Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton on Bush and Boiled Frogs

By Krissah Williams
Campaigning in locales as different as Hattiesburg, Miss. and Cheyenne, Wyo. today, Sen. Hillary Clinton stuck with the same colloquialism that she began using way back in Iowa to make a point about President Bush's energy policy.

"You all know how to boil a frog don't you?" she asked the folks in Mississippi, which votes Tuesday.

"Yeah!" some in the crowd yelled.

"You know you drop a frog in hot water, it jumps right out," Clinton said, telling her frog analogy with more vigor than usual. "But, you put it in cold water and you turn up the heat pretty soon you got a boiled frog."

Her large, enthusiastic Hattiesburg audience laughed. (And a few hours later so did the several hundred excited supporters who came to see her in Wyoming, where Democrats will caucus tomorrow.)

"We're starting to act like boiled frogs," Clinton continued. "When George Bush became president oil was at $20 a barrel. Gas is headed toward $4 a gallon. We've just been sitting in that cold water, and it gets a little warmer, and we get pushed around, and we don't do much about it. Well here's what I would do as your president -- II will say we've had enough. We're going to have energy policy that make us independent."

Asked while chatting with reporters before heading to Wyoming whether she had a recipe for boiling frogs, Clinton began the bit about dropping the frog in cold water.

A reporter broke in, "You've boiled frogs?"

Clinton said she had friends who had done it. "That's what you have to do to eat frogs legs."

Clinton's not the only one who sprinkles policy talk with frog legs. Al Gore also used a boiled frog analogy in his presentations during the movie "An Inconvenient Truth" to describe people's ignorance about global warming, and it dates back even further as a business theory.

In Wyoming, Clinton expanded on her cooked amphibian anecdote, adding a story about the time she slimed fish driving through the western part of the country in 1969.

"The best job I ever had in preparation for running for office was a job I had sliming fish in Alaska," Clinton said. "I was in a salmon fishery where they brought in the salmon. They had some experts from Japan who were there and slit the fish open and took out the caviar and I was there in hip boots with a spoon, and my job was to clean out everything else. What preparation that turned out to be for the current line of work that I have chosen."

In both places, Clinton told audiences she has an uphill battle against Sen. Barack Obama. But in a frog boiling, fish gutting contest, Clinton clearly made the case that she is more experienced.

Shrimp was on the menu on the Clinton campaign plane, but there was no word that the senator shelled and de-veined them herself.

By Washington Post editors  |  March 7, 2008; 7:20 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Puerto Rico Democrats Seek to Change Contest
Next: In Wyo., Criticizing Clinton's 'Standing' on War


I have to stop reading these posts. Every time I read some mean spiteful thing the Clinton's or their supporters say, I have to pull out my Visa and make a donation to Obama. I am going broke!

Posted by: bewildered1 | March 12, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

It's interesting, (not) that she's not getting the same treatment Quayle did when he believed potato should be spelled 'potatoe'.

This goes to prove that there is a liberal bias in the Main Stream Media. Of the two blunders, believing "That's what you have to do to eat frog legs." and claiming (lying) that she had friends that had actually done it is so much worse than being wrong about spelling.

Thank-you, Krissah Williams for daring to tell us what happened. I hope you don't find a frog's head in your bed!

Posted by: jimlininchina | March 11, 2008 3:22 AM | Report abuse

pstachelek, I'm personally sick and tired of all the hypocrites masquerading as 'Christians' demanding 'school prayer' (and similar) who refuse to read the Gospel, let alone follow it. Then to top it off you expect the government to play the role of some sort of 'enforcer' for the church. Are you familiar with the term 'blasphemer'?

Now pay attention:
Matthew 6:5
"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

Matthew 22:21
"Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Posted by: TomJx | March 10, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

This is also the tale of the predatory loan and usury mess which we've already seen the impact of.

But who's counting?

