Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton N.H. Official Resigns After Comments on Obama

Updated: 7:02 p.m.

CONCORD, N.H. -- Sen. Hillary Clinton today accepted the resignation of her New Hampshire campaign co-chair a day after he suggested that Barack Obama's candor about his past drug use would open the door to Republican attacks.

"I made a mistake and in light of what happened, I have made the personal decision that I will step down as the Co-Chair of the Hillary for President campaign," Bill Shaheen said in a statement. "This election is too important and we must all get back to electing the best qualified candidate who has the record of making change happen in this country. That candidate is Hillary Clinton"

Earlier in the day, Clinton herself apologized to Obama in person on an airport tarmac as the two of them flew from Washington to Iowa. Despite that face-to-face meeting, however, the Obama campaign did its best to turn to Shaheen's remarks to its advantage today, saying that the comments fit a larger pattern of negativity from the Clinton campaign.

At a press conference here, Ned Helms, a co-chairman of Obama's New Hampshire campaign, lamented the comments by Clinton state co-chair Billy Shaheen. In an interview yesterday with the Post, Shaheen said he worried that Republicans would have a field day picking apart Obama's past, notably his admissions of cocaine and marijuana use in his late teens. "The Republicans are not going to give up without a fight...and one of the things they're certainly going to jump on is his drug use," Shaheen said.

The Clinton campaign disassociated itself from the comments last night, saying they were "not authorized or condoned by the campaign in any way." Shaheen, the husband of former governor and 2008 Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen, said in a statement, "I deeply regret the comments I made today and they were not authorized by the campaign in any way." This morning, Clinton approached Obama on the tarmac of Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington to personally apologize for the remarks. "She made it clear that this kind of negative personal statement has no part in this campaign," said Clinton spokesman Phil Singer.

But Helms told reporters here that Shaheen's remarks were similar to other negative attacks and insinuations from the Clinton camp, including an incident last week in which a Clinton volunteer county coordinator in Iowa forwarded an incendiary e-mail falsely asserting that Obama is a Muslim (the Clinton campaign asked the volunteer to step down). With each incident, Helms said, it has become harder to believe that the individuals were acting without any direction from above.

"I suppose you could say, well, the first time, that's what happened," said Helms. "But when you see a pattern, of people making statements and then the follow-up statement, that that wasn't authorized, it doesn't take a genius to see that there's a thread going on here. How many times are we going to see the isolated incident followed by the denial before we just simply say, 'Would you please stop?'"

Helms stopped short of calling for Shaheen's removal from his leadership post on the Clinton team, saying that "is a conversation that needs to take place within the Clinton campaign."

Obama's national headquarters also sought to capitalize on the Shaheen comments, with campaign manager David Plouffe sending out an e-mail asking supporters to counter the remarks with a $25 donation from 5,000 of them. "In an increasingly desperate effort to slow Senator Clinton's slide, the focus of the Clinton campaign has moved from Barack Obama's kindergarten years to his teenage years," Plouffe wrote, referring to the Clinton campaign's inclusion in a campaign document of a kindergarten essay by Obama declaring his presidential ambitions. "The only way to stop these kinds of tired, desperate attacks is to demonstrate very clearly that they have a real cost to Senator Clinton's campaign."

In his remarks, Shaheen, a local attorney and Democratic powerbroker, said he was worried that Republicans would have a particularly easy time going after Obama's drug use as a teenager because he has been so open about it. He contrasted this with George W. Bush, who Shaheen said wisely ruled out answering questions about his behavior as a younger man during his presidential run in 1999 and 2000.

Obama's candor on the subject, on the other hand, would "open the door" to further questions, Shaheen had said. "It'll be, 'When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?'" he said. "There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It's hard to overcome."

Shaheen, whose law office was holding its holiday party Thursday afternoon, did not return a call seeking comment.

His departure from the campaign occurs as he was just about to cut back on his legal work and concentrate more fully on the Clinton campaign. Democrats in the state say he has been less fully involved in helping direct the Clinton effort -- which is being led on a daily basis by Clinton's paid state director Nick Clemons -- than he was in overseeing Sen. John Kerry's New Hampshire primary effort in 2004. Shaheen also was a key adviser in Al Gore's primary campaign in 2000, in which Gore narrowly beat Bill Bradley, and in Gore's general election effort in the state that fall, when Gore narrowly lost the state (and thereby the presidency) to George W. Bush.

In the interview Wednesday, Bill Shaheen said he was looking forward to going full tilt on the Clinton campaign in the final weeks before the primary, saying he was not demoralized by the polls showing Obama rapidly closing to a tie with Clinton.

"At this stage in the campaign, I've learned, worrying does not get you votes," he said. "There are only three things that matter: that you're proud of what you're doing, that you're proud of who you're working for, and that you're working as hard as you can."

Obama has been free about discussing his drug use as a young man. In his 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father, written shortly after he graduated from Harvard Law School, he wrote that during his difficult late teens "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though."

"Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man," he wrote. "Except the highs hadn't been about that, me trying to prove what a down brother I was....I got high for just the opposite effect, something that could push questions of who I was out of my mind, something that could flatten out the landscape of my heart, blur the edges of my memory."

