Obama Says No Mas
Posted April 18th, 2008 by Da King
It seems Barack Obama doesn't want to have any more debates. Imagine that. After stuttering and spinning his way through two painful hours attempting to respond to some semi-tough questions from ABC in Philadelphia, Obama has had enough. According to a CNN piece, Obama claims to be too busy campaigning to have more debates.
Right. Why have a debate, where your message can go out to 50 million people on television, when you can have a rally in a gymnasium in front of 5,000 ? Sure. Makes perfect sense. Here's an Obama quote on the matter:
"I'll be honest with you, we've now had 21," he said. "It's not as if we don't know how to do these things. I could deliver Sen. Clinton's lines; she could, I'm sure, deliver mine."
Yes, Mr. Obama, we know you can deliver your lines. I practically have your script memorized myself ("It won't be easy to take those profits away from Exxon"). The thing is, when you're in those gymnasiums, YOU control the message. In the last debate, you finally had to ANSWER some hard questions, and I'm not even talking about the Rev. Wright, Bittergate, Bill Ayers stuff. I'm talking about the policy stuff. You finally got into a dialogue that involved a little pushback (not even very much pushback, just a little), one that didn't allow you and your handlers time to formulate a carefully crafted response, and you folded like a lawn chair. Now you don't want to play anymore. That might be the correct political calculation for you (since you appear to be a lightweight), but it sure doesn't exhibit any, um…..what's the word ?….oh yeah…AUDACITY.
Obama didn't much care for the questions ABC asked. I'm sure he liked the first 20 debates better, when Hillary was the one being grilled with the tough questions, and the media was falling all over itself in adoration of the Hopemeister. Here's Obama talking about that:
"Last night, we set a new record, because it took us 45 minutes before we even started talking — until we started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people."
"Now, I don't blame Washington for this; that's just how Washington is. … They like stirring up controversy; they like playing 'gotcha' games. … I will say Sen. Clinton looked in her element."
Notice how Obama complained about 'gotcha' politics, and then in the next breath, made that snarky little 'gotcha' comment about Hillary by saying she looked "in her element," as if to say Hillary feels comfortable getting down and dirty………….Okay, Obama is right about that part. The Clintons ARE masters at dirty politics. I only wonder why Democrats didn't realize it until the year 2008 (hysterical blindness ?). The rest of us figured it out 15 years ago. Obama has proven himself to be no different. In spite of his protestations, he and his campaign take every cheap shot they can get away with, just like the Clintons do.
But anyway, Mister Hillary Clinton (who I believe is named William) chimed in on Obama's new 'I'm too busy to debate' stance, which I'll call The Timidity Of Hope. Here's Mr. Bill:
"[Obama staffers] were saying, 'Oh this is so negative, why are they doing this.' Well, they've been beatin' up on her for 15 months. I didn't hear her whining when he said she was untruthful in Iowa, or called her the senator from Punjab. … But you know, this is a contact sport. If you don't want to play, keep your uniform off."
You know what really cracks me up about all this ? The Democrats snark back and forth, using anything and everything at their disposal to discredit the other candidate, and then they have the temerity to excuse it all by saying 'well, you know the Republicans will use this in the general election.' Hillary and Barry did it several times in the last debate. Blaming Republicans for everything is a standard tactic for them (Hillary can barely utter two sentences without doing it), but I think we have to draw the line when the Dems start blaming Republicans for the actual words coming out of the Dems own mouthes. Classic.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Now I'm really confused. I thought "hope", "change", and "inspiration" knew no boundaries? Why does a candidate, that claims to be able to take a punch, now exhibit such fear in environments not subjected to his total control? As the alarm sounds, it has now come time for Osama to regulate all facets of Kool-Aid production, quality, and distribution.
***
"Last night, we set a new record, because it took us 45 minutes before we even started talking — until we started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people." ***
While the first 45 minutes caught BO's attention, it stands as the least significant record. Their debate drew the highest ratings and ironically, it was the only one which made these 2 step up to the plate. After 21 debates, that is a significant accomplishment! Wasn't Mr. Obama the one who pressed to have this debate, in the first place, and Hillary had the lead to lose? Given the previous track record of the Osama-friendly media, along with a friendly Philly venue, he thought this one was in the bag. Surprise!
***
"Blaming Republicans for everything is a standard tactic for them (Hillary can barely utter two sentences without doing it), but I think we have to draw the line when the Dems start blaming Republicans for the actual words coming out of the Dems own mouthes."***
I think ABC reset the bar for others to follow. One can ask questions which benefit the nation or pitch softballs which allow the candidates to thrive within their own world of inexperience. Let them continue to blame Republicans because, the more they do so, the more obvious it becomes that they have nothing of substance to offer. The nation already got a taste of their economic "expertise" ,Tuesday.
From day one, I've stated that neither of these individuals posess any credible experience, relevant ideas, nor leadership qualities. Their support base overlooks this "slight" technicality by focusing on the non-essentials: black, woman, hope, unity, inspiration, and other elements that have no bearing on their health, wealth, and happiness. The offended argue that they are not sheep, but I cannot see a difference.
In the possible scenario, Hillary does secure the nomination, I will have a great question to ask our liberal friends: Now that your far-left candidate Osama has had the nomination "stolen", how will you bring yourself to support a lesser left Hillary?
I've been hounded a thousand times, why I'm supporting a candidate that isn't quite as conservative as I'd like him to be. Some still cannot see the rationale why I prefer a moderate over a socialist. I'm no sadist, but I will receive great pleasure watching the far-left loons reluctantly kiss the feet of Hillary. Pucker up boys!
April 18th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Another good comment, Alexander. It seems that between you and King my mind has about been picked clean. When I think about this debate and about Barry begging to keep from having to do something like this again it reminds me of a little joke concerning him.
