By Mike Dorning
GREENVILLE, SC—After a fiercely personal debate last night, the barbs continued back and forth between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton today.
Hillary Clinton kicked off the day with a press conference this morning in which she dismissed Obama as a “very frustrated” candidate and repeated criticism of his legal work for “slumlord” Tony Rezko, an Obama campaign contributor who has since been indicted on unrelated corruption charges.
Shortly afterward, Obama was again charging that Clinton and her husband have been duplicitous in campaign trail attacks on his record, suggesting that the Clintons have shown a willingness to “fudge the truth” and will “say anything to get a political or tactical advantage.”
Obama was asked about Clinton’s morning press conference in a brief conference call with reporters to announce an endorsement from Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.)
"When it comes to Senator Clinton's remarks, I think it's very clear that Senator Clinton has and President Clinton have been spending the last month attacking me in ways that are not accurate,” Obama responded.
He went on to refer to a comment Hillary made just as the presidential campaign was heating up in Iowa in December that the “fun part” of the campaign had begun.
“Senator Clinton announced while we were still in Iowa that this was going to be her strategy and called it the fun part of campaigning. And, you know, I don't think it's the fun part to fudge the truth," he said. "The necessary part of this campaign is to make sure that we're getting accurate information to voters about people's respective records."
"If you get the kind of looseness with the facts that Senator Clinton's displayed and you're willing to say anything to get a political or tactical advantage — that erodes people's trust in government,” he continued. “It makes them cynical. It's part of the perpetual campaign that is how Washington all too often operates these days and it keeps us from solving problems."
Obama has charged the both Clintons have distorted comments Obama made describing Reagan as a transformational figure to wrongly suggest that Obama is an admirer to Reagan’s policies, which are anathema to the Democratic faithful who dominate the party’s primaries.
Bill Clinton also has derided Obama’s claim he consistently opposed the Iraq War was a “fairy tale.”
Obama spoke out against the Iraq war as a U.S. Senate candidate in 2002 when Congress approved the war authorization but he did not vote on the resolution because he was not a member at the time. Hillary Clinton and Edwards voted for the resolution. But Obama voted for troop funding for several years, although he has recently voted against the funds because they do not include a timetable for withdrawal.


Comments
Notice how Obama never mentions any actual proof that they are lieing. Obama has a very suspect record and he is finally being called on it. He cant seem to handle the heat. Keep on crying Obama.
Posted by: Vinny | January 22, 2008 1:30 PM
Please NOT Hillary. The fighting between OBAMA and CLINTON will hurt the chances of a democratic win in 2008. The tag team of Bill and Hillary is being watched by the voters. The actions of Bill and Hillary, when the head of the referee is turned, are not going without notice by voters. And who can envision Billy Boy again lurking in the corridors of the White House?
Posted by: neotrebor | January 22, 2008 1:32 PM
It's time for Michelle Obama to come out swinging. I've had it with the Clinton's lies.
Posted by: Walter | January 22, 2008 1:34 PM
Hope change lie hope change lie hope change lie. You know what desperation sounds like? The word lie lie lie comes up a lot when people defend themselves.
Here's a thought Obama why spend the hole time being righteous and giving us a sermon on lies and truth; convinced everyone is on the same page so you don't have to flex your muscles, show your work. How bout you compile a list, I know you like doing that, and publish it as an official run down of the lies told by Clinton about you in the debate. Point by point. No interpretations, no sermons on truthiness. And, without having the media do the work for you.
Posted by: Obama will say everything but be specific in HIS Press Meets | January 22, 2008 1:37 PM
Lol,
Obama never mentions facts about Hillary and Bill lying? So when Bill says he opposed the war in Iraq from the start that's not enough?
Of when Bill and Hillary say that Obama's opposition to the war is a fairy-tale that's not enough?
I can't think of anybody who sees of the Clintons as truthful. They might have a good presidency, but please, truthful?
Do you work fo
Posted by: yiannis | January 22, 2008 2:07 PM
ANYONE who falls for this Swift Boating CLINTONS Tactics Deserve Everything they get These People WILL Say ANYTHING to get in Office...Obama hit it on the Nail....OBAMA had NO CHOICE but to DEFEND Himself when U have Bill & Shillary ATTACKING HIM With LIES LIES LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AS A LIFELONG Democrat If those Clintons get the Nominee Im Voting Republican or Independent
Posted by: Cherry | January 22, 2008 2:11 PM
Hillary is out there today because she lost last night's debate to Obama.
The lies:
1. Clinton distorted Obama's record on Social Security in a campaign mailer by calling his mention of taxing individual income on 200k and above a tax increase on hardworking families. What a joke!
2 . She used a mailer to distort his excellent pro-choice record by citing present votes which were at the suggestion of Illinois Planned Parenthood.
3. She said he was for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump when he has been consistently against it.
4. Bill Clinton is trying to spin Obama's consistent opposition to the Iraq war into quite frankly Bill Clinton's own conjured "fairy tale."
There's more but citing the Clinton's deceit "is" (depending on the meaning of the word "is") too long and tedious for this blog.
Thank goodness Obama is calling them on their campaign tricks and distortions.
Posted by: verdad408 | January 22, 2008 2:14 PM
There you go again!
go a rent the movie,
"THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE"
Posted by: vinnie | January 22, 2008 2:33 PM
Speaking of people who will say anything to get elected, how does Mitt Romney feel about abortion again, now? As opposed to how he felt eight years ago?
Posted by: Jeff | January 22, 2008 2:35 PM
Hillary called Obama "very frustrated" about the race? Her husband's the one who's frustrated and desperate to return to the White House.
By the time the Clintons are done, no one's going to remember their eight years in the WH as anything positive.
Posted by: Tom J | January 22, 2008 2:36 PM
HILLARY IS SO INCREDIBLY DESPERATE TO BE DOING ANY OF THIS SO SOON - SHE IS RUNNING SCARED
do not fall for this "brazen it through" //"walk the dog" // manipulation on the part of the desperate clintons -- but do recognize she is most assuredly showing her true two-faced colors
Posted by: tom | January 22, 2008 2:36 PM
According to CNN Election Center 2008, 2,025 delegates will be needed to win the Democratic nomination for president at the Democratic National Convention to be held in Denver August 25-28. Current pledged delegate totals before the South Carolina Democratic primary election Saturday January 26 are: Obama 38, Clinton 36, and Edwards 18.
