home

Obama Attacks Hillary's FP Credentials

By Big Tent Democrat

If you are interested in the details of the attacks, go here. I am more interested to see if anyone is going to be shocked and appalled by Obama's attacks. I am not shocked. I am not appalled. This is a political campaign.

Do I wish he did not attack Clinton? Of course. I wish Clinton did not attack him. But all this shock and outrage going around about political attacks in a political campaign is a bit much.

Enough with the Political Sorrow and Pity.

< Super Delegates Will Decide The Nomination Open Thread | Tuesday Morning Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Even with all (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:07:31 AM EST
    the point by point attacks by the Obama campaign, he does nothing to show HIS FP credentials. Other than repeating till they're blue in the face that when he wasn't a senator he "got it right."

    exactly (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:11:18 AM EST
    As with the McCain being qualified statement, where Clinton clearly said that you would have to ask Obama is he passed the qualifications threshold, and Obama's response was, "Wah!!! She said McCain is more qualified than I am!!!  No fair!!!"  

    When saying, "This is why I am as qualified as Clinton if not more so..." would have worked a lot better.  Though, then again, since he's not, and he'd basically have to repeat falsehoods like the above, then maybe he chose the only answer he could.

    Parent

    That's not a small point (none / 0) (#30)
    by magster on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:22:22 AM EST
    But it's not a point (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:32:30 AM EST
    For which he has ever come under fire.

    Even on this thing that he claims to understand better than Clinton, he has never taken a stand on it to the point where he's been attacked by anyone for it.

    He managed to be the only anti-Iraq war advocate who also managed the neat trick of not getting himself polarized by his advocacy.

    For an Obama supporter, that means he's an expert Politician.

    For others it might mean he backed off his anti-Iraq war advocacy for a few years and then ramped it back up for the election.

    Parent

    I don't object (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Firefly4625 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:08:22 AM EST
    to them attacking each other on the merits. What I do object to is how the media seems to always paint it as:

    "Clinton ATTACKS" - "Clinton goes negative"

    and,

    "Obama GETS TOUGH" - "Obama FIRES BACK"

    The differences in the narratives are just glaring. So, I guess what I'm saying is that yes, attacks are normal and to be expected - but with the way they're portrayed, Obama ALWAYS gets more bang for his buck. And that, to me, is the outrage.

    Well I think SNL (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:09:12 AM EST
    tried to put a stop to it.

    Sisko came before Janeway.


    Parent

    And the MSM (none / 0) (#97)
    by 0 politico on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:32:34 PM EST
    will forget to remind folks of his non-functional chairmanship of his "foreign relations" subcommitte, too.

    Parent
    It's funny (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:08:42 AM EST
    because this is basically he said/she said stuff.  It reminds me of dueling experts in criminal trials.  You believe the one you want to believe.  Is this Obama supporter more credible than Clinton supporters?  Then, there is the fact that many, many people on the ground give credit to Clinton for working with women in Ireland, for instance.  Anyone who knows the history of the Troubles knows that it was the women who made things happen.  

    "I am quite surprised that anyone would suggest that Hillary Clinton did not perform important foreign policy work as first lady. I can state from firsthand experience that she played a positive role for over a decade in helping to bring peace to Northern Ireland," said former SDLP leader and Nobel laureate John Hume

    LINK

    And the there is Kosovo, where Clinton worked to open borders to keep refugees from being slaughtered:

    19 May 1999 - Just back from a weekend tour of refugee camps in Macedonia, US first lady Hillary Clinton yesterday announced an extra US$15m in US aid for ethnic Albanians who fled Kosovo, reports AFP.

    LINK

    Did you see (none / 0) (#14)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:13:33 AM EST
    the comments? Along with the horrible pics of HRC as their avatars? I'm so disturbed by this. And I've never seen anything of the sort coming from Clinton supporters. I have never seen a freaky Obama face as an avatar. I cannot get over the level of vitriol hurled at her from his supporters. I've never even seen it to this extent done by right-wingers. It's truly the most disturbing aspect of this campaign season for me. Add that to the misogyny and sexism displayed by the MSM and it's a horror show.

    Parent
    I have to be careful but I must respond (none / 0) (#53)
    by Independence33 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:32:45 AM EST
    I love all the outrage by commenters when this "web locations" commenters just had a thread that compared a picture of Barack Obama with that of a muppet. "Web locations" can not be responsible for the ignorant things that their commenters do. I dont hold this "web location" responsible for the muppet comparisons but it is interesting what gets deleted and what doesnt. Seems to me that it depends on who you insult. You can call me a cultist or a confused neophyte all you want but I guess I am a Obama supporter.

    Parent
    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:38:23 AM EST
    This site does take some responsibility for the behavior of it's commenters.

    Anti-Obama screeds that cross a line are deleted and if the commenter persists, posting priveleges taken away.

    As I understand it, when Markos goes on TV to explain how his "Kossacks" behave he says "It's not my job, It's democracy."

    I would expect a different answer from Jeralyn, et al to the same question.


    Parent

    This commenter was just outraged by people having bad pictures of Clinton as their avatar. I agree that this is pretty childish but so is having a thread comparing a pic of Obama to a muppett. As far as I know this was not deleted and I saw no outrage. I have been completley respectful and called no names or belittled anyone yet I was censored here for a day for saying "leave it to this site to have a "Obama is bad for Democrats" thread the monday after he helped Bill Foster win." I think that is completly appropriate and a simple critique. I def. like this site or I wouldnt still be checking it out.( I admit that I made the idle threat of leaving and never coming back but I just couldnt stay away)  Sorry, I know that this might have pleased some. I just like hearing the other side of things and having a debate. Thats what politics is all about. You def. cant criticize the stories or content of this "web location" or its out of bounds.

