Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior White House Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories.
RECENT POSTS
- Charlie's Interview with President Bush
- Oh, That Joe! (No. 45 in a Series): The Loquacious Blue Hen is Gracious to the Spunky Maverick
- Louis Caldera to be Director of White House Military Office
- Obama Sits Down with State Guvs to Stem Economic Slowdown
- The Spectre of a Senator Chris Matthews (D-Penn.)
- Clinton On the Case
- The Unit
- Obama's National Security Team
- The Handmaid's Employer's Tale
- 'I, Barack Hussein Obama, Do Solemnly Swear...'
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama's Inability to Hire Good Help Rears Its Head … Again
May 12, 2008 12:28 PM
We started covering Sen. Barack Obama's inability to hire good staffers in June 2007, when he blamed staffers for some opposition research trying to link Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, to outsourcing in India; for injecting some venom in the David Geffen/Hillary Clinton fight; and for missing an event with firefighters in New Hampshire.
In December, we noted again that Obama was blaming the answers on a 1996 questionnaire on a staffer; and was blaming his touring with "cured" ex-gay gospel singer Donnie McClurkin (which antagonized gays and lesbians) on bad vetting by his staff.
Those five buck-passing incidents were apparently not enough.
Yesterday, in an interesting New York Times look at Obama's rise in Chicago politics, we learned that in 2004 some Jewish supporters became alarmed to learn that in a questionnaire Obama refrained from denouncing Yasir Arafat, or from expressing strong support for Israel's security fence.
Reports the Times: "In an e-mail message, Mr. Obama blamed a staff member for the oversight, and expressed the hope that 'none of this has raised any questions on your part regarding my fundamental commitment to Israel’s security.'"
In January, during MSNBC's presidential debate in Las Vegas, Obama was asked about a document put together by one of his South Carolina staffers that listed comments made by the Clinton campaign that some perceived to be attempting to stoke racial fires. "In hindsight, do you regret pushing this story?” asked Tim Russert.
"Our supporters, our staff get overzealous," Obama said. "They start saying things that I would not say, and it is my responsibility to make sure that we're setting a clear tone in our campaign.”
In February in a meeting with the Chicago Tribune, Obama was asked about an earmark that went to the University of Chicago while his wife Michelle Obama worked there.
"I don’t think that I was obligated to recuse myself from anything related to the university," Obama said, adding, "when it comes to earmarks because of those concerns, it’s probably something that should have been passed on to [U.S. Sen.] Dick Durbin, and I think probably something that slipped through the cracks. It did not come through us, through me or Michelle, and Michelle has been very careful about staying separate and apart from any government work. But you could make a good argument that this is something that slipped through our cracks, through our screening system.”
In a March 2008 interview with the Chicago Sun-Times to answer questions about Tony Rezko, Obama was asked about the fact that Obama had told the newspaper in November 2006 that he had never been asked to do anything to advance Rezko's business interests. But the Sun-Times had subsequently learned about a October 28, 1998 letter Obama wrote to city and state housing officials on behalf of a housing project for seniors that Rezko was working on.
The letter, Obama said, "was essentially a form letter of the sort that I did all time. And that I wasn’t, by the way, aware of.”
A reporter asked: You weren't aware that he was associated with the project?
Responded Obama: "I wasn't even aware that we wrote the letter. The answer that I gave at the time was accurate as far as I knew...This was one of many form letters, or letters of recommendation we would send out constantly for all sorts of projects. And my understanding is that our letter was just one of many. And I wasn’t a decision maker in any of this process.”
The Sun-Times also pointed out that in November 2006 Obama estimated that Rezko had raised somewhere between $50,000 and $60,000 for him during his political career.
But since that answer, Obama has given back almost $160,000 in Rezko-related contributions.
"The original estimate was based on, I asked my staff to find what monies they attributed to Rezko, and this was the figure given to me," Obama said.
So, for those keeping track at home, that's ten instances of Obama publicly blaming his staff for various screw-ups.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10!
(You of course could also add Austan Goolsbee, Samantha Power, Gordon Fischer, and retired Gen. Tony McPeak.)
That would be 14. We will continue to keep track.
And for the record, yet again, let me state that I find Sen. Obama's staff unfailingly competent and polite, courteous and efficient, and I once again express my regret that Sen. Obama does apparently not feel the same way.
- jpt
May 12, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (222)
And he's done it again:
"Obama Says Supporters' Anti-Israel Comments Don't Speak for Him"
Bloomberg News, May 23
Posted by: D. Smith | May 23, 2008 11:05:28 AM
In my adult life, I have never seen a snake oil salesman get so close to being leader of the free world as we are now.
Obama is a dangerous, naive fool and wave after wave of sheep are following him to the cliff with great big smiles on their faces and empty eyes that can't see the truth in front of them.