And speaking with high school students in Manchester, N.H. a few weeks ago, he said that he had "made some bad decisions" as a teenager. "There were times when I, you know, got into drinking, experimented with drugs. There was a whole stretch of time where I didn't really apply myself a lot," he said. But once in college, Obama said, he realized, "Man, I wasted a lot of time" in high school. He added, "It's not something I'm proud of. It was a mistake as a young man."

Shaheen's comments inevitably renewed memories of Bill Clinton's handling of his past marijuana use during the 1992 campaign, when he said he had smoked marijuana but did not inhale. Asked about this at the Manchester high school, Obama said, "I never understood that line. The point was to inhale. That was the point."

--Alec MacGillis

By Web Politics Editor  |  December 13, 2007; 7:02 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: In Tame Democratic Debate, Respite From Political Wars
Next: The Thompson Nixon Knew

Comments

I think a Paul vs. Obama campaign would be very focused on issues and avoid character assassinations.

Paul has never resorted to such tactics, and it would be fruitless for Obama to try it against Paul's record of integrity. Just go to Youtube and listen to Paul's radio ads. There is no name-calling or ad hominem attacks.

Paul can tap 4,000 mothers whose children he delivered as character references if Obama tried any mudslinging. Paul's rebuttal to negative campaigning could be a cohort of African American mothers he served in his career as an OB-GYN who can attest to his character. Martin Luther King, Jr., said it is the content of a person's character we should judge and not the exterior package.

In light of Paul's stance questioning the efficacy of the war on drugs, Paul is not likely to make a big stink out of past drug use. As a medical doctor he probably knows questions to ask that would reveal addiction damage. For example, a question requiring responses to multiple points would reveal memory impairment, if any. We the People can assess mental adequacy based on debate responses alone and ignore drug history 20 years ago.

I would rather see brain scans required of all candidates to assure mental health than pester a candidate about past usage.

The campaign between these two gentlemen, itself, could go a long way to unifying the country.

Further unification would occur if the winner invites the loser into his cabinet just as Lincoln assembled his cabinet.

Obama could serve as Secretary of State in a Paul cabinet, and display his unification skills as he repairs America's damaged international relations. His service in a Paul administration would groom him as a successor to Paul in subsequent presidential elections.

In reverse, Paul could serve as Treasury Secretary in an Obama cabinet to reform the Federal Reserves's roll in our economy. His economic expertise would be just what the doctor ordered to improve the future solvency of the nation.

I just see a Paul vs Obama contest as a win-win situation for America. Our history of racial division will be behind us and our future prosperity will be improved.

Come on, We the People, let's not allow such a golden opportunity to escape U.S.

It would be sad, so sad if we did.

Posted by: Scrooge | December 15, 2007 2:27 PM | Report abuse

There is a bit of twisted irony here. Bill Clinon, Hillary's husband inoculatd all candidates on the drug question in 1992. Recall his "I smoked, but did not inhale" comment back in the 92 race. How many candidates, including Sen. Obama have admitted smoking weed back in their youth since then and not gotten hurt. This is not an issue. This is going to be a headache for Clinton because Black folks don't like the dirty tone toward Obama. It is ok against a Republican of course.
Leonard E. Colvin
Norfolk

Posted by: Lcolvin1 | December 15, 2007 7:38 AM | Report abuse

I think its just excellent* that Shaheen's apology is an overt stump for Clinton, barely even mentioning what he did and essentially martyring himself to cast Hillary as the Messiah. I also think its pretty stupid an unnecessary for the Post or any other paper to publish the part of his "apology" or "resignation" or whatever the heck that was where he claims in no uncertain terms that Her Royal Clinton is the best choice for president. That's his opinion, and his opinion should NOT get national press after what he did. Especially considering Obama contributed to his wife's campaign. What a jerk (Shaheen) . Not only that, but the same line about HRC being the one is in no less than four stories in today's post. Idiotic. I can't wait for this election to be over so I can stop reading this awful, biased newspaper.

Posted by: Nemotoad | December 14, 2007 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Is this the "fun part" Hillary?

Posted by: zb95 | December 14, 2007 10:16 AM | Report abuse

There is more to this than Hillary vs. Obama. In New Hampshire, independents outnumber either Democrats or Republicans. Independents tend to decide most of the general elections. Bill Shaheen's wife is running for Senate, and needs as many independents she can get to win. It looks like independents are fueling Obama's push here. Jeanne Shaheen needs to keep Bill Shaheen from alienating Obama independents or else they may not end up being Shaheen independents

Posted by: auburnfan10101 | December 14, 2007 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Where does any politician get off judging another. They are all corrup! When you choose a political position you are just choosoing a less of two evils!

Posted by: kalah_haley | December 14, 2007 9:03 AM | Report abuse

baronesskefc: The Cable News/Talk shows have been all over this the past couple days. They are playing the "Media Darling" and "Rock Star" of Obama to the hilt. This only shows how stupid this was by Shaheen when everyone knows, "I am not going to mention/bring up, {--whatever--]" and is exactly what they want. This appears to be working in a way not intended. I saw somewhere a comment about how the drug use by a youngster would be a powerful argument for the kids today against parents that are trying to tell their kids how wrong and harmful drug use can be.

