The Hill’s Pundits Blog » The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born

November 5, 2008

The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born (Brent Budowsky)

@ 10:30 am

It was a moment for the ages and the night Old Dixie died, when the trumpet sounded and a president like Caroline Kennedy's father came. In terms of race relations and America being a community of diverse people from countless backgrounds working together for the common good, it was the most important night since the Emancipation Proclamation.

It was the night Old Dixie died, when those who were whipped and beaten can have a president of their own, and we will have a president of our own. It was a night for the realignment of generations, as people age 18 to 30 have a president of their own, and just as profoundly, kids too young to vote in 2008 will have a president of their own. As they get older, they will change the demographics of our democracy for a generation, to the advantage of Democrats.

It was a night when the last became first and the first became last, when the small donors and hard workers and grassroots who were so alienated and maligned found a president of their own and made it happen. It was a night when the old and tired and corrupt told us that the Bradley effect would prevail and the American people left them behind, once and for all, now and forever.

It was a night for the ages, a night for the generations, a night for the historians. A night for the people and a night to begin the future.

It was the night Old Dixie died and the night a new generation was born, and from this night forward, every mom and every dad can tell every little boy and every little girl that anywhere in America anything can happen and anyone can rise as far as their talent and hard work will take them.

What a great country!

Archived under: Presidential Campaign
Permalink TrackBack

Email This Post

Share this post

del.icio.us:The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born

digg:The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born

newsvine:The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born

reddit:The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born

fark:The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born

Y!:The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born

What's This

113 Comments »

The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.

Brent;

Well said. Looking at the faces of those who wanted change I saw the new face of America. An America where we are all in this together and together we can make this a better country and hopefully a better and more peaceful world. As I looked at the newspapers from around the world this morning, it shows that they wanted a leader of teh USA that they could work with and Obama is that person. It was a great night for me and my family and hopefully we can work together to solve the big problems we face as a nation. God Bless the USA.

Comment by Mike Coleman — November 5, 2008 @ 11:03 am
Brent, Mike, Melissa, Theard, et al,

My congratulations on the victory of Presiden-elect Obama.

I now put aside my partisan commentary. The American people have spoken. I have been spirited in my discussions with all of you through this election, but the time for my predictions of what an Obama Presidency may mean is over. I now wipe the slate clean and can only judge him by his actions, reactions, and policies to the many challenges facing our country.

I hope that the country will become better, stronger, and partisan bickering can be reduced to a manageable level.

God Bless America!!

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 5, 2008 @ 11:17 am
A great night, Mike, a great moment, a great
country. The next time Barack goes to Berlin
there will be a million Europeans waving
American flags.

Comment by Brent — November 5, 2008 @ 11:19 am
I for the best guy for the job. I voted for the smart guy. I voted for the rational pragmatist. I voted for the level-headed guy.

And, oh yeah, the guy I voted for is black. I'm glad enough folks voted for the same guy.

Comment by smilinjack — November 5, 2008 @ 11:31 am
Gee Brent, for the last eight years you've been labeling America as a horrible place. Now that you've gotten your way, the heavens have opened up.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 5, 2008 @ 11:37 am
As much as I hope that differences can be set aside for the greater good of the country, I still have this nagging feeling that Democrats need to finally yank Joe Lieberman from his chairmanship. It doesn't mean they can't work with him, but I see absolutely no reason to allow him the continued privilege of serving in that capacity.

Comment by Melissa — November 5, 2008 @ 11:48 am
Congratulations to Barack Obama and to all Americans. The best candidate won. I guess I have to thank the Bush Administration for being so abominable that we are able to have a President-Elect obama.

Comment by Joyce — November 5, 2008 @ 12:06 pm
This election is a harbinger of what is to come. Whites are already a minority in the Democratic Party, soon they will be relegated to second class status (as they so rightly deserve).

Minorities elected Obama. Most whites voted McCain. McCain pulled as much of the white vote as Bush did in 2004. What was different was the minority vote flowed to Obama.

See my blog for an analysis.

Comment by DFAL — November 5, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
Brent-

Thanks for all that you do and your diligence. I am elated and proud.

To Melissa, Mike, and Jon a ciber toast to you all!!

I agree, LIE-berman needs his chairmanship stripped.

Comment by Theard — November 5, 2008 @ 12:13 pm
Is this the appropriate time to talk of the possibility of Sen. Clinton leading the Senate? Is this not the right time for a woman leader to take out Harry Reid and take command of the Senate?

Congratualtions to President Barak Obama

Comment by Lester — November 5, 2008 @ 12:19 pm
#2 Thank you, Jon. I'm glad to hear that you are not holding on to any resentment and are willing to give him a fair chance.

Comment by Melissa — November 5, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
Yeah, it's all hunky dory now. When the liberals lost in 2000 and 2004 the entire nation was treated to treatise of a bunch of sore losers who never stopped whining, gripping and complaining for 8 years.

Now, suddenly, we're all supposed to get along and be conciliatory.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 5, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
Thanks Jon, very gracious, much appreciated.
Robert, show a little class. If you knew
half of my biography you would not try to
teach me lessons about patriotism and loving
this country.

Comment by Brent — November 5, 2008 @ 12:36 pm
I think we are collecting the harvest of the tolerance education that got going for real in the public schools when I was in junior high.

Also for the first time I'm now older than the president-elect. It's only by a couple of weeks, but that counts.

Comment by Barry Schwartz — November 5, 2008 @ 12:51 pm
#8

You're being relegated to the back seat, but it isn't owing to the color of your skin. It's owing to the color of your soul, which is far darker than any skin you fear.

Comment by Melissa — November 5, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
Brent: As far as having some class, let the readers decide who has some class.

First, I never questioned your patriotism. Never. Either you're deluded, or you so vain glorious you've lost all reason.

Secondly, I've never even implied you don't love this country or any other. Paranoia?

Lastly, you don't have to lecture others like you do. It's childish and unprincipled.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 5, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
#12

Yes Robert the time of predicting what will happen is over. We can now only judge by what heppens in the future. Its time to turn the page and respect the vote.

I am not lying down my beliefs or ideals. But as an American I want good things to happen for the country no matter who brings them. Though my choice lost, I do not want Obama to fail so I may feel better or vindicated. I would much rather be wrong in my pre-election predictions.

How will it turn out? Only time will tell.

I do look forward to arguing my beliefs and positions when warranted.

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 5, 2008 @ 1:18 pm
While liberals are calling for being conciliatory, look at these posts. Throw Joe Lieberman out. You can't wait. Frankly, you look mean spirited. That's a liberal trademark.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 5, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
Robert: Class much?

I thought not. Your soul is a poisoned and withered as Shooter Cheney's.

Comment by coralsea — November 5, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
Interesting insider scoop from the campaigns for those with curious minds….

http://www.newsweek.com/id/167581/page/1

Comment by Melissa — November 5, 2008 @ 1:44 pm
May God bless Barack Obama and allow him to rise to the challenges that face him and us as a nation with the necessary wisdom and humility required. While I would have preferred a much more thorough and honest vetting of the man and his history of actions and positions, as my President, he will have my support and prayers for success in all things that will make our nation a better place for all her citizens.

As already last night in the wee hours after his victory, the pundits and the analysts were arguing over what he will and should do as President (it is apparently lost on them that it was their job over the last 2 years to have sufficiently illuminated him to the extent that those questions should have already been answered and only the extent of his likely success should be up for argument), I fear that he has already been set up for failure through competing and unrealistic expectations, and that's just from his own supporters.

I hope that people will realize and encourage him to realize that for him to be considered successful, he will have to keep us safe as a nation, improve and maintain our infrastructure, pursue an education policy that is focussed on HONESTLY EDUCATING ALL of our children equally and better than it's being done anywhere else in the world and not centered primarily on our educators as it seems to be historically, and of course protecting the OPPORTUNITY for ALL citizens to ACHEIVE whatever level of success they are willing to work for, and removing the barriers thereto. And of course providing the minimal safety net needed to assure the less fortunate amongst us is protected, while at the same time doing so in a way that allows and requires them, if at all possible, to re-engage in a way that will allow them to take advantage of all the opportunities available in our society.

