Race To The White House: Obama's Bipartisan Appeal
By Nicole Belle Wednesday Jun 18, 2008 6:00pm
(h/t Heather for video)
The Bizarro-World of the punditocracy has the world so shifted askew that in their view, John McCain, who has voted with President Bush 95% of the time in 2007 and 100% of the time in 2008 is a bipartisan who reaches across the aisle and Barack Obama, who has only the 40th most liberal voting record, is a flaming liberal with no record of working on a bipartisan basis, despite co-sponsoring legislation with ultra-right wingers Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar. Catch that logic?
Stephen Hayes and Tony Blankley are foisting this incredible bit of specious syllogism, based on The Weekly Standard's article naming Obama the most liberal Senator. Because we all know The Weekly Standard (founded by neo-con William Kristol) never makes things up, right? Rachel Maddow, once again casting pearls of wisdom before porcine truthiness, tries to set them straight:
MADDOW: ...Barack Obama has only been in the Senate for one term. In that time, the bills that he‘s sponsored have been with people like Tom Coburn on more than one occasion. He was the guy that extended the Nunn-Lugar bill so that it wasn‘t just about weapons of mass destruction. It was also about dangerous conventional weapons like shoulder fired missiles. He did it with Dick Lugar. He has.
When you‘ve only been in the Senate one term and you‘re a freshman, you don‘t have a huge legislative record. But what he‘s got is actually extraordinarily bipartisan.
HAYES: David, I think Rachel may have exhausted the list. I think that may be it. He clearly doesn‘t have a bipartisan record. The "National Journal" survey found he was the most liberal senator.
MADDOW: Come on. Come on.
(CROSS TALK)
MADDOW: And Bernie Sanders is obviously taking it to the refs on this one and Russ Feingold too. If Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar don‘t count as reaching across the aisle because we‘re rounding that down-
(CROSS TALK)
HAYES: I‘m perfectly happy to count them. There‘s just two. What other examples are there. The fact remains that "National Journal" poll-you can scoff at it, if you want. Other people don‘t seem to scoff at it. I guarantee that the McCain campaign is going to be using it liberally.
MADDOW: Let me ask you though, in 2004, that "National Journal" poll, who did they say was the most liberal senator in 2004?
HAYES: I don‘t know.
MADDOW: It would be John Kerry.
Transcripts below the fold:
GREGORY: I want to move on to number two here, but I do think there are two realities in this campaign. One is the bush years have given Democrats a bigger voice, a stronger voice to take on the tactics and the methods of the war on terror. There‘s also a Republican record where we have not been attacked in this country since 2001. That also is going to mean a lot to people. It will be difficult to take that away from the Bush administration, even if you attack them on the war on Iraq or on methods and techniques of dealing with prisoners. It‘s going to be a complicated and intense debate.
Let‘s move on to number two. One of Obama‘s calling cards here is that he can play across the aisle, that he has bipartisan appeal. What is that appeal? Does Obama have an actual track record, Tony Blankley, of bipartisanship?
BLANKLEY: I don‘t want to claim a comprehensive knowledge of Obama‘s record, but my impression is that he does not have a track record of challenging the interests of his own side. He challenges the interests of the Republican side. This is the argument McCain‘s making. If it‘s makeable, it‘s a powerful argument for McCain, because it goes to the very nature of how Obama describes his campaign and the reason for it, that he‘s beyond politics.
If you can show that he has the weaker record, decisively from McCain, who clearly has a bipartisan record-that‘s why he doesn‘t have base supporters, because he‘s been on the wrong side for a lot of us for many years. I think it‘s a powerful issue, if he can make it. Part of that will be advertising money, where Obama will be out-spending him two or three to one.
HARWOOD: That‘s one of the reasons he gave that speech to the African American on Sunday, though, was to provide some examples, contemporaneous examples, of him talking to people on his own side and saying you have to shape up too.
GREGORY: But has he done it in Washington? Rachel, this is the flip side of the argument that being in the Senate is a vulnerability for McCain, because he does have area‘s where he can say, whether it‘s gang of 14, campaign finance reform, other issues. Look, I‘ve done it. I have worked on the other side of the aisle.
