Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior National Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories.
RECENT POSTS
- Obama's Globetrotting
- DNC Sees Cindy McCain's Wealth as Fair Game
- Crypto-Gramm
- Night of the Gun
- Michelle Obama Fair Game for Another State GOP
- All the World's Obama's Stage
- The McCain Campaign's Anti-Obama Video
- Rahm: Bush and McCain Are Following Obama's Foreign Policy Lead
- Thanks for Nothin', Joe!
- Comedy Is Not Pretty
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Obama-Backing Senator Hopes Superdelegates Focus on Clinton Scandals from 1990s | Main | RNC and John McCain Condemn Anti-Obama TV Ad; Hillary Clinton Mum »
How Republicans Plan on Ganging Up on Obama for Being "Weak" on Street Gangs
April 23, 2008 4:58 PM
Floyd Brown is back.
Brown, the former political director of "Americans for Bush" (meaning George H.W. Bush), was a key player in the infamous 1988 "Willie Horton" ad, and his new group the National Campaign Fund -- which launched a new website "Expose Obama" -- aims to take a similarly low-road approach to the presidential race and his new target, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois.
As Time's Michael Scherer reported this week Brown is trying to raise funds to run a TV ad against Obama in North Carolina, which will holds its primary on May 6.
The subject of the ad is Obama's record on gang violence, which in recent days has become a real problem in Obama's home town of Chicago.
"WEEKEND OF RAGE," headlined the Chicago Sun-Times on Monday. "In gang-related drive-bys, an attempted robbery and other flashes of violence, some 37 people were shot in Chicago over the weekend -- seven of them fatally."
“Bloody Weekend: 32 Shot, 2 Stabbed, 6 Dead,” reported the local CBS station on Sunday.
Chicago police blamed the increased violence on warmer weather and gang battles between competing factions of the Gangster Disciples street gang. "You just have too many guns, gangs, too many weapons out there," said Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis.
**
Brown's TV ad names victims of gang violence -- Tamika McFadden-Harris, murdered shielding her daughter after church choir practice; Mike Boyd, 15, beaten with bricks after a gang member crashed into his car; and Severa Enriquez, 14, who was shot five times in the back after he refused to flash a gang sign.
These victims, however, are from 7 years ago, however, in 2001, when Obama was a state senator. Quoting the Chicago Sun-Times calling the mayhem "urban terrorism," the ad points out that in 2001 Obama voted against expanding the death penalty for gang murders.
"When the time came to get tough," says the narrator. "Obama chose to be weak. So the question is, can a man so weak in the war on gangs be trusted in the war on terror?"
The ad ends on an image of the World Trade Center rubble after 9/11.
Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement that "Floyd Brown and the garbage he puts on TV represent everything the American people hate about politics, and we look forward to John McCain denouncing this shameful effort to boost his candidacy using Willie Horton ads...If Floyd Brown and his right-wing allies want to talk about who keep us safer in the world, they can start by asking John McCain why he refuses to end a war in Iraq that has only strengthened the recruiting arm of al Qaeda."
**
The ad is factually correct in that Obama on May 15, 2001, Obama voted against legislation, H.B. 1812, that would have extended the death penalty for murders committed "in furtherance of gang activity."
The bill was introduced after Enriquez's murder. An earlier version was changed after civil libertarians voiced concerns that it would have given tools for prosecutors to seek the death penalty against members of gangs who commit crimes, whether or not the crimes were related to the gang membership.
At the time Obama argued that the bill would disproportionally impact African-Americans and Hispanics. "There's a strong overlap between gang affiliation and young men of color," he said. "I think it's problematic for them to be singled out as more likely to receive the death penalty for carrying out certain acts than are others who do the same thing."
Obama also took issue with the legislation having being drafted as a result of Enriquez's murder.
"It's problematic for us to continually pass criminal laws based on anecdote," Obama said. "When we have a single situation when a prosecutor doesn't get what he wants, we come down here and pass a law, which is why we have a criminal code rife with contradictions. And it seems to me that we already have sufficient laws on the books to deal with these kinds of situations.”
He called the incident "extraordinarily tragic" but said laws already on the books could allow for capital punishment for those responsible for Enriquez's killing.
"For those who support the death penalty, anytime that somebody…carried out these heinous crimes, I think they can, in fact, be dealt with in the appropriate fashion," Obama said.
**
What Brown's TV ad doesn't mention is that the state's Republican governor, George Ryan, largely agreed with Obama, and he vetoed the bill in August 2001, saying the bill raised constitutional issues, that most gang related killings were at the time covered by the state's existing death penalty statute, and because of concerns that the bill would unfairly and disproportionately affect minorities.
Ryan, who had issued a moratorium on the state's death penalty because of concerns innocent people were being killed, also said that the bill's "efforts are misdirected in light of existing laws, constitutional concerns and our past history of erroneously sentencing individuals to death."
Obama campaign spokesman Burton says, "The truth is, Barack Obama supports the death penalty for certain heinous crimes, and he led the effort to reform the death penalty system to ensure that it's administered fairly and that convictions stand in court. Since most gang-related murders already qualified for the death penalty in Illinois, the legislation in the ad wasn't designed to be tough on crime, but to score political points, and it was vetoed by a Republican governor."
There are other votes on gang-violence, however, that Republicans will likely bring up to paint Obama as soft on crime, should he be the Democratic nominee.