While I'm disappointed that it seems that the media and the pundits like Brent weren't willing to fully and truthfully analyze the candidate's positions sufficiently to where they wouldn't be questioning even the basics of what his win means, at the same time, I pray that that intellectual and ideological laziness and incompetence by them doesn't prevent them and us all from properly and honestly crediting Obama with his Presidential successes, (as it has at times with Bush) or with honestly holding him accountable for his inevitable Presidential failures without denigrating the man himself unjustly. Based on their peformance over the last 2 years, the last 8 years, and the last 40 years, I'm much more optimistic about Obama's abilities to rise to the occassion, then I am about them. I pray for him to be wildly successful.

Comment by Nick — November 5, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
Where is Igor in all this? Not a peep from him all day? Robert, give it up. The best candidate won, and that's what it was all about. He'll be a great president. God bless President-elect Barack Obama and VP-elect Joe Biden. We're here to help.

Comment by Jessara — November 5, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Well, I want to say that many of my ideological opponents have shown class and their attitude gives me great hope for the future. It's my hope that we liberals can prove to them finally that we, too, are patriots, that we believe in regulated capitalism, not socialism, and that we have no fondness for terrorists or their causes.

On the other hand, we seem to have Mr. Rosencrans, who is whining worse than any Democrat did, and Misha, who is spouting thinly veiled racial comments.

Comment by mkochinski — November 5, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Robert, here is a thought for you, which I
also remind myself very often. At my law
school graduation the commencement speaker
was the great lawyer Edward Bennett Williams
who said this in his speech: "win with humility
and lose with grace". I try to apply that to
myself as well as suggest it to you.

Comment by Brent — November 5, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
#23: You call this winning with humility? You're hilarious.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 5, 2008 @ 3:44 pm
Jon #2;

I thank you for your spirited debates and I hope that we can go forward to solve the problems that face this country in a way that makes it better. You're right that actions are what is needed now and we must, as American work for that. Again thank you and please have a good day.

Comment by Mike Coleman — November 5, 2008 @ 3:50 pm
#2. Jon, thank you for your graciousness.
#22. Jessara; I think Igor must be off somewhere downing Russian vodka as he tries to deal with the election of President-Elect Barack Obama.
THANK YOU YOUNG PEOPLE, WHITE AND BLACK AND LATINO FOR VOTING IN DROVES. YOU HAVE MADE HISTORY!

Comment by Joyce — November 5, 2008 @ 3:53 pm
like a typical child you are only happy once you've gotten your way, brent

dixie will never die. people want help paying their bills. mccain wasn't able to connect with them. obama is a consumable product, of course they were gonna pick him. mccain was a disaster and obama was a fresh face.

obama won the middle class touting a generic GOP policy—tax cuts.

will he be able to hold his precarious governing coalition of leftist/Libs and moderate Dems? probably not.

he'll inevitably offend one group by pandering to the other…

Comment by just fine — November 5, 2008 @ 4:11 pm
melissa, great link to the Newsweek story.
I had heard exactly the same story about
Palin from two sources, one in the media
the other a well placed Republican friend.
That she spent far more on clothes than
reported, that she spent more than she
was told to spend, even the Nicolle Wallace
part, I heard all of that. I suspect its
true. I didn't write about it because there
was no way to verify the facts from my end.
The line about Wasilla hilbillies looting
Neiman Marcus from coast to coast was hilarious
and that's from a Republican! Here comes the
Republican dirt about Republicans and the
Newsweek story was a great read!

Comment by Brent — November 5, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
#23: That comment from you about winning with grace and losing with humility is very revealing, because if you're a citizen, the government belongs to all. So, theoretically, no one losses or wins unless you perceive government as a power grab.

Since the U.S. Constitution hasn't been canceled, citizens still have a right to express their political views, and not be referred to as losers.

That isn't a humble act, it's an act of superiority and arrogance.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 5, 2008 @ 5:26 pm
#28 Brent,

Old habits die hard?

Its over (election) time to move forward.

I cannot believe you would find it beneficial (for the country) for the Republican Party collapse into disarray.

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 5, 2008 @ 5:34 pm
1.2% of the American population put Obama in office. For all the hype about huge expected turnout, it appears as though approximately the same number of voters turned out this time as in 2004, just over 120M.

The vote difference between Obama and McCain was 7.4M or 6.2% of the votes cast. Had just over 3.7M of those voters not voted for Obama but instead voted for McCain, the election would have gone the other way. So essentially, a hair over 3.1% of the total voters made the difference. There are appoximately 200M people of voting age in the country, and just over 300M people overall, so 1.9% of the age eligible voting pool and 1.2% of the overall population is all that stands between one candidate and the other. While 6.2% may be a large margin with respect to presidential politics, 1.5% of adults in the US is hardly a huge mandate.

Unless Obama is willing to take on the hard choices required to solve the huge budgetary issues of entitlements and national debt and debt service, in four years, he's likely to wind up on the other end of the US voter ambivalence. Talks of mandates and landslides turned out to be just talk, and at best, voters decided to give a new face a chance as solving the old problems that no one else has been willing to tackle. That kind of change is hard to believe in, until we see it. For our sakes, we better hope we do.

Comment by insidethenumbers — November 5, 2008 @ 6:22 pm
#28 From the article: "Some articles of clothing have apparently been lost."

Lost? Lost in boxes on their way to Alaska, perhaps? You betcha!

But there's some other news on the Palin front from Domenico Montanaro: "NBC-WSJ GOP pollster Neil Newhouse did a post-election survey last night, and here's what he found: Just 12% of those surveyed believed Palin should be the GOP's new leader; instead 29% of voters said Romney, followed by 20% who say Huckabee. Among GOPers, it was Romney 33%, Huckabee 20% and Palin 18%."

She can take her family's fancy new clothing back to Alaska and have plenty of time to wash and wear.

Comment by Melissa — November 5, 2008 @ 6:29 pm
An angry aide characterized the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast,"

Well, at least they'll look dapper back home in AK sittin' around the cee-ment pond.

Comment by Jeff — November 5, 2008 @ 7:13 pm
No. 32 - Nice work! First you guys investigate the working class man that your party supposedly represents. Now you actually accuse the Governor of criminal activity. And Mr. Bufraudsky here is congratulating you and talking about having "class" and being classy winners. You guys are the epitome of class.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 5, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
Wow, after whining about the left's "sore losers" for eight years,I was expecting a little more class from the right. Some have stepped up and shown it, but there are still quite a few that can't accept loss with any dignity.

Too bad.

Comment by mkochinski — November 5, 2008 @ 8:40 pm
For Jon and Nick and JFK-HRC (and even Robert and Ivan and Misha and insidethenumbers and justfine) now's the time to start fixing the things that need fixing.

The problems America faces will need all of us to solve them. We may disagree on the methods, and we may even disagree on what exactly is wrong, but none us are "the bad guys."

None of us want to tear America down, none of us are terrorists or Marxists or "soshialists" or Nazis. I suspect there's a racist or two in the woodpile, but I'm willing to work with them.

All of that has to go and we need to start talking with each other instead of down to each other.

There's an opportunity here, and a brief honeymoon. Let's make the best use of it.

Comment by mkochinski — November 5, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
#34 I'm not sure which working class man that you believe I investigated, but I know of none. Are you referring to that skinhead stooge Joe the Plumber? Believe me, I have no interest in investigating someone like that.

Yes, based on Palin's past and recent conduct, I believe it is very possible she kept the "lost" clothing. Why else would someone purchase that extravagant amount of clothing for her entire family when they were not even actively on the campaign trail? What was wrong with the clothing her children had for the scant time they were in public view? And if they needed something for a special occasion, why not buy something with her own funds that her children could keep? Unless, of course, she had intentions of keeping the clothing bought with someone else's dime.

Comment by Melissa — November 5, 2008 @ 9:26 pm
Jon, it is not what I think about Republicans,
it what Republicans think about Republicans.
The bottom line, is, that the Republican party
ran very very far to the right, number one,
and ran a campaign that was obsessively
personal and negative about their opponent,
number two. I repeated this often and
predicted its failure and noted that I have
never seen a campaign where the candidate
and his supporters almost never talked about
why their candidate would make a good
president and focused so exclusively on
personally attacking their opponent. To
the exclusion of everything else. I think
with Palin, McCain created a Frankenstein
monster for Republicans. I predict we will
someday learn from McCain that he knows he
made a mega-mistake with her and no good
for Republicans will come from her. If
Republicans keep running these campaigns
that are far right, and demeaning of all
opponents, they will be a small minority
party for a generation. Read Peggy Noonan,
Michael Gerson, David Brooks, Kathleen
Parker.

