05
Mar
08

Commentary On The Hillary Clinton Clusterf**k

  • John Hood on National Review Online: Well, You Wanted Change
    • except: “Clinton had several advantages going into Tuesday’s big prizes of Ohio and Texas. First, the Clinton team is tough, experienced, and willing to do pretty much whatever it takes to win a nomination to which the Clintons feel morally entitled. When my own boys, aged 10 and 7, came home from school the other day and asked how ‘the Muslim’ was doing in the presidential race, I knew that the Clintons’ viral marketing was infecting the broader population.”
  • Marc Cooper on The Huffington Post: It’s 3 a.m. and Hillary’s Dreaming
    • excerpt: “Clinton regained her footing this past week primarily by running a classic, Republican-style campaign of negative, fear-based ads. She blanketed the airwaves with a detestable spot that, stripped to its core message, warned that if Obama were selected, your children could be murdered in their beds in the middle of the night. Somewhere up above (or more likely from down below), departed GOP mudmeister Lee Atwater is cracking a grin.”
  • John Nichols on The Nation: Now It Gets Dangerous For Democrats
    • excerpt: “There was ‘Barack stole lines from Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick’ hit. There was the ‘Barack stole a page from Karl Rove when he sent out negative mailings’ hit. There was the ‘Barack dresses like a Muslim’ hit. There was the ‘Barack’s campaign told the Canadians one thing about trade and Ohio another thing’ hit. There was the ‘Barack’s not the guy you want answering the phone in the White House’ hit. There was even the ‘Barack’s defiling the memory of Ann Richards because she would have wanted Hillary to have a clean shot at the nomination’ hit. And always, always, always, there was the steady drumbeat from candidate Clinton that: ‘”I have a lifetime of experience I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech (against authorizing President Bush to attack Iraq) he made in 2002.'”
    • And “If the Clinton camp runs the right campaign on legitimate issues, and if it does so with dignity, they will not harm Democratic prospects in November – no matter who the nominee turns out to be. On the other hand, if they run wrong, and seek to destroy Obama by any means necessary, they could be responsible for two defeats: Clinton’s for the nomination and Obama’s for the presidency in November.”
  • Alex Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair on CounterPunch: A Great Day for McCain (and maybe Nader)
    • excerpt: “The Clintons have never been confused their own political fortunes with those of the Democratic Party. In 1996 and 1998 Bill Clinton refused to release campaign surpluses from his own war chest to help elect Democrats to the House and the Senate. Obama’s campaign has most certainly rallied blacks and the young to the Democratic Party. These new recruits will surely melt away as they see the party machine grind the politics of hope in the dirt.”
  • The Huffington Post: Obama Camp Lays Ground For Negative Attacks
    • excerpt: “The Obama camp appears to be laying ground for pushing back against Hillary Clinton’s latest campaign attacks, even if that means taking a negative approach themselves. The difficulty, as has been noted in the past, is maintaining the positive approach that has dominated his campaign while still drawing contrast with the Clintons.”
Advertisements

3 Responses to “Commentary On The Hillary Clinton Clusterf**k”


  1. 1 M.Miller
    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm

    Wow. Can you sight to me some proof that the ‘muslim’ sling came from the Clintons? Can you offer some proof that Obama didn’t give 710,000 this past year from his PAC to 36 Super Delegates who have endorsed him? Do you not see Karl Rove in action with the photo of Obama in native garb?
    I believe Hillary has a right to point out Obama’s shorts and the ad with the children did not infer your children would be murdered in their beds by a lunatic from Obamas zealots..the ad pointed out her willingness to work 24/7 to protect all of us in America from what ever may happen, any where in the world, that would threaten our way of life and most importantly, the well being of our children.
    My bet is if your boys, aged 10 and 7 came home talking about ‘muslims’ is that their friends overheard their parents and repeated their views.. Most bias and prejudice in children is learned. Did you ask your boys about who said those things? If your boys told you the answer, did you go to the source and correct them, if what they were saying was offensive? Hillary Clinton has always been a champion for children. Read “It takes a village”. She is adamant about opportunity and education for children and always has been. She has a very long and fine record of improving schools starting in her college days, through her tenure as First Lady of Arkansas and until now.
    She and anyone who knows her knows she would never make any disparaging comment about any religion or ethnicity. She is a champion now and always has been of diversity which has been pushed to the background noise of this campaign. Her top tier campaign staff has always reflected that-unlike Obama who has no minority representation on his top tier. (Wall Street Journal)
    So before you write a snide remark about Mrs Clinton-get some facts and try and teach your boys that the buck stops at you.

  2. 2 tony
    March 5, 2008 at 8:52 pm

    Reposting others’ words without citing any sources for the accusations and other claims doesn’t do any candidate any good. If you want to make an impact with your posting, be responsible and make it factual and irrefutable through citation.

  3. 3 Meredith
    March 6, 2008 at 10:23 am

    I posted commentaries by other people, with links to the commentaries, on my site because not everyone has time to troll through the internet to find interesting thoughts on the issues. I collect news stories as well. I love when people look at one post on your blog and make sweeping judgments and criticisms without taking a look at more of the material provided. I had posted my opinions on the issue earlier. And I cite all my sources. I suggest people do a little more research and find out just a little more about the subject (my blogging methods) before criticizing.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Scarlet Letter of Atheism

a

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

Blog Stats

  • 95,714 hits
WordPress Political Blogger

Top Clicks

  • None

%d bloggers like this: