The Chris Matthews Show: Tweety Still Getting His Hate On For Bill Clinton
By Nicole Belle Saturday Mar 08, 2008 11:00am
As the Clinton and Obama camps become more and more entrenched against each other, it's clear that there is very little that those in the Obama camp would put past Hillary Clinton. Chris Matthews, on the other hand, offers to all but campaign for Hillary Clinton and flaunts his hate of Bill Clinton for all the world to see. There is clearly nothing that Bill Clinton is not capable of for Tweety, and even he even brings up Whitewater and all those other scandals--driven by Republicans that led to nothing, mind you--as proof. Watch how his panel of Gloria Borger, Patrick Healy, Ron Allen and Andrea Mitchell all dismiss the notion that Bill Clinton could be "horse trading" favors for superdelegate votes, but Matthews just isn't buying it:
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather)
MATTHEWS: Let’s talk turkey. Let’s talk patronage. Let’s talk jobs. Let’s talk what Bill Clinton can very subtly provide in a back room. Bill Clinton sits down with a Philadelphia city committee, ward leaders—can’t he sit down with guys—superdelegates, men and women—and say “Look…” and talk turkey…
BORGER: No…
MATTHEWS: …In other words, jobs, favors later coming?
MITCHELL: You know who can? Two people in Pennsylvania, Eddie Rendell the Governor, Mike Nutter the Mayor.
MATTHEWS: On behalf of the President?
MITCHELL: Absolutely, on behalf of Hillary Clinton. They’ve endorsed her.
MATTHEWS: Can they go out and cherry pick 200 delegates by just offering things to people? I’m just asking.
HEALY: Nah, I think that’s really tough, because, I mean, this could blow up in their face in a way that would be exponentially worse…
MATTHEWS: What would happen?
BORGER: We’d find out about it.
HEALY: … If something comes out of Bill Clinton trying to horse trade on the telephone, you know, you know, with elected you know party officials or superdelegates, it could easily blow up in their face.
Login or Register to post comments.
but, do you think he WOULD do that?... i do... now...
I think Matthew's is absolutely right.
That will be part of the Clinton's strategy. They can't get a lead in pledged delegates and will trade in with the currency they have.
Not too shocking.
You know, maybe its just me but I'm getting tired of all of the bad mouthing of Clinton and Obama. It seems like everyday someone has something to say about one of them. There is part of me that wishes that the Democratic nominee was selected so that we can get to taking apart McCain.
I think you meant all but campaign for Obama.
Tweety is abosolutely right...they can and they will do whatever it takes to win. And I don't think the Clintons are thinking far enough ahead to consider what would happen if we all "found out". They just want to win and will worry about the onsequences later. Just like they never thought past super Tuesday because they figured they would be in.
would we know??? would the well informed citizens of america know??? would we do anything if we did know??? this is why we need a change-- yes we can--
Matthews is living in the past, if not in a dream world, and his repeated characterizations of Pennsylvania politics is insane. The old-style ward politics in Pennsylvania exists only in his memory. It might work barely for elections involving local row offices, but in national politics, Pennsylvanians are like most others in this country. They follow the national campaigns, and not what the bruiser down the street tells them to do. I was born and raised there, and voted most of my life there. I know.
I'm really worried about his mental health.
Was there any discussion about the Obama camp brow-beating, badgering and threatening Black Superdelegates to throw their vote to Obama? Probably not. But it is happening.
The coverage is so biased it's just pathetic. Why does anyone with a brain still watch & listen to Tweety. At best he's bi-polar and at worst he's just freaking nuts.
So does this blog and most of it's visitors.
ruffmama @ 5:
I am concerned the American people are not thinking ahead..if they let the Clinton's back into the Whitehouse...won't be long before Clinton fatigue will set in given the divisive politics that will continue.
I just don't get it....here we have a choice for an absolutely breath of fresh air who I believe will give the American people a voice again and people want a rerun of the Clintons
Has to be the "Liberal Media" getting people polarized into Clinton and Obama's battle for control of the New American Century and keeping everyones focus off of McDuke Boosh.
It sounds more and more like Matthews is hitting the bottle, again! MSNBC has become a joke and I am sure they are giving their pundits the green light to make this crap up. When viewers stop watching and buying GE products, maybe they will go off the air. They should take some tips from foreign journalists on how to report the news accurately and without propaganda.
Joe O. @ 3
I, too, wish we already had our nominee. I just wish it was Al Gore or John Edwards.
F* Tweety. He is about a half step up from FOX news. What a useless human. GET A JOB!
Bluesage @ 8:
Our entire main stream media is completely biased, this is nothing new. But the real issue is Obama is winning and Hilary has no problem with the Superdelegates turning over the will of the people to win the nomination. The should be a shining example of why we need to eliminate our whole electoral process and simply hand it over to the will of the majority of people.
The electoral college is in place simply to muddy up the whole process and confuse the voters.
Tweety said Obama made a tingle go up his leg, but his obsession w/ WJC is totally weired
RW @ 14:
No kidding, between Tweety and Russert they are Fox news!
What stuns me is that the Democrats who support Hillary are not telling her to shut the hell up about how McCain is better than Obama.
I know she wants to win and I would be content with her as president, but she shouldn't ruin our chances for a better life if she happens to lose.
Very, very selfish...
Sue @ 10:
Pretty much all I see is rows of houses with curtains drawn and the lights of TV's and Computer Monitors flickering and flashing on the other side of the curtains anymore these days.
Not much change.
Bluesage @ 13:
or Dennis Kucinich...at least he was able to hold onto his seat in the House, we need people like him fighting against our real enemies: The corporations who will be glad to see American in shambles.
For any responsible reporter to bring up Whitewater (there was literally "no there, there), or any other part of that most shameful period in American journalism, is stunning. I saw the segment. Matthews almost patted himself and the rest of our pathological press corps on the back for not referencing their old, dishonest, script. Unbelievable.
