Is HillaryCo getting a little desperate? (updated)
"There’s a big difference between our courage and our convictions, what we believe and what we’re willing to fight for," Clinton told reporters here. She said voters in Iowa will have a choice "between someone who talks the talk, and somebody who’s walked the walk."
Asked directly whether she intended to raise questions about Obama’s character, she replied: "It’s beginning to look a lot like that."
Hmmm. Going after Obama’s strength — honesty. That play sounds familiar.
"There’s a lot that voters don’t know about Barack Obama," Wolfson said on CBS’s "Face the Nation."
Yikes. We’ve seen this kind of sleazy smear by innuendo from Wolfson before, during the phony OMG-Obama-will-meet-with-dictators! controversy.
Politics is a contact sport, but tactically, I don’t think this is going to work for Hillary. It plays into Obama’s efforts to paint her brand of politics as the kind we want to leave behind, and by making the attack personal, it drags her down from her inevitable front-runner perch.
Your thoughts?
UPDATE
Via TPM, Robert Reich weighs in:
I just don’t get it. If there’s anyone in the race whose history shows unique courage and character, it’s Barack Obama. HRC’s campaign, by contrast, is singularly lacking in conviction about anything. Her pollster, Mark Penn, has advised her to take no bold positions and continuously seek the political center, which is exactly what she’s been doing.
…
All is fair in love, war, and politics. But this series of slurs doesn’t serve HRC well. It will turn off voters in Iowa, as in the rest of the country. If she’s worried her polls are dropping, this is not the way to build them back up.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Bingo
zuno!
Aloha
I’m don’t find Obama’s strength to be honesty… I find him to be tricky and disingenuous… but wrapped up in a real pretty package…
Sorry, off and running to work.
nice bingo mac
Looks like the wheels are getting a little wobbly on the Clinton bandwagon. Thank you very much!
Hey everyone!
Obama is my Senator, and I am not entirely happy with him.
For many of these reasons.
But Hil is not my point of comparison, Durbin is.
Frankly, Obama has his finger in the wind too much for me to consider him a real leader.
She’s finally played right into his campaign theme. Her campaign hoped they would be able to stay above the street fighting, and appeal for unity against the Repubs — great strategy if you can maintain it. Now she’s throwing that in, and having Wolfson out there as her “face” is very risky. The man offends me.
This seems a bad move for Clinton in my opinion also.
She really wants to make personal character the issue?
I think Hilary’s right about Obama. She voted on the despicable Kyl/Lieberman and Obama was nowhere to be found. They both suck.
Sorry Tex,
But There have rumors about Obama and Tony Rezko (not to mention Don King) that are not pretty. That has always been my biggest fear with him. That we would end up with a candidate that the GOP could take down at will becasue of skeletons in his closet. Better Hillary does it now. His voters will mostly go to Edwards.
This isn’t and never was intended to be hacky sack.
Exposing a candidate to some rough and tumble prior
to nominating them is a good thing. We don’t want to
discover he can’t take a punch in September of 2008.
Obama is suggesting students commit voter fraud…
What she says.
Wasn’t Clinton just complaining about John Edwards mudslinging in the last CNN debate?
Finian, Can you be more specific and do you have a link? I don’t know what you are referring to.
Tex, I agree with you that this move could backfire on Hillary b/c she has so many ethical issues herself. However, they are all old news, and a campaign with her kind of money and expertise certainly polled and focus grouped this before they undertook such a radical tactics shift.
finian,
That’s a pretty vague charge. Care to provide details and a link?
Speaking of getting the dirty laundry aired, On The Media just had a nice exposé on Hucksterbee.
hard to see how that was going to work without offering something significantly different than her brand of “centrism” which looks, to me, like more of the same – just competently managed.
Yeah, but her complaints didn’t poll well. So, she mustthink that if sharp elbows work for Edwards, they will work fo r her.
She scored big in the Senate race debate against Rick LAzio when he very rudley and aggressively left his podium to brandishsome piece of paper in her face. He walked deep into her personal space and she instinctively recoiled as if from an abusive spouse.
I was shocked tat he had done that, and his cmpaign fell apart as a reslut of people’s indignation. He was clearly trying to physically intimidate a woman (funny thing, he’s actually very gentlemenally towards women in real life).
Anyway, she was trying to put Edwards in that sam e posture, problem is–
1)He’s percieved as a nice guy
2) he stayed at his end of the stage
3) he was making legitiamte comaprisons not pulling some cheezy stunt
Obama represents youth and change wrapped up in a beautiful smile. The people love it.
Edwards seems to represent me as Im not sure what Obama represents.
Obama represents youth and change wrapped up in a beautiful smile. The people love it.
Edwards seems to represent me as Im not sure what Obama represents.
My thoughts are, I hope it runs her right into the ground. With all the bogus attacks on her and her husband’s integrity, both with and without cause, I don’t think she should be throwing stones. Too much glass around.
Don’t like Wolfson at all; he seems to be the Dems version of Karl Rove!
yikes three comments?
What do you think the odds are that Hillary & Obama will scratch each other’s eyes out, leaving Edwards as the one left with sight? Can we hope?
Hillary has a lot of problems, one of which is that the next principled stand she takes will be her first. Another is that she seems to be an excellent organizer and tactician, but has no concept of grand strategy. Hence, her tactics often seem inappropriate.
Paulson’s up on C-SPAN.
New design–will take some getting used to…
Paulson was All American for football at Dartmouth in the 1970s.
Rummy was a wrestler. Armitage too, IIRC. Ahnold a body builder.
Is there a pattern here? Should we consider a constitutional amendment preventing atheletes from running for politcal office?
link to the voter fraud-ette story
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..133459/537
plus I have to say how much I hate the new login system I got stuck in an update your profile thing and it would not let me register under by old screen name.
thanks. would love to have your commentary/
Paulson’s reading his speech as though someone else wrote it & he’s seeing it for the first time.
Interesting. Maybe it’ll work then. I still think the majority of Democrats in Iowa find him trustworthy, so we’ll see.
Except he’s not as smart as Rove, because he uses Republican frames to attack Democrats, which diminishes his brand.
Obama is a lightweight but then despite all the hoopla so is Hillary. Neither has exercised any significant leadership on any issue in the Senate. Almost all of the other candidates have. Dodd on FISA. Kucinich and Richardson on the Iraq War. Edwards on social and economic inequalities. But when we get to Obama and Hillary the candidates with the highest media exposure, there is nothing. I think that absence says a lot about them both.
Paulson:
Govt + ind to work together.
3 point plan, to help “able” borrowers continue to own homes.
Remind me again what that is. I’ve lost familiary with the concept.
So the “novelty” candidates are flinging the shit at each other.
BFD.
Edwards remains the pragmatic choice.
Hillary’s leadership on health care reform is instructive.
Recognize a real problem, make a big deal about it, and us it to build a donor base while never really advancing the issue significantly.
Paulson: national hotline of mortgage counselors.
Gee, somehow that seems incommensurate with the problem.
There’s a lot to be said for youth and change. My daughter says she is sick of baby boomers, and I kind of agree, even though I am one.
Paulson: Hope is but a phone call away.
Good thing my barf bag is at hand.
Actually, I wish this whole back and forth between the Clinton and Obama campaigns ends up netting a gain for Edwards, who I think truly deserves more than he’s getting. I think the media has decided to make Clinton and Obama the two that deserve all the attention and the people have decided to let them due to the novelty of their “minority” campaigns. Hopefully, before the primary, voters will come to their senses and do what’s right for the country, and I’m more and more concluding that may very well be Edwards, since we probably won’t be able to have Gore. At least Edwards served a fuller term in the Senate and has had a chance to prepare for the presidency. Obama got rushed into this too soon as near as I can tell. Had a lot of potential, but bloomed too soon. Hillary (or Billary) has too much of the wrong kind of experience, I think. She’s more a bridge to the past. She’s way too heavily involved as a corporatist and member of the establishment. I like Dodd, but I’m not sure he has quite the qualities and temperment we need at this time. Same goes for Biden and Richardson. If the press hadn’t successfully labeled Kucinich part of the lunatic fringe, and it hadn’t caught on with a majority of the people, he might actually be a viable candidate, although I understand that he has some serious flaws also. I guess I’m rooting for Edwards at this point.
