home

Spoiler Alert: Hillary on O'Reilly Tonight

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:43:03 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 2008 (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Hillary Clinton will be on Fox with Bill O'Reilly tonight. In case you aren't able to tune in, here's what she says about Rev. Wright and Obama.

O'Reilly: "Can you believe this Rev. Wright guy? Can you believe this guy?"
Clinton: "Well, I'm going to leave it up to voters to decide."
O'Reilly: "Well, what do you think as an American?"
Clinton: "Well, what I said when I was asked directly is that I would not have stayed in the church.
O'Reilly: "You're an American citizen, I'm an American citizen, He's an American citizen, Rev. Wright. What do you think when you hear a fellow American citizen say that kind of stuff about America."
Clinton: "Well, I take offense. I think it's offensive and outrageous. I'm going to express my opinion, others can express theirs. It is part of just, you know, an atmosphere we're in today."

< The New Criminal Defense Lawyer in Town | Government Seeks En Banc Review of Joe Nacchio Reversal >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Spoiler Alert: Hillary on O'Reilly Tonight | 161 comments (161 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Very, very well done. (5.00 / 7) (#1)
    by madamab on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:46:04 PM EST
    It's her opinion, don'tcha know? She'll leave it up to the voters to decide.

    And of course, now that Obama himself has thrown Wright under the bus, he can't say a word about what she said.

    Not that his supporters won't try to twist this into something nefarious. But to them, if Hillary eats an Oreo, it's a racist statement.

    Oh, but he will (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by angie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:51:45 PM EST
    bank on it -- tomorrow Obama and/or the blogger boiz will be attacking Clinton for daring to say that Wright's words were "outrageous."  I can see it now: "Hillary is bringing up Wright again because she is a racist %#@*%# She has no business commenting on Wright at all. She needs to move on. How low can you go? She will say anything to win."
    Really, it practically writes itself.

    Parent
    They can't have it both ways. (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:54:02 PM EST
    But it shows you that the Wright issue isn't going to go away.

    Parent
    They can't have it both ways (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:58:04 PM EST
    they have been doin a pretty good job of that.

    Parent
    Any who expects Hillary (5.00 / 4) (#22)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:03:36 PM EST
    to save Obama from himself is drinking some strong stuff.

    They're both in it to win.

    Parent

    Kool-Aid? (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:04:39 PM EST


    Parent
    Absinthe? (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Fabian on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:11:22 PM EST
    (the real deal, naturally.  Heh.  Absinthe is all natural - no artificial red dye number whatever!)

    Parent
    Hillary complimented Barrack (5.00 / 4) (#77)
    by Chimster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:28:32 PM EST
    You will see on the show tonight that she was gracious to Barrack, while being unflattering to Wright during this segment. She says that Barrack did the right thing--finally.

    Parent
    I just saw it (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by angie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:06:02 PM EST
    she did great -- could.not.have.done.better.
    but I'm still sure the blogger boiz will take umbrage.

    Parent
    Heh (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by Steve M on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:50:09 PM EST
    Let me guess, when Obama reaches out to wingnut media it's a sign of his willingness to listen to all Americans, but when Hillary appears on O'Reilly it's the end of the freaking world?  Is that the general tone in the blogosphere?

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:53:04 PM EST
    Well, neither should really be doing it. But you're right about who will be demonized and why.

    Parent
    Why not? (5.00 / 8) (#17)
    by oldpro on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:01:09 PM EST
    I'd say, of course they should appear on Fox...they should appear everywhere they can reach the American people, so long as they can handle it with aplomb and not make stuttering fools of themselves.

    It's a good test, in my opinion.  Bill Clinton never ran away from the bloviators...I want a candidate who won't shrink or shrivel...a fighting Dem like Bill who'll punch them in the rhetorical nose with facts and attitude...Democratic attitude.

    Go Hillary!

    Parent

    The answer, and I agree with it, (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:02:34 PM EST
    is that Fox is not a legitimate news network.

    Of course, now neither is MSNBC.

    Parent

    name the cable news network (5.00 / 6) (#24)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:04:11 PM EST
    that is legitimate

    Parent
    BBC World (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:06:30 PM EST


    Parent
    well (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:09:47 PM EST
    I was talking american news but touche.

    Parent
    BBC America n/t (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by dianem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:12:03 PM EST


    Parent
    A political candidate who restricts. . . (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:24:54 PM EST
    their television appearances to BBC World is not going to be a political candidate for long.

    Parent
    And a presidential candidate wins (none / 0) (#158)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:21:23 PM EST
    by acting like a president.  

    And a president talks to the American people, wherever they are.  Even on Fox.  It's why the president gets the cool Air Force One plane and other perks, to make up for talking to Americans like O'Reilly.  

    Parent

    I am glad you added the MSNBC (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by bjorn on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:05:13 PM EST
    part because I don't hear anyone in the blogosphere telling candidates to stay away from MSNBC, the Obama propaganda channel!  Faux news is faux news whether it has a left slant or a right slant.

    Parent
    But the audience is what mattters. (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by MarkL on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:11:20 PM EST
    Hillary can reach a different audience by
    appearing on Bill O's wonderful show.


    Parent
    Thank you for remember the audience (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:19:14 PM EST
    in all this.  We the people.  Where we watch tv is up to us.  Whether the candidates want to reach people where they watch tv is up to them -- but if they want to reach the people. . . .

    Parent
    When running for office (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by oldpro on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:12:40 PM EST
    go where the free microphones are to reach the people you want to reach.  Who are those people?  They're called voters.

    Never mind who's holding the mic...whatever they've got isn't catching.

    Parent

    In Dem's Eyes Fox Is Not Legitimate, Yet It Is (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:04:18 PM EST
    in the eyes of millions of viewers.  Needless to say, we would all prefer she stay away from Fox, but this is a good opportunity for more people to hear her message and that is a good thing.  Repubs
    will hear what she has to say when normally they wouldn't because they won't watch msnbc or cnn. Plus they will be thinking Bill O'Reilly will make mincemeat of her....fat chance! Sen. Clinton will do a stellar job....no worries.