[Deleted-Sitemonitor]
L.A. Confidential @ 11:
L.A. - I like what you say.
1) - What freaking Liberal Media, that's the reason for your quotes, anyone who says liberal media without quotes is either a puppet master or one of the puppets.
2) - The New American Century is not going to be that long because we are borrowing the money to police it. No matter who the police chief is.
3) - McDuke Boosh - the King is dead, long live the King.
Dahgrostab'ph-r-i @ 20:
They've pretty much accomplished that.
Sue @ 10:
It's Sunday, I can say Amen.
Dahgrostab' ph-r-i @ 15
I completely agree. And who ever is the next president there are some real changes that need to be made. I don't understand why for the past eight years the Democrats have not been working hard to change this ridiculous system we have now. I hope they will now take a very hard and long look at both the media and the election process and make it a top priority to institute change.
I saw this story on CNN: Two senators are asking congressional investigators to determine whether Iraq has enough oil revenue to pay for its own reconstruction, an effort that has been bankrolled to this point mostly by U.S. taxpayers.
Can someone please explain to our media that not one penny of American tax dollars have gone to pay for the reconstruction, our tax dollars went into duffel bags and were handed out to Haliburton employees. Our tax dollars have gone to make Dick Cheney and Exxon and the rest billions (if not trillions) of dollars.
And thanks to the complicity of our MSM there are still some Americans who believe we are trying to make a better life for the Iraqi people. All we are doing over there is trying to rob and steal as much as can be gotten away with...and it's being done with our soldiers in the cross-hairs. It's been done while our soldiers are serving their 3rd, 4th, 5th...get ready for your 6th tour of duty! and Republicans will say they are more patriotic then us because they are willing to fuck our soldiers in the ass and we are not! God how I hate the GOP!
#18 "...I know she wants to win and I would be content with her as president, but she shouldn’t ruin our chances for a better life if she happens to lose. Very, very selfish…"
I suspect it's something like GW's desire to replenish the coffers. No better way for the Clintons to replenish the coffers than to get into the White House once again.
When Bill Clinton first ran for President in 1992, Hillary provided most of the couple's income working for the Rose law firm in Little Rock; he earned only $35,000 a year as governor of Arkansas. I think they even described themselves at the time as "house poor."
Now the latest estimates put their net worth at 34.9 million plus.
And you thought this election was about you? Ha!
Dahgrostab'ph-r-i @ 20:
I was for Gore. I was Edwards.
I will go with Obama but I donate to Nader, even though I am poor as a church mouse.
Call me Schizophrenic if you like.
Nader is the only one who will tell the whole unvarnished truth.
Repeal Taft Hartley for one.
Single payer health care for two, not universal health insurance, it is not the same.
It is Obama and if not, then Nader.
It is not a protest vote.
Nicole, what do you mean? Are you saying that the Obama folks are being unfair to Hilary?
"As the Clinton and Obama camps become more and more entrenched against each other, it’s clear that there is very little that those in the Obama camp would put past Hillary Clinton."
Well I guess every picture tells a story.
http://www.pcox.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/budget-deficits.gif
jon @ 22
I think you may be lost (in more ways than one) hon. You might want to try Red State, Freeperville or maybe Coultergeist. Don't worry, many don't really believe she's a woman so you will be safe there.
After Hillary basically endorsed McCain over Obama not once but three times last week, the Democratic leadership, senators, congressmen, rank-and-filers should have crucified her as the traitor she is. I defended her for well, almost 16 years, but now she has revealed herself to care about power for power's sake even at the expense of the party. Why are Gore, Edwards, Carter, Dodd, and other people of gravitas in the party not condemning her for this "scorched earth" strategy? She has a 1% chance of winning at this point and seems intent on risking the party's future (and finances if we pay for FL and MI do-overs) on that chance! She had the money, the fame, and the machine to annhilate a rookie like Obama in Iowa! She failed! The party needs to move on!
It is ironic that the only caucusing that Hillary supports is that done by the superdelegates, if and only if, they hand her the nomination.
But if she loses the supercaucus, then her guy Wolfson will squawk that the process is illegitimate, that only Ohio, New York, California matter. And, Michigan, too, but only if Clinton is the only candidate on the ballot. And Hillary will continue, as she has been doing for past several weeks, explaining why McCain is better than Obama.
Maybe we'll see a McCain/Clinton ticket... they both have the same problems with Obama.
If Obama has the most delegates after the primaries and if the superdelegates give the nomination to Hillary Clinton, that would be the end of the Democratic Party. Obama supporters would stay home and there would not be a Democratic coattail effect in November. Foster would lose his newly elected seat in November and this seat would once again be controlled by Republicans.
seevee @ 31:
you've heard the old saying: "i (obama camp) wouldn't put it past him (hillary camp)"
pretty simple...
sorry i meant jon's not anon's.
Any panel where mrs. greenspan is on that ignores the fact we are plunging into a depression and neither of these candidate are effectively talking/addressing the issue, is useless. By any objective observation, these pundits are totally cluless about what is ailing this country. Whoever is the next president is going to preside over a severely wounded economy, a country stitched together by a battered, abused constitution. If there is a God....please help us.
L.A. Confidential @ 32:
Unfortunately the Obama-Clinton Jerry Springer special is more important the stupid charts and graphs.
question: is "super delegates" the new term for "electoral college"?
whatever happened to the electoral college?
Rico @ 7:
Chico - you are right about PA. The old ward leaders are being replaced by younger, progressive voters who will support Obama at the polls. Ward leaders/precinct leaders are free to endorse whoever they wish at the polls on election day as long as the candidate is a Democrat. The State Party rules. I know because I am a precinct leader and there will be a BIG Obama sign at our polls.