I don’t remember the ROM (republican owned media) being this investigative and up front about any of the republican candidates/politicians over the last seven years. Where were they? /snark
me too. my eyes are not adjusting to the new font. :(
wishing for 12pt verdana and a slight non-white background.
Anyone else notice Edwards bad hair appearance on Olbermann last week?
Clever.
On The Media also has a great piece on Hillary branding herself Hillary, and how that ultimately diminishes her stature as a leader.
Paulson was All American for football at Dartmouth in the 1970s.
Rummy was a wrestler. Armitage too, IIRC. Ahnold a body builder.
Is there a pattern here? Should we consider a constitutional amendment preventing atheletes from running for politcal office?
J.C. Watts and Heath Shuler were both college quarterbacks.
Jim Bunning was a major league pitcher. Jim Ryun(sp?) was a world-class mile runner.
So… there may be something to this.
Yep — that could be exactly what HillaryCo is thinking. It’s infinitely better for Clinton if Edwards wins Iowa than if Obama does.
On the mortgage meltdown, the best solution is the one proposed by Brad Miller, D-NC, to let bankruptcy judges cram down the mortgages of homeowners in Chapter 13. It solves the problem for homeowners, essentially giving them the same rights speculators have to modify mortgages in Chapter 11. It cuts the Gordian Knot of CDOs and other structured financings, because it doesn’t require their consent. And it should save the investors money in the long run.
They are most scared of Edwards. He is the most representative of the people.
Paulson: In order to solve a problem created, in part, by too loose lending practices, we’re going to loosen them more. (That isn’t exactly what he said, but that’s the import of it.)
Obama’s not my first choice, but I give him some leeway because of what he’s had to overcome to be where he is. Plus, his voting record is really not too shabby, except for the last few months where it’s been fairly non-existent, which is disappointing. And the Rezko stories I’ve read have seemed quite minor to me (couldn’t find anything about Don King, who’s a Repube mostly, but traditionally gives to both Parties to get invited to the parties).
I remember saying right after that speech at the DemocratIC convention “Obama ‘08!” kind of jokingly. Yet, he made it a reality. Really an amazing story…his entire life.
And this whole “experience” hogwash…I want someone with real life experience. Who’s been in “the trenches” of our society. Who’s lived all over the world. That kind of experience can’t be taught, and is precisely the kind of experience we need in a leader…finally! If someone’s been kissin ass and schmoozing enough to be considered wise to the ways of Washington, then that’s not the person I want representing me.
Edwards is my first choice for now, and he’s certainly not perfect either. No one ever will be. But Obama has a good track record, and I think he should be cut more slack by us Liberals because of the amazing tightrope walk he has to walk. I remember constantly hearing just a year or two ago about how there’s no way he could win because of his name and skin color. Well, certainly seems to be putting that one to rest, although won’t know fer shure until voting day.
Drop me an email, I’ll straighten you out.
It sounds like a come on for the Psychics Network.
I thought it was just me and these old eyes. I’m trying to not “fear change”
LOL
low interest rates to stimulate the real economy.
fiscal policy – should increase public infrastructure investment.
wow. sounds not insane (to this econ illiterate prole)
The editing function is gone too…
I think we might be better off if we could ban politicans from running for President while serving in Congress.
If Hillary can’t take Edwards’ strong and direct criticisms of her policies and practices, how will she stand up to the Gooper campaign ahead or the tough guys in the world.
[rubs thumb and forefinger together playing world’s smallest violin….]
And her policies and practices should be criticized and scrutinized–along with every candidate. Who does her mortgage bailout help more…beleaguered victimized homeowners? Or Clinton crony Rubin’s Citicorp?
Demand better. Be better.
Edwards ‘08
i’m sure there will be changes and improvements as time goes on. (i am making a list of suggestions – just in case anyone asks, i’ll be ready).
Hope is but a phone call away.