It seems that an old Texas rancher tore open his hand opening a cattle gate and while a young doctor was sewing it up they started talking about politics. The old man said that to him Obam is so much like a post turtle. Well of course the young doctor didn't know what a post turtle was so he had to ask.
The old man replied that a post turtle is one that shows up on top of a fence post. He doesn't know how he got there, he doesn't know what he is doing and he doesn't know how to get down. Now doesn't that sound a lot like old Barry?
Obama has been shepherded into the position he finds himself and it is beginning to look like as the mask of protection the MSM cloaked him in years ago slips away and we see him for what he really is some of his handlers are finally seeing where it has all come to. It is past time for them to put him back behind the mask, because as he demonstrated the other night he doesn't do well with questions he hasn't prepared for. I sure don't want Hillary to win but at least she hasn't been hidden from view the past 4 years like Obama has.
Those who make the noise about who we are forced to vote for really don't understand that even though our man isn't very conservative he is a whole lot farther that direction than either of these leftist candidates from the Democrat side. Maybe some of those who talk that way look in on the website of the CPUSA. com occasionally.
April 18th, 2008 at 10:41 am
Alex….my fine fellow and good writer of comments.
Obama is not going to lose the Dem nomination. Surely you know that. Or, are you simply in a continual state of denial about that specific issue?
Hillary will barely win Pa. Obama will take N.Carolina handily, and compete and probably win in Indiana.
Hillary has no chance and the supers are trending Obama's direction. All empirical evidence points to an Obama win.
What you say makes for interesting fiction…..but that's it.
April 18th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Glad you enjoyed, Roy.
Rev:
"Hillary will barely win Pa. Obama will take N.Carolina handily, and compete and probably win in Indiana."
I'll have to disagree on this one. These are all high profile states now and they now fall into the domino effect category. PA will set the tone and, as I see it, Hill will pull a 13-16% win. The undecideds and Operation chaos factor have not been considered. Just for kicks, I'd like to hear your projected margin of victory for Hill.
Should PA prove huge for Hillary, it will initiate the need for all to take a wider look at what is going on. Momentum is a funny thing and I've already seen some wierd stuff in the D primaries.
If this does occur, the "fictional" riots will become reality.
Even with an edge in popular vote and/or pledged delegates, do you think it would be prudent for the party to field the candidate with the least amount of armor? If you were a Hillary supporter, I know you would see the merit in this arguement. These are the arguements which will be made to the super-delegates and it is certainly within their rules to decide what is best for the party.
It's crunch time with the playoffs on the line………….oh who will we play…………………the injured franchise player that puts fans in the stands…………………..or a healthy hitter than can maybe put us on base? In the end, don't all of the fans have a common interest in winning the big one?
This is not an arguement the far-left extremists wish to discuss. Choose wisely, as any miscalculations will not fall under the juris diction of "G. Bush's failed policies". This one will be on you.
April 18th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Check it out, King.
Hamas endorses B. Hussein Obama.
http://cameron.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/04/16/a-hamas-problem-for-obama/
Big surprise, right?
The prospects of B. Hussein Obama being the presidential nominee of the Dim Party must have bin Laden shivering with orgasmic delight in the rat hole he's hiding in.
April 18th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
His best action is to play rope a dope the balance of the primary race. After that every raised can be blunted by branding it as another Rep. attack. I hope the eletion doesn't become reduced to him being able to avoid specifics. Unfortunatley the press will focus on is it or is it not a legitimate issue the Reps. have raised. Either way the particulars will be lost in the breathtaking coverage by the media
April 19th, 2008 at 2:22 am
Ghost of Vince: Have you ever thought that Hamas would endorse Obama because they'd rather see Republicans in office? They KNOW it will drive down his numbers in America, they're not dumb.
Sound crazy? well, guess what - Iran, Hamas (whom Iran now supports), Hezbollah, have all grown in clout throughout the Middle East since the Bush Administration has taken over, mainly due to its disastrous policies in the Middle East. The War in Iraq was a gift from the heavens for Islamic extremism in the Middle East, and every policy expert knows it.
But yeah, God forbid a Democrat win the presidency because Islamic extremists would be shaking in their shoes because the thought of a Republican president running the show for another 4 years would mean….wait.
Seriously, you're argument isn't logical.
April 19th, 2008 at 8:29 am
I think it would behoove America and our current candidates to have another debate.
Issues in this debate should cover a sort of "What Would Obama Do?" or "What Would Hillary Do?"
Questions could be along the line of defending our ORIGINAL Constitution—not the one Bush has commandeered for his own specific uses.
Perhaps a question might be, "Should America try Bush and Co. for high crimes and misdemeanors or should we just let it go that crimes have been committed in our name, as the arbitor of justice and freedom in this world?"
Or this one; "In the event that Israel is attacked and mass casualties are sustained, is it America's place to react with restraint or to help with a counter attack?"
Or perhaps this one; "In the hunt for terrorists on our own turf, do you think it is lawful to spy on our own US citizens library records, phone calls, e-mail messages, credit card records, bank records and so on in the effort to route possible enemies within our own borders?" If you think this is appropriate, how would you use those records and how would you thwart misuse of that power to spy on our own peoples?"
I would like to hear the "off the cuff" responses to these questions and more. In fact, I would like to hear what all four candidates (Nader included) would say if invited to a debate of these types of issues. Now.
April 19th, 2008 at 9:00 am
I find your reverse psychology argument unconvincing, David.
Bush's middle east policy has led to increased extremist recruiting, that's true, but you have to look at what the goals of Iran-Hamas-Hezbollah etc. are to know which american president they'd prefer. What they want is to eliminate Israel. A Republican president will absolutely prevent that from happening. Hillary Clinton will also absolutely prevent that from happening. Barack Obama says he will prevent that from happening, but Hamas can look to Obama's anti-semitic spiritual advisor Jeremiah Wright, and connect from there to the anti-semitic Louis Farrakhan. Then they can look to one of Obama's top foreign policy advisors, the anti-Israel Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security advisor for Palestinian sympathizer Jimmy Carter. There are others around Obama as well. Obama has more anti-Israel people around him than any other candidate, by far. Hamas knows who is sympathetic to them and who isn't. The more sympathetic an american president is to their causes, the more those causes are legitimized, when they should not be.