    Parent
    I think (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Steve M on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:07:02 PM EST
    that I have no real problem with Hillary appearing on O'Reilly, but I don't like to see her discussing Wright in that setting.  As to what I'd rather see her say, I have no idea.

    Parent
    I'm pretty close to that position (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:08:21 PM EST
    I'd rather she not go on BillO's show, but I REALY think she shouldn't have talked about Wright.

    Parent
    she answered a question (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:11:52 PM EST
    a question that was put to her multiple times.
    what is so bad about what she said?  can a reasonable person disagree with any of it?
    I dont see a problem.

    Parent
    It's that "reasonable" part ... (5.00 / 4) (#43)
    by dianem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:14:04 PM EST
    ...that worries me. We aren't dealing with "reasonable" people. We are dealing with Obamabots who think that every time Clinton breathes in she is involved in a plot to steal Obama's oxygen.

    Parent
    She was kinder! (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:20:10 PM EST
    She response to the question was milder than Obama's comments concerning Wright so I can't see any hassle over them. As far as going on O'Reilly, she went on Olberman and he's disgusting in his bias. What a shame, the only liberal voice on the air and he decides to become the king maker

    Parent
    "steal Obama's oxygen" (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:20:17 PM EST
    ha
    like the old cat myth.
    I could tell you what they can do as far as I am concerned but it would be deleted.

    Parent
    The unreasonable people (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:20:21 PM EST
    aren't voting for Clinton, anyway.  She's the only reasonable choice for reasoning people. :-)

    Parent
    Yeah, but she needs a majority. n/t (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:27:17 PM EST


    Parent
    Looks like Obama (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:05:30 PM EST
    is the Adlai wing candidate.  That always works out so well.

    Parent
    Well, no knock on Obama. . . (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:15:34 PM EST
    but it appears from reading the blogosphere that a large number of his votes are coming from people who've lost the ability to think at all.

    Parent
    On the intertubes (none / 0) (#160)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:36:13 PM EST
    I couldn't agree more.  But I think most of us have lost some brain cells during this primary.  I know I sure have.

    One positive thing though, Hillary Clinton has impressed me a ton as this thing goes on.  She's got a great sense of humor and, dare I say it, a first class temperament.  I always knew she had a great intellect, but the sense of humor had escaped me.  She's a great politician.


    Parent

    That's why (5.00 / 5) (#69)
    by echinopsia on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:25:43 PM EST
    it doesn't matter what she says. They'll find something offensive in everything she says other than "I quit."

    Parent
    If it's any consolation, (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:29:16 PM EST
    they feel the same way about Hillary supporters.

    BTW, not all Obama supporters or Hillary supporters are crazy.  :)

    Parent

    But she's not (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by DaveOinSF on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:44:10 PM EST
    At this point, she's given up on the Obamabots.  I don't think anyone other than them object to either appearing on Fox or repeating what she has said about Wright.

    Parent
    She can never please those folks so... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:47:26 PM EST
    ...she may as well do what she's gotta do.

    Parent
    Sure (4.50 / 2) (#74)
    by Steve M on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:27:43 PM EST
    but everyone knows Fox and O'Reilly have a hard-on for the Wright issue.  I'm a Clinton supporter so I don't think I'm being unfair to her, I'd just like to see her have a more diplomatic response prepared if she's going to appear in that forum.

    I realize Hillary is trying to win a primary here, but any Democrat who appears on Fox News has to also think about the effect on the party as a whole.  I think I'm sounding a very mild note of complaint here.

    Parent

    Comment after you watch? (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Chimster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:30:46 PM EST
    Hillary comes off much better than this clip portrays her, even during the Wright discussion. You may change your mind after viewing it.

    Parent
    Hillary is more loyal to the dem party right now, (5.00 / 4) (#91)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:32:18 PM EST
    it appears, than it is loyal to her.

    Just sayin'.

    She's already said she'd work to get Obama elected if he's the nominee.  That's a loyal dem, too.  Obama?

    :crickets:

    Parent

    I don't know... (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Chimster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:09:42 PM EST
    If you were a Democratic Presidential nominee and had a chance to address a Republican-leaning audience during their favorite "news" show, wouldn't you want to give it a shot?

    Cinton or Obama can communicate with an audience that may not ever have paid attention to what their plans were before this. It's an opportunity to let voters who've only heard rumors about them, see them in a positive light (facing possible tough questions). If both candidates claim to be a unifying force, then this would be a great way to get their message out.

    And I only watch Fox if it is on a YouTube clip on the internet.

    Parent

    An objective measure (5.00 / 4) (#39)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:11:34 PM EST
    In latest measures she beats McCain among independents (gasp) while Obama loses to McCain. For a GE strategy if she gets the nod this is actually brilliant, it does expand and redefine her image. Remember, every time she has appeared she is far superior to the caricature most people expect. So this is pretty wise for GE.


    Parent
    Proof of Her Conspiracy with Murdoch (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by BDB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:48:46 PM EST
    They love that one.  Obama sucks up to Murdoch it's simply reaching out.  Hillary does it and they're part of a cabal.  

    Parent
    O'Reilly was on by radio (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:51:52 PM EST
    [Leave me alone, I watch Fox and will continue to do so until we are in the GE and they go freak again]...

    anyway O' was on by radio and talking about how tough he was.  He didn't have much positive to say about her, he called her a professional, gasp, well rehearsed, etc.  He says he goes after her with facts about Iran etc that she did not expect and he's leading off with a shocker tonight of where he really 'got' her.  I'm going to watch tonight not just read about it.

    Good news... they covered the 'taking back the white house' video, her endorsements and that Obama's unfavorables are up, his favorables down and wow, Clinton's favorables are up 2 pts and her negatives are down 5.

    We should all watch (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Chimster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:58:42 PM EST
    his show on Faux this evening. A spike in ratings for his show tonight will be a win for O'Reilly, but also for Hillary (unless, of course, he really did give her a "gotcha" question). She needs to stay in-demand from the MSM. Her performance tonight will hopefully accomplish that.

    Parent
    You are brave (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by madamab on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:22:09 PM EST
    to take one for the team like that!

