Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior National Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories.
RECENT POSTS
- Panetta: Time for Clinton to Concede
- Obama May Declare Victory Before Winning
- The Ellsworth Endorsement
- The June Myth
- Huckabee on Hillary: "I Feel Her Pain!"
- Edwards' Campaign Manager to Endorse Obama
- Mr. Voting Rights Says Florida & Michigan Should Not Count
- Mike Gravel and Obama Girl
- Whither Hillary?
- Conference Call from Planet Clinton
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Carville Equates Richardson With Judas | Main | Clinton Campaign Finds a Friend at NationalReview.com -- Or Do They? »
Was Bill Clinton Questioning Obama's Patriotism?
March 22, 2008 8:17 PM
Former President Bill Clinton, laying out "the three reasons" for his wife's candidacy at Charlotte, N.C., VFW post 1160 Friday, said, "She'd be the best for the veterans, she'd be the best commander-in-chief, and she'd be the best at managing this economy."
Then he got into some trouble with a fourth reason: electability. Citing hypothetical match-ups between the Democrats and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the former president said his wife beats McCain in Ohio, Florida and Arkansas, while Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., would lose to him in those states.
"So she can win this election," he said to applause.
"And we need to change the direction of this country," he continued. "But it won't be an easy race. John McCain is an honorable man ... and he and Hillary are friends. They like and respect each other."
He then told about how she and McCain had worked together on global warming.
"I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country," Clinton said, "and people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics.
"So that's my argument for her."
Watch the remarks HERE.
As reported by ABC News' Sunlen Miller, an Obama surrogate saw in those remarks the former president by omission implying that Obama was not a candidate who loved this country -- and that his nomination, as opposed to his wife's, would mean a non-issue-based debate, i.e., "all this other stuff."
“Both Barack Obama and John McCain are great patriots who love this country and are devoted to it," said Obama campaign co-chairman Gen. Tony McPeak. "So is Hillary Clinton. Any suggestion to the contrary is flat wrong.”
To reporters, he likened Clinton's comments to those of red-baiting Sen. Joe McCarthy, R-Wisc.
"I grew up, I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors,'' McPeak said. "So I've had enough of it.''
Was Clinton implying that Obama was less that patriotic?
NBC's Carrie Dann says that considering the context of the last week -- the Rev. Jeremiah's Wright's inflammatory comments, the GOP making it clear it will attack Obama's patriotism -- "Clinton's comments could be seen as an effort to draw attention to the issue of patriotism in a state with a high population of veterans."
Andrew Sullivan didn't see it that way. No Clinton fan, he, Sullivan wrote: "I don't think he's implying that Obama doesn't love his country or is not devoted to the interest of this country (although you could, with some strain, parse it that way). He's actually hoping for a substantive, non-swift-boating, non-Coulter, non-Hannity campaign. It's pretty close to my own hope for an Obama-McCain race. Now why Clinton didn't include Obama, who is the current front-runner, and who has shown an ability to speak and talk constructively and civilly for the entire campaign, is an interesting question, isn't it?"
The Clinton campaign writes: "Actually, as is indicated by the quote itself, President Clinton was talking about the need to talk about issues, rather than falsely questioning any candidate's patriotism. He was lamenting that these kind of distractions 'always seems to intrude' on political campaigns. This is consistent with his criticism of the 'politics of personal destruction,' which dates back 16 years."
(Does he really think that a Clinton-McCain race would be a cleaner race than Obama-McCain? That seems, at best, a naïve notion.)
In any case, the Clinton campaign is now attacking Obama's campaign for likening Bill Clinton to McCarthy -- which seems interesting given that Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson once likened Obama to another Democratic bogeyman, former independent counsel Ken Starr.
Not to mention that, as McPeak referenced, in 1992 then-Gov. Bill Clinton himself once invoked McCarthy after then-President George H.W. Bush was attacking him for allegedly "demonstrat[ing] against your own country or organiz[ing] demonstrations against your own country in foreign soil."
Said Bill Clinton in 1992: "You have questioned my patriotism. ... When Joe McCarthy went around this country attacking people's patriotism, he was wrong. He was wrong. And a senator from Connecticut stood up to him named Prescott Bush. Your father was right to stand up to Joe McCarthy. You were wrong to attack my patriotism. I was opposed to the war, but I love my country and we need a president who will bring this country together, not divide it. We've got enough division. I want to lead a unified country."
I asked Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer to explain what could be seen as a contradiction.
"President Bush actually employed a McCarthyesque tactic, to which Bill Clinton responded," Singer said. "Bill Clinton didn't question Obama's patriotism."
As for the second point, Singer said, "Ken Starr raised questions about Sen. Clinton's ethics. The Obama campaign is doing the same thing."
I asked Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton to explain how Obama could claim to be trying to bring in a new kind of politics when his surrogates are on the attack -- McPeak with the McCarthyism, and Obama campaign manager David Plouffe in a full-out assault on Hillary Clinton on "character" issues yesterday.
He said Obama making a positive case for himself did not mean they wouldn't push back against Clinton attacks or correct the record.
And the beat goes on. ...
What do you think Bill Clinton meant?
-- jpt
March 22, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary, Obama, Barack | Permalink | User Comments (627)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/27365762
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Was Bill Clinton Questioning Obama's Patriotism?:
Bob4USA I appreciate your knowledge of history and articulate expression your views. I also live in a predominately Jewish neighborhood of holocost survivors and feel great kinship with and sympathy for them. However your post has made me realize that the plans of the Bush administration have throughly worked! They have made us so fearful that we cannot even make a fair judgment anymore.
