Obama was asked six months ago not to wear the bracelet
+++UPDATE+++
A few important and indisputable facts that need to be clear:
Jopek’s mother did ask him not to mention wearing the bracelet. This was confirmed in the recent AP story (opens in new window).
A few days after offering it to the Illinois Democrat, Jopek, of Merrill in north-central Wisconsin, had a change of heart. She realized it could be interpreted as a protest against the war, a statement that made her uncomfortable because other military families who suffered losses still supported the conflict.
“I am a mother, a mother who lost her son. It’s hard to know what’s right, what’s wrong about this war. Very hard,” she said. “And I know there are a lot of families who lost loved ones.”
So she e-mailed the Obama campaign through its Web site asking that he not mention it during debates or speeches.
Jopek’s mother is a Obama supporter, but an uncharacteristically pleasant and level-headed sounding one, so she obviously won’t take a public position that would hurt her candidate. I’ll also say, she’s handling all this in a very dignified way.
AP released two alarmingly different versions of the story, as Level_Head points out, a lot of damaging information was left out of the revised version, but there was no retraction.
Meanwhile, reporters are still up in Alaska digging through people’s garbage cans and harassing newspaper boys looking for dirt on Sarah Palin.
+++++++++++++++
The short of it: The bracelet with Ryan Jopek’s name that Obama had to consult during the debate was not intended to be a prop for a campaign stunt. Especially not an embarrassing stunt like the “I have a bracelet too, from the mother of…errm, uhhh, ummmm…” fiasco that is likely to blow up in Obama’s face in big way - much larger than a simple gaffe.
Bracelet, worn by Obama, commemorating Seargent Jopek
It seems neither the mother or father of the soldier want Obama to wear the bracelet. When Jopek’s mother gave Obama the bracelet it was intended to be between her and Obama, not fodder for the campaign trail. She asked him not to wear it. She’s now understandably upset with the attention she’s getting.
She was upset back in March when Jopek’s father was interviewed on the radio and discussed the problems Obama’s exploitation of their son and the gifted bracelet were causing.
Jopek: She had told me in an email that she had asked, actually asked Mr. Obama to not wear the bracelet any more at any of his public appearances. Which I don’t think he’s…
Moberg: It has been a while since he’s brought it up.
Jopek: Right. But, the other night I was watching the news and he was on, uh, speaking somewhere and he was still wearing it on his right wrist. I could see it on his right wrist. So, that’s his own choice. I mean that’s something Barack Obama, that’s a choice that he continues to wear it despite Tracy asking him not to… Because she is a Barack Obama supporter and she didn’t want to do anything to sabotage his campaign, so, if he’s still wearing the bracelet then, uh, that of course is entirely up to him.
Here Obama was causing these people grief six months ago. Note: Jopek’s mother is a Obama supporter which explains why she hasn’t pushed the issue publicly. It also explains why she hasn’t been causing a stir.
Had not Newsbusters beat me to it, I would have made the obvious point that this would be an entirely different ballgame if McCain was wearing a bracelet commemorating a fallen soldier against the wishes of the family.
No one is asking the father who supports the war in Iraq. No one can ask the soldier who volunteered and gave his life supporting it.
The other story here is that a blogger who discovered this, the radio interview, and basically broke the story. Hopefully it’ll snowball into something the mainstream media has to respond to.
***
H/T on some great blogging: Jeff-Protein Wisdom <-- Warner Todd Huston-Newsbusters <-- “Level_head” dehavelle.com
***
I’m anxious to see some comments on this one. Let ‘em fly.
At this point, it’s hard to believe that you are still ignorant of the facts and aren’t just lying.
If you’ve been on Twitter at all, you are most definitely a liar. Been updated probably 50 times in the last 12 hours.
Here’s a conservative site that cares (in this instance)about the facts: http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/29/the-verdict-on-obamas-bracelet/
But allow me to recap:
The mother and father are divorced.
The mother gave Obama the bracelet.
The mother is an Obama supporter and wants to honorably end the war.
The father does not agree with Obama on the war and is (I think) a McCain supporter.
The mother has NEVER told Obama to not wear the bracelet. She did tell him months ago to not use her son’s name in speeches because she did not want to do anything that might be perceived as not supporting the troops.