L.A. Confidential @ 42:
omg... and oil was $30 a barrel when gw took office? I'm going to throw myself off a cliff...
The Source
It was Chris Matthews who started the lets trash Hillary Clinton craze. On one of his shows, he posed a question: Can Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton? At the time, it appeared like a fire enough question, but I had no idea he would go about making sure Obama would beat Clinton. This meant spending well over three quarters of every show bashing her. This endless time beating continues as we note. It is the reason Obama has a funding advantage. Matthew's MSNBC and Wolf Blitzer's CNN answers all questions and attacks directed at Obama.
Of course this changes when John McCain walks into the picture. Then you see the full deceptive nature of the Republican media machine. The first two comments on this page are examples of a good division job. Hook line and sinker, they are ready to half their support for the Democratic Party. Most of the talking points used on the upcoming Democratic nominee will have came from, yes you guessed it, the Democrats who are upset at the fact that their candidate did not win a primary. Both camps are guilty of this dangerous name calling game which becomes a free for all for the Republican talking points machine.
When it comes down to it, something must be done about the way in which the right-wing brought about their division tactics. It can be argued they improperly influenced the Democratic Primary process. The amount of money has served to influence potential voters in a big way. One wonders if the media was picking who they think we should have as president. I can't tell whether Obama is a product of his wonderful speeches or the recipient of a wonderful well oiled right-wing media machine hell bent on destroying Clinton. His refusal to acknowledge Clinton's attacks by the media was the reason I would not support him. A few well placed words would brought the media attacks to a halt.
I fear we are coming too close to not uniting in November. After this is posted, I predict the hatred filled Obama supporters will prove me right. I would give much to witness a general tone of unity. I cannot live in this country another four years under Republican rule. I have contemplated leaving to Canada many times. The Republicans have really turned this country upside down and the recession may go into a depression. That I don't want to live through; I rather pack up and say goodbye USA.
Joseph
This whole "I won the big states" idea as a justification for her getting the nomination makes me mad. Living in Idaho, my GE vote is worthless. Now Hilary wants to take away the results of the Idaho caucus. "Little" states count too, otherwise why include them, just let the four or five most populous states decide it all. Pure unadulterated BS.
Bottom line...whoever gets the most delegates and the number of votes should win. If not, there will be riots in the streets, and rightfully so IMO.
Why is Halliburton making our troops sick just so they can make a higher profit margin!?!?!
What a go!!! Nice job supporting our troops Dick Cheney. While these troops do something that Dick and W wouldn't do, they let Cheney's company give our troops contaminated water. They should be in jail for this. If this had happened during WWII people would be in jail.
http://vicezilla.com/views/2008/03/09/kbr-peddles-tainted-water-to-troops/
make sure you watch the video.
Actually, if you look at all the coverage of both candidates and analyze it objectively, it's Obama who will do anything, say anything to get the nomination. He'll be the same way in the GE. Politicians who do this crap in the campaign will do anything once in office to augment their personal power.
#44 - apologies - I should have addressed Rico not chico.
Ron @ 25:
If a candidate is affiliated with the Council on Foreign Relations, he/she can talk about change till the cows come home. NOTHING will happen.
The candidates you hear nothing about are not CFR connected.
When something is done about the CFR influence on American politics, then you can start talking about change.
katy @ 43:
The electoral college elects the president, not the nominee. The Democrats have tons of superdelegates, the Republicans don't.
The media has once again framed the issue for us and many have adopted the narrative. I listened to what Hillary said about McCrazy and his experience and I did not think she was saying that McCrazy would make a better prez than Obama. She IS saying that McCrazy will use his experience against Obama easier than he could use it against her. That is a true statement.
What I really don't get is why everyone is so willing to just jump on Hillary and crush her with such hatred. I'm not a great fan of hers but I respect her intelligence and her stamina to stand against this hatred for the past 15 years and keep fighting. Too many in our party are beginning to sound too much like the GOP.
We, as good Democrats, need to work hard for our nominee no matter who it is and put a Democrat in the WH in Nov.
The Iraq war problem will be off the table in November if Hillary Clinton gets the nomination. How will she explain her vote? So far she has indicated that she was fooled by this president. Well, I don't want someone that can be fooled into action as president. It would be way too risky. We already have a fool in the White House.
kaT @ 49:
Only in your subjective opinion. Just because you say it doesn't make it fact.
katy @ 38:
Gee thanks Katy, that really clarifies for me what exactly Nicole was referring to...you know, examples, quotes, and such.
EliteLemming @ 45:
I don't know where this new breed of Clinton haters came from but they obviously are not educated. Even with Bills most glaring and obvious faults . . . he did manage an 8-year regime of fiscal prudence and restraint. Clinton was able, most importantly of all, to rebuild confidence in US capital market places. That is the most important thing he did. He was able to cut unemployment by half and reduce the inflation rate he inherited by two-thirds. Unemployment and core inflation were at their lowest levels in more than 30 years. And he was able to strengthen the dollar to all time highs and to generate 4 years of fiscal surpluses, something never before achieved in the history of the nation. Clinton did in fact use those surpluses to pay down debt as promised. In his second term, he was able to stop the practice of taking FICA taxes and using them as general revenue. The Dow Jones Industrial Average did move from 2400 to over 11000 during his regime. He did create more wealth for the average individual person in this country than had ever been created before-and you simply cannot take that away from him.
Bluesage @ 53:
I'm not a Democrat, as a whole they are far too conservative for me. But, I will vote for one if they listen to someone like Nader, as Gore did in 2000.
Joseph @ 46:
examples from the OBAMA camp, please...
you didn't ask for "examples", seevee...
no need to get snippy...
