- White House Reacts to Bob Woodward Book; Revelatory ABC News Interview From 2006
- Biden Blasts 'Deafening' Republican Silence on Key Issues
- In First Official Party Ticket Appearance, Palin Comes Out Swinging
- McCain Green Screen -- By Design or Accident?
- The Note: McCain Takes Fight to Obama’s Turf
- Police Clash with Demonstrators, Make Arrests at RNC
- Obama: Surge Succeeded But Too Costly
- Report: McCain Rips Bush in Woodward Book
- Rove: Palin Could Be Worth Three Points for McCain
- Obama Camp: It's not 1988
- Biden calls Palin 'Lieutenant Governor'
- Potential "First Dude" Todd Palin Speaks at Cindy McCain Tribute
- Lott: McCain 'Not a Great Orator'; Speech Won't Top Palin's
- The Note: Palin a Hit, and McCain Bats Next
- Biden's Gloves Come Off ... Against 'Sexist' Media
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Richardson, Bill
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Miss Iowa 'Moved' By Clinton, Supporting Edwards | Main | Giuliani Says Kerik Indictment Is 'Very Sad… Very Serious' »
Clinton Camp Admits To Planting Questions
November 09, 2007 9:06 PM
ABC News' Eloise Harper Reports: The Clinton campaign has admitted to planting questions in Iowa. They have confirmed that a campaign staffer approached a student to ask Sen. Clinton a question about global warming during a campaign stop at a biodiesel plant in Newton, Iowa, on Nov. 6.
The story was first reported by Patrick Caldwell, a junior at Grinnell College and the features editor of The Scarlet and Black college newspaper. He reported that student Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff was approached by the campaign to ask a question. She told the reporter that "they wanted a question from a college student." She also said that she "noted that staffers prompted Clinton to call on her and another who had been approached before the event, although Clinton used her discretion to select questions and called on people who had not been prepped beforehand. Some of the questions asked were confusing and clearly off-message."
Clinton Campaign spokesperson Mo Elleithee tells ABC News that "on this occasion a member of our staff did discuss a possible question about Sen. Clinton's energy plan at a forum. However, Sen. Clinton did not know which questioners she was calling on during the event. This is not standard policy and will not be repeated again."
The staffer still remains with the Clinton campaign and they would not reveal his or her name. The campaign did not comment on whether this is the only time they have planted questions among audience members.
Last month Clinton got into a tough exchange with Iowan Randall Rolph at an event in New Hampton, Iowa. She accused him of being a plant from another campaign and the two engaged in a heated back and forth. The exchange prompted extended media coverage.
November 9, 2007 in Vote 2008: Democrats | Permalink | User Comments (189)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/23214390
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Clinton Camp Admits To Planting Questions:
Good to hear Hillary will not be having her campaign doing this for her again, guess that happens when you get busted, aye?
Posted by: Tess, California | Nov 9, 2007 9:44:04 PM
Those Dorothy Dix type questions for Hilary Clinton; in the Australian Parliament every day in Question Time every second question is one that the receiver knows is coming. They're usually written it! It's a great way to damage the opposition party and make yourself look good by being on message consistently.
Posted by: Graham | Nov 9, 2007 9:51:38 PM
Hillary looks like she has been busted, by looking at her picture at the start of this story.
Posted by: Allen | Nov 9, 2007 9:58:18 PM
I love how she accuses Mr. Rolph as a plant. She gets hit with a serious question, and all of a sudden its a plant? Isn't funny how people accuse others for what they themselves are doing.
Posted by: Kiara Ashanti | Nov 9, 2007 10:03:06 PM
Who cares? Hillary is the nominee.
Posted by: TexBork | Nov 9, 2007 10:07:18 PM
the clintons has done more for this country, than the republicans have in the last 20 years of tgere presidentency
Posted by: james lentz | Nov 9, 2007 10:11:58 PM
When FEMA has a fake news conference there are dozens of comments blaming President Bush, but when Hillary Clinton does essentially the same thing she fades almost no heat over it. Gee, aren't liberals a hypocritical bunch?
Posted by: Sam_j | Nov 9, 2007 10:12:33 PM
When have the Clintons ever done anything straightforward or honest? NEVER! They are quite the duo of deceit. Hey James Lentz, have the Clintons ever lowered your taxes?