Posted by: pbr1 | March 10, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

The whole boiling frog thing could and should apply to what the Dems have been doing through their Liberal undermining of America's values for the last 30 yrs or so. No Prayer in Public school, no Bible in Public school...oh no, wouldn't want to offend anyone. When did the craziness begin in our public schools, or on our College Campuses? When we said bu-bye God, we've got it from here....don't need ya anymore (if you ever existed that is). What fools our Parents and Grandparents were to let this happen!
Red Skelton even predicted it in 1968. We the Baby Boomers, and Boomlets have been the ones who have suffered from their mistakes, and now our Children and Grandchildren are doomed to have ALL of their God Given, Inalienable rights taken away within a very short period of time if we elect one of these Liberal, Power hungry Maniacs to the highest office in the land. Senator Clinton has never run anything in her life and now she wants to run this country? Oh....Please! Then we have Senator Obama, uh I don't think anyone knows what he stands for from day to day. He is as much blown by the wind as Wheat chaff. Then we have Senator McCain....Great American, War Hero...I'm being serious, by the way. However, he is no more a Conservative Republican than Carl Marx was. He was, is, and always will be a Reps' clothing. What this country needs is a Man of True Character, True Conviction. A Man who won't go with the Status Quo, and who had the track record to prove it! That Man is Dr. Alan Keyes!!!

God Bless America! Please, please continue to Bless our country no matter how stupid we can be collectively!

Posted by: pstachelek | March 10, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

The person that wanted Barack to go to Europe had a good idea. He should go there and stay.

Posted by: joejo2 | March 10, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Obama is no boiled frog, he saw what was happening all along. A true leader would never admit to being that frog the way she is, but what other option does she have with her record being what it is?

How about the washington post start calling her ou t on lies like this one from her memo today:"In 2008, Senator Obama rails against NAFTA in Ohio while his top economic advisor assures the Canadians his rhetoric is just "political positioning."

It was her campaign this was attributed to and it is about time the wapo and the rest of the media put an end to this particular lie.

Posted by: nibaizi | March 9, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

A bit of frog and peach. Yum.

Posted by: ither | March 9, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Let's talk about Hillary and her claim to meet the threshold for commander in chief:

She did not have a national security clearance when she was First Lady. With all due respect, the statement that she's the only candidate who has been in the White House and hence is best prepared to answer that phone does not hold water.

By law, Bill Clinton could not discuss any issue of importance regarding security with her. So how can she claim knowledge and experience on anything during the Clinton presidency- when she couldn't even be privy to them?

How could she play any pivotal role in foreign policy when she, by law, is forbidden to be in the room when negotiations and discussions- the real work- were taking place with foreign leaders?

When she was First Lady, she was just that-a First Lady, not second in command.

Her senate experience is so similar to that of McCain and Obama that it really is a wash when it comes to who can handle that "red phone" moment. Senators are legislators not decision makers after all.

So in my mind, the issue of readiness to be commander in chief boils down to temperament, judgment and intelligence. Here is where Obama will win the case in Denver and then again in November.

I liken this to my many years in Corporate America. The most effective CEOs I know rise to the top not because they are the most book smart or the longest tenured. They rise to the top because they know how to lead by getting people to want to work for them; by motivating and inspiring them to work for the best of the company; by showing calm in the midst of a storm; by having an unwavering message and sticking to it; by being a great communicator; and above all by being well-liked and respected!


If all it took to win a presidential campaign was the ability to rattle off facts and figures, memorize reams of policies and out-debate competitors, then there would be a lot of people inside the Washington Beltway who could compete for the job. Because there are tons of white house staffers, think tank advisors and congressman who can claim those attributes.

A President must be a leader and that term is tossed about loosely in the media and within the campaigns. But for me and many more like me, this is what we see in Obama. This is why against the most amazing odds, against the most entrenched establishment candidate and against historical divisions, we have a candidate that is winning in the polls. He leads by delegates and the popular vote. I'll admit it; I never thought I'd see the day. I thought Hillary Clinton and her machinery would have sewn this up in February.

Let's have Hillary be accountable for and run on her own accomplishments and not those of her husband's. Let's have Obama continue to make the case for why he can bring real change and let the proverbial chips fall where they may.

To any one who finds this post offensive, I apologize in advance. These are simply my opinions.

Posted by: kabra1 | March 9, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse


WHAT? Are YOU talking about?

This thread is about Billary's Frog Boil, and how much she likes to eat them!

Posted by: rat-the | March 9, 2008 3:24 AM | Report abuse

Now, with his water boarding veto, its getting about time someone shoots this chap out of his neocon bubble so he eventually discover his wrong doings towards the American people!! And don't forget to do Cheney first because he is the master wrong doer!!