Posted by: lylepink | December 14, 2007 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Not only did Sheehan bring up Obama's teen drug use, he also implied that he was a drug dealer.

Now that's slimey.

As far as the Obama campaign being too 'touchy', I can only say that these last elections cycles have taught one very clear lesson.

Don't let disinformation stand, don't take the 'high road' nor attempt to stay 'above it all'.

Put a stop to it, call them on it, immediately and loudly. Don't give it any time to ferment in the media or in the minds of the public without a response.

Otherwise the Swiftboats will be fast on your trail.

Posted by: baronesskate | December 14, 2007 7:27 AM | Report abuse

Each fumble makes Hillary's credible deniability more and more difficult.

Posted by: FirstMouse | December 14, 2007 7:09 AM | Report abuse

We the People, please make a Paul vs. Obama matchup happen. I would find anything else borrringgg.

Posted by: Scrooge | December 14, 2007 5:50 AM | Report abuse

"How would your leadership get the 300 Bus Drivers to show up?"

The replies to this question by both Paul and Obama could be as memorable as Lincoln's House Divided argument in his Lincoln-Douglas debates

Posted by: Scrooge | December 14, 2007 5:41 AM | Report abuse

Connect my two previous comments to this one:

Ron Paul vs. Barack Obama would be an election for the ages!
Just think, the story of the 300 Bus Drivers could be an element in the history to be written about the 2008 campaign, as was the 300 Spartans in the Greco-Persian War.

A question for the two candidates to debate: How would your leadership get the 300 Bus Drivers to show up?


Posted by: Scrooge | December 14, 2007 5:30 AM | Report abuse

I suggest a 26 Mar 07 discussion on "The Fix" titled "Bill Shaheen: Brokering Middle East Peace?". This is a very good discourse of views by many and shows a lot of my reasons for being a strong supporter of Hillary. Today's discussion, as well, shows the different views of a wide variety of folks, and I personally think it is good for the process in selecting our nominee.

Posted by: lylepink | December 14, 2007 5:14 AM | Report abuse

Why should we trust in any new government program, when the old ones are failing miserably?

The picture of 300 flooded school buses in a New Orleans parking lot after Katrina is all the evidence I need to prove that a government program will not save your butt. The emergency plan for New Orleans said that school buses would be used for evacuation. When it didn't happen, everyone blamed Bush, but did anyone ask why didn't the 300 bus drivers show up? No, they did not. I guess they were expecting Bush clones to drive the buses, similar to the star troopers cloned by the Empire in the Star Wars movies (Some people must have trouble distinguishing fiction from fact.)

In contrast to that photo, there was a story of a young man who stole one of those buses to save his family and neighbors. His example proves Ron Paul's message of freedom and self-responsibility. If you want a compassionate society, you have to be compassionate yourself and act when someone is in need. You cannot sit on your duff, and expect a clone of the president, essentially any bureaucrat, to act in your place.

We recently had a popular movie about 300 Spartans who acted to save their community. We need a movie about 300 Bus Drivers who failed their community in New Orleans. It would reveal what seriously ails U.S.

Thank God there is a chance for a good doctor to be in the White House, Dr. Ron Paul, to cure what ails U.S.

The Paul Revolution can take heart from this poem related to the Grecian war with Persia.

"Forward, sons of the Greeks,
Liberate the fatherland, liberate
Your children, your women, the altars of the gods of your fathers
And the graves of your forebears:
Now is the fight for everything."

Any chance to get a movie made about 300 Bus Drivers? Maybe in a couple thousand years. But you can vote in 2008 for Ron Paul.

Posted by: Scrooge | December 14, 2007 4:57 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is just another slick talking used car salesperson wearing threadbare, shiny pants but no undergarments.

Hillary authored book It Takes a Village. What does she know about that subject when she sure didn't help the village of Washington, D.C. improve its miserable public school system? Chelsea went to private schools. Why didn't Hillary enroll Chelsea in a public school and then work as First Mother through the PTA to improve the quality of the school system. She might have obtained real credentials to qualify her as a transformative leader.

This book and her abdication of responsibility to improve the schools of the village which she resided in for 8 years is proof positive she is a Five Star hyprocrite just chomping at the bit to take over control of Uncle Sam's plantation. You loyal serfs shouldn't expect things to improve for you. Just take a good look at D.C. schools' improvement while she was a resident there. Washington, D.C. is the Village of the Federal Government.

As First Lady of that village, why didn't she work hard during her entire residency there to make a lasting improvement in the school system?

I hope Barack Obama asks her that question in a debate.

Hillary's candidacy and her book deserve to be thrown into the dustbin of history.

I rest my case.