MADDOW: In fact, he does. Barack Obama has only been in the Senate for one term. In that time, the bills that he‘s sponsored have been with people like Tom Coburn on more than one occasion. He was the guy that extended the Nunn-Lugar bill so that it wasn‘t just about weapons of mass destruction. It was also about dangerous conventional weapons like shoulder fired missiles. He did it with Dick Lugar. He has.
When you‘ve only been in the Senate one term and you‘re a freshman, you don‘t have a huge legislative record. But what he‘s got is actually extraordinarily bipartisan.
HAYES: David, I think Rachel may have exhausted the list. I think that may be it. He clearly doesn‘t have a bipartisan record. The "National Journal" survey found he was the most liberal senator.
MADDOW: Come on. Come on.
(CROSS TALK)
MADDOW: And Bernie Sanders is obviously taking it to the refs on this one and Russ Feingold too. If Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar don‘t count as reaching across the aisle because we‘re rounding that down-
(CROSS TALK)
HAYES: I‘m perfectly happy to count them. There‘s just two. What other examples are there. The fact remains that "National Journal" poll-you can scoff at it, if you want. Other people don‘t seem to scoff at it. I guarantee that the McCain campaign is going to be using it liberally.
MADDOW: Let me ask you though, in 2004, that "National Journal" poll, who did they say was the most liberal senator in 2004?
HAYES: I don‘t know.
MADDOW: It would be John Kerry. In both cases, I think Bernie Sanders was really-
GREGORY: Quick comment here because I want to get-
BLANKLEY: The Nunn bill was not a big partisan fight. McCain, on the other hand, is was paired up with Kennedy, with Feingold. He picked on the Democratic side on great fight, great partisan fights.
(CROSS TALK)
BLANKLEY: No, but it‘s not a big bill.
GREGORY: Let me wedge in here. The third question, John Harwood, your take on it in 20 seconds, desperate to drill, where are the votes in the oil debate, John, quickly?
HARWOOD: There are blue collar votes to be had in this debate, for a candidate to say we have to do something different, because you‘re paying more than four dollars at the pump. That‘s who McCain is talking to today.
GREGORY: OK, we‘ll take break here. Three questions, always lively here. Your play date in our remaining moments with our panel. Don‘t go away.
Login or Register to post comments.
Gregory always manages to stay in the "middle" even if that brings him to the edge of the precipice.
i <3 Rachel.
I sit on a man's back, choking him, and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by any means possible, except getting off his back.
Well, hell, I wish Obama was a progressive. In most ways, he isn't, though: he's a moderate by any standards save those of the neo-con radicals and the pundits they inspire. Still, if they can portray Obama as a liberal because those neo-cons tell them he is, why, gives the pundits good copy, and they don't even have to think to say or write it. Hey! A twofer!
maybe i'll have better luck here... i heard stephen hayes say something the other day and i'm still trying to clear it up... seems a good place to make sure he's the liar i figured...
here it is… i’ve been outside working in the beautiful high 70s, low humidity weather these past days… [tuesday] i heard this exchange - or thought i heard it and wasn’t sure until i could check the transcript [wednesday]… taking a break, i found it -
from Race to the White House with david gregory, simulcast on RACHEL MADDOW’s show on AirAmericaRadio:
well, i don’t recall that they ever got back to it…
but, is that true??? they are NOT incarcerated???
REALLY???
[katy, it's off topic on this thread. I'll let it stay at this one for a few minutes so that you can copy and paste it on an Open Thread. Thanks. Site Monitor ps- There were quite a few people arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned for that first attack, though it's hard to say if every individual involved was captured.]
Do you mean McCain actually voted for something in 2008?! I don't believe these lies!
Saying Obama is the *most* liberal senator is like saying Tony Blankley is an intelligent, free-thinking, caring person.
Makeable?
Yes, McCain is bipartisan. He supports both fascists and genocidalists.
ebone @ 2:
Me too. She is always prepared for the right's talking points and has a wonderful way of confronting and defusing their distortions. It's no mystery why she was chosen as a Rhodes Scholar.
Stephen Hayes earns 4 and a half Robert Novak heads out of 5 for his repertoire of douchebaggery.