If You’d Like to Make a Call, Please Hang Up and Try Again. If You’d Like to Make a Call, Please Hang Up and Try Again. If You’d Like to Make a Call, Please Hang Up and Try Again. If You’d Like to Make a Call, Please Hang Up and Try Again. If You’d Like to Make a Call, Please Hang Up and Try Again. If You’d Like to Make a Call, Please Hang Up and Try Again.
You got it.
My formerly R business owner friend has a good frame for the infrastructure problem: We had enough money to build the infrastructure when the country was a lot less wealthy than it is today. Why is it that now we don’t have enogh money to maintain it?
Paulson ducks out without taking Qs.
Pretty empty speech.
I hope that things don’t work for Hillary. No more Clintons and certainly no more Bushes. This Nation needs to get off the treadmill.
I don’t care who does it, but someone has to stop Hillary and her bloody ambition right now. Someone needs to put her in her place.
NYC area FDL meetup:
Wednesday, 12/5, 5:30; Parnell’s Pub, SW corner of 53 & First. Come one, come all.
Even some Republican?
Absolutely. If Clinton wins, my entire voting life will be made up of Clintons and Booshes. Jeezus…perish the thought.
Experience, as defined by the Conglomerate Media: Knows way around cocktail weenie circuit. That’s who we want leading us?
I’ll bet your list includes (working) preview & edit buttons. Didn’t realize how much I used ‘em until they were gone ;-)
There’s not enough money because Republics have been gathering punder unchecked for far too long.
Re: new design:
The whole site looks softer (a plus)…
Oh, there’s lots of answer to the Q, like yours & wars of choice, to name just 2. The point of his framing, I think, is to make one consider priorities, then & now.
The Thugs set out to loot the Treasury by hook or crook and pretty much succeeded.
brightening up the day of Edwards supporters…from on the ground in Iowa
“Jerry Crawford, Dem on the “Insiders” this morning says, “Mitt has one of the best organized campaigns he has ever seen in the state.” This is not spin and Jerry knows his stuff. He was instrumental in John Kerry’s Iowa win and works for Hillary this time. However, I would not under estimate the power of the pulpit for the Huckster. Jerry also continues to say, “if the caucus were held today, John Edwards would win.” This has been a consistent prediction. I’ll let you all know if I hear him say something different in the future.”
Since I didn’t post much until very recently, mostly just lurked, I didn’t use EDIT, but I do hope the heroic techies can fix PREVIEW. I agree that it will take time to get everything up and working properly — this was a MASSIVE effort (I’m in IT, so I have a good sense of it). I already see everyone adapting to the new ways of doing things and the workarounds, and helping each other. We just need to be very patient.
Kudos to Jane for this wonderful redesign! I love it!
wtf does that mean – “her place”
i dislike her policies probably as much as anyone here. but there’s no such thing as “her place” – please.
selise, if you’re still here.
Way back when (mid-1970s?) I got set up with a luncheon with a investment banking client who, among other things, owned a small farm belt bank. It was not my usual meeting, which were mainly with institutional investors, so I thought I’d see what I could learn. Things went well, and I was finally emboldened to ask: When you made all those loans to farms on the basis of inflated farmland prices, didn’t you realize that there was no collateral there? After all, if you need to foreclose, so do all the other lenders, and so asset (collateral) values collapse.
He looked at me like he had never considered that possibility, and after a pause, admitted it.
Nothing changes.
I hate to say this but the Fed is going to add some more coal to the train heading for the cliff.
The problem is that the financial system is all driven by fees and ROI on make believe financial instruments which are traded based on PERCEIVED value. We’ve really entered the realm of an economy which is like Monopoly board game.
All the capital has been sucked up into so called financial instruments which are traded like baseball cards and these managers extract enormous fees and shelter them or offshore them. Suckers invest in shares are give away part of the savings in fees in the hopes of making something for nothing… the tag line of the financial sector.
Sure print more money, issue more credit, add another card onto the house of cards. It won’t stand. The US economy is beyond the control of the Fed or even the Masters of the Universe. The casino is going broke and can’t pay their debts.
It was fun while it lasted by Marx told you that capitalism was going to be its own undoing. He was so right.