Comment by Brent — November 5, 2008 @ 10:57 pm
Among all the celebration, one brief emotional moment. Jessey Jackson crying on national TV, realizing that with Secret Service detail he'll never again have an opportunity to cut his nuts off. Some things are priceless.

Nothing died last night, not much was born except for fear. Fear is gripping our country, fear of losing democratic freedoms, Government takeover of our pension plans and fear of taking away our wealth and giving it to those who propel Obama to absolute power.

It's not the end of the world, but it's time to regroup, time to sharpen the knives, time chose eloquent Conservative visionary leaders and go reclaim American dream of keeping our wealth.

Comment by Misha — November 5, 2008 @ 11:28 pm
No. 37 - Your logic sounds hauntingly similar to those who asked, why else would someone not provide their original birth certificate, instead of a 2 year old cerification, or why else would a person not release all their medical records instead of just a one page summary of a doctor's statement saying he was in good health, or why else would a person cause to be kept under seal their college records and other records, etc. etc. etc. Unless of course he had intentions of hiding important damaging information….? It's good to see you apply your standards of logic and argument uniformly.

You fall far short of showing any class or any ability to objectively look at any issue associated with this political season. If America as a whole were to exhibit your lack of character and your vindictiveness, and apply it toward the new president-elect, and as your party did to his predecessor, we'll be sitting here in 4 years no better for the wear. I'd humbly suggest you take the spirit of what Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain stated so eloquently last night and implement it into your own life and outlook. Clearly you could use it.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 12:39 am
The honeymoon is already over for Barack Obama. Just look at the DOW. Before the open the futures had sunk to -125 and finished the day down 493 points. This morning the same picture appears to be developing. My original projection for the DOW was 7,200. I believe the DOW will now sink into the middle 6,000 range. And I am not blaming it on Obama.

However, his statements at tax increases and more government spending have done little to convince the investment class they are safe. In fact, I have never seen more palatable fear in the market of what may be coming.

There are members of the Democratic Party who have proposed seizing 401K's and folding them in with your social security account and then sending you a reduced payment. Talk like this has convinced many that the left wing of the party will prevail, and they are pulling their assets out now and investing them elsewhere.

The first step by the collectivist class is to seize private assets, by stealth or guile.

Talk about your faith in government all you want. Others attend church for their religion.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 5:57 am
#37: Claiming that Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin were not investigated at a higher level than Barack Obama is ridiculous.

In Sarah Palin's case it was understandable. In Joe the Plumber's case it was inexcusable.

Samuel Wurzelbacher, who is really Joe the Plumber, was ripped apart for asking a public official a question.

It was a disgusting moment in the campaign, indicating to citizens that it's better to remain ignorant then ask for information from public officials to educate yourself.

The real investigations should have been launched against the moocher class, highlighted by an Obama supporter who became known as "Peggy the Moocher" who exclaimed once Obama was elected he would pay for her gas and other expenses.

Personally, I would be ashamed to make a statement like that, but that's just me.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 6:04 am
I will say that I think it's a wonderful thing that someone of a varied ethnic background can become president and I believe that race relations in this country are far better than the race baiters would have you believe. But for those who continually whine about being kept down by others, it hardly seems appropriate to then put others down when you win. A poor winner is just as obnoxious as a sore loser. For your information, Old Dixie is made up of many people; the majority of whom are NOT the racist pigs you'd like to protray them as. I didn't vote for your guy, not because he's black (or half black), but because I strongly disagree with his liberal views. Had I shared those views, I would have cast my vote for him without hesitation. I suggest that you all now look inside yourselves and see if you can drum up a bit of humility and drop the arrogance.

Comment by Candide — November 6, 2008 @ 8:56 am
#39: LOL!

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 9:31 am
#38: Brent: Your post that the Republicans ran a far right campaign is mostly untrue. The only two issues you can tag on McCain as conservative would be the Iraq War, which many liberals in Congress voted for, and his policy not to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

In fact, the only tax cut of Bush's that will expire under Obama will be the Capital Gains tax and that's a maybe.
When faced with a declining stock market and a faltering economy Barack may be faced with the undesirable consequence of having to maintain the Bush tax cuts.

No, McCain ran as a maverick which is code word for liberal. I believe several million Republicans probably sat the campaign out in protest.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 9:36 am
Things are getting ugly from the McCain side
towards the Palin side. Everything I said
about Palin during the campaign, the McCain
people are saying now. As I've noted here
before, only part of what I am hearing behind
the scenes has come out, so far. But every
day now, more is coming out and what is next
wont be any more pretty. The fact is, Palin
it totally unqualified for any high office
and McCain made the most irresponsible and
reckless gamble in choosing her. Words cannot
describe what an irresponsible and reckless
decison that was. Just watch what comes next.
The reason Palin was so protected was that
she said things privately that were so weird
and so lacking in basic knowledge the McCain
people were terrified she would say them
publicly. And this business of pro American
communities implying other communities were
not pro America is just sick stuff. My advice
to Republicans is stop these cheap shot, low
road tactics. They were a disaster in 2008
and will doom Republicans for a generation
if they keep it up.

Comment by Brent — November 6, 2008 @ 10:18 am
#40 The reports about Palin are coming out, Frank, and they are damning. If you choose to disregard them, that's your prerogative. I'm not disregarding them, and I'm entitled to my opinion of Palin. If Frank Seville disagrees with me, my world isn't going to come to a screeching halt. It'll just give me reason for an occasional laugh.

#42 Robert, maybe you should re-read what I wrote. Frank accused ME of "investigating a working class man", and I responded that I never personally did any such thing. Frankly, I had heard more than enough about "Joe the Plumber" during the debate and would've preferred to never hear of him again.

Comment by Melissa — November 6, 2008 @ 10:27 am
RR and the rest of the neocon bunch;

Joe the plumber was investigated when he started making stupid and unwarranted comments. Did you hear when Joe agreed that the election of Obama was the death of Isreal? Hers is teh link to that:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Joe_The_Plumber_attacks_Obama_would_1028.html

Fox News tore him a new one about that comment. How about when Joe said that Social Security is a joke like he did here;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Sx04zXISnE&feature=related

Joe put himself out there as a spokemen for John McCain and when he make comments, he is suppose to called on them or is that unfair. Your call.

Comment by Mike Coleman — November 6, 2008 @ 10:43 am
No. 48 - You ought to be careful as based on your logic, Mr. Bufraudsky, Melissa, you, and many others here who have spoken out on behalf of Obama, have now opened yourself up to government sponsored and executed investigations into the most personal details of your private lives. If that's the change that you were looking for, then I'm pretty sure you're in the very very small minority in this country. Good luck to you.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 11:03 am
No. 46 - Mr. Bufraudsky. Perhaps you should make sure you don't live in a glass house before throwing stones.

http://www.wthr.com/global/story.asp?s=9299280

Indianapolis - Lines were long and tempers flared Wednesday not to vote but to get paid for canvassing for Barack Obama. Several hundred people are still waiting to get their pay for last-minute campaigning. Police were called to the Obama campaign office on North Meridian Street downtown to control the crowd.

The line was long and the crowd was angry at times.

"I want my money today! It's my money. I want it right now!" yelled one former campaign worker

And so it begins…….

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 11:11 am
#49 His last name is Budowsky, Frank. When you want to make references to other people lacking class, maybe you should examine your own practice of deliberately mangling someone's last name as a show of disrespect. How pathetically immature.

Comment by Melissa — November 6, 2008 @ 11:32 am
Frank;

If I were part of the campaign, then you logic would be correct but you made the mistake that some of our friend here make. I am a private citizen who supported my candidate but didn't get paid for it like Joe the plumber. I didn't go on Fox, NBC, ABC to tout my candidate nor did I have to get a PR guy to handle my appearances. So Frank to make the statement that you did shows how flawed your logic truly is.

Comment by Mike Coleman — November 6, 2008 @ 11:35 am
No. 46 - Mr. Bufraudsky - "Words cannot describe what an irresponsible and reckless decison that was."

Yet you've devoted your recent life to trying to describe it, lol. Is this "The Hill" or the "National Enquirer"? Thankfully, we have all learned about "winning with class" from you….though apparently you follow the maxim, "those who can't do, teach".