After really looking at the Clinton's I have come to the conclusion that there is absolutely nothing they will not do to grab power.She thinks she is entitled to the office and will destroy anything and anyone in her path with no regard to the effect,the scorched earth policy.The Clintons will be another disaster to the country at this point in time---and as far as I am concerned are a repeat to Bush et al in many respects. So no,Bill Clinton strongarming and doing all his back room deals are just business as usual. They hold elected officals hostage and can not win without this. The 44% and 49% Pres and that is what we get with his schizoprehenic Sybil bride.
Hillary Lieberman.
katy @ 59:
This whole Clinton witch hunt began when Bill was accused of saying something racist about Obama. Then the whole thing turned into a brawl.
I'm not saying Obama's operatives started that.
But who would have a stake in pouring fuel onto a flame in this thing?
#47: "This whole “I won the big states” idea as a justification for her getting the nomination makes me mad. Living in Idaho, my GE vote is worthless. Now Hilary wants to take away the results of the Idaho caucus. “Little” states count too, otherwise why include them, just let the four or five most populous states decide it all. Pure unadulterated BS."
Don't worry. Believe me that if Hillary had won Idaho or any of the "little" and so-called unimportant states, she would have stood on a platform and yelled out that the "Skies have opened...the Light has come down. They love me!" Trust me too that if she had won them, they would have mattered. But of course, the only states that matter are the ones she wins.
I just can't wait until she explains how North Carolina doesn't matter. That will be tough even for her, but again, she can always fall back on the "Black" explanation.
Katie @ 61:
Where are you getting all this from? This mindset your in?
Bluesage @ 53:
You are so right in your analogy. I am so tired of the hateful emotional driven comments directed at Hillary Clinton. Sometimes I feel like I am on the back of a school bus in a "Yo Mama" name calling session.
Joseph
This used to be an excellent website, pointing out the lies in the media and by the right wingers. However, today is the last day I will read your site since you have devolved into the equivalent of the right wing media outlets such as FOX or Rush. This kind of trash thrown at a Democratic candidate without fact and against all known information shows you have no integrity. Sad to see you go this way, but that was your choice. Hope you realize the problems with this site and correct them. Integrity is one of those characteristics that is easy to lose and hard to gain. This is my opinion. If you disagree, so be it, but try listening.
L.A. Confidential @ 62:
so, no examples...
Chris Matthews is as desparate, calculating and dirty as he likes to allege Hillary is. He should be reminded he's not running for anything and isn't part of anyone's campaign .... but you would never know it. Shameful!
LA Confidential @ 57
Thank you for pointing out that the 8 years under a Clinton were some pretty damn good years with many accomplishments. Not everything he did was right - I disagreed as Hillary did on Nafta and some other things but overall they were pretty good years.
I do believe that Hillary is just as smart, if not smarter, than Bill and I think she is more progressive than many give her credit for. I believe with the power of the presidency she would have a more progressive and aggressive agenda. What no one can take away from her is her ability to withstand the heat and come back fighting.
As far as her vote for the Iraq Resolution I'm pretty sure she regrets everything this chimp has done in that regard but if you look at Obama's voting record on war funding he has voted just like Clinton. And had he been in the Senate at the time he would have voted just like Kerry did or the man he once called his mentor, Joe Lieberman. It's was a whole lot easier to be in a very liberal anti-war district in Ill. and be against it than it was for those in WA. It was her state that was attacked on 9/11 and emotions were running very high at the time.
i don't understand all the bickering. this election is very simple. either you want 4 more years of bush or you don't.
Matthews isn't buying it and quite frankly, neither am I. The Clintons, especially Bill, have a long standing relationship with politics and politicians, they know how the system works and how things get done. I don't damn the Clintons for this, I damn the way our system works.
L.A. Confidential @ 57:
The Clinton years were good times for the US. Peace and prosperity. No doubt. But just like football, the qb ( or POTUS ) usually ( not always...see GWB ) gets too much credit or blame ( see Carter ) for things out of their hands. Carter got caught up in the blowback by our meddling in Iran and Clinton enjoyed the economic tsunami that the age of the home computer wrought. The reason people have soured on him IMO is that because he let himself get caught f'ing around and that issue ( no pun intended ) helped give us shrub, and people don't want to relive all the attendant BS of the last time he lived at 1600... Obama gives us a clean slate. That said, I will support Hilary if she gets (steals) the nomination.
If Obama has the most delegates after the primaries and if the superdelegates give the nomination to Hillary Clinton, that would be the end of the Democratic Party. Obama supporters would stay home and there would not be a Democratic coattail effect in November. Foster would lose his newly elected seat in November and this seat would once again be controlled by Republicans
i've got news for you, Obama gets the nom there will be a LOT of pissed of Hillary supporters saying FUCK YOU I WON"T VOTE for Obama after all the Clinton bashing by so called dems....
In this case, while it might be satisfying to "blame" the Clinton or Obama camp for possible deal-making with the superdelegates, and while it may in fact happen, it seems to have been started by the Ohio superdelegates, who say they'll trade their votes for agreement by either candidate to take their concerns into account.
This is pretty dirty dealing, and shows a shift in the superdelegate allegiance from their constitutents to something else, maybe their pet projects or appointments, who knows?
Flexing their new power to determine the Democratic presidential nomination, a bloc of Ohio superdelegates is withholding endorsements from Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton until one or the other offers a concrete proposal to protect American jobs, two Ohio Democrats told Politico Wednesday.
The apparent deal among Ohioans is the first evidence of superdelegates’ banding together and seeking concessions from the presidential candidates in return for votes at the convention. It’s a practice that could become more common after Clinton’s victories in Ohio and Texas on Tuesday put her back on solid footing in her race against Obama and ensured that the battle for superdelegates will continue for many weeks to come.
Ohio Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur, one of the leading protectionists in Congress, said Ohioans have many suggestions on economic and trade issues they hoped the candidates would address.