Say goodbye to your friends in Canada, Mexico, and Europe. Our agreements with them no longer matter. Say hello to your new friends in Iran, Cuba, Syria, and our buddy Hugo Chavez. Welcome Hamas with open arms.
And kiss Israel goodbye, because Obama is going to go talk to the man who says Isreal will be exterminated at least twice each week.
Posted by: Terry | May 21, 2008 4:07:06 PM
OTBW "Tina from Florida", Clinton did leave a surplus...by practically shutting down the military. How "astute" was that? He was another clueless monkey completely unfit to serve as CIC of anything.
Posted by: punkindrublic | May 21, 2008 3:54:32 PM
The more I hear of Obama, the more I dislike him and the less I trust him. I used to think he was an empty suit, but I've come to believe that he's calculated and vain. He seems to care more about him image than the work of office.
He will never get my vote. Actually, he's starting to remind me of Bush.
Posted by: Emily | May 16, 2008 4:49:08 PM
You folks can attack Obama all you want but he is ahead of McCain by 7 points (doing better than Hillary by the way who is leading McCain by only 4 points) and the general has not even started yet. A complete review of all the relevant data available shows a solid advantage for Obama:(read it and weap)
The simple fact of the matter is that while the media simply assumes that black voters will return to support Hillary, the vast majority will not and she will lose a large number of states she believes she has won as a result.
If Hillary would have just beaten Obama without all the cheating and race baiting (which her sore loser supporters are so willing to excuse) black voters would have returned. As it stands now, Hillary is more hated in the black community than David Duke. The media just will not cover it.
Does anyone wonder how Hillary could go from earning 54% of the black vote at the begining of this race to only holding 6% of that vote now? Did black voters not realize Obama was black at the begining of the race? Um no. They realized that Hillary was a race hustler and began jumping ship in mass numbers.
The party is split right now along racial lines and as Hillary's folks won't vote for Obama and Obama's folks won't vote for Hillary, McCain should win. If he loses, the republican party is truly dead at sea.
I quite honestly wouldn't mind a McCain presidency if he would just change his position on Iraq (I just think its costing too much and those folks have no incentive to stand up as long as we keep footing the bill). McCain just might change his position given the fact that much of what he says now is just to woo guliable conservatives.
Obama's clearly the better of the three but whether he wins or loses is of little matter in the grand scheme of things. People like to imagine that every presidential election "is the most important of our lifetime." Gimmie a break. I'm far more interested in the fight between the ideologies of liberalism and conservatism and, on that front, I'm happy with what I see.
The very fact that the republican party was too chicken to nominate a real conservative (remember when Rudy pro-choice Guilliani was the frontrunner?) is essentially a concession that they did not believe a conservative could be elected. Question is: why not? They've had a conservative president in for two terms and he had a republican majority to work with for most of that time. So, um, where's the beef? All of these Obama haters on here have alot to say about Wright but no defense of Bush's unspeakable failure. Americans are done with conservatism as it relates to economics, the environment, and foreign policy. There may be some hold outs on social issues like abortion, religion, etc. but the importance of that nonsense is diminishing every day. So stop worrying so much about Obama's staffers putting the wrong page numbers on their TPS reports people. The race for the white house is not the race to watch. The real race is the one that conservatives are losing in the long haul and so scared to talk about.
P.S. I'm watching McCain on fox right now discussing global warming...lol...he's practically a democrat
Posted by: Ray | May 14, 2008 6:18:32 PM
U.S. president Harry S. Truman had a sign with the inscription "BUCK STOPS HERE" on his desk. This was meant to indicate that he didn't pass the buck to anyone else but accepted personal responsibility for the way the country was governed.
Should we ask less of Obama as POTUS?
Posted by: Diana | May 14, 2008 11:33:24 AM
Gosh, some fairness from the media! Thx!
Please don't forget the BHO hypocrisy regarding the same old nasty politics of "guilt by association" that the Obama campaign claims to detest.
1. The very first response from the Obama campaign to his Jeremiah Wright scandal: Shoot out a picture as fast as possible to the media of Bill Clinton with Jeremiah Wright.
2. The very first response from the Obama campaign to his Bill Ayers scandal: Immediately question Bill Clinton's pardons for Bill Ayer's friends.
Thanks for this informative article. Maybe we'll get some fair and balanced coverage yet.
Posted by: Jan | May 14, 2008 10:13:04 AM
Great article Jake! Thank you for doing the electorate a huge favor by helping us know who Obama is and why we should or should not vote for him in November. This is what the MSM should be doing.
Now I wonder if Obama will blame his staffers for his crushing defeat in West Virginia yesterday!
