Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton Also Embraces Republicans

Updated 5:08 p.m.
By Anne E. Kornblut
ROCK HILL, S.C. -- Sen. Barack Obama may have said the GOP is the "party of ideas," but Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is no slouch when it comes to embracing Republicans on the campaign trail these days.

In front of audiences here, Clinton has repeatedly invoked her work with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and even cited Sen. John McCain, the newly resurgent presidential candidate on the Republican side. (In recent years, Clinton has embraced McCain so warmly at times that his advisers have worked aggressively to distance the two).

On Thursday, following her remarks on the economy, Clinton hailed the 1950s -- when Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected to two terms -- as a time "people look back at with great appreciation" because the economy worked well.

In response to a question about whether she can work with Republicans, Clinton cautioned an audience in Greenville not to believe what they may have heard about her in the past. "A lot of what you hear people say about me comes from people who do not know me," Clinton said, before going on to outline her work with Graham, who was one of the House managers who impeached her husband during the Monica Lewinsky in the late 1990s. She cited Graham at other stops on the campaign trail, including on the eve of the primary here, where she said that she has "worked across party lines with people that a lot of folks thought I would never work with."

On the same day, Clinton's campaign advisers held a conference call to slam Obama for being too conciliatory toward Republicans and pandering to a GOP audience when he said it was the "party of ideas."

Republican National Committee spokesman Alex Conant questioned some of Clinton's warm words on working with her GOP colleagues. "Even by Senator Clinton's standards, her claims to be bipartisan are dizzying. There is bipartisan agreement that Clinton is one of the most divisive and polarizing politicians of her generation," he said. "Isn't she the same Senator who last week said she's surprised even more Republicans aren't "afraid" of her? Her new claim to be a friend of the GOP is an incredible diversion from her regular litany of blame-the-Republicans rhetoric."

By Washington Post editors  |  January 25, 2008; 3:42 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: GOP Hopefuls Court Cuban American Vote
Next: New Racial Dynamic in S.C.

Comments

Here's the problem. The Clintons will tell anyone anything if they think it will benefit them and bring them the power they crave. They were scared after Iowa and their true character was revealed.

One lie after another: Barack's stance on Iraq was a "fairy tale", Barack played the race card, Barack loves Reagan. All ridiculous. It seems the more outrageous they could make their lies the better. And there is some indication that all of this is working. The media reports drama and doesn't emphasize little details like whether Clinton's attacks are true or not.

Whether Hillary is pretending to be human -- "I have so many opportunities for America" (huh?) -- or Bill is ranting and raving like an angry old man who once had power but can't get people to listen to him anymore -- it's the Drama that the media reports. And we watch. We get sucked in to the drama. And we let lies seep in. Maybe Barack did play the race card (why would he?!?), maybe Barack really did plan the war with GWB (he came out against the war before it began and has supported our troops as senator), maybe he does love Regan (what?!?), maybe Hillary is human (look into her eyes).

Wake up America!

Barack Obama is the only hope we have as a nation to avoid 4 more years of liars.

Posted by: edhere | January 25, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

With web stats like this, looks like Obama is taking more and more control:

http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=40

Posted by: davidmwe | January 25, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

I called all three campaigns to tell them that, as a pro-choice, anti-war, pro-gay marriage, pro-universal health insurance, pro-cap-and-trade Democrat, I can't support Hillary in the general, because she's missing the most important part -- decency. And I said how I'll give money to her opponent and actively campaign against her if she's facing McCain or Bloomberg. It was an incredibly vindicating outlet for some of the anger I've been feeling over the last few days. I urge anyone feeling the same way to do the same.

Posted by: davestickler | January 25, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

All you Obama supporters, quick being cry babies! Hillary Clinton should not campaign aggressively against Obama because it will hurt the party? Translation, Obama supporters want a welfare Presidential Campaign, where the prize of the Oval Office should be freely given, not rightfully earned.

To be completely honest, I don't understand why Obama keeps referring to his comments about the Republican Party and how they have been taken out of context by the Clintons (not to mention candidate John Edwards, other prominent Democrats and liberal blogs,etc.). He may have had a good intellectual point, but politically it was a stupid thing to say. And he keeps saying it, and saying it.....

Obama supporters will waste no time in blaming Hillary Clinton for everything that goes wrong in his campaign, but the Clintons can't be blamed for his foolishness.

Posted by: PeteIlly | January 25, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Anne Kornblut as usual again misses the point. I can't figure out why the Post continues to pay her.

Hillary Clinton did not praise Republicans as a party, rather she cited how on specific issues which she cares about she has worked with individual Republicans to get legislation passed. This is a very different thing.

Clinton knows how to get legislation passed and what it takes. That doesn't mean you give into Republicans on their ideas.

I have no idea what Obama will do to bring people together but he will never bring them together on Choice, gay and lesbian rights, minority rights and immigrant rights.

So I would rather go with Hillary Clinton who I know will stand fast on those matters which I consider the basis of the platform of the Democratic Party.

Posted by: peterdc | January 25, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

newagent99 -
No matter how many times you say it, it doesn't make it true. Can't you at least be intellectually honest. he never once stated he agreed with his policies. In fact, he has stated he was against him.
But I'm guessing since you are a Clinton supporter, you want to win the election 51-49 instead of 60-40.

Posted by: mcmahon10 | January 25, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

"On the same day, Clinton's campaign advisers held a conference call to slam Obama for being too conciliatory toward Republicans and pandering to a GOP audience when he said it was the "party of ideas.""

I believe Anne Kornblut may actually be a force of evil. It's really the only explanation that fits.

Posted by: zukermand | January 25, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Reagan was a racist. Barack knows this, yet he still believes reagan had great ideas.

Clinton has worked with republicans to get thngs done.
Obama? He'll let the GOP decide

Posted by: newagent99 | January 25, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Next thing you know, Hillary Clinton will criticize another candidate for having a spouse with wandering eyes. Nothing will make for a happier America than when we all find out about Bill's latest infidelity.

Posted by: jeffwacker | January 25, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company