My first post was simply to remind people that Democratic party needs to stick together and focus on winning the presidency... but the mud slinging against Obama would not stop. Page after page of comments with fearful undertones that made me wonder what they were really trying to say… and finally you said it. You are afraid that an angry Black man will take over one day and take his revenge on us all. He will be like Hitler. He will pretend to like us and as soon as we give him the power he will kill us all.
Until this day I really that Black people were exaggerating just a little when they described how we treated them in this country. I believe them now. Basically what you are proveing is that there is a no-win situation for Blacks in America. If a black man running for public office is articulate you see it as cunning. If hes thinking you see it as a plotting. If hes smart you call it sneaky. As if the only reason his parents paid all of that money to send him that ivy-league school was so that he could come out and wring our necks with his cap and gown.
Meanwhile it was not even the Black Panthers, Nation of Islam, or any other group of Black radical extremists you can name that tricked us into giving away our civil liberties by luring us into a bloody war for under false pretenses (where we lost 4000 of our children and counting), or crashed our dollar down to the lowest value it has had in hundreds of years! Farrakhan himself did not let Bin Laden, the radical Muslim extremist who attacked us escape while using a smoke screen to focus our attention on Hussein.
Did you know that the Bush family ACTUALLY has ties to Hitler! Did you know that GW Bush’s great grandfather gave contributions to Nazi party during the Holocaust AFTER it had began (knowing full well what they were doing)? We elected that same Bush family into presidency two times … and now we questioning this not even black but half-black man’s intentions just because he’s educated, articulate and people like him? For that alone you compare him to Hitler?
Newsflash people… we are not in danger of some disgruntled former slave coming into power one day to put America on a Hitler-like course to destruction. This country is ALREADY on that Hitler-like course of destruction and the best chance we have of surviving it is to get the Democrats back in office ASAP if it not already too late! This will not happen if we do not stop slamming eachother.
Posted by: lyne | Mar 25, 2008 7:06:48 PM
I believe that Barack and Rev Wright appear to be very motivational and ambitious speakers, however, Obama’s words are carefully chosen to be socially accepted. I once saw Obama as an eloquent newcomer who did a better job than most politicians at sidestepping issues and telling people what they want to hear. No one really knows his accomplishments (except he drafted a bill that never got passed), yet millions jumped on board because he said he stood for “change”. As much as I wanted to admire him, that wasn’t enough for me. Unfortunately, I know see him as someone who was once struggling internally and found his way, his spiritual calling that helped shape him in to the man he is today by someone who is very anti-American. He then went on to marry someone who was never been proud to be American and continues to be inconsistent about his financial transactions with Rezko. He makes excuses for these people yet is critical to family that made sacrifices to raise him. Yet, he’s still getting support because he gives a good speech. I pray that his supporters haven’t been duped. I hope if he somehow continues to receive votes and makes it into the White House that “changing America” “changing the way things are done in Washington” has a positive result for all of America. I hope he doesn’t have 20 years worth of ideas to implement a secret Farrakahn agenda to a country already in crisis.
Posted by: Jen Michelle | Mar 25, 2008 12:08:17 PM
NO, this is just another Obama stretching the facts. The Obama is really scrapping the bottom of the barrel for attacks in the last few weeks. If HIllary threw the kichen sink at him the he has obviously been throwing the dirty bathtub at her! Obama is playing using the dirtiest of tactics...the only difference is he tend to hide behind his attack dogs where Hillary and Bill is real enough to own their own words.
Posted by: Richard | Mar 25, 2008 11:13:08 AM
I'm outraged that here in the USA, two States and millions of people, are being denied a vote to determine the next President of the USA. It�s creating an unfair Democratic Primary and is unprecedented. No matter whom you are voting for, if anyone wins unfairly, the damage will reverberate for years to come. So please take the time, to take action so that all voters in the USA are heard and counted.
Let Florida and Michigan Democratic Voters Vote!
FL & MI Citizens Deserve a Democratic Vote
The fifteenth Amendment (1870) of the US Constitution promises:
The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied or abridged, by the United Sates, or any other State, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
The Nineteenth Amendment (1920) of the US Constitution promises:
The right of citizens of Citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, on account of sex.
Twenty-Fourth Amendment (1964) promises:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election... shall not be denied or abridged...
Twenty-Sixth Amendment (1971) promises:
The right of Citizens of the United States, who are 18 years old age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, or any other state...
Posted by: Paul | Mar 25, 2008 1:01:50 AM
What I find humorous is how one underestimates Clinton's cunning, political savviness. C'mon folks. There is reason behind every statement that the Clinton's make, and anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. Some of the comments I read on this board serves to substantiate the very motive that they (The Clintons) originally intended...to discredit Obama.
Consider this excerpt from Machiavelli's "The Prince:"
"To sum it up, it is useful to seem to be virtuous, but you must be ready to act the opposite way if the situation requires it. A prince should do good if he can, but be ready to do evil if he must. Yet a prince must be careful to always act in a way that appears virtuous, for many can see you, but few know how you really are. If a ruler conquers and maintains his state, everyone will praise him, judging his actions by their outcome."