“We have a laundry list of measures we think would be effective, some involving tax policy, some involving investment policy, intellectual property incentives to hold investments in this country,” Kaptur said. “I’m hoping superdelegates [who] are uncommitted that have the economy as their major concern will gravitate to our group and use that power to gain additional attention.”
Among congressional Democrats from Ohio, only Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Clinton backer, has endorsed. The rest - Kaptur, Reps. Dennis J. Kucinich, Tim Ryan, Zack Space, Betty S. Sutton and Charlie Wilson, and Sen. Sherrod Brown - remain uncommitted even after their state’s voters handed Clinton a decisive victory in Tuesday’s Democratic primary.
“We had a general agreement,” Kucinich said of the pact. “We have economic issues that need to be addressed. Ohio has economic issues more urgent than any other state.”
A spokesman for Ryan acknowledged that the Ohioans sent a letter to both Obama and Clinton last week in which they outlined their views about the economy, but he insisted there was no agreement to withhold votes. Ryan himself told Politico: “We want the candidates to talk about the issues important to Ohio. We all have the same issues, and we’ve talked about them. But I don’t think there’s any coordinated effort to stick together. There are conversations. It gets hard to build any kind of alliance when, in a lot of our districts, certain candidates did really, really well.”
....In the Feb. 25 letter, the Ohio lawmakers urged the candidates to address manufacturing job losses, “unfair” international competition and U.S. trade policy, with a particular emphasis on China. “American workers and industry can compete with any nation, provided the playing field is even,” they wrote.
The Ohio superdelegates’ decision to remain uncommitted even after their state had spoken mirrored patterns seen across the country Wednesday. Only two superdelegates - Dayton Mayor Rhine McLin and Georgia Democratic Party Chairwoman Jane Kidd - changed their positions after Clinton won in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, and both of them endorsed Obama.
If it's going on, it seems to have been initiated by the Ohio superdelegates rather than the candidates, though perhaps they're a hidden part of it.
[Deleted-Sitemonitor]
please help me, those BIG states Hillary won are SOLID BLUE, they will go to the Dems anyway in the GE..... so why wont any of these bobble head shows (luv ya sammy) bring it up?
Sorry Katy, just didn't care for the "pretty simple" line. No hard feelings.
katy @ 59:
At every opportunity, Barack Obama asserts Clinton is guilty of being some back room shady character who make inappropriate deals with lobbyist. He refers to Hillary Clinton as wanting this war, at times in the same sentence with John McCain. To me, this is the same kind of out of line comment Hillary made about John McCain. No, Obama is not a saint nor is Hillary.
Joseph
As a former Edwards supporter, a woman and a feminist, I have now come to believe that the Clinton's would do whatever it takes to get the Dem nomination.
She crossed a line of no return with me and can never undo her words and the damage they have caused, when she callously announced that:
Gary Hart nailed the sheer wrecklessness and disgracefulness of her actions when he said:
As a lifelong liberal and an uncompromising supporter of Bill Clinton who cheered for Hillary when she won the NY senate election and was thrilled that so many Americans bought her book, I never thought in a million years that I would ever think it, let alone say it, but: Hillary and Bill Clinton disgust me and I feel nothing but contempt for the two of them.
Good riddance to them both.
blockquote>
One person who had stake was Chris Matthews. The New Hampshire night he looked like he was sucking on a lemon but soon came up with the spin that teed up this narrative. His narrative: Hillary won because of the Bradely affect. Thereby, accusing the folks in New Hampshire of being ashamed to admit in exit polls that they didn't vote for a black man. He knew that wouldn't play well going into South Carolina if it caught on. Then for good measure, he minimized her skills and advanced the notion that she is where she is out of pity.
The irresponsibility of the press has been tragically shameful. They are advancing the dirty politics as that's what they'll focus on. I guess they don't think their listeners deserve substantive information. That's why so many people are tuning out of MSNBC. Sadly, KO turned out to be far from an Edward R. Murrow.
katy @ 67:
Well I think it's bullshit. The Jerry Springer let's push peoples buttons media circus and mud slinging. Whats important to me is what's going on behind the curtain with these candidates.
Obama for example. Obama's premise and credibility of not taking money from federal lobbyists hangs on a carefully crafted distinction. He is taking money, lots of it, from owners and employees of firms registered as federal lobbyists but not the actual individual lobbyists. But is that dealing honestly with the American people?
Public Citizen's list of bundlers for the Obama campaign (people soliciting donations from others), 27 are employed by law firms registered as federal lobbyists. The total sum raised February 16-29, 2008 by bundlers for Obama from these 27 firms: $2,650,000. (There are also dozens of high powered bundlers from Wall Street working the Armani-suit and red-suspenders cocktail circuits, like Bruce Heyman, managing director at Goldman Sachs; J. Michael Schell, vice chairman of Global Banking at Citigroup; Louis Susman, managing director, Citigroup; Robert Wolf, CEO, UBS Americas. Each raised over $200,000 for the Obama campaign.)
But go ahead and believe what you want to hear.
Bleh...
I am put off by the passive aggressive posture that seems to rear up whenever you talk about Hillary's blunders.
She's a great candidate, and I was happy as a clam when she was "inevitable"... even though Edwards had a better platform.
But now that she has slipped behind in the polls, she has taken her campaign in a cynical, self-serving direction that pisses me off because it hurts our chances for November. There is nothing more to it than that.
So, Hillary supporters, you need to knock off the passive aggression and accept the fact that Hillary just isn't perfect... and that human ambition, arrogance, and pride has been recognized as a flaw for thousands of years by many civilizations. And the last few weeks, this ambition has just gotten out of hand.