She has said SPECIFICALLY that the husband mischaracterized her opinions in the radio interview.
She has also said specifically that she was “ecstatic” that Obama mentioned that he had her son’s bracelet AFTER McCain mentioned that he had a bracelet.
Since McCain was using the other dead man’s life as justification for NOT ending the war, I’ll leave it to you to puzzle out why the mother thought it was okay for Obama to invoke her son.
It is a mystery to me why you and yours believe that this boy’s mother cannot shepherd her own memories of her dead son unless his father and her ex-husband gives the okay.
Chris
P.S. Your post is even less factual than most, if that matters to you.
Thank you.
As subsequent events have shown, the original analysis was correct. She DID ask him not to wear it.
Her objection: It was being used by Obama to make it seem that she was against the war effort. She wants it to be “successful.”
But, she is an Obama supporter, and as was originally said she doesn’t want to “sabotage his campaign” by complaining.
There’s almost a second story under the surface:
She said she was “satisfied” with his handling of it during the debate, but a number of places rewrote and propagated this as “ecstatic” in quotes. There was no such quote, and it is contrary to the tone she has in the quoted phrases.
So — which Obama supporter in the media decided that “satisfied” wasn’t good enough, and decided to play up the headline?
Of interest, many of the headlines that were posted with “ecstatic” (and they show up on Google News this way) were subsequently changed to “satisfied”. In other words, they know they’re being watched.
I will put this comment in the bracelet tag on my site; there are some other details you may be interested in.
===|==============/ Level Head
Level_head, thanks for stopping by, and congratulations on the work you did breaking this.
Chris, you bring bring up a lot of points that are entirely irrelevant. The first one out of the chute was “the parents are divorced.” So? The father wasn’t divorced from his son.
As for the rest, they either don’t contradict anything that has been written or shown not to be the case - ie the “ecstatic” statement which was exchanged with “defending” suddently in the AP headline.
The point is, Obama has been disrespectful of the soldier’s parents and the soldier. But that isn’t even the real story here - the real story is how the media has treated this. If it were the other way around, and McCain were thwarting the wishes of a fallen soldier to exploit his sacrifice, it would be non-stop network and cable coverage.
Anway Chris, thanks for stopping by and especially for the comment. I appreciate the visit and hope you’ll return and comment on any other posts where “I have the facts wrong.”
Level_head
“As subsequent events have shown, the original analysis was correct. She DID ask him not to wear it.”
Unbelievable. She did NOT.
“So she e-mailed the Obama campaign through its Web site asking that he not mention it during debates or speeches.” http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-wi-obama-bracelet,0,6413408.story
Reading is such a fundamental part of blogging. I just don’t understand how you can get this wrong. Or knowingly continue to lie about it. Even NOW she hasn’t asked him not to wear it.
The word “ecstatic” was part of the original Associated Press story yesterday. It was the headline. I saw it in at least two online newspapers yesterday. If they’ve corrected, fine, but Obama internet types did not embellish it.
The divorce matters because it explains why the parents are telling different stories. The father is now in Cuba and can’t be reached and people are quoting a radio interview from months ago where he say that she says X and then she says he got it wrong. There’s an attempt to make it seem like her story changed, but it never did. Over on Free Republic there have been suggestions that she was paid off by the Obama campaign.
Yep, that’s how you show support for the troops and their families–accuse them of being bribed to allow a candidate to use their dead son’s memory! Go right-wing!
And again, if the story is that the father disapproves that the mother gave Obama the bracelet then say so. Don’t start babbling about the “FAMILY” like they are in agreement. The father may be upset, but she is absolutely NOT upset. That much is clear. “Ecstatic” is just gilding the lily.
Finally, the media is not up in arms b/c there is nothing to be up in arms about. And if it seems like McCain is being attacked at every turn, it’s because he is. He makes the mistake of BOTH screwing up constantly AND telling the press to go to h-ll. And that’s a deadly combination.
Terrible candidates + terrible campaign + terrible attitude does NOT equal POTUS!
This is an example of little man that says he cares about people in a way the big, bad Republicans don’t. Trouble is, he only cares about getting their votes so he can get ahead. Sad, sad, sad.
Great article