    Parent
    I wasn't going to weigh in on this but... (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22:46 PM EST
    ...if I say that Bill Clinton reminds me of Fozzie Bear, will that make you happier?

    Parent
    Obama as muppet (none / 0) (#71)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:46:55 AM EST
    That was me, and I stand by my post that the picture of Obama on the cover of Rolling Stone looks shockingly similar to this picture of Sam the Eagle:  PICTURE

    Obviously this comparison bothered you because this is the second time you've brought it up.  I didn't post it maliciously.  I posted it as a joke.  And on a personal note, I happen to love Sam the Eagle.  He was one of my favorites behind Beaker.

    Parent

    Yea (none / 0) (#77)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:54:48 AM EST
    I love my dog but saying that you look like her would be not well received, imo. Just a guess..

    Parent
    squeaky (none / 0) (#104)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:00:16 PM EST
    you do a great disservice to Sam the Eagle.  Have you seen those commanding eyebrows?  That "do or die" glare?

    Parent
    My Dog Is Also Beyond Cute (none / 0) (#113)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:55:44 PM EST
    With eyes that would melt the coldest heart.  

    When I start hearing you fawning over Obama as you do your muppet love,  I will read your comment as a compliment.

    Parent

    Hello Kathy, I know its a joke and its funny (none / 0) (#94)
    by Independence33 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22:34 PM EST
    Thats why I made the joke originally about this being "Karl Rove muppet tactics". The larger point though is that this kind of silly stuff goes on in campaigns. There is no doubt in my mind that a lot of people make ignorant, mysoginistic arguments against Clinton that are unwarranted and wrong. Obama is dealing with the same on the racial attacks. I just find it funny all the outrage by some when their particular fav. is targeted but none when the other is. I made it a point to defend Clinton when I was sent an ignorant e-mail claiming she wouldnt meet with the Golds Star Mothers. It was an obvious lie and I mass e-mailed all the people that got it and pointed them towards the truth. My point is that some are very selective with what outrages them and what they delete.  

    Parent
    John Hume is an amazing guy... (none / 0) (#32)
    by kredwyn on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:22:37 AM EST
    I got to study a lot re: his participation in early NICRA agitation and then later in his efforts to bring peace to NIreland. And then I had a chance to meet him at a book signing back in 96.

    He looked exhausted. But damn...his efforts and those of the Women's Party were worth it at the Stormont table.

    Don't forget...this wasn't just a tea party with the "ladies of Ireland." This was sitting down with the women of Northern Ireland intent on creating the Northern Ireland Women's Coalition, an amazing group of women.

    Parent

    Absurd (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:09:27 AM EST
    Both candidates are qualified as CIC. Considering that everyone is pulling the necessary job requirements out of their butts, it all seems absurd. Given the criteria bandied about in the current pissing contest, McCain would be the best CIC and we know what a horror that would be. The warmongerer would be at least as bad as GWB.

    Having a good childhood seems more relevant than all the foreign policy experience in the world does, and that is no indicator of how a President would act as CIC.

    Politics as usual.

    A dumb strategy for Obama (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:16:06 AM EST
    First, because the argument behind these attacks is "we both don't have much experience."

    Hurrah!  Neither Democrat has FP experience.

    Second, because most won't believe it. Every American knows Hillary wasn't like other first ladies.  Even the pug attacks on her are based on this thesis.

    He would be better served furthering his judgment argument.

    this is the heart of the matter (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:20:08 AM EST
    Every American knows Hillary wasn't like other first ladies.

    Even those who don't particularly care for Clinton admit that she took a very active roll in her husband's presidency.  That fact is one of the very reasons that people started hating her.

    Parent

    So (none / 0) (#76)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:54:33 AM EST
    instead he should just let Hillary paint him as the only one who is not experienced?  Hillary opened this can of worms.  She can't complain if it comes back at her.

    Hillary's stated level of experience is nowhere near her ACTUAL level of experience.  You can go hereif you want to see a criticism of her claims.

    Parent

    He's welcome to try it ... (none / 0) (#92)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:21:46 PM EST
    I just don't think it will work.

    Fly, react like I'm outraged by Obama's tactic.  I don't do outrage.

    Obama's welcome to pull any arrow out of his political quiver.  Just think this one has a blunt end.

    Parent

    I don't think you're outraged (none / 0) (#100)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:45:00 PM EST
    that's why I referred to Hillary.

    I think this is a bad attack for both of them because they both are inferior to McCain on this issue.  

    Obama can't let this argument sit out there.  He needs to respond to it.  

    It won't change the minds of the Hillary faithful here but not everyone thinks that Hillary was co-president with Bill.

    Parent

    Both inferior to McCain? (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:52:43 PM EST
    Where's McCain's executive branch experience?

    Parent
    Compared to (none / 0) (#105)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:19:06 PM EST
    the two of him he has more experienced in this regard.  Ex military officer.  Senator for a gazillion years. Pushed through all sorts of notable legislation.

    It doesn't mean much to me but I certainly don't think that either candidate wants to make the differentiator be experience because they both lose.

    Parent

    Don't see it ... (5.00 / 2) (#106)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:32:03 PM EST
    having experience on both ends of Capital hill trumps senatorial experience.

    He gains something from his Military service.  But that's blunted somewhat by Clinton's support from flag officers.

    And no one doubts Hillary is tough.  Even Obama concedes that point.

    Sorry, I think Hillary can win this argument.  Obama can't.  

    Unless he can find a way to expand on his judgment argument.  The one speech judgment notion isn't enough.

    Parent

    Well of course you (none / 0) (#107)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:34:00 PM EST
    think she's experienced enough.  You support her!