That may be true, but is Billary (or anyone on her campaign) the one to be pointing that out?
Add in the fact that the Grover N. branch of the GOP has been doing thier best to eliminate the very idea of a public Good from our national discourse. They’ll be happy to build infrastucture as long as they can control it in perpetuity.
What Hugh said.
Let them duke it out now. I find this an oddly encouraging development. They especially need to take each other to task for not showing up for challenging votes < :-</p>
Alphonso Jackson being replayed on C-SPAN from his opening remarks at housing forum.
Gonna be lots of ‘heckuva job’ awards going out on the housing crisis.
wow.
i can see people buying homes at inflated prices – after all we all have to live somewhere. but what i can’t see is banks lending the money (whether to farms or home buyers) based on inflated collateral prices… just does not compute.
Well, I won’t have any say in the nomination. In my view, any of the Democrats will be far superior to any of the Republican candidates, all of whom endorse the disasterous Bush Administration. I don’t have a problem with any dynasty issue. The election of FDR four times was a good thing, whereas the election of GWB one time was far too much. I want to be able to strongly support whoever the Democratic nominee is. Have a nice one.
As I said: It’ll take a while for me to adapt to the new design. Might even affect my zed hunt a little bit…*g*
Jackson: $4.2 billion to bailout foreclosures has exhausted all the administrative action we can take. We need legislation.
Yep, blame the Ds.
It was exactly the same thing from Countrywide on the housing panel this morning.
BTW: Hotline # is 888-999-HOPE,* in Spanish & English. How ironic is that?
*Think I heard it right; Jackson didn’t repeat it & I wasn’t watching the TV screen, which is behind me.
Here are some numbers:
By any chance, do your stats correspond to the announcement of Oprah’s endorsement?
Probably one of those “pay by the minute” British West Indies numbers. /snark
Same POV as you. I couldn’t have expressed it any better, Crosstimbers.
Got to drive in to work. Read you all later.
Hey Jane, Christy and gang.
I used to be GSD.
Now I’m me.
-G
reply
Yes, Ms. Winfrey has waded into the battle, bringing hordes of women over 50 to Obama’s defense.
Of course, this is also the woman responsible for foisting Dr. Phil on an unsuspecting populace.
LOL
Anyone want to waste some minutes, give it a call & report back.
Well Said. I am a confirmed Caucaus goer for Edwards here in Iowa. I think Edwards will do well in Iowa. I hope he can build on that momentum in NH and then really take fire.
“Now I’m me.”
It’s about time.
I am LMAO that a Clinton is challenging someones character……
I did well when Big Dog was prez, my partner was at the WH on Clintons Hiv council for 8 years….BUT….character…um don’t think they should go there. They threw us progerssives under the bus and will do it again. Hillary is a good Senator that is it!
This is def. not playing well for Hillary. Her internals must be a disaster.
Hey Jane, Christy and gang.
I used to be GSD.
Now I’m me.
-G
Hey Greg – givin’ up on the “Destroyer” thing? Welcome
GSDGregB!!Bill Bradley.
There’s just one conclusion; Dem athletes good, R athletes bad.
Evidence?
new thread.
Yes and we shouldn’t forget the James Frey of A Million Little Pieces incident. Perpetrated a fraud on all the bookclub members when Oprah believed in him.
Edwards taking fire: I saw on Meet the Russert yesterday that he’s polling quite well in South Carolina as well, another very early state. If Edwards wins Iowa, he still might do just okay on N.H., since he’s pretty far back there, but I like his chances in S.C. and some other states, so it’s possible.
John and Elizabeth both just need more airtime, and people will start moving over to them.
I’m a woman over 50. I’ve never watched Oprah, and none of my friends have either. When my daughter was in college (recently) she and her roommates would get home from classes and turn on Oprah every day. So, who knows, the Oprah demographic might just skew a little younger than we think.
Bill Bradley.
There’s just one conclusion; Dem athletes good, R athletes bad.
Did I mention Heath Shuler?
My thoughts?
