May 1, 2008...7:56 am
Excuse me….who’s an elitist?
Jump to Comments
Wow. Just wow. Hillary Clinton must have known she was on the teevee, right?
“Rich people, god bless us. We deserve all the opportunities to make sure our country and our blessings continue to the next generation.”
Don’t get me started on the word “deserve.”
TheZoo got a heads-up about this from Willy at the American Everyman.
Check out his post here.
UPDATE:
From Op-Ed News: Hillary Clinton To Bill O’Reilly, “Rich People: God Bless Us;” Elite? Hmm
From Daily Kos: HRC: “Rich People, God Bless Us”
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
123 Comments
May 1, 2008 at 11:12 am
I can’t wait to see the videos of the second part of O’Reilly’s interview. He seems to bring out the real Hillary nicely.
May 1, 2008 at 12:41 pm
I can’t watch any of this crap. Clinton is irritating enough, but O’Reilly is such a gobshite that I can’t listen to him for more than 10 seconds without screaming. My clock radio went off at 0530 in the midst of a report about the interview and I lay there stunned and sickened because the very first thing I heard in the morning was that pompous voice. I’ve yet to recover seven hours later.
May 1, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Okay, to be clear, I can’t stand Hillary. But this sound bite seems too outrageous even for a pandering , self-serving snotbag like her.
Each sentence, individually, is not offensive. Note the camera cut between the two sentences. It seems highly possible that Fox intentionally pasted together two sentences that really did not connect together.
For example, the original full context might have been something like this:
“Rich people, god bless us. But this issue is important to all Americans. We deserve the opportunities to make sure our country and our blessings continue to the next generation.”
Maybe I’m being too nice giving her the benefit of the doubt here, but that’s only because Fox and O’Reilly have such a record of scumtastic behavior.
May 1, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Hi gorn, as far as I know the interviewees or their staff have a close look at what will be aired of an interview, before it goes on the screen. So, I don’t think it was pandered by Fox. This may have been a sarcasm gone bad, but I’d say let Hillary explain her own words. She was instrumental in Obama having to make statements on Wright’s words not his own and explain, so let her explain what she really meant here. She was behind the “bitter” controversy and made Obama explain his words over and over again, I don’t give her any benefit at all.
May 1, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Here is the entire interview:
http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/index.php?p=946
May 1, 2008 at 1:50 pm
It does help to watch the entire interview. I cannot stomach Billo. He tried constantly to trap her or get her to stumble or put her on the defensive. She stayed with him through the entire things and he never bested her. I can’t stand Hillary, but she definitely bested Billo.
It put the whole thing in better context to see the entire video.
I don’t know WHY she would agree to go on FOX except to try and prove to voters what a pitbull she is, that she can bring men to their knees.. (sarcasm)..
Either that, or she has become very comfortable with the attention and support she is getting for whatever reason from FOX.. That in itself puts me on alert. There is more to this..
May 1, 2008 at 2:29 pm
muse, I have the benefit of not being used to Bill O’Reilly. The only things I see or saw were clips on TP or C&L, but no more.
If I may give my 5 cents. He is no intellectual match for Clinton and she was fully well prepared for the interview. It is standard procedure, at least over here, to first get an outline of the questioning and then a transcript of the interview before airing. All the O’Reilly upset seemed phony to me.
What I saw was an interview with someone who was clearly aware of the huge publicity this interview was having. The many, many voters out there and she wasn’t answering O’Reilly’s questions she was catering to the masses of Fox viewers, in other words “the sheeple”. This was done admirably well and make me break out in goosebumps. This lady is so status-quo that I don’t wonder she’s the corporations’ darling.
As an aside: I watched her eyes, now I feel a little sick.
May 1, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Creepy huh..
May 1, 2008 at 4:07 pm
[...] mai 2008 J’ai trouvé sur un autre blog, TheZoo, une belle citation de Madame Clinton, que [...]
May 1, 2008 at 4:12 pm
And poor people…eff em. They deserve to rot for generations to come.
May 1, 2008 at 4:17 pm
They just need to work harder!
Welcome to TheZoo, unastronaut. You have a pretty cool blog.
May 1, 2008 at 4:24 pm
I will tell you something; however you look at it, the point is clear… she changes subjects, and she is assuring the “rich” that;
1. she is one of them
2. she is not going to increase the inheritance tax
3. she is going to protect the way the “government” works so that it continues the way it has.
this is the most damaging quote she has made as of yet. And there have been alot of damaging quotes that she has made.
Anyone who says this after accusing Obama of being “elitist”, desrves to lose. She blew it, and the MSM is syaing nothing about it.
May 1, 2008 at 4:27 pm
I am glad you put this up, Zooey. No matter what I say about how this system is working now, Obama is the best choice they have given us… and when their picks screw up like Hillary just did, we should jump on it as quick as possible.
Obama may be one thing, but he isn’t Hillary… and that is saying a lot these days.
May 1, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I agree with that Willy. She is most definitely ‘one of them’. The last couple of days, watching her make a fool out of herself trying to be “one of the little people”, by pumping her own gas, trying to work the coffee machine, etc.. just made me shake my head. Who does she think she’s fooling?
I told my husband I was going to go out and buy a set of those blue overalls mechanics wear and have her name embroidered on it, then send it to her. She could wear it out on the road.. Maybe that will make her look more ‘blue collared”.. She seems to like to ‘play’ different rolls.
May 1, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Thanks, Willy. I appreciate the heads-up. This just raised the hairs on the back of my neck.
I think what Hillary might be forgetting is that the rich know who and what she is — one of them. She failed to consider that many of Billo’s viewers are not rich people, and they might not appreciate her attitude.
May 1, 2008 at 4:31 pm
I loved it last night when one of the news people said they wouldn’t be surprised to see her driving one of those 18 wheelers next..
May 1, 2008 at 4:42 pm
What gets me is all the “progressive” sites that aren’t running with this story. They are the same ones that reported over and over again on the ‘elitist” comments of Obama, yet here we have the clearest elitist comment of any candidate… and they are silent.
what a world….
I am glad TheZoo took up this story. It needs to be told.
May 1, 2008 at 4:56 pm
I’ve been studying, so haven’t been paying that much attention. I thought this would be going like wild fire through the blogosphere.
