Guilt by Association.

[Ravy]

We have a problem.

The Obama campaign owes in some part, large or small, its standing because of their attempts to associate Clinton with the remarks of her supporters.

How much of the vote advantage that Obama is enjoying came from the allegedly racist comments from Bill Clinton in South Carolina? From Shaheen's comments in New Hampshire?

Now the shoe is on the other foot. With the widespread publication of videos of Reverend Wright, the Obama supporters are decrying "guilt by association". They claim that Wright is not part of the campaign, then it is revealed that he is. They claim that he is only in an "honorary" position, yet are largely silent when reminded that Ferraro's position in the Clinton campaign was honorary as well.

Just two days after Keith Olbermann demanded that Clinton "reject and denounce Geraldine Ferraro", that it was not enough just to reject and denounce the offensive words... two days after that comment that was widely applauded by the Obama supporters right here on DU... he turns the camera on Obama to convince us "condemn the sin, and not the sinner"

How can you decry "guilt by association" yet still apply it every chance you get?

There are threads on this board right now wanting to investigate Clinton's church ties, and further the effort of dragging a candidate supported by roughly half of the voters in Democratic elections this year. Will this end?

Although I have supported it for some time, I again propose that the only remedy is going to be when the party elders do what my Mom did when I was not getting along with my brother. Make us stay in the same room until we learned how to get along.

A unity ticket of Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama is the only way put us in the same room.

More and more of you will disagree with this as both candidates now appear to "flawed" in each other's eyes.

Our hypocrisy knows no bounds. Right now, the enemy is us.

[MichiganVote]

1. "Rght now the enemy is us"...totally true....

[Taxmyth]

2. Dismissive attitudes

Using words like, evil, disgusting, crook, criminal, dirty, horrible, ignorance does little to promote the discourse. Racism exists and bigotry exists, if you see or suspect violence or other criminal activity, call a cop. It's not right anywhere and that is a huge change from 30 years ago. But now it's on the order of spitting on the sidewalk definitely not a capital offense. Either you are friends with the spitter or you are not depends on what other good qualities that she or he has. Corporate racist and bigoted policies are outlawed with Federal penalties. We've come a long way, baby.

Two candidates for the Primary and either of them qualified, I have my opinions and you have yours about which it should be but I would say Nationwide it's about 50-50 for who the November match up could be. Republicans have had the power and abused it. The Democratic Party should prevail. Using words like, evil, disgusting, crook, criminal, dirty, horrible, ignorance is a Republican Party trick for many years now. I still think Senator Clinton should get the nod but if Senator Obama manages to turn this latest controversy and any future ones to his advantage I will have to throw him props.

[AX10]

3. kick for all to see.

[writes3000]

4. Really, REALLY good post.

I see calls to increase the attacks on Hillary now. NO!!! That's the wrong thing to do!

And I hope Clinton supporters start to put down their arms as well.

We can disagree and express our perspectives. But we are going to attack each other until both sides have NOTHING.

[emilyg]

5. k

[Drachasor]

6. When outrageous things are said, then they have to be repudiated. This is true for both sides.

Clinton's campaign, imho, has had more trouble swiftly repudiating disturbing remarks. There is often a noticeable pause for a day or two at least before they respond properly. Sometimes it has taken longer. They seem unsure of themselves in this regard. That doesn't mean I believe Hillary believes things people she is in charge of says. She is responsible for making sure the message her campaign delivers is good and consistent (which means dealing with people in her campaign that say offensive things).

That's how it looks to me anyhow, so I don't think I am having a double standard here.

[Ravy]

7. That should be a dead issue now.

No one could say that this repudiation came swiftly from Obama.

The key is for everyone to just shun the outrageous things. Let the campaigns deal with them. Don't assume that anyone but the candidate is speaking for the candidate.

[bridgit]

8. I'm sorry, but it is the fault of BO supporters for not asking *any* questions of their candidate...

The time has come & quite nearly gone - poof! It is all about tick tock tick tock mother fucker! The time the hour is ney! Tell your candidate to get down off his high chrome horse and answer some of these most serious questions in earnest. And not merely when his poll numbers flutter a bit toward the negative, to his detriment. Do your candidate the ultimate service...and tell him to be serious about this position he seeks most dearly.

DU's hypocrisy is well observed by many if not stated flat-out by DUer's themselves as such and of late...it is time to call a spade a spade

[Ravy]

9. If this had gotten to be a big deal early in the race, I think it would

either be over by now or we would have had different choices at this point in the game if the anti-Hillary crowd had coalesed around a different candidate.

You know that the other Democratic campaigns had to have this information, and be able to purchase the tapes as well. I applaud them for holding off. I am sure the RNC would have held it until later if it had been their preference.

I am surprised that favorable media to Obama didn't try to break the story and get the repudiation from Obama earlier in the campaign, sans tapes. They really fell down on the job.