Posted by: cbeargal65 | Nov 9, 2007 10:19:10 PM
The women is a fraud who exhales a lie with every breath she takes. What I don't get is she will even lie when she doesn't have too. I think there is a medical term for that.
Oh yeah, it's call Liberalclintonism, and the only known cure is a dose nominationnotus.
Posted by: Big D | Nov 9, 2007 10:22:13 PM
Do not trust Clinton or Bush. Do not trust either political parties. Both parties are completely infiltrated by corporate interests that are willing to dump money into both sides to ensure influence.
Posted by: Brent | Nov 9, 2007 10:23:12 PM
I wonder how Hillary feels to be busted she looks very sad in her picture.
Posted by: ncfoothills | Nov 9, 2007 10:26:17 PM
I don't know about Bill, necessarily, but Hillary has never done anything significant. Don't compare her with the Republicans, yet... She's got to win the nomination over her fellow Democrats, first... and it looks more doubtful every day...
Posted by: Carl | Nov 9, 2007 10:33:26 PM
She is a fraud just like her .. eeer .. husband.
Posted by: Scott | Nov 9, 2007 10:35:39 PM
Hey, I despise all the Clintons and gang but I want her to win so she can fight with with one of the publics...they all suck! I bet is she's up in the polls and is the nomineestress she won't debate anyone....get the popcorn...if she wins I gonna live off the system, you bet!
Posted by: bob | Nov 9, 2007 10:42:57 PM
Politicians always do this. It's not big news...except that it's being talked about publicly for the first time.
Posted by: rick | Nov 9, 2007 10:51:19 PM
Clinton = (Bush - War - Ignorance) = (Intelligent manipulation of people in Quest for power)
Posted by: RW | Nov 9, 2007 10:54:39 PM
Hillary will win the nomination regardless of what he thinks or the others that make comments about her. She also has the best chance of becoming president. So, face the facts. When that happens, you can start by biting your nails first then hit your head against the wall. This is how life is you lose some and you win some. Things don't always turn out the way you want them. There are downfalls in life just deal with them.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Nov 9, 2007 10:54:45 PM
Oh, I have never read so many comments about Hillary that appear to be coming from persons that are very jealous of the fact they have not yet progressed in life and may never. Hillary is highly educated, intelligent, an attorney, first lady and senator. Those that make these rash comments about her I wonder how far they succeeded if any at all.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Nov 9, 2007 11:07:37 PM
No big deal...politicians do this all the time...Hillary should just be more careful right now.
Posted by: bill | Nov 9, 2007 11:08:26 PM
yes James Lentz I agree with you
they have done more for this country
like whitewater, bimbo eruptions, selling technology to China, travelgate, Lewinsku, vince foster etc etc...
I do not want to go back to the years of the clintons..oh by the way what did clinton do while we were being bombed around the world and why did Berger distroy classified documents..what were the Clintons trying to hide??
Posted by: michele | Nov 9, 2007 11:33:44 PM
Hillary and Bill are both scam artists. They will do anything they can to get elected or to make a buck. This goes all the way back to Arkansas.
Posted by: Bud Smith | Nov 10, 2007 12:15:47 AM
Standard Clinton procedure. Stories like these continue to add to her negatives as someone who's phony, no personal convinction that she's willing to share because if that were to happen, everyone would bail.
Posted by: Getalife | Nov 10, 2007 12:17:08 AM
Please name what things the Clintons have done FOR this country. I know the things they have done TO this country.
Posted by: Louise | Nov 10, 2007 12:22:48 AM
I think it's wrong for Bush to pad his seats with friendly's at speeches and I think it's wrong for people to plant friendlies to ask them questions. What's worse is those who dismiss it as OK because "everyone does it". I wish the American voters would wake up and make wholesale changes in the system. The only way to do that is to vote incumbents out of office. It sends a big message.
Posted by: dk | Nov 10, 2007 12:32:30 AM
Do you know how to tell when Hillary Clinton is lying? Her lips are moving! An oldie, but TRUE!
Posted by: Earl | Nov 10, 2007 12:36:37 AM
Why does she have to do these things. She is already the President. Rothschild - a name that will be forever remembered. Look it up, and you will find interesting connections.
