By the Numbers

By the Numbers: Nationally, Rasmussen has Hillary up by 11 points over Sen. Obama (49-38) and Pew has Hillary up by 8 points over Sen. Obama (46-38). In Tennessee, InsiderAdvantage has Hillary up by 20 points over Sen. Obama (55-35). In New York, Quinnipiac University has Hillary up by 14 points over Sen. Obama (53-39). In California, ARG has Hillary up by 8 points over Sen. Obama (47-39).

When will the media and the progressive Netroots really cover what Obama Stands For?

 

When it is too late...................................

 

1) The New York Times on its front page explains how Sen. Barack Obama told voters he stood up to the nuclear power industry and how he passed a bill to require reports of any radioactive leaks after hearing from his constituents.  But The Times discovers, after a lengthy examination, that the bill was watered down after meeting with Exelon, the company whose plants created the issue and whose key executives are big contributors and bundlers to his campaign. Answering written questions for the NY Times, the campaign, in the words of the paper, never "directly" explains why Sen. Obama would tell voters he passed a bill that in fact was not passed and did not become law.

2)  The Chicago Tribune features a similar story on a different topic. While Sen. Obama on the stump tells people about the plight of Maytag workers who lost their jobs, ("Obama's fundraising collides with his rhetoric") the Tribune documents that the union covering those workers believes they got no help from the Senator, who was again taking significant contributions and bundling from one of the company's directors and biggest investors.

3) And yesterday there was an AP story where Senator Obama told the voters of Idaho: ''And then there are people who say, 'Well, he doesn't believe in the Second Amendment,' even though I come from a state  -- we've got a lot of hunters in downstate Illinois. And I have no intention of taking away folks' guns.'' But he didn't disclose to those voters, as the AP said that "he does support gun control and has a record of voting for it in the Illinois Senate. He backed limiting handgun purchases to one a month, but he made no attempts to ban them." When he originally ran for the state legislature 12 years ago, he filled out a questionnaire saying he ''supported banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.''  He gave the voters of Idaho no indication whatsoever of either his record in the State Senate or his prior views on the questionnaire.

4) In his New York Times column today, Paul Krugman further proves that progressives and others backing Obama really are confused or maybe it's seduced by this season's political Pied Piper. Still working through the unearned endorsements of movement progressives, again, I think about John Edwards and the issues he fought to bring to the forefront, only to have his own candidacy overtaken. Letting flash top substance in can't we all get along fervor is not going to further our Democratic ideals. But that's not really Obama's goal. He's not nearly as progressive on issues as Edwards, or as passionate and experienced about Democratic policies as Clinton, which is proven by the one issue that progressives have in our ideological sights.