In 1988, for instance, Obama was one of only three state senators to oppose a law declaring it to be a Class A misdemeanor for released convicts to knowingly have contact with a member of a street gang if a condition of his release is refraining from such contact.
But Obama's entire record paints a more complex picture on this issue. In 1997, he voted for a bill, to make it a Class-3 felony for peace or correction officers to commit a gang-related act (except in cases of undercover investigations.) In 1999, he voted to allow the court to require a minor to undergo a medical (or other) procedure to have a gang tattoo removed -- as a condition of probation. In 2003, he voted to allow courts to prohibit a gang defendant from associating with gang members as a condition of bail or release from detention. In 2004 he voted for a bill to create a new felony offense for gang recruitment on school property.
Obama showed a willingness in other votes to expand the death penalty -- for a first-degree murder near a house of worship, for some domestic violence cases, for killers who targeted disabled people, or who killed seniors with exceptional brutality.
It's clear that Republicans plan on painting gang bangers as "urban terrorists" and plan on connecting Obama to them. Clearly some of that will prey on racial fears.
Will it work? Will Obama's pushback be enough?
- jpt
April 23, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (136)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/28422686
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How Republicans Plan on Ganging Up on Obama for Being "Weak" on Street Gangs:
If you want to know what's going on in the streets, ask the streets, not the media. Half of the time, they report it completely wrong and miss out on key information. When the City of Chicago decided to expand this ongoing gentrification project that has been going on for the past 8 years, they were already aware of the complications to come when displacing large numbers of CHA residents and moving them into other areas of the city occupied by already existing street gang nations. Sure, many of them chose to relocate to other cities like Gary, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Benton Harbor, Calumet City or other Chicago suburbs, but many chose to remain in the city that they were born and raised in. WHY IS THE CITY ACTING LIKE THEY DIDN'T SEE THIS COMING?!! The idea of creating these high rises was racist from the beginning, no argument about that, but to solve the problem this way is and will forever be known as the ultimate disaster!!! Yes, the leaders of Chicago must take some responsibility for this one!! Plus, the chilren in the decaying urban mess that they call "a school system" need to stop being treated like second-class citizens and have opportunities for a "real education" not this nonsense that they are trying to pass now!! I've been in some of these schools, and it's hard to believe that you are still in America!! Some of them are just that bad! Superintendent Arnie Duncan has managed to make some improvements, but clearly not enough for a school system of that magnitude. YOU CAN ISSUE ALL THE DEATH PENALTIES YOU LIKE, BUT HOW DO YOU THREATEN SOMEONE WITH DEATH AND THEY ARE ALREADY SPIRITUALLY DEAD?!! TALK TO SOME OF THE POLICEMEN THAT HAVE INTERVIEWED SOME OF THESE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE MULTIPLE KILLERS AND HAVE THAT LOOK OF DEATH IN THEIR EYES. I'VE PERSONALLY SEEN IT AS WELL AS MANY IN THE COMMUNITY. THE ONLY THING THAT WILL CURVE THIS PROBLEM IS A SPIRITUAL RENEWING IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY BY TURNING OUR FOCUS BACK TO THE LORD AND HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS. ALL OF MAN'S SOLUTIONS WILL FAIL.
Posted by: ALL5TAR | Apr 25, 2008 10:37:43 AM
No funds are needed. Negative Ads about Obama gets millions of dollars worth of free promotion on television.
Republicans in the legislature and the Republican governor opposed the poorly written legislation. The expanded death penalty, meant lowering the age of children that could be given the death penalty. Illinois eventually banned the death penatly after DNA revealed that 1/3 of those on death row were innocent.
Posted by: Mr. Unite Us | Apr 25, 2008 2:06:46 AM
The point is that Republicans have been sitting on a lot of info that will come out in the general election. That Obama will be arrested and convicted for his crimes. Guess what the Dems will not have a candidate for President that any Democrat voted for in the primaries or caucuses. The VP candidate will end up running for President and McCain will win by a land slide. This info is from a Chicago resident who knows way too much dirty info on Obama that will get Obama convicted on many crimes. Just look at Obama's criminal, radical, racist and terror associates. The Republicans are counting on this. Obama fans come down from your emotional frenzies and allow some common sense, logic, reasoning and rationality back into your minds before it is too late. Vote for Hillary 08
Posted by: Bob4USA | Apr 25, 2008 1:33:03 AM
Maybe the bill wasn't needed; I haven't read the bill at this point so I don't know; but that doesn't change the simple fact that Obama's primary stated reason for opposing the bill was profoundly wrongheaded.
It's true that blacks are more likely to commit gang related murders; but at the same time blacks are more likely to be KILLED in gang related murders.
Thus "singling out" those who commit gang related murders for harsher punishment would actually give disproportionate benefit to law-abiding black people.
Which might not be fair when you get down to it. But the thing is that if it's unfair to anyone it's unfair to law-abiding white people.
I realize George Ryan gave the same idiotic reason for opposing the bill that Obama did; but that doesn’t make it right or logical...
Posted by: Bob Johnson | Apr 24, 2008 10:18:32 PM
what i do know is that both hillary and bill talk about how they are gonna run the white house when she becomes the president..... now who are we really voting for him or her because she tells us that she is gonna wear the pants in the white house but when she debates and refers always to the clinton days of the nineties that was Bills' presidency not hers. shouldn't bills name be on the ballot for third term president ever? what i see coming is another disaster of a Bush administration.