I love this blog but I hate it when people get the spelling of the Weakly Substandard wrong. :(
And I also need to ask what is "wrong" with being "most liberal?"
Wasn't jeebus a liberal?
I'd have Rachael's babies and I am a man.
I've heard quite a bit about Obama being the most liberal senator (more liberal than Feingold? Kennedy?), but I NEVER hear these windbags ask about the most conservative senator. Why is that?
North Texans having to chose between food and gas.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/living/2008/06/19/stoler.food.or.gas.wfaa
[Sorry about the wait on this one, burn. It's the over-zealous spam filter acting up yet again. The upside is that you don't have to deal with all of the Cyrillic porn spam that we get. The downside is that a lot of innocuous-to-important links activate the filter. Site Monitor]
In North Texas it's either food or gas.
http://www.cnn dot com/video/#/video/living/2008/06/19/stoler.food.or.gas.wfaa
theWalrus @ 7:
I'm not going to defend Tony Blankley's politics because I disagree with them - but your comment about his character is out of line.
I'd suggest you listen to "Left, Right & Centre" (KCRW) a few times. It's a great political discussion radio show with Blankley, Arianna Huffington and Bob Scheer. Blankley is the best I've heard at presenting the Right side of political discussion without relying on disrespect or common put-downs. - something you could do well to learn something about yourself.
The thing about Rachel Maddow is that when you watch her deliver her arguments and counter arguments on the screen she's even stronger and more persuasive than when you just read the transcript.
She has a natural television presence and really understands how the medium works.
David Gregory has no business hosting a show. He's so intent on when the show's going to a break, he never follows up on interesting comments. He's done it to Eugene Robinson more times than I can count. And this current discussion could've gotten a lot more interesting and informative if Gregory had more balls and let people say what they wanted to so. He always says, "We'll get back to that right after the break." And he never does. He's reading from his script and if it says, "this talking point now," break, "then we have to have a new talking point." The guy's such a scrotum.
And the National Journal rankings on who's the most liberal/conservative has been debunked sooo many times. Leave it up to Tony Blankley to bring it up. No one else with any brains even pays attention to it anymore.
Gregory doesn't like to give Rachel a chance to expose these two losers and their phoney source of "most liberal senator" crap. America had better get it's head out of it's ass and start exposing this right wing neocon crap pile for what it is....just propaganda and lies.
I'm glad the Democratic Party has a huge cash roll this time around. We need it. We need to expose these lying sons-of-bitches and their tricks and deception to the American people once and for all!!
Go Rachel. You make these two overstuffed sacks of shit look like JUST THAT!
John McCaint is a Nazi, until he proves me wrong
To the National Journal every Democrat is a liberal and every Democrat running for office is the most liberal.
stephen hayes is literally nothing but a fucking propagandist and liar. he still pimps the lie of a connection between 9/11 and saddam; and he is the author of a widely panned hagiography of dick cheney.
i find it interesting that he's now a regular guest on dancin' david gregory's ego-hour. and is finding his way on other general electric media outlets as well. i've seen him a couple of times opining on democratic primary results.
you'd think someone so clearly discredited would not be given a prominent platform to continue to spread his lies.
BLANKLEY: I don‘t want to claim a comprehensive knowledge of Obama‘s record
Do us all a favor, Pudge, get real and stop claiming knowledge IN GENERAL.
I heart Rachel’s laugh, too. Especially when she laughs in their faces when they spew their lies. Priceless.
Rachel Maddow is approximatley 10 times more brighter, more informed , more quicker thinking and more articulate than those other cowboys .
HAYES: I‘m perfectly happy to count them. There‘s just two. What other examples are there. The fact remains that “National Journal” poll-you can scoff at it, if you want. Other people don‘t seem to scoff at it. I guarantee that the McCain campaign is going to be using it liberally.
You are lying sack of detritus and bite the heads of live chickens in graveyards every Saturday night. The fact remains that I wrote it, right here. Does that necessarily make what I wrote fact, MORON?
(wait...it might well be true, but my point still stands)
HAYES: I don‘t know.
Make that your answer to everything, Snarky McBeardface. At least it would be the truth.
Why even dispute whether he is the most liberal senator or not?
Just say, 'I don't know if that's true, but all America can thank God that he's not a conservative!'