Posted by: PM | Mar 24, 2008 8:43:47 PM
Is the comparison of Obama and Hitler fair? Probably not. Here is some information that may shed light on the comparison. Adolph Hitler was very cunning. He had a hidden agenda. He avoided questions or didn't answer questions in a straight forward way about how he was going to unite the people and change the government, change the economics of Germany or anything thing else. He Twisted the words of his opponents show how untrustworthy, dishonest and disingenuous they were. After Adolph was elected he showed his true agenda. Obama hasn't been elected yet. Hitler had to defend his friends and the white Aryan church there too. He had great inspiring rosy speeches that caused the people of Germany to fall in love with him. The German Arch Bishop of the Catholic Church Declared Adolph Hitler a Saint before the election. He spoke of hope, change, uniting all of the German people, the government, the military very eloquently and in a very inspiring way. Many Jewish people went to the gas chambers expecting Hitler to save them. They all believed his inspiring speeches. Check your history. My next door neighbors lived it. Everybody I have talked to who lived it has said the same things I'm saying in this post. I have read it in history books. In fact most of the speaking tactics used by Hitler are similar to those being used by Obama. Obama's connections to Rezco, Wright, Farrakhan, etc... Obama's ability to excite people and make people feel good in his speeches. This is why so many people compare Obama to Hitler fair or not. Unfortunately there are similarities in some ways. I would like to think that Obama does'nt have a hidden agenda. By the appearances of the simularities I suppose it's a possibility thats why my Jewish friends who lived during the this horrilbe time in Germany are not voting for Obama. The brave survivors I have talked to are voting for Hillary. Is the comparison of Obama and Hitler fair? The decision belongs to the individual voter.
Posted by: Bob4USA | Mar 24, 2008 7:22:49 PM
I absolutely believe that Bill Clinton and the rest of the nation should most definately question Obama's patriotism. Here is a Preseidential candidate that won't even cross his heart for the Pledge of Alligence, wear an American pin on his jacket and listens to bigot and racist remarks from a sick and twisted Rev. Wright. You bet your a$$ I am questioning his patriotism, morals, values, and character.
Posted by: Brenda | Mar 24, 2008 7:13:54 PM
PM: Actually, your quote exactly describes Barack Obama. Thanks, I couldn't have said it better myself!
Posted by: Grammy Barb | Mar 24, 2008 6:32:41 PM
More "smoke and mirrors" from Obama to try to get your attention away from the Wright fiasco, the Rezko trial, whatever. There were two reporters at the speech that Bill Clinton gave before a small group of veterans, and when the anchors tried to get them to say that Bill was saying that Obama wasn't patriotic, both reporters said that was not their impression. Should have been the end of it, but this media seems so hell bent on creating controversy and helping the Obama campaign add credibility to their specious claims, and here we are how many days later still talking about nothing. Bill Clinton was stumping for votes for Hillary. Obama wasn't even in the conversation. Whine, whine, whine. Grow up!
Posted by: Grammy Barb | Mar 24, 2008 6:29:20 PM
Bill Clinton is campaigning for his wife, so it's only natural that he would compare McCain and Hillary. If he didn't mention Obama, how can it be inferred that he is saying that Obama is unpatriotic ? Seems like Obama camp is getting really desperate and is reaching for the straws by launching personal attacks on Hillary and Bill Clinton. If this is the new kind of politics Obama is going to bring, then all I can say is : Thanks, but no Thanks
Posted by: pleaseanswer | Mar 24, 2008 5:35:03 PM
What I find humorous is how one underestimates Clinton's cunning, political savviness. C'mon folks. There is reason behind every statement that the Clinton's make, and anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. Some of the comments I read on this board serves to substantiate the very motive that they (The Clintons) originally intended...to discredit Obama.
Consider this excerpt from Machiavelli's "The Prince:"
"To sum it up, it is useful to seem to be virtuous, but you must be ready to act the opposite way if the situation requires it. A prince should do good if he can, but be ready to do evil if he must. Yet a prince must be careful to always act in a way that appears virtuous, for many can see you, but few know how you really are. If a ruler conquers and maintains his state, everyone will praise him, judging his actions by their outcome."
Posted by: PM | Mar 24, 2008 4:47:08 PM
In TX, Obama won caucus by 10%, but was defeated in popular votes by 4%.
In WA, Obama won caucus by a stunning 37%, but only won the popular vote by 5%.
What do the numbers tell us? If we transfer all the caucuses to primaries based on TX and WA votes, then Obama has been defeated by Clinton with a large margin.
The conclusion? Obama, drop out right now before you hurt the party too much. There is no caucus in November.
Posted by: No More Caucus | Mar 24, 2008 4:38:14 PM
I heard that Obama kind of distances himself from McPeak's attack by the "tone" now, but still he maintains McPeak has a "fair" reading of Clinton's sentences.
People often said Obama is a Harvard-educated intellect, he should have known this "fair" reading won't pass an academic analysis, so why he still insists on McPeak's interpretations?
Posted by: Victor | Mar 24, 2008 4:34:00 PM
here's a news flash. Hillary made a speech on a future housing plan today in Philadelphia; what's so strange is that it is so similar to the memo Obama sent out March 2007 to Federal Reserve Chairman and Treasury Secretary. Hillary has a lot of gall and what she banks on is the American people not reading...
Posted by: tiredofthelackofknowledgeofvoters | Mar 24, 2008 3:59:09 PM
I am torn between Hillary and Obama, but the way the people on this forum are spitting hate against Obama I can not as a CHRISTIAN go along with this. Hillary supporters please stop you are losing Hillary votes. I am not the only CHRISTIAN that feel this way most of the people in my chruch think Hillary's supporters just hate Obama because he is winning and her supporters can not deal with a Black man beating a White women. PLEASE STOP!
Posted by: Emilianna | Mar 24, 2008 3:39:30 PM
Well I must say that I'm quite disappointed in the Bitchy fear-based comments that Bill has been making too. I thought he would have been more articulate. Maybe he is a hack considering that hes not dumb and probably does know better.