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 11:38 am
#36 Mkochinski

Already did see #2 & #17

Brent & Melissa,

With all that needs to be done in this country and policies that need discussion I just find it utterly amazing you are spending the time on dissecting Palin now. There is no question she flopped in her campaign efforts, possibly beyond repair for future runs at national office. But, again time will tell and lets move on and look forward.

Agree?

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 6, 2008 @ 11:41 am
#48: You're a moron. Joe the Plumber is a private citizen and can make any comment he wants. Why would anyone investigate a private citizen for making statements? Unless of course the investigators are Nazis.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 11:53 am
No. 52 - I see you take your revisionist history skills from Mr. Bufraudsky. Joe the Plumber was investigated and contined to be beginning immediately after he was shown on tape asking a simple quetsion to our next president. It had nothing to do with any participation in McCain's campaign, which came much later relatively. Clearly you find no quarrel with those tactics, which is your perogative, but I hope that you won't be soliciting public support and outcry when it happens to you.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 12:02 pm
Melissa, there are three kinds of Republicans,
those who want to work for solutions and
work with Democrats, and those who are filled
with anger, hate, negativity. These folks
are beyond redemption. They cannot be toilet
trained. They are losers. They are reduced
to hanging out on comment boards insulting
those who won. Their opinion does not matter
because they are not players anywhere. The
second kind of Republican are those who
supported Barack. Some have famous names
such as Goldwater, Eisenhower, Powell, Buckley
and even Nixon or have major reputations
such as Leach, Chaffee, and so forth. And
there is a third and larger group that has
supported McCain and will support Republicans
but can work with Barack and Democrats on
major issues. They are the players we can
deal with in the next Congress and they
should have a major seat at the table and
some of them should have senior Administration
jobs. As for the anger management problems,
they will remain where they belong, posting
under assumed names on message boards and
sharing their unhappiness with each other.
Nothing we can do for them, nothing they
can do for themselves. They are remnants
of age that has ended. They are irrelevant
to the future that has begun, until they
rise above their own insults, or fade into
the mist of yesterday, like George W. Bush.

Comment by Brent — November 6, 2008 @ 12:13 pm
#57: Brent: What happened to your humility? People who didn't back Barack are losers? My, you seem to change your position on that from an earlier post.

The last time I checked the U.S. Constitution has not been revoked and you don't dictate who the winners and loser are at anything.

As far as conservatism, it isn't going to fade away.

What's going to fade away are people like you, who think you can determine who is right or wrong, as opposed to what is right or wrong.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 12:26 pm
#57 Brent,

There are those same 3 groups within the Democratic Party as well.

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 6, 2008 @ 12:33 pm
First off RR and Frank;

You two have some nerve talking about how I treat you. For months now, you two have shown us how truly pathetic you and the republican brand really is. When I and others presented facts to back up our post, you two knuckledraggers would change the subject, add strawmen or run away. Again JTP put himself in that position and just like the Rev. Wright, we you two and Sean Insannity dumped on the American people he needs to be vetted. JTP acted like he was some sort of foreign policy expert when he agreed that Obama's election was the death of Isreal. He questioned Obama's patriotism, he made statements that he was paid for. You two are past stupid to compare me, a private citizen to JTP who is now muling recording contracts. Also JTP is a cousoin of Charles Keating so his chance meeting with Obama smells to high heaven especially sionce McCain used him as a metaphor a few days later in teh debate. Chance meetings like those are hard to take since the repubs have been known for dirty trick and putting in surrogates to trip up people.

Comment by Mike Coleman — November 6, 2008 @ 12:36 pm
No. 57 - In the interest of keeping them honest, we should also point out that there are apparently three types of Democrats. Those who have solutions that they believe will help our country and have fought to express those ideals and convinced enough Americans to give them a shot at implementing them. Then there are those who believe that they know better than everyone else and in that belief, they "know" they should do what is necessary, regardless of how it goes against the ideals of our Constitution, in order to enlighten us all through what they view as their superior knowledge. And then there is the third group, those who will say anything and everything negative they possibly can, no matter how unimportant, petty, or untrue, and yet will bloviate about any instance that a similar tactic is used against their own position. That third group has always been largely irrelevant except in their own minds and in the minds of those who are apt to look only at the surface of an issue or are dazzled by image and disregard substance. They are and have always been chasing the times, always a bit behind, but always attempting to convince others of their own relative importance. You find them on message boards and internet blogs dishing "inside dirt" that they've gotten from "insiders" they've worked through "various channels", as though that will validate them to others. They would do well to take a measure of themselves, and look to the first group, and see the disparity, and try to emulate that first group, And both the first and the third group, should work together to eradicate the party of any of those in the second group, as they are the real danger to America.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 12:59 pm
No. 60 - Thanks for confirming that you support the "investigation" of private citizens who dare to ask a question of a presidential candidate. Can we assume that your view applies to questions asked of any political candidate? Can you please clarify whether that support of investigation, including the private government records applies to only those who's questions illicit specific responses or is it universal? Also, should everyone now run into their homes and shut the doors, when political candidates invade their neighborhoods, or should they have simply pre-emptively moved prior to that candidate's decision to pay the visit? Will candidates now be required to post their schedules of such visits months in advance so that we will all know whether to move to or from the neighborhood? Of course, that last decision would necessarily be based on your answers to the previuos questions. Thanks for your help.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
MSNBC's Chris Matthews, a true patriot! I'm glad to see a MSM reporter finally on board with an unbiased, just the facts, approach to jornalism. Finally one of these guys taking a stand and realizing it is his job to make the presidency work. Perhaps 16 years too late for America, but at least a step in the right direction!?

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/214673.html

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 1:57 pm
Jon you are absolutely right that the
Democratic party has people like those
in the three Republican groups I noted.
I entirely agree. And there are anger management problems on the progressive
side as well, found especially on certain
blogs. No doubt about it. Robert I did
not suggest that all Republicans are losers,
only that one group of them are losers, anger
management problems, often with hate, and
irrelevant to anything that matters. Of
the three Republican groups I mentioned,
I was only referring to one of them as
losers. If I were a Republican right now,
I would be looking for areas where they
could work with Democrats, such as middle
income tax cuts, and green jobs which McCain
supported. Many are. I applaud them. Good
will come of it. But unreconstructed anger
cases, they cannot be helped, and wont be.
As for Palin, all I did was quote Republicans,
and Jacobus is wrong when she writes that it
is men talking about a woman. Trust me, there
are high level women Republicans who were and
are disgusted with Palin including from very
up within the McCain campaign. Palin is
everything that is wrong with the Republican
party and she was undermining McCain and that
is part of what her problem is when a long
list of prominent Republicans criticze her.
She's pretty tough making bogus attacks on
which communities are American enough for
her, but she becomes a marshmallow even when
Republicans criticize her.

Comment by Brent — November 6, 2008 @ 2:07 pm
#60: There is only one fact that applies to you, you lie frequently, and not very well.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
To the neo-cons who frothing about Joe:

It was McCain who threw the media spotlight on him, if he wasn't a plant in the first place.

When a presidential candidate names someone and quotes them, it is the normal procedure for the press to look up the background.

The taped conversation between Obama and "Joe" to me looked as if Obama eloquently addressed his every fear and statement. First is was: "Your tax increase will affect me!" and when proven to be untrue, it became "Your tax increase will affect someone, and it's wrong on principle!"

(Which is a valid opinion, but one I disagree with. The point of any tax increase is that it will have an effect on someone somewhere.

But after 8 years of profligate spending, I don't see any Republican plan to address the issue of debt. )

For one Joe, there were thousands who asked legitimate questions of Obama (for the sake of finding an answer to their questions) who were NOT investigated.

Given Joe shouted out talking points and clearly was not interested in any answer Obama might have given, and then he was used by McCain as an example, I suspect there was a little more going on here than an innocent question of a candidate.

I know it serves you purposes to look at it otherwise, but that's the reality.

Odd, though, that I keep seeing such certain, dire predictions for America. I'm starting to think some of you want Obama and America to fail. Why do you hate America?

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
RR;

So now you're calling me a liar, coming from you thats like Col. Sanders arguing for chicken rights. LOL.

Comment by Mike Coleman — November 6, 2008 @ 2:59 pm
No. 66 - If your view is sincere, that it's OK to "investigate", even to the point of government officials doing the investigating, any person who asked a question of a candidate, and that view is held by anything more than a lunatic fringe minority of our population, then we are indeed in trouble as a country and there will be dire consequences. I doubt it's the case that anything other than a very few fringe hold that view, though apparently Mike Coleman, and possibly you, do.