P.S. to strengthen an earlier analysis that the election of 1860 foreshadows the election of 2008 (see thread http://dyn.politico.com/members/forums/thread.cfm?catid=2&subcatid=30&threadid=227812 ), it would be stunning if Barack Obama, Senator from Illinois is nominated by the Democrats to oppose Ron Paul. In 1860, Abe Lincoln defeated Stephen Douglas, a Senator from Illinois. It would also be fitting that an African American be the challenger against Honest Ron, a man of the same integrity to principles as Honest Abe. That would make for one exciting campaign that would galvanize the attention of the entire electorate.

Republicans I dare you to nominate Ron Paul, likewise I dare Democrats to nominate Barack Obama. Such a matchup would electrify the country like the match race between Seabiscuit and War Admiral on November 1, 1938, almost 70 years ago to the day of the election, Nov.4.

Go ahead, just do it! I dare both parties.

Posted by: Scrooge | December 14, 2007 4:36 AM | Report abuse

Abhorrent, vindictive, desperate, shameful, devious, condemnable... and typical for the Clintonian machine. Where was all of this serpentine behavior when HRC was leading in the polls, preparing for her inevitable coronation? This isn't a "revelation," this issue has been known about for years and in the news a few weeks ago when Obama shared the story with high school students. Was there a noticeable, lasting fallout or backlash on his drug usage after he did so? No. What does that suggest? That the story had no legs in the media, despite Romney being the only Republican to condemn Obama's admission. So if it had no legs a few weeks ago, it wasn't for HRC's campaign to try and raise it again. If the Republicans were going to use it then it should have been the Republicans who raised it. Is it a coincidence that everytime there's an issue with HRC's campaign being responsible for airing Obama slurs that the scandal gets regurgitated "unintentionally" in the media, allowing HRC to enjoy the subliminal "hit" on Obama while she gets to claim ignorance, condemns the actions of the culprits and dismisses them? HRC hasn't been falsely painted with "high negatives," it's just a part of who she is after years of battling alongside Bill in the political trenches, rightly or wrongly. For all of you HRC supporters, if you can't see now that a vote for HRC means revisiting and reliving the lies, scandals, divisive, secretive, and retributive nature of the last nearly 16 years, then you have truly allowed feverish passion to trump reason. We've been there and done that with that type of degrading, demoralizing, non-productive politics. How in all that is right and proper can we think that continuing that path in January 2009 is going to be in the best interest of our country?

Posted by: Eyzwidopn | December 14, 2007 3:55 AM | Report abuse

Or wait, I think last time I ment to say Deborah. Deborah led the jewish people to victory.

Posted by: matthewsisco2 | December 14, 2007 2:03 AM | Report abuse

http://www.easyenglish.info/bible-outline/ezra-summary.htm

For those that dont know
Ezrah was this guy that was like a leader from long ago or something

Posted by: matthewsisco2 | December 14, 2007 1:54 AM | Report abuse

Seriously thou, Isiah says you need Ezrah

Posted by: matthewsisco2 | December 14, 2007 1:50 AM | Report abuse

What I want to See in the morning is Regis and Kelly on tv, what I dont want to have to see is Whitney Houston screaming on the Whitehouse lawn!
Bobby come out, give her a wack smack and then drag her in by her hair.
We did See Bush freakin push the war button for his stay!
Hillary looks like the worst she could do is smoke a joint, splurge on a bag of Doritos then turn to Bill and say "Is it just me or are the walls getting smaller in here everytime we live in this place."
Ok, now I feel I should be serious because joking is not something that an intellect should Constantly do. I would like to say that many people lack class but being honest is a virtue as well. Having the guts to be honest is honorable. Some people only love the people that say everything that they want to hear but they will always listen to honest people. To look into everyones face and lie is diplorable especially when they and you both know you are lying. There is also class. It's all relative and personal decision what do in situations. There is so much more to a statement than just honesty, it should have class,honor,dignity,timing,etc. and etc.. I didnt have a facelift or I didnt slip and cheat on my family is something that can also be the honorable, classy, intellectual thing.
With Hilary Clinton we see tried and true.
This time with the return of a Presidential dynasty, it isnt the war dynasty it's finally your time to change to the new dynasty. She needs to realize, the minute she is elected president, she has the power to become something that no one before could and do it all with Jackie Kennedy poise and presence. An era of peace with the world loving America and caring for the new woman that they just want to help. Lets be honest, no one is going to see this woman as vulnerable. She can play that card and use Bill as backup if she ever felt like it. I think she made the journey to the Whitehouse on her own more than he made it on his own. She doesnt need his hand on her shoulder but we all know she can lay in bed with an expresident if ever she feels like it. You need a president famous on Entertainment Tonight not just the Situation Room. Work photos like Princess Diana. Photos are free but perfect brilliant ones are an art. People love those that they cant get enough pictures of. What is really important is if she filled out a resume I would hire her. More than respect or any dynasty there's a feeling of confidence in her ability to harness change for the better. I think once actually returning to the whitehouse she would be firm and unwavering in making change for the better.
So thats all my help, support and nice statements for her but what do I know..I also like John Edwards on account that he's so dreamy.
He could flub his words for an entire term and everyone would just sigh. lol Just kidding

Posted by: matthewsisco2 | December 14, 2007 1:44 AM | Report abuse


The old men running cannot connect to the voting majority if they never inhaled.
Personnaly I'm tired of the false preacher, and moral inquisitor types.
A little empathy will go a long way to curing the nations and world ills.