If anything, Hillary supporters should do the responsible thing and tell her, "We love you, but you have to campaign in a way that befits a woman of your dignity, integrity and accomplishments." We would all benefit.
voxpopgirl fuck you, you never supported either Clinton. I would be willing to bet if they both died in a plane crash tomorrow you'd be happier than shit. It's people like you that lap up the MSM SHIT and tout it as if you're some professor...Clintons words have been taken out of context period, end of story..hell she could say the sky was blue and you'd say she said the sky was blue because of her and her weather skills, that monster! pfft go fuck yourself you phoney
I don't think hillary should become president. I mean look at their body count. Everyone who works for them in some capacity has a knack for commiting suicide by shooting themselves in the back of the head, being thrown onto train tracks etc. What kind of body count do you think she'll have this time.
clintonistas seem to have the same temper problem as do the bushies
david
fuck off and go snort some coke with Obama
L.A. Confidential @ 57:
But they still keep trying. It's all about the Clenis. I think his detractors should get over their "Clenis envy." I was too young to retire while he was in office when the economy was great. My 401 is down the tubes and so is my conventional pension plan (I'm still ony 45 btw), but according to some all of the negatives after he left office are attributable to Bill, and all thye positives are because of Reagan. Give me a fucking break already.
Joseph @ 65:
I don't support Hillary but certainly concur with your big picture reasoning. Let's shred the Republicans, not ourselves.
the clintons are monsters really. Murderers and elite organized crime. I didn't believe it until I started reading into their backgrounds. Criminal Trading, Murders, Multiple suicides by gunshot, shotgun to the back of peoples heads Look at how many state police and bodyguards the clintons had that died by suicide like 16 seems a bit much.
steve @ 87:
Not really I could probably point out a pimple on an Obamahians face (politely and delicately) and they would probably go ballistic.
"Hey man your mean!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who in the hell do you think your ARE BUDDY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOUR EVIL MAN YOUR ONE OF THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
erick @ 88:
actually bill clintons nose was like a vacuum cleaner...... so was george bush....doesnt every pres?
bmw 528 @ 91:
Fuck ourselves. This is a two part system; Fuck Others or Fock Our selves. We're Fuck Ourselves.
david @ 92:
And according to Jerry Falwell the incarnation of Satan himself.
LOL
Anon @ 90
"But they still keep trying. It’s all about the Clenis. I think his detractors should get over their “Clenis envy.” I was too young to retire while he was in office when the economy was great. My 401 is down the tubes and so is my conventional pension plan (I’m still ony 45 btw), but according to some all of the negatives after he left office are attributable to Bill, and all thye positives are because of Reagan. Give me a fucking break already."
Many, many people who live in the USA are more morally outraged by Bill's oval oriface comings and goings than by the hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths in Iraq. You know...the "Pro Life" crowd.
L.A. Confidential @ 93:
wtf?
We are back to coming to the defense of the Clintons once again--it will continue and again we have the drama and all of the handwringing about how maligned and mistreated they are.Oh and if one dares to show disgust at their tactics naturally it stand to reason it is because one if a Clinton hater. I dislike her for many many reasons but the final straw was her statement on her and McCain being ready for the job and Obama not. Hence Lieberman.She needs to be on a ticket with McCain --it truly is a better fit for her---oh yes check out her voting record and her speeches over the last years and then tell me how she is such a fine leader. FYI --Hastert's seat goes to Dem with an ad and support from Obama.How many of the insignificant and not important states are clamoring for her support?? how many down ticket candidates are going to just beg her to come and campign and help?? The list is endless with the shenanigans of the Clintons and I for one do not want a repeat----as a woman and a Dem have had enough of her dissing and maligning ----and yes for the second time I do dislike her and her campaign --we can have more of Penn.Carville,Wolfson,et al ---what a refreshing change for our political landscape right???
I'm no HRC fan but what is Tweety accusing them of? Engaging in politics? Get real Tweety. I'm just waiting to see Olberman backhand him one day on the air.
steve @ 98:
I'm disappointed (not angry) that so many Obama supporters are so bitter and consumed with hatred.
And don't try to tell me they aren't.
L.A. Confidential @ 101:
Yeah, but its ture blue old-fashioned American self-loathing.
OT but I'm about to scream....Doug Feith is coming out with a new book called War and Decision where he blames the Iraq fiasco on Colin Powell, the CIA and Tommy Franks. The article was from the Washington Post. Sorry for OT stuff but my head was about to explode.
L.A. Confidential @ 101:
I completely agree. But it's only true if you support Hillary. Don't forget he's a saint who can do no wrong.
Katie @ 99:
Well at least your not saying She Endorsed McCain Man!!!!!! I saw it on YOUTUBE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thats promising. Maybe there's hope the Dem Party can reconcile and unite at some point up and coming here and do what we should be doing. Which is keeping our eye on the McBall.
L.A. Confidential @ 101:
And you sir, are just a ray of sunshine.
L.A. Confidential @ 101:
some of them are directing it badly I admit, I'm pretty sure the hatred is towards the politics of divide and collect the spoils in recent history have accomplished nothing
EliteLemming @ 102:
Thats right. All I'm trying to do is say look people, Dems, when we start fighting amongst ourselves it's Finished.
Nope. No one wants to listen. And thats exactly what the Cons and the CIA controlled Media is trying to do.
mo_dem @ 107:
I can't wave a magic wand and everything suddenly becomes Sunshine and Puppy Dogs.
Joseph @ 78:
well, could be subjective or relative, however you lean... i haven't heard it that way...
you still have not provided examples - quotes, linked articles, etc...
and, i am voting for the democratic candidate.
L.A. Confidential @ 109:
LA, do you ever skip over to Larry Johnson's blog? noquarterusa.com? He's got some interesting points that truly scare me for November. It seems the right wing is squirrling away the really nasty stuff about Obama until after he wins the nomination.
