Political Punch

can you post the audio of these calls?

The t-r-u-t-h comes out about Hillary Clinton! Former White House Press Secretary (For President Clinton) speaks out about the real character of the former First Lady in a PBS Interview. Search: PBS Clinton Years and read it for yourself. There are numerous Clinton Staffers who give their account of the woman who would be President.

Q: Were people afraid of her? Were people afraid to speak out against her?

A: Yeah. And I think because not only would she sort of humiliate you in front of your colleagues or whoever happened to be around. It wasn't like she did it every day. I found that she wasn't the most direct person. Although that was very direct, that to me was the exception rather than the rule. Hillary tended to kind of campaign against people behind their back, and that was certainly my experience. She was not happy with me, but she never confronted me. She never had a conversation with me about it. She would go call Leon in and yell at him and then he'd have to call me in and say, "Mrs. Clinton is really upset about X. You said Y, and she disagrees with that, and you know, she wants you to fix it," or whatever. As opposed to her picking up the phone and calling me. Sometimes it's appropriate, I think, to go through the chief of staff because it's the chain of command. Maybe she's talking to him about six things and one of them is me. But there were times when I thought she should have dealt with me directly and she didn't.

...I didn't respect that. If you have a problem with me or anybody else, it doesn't mean she shouldn't try achieve whatever outcome she wanted to achieve. But I think there is a certain grace and I just think it's a bit better politics and personnel management to be direct

Wow, good for you, Jake! That's a very good question and a very telling answer.

Now can we all move on to more important topics, like Obama's excellent economic plan?

I hope so, but I have to say, that's very good work. Highly commendable.

Hillary is just talk? Ironic that Hillary is blasting speech-making and talking during one of her speeches. It is like writing a book about how horrible books are. If we accept her assertion that promises do not solve problems but that solutions do, shouldn't we conclude that her promise of solutions are also empty? Maybe she should have written a communique or manifesto blasting speech making and promises of hope instead of verbally doing so while making promises (solutions) of her own.

The Clinton campaign is looking less and less attractive every day. This kind of attack stinks of desperation. You'd think that they would want to go down with some shred of integrity but I guess not.

Newt Gingrich has used "American Solutions" for awhile now. Seems sketchy, HRC. And please, stop being "fired up, and ready to go" a la Obama.

Obama's campaign is real, and better than Clinton's. So that's why you're upset?! If you think Hillary invented anything, you are crazy. Politics are oft-recycled. I voted for Obama because I think he is a generally honest man, and smarter than Clinton -something about more elected experience, community organizing and number one in his class at Harvard, versus ONE stinkin' year at the Children's Defense Fund in 1974, about 15 years as a State, then National First Lady, and graduation without honors at Yale. ps Guess who skipped the vote on FISA last week? HRC.

bacalove writes: Let's talk about getting Real. Just because Obama used a few lines from a political advisor and friend for a speech,

You people so need to do your homework if you think this is a first. It's only
now "some of the media" is finally sobering up and actually doing their jobs. But real journalists have been reporting on this for several months. For starters his campaign is circa Bill Clinton 92. "I come from a small town called Hope" ring any bells? It has been reported numerously how this man has been plagiarizing campaign speeches that go back 50 to 100 years. Are they really that stupid (rhetorical question) not to realize anyone can dig up the exact same speeches? I guess no one read the article about him stealing lines from McCains campaign as well or how he just happened to borrow Hillary Clinton's policies? And I totally agree with the poster who wrote how NOBama hides behind his race as does his wife. Case in point, had Bill said "I'll have to think about supporting Barak if he wins the nomination" he would've been stripped of his former presidential title castrated in the media and called a racist. But Michelle says she "has to think about supporting Hillary" and no one says a damn thing about it.

As always... this ridiculous stuff will probably work with some people. Mainly the "low information voter" AKA "Clinton's base".

Oh puh-leeze people get real and wake up. This entire mans campaign has been plagiarized from day one. There's damn good reason why the two platforms are
so much alike, this man has never had his own thoughts, words and idea's since he stepped foot on the campaign trail. How many votes has he been absent for or voted present? Every single speech he gives is written from the first letter to the final period. Ever wonder WHY they keep him sequestered from the press on his OWN BUS? Could it be their afraid the ruse will be exposed, that someone might catch or overhear him memorizing his lines? The man goes no where without a telepromter and refuses to take questions. Then you wonder WHY he refuses to debate Hillary? He has quoted JFK and RFK more times than Ted Kennedy has ever spoken of them in his entire life. And let's not even mention him constantly invoking Martin Luther King and Ronald Regan. This is the biggest farce and charade since the media sold the WMD's. People all over the world are laughing at you. You think you would've learned after Bush.

Hillary believes herself to be the master of projection-- that ever so handy trick where you throw on your opponent that which you do yourself. Reason she believes this? Because she also believes she can justify anything, nevermind this kind of justifying is foundational in all addicts' thinking in order to maintain their amazing capacity for denial. With all that going on, she sincerely won't be able to understand that her plagiarism counts too. Her enormous yet fragile ego is still safe from any actual realization about logic or fair play. Question is: how safe are we from her? About as safe as we've been from Bush. He is exactly like this.

Obama says constantly to everyone who is jumping down up to his feet in adulation that he is NEW. A near fifty year old claiming to be new - you have to give the bloke due credit for it! Either this or his electorate are willing muttons! That he does not take lobbyists' money ( which is showing up to be a complete falsehood ), that he is CHANGE ( somehow, the electorate, democratic ones mind, are believing that indeed he is not a politican like Clinton and others ). Criticise him and we lashed those that do for being rather puny-minded, have-to do-better-than-this-am-afraid brigade. Really... what nerve! He gets by BECAUSE of his race, when others have to walk the line for fear of being labeled racists ( viz the Bill Clinton phrases which were jumped onto by the really-have-to-do-better-than-that brigade). Yet at every opportunity, his adulators do not fail to circumvect the opportunities to lay into Hillary Clinton ( rarely is the media saying hey wait a minute here, Hillary is being laid into mainly because of Bill Clinton's womanising trespasses, and let us talk about issues ). And you have to check the invectitudes that are directed towards Hillary Clinton. How many would have said before that we want a politician to talk to us about issues that matter. Go do a check as to who does this on the campaign trail. It definitely is Hillary, whilst the other candidate dreamily parrot the word change. Obama IS what is wrong - part of this nonsense political correctness front, when it is quasi impossible to expose any truth about a black man that makes him out be just this - a politician with the same hunger for power. Change indeed!

Clinton says she has Solutions but the Solution she offered, when it really matterd to millions of lives of young people and to our country, was the Solution and Authorization to go to War --the Iraq War. In the Most Important Policy Decisiion of Our Times, the Iraq War, Hillary Clinton got it Wrong. Her 35 years of experience didn't get it Right then, and that speaks Volumes.....

Let's talk about getting Real. Just because Obama used a few lines from a political advisor and friend for a speech, they now want to muddy and cloud the issues by stating Obama is a Plagarist, which by definition means you are stealing someone's words or lines without their knowlege, which is a very serious Charge. Is that her Solution to make this non-issue into something it's not, to offer more Spin and Illusion, when they know full well exactly what it was and is, and because they too are guilty of the same thing, this borrowing of lines in political discourse and is common practice.

Her solution is to insult the intelligence of every day average, citizens by distorting this situation, which is total hypocrisy, because they too have done the same thing and are doing it NOW. They should apologize to the Country, for turning away from being so-called Real, as she likes to say, to puting out this kind of Slime, Distortion and Illusion into the water, trying to Cloud the issues -- to Cloud Reality! If you are going to raise doubts about an oppenent, it should be about real facts and not about illusions, about truth and not about falsity.

OK
An offer from a supporter of all DEMS with HILL first
OK

As much as I dislike BO defending himself and his style with the words of others ...I will offer the following bargain

I can agree that it is not a big deal as BO said - if BO supporters can agree that the media has been Pro Obama and anti Hillary

OK?

The point?

Well sometimes its fair for a politician to say try a hail mary pass -- if the PRESS is biased and does not listen to anything of substance
-- when other means of pointing out legitmate faults and shortcomings of BO are as useful as trying to nail Jello to the wall

(I heard that phrase before it is not mine)

I'm particularly interested in the fact that the Clinton demographic is poor and uneducated. To me, that speaks volumes. Clinton appeals to dummies and that's probably the real crux of the problem here!

From Wikipedia:

Clinton has been criticized for not giving credit to a ghostwriter in connection with It Takes a Village. The majority of the book was reportedly written by ghostwriter Barbara Feinman. When the book was first announced in April 1995, The New York Times reported publisher Simon & Schuster as saying “The book will actually be written by Barbara Feinman, a journalism professor at Georgetown University in Washington. Ms. Feinman will conduct a series of interviews with Mrs. Clinton, who will help edit the resulting text.”

Feinman spent seven months on the project and was paid $120,000 for her work. Feinman, however, was not mentioned anywhere in the book….

During her promotional tour for the book, Clinton said, “I actually wrote the book … I had to write my own book because I want to stand by every word.” Clinton stated that Feinman assisted in interviews and did some editorial drafting of “connecting paragraphs”, while Clinton herself wrote the final manuscript in longhand.

This led Feinman to complain at the time to Capitol Style magazine over the lack of acknowledgement.[12] In 2001, The Wall Street Journal reported that “New York literary circles are buzzing with vitriol over Sen. Clinton’s refusal, so far, to share credit with any writer who helps on her book.”

Later, in a 2002 article for The Writer’s Chronicle, Barbara Feinman Todd (now using her married name) related that the project with Clinton had gone smoothly, producing drafts in a round-robin style. Feinman agrees that Clinton was involved with the project, but also states that, “Like any first lady, Mrs. Clinton had an extremely hectic schedule and writing a book without assistance would have been logistically impossible.”

Feinman reiterates that her only objection to the whole process was the lack of any acknowledgement. A 2005 Georgetown University web page bio for Barbara Feinman Todd states that It Takes a Village was one of “several high-profile books” that she has “assisted, as editor, writer and researcher

As someone who was as ardent supporter of the Clintons, I feel betrayed by their actions in this primary season. I have become disillusioned by the machinations of the Democratic party, and have changed from Democratic to No Affiliation, as a way to express my displeasure. However, I still consider myself a very liberal person. I believe in this country and I want the best for US. We are in a critical stage in the history of this nation. If we blink the insidious fascists will devour us, totally. At this juncture we need to deal with the issues that are ailing our great nation, and not some petty nonsense. The brouhaha surrounding Barack Obama's use of words his friend used during his campaign it just a smokescreen being used by the Clintons. My personal belief is that they, the Clintons, were under the misconception that their candidate was an automatic to represent our side for the presidential race. However, one should always treat a competitor with respect and credit them with some abilities. Especially so, the American public should be able to see that you're making an honest effort to win your arguments without resorting to petulant behavior. The Clinton campaign was ill-conceived and ill-planned. They expected to have blown away the competition early, therefore there were no plans for what has become a protracted affair. In their desperate attempt to halt the progress of a more vital and inspiring campaign they have resorted to Rove-like tactics. Perhaps Rove is on their team and spooning out his turd-blossom advice to them. At this stage the Clinton campaign will try anything to get back the White House. Perhaps they have nefarious reasons to once again get behind the wheels of the Executive branch. Perhaps they have left something incriminating that needs to be hidden until they are dead, and the presidency is their only access. Whatever their motivations for the possible destruction of the Democratic party, as their actions have lead me to believe will happen, I wouldn't know, but we have to be cognizant of their willfulness. At this point I don't think there's an hair breadth of difference between Hillary Clinton and John McCain, and GWB. HRC and JM are both power-lusting individuals for whom scruples do not exist on their way to their prize. I can now understand why so many Republicans detest and despise the Clintons. For so long I looked to them for leadership and trusted their judgement--no longer do I wear rose-tinted glasses when observing these sociopaths.

Per the comments of Grace Adams

RIGHT ON!

From an earlier posting....

"Clinton doesn't run on her rhetoric and inspirational message therefore it's almost a non issue - she is running on experience, breadth and depth of her knowledge of the issues."

ummmmm, the experience is largely her husbands. I watch a lot of football, doesn't mean that I can play.

Canada will go down side by side with the US if the US economy tanks. The US cannot afford the war, let alone a war for 10 or 100 more years.

Many in the world prefer Obama because we are on the outside looking in. We can see the need for the US to be stable and doing well economically...we can see how the US has had its reputation ruined by Bush. The US once had many friends and now has very few.

McCain said the US is looked at as the "LAST HOPE FOR THE WORLD" - this guy is scary beyond belief.

LAST HOPE???

God help us all if he gets elected. A hot-head, war monger like him is exactly the type of person who will lead us into a nuclear war.

So I'm begging you all who hate Hillary - PLEASE - if she is the democratic nominee - VOTE FOR HER.

Don't vote for McCain out of spite. The US will tank and take everyone in North America with it.

Another point of contention with the reductive Mr. Wolfson,

Obama's campaign is not based on his rhetoric alone, but rather his ability to inspire others to action. Rhetoric is one means by which he does this.

I don't care how great your policies are, if you can't get people to come along behind you they are largely worthless. Sort of like an empty pantsuit.