Posted by: Janet | Mar 24, 2008 2:57:32 PM
I'm sorry Kris but comparing Obama to Hitler is just plain dumb.
Obama is not preaching hate against anybody and Hillary and Obama are much more alike than McCain and any of the republicans he was running against. My point is that the Democrats need to stop the infighting... period and see the bigger picture. The republicans to the far right who were running against McCain (and had much less in common with him and his leftist views) were at least smart enough to rally behind him when they saw he was winning for the unity of the party!
If Hillary were winning right now I would say that Obama should rally behind her but that is not the case, so I'm saying the oposite. Everytime Hillary and Obama go on smear campaigns against eachother they are just giving McCain more ammunition to use against whichever one of them is still standing after the primarys. They're doing the job for him!
Bottom line... If democrats don't begin to support eachother from now on, the democrats lose. Thats it.
Posted by: Lyne | Mar 24, 2008 2:46:31 PM
cba-you are a little twisted in your thinking about the Clintons, but that is your right.
Obama has been negative and attacking without legitimate facts; he has shown himself to be racist; he has not released his House records from the Illinois Legislature; and he is running on an entertainment ticket. He thinks that because women and ment could cry at his every word that makes hima good leader. That equals him to the Beatles and I wouldn't vote them into office either. Obama's cult-like status is scary. You know Hitler won over the masses with his speaking ability.
Posted by: Kris | Mar 24, 2008 1:58:22 PM
BARACK OBAMA DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE 2008! THANKS GOV RICHARDSON FOR HAVING THE COURAGE TO STEP UP!
Posted by: MERLE7 | Mar 24, 2008 1:39:56 PM
In my opinion Bill Clinton's so call support of Hillary is actually hurting her and the entire party if anything. The worst was when in his speech he actually said that Hillary and McCain are 'Friends' and implied solidarity between them yet did not mention fellow Democrat Obama. This shows weakness, fear, and indecision on his part to basically kiss up to McCain right now. Democrats do not want to hear that! This infighting within the Democratic party is killing them and ushering McCain right into the White house! Has anyone stopped to consider that maybe Bill Clinton might really be a HACK trying to sabotage his wife's candidacy? Maybe he's just like many other men dont really want to see their wives in a powerful position.
Posted by: Lyne | Mar 24, 2008 1:34:25 PM
There is no question that Bill Clinton is questioning Senator Obama's patrionage. This attack is right out of the Republicans books on "Subtle and Dirty" political tricks. I believe this tactic will back-fire because people who want Change realize that personal attacks are used only to divert the electorate from real issues. The real issue for Hillary is that she is loosing the nomination and has little chance of winning with out convincing super delagates to vote for her instead of Mr. Obama. Super delagates will only break ranks with the public if they are convinced that t Senator Obama is not ready or worthy enought to become president. I believe the American electorate is intelligent enought to reject this kind of rhetoric and vote for Obama anyway.
Posted by: James - Atlanta | Mar 24, 2008 1:31:06 PM
Which candidate has no details how to get out of Iraq too fast? Which candidate has no details on all issues? Which candidate waits for the other candidates to come out with speeches on major issues then copies them and claims the ideas as this person's own ideas? Which candidate twists the words of opponents to make them look disingenuous, untrustworthy, divisive, ect... Which candidate has the potential to have a very dangerous hidden agenda that could potentially hurt most Americans? Which candidate has long time associations with immoral or corrupt people. Is this the candidate who we want making decisions for you ?
Posted by: Bob4USA | Mar 24, 2008 1:06:59 PM
How can anybody ever consider Hillary as Commander in Chief when she has such a distain for the military.It was the Clinton White House that banned the military staff from even wearing thier uniforms.There was a AF Col who resigned after they wanted him to serve dinner at a formal dinner, while in uniform. This is not why I served my country for 22 years in uniform, to serve under a Commander in Chief that dislikes our servicemen.
Posted by: David Holladay | Mar 24, 2008 12:51:42 PM
Obama camp is really getting desperate now. To quote Obama "They are trying to read the tea leaves".
Posted by: pleaseanswer | Mar 24, 2008 12:36:32 PM
Both of these candidates are running competitive races to become the nominee of the Democractic party. The fact that many of these comments attack the character of Senator's Obama and Clinton are at best childish. Many of these statements have nothing to do with talking about the candidates and the issues they support. If you find Senator Clinton policies match your own, then follow your candidate and say why you support those issues. If Senator Obama is your candidate then do likewise. Stop these personal attacks and get back to the issues that matter to all Americans!
Posted by: Gary | Mar 24, 2008 12:06:23 PM
Shevotedforwar....
There cannot be such a thing as reverse discrimination until the playing field is leveled.
What? Racism is Racism.... And by the way..no one stole the White House. Quit crying in your milk. The Dems are going to lose again this November because they still do not get it. The party cannot even decide on a nominee. And you currently have the worst Speaker in the history of our government. McCain is going to win. Actually he is not going to win, but Obama is going to hand it to him.
Posted by: chad | Mar 24, 2008 12:05:31 PM
BILL? How about most americans are questioning Obama's patriotism?