Florida will be meaningless to Democrats because like Michigan all Democratic delegates have been declared illegal by the national committee because of the state party’s non compliance in setting their primary date no sooner than Super Tuesday February 5.
Should Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton Become the Democratic Party’s Nominee for President in 2008?
Which candidate is best able to inspire Americans with a new vision of a better America both domestically and in foreign affairs that will attract sufficient independent voters and disenchanted Republicans so that Democrats can win the general election in November?
Which candidate is least likely to cause a worsening division and polarization of voters and elected officials that maintains the partisan politics that currently paralyzes Washington?
Which candidate refuses campaign contributions from lobbyists and political action committees as a first step in seeking to change the money dominated special interest politics that currently rules Washington?
Which candidate has had the personal background and life experiences and possesses the vision and ability necessary to bring together Americans of all ethnic backgrounds be they white, Latino, Asian, African American, or native American in a sense of common purpose?
Which candidate do Americans most respect and admire given the facts of his or her personal family background, marriage relationship, intelligence and academic achievement, and the particular path by which he or she has become a candidate for president of the United States?
Which candidate does not have a spouse whose past political experience and personal behavior could prove to be a serious distraction that might needlessly complicate the office and duties of the President and potentially interfere with the normal functioning of cabinet officers?
Which candidate will the American people be able to trust when times are tough because he or she consistently values telling the truth, rather than choosing his or her words primarily with regard to the politics of the moment?
The inescapable answer is Barack Obama.
Posted by: Uniting | January 22, 2008 2:47 PM
I went back and read what Obama actually said regarding Reagan, and it is nothing like Hillary portrays it. She's trying her hardest to use the Rezko connection against Obama, but there's nothing there. Obama may lack experience, but I'd rather elect an empty suit than a dress full of lies.
Posted by: David | January 22, 2008 2:58 PM
Obama mopped the floor with Clinton in the debate last night. He's not nasty,as she is, but classy.
God help us if Mrs. Clinton is the nominee because she will go down in flames against McCain. The Dems seem to be a self sabotaging bunch who never have the foresight to pick a winner.
Posted by: Jane | January 22, 2008 2:59 PM
Clearly, it is only about POWER to the Clintons. As they have said many times, it's a game. There are 3 teams in this game. The press is one of them. Only it's a game with our lives. This whole process is disgusting.
Posted by: MAR | January 22, 2008 3:00 PM
It's fun watching the Clinton Loons and the Obama Loons at war.
As usual, though, Obama states the obvious: "the clintoons will say anything for political advantage." Those with a clue have known that for over 15 years!
Posted by: John D | January 22, 2008 3:05 PM
Posted by: yiannis | January 22, 2008 2:07 PM
Is that you connecting the dots for us, or Obama. Hmmm. Once again Obama gives a lecture about truhiness and fails to make a stand. Instead, aliases or the media try to do the deciphering. He really meant this, He really meant that, What do you think? The only one missing in the conversation, who this is about, is that guy who is too bust lecturing others on the value of some abstraction.
GO ON THE RECORD OBAMA WITHOUT GIVING A SERMON. Roll up your sleeves. YOU LOOK FRUSTRATED.
Posted by: Obama will say everything but be specific in HIS Press Meets | January 22, 2008 3:05 PM
There is NO way I will vote for a Clinton. I am a life long democrat and actually used to Love Bill Clinton during the 1990's but this election has really showed me how that family is pure scum. I will vote republican before I vote for Hilary, I do like Edwards and Obama though.
Posted by: Stacey | January 22, 2008 3:06 PM
It is downright disgusting to see and hear the Clintons do whatever to win the White House!!!. If that is not the proof in the pudding I don't know how your ignorance can be helped. If the Clintons are the best candidates for the job(yes Bill wants the White House, too, even though he knows he can't have it) why do they need to run a smear campaign? because they know they don't have a prayer, if they had to run on TRUTH,RESPECT and GOOD JUDGEMENT. But what troubles me, actually frightens me, are the number of people who are just so clueless about the real facts surrounding this campaign. I can honestly say, I'm ashamed of our political process. The Clintons have turned it into a debacle, that is further eroding our standing around the World. I wish my fellow Americans would stop believing the words of a man, who told us over and over that he did not have sex with Lewinsky, and later had to admit he did. Don't you see that makes him a liar! And Hillary's miscontruing of Obama's record, even after research by analysts show that's what she's doing, makes her a manipulator, and anyone who votes for her an manipulatee. America, are we really this DUMB!?
Posted by: branch | January 22, 2008 3:07 PM
Quite frankly, Hillary is an old fart like almost all of the candidates to be the president of this generation, she may have the experience but she does not have the vision, integrity and character to move our country past the old Washington crap that has brought us in this mess for all these years. We need change and unity with fresh talents and voices to make us proud as Americans again. When was the last time you had that feeling. With Hillary's mouth and Lewinsky and all those scandals behind them? I don't know
Posted by: Marina Cubero | January 22, 2008 3:10 PM
Hilary is a clever person who can recite in an instant the words her people contrive. They push others into a corner where they are damned if they refute and damned if they do not. This is their scheme. But we need a voice we can trust. We've had over 16 years of blatant, arrogant deception. Bill Clinton's years were acceptable to many only because the US enjoyed, as did Bill, a boom in technology and economy.
Posted by: CJ | January 22, 2008 3:16 PM
Actually BOTH OF THEM ARE EVIL, DIVISIVE AND GREEDY!
Stop the nonsense!
For once I'm considering voting Republican. At least they have not behaved like rabid dogs.
Posted by: Lily | January 22, 2008 3:20 PM
It's amazing how the Clintons use typical propaganda tactics like repeating charges that have been refuted.
Obama has well explained why he voted present, that he was a young new lawyer who worked about 5 billable hours for Rezko as a client before Obama became a community organizer, and that he did not agree with Reagan's ideas.
Why then are Hillary and Bill not embarrassed by their own repritive charges against Obama?
Actually, they feel entitled to the White House--but why?
We don't have kings and queens in American government.