    I will never watch O'Reilly or Fox News, I don't care how fair they pretend to be to HRC.

    However, I'm not the voter she's trying to convince. She's already got my lurv. So I say, if she can pick up more votes, go for it, girl!

    And let Obama do it too. Since his schtick is that he reaches out to Republicans, it would be crazy for him NOT to go on the Republican Propaganda Network.

    Parent

    Of all the sacrifices I make for Hillary (5.00 / 3) (#96)
    by Chimster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:34:03 PM EST
    this is the biggest. I'll only pay attention to the Hillary interview, and turn it off immediately after.

    Parent
    Your great sacrifice (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by madamab on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:36:47 PM EST
    will not be forgotten!

    [sob]

    Parent

    Think of it as (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by cmugirl on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:42:29 PM EST
    Making Olbermann's ratings seem even lamer then they are any other night of the week.

    Parent
    I hope this does her some good- (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by kenosharick on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:52:29 PM EST
    he does have A LOT of viewers. I am traveling and heard a bit of Rush on the radio today. He says Dem supers KNOW, they Know that Barack is "damaged goods" (his words) and cannot win the general- but are too scared of losing the AA vote forever to go with a possible winner (Hillary). And apparently most repubs are salivating at taking on Obama.

    Hate to say it (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:00:45 PM EST
    but I agree with Rush.  (gasp!)  I was talking with a Repub co-worker today about the Wright situation.   I told her that I believe the Super-D's will give Obama the nomination for exactly the reasons that you laid out.  She was unconvinced, but she is convinced that Obama is toast in the GE.  She actually thinks he will lose in NC.

    Parent
    The African American community (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:14:07 PM EST
    isn't stupid. They will realize that Wright and all the other stuff coming out about Obama is what knocked him out of the race, not the Democratic Party not wanting to run him as a candidate. Many of my black friends are surprised that he has gotten this far, given his lack of resume. And they didn't like the way he handled the Wright situation. Dissing your pastor is no way to win AA votes.

    Parent
    We just gave another $100 to Clinton (4.00 / 2) (#36)
    by dianem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:10:41 PM EST
    Even as I said "Yes", I felt the futility of it all. The Super's simply can't let Clinton be our candidate. They would alienate too many people whose vote we need to win. My biggest hope at this point is that Obama implodes so badly that it becomes obvious that he can't possibly win the general and they set up a Clinton/Obama unity ticket. Unfortunately, I expect to be observing porcine aeronautics before that happens.

    Parent
    Are you serious? (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by madamab on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:17:42 PM EST
    Who would they be alienating if they didn't nominate Clinton?

    What about if they don't count Florida and Michigan until after they pick Obama?

    Do you have any clue how poorly that will be received by the millions of voters who voted for Clinton?

    Why, why, why is this never, ever brought up?

    Parent

    Thanks (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:28:20 PM EST
    I'm getting really tired about hearing how alienated the Obama crowd would feel. I really believe the SD have to look at the total popular votes, the delegates and even the polls. That's why the system was devised. They're supposed to be the steering committee not the followers. If they have to vote with the state, fine. Have the SD of CA, NY, NJ and even NM vote for Hikary and Obama can have the SD's from the states he won. Sorry Gov Richardson!

    Parent
    Put 'em in charge of process for 2016 (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by lambert on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:34:50 PM EST
    They eat that process stuff up, and they could rig the whole system, instead of crudely disenfranchising states.

    Parent
    Uh... (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by sweetthings on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:28:32 PM EST
    The millions of people who voted for Obama? The donors who have raised more money for him than any candidate before him? The volunteers that have put together one of the greatest ground games ever conducted, and which gave him an almost certain lead in pledged delegates?

    Now I'm not saying the Supers should give to Obama. Millions of people have voted for Hillary too, and there are all kinds of excellent reasons why she should be the nominee. But let's not pretend that everyone will be happy with that result. We're split down the middle on this one, and no matter what they do, the Supers are going to end up making a lot of people very unhappy. People that are going to need to be brought back into the fold before November.

    Parent

    I agree with you. (5.00 / 4) (#90)
    by madamab on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:32:03 PM EST
    But, the HRC side of things never seems to be mentioned. Thank you for admitting that it exists.


    Parent
    Rush Limbaugh Stirring Up Recial Divisions (4.00 / 1) (#114)
    by BDB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:51:46 PM EST
    Say it ain't so.  

    This is the new favorite wingnut talking point.  Nothing would make them happier than to have the democratic party split on race and so that's what they're pushing.  They're trying to stoke black resentment of Clinton is the nominee (see, they don't care about you) and white resentment if Obama is (they know he can't win, they just went with him because that's what the blacks want).

    Screw 'em.  Vote against McCain.

    Parent

    Nicely done.. he was trying to trap her (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:54:22 PM EST
    and she avoided it beautifully. I hope she hands him his head. Nicely, of course. Heh.

    I think it'll be good for her (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:55:59 PM EST
    Fox pundits are saying that she showed a softer side of herself and they think it'll help her.  Of course, Bill O. is congratulating himself on giving such a tough interview.  I cracked up when a Dem pundit on Fox - I'm not sure who he is - said that he wants to know who talked more, the interviewer or the interviewee!

    Also, FWIW, Fox is showing a poll that shows an increase in Hillary's positive ratings and Obama's negative ratings since February.

    I tuned into MSNBC briefly and Tweety seems to be backing off from yesterday's meme that Obama's press conference put Wright to rest permanently.  

    I don't have a problem with her going on Fox.  I find them no more offensive than MSNBC.  

    Well, I'm hoping he gets good ratings for this (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by MarkL on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:00:21 PM EST
    .. anything to make KO's head explode.
    Heck, maybe O'Reilly will get another Polk/Peabody
    award for this!

    Parent
    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:02:41 PM EST
    they're already salivating at the prospective ratings.  I don't know the names of the anchors of the show that's on at 5 p.m. EST, but they estimated that the show would get 3 million viewers.  Oh, and their s*cking up to O'Reilly is quite nauseating.  He's obviously the King of Faux News.  