Dada has it right!! ONCE. Just Once I'd like to hear them put all of this talk of "liberal", "conservative", into perspective.
Why does a liberal have to defend their record when a conservative does not? What votes were cast that put them in the "liberal" category? If just once these talking heads would describe what liberal actually means, people in America would realize that liberal ain't so bad. Something along the lines of...say..."well, Obama voted against the rights of X corporation to screw over working class people, and stood up for consumers and workers, so I guess if that makes him 'liberal', so be it, but I bet most Americans would agree with his vote, etc..." Why won't they say that??!?!!? Why do even fellow liberals/progressives go along with the implicit frame?
More importantly, since when does Obama stand ONLY for "bi-partisanship", when clearly, he is considered by many to be a good LIBERAL antidote to CONSERVATIVE misgovernance (sp?)???? This frame acts as if our problem in America has not been conservatism (it has), and that liberalism is better (it is), but that our problem is somehow, lack of bi-partisanship. BS. This is what concerns me about the Bush-bashing. If we do not link the disaster that has been "Bush" to the larger truism that Bush simply represented conservatism, we get nowhere, even if Obama wins. Because the wrong lesson is learned... that once again, it is not about an inferior vs. a superior ideology (which it is), but about personalities. We HAVE to get away from this and the first way to do this is to link CONSERVATISM with this disaster, not just Bush. Make conservatism as "bad" a word as "liberalism" was made into after the 60's-70's!!!
Grrrrrrr.
And yes... I know Obama aren't no FDR, but still.....
And yes, I also know that's bad grammar...
I hafta say- Maddow is so refreshing to have on TV. She is smarter and tougher then any of these propaganda pigs she faces.
Man, Rachel Maddow is smarter than all of those gasbags put together. She ripped apart their arguments and they could do nothing but repeat the same tired phrases.
ElleninBigD @ 18:
Canuknotusa @ 16:
tony does have something to offer i do listen him when i have a chance....i think he is more of a classical republican at times not sure he agrees with the NEOCON philosophy......i don't believe he fully appreciates mcBlame
It must be hard for Rachel to be on these shows while being a member of the "reality-based Community".... but at least she can still laugh at them...
I am no fan of Rachel Maddow, her ambitious to play at the MSNBC boy's club led her to some spout some truely nasty garbage about Hillary Clinton. She's also kissed the tokas of Chris Matthews, well, just see the Daily Howler.
Oh this issue, She's right of course and does a decent job with these two. But by now the "most liberal" ploy is badly shopworn, and these Republican hacks won't get much milage from it. I like the fact that Maddow suggests the Republican Party is now out on the fringe of Public Opinion, but why not just come out and say it?
Canuknotusa @ 16:
Well....ok. Knee-jerk dislike (I did it on this thread, too, that's why I am am replying) of a republican isn't the best way to go about things. But I pause to wonder....why in the world would I feel so strongly about him and his peeps? Why am I so reflexively repulsed and suspicious? I'm going to go with the last 7+ years of GOP hijinks plastered on top of another 30+ years of similar chicanery having scarred me so deeply...
BLANKLEY: I don‘t want to claim a comprehensive knowledge of Obama‘s record
then why the hell do you go on national teevee and make generalisations about him?
Bonkers @ 35:
Dude- don't apologize for calling the kettle black... that sort of thinking, we'd hafta demand they change the name of this site!
And now we see the contrast between a woman with her doctorate in political science and a "journalist" carrying water for a quickly dying political ideology.
Maddow shouldn't go on shows like that. They're all jokes and she can only laugh at the stupidity rather than have a proper debate.
maddow got them good when she asked the rhetorical question who was the most liberal in 2004 -- kerry.
yeah, we've got the playbook.
whoever the democratic candidate is automatically number one on "the most liberal" list.
i shake my head in wonder at the format -- two minutes of four people speaking over each other. they have to do it that way. otherwise the viewers might hear an opposing viewpoint at enough length for it to be able to sink in and then where would they be!
What a bullshit ADHD format; it's a (insert bigoted adjective) firing squad.
Rachael Maddow should get position of press secretary for Obama. Her intelligent fact gathering, honesty, and analysis is second to none!