Posted by: 4honey9 | Apr 24, 2008 8:18:28 PM
Are we talking about the same Obama that said his welfare mother that raised him but then Americans find out that he went to private schools all his Republican life. The only one that made race an issue was the Senator from Illinois when he got in trouble making racist remarks. Obama also got away with making sexist remarks when Obama used "Annie Oakley" remarks toward Sen. Clinton insulting all women and America's first female hero (i.e., Oakley).
Why don't we talk about Obama's tax plan that will force the Middle class and retirees to pay more taxes? Why not discuss Obama's terrorist (e.g., Byers, Farankam, Meeks, etc.) friends, or slumlord (e.g., Rezko and who knows who else) friend, or racist (e.g., Wright, Meeks, etc.) friends. American's know not to listen to the media especially cable news for they are 100% for Obama. Even when he lies, the media will defend him. It is everyone's fault except Obama. What a surprise? Signed Obama style sarcasm!
Posted by: Dr Hubert, Lt Col, USAF Retired | Apr 24, 2008 6:00:45 PM
East Coast - I agree with you ..HilLary did great in the debate -she has concrete answers. Obama looked nervous, defensive and devious and I have concluded that he is both. He won't debate in N.C because it will blow his chances there and he needs that vote because he may lose Indiana. He doesnt connect to the middle calss or older voters because of all his dramas and his awful choice of associates. He acts like a young kid at times and a black rapper at other times. His mask is slipping and theres more scandals to come involving his criminal associates in Chicago. He is not what he seems. He takes money frm employees of oil companies and then criticizes clinton for accepting money also. He is allowed to do it because it is listed as ""donations"", but he still criticizes her for it. What a hypocrite !! Wake up America !!!
Posted by: JIMBO | Apr 24, 2008 3:43:52 PM
Patti, I find that most of the people posting are missing the point, the ad blaming gang violence on Obama is absolutely ridiculous. And the ad ties gang violence to the war on terror! Gang violence is going up all over the country and if anyone should be held accountable, it should be law enforcement and ultimately the administration that is supposed to enforce the laws. Secondly, in Ohio where I live, a low estimate would be 1 out of 10 people hold some form or prejudice that will make them to never vote for a black person. In Ohio and PA, Clinton won by 10%. Nobody wants to admite it but the fact of the matter is prejudice still exist in America. (eg. Bob4USA post)
Posted by: Phil | Apr 24, 2008 3:23:07 PM
I am a rural, small-town American. I’m not bitter. I don’t carry a gun but I do believe in the Holy Bible and God.
Hillary won in Pennsylvania, despite being outspent by Obama's “mega bucks” and bombardment on TV, radio, internet ads, phone calls, etc., etc., because we believe Hillary to be the better candidate --- pure and simple. True Americans cannot be bought!
Hillary was GREAT in the Pennsylvania debate --- Obama did quite poorly.
OBAMA HAS REFUSED TO DEBATE IN NORTH CAROLINA. He apparently can only read a pretty scripted speech from a teleprompter --- And he wants to run our country??? NO WAY!
Does he plan to have Jeremiah Wright spewing “God Damn America” from the White House? It’s bad enough he did it in a church of God.
Are Obama’s frequent visitors going to be their anti-American, terrorist friends: bomber Ayers, Farrakhan, Rezko, among others?
We need someone to show respect to ALL Americans, regardless of where they live.
GOD BLESS AMERICA --- HILLARY 2008!
Posted by: EASTCOAST | Apr 24, 2008 2:56:36 PM
Well, its quite obvious that America is still too racist to elect a black man for president. All the commenters failed to acknowledge the a white governor vetoed the bill and in fact stopped all executions in Ill. But all the people responding show their hatred for blacks, it obvious. Obama has offered hope and not the same old slash and burn politics that you all thrive. As a white man married to a black women, I had hoped that she was wrong when she said the a black man could never be elected to the presidency. But I must now agree, with the bigotry I have read in these comments, she is right. You all make me sick!
Posted by: Phil | Apr 24, 2008 2:17:00 PM
Patti...Good point! Maybe he will give a "speech on the vote. One other thought ..if he is elected president will he ever give a news conference?
Posted by: Jim | Apr 24, 2008 1:53:32 PM
The media needs to stop being bias
People need to relax and let the American voters vote.
The democratic party needs to swallow their pride and count the people of FL and MI - do a revote as requested
I believe Hillary is the stronger candidate and will be the nominee and the President of the United States. It is time for a woman to be in charge; relax she will do a great job and it won't be easy cleaning up Bush's mess.
Posted by: David | Apr 24, 2008 1:44:50 PM
FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR
FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR
Bill Clinton in 2004:
"Now one of Clinton's Laws of Politics is
this: If one candidate's trying to scare
you and the other one's trying to get you
to think; if one candidate's appealing to
your fears and the other one's appealing
to your hopes, you better vote for the
person who wants you to think and hope.
That's the best."
Posted by: Penny K | Apr 24, 2008 1:12:52 PM
The ad represents what is instore for Obama if he is the Dems choice in the fall, and the same will done to Clinton. The difference is Hillary will give it as good as they dish it. I don't think alot the ads against Obama are very nice, but they are not racist just because he is black...he is the front runner. The relentless calls of racism will hurt him ...now and in the fall.
Posted by: Jim | Apr 24, 2008 1:06:56 PM
my i used to admire the way they used to vet the presidents of this country but now after all this in fighting the people look to even be losing forcus that is the economy which is in real trouble we may not even know the extent of how bad it is until we get an honest person out there to be open we have seen this so far with global warming. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES economic policies will pull the country out of trouble all economist have said so. To me that is the most important thing when the economy get better then the violence robbery and the like will stop. Not even hillary's or obama's plan will make the economy better considering the fact that democates have always increased taxes. macain i don't even know where to start his isn't even good. Do lose focus the economy is a very important issue and by the way hillary being so articulate doesn't mean she is a btter candidate believe me all politicians are like that they lie a lot watch out. Hillary also has a warehouse of skeletons so it doesn't make her an exception google the clintons and see how they pardoned those puerto ricans who carried out bombings in the 90's and also the pardoning of the weather field under ground members found with explosives. Oh but hillary said she would obliterate iran don't forget with nukes i guess we have to forget that and just vote for her coz she is entitled to the presidency since it's a mornacy now.
Posted by: shay | Apr 24, 2008 12:42:36 PM
Obama would be a weak President. Good talker with no substance.
HILLARY 08!!
Posted by: John | Apr 24, 2008 12:27:42 PM
Richardson cannot be trusted and a traitor. Don't vote for him when runs for a Senator. He belongs to Wright, Rezco and Ayer who join any rgoup or fraternity where he will benefit and not the Americans.
Obama’s motto and theme should be Pay per Vote. Obama overspent in Pennsylvannia and still came out the loser.
Look at the facts as to how strong Hillary is:
Obama lost in Pennsylvannia in spite of endorsement by a Senator and overspending in ads, 5 to 1.
Obama lost in Texas and Ohio even overspending in ads and manipulating info in Ohio.
Obama lost in California even though Oprah, Maria Shriver, and Katherine Kennedy endorsed him.
Obama lost Massachusetts even though Kennedy and John Kerry endorsed him.
Hillary won the big states and has more electoral college votes to date than Obama that is crucial in November.
Obama lost the big states even though the media is most of the time unfair with Hillary and always positive to Obama.
Wake up superdelegates! You will make the right choice if you pick Hillary.
Obama mocked the Pennsylvannians and the entire nation, which is so irresponsible and very degrading to all Americans. He is just like Wright who mocked the Americans and like Rezco and Ayers who we can’t trust.
Wake up superdelegates!
Posted by: Alfredo | Apr 24, 2008 12:21:51 PM
Why should someone who prefers a different candidate than someone else be told to be free to leave the country? In every election, people choose one candidate over another. The right to vote and freedom to choose are what America is about.
Posted by: Patti | Apr 24, 2008 12:18:03 PM
I so despise Obama. He's determined to jump in and push his way to the front without earning it. Too many times in the past he has been the beneficiary of affirmative action, no doubt. And now he thinks it applies to running for president. McCain is going to kick his arse because the U.S. is far too smart to vote for someone who has a BLACK AGENDA. So now, instead of a victory by a Dem, and health care and an end to our messing in Iraq, we will have 8 years of yet another Republican and his moneyed cronies. Thanks OBAMA, you sure represent HOPElessness to me.
Posted by: Sick of Him | Apr 24, 2008 12:00:35 PM
Regardless of the issues Americans have with Clinton, she is the best candidate to get the job of running this country. She is a take-charge kind of person. Obama could not talk his way out of a wet paperbag. He is not good at interactions with others -- his speeches sound good when he is talking, but get him in a debating arena and he falls apart. Let's all get behind Clinton, send in your dollars, cast your vote for her and send her to the White House. Time to move on and send Bush back to scrublands of Texas .... Obama back to Chicago to ignore those issues, McCain back to Arizona to drink beer, and Clinto to the White House. Go Team Clinton!
Posted by: dixiecharms | Apr 24, 2008 11:59:13 AM
Hilliary, despite all her failings, is still the better choice. It's evident by the way she talks about the issues and her policies. Our prayers are with her. HILLARY '08
Posted by: gee | Apr 24, 2008 11:45:01 AM
Staying with the issue, the headline of this article is " Republicans Plan on Ganging Up on Obama for Being "Weak" on Street Gangs."
Yes, he did support laws requiring gang members to have their tatoos surgically removed, and other laws that forbid gang related activity or recruitment in the vicinity of schools or churches.
The question I'm posing is, "Have those measures been effective in significantly curbing gang activity and gang related deaths in the south side of Chicago?"
The latest rise in death tolls does reflect that those measures are not major deterrents. So, I'm saying that while Senator Obama has passed some very good measures, they might, indeed, be considered 'weak' because they are simply not strong enough to dispel the gangs, displace them, or discourage the senseless killings taking place. On the contrary, gang activity and deaths have increased, not decreased.
Posted by: Patti | Apr 24, 2008 11:28:57 AM
bob 4 usa hillary is no exception she too has a criminal background you have not just heard of it you are not told she has many cases pending in court at least in california just google in the clintons or peter paul the ship sailed away when edwards left the race he looked like the only dem hope the rest don't even have good economic policies perhaps we should vote for hillary who will obliterate iran in stead of macain i think the gop will be greatful for another 4 years in the white house which i feel they have already got.
