It started with Hillary and Edwards...now get ready for the Obama hit piece book

[TeamJordan23]

I thought the recent books on Edwards and Hillary were hit pieces. Now comes one against Obama. It was only inevitable.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-obama_thujun21,1,7127706.story?track=rss&ctrack=2&cset=true

New book offers view of Obama's political calculations

By John McCormick
Tribune staff reporter

June 20, 2007, 8:19 PM CDT

A soon-to-be-released biography about Sen. Barack Obama portrays the Democratic presidential candidate as a far more calculating politician than his most ardent supporters might imagine.

One such calculation was his much-heralded 2002 speech in Chicago about the impending Iraq war, according to "Obama: From Promise to Power," a nearly 400-page book by Tribune reporter David Mendell to be released in August.

Obama gave the speech not just because of a desire to speak out about the coming war, Mendell asserts, but also to curry favor with a potential political patron, Bettylu Saltzman, a stalwart among Chicago's liberal elite, and to also try to win over political adviser David Axelrod, who was close to Saltzman.

"Obama, still an unannounced candidate for the U.S. Senate, did not immediately agree ," according to an advance copy of the book obtained by the Tribune. "But he told Saltzman that he would think it over."

[illinoisprogressive]

1. a load of crap.

this guy is just trying to make a name for himself and be on television. Can't do it one way so go out and do it another. Get on Fox and be a star.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

4. self delete nt

[iamjoy]

2. Is That The Best They Have

Really, what nonsense.

Of course, what is significant about the hits on Edwards is that they are supposedly coming from Democrats, like :wtf:

But you know, I don't give Obama much credit on the political courage front for that rousing, prescient anti-war speech in 2002. Just as I don't give Edwards credit now for speaking out against the funding bill. It's easy to speak on something one way or the other when you aren't accountable for the result.

Sadly, I think true and consistent political courage is a thing of the past, if it ever existed. Americans like to talk as if political courage is something to be admired, but most of us are very unforgiving of politicians who have different views. And when you look at all the campaigns and petitions to urge an elected official to vote a certain way, well, we EXPECT them to do the bidding of the majority (or loudest of) their constituents. If we really expected them to stand by their convictions, we wouldn't bother contacting them about an issue.

Or am I just cynical?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

3. If the IWR allegation is true that will detonate the Obama candidacy

Sure, this is a hit piece but hit pieces contain some truth in them. After this is released people will comb through the book to separate fact from fiction. If the part about the IWR is accurate that will detonate the Obama candidacy, which relies heavily on the IWR to sell Obama over his chief rivals (not to mention the whole thing about Obama standing for what he believes, and does not vote based on polls)...

[JDPriestly]

6. What is the IWR allegation?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

7. Allegedly, his highly touted IWR speech was a product of political calculation

Since that speech is a pillar of the Obama candidacy, if this allegation is true it would do great damage to him. Take away that speech and I doubt Obama would have even run this time. The IWR is what gave him a rationale to run now and contend, since the two other major Dems voted for it (as did Biden, Dodd, and Richardson supported it).

Make no mistake: Obama was against the war in 2002 (he later spoke out against it on a local tv show in 02'). The damage here would be that it takes the luster of the speech and casts doubt on one of his selling points (which is related to the IWR): that he says what he believes, not what is popular. Some people who support him believe HRC and JE voted for the IWR based on political calculation. BO offers a refreshing alternative to such people. If BO is found to be another calculating politician (we also have the recent revelation that he changed his vote on abortion--and advised other Dems to do the same--for political reasons while in the state senate. The source? His friends...http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3328663&mesg_id=3328663) he will lose a substantial part of his supporters, who like him for being "different" and above things like making self-serving political calculations over principle.

[TeamJordan23]

8. yep, real nice political calculation. It was considered political suicide to be against the war.

That is why Hillary and Edwards caved in, and did not speak up when military actions started.

[Superman Returns]

11. you never surprise.

[JDPriestly]

5. Where are the hit-piece books on the Republicans

They would be far easier to right -- although there is so much negative information about every one of them that it would take a while to select the juiciest stuff.

I think we here at DU should focus more on finding the faults in the Republicans than we do in the Democrats. So far for every anti-Republican candidate thread, I read two or three pro-Democratic candidate thread that turns into a hit-piece on the Democrat. I have to admit, I'm as guilty of some of the mudslinging as the next. But we need to switch our focus.

[Bullet1987]

9. That's what I'd like to know....

where's the hit peice book on Guiliani? You could write a 500 page book on that guy.

[Superman Returns]

10. he got a "hit movie" instead

it's called "Guiliani Time." Haven't seen it though.

[zulchzulu]

12. It's part of the process and will be completely debunked

Gee, I can't wait to see what picture they put on the cover... :crazy:

[loyalsister]

13. I'm not so sure this is damaging

Just because you have played doesn't mean you don't want things to change.
This sets up a whole line of new speeches about who has done the most samage with opportunistic voting.