Obama Exaggerates
June 24th, 2008 at 05:55am Mark Noonan
Well, truth be told, he lied - but we’re into the New Politcs of Hope and Change, so we’ll gentle it down. From NRO’s The Corner:
Barack Obama released his first general election ad on Friday, which seems aimed above all to answer some early concerns about his biography and experience. It’s a well made ad, but it also offers an example of the kind of brazen padding of the resume that Obama will inevitably need to engage in, and which will carry serious risks for him.
About 46 seconds into the ad, we are told that Obama “passed laws” that “extended healthcare for wounded troops who’d been neglected,” and in the usual manner of these political commercials we are given a little citation at the bottom. The citation reads “Public Law 110-181 1/28/08”. That law is the only federal legislation cited in the ad — the other two items mentioned were from the Illinois legislature and referred to other issues raised in the ad.
Public Law 110-181 was the 2008 defense authorization bill. It passed the Senate by 91 to 3 in January, with six Senators not voting. Among those six absentees was Barack Obama. So he cites a bill he didn’t even vote for. Did he contribute to it in some way that might be reasonably referred to as extending healthcare for wounded troops who’d been neglected? It certainly doesn’t seem that way, as even Obama supporters at the Daily Kos discovered when they tried to answer some of the bloggers who pointed to Obama’s citation of the bill.
Obama was a “community organizer” (and I’ve got $20 for the first person who can tell me just what that accomplished), a mediocre State Senator, elected to the US Senate in a walkover because a dirty trick forced out the strongest GOPer, an undistinguished member of that body and now the presumptive Democratic nominee for President of the United States of America, the most powerful office in the world. Essentially, he’s got nothing to justify his attempt, so he’s fallen to making stuff up about himself.
The Obama icon is being eaten away by the acid of truth - the only question is will the acid do its work before, or after, election day? One way or another, the fact that Obama is a presumptuous fraud will come out - but lets hope it doesn’t come out in the form of disasterous policies in the Executive branch.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Corruption, Democrats, Kook Left
43 Comments
1. Danish Artist | June 24th, 2008 at 6:21 am
I am sure he voted “present” on that legislation. He did not vote against it! It’s the same thing isn’t it?
Come on now - stop smearing this man. A smear to a liberal is revealing the truth behind the lie.
sarcasm off.
2. Dollardays | June 24th, 2008 at 7:48 am
He is an elitist, unpatriotic, hater of flag pins, liar, Muslim, arrogant, exaggerator. The Karl Rove wing of the Republican smear machine is alive and kicking. No discussion of ideas just smears the messenger, for the Cons they have found this tactic to be intellectually easier.
3. hermie | June 24th, 2008 at 7:52 am
So pointing out his deficiencies, hypocrisies and outright falsehoods is now ’smearing’?
4. Dollardays | June 24th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Elitist, unpatriotic, hater of flag pins, liar, Muslim, arrogant, exaggerator have nothing to do with Obama’s deficiencies, hypocrisies and outright falsehoods. These are simply swift-boating labels the far right such as Hannity, Limbaugh, Rove and Dobson will keep trying in hopes one will stick.
5. neocon | June 24th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Obama is nothing more than a brand. A slick marketing campaign on the level of Budweiser and Viagra.
They have learned that through image making, branding, and frequency, they can creep into the subconscious of the vulnerable ones and capture their loyalty, in spite of what the side effects are.
peace, neocon
I think dollardays prooves this theory.
6. hermie | June 24th, 2008 at 9:29 am
I was always told that in America, anyone can become President.
With Obama, that is a far more frightening prospect than we were supposed to believe.
7. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Actually, neocon, I think the brand you are looking for is Prozac :)
As for Dollardays, are we not allowed to criticize the Messiah at all? Could you tell us exactly what we are allowed to write about him?
8. Retired Spook | June 24th, 2008 at 11:08 am
I think dollardays proves this theory.
Come on, neocon; someone has to occupy the lower portion of the bell curve.
On a darker note, in 2004 it was generally accepted that the MSM bias for Kerry was worth about 15 points, and a lot of Dems didn’t even like Kerry. I figure with the orgasmic adoration for Obama, the bias in the media could be worth as much as 20 or 25 points. If such a bias by referees in professional sports was discovered, it would merit a Congressional investigation.
9. Danish Artist | June 24th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
To a liberal, pointing out truth is smearing. Thanks Dollardays for proving my point. We saw it with Kerry and we are seeing the super extreme with Obama. Any truth that shows the candidate in a negative light, as in his vote (or non-vote) as a Senator, a vote on record mind you, is a smear. Of course that does not apply to non-liberal candidates. When liberals outright smear, they are called “concerns”.
