Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama Spokesman Robert Gibbs (304 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  On the second part I agree, but on the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    talex, Sam I Am

    first part I think the Clintons look pretty lame complaining about one of their previous supporter's obvious disenchantment with them.  I don't really think Geffen's comments about the Clintons had a thing to do with Obama.  Geffen and the Clintons have a much longer history than Geffen and Obama do.  The Clintons objections are sort of like an ex-husband asking his ex-wife's new husband to denounce the ex-wife for saying something bad about him.  At least that is how it strikes me anyway.

    •  Well They Did Have To Do (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Athena, inclusiveheart

      with Obama because of the fund raising. Which is exactly why Obama got dragged into it by the press. And again he didn't handle it in a good fashion at all.

      As for Clinton she could have handled it better also by just brushing Geffen's comments off with a laugh and a joke. Now whether she was just clumsy or used it to take a shoot at Obama who knows. But what I do know is Obama's renouncement of slash and burn politics is BS.

      "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

      by talex on Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 01:48:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Technically Obama works for Geffen though (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sam I Am

        and not the other way around.  Strictly in the sense that the money flows from Geffen to Obama if you see what I mean.  You can't have any expectation that Obama can control what Geffen says - that is what the Clintons want you to think though.  You might not have seen Hardball last night - the Clinton guy was all about trying to make people think that Geffen could be controlled by Obama.  Funny how the Clintons didn't manage to do that and lost his support.  I personally think they come off like the big losers ultimately here.  If I had been that communications guy alloted all that time on a national cable show (he had two segments), I would have addressed the dust up for about a minute and tried to talk about what my candidate wants to do.  Instead he really just couldn't get over himself and this Geffen thing.

        Anyhow, Obama has not risen to any super-hero status in my mind.  He'll actually have to do something to achieve that and stop talking about "third way" bs and the politics of politics that have nothing to do with actual issues that I care about.  Frankly, I long for the days of a cruel and calculating Lyndon Johnson because he did things like gave us the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act and never pretended that you had to be "nice" to be effective.

        •  Scary (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          You say Obama works for Geffen. That says it all about how screwed up the election process is. If a guy gives you money you march to the beat of his drum? Well that's is true in some respects as we know. But saying the words 'works for' is a might strong. But then again maybe not.

          Anyway I think Obama or anyone else running for that matter can ask someone outside their campaign to turn down their rhetoric. If the candidate tells a supporter that what they are saying is not helpful or consistent with the campaign and that supporter does not respect the candidates request then what type of "supporter are they really? And if the candidate does not ask the supporter to quit saying or  doing something (i.e. Bush & Swiftboaters) then what does that say about the candidate?

          "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

          by talex on Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 02:26:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It is scary, but I think it is the reality. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            I know it is strong, but the Clintons were trying to paint it in the opposite and that is effectively a misrepresenation.  In fact, they all work for us.  The distinction between a "good guy" in politics and a "bad guy" is the good guy doesn't think that the only people they work for are the ones who send them checks or raise money for their campaigns.

            •  Scary (0+ / 0-)

              The notion that an elected official or a candidate "works for" the people who fund his or her campaign is scary, and, I think, inaccurate.  None of the candidates I've worked for ever felt that they worked for their donors.  The elected official works for the voters who elect her.  There is a lot of appreciation for donors, but the donors to any particular candidate may themselves disagree often enough.  What happens then?  Does the politician have to "disobey" one of his bosses and "get fired"?  

              I appreciate the point you're making about how Obama doesn't necessarily have any control over what one of his funders says about an opponent.  I get it--Obama is at this moment appreciating Geffen's help with fundraising, and unlikely to call Geffen and say "Apologize!"  The power in that relationship works completely differently than Obama simply telling Geffen what to say.  

              But Geffen can't tell Obama what to say either.  Obama doesn't work for Geffen.

              "Calmer than you are."

              by Sheffield on Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 07:52:07 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site