Posted by: Billy Joe | May 14, 2008 9:19:25 AM
While usually I'd say that this was just silly, Obama's 'management style' as he described in one of the debates does make it highly relevant. According to Obama, he has some kind of clean desk fetish -- he will read one position paper, and then a staffer has to come and take that one away and give him the next one. He can't have a pile of things he needs to read on his desk and go through them one by one...
the linearity of this process suggests tha Obama will be even more heavily reliant upon his 'overzealous' staff than an ordinary President -- and that whoever controls the paper flow into the oval office will be running the country.
Posted by: paul_lukasiak | May 14, 2008 8:50:34 AM
Sorry, can't vote for Obama. Not enough known. Can't or won't maintain eye contact with those he is talking to (sign of deception?) Wife very angry about "mean" America. If Obama is candidate, I will not vote for President, but will vote for others on the ballot. This way a Democratic Congress will be able to control President McCain, and put this country back on track.
Posted by: JO NEIL | May 14, 2008 5:27:23 AM
You obamabots are simply delusional! I fear greatly for the future of our nation.
Posted by: specialk1216 | May 14, 2008 4:14:11 AM
Jonathan, I am with you. McCain should pick Hillary as VP. My husband has been saying this for months. He says both parties would then have a 50 state strategy. The Republicans would win 50 states and the Democrats would lose 50 states.
It sure would serve the Democrats right. They are no longer my party. We plan on voting a straight Republican ticket for life - which is at least 8 Presidential election cycles plus mid-term elections.
I think a boycott of the entire party would be a great idea!
We're signed on!
Posted by: Susan | May 14, 2008 3:08:43 AM
I do think we need leaders that say the buck stops with me and actually lead, but if we are honest, which major candidate has truly exhibited that ?
This is some unobjective clap trap. All those saying his comments are too late, take a look at his recent posts. They all seem to be fairly crtitical of Obama and very few of Clinton or McCain. Let's try and get real about this.
Obama put together a very effecient and effective campaign team while Hillary, until lately, had a chaotic campaign and strategy. CNN claimed tonight that the Clinton campaign still falls into some bad habits at times. Where is Tapper's commentary on this ?
How can Obama be blamed for Samamatha Power's comments ? That was her own mouth.
ABC has been very favorable to Hillary and put things in her or republican frames. When the elite/main stream media decided to destroy Howard Dean with the "Dean Scream", after he said we needed to look at media concentration, they played that scream over 700 times in a few days. The same group tried to count how much they did loops of Rev. Wright and they stopped counting at 3000. Some favorable media there! They took no effort to put things in context or note that 20 seconds of sound bytes compared to how many thousands of hours of sermons reflected the "more onerous" views.
They also cut off the quotes at strategic points to make them seem worse.
I want a president that is accountable. So, I appreciate the report for that if it is out of the ordinary but why is this examination limited to Obama. I can make similar examples for all the remaining candidates.
I know this, the current McCain will be a disaster for the country. His plans will continue to explode the deficit. That makes everything cost more and allows the middle east and China to buy us. He believes in wide open free trade ! So, he will be more than happy to send more jobs over seas and healthcare and other company benefits will just be too expensive.
Posted by: Laber | May 14, 2008 2:58:12 AM
Hmmm. . . attribute A FEW harmless human errors to your staff or blame every failing, mistake, and blunder of your political career on a "vast right wing conspiracy?" This article is silly.I bet if someone with absolutely no time on their hands tried, he could find 20 such statements from HRC, Barack Obama, John McCain, W, and every politician or CEO in America. Whats sad is that there are people out there who are looking for an excuse not to vote for this qualified BLACK man and this idiot columnist just gave them one.
Posted by: jonathan | May 14, 2008 1:37:16 AM
I, along with many Clinton supporters (Democrats & Independents), will NEVER support Obama. We also plan to vote against any Obama superdelegate who is up for relection.
One example why: Obama stated on the stump that he has MORE foreign policy experience than Clinton or McCain because he spent his childhood in Indonesia and because he visited Pakistan during his college years. What an idiot!
He also told his supporters the night he won NC that they should not listen to statements against him. That sounded like when Jim Jones told his “flock” in Guyana before our government intervened.
Obama is a scary, leftist, clueless, messiah wannabe. I tired of hearing people being accused of being racist in the media since he started his campaign. I will not tolerate it for 4 years.
I have NEVER voted for a Republican president, I will this fall even if Hillary is Obama’s VP.
I think tonight’s WV exit polls saying that they would vote for Obama are inflated. They will go for McCain.
McCain should choose Hillary as his VP. He would win for sure! That is called “unifying the country”! Jon Stewart suggested it last week to McCain. I've been thinking about the same thing for 2 months.
Posted by: Susan | May 14, 2008 1:29:13 AM
Did it ever occur to this reporter that perhaps staffmember DO make mistakes and what Obama is saying is true?