May 1, 2008 at 5:01 pm
I have to agree with Jon Stewart about this whole “elitism” crap. To paraphrase him, “You’re running for an important elected office, and if all goes well, they might put your face on a mountain. You;re supposed to be better than me.”
Fran Liebowitz (the comedian) said, “Everybody wants the president to be just like them. You’re not qualified to be president!”
Now, none of this means that I support Sen Clinton to be president. She asked us New Yorkers to give her six more years in the Senate and we did, and I intend to make sure she’s around to serve out those six years. She can’t do both in 2012.
But this whole idea that “regular Americans” want the president to be “just like them” is absurd! I don’t want the president to be “just like me.”
I want a president who will enjoy getting out of bed each morning and facing the challenges of the day.
I want a president who doesn’t go through each day wondering if he can stay off the alcohol.
I want a president who is knowledgebale enough about the rest of the world to have a proper idea of how to handle things, not some nobody who’s only read about these places and has never been there.
In short, if I were choosing a president, I would NOT want someone “just like me”. And if most Americans would take an honest look at themselves, they would say the same thing. But about themselves. I know they wouldn’t want me, either.
Maybe that’s just me.
May 1, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Thanks for the welcome, I’m a fan of TheZoo for sure! Keep up the good work! I had to repost the video, more eyes are necessary. I have a suspicion this story won’t take hold like the “bitter” comments. That’s especially odd considering the poor quality audio recording supposedly “lessened the blow” of those comments, and yet this plain-as-day interview will probably fly under the radar.
May 1, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Good idea to re-post the video, unastronaut. It looks like getting this out there will be up to we “angry” bloggers. We’ve had 7000+ views so far, so the word is getting out there.
May 1, 2008 at 7:12 pm
No doubt Hillary has a big heart for the poor…
May 1, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Hil just radiates compassion for the little person.
Welcome to TheZoo, Mer Pints.
May 1, 2008 at 9:13 pm
I think you’ve completely misinterpreted what she was saying to suit your means.
May 1, 2008 at 9:15 pm
[...] I almost forgot to link back to the original article at TheZoo, where I first heard about this story and watched the video. After watching the context, it’s [...]
May 1, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Oh, it’s worse than that, folks. Wayne, there’s a BIG difference between Obama’s alleged elitism and that of Hillary.
Obama, at worst, was saying that the poor have a grudge (damn him for telling the truth!) On the other hand, Hillary was implying the rich are special people.
I agree with Jon Stewart that we should hope our president has a superior intellect, compassion, and wisdom. By contrast, I’m pretty sure none of us giving a flying shit if the president has superior wealth.
As to why the MSM has not picked up on this story - simple. The MSM no longer comprehends independent investigation and reporting. Instead it only reports what comes easiest - whatever is fed to it by political and corporate shills, such as the ones who prime the MSM pump for the Republicans and the Clintons. Obama appears not to employ professional assassins of Rovian caliber.
May 1, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Being rich is bad? Then why do people work hard to save money? to be poor? DUH! you work hard to save Money to accumulate wealth whenever possible. Nothing elitist about it.
As if Anyone is actually Focusing On Obama’s or Clinton’s Elitism now. It’s all about racism and Obama Not having the Cojones to do things right when he had the Chance and leave the Church Of we hate whitey…which he’s still a Member of.
Don’t Hate Hillary. She’s a democrat, Just Like You! She, despite what you think,has the Ideals of the Democratic party and the American people at heart.
She and Obama have almost the same views on a great many subjects. Look at their voting records in the Senate. 98% Identical. 102 out of 105 votes they voted the same way.
Yer bitching about style. Substance is what’s Important. She has More of it. He’s a pretty boy, a Media Darling who gets all the good press.
That’s My View. He’s a Good guy, but I don’t Think Barry’s ready just yet. That he hasn’t finished her off when he had the chance is the proof of it.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 1, 2008 at 9:58 pm
I think its not so much about being an elitist as being an absolute opportunist and hypocrite.
May 1, 2008 at 10:00 pm
I don’t think she is a Democrat as much as she is a Hillaryite.. This feels so much like it is more about her than the party or the good of the country. Its an attitude of entitlement. There are undercurrents and hints of behind the scenes connections that don’t go along with the words she is using to paint herself to be whatever it is people want to hear. It is more than a little unnerving how in sync she seems to be with McCain and FOX. Something is very wrong with this picture.
May 1, 2008 at 10:07 pm
A politician who is not an Opportunist is not a politician for long. Obama is an Opportunist, and that’s not a bad thing for him. Tell me he hasn’t taken advantage of the Opportunities given him by the press and the Clinton Campaign. Of course he has.
It may feel that way, but look at it without the Obama Blinders on. Look at the Democratic Party platform. What the Party wants to achieve. And then look at Both candidates. They are Both in Lock step with the Wants of the Party.
Hate her all you Like. Hate her for what she’s Done that you think is wrong. Not for YOUR emotions, But HER actions.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 1, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Yeah Mikey, you’ve hit on it. We dislike her because of HER actions.
Thanks for clearing that up for us, we really hadn’t figured that out until now.
Kisses & snuggles.
Zooey
May 1, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Which Ones? Inquiring Minds want to know!
A complete list would be helpful.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 1, 2008 at 10:42 pm
the coffee machine gaffe was hilarious! :))
May 1, 2008 at 10:48 pm
That’s a reason to Not Vote for her? or to Not like her? Are you High?
LOL. Try again.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 1, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Sorry, I’m just not a fan of “suitpants.”
Chelsea needs to shed that image too.
Suitpants = bad.
May 1, 2008 at 11:23 pm
….and on this basis you either will or have voted for, I am presuming, Obama?
FAIL.
we’re talking about looks here? You’re the Ones who fell in love with Senator URKEL and you can talk about the way Hillary Dresses? LOL.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 1, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Wow! I thought Libertarians were hard on the woman…
May 1, 2008 at 11:30 pm
It’s been Fun, But I have to do things tomorrow, so I must go. It would have been nice to have a real political discussion, but yer a fun crowd, even if you’re, on average, about as sharp as a bowling ball!
Enjoy Your Elitism! HAGN!
Love Always!