Why are liberals scared of the truth? Why are liberals scared of the fact that they are liberals?
10. Dennis | June 24th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Noonan: “I’ve got $20 for the first person who can tell me just what that [Obama's community service] accomplished…”
Two years after graduating from Columbia University Obama moved to Chicago to work with local churches organizing job training and other programs for poor and working-class residents of Altgeld Gardens, a public housing project where 5,300 African-Americans tried to survive amid shuttered steel mills, a nearby landfill, a putrid sewage treatment plant…
Obama was a stranger to the area but caught on quickly by showing humility and a strong work ethic. “We knew what was wrong in the community but we didn’t know how to get something done about it,” recalls Yvonne Lloyd, 78, who worked with Obama. Obama insisted on “staying in the background while he empowered us.” …Whether getting the city to fill potholes, provide summer jobs, or remove asbestos from the apartments or persuading the apartment managers to repair toilets, pipes, and ceilings, Obama encouraged residents to come up with their own priorities with the gentle admonition: “It’s your community.”
Obama lived a few miles away in a modest Hyde Park apartment, but he quickly became part of “the Gardens” community. He played pickup basketball. He walked from house to house to discuss what needed fixing. He spent many hours meeting in kitchens, parlors, and churches. David Kindler, a colleague at the time, said the newcomer with the funny name spent hours with Altgeld residents one on one, learning their problems and their dreams. He resisted taking credit for success, preferring to give it to individuals in the community.
His wife says Altgeld gave him the skills to bring Washington’s factions together. Barack is not one of those people who fight for the sake of fighting,” says Michelle Obama. He’s willing to do it when it’s necessary, but knows you have to keep the door open to deal with the other side.
Perhaps his most confrontational effort was to pressure city authorities to remove asbestos from the apartments in 1986. When the on-site manager didn’t take action, Obama nudged the residents into confronting city housing officials in two angry public meetings downtown. These generated “a victory of sorts,” Obama said later, as workers soon began sealing the asbestos in the buildings. But the project gradually ran out of steam and money. In fact, some tenants still have asbestos in their homes, according to current resident Linda Randle, 53, who worked with Obama in the ‘86 anti-asbestos campaign.
Faced with such frustrations, after three years in Chicago, Obama decided to apply his skills in the wider world. He entered Harvard Law School in 1988 and earned his law degree in 1991. He returned to Chicago to work as a civil rights lawyer and teach at the University of Chicago Law School. He eventually won a seat in the Illinois State Senate and was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004.
His friends at “the Gardens” don’t see Obama’s reaching for the White House as a strange move at all. “He has a great understanding of people,” says Randle, “and he knows how to bring about change through compromise. That’s what we need in Washington.”
From “On the Streets of Chicago, a Candidate Comes of Age”, http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070826/3obama.htm
You can donate my twenty bucks to the Obama campaign, Mark. That is, unless you were just exaggerating or lying.
By calling Obama a “slick talking con artist” and a “presumptuous fraud” you only reveal your own smallness of spirit. You’re shoveling coal for Screwtape here, Mark.
As I said in your “Seal of Arrogance” thread most of his supporters see Obama not as a messiah, but as a common-born man with a good work ethic, an inquisitive mind and a conscience who wants to be of service to others. And after nearly eight years of a narrow-minded, stubborn and self-entitled child of privilege in the White House, America seems ready for that.
11. neocon | June 24th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
You’ve convinced me Dennis. I would support Obamas candidacy for President of the United Way or other similar charitable organization.
I think he’d do a fine job.
peace, neocon
12. Dollardays | June 24th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
7. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 11:00 am
As for Dollardays, are we not allowed to criticize the Messiah at all? Could you tell us exactly what we are allowed to write about him?
If you disagree with Obama’s views, which all can be found on his web site, on our involvement in the Iraq civil war, the real war on terror and Bin Laden, energy policy, housing crisis, health care plan, his policies to save the environment, education improvement, rise in inflation or emergency response readiness please tell us the Con’s solutions. We have been waiting for seven years.
I stand by my earlier statement to Cons and their swift-boaters it is intellectually easier to just say Obama is an elitist, appeaser, unpatriotic, hater of flag pins, liar, Muslim, arrogant, exaggerator and therefore has no plausible views on the important issues of the day.
13. Dennis | June 24th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Neocon - so far so good.
At the risk of having you hurl the BDS thing at me again, I’m curious as to the real-world qualifications you believe Mr. Bush brought to the job of the nation’s chief executive.
