest church in the neighborhood. About 8,000 members. … Why did he join the church? … Because that’s how you get to know people.

“Now maybe it takes a couple years,” Nadler says, suggesting that soon Obama starts to think of Wright, “’Jesus, the guy’s a nut, the guy’s a lunatic.’ But you don’t walk out of a church with 8,000 members in your district.”

If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • Presidential Elections are about the 3 C’s … Credibility, Courage and Character … Remember that when You Vote for McCain or Obama Today
  • Something Wasn’t Wright: Why Oprah Winfrey Left Rev. Wrights Church … Didn’t Want to Offend Audience, then Why Did Obama Want to?
  • Separation of Church and Obama: Barack Obama Quits Trinity United Church of Christ Due to Political Liability … What Took You So Long?
  • The Pot Calling the Kettle Black … Obama Campaign Claims Clinton Has ‘Character Gap’
  • Patriot Act Hearing has the Democrats Screaming Into the Wind

  • Comments

    37 Responses to “NY US REP Jerrold Nadler: Obama Didn’t have the Political Courage to make a Statement and Walk out (of Wright’s Racist Church)”

    1. FL on November 3rd, 2008 12:23 pm

      Nice to see: there’s a votematch to test your political preference. After 18 questions (with two statements each) you’ll see the candidate whose views most reflect your own.

    2. Rusty Bridges on November 3rd, 2008 12:24 pm

      So, it’s okay to be involved in a radical hate church because thats the way politics work? He was just getting to “know” people for political expediency? He needs that kind of association? They can spin it every way they want, he is still a spinless anti American race baiter.

      It’s okay with these people that he changes his stance depending on the current demographic. How about lets vote for someone with a set that knows who he is and stands behind his beliefs like McCain who isn’t afraid to take a side. Our side, Americas side.

    3. Maggie on November 3rd, 2008 2:16 pm

      Big Hillary supporter for McCain.

      Lynn Forester de RothschildPosted November 1, 2008 | 02:26 PM (EST

      Obama’s Economic Plan

      In a stunning about face this week, Barack Obama announced that “I’ve got an economic plan that is similar to Bill Clinton’s.” On its face, this would mean that, if elected, Barack Obama would raise taxes on all taxpayers, support NAFTA and reduce welfare, three cornerstones of the Clinton economic legacy. This would be a serious reversal of Senator Obama’s campaign promises and his stated policies. Other than a crass attempt to hitch his fate to the Clinton star, the comment highlights the serious risk to our current economic situation that is posed by Barack Obama’s pledge to raise taxes on the producers of jobs and capital, increase welfare and abrogate our commitment to NAFTA. These policies create a serious probability of leading our economy into further economic dismay.

      Barack Obama is wholly disingenuous in implying that his tax policy will have the same success as the Clinton policy when, in fact, the economic environment inherited by Bill Clinton was vastly different from today’s economy. Obama’s assertion is similar to saying that because an aspirin cures a headache it will do the same for cancer. President Clinton benefited from an economy that grew by 4.2% in the first quarter of his Presidency, the Dow was up 5.8% for the year prior to his election, total national debt was 54% of national output and information technology was in its infancy. Tax rates inherited by Clinton had been reduced by 60% under Reagan and Bush Senior since the Carter years. When President Clinton increased taxes, he simultaneously brought our national budget into balance in sixteen months. He signed NAFTA against the will of his own party.

      Yesterday, the country’s growth contracted by .3%, providing one-half of the technical verification of the recession being felt around the country and certain to be inherited by the next President. The Dow is down 32.5% for the year, our national debt is at nearly 70% of total GDP (after WWII national debt was 102% of GDP and America was at the beginning of its stunning economic success). Currently, unless investors are able to forcefully advance new energy technologies, there is no analog to the 1990′s information revolution which can give us the necessary economic stimulus for innovation and job growth. Supporters of the Illinois Senator not only ignore the current fragile economy, but also the obvious consequences of Obama’s opposition to NAFTA and his destructive economic philosophy. In fact, Senator Obama’s policy of higher taxes and higher tariffs for our fragile economy at this time is exactly the wrong direction for the country.

      One of the reasons that Barack Obama could well lose on Tuesday is because voters are beginning to realize that his policies will tank the economy and the markets. The stock market looks forward, not backward, and there is a direct correlation between the declining Dow and the increasing poll numbers for Barack Obama. According to the June Gallop Poll, by a margin of 87 to 13, Americans care more about improving the economy than they do about redistributing wealth.

      According to his rhetoric, Barack Obama is helping working Americans. In fact, John McCain offers bigger tax breaks to the working class than Barack Obama. (The only reason you do not know this is because you have not looked at the fact that no one earning under $50,000 will pay any tax under John McCain and, on the famous “Obama Taxometer”, the untruthful Obama campaign does not include the $5,000 health care tax credit that John McCain in giving to every American). Moreover, almost 75% of Americans making $100,000 have some capital gains. As the value of their investments turns negative they will suffer badly, even if Barack Obama does not raise their taxes. A declining economy is bad for everyone.