Posted by: shay | Apr 24, 2008 11:09:26 AM
since we're talking facts lets really get the facts straight
Obama Sponsored Bill To Extend Death Penalty For 1st Degree Murder Within 500FT Of A Place Of Worship. Obama was the chief co-sponsor of bill providing that a person who commits first degree murder using a firearm in or within 500 feet of a church, synagogue or other place of worship is eligible for the death penalty. The bill would provide enhanced penalties for commission of other enumerated offenses, including second degree murder and aggravated assault. [91st GA, SB 1615, 2/15/00]
Posted by: andrew | Apr 24, 2008 10:33:32 AM
Actual Facts
Obama Voted To Make Recruiting For A Gang At School A Crime. Obama voted to create the offense of criminal street gang recruitment on school grounds (including a school yard, school playing field, and school playground), which a person commits when on school grounds or public property adjacent to school grounds, he/she threatens the use of physical force to coerce, solicit, recruit, or induce another person to join or remain a member of a criminal street gang, or conspires to do so. The penalty for the offense (House Amendment No. 1) is a Class 1 felony. [93rd GA, HB 4788, 5/13/04, 3R P; 57-0-0; PA 93-0938, 8/13/04]
Posted by: Nigel | Apr 24, 2008 10:28:49 AM
Obama never ever worked the streets of Chicago and never visited the families on the southside that lost their children to gun and gang violence. He lives in Hyde Park in a home bought by his crooked business friend Rezko. Obama doesn't care about the killings he only cares about himself. But he wants the black votes and they are dumb enough to vote for him. Plus they don't know the difference of when he is telling the truth or lying. His close ties to Ayers, Ayres, Wright, Rezko and Farrakhan are enough to view him as anti-american and a racist.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Apr 24, 2008 10:19:27 AM
That Ad tells the truth. Obama doesn't care less about the killings of young people on the southside of Chicago. Since he is getting all the votes from them he should care. But, Obama is for himself and only himself. He wants to make history like MLK. He has read many books on MLK and that's what he is interested in first. Do you think he wants to change politics in Washington? Think again. He wouldn't know what to do the first day on the job. He gives a good speech from the book of speeches of RFK that was given to him and that's what he reads. RFK gave speeches of hope and Obama copied that word. He can't do anything by himself how would he run the country.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Apr 24, 2008 10:11:44 AM
One more comment to add to the one I just posted. I do believe that Senator Obama supports the tougher laws on hate crimes (as do most people I know). So, if he supports those laws, is there hypocracy in his reluctance to support tougher laws for gang crimes? In many ways, they are the same. This isn't about race; it's about passing laws that target heinous criminal activity and deterring and punishing those who commit it. If he bases his position that all criminals who murder should be treated the same, why does he support tougher laws on hate crimes, but not for gang-related crimes?
Posted by: Patti | Apr 24, 2008 9:27:56 AM
I live in the south suburbs of Chicago. I understand legislation and the reason for laws. Laws are designed for two reasons: one, to deter criminal activity; and two, to punish those who are found guilty of criminal activity. The capital punishment laws are designed to do both of those. Gangs are an issue, and a very strong one, for those in the south side of Chicago. That's a fact, and statistics prove it. The one thing that Senator Obama didn't take into account, and if he did, it didn't weigh as heavily as his argument in support of protecting the interests of minorities who are in gangs, is the fact that most, if not all, of the gang-related deaths are minority on minority crimes. So, in essence, what Senator Obama did by voting against this law was to choose the minority criminal over the minority victim. Now, keep in mind that most, if not all, of these victims are minorities. Statistics also reflect that gang members who kill are likely to do it again if they are convicted and released from prison at some point in their lives. So, choosing to protect the interests of the gang member because he or she is a minority on the basis that it is unfair is also not fair to the victims of these crimes. They, too, are minorities. The only difference is they are the ones who die, not the person who murders them.
Gangs are known to be violent and ruthless with guns and lives. Why protect them more than we protect the victims, who are of the same race and class? I'd like to hear the justification for this track of thinking. It makes no sense to me, and if I were a parent who had to visit my kid at a cemetary while the parent of the kid who killed him got to see her son or daughter in prison or worse yet, living freely, I'd be angry at any politician who didn't do everything and anything to both deter and punish gangs for these crimes.
Posted by: Patti | Apr 24, 2008 9:17:41 AM
It's amazing how dumb most people are in America. People respond to article without reading or understanding the content of what they are responding to. No wonder Bush was re-elected after a disasterous first term and the whole world was shocked. If someone oppose a piece of legislation because a similar one exist in the book and do not want to duplicate, how does that constitute weakness? The racial tone of many respondents show what kind of society America really is.
Posted by: Maxwell | Apr 24, 2008 8:58:29 AM
It is very very simple.
If an ad is approved by
a candidate (McCain,
Obama, Clinton)it will
say so. It not, then
the ad is a lie and
should be taken as such.
Posted by: Beto | Apr 24, 2008 8:51:14 AM
Obama will lose the general election not because he is black but because he is too liberal! Remember the "Reagan democrats"? they are the ones coming out in droves to vote for Hillary whom they see as a moderate...they will never vote liberal and will just as easily become "McCain dems"..they would love to support the democratic party again but won't if they see the canidate as someone out of touch with their lives..."so saddened" you are so right!
Posted by: morn | Apr 24, 2008 8:36:13 AM
Thanks for the warning - The Clinton McCain ticket! Heads they win - Tails we lose! SO SAD
Posted by: That's Why! | Apr 24, 2008 8:28:56 AM
the devil we know is better than the one
we didnt even know at all.LET VOTE
FOR MCCAIN SO AS TO DEAL WITH IRAN AGAIN
Posted by: kaz | Apr 24, 2008 8:09:41 AM
Obama and his wife brag about his work in the streets of Chicago and what a big positive difference he made in the streets. If he worked in the streets of Chicago, he apparently did not make a difference with all the violence taking place in the streets and homes in Chicago. Go home Obama and prove you can make a differecne on the streets of Chicago and then maybe the American people will trust you to handle the problems facing our country and the world. Obama can't even sway his own people in Chicago!!!