Posted by: Gretchen Wagenseller | May 14, 2008 1:05:41 AM
How does Obama's behavior - if true - compare with one who is intentionally stoking racial fires to win at any costs when the rules she agreed to didn't work out for her ? I remember when Bill Clinton ran for President saying he wanted to represent the people who played by the rules and deserved to enjoy the American Dream. I voted to Bill twice and have no regrets compared with the choices we had. Does Hillary play by the rules? Or just in speeches ? What all of us partisans need to see in ourselves is our own hypocrisy in blindly supporting our candidates without seeing their faults. Sure Obama has faults and is hypocritical, but he is not in the same league with his opponents, particularly his Democratic rival who should know better and whose liberal philosophy demands that she not be unjust. In our country, there is no difference between any humans when it comes to their right to be treated justly - black, white, brown, yellow, male, or female. This is where Obama stands head and shoulders above Hillary Clinton and John McCain who forget their own past behaviors, beliefs, and alliances as they accuse Mr. Obama of little more than a few real and many tenuous 'associations'.
Posted by: Arthur Howe | May 13, 2008 11:49:55 PM
Obama has copied Bill Clinton's campaign strategy and has merged it with Karl Roves' strategy for Bush. So much for "change"... Wonder when he'll boot Kennedy out of Congress? Isn't Kennedy the "old way" Obama is gonna root out and do away with? What a hypocrit. And once again, like with Bushie, the public bandwagon is going full speed ahead - right over the cliff.
Posted by: Kim | May 13, 2008 11:18:08 PM
I am so done with you networks and Cable news channels that have the nerve to call yourselves journalists. You have done the american public a real disservice with what you call reporting. I have never been so disappointed, felt so shortchanged, as I do now. I hope you're enjoying your cushy life, while the rest of America is SUFFERING! Suffering and in real need of a real president and instead you are talking about Obama blaming his staff!! For crying out loud-- do you think that you're untouchable? That if McCain wins in the fall only the "little people" will be affected you're head is buried even further in the sand than it appears!!!!!
You SUCK! This article sucks! I can't believe you think this is a critical analysis of ANYTHING. I am sure this won't make it past your staff censors--talk about blaming your staff!
God, I am done reading your drivel.
Good LUCK!
Posted by: Lucy Mends | May 13, 2008 11:11:43 PM
First off, the article is silly and will get no play in the national media.
Second, Hillary is done in the democratic party. Even if she steals the nomination from Obama, she will not win the general. There is a massive grass roots movement in MD, DC, VA, NC, SC, NY, and NJ among angry black and white Obama supporters to make certain that Hillary loses all those states in the general. The media will not cover it as they focus only on Obama's problem getting working class whites. They fail to realize the impact of 91% of black voters (who form probably at least 30 to 40% of the overall Democratic vote) staying home or voting for McCain. The buzz on black talk radio shows has been nuts!! Blacks will not vote for Hillary and she has no chance.
Third, while the media refuses to cover this story as well, Ron Paul has pulling about 25% of the Republican vote even though McCain has had the nomination wrapped up for months. Paul is planning a riot at the Republican convention and the national press has finally had to recognize the bid of Bob Barr who is seriously a threat to pull votes from McCain. Barr is the genuine article for many conservatives and had he been in the race earlier, McCain wouldn't even be the nominee right now. You couple the influence of Barr, Alan Keyes, and possibly even Paul in the race all pulling votes from McCain in November and then tell me about who is electable.
Obama's prospects are far better than people realize but I am happy that people are so eager to go after the "black guy" too early. You should have saved that Wright video for October. Dumb move.
Posted by: Ray | May 13, 2008 11:03:21 PM
"And for the record, yet again, let me state that I find Sen. Obama's staff unfailingly competent and polite, courteous and efficient, and I once again express my regret that Sen. Obama does apparently not feel the same way."
This is more than silly. It's just plain dumb. Who do you think Tapper has to blame (or credit) for the quality of Obama's campaign staff and how well managed his campaign has been? Who should we blame for how poorly Clinton's campaign has been run?...or for why she has so much less money? Half of Obama's campaign money comes from people like me who donate less than $200.
Who should we blame for the gutter level political gameswomanship that desperately tries to show guilt by association and distracts from substantive issues? Who should we credit for not stooping to the same thing, but who continues to congratulate her for her victories and hush his supporters when they boo her?
Some of the examples Tapper provides are perfectly reasonable responses from Obama, and do not go any further than claiming simple human errors and oversights to which any staff, no matter how capable, is vulnerable. Some comments here are clearly coming from people wearing very deeply colored glasses, people who fail to show the slightest hint of objectivity.
How can some be so poor at reading body language and clearly radiated low-ball attitudes that they can't see through either of the Clintons even if they are completely ignorant of the Clintons' totally sold-out status with regard to some pretty rotten corporate interests? (Monsanto comes to mind with their aggressive suing for patent violation of farmers whose pureline crops they contaminate and ruin with their genetically engineered pollen).
Have some of us completely lost any feel at all for reading basic human character (or utter lack of it). Clinton acts like a spoiled rotten brat who thinks she has a God-given right to the presidency and telegraphs her stinky attitude with body language that cries, "But I'M supposed to be president. This isnt' fair! Wha-a-a-a-a!!!
But far worse, I'm talking total corruption, and that's precisely what we need to get rid of in this country. We need people of character and moral fiber who don't forget that they weren't shot at in Bosnia (a relatively mild example of her lies!!!). Hsven't we had enough of liars in the presidency?
We don't need another intelligent but corrupt dingbat that pretends to be one more "bubba" so she can get elected. Some of us have matured beyond that stage. We've had enough of bubbas. Those who vote for bubbas need to have their heads examined.
The presidency doesn't call for a bubba and election campaigns shouldn't be a high school popularity contest. That's a big part of how we got into the mess we're in, and I blame us, the voters. JFK said there were only two qualifications for becoming president in this country: to be over 35 and to win a presidential election.
We need to put our heads on straight and vote for a real leader with character and integrity and quit voting for bubbas.
Posted by: Straight_t;alk | May 13, 2008 10:55:23 PM
Obama is the liberal version of Bush. Out of touch, stubborn, inexperienced, dangerous, idealistic, made of teflon, etc. Do we really want to make the same mistake again? Same kind of person, different perspective. I'm not willing to take that risk!
Posted by: Sara in PA | May 13, 2008 10:39:14 PM
This has bugged me about Obama since day 1. It's ok to blame your staff for mistakes but a real leader takes responsibility for decisions made by his staff. I don't feel comfortable when he says he has no knowledge about goings on in his organization. The closest Obama has ever come to (grudgingly) admitting a mistake was following the San Francisco comments and that was only after he tried very hard to deflect ownership in his first couple of press conferences.
I am reminded of the way Bush has never expressed regret for the way he bungled Iraq.
Posted by: CAS | May 13, 2008 10:35:55 PM
Obama is okay wtih admitting mistakes... other people's mistakes. He's a hypocrite and the people posting here seem to have a blind loyalty to a guy they don't even know. I'd be having serious buyer's remorse if I were an Iowan right about now.
Posted by: Jeremy | May 13, 2008 10:22:06 PM
Look at the electoral map people. This man cannot win the general. The Republicans are going to beat him over the head that he cannot win the WHITE blue collar vote. We are dreaming if we think these people are kidding. Just remember Tom Bradley and as Doug Wilder admitted on a recent talk show it is there and they have to find a way to deal with it. I believe the results of WV showed that tonight. The strategy they are using now that is to try to appeal to blue collar workers by visiting a few will not work.
Posted by: James | May 13, 2008 10:19:41 PM
Could Jake Tapper sink any lower? This is a journalist? What a hack job this bozo turned out to be. I was once an ABC News watcher -- Peter Jennings was a hero of mine -- but these days they are behaving as utter hacks.
Posted by: Jesse | May 13, 2008 10:02:45 PM
What a joke calling Obama's campaign incompetent when they ran the best campaign since a little know governor named Bill Clinton.
Posted by: KQuark | May 13, 2008 9:59:18 PM
I wonder which staffer's fault it is that rev. Wright is a racist.
Posted by: Logan H | May 13, 2008 9:42:16 PM
Richard Cohen wrote a horrible op-ed in the post today about how McCain has lost his values because his staff sent out an email containing the Hamas leaders quote endorsing Obama. Cohen acted as if this was an act by McCain and McCain only dispite the fact that McCain has said repeatedly that he does not believe that Hamas would be happy with an Obama presidency, just that Hamas would be very unhappy with a McCain presidency. This in contrast to Obama who repeatedly refuses to condemn his own campaign's missteps and instead blames his staffers at evey possible moment.
Posted by: Logan | May 13, 2008 9:29:10 PM
I suppose it is also his staff's fault that Obama thinks there are 57 states.
Posted by: Scott D | May 13, 2008 9:23:06 PM
I supposed it was also his staff's fault he thinks there are 57 states!!!!!
Posted by: Scott D | May 13, 2008 9:21:49 PM
Wow! Sen. Obama made reference to mistakes made by his staff 10-14 times in 12 years? Really? They made 14 mistakes in 12 years and because he mentioned them he thinks they're incompetent? What a monster! Way to spread the propaganda. . .
Posted by: Jon | May 13, 2008 8:58:58 PM
Name one 'big' mistake Obama has fessed up to... Still trying to think of one? Yeah that's because he hasn't.
Obama runs on no record and viciously attacks any mistakes his opponents have ever made. He wants to hold both sides of every issue. He wants to say he is for universal health care becuase that is popular, but his plan doesn't call for universal health care then he attacks Hillary for the provisions of her plan that make it universal health care.
He ran for 8 months on Hillary's Iraq vote but when asked how he would have voted in 2004 (when the war was going well) he said he didn't know how he would have voted.
Obama skips hundreds of contentious votes in the Illinois State Senate to leave no record of anything anyone could criticize him for.
Obama is no leader. He is a cheerleader. (Wow, one more similarity between him and George W).
Posted by: Michaelp0429 | May 13, 2008 8:40:25 PM
Let's see, Clinton's top strategist didn't know that the Dem. primaries delegates were allotted proportionally,
her campaign got beat by an unknown, African American, first term senator and you say he has staffing problems...great laugh, thanks.
bdu
Posted by: bdavid | May 13, 2008 7:53:15 PM
wow, this is news? of all the important things to talk about, this is what have to report on?
this news team has lost ALL of my respect this year. I think the real team who has failed to hire good help is ABC News!
another viewer sayin bye bye
Posted by: Zaggy | May 13, 2008 7:48:42 PM
All you Obama supporters ...
Please wake up ...
Obama is conning you ...
He claims to be a healer, a uniter and a moderate ...
Yet you know he has never acted on any of those claims ... EVER ...
Why is that ?
Its a con folks ... pure and simple ...
Wake up before you do the stupidist thing in your life ...
Posted by: Jeff | May 13, 2008 6:27:24 PM
This is such a joke. Obama is the only candidate who has admitted a mistake since Bush has been in office.
Posted by: KQuark | May 13, 2008 5:55:40 PM
Obama has been given a free pass since Iowa by the lame stream media and the DNC. He is inexperienced and unvetted. This takes AFFIRMATIVE ACTION to a whole new level!
Posted by: NYSmike | May 13, 2008 5:52:52 PM
Obama is a joke: words, words matter.
Posted by: jenkins | May 13, 2008 5:48:18 PM
Why does John McCain hate this country allowing a war to bankrupt us making us even less safe? Why does he hate this country allowing a pastor's support who believes the wrath of God came down on New Orleans for a "Gay parade." Does God hate the American South in general for all the tornadoes, floods, fires, and hurricanes? HE MUST according to this pastor's thought process.
Posted by: Patrick | May 13, 2008 5:41:00 PM
It is not odd that in an intense multi-million dollar campaign, lasting for over a year, and months of constant campaigning by thousands of paid and unpaid workers, that there are errors not attributable to Obama's personal decisions.
14 mistakes sounds like a very, very low number - you must be right, Obama's staff is pretty capable.
Posted by: John | May 13, 2008 5:37:06 PM
Remember, Obama is going to transform this country (nay, the world!) by the brute force of his awesome personality and goodness.
Unless a staffer screws it up.
Posted by: A3k | May 13, 2008 5:31:18 PM
I Puked on the Kool Aid! I wish I'd written that!
Posted by: Alice Cooper | May 13, 2008 5:30:44 PM
Boy, the liberal fascists have a good one here! Not only is he an anti-American Marxist who also happens to be a racist, he is also the man who listened to a raving maniac for 20 years and never heard a word that was said. Is it any wonder he disses his staff members; look what he did to his grandmother?
Posted by: Katz | May 13, 2008 5:22:49 PM
ABC what is wrong with you Obama can do NO WORNG.... Fall in line with the rest of the media if you know whats good for you. No one wants real news anymore. People want you to spit back to them they want you too say. Forget about the truth
Posted by: Chicago Joe | May 13, 2008 5:17:33 PM
Nice summary- what a scam Obama's got going- play dirty and keep lying; if busted, blame subordinates. Somebody tell Obama that the buck stops at the Boss' desk; he needs to start taking responsibility. Imagine, if the US faced a terror threat and a President Obama does not react, will he cop out by saying "My administration did not inform me"???
Posted by: Ryan G. | May 13, 2008 5:10:44 PM
Ryan
Thank Goodness there are more people in the american electorate that can balance you out... since you dont have much sense!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:02:19 PM
Haha, here we go again, ABC trying to knock down Obama. It's not going to work. The American people are smarter than you think.
Posted by: Ryan | May 13, 2008 4:58:02 PM
-- Flotsam. or better yet, in fishing terms this piece would be called chum.
It is meant to stir, not inform, to create a caricature, not to characterize critically or fairly, and so just stirs debate among the choir. -- All politicians always pass the buck some. Name one who hasn't, one.
...and it looks like the chumming worked...
Posted by: Patrick | May 13, 2008 4:54:05 PM
Yeah right Obamas staff is disciplined and Professional... thats like saying that Obama prefers to hang out at regular people places eating waffles and stopping in a Mcdonalds to get a Cheeseburger and telling people how to fix the economy on the way out... BO is a mirror of Ws campaign ablilitys and Gores lack of being comfortable combined... they are not disciplined and seem to pile on the electorate that they need to win the GE which they wotn get and BO will not win!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 4:53:29 PM
These are mild causes for concern, indeed. But a few things to point out: First, Team Barak is probably as inexperienced as was Team Lincoln in the early going; mistakes are inevitable. Second, when Barak wins he says "We won," so when he goofs up it is no surprise that "we goofed up." Third, Barak seems to have made a genuine effort to make things right. And last, these are all less than significant in comparison to the giant gaffs of Clinton, McCain, Bush, and most experienced politicians, who with time learn to carefully screen such distractions. A minus, no doubt, but given Barak's superior ability to raise money and to manage his campaign, it seems a mere trifle.
Posted by: philofficer | May 13, 2008 4:52:33 PM
Are people on this blog actually saying Obama did not play the race card. GET OVER YOURSELF, this is NOW FACT. Your candidate is not holier than thou, in fact, this idea of a "clean" campaign is all the worse because you are coming off as HYPOCRITES. To boot, many of you are snapping at Hillary and her supporters on this blog as a testament to your true nature. You are eerily, eerily like Bush supporters and I am just so worried to have the liberal equivalent. I want a true uniter and its not Obama nor his supporters.
Posted by: james | May 13, 2008 4:29:49 PM
To all Clinton supporters ... please do not support Obama in November -- if he gets there (but I don't think I have to plead too much given what I'm hearing from Hillary supporters everywhere). This article states well that Obama has a lot of unpacked baggage and we're better off with the enemy we know than the monstrous phony we don't know.
Posted by: Ike | May 13, 2008 4:28:34 PM
Eric, What a naive thing to say. Sen. Clinton's health care plan failed because the men in Congress did not want a First Lady to take care of things that they had been unable to do. She went on to work for work towards at least having children of uninsured people covered. Obama is the one that is a drama diva, blaming everybody but himself for his mistakes. He did not accomplish anything as a State Senator. If he is the Democratic nominee, McCain will win. It is as simple as that.
Posted by: svsolis | May 13, 2008 4:26:33 PM
Boy does the truth hurt. This list will grow--not because of incomponent staff but rather Obama's inability to own up to his history.
Posted by: Robert in Cleveland | May 13, 2008 4:25:32 PM
I thank God Clinton will be dropping out next week. She miserably failed in her task of reforming health care as the First Lady. That was her ONLY responsibility and she failed within a year. I am glad we can finally unite behind Obama for November without Clinton adding selfish and unnecessary drama.
Posted by: Eric | May 13, 2008 4:14:18 PM
why is this coming out now???
Posted by: kim jones | May 13, 2008 4:13:18 PM
So let me get this straight... You're essentially trying to break Senator Obama's campaign from the inside, right? Its basic psyhcology... Convince his staffers that he's not as great as he appears and then hope for an implosion. I can understand how politicians can get ridiculous, but how do we trust our media when journalists start wallowing in petty?
This story was unnecessary and the last half of the story was essentially a blatant political attack. Stop being a political assassin who legitimizes their attacks by saying you're an advocate for the people and start actually reporting on what these candidates are saying, what their background is, their plans and their visions. THAT's how you serve the American people well.
You're pathetic if you think that this trash constitutes as helpful.
Posted by: Greggory Heist | May 13, 2008 4:13:08 PM
I suppose Obama's staffers encouraged him to hang out with Ayres and Wright as well. Look, this guy is either the biggest suck-up ever or he has the worst judgement I've ever seen. He talks about political reconciliation yet he's never, ever, crossed the aisle to work with the GOP on any issue. He clearly talks a big game but that's it. John McCain has walked it for years. You Obama folks enjoy it while you can. McCain will win 42 states. No way we turn the country over to this over inflated wind bag.
Posted by: Jay Johnson | May 13, 2008 4:11:37 PM
This is just another indicator that Sen. Obama is a mixed race, liberal version of our current President.
Arrogance: check
Never admits mistakes: check
Blame others: check
Relevant experience: nope
Why do we keep electing these losers?
Posted by: Dave | May 13, 2008 4:09:49 PM
Senator Obama: "uh uh, yeah, uh uh, what Hillary said, uh uh". He can't give a straight answer or take blame. He lacks character and strength-- he has practiced old time smear politics while pretending to be a change candidate. He didn't have the courage to stand up to Wright for 20 years. No surprise that he doesn't take responsibility for small matters either.
Posted by: Kerry | May 13, 2008 4:09:19 PM
Having Obama in office will be like another George Bush, just Democrat. He clearly has no idea what is going on. If he can't make it work in Chicago - how can he for all of the US & in their international relations?? What a dope. Still can't believe he has that many backers after all of this is coming out.