      It is dishonest for Senator Obama to claim he will fix this economy by taxing the top 5%. His spending increases on programs alone amount to $300 billion per year. The dishonesty is to say that this will be paid by his tax on the top 5%. It is simply not possible. As the Obama plan makes clear, the additional taxes of the “rich” have already been committed to his “refundable tax credits”. According to the Tax Policy Center, the Obama tax plan will take $70 billion from the top 5% of earners in the country and redistribute it to the 60 million Americans who pay no tax.

      Senator Obama’s economic philosophy will make America neither stronger nor fairer. Today, the top 1% of earners contributes 40% of the nation’s $2.6 trillion tax intake and the bottom 50% pay 2.9% of our nation’s total needs. This is in contrast to the 17% of total tax paid by the top filers under the Carter Administration when the top marginal rate was 70%. It has been shown that reductions in tax rates increase tax revenues because incentives to private enterprise strengthen the economy and create jobs and a larger tax base.

      As he exploits the current widespread economic uncertainty in the nation and blames the richest, Barack Obama not only ignites an insidious class war, but also ignores the inconvenient fact that America’s top earners have paid double in taxes since the reduction of their tax rates under George Bush. Namely, in 2003 the richest Americans paid $136 billion in taxes and after the tax cut in 2006 they paid $274 billion. Times of economic uncertainty are exactly when our government needs to cling to business and the generators of wealth and jobs, not use them as scapegoats.

      Along with my Democratic “friends,” I used to make fun of Republicans by saying that they lived in an “evidence-free zone.” Well, I now see that it is the Democrats, swept away in the “narrative” and “transcendence” of Barack Obama, that are refusing to look at the facts about the likely consequences of electing Barack Obama. The same media outlets that failed to vet the Iraq War are now failing to vet Barack Obama. Unfortunately, they will never accept responsibility; it will be our country that takes the hit. For me, that is very sad.

      John McCain may not be the most eloquent or sexiest candidate in this race, but he is the candidate who will best serve this nation for the next four years. He is reducing taxes for all Americans further than Barack Obama, cutting federal spending and encouraging free trade and energy independence as engines for domestic economic growth. More importantly, he and Sarah Palin actually have a record of taking on the vested interests and their own party (while working with Democrats) to make tough decisions. I have yet to be shown the same evidence of the junior Senator from Illinois.

      Regrettably, the road kill of Obama’s reckless rhetoric and policies is not the rich taxpayer, but the entire American economy. The pain will be felt mostly by those who lose their jobs in the economic downturn and are the owners of 401ks and other savings who suffer at the stock market continues to decline. Barack Obama has not been held accountable for the obvious consequences of his tax and trade philosophy and policies. If elected, it will be all Americans who will suffer.

      PS. Most readers have probably not read this far into the piece, but if you have, I have one more comment…..Since speaking out about this election, I have seen the Obama response is to attack me personally, particularly on the Internet. Fine, but just to let you know, eighteen months ago my husband wrote in the Financial Times that capitalism was in retreat because of the greed on Wall Street. We have subsequently invested only in tax-free government securities. So, my opinion is not driven by my economic interests. I am driven by what I said in the New York Times in June, “I love my country more than my party” ……and it is ok with me if you hate me. xoxoxo


    4. katablog.com on November 3rd, 2008 3:01 pm

      Obama Campaign knew about Obama’s Auntie. Which of course means: chalk up another lie for Obama.

    5. Maggie on November 3rd, 2008 3:07 pm

      Was watching the news today and they were showing somewhere..didn’t get the city where people’s registrations to vote are in piles along the highway or road.. Haven’t heard anymore about it since.

      Kind of amusing watching MSMedia .. They have beat up on Sarah Palin and John McCain and then sit and act like they played no part of it. Blaming others. That was their whole idea all along.. to try to destroy them and do fluff pieces on Obama and barely mention Biden.

      Like the Nadler story above, behind the scenes there are many more Dems saying this among other things about Obama. I know someone who works for his campaign in this area. When Clinton was in office..used to hear how those defending him off the record were saying not so pleasant things about him and the things he done or said.

    6. Michelle on November 3rd, 2008 3:26 pm


      Wait! What? You say Obama’s campaign knew about his Auntie living here illegally? Can’t be, because Obama said he didn’t know that and we know he doesn’t lie.

      I’m sure it was an oversight.

      This would be funny if it wasn’t so disgusting….

    7. Just Bearly on November 3rd, 2008 3:26 pm

      Taxation (without representation) is unconstitutional….

      Did OBama bring his children to that church? Would not that be a form of child abuse….??? I would not want to shape my kids thoughts with the teachings of the Reverend Wright.

    8. Rusty Bridges on November 3rd, 2008 3:27 pm

      Say it ain’t so, the Obama website set up by the Obama campaign distorts truths in Obamas favor? Now I have lost all faith in mankind. I also find out now that Bush is not responsible for the housing crisis! Gee, I’m sure glad I found out before I voted.


    9. Rusty Bridges on November 3rd, 2008 3:34 pm

      In Obamas defense, if he allowed his Aunt to be deported back to Kenya, she would likley be “purged” by his cousin.

      Makes you wonder why she couldn’t claim political asylum? Oh yeah, It would be revealed that Obama campaigned for his murdering cousin.