Posted by: CounterSicilian | Nov 10, 2007 12:37:41 AM
Clinton's did more than Repubs? For which side lets recall, ignore terror for years, made sure enemy's better armed than military, gave us regressive taxes decades later still being felt, armed enemy with nuclear technology, refused OSAMA BIN LADEN, glad you see them in rose colored prisms, hope this puts the finishing touches on a failed campaign, she flips faster than John Kerry.
Posted by: notforhillary | Nov 10, 2007 12:39:16 AM
bill clinton left this country 3 trillion dollars to the good - how else do you think bush was able to begin funding his war - hillary will win - she will do a good job and after bush it is a going to be a tough job to do -
Posted by: skyz | Nov 10, 2007 12:43:20 AM
I was supporting Hillary but after all the scams she has pulled lately I don't think so . This cockroack(Hillary) is not getting my vote anymore. People kept telling me she was going to pull something shady and I did'nt believe them . Now I understand what they meant . I can't believe I thought she would run a clean race . She has proven to me that she will do whatever it takes to win for herself not for me or you . She wants to win this for her personal gain ... that's what she is portraying so far.
Posted by: I'mdonewithhillary | Nov 10, 2007 12:51:47 AM
After Presidemt Bill Clinton,the view of behavier he gave this countries youth,along will come his wife, Who stood by her husband,not giving a lick,not only what this will do to her own child,but this nation...try to gain the highest position in the land with the best machine money and power can get you ....thier can only be bumps in the day to day running of this.
Posted by: phillip fuger | Nov 10, 2007 12:58:27 AM
Bill's going to have to tell her how to run the country if she knows what's good for her.
It's too bad that all the women in this country are going to vote for her just because she is a woman. Of course, what other choice do they have? Other corporatists like Feinstein and Pelosi are no better and there are no female Russ Feingolds out there.
Posted by: Ranta | Nov 10, 2007 1:04:16 AM
"Those that make these rash comments about her I wonder how far they succeeded if any at all. . . .Posted by: Mariann Pepitone"
It doesn't appear that you have advanced too far yourself. If you had, you wouldn't need to resort to insults, but would be able to concrete reasons for you support of Hillary. Yes, she is highly educated, very intelligient - AND a LIAR. Who, in heaven's name, could possibly be jealous of HER? Some of us do not order our live by an unquenchable thirst for power.
Posted by: mzsally | Nov 10, 2007 1:05:22 AM
oops - pressed submit button before proofreading :(
"Those that make these rash comments about her I wonder how far they succeeded if any at all. . . .Posted by: Mariann Pepitone"
It doesn't appear that you have advanced too far yourself. If you had, you wouldn't need to resort to insults, but would be able to give concrete reasons for your support of Hillary. Yes, she is highly educated, very intelligient, etc. - AND a LIAR. Who, in heaven's name, could possibly be jealous of HER? Some of us do not order our lives by an unquenchable thirst for power at ANY cost.
Posted by: mzsally | Nov 10, 2007 1:09:43 AM
the = that* wheres the damn edit button here:)
Posted by: Rexblade | Nov 10, 2007 1:13:14 AM
Now let's see how many questions she will try to plant at next week's debate....
Posted by: Lioness | Nov 10, 2007 1:22:28 AM
Mrs. Clinton did not plant the question.
Some overeager kid working for her campaign apparently did it.
These things happen in every campaign.
Get over it.
Posted by: Inquirer | Nov 10, 2007 1:41:50 AM
Hillary can do no wrong in the blinded eyes of the media and those under the influence of tv opinion. Hill and Bill's cohorts have been jailed with the Clintons receiving absolutely nothing from the Whitewater dealings during the Clintonian rule. Now, they have been caught in multiple fundraising scams with NO punishment AND if ANY OTHER candidate would have endorsed giving $5,000 to all US born babies, they would have been condemned and thrown from the ballots. Most qualified? So she says! Just how much time has the Junior senator "of" New York spent in Washington at all of roll calls and voting on issues that face the US daily? Barely any because she is out stumping for President of the US. The only thing that qualifies the Junior senator "of" New York is all of those frequent flier miles. Please America, open up your eyes, I beg of you.