Posted by: jwholtkamp | March 9, 2008 3:10 AM | Report abuse

Hey jacksmith -

If you think Hillary Clinton's 35 years experience is anything more than fluff - she worked for the Children's Health fund for 1 YR then been a corporate lawyer and stayed one till she became first lady - she went to Kosovo with Cheryl Crow & Sinbad one day after the border opened - and she sat on the Board of ANIT-UNION WALMART till she ran for the senate.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think Bill Clinton won't be there to help Obama when he wins the election. Bill will work hard to help our economy recover, right along side of Obama.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Hillary Clinton can get health care reform passed - she couldn't do it when she had the chance - remember those 8 years in the white house and no true health care reform. She's too divisive and the GOP hates her guts.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Hillary can get us out of two wars better than Obama. Bill is hip-deep in the pocket of the Arab world - why do you think they won't release their 2007 tax return? Besides, Bill Clinton is the one who gave Osama Bin Laden the guns and freedom to start Al-Qaida.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Hillary Clinton is big on environmental cleanup - look to her campaign contributions from Oil companies and drug companies.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Hillary Clinton is great on education - she didn't get through Yale the way Obama got through Harvard did she? She's been wealthy so long she can't remember how hard it is - Obama was middle class 5 years ago and has a vested interest in education because he and his wife get through college on loans and scholarships, and they have first hand knowledge on how hard it is to go into the workforce deep in debt.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Hillary Clinton was ever at Bill's right hand anywhere but in public for photo ops. They don't even live together anymore. He's a chronic philanderer, remember!
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think Hillary will get anything done in Washington other than lose the Congress to the GOP just like Bill did - she is one of the most divisive people in either the House or Senate - look at the Bills she's tried to pass - NO ONE has co-sponsored any of her legislation.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think Hillary Clinton could ever beat John McCain. All those new democrats, independents and GOP change-over voters will NEVER vote for her.

Best regards,

Posted by: frillymail1017 | March 8, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

I seriously think Hillary has problems. And, I don't think she should be sucking up to locals talking about how cruel she is to frogs....boiling them. That seems like cruelty to animals, and is not very presidential.

Posted by: ArmyVet | March 8, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

"Where's the G-damn flag?I want the G-damn f**king flag up every f**king morning at f**king sunrise!"
Hillary, according to four Arkansas State Troopers who who assigned to Gov. Bill Clinton.

Posted by: sperrico | March 8, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

"For every day that passes, Hillary is appearing more and more presidential."

You mean she reminds you of Bush?

Posted by: TomJx | March 8, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

if you count 200 to 2004 as two years-
if you think that undefined "change" rhetoric is enough to make any significant change
if you think that winning a bunch of college liberals and the whole African American population-already done in 2000 by Gore and 2004 by Kerry- will get the white house without significant Latin and working class support
If you think that somebody whose few policies that have been expanded upon are more conservative than the Clinton's is a liberal
if you think that this is a new kind of campaign when he uses surrogates (Donna Brazille et al) to create the impression that the Clintons are racists so that he can win SC
If you think that calling her whiney, moody and presenting her like Lady McBeth is not mysogynst
If you think the constant negativity by all of you Obamopaths is making it easy for the rest of us who may have to vote for your guy in November to do so

Please stop your obnoxious, offensive posts

Posted by: nycLeon | March 8, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

rat-the: sorry about that.Keep on with frogs, they are just too bony for me.

Posted by: work2play | March 8, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Mr Obama's senate experience is very well accounted in today's NYT. Here is some interesting paragraphs,

In the Senate, meanwhile, he was discovering the realities of being a senator -- that not every bill is perfect (or perfectly unacceptable) and that most votes required balancing the good and bad. Mr. Obama wanted to vote to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. for the Supreme Court, for example -- he thought the president deserved latitude when it came to appointments -- but Mr. Rouse advised against it, pointing out that Mr. Obama would be reminded of the vote every time the court made a conservative ruling that he found objectionable.

Mr. Obama took few bold stands and diverted little from the liberal orthodoxy he had embraced in the Illinois Senate. His voting record in his first year in Washington, according to the annual rankings by National Journal, was more liberal than 82.5 percent of the Senate (compared with, for example, Mrs. Clinton's 79.8 percent that year).

He disappointed some Democrats by not taking a more prominent role opposing the war -- he voted against a troop withdrawal proposal by Senators John Kerry and Russ Feingold in June 2006, arguing that a firm date for withdrawal would hamstring diplomats and military commanders in the field.

To others, though, the mismatch between Mr. Obama's outside profile and his inside accomplishments wore thin. While some senators spent hours in closed-door meetings over immigration reform in early 2007, he dropped in only occasionally, prompting complaints that he was something of a dilettante.

He joined a bipartisan group, which included Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, and Mr. Kennedy, that agreed to stick to a final compromise bill even though it was sure to face challenges from interest groups on both sides.

Yet when the measure reached the floor, Mr. Obama distanced himself from the compromise, advocating changes sought by labor groups. The bill collapsed.

To some in the bipartisan coalition, Mr. Obama's move showed an unwillingness to take a tough stand.

"He folded like a cheap suit," said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a close ally of Mr. McCain. "What it showed me is you are not an agent of change. Because to really change things in this place you have to get beat up now and then.


Finally, Mr. Obama did what he had done when he first arrived in the Senate, quietly consulting those who knew the institution well -- Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Daschle -- for advice on whether to run.

They told him that these chances come along rarely. His celebrity was undeniable. And yes, he was green, but that also meant he did not have the burden of a long record.

"For somebody to come in with none of that history is a real advantage," Mr. Daschle said. "I told him that he has a window to do this. He should never count on that window staying open."

Posted by: work2play | March 8, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Worktoplay-LOL! Well, we are talking about "Frogs"!.

However, these are the kind Billary likes to Boil up and Eat, NOT the European Type! ;~)

Besides, aside from the displaced World Labor Party(Chirac) ones, the French are now the New, Improved ones! :-)

Posted by: rat-the | March 8, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

kevinlarmee: your out of box thinking is rather creative and wacky. John Kerry got republican shoes in his ass only because he speaks French. Going to Europe is political suicide.

Posted by: work2play | March 8, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Ha ha. She is soooo fake. That's why she's behind. You can fool some people some time bu you cant fool all the people all the time.

So as journalists start to trickle into the vetting of Hillary Clinton's claim that she is more experienced in foreign policy than Barack Obama, guess what? It turns out all of her experience consists mainly of giving speeches to the women of Northern Ireland, to the women of China...

Why am I not surprised?

First off, its classic Hillary Clinton to belittle someone whose done the same thing she herself has done for political gain.

Two, guess what Hillary part of being commander in chief is rallying the troops and you do that with speeches.

Posted by: n2itiveus | March 8, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

For every day that passes, Hillary is appearing more and more presidential. So Obama wins Wyoming, the most thinly populated state in the union. We need a president with experience, toughness, an ability to function in the political world of rough and tumble. Hillary is exactly that candidate. Obama, for the moment, is a lightweight. He might get his chance in 10 years or so. At the moment, he's not ready. Hillary will win this contest.

Posted by: dhayjones | March 8, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

God, she's full of crap.

Posted by: mwfree | March 8, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

she's a frigging liar. people all over the world know it, except for our resident clinton kool-aid-drinkers.

Nobel winner: Hillary Clinton's 'silly' Irish peace claims
By Toby Harnden in Washington

Hillary Clinton had no direct role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland and is a "wee bit silly" for exaggerating the part she played, according to Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former First Minister of the province.

"I don't know there was much she did apart from accompanying Bill [Clinton] going around," he said. Her recent statements about being deeply involved were merely "the sort of thing people put in their canvassing leaflets" during elections. "She visited when things were happening, saw what was going on, she can certainly say it was part of her experience. I don't want to rain on the thing for her but being a cheerleader for something is slightly different from being a principal player."

Posted by: esles2000 | March 8, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Kevinlarmee, What a GREAT Idea!

I can see Barack Hussein right now, walking by the Eiffel Tower, hand in hand with Soros, promising the World Labor Party everything it could ever want from OUR Country, all the Wide-Eyed Drooling Socialist losers looking on in lust...

No, unfortunately Barack Hussein is to smart to show everyone who he is really running for! ;~)

Won't happen, until maybe March, '09, After he gets sworn in!

WE, as a Nation, CAN'T let THAT happen! :-(

Posted by: rat-the | March 8, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse


Obama is unelectable.

If you can't win Ohio and other big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November, you can't win the Presidency. Obama has failed to close the deal.

Hillary has proven she can win all the big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November. That makes her the most electable candidate and she's clearly the most qualified candidate.