Posted by: hhkeller | December 14, 2007 12:16 AM | Report abuse

Clinton is playing dirty now. What Obama did when he was a kid is not relevant to the issues we are dealing with today. Let's just focus on the election here people.

Posted by: cklover | December 13, 2007 11:36 PM | Report abuse

It is not enough that Billy SHAHEEN has resigned his position of Co-Chair on the Hillary campaign. His actions deserve his removal from ANY official participation in any part of her presidential campaign.

Posted by: neotrebor | December 13, 2007 10:07 PM | Report abuse

He who hasn't thrown someone under the bus throw the first stone.

Posted by: cakewalk | December 13, 2007 9:33 PM | Report abuse

I don't care that Obama used drugs when he was a kid.

I don't care that someone at the Clinton camp called him on it.

What I care about is which candidate is qualified to handle criticism from an opposing camp because while we're interested in having a strong Democratic Candidate, having a Democratic President is far more important.

To do that, we need to see who can best survive going 9 rounds against the Republican campaign (who, let's be serious, will be -way- harsher than what we've seen in this primary).

The fact that Obama Camp's reaction to allegations that his drug use might come back to haunt him later has been "They're playing dirty! They're playing dirty!" is disappointing. Is it so unreasonable to ask what we're going to do when the republicans start painting our presidential candidate as a potential drug trafficker? Are we lending merit to this base allegation by asking what our strategy should be if and when it gets trotted out by the other side? The answer is: No, but we *are* recognizing that it will be a potent smear campaign that needs to be prepared for.

If the best reaction Obama's camp can muster is "No fair! They're playing dirty!" at every single pebble that gets shied in their direction, then we have some serious problems. Not because these little criticisms in and of themselves necessarily hold any merit, but because it shows a serious lack of strategy and ability on Obama's part to weather what will certainly be a much harsher storm that will come from the Republican camp.

It is the battle for the undecided Dem vs. Repub voters not the undecided Hilary vs. Obama voters that is the real battleground of 2008. And on that playing field this constant cry of "Foul! Dirty Politics!" won't stand long, especially if the other side raises the occaisional valid question.

Posted by: bea_sze | December 13, 2007 9:18 PM | Report abuse

yes, a "crackberry" with no solid connections except Oprah winfrey and Al Sharpton...sounds worse than an episode of dancing with the stars.

Personally I don't plan to vote for either one of them. I will vote Republican. However the fact remains that it's laughable that someone like "Obama" would even think he would know what to do as president.

He is a typical Black Extremist(racist), with one agenda in mind. The people he consorts with only confirm it ie, Al Sharpton.

He's trying to cover up more than drug use. He's hiding from the church he attended(along with Oprah)...since his campaign. He has nerve.

Actually he's as delusional as Al Sharpton. He compares himself to Abe lincoln...Ha! As old Al compares himself to MLK...Ha!

delusions of grandeur!

Posted by: creativethought777 | December 13, 2007 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Take Reagan's name OFF of Washington National Airport!

Doesn't Mitt Romney remind you of a young Reagan? He makes my skin crawl just like Reagan did.

Posted by: dubhlaoich | December 13, 2007 9:06 PM | Report abuse

I have several comments:

1) so...there's someone on this post wouldn't vote for a candidate who disclosed part of his distant past with drugs, but you would vote for someone who felt the need to conceal it (as well an many other things) because you think your kid will look at the president of the US, and think to him/herself, "Dude, you mean I can still do 8 balls in college and STILL be president?! No way! (taking a pull from a GIANT bong)"

Sure.

Between us, the US' drug policy is a joke. Google the ONDCP to find out what exactly this country spends its money on. (HINT: its not on your kid's DARE programs)

2) Obviously character is EXTREMELY important to the citizens of this country. How else would we have elected leaders such as GWB and (yes ill say it) Bill Clinton?

3)I'm pretty sure Mr. Obama has a crackberry and therefore is in no need for Mrs. Clinton's antiquated rolodex.

4) If you think Mr. Obama stereotypical, my hat is off to you, and to your "sterotypical" friends. Columbia and Harvard educated, as well as faculty at the U of Chicago and US Senator...drugs? what? I apologize, I was lost in the shower of degrees and honors.

5) This is politics people, not an episode of Dancing with the Stars. Who CARES if her aide talked out of school with some reporter...it wouldn't be interesting enough to keep us all posting about it if he hadnt:)

Posted by: thurmond | December 13, 2007 8:59 PM | Report abuse

All you folks who are willing to believe in the sincerity of Sen. Clinton's apology and her campaign's repeated protests of innocence should take a look at this item that appeared in the HuffingtonPost the DAY BEFORE Sheehan's comment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/11/as-iowa-nears-clinton-al_n_76235.html

Her campaign was trying to pimp this story in an off the record kind of way in emails to reporters and potential supporters well before Sheehan made his comments. It kind of makes it hard to believe that their sorry about anything other than it backfiring on them.