Do you believe Mr. Bush to have posessed a superior set of skills at the outset of his first term over the present qualifications of Sen. Obama, and if so, what were his particular strengths?
14. Dennis | June 24th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Stumped, Neocon? Here’s a little more help.
Beyond the community service, Obama’s degree from Columbia University is in poli-sci with an emphasis on international relations; he’s a Magna Cum Laude graduate from Harvard Law School and a Constitutional Law Professor at University of Chicago - and of course has been an elected representative for nearly twelve years and counting. This is what Obama brings with him up front as a candidate for the Oval Office.
We can count Obama’s multicultural background and independent travel abroad as extracurricular points. Sort of like George Bush’s being a cheerleader in college, only more educational.
15. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Gee, dollar, we have already debated those same things hundreds, if not thousands, of times. Senator Nyeophyte is running a campaign based mostly on his character, his changiness, his hopiness. So, guess what? It is a legitimate issue to address, just like when Kerry made his Vietnam service the focal point of his campaign during the Convention.
But, we know t’all on the left do not like to discuss the character traits of Obama that show him to have racist associations, associations with terrorists, etc and so on.
And, quite frankly, you are doing exactly what Obama has programmed you to do: deflect away, rather then discuss the issue. Why not try actually addressing the substance of the post?
Dennis, GWB was the Gov of Texas for 5 years, and, as such, met with plenty of foreign leaders. He has plenty of experience in private business, actually being involved in the running of companies.
What has Obama done that makes him even close to having the experience to be the most powerful leader in the world? Community activist? Sorta lawyer for a short time? Book author? 20 years attending a racist church? Associations with Bill Ayers, a home grown terrorist?
OK, he has some good experience in the Ill Senate.
Anything else?
16. neocon | June 24th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Like I said Dennis,
Obama would currently make a fine President of a charitable organization or some liberal group think tank that offers flowery rhetoric and no measurable achievements.
I’d say Bush’s private enterprise experience would trump anything that Obama has so far achieved. But aside from that, I am not a huge Bush fan, at least on the spittle licking scale you are with Obama.
But Obama does have a good marketing team. I guess that’s all that matters with impressionable young minds.
Anything else?
peace, neocon
17. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I’m hoping the marketing team will come up with something to replace the “presidential” seal they just dumped.
18. Tractatus | June 24th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Pretty sad that the wingnuts around here are so desperate to find something, anything over which to attack Obama that they end up denigrating community service.
19. Dennis | June 24th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Neo, I asked for Bush’s comparable qualifications at the beginning of his term as chief executive and you cite his “private enterprise experience.”
Bush’s performance on the board of Harken Energy Corp and its subsequent losses demonstrate him to have been woefully slack as a businessman, although it appears he benefited from exactly the same type of insider trading for which Martha Stewart was pilloried. His record as co-owner of the Texas Rangers do him little better credit. As a matter of fact Mr. Bush has a mediocre record at best in the private sector. It explains a lot about his very slow learning curve as president.
You spittle-licking comment is detestable. As I have said repeatedly most of Obama’s supporters see him not as a messiah, but as a common-born man with a good work ethic, an inquisitive mind and a conscience who wants to be of service to others. One can safely say he shows more promise than the current decider-guy ever did. You might talk to the fellows who ran Blogs for Bush about the sycophant thing.
20. neocon | June 24th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
I thought the spittle licking comment was very witty and deserved.
The fact that we can actually discuss Bush’s private sector experience means that he has more experience than Obama. Tell me what large private sector firm has Obama worked at?
And if you like common men, the McCain is not for you. He is exceptional considering his POW heroics. But if you prefer average, than so be it.
Have a nice day
peace, neocon
21. Dollardays | June 24th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
15. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Gee, dollar, we have already debated those same things hundreds, if not thousands, of times.
So that’s it, all you have left in that Limbaugh/Hannity mushed brain of yours is smear. A 28% approval rating for the Con agenda has to be artificially high.
22. Rich | June 24th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Tractacus- I have worked with habitat for humanity off and on for fifteen years. Unlike Mr. Obama, I have actually put roofs over people’s heads, rather then getting other people to do it for him. Do you really beieve that is a measure of success worthy of making one president? If so, there are many more deserving than Obama.
23. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
So, saying that we have debated those things tons of times is now a smear, dollar? Wow, I had no idea.
If one wants to discuss smears, perhaps you should consider what you are calling me and others. That would be what is commonly called a, wait, let me think about it, yes, a smear!
BTW, dollar, whose approval rating is lower, Bush’s, or the Democrat led Congress? Woops!