    Parent
    I might increase his ratings by 1 just tonight (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by lexicoscott on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:02:00 PM EST
    just to watch. I've had to back away from the political scene after high blood pressure from huffpo and kos. Maybe I'll tune in again, just to see my next president. I hope she does well, and remains in full calm collective control.

    I honestly dont have (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:06:11 PM EST
    a problem with this at all.
    FOX has been more fair to her than MSNBC and they have a huge audience.  I say go for it.
    I have actually been watching FOX sometimes when I feel the need for a news fix.
    I simply like my TV to much to turn on MSNBC and I absolutely hate CNN.
    And wasn't HRC recently on (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:23:18 PM EST
    the Greta Van Susteren show?  Isn't that Fox?  It was a very well-done interview, good airtime for HRC.  So the problem for some people is not Fox, it's O'Reilly?  

    If so, she's faced down far worse working for NBC.

    Parent

    exactly (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:27:08 PM EST
    this idea that FOXs bias is evil but MSNBCs is ok just seems completely weird to me.

    Parent
    yep (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by miguelito on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:54:46 PM EST
    the garbage MSNBC and CNN has put forth this season has actually legitimized FOX, at least for political coverage during this primary.  And I hadn't watched them EVER until PA eve.  

    Parent
    So now we just (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:18:32 PM EST
    stick our fingers and go lalalalalala when news happens? Or are you implying that Jeralyn used mind control on Sen Clinton and reneged on her statement?

    Or do you simply have no valid point?

    Flogging the horse (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:26:15 PM EST
    You do realize the horse got up, danced around for a while, pooped, ran around for a while and is now kicking people in the head, right (all metaphorically)?

    So why shouldn't it be flogged? Do you really think this is going away because Obama supporters say it is going away?

    I am personally looking forward to the Rev Wright book tour and his writings. I think its pretty topical clip and probably only reason I would tune in to watch.

    Parent

    Ok I'll drop the metaphor (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:32:40 PM EST
    As it doesn't seem to be clear enough. THIS IS THE HIGHLIGHT REEL OF THIS INTERVIEW. It is current news. See? Simple.

    Parent
    XD (none / 0) (#152)
    by BrandingIron on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:41:33 PM EST

    You do realize the horse got up, danced around for a while, pooped, ran around for a while and is now kicking people in the head, right

    LOL!  Great imagery there.

    Parent

    Yeah, unless you have ever (none / 0) (#162)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:41:11 PM EST
    actually been kicked in the head by a horse, and then you just want to shoot the sucker. Of course, you don't, but you want to. Heh.

    Parent
    No (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:27:39 PM EST
    We listen to viewpoints all the time, we try to ignore propaganda and insults is all.

    Parent
    I'm sorry did you say something (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:35:06 PM EST
    I had my fingers in my ears and going lalalalalala.

    I'll stop if you feel the need to insult me some more.

    Parent

    Hey, why not? (none / 0) (#163)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:43:49 PM EST
    You couldn't debate it, so you play the vic...good luck with that.

    It worked for Obama, didn't it?? Snicker.

    Parent
    Why didn't you do a minute of research (5.00 / 3) (#80)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:29:24 PM EST
    and click up even one of the many stories on the Web about this interview for the answer to your question?  You clearly are here to contribute nothing.  Stop it.

    Parent
    I suspect (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Steve M on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:29:55 PM EST
    that of everything Hillary might have said in this interview, her comments on Wright will be the subject of more feeding-frenzy diaries from Obama supporters than anything else.

    I assume you will have harsh words for them, as well.

    Parent

    It looks like the only comment (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:30:04 PM EST
    they have released publicly so far. Just a teaser.

    Parent
    That was the clip they leaked (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Chimster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:45:32 PM EST
    If you research online to find a partial transcript, or wait until the actual show tonight, your questions will be answered. Wright was the section leaked to bring in bigger Fox ratings. Its called marketing. It's a hot topic (unfortunately for Barrack).

    Parent
    No (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:58:29 PM EST
    we do it when new people keep making the same snark and little digs while bringing nothing to the conversation.

    For someone who has spent what? 2-3 days here (managing to get several ones).... you sure b!tch a lot about the content and the other commenters.  

    Why does a person come to a site they don't like?  Why does a person enter a post on a topic they don't like and then do nothing more than whine?

    Then there is that person who joined on the 27th and their first post was 'check it out' har har har....'Why Hillary Makes My Wife Scream' yuck, yuck, chuckle, guffaw... yaaaaawnn....

    Parent

    Hey, the latest news is that (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by MarkL on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:19:11 PM EST
    the Wright brouhaha is making Republicans support Obama.
    Wright is still fantastic news, only in a different way now.

    somehow I think (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:23:05 PM EST
    the number of republicans here might not fill a smart car.

    Parent
    Am I the only one that doesn't understand (none / 0) (#102)
    by MarkL on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:38:29 PM EST
    Howdy's comment? I laughed anyway, though.. :)

    Parent
    This will explain all (none / 0) (#104)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:40:23 PM EST
    Look Here

    Fill this up and count!

    Parent

    sorry (none / 0) (#105)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:42:11 PM EST
    you know the republicans that are going to switch to Obama as a protest for the RNC using Wright for swiftboating.
    not enough to fill a smart car.

    Parent
    Gotcha. (none / 0) (#108)
    by MarkL on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:42:57 PM EST


    Parent
    Ministry of Information has spoken (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:27:05 PM EST
    Everyone, revise your books NOW! ;)

    Parent
    Ministry of Truth (none / 0) (#121)
    by angie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:00:43 PM EST
    I love a good Orwell reference.

    Parent
    Wow... Can I have Delusion for $1000, Alex? (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by Exeter on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:32:31 PM EST


    Parent
    What does it matter what she says? (5.00 / 5) (#65)
    by ChrisO on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:25:03 PM EST
    Whatver she says, Obama has already said it in stronger terms. It wqould be pretty silly to jump on Hillary for criticizing Wright after Obama has already said his remarks were outrageous.

    As a matter of fact, I expect to see Obama supporters admitting that Hillary's remarks about Wright in the last couple of weeks were perfectly appropriate.