    10. CBB on November 3rd, 2008 4:02 pm

      On the eve of this election, I will be at my airport to cheer John McCain and wave an American Flag and say my prayers, not for me, but for my country. I can’t help but to step back and take in this situation.

      There are two men running for the office of President of the United States, the most powerful position on earth, and only attainable with the votes of the American people.

      One man spent more time in a torturous prisoner of war camp than the other has in the U.S. Senate. He was given up for dead because of the bones broken, teeth cut off, and torture he endured for our sake. But, he lived to choose to stay because of the demoralization his leaving would cause his fellow American prisoners.

      Returning with his fellow prisoners, years later, he chose to serve his country again in the government and as a Senator developed a reputation as one who didn’t consistently vote along party lines, but measured his decisions by a standard of what he believed was best for Americans. His name is John McCain.

      Most recently, while his opponent was accepting our money to further an agenda in the mortgage market that would devastate our economy and ruin retirements for senior Americans dependent upon their pensions, this man was standing in the Senate calling for oversight, naming the corruption, and sounding the alarm. His opponent and cronies silenced the warning and pushed ahead, villinizing an investigation that could have saved every American the declining value of their homes, and an overwhelming legacy of debt. The danger isn’t over. History teaches that raising taxes will certainly cross a crisis into a depression.

      Whose hands we deliver our future into at this juncture, has never been more important. Terrorists have promised to destroy all Western Culture, and have proven their resolve in the act of war of 9/11. On that day, 3,000 Americans arriving at work, and flying home, or to job assignments, or to family, were mercilessly murdered. We watched in horror as our innocence burned. We were introduced to Radical Islam on that day, and we will never forget…………will we?

      The opponent was educated at a muslim school at a young age, joined and attended a church for 20 years with an anti American, racist pastor who baptized his children, performed his marriage, and who he calls his spiritual mentor. The opponent spent American taxpayer dollars to campaign in Kenya for a candidate who committed genocide, agreed to impose Islamic Law and renounce an agreement with America that Kenya be a non protected zone for world terrorists. The opponent has close associations with domestic terrorists who bombed the capitol, cost loss of American life, and wishes he could have done more. The opponent has vowed to bankrupt our industry that produces ½ of our energy sources and cause all Americans to suffer under skyrocketing energy costs. The opponent has contributed to agencies he has long associations with that mock our cornerstones of liberty by fostering voter fraud in our free elections. His name is Barack Obama.

      I have two questions:

      Are you voting for Obama?

      How can you make that decision?

      Please, vote for your country. Vote McCain

    11. ANewGirl on November 3rd, 2008 4:56 pm

      #10-CBB- Great Post!

    12. Susan on November 3rd, 2008 4:56 pm

      Ain’t that the truth…OSAMA bin Laden Barack SADDAM HUSSEIN Obama didn’t have the GUTS or decency to stand up to Jeremiah Wright (WRONG) to correct a WRONG!!

      Obama’s not doing so makes him just as GUILTY as all of the other racist hatemongers (members of Wright’s so-called church) of condoning Wright’s behavior…

      GET OUT AND VOTE TOMORROW!! Do your real patriotic duty and I ain’t talking about paying more taxes ;-)

      McCain/Palin 08 :-)

    13. Diane on November 3rd, 2008 5:17 pm

      I will be voting tomorrow.
      It will be for Barack Obama.
      We all have our opinions. We all have to make up our own minds.

      I hope whatever the outcome, we can learn to tolerate each other and be able to find the good in each other.
      We need to make America a strong country again and we need all of us working together to do that.

    14. Maggie on November 3rd, 2008 5:18 pm

      Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin walks down the front steps of the Missouri State Capitol building Monday in Jefferson City before speaking to supporters. (Columbia Tribune)

      They were FIRED UP to see Sarah Palin in Missouri today!
      It was the second largest crowd in Jefferson City history.
      Prime Buzz reported:

      We have a crowd estimate! The Highway Patrol is saying 17,000 to 18,000 — more than the Kerry-Edwards appearance here four years ago and probably second only to Mel Carnahan’s funeral in 2000.
      Meanwhile, in Lee’s Summit, Missouri, outside of Kansas City 400 people showed up to see Democrat Joe Biden.
      Prime Buzz reported:

      Vice presidential candidate Joe Biden urged supporters in Lee’s Summit Monday to work hard in the closing hours to elect Barack Obama to the White House. “Thirty-seven hours!” he told some 400 supporters in the gym at Longview Community College.
      And, once again the mainstream news comes out today with its latest report on how Sarah Palin is costing McCain the election.
      Sadly, this has become the norm from the mainstream media.

      Pictures on the site.


    15. Alesia on November 3rd, 2008 6:43 pm

      Nov.4 Obama/Biden

    16. katablog.com on November 3rd, 2008 6:53 pm

      Rusty Bridges: it’s wonderful that you’ve seen the light. If your real point is that it happened while Bush was President, that doesn’t mean that Bush caused it. You have to go back and learn a bit more than what’s explained in that video. You have to find out who pushed for allowing Banks to buy those mortgage backed securities and who warned that trouble was on the horizon. Then you have to look into who refused to listen and stopped any action to curb those rotten securities. Who pushed to allow those without regular real income to purchase houses even though they had been deemed by standard credit sources not to be credit worthy.