Perhaps you would like to explain the Left’s smearing of Cindy McCain, who has not really even involved herself much in this campaign, the smearing of John McCain’s age, and of his military service?
And, perhaps you can explain the 7+ years of personal attacks on Bush and everyone around them?
No? Didn’t think so.
24. FmrMarine | June 24th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
dennis
>>>I’m curious as to the real-world qualifications you believe Mr. Bush brought to the job of the nation’s chief executive.>>>
1. Graduate Harvard
2. Graduate Yale MBA
3. Graduate Officer candidate school
4. Graduate FLIGHT school
5. Graduate JET FIGHTER school
6. Jet fighter pilot
7. Rose to the rank Captain
8. Owned baseball franchise
9. Owned oil company
10 TWICE elected Governor Texas
11.Twice elected President of the USA
How about YOU dennis?
How about b. Hussein?
PS
The term “community leader” 99.9% means a meaningless GOVT paid job.
Sort of the ilk of je$$e, and al have.
NO managerial experience or performance required. Only a loud voice.
B. Hussein has a 1 page resume and is totally not qualified to be POTUS.
He will be jimmah’s second presidency with far reaching worse results.
In that sense he is dangerous for the security of our country.
25. FmrMarine | June 24th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
dennis;
ASBESTOS ?
EVERY building 25 years and older HAS asbestos, AND leaded paint, AND mold, AND indoor air quality.
So what exactally did B.hussein prove?
People living off the WORKING communities taxes, have it worse than those who dont??
26. Danish Artist | June 24th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
None of the liberals have commented on TOPIC!
Why am I not surprised?
Obama claims he passed legislation that he did not vote for?
A non-vote on record! Liberal translation - smear!
Why are liberals afraid of the truth?
27. Dollardays | June 24th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
23. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
So, saying that we have debated those things tons of times is now a smear, dollar? Wow, I had no idea.
Never said no such thing. You are a lost soul! Have a happy life
28. Dollardays | June 24th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
oops any such thing
29. William Teach | June 24th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
WT 4 - Dollar 0
Too easy!
30. Dennis | June 24th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Deleted - off topic.
31. Dennis | June 25th, 2008 at 12:27 am
Neocon, post 20: “Tell me what large private sector firm has Obama worked at? And if you like common men, the McCain is not for you.”
I said Obama was common-born (as opposed to being born into privilege). He is certainly an uncommon man by dint of both character and hard work. As McCain is also, in his own extraordinary way. I’ve always liked McCain and never had anything bad to say about him.
As to your rhetorical question about the private sector, even Obama’s critics acknowledge that after his Harvard accomplishments he could have walked into any blue chip firm and made millions. Part of what makes him uncommon is that he chose instead to use his substantial skills and intelligence not to accumulate personal wealth, but for the betterment of others.
America’s founding fathers, and many of us out here, both liberals and conservatives, still view the presidency as the preeminent public service job. Not as a means to tweak the system for the advantage of corporate entities and the already-advantaged, as Mr. Bush has done consistently.
32. Mark Noonan | June 25th, 2008 at 12:34 am
Dennis,
No, you’ll have to tell me what it accomplished - did anyone actually get a job because Obama “organized”? Did some teens decide not to have sex because of Obama’s “organized” neighborhood? Did a drug pusher turn himself in out of respect for the “organized” Obama neighborhood?
Give me one, concrete thing that Obama’s “organizing” accomplished…other than, of course, making it appear as if he’s accomplished something.
33. Mark Noonan | June 25th, 2008 at 12:37 am
Dennis,
Didn’t spend time building up his personal wealth? Have you seen his house?
34. Mark Noonan | June 25th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Rich,
They don’t understand, our liberals; they really think that advocating for the poor is the same as helping the poor…in liberal-think, Princess Diana was as helpful as Mother Theresa, and perhaps moreso because Mother Theresa also had those hang ups about abortion and whatnot…
35. Dennis | June 25th, 2008 at 1:44 am
Mark, get real. Obama’s personal wealth?
Two days ago I listened to an interview with David Guterson, who authored “Snow Falling on Cedars.” Perhaps you’ve heard of it. Since Guterson’s new novel examines (among other things) the effects of unexpectedly coming into tremendous wealth, the interviewer asked him how the success of his hugely popular first novel affected his life. In fact it brought him millions, and his answers were honest and unsurprising. The germane point here is that he really never anticipated the wealth - he certainly wasn’t writing the book with the object of getting rich in mind.
I also have written a novel, as yet unpublished, that I don’t expect will make me a dime. Yet the fact is that theoretically, at least, someday it could. You can be sure that wasn’t my concern while I was writing. I was much more concerned with telling my story well, being honest with my characters and with life as I know it.