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 2, 2008 at 12:20 am
Truthfully this isn’t a voting issue. None of the previous distractions, gaffes and rhetoric attacks on any of the candidates should be considered voting issues.
It is, an example of her hypocrisy. She was an opportunist when she attacked him for his “elitist” remarks. When she turns around and says something very much resembling her pride in the club and willingness to keep membership the same, it reveals that hypocrisy. Not that this is strange for politics, but worth reporting in the name of fairness.
It’s funny Rhino, you talk about a lack of real discussion but you brought absolutely nothing (except for the excessive capitalization) to the table. I’m sure nobody would mind if you made sense every now and again.
May 2, 2008 at 12:29 am
mikeytherhino,
It’s a shame that you can’t comprehend that the issue at hand is not one elitism versus another, but rather the issue is hypocrisy.
Clinton and Obama are both “elite” in their own ways. This is obvious, as Jon Stewart points out. So is McCain. So is Bush, though unlike the others, his elitism is purely inherited, and is far outweighed by is ignorance, drug-addled brain, intellectual apathy, and general incompetence.
The distinction between Clinton and Obama is that Clinton and her attack dogs make a spectacle of Obama’s generally benign elitism. We distinctly do not see Obama playing the same game: spouting off about Clinton’s elitism.
This is perhaps too subtle for you, but we should not be surprised as you also made the erroneous assumption that everyone here is a Democrat.
I guess you’re just about as sharp as a bowling ball. Hee haw hee haw…
May 2, 2008 at 5:20 am
she isn’t pretending to be poor or under privileged like Obama and his wife - what’s the problem? things never get better when you ad a brief clip from a tabloid gossip ridden, former sports newscaster like Olberman…esp when all it shows is someone at a vending machine…as opposed to say, exposing terrorist links, a racist spiritual advisor, illegal housing transactions, suggesting talking to terrorist regimes - yes what’s more trivial…oh yes, the vending machine
How about Obama and his poll-fixing friends the Zogby’s?
May 2, 2008 at 5:32 am
sounds like you guys are trying to just be nitpickie…
sheesh….
May 2, 2008 at 6:00 am
Seems like someone missed the point…
Look, there was nothing edited from her comment. You can tell by wathing her “hed-bobbing” for dramatic emphasis. Her “sing-songy” vocal pattern doesn’t change and never misses abeat.
nothing was edited out.
Now for those of you who say there is nothing wrong with being rich…
again, on my site I said the the Obama people would avoid using this because it is too easy for Clinton supporters to dismiss it as being about class baiting.
But that’s NOT why this video is important; what she is doing is reasurring the wealthy class that she is not going to change the status quo, folks.
That’s what the democratic national committe wants and that’s why they hand selected the candidates they have.
In an election that is all about “change” here she is assuring the ruling class that she is not going to change anything.
And there is a problem when she makes her moeny because of her close connections to political power. Check our her previous holding in WalMart, Wal-Mart de Mexico, General Electric, Raytheon, NewsCorp, big oil companies, and the pharmacudical industry.
It isn’t just “opportunism” or cronyism, it’s the fact that she had economic ties to these businesses and that slanted her votes as well as her influence on other legislators when it came to getting bills passed.
Her “opportunism” comes at a price; and that price is too often paid by her constituants.
Besides, was it just “opportunism” when Dick Cheney was pushing all those no-bid contracts for Halliburton? Is that just “opportunism” or is that corruption?
May 2, 2008 at 7:02 am
Excellent rebuttal, Willy. I knew I wouldn’t vote for her when I realized she was all about corporate america and keeping the 1% ahead. This is just another confirmation and blatant hypocrisy. Most of us haven’t made a voting decision based on one interview……we are a little more informed than that, Strawman Sam.
May 2, 2008 at 8:02 am
Funny that Hillary is now thought of as less of a liberal than Obama.
We truly are doomed to socialism.
Sad.
Real Sad.
May 2, 2008 at 8:03 am
There is nothing wrong with being an elitist, unless you’re running for office, of course.
Many of us work hard - or work, period - to achieve a desired level of financial security - we’re supposed to look upon those who feed off the gov’t tit or sit around and cry the blues with the same level of respect we’d give our peers? I think not.
You lose you job, go out and learn a new skill and get another one. Stop blaming other people. It may, may not be true, but sitting around and pining over “what was” serves no good purpose.
May 2, 2008 at 8:06 am
Stilletto,
Please go shine up your reading skills, m’kay?
May 2, 2008 at 8:25 am
It’s good to see that this is about more than pantsuits and coffee machine gaffes.
Unastronaut. I apologize if you dislike the way i type. My wife takes me to task for the Capitalization thing as well.
And the statement I made was about Senator Clinton’s actions vs. The Emotions of those who dislike her. No one has yet explained exactly what form her hypocrisy has taken.
To Gorn: Obama has No Attack dogs? Do you remember where the term “Reject and repudiate” came from? It was the Obama camp speaking about Geraldine Ferraro. Like she said something bad, which she didn’t.
And thank you. I would have been deeply disappointed had no one responded to the Bowling ball comment.
And gorn, if you’re voting for Obama, regardless of what you think of yourself as, or how you are registered, It is a vote for a Democrat. Which makes you at the very least pro-democrat.
Thank you Creeping.
To WillyLoman: before anything else is said, Nice Emoticon!
So there is something entirely sinister in owning stock in These companies? Hadn’t realized that.
WillyLoman, i want to know exactly what votes were influenced by those corporations when. Details my Brother. Bring me Details.
This election isn’t about change. It’s about control. About who controls what in Washington. The Republicans have done it wrong for 8 years and made a shambles of everything.
Obama says he will change Washington. How? Will he change the Democrats? No, he is one of them, no need to change that. Will he change the Republicans? No. He is incapable of that. Can he change the way Lobbyists and Pacs do Business? No. He is incapable. It cannot be done. you cannot tell 36,000 lobbyists that there jobs are no longer necessary. The house and Senate, which live by the Pac and the Lobbyist, will not stand for it.
…or do you not remember the earmarks bill that got voted down last month. By Democrats and Republicans. The same thing will happen if Obama tries to legislate the Lobbyists out of Washington.
Obama is as Much the Regular old Politician as Clinton. The issue I have is that he plays like he’ll be different when all arrows point to that not being true.