It's up to the American people to drop these two doughheads ASAP.
Posted by: stephen s. | January 22, 2008 3:30 PM
God knows how Bill Clinton lies - wagging his finger he lied about Monica Lewinsky, Jennifer Flower, Paula Jones, Whitewater etc - and now he is trying to tear down Obama with his hallmark lies - It is a shame that the media is playing along. The Clinton's will do anything to get back to the White House.
It is simply very sad to see how the mediocre or rather pseudo journalist Wolf Blitzer is orchestrating all his questions to that end. The way you, Bill Schneider, Candie, Susan Malveaux ALL THE HIRED GUNS BY THE CLINTON MACHINE - misuse MLK Holiday to sell hidden motives - but the truth is,,
Had Dr. King “waited” for someone to bring freedom and civil rights to him, he might still be waiting. For Bill and Hilary, and whoever else offers a promise of freedom. Thank God Almighty, he did not. Were he alive today, he would have probably said, “I hope, Hilary and Bill, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.”
MLK’s Human Rights Legacy: Barack Obama Can Lead the People From the Mountain of Despair to the Valley of Hope!
Senator Obama seems ready to pick up Dr. King’s mantle. He uses language that unifies America, not divide it. He appeals to principles of justice, freedom and equality, not to whites or blacks or other races. He declared, “There is no black America. There is no White America. Only the United States of America.” That is in the same spirit of Dr. King’s dream, “a dream deeply rooted in the American dream ‘that all men are created equal.’” It is the same aspiration.
Obama’s message is resonating with people of all races, as did Dr. King’s. Whites, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians and others are coming out to vote for him in record numbers. He is revitalizing American democracy, and awakening a new spirit of political participation and involvement among the young. He has struck a chord in the American imagination and spirit. He sounds just like Dr. King when he says, “I’m talking about a moral deficit. I’m talking about an empathy deficit. I’m talking about an inability to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we are our brother’s keeper; we are our sister’s keeper; that, in the words of Dr. King, we are all tied together in a single garment of destiny.” He talks about finding our way out of the wilderness. “That is how Dr. King led this country through the wilderness. He did it with words — words that he spoke not just to the children of slaves, but the children of slave owners. Words that inspired not just black but also white, not just the Gentile but also the Jew, not just the Southerner but also the Northerner.”
Whether Barack Obama becomes president is an important fact. His candidacy and the public support he has generated to date marks a historic milestone in American history. But to many of us, whether he can carry the mantle of Dr. King is equally important. Can he pick up where Dr. King left off? Many of Dr. King’s people are stranded on a mountain of despair. They need someone to lead them out of the wilderness to the valley of hope? I truly believe Senator Obama can = YES HE CAN!!!
I wonder is Hillary or Bill on the Board of CNN??? Or Is CNN owned by Wal Mart???
Posted by: Anonymous | January 22, 2008 3:30 PM
Posted by: John D | January 22, 2008 3:05 PM
And you add credibility to the statement........
Posted by: LOL | January 22, 2008 3:30 PM
God knows how Bill Clinton lies - wagging his finger he lied about Monica Lewinsky, Jennifer Flower, Paula Jones, Whitewater etc - and now he is trying to tear down Obama with his hallmark lies - It is a shame that the media is playing along. The Clinton's will do anything to get back to the White House.
It is simply very sad to see how the mediocre or rather pseudo journalist Wolf Blitzer is orchestrating all his questions to that end. The way you, Bill Schneider, Candie, Susan Malveaux ALL THE HIRED GUNS BY THE CLINTON MACHINE - misuse MLK Holiday to sell hidden motives - but the truth is,,
Had Dr. King “waited” for someone to bring freedom and civil rights to him, he might still be waiting. For Bill and Hilary, and whoever else offers a promise of freedom. Thank God Almighty, he did not. Were he alive today, he would have probably said, “I hope, Hilary and Bill, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.”
MLK’s Human Rights Legacy: Barack Obama Can Lead the People From the Mountain of Despair to the Valley of Hope!
Senator Obama seems ready to pick up Dr. King’s mantle. He uses language that unifies America, not divide it. He appeals to principles of justice, freedom and equality, not to whites or blacks or other races. He declared, “There is no black America. There is no White America. Only the United States of America.” That is in the same spirit of Dr. King’s dream, “a dream deeply rooted in the American dream ‘that all men are created equal.’” It is the same aspiration.
Obama’s message is resonating with people of all races, as did Dr. King’s. Whites, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians and others are coming out to vote for him in record numbers. He is revitalizing American democracy, and awakening a new spirit of political participation and involvement among the young. He has struck a chord in the American imagination and spirit. He sounds just like Dr. King when he says, “I’m talking about a moral deficit. I’m talking about an empathy deficit. I’m talking about an inability to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we are our brother’s keeper; we are our sister’s keeper; that, in the words of Dr. King, we are all tied together in a single garment of destiny.” He talks about finding our way out of the wilderness. “That is how Dr. King led this country through the wilderness. He did it with words — words that he spoke not just to the children of slaves, but the children of slave owners. Words that inspired not just black but also white, not just the Gentile but also the Jew, not just the Southerner but also the Northerner.”
Whether Barack Obama becomes president is an important fact. His candidacy and the public support he has generated to date marks a historic milestone in American history. But to many of us, whether he can carry the mantle of Dr. King is equally important. Can he pick up where Dr. King left off? Many of Dr. King’s people are stranded on a mountain of despair. They need someone to lead them out of the wilderness to the valley of hope? I truly believe Senator Obama can = YES HE CAN!!!
I wonder is Hillary or Bill on the Board of CNN??? Or Is CNN owned by Wal Mart???
Posted by: Lily | January 22, 2008 3:32 PM
I resent your calling Obama a rabid dog, because he has the guts to defend himself against the Clinton attacks!! and at great risk to his campaign. Really, as Obama has mentioned time and time again, he would like to stay focused on the issues. Only someone ignorant would not be able to identify their callous maliciousness as a deliberte strategy to keep Obama so forced on defending himself against thier lies, that he has less to devote to showing us why he is the best candidate. But I am confident that his campaign will prevail. We Shall Overcome!!!!!