I think most people are quietly outraged and concerned that it was done. I think they don't feel there is really an outlet to voice their opposition, and because of that they're willing to let it slide this time, though with a more wary eye toward looking to see if it will happen again in the future. Unfortunately, that's how many very bad things in society begin.

It is an outrage that it happened. It is a disappointment that Obama didn't publicly denounce it. However, it is also an outrage that the MSM focussed on one phrase out of the entire question and response. I'd bet most people here never bothered to watch the whole exchange, but just what the MSM fed them, yet they are willing to bloviate about it and justify the investigation of Joe the Plumber and try to smear a private citizen rather than just questioning the politicians and the MSM for framing the discussion as they did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ilwk_wmsQk

When you do take in the whole exchange, it's certainly not what it's cracked up to be on either side, and if it were to really be argued, the argument would really boil down not to the questioner, but rather to the issue of whether the tax hike on the richer will cost jobs to those who are targeted for the tax cuts, thus nullifying the tax cuts positive impact. That experiment will play out over the next few years. Stay tuned.

But if you feel you can argue justification of an investigation into someone who asked a question, then it is you who are the real enemy of America.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 3:18 pm
#54 Jon,

I don't find discussing Palin at this point to be irrelevant. First, Republicans will be seeking out new leadership, and whomever that person is will influence the work that needs to be done. Given that Palin seemingly has some interest in filling that role, and given that some people apparently would like to see her in that role, it is not without its merits to discuss her.

The Republican National Committee has now sent lawyers to Alaska to try to account for every article of clothing, jewelry, luggage, etc… she may have pillaged in her short stint as VP candidate. [http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/Story?id=6196407&page=1]

The current blame game amongst Republicans will ultimately help to shape the future path the party takes. And the future the party takes will ultimately determine whether it is committed to working together in a bipartisan fashion to solve problems or, as one of the racist fools on this blog suggested, "time to sharpen the knives." I believe Palin would be dedicated to the latter, and I'm apparently not alone in that thought given the Republican sources who are sharing similar concerns based on their experiences.

Comment by Melissa — November 6, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
FrankSeville -

I didn't say it was "OK" to "investigate", I said it was normal for the media to fact check. I don't know where you get "government officials investigating" from, because we're talking the media looking into public information.

"Joe's" outstanding tax debt, his lack of a license is all public information. His tax forms weren't released, but the median income for plumbers was.

I think you're a little confused. Can you show me anything that was released that wasn't information in the public record? Anything at all that I could find out in a City Hall or a 10 minute internet search?

Now, on the other hand, here's something you SHOULD be afraid of -

"Agents will be allowed to use informants to infiltrate lawful groups, engage in prolonged physical surveillance and lie about their identity while questioning a subject’s neighbors, relatives, co-workers and friends. The changes also give the F.B.I. — which has a long history of spying on civil rights groups and others — expanded latitude to use these techniques on people identified by racial, ethnic and religious background."

But those are the last minute things the Bush Administration is pushing through.

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 3:43 pm
#69 Melissa

The two parties always have a time of collapse and rebirth.

I remember this very same conversations about the Republicans with the Democrats in 1994 and 2004.

Under Bush the Republicans in Congress lost their way. It wasn't that there was not enough bi-partisianship, it was they did not govern according to their principles and the scandals and corruption was beyond the pale.

This stuff about Palin and the figthing, diva, clothers etc is all crap. Some say she did others say she didn't. Who cares? That will not be relevant until at least after the first year of Obama's administration.

Bi-partisianship is a two-way street and NEITHER party worked towards that end from 2004 - present.

Dems have complete control. They do not need the Reps at this point lets wait and see what happens. For me, speculation time is over. No policy discussion until after Jan 20.

Look, bottom line is I am as disgusted with my party as I have ever been. But chasing down stories about clothes is not going to improve the situation.

Last on Palin. We could both come up with even more disturbing issues with politicians who overcame them and actually provided great service to their country. Again, this clothing story is lame, boring and irrelevant, IMHO.

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 6, 2008 @ 4:08 pm
Sarah Palin didn't know which countries are
in the North America free trade agreement?
She thinks Africa is a country? This is
from Republicans, as reported on Fox. This
gets better and better. There is trouble
in the leper colony. I warned about this,
right here on The Hill Pundits Blog. They
spend a campaign demeaning and slandering
Obama, Obama wins, now they turn their charms
on each other! This gets better and better.

Comment by Brent — November 6, 2008 @ 4:20 pm
#71 Jon,

You're under no obligation to participate in any discussion about the information that is surfacing re: behind scenes of the campaigns. I personally find it both interesting and curious. There were many other revelations in the article I originally linked, and they pertained to both campaigns.

The clothing receives the most attention because it's the most outrageous bordering on appalling. The RNC apparently doesn't find it lame, boring, and irrelevant as you do; otherwise they wouldn't be tracking down the items and finding out exactly what transpired.

Lastly, I agree that Dems don't *need* Republicans at this point. But that is not the attitude I would like to see the Democratic leadership take.

Comment by Melissa — November 6, 2008 @ 4:31 pm
It's obvious that Sarah Palin has been recognized for her raw talent. Comon Brent, Joe Biden though there were TV's in 1929 and he is the vice-president.

The fact is the number two and three rated Senators won the election.

The DOW is sending out a signal of fear. Since the election it has dropped almost exactly 950 points.

I predict it will fall further and further and as Barack launches his attack on wealth, the economy will turn from bad to worse, while liberal bloggers continue to high five themselves on a job well done.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
Brent and Melissa,

Those who continually look back are bound to hit obstacles in front of them.

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 6, 2008 @ 4:41 pm
No. 70 - I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you've been so drunk on the kool-aid that you missed this:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=79308

Following the third presidential debate, a state agency director and maximum donor to the Barack Obama presidential campaign immediately authorized a government background check of Joe the Plumber's child-support records.

Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services and a $2,300 contributor to the Obama campaign, permitted state employees to conduct a check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, the Columbus Dispatch reported.

Now Ohio Inspector General Thomas P. Charles is seeking to determine whether at least four probes on state computers were legal.

Jones-Kelley denies the Support Enforcement Tracking System search was politically motivated and claims the check was ordered to verify that Wurzelbacher was not behind on child-support payments.

While the state agency director would not share information about Joe the Plumber's record with the Dispatch, Wurzelbacher reportedly lives with his 13-year-old boy, and it is uncertain whether he has ever been ordered to pay child support.

Jones-Kelley said such background checks are not unusual.

"Our practice is when someone is thrust quickly into the public spotlight, we often take a look," she said. "Our practice is to basically look at what is coming our way."

Ohio's Democrat Gov. Ted Strickland told the Dispatch his appointee, Jones-Kelly, did not authorize the check for political purposes.

"Based on what we know to this point, we don't have any reason to believe the information was improperly accessed or disclosed by a state employee," his press secretary told the paper.

Name searches on Joe the Plumber were also conducted at the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, where his registration and driving records were pulled. The State Highway Patrol has seized a government computer at the Ohio Department of Insurance as evidence. A separate search was conducted in the Toledo Police Department's criminal database.

Comment by FrankSevilleq — November 6, 2008 @ 4:45 pm
No. 72 & 73 - Ah, so glad to see the self proclaimed classy winners doing away with the "politics of destruction" they so valiantly championed against oh these many years.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 4:52 pm
#75 Why don't you tell me exactly what you'd like me to discuss since you apparently don't believe I should be discussing that which I find interesting or curious.

Tell me what is on Jon's mind right now and I'll see if I can help you out and weigh in on a discussion of it.

Comment by Melissa — November 6, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
No. 72 - Just keep in mind as you try to lend credibility to these cowardly, off the record, comments on Palin. These are the same sources that authored all the commentary on Barack Obama and his past associations, and deeds, and whom you found so "credible" just a few short days ago. Oh how the wind (read hot air) changes.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 5:00 pm
Melissa,

You can discuss anything you like. I was just under an impression (false?) that you would prefer to discuss the transition of administrations, Obama appointments, which policy he may push for first..

Things like that.

btw, Melissa I am under no impression that I can "tell" you to do anything…:-)

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 6, 2008 @ 5:14 pm
FrankSeville-

Thank you, I don't drink kool-aid.

Hm. How to explain this.
I would never quote as a source a Buzzflash editorial, or a Huffington Post blog. Or Bartcop.

Similarly, there are plenty of non-mainstream media where on can find all sorts of "facts" and "news reports"

None of these sites are really accountable for what they print.

Now, I'm not saying the "mainstream media" is by any means always accurate or forthright. But they are liable to be nailed if they give out blatantly false information, and therefor can be considered somewhat more reliable.

For instance, I was quoting the New York Times, not a favorite source for either side, but a major information source.

The World Net Daily does NOT qualify as a reliable source, I'm sorry.

That said-

Within that very report, we have a quote from the Governor of Ohio that contradicts your main point:

"Based on what we know to this point, we don't have any reason to believe the information was improperly accessed or disclosed by a state employee,"

Until charges are brought, I don't think you have a case here for anything but a standard background check.

Even if it was more than that, it appears to be the actions of an individual, not the Obama campaign, and not the Democratic Party. If anyone abused their position, it's the individual involved. And if this is the case, they should be investigated.

I don't think Kool-aid was involved, and I'm not sure you grasp the legal nuances involved here.

Other than this individual, who may have allowed investigations, I'm still waiting for any bit of information on "Joe" that wasn't available in the public record. Because everything I've heard so far was easily available and public.

Enlighten me.

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 5:39 pm
Melissa,

Wow, it's great to see such a pertinent and lively discussion going on here. NOT! If you're looking for a discussion topic of moment, perhaps you might ask how our new Vice-President-Elect plans to engender within our nation, a spirit of helping one another, when over the last 10 years, he managed to donate just shy of $3.7K of the $2.4M that he and his wife made to charitable causes. That's less than $370 per year.

Even taking into account that it probably doesn't reflect the totality of his charity, even if they gave 5 times that amount, it is hardly something that one can classify as leading by example.

I understand that you
may not view this as curious or interesting as the juicy or gossipy politically motivated clothing story. However, keep in mind Biden is, afterall, the VP-Elect of the United States while Palin is just the governor of Alaska. Biden is, afterall, half of the team that is counting on a more patriotic wealth sharing outlook from the people of the Country, and he has preached about the patriotism of involuntary tax payments, does his lack of voluntary giving make him not a patriot or a better person than Palin? Is it not curious or interesting that he has given so little when he has so much.

I know, I personally have given much, much, more just this past year than he has in ten years, while I made less than half of what he did. Meanwhile, I've got the same family expenses, if not more, than he does, that I have to manage. I'm sure I'm not the exception even just among those of us who post here.

Perhaps, if you want to talk about pertinent issues, you can talk about how our future leaders will live up to their promises rather than talking about what may or may not be true about our past candidates.

Comment by Nick — November 6, 2008 @ 5:55 pm
The problem mkochinski, is that unlike McCain, we actually vetted the fraudulent Joe and exposed him as a hypocrite.

We now find out that Joe the plumber used to be on welfare, so much for that socialism smear.

lastly-Jon? regarding that "chasing down stories about clothes" thing, well the GOP is sending folks to AK and if you guys didnt make such a fuss about Edwards' haircut, I don't think the story would have gotten so many legs..

Comment by Theard — November 6, 2008 @ 6:05 pm
And, as a side note, bi- or post-partisanship doesn't mean we're all going to hug and sing Kumbaya.

It just means we need to get away from demonizing each other and realize that we're all trying to improve America.

I saw such an attitude from McCain, but I haven't seen it from Palin, and she was far more strident in her accusations on the stump.

And mostly, being post-partisan does not include ignoring law breaking.

From what I understand, the clothing issue dances on the edge of legal use of funds. It also is certainly hypocritical to the supposed "soccer mom" reputation given to Palin.

I'm not honestly too concerned about it, but it looks as though a branch of the Republican Party is using it to prevent Palin from becoming a major force within the party.

I think the left is enjoying (and perhaps overly so) the show, but they aren't the ones pushing it.

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 6:09 pm
You would think that with Baracks' win all the liberals would be overjoyed. Yet, look at what we have here, calling people losers, launching attacks against private citizens who simply questioned a public official, engaging in sophomoric put downs. My, what a jolly lot. If I didn't know better, I would have thought their candidate lost. Perhaps they are bitter because they desire guns and religion. Very odd.

Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 6, 2008 @ 6:10 pm
No. 81 - Only an open mind can be enlightened, so perhaps te point is moot with you.

Your first claim was: "When a presidential candidate names someone and quotes them, it is the normal procedure for the press to look up the background."

Regardless of the blatant falseness of that statement that it is normal procedure (please enligten us with 10 instances showing that to be true), when shown that it wasn't the press that was looking up background, but actually government officials, you ignored that and claimed:

"I think you're a little confused. Can you show me anything that was released that wasn't information in the public record? Anything at all that I could find out in a City Hall or a 10 minute internet search?"

When pointed to just one of hundreds of available articles that proved that it was government officials looking into private records, not the press fact checking, not surprisingly, you tried to discredit the source of the article, rather than condemn the action.

You go on to suggest I'm missing the "legal nuances". Perhaps you need to be reminded that this is far from an issue of "legal nuance". I'll remind you that this was a private citizen asking a simple question of a presidential candidate which resulted in a smear campaign of that private citizen, and actual government officials investigating this person simply because he asked a question. You seem to suggest that that is "nuance".

Ignoring that you falsely state that the records checked are public records available by internet with a 10 minute search, you really seem to fail to grasp that a private citizen asked a question, he didn't commit a crime, he didn't threaten anyone, he didn't conspire to overthrow a government, or kill someone, he simply asked a question. And solely becuase of just that simple act, media outlets and government officials investigated this person.

And you somehow are willing to justify or excuse that. You are far beyond enlightenment I'm afraid.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/10/29/joe30.html

Comment by FrankSeville — November 6, 2008 @ 6:50 pm
Frank;

Since you whine about what happened to JTP, you left out the unauthorize disclosure of information about Obama's aunt. Information about her was release to the press about her immigration status in violation of federal law. Soon after Julie Myers said that she is resigning. Chance? Like all of you out crying about JTP whom was put out there by McCain, Obama's aunt was a private person whop didn't seek the limelight. What do you have to say about that.

Comment by Mike Coleman — November 6, 2008 @ 7:16 pm
FrankSeville -

Thank you for your reply. I assure you, my mind is open and relatively sharp.

For openers, you say it is blatantly false that the press investigates people who are used by politicians to prove a point and ask for 10 (10! I only asked for one!) items to prove it.

I will attempt to find a few for you.
But let me address your other points.

You then bring up that it wasn't the press, but government officials. Well, I never brought up who did the search, and I don't know if it was the officials who did it and then leaked it to the press, or if the press dug up those facts themselves.

You do have one source (which I deem questionable, and for very good reasons) that makes accusations, but that very source has statements explaining that no laws were broken.

Your second source is much better, and I thank you for that. This source interestingly suggests that the Obama campaign supports an investigation into the allegations.

This report though, seems to concern child support services, which is indeed likely to be confidential. However, I never read any reports on Joe's child support payments, if he has any. I never heard if he was married or had kids.

What I remember reading about was that he was unlikely to be able to afford to buy a $250,000 business based on average plumber income in the area, that he did not have a plumber's license, and that a small amount of taxes was in arrears.

That said, can you please show me one (just one!) piece of information that was released that was NOT in the public record? If it was in the public record, then anyone can find it.
There's no crime involved if it's public record.

What you are calling "investigation" -implying some government department was searching this man's private records - is what used to be called "journalism" - looking into the public information of individuals who leap into or thrust into the public spotlight.

If it was carried out by journalists, fine. They have the time, resources, etc. to do what the average citizen does not.

If it was a government employee acting on their own, there may be an abuse of position involved, but I have a hard time seeing it if it's all public information. If it is private information and was illegally leaked, it should be investigated and charges should be brought.

If a government agency directs its employees to dig into and leak private information about a private citizen (tax forms, medical records, FBI files, CIA agent status) THEN you'd have a serious problem.

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 7:41 pm
And FrankSeville -

I'm at a loss thinking of any similar situation or even how to search for it.

Here's my understanding of the situation, feel free to add to my knowledge -

Joe came up to Obama and offered an extended question/argument outdoors during a campaign stop. It was entirely videotaped, though I'm not sure by who.