The second thing Iran-Hamas-Hezbollah-Islamists want is for america to get out of the middle east. Obama would do Iran an enormous favor by pulling out of Iraq and opening the door for a lage increase in Iranian influence in that country. That may happen anyway, but Obama (and Hillary) would make it almost a certainty.
Yes, Hamas is smart. Smart enough to know which american president would be most sympathetic to their cause. Obama is the one. There is no subterfuge coming from Hamas. They DO want Obama to be the president.
April 19th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Such a decent campaign this Obama gentleman has run…so different from old style politicking…so refreshing….so…so…hypocritical.
OBAMA:
04/13/08 Obama says Hillary 'knows better. She knows better, shame on her. Shame on her. She knows better!'
[Source: CBS]
04/10/08 Obama says he is 'confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton.'
[Source: New York Times]
04/08/08 Obama accuses Hillary of being 'a candidate who has said one thing but one another this entire campaign.'
[Source: The Hill]
03/29/08 Obama accuses Clintons of 'real nasty, sort of anything goes, whatever it takes kind of politics.'
[Source: CNN]
03/27/08 Obama says Hillary 'doesn't have the sense that things need to change in Washington.'
[Source: Winston-Salem Journal]
03/26/08 Obama Chief Strategist David Axelrod: 'The Republican Party would very much like to run against Hillary Clinton.'
[Source: Washington Post]
03/26/08 Obama campaign memo questions Hillary's 'willingness to adhere to the truth.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Memo]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign held a conference call 'to Discuss Clinton Campaign's Pattern of Misleading Voters.'
[Source: time-blog.com]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign says Hillary would 'cause real issues if she were to be our nominee'
[Source: Obama Campaign Teleconference]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign says Hillary has 'character issues here that will cause us real problems in the fall.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Teleconference]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign says Hillary 'has consistently in this campaign engaged in political calculation to mislead voters.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Teleconference]
03/20/08 Obama campaign says Hillary's support of a revote is 'evidence that Clinton is willing to do absolutely anything to get elected.'
[Source: Washington Times]
03/20/08 Obama campaign says Hillary's support of a revote is 'evidence that Clinton is willing to do absolutely anything to get elected.'
[Source: Washington Times]
03/20/08 Obama campaign memo says Hillary has 'a legacy of misleading voters.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Memo]
03/12/08 Obama accuses Hillary of twisting 'the words of an adviser who's not even speaking in an official capacity.'
[Source: Philadelphia Inquirer]
03/12/08 Obama campaign says Hillary was willing to 'wink and nod at offensive statements.'
[Source: Philadelphia Inquirer]
03/12/08 Obama says 'Senator Clinton represents the same way of doing business.'
[Source: Allentown Morning Call]
03/11/08 Obama says Hillary 'is trying to bamboozle you.'
[Source: USA Today]
03/11/08 Obama campaign suggests that Hillary's 'claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.
[Source: The Page]
03/11/08 Obama spokesperson Axelrod said Clinton campaign follows an 'insidious pattern' when it comes to race.
[Source: Politico]
03/10/08 Obama said Hillary was 'saying one thing and doing another' on NAFTA.
[Source: Obama remarks in Jackson, MS]
03/08/08 Obama campaign: Clinton camp should 'stop telling the American people things that they know aren't true.'
[Source: Obama campaign memo]
03/06/08 Obama campaign manager says Hillary is one of the 'most secretive politicians in America today.'
[Source: Politico]
03/05/08 Obama campaign manager says 'The Clintons are the gold standard of negative tactical campaigning.'
[Source: Washington Post]
03/05/08 Obama surrogate accuses Hillary of 'derogatory comments.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Release]
03/05/08 Obama questions whether Hillary was 'negotiating treaties or agreements' or 'handling crises' when she visited foreign countries.
[Source: MSNBC]
03/05/08 Obama spokesperson falsely accuses Hillary of misleading people about whether Obama is 'a devout Christian.'
[Source: MSNBC]
03/05/08 Obama surrogate accuses Clinton campaign of trying 'to exploit race, exploit sex, exploit fear for political expediency.'
[Source: CNN]
03/05/08 Obama spokesperson alludes to Hillary's 'law firms and real estate deals.'
[Source: Politico]
02/18/08 Obama says that Clinton politics offer 'more of the same divisions and distractions.'
[Source: LA Times]
02/15/08 Obama accuses Hillary of 'being part of business-as-usual in Washington.'
[Source: CNN]
02/13/08 Obama surrogate suggests that Hillary 'demonizes people.'
[Source: Washington Post]
02/11/08 Obama surrogate refers to President Clinton as 'Slick Willy.'
[Source: Washington Times]
02/07/08 Obama says there is 'a whole dump truck' of dirt that Republicans could use on Hillary.
[Source: New York Post]
02/04/08 Obama calls Hillary's behavior 'more troubling than legislative gamesmanship.'
[Source: Newsweek]
01/31/08 Obama says sometimes 'he can't tell' if he's running against Hillary or President Clinton.
[Source: New York Times]
01/30/08 Obama campaign sends negative mailer to Connecticut contains misleading attacks against Hillary on Iraq.
[Source: FactHub]
01/29/08 Obama mailer claims Hillary will put 'Washington thinking and Washington interests first.'
[Source: TPM Election Central]
01/28/08 Obama says sometimes 'he can't tell' if he's running against Hillary or President Clinton.
[Source: Associated Press]
01/27/08 Obama likens Hillary to 'the status quo, fighting back with everything it's got.'