She has it all, a doctorate, personality, and passionate concern for America and our democracy. She is really raising the bar on what journalism means as a job. Her self effacing humor is really genuine. GO RACHAEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rob @ 40:
She constantly makes those MSM dimwits look stupid. The contrast is vivid for all to see. I think it is good to have her there for that reason.
The host always serves her a curve just when it gets going. Rachael Maddow for Press secretary for Obama!!!!!!!!!
g @ 37:
That fat dumbass is the perfect representative for the neocons. It shows clearly for all to see that ideology and fact are not the same.
I love to watch that idiot opine on subjects that he knows nothing about. It really helps show how intellectually and morally bankrupt Refucklinism is!!!!
Rachel nows how to take em apart
karl @ 33:
Classical republican? That's a new one. Kind of like classical Nazi suppose. Watching him is like watching McCain. They just make up shit as they go along.
when the mind is cloudy and thoughts are incoherent, and when the pangs of desperation loom ever larger for the g.o.p., you can bet they will come out of a coma long enough to say 2 things: 'LIBERAL' and 'TAX CUTS.' and if you're guiliani: 9/11.
katy @ 5:
thanks, site monitor... i had some running to do and just now see your message...
i understand the topic was different, but the characters are the same... and so is the m.o.
i guess no one else knows the answer either... i've been schooled that the perps of the 93 attack WERE, as you say, arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned...
too bad hayes wasn't called on to clarify his statement...
When dopes like these two debate Maddow, it really isn't a fair fight.
Give her "Meet The Press," right now.
Republicans and their supporters do not have a history of honesty. If they told the truth about their intentions they would never get elected to anything. (R) stands for liar.
Let's face it: any Democratic presidential candidate will be referred to as a Trotskyite by the GOP and its minions.
I love Rachel (not romantically). She has such a subtle way of discrediting right-wing smear points, just by using her laugh. It just gives her so much more creditability, when she can inject facts and humor, while the republican talking heads, are foaming at the mouth and preaching fear. She is always the best prepared and they cannot find a single way to attack her. It is like trying to pick-up mercury. There is nothing to grab onto.
Long-live, Rachel. Wouldn't she make a great press secretary for Barack?
Dude,
Is it just me, or do the Republicans have literally no relevant political ammo at all this election cycle?
They dont even really stand for much of anything anything that I can tell anymore.
Just seems like they are all trying to be the un or anti-leeeeeebrul. Whatever the hell that is anymore.
Theyve just screwed things up too badly. I really dont think god, guns, gays, and minorities (the KKK voting bloc) is gonna be enough for them this time around.
-the dude
I'm just reeling that Hayes, after pimping the National Journal's "most liberal 2008" review, would try to sell the idea that he didn't know 2004's winner. He's either remarkably ill-informed or lying through his teeth.
Did no one hear Stephen Haye's last comment after Rachel Maddow said the Weekly Standard named John Kerry the most liberal senator in 2004? It reveals his and the Weekly Standard's motives. He said, "Not President Kerry." He is very smugly admitting their agenda in 2004 was to influence the outcome by spreading propaganda, and it obviously worked for them in 2004.
Why does MSM give these people credibility? A "Liberal" could never get away with admitting something like that.
It's insane to believe that because Obama reached across the isle with one bill, republicans will see him as an appealing candidate. MCcain introduced a immigration bill with Kennedy and that got him into deep trouble with the conservative base. And I also don't find him appealing to me because of that.
I like Maddow, but sometimes her arguments are as dumb as Hannity's.
nyguy @ 57:
Except the question didn't ask "will Republicans like Obama?" The question asked if he has a bi-partisan track record. If Maddow seems protective, it's because she knows the right-wing is spinning Obama into a liberal commie pinko who drinks the blood of squashed fetuses - and they're going to push the idea that "this bi-partisanship business matters to YOU, Mr. John Q. Public, so I hope you're comfortable with voting for a leftie loony who will consistently alienate his craziest co-workers."
