Sunday, April 13, 2008

Obama's "bitter" comments: check this

A hour ago USA Today posted the following, after which I comment below the star line.

USA Today begins - - -

How the news about Obama's 'bitter' words is playing in Pa.

Will what Sen. Barack Obama said about some small-town folks in Pennsylvania hurt him when Democrats vote in the Keystone State's primary on April 22? One way to measure whether a controversy is getting much attention and therefore will affect voters' thinking, of course, is to look at the front pages of local newspapers.

With some help from the Newseum's daily online catalog of front-page images from around the nation, here's how the story is playing in five Pennsylvania newspapers today. Working from west to east:

• Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Stripped across the top of the front page is the headline "Furor over Obama quotes." Story here.

• Sunday Patriot-News (Harrisburg): There's no headline about the controversy on the front page -- just a small "refer" to a story inside. The line reads " 'Bitter' voters: Obama explains his comments."

The Morning Call (Allentown): At the top of front page is the headline "Obama stands firm on 'small towns' talk." Story here. (Also today, the Morning Call's editorial board endorsed Obama.)

• The Sunday Times (Scranton): In large type at the center of the top of the page -- "Obama choking on 'bitter' pill."

• The Philadelphia Inquirer: Half-way down the right side of the page is a story headlined "Rivals rip Obama's 'bitter' Pa. depiction."

If you need to catch up on what the controversy is all about, our original post (with lots of background) is here. And the most recent one we did before this, is here.



I posted yesterday and said IMO Sen. Obama's clarifications were only making things worse.

I've read his further clarifications this morning. They're making things worse still because, among other things, Obama's obfuscating on what he actually said.

If I call you the dumbest person in town and all your friends get mad at me, I don't help myself by saying:

"If I offended anyone, I'm sorry. What I was trying to do was help you all understand why your friend would do certain things."

"I didn't choose my words carefully. I should have said your friend isn't the brightest guy in town. But everyone knows my basic analysis is correct."

"Now I want to explain some other things to you. How many of you know there's no place in town where you can buy a latte? Or that since George Bush became President, the price of cinnamon has doubled?"


Anonymous said...


My grandparents emigrated to the US and settled in Windber Penn. I have visited there many times as a boy.

I found small communities, like Windber, tend to be a place of strong relationships. Those relationships are not formed overnight. Obama has just lost voters in Penn that will never vote for him again. Ever.

That he would make such odious comments (even at a private gathering) indicates the country does not really know this man.

Perhaps the long primary season has a silver lining after all.


Archer05 said...

It seems BO needs another soaring speech already. I know there is a limit to how many people can be inside a bus, but how about a limit to how many can be thrown under the bus? Grandma, Farraro, Wright, Farraghan, New Black Panthers, and now the whole state of PA!

I heard a sly remark about Ray Nagin offering his unused school buses to save the disillusioned folks before they sink under the 'Snobama' tidal wave. The comics are having fun with this one.

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

The Philadelphia Inquirer's story illustrates some splendid chicanery pulled by the New York Times. Its initial story, which ran on the front page of the Inquirer, had some language which must have given the Times moguls of public-opinion bulldozing some fits. So if you look at the Times story, the 'incorrect' spin of the first story has been swept under the rug, and one would never know about the hasty change of Party line without a fine article on the erasure over at Classical Values:

The campaign did indeed 'take a sudden turn' - against Obama's media-created glory - and those words were among the ones stricken. But the blog continues First, while the campaign did indeed take a sudden turn, the most sudden turn of all has been Hillary's very opportunistic claim to be a Second Amendment supporter, and illuminates yet more chicanery on the part of non-straight-talking Hillary.

Most amusing reading, and a fine demonstration of the party line preferred by the NYT.

Anonymous said...

As I have said before: "I'm getting my popcorn ready so I can enjoy the show when Mr. Obama's wheels come off." He's doing a masterful job of repeatedly shooting himself in the feet while STILL BEATING Rodham. Heh Heh.
Tarheel Hawkeye

mac said...
This comment has been removed by the author.