In Ohio, Obama outspent Hillary 3 to 1 yet still won ONLY 5 out of 88 counties! No amount of money is going to get Obama over 50% of the vote.

It's time for Obama to exit the race and for the Dems to unite behind Hillary.

Posted by: TAH1 | March 8, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

If you read the comments by Mr. Unity's supporters, they are some of the most divisive supporters in all of politics. Ironic, isn't it?

I see some Clinton Haters are here questioning Clinton's foreign affairs experience.

Tell us, please...
What does Senator Obama have to counter this with:

Statement from John Hume former MP MEP, founder of the SDLP and an architect of the Good Friday Agreement. He is the only person to win the Nobel Prize for Peace, the Ghandi Peace Award and the Martin Luther King Peace Prize.

"I am quite surprised that anyone would suggest that Hillary Clinton did not perform important foreign policy work as First Lady. I can state from firsthand experience that she played a positive role for over a decade in helping to bring peace to Northern Ireland."

Posted by: freespeak | March 8, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse


IF you think Hillary's 2 more years of experience in the Senate makes her more "experienced"

You might be an Idiot!

IF you think Bill Clinton is running this year

You might be an Idiot!

IF you think a failed attempt at health care reform is something to put on a resume for President

You might be an Idiot!

IF you think Bill Clinton is running this year

You might be an Idiot!

When talking about education and using the possesive "salary's" rather than the plural "salaries" is a good endorsement

You might be an Idiot!

IF you think Bill Clinton is running this year

You might be an Idiot!

And finally, if you think being the wife of a President means you can run for President and use his record as your record to legitimize your candidacy

You are an Idiot!

Posted by: kabra1 | March 8, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

After listening and watching Clinton campaign in Mississippi, I was once more faced with the reality question, what her experience that she keeps touting about?
With all due respect, Clinton is out of touch with the realism and pragmatism of international economies and politics.

In terms of international politics, no country, and I mean no control is an Island! The essence of globalization is to bring all the world resources of the world; human and natural to the table and fashion out a way that it can be distributed humanely and without anarchy, discrimination and melancholic politicking. Did she understand really honestly understand the dynamism of world economics and the correlation between foreign exchanges and international trade advantages with two or more countries involved?

Her explanation regarding the value of a barrel of gas and the other statistic she mention is tantamount to fabrication and amount to nonentity when compared to the scenario that used to be and what we have now. In those days, we were not waging wars against our Middle East allies or elsewhere in the world. The reason why we cannot effectively harness the natural resources of the countries in this region is essentially sequel to the detrimental political and foreign policies of the United States of America to wage war rather than using diplomatic approach. Hilary Clinton contributed immensely, enormously and extremely in propagating and actualizing this inimical policy.

Furthermore, Ms. Clinton have no moral justification to stand before the people of America, lied to them, and continued to lie to them as to her involvement in the detrimental policies of George Bush. She started criticizing only when she was getting ready to run for the presidency. By implication, in spite of all the nefarious and negativism directed at the person of Obama and his ideology and hope and change, it is an indisputable fact that, her ambition of becoming the next president of the USA, supersede her desire to make the necessary change that will reconcile us with our allies and move the country forward.

Sequel to her speech and the rhetoric's about alternative sources of energy, which unfortunately was not represented in this article but nevertheless is very crucial, I find it again very difficult to appreciate her touted experience, if she finds it very difficult to differentiate between reality and dream. At least for the next decade if not more, American cannot produce an alternate source of energy that can comprehensively tackle the energy need of the country. Her plan to compel the Oil producing nation to bring the price of oil down by having the country's dependence on oil reduced is the funniest proposal I have ever heard from one who claimed to know a lot about international policies and trade.

In case she's not aware, she may have to once more borrow a page from Obama. The most effective tool available to America in order to continue to benefit from energy sustenance is to diplomatically resolve any pending areas or department of conflict with allies and trade partners, while concurrently making sure that we aggressively pursue educational and scientific studies that will make alternative energy a reality.

The press will not take note of this very conspicuous policy differences between Obama and Clinton, on the contrary, it is only exclusively concerned with helping the established candidates to defeat the people of America, their movement and Obama. That is such a shame, that noble profession such as those of information dissemination is allowing it to be discriminatively used against Obama and his ideology it pragmatically make the USA a better place for us and the future generation.