Posted by: srobinson2 | December 13, 2007 8:54 PM | Report abuse

as far as i can see these folks are fighting over the nomination, that will likely lead to the presidency.. so they will get to take the wheel as the whole show goes over the cliff..


who would want that?

of course you slobs are in much better shape.. you're in the passenger seats.

have a nice trip!

Posted by: thebigwing | December 13, 2007 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Well, Shaheen actually did not accuse Obama of dealing drugs. He just said that the GOP would use that against him. The GOP is ruthless. They are not the great americans that they pose as. They are animals with absolutely no morals.

Posted by: pinechee | December 13, 2007 8:48 PM | Report abuse

As I have said before, and others have also, Obama's candor about drug use, and the fact that he did party, makes more more likely to support him. Wish he would not backpedal now, but embrace it. Seems like some people have a drug-phobia due to ignorance, both pot and cocaine are less addictive than most "legal" drugs. If he had done heroin, I might question his judgment, blow, he's alright in my book. Perhaps the GOP will also find out he banged white girls, another admission in his book, eeeekkkkk.......

Posted by: merganser | December 13, 2007 8:36 PM | Report abuse

when a man or woman can be transparent about their past, there is freedom. looked we all fall short and have failed, but that do not mean that we are still bound to past mistakes or failing's,just look at whats been done since, why do we always have resort to non-productive talk why, well it seems to me that if we really want to see change then we better go with Mr.Obama,at least he's honest enough to say i made some real dumb decsions, when i was younger,you see that man do not have anything to hide, we dont have to woory about him his truthfulness has set him free, hey guy's this is a histroy making election, this is the first time that a woman and a Black Man has a strong chance at winning, the good thing is that Mr. Obama is staying his course of being a gentlmen, now here is a thought why dont BO/HRC JOIN TEAMS AND SHOCK THE WORLD.

Posted by: barney_sm | December 13, 2007 8:23 PM | Report abuse

After knowing that Senator Clinton canned Mr. Shaheen, and after accepting an apology from the Senator herself, Mr. Obama dives to the bottom of negative campaigning by proclaiming that Mr. Shaheen's comment fits a larger pattern of negativity from the Clinton campaign. Was that sleaze or was it just hypocrisy.

Posted by: bn | December 13, 2007 8:22 PM | Report abuse

I think the biggest problem for many that Shaheen acted alone is that this man is not on his first campaign.
He is a seasoned pro. His wife was governor and is running for the senate. He is close to the Clintons and has been in politics a very long time.
So, to say he just decided to call up the Washington Post and say this stuff about Obama all on his own, is just too hard to swallow.
Especially with not one but, Three Iowa chairpeople for the clinton campaign having to resign for the slime emails about Obama last week.
Clinton's campaign has lost itself and gone off the rails. It's like seeing a slow motion train wreck and it is not pretty.

Posted by: vwcat | December 13, 2007 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Oh well...so much for freedom of speech. What gets me is how would Obama not expect his candor about drug use not affect potential voters? There's nothing wrong with full disclosure and allowing the voters to decide. Clinton's aide committed slander, what's the big deal? Nice to see that Hillary will run the White House the same as she did when First Lady, nothing more than a tyrant.

Posted by: WildBill1 | December 13, 2007 8:00 PM | Report abuse

I am drifting farther and farther away from Hillary Clinton. Her camp keeps sending me solicitation after solicitation. I think she is a very smart lady. But what drew me to her was her intelligence and the perception that she had warmth and compassion. This latest episode is showing me something different. Something I've seen for the past 8 years in the White House.

We can do better and we have to change. GO OBAMA!!

Posted by: john_clendenin | December 13, 2007 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Even the resignation gives the story more legs.

Obama's cocaine use, IS an issue. Americans have a stereotype of black men as being drug users/dealers, and criminal.

The drug use issue puts Obama into the stereotype, and it WOULD be used by the GOP if the dems nominate him.

Better to go with Edwards, who is not burdened by cocaine use, or being black, or a woman.

Posted by: river845 | December 13, 2007 7:38 PM | Report abuse

A known past drug user, especially a cocaine user would make the job of parents and teachers on educating their children not do drugs almost impossible. It would have a huge negative effect on the overall campaign of this nation's drug war. The media is giving too much credit on Mr. Obama's so called honesty about his past drug use according to his own words. It is better Bill Clinton or W lying about their past than to have a known past cocaine user in the white house. Don't hold truth so dearly, after all Santa Claus is not real, are you going to call on parents lying? As a parent, are you looking forward to your kids telling you and the teachers to back off regarding not using drug and someday I can be a president too? As a parent, I will never vote for a known drug user, especially a cocaine user, republican or democrat, period.

Posted by: lhong_99 | December 13, 2007 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Obama and his followers can't take the heat even at this point. They should go ahead and start getting out of the kitchen.

Hillary is the bigger person for her appology. Which was truly not needed, but that's what you have to do to babies sometimes(baby them).

Obama and his little posse already crying like babies(you people on here). How pathetic.

I guess he'll be hiding behind the civil rights movement even as president...He's already rubbing elbows with Al Sharpton so what else would we expect.