Posted by: branch | January 22, 2008 3:42 PM
1. I can hardly wait for Michelle Obama to "come out swinging."
2. Sadly for Obama, the Rezko business isn't "nothing." It's a very serious matter. Unfortunately, he lied about his involvement with Rezko during the debate.
3. I think that all the floons who announce they are lifelong Dems who are planning to vote GOP if their candidate doesn't prevail are completely ridiculous. They are proof to me that we ought have voters take an IQ test.
Posted by: Tabloid Mary | January 22, 2008 3:43 PM
I'm an independent who supports Obama, but had imagined myself voting for Clinton if she won, fair and square, in the primaries. But last night ended that thought forever. She lies with no sense of right and wrong. It's so reminiscent of her husband's perpetual mendacity. After last night, I realize I will never vote for her, and she appears willing to entirely write off any independent votes. Like Bush, her approach is "my way or the highway." But we don't need yet another president with no principles, taking money from fat cat corporate benefactors, while treating everyone who doesn't agree with her as enemies. Hillary just doesn't seem to understand that you can't win the Presidency by appealing only to hard-core Democrats, which is why, if the Dems are dumb enough to nominate her, she will go down to defeat in November.
Posted by: Lie to Get Nominated and Lose in November to Republicans | January 22, 2008 3:48 PM
Obama's call for honesty in government is part of a fight for the soul of our nation. It is from the soul of our Nation that defines the kind of policies, both domestic and foreign, we will allow our politicians to create or fail to create.
Today, the majority of other countries see us as without moral character, willing to say anything one day and take opposite actions the next with impunity. The "anything goes" that you can get away with philosophy.
The Clinton's behavior mirrors this "anything goes" philosophy and they are doing a great job in showing us how far we have fallen from grace....so far that some people think their behavior is "just part of "politics." That it is okay, or better than okay....she is tuff...a leader.
Whereas Mr. Obama, much to his own demise and sacrifice, is taking the time to remind us that the path of "anything goes" in our "politics" is what has lead us to where we are today...at war and in a failing economy and suffering the results.
Obama reminds us that we can do better than this by demanding more honesty and integrity from ourselves and our politicians.
Obama's sacrifice in keeping on this message to remind us how great we can be as a unified Nation acting from a foundation of honesty and integrity may well cost him a Presidency.
His personal sacrifice is a great example of true Leadership. He is showing us in real time by his actions of keeping on this message in the face of all the "anything goes" noise made to drown it out.
Obama shows us the depth of his conviction and great strength of his character by refusing to go off his message to us despite the personal gain that can come from it.
Obama has drawn a line in the sand by refusing to further corrupt the spirit of our Nation for his personal gain. He has won my trust and I thank him for his sacrifice.
better than the same old "anything goes" politics that has served only those who utilize it at the cost corrupting our Nation's spirit.
Posted by: Mercedes Phillips | January 22, 2008 3:50 PM
The Clintons used the same old strategy. They lie. They are not honest. The will say anything to win the nomination. They have no ethical value. Things that Bill Clinton did in the white house as president that has lead to the prelude of his impeachment, was so bad, I do not even know how to explain it to my 6 year old. They used all kinds of tricks, tears and pretense of anger to manipulate the media and scare up votes. This is disgraceful. I know that Bill wants to finish his legacy, but he needs to conduct the campaign in a way that is conducive to respect and civility.
Here is the current strategy -- Bill goes loose and says anything that he wants including lying to derail Obama off his message. In the meantime, Hillary will have more time to talk about the economy and her mandating health care system, similar to the ones implemented by governor Mitt Romney in Massachusetts before his departure. People in Massachusetts, who cannot pay for their heating bill, would rather pay the current fine because it is less than buying a health insurance premium. Forcing people to pay a fine and yet calling the plan, universal heath insurance, sounds more like a great euphemism to me. This sounds just like as a real fairy tale to me; give me a break. Our problem will not be solved until we remove the lobbyists in Washington. The previous attempt to solve the healthcare crisis was done behind closed doors. The second attempt will be mandating a health care plan to force people who can’t afford it to pay additional fees. She may as well choose the previous governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, as a running mate, for they have the same health care plan.
The strategy outlined above may win the nomination, but it will lose the election.
1. The Clintons are working vigorously to put a wall – calling Obama “young African American.
2. This morning, she called him a frustrated young man
3. The Clinton purposely lied to provoke Obama and to derail him off his message.
Please Obama do no let this only hope dies.
Without you, there is no more interest in politic. Without you, there is no surge in voting registration. Without you, there is no full auditorium with thousand and thousands followers. Without you, there is no more reason to believe in again. Without you, The Tiger Woods analogy ceases to exist – he made golf interested to young people as you make politic interested to college kids across the country. Without you, citizens would stop changing party affiliation from republican and independent to democrats for the coming 08 election. Without you, we are back to the same food fight – red and blue state again -- Red for republican and blue for democrats.
Please don’t let the status quo blocks the change movement and derail Obama off the message to unite the America.
“There is not a liberal America and a conservative America - there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America - there's the United States of America.”
Posted by: Nixon | January 22, 2008 4:04 PM
I always find it funny when people say that Clinton has the most experience and is best suited for the job. Oh really now, is that so. Its strange that of the hundreds of millions of people in the U.S. the most 'experienced' and 'qualified' democratic candidate is the one who just so happens to be married to a previous president. Clinton has an incredibly shady past (Wal-Mart Board of Directors, making 1,000%+ returns on investments, the whole China-donation scandal) and has ridden her husbands coattails to every position of power she has ever had. On the other hand we have Obama, a man who was able to raise himself up, who was able, without the aid of cronies or name recognition to get positioned to be a leading presidential candidate. But no, keep deluding yourself into thinking that this woman who was handed everything she ever had is the most experienced, keep thinking that she will change things, keep thinking that she is the best choice, and after the election, when things continue to become worse and worse, with the nation becoming more and more divided hopefully then some people will realize, that sleeping with the President of the U.S. is not a satisfactory item to run a campaign or a country on.
Posted by: Tim | January 22, 2008 4:43 PM
"Notice how Obama never mentions any actual proof that they are lieing. Obama has a very suspect record and he is finally being called on it. He cant seem to handle the heat. Keep on crying Obama." From Vinny
First of all, Vinny, learn to spell. Second, read Eric Zorn's article today giving a transcript for transcript translation that details exactly how the Clintons have lied.