    Toughness is not part of the discussion.  

    We were talking about experience.  Hillary has unofficial chats with diplomats.  McCain has time spent in a POW camp.  Whether you like it or not, McCain wins the experience debate.

    Parent

    Last time I checked (none / 0) (#109)
    by tree on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:40:16 PM EST
    We were talking about experience.  Hillary has unofficial chats with diplomats.  McCain has time spent in a POW camp.

    Sitting Presidents don't spend their time in POW camps. It hasn't ever been considered a prerequisite for higher office. Don't think it ever will be. On the other hand, presidents do speak with diplomats.
     

    Parent

    what does expending time in a POW camp (none / 0) (#111)
    by Florida Resident on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:42:07 PM EST
    qualify you for anything but maybe toughness?

    Cause I have a few friends who spent time in POW camps in Nam and I wouldn't want them to be President.

    Parent

    If you don't think toughness ... (none / 0) (#112)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:47:56 PM EST
    is part of the FP argument you've been asleep for 30 years.

    Against Hillary, McCain needs to do some work to win the FP experience argument.  Against Obama he just has to show up.

    You're still trying to dumb down Hillary's experience, and it just won't work.

    Obama's best chance is expanding his judgment argument.  Where the argument stands right now works in primaries (though its power is fading), but it won't work in the general.

    Parent

    Believe it or not (none / 0) (#116)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:11:11 PM EST
    but I have no interest in "dumbing down" Hillary's experience argument because I know that all 3 of them do not have the experience.  

    Parent
    But you are dumbing it down (none / 0) (#131)
    by felizarte on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 04:17:20 PM EST
    by saying all three of them do not have experience.  The three of them are NOT the same.  Hillary had a ringside seat where foreign policy was deliberated on.  It's true that she never attended national security agency meetings, but Bill Clinton says he used her as a sounding board.  I remember how Mrs. Carter got barbecued in the media for attending cabinet meetings because Jimmy Carter asked her to.  But with Hillary, as some poster pointed out, the whole world was aware that she was a much more active in politics as a First Lady.  

    Being a prisoner of War for soi many years gives one experience on being a prisoner of war and perhaps the effect of the wrong foreign policy; but it is not experience in FP per se.

    This is the whole idea of the Foreign Policy debate:  who is better prepared? Who has had the opportunity to be exposed to the various issues affecting the USA, close up?

    Parent

    Capitol Hill ... (none / 0) (#108)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:35:20 PM EST
    typing too fast today.

    I even remember the mnemonic for this "capitol has an O, because capitols have domes."

    Parent

    That would be more honest and respectable (none / 0) (#110)
    by Ellie on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:41:53 PM EST
    He would be better served furthering his judgment argument.

    I'd be more inclined to trust what he has to say about himself and his New Politics if judgment, and showing some leadership on current issues, were the basis of his pitch to voters.

    But they're not. What I've seen mostly is mud-slinging and divisive, smarmy tactics from his team.

    And hiding away when the worst stuff is happening doesn't look good on him and doesn't enhance his argument that he's the leader we should have after the last image-over-substance doofus we got stuck with.

    Parent

    Obama's argument (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:18:37 AM EST
    She has no experience and I "Obama" have less.  

    ha-ha (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:20:59 AM EST
    "You think Hillary's inexperienced?  You should see my record!"

    Parent
    No wait (none / 0) (#29)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:22:13 AM EST
    He did kindergarten in Indonesia.  That is FP experience.  

    Parent
    Reverse me-too-ism. (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by MarkL on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:46:12 AM EST
    "She's no more qualified than I am".
    Now there's an argument that inspires confidence.

    Parent
    Kinda strange (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by Steve M on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:56:17 AM EST
    that even though Obama is guaranteed the nomination due to his insurmountable lead in pledged delegates, he's spending time tearing down Clinton's foreign policy credentials.

    Are his supporters wrong when they repeatedly assert that Obama has this thing in the bag, that Clinton should just give up now for the good of the party?  Or are they under the impression that he's just doing this for fun?

    No, its in the bag (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:20:40 PM EST
    They just have to make sure all of us know its in the bag. You see, some of us are just deluded, or dumb, and don't realize it is over. So its kind of public service on their part. After school special: its over, go home, accept it.

    Parent
    See, the 3am ad has worked (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by NJDem on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:21:11 PM EST
    (even if I didn't care for it too much, initially).  

    Not only did it probably win her TX--this is the argument she wants to have.  You can't deny that her time as First Lady and during the Senate makes her more qualified than BO (and for those that disagree, please listen to what the 30 flag officers have to say about her, what the former PM of Ireland has said, and actually check her website for the facts that she was involved in the 90s).  

    While she was personally chosen by the Pentagon as the ONLY Senator to spearhead their modernization task force, BO was too busy campaigning to hold a hearing on his committee (the chronology may be off on that, but you get my point).  

    Facts are facts, and he's just not going to win this argument, and if anything, he'll alienate more women as he dismisses her experience.            

    LOL (none / 0) (#1)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 10:58:34 AM EST
    It's a lame attack, if that's an attack.

    There's been some back and forth on this.

    Here's a good Diary entry on the topic.

    http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/10/235744/616

    In any case, they're not just repeating it.   It's backed up testimonials and endorsements.

    I had (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by 0 politico on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:12:57 AM EST
    read about the Irish peace efforts.  Irish Echo published a piece last week (see: http://www.irishecho.com/newspaper/story.cfm?id=18626)) that went into details.  Perhaps some folks should read this.

    I did not know much about the Kosovo experience, but it does not hurt.

    Together, these make taking an AIDS test (I think that's what it was) that BO sound rather minor by comparison.