Posted by: Char | Mar 24, 2008 11:58:09 AM
Its amazing to me how Hillary will blamed for all things. The passport incident were pointed at Hillary at first. The Wright incident were blamed on HIllary. The whole MI and Florida democratic process was denied, yet, HIllary is to blamed. And Obama had the audacity to go on Larry King and claimed that Hillary threw the kitchen sink at him? Well, if she did throw the kitchen sink then he's throwing the bathtub. I'm surprised they haven't blamed her for the current flood and tornados that's been happenning. In fact, why not go further and blame her for the housing slump, the aids virus and the bird/flu virus also! Why the heck not, the media is willing to do the HIllary beatings on demand by Obama anyway. All this talk of race has really pull a great big curtain over the larger issue here...that is gender bias!
Posted by: chrissy | Mar 24, 2008 11:43:43 AM
If guessed Obama your right!
Posted by: Bob4USA | Mar 24, 2008 11:29:23 AM
'm curious. Which candidate or candidates running for president excites the emotions of the people during speeches telling true heart wrenching stories of the great people of the USA then twists words of their opponents around so they sound like crooked politicians who are divisive, diningenous, untrustworhty ect...and then quotes inspiring messages from great Orators of the past? What kind of effect has this had on the people listening to the speeches? Have great day people
Posted by: Bob4USA | Mar 24, 2008 11:24:21 AM
'm curious. Which candidate or candidates running for president excites the emotions of the people during speeches telling true heart wrenching stories of the great people of the USA then twists words of their opponents around so they sound like crooked politicians who are divisive, diningenous, untrustworhty ect...and then quotes inspiring messages from great Orators of the past? What kind of effect has this had on the people listening to the speeches? Have great day people
Posted by: Bob4USA | Mar 24, 2008 11:24:12 AM
Not sure which is more telling, Obama`s giggles, his Bush-smirk or his idiotic distant smug look.
Posted by: luke | Mar 24, 2008 11:24:08 AM
Hillary was on CNN giving her economic speech. While obama has is tied up with his race problem. She is the ONLY on talking about the issues that we face.
and what she is saying makes sense. I do not understand. the people on these blogs talking about all that old stuff
must be rich-and none of the issues effect them. Now after the obama people listen to and get copies of what Hillary has said he will give his economic speech. He has copied everything Hillary has done and that is a fact. We are making a big mistake in putting obama up for president. He is not ready-he has poor judgement and he has proven he is a politician just the same as all the others.
Posted by: jgaw | Mar 24, 2008 11:08:30 AM
Bill Clinton can not open his mouth these days. He said, he only campaign for Hillary, he is only speak for Hillary. Even if he intentionally left out Obama on that statement, it still does not necessary that he implies Obama is NOT patriotic.
If Mark Twins says Some Congressmen are dogs, then it may imply some are not dogs (Because we are human being by default definition).
But if Mark Twin says some Congressmen are human being, does that imply some Congressmen ARE DOGS? No, it could be CATS, BUGS, FISH, or still very well human beings.
Logically if you state some is true, IT IS NOT NECESSARY THE REST IS NOT TRUE. IT CAN BE TRUE AND CAN BE FALSE.
Give you Media a MATH or Logic lesson. Goldbach conjectured every even number is the sum of two primes. But we have listed many even numbers are the sum of two primes. BUT THAT DOES MEAN THE REST IS TRUE OR FALSE. IT SIMPLY DOES NOT KNOW.
THAT PROVES MEDIA EITHER IDIOTS OR BIAS.
It also shows Bill Clinton is THE MASTER.
Posted by: WrongLogic | Mar 24, 2008 10:43:13 AM
Clinton is a brilliant politician, even Obama agreed to that on Larry King. So why do we question him, instead of Obama?
Posted by: Liz | Mar 24, 2008 10:42:37 AM
Obama would be bad for America, I agree. I wish someone could ask him what he means when he says he 'want's to change this country'. Change can mean so many things when it comes to a country.
Obama's church is more commited to Africa than America. I can't belive that there are folks who still believe in this guy.
Posted by: Liz | Mar 24, 2008 10:39:00 AM
I find it stunning that the Obama campaign could have found something objectionable in that remark. Certainly there was NOTHING to suggest McCarthyism. Then to see Obama stand there, arms folded over his chest, with that smug look on his face while he had one of his minions do the attack back was sickening. It was disgusting. Oh, Obama is a different candidate, don't you know. He is just like any other politician, only worse, because he pretends he's above all that. He's as bare-knuckled as Clinton.
I find it very interesting that it was big news -- I heard George S on "GMA" Friday morning talking about what huge news it was that Obama's passport into had been breached. But now that it was also Clinton's and McCain's, now that the firm in charge is connected closely with Obama's campaign =- poof! Gone! Not of interest. Can you imagine what hay the Obama campaign would be making if the firm were connected to Clinton? My god, the drumbeat would be deafening.
How about it, ABC? Why aren't you on that story?
Posted by: Beth | Mar 24, 2008 10:20:41 AM
If Obama has been gladly accepting the anti-American stuff put in his head by his "old uncle" in the last 20 years, how can he be patriotic? Can you? Can your kids?
Posted by: Liz | Mar 24, 2008 10:17:04 AM
Bush LIED about Iraq.
4,000 American Soldiers Dead
30,000 American Soldiers Wounded
Hillary LIED about sniper fire in Bosnia.
How many American Soldiers will die?
How many American Soldiers will be wounded?
She will LIE, again.
Does that make Hillary a patriot?
Posted by: JB | Mar 24, 2008 10:04:21 AM
Obama emphasises in his campaigns "words....just words" when Hillary was attacking him. He explained how words could change the nation. He then quotes famous speeches.
What about "words..just words" from his pastor?
Isn't he speaking out of both sides of his mouth?