Posted by: Jason | Nov 10, 2007 2:16:30 AM
I've had it with people talking about how "smart" Hillary is. Well, get this: it isn't smart to simply assume that
voters are all so stupid/naive/gullible
that they'll all believe what she says and continue to support her-- no matter HOW many times she flip-flops or waffles on important issues. Most of us are paying close attention to what she says-- and many are beginning to see through her ambiguity. A whole year remains before the 2008 elections-- Hillary doesn't "already have the DEM nomination," much less the presidency. More and more people will figure her out-- and there's plenty of time for her to self-destruct.
Posted by: dks0442 | Nov 10, 2007 2:32:55 AM
At the end of the day, Clinton is just another liar.
Posted by: jamula | Nov 10, 2007 2:40:57 AM
"WOW WHAT A SCANDAL?" - The Republicans must think! Give me a break - It is pathetic that everyone tries so hard to find something on Hillary and that's all they come up with.
Posted by: Concerned_Desi_of_America | Nov 10, 2007 2:46:46 AM
I've had it with people talking about how "smart" Hillary is. Well, get this: it isn't "smart" for her to simply assume that all voters are so gullible that they'll believe what she says and continue to follow her-- no matter HOW many times she flip-flops or waffles on important issues. Most of us ARE paying close attention to what she says-- and many are beginning to see through her ambiguity. A whole year remains before the 2008 elections-- Hillary doesn't "already have the nomination," much less the presidency. More and more people will figure her out-- and there's plenty of time for her to talk herself deep into trouble. Wait and see.
Posted by: dks0442 | Nov 10, 2007 2:49:20 AM
It's naive to think Hillary doesn't have a hand in this kind of stuff. She wrote the book on controlled appearance, that's why she bombed last week. The rest of the country will now see what the rest of us in upstate NY have to endure with this fake stone waller with no answers to real questions.
Posted by: Big D | Nov 10, 2007 2:50:12 AM
Well they gotta keep questions on topic....i mean, what is the point of a 4 day roll out of Energy Policy if people ask about everything BUT energy?
I think it's just smart.
Posted by: Ryan | Nov 10, 2007 2:52:47 AM
Lol 3 trillion? And the liberals spent nearly 7 trillion on poverty, tell that to ward nine folks, they're still poor, and the rest of USA, didn't $chlickster borrow from social security trust to pay for his Bosnia botch? led by NATO, and little to show for it???
Posted by: not forhillary | Nov 10, 2007 3:11:35 AM
Yet another reason to forget about the Clintons and Obama, and hope for either John Edwards or Al Gore. If God still loves this country, one of those two will be leading us soon.
Posted by: Symbiot | Nov 10, 2007 3:15:57 AM
Get a life, these two Hillary gaffs drivers licenses and planted questions, to make her ''look good''slipping in IOWA? Forget it, she's toast, deal with it Clinton dejavu all over plus her cult apologists hubby, good riddance to bad sewer slime.
Posted by: ntforhillary | Nov 10, 2007 3:17:22 AM
I am a Democrat and I DO NOT support Hillary Clinton. She is keeping her records hidden, won't give straight answers, and will continue this stupid misguided "war on terror" (which, if you really do your research, you will find has some very sinister ulterior motives). She is a wolf in sheep's clothing.. but so are all the GOP candidates, except for Ron Paul! Obama is okay..
Posted by: Jeff D | Nov 10, 2007 3:23:18 AM
Ha Ha Ha, Eloise Harper get a life, if this is the best you can to do get Hillary, which you are clearly trying to do, you have failed miserably. All the politicans suggest questions to the audience, I have been following politics for many many years, this is not the first time this has happened and won't be the last. Every canpaign does this, they may keep it hid but this is common practice, get a clue.
Give it up Eloise Harper, your political persuasion is showing, and it's not pretty.
Posted by: Claude | Nov 10, 2007 3:31:27 AM
Clintons? Bushes? What are we, back in England? This country does not have a monachy!! We need to wise up and get BOTH of these families out of American politics. It's painfully obvious they are both in it for their own personal benefits. We need some NEW blood in there. Someone who hasn't been completely tainted by special interest groups. I'm voting for Barack Obama. They say he "doesn't have the experience". But given our horrible choices of "experienced" people, I'm going with the new guy who can hopefully turn this thing around. He's the only guy who can provide HOPE, which might go a long way these days.
Posted by: Rob In Dallas | Nov 10, 2007 3:34:35 AM
The voters in Iowa and New Hampshire place a premium on the authenticity of these opportunities to meet the candidates and have their questions answered. Mark your calendar and forget her last shaky debate performance, this planted question incident will mark the real beginning of the fall for HRC.
Posted by: sps91158 | Nov 10, 2007 4:25:28 AM
Why is Hillary getting flack for this?
President Bush's questions are always highly staged and controlled so that nothing surprising or that he can't practice the answer for can be asked.
Why do Democrats always get 'busted' while Repubs do the same things, only worse, and none of the corporate-republican-controlled press says a word about the manipulations of Bush?
Posted by: JL | Nov 10, 2007 5:04:24 AM
I read the above two posts and
check for myself on the internet
because I didn't believe it.
But what I found was 93,000 entries.
There must be something to the story
that this Smith guy is talking about.
Posted by: Michael Collins, Iowa city, Iowa | Nov 10, 2007 5:08:22 AM
Hilary Clinton is a wonderful and transparent person. I know several persons who have told me they can see right through her.
Posted by: Joseph Reale Bitteford ME | Nov 10, 2007 5:29:58 AM
I am sitting here at 4:00 AM with nothing to do but read all the comments. Yes, we really are diverse nation with many viewpoints. It also points out, to me, how people really think they are right regardless of which party they favor. I say, let's try to find some common ground and get back to a country we are proud of. Which candidate can bring us closer to this ideal daydreaming thought of mine?
Posted by: Rich | Nov 10, 2007 5:32:08 AM
I was thinking the same thing Joseph.
This country needs a change, good
values. After reading this blog, I have decided to vote for Obama. I am just tired of the madness.
Posted by: Louis Simpson | Nov 10, 2007 5:38:58 AM
Wake up ABC news! Nobody did more to control their audience than the handlers of George W. Bush. They were unprecedented in their screening techniques aimed at protecting little Georgie. Amazingly even with a carefully handpicked crowd W still fumbled and bumbled.
Posted by: Roy | Nov 10, 2007 5:56:56 AM
Hillary ROTTEN-CLINTON NEEDS TO DROP OUT OF THE RACE AND RESIGN FROM CONGRESS. SHE IS A DISGRACE TO THIS NATION.
Posted by: Allen Ridge | Nov 10, 2007 6:55:22 AM
Oh holier than thou' Hillary! She has become purely pathetic. Poor little girl who is being ganged up on by the big bad boys and has to play her gender card, or send hubby out to speak for her when he should be the last one she'd want to front for her. Now padding the audience to make sure she gets the questions she wants asked. I'm so sure this has never happened before and never will again. I'm also sure the stock market will make a comeback on Monday and be up, oh to record highs no less. And Bush will recall all the troops on Tuesday as well. Then on Wednesday the budget will balance & we will hear someone discovered many billions of dollars in a savings account that will put our country back in the black. Then, too, Hillary will be a straight arrow. All of which is absolute and pure BS.
Posted by: Connie | Nov 10, 2007 7:40:59 AM
Wow. Hillary and her gang will do anything to get elected. Pathetic.
Posted by: bob | Nov 10, 2007 7:42:55 AM
Hillary supporters could care less. It is bout the end result, not a scam or two made to get there. Hillary has the media in her pocket and libs have no moral code because they have been immunized by the lib media. This will go away in 24 hours and it's on to the next scam.
Posted by: Bill | Nov 10, 2007 7:47:07 AM
What a joke. Some commander and chief she would make. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. She's not a commanding figure in public and now can't even speak in public w/o knowing the questions before hand.
Posted by: don | Nov 10, 2007 7:52:17 AM
Its about her supporters playing dirty tricks and sending emails to people to spin a good man like Barack as a Muslim plant ,yet Hilary has the most secret Saudi and Muslim ties of all Presidential candidates, reps&dems combined.
Shame to Hilary dirty tricks.Now the mask is off, will Americans still be bought over by the Clinton machines.
Edwards said it all,will Americans be able to look at their children and say , yes i voted to replace a corporate rep with anothe corporate dem? shame on you americans, shame!
Posted by: TITIBERG | Nov 10, 2007 8:00:00 AM
Our ONLY salvation..."Kucinich/Dodd" in 2008!!!
Posted by: mod rit | Nov 10, 2007 8:28:14 AM
What else would you expect from one of the most amoral families in politics.
Posted by: abccrap | Nov 10, 2007 8:35:44 AM
When Hillary appeared at a Q&A session in Charlottesville, VA., she specifically asked that 1/4th the time be allocated to questions from the audience. I was one of those questioners, and queried her rather intensely about whether she would return Bush's ill-gotten power grabs back to the other two branches of government.
No one prompted me, or even asked me what my question was before handing me the microphone. That she 'planted' a question about global warming in the audience is not necessarily inappropriate. She just should have noted it as such when she began answering it.
Posted by: DW | Nov 10, 2007 8:55:31 AM
This isn't as bad as Bush's White House press conferences having a male prostitute (Karl's GW's boyfriend) planted in the audience asking simple softball questions. He got to spend many nights at the White House. I wonder if Larry Craig was there too.
Posted by: WWJD | Nov 10, 2007 9:07:34 AM
Who cares. What does everybody believe how the republicans TRIED to prep George Bush? He's so stupid he fails to ask his plants to ask a question and when he does he doesn't remember the canned answer. You can't write this stuff.
Looks like the Demmy's are gonna blow Hillary's lead ( no pun intended ) and force Gore to run.
Posted by: Dave Junewae | Nov 10, 2007 9:11:00 AM
This is exactly the same tactic the Clintons employed during their "townhall" meetings. The rumors were circulating then about embedded questions.
The same is true about illegal campaign contributions. The illegal chinese contributions accepted and then returned after they are revealed.
Nothing has changed, it's corruption and the american people should not tolerate it.
Posted by: Dave | Nov 10, 2007 9:13:30 AM
Why does the press waste so much time on reporting on the Clinton campaign when she no chance in hell of winning the election?
Posted by: Will Power | Nov 10, 2007 9:20:10 AM
Why is there money coming from China to support her campaign?
Posted by: G | Nov 10, 2007 9:29:49 AM
Her "staffer" is the one that set it up and it was a good decision, in my opinion. They didn't leave to chance something that should have been discussed. Hillary is a politician and a very smart one and yet she retains a bit of humanism and true concern for our people and our planet. Unlike many other politicians who care only about lining their pockets at the expense of the people and the planet. I believe in Hillary and I believe she can make a difference just as Bill Clinton made a difference. All we've had since his Presidency is outright corruption, lies, and cronyism of the worst sort. So many men are afraid of a woman President and they will do and say whatever it takes to denigrate her. Well, I say it's time to let a woman get control of the HOUSE because it's in a pretty big mess right now and the best man for the job is a woman. GO HILLARY! This country needs you and your First Man! Clinton in 08!
Posted by: LucyInBuford | Nov 10, 2007 9:44:00 AM
Visit bookstores to see all the books available to see the "true" Hillary. Take some time to read and listen. It is so important that we stay informed on all those on both sides of the aisle. Our very survival depends on us, not on our congressmen, our president now or the one to come. Who do we trust? As a well-known talk radio person has said, "Trust in God."
Posted by: Martha Mendenhall | Nov 10, 2007 9:44:12 AM
I feel quite certain the pro-Hillary commenters on this site are Hillary campaign plants.
Posted by: carol | Nov 10, 2007 9:44:55 AM
So i hear that Hitlary has canned questions at an iowa campaign rally and all some of you can say is " they all do it" ok site it , who else and where and when...Where is the proof of this as there is proof of ample ankles doing it. Now the "bent one" says that he is to Blame for old thunder thighs failed healthcare scam in 1993..why then did he let piaps ( pig in a pant suit) swing in the breeze for 15 years and not be man enough to come out with this sooner....
Posted by: Bob | Nov 10, 2007 9:45:02 AM
Republicans hate children. : (
Posted by: WWJD | Nov 10, 2007 9:49:58 AM
Poor stupid Billary... she didn’t know.... YA Right...... like I believe that…….. she has the most scripted campaign ever run….….and who micro-manages every campaign stop and news conference….ANOTHER LIE…. Buts then, that’s the norm for the Clintons....
Posted by: FidoNY | Nov 10, 2007 9:55:46 AM
Looks like Hill's campaign is in trouble when you have Bill covering for
Hill. Will he also admit in the future in the event that Bin Laden will be able
to execute another 9-11 during a Hill administration ? The Clintons will never
be able to earn the trust of 50% of the voters, as more lies and illicit
tactics are coming out and they have to admit when caught with their pants
down. Just read about planted questions from audience in Iowa that was exposed
recently. How many more times need they be caught before the people will
finally accept that they are congenital conjugal liars and repudiate them.
People should remember that Hill has an elephantine memory who can't
forgive those she hated. She is the only first lady who did not attend Pat
Nixon's funeral because she hated Dick so much, and yet she carries that hate
to someone who had done her no wrong except just being married to a President
she wants to impeach. How ironic that it is she who was ask to pay the price of
getting humiliated when Bill become the only 2nd president to be ever impeached
! That must have been the way how the gods paid her back !
Posted by: wilson | Nov 10, 2007 10:02:40 AM
Ron Paul isn't going to make it..buit he would be better then Hillary ( I'll never lie to you) Clinton
Posted by: Bob | Nov 10, 2007 10:42:00 AM
Clinton lovers won't care about this. This kind of thing only matters if a republican does it. Socialists are never considered hypocrites, so her supporters could care less what she does. She's the democrat nominee and represents the democrats and their party. Everything you see in Hillary now, or the lack of it, is exactly a small fraction of what we will actually experience if Hillary seizes power of the country with the lockstep Clinton worshiping democrat congress and senate. She's proven that she really is the lesser of the two Clintons and had it not been for her letting him cheat on her during their whole sham of a marriage, she would never have amounted to much more that a lawyer with criminal tendencies. Democrats love Clintons though. Can't get enough of them. At least the era of Bush is over, for now I guess. Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton... We seem to get dumber each election.
Posted by: TexBork | Nov 10, 2007 10:49:34 AM
Has anyone ever been able to ask a question of King Dubya that WASN'T planted? Just asking.
Posted by: Thomas Mc | Nov 10, 2007 11:07:03 AM
Reading the comment posts, I cant help think "these people are going to vote?" Jeez sounds more like a bunch of whining 3rd graders. And that it's "news" about planting questions? Bush planted the questions, the audience, and had goons to "escort" non-believers away from his speaking events...did ABC raise a stink about that? Nope! The MSM are going to make mountains out of molehills wherever the Clintons are concerned...and even though I'm pretty sick of the whole B-C-B-C presidential era...I get a kick watching the neocon fringe going crazy about the Clintons.
Posted by: Mcspikev | Nov 10, 2007 11:12:10 AM
Big deal! The campaigner wanted a question asked so that Clinton could have an opportunity to address a certain issue. It wasn't like they instructed the audience not to ask certain questions or stage the entire audience with Clinton's supprters like the idiot in the White House did when he was campaigning.
Posted by: tom | Nov 10, 2007 11:14:52 AM
the only people that will wind up voting for the hilderbeast is the Blue dress democrats...nuff said
Posted by: Bob | Nov 10, 2007 11:15:57 AM
First, speaking as someone who will support the Democratic nominee in 2008, it was dishonest, manipulative and wrong for the Clinton campaign to plant questioners in a supposedly free forum. While in degree the transgression pales in comparison to a sitting administration hosting a fake press conference about an actual natural disaster, in principle it is the same dirty trick. Clinton supporters who refuse to acknowledge this are not helping the party or our country.
Far more astonishing, though, are those comments condemning Clinton while failing to acknowledge the extraordinary, orchestrated and unprecedently harmful deceptions of the Bush administration. The pre-9/11 mentality pervasive in these anti-Clinton comments -- the failure to recognize the disparity in proportion and harm between the wrongs of the Clinton and Bush administrations -- will amaze future historians.
Let's assume that the worst things you think about the Clintons are actually true (aside from killing Vincent Foster; if you believe that you are beyond reach). Let's assume they committed fraud in order to lose money in the Whitewater investment deal, despite the fact that a federal investigation spanning years of labor and millions of taxpayer dollars yielded no evidence of this fact. Let's acknowledge that Bill Clinton's affairs, particularly the Monica Lewinsky matter, were an embarrassment to that family and the country. Let's even assume that Bill Clinton's careful parsing of his relationship with Lewinsky in a sworn deposition in a civil lawsuit unrelated to his performance in office was a highly technical example of perjury, although most legal experts at the time said such an incidence would almost never be prosecuted. Let's say Hillary Clinton really did intentionally hide a box of records from her law firm that showed evidence of -- what, overbilling or something? Let's assume that there was some patronage involved in the Travelgate affair.