Third, do you recall, Vinny, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman. . ." ??
Fourth, can you define Obama's suspect record? Get your facts, Vinny, and present them. Ever notice how people blog using blanket (and false) statements about Obama, but never actually present any facts to support their bald assertions. . .?
Posted by: BrwnSknGurl | January 22, 2008 4:56 PM
Please, so many of you here sound so crazy. The Clintons have finally given the Obamas a taste of their own medicine and they can't handle it. For months Michelle has been out slinging mud and saying that HRC can't be President because because Bill cheated on her. If you search for "Michelle attacks Hillary" you can find a YouTube clip from the CBS 10pm news.
All of you people saying you'll vote for a Republican before you vote for a Clinton should just go ahead and switch now...because if after 8 disastrous years you'll still vote for a Republican you shouldn't be in this party. Period. Pick up your ball and go home now.
I will not be voting for Sen Obama for the nominee because of his 17 year friendship with Rezko, his writing letters of support to city hall, for taking his campaign contributions and looking the other way while Rezko stole tax payer money and created slums for the black community in Chicago.
Posted by: Clintonsbaby | January 22, 2008 4:58 PM
I'm an independent who supports Obama, but had imagined myself voting for Clinton if she won, fair and square, in the primaries.But last night ended that thought forever. "
Yeah Right. Somehow I'm getting the idea that each time is the "last night that ended that forever." Evey time Hillary speaks, a whole sea of fish come out of the water to declare "I am a life long democrat, I supported Hillary, but last night changed my mind forever."
Posted by: Obama will say everything but be specific in HIS Press Meets | January 22, 2008 5:02 PM
If you really would like to know what kind of President you will have in the White House if Billary gets in. Read a book by Lt.Col Robert"Buzz"Patterson entitled "Dereliction of Duty". Its scary what we could be headed for. After you read the book you will also be glad the Gore did not win.
Posted by: Paul Jaeger | January 22, 2008 5:15 PM
I am discussed in the Clintons. AS a AA who a champion of theirs, I now dispise them. They are doing to Obama what the Republicans did to them. They need mental help. I'm afraid that they are going to give the president of the U.S. to the republicans.
If Hillary gets the nomination, she will not get my vote. I will vote independent or not vote at all.
SP
Posted by: sp | January 22, 2008 5:25 PM
Vinny,
You have the nerve to mention Obama crying. Your candidate cried and wept her way to a slim margin of victory in NH. The hypersensitive girls in NH went for her trick and handed her a lifeline.You suffer from a case of amnesia, perhaps? I guess it's blind fanaticism.I hope you don't she can weep her way to the general election. Whatever happened to the "strong candidate" nonsense?
Posted by: joseph pierre | January 22, 2008 5:30 PM
"SPURIOUS DEBATES SOUGHT"
ABOUT TIME, TWO PEOPLE TOOK OFF THE GLOVES AND SHOT STRAIGHT. JUST THINK THEY WEREN'T STANDING NEXT TO SOME TRAIN WITH NO KABOOS.
ABOUT TIME, VOTING RECORDS, AND THOUGHTS TOWARDS THOSE VOTES CAME TO THE TABLE.
YOU WON'T SEE THE GOP TALKING ABOUT VOTING RECORDS, HECK VOTING RIGHTS FOR THAT MATTER.
YOU WILL NOT SEE ONE REPUBLICAN TAKE ON GEORGE BUSH AND TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE TRUTH.
THE SKY IS NOT FALLING. STOP PLAYING THE GOP "HIDE AND GO SEEK" FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHILE ON THE WAY OUT.
SAME TIME, SAME AMERICAN CHANNEL WHEREIN
NONE OF THE REPUBLICANS ARE EVEN TALKING ABOUT WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING, EAVESDROPPING, CIA SEXGATE, PURGING OF THE PROSECUTORS OR THAT STUPID IMMIGRATION ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY THEN IMMIGRATION REFORM BILL THEY TRIED TO SLIP PAST EVERYONE BORN BEFORE 1964.
SO IT'S ABOUT TIME TO SEE IF AMERICA IS GOING TO GET A MEAN DEAL OR 99 CENT BURGER WITH THEIR NEXT VISIT AT THE DRIVE THRU'S IN AMERICA.
Posted by: Roger Morris | January 22, 2008 5:36 PM
Clinton cries, Obama whinnies.
Big deal.
Posted by: joe | January 22, 2008 6:21 PM
If you look back, Michelle Obama was the very first mudslinger in this election with comments about how can Hillary run the White House if she can't run her own house. This coming from a black woman of the inner city of Chicago, where the issue of cheating husbands and baby mommas and baby daddies is a staple of popular culture. She should be ashamed. Instead of trying to set a good example for the black community and for her husband's presidential bid - she threw mud from the get go. Haven't heard a peep from her since, because she simply couldn't keep it to the issues. Obama at least used to inspire rather than mudsling.
The point is, Obama is weak on record, weak on issues, weak on mostly everything.
Don't believe the hype.
Posted by: Legalknievel | January 22, 2008 6:45 PM
The Clintons are just as power hungry as the Bushes. It's time for the country to move forward without a Clinton or a Bush. Leave them at the curb like smelly used garbage.
Posted by: Tony otiz | January 22, 2008 6:46 PM
nobama fairy tales present
Posted by: abcz | January 22, 2008 7:27 PM
Keep in mind when you hear Bill Clinton talking trash this week about Obama that he was a failure as a President because he lost two years of his second term - and an ability to leave a legacy - because of a lie that led to an impeachment attempt. The fact that he is lying now shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. We simply cannot afford, as Democrats, to risk losing our momentum, our majority in the legislature (Clinton lost that in 1994), and a real chance to move Democratic policies forward in DC by installing the divisive Clinton gang back into the White House.
Posted by: Moe | January 22, 2008 8:05 PM
The Clintons ARE lying and distorting Obama's record. Don't think Obama was against the Iraq war from the start? Watch this video from 2002 and educate yourself:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po
Meanwhile Hillary DID vote for the war and showed NONE of the prescient judgement of Obama in predicting the problems of the Iraq war.