    I know the BO campaign feels it needs to press its case, but going after FP is going to be a losing proposition in the eyes of anyone who studies up.

    BTW - most foreign policy work does not make the "front page" in this country, but people who are interested or involved (with FP) know that.

    Parent

    Yep, this is getting my Irish up (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:23:46 AM EST
    as we say.  And more than 40% of Americans have Irish heritage (including Obama), so this could get a lot of Irish up.  

    And almost on the eve of St. Paddy's?  Oh oh.

    Parent

    FP Credentials? (none / 0) (#2)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:04:04 AM EST
    Where is Clinton a front pager?  At Taylor Marsh?

    She's welcome to use my frontpage but anyway... (none / 0) (#10)
    by goldberry on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:10:36 AM EST
    I'm thinking that this is going to backfire on Obama. Don't ask me why. It's just a hunch.  Besides, no one's paying any attention to him.  It's all Spitzer today.  


    Parent
    both true (none / 0) (#19)
    by Nasarius on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:16:51 AM EST
    And I'd say it will backfire because while Hillary wasn't exactly the Secretary of State, Obama's foreign policy record is pretty much nonexistent. Really bad idea.

    Parent
    It was actually (none / 0) (#23)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:19:38 AM EST
    not very smart of him to put this out there today since Spitzer is dominating every news cycle. Sex scandals will always trump other news. Even now.  And it will backfire because all it does is re-iterate in the minds of voters (not converted Obama philes since that's preaching to the choir) that he has even LESS FP experience than HRC.

    Parent
    GE (none / 0) (#3)
    by waldenpond on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:04:22 AM EST
    Obama has 'new politician'.  Clinton has 'experience'.  They trash each other it just gives McCain room.  He's known for breaking with his party, thus not a traditional politician.  He has the 'experience' label.  It's stupid politics but it was going to happen.  It always happens.

    I'm not only shocked.  I'm shocked, appalled, aghast, outraged, mortified, agonized, disturbed to the deepest depths of my soul.  Oh how, oh how could this have happened?  Insert CAPS, characters $#@###, and exclamation points !!!!!! here ______.

    Was it me or was the 'fair minded and objective i.e. not affiliated with the Clinton campaign' kind of odd?  If someone feels she is best to deal with FP issues, wouldn't you associate with her campaign.  I'm getting tired of all of the circular logic coming out of the Obama campaign.

    BAU (none / 0) (#9)
    by Salt on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:09:42 AM EST
    and no shock from me, I think Obama's campaign is extremely negative always has been exploiting some of the worst group grievances using Lee Atwater's methods with a differing target while claiming its the other side.  This new one women as sneaky and deceptive is just flaming no surprise here I expect this nasty stuff don't like it of course.

    It seems to me (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Firefly4625 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:22:00 AM EST
    that Obama's strategy is to demonize Clinton in every way possible. The "monster" comment is a perfect example. Not to mention that Obama spent yesterday on the stump accusing Clinton of leaking the Somalia photo - no accident that the Mississippi primary (huge AA populaton) is today. Countless other examples.

    He can't compete on the merits. He's got to make her the devil - and the corporate media are oh so cooperative...

    Parent

    He is doing the okie doke again (none / 0) (#33)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:23:18 AM EST
    and the hoodwinked shtick.  That is not race baiting, remember.  

    Parent
    Right ... (none / 0) (#46)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:31:07 AM EST
    and most Obama supporters seem more committed to sending the message that Clinton is a "racist, Rovian monster who will do anything to win" than making arguments for their candidate.

    And criticisms of Obama positions are always met by the riposte:  "But Hillary ..."

    Even Obama does this most of the time.


    Parent

    Having an agreed upon scapegoat... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:35:00 AM EST
    ...is an effective way of bonding,I guess.

    Parent
    As long as the ... (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:38:34 AM EST
    scapegoat is a Clinton.

    Because if you go the Edwards route at start attacking corporate America, you're "too angry."

    If you go the Clinton route and state facts you're an unbalanced monster.

    We're really through the looking glass here, aren't we?


    Parent

    Is TeamO playing with a full deck of Race Cards? (none / 0) (#114)
    by Ellie on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:01:17 PM EST
    This is just sad on so many levels:

    I have spent my life studying the pictures and symbols of racism and slavery, and when I saw the Clinton ad's central image -- innocent sleeping children and a mother in the middle of the night at risk of mortal danger -- it brought to my mind scenes from the past. I couldn't help but think of D. W. Griffith's "Birth of a Nation," the racist movie epic that helped revive the Ku Klux Klan, with its portrayal of black men lurking in the bushes around white society. The danger implicit in the phone ad -- as I see it -- is that the person answering the phone might be a black man, someone who could not be trusted to protect us from this threat.

    The ad could easily have removed its racist sub-message by including images of a black child, mother or father -- or by stating that the danger was external terrorism. Instead, the child on whom the camera first focuses is blond. Two other sleeping children, presumably in another bed, are not blond, but they are dimly lighted, leaving them ambiguous. Still it is obvious that they are not black -- both, in fact, seem vaguely Latino

    .

    Our multi-hyphenated, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural family is part Spanish. Some of us are blond or have light hair and eyes, in resemblance to the Spanish wing of the family.

    When I stayed with a friend's (black) family in the Caribbean, I tanned darker than some of the "black" relations.

    I'm genuinely mystified by these goalpost shifts and rules for gauging enemies written on the fly. What are we supposed to do under the New Politics ... go in for a race checkup based on color swatches or that bread scale at the side of the toaster?

    Does it save time to check in just with the academics who spend most of their times poring over images specifically to seek out racism?

    Parent

    Here's the link and attribution for the preceding (none / 0) (#115)
    by Ellie on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:08:05 PM EST
    The Red Phone in Black and White
    By ORLANDO PATTERSON
    Published: March 11, 2008
    NY Times Op-Ed

    via
    Atrios

    Parent

    Possibly the stupidest op-ed (none / 0) (#126)
    by RalphB on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:55:25 PM EST
    ever to appear on the pages of the NYT.  It's becoming fish wrap now.  These words should strike fear into anyone who cares about education.

    Orlando Patterson ... Professor at Harvard.


    Parent

    How does one LEAK an already public photo ...? (none / 0) (#118)
    by Ellie on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:23:40 PM EST
    The pic was already part of his public record, not even controversial or offensive in the first place but which actually puts him in a positive light.

    It speaks to his ability to talk across the divisions of race and creed -- which I thought was at the center of his campaign and message.(Or is it just those RW nutters he'll be mollifying?)

    This has got to be one of TeamO's stranger accusations and complaints.

    Parent

    Not to mention (none / 0) (#127)
    by Firefly4625 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:12:36 PM EST
    that the Clinton campaign said they weren't involved in it - and Barack said he took her at her word.

    Except that he really didn't - not when there's so much hay to be made in Mississippi and North Carolina - and not when the MSM will NEVER question it...

    Parent

    since i haven't seen anything obama (none / 0) (#12)
    by hellothere on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:11:23 AM EST
    has done foreign policy wise other than claim to have experience because he lived overseas, color me not impressed with him. and the "quality" of his advisors isn't much to brag about either.

    But, but (none / 0) (#15)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:13:55 AM EST
    he got it right that day in 2002!!

    Parent
    And thats still his only talking point (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by tree on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:32:16 AM EST
    in support of his foreign policy bonafides, according to his memo:

    Barack Obama has a very simple case. On the most important commander in chief test of our generation, he got it right, and Senator Clinton got it wrong.

    sounds pretty much like..." Sen. Obama's got one speech in 2002."

    At least he wasn't silly enough to include his childhood as part of his foreign policy experience.

    Nothing shocking about the memo, but I don't think it will impress anyone other than those who are already with him. It certainly won't do him any good in the general if and when he gets there.

    I almost think they went into too much detail on Clinton, and in doing so ended up giving her more credit than they realize.

    Standard political fare in my mind, certainly nothing to get outraged about, but if that's the best they've got after 2 weeks then they definitely aren't ready for the general. I think they should stop talking about it.

    Parent

    He makes HRC's point FOR her (none / 0) (#58)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:36:41 AM EST
    that he's still only got the one speech in 2002.

    Parent
    Actually... (none / 0) (#61)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:38:40 AM EST
    At least he wasn't silly enough to include his childhood as part of his foreign policy experience.

    Yes, he can.  He's talked about how he "lived overseas" in his speeches, failing to mention it was only a handful of years and that he was a child.

    Parent

    Sorry, (none / 0) (#74)
    by tree on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:52:57 AM EST
    I wasn't clear about this in my post. I meant that the memo that was released today wasn't silly enough to mention that stupid talking point about his childhood that he's used in speeches.

    Parent
    hey, he spent four or five years in Kenya (none / 0) (#16)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:14:42 AM EST
    where, according to his memoir, he was speaking the local dialect fluently within a few months.

    I need to find an article I read a while back wherein some of Obama's Kenyan classmates were interviewed.  Basically, they said he was kind of arrogant and didn't fit in or speak the language, and, again, according to them, he got beaten up a lot.

    Of course, you can also find some classmates who claim he was beloved and worshipped.  There are always two sides to "eyewitness" testimony.

    Parent

    i imagine obama was just another (none / 0) (#119)
    by hellothere on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:25:36 PM EST
    kid among many. he wasn't special or awful. all he was then was an average child. when someone tries to claim other than that, my red flag antennae goes up.

    Parent
    LOL, so which comes first..... (none / 0) (#17)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:15:47 AM EST
    ...the official Obama campaign memos or the Obamablog trial balloons of outrage? The diarists at DKos who have spent the past couple of days mocking and belittling Hillary Clinton's overseas trips as First Lady must be puffed up with pride.

    And since the TPM and Kos folks are still accusing Clinton campaign of circulating the dreaded photo, its not surprising that Obama has now taken to doing it on the stump.

    Welcome to the world of politics as usual, Senator Obama.

    All the supporting (none / 0) (#20)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:16:56 AM EST
    documentation they linked to in that post on TPM was back to daily kos. Or the constant circle of back and forth Obama love.

    Parent
    but the footage of the little girl sleeping in the bed in the 3AM ad was shot 10 years ago, and that little girl is now 18 y/o and is a full-on Obama supporter.

    Anyway...Hillary has little to no relevant FP experience and neither does Obama.

    I saw that and commented that... (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:25:22 AM EST
    ...it was stock footage and that it debunked the story that the Clinton campaign picked out pajamas and carefully posed the little girl so that the letters "n" "i" and "g" would be prominent in the ad. Maybe you missed that one in the daily list of Clinton outrage diaries.

    Parent
    I must have missed that one, (none / 0) (#41)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:28:25 AM EST
    or at least NPR didn't mention it on my way home from work last night.

    Parent
    stock footage (none / 0) (#42)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:29:15 AM EST
    yeah, I read about that over at Kos.  There was a FP apology and all the commenters agreed that they were wrong.

    Or maybe I just dreamed that?

    Parent

    I, for one, (none / 0) (#48)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:31:27 AM EST
    have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

    Parent
    I missed the apologies.... (none / 0) (#52)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:32:31 AM EST
    ...I don't go over there very frequently anymore. Only when this site is slow. :-)

    Parent
    Ha (none / 0) (#54)
    by spit on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:33:19 AM EST
    I was about to ask if this meant it was all stock footage.