[Source: Economist]
01/26/08 HEADLINE: Clinton calls for calm as Obama attacks continue.
[Source: Times Online]
01/25/08 Obama campaign Truth Squad member says Hillary and Bill Clinton are 'all about deceit.'
[Source: Washington Post]
01/23/08 Obama Radio Ad says 'Hillary Clinton will say anything to get elected.
[Source: Obama SC Radio ad]
01/23/08 Obama campaign accuses Hillary of 'politics-as-usual attacks.'
[Source: barackobama.com]
01/23/08 Obama: Hillary's campaign has 'former President Clinton delivering a bunch of inaccurate statements about my record'
[Source: NBC's Today Show]
01/22/08 Obama campaign accuses Hillary of 'incredible distortions.'
[Source: usatoday.com]
01/21/08 Obama accuses Hillary of being 'willing to say anything to get elected.'
[Source: South Carolina CNN Debate]
01/21/08 Obama says sometimes 'he can't tell' if he's running against Hillary or President Clinton.
[Source: South Carolina CNN Debate]
01/21/08 Obama accuses Clintons of playing 'political games that we are accustomed to.'
[Source: South Carolina CNN Debate]
01/19/08 Obama says Hillary's Washington experience is 'why people mistrust our politics.'
[Source: Newsday]
01/19/08 Headline: Michelle Obama launches attack on Clinton.
[Source: Telegraph.co.uk]
01/18/08 Obama supporter says Hillary uses 'the kind of politics I expect from the other party.'
[Source: Las Vegas Sun]
01/18/08 Obama says Hillary would be 'a president whose plans change with the politics of the moment.'
[Source: New York Times]
01/18/08 Michelle Obama says Hillary represents 'the same old thing over and over again'
[Source: telegraph.co.uk]
01/17/08 Obama characterizes contest with Hillary as a contest 'between the past and the future.'
[Source: rollingstone.com]
01/15/08 Obama says Hillary uses 'fear of terrorism in scoring political points.'
[Source: MSNBC's Las Vegas debate]
01/14/08 Obama says 'Senator Clinton started off trying to make history, and now she's trying to rewrite it.'
[Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal]
01/11/08 Obama supporter suggests Hil's tears were crocodilian.
[Source: New York Daily News]
01/10/08 Obama predicts a Clinton victory would mean 'starting off with half the country not wanting to vote for Democrats.'
[Source: The Hill]
01/09/08 Obama supporter calls Hillary one of the 'guardians of the status quo.'
[Source: Morning Joe]
12/28/07 Obama's campaign says Bhutto's assasination was 'yet another manifestation' of Hillary's poor judgment.
[Source: Politico]
12/27/07 Obama links Bhutto's assassination to politicians like Hillary who 'have not made particularly good judgments.'
[Source: Larry King Live]
12/27/07 Obama's talking points hit Hillary on electability.
[Source: Obama talking points]
12/27/07 Obama: Hillary 'more of the same.'
[Source: Chicago Sun-Times]
12/27/07 Obama: Hillary will 'be secretive as president.'
[Source: Chicago Sun-Times]
12/23/07 Obama: Hillary 'tends to galvanize the other side.'
[Source: CBS]
12/21/07 Obama Hits Clinton on Electability
[Source: cnn.com]
12/18/07 Clinton makes nice, but Obama questions her character
[Source: AFP]
12/05/07 HEADLINE: Obama: Many view Clinton negatively
[Source: Des Moines Register]
12/03/07 Obama says if Hillary wins she 'will not be able to govern.'
[Source: Boston.com]
11/27/07 Obama Mocks Hil 1st Lady Role
[Source: New York Daily News]
11/26/07 Obama says Hillary takes credit for Clinton administration successes, says failures are 'somebody else's fault.'
[Source: Nightline]
11/21/07 HEADLINE: Obama criticizes Clinton, Edwards on health care plans
[Source: AP]
11/18/07 HEADLINE: Obama accuses Clinton campaign of mud-slinging with Novak column
[Source: San Francisco Chronicle]
11/18/07 HEADLINE: Obama criticizes Clinton campaign at Austin rally
[Source: Dallas Morning News]
11/13/07 Obama campaign manager says Hillary has 'has been ducking and dodging tough questions at rapid pace.
[Source: Plouffe email]
11/08/07 Obama says Hillary 'can't deliver' change.
[Source: Fox News]
11/06/07 Obama attacks Clinton's ethanol shift
[Source: Des Moines Register]
11/04/07 HEADLINE: Obama Criticizes Clinton's Drive to Win
[Source: Washington Post]
11/03/07 Obama says Hillary gives 'vague, calculated answers' does not have 'clear, consistent principles.'
[Source: New York Times]
11/02/07 Obama said Hillary has 'one position one day and one position another day.'
[Source: AP]
11/01/07 Obama campaign said Hillary 'offered more of the same Washington political calculation and evasion.'
[Source: The Hill]
10/30/07 Obama says Hillary 'has not been truthful and clear.'
[Source: MSNBC Debate]
10/29/07 Obama on Hillary: 'I don't think you're ready to lead if you can't tell us where you're going.'
[Source: Quad City Times]
10/28/07 HEADLINE: Obama Ratchets Up Criticism of Clinton
[Source: Washington Post]
10/28/07 Obama says Hillary believes 'you should hedge and dodge and spin, but at all costs, don't answer.'
[Source: Financial Times]
10/24/07 HEADLINE: Obama takes aim on Clinton's vote on anti-Iran resolution
[Source: Waterloo/Cedar Falls Courier]
10/23/07 HEADLINE: Obama steps up criticism of Clinton Iran vote with voter mailing
[Source: AP]
10/15/07 Obama says Hillary is 'the most calculating politician in this race.'