Likewise it is fair to say Obama wasn’t writing his books with the object of becoming rich. But both of them became bestsellers and enabled him and his wife to buy a decent house in Chicago, and no doubt made both their lives easier - the same as Guterson.
The Obamas only recently finished paying off their college loans. His public sector work has not made him wealthy, and that Chicago house is hardly a patch on what he could own if he had set himself to become truly wealthy. The writing of his books can hardly be called a materialistic venture. A sufficient number of people found them interesting and inspirational that they have financially helped the Obamas up a rung.
By contrast Bill Clinton has become a veritable money-making machine in the past decade, working with lobbyists and international financial speculators. McCain married into money, and the Bush political dynasty was built on grandfather Prescott Bush’s wealth (I will not speak particularly here of how that was attained) and continued through investments with defense industries. Obama is not even close to wealthy by these standards, he is merely self-sufficient.
As for you flaking out on my 20 bucks, I expected it. If a published USNWR story with personal testimony from people who watched Obama’s work in Chicago isn’t enough for you, I’m certainly not going to drop everything to go bring you photos and notarized statements. But don’t feel slighted when people here question your integrity. I’d love nothing more than to be surprised and see you come thru on your word, and thus be able to defend your integrity to your critics, even if we disagree politically. But sadly, over and over you prove yourself to be a hollow man.
36. Mark Noonan | June 25th, 2008 at 2:38 am
Dennis,
Nothing like my daily dose of self-righteousness from you - wouldn’t be the same without it.
Anyways, perhaps we’d better define “accomplish” here - for you to get my $20, you’ll have to list something that Obama’s “organizing” accomplished. Missionaries of the Poor will be our standard of “accomplishing” something - show me something like Missionaries of the Poor which Obama did while “organizing” his community (which, by the way, arrogantly pre-supposes that the community - presumptively poor - needed an outsider to organize itself).
As for the impoverished, little Obama’s: they made over $900,000.00 last year - and that is $500,000.000 or so more than what is needed to enter into the top 1% of American earners (to do the math for ya, each of them is individually well into the top 1%). And even back in 2004 - when they were supposedly poor as Church mice - they were making $200,000.00 per year, which put them well into the top 2% of wage earners in the United States. They ain’t poor, not by a long shot - and while Obama could certainly have made more as a Wall Street executive or as a high priced attorney, the plain fact of the matter is that they live in an economically rarified atmosphere 99% of Americans have no experience of…and they’ve lived at least in the top 10% their whole adult lives.
Now, as for that “decent” house - it is a $1.65 million, 96 year old Georigan revival mansion in Chicago’s historic Kenwood neighborhood. It has four fireplaces and a 1,000 bottle wine cellar. If that is “decent”, I’d like to know your definition of “luxurious”…
Dennis, you’re being taken for a ride by a con artist who has emerged out of the hopelessly corrupt morass of Chicago Democratic politics…
37. Dennis | June 25th, 2008 at 3:24 am
Deleted - off topic.
38. Dennis | June 25th, 2008 at 3:39 am
Deleted - off topic.
39. Chuckasaurus | June 25th, 2008 at 5:22 am
Okay Dennis, let’s forget Barack.
Forget Barack - Michelle stated in a college thesis that she will use all present and future resources to help the black community first and foremost.
Why would any non-black want her and her husband in the White House?
Oh, that’s right……I stated the facts. That’s a smear. I guess I’m “swift boating” poor Michelle now.
40. Dennis | June 25th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Chuck, I don’t know what you stated is a fact. But if it is, so what? I said things in college that I no longer believe or can support.
Life is supposed to be about growth and the acquisition of wisdom. Anyone who remains stuck believing everything just the way they did back in college would be very suspect to me.
41. Danish Artist | June 25th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I still see liberals are dodging and weaving away from the topic.
I haven’t seen moves like that since Mohammed Ali.
Why can’t they stick to the topic?
Why are they afraid of the truth?
42. Dennis | June 25th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Deleted - off topic.
43. Danish Artist | June 25th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Dennis,
that bet is between you and Mark. However, the article you cited says Obama went to work for the church groups not that he organized them.
Beyond that, why don’t you address the original topic and answer why Obama claims to have “passed laws” and he did not even vote for them.
It’s resume enhancement or padding or frankly just plain lying.
Obama could be padding his resume with “community organizing”. I mean if he lied about those laws why not a lie about community service.
Address the topic and stop dodging and deflecting.
And don’t call it a smear to reveal the truth about a candidate.