I thought about voting for him too, but his entire campaign is based on Hypocrisy.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 2, 2008 at 8:48 am
I think the only way to understand her is to understand the masculinist paradigm of Right politics that she’s pandering to. Fortunately I have theorized it here:
http://www.stuffwhitedbagslike.wordpress.com
May 2, 2008 at 9:00 am
Love your blog, chunque.
May 2, 2008 at 9:09 am
She is an idiot…I hope she wins the Democratic Primaries so that John McCain and the Republican machine can send this Elitist %@^! back to Arkansas packing.
Stupid *&@^@&@**&^@*!^!(@(
@(@^!%!@**^70@
#9#&#%!
Iranian Ajax
May 2, 2008 at 9:12 am
Thanks for stopping by, Iranian Ajax.
May 2, 2008 at 9:44 am
I thought she was being sarcastic at first, but by the end of the quote, she clearly is not.
May 2, 2008 at 10:00 am
mikeytherhino:
“To Gorn: Obama has No Attack dogs?”
I didn’t say that. You should try a little harder not to draw broad assumptions. It’s impossible to play in politics without some level of aggressive observation and response. That said, I find his approach and demeanor about ten notches above the gutter lived in by the Clintons and by the Rove machine. She’s not much better, or less obvious, than the swift boaters.
“And gorn, if you’re voting for Obama, regardless of what you think of yourself as, or how you are registered, It is a vote for a Democrat. Which makes you at the very least pro-democrat.”
More broad assumptions. I haven’t said who I will vote for, though I grant you that at this point there is only one choice.
I have voted for Republicans, Democrats, and independents over the years. I don’t vote based on the schoolyard ideological definitions of Fox, Rush, and Ann, but on my assessment of what is better for the country at a given time (or, often, I vote against what is worse - a policy that should be considered by many followers of this blog - if followed more generally, the Bush disaster would never have happened).
May 2, 2008 at 10:01 am
Hey mikeytherhino, so your point is every one of them is as bad as the other one. We’re all doomed no matter who we vote for. Spokent like a true Republican. Most of the regulars here started out as supporters of neither Clinton or Obama. Believe me, we each have our own reasons for who we are supporting now. However, that reason is not based on the premise that nobody can do anything to improve the country no matter what. That’s how you feel when you vote for somebody like GWB or Ronald Reagan, TWICE.
May 2, 2008 at 10:28 am
Shayne. I am a Democrat. And a realist. I have seen too many contests decided by personality rather then issues and the People ALWAYS lose out when that happens. I never said no one can do anything for America. I have great faith in the American People to do the Right thing.
And I voted for Gore. And Kerry. And Bill Clinton. Did you?
To Gorn: My Humblest Apologies. you are right, I should not make broad assumptions. I will simply say that I disagree with your contention about his approach and demeanor. I say it is The demeanor and approach Of Obama and Axelrod and the rest Of Obama’s staff which is below board here.
Love Always.
The Rhino.
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 2, 2008 at 10:33 am
mikeytherhino:
“I say it is The demeanor and approach Of Obama and Axelrod and the rest Of Obama’s staff which is below board here.”
Fair enough. I totally disagree, but that’s why we have elections, so it’s okay.
However, given that there is zero chance of Clinton taking the nomination, and that has been the case for some time, if you are really a Democrat as you have labeled yourself, at this point you should be rallying behind the inevitable nominee.
May 2, 2008 at 10:39 am
This woman was never an appealing candidate predating when she moved up and became a Senator. She rides the coattails, plays up the pitty party, thinks that just because she has a vagina she’s entitled to things, and wants the common man to feel they can relate to her…
never believed any of it for a second.
And now…
that’s a great statement. It shows people just who she *really* cares about. Then again, they are paying for her run.
Please let it finish. I don’t want this little engine to go.
~js
http://iamanenigma.wordpress.com/
May 2, 2008 at 10:40 am
If Obama is the Nominee, I will back Him, support him and Vote for Him. I think Hillary is the better more able candidate, but if she should lose, I will back him. Until that Time tho, I will back Hillary.
Like i’ve said, personality aside, on a strictly issue based viewpoint, Obama and Clinton are almost Identical. Precisely Identical when It comes to Environmental Issues.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 2, 2008 at 10:41 am
And of course mikey you have a right to your opinion and nobody is trying to change it. Most of us here are very much against the war in Iraq and have always been. Hillary’s vote to for it has been the reason most of us supported somebody else during the primaries.
It was a Hillary staffer who went in with a tape recorder and taped Obama’s comments, which I understand and feel are vastly misconstrued, in San Francisco and then released them to the press. At this point I don’t think we need a Democrat who is working so hard to get a Republican the general election if she can’t win the nomination.
Also, I feel that for all of us who voted in the primaries earlier, and who gave Obama the lead that Hillary legitimately is unable to catch no matter how her people try to convince the media they can, it is vastly unfair that she believes she can take the nomination away from the frontrunner. Because a bunch of dumbasses in Philadelphia care how a nominee bowls doesn’t mean that the rest of the voters that voted for Obama in other states don’t want him nominated no.
Clinton’s people talk like we are all on school of fish riding the same big wave and that when people in one part of the country vote for Hillary we all turn and follow the head fish.
In addition, as an Illinois resident I voted for Obama for Senator even though he wasn’t my first choice for the presidential nomination. What most of us from Illinois find “Hillarious” is during the whole Clinton presidency Hillary was always know as a Park Ridge, IL, girl. Only when she wanted to run for senate did she become a NY resident. Then when she was running in Philadelphia she all of a sudden was born there. Who knew all those years she made it seem that Illinois had been her home.
Who said a leopard can’t change her spots.
For the record, I only voted for a Republican once, that was for Ronald Reagan the first time he ran. And that is because I was working for an investment banking firm and believed all the lies I was being told about Jimmy Carter.
May 2, 2008 at 10:44 am
And mikey, while environmentally and on many other issues Hillary and Obama may seem to have the same viewpoint, I can find many more places where Hillary has lied and is not to be trusted then I can on Obama. Also, it would have been nice if just ONCE she had admitted she’d been wrong on the Iraq war.
May 2, 2008 at 10:48 am
Well said, jenniferstavros.