Posted by: America the Beautiful | Mar 24, 2008 9:22:29 AM
Let me get this straight. Just because Obama wasn't mentioned he was being called unpatriotic? If I don't mention his name when I say Hillary is patriotic, am I calling him unpatriotic?
As for some Hillary supporters saying that they would vote for McCain if Obama is nominated, when I started reading blogs the first person I read that said they would vote for McCain was an Obama supporter. Both campaigns do not advocate that stand. The attacks by supporters have become more vile day by day. By the way, most negative attacks by supporters back Obama.
Now for the most important fact for all supporters of Obama and Clinton, any delegate who was named in the primary does not have to vote for whom they were pledged. They have the right to vote their conscience, not for the person who won either the popular vote or the delegates named for their state. If Clinton dropped out now with information that has come out then the delegates would have no choice. The actual votes do not count only the votes at the convention. Some of the states delegates might have changed their minds since their state voted.
I am urging all delegates to vote their conscience at the convention. Be sure to know why you cast your vote, not just because of your feelings, but because of the issues.
I back Hillary Clinton because I like the details of her positions and I don't hear Obama giving details, just promising to cause change. All change is not good without a plan.
The devil is in the details. Starting a trip with the hope you get there is not a trip that I want to go on, I want to know how I am going to get there. Obama does not give that detail.
Hillary 08
Posted by: Paul Moore | Mar 24, 2008 8:59:49 AM
It means Bill Clinton can't wait to get back into the White House. The question is - will the other Clinton be the President or a lame duck president for 4 years. Will Bill continue to mix his words around to convince the people he is telling the truth? While I'm at it how come Mrs. Clinton never made any statements regarding Mr. Clinton's sexual activities during his 8 years in office.
Posted by: ken | Mar 24, 2008 8:50:04 AM
Why can obama make a comment ex:"typical white person" then everyone is bending over backwards to explain it away as what obama really meant. So this looks like the obama camp is trying to change the direction off of the rev wright.
Posted by: toby | Mar 24, 2008 8:39:39 AM
It is alrady sickening to see Obama explaining all the time in the CNN about his pastor and his grandmother. Could the CNN people have the courtesy to give us viewers a respite of his face and words that are lies. He is like a child in the story who cried wold all the time. he lost credibility and I hope the CNN will know that no amount of damage fixing can control the damage. America has decided already.. Gallup polls decided.. Penn voters only roughly 20% will vote for him. No independent voters will lose their mind voting for Obama. So better concede that Penn are disgusted with Obama. They have had enough of Obama's style and traditional politics .
Posted by: asd | Mar 24, 2008 8:28:15 AM
If Hillary dropped out, it wouldn't change the fact that Obama hasn't won a big state outside of his own. How exactly to you think you will win in a GE with that kind of record? Barack can only blame himself and his campaign that she is still in the race. If he had one ANY other big states she would probably be forced to drop out. Someone who is an Obama supporter please explain to me how he didn't win ANY?
Posted by: Geneva | Mar 24, 2008 7:45:07 AM
We could get back to the issues of the nation if the Clinton's would knock off the personal attacks! It would be more beneficial if the press would stop fanning the flames and start asking about the issues. Obama has given 2 speeches since the race speech and that is still all anyone wants to talk about.
Principals before personalities, I may
not personally like some of the people I
work with, but it doesn't mean they don't do a good job or have good ideas.
All the Clinton's are doing is dividing the party and preparing for a "war" at the convention.This has to stop - NOW
Posted by: white mountain | Mar 24, 2008 7:14:16 AM
Of course he was. Before the news article was reported on what Col. McPeak had said, there were several posters, including myself, who had referred to the McCarthyism tactics President Clinton had used. President Clinton is not labeled as Slick willie for nothing.
By the way, do you know that Senator Clinton was in the white House when this dirty fellow had sex with Lewinsky? There's something real fishy about their husband-and-wife partnership relationsip.
Posted by: bilbo983@gmail.com | Mar 24, 2008 6:56:22 AM
Hillary is UnTrustWorthy, she praised McCain in National T.V. she wont release her Tax Info,and she wasnt against the War In Iraq, till she decided to run for Office!
Posted by: Demo Rules | Mar 24, 2008 6:45:59 AM
Of course he was, this is the guy who called Obama a roll of the dice, he's Slick Willie nothing comes out of his mouth in public unless its calculated.
Posted by: axt113 | Mar 24, 2008 5:22:24 AM
Obama supporters have stooped to a new low by comparing Bill Clinton to McCarthy and calling Hillary a "flawed candidate". I hope the American people will stand up and reject these vicious personal attacks. Hillary stays pure by sticking to the issues and avoids mudslinging. If she does criticize Obama, it is on the issues, for example, his experience vs. her experience. That is the kind of valid comparison we want our Democratic candidates to make.
Posted by: Sue | Mar 24, 2008 5:16:30 AM
My answer would be in line with others who said unequivocally NO. Seems to be merely another attempt to silence WJC. They are, like the far-right, unable to diminish him or his impact on those of us who still think he was a great President, and a President for all.
He drives his paranoid naysayers nuts! They have defied all common sense in trying to paint him as a racist, had McPeek try to ridiculously brand him as McCarthy, and on and on. Yet Ol' Bill just keeps on talking to folks, wooing voters in venue after venue.
The ("we are holy and above such, but we do them anyway or have someone do it"),incessant attacks on both Clintons are the reason HRC voters are now so defiant regarding how we will use our votes in the GE if Obama is the nominee.
We are fed up with Obama, his campaign, the press, and "the all we need is faith in Obama lock-steppers" clamoring the empty rhetoric of "hope and change"! Along with the highly denigrating mantra of "if you do not support our half-black candidate you must be racist!"