      If you like all those decisions that the democrats pushed through, then Obama is your man. If you prefer someone with more prudence that warned of the impending doom, McCain is your man.

    17. Maggie on November 3rd, 2008 7:10 pm

      From: Springer, Dan
      Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 7:21 PM
      Subject: Urgent
      Personnel Board investigator assigned to look into Troopergate, found
      no probable cause that Palin violated the state’s ethics law.

      This is reversal of legislative investigation which concluded she had
      abused her power.
      Dan just sent a second email that had this note in it…I am not sure if this is language right from the decision or not:

      there is absolutely no evidence to support a finding of probable cause
      for violation of the executive ethics act against the gov.

    18. yoyo muffintop on November 3rd, 2008 8:42 pm

      If you like all those decisions that the republicans pushed through, then McCain is your man. If you prefer someone with more prudence that warned of the impending doom, Obama is your man.

      Barack Obama
      March 22, 2007

      Dear Chairman Bernanke and Secretary Paulson,

      There is grave concern in low-income communities about a potential coming wave of foreclosures. Because regulators are partly responsible for creating the environment that is leading to rising rates of home foreclosure in the subprime mortgage market, I urge you immediately to convene a homeownership preservation summit with leading mortgage lenders, investors, loan servicing organizations, consumer advocates, federal regulators and housing-related agencies to assess options for private sector responses to the challenge.

      We cannot sit on the sidelines while increasing numbers of American families face the risk of losing their homes.

      And while neither the government nor the private sector acting alone is capable of quickly balancing the important interests in widespread access to credit and responsible lending, both must act and act quickly.

      Working together, the relevant private sector entities and regulators may be best positioned for quick and targeted responses to mitigate the danger. Rampant foreclosures are in nobody’s interest, and I believe this is a case where all responsible industry players can share the objective of eliminating deceptive or abusive practices, preserving homeownership, and stabilizing housing markets.

      The summit should consider best practice loan marketing, underwriting, and origination practices consistent with the recent (and overdue) regulators’ Proposed Statement on Subprime Mortgage Lending. The summit participants should also evaluate options for independent loan counseling, voluntary loan restructuring, limited forbearance, and other possible workout strategies. I would also urge you to facilitate a serious conversation about the following:

      * What standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verification of income and assets and the underwriting of borrowers based on fully indexed and fully amortized rates.

      * How to facilitate and encourage appropriate intervention by loan servicing companies at the earliest signs of borrower difficulty.

      * How to support independent community-based-organizations to provide counseling and work-out services to prevent foreclosure and preserve homeownership where practical.

      * How to provide more effective information disclosure and financial education to ensure that borrowers are treated fairly and that deception is never a source of competitive advantage.

      * How to adopt principles of fair competition that promote affordability, transparency, non-discrimination, genuine consumer value, and competitive returns.

      * How to ensure adequate liquidity across all mortgage markets without exacerbating consumer and housing market vulnerability.

      Of course, the adoption of voluntary industry reforms will not preempt government action to crack down on predatory lending practices, or to style new restrictions on subprime lending or short- term post-purchase interventions in certain cases. My colleagues on the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs have held important hearings on mortgage market turmoil and I expect the Committee will develop legislation.

      Nevertheless, a consortium of industry-related service providers and public interest advocates may be able to bring quick and efficient relief to millions of at-risk homeowners and neighborhoods, even before Congress has had an opportunity to act. There is an opportunity here to bring different interests together in the best interests of American homeowners and the American economy. Please don’t let this opportunity pass us by.”

      It’s ironic that the administrations of the most outspoken champions of capitalist free market policy (Republicans) keep hitting meltdowns which force them to take “socialist” actions to save the economy.
      Ironic indeed. lol.

    19. Richard on November 3rd, 2008 8:45 pm

      I read an article today saying that McCain has some real chances due to the vagaries of the Electoral College, although (according to the article) it has to be admitted that he will not win a majority of the popular vote.

      We’ll see what happens.

      The most dire thing that I fear … Obama will be the darling of the TV/Hollywood crowd. Some decades ago, these people did not have a decisive voice in shaping public opinion. They were looked on as entertainers, but no more than that.

      Now they are cultural icons.

      The laxity of our American culture over the last few decades is coming back to bite us in the ass.

      God help us.

    20. yoyo muffintop on November 3rd, 2008 9:06 pm

      The conservative post-mortems are going to make for some fascinating reading in the coming months if Obama wins.

      McCain’s divisive, disastrous campaign is as much a product of today’s Republican party as it is a reflection of a shaky character. If you hear the NRO and Fox News tell it, McCain’s problem is that he didn’t take the current conservative insanity far enough.