May 2, 2008 at 10:52 am
“If Obama is the Nominee, I will back Him, support him and Vote for Him. I think Hillary is the better more able candidate, but if she should lose, I will back him. Until that Time tho, I will back Hillary.”
Understood, and I will (gag) back Hillary if she is the nominee. However, this does ignore the point that she cannot win the nomination through any rational scenario.
“Like i’ve said, personality aside, on a strictly issue based viewpoint, Obama and Clinton are almost Identical.”
I agree. However, in my opinion she is by far the greater pandering opportunist, and much more likely to back away from her principles in order to satisfy corporate and political power interests.
He proved his willingness to stand for principle despite political cost when he declined to “disown” Rev. Wright during Obama’s race speech. Clinton most certainly would not have that kind of ethical courage. Few politicians would.
May 2, 2008 at 11:08 am
she’s not the Only dem who voted for the war in Iraq. The majority of democrats in the senate, by a 29-21 margin voted For the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution
A lot of people were hoodwinked into voting for that damnable war.
The Obama lead in the Popular vote is a small one and is only a recent occurrence only developing after Louisiana if I remember correctly. I could be wrong tho.
I think Hill Can catch him. mind you, she will need some help. Michigan and Florida would need to be seated as they voted, and the Super delegates would have to go her way, But it can Happen, despite the Viewpoint given here that it is Simply Impossible for her to pull it out.
And In some way shape or form, Michigan and Florida MUST be seated. To cut two Large states Like that out of the convention would send a Message to Swing states that the Dems Just don’t Care about them. Even if it means giving ALL the delegates to Obama, it matters not. The Delegations for those two states MUST be seated, or the Democrats will Fail in November. Regardless of what else happens.
Talk of Clinton People and Obama people really should Just stop. Let’s keep it to Issues and the Candidates.
“School of fish”…. never heard that before.
I think this is gonna be it for me here today, I have things to do. If you wanna talk Politics drop me a line On my blog, or here, I’ll get to it, probably tomorrow. HAGD.
Love Always.
The Rhino
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 2, 2008 at 11:11 am
ummm…who here has heard of “irony”? i’m still voting for obama, but come on.
May 2, 2008 at 11:13 am
Don’t expect the poor lady to know how to operate every coffee machine in the world!…sorry..Don’t expect the “rich” lady …
May 2, 2008 at 11:17 am
Right amlistening. And it’s not her fault she hasn’t had to pump gas in a over 16 years because of her coverage by the Secret Service. It’s just the way it is. But then maybe her people shouldn’t be throwing around accusations of elitism.
May 2, 2008 at 11:19 am
Sure mikey, but many of the Democrats who voted for the war authorization admitted they were wrong and apologized. Hillary hasn’t done either of those things yet. And since when does two wrongs make a right? And with all her “experience in the White House” shouldn’t she of all the senators have known better and maybe led the others to vote against the authorization.
May 2, 2008 at 11:21 am
“I think Hill Can catch him. mind you, she will need some help.”
Indeed. She will need to count on the destruction of the Democratic party or some catastrophic event for Obama.
“Michigan and Florida would need to be seated as they voted, and the Super delegates would have to go her way”
Oh, is THAT all?
“But it can Happen, despite the Viewpoint given here that it is Simply Impossible for her to pull it out.”
No, the viewpoint expressed here (at least by me) was that she could not win under any rational scenario. Hoping that Michigan and Florida would be seated as they voted is not rational, nor would it be representative of the Democratic process. Hoping that there would be a mass defection of superdelegates from Obama to Clinton is not rational either. If the only way she can win is to disenfranchise the majority of the electorate and try to slide on with some good-ol-boy backroom dealing, she is one sad bit of work, completely lacking in principle.
She cannot possibly win in any rational, non-destructive manner.
May 2, 2008 at 11:23 am
‘And with all her “experience in the White House” shouldn’t she of all the senators have known better and maybe led the others to vote against the authorization.’
Amen and hallelujah!
May 2, 2008 at 11:29 am
Not only would they have to give her all the Michigan and Florida delegates they’d have to act like all the caucus voters don’t count. How is it good for the party to recognize the two states that violated the rules but disregard the wishes of all the people who spent time at the caucuses?
May 2, 2008 at 11:59 am
I’m not for Clinton, but it almost sounded like she was being sarcastic in response to the douche she was talking to.
May 2, 2008 at 12:07 pm
“Not only would they have to give her all the Michigan and Florida delegates they’d have to act like all the caucus voters don’t count.”
Right. There’s nothing elitist about being dismissive of those silly, unimportant caucus states, is there?
May 2, 2008 at 12:58 pm
To be honest, when Obama’s “bitter” comments came out, I was quick to defend. I’d like to think if this clip came out before those comments, I’d have defended Clinton as well. The problem is in the between-time, where Hillary chose to be opportunistic and jump on a misspeak, trying to imply he actually meant it to be condescending.
There’s nothing wrong with a candidate telling a rich person she believes that wealth should continue to the next generation. (Steve Forbes, for example)
There’s nothing wrong with a candidate saying that people who are disenfranchised by the government feel comfort in religious and cultural communities.
There’s nothing wrong with a candidate letting a crazy religious group or figure endorse their campaign, they are Americans too.
It’s more about time and setting than any one phrase or quote.
May 2, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Whoa, love the dialogue. Thanks!
To Iranian Ajax: As a Canadian or a “citizen of the world”, trust me, we don’t need another Republican Prez in the US. 8 years of George W was quite enough, thanks.
Ian
May 2, 2008 at 1:25 pm
“I’m not for Clinton, but it almost sounded like she was being sarcastic in response to the douche she was talking to.”
Um, exactly.
May 2, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Um, exactly NOT.
We here at the Zoo recognize sarcasm when we see it.
That ain’t it.
Nice try.
May 2, 2008 at 1:39 pm
She was reassuring Bill-O and the 1% that she is not going to change anything.
Call it what it is. If you still want her in the White House after she flat out admited she lied about the Bosnia sniper story, then more power to you.
I for one, think I have seen enough liars in the White House for one lifetime.
May 2, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Hey ZZ? What happened to the other story? Zap me an email answer, if you like.
May 2, 2008 at 1:46 pm
“How many lies are too many?