Posted by: Jake | Apr 24, 2008 7:54:46 AM
Smear? If it's factual how is it a smear. Again, no one will be able to attack or criticize Obama without being labled a smear campaign or racist or both.
Posted by: stop2think | Apr 24, 2008 7:05:05 AM
Since the ABC debate, Obama has proven again and again just how weak he is. He crumpled during the debate because he didn't do any work to prepare for it by anticipating the questions that might be asked.
On the campaign trail he pointed fingers at Hillary and ABC, blaming them for his pathetic performance. He was still whining about it this week.
He thinks he should not be criticized. He thinks we should not raise issues about Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, or his past votes as a State and U.S. senator. He thinks he should not be questioned on anything he doesn't want to discuss.
Do you really want this man in the White House and meeting with America's worst enemies as he's promised to do? I don't.
I'm fine with Obama as the nominee, because I think McCain is a fine man who will make a fine president. Hillary can run in 2012.
Many Obamabots are too young to remember a Democratic nominee named George McGovern. He is the reason the Superdelegates came into being. The left wing of the democratic party nominated him in 1972. He won ONLY ONE STATE in the general election - Massachusetts (which Hillary won in the primary).
Posted by: HoosierSue | Apr 24, 2008 6:46:26 AM
Terry was right. Racism does still exist. Rev. Wright proved that, and J.J. Jackson, Sharpton, and plenty of other black "Leaders". Our ancestors took your ancestors away from their homeland against their will?? HA!! Blame the Dutch! If you don't like it, maybe Liberia is still available. Oh, I forgot, there might be work to be done to make that place livable. Pretty much like most countries in Africa. I'm sure the white devil produced Robert Mugabe as well, Oh, I forgot Mr. Carter (Democrat?) is his biggest fan.
Why don't you people just stop with the "Po Me" crap. My mother brought me to the U.S. when I was three years old. You might not like this but, I DON'T OWE YOU PEOPLE A DAMN THING!!!! I'm Out.
Posted by: J.L. | Apr 24, 2008 4:48:37 AM
we hillary supporters are tired of being called uneducated racist hicks. we are doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers, waiters, truck drivers, accountants, whatever. we are americans.
obamaites persist in insulting us, then hold onto their dreams of a winning general election campaign. just a clue, kids - insulting people then asking for their votes is not a good strategy.
in this case, it doesn't matter anyway, because we're too intelligent to vote for a pro-hamas, pro-terrorist, racist, anti-american, anti-woman, anti-old people, anti-israel, anti-everybody who disagrees with his self-image as messiah, creep.
Posted by: so saddened | Apr 24, 2008 3:07:51 AM
We all knew from the begining and now os prven more thean ever Obama is unelectable. He himself is affraid of debates. He does not know how to answer anything with substance about the issues and has too many shady relationships with US haters.
Posted by: Libre | Apr 24, 2008 2:32:59 AM
One of Obama's problems is that he won't give a straight answer on anything. He dodges questions, gives answers that don't pertain to the question, brings in false information, and at times just blatantly lies.
So, you just can't believe a word he says.
He proved it when he told us one thing and told Canada don't believe it, it's just political rhetoric.
Posted by: Sheryl | Apr 24, 2008 2:25:53 AM
The point is that Republicans have been sitting on a lot of info that will come out in the general election. That Obama will be arrested and convicted for his crimes. Guess what the Dems will not have a candidate for President that any Democrat voted for in the primaries or caucuses. The VP candidate will end up running for President and McCain will win by a land slide. This info is from a Chicago resident who knows way too much dirty info on Obama that will get Obama convicted on many crimes. Just look at Obama's criminal, radical, racist and terror associates. The Republicans are counting on this. Obama fans come down from your emotional frenzies and allow some common sense, logic, reasoning and rationality back into your minds before it is too late. Vote for Hillary 08.
Posted by: Bob4USA | Apr 24, 2008 2:09:47 AM
We have a real problem here with gangs in NC, and this ad might do some good here against Obama. It is very scary to go out at night, as a white woman with a teenage daughter, and have forty or fifty black men standing in the parking lot of the grocery store or McDonalds, and then they decide to get in their vehicles and follow you when you leave. And I'm not talking about Raleigh or Charlotte. Oh, they have their gang issues. I'm talking about Wallace, Rose Hill, Warsaw. Towns of 600-1000 residents. They have moved in on us en masse. In towns where you could go several years without a murder, there are now home invasions being carried out and little children being murdered in the cross fire. Our teenagers are being murdered as part of gang initiations. In a town that has one to three police officers, how are you going to fight gangs? LaGrange and Pink Hill, typical towns where they roll up the sidewalks when the sun goes doen, have been infilitrated by gangs as well. The Mexican gangs have started moving in to challenge the blacks for territory. Two of them shot a man to death in front of a business on Main St. at two in the afternoon while he was changing a tire, because he was dealing drugs on a street that their gang had assigned to them. Obama comes here with his CHANGE and his HOPE and his YES WE CAN. Runs ads on tv about not taking money from lobbyists, while USA Today has a list of THIRTY EIGHT Washington lobbyists that have pledged to raise between fifty thousand and two hundred thousand apiece for him. Obama hasn't got a clue about what this country needs.