L.A. Confidential @ 109:
by that reasoning hillary should drop out right? the math is not kind to her
katy @ 111:
I am not going to work that hard to prove something obvious. Especially when you have not provided an example with links for your point. If you think you can intimidated me with academic hurtles, you are wrong. I don't want to go that far to prove you wrong more than I would respect your right to have a different opinion.
Joseph
steve @ 113:
NO. Then they'll come out saying "see the Dems are quitters, weak and spineless, can't get it together, divided, fighting and bickering, unorganized. This is the party you want protecting the United States?"
Strawberrybitch @ 112:
No I haven't. But I'll check it out. As far as the right wing, I suspect what they have in store for Obama is going to make this inter party squabbling look like Sesame Street.
These are the exact symptoms of hypnosis when a person thinks that Chris Mathews is hurting Hillary Clinton. In the days ahead we will see more of the double-whammy effect of ethical violations as the rule in television broadcasting. It was, in the nineties, called "outside the envelope." The mission is to elect Hillary. The misssion is also to insult us yet at the same time tantalize us with things we shouldn't care about...the magazines at the checkout line. Never mind the cost of groceries. Hypnosis.
The next phase, as Obama climbs even closer to victory, is for the MSM to claim "fatigue" with the whole bickering aspect....see Bush V. Gore.
BTW: Haven't seen Michelle Obama on television lately. Noticed?
L.A. Confidential @ 115:
you cant have it both ways.... they are bickering now no?
Dahgrostab'ph-r-i @ 27:
He sounds like most of the "democrats" on this and other blogs.
I havent seen such vitriol towards the Clintons since Bill was President and the Right wingers were spewing it.
Its sad whats become of MY party.
Totally hate filled.
steve @ 118:
Every time Clinton and Obama have attempted to make peace, and they have many times the CIA controlled media tosses another bucket of chum out to the masses.
It's getting really old that ignorant people are taking the bait.
L.A. Confidential @ 121:
I agree!
not trying to "intimidated" you, joseph... not into "academic hurtles" either...
plenty of links to hillary's slams and cuts on C&L alone, but you were the one who said - "Both camps are guilty of this dangerous name calling game...", and so i asked for examples from obama's camp... that's all...
and that's all...
Bill's background shenanigans is why I switched my support from Hillary to Obama. Hillary is smarter and probably more competent. But if she gets in, the Democratic party machine wins. No delegate should be a super-delegate. That's undemocratic. One person, one vote. One delegate, one vote. If the democraps let the super-delegates void the will of the voters, I will cheerfully vote for John McCain, because at least he will have been democratically chosen by his party. I would forever swear off the Democrats.
How bout this one from Obamas Blog.
"I'm an Independent voter. My first choice for President is obviously Obama, as I am here.
We need a strong message to counter Hillary. Personally, if she gets the nomination I will NOT vote for her in the Fall. McCain will get my vote, sadly."
Does anyone ever think is this poster a CIA Spook?
katy @ 123:
Yes, likewise here, link me to those Obama slams Hillary.
As many as you have, in the sense of fairness.
leaving today with a very good article perhaps you all might like to read...
and also saying...come on you young people do this one for us!!! If ever there were a time that the future belongs to you it is now. Go for it...we need you to stay informed and interested in the election process and vote. Take us away from a return to the Clinton years.....
http//www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/20/201332/807/36/458633
EliteLemming @ 95:
Only to an intractable cynic. We can rebuild what the republican troglodytes gave torn down in the last 8 years. It will take time, but more importantly, we need to believe that we will succeed.
L.A. Confidential @ 116:
that is to be expected - from republicRATs...
but, at least it will be "new" and "improved"! ... not the same o same o...
and larry johnson is a rabid hillary-ite... he is not helping the "party" either...
i really really really hate that dems are putting down dems who don't deserve it... i mean, from "i am so honored to be here with barack" to
"shame on you!" for weeks old flyers... whew! i was dizzy... and then severley disgusted when she kept going deeper... very sad...
Biggus Diggus @ 124:
Well looky here. Not quite CIA material though. Basic Freep.
L.A. Confidential @ 125:
There are spooks all over the place.
I want to see links where Obama, in the flesh, slams Hillary. I have links where she slams him, I want a balanced picture.
Biggus Diggus @ 124:
Don't go over to the dark side, Luke. The repubs pray to their god of deception and fraud that you will.
Bluesage @ 53:
Bluesage,
You, I and a few others have been beating our collective heads against the stone wall of Senator Obama's supporters, trying to get them to understand that by acknowledging a truth, that Senator Clinton was attempting to insulate herself from the "experience" attacks by the Republicans, should she win the nomination.
I was slammed for hours last night here on Crooks & Liars for posting that simple truth. But as another poster made a point last night, what we Senator Clinton supporters say tend to fall on deaf ears. Especially since Senator Obama praised former President Reagan right before the Nevada caucuses.
Larry Johnson, like most of Hillary's supporters, profit off of TERROR! The thought of the commercialized version of TERROR! leaving our shores is well..TERRORIZING to them.
Now comes Chris Matthews, a smarmy ball of terror unto himself. Poor guy is like a drunk who dances for pennies to buy more booze
But what the hell is this: is Clinton trying to be the new white female leader of the Nation of Islam??
YEE-HA!
CNN is airing this now as I speak- she's campaigning in Katrina devastated Mississippi -dressed to the hilt, standing on a regal flag decked platform, at a podium, with her voice at a pitch that'll shatter the levies again if she doesn't tone it down. But standing at her side are not flocks of victims. No -she must have hired the two biggest and blackest men in Mississippi, in suits and in stiff military posture, who stand stiffly at her sides.
What other purpose was that visual meant to infer?
What next -will she don dreadlocks and a backpack to campaign in Oregon?? Will she tweeze the shit out her eyebrows to campaign in Puerto Rico?
This is all so sickly desperate -but hysterically and sadly entertaining -in a bad baaaad way!
