Why is pointing out the obvious construed as an attack?

[Horse with no Name]

Obama merely pointed out that we DO NOT need dynastic Presidencies.
We do NOT need more of the same.
How is that an attack?
Pointing out the flaws of Hillary's campaign is NOT attacking her.
I wish the media would quit spewing that garbage.
He has EVERY right to point out the obvious without it being called an attack.

[Orrex]

1. Why do you want to invade Iran?

The problem, I think, is that you are seeking rational explanations for non-rational methods.

I applaud your faith in humanity, but I fear that it might be ill-placed.

[Horse with no Name]

3. I don't want to invade Iran

What are you talking about?
By the way, I am NOT an Obama supporter, but I feel he is getting unjustly crucified for THIS statement.

[Orrex]

11. LOL! For a while, that's been a standard knee-jerk response in some parts of DU

I was lampooning it by using it as a response to your quite reasonable post.

I had hoped that the body of my message would have made my intent clear regardless of the subject line!

[saracat]

2. And doesn't the media sound just like those on DU who view any discussion of Hillary's campaign

in anything but glowing terms as an attack!

[Horse with no Name]

6. I know it

There is very little difference.
What THEY did to John Kerry, Al Gore, Howard Dean, John Edwards, et al were PERSONAL attacks.
Stating the obvious is NOT.

[Az]

4. Because modern politics is marketing

And anything you can twist to turn the opponents words against themselves is something they have to go back and defend. And that is controlling your opponent.

[Horse with no Name]

7. Ala Karl Rove

Funny that the media is using Rove's tricks to benefit Hillary...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. Because people get mad at the critics that they know are right.

The only reason Hillary's a candidate is because she was a former first lady, and when people realize that's a horrible reason to vote for somebody then they get mad and shoot the messenger.

[Horse with no Name]

9. delete

[mondo joe]

12. Since when are Republicans pro choice? Pro civi unions? Pro Habeas Corpus?

?

[Horse with no Name]

13. Since when are Democrats Pro war? Free trade?

It really works both ways.

[mondo joe]

15. No, not really. Hillary is not out of line with most Democrats.

Of course the primarys will determine what most Democrats want.

[Horse with no Name]

16. Yes.

Which is why I deleted the post immediately.
I didn't want to "go there". It was out of line.

[mondo joe]

8. These are not facts - they are opinions. Like saying Obama doesn't have the experience.

While an opinion might seem obvious to you, it is not unarguable and can be an attack.

[Enrique]

10. when it's repeated too much

[H2O Man]

14. It's not an attack.

No one is entitled to become president. They have to earn that right. That includes having other people, including the competitors in the primaries, question their qualifications. It also includes having citizens consider the pros and cons for each candidate.

Senator Obama was not attacking Senator Clinton. He was voicing a concern that many people have. Likewise, it is not an attack on Obama when Clinton supporters say they think she is the best qualified candidate for the presidency.

[Perry Logan]

17. It's a desperate loser's argument.

You definitely need to wear hipboots when debating anti-Hillarites. This little bit of sophistry tries to use the rottenness of the Bushes to argue against the Clintons.

[undergroundpanther]

18. I heard on Olbermann last night

That Obama is Cheney's cousin. Still dynastic if you ask me because the same families have been in power too long ,and yeah you'd be surprised how related they all are.

Washington - Lynne Cheney said on Tuesday that her husband, vice president Dick Cheney, is a distant cousin of his political polar opposite: Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama.

Cheney said she made the surprising discovery that her 66-year-old Republican husband and Obama, 46, are eighth cousins while she was doing family research for a book about her experiences growing up in Wyoming.

The vice president's wife said she traced a common ancestor of the two men to a 17th century immigrant from France.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2203456,00.html
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/10/17/all-in-the-family-cheney-and-obama-related/


It sure would be an awkward family reunion. But, believe it or not, Barack Obama is related to both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

OK, distantly related: Obama and Bush are 11th cousins.

That's because they share the same great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents -- Samuel Hinckley and Sarah Soole Hinckley of 17th century Massachusetts.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/familytree/545460,BSX-News-wotreea09.article

http://www.sa.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1196&Itemid=106

George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush are distantly related to presidents: Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, George Washington, William Henry Harrison,Benjamin Harrison, John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, Ulysses S. Grant, James Madison,Zachary Taylor, and William Howard Taft.(5 by blood and 7 by marriage)

No need to wonder why the same people keep being in political power,The "family" is bigger than we think.

[cuke]

19. Because those idiots don't know what a dynasty is

[durrrty libby]

24. Nailed it...and everything they say after "The Dynasty" meme is shit

:yourock:

[saracat]

25. Any vulgarity seems to be your favorite mode of expression.

[Lerkfish]

20. If you prefer not to discuss something, bringing it up is uncomfortable.

on the other hand, I think Clinton cannot help who she is, so criticizing her for being married to Bill is immaterial.
I think there is plenty of valid concerns about her policy positions that you don't even need to go there.

[Individualist]

21. According to some of their supporters, anything that doesn't meet with DLC approval is an attack.

[Cha]

22. It's not "construed"...it's Distraction

from the obvious. It's all bullshit, smoke, and mirrors.l

[Bluerthanblue]

23. it's the if your not with 'us' you are with the enemy mindset don't you

think?

I've noticed this more and more- I used to think it became more common right after 9/11 and *'s "yer either with us or yer with the terraists" but I wonder if that is fair. Maybe we've always been this way.:shrug:

How will we ever have peace in this world if we can't see the 'whole' of a person-issue-opinion?
Even the 'best' people have 'negatives'.
Even wonderful ideas have down sides-

Why are we so frickin black/white, either/or?

Why do we let the media screw with us?

I'm glad you posted this HWNN- maybe if we call out the media when they do this, it will help us all think for ourselves.

:hi:

[RufusTFirefly]

26. The dynasty argument is a B.S. diversion

It's designed to draw attention away from the actual issues.
Frankly, I don't care if it's Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton from now until doomsday. (which may be coming sooner than we think).

What I care about is a candidate's views and his/her record.

And I can tell you is that anyone who voted in favor of giving Whacko Boy a blank check with the IWR, who blames Iraq for not capitulating to the Oil Blackmail Bill, and who is now doing some serious saber rattling in regards to Iran is definitely not going to get my vote in the primaries. (Not that this matters; it seems the election is already over, after all.)

[Raejeanowl]

27. A Whopping Red Herring

Obama may construe a dynasty (or legacy) from the spousal relationship, but characterizing it as a self-evident negative against Clinton is simply promulgating Obama's adversarial opinion, probably one by which he wants to gain purchase by associating it with the negative perception of the Bush regime.

That's why it's being perceived as an attack by HRC supporters. And I can't say I blame them.