How much bullshit can the human organism tolerate?”
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/at-the-twilight-of-the-american-empire/
…all that AND Hillary clapping for Bush as he lays out the need for war…. Gotta love it.
May 2, 2008 at 1:49 pm
The best part of the above video is when the Taliban Godzilla Suicide Bomber attacks the one building and it blows up… another falls down (straight down) all by itself. Ha, that’s funny.
May 2, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Willy, email sent.
May 2, 2008 at 2:56 pm
It is frightening the number of persons here who cannot decipher a recognizable human tone. Clinton was being ironical, not literal. There isn’t even the vaguest hint of elitism in her remarks and one can only wonder why any listener/viewer would read this into her remarks. It’s scary to think that such people get to vote.
May 2, 2008 at 3:09 pm
To anyone stating as a matter-of-fact that Obama cannot change Washington, I ask you one question:
Did President Bush change Washington?
Did he not make it a happier place for big business? Is the current administration less flexible than previous administrations?
Did he not turn a blind eye to more pork-barrel projects than any of his predecessors?
Did he not expand government drastically with the Department of Homeland Security (which I thought was a job of the military) and the No Child Left Behind Act?
Believe me, change is possible in Washington and it all starts at the top. As one of 100 Senators Obama would never be able to change the way politics is done. You can still bet your ass the President sets the tone, and affects the direction of change. We’ll be changing anyway, but after changes in the last 7 years, I just wish to have a good captain at the helm.
May 2, 2008 at 3:11 pm
[...] “Rich people, god bless us. We deserve all the opportunities to make sure our country and our bles… [...]
May 2, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Grunes - if you read many of the comments, it’s not about what she said, it’s the fact that what she said is akin to something she’s attacked in the past.
I also said I was going to ask one question before I thought about the question, which turned into four questions. I apologize or not sticking to my promise.
May 2, 2008 at 3:14 pm
grunes, after 8 years of Bush, it’s surprising to me that you still buy such bullshit.
Whatever.
May 2, 2008 at 3:23 pm
You know why grunes is unable to pin down what she really means? Because for the first time in awhile, she is telling the truth. And that’s a strange thing for her. She seems a little at odds with it.
May 2, 2008 at 4:10 pm
What flavor Kool-Aid to the Clintons serve grunes?
May 2, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Well this is nothing compared to McCain admitting the Iraq War is about oil.
May 3, 2008 at 11:02 am
[...] Politics: The Arguments I heard were many and Varied from the Obama Camp. Michigan and Florida Should Not be Seated. They Broke the Rules. Hillary is Evil, and if Not actually evil, then Devious and Underhanded. And she Has No Chance to Win. The Clinton People think we are a “School of Fish riding the same big wave and that when people in one part of the country vote for Hillary we all turn and follow the head fish.” END QUOTE. This same person also said that “just because a Bunch of Dumbasses in Philadelphia care about how a Nominee Bowls doesn’t mean that the rest of the voters that voted for Obama in other states don’t want him nominated no.” END QUOTE. for the Post and comments I speak of click here —> http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/excuse-mewhos-an-elitist/ [...]
May 3, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Mikeytherhino,
In your blog, quoted above, you continue to display an amazing ability to draw broad (and incorrect) assumptions, and a lack of comprehension of context.
You noted my statement about Obama revealing personal principle above pandering for political gain, by declining to disown Rev. Wright during his now famous race speech.
Somehow from this you seem to conclude that Obama supports Wright’s statements, which is both false and completely loses my point.
First of all, Obama clearly does not agree with Wright’s positions in even the remotest way. There is a huge difference between declining to disown a loved one on a personal level and embracing their views. I clearly recall my grandmother making racist statements in her lifetime. I loved my grandmother. I did not agree with nor endorse her viewpoints at all. Surely everyone has comparable experience. This is what Obama meant in the first place when he likened Wright to a wacky uncle.
You said in your blog:
“Onto Wright. Hmmm. I don’t have a problem with Him Hating White America. White America has Done some Insanely Evil things towards African Americans. But that Gives him No right to be a Racist.”
This is seriously messed up thinking. First of all you have it totally backward. You SHOULD have a problem with him hating “white America”, yet he HAS the right to be a racist. You said the opposite.
Secondly, “white America has done some insanely evil things” is an absurd statement. What is “white America” anyway? How can you throw an entire, and ambiguously defined, race under the bus like that? There is no “white America” and “black America”. There are racist Americans and non-racist Americans. Racists come in all colors and shades, as do non-racists. Isn’t it time we should be judging by the content of character and not the color of skin?
“Defend Him all you Like.”
I most certainly did not defend Wright, and neither did Obama.
“This man Wright is a Racist. He can spout on about God and Love all he wants. It will not change the racist words he’s said.”
No shit, Sherlock. I fully agree with your statement, and so does Obama.
“Obama sticking with Him is Wrong. It is NOT ethical Courage to stand with Racism.”
Yet again you make incorrect assumptions. I was not talking about ethical courage, but about POLITICAL courage. Declining to disown Wright as a loved one took political courage because it would certainly have a political cost. (Of course, Wright failed to accept that gracious lifeline, and continued to make an ass of himself, so now Obama has disowned not just the man’s statements, but the man himself. He could have done so in the first place. Politically, he should have done so. Clinton would have done so - strictly for lack of political courage).
In your blog, you continue with your strawman arguments about ethical courage and your fallacious implications that Obama somehow endorses this guy’s rants. Then you summarize with this delusion:
“You do not Right the Wrongs Of the world By standing with them, But by stomping On them.”
What’s the delusion here? That your favorite candidate, Clinton, will stand on her high moral principles and stomp on the wrongs of the world.
What dope are you smokin’, Rhino? Nobody is more ready to walk away from principles for political gain than a Clinton. By policy, she may be positioned to stomp on the wrongs (same is true for Obama), but when push comes to shove, she’ll do what she has always done - capitulate to corporate and power interests.
“It is Not ethical Courage to Run for the Presidency and stand By a Man…”
You betcha - and you’re endorsing the ultimate “Stand By Your Man” woman. Do you need to be reminded of examples?
May 3, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Gorn, I hope you put this that fuckwit’s blog.
