RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Daschle Suggests Clinton Should Can Wolfson
March 08, 2008 10:54 AM
...for likening Obama to Ken Starr...
"It's comments like [Wolfson's] that make me question whether we do have the same standards," says the former Senate Majority Leader in the Huffington Post. "I don't think that you can make a statement like that and consider yourself within the bounds of civility. I mean, this shouldn't be tolerated. It's not acceptable, and it's unfortunate...
"(O)nly one person can make that decision [for Wolfson's resignation] and that's Hillary Clinton. I'm just prepared to say today that the standard by which we judge civility and the degree of acceptable behavior appears to be different in the two camps. In our case, when somebody says the wrong thing, they're gone. It appears that in their case, normal life goes on."
Read more HERE.
- jpt
<
March 8, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (65)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Don't you love how Bradley and Kerry and Daschle keep making suggestions about how people should run their campaigns? Losers all, and all for Obama, which is what we'll all be if he wins. Obama should be so lucky to be anyone's vice president with his meagre duplicitous record. Who does he think he is? Obviously as a godsend or even the Second Coming, a belief reflected by his supporters with their alarming, unreasonable zeal. If you read history then you know that this is the first sign of very big trouble if he's elected.
Posted by: rj percy | Mar 10, 2008 2:22:04 PM
Tom Who?
Oh, yeah. That Democrat from another one of those electorally insignificant Red states.
The man has an attitude problem. Hillary Clinton should be pleased that the former (note that word, FORMER! Senate Majority leader is on the Obama wagon.
Posted by: Change | Mar 10, 2008 11:20:30 AM
Daschile is again showed his near sighted view and jealousy. He attended president campaign and ended to one of the last ones. His jealousy prompted him to support Obama cause he though you Clintons took too many glory of Democratics. Bill had 2 terms and now Hillary will another 2 terms. Come on, your victory will belittle us too much so we need to form an ally - Ted Kennedy, John Kerry - to prevent you from becoming a president.
Let me point out: 1 This group of TK, JK, TD and Obama went to blame NAFTA for bad economy instead current White House. 2. Monster is a name calling. Ken Starr is still a good American citizen with different political view in GOP. To compare an action with an action from those of Republian is not a name calling. Obama openly and repeatedly compared McCain with Hillary for Iraq war vote. Should Obama be fired?
This tells us how low judgement ability Tom has and how negative TD, TK, TD and Obama are in the primary. If you looked at their opposition to Michigan and Florida revote or recount, you will able to see that they are really at their end of wisdom.
Posted by: uscitizen2144 | Mar 9, 2008 4:01:10 PM
When I become president, I will make every American billionair. I can turn recession into unprecedented boom overnight. Every one will love each other like the othe half.
IT WON'T HAPPEN.
Obama did not vote for the war because he was in nowhere then.
Mr Daschel couldn't keep his senate seat as a leader, Mr. Kerry could not win an easy election. I doubt they have the vision to choose the right candidate.
For the sake of the coutry, I'll either stay at home or vote for Mccain if Obama becomes the nominee. Hillary is not the best candidate, but better than Mccain or Obama.
Posted by: Eh | Mar 9, 2008 11:39:29 AM
About specific proposals from Clinton. Who really thinks she will actually accomplish to the letter what she says she wants?? It just won't happen. She is of the promise but ya'll know I won't deliver school.
Posted by: Reality | Mar 9, 2008 9:45:41 AM
Yes, exactly, Daschle is right. If Obama fired his adviser Samantha for having called Clinton a Monster (I would have said a double-headed monster, if we count Bill), why doesn't Hillary fire Wolfson for his comment comparing Obama on Kenneth Star? After all, for Hillary, Kenneth Star is also a monster. Again, we see Obama keeping to his promised clean campaign, while Hillary wouldn't mind to set the Party on fire just to get the nomination. Obama 08
Posted by: Denis van Dam | Mar 9, 2008 9:27:45 AM
Mrs.Clinton is by far the best one for the job. We need to look closer into what Obama would do as President. He cannot give any specifics. People need to wake up to that fact and vote for Mrs.Clinton.
Posted by: Ed | Mar 9, 2008 9:25:41 AM
All Americans should really take their time deciding on who should be president of our country.
Obama really does have a lot of questions to answer. He can't keep saying that things are silly and boneheaded. Those aren't responses that the American people want to hear.
He is not being positive. He's being evasive.
Posted by: America the Beautiful | Mar 9, 2008 7:20:59 AM
Mrs. Clinton will do ANYTHING to win and I mean ANYTHING. Someone should ask
her if she becomes president will she and husband charge $200,000 a night to
stay in the Lincoln bedroom and will they sell information to the government of China. Why can't the you admit Obama
is the best person for the job not Clinton?