      I imagine 2012 will be the true wakeup call, when they run a “True Believer” and get destroyed. Then they might wake up to the fact that Bush might not have been the problem, but rather “Republicanism-as-we-know-it” was the problem. Social conservatism is intolerant, at least as currently practiced. It’s governmental intervention in the most private spheres of daily life, governmental enforcement of religious morality and governmental discrimination against minority groups. Social conservatism is trying to sell intolerance to the American people.
      To a growing number of Americans (particularly young Americans), social conservatism is synonymous with bashing the homos, legislating the womb and pretending that if we don’t tell kids about condoms, they won’t have sex. Those aren’t “ideas.” They’re thinly-disguised ignorance, intolerance and incompetence.
      And the longer Republicans try to sell them as if they’re some grand solution to our nation’s problems, the more they’ll wander in the wilderness.

    21. Richard on November 3rd, 2008 9:09 pm

      Can Obama win popular vote but lose election?
      Associated Press

      WASHINGTON – It’s a nightmare scenario for Democrats — their nominee Barack Obama winning the popular vote while Republican John McCain ekes out an Electoral College victory. Sure, McCain trails in every recent national poll. Sure, surveys show that Obama leads in the race to reach the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.

      Sure, chances of Republicans retaining the White House are remote.

      But some last-minute state polls show the GOP nominee closing the gap in key states — Republican turf of Virginia, Florida and Ohio among them, and Democratic-leaning Pennsylvania, too.

      If the tightening polls are correct and undecided voters in those states break McCain’s way — both big ifs — that could make for a repeat of the 2000 heartbreaker for Democrats that gave Republicans the White House.

      In 2000, Democrat Al Gore narrowly won the popular vote by 537,179 votes. But George W. Bush won the state-by-state electoral balloting that determines the presidency, 271 to 266. The outcome wasn’t clear until a 36-day recount awarded Florida, then worth 25 electoral votes, to Bush by just a 537-vote margin.

      Before the 2000 election, political insiders had speculated just the opposite, that perhaps Bush would win the popular vote but lose the presidency to Gore.

      One day before the 2008 election, Obama sat atop every national poll.

      Enthusiastic by all measures, the Illinois senator’s Democratic base was expected to run up the score in liberal bastions of party strongholds such as New York and California.

      But the race appeared to be naturally tightening in top battlegrounds that each candidate likely will need to help them reach the magic number in the Electoral College, electoral-rich Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia among them.

      To win, McCain must hold on to most states that went to Bush in 2004, or pick up one or more that went to Democrat John Kerry four years ago to make up for any losses. McCain’s biggest target for a pickup is Pennsylvania, which offers 21 votes and where several public polls show Obama’s lead shrinking from double digits to single digits.

      McCain faces a steep hurdle. Obama leads or is tied in a dozen or so Bush-won states, and has the advantage in most Kerry-won states.

      The Republican’s campaign argues that as national surveys tighten, McCain’s standing in key states also rises and that, combined with get-out-the-vote efforts, will lift McCain to victory in Bush states and, perhaps, others.

      “What we’re in for is a slam-bang finish. … He’s been counted out before and won these kinds of states, and we’re in the process of winning them right now,” Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager, said Sunday.

      Obama’s team is awash in confidence.

      “We think we have a decisive edge right now” in states Bush won four years ago, said David Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager.

      There’s still another possibility, perhaps more improbable than the first — that McCain wins the popular vote while Obama clinches the White House.

      True, Democrats have been fired up all year.

      True, Republicans haven’t been.

      True, Obama and McCain have been faring about even among independent voters.

      But there are signs that the GOP’s conservative base has rallied in the final stretch and these voters usually turn out in droves, even if lukewarm on the candidate.

      Then there’s the question of a tie in the Electoral College. In that case, members of the next House would select the winner.

      If Obama carries every state that Democrat John Kerry won in 2004, plus Iowa, New Mexico and Nevada, then he and McCain each would have 269 electoral votes. A tie also would result if McCain takes New Hampshire from the Democrats’ column but loses Iowa, New Mexico and another state that Bush won, Colorado.

      In an election year that’s defied conventional wisdom time and again, anything can happen.

    22. Maggie on November 3rd, 2008 9:39 pm

      yoyo muffintop on November 3rd, 2008 8:42 pm
      If you like all those decisions that the republicans pushed through, then McCain is your man. If you prefer someone with more prudence that warned of the impending doom, Obama is your man.

      Barack Obama
      March 22, 2007

      I have provided a bill that McCain co-sponsored concerning these companies and warning of the exact problems we are facing now. It was voted down by Dems in committee..Also a New York Times article from 2003 saying George Bush called for a massive overhaul of these places. I have provided a long list of George Bush calling for massive overhaul of these place.. I have provided a tape of Maxine Waters, Barney Franks and others saying there is no housing crisis, praising Franklin Raines when Rep. were trying to get tighter regulations. They were beating up the regulator and praising Raines. If you want to ignore it, that’s your choice. Doesn’t make it any less true. I’ve also provided tapes of Hillary saying Obama lacks experience and is not for on the job training. McCain has experience and knows what he’s doing. Biden praising McCain saying he would be honored to serve with him and the country would be well served and trashing Obama.. Bill Clinton praising McCain, blaming dems for fighting regulations and that dems too voted for deregulation and saying Obama has only 1 year in the Senate, not enough experience, Obama giving Hillary the finger. Bill Clinton worked with a Rep. congress.. Today Jerry Nadler is saying Obama lacks political courage..The number 2 recipients of money from Freddie and Fannie was Obama.. Look at Dodd he was number 1 and president of the Banking Committee. Sorry but the thought of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Howard Dean and George Soros don’t get it for me. Keep on ignoring it, don’t make it any less true. Just like ignoring the housing bubble that was bound to burst.. the internet bubble, 911 and a recession coming on. Alan GreenSpan even admitted he made a mistake. Like I said ignore it, doesn’t make it any less true.