Furthermore, ask yourself why Al Gore didn't swamp Bush in 2000. Cry all you want about it being stolen but the reason it was so close was because the country was SICKENED by Bill and Hillary's scandals, both sexual and political.
All you Hillary supporters are too afraid to believe that there can be a candidate who can win and keep his dignity. His name is Barack Obama.
Posted by: Art | January 22, 2008 9:17 PM
I have nothing against a woman becoming president. As a matter of fact if some other women was running i’d probably vote for them. But Hilary, oh brother where do I begin.
People talk about the Clinton years, when the economy was strong, where there were great jobs high wages etc etc. Of course the economy was good, but was it Bill Clinton who torpedoed the economy into greatness? no it wasn’t, it was actually economic policies that were proposed and implemented by Ronald Reagan back in 1984 after we hit a recession that helped propel growth in the 1990’s, in the early 90’s before Clinton took over we also hit a small recession, congress took care of that. And what happened, Bill Clinton took all the credit for it.
This recession period we are facing hasn’t reached a trough yet, but this recession I blame the presidency for increasing our deficient due to the war, and selling out the middle class, which really hurts me, Bush too will look you in the eye and say the economy is healthy. Yeah right!! Even a business student who’s taking Econ 101 can tell you its not.
So who do I vote for is the question. I vote Barrack, why?! He is young, vibrant, he has lived my life, he understands how it is like to be broke and poor, he has worked with the poor, and defended their rights. He loves this country, and HE AINT MUSLIM. His economic policies will stimulate growth. The only place I do not agree with him is increasing taxes in high income earners for social security, I think the system should be scrapped along with Medicaid, because its going to go bankrupt, and me and my generation will end up picking the tabs. Other than that I agree with him on all other things.
“Barrack 08″
Posted by: Zac | January 22, 2008 9:30 PM
Posted by: Zac | January 22, 2008 9:30 PM
Seeing how you stressed the most important part- HE AINT MUSLIM I can only suspect that that must be the only reason why you are voting for him.
I'm not convinced Zack. Someone who wouldn't vote for Obama because he is a Muslim wouldn't vote for a woman either.
Ps
Posted by: Slater | January 22, 2008 11:46 PM
What Obama actually when he was pandering to the conservative editorial board of the Reno Gazette:
"I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what's different are the times. I do think that for example the 1980 was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.
Nowhere in the quote did he mention that those ideas were bad, or that he admired how reagan made people vote against their economic interests.
Posted by: FJ Stratford | January 23, 2008 1:30 AM
Roger Morris: We're talking about Hillary and Obama, not GOP.
Wow, the Clinton's lied. Give me a moment to contain my surprise.
My vote can be summed up in three letters: ABC, aka - Anyone But Clinton. I think that Obama is young and unexperienced than someone experienced in lies and heartlessness. Obama is a genuinely good person who will make the decisions he believes to be the best for this country. Hillary is a bad person. I'm using very simple classifications, but that's the best way to express it. I'm tried of politics mudslinging, when I travel internationally, I'm ashamed, not of my country, but of those who did run, run or want to run it. Nothing could make me happier than to see the "Fall of the House of Clinton". Preferably around their ears...
Posted by: Elenor | January 23, 2008 2:34 AM
Political candidates should be fined each and every time they intentionally distort an opponent's records and held accountable for this kind of unethical behavior and slander. Example, Hillary's recent statement she made on Meet the Press in which she said: "Sen. Obama's chief strategist accuses me of playing a role in Benazir Bhutto's assassination.'' When in actuality David Axelrod never made such an accusation. He said former Prime Minister Bhutto's death will ''call into issue the judgment'' of ''taking the eye off the ball and making the wrong judgment in going into Iraq.'' That statement of her's is Outrageous and potentially Slanderous! After all, most of us teach our children to play fair -- not to lie, cheat and steal! The leaders we elect to office should be held to a higher standard and should be people of principal, high moral character, honest and forthright.
Second: There is a time to be silent and a time to speak. Unfortunately, Senator Obama had no choice other than to diplomatically confront the Clintons on their lies and misstatements. He cannot and could not allow them to paint a picture of him that is NOT TRUE. The Clintons' tactics are old time party politics and should be a thing of the past as we move towards the 21st Century, towards cleaner air, cleaner water, cleaner politics, towards a more holistic way of living. It is a greater duty and in the best interest of the country for Barack Obama to continue to stay positive and hopeful while attempting to clear his record from these misstatements -- as he continues to try to bring this country together and lift it up from fear and a distrust of one another -- and to continue to show the American people and the world there is another way to run for office other than smear and fear and tearing your opponent down with lies and slander -- Swiftboating! That is why Obama and Huckabee are so appealing. They are authentic and each in their own way are trying to lead the Americans away from dirty campaigning, lies and tricks. How can we as a country be blessed and be a beacon of light to others after all that ugly and dirty fighting (lies, distortions and slander) we can't be. There is a positive way -- honorable way to fight with dignity, honesty and truth and a dirty way to fight that is unethical and slanderous and without dignity.
And too, we have to ask ourselves as a people, why do we allow this unethical and negative way of campaigning to be acceptable and then reward this kind of behavior, with one of the highest offices in the land?
Posted by: Bacalove | January 23, 2008 5:44 AM
How can anyone respect anything Bill Clinton says considering the way he lied to the whole world when President of the United States. End of story Bill, give us a break !.
Posted by: Peter Dean | January 23, 2008 9:38 AM
take a look at this: http://www.spymac.com/details/?2334927
Posted by: Blindhammer | January 23, 2008 10:26 PM
Hillary lost the debate and reporters have been trying to spin it as the audience turning against Obama AND Clinton's conflict.
Hillary was booed loudly for revisiting issues Obama already debunked, and not just by Obama supporters but by EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE. She lost not just the debate but most of her support that night.
The media, of course, said it was the audience turning against Obama AND Clinton. Of course, it didn't stop them from clapping when Obama stuck it to her five seconds later.
Obama AND Clinton, huh?
Which one of them lost a 20 point lead to end up 20 points behind over the span of one month? Yeah, thought so.
Posted by: Ed | January 23, 2008 10:49 PM
Ditch both of these people
Ron Paul is the only
only candidate who has outlined specifically what he will change. And he has a history of keeping his word and sticking to his principles.