May 3, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Woohoo, Rhinobreath quoted me, twice. Sure, he misinterpreted most of what I said. And oversimplified it in a way that makes him seem so … Republican. But that is typical of Clintonistas it seems. What they fail to understand is the more they act Rovian the more it makes us want to vote for anybody but Hillary. In fact it was Hillary’s own campaign practices that turned so many of us away from her campaign to others that were running. THAT’s how she lost her easy victory, at her own hand. And what kind of leader can’t even control their own campaign workers? Sad really.
May 3, 2008 at 3:55 pm
People like Rhinobreath remind me of the kid who just can’t stand to think he might not be on the winning team. So he has to make himself seem smarter than everyone on BOTH sides, pulling everything way out of whack, so that in the end he can say he knew all along Hillary/Obama was going to win — and can justifiably (in his own mind) place himself on the winning team.
He’s like Exley.
May 3, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Zo - I had not posted to his blog because I had to post and go… but I’ve done so now.
It’s always a bad sign when someone pops onto a blog for the first time and immediately starts making sweeping generalizations about the other participants, along with hit-and-run commentary and cheap shots about the group intellect.
On TP, this was the province of the right wing kook fringe, but I agree with Shayne that I’ve observed the same kind of bombastic bile coming from the Hill-itary Hit Squad. I guess the key common characteristic is “kook fringe”.
May 3, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Good for you, Gorn. We can’t let the rhino guy go unchallenged in his own space.
May 3, 2008 at 8:49 pm
You wanna know what really bothers me?
Everything.
You Know everything.
Or you think you do.
Don’t Mind me, I’m annoyed.
Wanna Know Why, Obama Backer?
Read my latest post.
And one More thing.
F*** Obama.
I’ll give rational explanations of my thoughts about your comment to me at a later date.
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 3, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I don’t care about being on the winning team.
I’ve lost before.
It happens.
I can handle it. I handled Bush winning.
I can handle Obama winning if it comes down to it.
No worries.
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 3, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Am i kook in your eyes because i disagree with you or because I back Clinton?
Just curious.
Sigh…Rhinobreath…what are you ten years old? Jeez…
Mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 3, 2008 at 9:04 pm
I’m impressed by your objective and rational attitude.
You begged for a debate, and then when your ass is handed to you, you get all truculent. That speaks volumes.
Next move? Ban me from your blog, perhaps.
May 3, 2008 at 9:10 pm
No. And I am not finished Not by a long shot.
And where was I Truculant? I’m just a Bit Tense and Overwrought. Like I said. Read my latest post.
I am currently reliving a Bad day. It happens. I will get you a Rational response when I am capable of one.
My Apologies for Not being able to better answer you.
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 3, 2008 at 9:12 pm
My apologies back to you. Sorry you’re having a bad day. When you’re ready for cool-headed discussion, come on back. For now, I’ll refrain in piling on you.
May 3, 2008 at 9:17 pm
I thank you.
Have a Good Night.
May 3, 2008 at 9:55 pm
You have a good night as well.
Thought I’d say a few more things while my brain is sort of fresh. When I said truculent, I was referring to the “fuck Obama” comment coupled with the “Obama Backer” business. The first is just nasty, and the second is reminiscent of the way Rush Limbaugh uses the word “liberal” like one might use “nazi”.
I took a quick look at your blog post, which goes from 9-11 to Wright to Obama. I understand your progression of thinking. However, I also think it’s wrong and destructive. I do agree that Wright is an asshole for his 9-11 comments, just as the same is true of equally evil statements from Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell, and many others. The one thing all of these assholes have in common is religious fanaticism, which is the greatest single ongoing danger in the history of mankind.
But the great leap to Obama hatred simply is not justifiable. For one thing makes the assumption that he heard the statements of Wright, although he claims otherwise. I have no reason not to believe him on that. For another, the fact is that religious leaders make outrageous statements every single day. Nobody should be accountable for it other than the people who make the statements. The world would be a better place if everyone distanced themselves from religion and its tangled web of irrationality, but that just isn’t going to happen in our lifetime.
I’m not saying Obama is perfect. He is not. I was very annoyed with him earlier in the campaign when he did the seemingly required pandering to the “faith” crowd. However, given that all of the candidates do it, that itself cannot be a differentiating factor.
Here are some reasons to prefer Obama to Clinton:
- Obama clearly strives to be a uniter. Listen to him , read his speeches, and look at his record, and we see this consistently. Hillary, by contrast, is one of the most divisive politicians since… George Bush.
- Obama has shown political courage, as I’ve stated previously. By contrast, Hillary showed cowardice and capitulation when we needed courage the most: when the Iraq war decision was being made.
- Obama, so far as I can tell, has always been honest, or at least as honest as a politician on the stump can be. Hillary, by contrast, is an admitted liar. Where is your outrage over her knowing and intentional lying about sniper fire?
- Obama has refrained from labeling Clinton as an elitist. Hillary, on the other hand, has spent tremendous effort in the reverse direction, despite the fact that she is the wealthiest candidate in the race, hasn’t been remotely close to a “common person” for at least 15 years, and has consistently been a whore for corporate interests.
I could continue, but the point has been made, I hope. Perhaps after you’ve recovered from your bad day you can consider these ideas.
May 3, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Great post, Gorn. Succinctly stated.
May 3, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Thank you, MsJoanne.
Upon contemplation, I was a little hasty in saying Hillary hasn’t been remotely close to being a common person for at least 15 years. That was too generous. She was living in the Arkansas governor’s mansion nearly 30 years ago. Going further, she graduated from Yale Law School in 1973, before Obama even grew his pubes.
Later…
May 4, 2008 at 12:04 am
I am back. And In Control. And I apologize to one and all for Being out of it. A man should never let his emotions get the better of him, But I did and I should not have. My Humblest Apologies.
2 quick statements.
1)I will not, Unless Hillary Concedes Defeat, Back Barack Obama.
2)You will not, Unless Barack Concedes Defeat, Back Hillary.
So does it not make sense to attempt to change My Mind, any more than It is for me to change yours.
Another point. Does it make sense to make fun of or belittle either of the Candidates or Their supporters? I know I’ve done it, and you do as well. I for one would like to try to move this towards issues. I know I moved away from that, if I was ever there. Not sure too many people here were either.