      John McCain is not a socialist. Both men voted for that package. McCain didn’t just want to bail out financial institution that help get us there, he wanted to help the home owners stay in their homes and get mortgages they could afford. NOT give them money, but refinance their mortgages so they could pay the money back. That is not just giving them money, they have to pay it back.

      George Bush is not the cause of all the problems in Washington. One of the persons dems are now cheering is the main guy who went before the United Nations to make the case for war.weapons of mass destruction.

    23. Maggie on November 3rd, 2008 9:49 pm

      btw,,,,,,,dem lead congress the last 2 years ..9% approval rating.

      Today Clinton is campaigning for Murtha..the guy who called people racists, and rednecks , you know the one’s clinging to their guns and religion. Murtha also was the one who made the gaff about our military men. Bill Clinton said the guy doesn’t even really live there that is running against Murtha(yeah right) He has a home there and that Murtha didn’t really say that stuff.. oh brother.

    24. yoyo muffintop on November 3rd, 2008 11:13 pm

      Maggie – Then I guess we’ll see a republican landslide in the Presidential race and republican landslide in the House and Senate?

      In regards to #23 – I’m having trouble figuring out where and when John “BIG Government is the enemy” McCain thinks government intervention is appropriate. He doesn’t want to build a new, vast government bureaucracy to help people get access to health care but he does want to build a new, vast government bureaucracy to help people to sell their homes? In addition to owning the biggest insurance company in the world (AIG) and the biggest mortgage refinanciers in the world (Fannie and Freddie), the government now gets to become the biggest real estate broker in the world? I’m sorry but I don’t get it. It seems to me that nowadays when it comes to national politics, “conservative” is a codeword that only refers to social and religious values. The small government ideology that has always been the core of the conservative movement has been abandoned in the name of political expediency.

      It’s sooo Republican – capitalism on the way up & socialism on the way down. Hypocrisy at it’s finest.

    25. yoyo muffintop on November 3rd, 2008 11:55 pm

      Maggie – btw it was 25% approval rating for repubs in 2006.
      It appears they both suck, so to speak.

    26. Donna r on November 4th, 2008 2:01 am

      I feel like I’ve been sitting through 20 years of hate with all these anti-Obama blogs. Maybe now you anti-Obama’s will experience the hell on earth the anti-Bush crowd has endured the past 8 years. I’m especially looking forward to Obama’s Supreme Court selections!
      SM: You think that a difference of opinion is hate? You think that political discourse is hate? ARE YOU STUPID? SORRY, YOU MUST BE JUST PLAIN IGNORANT.

      I can’t wait until your Messiah cannot do any of the things that he promised his minions without sinking a country. Wait until he is held accountable for his actions.

      Is is a sad state of affair in the US where people know from an economic and national security stand point that Obama is a danger to the future of the US and yet he is supported as some type of feel good social experiement.

      The days of Jimmy Carter may soon be upon us.

      BTW … when ya tax the rich … it has a way of trickling down to the middle and lower class. Alsways has and always will.

    27. nurturer on November 4th, 2008 7:02 am

      On with the show! THIS IS IT!

    28. Rusty Bridges on November 4th, 2008 7:35 am

      Katablog, I was being extremely sarcastic.

      I know that Obama sued Citibank to lower the standards that led to this crisis. I know why he did it and how he gained from it. He walked on the backs of the people he claims to be helping. I suppose he justifies it as a small sacrifice to elevate himself just like everybody else he throws under the bus.

      I’m really shocked that more people don’t see it. I guess that most younger people had other interest in school besides learning how our government works. It’s just easy to blame Bush.

      I fully understand the Ayers connection and his “education reform” that is teaching young minds to reject the establishment. I am well aware of the implications of his connections with Rev. Wright and his radical teachings.

      Now the Kenyan connection plays into his plan quite nicely

      The more I find out the more I understand why I felt the way I did when I first saw him.

      The truth of the matter is that we can not convince anybody of the truth and they will have to find out for themselves should this election go to Obama.

      Would you like for me to make my predictions if it should? I’m pretty sure that those who understand, such as yourself, don’t need it spelled out for them.

    29. Rusty Bridges on November 4th, 2008 7:45 am

      Katablog, to clarify I meant sarcastic towards people who reference the Obama website like it is gospel truth.

    30. Rusty Bridges on November 4th, 2008 7:49 am

      #20, Those post-mortems won’t be as amusing as the dumbfounded Obamanites a year from now.

    31. katablog.com on November 4th, 2008 8:38 am

      YoYo let’s see: who do you think makes a better senator, doing his job representing the people.

      1. The guy who tries to pass legislation to stop a wrong.

      2. The guy who writes a letter.

    32. Richard on November 4th, 2008 1:22 pm

      RustyBridges (#28) … Isn’t that what the media and the TV celebrity types do? They say:


      is responsible for everything.

      No complexity in their world view.

      And lo and behold, people accept it.

    33. ANewGirl on November 4th, 2008 2:55 pm

      Rusty Bridges says……#20, Those post-mortems won’t be as amusing as the dumbfounded Obamanites a year from now.

      Dumfounded is an understatement! They’ll be angry ALL OVER AGAIN—-who will they blame now? Themselves? For voting THE CHOSEN ONE in for that “change” they so desparately wanted. Well, we are going to get LOTS of change if Obama gets in. We can count on that! Just not welcome changes that the American public will accept gladly.

      ***McCain/Palin ’08***

    34. Maggie on November 4th, 2008 3:35 pm

      The conservative post-mortems are going to make for some fascinating reading in the coming months if Obama wins.

      McCain’s divisive, disastrous campaign is as much a product of today’s Republican party as it is a reflection of a shaky character. If you hear the NRO and Fox News tell it, McCain’s problem is that he didn’t take the current conservative insanity far enough.

      I imagine 2012 will be the true wakeup call, when they run a “True Believer” and get destroyed. Then they might wake up to the fact that Bush might not have been the problem, but rather “Republicanism-as-we-know-it” was the problem. Social conservatism is intolerant, at least as currently practiced. It’s governmental intervention in the most private spheres of daily life, governmental enforcement of religious morality and governmental discrimination against minority groups. Social conservatism is trying to sell intolerance to the American people.
      To a growing number of Americans (particularly young Americans), social conservatism is synonymous with bashing the homos, legislating the womb and pretending that if we don’t tell kids about condoms, they won’t have sex. Those aren’t “ideas.” They’re thinly-disguised ignorance, intolerance and incompetence.
      And the longer Republicans try to sell them as if they’re some grand solution to our nation’s problems, the more they’ll wander in the wilderness.

      Put down your dem. talking points. I haven’t heard one person say if they win on the Rep. side they are going to change roe vs wade. In fact they did a survey of young people and almost all thought it was about marriage. I haven’t seen one trying to impose on religion on anyone. What is wrong with a person who believes in their religion. Doesn’t anyone on the dem. sides do the same thing? Or are they hyprocrites..go to church and do the opposite. I know many reps. who don’t bash homosexuals. Please explain to me how..a court can find a man guilty of a double homicide if he kills a pregnant woman, and yet an abortion is legal. Please tell me how Jack Kevorkian was sent to jail for helping people who asked to die painlessly, please tell me how you can be for the death penalty and abortions are legal? I find all that hypocritical. Obama and Biden don’t support same sex marriages.. are they ignorant, intolerant and incompetent. I have never seen a Reverend ever come close to winning the presidency.

      You have a group of people trashing Obama and yet campaigning for him. Telling people he’s not experienced and he has no political courage. Isn’t that ignorant?

      It’s been divisive since dems took over Congress, they had no intention of wanting to work on anything. too funny You dont think Pelosi and Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden aren’t divisive. lol What’s their records of working across the aisle with people? You see John McCain was the one always praised for working across the aisle.

      You call McCain a shaky character..lol As for minorities…can you tell us what dems have done for minorities? What about going after Joe the Plumber who asked a simple question. What about the newslady in Florida..who was banned from interviews because she asked some tough questions. BTW Fox news.. was listed on the Pew study as the most fair and balanced station.

      and No I didn’t say a Republican clean up.. Who ever is in office as president if things are going bad, that party always suffers, just as in Jimmy Carters day and the dems in the early 90s, but what goes around comes around and it will again and again.

      Unlike you if Obama wins I won’t sit and hope he fails or we all lose.. I voted weeks ago. For someone to say all one party believes is correct and right and the other wrong is partisan and divisive to me.. Both parties represent different groups of American people..and it’s divisive, ignorant and intolerent to not recognize it. It’s also divisive and ignorant to believe Bush caused all the problems in DC. The Liberal Media carried that one. Just as they have for months about Sarah and John McCain.

      Money is what runs politics now. Whoever has the most money is almost a sure bet to be the winner.

    35. Maggie on November 4th, 2008 4:18 pm

      Here is one story for you about what a Rep. has done for minorities from a liberal dem.

      Bob Geldof in Rwanda gives Bush his props

      KIGALI, Rwanda — Bob Geldof has parachuted into the White House travel pool here in Rwanda, and will join us on the flight from Air Force One to Ghana tonight.

      He’s going to interview President Bush for Time magazine and several European outlets, such as Liberacion, about aid to Africa for HIV/AIDS, malaria, and business development.

      Mr. Geldof is an Irish rock and roll singer and longtime social activist who has helped, along with U2 rocker Bono, raise awareness about need in Africa. His most well known achievement is organizing the Live Aid concert in 1985, which raised money for debt relief for poor African countries.

      But Mr. Geldof has remained closely engaged with African affairs since then, and he spoke off the cuff to reporters today who were waiting for a press conference with Mr. Bush and Rwandan President Paul Kagame.