The first reference I heard to it was by McCain during the debates. After the debates, the tape was put on YouTube.

(Understand, I do not watch network TV with the exceptions of the debates themselves,and I mostly watched those via the web.)

Next I knew "Joe" was showing up on the news for interviews, and roughly at the same time, his information came out.

I don't know of any other case where someone thrust himself into the spotlight in the same way. I remember from past campaigns, other politicians would tell similar stories, but they were often anonymous first names, without the tell-tale videotape.

The press would often try to track down just exactly who those people were, but they were often considered hypothetical.

The difference is really that the other candidates mysterious "friends" were often off the record private conversations. Joe thrust himself into the spotlight. He seemed to appear willingly on Fox pretty often. I don't think he was dodging publicity.

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
Better timeline -
Question occurs, McCain uses it in debate.

"but he looked at your (Obama’s) tax plan, and he saw that he was going to pay much higher taxes. You were going to put him in a higher tax bracket which was going to increase his taxes, which was going to cause him not to be able to employ people."

Obama disputes this, as he did in his conversation with Joe.

Press investigates to see who's right.

Turn's out McCain is misrepresenting the facts.

"Wurzelbacher said Obama’s tax plan wouldn’t affect him right now, because he doesn’t make $250,000. “But I hope someday I’ll make that,” he said.

“If you believed (Obama), I’d be receiving his tax cuts,” Wurzelbacher said. “But I don’t look at it that way. He’d still be hurting others.” "

Because of the initial misrepresentation, it became a bigger story. In the subsequent search for information, the other facts came to light.

Here are the facts as I heard them:

Plumbers in Ohio don't make 250,000.
"Joe" isn't his real name.
Joe admits he can't really afford to buy the business.
Joe doesn't have a plumbing license.
Joe isn't registered to vote. (later proven not to be true.)
Joe may be related to Charles Keating.
Joe owes a small tax lien.

That's pretty much what I heard.

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 8:28 pm
Now I think I've clearly stated the case, and your accusations are simply over the top histrionics. You misrepresent me on one point, I did not say all of the information was accessible by a 10 minute search on the web, I also stated a visit to a county clerk would also be available.

Let me know if you find any information about Joe that came out that wasn't a matter of public record.

Comment by mkochinski — November 6, 2008 @ 8:33 pm
#80 Jon,

Don't tell me too many of your thoughts all at once.

I can't say that I'm all that familiar with the resumes of the various contenders for cabinet positions. The position I'm most interested in seeing filled is Secretary of State. If it were my choice to make, I'd select Bill Richardson.

Discussing policy pushes, all I can do is speculate. My best guess is that some type of economic stimulus would be the first order of business.

As for transition, what more is there for me to contribute other than my hope that it goes smoothly?

Comment by Melissa — November 6, 2008 @ 8:41 pm
#82 If the best you can do is address me in such a condescending tone, please don't waste your time or mine.

Comment by Melissa — November 6, 2008 @ 9:01 pm
One piece of great news is that we wont have
to hear much more of Joe the phony the alleged
plumber. What a joke. It is incredible that
John McCain and Sarah Palin used this joker
as the centerpiece of their last attack on
Barack for a whole week. He had no credibility
with voters, they didn't believe in Joe any
more than they believed in Palin by the end.
But McCain couldn't let go in this pathetic
manta about this guy. Another thing we wont
have to hear any more is this bogus socialism
change, which made McCain sound like one of
those old hacks from the 1950's. Every day
we get further away from election day, it will
be more obvious to whomever hasn't yet figured
out that the McCain campaign was sad as well
as an outrage. With Joe the Plumber, give
me a break. Maybe he will get his plumber's
license now, but I doubt it, he want to be
a star, so he'll have a few more minutes,
then fade away into nothingness.

Comment by Brent — November 6, 2008 @ 9:56 pm
No. 87 - Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of the issue. It seems rare around here.

Also, let me clarify my earlier statement. What I meant by your statement being blatantly false was not about the press verifying the stories of people who are invoked by public figures, but specifically to it being "standard procedure" as you stated. If it were standard procedure, 10 examples would be quite easy to find. It is not. For a recent example to confirm my assertion, can you please cite the MSM reports confirming or denying the stories of the private citizens included in the Obama informercial. Unless I'm mistaken, there were none.

As for the rest of the issues, in my first comment to you, I brought up the government officials investigating, I didn't say that you did. You responded that it was the press, to which I provided you information that it wasn't just the press, which you went on to discount my source.

The rest of our back and forth, in my opinion, is just extraneous argument on both sides.

The real issue is that on a Sunday, a political candidate for president went down the street of this private citizen's neighborhood for a campaign photo op and specifically to show his connection to the average person. That citizen did what most of us would do, he took advantage of the rare access to ask a question, albeit one that ultimately was discovered at that particular date to be mostly hypothetical. Nonetheless, there was nothing invalid about the question, as it was about clarifying the candidate's policy initiative. Obama answered it well, I thought, and thoughtfully and truthfully. Unfortuntely, he used a phrase he'd probably wished he wouldn't have that the conservative pundits latched onto when it was broadcast the next day, Monday. By Wednesday, the day of the debate, the plumber had beeen made semi-famous by the press becuase of Obama's spread the wealth comment, and that night McCain invoked the exchange as a symbolic example of what he saw as the shortcomings of Obama's plan.

This net result of the exchange obviously had a negative effect on Obama, and a positive one on McCain, oveall, and the Obama-sympathetic MSM news outlets went into damage control. However, rather than an "investigation" into the question and the merits of the question and answer, a personal investigation into the man, and a deliberate attempt to smear and discredit him personally, ensued. And be honest, those reports on Joe the Plumber were presented by the MSM in a very salacious way.

Both the press, and the "government" (which included at least one official and a subordinate in their official roles on government time and equipment, and possibly others as is being investigated per the articles I cited) investigated the man. Whether any of the specific information that was released was technically public or private by the technical definitions, I can't tell you as I don't know, (though we found out he did not owe child support, which I assume is private information, though since it was the confirmation of a negative, people tend to dismiss as not having privacy breached).

The ultimate point is that he was a simple private citizen who asked a question that elicited a controversial response from the candidate himself, and that damaged the candidate's political image a bit, and it is for that reason alone, that this person was investigated. Had Obama's answer not damaged himself a bit, Joe the Plumber would never have been investigated period. If you don't see that as a scary and really wrong cause and effect, or don't see that as an attempt to intimidate, then we see things from very different prisms.

This is not a partisan issue to me in the least. It just happens to be the Democrats and Democrat sympathizers this time. The roles could easily be reversed, and I'd be just as vocal and staunch in my criticism. This is a universal issue about our most basic rights of speech and the ability to question and hold accountable our public figures, our media, and our government. The attacks on Joe the Plumber were geared at stifling those rights, this time by the Democrats and the liberal media outlets. The next time it could be by the Republicans and the conservative media outlet. Both scenarios are equally and totally alarming and out of line.

As an aside in response to your closing bullet points:

Who are you to universally say plumbers in Ohio don't make 250,000. The greatness of our country and our system is that they can make as much as they can make. I can guarantee you there are many plumbing companies in ohio and elsewhere that make far in excess of $250K.

"Joe" isn't his real name. Then Brad isn't Brad Pitts real name either as his first name is William. There's a perfect example of the tone and negative objective of these reports, suggesting the guy's a liar because he goes by his middle name.

Joe admits he can't really afford to buy the business. Perhaps at the time of the question he couldn't. After this whole episode, he just might be able to!

Joe doesn't have a plumbing license. You don't have a internet posters license, yet you post. Joe plumbs, he's a plumber, licensed or not.

Joe isn't registered to vote. (later proven not to be true). Completely irrelevant as under the premise of the question, he'd still pay taxes, registered to vote or not. More attempts at salaciousness.

Joe may be related to Charles Keating. See above.

Joe owes a small tax lien. Apparently the efficient governement machine never notified him of that, so apparently it took violating his privacy to make us all aware of that.

I'll leave this to rest here as if you disagree with me about this issue, you can't convince me I'm wrong in my outrage on this issue, and I'll never be able to convince you you're wrong to accept and justify what happened. But thanks for reading anyway and for the exchange of ideas.