Issues. Like electability. Florida. Michigan. Super delegates. Health care. Iraq. Foreign Policy. You pick The Subject.
Maybe I’m just worn out from all the Bickering and the “personality” arguments and I want to try to bring a Semblance of Sanity to the Discussion here. Which admittedly I made worse with an arguing style which is….well…how did you put it gorn…Truculent? And those damned “Broad Observations” of mine probably didn’t help either.
But it is your Blog, so the Choice is yours.
If you are done for the Night then we can pick up the thread tomorrow.
Thank you and Good Night.
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com
May 4, 2008 at 12:08 am
worded stuff wrong. that’s what I get for posting On an empty stomach with no caffeine In my system at 3am.
“So does it not make sense to attempt to change My Mind, any more than It is for me to change yours.” Should have read
So it does not make sense to attempt to change My Mind, any more than It does for me to change yours.
May 4, 2008 at 3:40 am
Well, it’s certainly past my bedtime, but as I will be booked up probably for the next couple of days I’ll give my two cents on your issues list.
Electability - let’s be honest. All three candidates have electability issues. For Obama it’s racial and the fact that he has the shortest political resume. For Clinton it’s an abrasive personality and difficulty with the truth. For McCain it’s his age, his hawkish attitude, and his connection to the current regime. I see no inherent advantage for any of them. In the general election, it should come down to a referendum on whether or not moderates have had enough of Republicans and are ready to support a Democrat. An immoral and costly war and sick economy suggest either Democrat should have a clear edge. Perhaps a slight edge to Clinton only because she and her camp are as skilled at dirty politics as Rove and the right wing machine. Pretty sad statement about our political system, actually.
Florida, Michigan - these cannot be counted as-is, period. In fact, it’s already been made clear that they won’t. You certainly cannot count Michigan as-is because Obama was not even on the ballot, and he followed the rules by not campaigning in either state. Not giving voice to the voters in those states is wrong, but pretending the outcome of those votes is representative of a real election is equally wrong. Two wrongs don’t make a right. A straight re-vote would have been the best option, but this has been rejected already. I’m sure some resolution will be reached to give seats to those states in some fashion, but it will not happen in the quantity or proportion that Hillary desperately wants. No edge either way on this one.
Super delegates - it is fantasy to think there will be a mass defection of Obama SDs to Clinton. Will not happen. On the contrary, after Tuesday’s primaries in North Carolina and Indiana, there may be more defections from Clinton to Obama. North Carolina is the last big prize on the board, and Obama will win it big. They will more or less split Indiana. Game over. Edge Obama.
Health care - neither plan is particularly great, but both are better than the status quo. Hillary’s botching of healthcare under Bill’s early administration, with it’s turgid bureaucratic design, nearly derailed Bill’s presidency and is the primary element that fueled the Republican surge in Congress, leading ultimately to eight years of Dubya. Her plan still gives moderates a bad taste and will be an albatross for her in the general election. Republicans would also use the fear card about her plan forcing people to pay “even if they can’t afford it”. The right wing machine will paint her as a socialist or worse.No doubt they’ll try the same thing with an Obama nomination, but with perhaps less sticking power. Slight edge Obama.
Iraq - Clinton loses here. She voted to permit this mess, costing thousands of lives, billions of dollars, and immeasurable loss of credibility on the international stage. Obama spoke out against it from the beginning. Big edge Obama. Huge.
Foreign Policy - Either would be better than McCain, and either would be seen globally as an improvement over Bush. From what I can tell (having spoken to perhaps a couple dozen people in France, Germany, and UK), the general “street” opinion of our allies seems to prefer Obama. Edge Obama.
From your list of issues, my assessment is the edge is for Obama. This is on top of the fact that he will head into the convention with more popular vote, more delegates, and more states.
Hard to see what the argument is really about at this point.
Your turn.
May 4, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Electability Issues: Obama: Agreed.
Clinton: Agreed
McCain: Agreed. Except for the Age thing. I do not believe that age is that much of a factor.
Florida/Michigan: Disagree: Obama didn’t campaign, true, but Neither did Clinton or Edwards. “Not giving voice to the voters in those states is wrong, but pretending the outcome of those votes is representative of a real election is equally wrong.” Agree on point one. Why is it not repsresentative? Expand on this when you get a chance. Florida can be taken, in my mind, as is. We may just have to disagree on this one. Michigan need to be reworked. Like I’ve said before, Hillary got 55% of the Vote, she gets 55% of the Delegates. 45% of the Vote went to undecided or Kucinich or Gravel (where is he BTW) So Give that to Obama. It’s more then he would have gotten had he and edwards kept their names on the ticket Like Hillary did.
Super Delegates: I agree there will be no mass defections. But I do not agree with your assessment otherwise. Obama will take North Carolina, but Not by the percentage I think is necessary to push Hillary out of The Contest. Hillary I think will win In Indiana.
Health care: I actually Like Both candidates plans here. I did an exhaustive look at both of there Health care plan strategies, as well as there overall plans from their websites. If yer Interested in reading it is—> http://mikeytherhino.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/anagram-comparison-shoppingmorons-poaching-pips-part-4-finale/
There are three other Parts that were done earlier that day, I’m sure you can find them.
Iraq: Factually correct. Clinton did vote for it, and Obama has been against it from the Beginning. What I think matters here is what either one will do to End it. They both have essentially the same plan. No advantage either way. I initially did give the Edge to Obama here as well, but when the Samantha Power thing came out about Obama’s 16 month plan being less then genuine, and I saw that His plan and Hers were Identical, He Lost me. BTW, I Forget her precise wording, my apologies for Spinning this with the Words less then genuine.
Foreign Policy: Agreed that either would be better then McTurkeyneck. This statement is odd to me “having spoken to perhaps a couple dozen people in France, Germany, and UK), the general “street” opinion of our allies seems to prefer Obama.” You can Imply, from a Few dozen People on the streets of three Nations that Obama is better? How High up the Chain of Command are these Friends of Yours? Are they necessarily representative of The Feelings Of the Governments Of said Nations? And if so, How did you ascertain that? I’m Not saying she will be better, but I need a Bit of clarification here.
I think the Edge Goes to Clinton here.
Your Turn.
mikeytherhino.wordpress.com