    OK, I made that last part up.

    More power to Hillary - (5.00 / 3) (#86)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:30:54 PM EST
    my ears would have been bleeding just listening to the tone of O'Reilly's voice.

    What O'Reilly - and many others - still just do not get, is that Hillary is just not afraid of him, or anyone else.  It just slays me the way these people fairly drool contemplating that they are going to be the one who finally gets Hillary to fall apart under their withering questioning.

    O'Reilly doesn't seem even to listen to the people he interviews, so eager is he to close the trap.

    And for all those Obama supporters who want to criticize Hillary for her comments on Wright - if your guy can call Wright's comments outrageous, so can she.  If your guy can be offended, so can she.  Really, the smartest thing he could do is stop trying to territorialize Wright as his own issue, remember how well the "me, too" strategy has worked for him so far and start saying that he shares Hillary's opinion.

    She frames this perfectly: If it were MY church (5.00 / 3) (#88)
    by Exeter on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:31:24 PM EST
    That's all that needs to be said to a reasonable person and what 75% of America is thinking. The Obama blogs will have their caniption fits, but who cares anymore what the he## they think?!?

    Hey, there is a fantastic article (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by MarkL on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:36:35 PM EST
    by Mayhill Fowler, the same woman who broke the story of Obama's "bitter" remarks.
    This is so good I'm going off topic to present some snippets (via Larry Johnson


     Monday in Wilmington, however, not only did he seem not to know Wilmington but the date and time, saying that it was "March" and "nine months to November." The fact that his audiences are largely composed of die-hard fervent loyalists usually masks this underlying dis-connection.


    Getting the nuances and particularities of a community just right is a problem, perhaps an inevitable one, for a candidate whose necessary life is in the campaign bubble. Not only do Senator Obama and his press entourage never really see towns like Hickory but they don't see the opposition first-hand, as well. Therefore, Senator Obama has no idea that, despite whatever her campaign may be up to, Senator Clinton hardly ever mentions him anymore. Despite his remark to Hickory that he's told his staff the campaign needs to get away from going negative, Senator Obama laid into Senator Clinton, usually in conjunction with Senator McCain, several times during the afternoon. At one point he said, "Lately the other candidates aren't talking about their ideas-they're talking about me." As far as Senator Clinton is concerned, nothing could be further from the truth. She presents more ideas on the stump than she has time for. This misrepresentation incensed a group of women friends in Hickory. They had seen Hillary Clinton several times in North Carolina and had come to hear Barack Obama before finally making up their minds. Scratch twelve votes for him.

    OUCH.
    Sounds like Obama needs the next "nine months" off!

    Maybe his staff forgot his pillow? (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by lambert on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:37:22 PM EST
    And that's why he's so cranky?

    Parent
    They forgot (none / 0) (#149)
    by BrandingIron on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:27:44 PM EST

    his pillow, his nuk-nuk, his bankie and his bear.  Of course he's cranky!

    Parent
    He Should Take The Next 90 Years Off...As (none / 0) (#154)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:50:29 PM EST
    a politician he has done little good for any of his constituents; and it apparently is not any fun being a senator for him.  He has bigger offices to mess up.

    Saying his opponents are always talking about him shows me the very reason for the parting of the way with Wright was because they both have huge egos and this election cycle is too small for the both of them.  Wasn't it michelle that said she was in charge of keeping obama's ego in check.  My question is who keeps her's in check?

    And, I bet the HuffPo lynch mob is hating Mayhill Fowler about now.

    Parent

    In the comments of the article (none / 0) (#159)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:27:18 PM EST
    some of them make an interesting point. Obama wants to BE the President, he doesn't want the JOB of President. Hillary is running for the JOB of President. They compare their performances as Senators. It is a very interesting thread.

    Parent
    My Republican co-worker (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:18:46 PM EST
    just called me to remind me that "my girl" will be on O'Reilly tonight.  I told her I wouldn't miss it for the world.  

    Rise, Hillary, rise!

    Any Dem who is more scared/hateful (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by daryl herbert on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:25:46 PM EST
    of Fox news than the current Iranian regime is not fit for office.  It's good to see Sen. Clinton go on Fox News, hold her head high, and stand her ground against Bill O'Reilly.  It shows class, dedication, and competence on her part.

    Sen. McCain does press conferences with the Obama-supporting media all the time.  He isn't afraid to take questions from people looking to bring him down.  That's a good quality in a leader.

    It's a quality that Pres. Bush and Sen. Obama are both lacking.  They avoid the press because they don't like being accountable, even in that small way.

    Clinton is on, part 1 (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:10:54 PM EST
    gas tax vacation paid for with windfall profit tax.  They go at it.  She does great.  They are both very animated.

    O: Both partiess sold us out, you are going to bankrupt us with your UHC. O presents debt of states and the cost of medical progams and fraud. CA/NY are doing terrible, how will your program not bankrupt us?  C:  If we don't ge UHC we will continue to bleed money, protect what is best ... take existing plan , not govt run and open  it up.  O: you are subsidinign $900 hidden tax, we pick it up, everyone pay something... it's a moral issue.  O: it is and isn't.  C: pay for a kid with juvenile diabetes,  if we don't we will be here again in 5 years.  Woo... fired up.

    Commercial.

    Wow, the most brilliant part... (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Oje on Thu May 01, 2008 at 12:54:09 AM EST
    Is the way Clinton takes "Fox on" during this interview. During that first segment on taxes, she positions herself as "with" O'Reilly as "rich," then shreds the "common sense" notion about tax reductions for the rich and swipes away his "socialist" counterattack effortlessly. In the process, Clinton undermines his you-and-I-are-not-alike arguments ("I am right [American] and you are wrong [unAmerican]"), as she attempts to carry (*and does imo) the tax debate as a matter of what is best for us (further aligning herself with his viewers then) under a Teddy Roosevelt ("American") progressive tax system.

    Sorry if mentioned upthread, too tired to read all right now.

    good point (none / 0) (#167)
    by kempis on Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:08:17 AM EST
    she attempts to carry (*and does imo) the tax debate as a matter of what is best for us (further aligning herself with his viewers then) under a Teddy Roosevelt ("American") progressive tax system.