Comment by FrankSeville — November 7, 2008 @ 3:34 am
OK, this Palin dump has gone too far. The
media frenzy is getting a little bit sick.
I am not a big fan of Palin or the kind of
campaign she ran, but there is now a cruelty
to this that is very unfortunate. I think
Barack should reach out to her. I have made
my suggestion in the right place this morning.
We will see if my advice is followed. I will
confess on one level it is fun as a Democrat
but either we try to bring civility back to
politics, or we dont. This is a good place
to start. The sadistic tone of the Palin
dump should end.

Comment by Brent — November 7, 2008 @ 7:54 am
Brent - first Obama's gang along with a media does everything possible to denigrate Gov.Palin during a campaign. Then you setup him up as a statesman reaching out to her. Drop this nonsense. She does not need his help, she's got a promising future once we regroup and go after Obama left-wing policies that lead nowhere but failure.

Comment by Metamucil — November 7, 2008 @ 9:30 am
matamucil, with all due respect, you can kiss
my butt. I dare you to publish your real
name, which I do, I dont hide behind internet
aliases in columns, pundit blogs or comments.
I have no interest in punk dialogue such as
you offer. During the campaign Palin attacked
with sickening tactics I called her out about
it. My last two columns in the paper, pre-
election and post-election, were positive.
Now, I think the Palin stuff has gone too
far and to the degree I have any influence
or credibility, which in some Democratic
and even Republican circles I do, my view
is to urge everybody stop it, because it is
now out of hand. If you disagree with me,
feel free to suggest to Barack he not do it.
I am sure an alias like you can make the
suggestion in the proper places and you
will be given all the crediblity you deserve.
In the meantime, I would propose you wait
on tables and use your time wisely rather
than waste it putting puke on comment boards.

Comment by Brent — November 7, 2008 @ 9:53 am
Brent,

I wonder what Bull Connor, Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and the slimey Jerry Falwell would be saying now?

Comment by rightistrash — November 7, 2008 @ 10:22 am
rightistrash, it is amazing, and it is also
amazing that the Bradley effect is dead. I
expected Barack to win, but was surprised
by the magnitude and thrilled that we won
Virginia, North Carolina, Indian and the
Southwest. Somewhere in heaven Bull Connor
is weeping and Robert Kennedy, Abe Lincoln
and Martin are smiling.

Comment by Brent — November 7, 2008 @ 10:55 am
#91 Melissa,

It wasn't too many of my thoughts, it was all of them!! lol

Bill Richardson as Sec of State, hmm might be good. But this rumor about John Kerry gunning for that position.. that would be ridiculous (bad).

At least Bush seems to have started a good transition as he should.

Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel was a good choice. Yes he can be partisan but he is not too far left (imo). To me he is a no nonsense tough guy who speaks his mind and won't put up with crap from anyone. His mouth may get him in trouble. I grade that one a B+.

#94 Brent

Another agreement, already put that on my Outlook calendar!! lol

I think rather than an Obama outreach I think it is now up to McCain to step in and publicly denounce this crap. Step up John and be a man!

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 7, 2008 @ 11:23 am
Jon, agreed. I think Barack should reach out
and I suggested it, and I also think McCain
should say something and tell any of his
people badmouthing Palin to stop it. And
of course the media should cool their jets
(fat chance). Yes, Bush has been surprisingly
good about the transition. Check out the
pundit blog I put up this morning about
stopping the Palin hatefest. I will probably
get hate notes from both sides about that
one, LOL.

Comment by Brent — November 7, 2008 @ 12:46 pm
#100 Brent

In the battle of election neither side holds back and of course can stand by their statements of the cycle. In history Presidential politics during elections has been more, lets say "heated" or "dirty". The thing that is difficult for a lot of people is once the battle is over, shake hands, forget the rhetoric and look and move forward.

The slate should be clean, iow, what he or she said 2yrs, 1yr, 6 months ago is now the past.

You are an avid supporter of what you believe as am I. Nothing wrong with that, that is how we remain strong.

I look forward to spirited debates in the future with the election cycle removed from the discussion.

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 7, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
#99 I am not fond of the idea of John Kerry for Secretary of State. I'd much prefer to see Richardson in that spot and think he'd do a much better job. I guess we'll see what happens.

And I don't know if it is a full moon or what kind of astronomical odds there are that I'll ever agree with you twice in one post again (LOL), but I do agree that McCain and not Obama needs to step up where Palin is concerned. For Obama to do so would be walking into a sensationalized crossfire. He has too many important decisions to make right now to get caught up in that sort of thing.

Comment by Melissa — November 7, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
FrankSeville-

Thank you for the pleasant exchange. I'll just hit a couple of quick things since we've taken up enough bandwidth-

As I said, I don't know the exact playing out of events, but I will agree that a government employee potentially abused her position. But it was not directed by some agency or group.

The media explores people of interest, and Joe happened to be loud and on camera. He also seemed to welcome the publicity at first.

I would expect the press to investigate anyone who stepped forward so blatantly and publicly and criticized a candidate, and then was used as an example in a presidential debate.

Given that he approached Obama, and that it was taped, and that he was asking a question that he really had no desire for an answer to, and he simply ignored Obama's response, and that he is possibly a relative of an old friend of McCain's, I have a suspicion he was a plant from the beginning, and was trying to trip Obama up.

That said, it doesn't justify a government employee abusing her position.

I think it could justify the media exploring who this person is.

His plumbing license is public record, no doubt explored by people who want to hire him. His voting registration truly is irrelevant, unless you're curious if he was a plant. The tax lien is personal and unfortunate, but understandably news worthy because of the irony.

"Who are you to universally say plumbers in Ohio don't make 250,000."

I'm not saying that. I'm quoting what the media said about the average income of plumbers in that locality. Myself, I have no opinion.

That goes for a lot of the bullet points that you mention, I'm just echoing what the media determined.

However, I will take issue with this one : "Joe plumbs, he's a plumber, licensed or not."

There are a few laws involving standards of practice and licensing - and a good thing, too. If Joe is plumbing, he may be doing it illegally.

And committing crimes isn't protected by privacy laws.

I don't think he's as innocent as you make him out to be, and I think he was inviting attention, but I do think your observations are valid.

Comment by mkochinski — November 7, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
I am a 35 year-old white female from Arkansas and I have always hated the religious hypocrisy, backwardness and racism here. I have traveled abroad several times and all over the US. I have a Master's in poltical science. I voted for Obama because he is beautiful in every way. He is brilliant. I admire intellect and I think that is one of the biggest things wrong with the South…lack of education. I feel like if I was able to grow up, and never see color, not be religious beyond all reason, and not fall for the "Southern Strategy"…that maybe just maybe there is hope for the South. But I wouldn't hold my breath and if you are smart I wouldn't move here. When I saw the map the NYT put out showing the red/blue trend..I got depressed. I want to find a nice dark blue place and move. My husband is a tenured professor at the UA…so I may have to wait a bit. I would love to say "see ya Dixie!."
OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comment by Stephanie — November 7, 2008 @ 3:40 pm
Agreed. Obama should steer clear of the Palin mess. Besides, its the repubs going after each other.

Comment by Theard — November 7, 2008 @ 3:59 pm
Say see ya Dixie and hello Cuba! Enjoy. The weather is here and I wish you were beautiful!

Comment by Viva Obama — November 7, 2008 @ 4:05 pm
#102

Don't worry we will disagree in the future and you can be wrong again
LOL

All kidding aside, I look forward to the thinking you force me to do during our spirited discussions.

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 7, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
#107 Smart-ass! Don't make me have to mop the floor with you.

Here's a funny from The Onion that you might enjoy. Sadly, there is an iota of truth to this, I think. LOL

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/obama_win_causes_obsessive

Comment by Melissa — November 7, 2008 @ 10:11 pm
Hey my number one news source, The Onion!!

That was funny, especially the bottom scroll!!

"Don't make me have to mop the floor with you."

You are too late, the Dems just did that!!!

Comment by Jon Pemberton — November 8, 2008 @ 1:43 pm
You do remember that the "civil" War was NOT about slavery and was about states rights correct? Just wanted to clear that up a bit.
I may be republican, but
either way, Obama is our president now, and if he can get the job done then God bless him.

Comment by mlisniper — March 20, 2009 @ 3:17 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Blogroll

November 5, 2008

The Night Old Dixie Died and a New Generation Was Born (Brent Budowsky)

113 Comments »

Leave a comment