[Source: US News & World Report]
10/13/07 HEADLINE: Sen. Clinton fires back after Obama's attack on war vote
[Source: Waterloo/Cedar Falls Courier]
10/12/07 HEADLINE: Obama critical of Clinton on Iran
[Source: Cedar Rapids Gazette]
10/12/07 Obama on Hillary: 'I'm not sure if any of us knows exactly where she stands.'
[Source: Andrew Sullivan]
10/12/07 Obama campaign accuses Hillary of 'purely tactical posturing.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Memo]
10/12/07 Obama says Hillary is leading 'because she's Hillary Clinton as opposed to Hillary Rodham.'
[Source: Concord Monitor]
10/03/07 Obama says Hillary would be 'another president who shuts the door on the American people.'
[Source: Bloomberg]
09/07/07 Obama says, even if elected, Hillary 'can't govern.'
[Source: Salon]
08/17/07 HEADLINE: Obama Takes Sharper Tone to the Trail
[Source: New York Times]
07/27/07 HEADLINE: Obama attacks Clinton's foreign policy direction
[Source: Financial Times]
06/15/07 Obama campaign pushes opposition research falsely accusing Bill Clinton of giving paid speech on 9/11/06.
[Source: Politico]
04/11/08 Obama blames economic problems on former Clinton administration.
[Source: CNN.com]
04/09/08 Obama says Hillary 'doesn't see the problem with lobbyists in Washington.'
[Source: Associated Press]
04/07/08 Obama says Hillary doesn't 'believe Western states count for much.'
[Source: New York Times]
03/27/08 Obama campaign says Hillary 'has exaggerated her role as first lady.'
[Source: New York Post]
03/26/08 Obama strategist says the Republican Party 'would have a field day' with Hillary as nominee.
[Source: Washington Post]
03/24/08 Obama campaign says Hillary is 'wallowing' in special interest influence.
[Source: Obama Campaign Conference Call]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign Manager accuses Hillary of having a 'real character gap'
[Source: Obama Campaign Teleconference]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign says Hillary 'would be a deeply flawed nominee.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Teleconference]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign says American people believe Hillary 'is not being honest and trustworthy.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Teleconference]
03/21/08 Obama Campaign says Hillary failed the test of having 'the integrity to be consistent in her views.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Memo]
03/20/08 Obama campaign memo says Hillary 'has consistently made political calculations to deliberately mislead the American people.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Memo]
03/19/08 Obama camp accuses Hillary's campaign of being 'more than happy to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters' in Michigan.
[Source: AP]
03/12/08 Obama campaign says Hillary 'will only decry offensive comments when it's politically advantageous.'
[Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]
03/12/08 Obama campaign says Hillary 'will say and do anything to win this election.'
[Source: Bloomberg News]
03/12/08 Obama campaign suggests 'an insidious pattern' of race-based remarks from the Clinton campaign.
[Source: Bloomberg News]
03/11/08 Obama campaign accuses Hillary of 'hiding information in her tax returns from last year.'
[Source: New York Daily News]
03/11/08 Obama campaign: 'There is no reason to believe that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration.'
[Source: The Page]
03/10/08 Obama falsely accuses Hillary campaign of leaking photos of him overseas 'to make people afraid.'
[Source: Obama remarks in Jackson, MS]
03/09/08 Obama spokesman says Hillary 'deprived most Democratic voters of the ability to fully judge her.'
[Source: ABC News]
03/06/08 Obama suspects 'you're not going to get a bunch of particularly impressive answers' to questions on Hillary's foreign policy experience.
[Source: Time]
03/06/08 Fmr. Obama adviser Samantha Power called Hillary 'a monster.'
[Source: The Scotsman]
03/05/08 Obama Texas state director accuses Hillary campaign of trying to 'discourage Texans from participating' in the caucus.
[Source: Associated Press]
03/05/08 Obama spokesperson accuses Clintons of being 'the same old thing' and using 'kitchen sink strategies that have mired us in the mess we're in, in Washington.'
[Source: MSNBC]
03/05/08 Obama spokesperson attacks Hillary on tax returns, library donors and White House records.
[Source: CNN]
03/05/08 Obama surrogate falsely accuses Hillary of 'out of order comments' about religion.
[Source: MSNBC]
03/05/08 Citing Wall Street Journal editorial, Obama campaign attacks Hillary on 'cattle-futures trading profit.'
[Source: Obama campaign memo]
02/21/08 Obama says that Clinton politics offer 'more of the same divisions and distractions.'
[Source: LA Times]
02/18/08 Obama surrogate accuses Hillary campaign of 'distortion, misrepresentation, and what I think is basically fear-mongering.'
[Source: Chicago Tribune]
02/14/08 Obama surrogate suggests Hillary represents 'Washington-style - promises made and promises broken.'
[Source: Houston Chronicle]
02/11/08 Obama says Hillary 'starts with 47% of the country against her.
[Source: Washington Post]
02/08/08 Obama campaign says Republicans have 'expressed almost uniformly an interest' in having Hillary as the nominee.'
[Source: National Journal]
02/05/08 Obama spokesperson accuses of Hillary's campaign of 'second-tier Congressional race tactics.'
[Source: New York Times]
02/01/08 Obama supporter says Bill Clinton's role 'undermines' Hillary's 'image as an independent woman.'
[Source: New York Times]
01/30/08 Obama accuses Hillary of 'changing positions when the politics of the moment changed'
[Source: USA Today]
01/29/08 Obama camp sends negative mailer to North Dakota, with misleading attacks against Hillary on NAFTA and lobbyists.
[Source: FactHub]
01/28/08 Obama says Clinton is 'not being straight with the American people.'
[Source: New York Daily News]
01/27/08 Obama campaign accuses Hillary of 'cynically flouting' the rules.
[Source: Financial Times]
01/27/08 Obama says Hillary will 'say anything or do anything to win an election.'