Principles like upholding the constitution, not using it for tissue paper like these two.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 23, 2008 10:49 PM
Barack Obama is the only candidate I would consider. Bill and Hillary would bring too much political baggage to the White House - it would just be another level of resistance they would have to fight though.
OBAMA ALL THE WAY! Please, sweet god, don't let Hillary be our representative.
Posted by: Mike B. | January 23, 2008 10:50 PM
There appear to be two kinds of Democrats: those that are merely power-hungry (Clinton supporters) and those that want to elect somone who can bring about change(Obama). Clinton supporters are blind to the shady past and proven deceits of the House of Clinton. Obama supporters don't realize that beating the Clintons is just a warm up act against the Republicans. This is war. You think the Clintons are going to let someone steal their White House? Whoever wins will likely be damaged goods.
Posted by: Crayola | January 23, 2008 10:51 PM
If "Billary" continues with this and wins the primary in this fashion, Republicans will surely win in November. Why? (1) All those who voted for Obama will not vote for Billary and the Democratic party will lose one of the best assets and attraction for swing voters, Obama. (2) Republicans will use this against her in the national election. (3) She will turn off Independents.
Posted by: iListen | January 23, 2008 11:11 PM
Notice how Obama never mentions any actual proof that they are lieing.
Yes, Obama has mentioned the exact quote they're using several times. Go watch the SC (or maybe Nevada) debate. He explains the quote and why what the Clinton's are saying is total BS.
Here's a quick analogy of what the Clinton campaign is doing. Let's say I say this: "Hitler was an important person in history." The Clinton campaign is then saying "Joey said that Hitler was the most important historical figure ever and he was a great positive influence on history."
Seriously, go read the quote that Obama and Clinton are arguing about. It's that epic of a lie. What's worse is the American people are stupid and they're buying it.
For the love of the flying spaghetti monster don't vote for Hilary. Her health care plan is going to be the biggest sucker punch to the American people in our short history. It doesn't actually offer anyone affordable healthcare, it just FINES you if you don't have health insurance.
Does anyone believe poor people don't have health care because they're lazy?
Posted by: Joey McAdams | January 23, 2008 11:15 PM
Every DemoRAT will say anything to get elected. Look at our ridiculoua governor. BGE rate hikes ring a bell? I just wished people in Maryland would wake up and realize that demoRATS have torn down this state and will continue to do so.
Posted by: tahoe1115 | January 23, 2008 11:25 PM
Every DemoRAT will say anything to get elected. Look at our ridiculoua governor. BGE rate hikes ring a bell? I just wished people in Maryland would wake up and realize that demoRATS have torn down this state and will continue to do so.
Posted by: tahoe1115 | January 23, 2008 11:26 PM
Every DemoRAT will say anything to get elected. Look at our ridiculoua governor. BGE rate hikes ring a bell? I just wished people in Maryland would wake up and realize that demoRATS have torn down this state and will continue to do so.
Posted by: tahoe1115 | January 23, 2008 11:26 PM
"Notice how Obama never mentions any actual proof that they are lieing."
Are you kidding me? Or do you just have VERY poor reading and listening comprehension?
I suggest you start by reading the article again, and then if you still are at a loss, maybe this one will make is easier for you: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html
Keep trying, one day you'll get there!
Posted by: anonymous | January 23, 2008 11:31 PM
Proof?
Read what Obama said and compare with what Clinton said.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html
Posted by: otherbot | January 23, 2008 11:32 PM
"Notice how Obama never mentions any actual proof that they are lieing."
He doesn't have to. Some of us have memories we can rely on.
Posted by: Brian Reich | January 23, 2008 11:55 PM
Tell me something. If Hilary thinks she can handle to become the president then why she need Bill? She need to tell him to back off. Bill is a liar and that's means Hilary is a liar because she depend on Bill Clinton.
All she does is bash on Obama. All I want is to know what is her goals for our country. I still don't know why people are still voting for her. She's acting like little kid right now.
Posted by: Dan B | January 24, 2008 1:21 AM
The Clintons Record:
-Welfare Reform
-Pushed/Signed NAFTA into Law
-Failed On Healthcare Reform
-Failed to grow to grow a Democratic Majority
-Lost Congress to the Republicans
- Scandal after Scandal
Do we really want 8 more years of that? If so why don't we just elect a Republican president because they would all deliver a similar presidency.
Posted by: BillaryisJustLikeBush | January 24, 2008 2:12 AM
It is a shame that non-response is considered weakness. If he were to respond there would be a post that said "to bad Obama had to engage in the verbal battle"
It is also to bad that, in an age when I would LOVE to get down to "what are you going to do as my president and how do you propose to do it" so much time ends up being wasted on the minutia.
No one, no politician, no voter, no person commenting on this page is with out flaw or foul. Lawyers have a job to do and they do it. The legal system is a whole different ball of wax. Hillary's comment was a pathetic reach if you ask me.
Obama wants change. Hillary is the product of, wife of and practitioner of politics as usual. We have a government that contains all to many corrupt, wealthy, self interested elitists who's time is hopefully coming to an end thanks, in part at least, to people like Obama. He has stirred an interest in an age group that is going to inherit a ton of problems.
Our current President and Vice President would be the poster children if there were a telethon for do as you please in politics. I await their departure as I would await the removal of a finger from my eye.
Whew, where's the Asprin.
Posted by: B. L. | January 24, 2008 1:17 PM
It's not entirely true that Clinton has more experience than Obama. Their experience is actually pretty even. Clinton likes to consider the aide work she did in college as 'real experience', as well as the 8 years of her husband being in office (White House records show that she never had access to anything confidential, wasn't given daily briefings, was not involved in meetings), and the time she spent in foreign countries she was not there acting as a negotiator, but only representing America's interests (aka, a figurehead).
Posted by: LNE | January 24, 2008 1:18 PM
Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton?
Bad idea. These are the throes of the power elite trying to remain in Washington at any cost. It just may come to pass that the Clinton's find themselves in the White House again - at the price of our democracy and freedom.