Fact is I am prejudiced against both halves of him, not because of race ( you can paint a con blue and he will still be a con), but because I see him and Axelrod as the ultimate charlatans!
I have faith, but it is not vested in Obama! It is vested in God. I need no living being as a Saviour!
I will not vote for Obama under any circumstances, and I believe the many, many bloggers, (and personal contacts, including my family) who say they feel the same! Call it anger, call it pragmatism, call it "common sense". By any label it still boils down to No Way, re Obama!
Posted by: Mike in Texas | Mar 24, 2008 4:28:45 AM
WHAT WAS BILL CLINTON IMPLYING WHEN HE SAID "I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country, and people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics. THERE ARE THREE CANDIDATES STILL IN THE RACE.HIS WIFE, OBAMA AND THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE, MCCAIN. HIS WIFE IS BEHIND OBAMA IN THE DEMOCRATIC RACE. IS THAT NOT TRUE? SO THERE IS NO LOGIC BEHIND HIS STATEMENT WHEN HE TALKED ABOUT TWO PEOPLE LOVING THE COUNTRY FROM WHICH WE CAN DRAW CONCLUSION THAT MCCAIN IS ONE OF THE TWO PEOPLE HE WAS TALKING ABOUT “LOVING THIS COUNTRY”. I, THEREFORE, CONCLUDE THAT HIS RECENT BEHAVIOR AND UTTERANCES IS NOT BEFITTING OF A FORMER PRESIDENT OF OUR BELOVED COUNTRY. WE MUST TREAT HIM, AT THIS JUNCTURE, NOT AS A FORMER PRESIDENT BUT AS THE HUSBAND OF HILARY AND RIGHTLY SO. DESERVE THE CRITICISM HE IS GETTING FOR HIS DIRTY COMMENTS. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Posted by: EVANSEA | Mar 24, 2008 4:26:26 AM
Nancy writes: "..because non of the other candidates associate for over 20 years with people -let alone preachers - who damn America and its white government."
Mmmm..NOT TRUE. On August 11, 1999, Bill Clinton commuted the sentences of 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group that set off 120 bombs against the United States mostly in New York City and Chicago, convicted for conspiracies to commit robbery, bomb-making, and sedition, as well as for firearms and explosives violations.
Maybe you can get Hillary to tell you why he did that. Then again, probably not.
Posted by: Typical American | Mar 24, 2008 4:15:58 AM
Methinks the candidate doth protest too much!
Posted by: Golden | Mar 24, 2008 3:45:45 AM
Wow, all these responses that are WAAAY off topic.
My answer: No.
Moreover, No, and no.
And a question: Why did the Obama campaign respond long after McPeak made the very statement at issue as Mr. Obama was present when the comment was made? There is a picture of McPeak and Mr. Obama standing next to him.
Obama had ample opportunity to call McPeak on the comment right there and then.
I am getting sick and tired of these manufactured outrages and scandals.
Posted by: Donna | Mar 24, 2008 3:43:13 AM
I get that people want to focus on the issues. But which two people does Bill think "love their country and were devoted to the interests of this country" I see no reason to start with this statement if Bill did not want to imply that Obama is unpatriotic.
Martin E. Marty, a widely respected religious scholar said today that Wright's speeches were mostly hopeful and uplifting. In addition to preaching hope, preachers are supposed to make us feel guilty for our supposed sins. Before 9/11, Wrights radical comments - aka "GD America" and "chickens coming home to roost" were mainstream
Evangelical pioneer Francis Schaeffer "called for the violent overthrow of the US government, yet was often solicited by Reagan and Bush Sr.
Jerry Falwell: "That our gays, lesbians, abortionist the ACLU etc. were to blame for 9/11".
"This stranglehold has got to be broken or the country's going down the drain," said Billy Graham, agreeing with Nixon's comments about Jews and their influence in American life.
Pat Robertson: "Just like what the German Nazis did to the Jews, so liberal Democrats are doing to evangelical Christians." Like Wright, he also believes God allowed the 9/11 attacks as punishment for our evil country. Yet President Bush consults him on the Iraq war.
McCain's “spiritual guide” Rod Parsely has said “it's America's destiny to destroy Islam” while Parsley labeled McCain a "strong, true, consistent conservative."
Huckabee understands the importance of keeping such bile in context AND of not transferring blame to the politicians who keep such associations.
By listening to hurtful words for twenty years, Obama speaks profound truths that every American should listen to (with their children). Frankly children get their cues from their parents' reactions to radical ideas, not the ideas themselves. It is now time for this country to grow up and stop judging a man's patriotism by what he chooses to listen to at church.
Posted by: hopeful08 | Mar 24, 2008 3:28:21 AM
Stan, check out the "creed" of Trinity.
Much stuff has been "scrubbed there, as well as on Obama's site.
Also check discussion between Obama and Wright regarding Obama's need to distance himself from wright because of said sermons, and others. Simply search "Obama Wright discussion".
As for the 1992 timeline, Obama first stated that year, then was forced to backtrack to the time-frame of "over 20 years".
Then perhaps ask yourself, as maybe others should. How much blasphemy and vulgarity flowing from a pulpit is enough to make one question his pastor? One time, ten, a hundred times, how many times?
It would not take but one time for me to hear someone using blasphemous language to call down God's wrath on my country or using profanity while supposed preaching the word of God.
Why would I stay when such seemingly contradicted the very reason I was there? I would walk out. I owe allegiance to God and my country, not to any pastor or church.