There is a subset of Democrats who disapprove of anything Hillary does. The blogosphere gives them a microphone and they can say whatever they like about Hillary and their musings will be accepted uncritically.
But this move by Clinton doesn’t seem to me to be all that unusual. Iowans who are planning to vote for Clinton are more firm in their committment to her than Obama and Edwards supporters. In actuality, it should be Obama and Edwards who should be concerned. Hillary is just locking down her delegates and picking off a few more from other candidates.
It may be close and she may have more work to do, but desperate? Given how her campaign has built in contingencies this was probably all planned out. It’s time to make the other candidates look like risky investments.
Yup, all according to schedule.
Evidence…..
well, maybe I did go too far with that comment….SO, I will take it back.
707
Jane’s upstairs.
new thread on Waxman requesting docs from Fitz
The Bill Moyers journal on the run-up to the Iraq War had a segment that showed Oprah viciously attacking a young woman who had dared to question the administration’s premises. Told me all I needed to know about Oprah.
I don’t know if raising the issue of Obama’s honesty and integrity is actually a losing strategy. The comment in the OP sounds very much like an Obama Campaign effort at preventative dissuasion.
But we have to realize that Obama has been disingenuously attacking Clinton for supporting the Kyl-Lieberman Resolution on Iraq…which he didn’t vote on because he was absent. Whether that absence was intentional, justifiable (because he wasn’t notified), or simply because he didn’t think it was an important vote is neither here-nor-there.
What is important is that Senator Obama was a co-sponsor of an almost identical bill S.970. Titled the Iran Prevention of Nuclear Proliferation Act…it also called for severe economic sanctions against Iran by designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a “terrorist organization”. One of the first Democratic sponsors of this act (Clinton signed on the next day) Obama never submitted any Amendment or acted to withdraw his name from this bill.
http://www.govtrack.us/congres…..l=s110-970
Senator Dodd, also a co-sponsor, actually added a critical Amendment to the Kyl-Lieberman Resolution that expressly stated that the K-L version was not to be construed, in any way, as representing a Congressional authorization for military action against Iran. Sen. Clinton voted in favor of that Amendment. S.970 never had such a stipulation attached to it.
It’s thus puzzling why Sen. Obama is so virulent about Clinton’s vote on Kyl-Lieberman when he was himself a co-sponsor of S.970 which also designated the Iranian Revolution Guard as terrorists. Pot-meet Kettle!
Is it on youtube yet?
Oops! My mistake. Blue Dog Dem athletes bad.
Thanks.
A very long time ago, I think it was even before Jane moved to WordPress, she and some other bloggers got together with Bill Clinton. The idea was as I saw it at the time to let Big Dawg test the net waters for Hillary and use his personality to smooth the way for her. The meeting was if I remember correctly set up by Peter Daou who was a blogger before going to work for Hillary and who had written some good stuff about the use and creation of narratives in politics. This was as far as I know way before anyone else thought to do this.
The problem was nothing came of it. There was no follow up, no further meetings, no participation by Hillary. It was in other words a major blown opportunity. At the time, a lot of people would have looked forward I think to working with Hillary if she had been willing to work with us. She wasn’t.
Despite the triangulation schtick, Hillary is pretty rigid in her thinking. Just as she could never apologize for her Iraq vote because in her mind this would have been an admission not of a mistake but a show of weakness so she never could wrap her mind around her relations with the blogosphere as anything other than a top down one best handled by underlings.
The recent attack on Obama is another case in point. It is the so predictable reaction of a career pol feeling some heat from her in party competition. Obama and Edwards, of course, has been doing much the same except they aimed their barbs at her policies not her character.
I get this feeling that people tend to look at candidates as they wish they were and read into them qualities that they wish they had. I think Hillary has in particular benefited from this but perhaps not so much anymore. She is at heart an Establishment pol, authoritarian, do as I say, I’m the boss, I don’t apologize, I will lash out at those who disagree with me. This is how she acts. This is how she will act as President.
The value of real estate is also smoke and mirrors, supply and demand. It presumes constant appreciation and it can therefore be managed.
