Obama's wishy-washy answer

Posted: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:13 PM by Chuck Todd

From NBC's Chuck Todd
Clinton saw the opening with Obama on Farrakhan and just drove a Mack truck through it.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

And that's the mark of a leader who thinks on her feet (or seated at an extremely important debate).

Joy Newcom (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:16 PM)

She's being petty and playing with semantics. The media may love it but I think the public sees through it.

Maria Donovan, North Olmsted, OH (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:16 PM)

and obama just showed why she just cant win. LOL

frank (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:16 PM)

You must be kidding, Chuck, he rolled all over her on that one with her petty quibbling over the difference between denounce and reject. She looked foolish.

Jayne Stafford, Midlothian, VA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:16 PM)

And Obama just showed that she was trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Mark Goodwin, Danville, Illinois (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:17 PM)

Denounce is to condemn. Reject is to just say no. In my opinion denounce is a stronger verb then Reject.

Troy Lawson, Aldie VA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:21 PM)

Obama finished witha zinger and got a great second chance at that question...right before the break no less..

Luke, Appleton, WI (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:21 PM)

Chuck c'mon man he denounced it. Your really grasping at straws.

Terry, Manhattan, New York (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:21 PM)

he's not asking the man to go out promoting him....he has to take a softer stance...it allows those that are loyal to farrakhan to differentiate his distain for farrakhan statements from their beleif..

Brandon (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

Obama made it clear, " denounce and reject," making Hillary appear too aggressive and seeking to be critical even if it wasn't necessary.

Paulo Valerio, Adelanto, Ca. (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

I really think you missed the point on Senator Obama's response. Clinton looked desperate to make a point, great comback Obama

Sandra Mcclairen, New Castle Delaware (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

I'm glad you saw the point....give her credit for it. Relax your other thoughts of her and praise her astuteness.

A. Dede, Bowie MD (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

I agree but he managed to take lemonade out of it by taking a shot at Clinton. The audience even laughted.

Chris Johnson (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

Based on the way the audience responded to Obama's response, I think you're off the mark here Chuck. BTW, I love your analysis in general and you don't drive your car into the ditch often, and I'm willing to loan you my AAA card it you need it :)

C Williams, NJ (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

Chuck are you serious Mack Truck?? He turned it around on her on a dime.

alexandria, va (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

Why is Tim Russert even asking questions like this?

This is not "Meet the Press" on Sunday mornings. Millions of people are watching this debate to hear about the issues, like the economy, health care, and national security.

Tim Russert should be reprimanded by both campaigns for asking such an irrelevant question and trying to create awkward tension b/w both Hillary and Obama

Jack, CT (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

I think that you chosen not to note the entirety of Obama's response on this question, especially in regard to antisemitism. As a Jewish American,I was very impressed with it.

M. Lerner (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:22 PM)

Good for her!! This is the type of leader that this country needs! Someone with guts. Obama conceded sheepishly to rejecting Farrakhan. I hope this opens the eyes of the American people.

maria (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:23 PM)

Hillary made an idiot of herself with her response to Obama on Farrakhan. She's an attorney, do we did to bring out a dictionary for her. She's too emotional to be President. That's the bottom line!

Flowers, Atlanta GA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:23 PM)

what about his pastor, will he denounce him also? obama looks a little meek tonight. you go hillary. you are our next president.

susan oakland, nj (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:23 PM)

I don't necessarily think that she "drove a truck" through his response. In fact, Clinton's response was one, not of an issue, but of semantics. As it turns out, Obama didn't necessarily disagree, in fact he "rejected" Farrakhan's support.

Elizabeth, San Diego, CA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:23 PM)

What, are you retarded? Reject is a synonym of renounce! Look it up.

David

David, Hanover, NH (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:23 PM)

Mack truck?? Her outburst was desperate and silly. She and the media are trying to make an issue about a complete non-issue. We live in a democracy? That means every citizen, including Louis Farrakhan, gets to choose who they vote for.

Zach Long, Philadelphia, PA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:23 PM)

Louis Farrakhan is American, just like you and me...although he is Muslim folks...(ohhhhh..hide your children), and this is a drummed up, prejudicial non-issue, once again. What Hillary couldn't do in a photo, she can't do in words. Next question please...