Posted by: creativethought777 | December 13, 2007 7:35 PM | Report abuse

I am a staunch "neocon" conservative who will vote Libertarian when the time is right. That being said, Hillarys attack on Baracks past drug use will hurt her terribly. I, as well as hundreds of thousands of others, political philosophy aside, are 40 years old now and do not believe anyone under 50 who says they never smoked pot. You guys are in 40-50 year old range too. Remember the camaros and chevelles we used to drive to the back parking lot before 1st period in high school? I know I do. I respect Obama though I will not vote for him.

Posted by: jaimielpn | December 13, 2007 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Are you people new to politics? Once again no leaf is left unturned in these debates.

Character is very important...especially when this guy appears out of nowhere. You all act as if you know him...what do you really know?

No one knew who he was until recently...I appreciate knowing all I can.

The American people have the right to decide on their own. So what he wrote a stupid book....I didn't read it.

Excuse us non-Avid Obama Followers.

I shouldn't have to go purchase his book and pad his pocket to know who I'm considering electing for president.

I just can't imagine why you all would think he deserves a break... ye right.

Thanks Hillary campaign for informing people of his charachter! It does matter...peoples past and character always has. Now we can decide!

Posted by: creativethought777 | December 13, 2007 7:23 PM | Report abuse

This is classic Clinton from their play book. Desperation of the Walmart back Clinton-Corporate States of America.
Hillary is about change as the oil companies are about better miles per gallon. Give me a break.

Posted by: stanjax3 | December 13, 2007 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Obama would have to borrow Hillary Clinton's rolodex if he were in office.

Exactly what would he be good at in office? Not much.

I don't want to even think what he would do to our country on a global scale. Who in their right mind would want to vote for this guy? Uninformed minorities, only because he's African American? There is more to running a country than "Civil Rights" issues.

Not to mention he's a racist to begin with.

Fox News video confronts Barack Obama's racism, and speaks about the racist church he attends.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB7XkZUIHEQ


Things you should know about his muslim past
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_barack_obama_muslim.htm

A link to video with Oprah's Racist Comments...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDmtPuPbVgU


Wake up and get a clue!

Posted by: creativethought777 | December 13, 2007 7:13 PM | Report abuse

HA HA HA - Run Billary run. wait - someone did drugs? ROFL, a whole lot of people did drugs back in the 60s, especially those tramping through the liberal colleges. As far as the repubs wiping the floor with anyone I think y'all see boogeymen under the bed. Fight the good fight, not the normal Demoncratic limp wristed way of folding under the lights.

Posted by: zendrell | December 13, 2007 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Hmmmm... zukermand... you confuse us...

This morning, Clinton approached Obama on the tarmac of Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington to personally apologize for the remarks.

Are you mad because the Obama team -- while accepting her apology -- expressed concern that this was a continuing ploy of the Clinton campaign.

Perhaps it is the Clinton campaign you should be disillusioned with.

OBAMA '08!

Posted by: jade7243 | December 13, 2007 7:03 PM | Report abuse

There is more to this than Hillary vs. Obama. In New Hampshire, independents outnumber either Democrats or Republicans. Independents tend to decide most of the general elections. Bill Shaheen's wife is running for Senate, and needs as many independents she can get to win. It looks like independents are fueling Obama's push here. Jeanne Shaheen needs to keep Bill Shaheen from alienating Obama independents or else they may not end up being Shaheen independents.

Posted by: steveboyington | December 13, 2007 6:54 PM | Report abuse

If obama does not learn to take a few of those punches without making a mountain out of a mole hill he is proving publicly that he is not qualified. The fact that he used drugs and alcohol during his teens and college years is significant. Bill Clinton is not a candidate so his claim of not inhaling is no longer significant. The GOP will wipe the floor with obama if he does not keep his mouth shut. Oh well, he will not garner the nomination anyway so whats the fuss?
Vote for Joe Biden in 2008!!!

Posted by: lindafranke1952 | December 13, 2007 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Ok, just because Obama did drugs when he was a teenager, it doesn't mean that he is a bad presidential candidate. In fact, he is the best choice. While Clinton and Edwards plan to keep troops in Iraq, Obama plans to pull them out. The Republicans aren't even worth mentioning. Also, it is good that Obama has been honest about his past, something not everyone has done or will do. Obama will be a much-needed change in this country.

Posted by: ccschlichting | December 13, 2007 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Content of Character:

Character and judgment are important in a president; assessing them helps voters know what kind of person they're placing confidence in. Many people say Barack is a good guy.

Are political, humanistic, and Christian morals compatible; and are subtle political deceptions conscionable in the president?

Obama is open about his past drug use:

The cocaine and marijuana issue humanizes Barack's campaign image, in contrast to the "messiah" image in play. Common standards condemn illicit drug use; but recovery reflects improved moral character and judgment, which people may identify with generally--appeals to realists.

The messiah-politician image appeals to idealists who need a superman, an "uber" image of Obama, to buy into the claim he can save them from their human plight--poverty or oppression or degradation and the like--by ushering in an Utopian revolution with the magical legislative power in the pen of the US president; it is a god-king image, which in the idealists' minds endows the man Obama with superhuman powers, a mystical deliverer born to save.