Let's go on and on and admit to every unproven molehill that was investigated by federal officials and splattered across the front pages of newspapers across the country for eight years. How can any of these evils compare with what the Bush administration has perpetrated on the country since?
Clinton didn't do anything about terrorism? In the late 1990s, he undertook a major bombing campaign against Iraq that likely wiped out whatever remained of Saddam Hussein's major weapons capacity. He also responded to attacks on American embassasies in Africa by destroying suspected terrorist facilities in Sudan and Afghanistan, perhaps missing Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan by a matter of minutes.
How did today's "war on terror" folks respond to Clinton's military actions at the time? Almost universally, they accused him of "wagging the dog" -- undertaking military campaigns to distract people from the "substantive" issue of his being impeached for receiving an Oval Office blow job. Clinton's efforts to protect the nation against terrorists and dictators were severely undermined by a lack of political support, which virtually handcuffed any more aggressive activity against Bin Laden, whom most Americans hadn't even heard of at the time.
All this aside, when intelligence agencies warned the administration of a potential devastating domestic terrorist attack around New Year's 2000, the entire federal government went on alert, capturing a terrorist at the Candian border and averting a major West Coast attack. As it was leaving office, the Clinton administration was formulating an aggressive offensive against al Qaeda -- which was promptly placed on the back burner when Bush took office. See Richard Clarke's book, "Against All Enemies," for details from a high-level antiterrorism administrator who served in several administrations of both parties.
What did Bill Clinton do for the country? In addition to balancing the budget, reforming welfare, contributing to a major reduction in violent crime, lifting the standard of living for millions of Americans, and presiding over a period of relative peace, he left office with the United States a highly regarded, respected and even liked nation by countries and peoples around the world.
The Bush administration's failures in the war on terrorism are well enough documented. Osama Bin Laden, who oversaw the Sept. 11 attacks on our country, remains at large, and basically left to his own devices, more than six years later. Afghanistan, which we rightfully invaded with world support to rout the Taliban, has made virtually no political, economic or military progress since we all but abandoned that country to invade Iraq. We and many other nations broke our promises to rebuild that country, and we are paying the price.
There are numerous books detailing Bush's failures in Iraq, most notably "Fiasco," by Thomas Ricks. The bulk of the hundreds of sources for this book are not liberal navel-gazers but members of our military, from the highest to the lowest ranks. I have seen nothing even attempting to rebut the general conclusions of this work.
Domestically, Bush's policies have plunged us back into debt (much of which is owned by the Chinese and Suadis), increased the disparity between rich and poor, and increased the number of Americans without health insurance. Regulatory agencies have been stocked with people representing the industries they were supposed to be regulating. It's been recently revealed that leaders of the government agency responsible for monitoring toy safety (in the wake of the recall of millions of lead-laden toys made in China) were receiving free travel and gifts from the corporations they were supposed to regulate. That scandal alone, which was essentially buried in the press, puts to shame any improprieties of the Clinton administration. And to accuse Hillary Clinton of setting up her public appearances when Bush from the get-go has stacked his audiences with only his most ardent hand-picked supporters -- tossing out and even arresting opponents who tried to get into his events -- is the height of either delusion or hypocrisy.
I could go on about Abu Ghraib, which alone has probably created more terrorists than we've managed to kill in the past six years; the secret erosion of our privacy and civil liberties; the fact that this president (or the next one -- maybe Hillary) can now declare any one of us an enemy combatant and disappear us from our lives and families with no legal recourse forever; the fact that the attorney general of the United States lied and obfuscated before Congress to the point that he was forced to resign; the fact that the vice president has connections to a company, Haliburton, that received billions of dollars in no-bid contracts for work in Iraq, some of which proved to be subpar at best. And I would just be clearing my throat for what has happened to the country since 2001. I didn't even mention the government's response to Hurricane Katrina. Or the fact that the world, which overflowed with warmth and compassion for the United States after Sept.