Alex, New York (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:24 PM)

The Mack truck still has "Uninspired, Divisive, Cloying Campaign" painted on its sides, and with as little traction as Hillary's truck has she's gotta drive it somewhere.

Adam Fitting, Washington, NJ (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:24 PM)

Obama's ties to Farrakhan are so long standing --he can reject his endorsement--but the church where he's worshipped for 20 years has just given the guy a life time achievement award & he tithes 20% annually

SammyAL (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:24 PM)

THIS IS CLOSE TO PANDERING....WASN'T HILARY ON THE TYRA BANKS SHOW...ISN'T IT THE SAME IN A WAY...IT IS A FREE COUNTRY...OBAMA DIDN'T ASK FOR FARRAKANS SUPPORT...GOD KNOWS HE IS SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THE MACK TRUCK THAT WOULD BE DRIVEN THROUGH IT...PERSONALLY I AM BOTHERED BY HILARY GOING ON THE TYRA BANKS SHOW AND CRYING...NOW THAT IS SCARY AND TASTELESS AND HILARY NUMBER 219 PERSONAILTY...SHE WILL DO ANYTHING TO WIN...WINNING IS EVERYTHING /// I WISH SOMEONE WOULD ASK HER WHAT INTEGRITY MEANS TO HER...
THAT SHOULD MAKE HER QUIET. patty

PATTY MERRILL, PORTLAND, OREGON (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:24 PM)

Has it been missed that Obama's minister, of 20 years, is also anti-semitic? They quoted him during the discussion.

Michelle Rogers, Richmond, VA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:24 PM)

renounce vs. reject... reminds me of Bill's "the meaning of is is" argument

Andy Oliver, Fort Lauderdale, FL (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:25 PM)

I'm just wondering if we are watching the same debate as the NBC News political unit. I am not seeing the clear wins by Clinton that they are seeing. Are you all so afraid that she'll criticize you for taking sides that you are not complementing Obama the way you should be!?

TM Jones (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:25 PM)

In general why hasn't anyone discussed obamas religious beliefs and his church. I feel the media is afraid of being accused of racial bashing when they are simple questions that should be answered. Mitt Romney would agree would certainly agree I'm sure

Kris Aliff, Bridgeport, WV (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:25 PM)

What? He just totally "denounced" Farrakhan. I think most of us not speaking in wahingtonese completely understood the point. Hillary is parsing words as usual. Her lawyerly comments reminded me of the debate over what the meaning of "is" is.

Matt, Kansas City, MO (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:25 PM)

whats th diffrence between denounce and reject

hesperia,california (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:26 PM)

Mack truck where. Did some one get the plate. opps it was just Clinton on her skate board. Denounce reject who cares. Bottom line is he denounced and rejected. This was just Clinton trying to get a toe hold in this debate which she seems to be losing.

John, Long Island , NY (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:26 PM)

She spoke for the sake of getting the last word AND to imply something so hideous- instead of taking the bait he took the opportunity humiliate in a very subtle, condesending (sp?) way. I am embarrassed for her.

Tricia Lea Tobin (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:26 PM)

gee, obama agrees with hillary on jst about everything. does he have his own agenda! and he dosen't or hasen't been quoting everyone and their mother. who will he quote or pull quotes from if he does come in. (maybe hillary)

susan oakland, nj (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:26 PM)

Yes, she was quick on her feet... but he was quicker. Please, it really depends on what you mean by "is"...

Kevin, Austin (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:26 PM)

Chuck,
I'm not sure what you're smoking, or where I can get some, but there was no Mack truck driving through that argument. Obama is willing to admit his mistakes and admit where he disagrees with those who support him - whether it's environmental standard proposals given in front of auto workers or denouncing Farrakhan. Can Hillary say the same? She has been so defensive over her record - denying, deflecting, and delegating responsibility on nearly everything Russert and Williams have thrown at her - blaming her Buffalo job-creation comment on a hypothetical presidency? You've got to be kidding me.

Lars Almquist, National City, CA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:26 PM)

His questions have been softballs. She has no room to pounce. The first half hour was like watching Hillary on meet the press.