Both aim at votes.

With respect to Obama's moral character, the latter reflects an ends-justify-means morality; fictitious savior image of Obama is "good" because promising Utopia appeals to idealistic voters; the reformed drug user image projects to realists a humanistic morality--people make mistakes, learn, improve character and judgment, a life-long process.

Integrating fictitious and humanistic campaign images reflects Obama's assent to differing moral principles: ends-justify-means and human improvement morality. The former utilizes subtle deception and the latter honesty to capture public trust; one is political morality and the other personal; while Obama's campaign image as a Christian suggests an overriding Judeo-Christian morality.

Posted by: shaunie4u2001 | December 13, 2007 6:34 PM | Report abuse

You want to see someone play tough and dirty? Just see what Bush & Chaney & the Republicans did to John Kerry and John McCain in the previous elections!

What Sheenan did is child's play compared to what the Democratic nominee can expect in 2008.

Posted by: David2007 | December 13, 2007 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Re david_kelley's comment, the article states that Obama wrote about it in his book. In doing so he made it public. Once it is in the public arena then it's fair game. Why oh why do people go bonkers when someone makes a statement that it may be an issue in the election. Will the Republicans bring it up in the election if Obama is the nominee? I will take bets on it now. One day Americans will wake up to the realities of politics.

Posted by: hughkeogh | December 13, 2007 6:20 PM | Report abuse

OOOOps, are we not missing the point! Are we judging which of the two, H.Clinton or B.Obama, is best qualified to bring this country to what she used to be, by what each od them did when they were kids, or what they can do by what they are TODAY!

Posted by: rafael1 | December 13, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

OOOOps, are we not missing the point! Are we judging which of the two, H.Clinton or B.Obama, is best qualified to bring this country to what she used to be, by what each od them did when they were kids, or what they can do by what they are TODAY!

Posted by: rafael1 | December 13, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Shame, shame, shame on the Clinton camp! This is low-blow, right-wing smearing at its finest. Perpaps Mrs. Clinton is adopting the methods so viciously used against her husband for years, but it doesn't justify this attack against Obama. I pray she does not get the Democratic nomination next year. Please everyone who ID's themselves as Democratic or progresive: vote for Edwards (or Obama) in the primaries!

Posted by: vegasgirl1 | December 13, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

A while back, the voters let it be known
how fed up they were with the powers to be,
when they gave the US Congress back to
the Democrats. The problem is, which party
gets The White House? If they let the
Republicans keep it, they're likely to see
almost every piece of legislation passed
by this Congress get vetoed, or if they
give it to the Democrats, then when they pass a sensible bill, it gets signed,
and the regular majority will get a breath
of fresh air again, knowing that things
just may start going their way. Ira D. York
Cell Phone:515-460-0828

Posted by: iyork50036 | December 13, 2007 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Wow... I like Obama and Hilary, but for her to make such a low sting like that is reallly bad. I can't believe it. Techinaclly I believe that is an intrusion of Obamas right to privacy. He should be able to keep his private life private especially if something happened in the past.

Posted by: david_kelley | December 13, 2007 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Clinton policy is to do mudslinging now, wait and see the media & public's reaction and then apologize, if u can call it that, how straight forward is she, u are either with her or against her.... and if u are against her she will go "AXIS OF EVIL" on u. Sounds familiar... that is why we need change, real change in washington. Obama is the man we need, he is the change we need. Go Obama.

Posted by: forjarigirlonly | December 13, 2007 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Shaheen's walked the plank. See CNN link below.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Blogger in trouble in NH as well. All this after Iowa e-mail episode and not more than two hours ago, Clinton tells us she's for "change" and has "experience". Rumsfeld and Cheney had "experience" and look where that's got us.

Seriously, this is one campaign in trouble with too many loose cannons. Better bring Bill in and fast. Where's the "judgement" factor here. Tell me who your supporters are and I'll tell you who you are. Jeez, Hillary, I gave you more credit than this!

Posted by: Smokescreen | December 13, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Oops. I seem to have copied when I meant to cut.

Posted by: zukermand | December 13, 2007 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Malia2, you don't read very well, do you?

Posted by: zukermand | December 13, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

This unseemly response to a personal apology is just plain rude. I'm fast becoming disillusioned with Mr Obama. Two minor incidents out of an organization of thousands and communications numbering in the millions tells me Helms is full of crap and he knows it. I'm fast becoming disillusioned with Mr Obama. Of course, he does seem to please Mr MacGillis, Ms Kornblut and Mr Balz mightily. Perhaps that's the idea.

Posted by: zukermand | December 13, 2007 4:04 PM | Report abuse

NO ONE has ever accused Obama of being a drug dealer before this Sheehan guy. But his candidate, Hillary Clinton, is married to a man who has been accused of forcible rape. Ask Shaheen about supporting Bill and Hillary Clinton, Washington Post. Does Shaheen just reject the rape accusation at the same time he's making up the drug dealing accusation based on nothing?

Posted by: Malia2 | December 13, 2007 3:59 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company