    Unfortunately, I was interrupted by a phone call and couldn't watch the whole thing, but the part that I saw illustrated what you say so well: she had a firm sense of her real audience--middle America. She was talking past Bill O's jingoism and appealing to their common sense. It was a masterful performance, something not many politicians can pull off. (Many stay in bubbles for a reason.)

    I guess we'll see how good it was if the rightwing attacks against her ramp up.

    Parent

    She Just Repeated What Obama Said (4.50 / 2) (#115)
    by BDB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:53:27 PM EST
    yesterday.  What, she's supposed to defend Wright and attack the media when Obama won't.  He was just on Fox and dilligently answered all of their Wright questions without calling them out.

    But then for some reason, Hillary is always supposed to do Obama's work for him.

    what's so funny is - (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Josey on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:00:09 PM EST
    Obama supporters claiming Hillary should jump in everytime poor little Obama is in a jam - and denounce those mean people hurting him.
    Oh and Edwards is "nothing to them now" because he won't endorse Obama.
    They really are a silly bunch.


    Parent
    nooo. Hillary, don't do it! (4.00 / 1) (#18)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:01:37 PM EST

    i think she could have answered that better. she should have given an answer that o'reilly wouldn't have liked.

    maybe point out the good qualities of Rev. Wright. he brings up some important issues. he's just motivated by the wrong thing. and his delivery could use some tweaking.

    i think everyone can agree that there is a lot of things in this country that need fixing. and who better to do it than Hillary?

    Motivated by the wrong thing?! (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:07:51 PM EST
    Wright is retiring!  I'd say his motivations are now set in stone.

    I repeat:  This is a problem of Obama's making.  I'm not going to soothe his supporters' feelings by wishing she'd said something else.  There are more important issues that need discussing.  Too bad Obama doesn't seem to want to do that.

    No debates, no talking to the press.  Bad news.

    Parent

    motivation (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:35:14 PM EST
    i meant that Wright is motivated by perpetuating divisiveness. he thrives off of it.

    there is nothing wrong with bringing up the problems this country faces, but he doesn't seem to want to fix these problems.

    i'm not suggesting that Hillary soothe the feelings of his supporters. but, this is an election, and the more people she appeals to the better.

    Parent

    I read that Raw Story (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:15:59 PM EST
    or another fine piece of journalism like that believed that Hillary's silence about Wright was a sign that his appearance before the press corp was (yet another of) her nefarious scheme.

    She can't win even when she says nothing.  No problem speaking!

    Parent

    In Checking On Raw Story Today, I Was (none / 0) (#155)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:51:45 PM EST
    thinking they are getting a tad tabloidy.

    Parent
    Raw Story (none / 0) (#165)
    by kenoshaMarge on Thu May 01, 2008 at 04:49:58 AM EST
    Is another of the many places I don't visit anymore. I don't understand how hating one Democratic woman can make so many people that I once thought were thoughtful, intelligent and fair turn into lunatics.

    There are some who believe that once the election is over we will all somehow just morph back into a community. I don't. I believe that the rift within the Democratic Party has always been there and these two nominees have exposed it in all it's ugliness.

    Parent

    I disagree -- I hate all this Wright sensativity (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Exeter on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:33:59 PM EST
    crapola... The guy gave a lifetime achievment award to the head of a hate group. That's all that needs to be said. He's a fool.

    Parent
    Explain, please.. (4.60 / 5) (#59)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:22:59 PM EST
    maybe point out the good qualities of Rev. Wright.

    How would that help her? Why should she invite attack by defending the indefensible?? Obama tried and look where he ended up. He had to toss him under the bus with grandma, the church, etc. Why would a sane person defend Rev. Wright when he has insulted her, her husband, her daughter and everything she stands for?? You must be out of your mind to think that defending Wright is going to help anyone in this campaign, let alone Hillary. If you want to defend him, email O'Reilly yourself. But don't expect Hillary to do it.

    Parent

    explanation (2.00 / 1) (#111)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:46:58 PM EST
    Obama is confident that he has the African American vote. that is the only reason he threw Rev. Wright under the bus.

    don't get me wrong, i think the Reverend is a nut. i think it's disgusting what he said about the Clintons and the way he dismissed Hillary.

    but it's obvious that a lot of African Americans are reacting to Wright in a positive way. i believe this is because he seems to show a clear understanding of the inequalities they face. well, sometimes clear.

    i think that Obama overestimated himself. i think that by throwing Wright under the bus, he essentially threw the African American vote under the bus.  

    Parent

    Well, that may be true, but (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:58:41 PM EST
    it is still not Hillary's job to defend him. And if she did, it would be seen as pandering by the AA community. She knows them well enough to know that. Right now my friend Margaret is on her way to church to attend a meeting with a NAACP member who is coming to talk this evening. She is going to call me and let me know how the meeting went. In her church, they aren't happy with Obama's repudiation of Wright. They also like Hillary. Many of the women plan to vote for her in the GE, and did in the primary. The thing is that the AA community takes loyalty very seriously, especially when the choice is between a black man and a bunch of white people. Which is the group that Obama catered to when he tossed Rev. Wright under the bus. He could have disowned his politics a lot earlier and not done this terrible thing. And it is viewed as a terrible thing to disown your pastor like that. It really is.

    P.S. I know most of the people in Margaret's church, but she is the one I chat with on the phone all the time, so that is why I keep mentioning her.

    Parent

    Why on earth (4.50 / 6) (#62)
    by nell on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:23:28 PM EST
    should she defend Obama's pastor when even Obama won't defend his pastor?

    Also, don't forget Wright's disgusting rants against Hillary - Hillary Clinton aint never been called a....or against Bill Clinton when he humped the pulpit and said Bill Clinton did African Americans just like he did Monica Lewinsky...

    His words against the Clintons were disgusting, cruel, and totally inappropriate.

    But yes, Hillary should defend Wright, just like she should stop challenging Obama for the nomination Whatever.