Kelly, austin, Tx (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:27 PM)

This nomination process is no longer about issues, voters are making their decisions based on who connects with who.

Who won the MSNBC Democratic Debate in Cleveland Ohio?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1788

Paul, Dallas TX (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:27 PM)

Here's another Clinton asking us, "It depends on your definition of is". She was just being petty here and Obama handled it easily.

Paul (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:28 PM)

Very minor issue. in any case Clinton's stance is much clearer.

Michael Dunbar, NEW YORK, NY (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:28 PM)

he did reject him at the what you think he supports him move on

bradley (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:29 PM)

Nah-ah. I didn't just hear Clinton repeat her anti-Semitic Islamophobic biases again, did I? She just mentioned how she rejected pro-Arab groups support, as if it were a good thing. I remember this moment in the NY campaign well. It was the moment when I decided I'd never support her for President. It wasn't anti-Jewish groups; it was people saying America should not support only Israel; it was anti-Israeli. Hillary responded by apologizing for previously doing a traditional Arab greeting to the former Palestinian first lady. It was blatant anti-Semitic Islamophobia. And now she is mentioning it as if it were a good thing?!

Yes, Obama should reject Farrakhan's anti-Semitic beliefs. But he needs to walk the tight-rope of also affirming Muslims, and continue on his good record of saying he will no longer practice the historic isolationist American bias for Israel only, but be an honest broker, treating Arabs and Israelis equally, and pursuing justice to end the Palestinian apartheid. Being anti-Israeli is not the same as being anti-Jewish; being Muslim is not the same as being anti-Jewish; and we need to remember, that for all of Farrakhan's mistakes and anti-Semitism, he also has positive aspects too. For those reasons, his support shouldn't be rejected anymore than a pro-Zionist group's support should be rejected.

Let's move beyond the historic Islamophobic attitude of American culture and press. Let's begin to say, I reject some things this guy says, and I affirm other things he stands for. I reject Zionism, but support those who want a place for Israel to exist safely. And I affirm that not only are Christianity and Judaism valid religions, but so is Islam, and there is no reason at all that we should flee from even the image of it, just because of our own racism from the actions of a minority of terrorists. (Most terrorists in US history were white males, not Arab males.)

Both candidates screwed this question up. Hillary did it worse, because she repeated her historic racism. At least we can count on Obama's past family history with Muslims to consider that he will be more equitable than other candidates, and past Presidents.

Jedidiah Palosaari, Seattle, WA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:29 PM)

You white people alway have to use The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan as a litmus test for Blacks. Yes Minister Farrakhan gave a 2 hour speech in which he said many great things about Barack Obama. So what!!! The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan already stated that he did not say anything about Obama's running for President because he did not want to hurt his brother. You white people are wick with your tricknology and as Blacks if we want to support THMLFarrakhan then so be it.

Darlene (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:29 PM)

Why should he reject Farrakhan? He is not his keeper. Should he also reject certain Jews?

g newton (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:29 PM)

This is still a free country. How can you reject anybody supporting you based on your qualifications? A person or a group can throw their support behind anyone they wish, this is their inallieable right. Who are you or I to deny people their own rights? Are you going to deny Hispanic votes because neither candidate are Hispanic? We live in a multicultural, multiehnic, multiracial society.

Schaun Holr, Chicago, Ill. (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:29 PM)

Why did Obama first say that he can't stop someone from support him but not outright say he rejected that support until Clinton prodded

Marvin Millar, Detroit, MI (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:30 PM)

I actually saw Senator Clinton as losing the race with this comment - it sounded petty - it seemed to be a veiled attempt to imply that she is less prejudice than Barack. Obama made it clear that he rejected the racial rants of Farrakahn - that should be enough.

Those of us not in politics understand the basics of human dignity without having to question each and every nuance of a person's character. Somehow, politicians seem to miss this point entirely (as the media, but that's for another day!)

Robert Dal Porto, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:31 PM)

Once again, Sen. Obama smoothly avoided a direct firm answer. He often talks well about issues and sounds firm but manages not to be firm! I have no idea whether he will accept financial or political help from Min. Farrakhan.

Tricia Stultz, Atlanta GA (Sent Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:31 PM)

Next >>

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=705661