God, watching David Gregory moderate is about as satisfying as sitting through a three-hour high school commencement ceremony for the cousin you hardly ever see or talk to. He's not a good host, which is why he'll probably get MTP. It always seems to me he's walking the tightrope between being a real investigative journalist a la 1970's Woodward and Bernstein and being a buttboy-yesman for the Washington press/pol machine. He'll never grow the balls necessary to be anything else. Even beyond that, he can't maintain control of a panel for shit. There's no presence, no personality, and no intellectual bacon. Just another forum for unfettered distortion and soundbyte pugilism.
Rachel, I offer you my womb to bear your children. Or something along those lines.
Dude,
Is it just me, or do the Republicans have literally no relevant political ammo at all this election cycle?
Dude, it's not just you, they spent the last of their 9/11 fear potion on the 2004 election and wasted it totally on Hurricane Katrina. It really was all they ever had.
How dare MSNBC let a liberal onscreen with her facts and evidence inside pundit discussions.
How dare MSNBC let a liberal onscreen with her facts and evidence inside pundit discussions.
I understand the snark, but what Rachel does is not so much liberal as simply reality-based. They say Obama has no bipartisan record, she corrects with facts.
They claim some absurd most-liberal tag applies to Obama, she laughs and gives two examples that show the silliness.
They have only ideology, she has information. In current parlance, that makes her a liberal.
joeedugan Says: Why even dispute whether he is the most liberal senator or not?
Just say, ‘I don’t know if that’s true, but all America can thank God that he’s not a conservative!’
Exactly!!
When will Democrats/Liberals/Progressives going to start to hit back hard at the conservative criminals.
I mean, I don't think America can stand one more day of this conservative success!!!
McCain is generous and bipartisan because he voted with Bush 95 percent of the time.
Obama is selfish and partisan because he did not.
Makes perfect sense, if you wear Republican kaleidoscope glasses.
I thought William "The Bloody" Kristol founded the World Weekly News?
What? The Weekly Standard, not the World Weekly News? Aw c'mon, what's the difference?
(Note: I did not intend to disparage the World Weekly News with this post by comparing it to Kristol's rag, the Weekly Standard. The World Weekly News obviously had many more fact-based articles, and a whole lot more humorous, than anything in Kristol's rag).
jimbo92107 @ 64:
Republo-logic, volume 8.
You are bipartisan if you vote with your opponent party more than 5% of the time.
Stephen Hayes? When will the quit putting the dumbest pathological liars on t.v?
These asshats are an absolute Orwellean joke! Give me 5 minutes with that moron on the tele. I won't be nearly as respectful as Rachel, but I think I would get some laughs.
I'm really getting bored watching this little woman constantly kicking these guys ass. "Meet The Press" welcome to the 21st century...give the most qualified person the job. Please.
Does bipartisan appeal mean you appeal to bi partisans?
Or should I not ask?
Guys hate it, especially conservatives, when a woman makes them look bad and Rachel did it. Rachel has more balls then these three guys combined.
What is it with these republican "rebels" and their goatees? Anyway, it looks like this year is beginning to look like 2000 & 2004, with republicans inventing an issue - in this case, Obama being "the most liberal senator" - and the press keeping it alive by treating it seriously.
The obvious annoyance of these rightist propaganda priests at having someone (in this case a woman) call bullshit on their bullshit was entertaining.
katy @ 5:
Not incarcerated? Sounds like another cover-up.
And McInsane is the most conservative! CONSERVATIVE! Just like Bush! Bush is a conservative like McCain. Obama is liberal, the opposite of Bush and conservative!
Yes weakly shit-standard moron, lets have that debate. See which side loses big time! What's next, are they going to warn us about the evils of the incadescent bulb? God are these people stupid!
Thank the Great Spaghetti Monster that I'm gay or I'd be spending all my time in hopeless adoration of Ms Maddow.
He's only the "..most liberal senator" in the eyes of the GOP and the right leaning pundits. Not more than a few weeks ago, when his record was examined, he placed 39th or 40th in the spectrum of conservative/liberal which made him a "centrist".
So why is the right lying to the American public about his status as a liberal?
Pwned again! Thanks Rachel Maddow. Style, grace, humility, substance, evidence.
katie @ 59:
Exactly! I love Rachel and I wish MSNBC had given her the show instead of Gregory. His constant need to finish off Rachel's excellent points by defending Bush/McSame is so irritating.
Login or Register to post comments.