God bless USA
God bless Obama

Posted by: Odehson | March 8, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

To the parents out there - would you be proud of your children if they acted how Hillary Clinton has acted in this campaign? the tears before primaries she was on the verge of losing, surrogate attacks, code words and whisper campaigns targeting her opponents race, ethnicity, AND religion (the trifecta!), planted questions, and the do-anything to win approach? Would you honestly reward that?

I havent even discussed her behavior during the presidency of her husband, when she destroyed the reputations of the female victims of her husbands abuse of power. Or her relationship with dick morris, or her role in whitewater?

Is that how we want to treat each other? Is this the behavior we want to promote?

Hillary Clinton as President will be bad for America. Plain and simple.

Posted by: maq1 | March 8, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

There are so many things wrong with Hillary taking that story literally...but then we know how gullitble, trusting naive she's been on other things. Not to say her penchant for refusing to back down on ANYTHING.

She has no concept of the principle of gutting a frog (or fish or chicken or duck or steer or hog or whatever) before cooking it? Terrific. Assuming she at least occasionally cooked for her family, it's amazing they survived.

And of course she lost the Animal Rights vote with her tale of animal torture.

No commonsense whatsoever. Zero.

Posted by: TomJx | March 8, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

thinktank: "Folks are confused who the 'other side' really is."

I'm very clear who the "other side" is. It's Clinton who's confused, continuing to acknowledge McCain as more prepared for C of C than Obama. She's acts as if she's not concerned about the Democratic Party; so I'll treat her as she acts.

Posted by: converse | March 8, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

"Folks are confused who the 'other side' really is." said thinktank

Below is a recent quote from Hillary Clinton that speaks volumes to what kind of person she is and what kind of Democrat she is. The quote tells us what *side* Hillary is on.

*Hillary Clinton told reporters that both she and the presumptive Republican nominee John McCain offer the experience to be ready to tackle any crisis facing the country under their watch, but Barack Obama simply offers more rhetoric. "I think you'll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say," she said. "He's never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002." Clinton was referring to Obama's anti-war speech he delivered in Chicago before entering the United States Senate.*

Posted by: dionc9 | March 8, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

I wonder if any other candidates repeat elements of their stump speeches.

Posted by: zukermand | March 8, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

nycLeon: *Hey cool. Go to Europe- the last presidential candidate to leave campaigning to do that was NY governer Seward in 1860- he went from presumptive front runner to 3rd place-*

No television. No Internet. 1860 and 2008 have many differences in regard to technology that *change* where one can and can not go to get *media attention*. The travel time... another big difference between 1860 and 2008.

Posted by: dionc9 | March 8, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse


If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards


Posted by: JackSmith1 | March 8, 2008 6:35 AM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton is one of the brilliant minds of our times. Antisocial comments against her only reflect upon their author. Senator Clinton and BO deserve a chance at the dream team. Folks are confused who the 'other side' really is.
Slow down with the defamation which unbecomes this Democratic primary race.

Posted by: thinktank | March 8, 2008 3:43 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: converse | March 8, 2008 01:53 AM

Converse writes,

It is truly amazing how easily she lies.

There are no frog leg recipes that call for boiling a whole live frog. That's ridiculous. But rather than admit that it's just a story to make a point, she gets defensive and lies about it--"oh, my friends do it all the time...".

Is this who we want leading the nation?


My parents noticed that too we were watching the clip when a man shouted out to her during a rally "will you marry me"
and instead of just rolling her eyes or something she gave this real awkward laugh and said something back to the guy. I forget what but she like actually acknowledged him. I dunno it was kind of vulnerable. She puts herself out there that's for sure.

Posted by: jpn71 | March 8, 2008 3:18 AM | Report abuse

Hey cool. Go to Europe- the last presidential candidate to leave campaigning to do that was NY governer Seward in 1860- he went from presumptive front runner to 3rd place- Lincoln (who was the only president to have as little experience as Barak) was elected and the Republicans were born. Maybe he can bring back a "My rival ran for president and all he got was this silly t-shirt" thing from Paris.

It's good to have been paying attention to history and politics for the long term to understand what things mean. Since you Barakopaths are newbies, I figured I'd share

Posted by: nycLeon | March 8, 2008 2:27 AM | Report abuse

It is truly amazing how easily she lies.

