Obama: The Buck Stops Over There

Just a quick question, Mr. Tapper: why bring up June news at this time?

Is it because:

A) You are a closet Obama hater and you secretly want to get someone else elected?
B) You thought this might be a good way to get people to read your blog? or
C) You don't have anything new to say?

There might be some other reason I can't think of. But my guess is C.

Just wondering... and by the way, thanks for the background info.

This does seem to rehash some old things doesn't it? And the new stuff is kind of .... nothing. Nice try.

The 1996 questionnaire issue tells us a lot about Obama and it is not good. Think about it:
A state legislator doesn't have time to fill out a questionnaire on their own? What kind of nonsense is that?
And even if it's true- what kind of a staff member would dare even guess what Obama's answers should have been? And then have the gumption to not review the answers with his boss!?
My conclusion on this is that Obama does not know how to delegate responsibility, if he is not in fact lying about it.

When it comes to tell the truth I will pick Obama over the Clintons any time. I hope their daughter will not take after them on that aspect. She seems to be a fine young woman.

Is this a re-print? Haven't I seen this article on another blog somewhere? Seriously, this seems exactly like another article I've read already - something's fishy about this post.

Thank God there is one journalist and one article who dares to shed some light on the hypocricy of the Obama campaign. I can tell that many Obama supporters are upset and say its a piece of garbage journalism, but if it was an article about Clinton you would say how calculating and devious she is. You would further point out how her staff is an extension of her and how her campaign is corrupt and morally bankrupt. HMMMMM! Maybe some one should look at the big picture and realize Obama is no saint and he has painted a rosey picture of himself at the expense of smearing Hillary Clinton. Wake up democrats. Dont be duped by Obama. Think and then think again before you make a big mistake and vote for him. Hillary is not perfect, but she is competent, experienced, compassionate and not a hypocrite. the buck stops here with clinton. She has appologized for her mistakes, Obama blames his staff. You tell me who is the more likeable and honest candidate. i cast my vote for Hillary Clinton.

Great article, Jake. I'm sure Obama is very proud of his staff as they have been key in propelling him to the front of the race and are running the most organized campaign in the race. Sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the bed. Let's see what you come up tomorrow.

Obama is as principled as bowl of Jello.

Jake Tapper is one of the most respected political correspondents out there. You Obamites who think that your guy is Jesus returned just can't see the forest from the trees.

The Clintons are known for keeping members of the press on tight leashes and rewarding or punishing them based on how 'friendly' their coverage is. How else to explain a story like this on Obama, when Hillary's record of shifting accountability for ANYTHING negative dwarfs Obama's?

ABC's pro-Clinton bias is rivaled only by CNN.

I agree with the other comments, this article is highly opinionated against Obama and represents a lousy piece of journalism. It is not a new story and seems to be scrapping the barrel to plaster some dirt on the Obama campaign. Why dont you write articles comparing important position issues between the candidates?That's what voters would really care about...

I agree with all of the other posts here - this is certainly another meaningless hit piece on Obama because you can't find anything better to come up with. I have been campaigning for Obama locally and will continue to enthusiastically do so. I can certainly understand with the frenetic pace and different personalities (especially in a campaign that rose so quickly), how well-meaning people can make mistakes. Even people in Hillary's camp can do the same thing (although I find it hard to believe about Shaheen, who is quite experienced in politics). What a sorry piece of journalism this is, you're pathetic.

It truly is sad what passes for journalism anymore. And this is a 'senior' correspondent for ABC?

Thank goodness I'm old enough to remember what a respectable media looked like.

I agree with all of the other posts here - this is certainly another meaningless hit piece on Obama because you can't find anything better to come up with. I have been campaigning for Obama locally and will continue to enthusiastically do so. I can certainly understand with the frenetic pace and different personalities (especially in a campaign that rose so quickly), how well-meaning people can make mistakes. Even people in Hillary's camp can do the same thing (although I find it hard to believe about Shaheen, who is quite experienced in politics). What a sorry piece of journalism this is, you're pathetic.

First it was Hillary, then Obama, now it's back to Hillary. Will you (the press)just hurry up and decide who you want to anoint so we can get the show on the road?

This is just another hit piece on Senator Obama. Is this all you've got? Why don't you go after Hillary about her vote on Iraq and her if I knew then what I know now answer, or her Kyle-Lieberman vote? Or how about Billy Shaheen in NH for accusing Obama of being a drug pusher and her know responding to it for over 24 hours. The Clinton machine is at work again trying to smear Senator Obama and the media just sits by and lets it happen. Shame on you. Who does Hillary blame for this one?

While the concept of "the buck stops here" sounds admirable, there's a limit to what can be expected of a candidate -- especially in a rapidly-assembled volunteer organization. I would argue that Obama is merely being open and honest in his comments and seriously doubt that he questions his staff's professionalism and competence.

In those specific situations that you mention, there were obviously mistakes made that Obama was not aware of and would not have made himself had he been personally involved. Ultimately, our leaders are responsible for the strategic direction that they set but can’t be held accountable for each and every action that occurs by his/her staff. Especially in relatively insignificant situations like you've described, I'm satisfied when a leader acknowledges (a) that they were not personally responsible, (b) that it was an action taken by someone on his/her staff that they themselves would have handled differently, and (c) that they will discuss the issue with the person to ensure that the issue does not occur again. In more serious situations, you obviously need to evaluate whether the staff member is the right person for the job and take appropriate action, as I'm sure Obama is very capable of doing.

Applying this standard, I can’t help but question Hillary’s involvement in some of the seemingly "dirty politics" activities of her campaign – most notably the recent comments by her NH campaign co-director who attempted to make an issue of Obama's acknowledged teenage drug use. In fairness because of their lower level roles, I wouldn’t hold Hillary accountable for the false emails claiming that Obama is a Muslim and am pleased that those volunteers were removed from her campaign.

All considered, Obama has my vote for his continued openness and honesty. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to have a President who is sincere and unscripted?!

Hmmm, interesting (and biased) viewpoint. Also, strange how this same story is "newly" reported in a different news venue weekly.

And this with a handful of Clintons staffers "resigning" weekly for "unauthorized" transgressions.

It's amazing you were able to type all of this with a straight face! lol

Interesting bit of editorializing. Not unexpected from a partisan blogger but something of a shock coming from reputable broadcast journalist.

I don't know whether your comments are inaccurate but the approach/context seems inappropriate to me and the closing was downright snarky.

This story is tright and meaningless, are you really reporting on all the things Obama has blamed on his staff? Why not report all the things every candidate blames on their staff? Is there a particular reason you are picking on Barack and not every candidate? Why single him out for something everyone does? This is just more yellow journalism, and it proves that you are a talentless hack of a reporter with nothing to provide the communtiy at large besides your one sided crappy opinion.