Oh-eight (D): Obama’s big haul…

Posted: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:00 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: Democrats

CLINTON: It's a kinder, gentler Bill Clinton, according to the New York Times.

OBAMA: Obama's campaign chose to report that it raised more than $1 million a day in the month of January ($32 million this month, to be exact). It's an eye-popping figure and one the Clinton campaign chose not to respond to (they don't have to report their January fundraising until the end of NEXT month). But it's a reminder that Obama's probably got more money for February 5 than Clinton. We don't know for sure yet but look at the ad spending, the staff they've deployed and it appears, resource wise, Obama has a slight advantage.

Salon does Rezko: "Obama's dealings with his hinky friend have never led him afoul of the law, but they show that, despite his high-minded politics, he was no purer -- or no savvier -- than Illinois' biggest hacks in his weakness for a generous contributor. He wouldn't even say no when Rezko cooked up a deal to help the newly elected senator buy a gracious Georgian-revival home."

For those of us who "grew up Reagan," the imposing figure of Fed Chair Paul Volcker was who we associated interest rates with. Well, Volcker is for Obama and while it's a nice talking point for Obama to say he has Reagan's Fed Chair backing him, remember, Jimmy Carter actually appointed Volcker in '79.

Obama, like McCain, is trying to bring back the war as an issue. The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder gets his hands on a mailer Obama's sending to Connecticut voters hitting Clinton on Iraq.

Both at last night's debate and yesterday in L.A., Obama attempted to bridge the perceived divide between Latinos and blacks. "Obama's L.A. appearance was his only public event Thursday. Clinton held no public events. The candidates met Thursday evening for a debate at the Kodak Theatre in Hollywood, their first one-on-one debate of the campaign.”

“At the technical college, Obama said the nation's ills affected Latinos and African Americans equally and could only be solved by working together. From higher dropout rates to a greater incidence of diabetes and infant mortality, Obama said, the two groups suffer more than any others in the country."

During a town hall in Los Angeles yesterday, NBC’s Lauren Appelbaum notes, Obama was asked a question about immigration. He gave his stump speech answer on comprehensive immigration reform: reform border security, fix the legal immigration system, crack down on employers taking advantage of workers, and create a pathway to citizenship for those already here by paying a fine, learning English, and going to the back of the line.

But Obama then deviated from his typical answer. When telling the crowd immigrants will need to learn English, Obama said he will learn Spanish as well, earning some cheers. "I know most people want to learn English. We need to have more ESL classes available for people to do it but you need to learn English. Of course, I need to learn Spanish. So, we can teach each other."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

This impressive number of contributions shows that while some newscasters have already given the nomination to Clinton, many Americans have not. We still have hope! And among that group are people of every age, every ethnic group every background. I wish they would stop trying to pit one group against another and label them as followers or opponents. Barack Obama is an inspiration to people of all groups and is the one Democrat who can unite this country again.

Carol, Germantown, Maryland (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 9:20 AM)

Obama knows how to reach out and bring people control. The Clintons know how to divide and control like the Bushes. Which do you want?

Independent in Missouri (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 9:25 AM)

Carol of Germantown MD, I could NOT have said it better. This "Vote For Hope" comes from a middle age white woman in Florida who does not NOT want to repeat the 1990's.

Barbara C., Pompano Beach FL (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 9:28 AM)

Obama did the right thing by bringing up the Iraq war, because he was not for it from the beginning. Hillary was for the Iraq war from the beginning, but can't admit she was wrong. It takes a person with character to admit she/he was wrong. Hillary definitely does not have character. Experience does matter, however when making the decision to choose between Hillary and Obama keep in mind the qualties you want in the next president. My decision was easy, Obama has experience, character, he demonstates leadership, he speaks to the nations as a whole, he has inspired so many young people, he speaks of fairness, and he has gained so many of the republicians votes. Also, Obama speaks of being "RIGHT" on day one. Which means a lot to me, because making the right decision can save lives, money, and respect from Americans, and World Leaders. When I think about all the young people in the world, they are our next generation, who wants to live in a nation that is diverse, fair, and accepting.

"Obama 2008"

Sandra (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 9:37 AM)

In fairness to the Iraq war issue one should think back to the time when America was being briefed by Powell and others as to the "evidence" of WMD etc. and the potential for harm they may have done. America was in defensive mode and was taking NO chance that there might be another similar attack.... like we all don't pretty much know this.

To use the fact that Clinton voted in favor of the resolution that enabled the war as a club to beat her with just seems unfair as most of us were similarly misled and most of us, had we been given the actual opportunity to vote on what steps we would have approved to enable government to protect our citizens would have made a choice similar to Clinton's...and Kerry's and Edwards and a whole lot of other good Dems.

Obama is a good man and he did make it known that he did not agree with the action of going into Iraq. But once elected to the Senate it became clear to him that situations often dictate a Senator's actions and sometimes one must vote in such a way as to do no harm..... it may not be a good thing one agrees with through one's vote but it is better than the perceived alternative. This might explain why Obama has voted with Clinton when the issue has been continued funding of the war effort.

Both of our candidates are strong and both are capable. As Democrats lets remember that we are being called on to select which we think will best be able to lead not just America, but the world in its struggle to eliminate the cultural based divisions that are destroying the lives of many innocent people. And let's focus on the possitive aspects of both candidate and make our selection based on who is better rather than less worse.

As a life long Dem I see the first opportunity in my lifetime to take and hold the White House for the next 16 years. WE CAN DO THIS!

campdog (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 9:50 AM)

Campdog...great post. I agree with you regarding Iraq; I, too, believed that if our president said we had to go in to Iraq, that we needed to believe him. I have learned not to trust a thing he says since then, but too late! We need someone we can trust to do the right thing, not continue the bullying ways of the current administration.

Hopeful, Reston,VA (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 11:24 AM)

I do believe it's fair to consider a candidate's support of the resolution to go to war. There were demonstrations all across the country against the impending invasion. For weeks before we invaded Iraq, there were peace rallies every Sunday afternoon in Kansas City. Those of us who stood in the cold every Sunday were not misled by the administration's false claims. Plenty of us around the country were willing to stand up and be counted in opposition to the war. It is imminently fair to hold Hillary Clinton accountable for her decision to wage that war.

Dawn, Kansas City, MO (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 11:40 AM)

"Obama's big haul..." Is that a pro-Obama stance? If you look at the significance of Obama's $32 million fundraising in comparison to what is being said about Hillary Clinton, I don't think this (and even the Iraq war graph) shows bias.
Sure, the media gets biased, but many of the isntances of Obama reporting have more to do with the significance of the issue.
If voters consider the economy is currently the most important issue, that is fine. But the fact that we sent over 100,000 troops and had more than 3,000 murdered should never be ignored. We must not focus on other issues at the expense of innocent merican lives destroyed as a result of McCain's and Clinton's votes to authorize "pre-emptive" military strike on Iraq.
So, is that bias for MSNBC to highlight the issue in a graph at last night's debate? Certainly not. I don't always trust the media, but much of the complaints about MSNBC's political bias have to do with voters' neglect for the critical issues we face.
The economy is certainly an important issue; but one may argue that McCain's and Clinton's (along with the other senators) vote to authorize the war in Iraq may have somewhat contributed to the decline of the economic through huge and wasteful war and reconstruction spending (we could have used some of the money to stimulate our economy).
I should also remind voters that McCain's and Hillary's vote for the war have resulted in the death of civilians that significantly exceed those killed by Saddam. The exact number is unclear, but it is possibly over a half million.
It is sad that voters show little concern for the wel-being of non-Americans, which demonstrates lack of compassion of humanity.

Ken Z. NY (Sent Friday, February 01, 2008 12:57 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=628303