There are no frog leg recipes that call for boiling a whole live frog. That's ridiculous. But rather than admit that it's just a story to make a point, she gets defensive and lies about it--"oh, my friends do it all the time...".

Is this who we want leading the nation?

Posted by: converse | March 8, 2008 1:53 AM | Report abuse


After your impressive win in Mississippi, next Tuesday...don't go directly to is expected (let Hillary do that)
Instead go on a whirl-wind one week tour of European capitals....officially to "meet with leaders", but in reality to "meet the people"...(or rather, let them meet you"), i.e. monopolize the news with you being photographed/filmed with thousands (tens of thousands) of European supporters....(and that will happen; they love you) ...hands reaching out to you.....American flags..."je t'aime Obama", etc. signs.
Go to Berlin! Go to London! Go to Paris! Go to Madrid! Go to Rome!
(Hillary can go to Pennsylvania)
Everyday on the television (of the world, as well as America) will be the images of you being surrounded by thousands (tens of thousands) of adoring fans...every newspaper will be full of the reportage.

In one week you can go from "Democratic Nominee" to World Leader.
America can go from being hated to being loved
And then, when you return...after having monopolized the news for an entire week...after you've shown how your presidency (and America) will be seen by the rest of the world.

You can cash in your delegates, get your new "super delegates" and become the Democratic nominee (and the next president)

Posted by: kevinlarmee | March 7, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton worked for the children's defense fund.

Obama and Hillery both went into political world at a young age. I know this might upset some Obama supporters and was one of Obama big lies that he stopped trying to push a few months ago.

He ran for office at 30 and lost. Bill with HRC 27. Back then women had a very very hard time running on there own.

Posted by: mul | March 7, 2008 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Ok did the WP hear about Ms. Power's comments and resignation.

Turns out she was an academic too. I thought she was a crusader. She did spend some time in the Press were she learned how to talk about women running for office.

Trail Fix?

Front Page - It is all over the news so you don't have to hide it OK.

Iraq part II.

Posted by: mul | March 7, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Krissah Williams: great transcription, and a wonderfully light-hearted bit you got in there about the frogs!

However, I have to ask: do you think you're in any way a real journalist?

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | March 7, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

"LOL! I need a Hawaiian Spell Check!

"Happa HAOle"

Posted by: rat-the | March 7, 2008 08:25 PM

Brain Check!

Posted by: denise2233 | March 7, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

LOL! I need a Hawaiian Spell Check!

"Happa HAOle"

Posted by: rat-the | March 7, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

LOL! Barack? Cook?

I bet that Happa Hoale can only make good Sashimi Ono.

Which is BTW, ONO BRA! ;~)

Posted by: rat-the | March 7, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Experience? She had not served in any office until less than 8 years ago. Her only professional experience is as a very good corporate lawyer. But there are very many good corporate lawyers in the world...

Clinton fanatics are clearly savoring the recent victories (slim as they were), but they'll soon discover what the rest of the democratic party has already found out: Hillary Clinton offers nothing new. We saw what happens when the country falls for dirty tricks throughout the Bush-Clinton years - we have a President caught doing classless things in the oval office and subsequently impeached, and you have a revitalized conservative base electing an uninspired president and dragging us into an unwinnable war. Thats where this kind of politics gets us. Obama offers an alternative for those with enough wisdom to opt for change rather than mindless repetition and strife. He has shown he has detailed, substantive policies to get us to where we need to be.

Opting for the failed and unprincipled bush-clinton mode of operating is a travesty, and the party will ultimately lose out.

Posted by: maq1 | March 7, 2008 8:14 PM | Report abuse

She veins shrimp, boils frogs, slimes fish. How did she lose Louisiana to Barak? She can make jambalaya and it didn't get her elected? Just what kind of a Cajun cook IS Barak, anyway?

Posted by: ceflynline | March 7, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

LOL! What a Poser! :-o

Boil Frogs?

Does she like the Insides, or maybe sucking the Heads"

Must be an Arkansas/New York thingy-Frog Boil! :-/ Yeach!

LOL! I can just picture the Corn and Potatoes in the Mix!

Uh, Chelsea's Mom, Next time try choping off the Legs, and Frying Them! ;~)

Bet she is ready to Ad Lib Commander In Chief too! :-(

Posted by: rat-the | March 7, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company