      Mr. Geldof praised Mr. Bush for his work in delivering billions to fight disease and poverty in Africa, and blasted the U.S. press for ignoring the achievement.

      Mr. Bush, said Mr. Geldof, “has done more than any other president so far.”

      “This is the triumph of American policy really,” he said. “It was probably unexpected of the man. It was expected of the nation, but not of the man, but both rose to the occasion.”

      “What’s in it for [Mr. Bush]? Absolutely nothing,” Mr. Geldof said.

      Mr. Geldof said that the president has failed “to articulate this to Americans” but said he is also “pissed off” at the press for their failure to report on this good news story.

      “You guys didn’t pay attention,” Geldof said to a group of reporters from all the major newspapers.

      Bush administration officials, incidentally, have also been quite displeased with some of the press coverage on this trip that they have viewed as overly negative and ignoring their achievements.

    36. Maggie on November 4th, 2008 4:41 pm

      here’s you a comment from a fellow dem.

      Lou Dobbs Cnn..

      The Republicans in Congress have little to brag about when they return home. And the Democrats have a lot of explaining to do, as well. Once the party of the New Deal, Fair Deal and Great Society, the party of working men and women, the Democrats are now buried as deeply in the pockets of their corporate masters as are the Republicans.

      The Democratic Party has played a major role in helping to pass legislation that is grossly injurious to middle-class Americans and their families. This Congress, Republican-led with complicit Democrats, has cut $13 billion in college-student aid, passed numerous free-trade agreements that threaten good-paying jobs and approved an unconscionable bankruptcy law written by credit-card companies that is nothing less than a federal government heel in the neck of American families bankrupted by catastrophic illness and crushing medical bills.

      In fact, 18 of the 44 Democrats in the Senate and 73 of the 201 Democrats in the House voted in favor of the creditor-friendly bankruptcy bill. They apparently either didn’t bother to learn or didn’t care that half of all bankruptcies are caused by the soaring medical bills that stem from unforeseen illnesses and injuries.

      The Democrats are also casting deciding votes on the so-called free-trade agreements that have allowed corporate supremacists to export American jobs to the cheapest sources of labor. Twenty-two House Democrats approved the recent Oman free-trade agreement, including 10 that had previously voted for the Central American Free Trade Agreement. CAFTA, which passed the House by only two votes at the midnight hour, opened up to American businesses a market about the size of New Haven, Connecticut.

      And Democrats in the Senate have embraced the wrongheaded policies of the Bush administration on border security and illegal immigration. Thirty-eight Democrats joined with the Senate Republican leadership to crush the Republican majority and pass the illegal-alien amnesty bill.

      Forty-two Democrats voted against legislation that would have built a border fence to stop the flow of illegal aliens and drugs across our borders. In fact, it was Democrat Christopher Dodd of Connecticut whose amendment was attached to the legislation that would require the U.S. government to consult with the Mexican government before building a fence along our southern border.

      Congressional Democrats are even more dismissive of the need for border security than the Senate Republicans. House Republicans have taken to calling the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill the “Reid-Kennedy bill” because Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts shaped most of the legislation.

      The Democrats incredibly talk about illegal aliens as victims as they press for amnesty, yet not one has raised concerns for the true victims of corporate America’s lust for cheap labor: American working men and women, taxpayers all.

      It was, after all, Sen. Reid who argued in 1993 that illegal aliens place “tremendous burdens” on this country’s justice system, schools and social programs, stretching our federal wallet to the limit as a result of “illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits.”

      What could possibly explain Sen. Reid’s complete conversion on the issue? He’s said it was from talking to his wife and immigrants, but could his state’s wholesale importation of illegal aliens and the importance of all that corporate lobbying and campaign contribution money be a factor? Surely not.

      And how about that firebrand advocate for the Democratic Party’s traditions and values, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean? Once considered a presidential candidate with a refreshing vision for America, Dean now spends no time pursuing ideas and proposals that would help working men and women. Instead, he’s devoting his time and energy begging for money at the same contribution slop trough as his opponents while hurling insults at Republicans and indulging in petty name-calling.

      Instead of articulating a vision and plan to help the United States win the war in Iraq, he said simply late last year, “The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong.” And when Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was to address a joint session of Congress, Dean called him an anti-Semite for criticizing Israel. The petulant DNC chairman outdid himself by comparing an inconsequential Republican congresswoman, Katherine Harris of Florida, to the rather consequential Joseph Stalin. The incomparable Howard Dean managed to do that while calling for an end to political divisiveness.

      The Democrats want to wrest control of Congress from Republicans, and they have a better than average opportunity to accomplish the feat. The next five weeks just might be a good time for frustrated, disgusted constituents to ask what it will take to elect a Congress willing to represent working men and women and their families.


    37. yoyo muffintop on November 5th, 2008 5:45 pm

      “You call McCain a shaky character..lol”

      Maggie – you didn’t understand the sentence or the definition of shaky. “shaky character” refers to the republican party and in that context makes complete sense.

      Sorry, social conservatism is over and evangelicals like yourself are a thing of the past.

    Leave a Reply

    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
    E-mail It