[Source: Economist]
01/25/08 Obama campaigns says 'Hillary Clinton will do or say anything to win an election'
[Source: Plouffe Statement]
01/24/08 Obama paints Hillary as 'a president whose positions change with the politics of the moment.'
[Source: Boston Globe]
01/23/08 Obama radio ad says 'Hillary Clinton. She'll say anything, and change nothing. It's time to turn the page.'
[Source: Obama SC Radio ad]
01/23/08 HEADLINE: Obama Hurls New Anti-Clinton Broadsides.
[Source: AFP]
01/23/08 Obama truth squad member compares President Clinton to Lee Atwater.
[Source: CNN]
01/22/08 Obama supporter accuses Hillary of 'backbiting, bitter give-and take.'
[Source: Associated Press]
01/21/08 Obama tells Hillary, 'Truthfulness during campaigns makes a difference.'
[Source: South Carolina CNN Debate]
01/21/08 Obama described Hillary as 'a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.'
[Source: South Carolina CNN Debate]
01/20/08 Obama camp: 'people have heard a lot of things that just aren't true from the mouth of the First Lady…from the mouth of the campaign.'
[Source: Politico]
01/19/08 Obama campaign accuses Hillary campaign of looking for an excuse to 'evade the pledge.'
[Source: Politico]
01/18/08 Obama supporter says 'no amount of falsehoods from the Clinton campaign' can change Obama's record.
[Source: AP]
01/18/08 Obama campaign says Hillary's campaign 'clearly would like to have workers' voices silenced'
[Source: salon.com]
01/18/08 Obama suggests Hillary was not truthful and was 'willing to say anything to get elected.'
[Source: telegraph.co.uk]
01/17/08 Obama Campaign says Hillary is 'just trying to confuse people about Obama's record.'
[Source: Boston Globe]
01/16/08 Obama campaign says Hillary believes 'this is a race for who would make the best chief of staff.'
[Source: USA Today]
01/14/08 Obama says Hillary 'hasn't taken the issue of lobbying very seriously.'
[Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal]
01/13/08 Obama claims Hillary is distracted by 'political points-scoring.'
[Source: AP]
01/10/08 Obama supporter doubts Hillary's sincerity and says 'those tears have to be analyzed.'
[Source: New York Daily News]
01/10/08 Obama supporter mocks Hillary's teary moment and says 'don't cry' to Obama.
[Source: New York Post]
01/06/08 Obama's campaign accuses Hillary of trying to 'rewrite history.'
[Source: Newsday]
12/27/07 'Barack Obama's right hand man thinks [Hillary] may have had something to do' with Bhutto's assasination.
[Source: CNN.com]
12/27/07 Obama's campaign links Bhutto's assasination with Hillary's 'different judgment'
[Source: Politico]
12/27/07 Obama attacks Clintons, says 'problems were there long before George Bush ever took office.'
[Source: Chicago Sun-Times]
12/27/07 Headline: Obama Says It Would Be 'Madness' To Elect 'Same People…Over Again' and Expect Change
[Source: abcnews.com]
12/23/07 Obama asserts Hillary will be 'playing on a very short field' against Republicans.
[Source: CBS]
12/21/07 Obama Camp Registers Anti-Clinton Web Sites
[Source: abcnews.com]
12/18/07 Obama Hits Hillary In New Hampshire Mailer
[Source: tpmelectioncentral.com]
12/18/07 Obama Goes Negative
[Source: The Page]
12/04/07 HEADLINE: Obama: Clinton can't win mandate for change
[Source: Des Moines Register]
12/03/07 Obama campaign said Hillary's campaign is 'desperate and negative.'
[Source: The Hill]
11/26/07 Obama claims Hillary is arguing she is 'the best qualified' to President because she talked to Bill Clinton 'on occasion.'
[Source: abcnews.com]
11/19/07 Obama attacks Hillary on NAFTA
[Source: Washington Times]
11/19/07 HEADLINE: In Iowa, Barack Obama criticizes Hillary Rodham Clinton on NAFTA, trade
[Source: AP]
11/18/07 HEADLINE: Obama continues not-so-subtle jabs during quick Texas stop
[Source: AP]
11/14/07 Obama surrogate Larry Tribe: '[Hillary is] not really a phony, though she plays one on TV.'
[Source: Concord Monitor]
11/09/07 HEADLINE: Obama hits Clinton on domestic front
[Source: Rocky Mountain News]
11/07/07 HEADLINE: Obama: Clinton flip-flops on energy
[Source: Des Moines Register]
11/06/07 HEADLINE: Obama turns up heat as he targets Hillary
[Source: Chicago Sun-Times]
11/03/07 HEADLINE: Obama calls Bush leadership catastrophic, extends criticism of Clinton
[Source: AP]
11/03/07 Obama says Hillary is 'disingenuous'
[Source: Newsweek]
11/01/07 Obama chief strategist says Hillary passes 'everything through a political calculator' and is not 'forthright.'
[Source: LA Times]
10/31/07 Obama Goes Negative on Clinton
[Source: wsj.com]
10/30/07 Obama chief strategist: Hillary 'has a special-interest obsession.'
[Source: MSNBC]
10/29/07 HEADLINE: Obama criticizes Clinton over Social Security
[Source: Quad City Times]
10/28/07 Headline: Clinton sidesteps social security issue, Obama says in DM
[Source: Des Moines Register]
10/26/07 Obama said Hillary is 'afraid of losing a propaganda battle to some small-time dictator.'
[Source: Obama Rally]
10/23/07 Obama Targets Clinton's Iran Stance in Iowa Mailer
[Source: foxnews.com]
10/15/07 Obama accuses Hillary of 'triangulation and poll-driven politics'
[Source: AP]
10/13/07 Obama says Hillary is willing to 'go along with Bush policies.'
[Source: CNN]
10/12/07 HEADLINE: Obama: Bye-Bye Mr. Nice Guy?
[Source: Chicago Tribune]
10/12/07 HEADLINE: Obama attacks Clinton on Iraq vote
[Source: Quad City Times]
10/12/07 Obama campaign says Hillary tries to 'duck legitimate questions.'
[Source: Obama Campaign Memo]
10/12/07 Obama campaign says it questions 'what principles, if any' Hillary has.
[Source: Obama Campaign Memo]
10/11/07 Obama accuses Hillary of trying to 'massage the past.'
[Source: CNN]
09/29/07 HEADLINE: Obama uses Bill Clinton's words against Hillary
[Source: AP]
09/05/07 HEADLINE: Obama says he won't make the same mistakes as Clinton on health care reform
[Source: AP]
07/27/07 HEADLINE: Obama likens Hillary to Bush; Hints at poor foreign policy
[Source: Washington Times]
06/16/07 Obama campaign pushes opposition research referring to Hillary as '(D-Punjab).'
[Source: Washington Post]
02/12/07 HEADLINE: Obama's first salvo targets Hillary Clinton
[Source: Daily Telegraph]
April 19th, 2008 at 10:12 am
David asks: "Have you ever thought that Hamas would endorse Obama because they'd rather see Republicans in office? They KNOW it will drive down his numbers in America, they're not dumb."
You're hypothesis is wrong, Dave.
Hamas and other Islamic terrorists favor B. Hussein Obama for very pragmatic reasons — 1) he will grant them victory in Iraq and 2) will be generally impotent in the war on terror.
Then there are the intangable reasons for Hamas and other Muslim terrorists to support Obama. They sense a kinship with him. Fact.
You say these Muslims are not dumb. Well, these barbarians are not exactly brilliant, either. They are smart enough to realize that a significant semgment of BO's supporters here are America-haters. And here I'm not just speaking of Hussein Obama's spiritual guru — the bigoted Jerry Wright. The other America-haters include the Left, much of which currently pollutes our colleges & universities, Hollywood, etc.
But, the Muslim terrorists like Hamas are not smart enough to know that, once the American people see BO what what he is, they will vomit him out of national political life.
+++
King says, "Bush's middle east policy has led to increased extremist recruiting"
Perhaps.
But without a doubt, Bush's policies in Iraq have lead to an increase in the extermination of Muslim extremists.
And say what you will about Bush's excessive deference to Muslim sensitivities, there has been no terrorist attack here in the U.S. since 9-11. Maybe the killing of these mutts in Iraq has something to do with this success, ya think?
April 19th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Some "experts" have stated that the Muslim extremists would rather see a Rep. win. They dont believe the policies will differ drastically just that the Dem. rhetoric which wil be less strident thus slowing their recruitment. My opinion —either way they believe America will act with restraint and rather than allow the military to take the gloves off and go on the offensive we will continue on the present course and slowly crumble through debt and loss of will.
April 19th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Humble you are sticking up for Hillary, I see. I agree with all the things you said to make his campaign something less than decent and believe that the Clintons haven't had to get nearly as nasty as they could have because of the way he has campaigned. He has run what I see as an attempt to be considered a messiah by the people that I have come to call his cult and they have followed obediently.
Clinton v. McCain is what I want to see since so many of the cult have said they won't vote for Hillary. Who cares whether they vote for McCain or not, they will be doing him a favor if they don't vote. Surely there won't be so many Republicans of the far right variety, (whoops we have one of those among us, don't we?), that won't vote for McCain as to keep him from winning. If they get their way and Hillary wins most of them will be very sorry they backed out.
April 19th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Da King: It's not reverse psychology. The point is under a Republican president, Islamic extremism has grown in power in the Middle East, and part of that is due to the administration's policies. To think they may welcome another Republican administration isn't any crazy idea. Now, I for one think McCain would be much more effective than Bush, mainly because he's not Bush, and its my belief that McCain will listen to a wide variety of inputs and is entirely capable of implementing an effective foreign policy in the region.
However, to say that these extremists really want a Democrat in office because it will work to their benefit is absurd, in my opinion.
Another point - Iran doesn't want the U.S. out of Iraq, at this point. They want a U.S. presence, but not a stable, prosperous rival. They are quite content with letting the U.S. spending billions in Iraq, while making relatively little progress (as far as they're concerned).
I'd also submit that many in the US foreign and civil service are quite aware of very immense problems Iran and their cronies are causing in the Middle East. Nothing drastic is gonna happen with any of these new possible presidents.
The basic point: Given the policies of the last 7 years, and given the real recognition within the USG that Iran is a real and growing threat, I don't think it's fair to say those terrorist groups are begging for Dems.
Ghost: We're pretty far apart, so I'll just agree to disagree. I do think it's entirely possible the war in Iraq has led to less possibility of an attack here, because terrorist groups are placing more resources there. But that also comes at a high cost - so I guess it depends on if you think it's creating more extremism or eliminating more, while also factoring the human and economic cost. Very tough call, for sure.
April 19th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
David,
There is another school of thought that says they want the US out of Iraq. The reason is that once they control southern Iraq it gives them access to the area of Saudi oifields that are in the Shite area. This gives them the chance to destabilize their Arab/Sunni foe and possibly pick up oil production to suplement their dwindling output.
April 20th, 2008 at 12:25 am
Well, that's certainly a possibility, but Iran's relationship with Shiites in Iraq is actually very complex, and it's not a given they'll be on good working terms with them - esp. when your talking about Iraqi oil. Part of the reason that Iran is not keen on the U.S. leaving is their skepticism of Iraqi Shiites.
But you bring up a good point. At any rate, the problem is that the U.S. is going to have to reduce their presence in the not-too-distant future. The key is too look at the problems in Iraq pragmatically, and that's means not leaving rapidly just for the sake of getting out, and not staying based on some idea of "victory". The answer lies somewhere in the middle.