Posted by: Joe | January 24, 2008 4:36 PM
====>Tony Rezko, who is facing a Feb. 25 federal criminal trial in Chicago http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3695966.html
http://www.ontheleft.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=8513
I just submitted this on ABC blog (none / 0)
Obama supporters, ask yourself these questions regarding Senator Obama:
Why did he get a cheaper price on his house? (While Rezko's wife paid the full asking price for the land, Obama paid $300,000 under the asking price for the house. The house sold for $1,650,000 and the price Rezko's wife paid for the land was $625,000.)
Why did he do business with a man he knew was under investigation by the FBI? (Rezko had been widely reported to be under investigation by the U.S. attorney and the FBI at the time Obama contacted him and has since been indicted on corruption charges by a federal grand jury in a case that prosecutors say involves bribes, kickbacks and "efforts to illegally obtain millions of dollars." )
Why did he write letters for this same man to get government contracts?
"For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago's South Side. It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers."
"But Obama's ties with Rezko go beyond those two real estate sales and the political support, the Sun-Times found. Obama was an attorney with a small Chicago law firm -- Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland -- that helped Rezmar get more than $43 million in government funding to rehab 15 of their 30 apartment buildings for the poor."
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/35382 9,CST-NWS-rez23.article
I do understand wanting to defend your candidate but this is reality and we can't afford to loss this election, and, my god, the country certainly can't afford it. There are two other democratic candidates in this race who have a much greater chance of defeating the Republican nominee in the fall. Here's another question you should ask yourself, what do you think the Republicans will do with this information pertaining to Senator Obama's record?
Posted by: ood | January 24, 2008 10:24 PM
At this point, the Clinton's are just sickening and despicable.
What do you bet the Clinton's are using their syndicate of criminals to threaten Obama's family.
That's why he is backing down.
The Clintons raising "ethics" as an issue and judging Obama? puh-leeeeeeeezzzee!!! That's like Al Capone accusing a boy scout!
Posted by: fresnojo | January 25, 2008 12:50 AM
Time for a black president with good morals. It'll help to shut all of you idiots up. He'll show everyone how a country is supposed to be run.
Posted by: Peter | January 26, 2008 6:25 PM
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:36:34
Please forward this to every person you can…especially to non-political types and women who just like the idea of a woman president. The U.S. is definitely ready and willing to elect a woman president. But, that HIGH honor, should not go to this crook. Everything stated here is absolutely true and irrefutable. There are perhaps a hundred books written about the lies and crimes of the Clintons. Before you vote for her, it would be a great idea to read at least one! JUST to refresh your memory.
Just in case you may think this person would make a good president…
Hillary Clinton has been telling America that she is the most qualified candidate for president based on her 'record,' which she says includes her eight years in the White House as First Lady – or 'co-president' - and her seven years in the Senate. Here is a reminder of what that record includes. . .in case you have forgotten.
Ø As First Lady, Hillary assumed authority over Health Care Reform, a process that cost the taxpayers over $13 million. She told both Bill Bradley and Pat Moynahan, key votes needed to pass her legislation, that she would 'demonize' anyone who opposed it. But it was opposed; she couldn't even get it to a vote in a Congress controlled by her own party. (And in the next election, her party lost control of both the House and Senate.)
Ø Hillary assumed authority over selecting a female Attorney General. Her first two recommendations (Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood) were forced to withdraw their names from consideration, and then she chose Janet Reno. Janet Reno has since been described by Bill himself as 'my worst mistake.'
Ø Hillary recommended Lani Guanier for head of the Civil Rights Commission. When Guanier's radical views became known, her name had to be withdrawn.
Ø Hillary recommended her former law partners, Web Hubbell, Vince Foster, and William Kennedy for positions in the Justice Department, White House staff, and the Treasury, respectively. Hubbell was later imprisoned, Foster committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.
Ø Hillary also recommended a close friend of the Clintons, Craig Livingstone, for the position of director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of up to 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, both Hillary and her husband denied knowing him. (FBI agent Dennis Sculimbrene confirmed in a Senate Judiciary Committee in 1996 both the drug use and Hillary' involvement in hiring Livingstone. After that, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office, after serving seven presidents for over thirty years.)
Ø In order to open 'slots' in the White House for her friends, the Harry Thomasons (to whom millions of dollars in travel contracts could be awarded), Hillary had the entire staff of the White House Travel Office fired; they were reported to the FBI for 'gross mismanagement' and their reputations ruined. After a thirty-month investigation, only one, Billy Dale, was charged with a crime - mixing personal money with White House funds when he cashed checks. The jury acquitted him in less than two hours.
Ø Another of Hillary's assumed duties was directing the 'bimbo eruption squad' and scandal defense:
---- She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit.
---- She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.
---- Then they had to settle with Paula Jones after all.
---- And Bill lost his law license for lying to the grand jury
---- And Bill was impeached by the House.
---- And Hillary almost got herself indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice (she avoided it mostly because she repeated, 'I do not recall,' 'I have no recollection,' and 'I don't know' 56 times under oath).
Ø Hillary wrote 'It Takes a Village,' demonstrating her Socialist viewpoint.
Ø Hillary decided to seek election to the Senate in a state she had never lived in. Her husband pardoned FALN terrorists in order to get Latino support and the New Square Hassidim to get Jewish support. Hillary also had Bill pardon her brother's clients, for a small fee, to get financial support.
Ø Then Hillary left the White House, but later had to return $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork she had stolen.
Ø In the campaign for the Senate, Hillary played the 'woman card' by portraying her opponent (Lazio) as a bully picking on her.
Ø Hillary's husband further protected her by asking the National Archives to withhold from the public until 2012 many records of their time in the White House, including much of Hillary's correspondence and her calendars. (There are ongoing lawsuits to force the release of those records.)
Ø As the junior Senator from New York, Hillary has passed NO major legislation. She has deferred to the senior Senator (Schumer) to tend to the needs of New Yorkers, even on the hot issue of medical problems of workers involved in the cleanup of Ground Zero after 9/11.
Ø Hillary's one notable vote, supporting the plan to invade Iraq, she has since disavowed.
Quite a resume, isn't it? Sounds more like an organized crime family...
...YES, many think it is time for a woman president--but think clearly. IS THIS WOMAN????
Posted by: carol | February 7, 2008 10:20 PM