To create demand flood the market with credit and people go chasing after real estate and bid the values up and then the players start speculating. And the fees come flying in. Closing fee rip offs, title fees, insurance fees, mortgage fees, points, real estate feesand it goes on and on.
But of course, you need cash flow to pay the mortgages. And decent jobs and so forth. The banks are essentially laughing all the way to the bank.
Suckers!
Is it on youtube yet?
Don’t youtube much (it’s blocked at work & I’m on dial-up at home) so I don’t know, Prairie.
Why can’t these candidates simply issue policy statements and run on their positions and not bother with what the other guy said. It’s really seedy to call BS and gotcha on another candidate. Let them stew in their own words. We can tell if it is properly reported.
SanderO, just curious, do you read the Housing Bubble Blog?
No… should I?
Can you drop in a link for HBB?
The Housing Bubble
Warning, though: The politics tend to be pretty disgusting at time, but there’s a lot of useful information passed over there.
Found it… I love how the financial sector simply decides on their ROI and doesn’t play unless they get it. What a racket.
Oh, and if you haven’t seen Krugman’s Monday opinion piece in the Times yet, don’t miss it. Scary stuff.
Only a few weeks ago the Wise Beltway Pundits were declaring Hillary “unstoppable.” My prediction is that she will be challenged for third place in Iowa by Bill Richardson.
Oprah did not believe Obama in 2002
BILL MOYERS: EVEN OPRAH GOT IN ON THE ACT, FEATURING IN OCTOBER 2002 NEW YORK TIMES REPORTER JUDITH MILLER.
JUDITH MILLER: (OPRAH 10/9/02) The US intelligence community believes that Saddam Hussein has deadly stocks of anthrax, of botulinum toxin, which is one of the most virulent poisons known to man.
BILL MOYERS: LIBERAL HAWK KENNETH POLLAK.
KENNETH POLLAK: And what we know for a fact from a number of defectors who’ve come out of Iraq over the years is that Saddam Hussein is absolutely determined to acquire nuclear weapons and is building them as fast as he can.
BILL MOYERS: AND THE RIGHT HAND MAN TO AHMED CHALABI.
OPRAH: And so do the Iraqi people want the American people to liberate them?
QUANBAR: Absolutely. In 1991 the Iraqi people were….
WOMAN: I hope it doesn’t offend you…
BILL MOYERS: WHEN ONE GUEST DARED TO EXPRESS DOUBT OPRAH WOULD HAVE NONE OF IT
WOMAN: I just don’t know what to believe with the media and..
OPRAH: Oh, we’re not trying to propaganda– show you propaganda. ..We’re just showing you what is.
WOMAN: I understand that, I understand that.
OPRAH: OK, but Ok. You have a right to your opinion.
All of the candidates are better than anything the Gopers send against us. But my concern is that they are ‘candidates‘ when what we really need are Statesmen. I think the Democratic party, or at least a very significant part of it, realizes this.
I may be swimming against the tide, but it’s a loooong way to Denver and I’m gonna hold out for Gore/Dean.
That’s the ticket that we deserve, not the one we have to settle for.
hugh – you remember correctly (of course) on the blogger meeting with bill clinton. just want to add that there were some complaints about the “whiteness” of the meeting (which took place in harlem). peter daou promised that there would be more meetings (that would be more diverse). but i don’t think that ever happened. good summaries from kid oakland (here and here), and more on the firestorm the meeting generated.
After reading summaries of each, those seem quite different to me, so inferring that Obama is hypocritical on this is unfair IMHO. Dodd, Durbin, Kennedy and others also supported S.970.
Dodd explains the dramatic difference here on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPnN2m8tCpE
There are democrats who disapprove of Hillary, period. I am one of them and that is based upon 8 wasted years of the Clintons in the White House with appointments like Berger, Tenet, the vapid Gore and Hillary’s non event as a US Senator from my state. The Clintons are small time thinkers, whose biggest deals have been various instituional imprimateurs including gilded educational institutions and soft core careers in academics and politics. It is more important to Hillary to be elected than to serve. And her biggest test in politics, Rick Lazio? Come on folks.
there is a fine line for democrats to weave during the primary process:
1) making the eventual dem nominee battle-hardened for the slime blitzkrieg they’ll face against the wingnut noise machine: honing attack and response skills.