L.A. Confidential @ 116:
So the message is..."Don't vote for Obama cuz they might have dirt?" That this comes from a Hillary supporter doesn't tip you off? Apparently it's working since you are falling for it. Do you think they don't have "nasty stuff" about Hillary? No matter who the nominee is, they are going to have dirt thrown at them.
After years of the media blowing smoke up our ass, you haven't figured out that if they are attacking Obama it's because THEY don't want him. Both Hillary and the republics are throwing dirt at Obama. Why do you think that is?
Obama hasn't slammed Hillary. The media just claims that both sides have gone negative so that they can appear impartial. But everyone knows that a Clinton nomination guarantees continuity of Coulter-style politics, which is what they love. I mean Drudge is probably creaming himself with Clinton nostalgia.
katy @ 129:
anon @ 4:
Did you follow the link? I do not really agree with the interpretation, but Nicole wrote exactly what she meant.
As far as not putting anything past the Clintons, exactly on what basis would one claim they had any ethical standards beyond personal victory in the contest at hand? I haven't seen any evidence of such character from them.
16,000+ Republicans crossed-over in Ohio's Democratic Primary in Cuyahoga County alone.... I wonder who they voted for.
How is this hate? Hasnt Chelsea gone out with a 22 yr old superdelegate? I am sure both sides have offered favors to the superdelegates... I dont see the 'hate' maybe because I dont see her as a victim, she is just too evil, she has crossed the line on hate several times. Methinks the author is trying to create controversy where none exists, this is exactly the kind of rabble rousing that Fox does to bury their opposition, this is exactly what Shillary wants people to keep saying .. Bill Maher had it right when he said "Hillary loves to play the victim, her latest ad says 'Someone please take my purse and leave me alone' ".
Janet Hussein @ 135:
I said I am voting for Obama or Clinton. NOT MCCAIN or the NEOCONS.
See it. Study it, think about it. ABSORB IT.
Janet Hussein @ 135:
Janet, for cryin' out loud, that not what we're saying. THINK! We need to get this shit out BEFORE THE GENERAL! That's what the primaries are for. I like both Obama and Clinton, but I saw Clinton get hammered during the 90's and she's still here. I don't want to see the same thing happen to Obama. It will stifle his presidency if he manages to beat McCain. The repugs haven't even begun to throw the Iraq/ Iran/ communist connections yet. Why is that? Because it's their weapon for after the primaries. They are not afraid of Obama.
L.A. Confidential @ 116:
Are you retarded, you are acting like a Shillary tool parroting their line. If the repubs attack him, we will all unite and handle that, no reason why her campaign has to repeatedly cross the line and go out of its way to attack him.
Phoenix - of course the obama supporters understand that "Senator Clinton was attempting to insulate herself from the “experience” attacks by the Republicans, should she win the nomination."
but, someone as smart and talented as hillary should have come up with a better way of saying so without deliberately taking down obama...
but then, abused people either use that experience for betterment or turn to abusing others... i would think she would want to be done with it...
i'm very disappointed to think i'm wrong about that...
Strawberrybitch @ 143:
Can you enlighten me on the Iraq/Iran communist 'connection'. Are you suggesting BO is a communist arab? Please tell elaborate, let us all hear what Hill supporters think of BO.
mo_dem @ 139:
The bigger question is who will they vote for in November. Repugs are evil. I wouldn't put it past them to vote for Obama now just to vote for McCain in November. These are the people who vote party over country everytime. PS isn't Cheney from Wyoming?
Ive seen more Republicans saying they will vote for Obama than I care to share.
Those crossovers in Ohio Werent for Hillary. They were for Obama.
hazmaq @ 134:
Why do you hate women?
TheEnticer @ 147:
That's my point. The connections are weak at best but the repugs will spin it as see BURRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA is secretly in league with terrorists. You and I can see the connections as bullshit, but most repugs think only in black and white. That's why this shit needs to be hashed out NOW!
TheEnticer @ 144:
How is pointing out deficiencies attack? Or is it you fear Obama might not be the perfect unblemished candidate you want him to be?
Strawberrybitch @ 152:
Wingnut inventions that Hillary supporters are using now to scare people. I've seen reich wing blogs (or maybe that's clinton supporter blogs - who can tell the difference these days) that "connect" Obama with Saddam Hussein for chrissakes. Of course it all goes through Rezco and some scary sounding iranian businessmen.
Phoenix Justice @ 133:
Welcome to the Club.
No one seems to want to answer my questions.
Is it because I quote Chomsky and Nader. I haven't gotten to Michael Parenti yet.
There are others.
Government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations… and their buddies.
I am sticking around just to prove that most folks here are moderates.
Maybe it will help take the sting the far right wingers seek to cause with their invective of 'liberal'.
It will also help you win in November.
I still want to see links where Obama slams Hillary. For the sake of balance.
mo_dem @ 154:
You can't even tell the difference between a Democrat and a Right Winger thats not a good sign.
mo_dem @ 154:
Nevermind. You really can't see it? I'm not trying to scare anybody. Jesus Friggin' Christ. If you can't see that republicans are trying to pit dem against dem or manipulating votes or saving the big salvos for November than I can't help you. Even if it is just bullshit, a prudent person would plan for it anyhow.
L.A. Confidential @ 155:
That is an outright lie. You are lying and taking what Obama said out of context. Here is what he said,
"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 that 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.
I think Kennedy, twenty years earlier, moved the country in a fundamentally different direction. So I think a lot of it just has to do with the times."
Now after reading that, can you still say "Obama praised Reagan"?
These people, the Andrea Mitchells, the Tweety's, and all the talking heads who need to fill TV time are ruining this election with their theories, plants, and sensationalized langauge. It's disgusting that the FOX News model has taken over.
Login or Register to post comments.