Posted by: Melanie | Apr 24, 2008 2:09:00 AM
OBama's criminal past will catch up to him in the general election and the Republicans will win again.
Posted by: Bob4USA | Apr 24, 2008 2:00:06 AM
The point is that Republicans have been sitting on a lot of info that will come out in the general election. That Obama will be arrested and convicted for his crimes. Guess what the Dems will not have a canditate for President that any Democarat voted for in the primaries or caucuses. The VP candiate will end up running for President and McCain will win by a land slide. This info is from a Chicago resisdent who knows way too much dirty info on Obama that will get Obama convicted on many crimes. Just look at Obama's criminal, radical, racist and terror associates. The Republicans are counting on this. Obama fans come down from your emotional frenzies and allow some common sense, logic, reasoning and rationality back into your minds. Before it is too late. Vote for Hillary 08.
Posted by: Bob4USA | Apr 24, 2008 1:41:32 AM
Just came off another ABC site - we had a great discussion involving the issues from three points of view - supporters of Obama, Clinton, and McCain. Great concept - discussing the issues instead of name calling and mud-slinging - too bad you people cannot practice the art of debate on this site instead of seeing how low you can go. Sick! Out of this nut house.....
Posted by: sandy | Apr 24, 2008 1:15:50 AM
Isn't it better we find out what affect a Rev Wright ad will have now rather than later.
Posted by: Tina D | Apr 24, 2008 1:01:21 AM
Senators stop gang violence??
Posted by: power-and-knowledge | Apr 24, 2008 12:55:05 AM
This is what happens when no matter how far we have come in racial relations there are still certain individuals in America that will continue to fan racial fears and stereotypes. Makes me wonder when race will no longer be a factor in America politics. Haven't blacks, hispanics and whites fought together in wars to defend America's liberties and freedom. After several decades of "so-called" progress why does the Republican Party and yes a segment of the Democratic Party continue to use race to divide our country? Aren't we supposed to be moving forward rather than regressing as a people?
Posted by: win | Apr 24, 2008 12:41:06 AM
michafiath
I'm not sure you read all my comments. I think we kind of agree. I think Obama's association with Wright is not about race at all...I think that Obama's sitting in that church is a case (and there are many) of his poor judgement.
He has a waffly record with no major accomplishments in the State Senate. As a community organizer he is trying to take full credit for the "asbestos project" which he only had minimal involvement in. He started running for President the day he became a US Senator. His record of fundraising far exceeds any legislative efforts.
Thin record...no coalition building...very little original efforts if any in his career. "Judgement and experience" are his weaknesses. He couldn't even create change or enlighten his own minister about AIDS and 911 and Black separatism.
The high tolerance for guys like Ayers and Wright and his ultra liberal voting record combined with his comments about "bitter and antipathy" do make me wonder if he can be inclusive in his thinking.
I know the media won't "get it" but Obama continues to diss voters...like Clinton's older voters,,,I guess he hopes they will just stop voting to make way for the Obamacans.
Posted by: Jackie | Apr 24, 2008 12:40:32 AM
It's pitiful how ignorant some of these comments are. your ancestors brought our ancestors here against their will, and now we're here to stay -- get over it! At the end of this primary race, Obama will have won more votes, more states, and more elected delegates, and he will have won the nomination. If the superdelegates are ignorant enough to give the nomination to Clinton, trust me, there won't be enough left of the Democratic party to be elected dogcatcher.
Posted by: Barbara | Apr 24, 2008 12:37:25 AM
The Republicans are going to try and pick up seats in Nov. They suspect Obama will be the nominee. He has plenty to attack. This has nothing to do with Hillary. This is how Kerry was successfully "swiftboated".
Prior to the independent ad Howard Dean has been planning and purchasing some serious attack ads targeting John McCain. Negative mailers are going out in the hugest quantities ever seen from obama's campaign. They are canvassing Indiana as we speak...or as obama whines.
Apparently when Obama said he wanted to change politics he was just hoping that no one else would use the tactics on him that he has been using on Hillary since the beginning of the campaign.
Posted by: Jackie | Apr 24, 2008 12:24:53 AM
Bill Clinton or Mark Penn is behind this crap!
Posted by: spoon2456 | Apr 24, 2008 12:23:30 AM
By the way, the same survey that has Obama's handwriting on it in 1995 said if I'm not mistaken that Obama was against capital punishment. When did he become for capital punishment? I believe he is on record holding both "for" and "against" positions.
Actually this is one of Obama's less controversial votes. The Republicans are just warming up with their openers>
Posted by: Jackie | Apr 24, 2008 12:08:36 AM
Not all of Mrs. Hillary supporters are uneducated and ignorant. They must know something and that is, who is the best candidate. There are millions of people who have voted for Mr. Obama lots of them don't have a high school diploma and millions don't have a college degree yet. If you are so educated and affluent why can't you even reason about something so simple to understand? Why can't you talk about the issues Mr. Obama is running for. Put racism aside. Mrs. Clinton plan includes a "Green vehicular bond" the goverment will lend money to Detroit to help the auto manufacturer make commercial viable technology which will make cars that will run 100-200 miles per gallon.
Posted by: alice | Apr 24, 2008 12:03:54 AM
Aw gee I guess that everyone just keeps using racial "fear" tactics on Obama. Poor guy...unable to take responsiblity and unwilling to stop whining.
The truth is if his record had been examined by the media much earlier in this campaign we would not be so vulnerable. Obama has some serious flaws in his voting record. He has been unwilling to participate with the rest of the IL Senate in cracking down on gangs. He has been unwilling to participate with most of the IL Senate on cracking down on pornography near schools. He has a terrible voting record unless he wants to claim that "present" means nothing at all.
I wish the media would forget about race and forget about sex because Obama has no record of acheivement. Every time that Clinton tries to confront his record or his poor judgement Obama complains that she is going negative. Perhaps if the media has spent near as much time revealing Obama's record instead of trying to demonize Hillary America would have profited.
The Republican's will use the issues they have...and they have a world of ammunition against Obama..he has very little experience but none of it looks good....the Republicans did take the time to look over his record and his "poor judgement" associations.
Obama's rhetoric is nothing like his life up to now. His rhetoric is very familar though...it is Patrick Devall's campaign of 2 years ago...Devall has been a terrible governor up to now...go figure.
Perhaps the truest indicator of what someone will do is what they have done. Perhaps if Obama was a "uniter" he would have told his minister of 20 years that whites weren't really evil...perhaps he would have stood up and left the church or corrected the teaching that 911 was exactly what America deserved and AIDS was a government conspiracy...maybe if he really didn't agree he would have let Wright know that Isreal has a right to exist and Hamas is a terrorist organization.
Perhaps if Obama had a true record of accomplishment instead of a good speech this record would have been reflected in his votes and accomplishments!
Posted by: Jackie | Apr 24, 2008 12:02:05 AM
Kravitz,
Barack Obama enabled a war criminal too. He voted for the confirmation of Condoleeza Rice as Secratery of State.
If you want clean people vote for Nader, Ron Paul.....
Posted by: magda | Apr 23, 2008 11:56:56 PM
A race based rep. ad, full of false information, gosh I am stunned! LOL
Posted by: ndrick50 | Apr 23, 2008 11:48:54 PM
Gangs have been around forever--does the name "HELLS ANGELS" ring any bells?? Marlan Brando glamorizeing it in the "50's" !! Now,Obama is supposed to clean up something that started long before he was born?? Why isn't Hillary held responsible for all crimes commited since she became a N.Y. Senator??
Posted by: orange cat | Apr 23, 2008 11:28:43 PM
John McCain and Hillary Clinton enabled a war criminal. This issue is a problem to get into, since a republican governor vetoed the bill. So the GOP is soft on crime, and Obama is for the death penalty?
Posted by: kravitz | Apr 23, 2008 11:17:35 PM
What's truly frightening is how easily manipulated the public is—including some of the posters here. Support Obama or not, but do it based on facts. Respect yourself, your fellow citizens, and your country enough to do that, at the very least.
Did you even read the article completely? Did you understand the gist of Obama’s objections to the piece of legislation? Did you understand why the Governor at the time—a Republican—vetoed the bill?
Do you understand that legislators can vote against a bill and still support its underlying issues?
Keep in mind that Obama is a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for 12 years. So, he said he had concerns about the bill’s constitutionality and fairness, and there were already laws on the books that addressed death penalty cases.
Which was echoed by then Gov. Ryan, who said, "efforts are misdirected in light of existing laws, constitutional concerns and our past history of erroneously sentencing individuals to death."
Gee, why let a small concern like adhering to our Constitution, equal protection under the law, and justice for all get in the way?
What a fearful, hateful bunch of irrational fools we can be!
Posted by: JustConsider | Apr 23, 2008 11:09:14 PM
Soo...Wille Horton DID get out of prison and commit another heinous crime...thats a fact...and did it on Dukakis' watch as well. My god the Libs hate the truth, don't they?
Posted by: Angus | Apr 23, 2008 11:06:04 PM
You do have to wonder why Republicans are working so hard to get Hillary nominated. First there is "operation chaos". Next the NC GOP ad. Now this, from Mr. Willie Horton himself.
You'd think that they would want to wait until the General Election to go with their hits.
Posted by: Bubba | Apr 23, 2008 11:00:32 PM
"You just have too many guns, gangs, too many weapons out there," said Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis"
Maybe because the Rebublican's ended the assualt weaponds ban, the streets are flooded with weaponds and the police are out gunned. I don't think gang bangers are using hunting rifles. I am pretty sure you don't use an assualt rifle to hunt deer.
REPUBLICANS look in the mirror, you are the reason for this issue.
Trying to paint a black candidate as "soft on urban terrorism" is Rovian (racist) code for black man looking out for his own. This is the state of our country today.
Can you be proud of this country if this is how its portrayed? If so, then put on your sheet and burn a cross, look at yourself as a pathetic human beigns and have no right calling yourselves Americans.
Posted by: Drew in Virginia | Apr 23, 2008 10:55:12 PM
MURDER is MURDER no matter who's doing the shooting, stabbing or how they commit the crime. There needs to be a FAIR BILL that not only targets gangs but one that includes spouses, children, students, mentally ill patients or whoever the propietrator. You just cannot target one or two segment of society and ignore the other segments of society. We need to be very careful about using the term WEAK. TO PASS A BILL THAT'S FAIR AND CONSISTENT WHICH INCLUDE ALL MURDERs, THEN YOU WILL SEE STRENGTH FROM ALL MEMBERS OF THE SENATE. IF NOT, I WILL CALL THEM SOME WEAK SENATORS.
Posted by: SEAL1718 | Apr 23, 2008 10:49:33 PM