Tim Russert interviewed Harold Ickes on this morning’s “Meet The Press”.
Ickes isn’t doing Clinton any favor here… Is he operating on some alternative realty?? Did he NOT get the memo? And what the heck is up with that math..? I guess the fact that he is running her campaign explains a lot.
Russert:
“If on Wednesday morning, if Barack Obama has enough elected delegates, and committed superdelegates to put him over the 2118, will Senator Clinton congratulate him as the nominee?”
Ickes:
“We expect to get the nomination.” “We don’t accept the premise of your question.”
I watched this interview. Ickes went on to say that Clinton WILL be the nominee..
20 Comments
June 1, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Delusions of something, I don’t think it’s grandeur, maybe just batshite crazed…
June 1, 2008 at 5:51 pm
The math.. Aside from the logic, the math. I guess if you say it, it must be true.. (Sounds like Bush/Cheney).. They makes me nuts! Don’t the statements they make have to have some sort of relation to the truth? Or am I being totally naive here..
I believe people in politics and our government have an obligation to tell the truth as much as possible. If they stray from that they deserve to be nailed for it. People can’t make an informed decision if they are being fed bullshit.
I have come to expect Republicans to lie. I expected higher from the Democrats.. Naive again..
June 1, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Well, according to russert himself, if you add in Florida’s popular vote and Mich. she has the 17 million they claim.
And by Russert’s own math, if she gets the 40 of the remaining delegates and then 190 something of the 203 superdelegates, she’s in.
Now, will that happen? No.
But, …still possible. Within the realm of possibility enough to justify dragging this out and being used as a rationalization for why Obama will lose in Nov.
And let’s face it: that is what she is doing.
June 1, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Hey! I’m on Op Ed News! They’ll post anything these days…
http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Naive-Left–How-the-Li-by-scott-creighton-080601-382.html
June 1, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Congratulations Scott!! You’re famous!
June 1, 2008 at 8:19 pm
I admire Hillary. The only problem that I have with her is that she is trashing the Democratic Party. This has to end! It is time to cut bait and fish.
June 1, 2008 at 8:27 pm
“I reject reality and replace it with my own”
~Harold Ickes
June 1, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Thanks muse. Yeah, now I got the liberals and the conservatives cussing me out. That’s my version of multi-culturalism.
June 1, 2008 at 9:02 pm
WaltTheMan
“I admire Hillary.”
And I’m beginning to see why Bill admired Monica.
June 1, 2008 at 9:07 pm
The Clintons started trashing the democratic party long, long ago.
June 1, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Didn’t they also trash the White House on their way out..?
June 2, 2008 at 4:15 am
Didn’t they also trash the White House on their way out..?
Not exactly, muse. There were a few incidents of minor vandalism, but this whole episode demonstrates how the Bush Administration spread lies and disinformation almost, literally, from day one. Through their typical pattern of understatement (the kind where they leave out the major qualifiers that put what they’re pointing out in context), they gave everyone the impression that every kind of vandalism happened in every kind of office.
And I can understand now why Harold Ickes fit in so well in the Clinton Administration (with his gift for obfuscating language). But Ickes ought to understand the construct of a hypothetical question when he hears one. It is ridiculous to refuse to answer on the grounds that you reject the premise, especially if that premise is far more likely to happen than the one you think will happen. When you do that, people can rightly claim that you are in denial of reality. Ickes, time to join the Bush Administration.
My memory is fuzzy on this this (and my mind too sleepy to investigate), but didn’t Hillary Clinton first start out in the Republican Party? Well, either way, she has run her campaign as if she wanted to appeal to Republicans (and worse, conservatives) more than to Democrats, and I believe that’s why she will lose (/has lost) the nomination.
["But hold your nose, 'cause here goes, she's Goldwater"]
June 2, 2008 at 6:10 am
Here we go again with the republicans verses the democrats.
As is usually the case; things are a little more complicated, Wayne. You see, the democratic party can be corrupt as well; there’s no magic that keeps them “pure”. (remember back when real progressives were in the race?)
Look up LBJ and Vietnam…
Clinton and NAFTA…
Clinton and Welfare Reform…
Clinton and health-care or Labor Unions…
Clinton and WalMart….
Clinton and India…
We have two parties in this country:
The Pro-Business/ Unrestricted Free Trade Party
and the Populus Party, and the latter has no dog remaining in this hunt, no matter how much you want to believe it.
Ickes is right were he should be: the new pro-business democratic middle.
That’s why Hillary is doing what she is doing. Because it’s not her time to win, and she doesn’t want to lose to McCain (in the next installment of “Rigged Elections for Democracy”.)
Her stocks will continue to rise, and Bill will continue to speak and get paid, and their connection with the IMF and WTO will continue to profit them both just wonderfully.
There are republicans who stand against this tide and democrats. This is the fight. We all need to become aware of it, lest we lose the war without ever knowing we were in one.
June 2, 2008 at 6:25 am
I watched the DNC’s meeting this weekend. Ickes was particularly repugnant. He did the same with Russert.
This week is when the bell tolls for Hillary. She can spin it, stretch it or lie about it, but the chickens come home to roost by Wednesday.
June 2, 2008 at 8:58 am
Ickes made a fool of himself at this weekend’s DNC meeting, and he continues to do so. When Hil thought she was the heir apparent, she was willing to go along with the DNC rules and the delegate count, not the popular vote — now she’s circling the drain, and all bets are off.
She’s acting like a fucking Republican. I’m embarrassed for her.
June 2, 2008 at 8:59 am
Op-Ed news!? Congrats, Willy!
June 2, 2008 at 9:17 am
On of the MSNBC one of the “pundits” said something how the Clinton campaign has changed the goal posts so many time it seems like they’re just whining no. And one of the “anchors” said they passed that threshold a long time ago.
June 2, 2008 at 9:21 am
Hillary is losing the press as well, they’re beginning to talk about her like she’s rather pitiful.
June 2, 2008 at 9:22 am
I hope the next time the primaries start for real, hopefully in 8 years, another more progressive woman is around to run so we don’t get stuck with Hillary garners all the so called women’s votes. I am particulary irritated by the way they act like Obama has no support among white women. Do they not see the audience full of white women at his rallies.
Also, the pundits talk about how he can’t get the Catholic vote. Really, Father Pfleger was a guest at Obama’s church while Reverend Hagee called them names. The media continues to set the agenda.
Mika B, ugh, this morning was talking about all the emails they’re getting from people complaining that the media focuses too much on his church without mentioning McCain’s or Clinton’s. One of the “pundits” stated that that was just an orchestrated campaign by the Obama folks.
June 2, 2008 at 9:25 am
Really. Hillary will be back in 4 or 8 years, and she’ll be even more bilous than ever. Unless, of course, she completely ruins herself in the next week.
It’s ridiculous the number of times I’ve seen the report that Obama has left his church — nothing new on the subject, just over and over again.