2) not inducing permanent damage to the eventual nominee.
My take so far is that everybody has been running with kid-gloves on. A little rising temperature is necessary.
.
The Clintons are small time thinkers
no fan of the Clintons here, but this is a pattenly way off the mark comment: Bill Clinton elected the youngest Governor in US history; a woman running for president in the US… ’small time thinking’ – come on already. The Clintons are not in anyway small time thinkers – they are quite ambitious.
What they are is inside game players, manipulators, they are NOT progressives. Their goal is to win, whatever that takes with little regard to ideology – hence the triangulation and the frequent sop to outrageous republican positions that should be anathema to progressives. They have no strong ideological underpinning, which is highly undesirable, but does not constitute “small” thinking.
.
You are right, and they are way to the right of anything resembling a true democratic party philosophy that actually has labor, by that I mean most of us out here in sudetenland, at the core of their Ideology as they should. This may be sacrilege on my part but I will not vote for Hillary or Obama they will only take this country further down the road of corporate oligarchy, a road that would be the ruination of anything that defines America as a democracy.
“Put her in her place”? Why, is she some uppity woman who … words fail me.
With all three of the top Dems, we know what kind of general election campaign will be run against them by the Republicans: John Edwards was a trial lawyer, Barack Obama is not only black but his mother was white, and Hillary Clinton will carry the Bill Clinton years. It’s going to be very ugly no matter who the standard bearer is.
Sen. Clinton, in this case, has the easiest race: we already know most of the stuff from those years and I don’t think the charge of bitch or hysterical female will play very well, especially to women voters and the men who love them. The other two will have a harder time with Sen. Obama having the hardest.
But be clear, there is not a Republican on the horizon who can beat ANY of them unless Democrats shoot themselves in the foot (not unheard of).
The tricky part now is to run as if this were the General and not primaries. Why, you ask? Because everything is online, print and youtube, and everything can be brought up and used again and again. This, I think, was the purpose of K Rove’s column earlier today – to try to stir things up for future use.
Some of the Democrats are being smart in this and not running to the far left, but are giving us a view of how they will govern the whole country and not just the “base”.
The Republicans haven’t figured this out and are running so far to the right that none of them will be able to head towards the middle after the primaries. For instance, Gov. Huckabee will never be able to restate his stupid opinion on “creationism”. They are running a traditional 20th century campaign and it will hurt them.
The Democrats have to keep their collective eye on the end goal which is to take control and actually govern. And to that end, each needs to clarify their positions, not necessarily to explain their opponents positions.
I can’t vote in the primaries, but fully expect to vote for the Democratic nominee so I am watching all this pretty closely and there are things I like very much about each of the Democratic candidates – I don’t have a favorite, but, Deandra, Sen. Clinton’s “place” is wherever she wants it to be, as is yours, as is mine.
Small time ambitious thinkers. Sorry I left out the descriptive term ambitious. But they are definitely small time.
Actually he is suggesting students come back to Iowa to vote. You have a right to vote where you go to school. The real story is Hillary Clinton doesn’t think students have the right to vote where they go to school. First she tossed immigrants under the bus to win, now students, can’t wait to see how who gets tossed under the bus in her general election.
I am afraid I used to regard Obama as my number-two, or maybe one, pick. But he started it, guys. He started mudslinging and ganging up with the dishonest Russert and the insane Matthews, who are stuck in 1998 and the blowjob. He portrays issues like the Republicans (SS) and lies when confronted with the fact that his plan won’t cover everybody. (See Krugman.) But a lot of people on the progressive side seem to have the hatchet out for Hill.
My choices? Number one, Hillary. Two, Edwards. Three, Dodd. Four, Kucinich. Down around 5 or 6, Obama. He had me when he began the campaign, but he’s just another politician.
Psst> He started attacking the front-runner for her strengths.
How anybody can regard Gore as “vapid” is beyond me. Have you been watching the news?
I’m surprised to hear that. I’d guess that video might still be on pbs.org
It would be interesting to see that here on fdl.