    Parent

    not wright so much as what wright said (1.00 / 1) (#119)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:00:12 PM EST
    look, i am not saying that she should defend everything the man has said. especially not what he said about her.

    but why does it have to be all or nothing?

    lookm, we're all adults. we have to deal with people we may not like, people who we may have strong disagreements with. but just because wright is a biggot and a sexist doesn't mean his critisms of our government's war policy are invalid.

    i just think it would help more than it would hurt, to point out the validity of some of wrights claims, and take that as an oppurunity to explain why she would be the best person to address those claims.

    Parent

    the (2.50 / 2) (#150)
    by BrandingIron on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:33:55 PM EST

    validity of Wright's claims???

    Like how the government created AIDS to kill AAs?

    No thanks.  No need for Hillary to point out the "validity" of that crap.

    Parent

    what are you kidding? (none / 0) (#156)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:57:35 PM EST
    that is not what i had in my mind.

    Parent
    spelling (1.00 / 1) (#122)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:02:22 PM EST
    *opportunity

    Parent
    BTW, you can troll rate me (none / 0) (#153)
    by BrandingIron on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:48:13 PM EST

    because I make sense.  But since you make no sense, THAT is why I'm troll rating you.

    It makes no sense for her to even deign to defend the indefensible.  If you don't like that, tough.

    Parent

    troll raiting? (none / 0) (#157)
    by DefenderOfPants on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:16:47 PM EST
    sorry, but i don't think your attempt at putting down my intelligence merits a higher rating.

    i never said that Hillary should defend these conspiracy theories. i never said it was her job to defend Wright. i simply thought it would be a shrewd strategy to acknowledge his obvious appeal to so many African Americans.

    i understand the cynics would accuse her of pandering, but i'd rather them think she was pandering to African Americans than to a Fox news audience. i'm tired of people trying to align Hillary with the ideas of the right-wing.

    Parent

    She's doing great. (4.00 / 1) (#136)
    by MaryGM on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:11:13 PM EST
    That's right, Hill.  Shove that health care plan right down his throat.

    On the flip side, I'm with him and Krugman and Friedman on this gas tax baloney. She can't walk it back now, but she's dead wrong on how it would play out.

    OMG. Don't vote for Wright! (2.50 / 2) (#27)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:05:35 PM EST
    He should not be president!

    Why don't you tell Bill-O that? (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Fabian on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:14:13 PM EST
    He's the one who pressed the question?

    [lame-O Obamatron]

    Parent

    He's not running. Read a newspaper (none / 0) (#48)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:16:25 PM EST
    or a news site. Or Google Rev. Wright. Please.

    Parent
    Are you serious? (1.00 / 1) (#56)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:20:28 PM EST
    Do you really think that people who read political blogs don't know who is running?

    Or was that very lame snark?

    Wright is not running, he is not married to Obama and he is not a consultant or campaign official. So all this gloating is really silly and ugly.

    No one on TL thinks that Obama is an angry black separatist, but you are willing to play the right wing game with no shame.

    Parent

    no (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:31:02 PM EST
    he is Obamas pastor for 20 years who married him baptized his children and WAS a campaign consultant until he became an embarrassment.

    Parent
    The problem with Obama is that no one knows (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:38:48 PM EST
    what to think. He hasn't really defined who he is or what he really believes in. And he sat in Rev. Wright's church for 20 years, was married by him, claimed him as a mentor and spiritual advisor, and now says he didn't, wasn't and didn't know anything about his sermons. Well, we know he heard the "riding dirty" one, he is on tape in the audience. So he heard some of it. And he could not have been totally ignorant of the content of the other sermons, unless he is deaf when it suits him. He used the church, and the Rev. Wright for his own purposes, political purposes. Now it is coming back to bite him in the butt. I don't care if he is a black separatist. What I care about is that he is not loyal to a man, and a church, that helped him up the ladder. He lied, he waffled, then he disowned a friend of over 20 years. Why? Because that friend was politically inconvenient and Obama didn't have the foresight to see that he would be. That is NOT who I want as the head of the Dem party. That is NOT who I want as President. If his own pastor can't trust him to stand by him, why should we?? And he is running for office, so we get to ask these sorts of questions. I mean, if someone knew you were a liar and an opportunist who would stab people in the back to get ahead, would they hire you??

    And spare me the "Hillary did it too" crap. She keeps her word and is loyal to her friends. I just wish her friends were more loyal to her instead of jumping on Obama's bandwagon at the first sign of trouble. She won't say anything, and will campaign for them. But the voters will remember. And it may cost them in the future. Betrayal usually exacts a high price. As Obama is learning.

    Parent

    don't speak for me (none / 0) (#151)
    by BrandingIron on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:36:27 PM EST

    No one on TL thinks that Obama is an angry black separatist

    Holy cr@p, that's part of the basis for his first book.  Angry.  Black.  Separatist/nationalist/whatever you want to call it.

    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#161)
    by IzikLA on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:38:54 PM EST
    His statement last night that he was Just his pastor is false.  He has said numerous time that he was his spiritual mentor and was in fact a spiritual advisor to his campaign.  Am I crazy or was that a flat out lie?  If I'm wrong someone please tell me.

    Parent
    Right. She could have said (1.00 / 1) (#64)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:23:36 PM EST
    that the media needs to focus on policy not personality.

    but that would have been a presidential thing to do

    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by madamab on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:30:01 PM EST
    And there you have it, folks.

    IACF in all its dizzying glory.


    Parent

    Huh? (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:34:58 PM EST
    that the media needs to focus on policy not personality.

    No debates.  No press conferences.  Little substance.

    Right.  Let's focus on that.

    Parent

    heh (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by moll on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:35:50 PM EST
    that the media needs to focus on policy not personality.

    but that would have been a presidential thing to do

    It's only Presidential if you scratch your nose with your middle finger while you're saying it.

    Parent

    Oh, snap! (none / 0) (#146)
    by lambert on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:36:07 PM EST
    Gotta propagate that one, moll...

    Parent
    Hmm (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:46:37 PM EST
    I wish she hadn't taken the bait again.

    I guess I'll have to see the context of the whole interview.