    Funny. I'll await the sincere apologies of those who tried to fan the flames over, apparently, "nig" as in "night" filmed on some jammies years ago.

    Parent

    I'm changing my vote (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by ChrisO on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:43:17 AM EST
    based on that news. If a 17 year old first time voter who was in stock footage taken a decade ago supports Obama, how can I argue? I also read an article where her mother says she was "trembling and crying" after shaking Obama's hands, which only enhances her credibility in my eyes.

    Parent
    And to further (5.00 / 0) (#84)
    by Joan in VA on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:01:32 PM EST
    persuade you, she said she wasn't really sleeping and the whole thing was staged! That other lady will do anything to win!

    Parent
    Oh really (none / 0) (#34)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:23:23 AM EST
    Concede the issue to McCain then.


    Parent
    I saw that (none / 0) (#39)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:25:54 AM EST
    yesterday. Explain to me how that is in any way newsworthy? Other than for the media to help rub it in HRCs face. Like Nya nya! The little girl doesn't even like you!

    Parent
    Then ignore it, (none / 0) (#44)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:29:46 AM EST
    no one's forcing you to comment on it.

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#49)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:32:09 AM EST
    Are we not commenting on the at times ridiculous turns this campaign has taken? Or is it because I'm pointing out it's ridiculousness? Kindly tell me what you think is wrong with commenting on this. Other than to call out the tactics the MSM will use to make HRC look bad at every turn.

    Parent
    You don't think it's newsworthy. Fine. (none / 0) (#69)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:45:57 AM EST
    My suggestion, if one wants this "non-newsworthy" issue to fade away, is to not promote the issue by keeping it alive. You know, by continuing to comment on it. You don't have to agree, of course.

    Parent
    That was certainly John Kerry's strategy (none / 0) (#72)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:50:39 AM EST
    when he was swiftboated. How'd that work out? (Note, your insertion of the young voter's preference into the conversation is of course not akin to swiftboating, but, IMO does deserve ridicule.)

    Parent
    campaign. 2) Hillary's FP ad is pretty big news, to suggest additional info about that ad is deserving of ridicule is an opinion that belies your partisanship. (IMO.)

    Parent
    I am a proud partisan (none / 0) (#88)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:07:15 PM EST
    I like my candidate, no doubt. I like her enough to call bs on posts such as yours.

    In the ad, I think her pajamas were blue --information? Yes.  Relevant? I'm gonna have to go with No.

    Parent

    Irrelevant (none / 0) (#40)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:28:19 AM EST
    The little girl's political preferences are about as relevant to the debate as the fact that I own a one-eyed cat -- interesting, perhaps, but not really relevant.

    Parent
    to be fair (none / 0) (#45)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:30:33 AM EST
    Obama girl voting for Clinton was a "news" story.

    Though, an eighteen year old all googly eyed for Obama is hardly surprising to any of us, is it?

    Parent

    Hey (none / 0) (#73)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:52:32 AM EST
    18 year olds are people too, and just as capable of being googly eyed as a 60+ year old. In case you forgot we did just live through almost two terms of GWB and he did not win only from 18 year olds naiveté.

    Parent
    He did not win remember Fl (none / 0) (#81)
    by Florida Resident on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:58:59 AM EST
    and then Diebold in Ohio.  

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#89)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:19:30 PM EST
    Then, wake me up I must be dreaming.

    Parent
    Winning and stealing are two (none / 0) (#98)
    by Florida Resident on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:33:03 PM EST
    different things.  He did not win.  

    Parent
    OK (none / 0) (#99)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:39:04 PM EST
    But the bottom line is the same, concession speeches and all...

    And that doesn't change the point that people of all ages can be guilty of being googly eyed when it comes to voting their candidate.

    Parent

    that is so true. (none / 0) (#103)
    by Florida Resident on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:57:17 PM EST
    Oh wow! Really? (none / 0) (#66)
    by tree on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:44:16 AM EST
    That does it then! I'm voting for Obama! If an 18 year old former child actress is a supporter then what's stopping everyone else from jumping on board the Obama train? I'm so excited! Where's my pony?  

    (I do sarcasm too, but I have a name.)  

    Parent

    I don't understand (none / 0) (#90)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:19:30 PM EST
    What does that have to do with anything? It is an amusing coincidence, yet. Human interest story, maybe.

    But MSM and people repeat that like she was a Clinton supporter as a child, shot a commercial, then switched.

    Funny really.

    Parent

    Remember (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Claw on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:30:06 PM EST
    The real media bias.  It's laziness.  That the little girl in HRC's ad is an avid Obama supporter isn't really newsworthy but it's easy, probably interested a lot of viewers, etc.  
    The constant demeaning of BO supporters from the Clinton faithful only makes them resolute and probably adds to their ranks...IMO.  I would ask you to remember, when insulting us, that some of us are not 18 year old girls with "googly eyes" (I saw her appear on CNN and she actually seemed very together for an 18 year old), some of us are latte drinking, Prius driving millionaires who have simply been brainwashed into being Obamabots.  

    Parent
    Hahahhaa (none / 0) (#122)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:37:57 PM EST
    Ah...but (none / 0) (#27)
    by Andy08 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:21:58 AM EST
    you miss the point entirely BTD.  Political attacks are not shocking; indeed this is a political campaign. What is shocking is the hypocrisy of Obama's  trumpeting he is about a "different kind of politcs"; that he is "not the usual politican". That he is "a better politician".  
    That is what is exposed here: how absurd his claims are.  He is indeed "just another politician".