Posted by: Mike in Texas | Mar 24, 2008 3:14:38 AM
I could not get into a good school of my liking just becoz of affirmative action. A black person with lower score than me was admitted and that too on scholarship. I went to a second tier school. Is this what one calls equality of rights?... (GZ)
I wonder, did you spell as badly, or write with such deplorable grammar, on your entrance essay to the mythical tier 1 college as you did on this website. Please prove you are not just an idiot who thinks because a black person went to the college you wanted to go to, that means you were shoved aside.
Fellow white people, I am here to let you know that racism DOES still exist. I have seen its expression numerous times, and it shouldn't surprise any of you
Posted by: whiteyguy | Mar 24, 2008 3:07:06 AM
Whilst I have heard the 60 seconds of offensive language of Reverend Wright over and over again, I have not heard anything that suggests that he was preaching this hatred since 1992 when Obama joined the church.
Are we bound to 30 second sound bites? I heard an audio of the audacity to hope sermon, which was very uplifting. That dates from the nineties when Obama did join the church. Any chance he listened to that kind of language for almost 20 years? Where is the in depth reporting on this?
Posted by: Stan | Mar 24, 2008 2:27:34 AM
1. WHY DOES THE MONEY HERE IN AMERICA CONTINUE TO DISPLAY THE FACES OF THE FIVE PRESIDENTS, WHO OWNED SLAVES, ON ITS CURRENCY?
Washington $1 Owned slaves.
Jefferson $2 Owned slaves.
Lincoln $5 never owned slaves.
hamilton $10 Never president
Jackons $20 I don't know.
Grant $50 Never owned slaves.
Franklin $100 I don't believe he ever owned slaves. Never was president
Posted by: Dennis Downey | Mar 24, 2008 2:26:21 AM
Here's what we have on Obama so far;
1. Lied to the people about the amount he accepted from Mr. Rezko - from $150,000.00 now he is saying $250,000.00
(100 thousand dollars difference).
2. Lied when he said he never heard Mr. Wright preached Racism and unpatriotism to our country then he retracted again and said he heard some.
3. He had his senior economic advisor relay info to a Canadian Ambassador that his rhetoric about NAFTA is nothing but a political ploy.
4. He attended 25 years in a church which preached Racism, bigotism and unpatriotism.
5. He is involved with an indicted businessman Mr. Rezko which the case is ongoing and his name will more likely surface anytime soon.
6. He was caught PLAGRIARIZING.
7. Another bombshell that should come out soon is about his intimate relationship with a man from Minnesota. This man was silenced by DNC, Mr. Axelrod and Mr. Obama himself. ABS should dig deep on this bombshell as well so America will know the facts.
8. Obama and his wife are known to be UNPATRIOTIC americans. Obama refused to patronize the national and pledge allegiance. His wife stated that for the first time she is proud of her country.
9. Obama continues to lie to the American people. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Posted by: James RR, PA, Independent | Mar 24, 2008 2:12:31 AM
It is sad to see the Obama campaign slandering Bill Clinton for a completely innocent comment
It is important to know that inspite of all his mistakes, Bill Clinton is out there in Louisiana rebuilding homes for the victims of Katrina...while Obama camp is speaking in very degrading terms of a former President.
Obama is trying to get attention away from all the lies he has told the American People.
Too little---too late.
Posted by: proudamerican2008 | Mar 24, 2008 2:10:46 AM
mothers all over the country will identity with this. When one screams at her 7 year old smart aleck "What part of "No" don't you understand? And the child responds the "O"
Posted by: ruthmatters | Mar 24, 2008 2:08:57 AM
Just got through reading a Washington Post article that said democrats who are for Hillary are saying they will vote for McCain if she doesn't win. People voting republican for the first time in their lives! That's how much Rev. Wright has poisoned Obama's chances! Whoa!
Posted by: Lisa
I have not seen the article Lisa, however, if it reads as you state, I do believe it to be factual.
HRC voters are so fed up with Obama, the press, and "the all we need is faith in Obama gang" clamoring the empty rhetoric of "hope and change"! Along with the highly denigrating mantra of "if you do not support our half-black candidate you must be racist!" Fact is I am prejudiced against both halves of him, not because of race, but because I see him and Axelrod as the ultimate charlatans! I have faith, but it is not in Obama!
I am one of them! I will not vote for Obama under any circumstances, and I believe the many, many bloggers, (and personal contacts, including my family) who say they feel the same! Call it anger, call it pragmatism, call it "common sense". By any label it still boils down to No Way, re Obama!
Posted by: Mike in Texas | Mar 24, 2008 1:56:17 AM
Shevoted, your excuses for Rev Wright are as bad as your liberal logic.
Brian Ross of ABC admits they have hours and hours of these tapes and they are all basically the same.
Trinity has a doctrine they stress and teach and these sermons are typical.
Nothing is taken out of context, and if you continue to pull that excuse, America will laugh harder than you've ever seen.
How about the Louis Farrakhan award? How was that taken out of context?
You guys are hilarious. I'm looking forward to a 2004 redo all over again with the liberals mouths aghast in disbelief. Good times.
Posted by: Jo | Mar 23, 2008 10:37:07 PM
Jo do you pay attention. McCain is ahead of Hillary as well and will win the presidency because of all this fighting in our party. Hello to another 100 years in Iraq. You dems make me sick. We should vote for the dem no matter who it is. To vote for McCain is more of our families getting killed in Iraq. I can't take that any more. We have lost too much already. We have to band together
Posted by: moe | Mar 23, 2008 10:35:33 PM