As a side note (and back to the point that I previously made), I believe McCain or Obama are going to be much more pragmatic than they're being painted. McCain is largely campaigning on "stay til we win" message, and Obama is generally going with the "Get out now/soon" message. It's my personal belief that either would look at this in a much more practical way than many seem to believe.
April 20th, 2008 at 9:52 am
David writes, "Ghost: We're pretty far apart, so I'll just agree to disagree."
That's an understatement, for use. But be clear about one thing:
Regardless of why Muslim terrorists support B. Hussein Obama, it is desirable that the America people know that, in fact, they do.
Then, Dim apologists like yourself are free to try and make a silk purse out of this sow's ear — just like what is being attempted regarding BHO's close association with the raving bigot, Jerry Wright — by rationalizing the facts to the voting public.
But of course we both know the facts are so damaging to B. Hussein Obama that he's greatly diminished [by exposure] merely by the debate being held.
April 20th, 2008 at 11:20 am
I think David is underestimating McCain's militarism.
McCain has made it extremely clear that he agrees and supports the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive, unilateral wars of choice.
He not only promises there will be "more wars"…..but also with him as president, those wars will be bigger wars. His only objection to Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney, seen also in a comment here, is that the Iraq assault wasn't bigger and more destructive.
McCain is reliving, in his angry mind, his Vietnam days. This, to me, is transparent.
It's ironic, yet still true, that McCain's supposed strength, that is, his foreign policy/military experience, is in fact, the strongest reason why he should never be president.
W. on steroids.
April 20th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Vince,
I think Bush deserves a lot of credit for preventing terrorist attacks here following 9/11, more than he gets. He went to great lengths to make sure they didn't happen, with the left fighting him much of the way, and many plots were stopped. And yes, invading Iraq and Afghanistan led to the killing or apprehending of a lot of extremists. However, I don't think we had to go into Iraq to accomplish that, and there are plenty more extremists in the middle east to deal with. You won't find me shedding a tear for Saddam, I'm glad he's gone, but I thought from the beginning that going into Iraq was a dangerous tactic, and could create as many problems as it solved. After we were in Iraq, it was a different story. Then we HAD to succeed. We still do. It's mandatory. At this point, if a Dem wins the White House and starts pulling out prematurely, that will greatly increase the chances of failure, and waste the huge effort made so far. I still can barely believe the Dem candidates are serious when they make these unqualified statements about pulling out of Iraq. That is highly irresponsible.
April 20th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Rev,
Many Democrats criticized Bush for not going into Iraq bigger than he did. They blamed the small size of our force for the lack of security following Saddam being ousted and the subsequent chaos. Now you are blaming McCain for agreeing with the Dems on that ? It was a valid criticism of Bush/Rumsfeld and McCain was right.
And please spare us the amateur psychoanalysis of John McCain, Dr. Sigmund Fraud.
April 20th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
King,
Whether going into Iraq was a mistake or not is a vaild question.
In retrospect, given the half-ass, politically correct way the war was fought, one can argue that it was a mistake.
[But that's water under the bridge. Like you say, King, the bigger mistake would be a reckless pullout as advocated by B. Hussein Obama, Comrade Hillary, and the America-hating Left.]
And this nation building, especially in the Middle East, is for the birds. In fact, Bush himself said so in his campaign for the presidency in 2000. He only changed his mind after we were in Iraq and had a mess on our hands.
April 22nd, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Mr. Ghost,
You are hilarious! I didn't know we were fighting Hamas in Iraq. But it really is amazing that you are able to glean their motives, too. As to the other "Muslim terrorists", Al-Qaeda of Mesopatamia will last about two weeks after we leave, the Irani supported Shia and the Saudi backed Sunnis only became terrorists through our actions.
As to the "half-ass politically correct way in which the war was fought", the war was fought efficiently, it is the aftermath that is screwed up. The PNAC architects tried to turn Iraq into their free enterprise paradise. They were so deluded that they thought Iraqis would welcome us.
Perhaps you can tell us when either candidate promised a "reckless pullout".
Nation building is indeed, for the birds. But that is not what we're doing in Iraq. We've destroyed Iraq.
April 22nd, 2008 at 6:27 pm
"Perhaps you can tell us when either candidate promised a 'reckless pullout'"
Sure. The two remaining Dims have been promising a precipitious pullout from Iraq throughout the entire primary campaign — B. Hussein Obama more so than Comrade Hillary.
April 23rd, 2008 at 4:49 am
What part of Obama/Hillary's claims that 'we will end the Iraq war' is so hard to understand, frank ? Seems pretty clear to me. Obama voted to stop funding for Iraq last year, which would have stopped the war immediately, and he also voted for a troop withdrawal last year that would have had all our troops out by now. What is hilarious is how you and the Rev pretend none of that ever happened.
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:09 am
Pretending is what these clowns do. That's why they're Dims.
April 23rd, 2008 at 8:52 am
Frank doesn't consider "We will get out a bit at a time but be out in 16 months" as precipitous at all. I wonder what the terrorists would consider something like that that they could lie low and wait until it happened and then come back to "work". Somehow I don't think they view those words the same way Frank does.
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:38 am
Mr. Ghost and Mr. King,
It sounds like you both think that any ending of our occupation would be reckless. Actually, with Ms. Clinton, I'm sure the occupation would continue on a much smaller scale at our permanent(enduring) military bases.
Mr. roysoldboy,
I don't consider a 16 month schedule for ending our occupation as precipitous. Iraq is becoming a de facto confederacy. Kurds, Shia, and Sunni are migrating to their regions to avoid the sectarian violence resulting in ethnic cleansing. Our presence there is not stopping this. Although we owe the Iraqis for destroying their country, we can't unscramble this egg. And Mr. roysoldboy, remember that the people you refer to as terrorists are participants in a civil war that we unleashed and are in no way connected with the perpetrators of 9/11.