    Not bad but.... (none / 0) (#31)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:22:26 AM EST
    ...you've got to work in something about being old and a victim. Maybe instead of anti-anxiety medication, you could use anti-angina medication.

    don't forget entitlement (none / 0) (#38)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:25:32 AM EST
    Clinton felt entitled to the nomination.  She felt she was inevitable.  CNN told me, so it must be true.

    Parent
    Obama can Pooh-pooh Hillary's FP credentials (none / 0) (#36)
    by felizarte on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:23:59 AM EST
    all he wants.  The obvious thing is:  he has NOT done even a single thing to compare with those.  She certainly learned by observing international events as her husband dealth with them.  It is like being in a class, hearing the professor and the questions and responses of the students and learning from being in the class; compared to Obama who has not attended a single class!

    Just like Hillary has more experience in the U.S. Senate and dealing with military and foreign policy issues for over six years as opposed to Obama being there only a year before he started his campaign for the presidency.

    Only people who are experienced can appreciate experience in others when they see it.

    Work experience (5.00 / 0) (#47)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:31:18 AM EST
    Hillary, I know they demonize this part of her career, was a corporate attorney, yes, the she devil.  Obama was a community organizer.  Frankly, that is the lowest rung in the ladder of community development.  

    Was he doing economic or community development?  No, he was organizing meetings to get people together, putting up butcher paper and using colored markers to write down the consensus items.  Most community organizing meetings end up with 10-15 people.  What significant piece of community organizing work did he do?  

     Cannot find if he then was busy negotiating with City, and other officials to define land use, or to see about resources coming to the community.   Was he structuring complex affordable housing deals?  Obviously, no one is telling us what he did.  

    Parent

    How do we find out? (none / 0) (#57)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:35:43 AM EST
    Does he discuss his accomplishments as a community organizer on his website? I hate going there and seeing the glowing JOIN button, but I'll venture over if I can find out more about what he actually did. Have you looked?

    Parent
    Community Organizing (none / 0) (#65)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:44:00 AM EST
    It's lip service in local government politics to make low income communities feel like they are being heard.  The real deals are made in back rooms and with developers like Rezko, that's who walks away with the money.  So, I want to know what experience in his years of Community Organizing gave him creds for FP?  

    Parent
    Why would that be? "Structuring complex (none / 0) (#64)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:43:33 AM EST
    affordable housing deals"?  With Rezko.

    Parent
    badly...ha...ha... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:44:39 AM EST
    Was that perhaps the time he met up with Rezko? (none / 0) (#83)
    by felizarte on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:59:49 AM EST
    I recall an article where some older community leader was quite upset with Obama.  I think her name was mentioned in one of the topics here.

    Parent
    He did two stints of organizing (none / 0) (#86)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:02:52 PM EST
    The timeline is hard to pin.  Rezko he met after law school  

    Parent
    that would explain all the Obama fan boys then (none / 0) (#56)
    by RalphB on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:35:06 AM EST
    I agree... (none / 0) (#82)
    by cmugirl on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:59:40 AM EST
    While this is a terrible comparison, but follow me on this (and feel free to improve where you can) - it's like an internship.  

    For example, take these so-called "journalists" we have criticizing HRC for her First Lady experience.  I wonder if they ever had an internship before they became "reporters". I'm sure if they interned at a newspaper, they weren't making editorial decisions (or even sitting in on editorial board meetings), but they saw how the newspaper office ran and what needed to get done and how it got done.  So tell me, if you were hiring a reporter, would you want the kid who had an internship at a newspaper, where he/she got some real world experience, or would you hire the kid who was running for the student council? Both are noble pursuits, but where do you put your money for the biggest and quickest return?

    Parent

    "intern" (none / 0) (#124)
    by diogenes on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:44:34 PM EST
    I don't think that the Clinton will talk too much about interns, what with the Spitzer scandal and the way Hillary swiftboated Monica for months by letting her twist in the wind while she was belittled by the media as "troubled".

    Parent
    accordiing to a Chicago Tribune (none / 0) (#62)
    by NJDem on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:39:06 AM EST
    article (IIRC) he also claimed to speak fluent Indonesian within 6 months of living there.  But when they interviewed former classmates and former teachers they said it wasn't true. THe kids teased him about it and his teacher offered to tutor him and he refused.  

    I'll try and find the link.  I don't care if he learned the language, but he shouldn't exaggerate or flat-out lie about his experiences overseas.  

    I am more angry (none / 0) (#68)
    by Foxx on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:45:48 AM EST
    that Obama is repeating what he knows is an untruth, that Hillary circulated the African garb picture.

    Not shocked or surprised, since he has lied shamelessly about her from the beginning.

    I am very depressed about it all. She is so clearly the better candidate. If he wins the nomination we lose universal health coverage and probably social security, speaking of kitchen sinks he's already thrown it away.  And we'll have a disaster as president.

    And greatest tragedy of all, we will have lost as president this brilliant, beautiful woman who would be AMAZING.  

    The way I read it (none / 0) (#75)
    by sander60tx on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:53:54 AM EST
    is that what Clinton says is true, he's mainly got a speech in 2002.  His only other claim is to CiC credentals that he "has worked to confront 21st century challenges like proliferation and genocide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."  Of course Senator Clinton also serves on the Senate Armed Services committee, but I didn't see any mention of that.  What's never mentioned, but is obvious, is that Hillary can always discuss things over with Bill (and other advisors).  Obama, surely, will also have advisors to assist him as well.  

    I read recently Obama re-recorded (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:04:12 PM EST
    that 2002 speech long after the date he gave it.  

    Parent
    The only time I get outraged anymore (none / 0) (#80)
    by Florida Resident on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 11:56:38 AM EST
    is when I read that the FL MI Democrats have to be punished for voting during their primaries like theiy are some kind of Kindergarden students that need to be put on time out

    The infantilizing suggestion that their (none / 0) (#93)
    by MarkL on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:22:34 PM EST
    votes shouldn't count because Obama didn't get to campaign in FL---as if people didn't know about him.

    Parent
    the bar has been lowered (none / 0) (#96)
    by thereyougo on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:25:11 PM EST
    so much that the Dem Candidates sparkle.

    they're both good people,fortunately for the nation.
    compared to McSame and GWB.

    that said,anything coming out of Hillary's mouth is subjected to ridiculous scrutiny. If Hillary says no no,I don't think he's a Muslim, its turned around to say she's not sure he's  a Muslim.  

    If this woman gets the nomination, it won't be because of her "positive press."

    Meanwhile McSame hires lobbyists to ride on the Straight Talk Express and is having trouble with the rules for public financing, wants to have a 100 years of war and has no clue about the economy --all admitted out of his mouth. That is what the Republicans want the people to vote for?

    The Dems will get the win in the GE with either landslide or simple majority.


    Sinbad on HRC's Bosnia trip: (none / 0) (#102)
    by mike in dc on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 12:55:21 PM EST
    "I think the only 'red-phone' moment was: 'Do we eat here or at the next place.'"

    Does anyone know if BO (none / 0) (#121)
    by NJDem on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:31:31 PM EST
    is still planning that trip abroad?  Wasn't he supposed to go in April?  Maybe McCain just took his itinerary :)

    I also don't think he would have planned it if he was so sure of his own FP credentials.  

    This may or may not work for Obama (none / 0) (#123)
    by fuzzyone on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:43:37 PM EST
    It certainly seems like exactly what McCain will do.  He will say she exaggerated her experience (which it seems pretty clear she did) and that she will say anything to win.  Now I think McCain is full of crap 24/7 but as long as the press keeps buying the straight talk express thing, that could be a pretty good argument for him.  (For that reason I'm not crazy about Obama doing it just as I did not like Hillary fawning all over McCain.  Of course when I objected to that I was told it was actually good because it was what McCain would do in the GE so I'm not sure why Hillary should not be grateful for the return favor.)

    On the lighter side, its alway nice when bad comics join the debate:


    Clinton, during a late December campaign appearance in Iowa, described a hair-raising corkscrew landing in war-torn Bosnia, a trip she took with her then-teenage daughter, Chelsea. "They said there might be sniper fire," Clinton said.

    Threat of bullets? Sinbad doesn't remember that, either.

    "I never felt that I was in a dangerous position. I never felt being in a sense of peril, or 'Oh, God, I hope I'm going to be OK when I get out of this helicopter or when I get out of his tank.'"

    In her Iowa stump speech, Clinton also said, "We used to say in the White House that if a place is too dangerous, too small or too poor, send the First Lady."

    Say what? As Sinbad put it: "What kind of president would say, 'Hey, man, I can't go 'cause I might get shot so I'm going to send my wife...oh, and take a guitar player and a comedian with you.'"

    As you may have guessed by now, Sinbad isn't supporting Clinton for president. He's an Obama guy.



    Sen Clinton (none / 0) (#125)
    by PlayInPeoria on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:50:21 PM EST
    is a Senator from NY. A plane flew into a building in NY... She HAD TO vote for Iraq. If for no other reason to investigate wiether Irag was involved in the terrorist attack.

    She represented the will of the poeple in her state.

    NOW, Sen Obama was a state legislator in Illinois at the time. Had a plane flew into a building in Chicago... that 2002 speech would of sounded a whole lot different.

    I'm tired of hearing about his speech. He has even said that he is not sure about how he would have voted.

    I don't think that's the argument you want to make (none / 0) (#128)
    by fuzzyone on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:16:54 PM EST
    I'll set aside the fact that I was in NYC on 9/11 and I did not want her to vote that way.  What you are suggesting is that she voted as she did because that was the will of the people regardless of what she thought was right.  Is that the kind of leadership she is selling?

    There was also no evidence, then or now, that Iraq was in any way involved in 9/11.  That is one of Bush's big lies which I don't think she is going to want to defend.

    There may be defenses to her vote, but I don't think that is it.  Indeed, the difficulty she faces in defending her vote, particularly given her failure to read the NIE, is why Obama keeps brining it up.  I've heard her claim she did not think she was voting for war, but her speech in the Senate at the time belies that and even if true it just makes her seem naive.

    Parent

    NO -That is not (none / 0) (#129)
    by PlayInPeoria on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:49:39 PM EST
    what I am saying.

    What you are suggesting is that she voted as she did because that was the will of the people regardless of what she thought was right.

    I believe she thought it was NOT a vote for war
    misrepresented Clinton's vote

    In fact, the 2002 resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq for which Clinton and a majority of her congressional colleagues voted gave the president the authority to go to war in Iraq; it was not, as Tapper suggests, a congressional declaration of war or a directive to the president to launch an invasion.

    And, I do expect gov to listen to the voice of the people... Age old argument.... do people initiate change or does goverment officials. Like the MLK vs LBJ discussion.

    Parent

    To be fair (none / 0) (#130)
    by Steve M on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:57:47 PM EST
    it was an authorization to use military force, not an authorization to conduct an investigation.

    I lived in NYC on 9/11 and I sure don't recall a groundswell of sentiment for an invasion of Iraq.  Nor do I suspect Hillary would have voted differently if she were the Senator from Arkansas.

    Parent

    My senator from Mass... (none / 0) (#132)
    by CST on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 06:00:21 PM EST
    Now, I will grant you, we did not feel it the way NY did, but they were planes out of Boston.  Kennedy didn't seem to care, he still voted against the war.  And IRAQ had NOTHING to do with 9/11

    Parent