Posted by: ruthblue | Mar 9, 2008 6:12:23 AM
ditto
Posted by: chris | Mar 9, 2008 5:08:54 AM
Yeah, well there's a long list of reasons to fire Axelrod. Tom Daschle will lose credibility if he joins the whole pretense of BO not doing "dirty politics". Pitty they think everyone is as dumb as they think, maybe they are projecting their intelligence (or lack of) on to the public. Or, maybe, just maybe, THEY LIE!
Posted by: irma | Mar 9, 2008 12:39:19 AM
deb il, you are so right. but obama would never fire axelrod. as we all know, axelrod IS obama, he created him, like deval patrick, and he holds the strings. axelrod is, in my mind, an incredibly talented campaign manager. not that i like his candidate - i wouldn't vote for him if the choice were him vs. the dead reagan or nixon. but you have to give axelrod credit for finding a loophole in the dnc's idiotic delegate allocation scheme that allows his puppet to look like a winner. if obama were to fire axelrod, he'd be out in a week. i wonder who his puppet will be in the next election?
Posted by: so saddened | Mar 8, 2008 11:54:35 PM
is goolsbee gone? daschle is just a bitter ex-politician who lost his seat.
Posted by: so saddened | Mar 8, 2008 11:49:47 PM
Well said, Kent. That may be the 1st, rational comment I've read today without the obvious slant of a Clinton or Obama perspective. I agree wholeheartedly.
Posted by: Vision Quest | Mar 8, 2008 11:49:23 PM
The fact that Clinton's going negative because she is behind is standard politics. That doesn't make her an evil person, it makes her a politician. The fact that Obama is refraining from going negative doesn't make him weak; restraint in the face of aggression is a lot more difficult because striking back often appears to work--in the short term (see Bush and Iraq as a prime example). Obama is trying to be the kind of leader this country needs, and so far, I think he's done well. Clinton should be critical of Obama because doing so will prepare him for the Republicans and it is important that voters understand the distinctions between the candidates. But using cheap Republican (redundant?) tactics will only help the Republicans because they'll get to see what works and what doesn't. What both Clinton and Obama need to do is compete for democratic voters by seeing who can come up with the best critiques of the Republican policies and John McCain. Democratic voters can then really decide who will be better at defeating McCain in the fall, since most democrats (even most rational people) would prefer either Obama or Clinton to McCain and four more years of Republican misrule.
Posted by: kent | Mar 8, 2008 11:27:11 PM
This was just a smoke screen in order to avoid the issue of releasing tax returns. The Clintons must be scared to death about their financial connections.
Anyway, there will be some people to believe Hillary when she says "vote for me first, I will tell the truth later". Rather sad.
Posted by: Mark Webb | Mar 8, 2008 9:32:32 PM
All I can say is, if someone didn't already understand why the Dem. establishment and elite hate the Clinton's, they know now. The people they employ are no better and no worse than they are.....
And let us be clear, she only won last Tues. because the voters felt SORRY for her. Here you have this first lady coming off looking like a loser. And here you had this lady complaining every other day about something, so yes, people felt sorry for her.
The voters of Texas, didn't feel to sorry for her though or else it would have been a total blow out. Unlike Ohio, Texas voters are smarter. But, I can't say Ohio are stupid people or else it would have been a major blow out there too. Anyway, this is just more Clinton Crap - Kennth Star of all people...
Posted by: Brian | Mar 8, 2008 9:15:23 PM
Wolfson is right.
Posted by: joe | Mar 8, 2008 7:45:27 PM
Hypocritical comment #1001 from the Clinton campaign: comparing Obama to Kenneth Star??? Wow, I thought the comparisons to George Bush and Karl Rove were stupid, but this takes the cake! The more Howard Wolfson speaks, the less confidence I have in HRC. This is her most prominent spokesperson? Clearly, he represents her true sentiment. When Obama makes a legitimate request, by ALL standards, for the Clinton tax returns, their only retort is "Stop, bullying her. You're just like that mean right winger Kenneth Starr!" Just when you think Clinton's propensity to play the victim card can't get any worse, they lower the bar even further. Obama = Kenneth Starr, this one takes the cake!!
Posted by: Vision Quest | Mar 8, 2008 5:58:44 PM
There is not big diference between Hillary Clinton o
Barack Obama, at the end the one become President
will be doing the same thing.
Posted by: vduarte | Mar 8, 2008 5:55:56 PM
Post a comment