    What could she say in his defense that (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 04:52:00 PM EST
    wouldn't get her in trouble?

    She agrees with Wright?

    Sherefuses to comment (so everyone can speak for her?)

    Better to say what she wants and put it out there.  She'll get slammed for it, but at least it's what she believes.

    Parent

    She could say that guilt by association (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:21:59 PM EST
    is not how we should be deciding who has better ideas to lead the country.

    But that would be civil and would not take advantage of another chance to highlight Wright.

    Parent

    or she could have said (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:25:41 PM EST
    he was a hatful freaky old windbag and that there was not excuse in the world she could possibly imagine that Obama sat and listened to  him for 20 years.
    thats what I would have said.

    Parent
    Why, bless your heart, I believe (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:25:41 PM EST
    that's what she said, if you listen.  She may not have used your exact words, but then, even her great mind does not extend to mindreading.

    Parent
    You mischaracterize their relationshop (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by nell on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:29:42 PM EST
    It's not just guilt by association.

    Guilt by association would be if Obama went to Wright's church every now and again for political reasons (which is the case with most African American politicians in Chicago), but had no further relationship with him.

    This is not guilt by association. Obama knows Wright, he was part of the church for 20 years, he has donated more than 50,000 in the past two years to Wright's church, he has referred to Wright as his moral compass, his sounding board, and even appointed him to be part of his campaign. How on earth is that just guilt by association?

    Parent

    Why should see even think about defending him... (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:54:22 PM EST
    ...after what he said about her and her husband from his pulpit?

    Parent
    In his defense, she might have said.... (4.00 / 1) (#120)
    by jerry on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:00:14 PM EST
    No one could have predicted that Reverend Wright would slam into a towering candidate like that....

    Parent
    Bait? Hey... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by oldpro on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:04:11 PM EST
    It's publicity and it's free.

    Meanwhile, Michael Moore and Michelle Obama will be on repetetive prime time (Larry King) bashing Hillary bigtime...and Moore will lie flat out about Hillary and healthcase.

    Shame.

    Parent

    She was baited into talking about Wright (none / 0) (#28)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:05:56 PM EST
    I also think she shouldn't have done the interview, but this is slightly different.

    Parent
    I don't get it (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by kimsaw on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:00:43 PM EST
    She wasn't baited I'd call it more pressed, and she answered when asked. At least she didn't stuff a waffle her mouth to avoid answering.  She had previously said about the same thing anyway, no real news. O'Reilly wanted more than he got.  

    Everybody wants us all to get along, isn't that Obama main appeal, yet no one should present themselves to the other side. How do you bring change if you're only willing to talk to your own side. Fox is no less credible than any other new organization out there.  Obama went to Wallace, not so tough. Clinton goes to O'Reilly, its giving aid and comfort to the other side, while Obama was trying to aid himself. It's just bizarre.

    She is a woman with steel ovaries which is more powerful than testicular fortitude claimed by any male leader in modern history. She's obviously not afraid to debate with anyone, can't say the same about Obama.

    Parent

    Can we please put the ridiculous PC (none / 0) (#112)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:48:42 PM EST
    stuff to bed?

    Parent
    She Can't Not Condemn (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by BDB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:56:12 PM EST
    the guy that Obama held a press conference yesterday to condemn.  I thought she was restrained, which is about all she can be.

    Sure, the Obama-maniacs will scream and shout, but after their guy going on Fox and 1) praising Republican deregulation ideas, 2) throwing Kos under the bus, and 3) discussing Wright and other "distractions" without ever taking Fox on, it's kind of hard for them to complain about Clinton.  Oh, they will.  But they whine about everything these days.

    Parent

    Can anyone confirm? (none / 0) (#92)
    by cmugirl on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 05:32:25 PM EST
    Since we're talking about Fox...I read on another blog that Geraldine Ferraro was on Fox today and said that the whole Wright-Obama thing was staged. Now before anyone accuses me of being a conspiracy theorist (which I am - I admitted it in another post), I just want to check out what was said, so if anyone has info, I'd appreciate it.

    Going on O'Reilly's show? (none / 0) (#127)
    by Radiowalla on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:44:45 PM EST
    All I can say is "Ewwwww!"

    This is one creepy man!

    I'm watching (none / 0) (#133)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:08:02 PM EST
    She's totally relaxed and on her game.

    Go, Hill!

    Memo to Obama (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by angie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:11:05 PM EST
    that's how you "take on Fox." ;-)

    Parent
    She's actually debating issues with him. (none / 0) (#137)
    by Teresa on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:11:16 PM EST
    "Don't back down" really is her personality. (I still don't like FOX but I'm glad to see her not suck up and praise Republicans.)

    Parent
    She handles him SO well! :) (none / 0) (#138)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:12:47 PM EST
    and she's also got time tomorrow night!

    Parent
    yeah, they're stretching it out (none / 0) (#139)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:21:21 PM EST
    And I totally called it!  Bill O is asking Hillary to give Fox props for being fairer to her than the other networks.  

    Parent
    The Obama folks praised her (none / 0) (#142)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:28:24 PM EST
    lol!~ well, that looks like a win/win tonight!

    Good for her.

    Parent

    Hagee and Parsley (none / 0) (#166)
    by bernarda on Thu May 01, 2008 at 04:58:28 AM EST
    Did she ask Bill O'the wimp what he thought about Revs Hagee and Parsley who are McBush's friends and supporters? If she didn't, she should have.

    Not quite. (none / 0) (#168)
    by QuakerInABasement on Thu May 01, 2008 at 11:54:24 AM EST
    "Well, I take offense. I think it's offensive and outrageous. I'm going to express my opinion, others can express theirs. It is part of just, you know, an atmosphere we're in today."

    Almost a good answer, but not quite. Here's what I would recommend to the candidate:
    "That's his opinion. I'm going to express my opinion, others can express theirs. Bill, this is a big country and a strong country. There's room for all kinds of opinions on important issues. And it's part of our national character to listen respectfully to all sides without trying to shout anyone down or shut anyone up."
    Spoiler Alert: Hillary on O'Reilly Tonight | 161 comments (161 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment