Sen. Barack Obama won't be in West Virginia tomorrow on Election Day. With his sights set on the general election, he'll be in Missouri.
Obama's public schedule isn't offering many details yet, but reveals he will be in Cape Girardeau, MO, on Tuesday.
He'll hold an economic roundtable in the 72,000-population county*, located near what's called Missouri's bootheel on the southeast corner. It's a strongly Republican area represented by Rep. Jo Ann Emerson.
On Super Tuesday, Sen. Hillary Clinton won the county 57-39 — but fewer than 8,000 people voted in the Democratic primary. On the Republican side, where 11,000 voters showed up, Mitt Romney edged out John McCain.
More interestingly, it's Limbaugh country. Cape is conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh's hometown. His brother, a lawyer, and cousin, a judge, still live there, and tourists can get a peek at old Limbaugh home. (I also have family there.)
Here's a piece with some more details written by the Post-Dispatch's Jo Mannies, the David Yepsen of St. Louis.
UPDATE, 9 A.M. - An Obama aide says the senator "is still focused on winning votes and delegates in primary states," but "we are also spending some time in battleground states going forward to make sure that voters know the real choices this fall."
* This original post contained an error - I mixed up Cape Girardeau county's population with the city. As Rush himself apparently corrected me today on air, the town's population was about 36,000 in 2006.
— Christina Bellantoni, national political reporter, The Washington Times
Comments (36)
Then the fine people of Cape Girardeau will find that as BHO didn't make it as an attorney in the practice of law, he turned to politics. What he will say is will great ambition and little substance. When I have read his speeches, they are hollow. Perhaps he has been saving it up for the real campaign? If he wins, it is time to take my retirement out of country where I can live without socialists.
Posted by Joe Jones | May 12, 2008 10:18 AM
Couldn't make it as a lawyer? The guy headed up the Harvard Law Review, the most prestigious law school position there is. He could have made millions in corporate practice without breaking a sweat. I understand you don't like the guy, but please, at least get your facts straight.
Posted by Bill Friedler | May 12, 2008 12:14 PM
I think that the good people of Cape Girardeau will find Mr. Obama is a good and decent man. I think that they will give him an ear and a hand in his quest to make our country better...regardless of whether they vote for him or not.
If a victory in Nov. by this man who is the embodiment of the best that we have to offer (as well as Mr. McCain) drives you from this great country of ours I say GOOD RIDDANCE!
There will be fleas whereever you lay J.J.
Posted by ishok | May 12, 2008 12:19 PM
From the sound of your comment, I doubt you read the speeches, or anything. Of course he "made it" very well in the law field. It probably would be a good decision for you to retire out of country, though where you will find that is less socialistic and still comfortable to live I wonder!
Posted by tjhurst | May 12, 2008 12:22 PM
It's a shame that in this day and age we still have racists, bigots and such ignorance in this country, i.e. W.Virginia,Kentucky and Joe Jones!!! Apparently they are exactly the people the clintons attract, uneducated, igorant racists. Not enough smarts to research the "truth" about the clintons, not smart enough to realize the clintons are NOT one of them, the clintons are very wealthy and very elitist. Oh well, it shows that this country needs to do a lot more to educate people. Bye, bye Joe and your ilk!
Posted by Susan K. | May 12, 2008 12:23 PM
Don't let the door hit you on the butt, Joe.
If you think that Obama is a socialist then perhaps you can find a suitable bannana republic.
Posted by Sam Snark | May 12, 2008 12:46 PM
Not making it as a lawyer -- to me, that's a good thing!
Maybe there are some lawyers out there with ethics and honesty, but I bet they get drowned out by the rest.
Posted by Ron Heiser | May 12, 2008 12:46 PM
Joe,
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Posted by Gabby | May 12, 2008 12:47 PM
Hey Joe - You might want to reconsider your comments on Sen. Obama's legal prospects. As the Head of Harvard Law review you generally get to write your own ticket. Even if he loses he will still get to write his own ticket in any law firm in the world.
Here is some of the substance:
During the first (8) eight months of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills including:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included the following:
**the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee), and many more.
In all since he entered the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096. An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no legislative record.
Posted by B Meredith | May 12, 2008 12:48 PM
Put your money where your mouth is Joe. If our candidate wins, we expect post cards. Godspeed.
Posted by Jay | May 12, 2008 12:50 PM
Well, speeches are different from policy proposals.
Have you read his proposals for Iraq, national security, healthcare, education, energy or any other substantive issue?
I am tired of the older generation saying that everything they have benefitted from-good schools, Social Security, Medicare, college loans, the GI bill, affordable houseing..are now socialism. You had yours right?
And the next generation deserves no middle class, no good job, no chance for a good education. All that is now socialism.
No, those are the things that made America a leader in new technology and innovation. The middle class is the strength of this nation.
McCains policies will take that all away and expand the New American Century project of Woolsey. Rewards for the wealthy instead of the hard working people who make our America the land of opportunity and justice for everyone, not just the rich.
We liked the old America of our fathers and grandfathers. And we want the same advantages they had.
Obama '08
Posted by shano | May 12, 2008 12:50 PM
It is the logical thing to do. Do not let the short term goal - Primary contests for pride - derail you from the real long term goal - win the whitehouse. It is clear that Obama has well articulated line of thinking and priority placements; which are what we need in a president.
Posted by Chris | May 12, 2008 12:51 PM
I"m with you Joe. I like things exactly how they are now. I'm with President Bush 100% and I'm sticking with the Republican party all the way.
Posted by Ron Calebs | May 12, 2008 12:53 PM
To Comment (1)
We won't miss you. Go, please.
Posted by 1959 | May 12, 2008 12:58 PM
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Joe! You don't like it here in America, good luck finding something better!
Posted by Donise | May 12, 2008 1:00 PM
Joe Jones -
This is indeed a free country and your choice to relocate abroad would leave no one mourning.
And what exactly are you reading? Besides the substance of change from corporate-owning Washington to People-owning America; I find the inspiration of unity of ALL people quite encouraging... and as one who traveled recently abroad, for an extended time, America is my choice.
You sound quite closed-minded kinda like you reside in W. Virginia or Kentucky!
Posted by Lynne in the South | May 12, 2008 1:05 PM
I have great respect for attorneys, those are the people that practice law successfully. Yes, he was at Harvard law review, which still did not make him a successful attorney and the reason he went to politics. He is an interesting orator, but if you read the text of his speeches, not much actually said. I think being from the Harvard area, the law review and his personal history, he is a socialist. I do find him interesting but the thought of one party controlling the House, Senate and Presidency scares me as my basal beliefs are that we need the protection of balance because of the basic two party system. I did not like the Newt years due to too much Repub. control nor will I find pleasure in too much Dem. control. And Dem. control will be socialistic swing not just the left vs. the right. We need the left vs. the right for balance just as our diets, physical activity and most facets of a good life require balance.
Posted by Joe Jones | May 12, 2008 1:34 PM
Y'all are being awfully hard on Joe. Being a good law student, and editor of the law review, does not necessarily translate into being a good lawyer. This is why many of the best students become law professors. Further, I don't see anything racist about Joe's post, but some Obama supporters just can't seem to understand that a preference for another candidate may not have anything to do with Obama's race.
Posted by Sandy | May 12, 2008 1:41 PM
Good bye Joe Jones, we will miss you not.
Posted by Anikitos | May 12, 2008 1:44 PM
Re Joe - Change is tough on people who are self centered and have found their slot in life.
lili
Posted by lili | May 12, 2008 1:49 PM
Hey, as long as he remembers he can't vote "present" or just not show up to a vote if he makes it the presidency, then we should be okay. I think he has the intelligence to represent the entire nation, not some pocket of the constituency. That being said, I still would much rather have Hillary beat him out, because Obama himself said that he would not have enough political experience to be present after a term in the Senate (during interviews about a possible run when he was newly elected).
Posted by Geoff | May 12, 2008 2:41 PM
Try Dubai Joe, if you can afford it.
Posted by Walden "Hussein" Greenwood | May 12, 2008 2:45 PM
It's really refreshing to read the comments of people who are not racist whether you are Republican or Democrat! The bottom line is you are an American, land of the free, home of the brave!! Everyone just pray for Joe cause he needs some HOPE! LOL
Posted by Callie, Ohio | May 12, 2008 3:08 PM
The folks of Cape Girardeau should consider themselves fortunate.
Posted by Groovacious Tim | May 12, 2008 3:33 PM
Hey Joe,
Don't worry about keeping your word on leaving.
#1. He will not win.
#2. Even if he does you will be OK since the other side set the standard when all their folks changed you mind when GW won twice.
Posted by Bill | May 12, 2008 5:07 PM
It is a pity that the many of you liberals who have posted here (bashing Joe J) don't have any perspective over what would come about when a most Liberal President (BHO) coupled with a misguided Liberal Congress would mean to our 238-year-old country . . . you can kiss your comfortable way of living goodbye! Welcome in Socialism (where there is no turning the tide back) . . . if not outright Marxist/Communism . . . and I'm speaking to those of you that think you'd be immune to this movement! Think again, and I hope you well be prepared to welcome your fellow needy "comrades" that you'll be called upon to support!!
Posted by Sharon | May 12, 2008 9:46 PM
Not sure where socialism came into this campaign? I have heard nothing mentioned of workers collectives or wealth distribution. But some of our loosely defined socialistic institutions are things I'm sure you wouldn't want to do without - law enforcement, fire departments, 911 call number, medicare, social security, etc. The issues in this race aren't about socialism, they are about wars, jobs, and equality, the latter being a tenement of democracy. Democracy, the basis of this country, has been desecrated by the administration John McCain upholds. If we lose our democratic principles, we will become subjects of whoever takes over and have no choice as far as belief or freedom to leave the country. You would tell us to vote for that??
Posted by tjhurst | May 12, 2008 11:35 PM
Lay off Joe! You liberal democrats are all alike, piling up on the fellow like that. If Obama's one of "us" average Americans, why is he the most liberal democrat in the Congress???
Posted by Michael Drake | May 12, 2008 11:48 PM
I don't think Joe or anyone is stupid because they don't try to find out the real facts or because they cannot open their mind wide enough to encompass a new thought or change of direction. I think they are afraid, afraid of anything new or different. Even Hillary a woman is hard to get their mind around, but they aren't stupid. It's easier to believe the worst of someone than to examine one's own values. Sometimes we fear just because we have never known anything else. It's the person who supports GWB 100 percent who is the saddest, that man has had to accept the destruction of the US Constitution, our Bill of Rights, the destruction of the US economy, torture, lying into war, and so many other things to keep supporting the GWB administration.
But a person has to vote for the person who makes him/her comfortable and hope for the best and should not be labeled "stupid or ignorant" that's part of democracy.
Posted by Sally | May 13, 2008 12:09 AM
Joe Jones, you dreamer. You're looking for sincerity and integrity. When (if ) you find it, praise it!! Otherwise, know that in order to get what the candidate wants, he/she will compromise. That's what they have to do!!
Republicans may compromise to get a few more votes to pass a bill that encourages industry to create jobs and develop a spirited and progressive society. Democrats may compromise to get a lot more votes to spread lard and butter over the restless masses, in order that they get a little food and medicine, and stop complaining, and vote the Dems back in. And then after 30 or 42 years in the Senate, the Senator my retire and go fishing, and leave the people no better off than they were when that Senator came into office. He nevertheless is comfortable and respected, and dignitaries come to his funeral. He is praised for having advocated and provided mercy and aid and night basketball, and charity, charity, and charity. A fine traditional old Democrat.
The Republican, on the other hand, if he/she manages against the onslaught of PAC's to stay in office,encourages the producers and the capitalists to generate new industry and to hire workers. Those workers then proudly buy cars and homes, send their kids to college, and pay taxes to support the masses who play night basketball and survive on charity, charity and charity. And the nation just barely survives against becoming totally socialistic. Checks and balances? How did our founders become so foresighted and intelligent?? Take time off from your work or from your basketball and read about them. You might help to save our struggling nation.....
Posted by Quentin Haning | May 13, 2008 2:02 AM
I don't pretend to be an expert but it would seem that there has been a leader of the party for the last 16 years. That would be Bill Clinton. He has been behind the scenes controlling the party for the past 8 years.
He is responsible for all the weak leaders. Who was the head of the DNC for the 2004 elections? Gee it was Terry McAuliffe what a coincidence.
Its not very complicated. The weakness in the democratic party over the past 8 years has been due to the Clinton's desire to win the election in 2008 and take them back to the White House.
Did Mr. Clinton campaign as strongly for Al Gore as he has for his wife? no
Did Mr. Clinton campaign as strongly for John Kerry as he has for his wife? no
The plan has always been to have HRC serve 6 years in the senate then run for the white house. Everybody knows that.
Would that have been possible if Al Gore had been elected? no. Chances are he would have served 8 years and the his vice president would have had the shoe in for the nomination.
Would that had happened if John Kerry had won the white house? no.
There is a man behind the curtain in the Democratic Party and its Bill Clinton. Just look at who was on the campaign for John Kerry. All Clinton plants.
So i thank God for Howard Dean.
Think about it.
Posted by McPander | May 13, 2008 5:45 AM
Wow, I guess I should not be surprised to see so many liberal freaks doing the piling onto Joe, and their usual calling in the race card and blaming it on Joe. He said nothing racist at all in his comment, and you libs have been playing this the entire time that if anyone dare to have a different opinion than BHO you label them racist. He has nothing to say in any speaches that have substance, he just as well stand on the stage and say I am present like he did in DC, except when he actually is present in his 100% racist church then he says he was not there. Typical liberal.
Posted by SG | May 13, 2008 6:41 AM
For all you Liberals.
1) We are a Representative Republic, not a Democracy.
2) The only jobs Democrats create are Goverment jobs.
3) The Companies you think are evil may be in your retirement portfolio. So think twice before condemning them for relocating overseas do to over-regulation and over-taxation.
4) There is no Social Security left, the Government spent it.
5)There isn't a dimes worth of difference between Hillary (Smartest Woman in a Pantsuit), Obama ( Half Black/Half White Agent of Change), John McCain ( Straighttalk Rino). This Republic is going in a direction the Founding Fathers never intended and the Democrats and Rino's are relishing every minute.
Posted by paul coppedge | May 13, 2008 9:58 AM
Let's be honest...nobody will move out of the country if Obama wins in November. Nobody will move out of the country if McCain wins in November. After all, Alec Baldwin still lives in the US (remember his promise in 2000).
Now for what I really wanted to say. Tjhurst, you really need to open your ears and pay attention. If you think Socialism has never been brought into the campaign, you haven't listened. Clinton or Obama will certainly never mention the evil "S" word, but it is all over what they say. When Hillary says, "...seize the profits of the oil companies," what do you think she is talking about? When democrats talk about wanting to expand the middle class, what do you think they are talking about? When they want the government to control health care, what do you think they are talking about? Open a dictionary and read the definition of socialism. The democrats want the government to control everything and have you dependent on them for what you get, and then be ashamed of what you have. Heaven forbid you should live the American dream and make a good life and have a little bit of money to pass on to your family when you die. If you make money, the government wants it. If you have an estate to pass on to family when you die, the government wants it. Democrats may hate the rich, but who creates the jobs we all need to make a living? When the next liberal President starts seizing the profits of the big oil companies, then the oil companies start relocating their HQ's to Dubai, what will happen to the US economy. Our only problem is we don't have a Republican candidate who has the guts to stand up against all the non-sense. Heaven help us all.
Posted by Indian Mascot | May 13, 2008 2:39 PM
Socialism! You McBushies need to stop watching the Fixed News Network and start thinking and reading for yourselves.
Joe, your ill-informed and illogical comments should serve you well if you retire to West Virgina. What exactly are basal beliefs?
Obama08
Posted by MY MIDDLE NAME IS "HUSSEIN"l | May 13, 2008 11:32 PM
I can agree with 99% of your comments Indian Mascot, you nailed nearly everything on how Democrats operate as well as us not having Republican candidate with guts. The only thing I might correct you on is that Democrates don't actually hate the rich, since all of the Democratic leadership is just as rich as anyone else, they just want to give their followers the impression that they will take from the rich. You are right on the money that they want to keep the poor poor so they can make promises to take from those who will work and give to them. They are certainly socilists, just by another name.
Posted by SG | May 14, 2008 7:40 AM