Jack, you better work your magic. Otherwise, he is going to be your president too unless you move out of the country.
I am yet another voter who will have no choice but to go with McCain if Obama gets the nomination. Still sad that he doesn't even feel the need to promote in WV. Will he give up on America too or will we have to guess which states he will turn a blind eye to?
Posted by: kim jones | May 13, 2008 4:06:15 PM
Can we have a mulligan in the presidential race for both parties? All 3 of these candidates will be historically atrocious presidents and the damage the winner will wreak on this country will be devastating and long lasting.
Posted by: Real American | May 13, 2008 4:03:46 PM
Jake, I hope you realize that by writing anything even remotely anti-Obama you will be criticized and fired as a part of the racist right-wing smear machine. Don't bother updating your resume either. You'll be blacklisted...
Posted by: Real American | May 13, 2008 4:00:54 PM
It is a fact that the media has become quite irrelevant in providing real news and has an increasingly hard time manipulating the public's views, witness ABC's efforts to cut Obama at the knees with manufactured handicaps. On the other hand, the media remains silent on anything negative about McCain. What about an in-depth story probing McCain's relationship with lobbyists and specifically Ms. Iseman. Inquiring minds want to know.
Posted by: Melissa | May 13, 2008 3:58:17 PM
It is a fact that the media has become quite irrelevant in providing real news and has an increasingly hard time manipulating the public's views, witness ABC's efforts to cut Obama at the knees with manufactured handicaps. On the other hand, the media remains silent on anything negative about McCain. What about an in-depth story probing McCain's relationship with lobbyists and specifically Ms. Iseman. Inquiring minds want to know.
Posted by: Melissa | May 13, 2008 3:58:04 PM
I don't agree that Obama has a habit of "blaming" staff for things that have gone wrong in the campaign. I work for a fairly small company and I see all kinds of "staff" errors made around here every day. I think that staff people, and sometimes volunteers do make errors and it is okay to hold them responsible. How many people screwed up in the Clinton campaign. How many guys have recently resigned from the McCain campaign. It happens and it is not a big deal. You have to stop making stuff up.
Posted by: Lowell | May 13, 2008 3:57:13 PM
yawn
Posted by: Jim B | May 13, 2008 3:54:38 PM
What is that French proverb? La Cage aux folles! You are known and judged by the company you keep and "birds of a feather do indeed flock together." Obama may use lies, deception and hypocrisy to conceal his true values from the American people, but if voters want to know about the real Obama, just take a closer look at the company he keeps and who has working on his campaign staff. And just think that if he wins in November, all these left wing nuts will be strutting around (like Obama does on stage) the White House barking orders and throwing their weight around. God help us!
Posted by: Billy Joe | May 13, 2008 3:49:34 PM
Rule Number One- Do not criticize The Messiah.
Rule Number Two- Remember, do not criticize The Messiah.
Posted by: The Truth | May 13, 2008 3:48:26 PM
So, Obama delegates, so what? So did Reagan. The disadvantages include being vulnerable to petty sniping like this article. But on the plus side, it's the mark of an effective commander.
Posted by: Renatta McPhee | May 13, 2008 3:35:00 PM
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. Senator Obama is starting to act an awful lot like GWB. NOTHING is ever his fault. You get what you see. Is this the type of President the country needs?
Posted by: JUST THE FACTS M'AM | May 13, 2008 3:34:08 PM
Whatever the problem is Barack supporters, blame it on the Clintons. Rev Wright says something stupid, oh he was invited to the Clinton White House when Bill had his problems. A photo appears on Drudge of BHO in Africa, blame it on Clinton campaign. BHO association with Ayers, oh Bill Clinton pardoned them too. Tony Reszko being a slum lord in Chicago and connection to Obama, oh there is a photo of him with Bill and Hillary. BHO did not return to Senate to vote on Iran resolution, oh I was in NH campaigning but he says Hillary has once again given Bush authorization to wage another war. The feelings within the Clinton camp and her supporter is deep because BHO gets away with all these flaws and gaffes. Put the shoe on the other foot and you will see the feeding frenzy. On this score, I am not persuaded that I or other Hillary supporters will quickly fold up and rally behind BHO. I personally feel more comfortable going to sleep at night knowing Hillary or McCain is in charge of this country. Sorry it is a genuine feeling.
Posted by: Mark | May 13, 2008 3:33:34 PM
fair enough, are you tracking the same thing for mccain and clinton? I ask, because my impression is that most politicians deflect those kinds of low-level gotcha-type questions by claiming to be personally ignorant of the charge. Not saying I like it, but I don't think Obama is any worse in this regard than other politicos. Prove me wrong by honestly looking back over other politicians statements.
Posted by: dave | May 13, 2008 3:30:36 PM
Kathy in Michigan, you h