The Pittsburgh City Paper conducted a roundtable (rectangle, really) with two Obama supporters and two Clinton supporters on Sunday. Excerpts are in the paper today (I haven't seen it yet, but Dayvoe has).
It's an outgrowth of the "The Third Round" series and there will be video available later (tomorrow?).
The conversation was remarkably civil (unlike on this blog).
Hosts: City Paper Editor Chris Potter and Jackson/Clark Partners Managing Partner and Ground Zero Action Network (G0) core member Pat Clark.
For Obama: Valerie McDonald Roberts, Manager of the Department of Real Estate and OffQ panelist, and Jason Tigano, URA Public & Legislative Affairs Manager (and former staffer for Rep. Mike Doyle).
For Clinton: Barbara Ernsberger, City Democratic Committee Chair and attorney, and moi (Maria Lupinacci).
UPDATE:
Online story link here. Video will be available tomorrow.
.
14 comments:
John K. says: I bet this point was never brought up. After Imus made his comments, Obama said he would not be in the same room as him. But of course he continues to be in the same room as Rev Wright.
Ah yes, behold the unhinged right-winger. Obama owns up to his association with Wright, and does so in a speech that is brilliant in its eloquence, brave in its character, and bold and smart politically. And how does Johnn Queeg, er, K and his ilk respond? By harping on an old point, accusing Obama of being a bigot and shake-down artist, and telling us that the term racism doesn't mean squat anymore (unless directed at white people). The breadth and depth of pettiness and anger displayed by wingnuttia is a sight to behold. Well done, John! Like I said before, keep it up! Your display of moral bankrupcy and obssessiveness only serves to remind the voting public that at the end of the day you and yours no longer have anything to offer but recrmination and fear. People may not vote for Barack Hussein Obama, but at least he's offered them something besides screeching, chop logic, and old broadsides about race relations. That's a damned sight more than you and yours have offered since, oh, 1994. Well done! The lower you sink, the higher my guy rises. If you didn't exist, we'd have to invent you John K. In fact, I'm beginning to supsect you're a big ol' liberal in wolf's clothing. Either way, well done!
- Shawn
John K. says: Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah. My peenie is bigger than yours. Or at least almost as big. Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah.
Obama owns up to his association with Wright, and does so in a speech that is brilliant in its eloquence, brave in its character, and bold and smart politically
I suspect Obama could have defecated on the stage and his supporters (including the NYT and MSNBC) would say the same things about the speech.
I predict that the Rev. Wright videos have damaged Obama and when this become apparent, his supporters will scream "swift boating".
John K. says: Obama did not own up to anything. Good thing the reverend's name is not Imus because then Obama would not want to be in the same room as him. And remember, Obama sent money to this church for 20 years. But the best part, on Friday, you same left wing kooks were trying to tell us that Obama never heard Rev. Wright say one of these things. LOL LOL How funny can this be?
I suspect Obama could have defecated on the stage and the result would have been appetizing to Mein Heir.
John K. says; By the way left wing kooks. On April 22nd I am going to cross over. And at this point I will be voting for Obama just to keep him in the race because this is just too much fun.
Actually, I'm not blind in my support of ol' Barry. I imagine that if Hillary actually pulls of getting the nomination that I'll be supporting her. As for your response, Heirykins, if discourse on scat play gets you going, that's your right. Might I suggest you read Dan Savage ( http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove ) to keep up how your flavor of kink compares to others?
As for damage, yeah, he's been hurt. But it's mid-March. We knew this was coming and if the good Senator is any kind of politician worth his salt, he'll keep standing up and hitting right back. Like I said before, hate and fear are all you have (and maybe some 'steam' from Cleveland). It works - up to a point. But like I said, all you're doing is showing your hand to early. The RNC and various 527 groups (you can thank your nominee McCain for them) will hammer away at this but I suspect that it'll hit a saturation point fairly quickly as folks realize it's just crying wolf. That isn't to say that it won't work, but if it does it'll be a Phyrric victory at best as the next President will be looking at a larger Democratic majoiry in both houses of Congress. Still, I'll put up a rhetorical $20 that we'll calling Barack Hussein Obama "Mr. President" at this time next year. Hail to the Chief, baby!
- Shawn
could we get a vodcast version of this so I could watch it on the metro?
Maria, I read only far enough into the article to read your "Why are you voting for Hillary?" answer. Let me just say that it was a great answer. I believe the first part was the strongest, part, and the second part -- "she's a fighter" -- is true but it's just not as important to me. I'd rather have a poker player.
1.65 million views--YouTube counts only views of the entire video--in 24 hours. Obama gets better ratings than Bill O'Reilly.
It was a hell of a speech. It was *leadership.* Obama damned political calculations and did what he thought was right at the moment. It is the same thing he did back in 2002, when he was a nascent US Senate candidate, and decided to oppose the war. It's refreshing to see a politician who does what he or she thinks to be right, political consequences be damned. And I suspect this will work out well for Obama, just as the opposition to the war put him where he is today.
As for Hillary, she has her own pastor problems.
CONGRATULATIONS, MARIA!
Great article!
-dayvoe
It's .. um ... going to take an extra day to get that stuff online. Sorry about that. But thanks to Maria for her participation.
-- potter
Maria -- After reading the whole thing, I left a comment on the article on the C-P website. Since it inevitably winds up calling out one of your Clinton arguments, of course I would be delighted to get your response!
Post a Comment