About Channel '08  |  Blog Partner: PrezVid.com  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed  (What's RSS?)

Clinton Made Comments Similar to Charlie Black's

John McCain's top adviser Charlie Black is not the first or the only political veteran to suggest that another major terrorist attack would be a political benefit to the Republican Party. Last summer it was Hillary Clinton who made a similar remark during a town hall meeting in Concord, N.H.

Note: Please upgrade your Flash plug-in to view our enhanced content.

When asked how she planned to win the White House, Clinton answered:

"There are circumstances beyond our control, and I think I am better able to handle things that I have no control over.

"It's a horrible prospect to ask yourself, 'What if? What if?' But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world."

At the time, Clinton faced criticism from her Democratic opponents and left-wing blogs.

"Frankly, I find it tasteless to discuss political implications when talking about a potential terrorist attack on the United States," Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) said at the time.

-- Ed O'Keefe

By Ed O'Keefe |  June 24, 2008; 3:13 PM ET Hillary Rodham Clinton , John McCain
Previous: McCain Ad Attacks Obama's Funding Decision | Next: Gordon Smith Suggests Obama Supports Him

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



another instance of st john's mcbase running to the rescue to defend and explain away the latest insult by his high-level campaign staff.

and it's accomplished thru the all-purpose excuse: clintonclintonclintonclintonclintonclinton

Posted by: linda | June 24, 2008 3:34 PM

only the crybabies looking to gain an advantage would made any kind of deal about what was said by Black or hillary. People better grow up and stop showing their ignorance...

Posted by: Dwight | June 24, 2008 3:36 PM

Right. We REJECTED Clinton, too.

Good reorting.

What's your point? That disingenuous dinasaur political operators are scum?

Oh yeah you're right. Ok.

...Did you have some other non-news, editorialist point to make as usual? No?

GOOD.

Posted by: JBE | June 24, 2008 3:41 PM

The WPost loves to beat on the same dead horse over and over again. We get it, you hate the Clintons.

There was nothing wrong with her comments. It's nothing more than a true statement. Due to the magnitude of the 9/11 attacks, the Republicans are the only ones that can claim experience in dealing with terrorism.

It's also true that no matter how badly Republicans screwed up their reaction in the aftermath of 9/11, people will still see them as the ones that could... for better or for worse. I still remember how even Democrats were saying how fortunate we were that Gore wasn't the Commander in Chief.

So Clinton was right, and so was Black. The only difference is that Clinton was horrified at the idea, and Black seemed to welcome it.

Posted by: EGGArgost | June 24, 2008 4:01 PM

Are we afraid to say anything in this country of supposed free speech? Should we shy away from being realistic because our words are offending someone. Not smears or slams which hurt everyone by their senselessness, but real issues that may confront us. Is everyone (Obama supporters) so arrogant that they think any comment is aimed at them? It is not wrong to look ahead at possibilities and comment on them. This election has not been about the President of the United States but about race, religion, sexism, and the kitchen sink but not about who will be the most qualified to run this country. If it were, then the race would be between Hillary Clinton and one of the Republicans who did not survive the primary.

Posted by: lee,sarasota | June 24, 2008 4:14 PM

At the same token when democrats say that if the unemployment figures shoots up, stock market further down, oil prices up, housing market collapse, and inflamation way up, that is the ripe time for democrats to win the white house. If WP and its so called experts buy such comments, then why blame Clinton? Its this left wing media who brought her candidacy down. Shame on you!

Posted by: P. Raje | June 24, 2008 4:20 PM

I don't know why the Obama folks are politicizing this. Fact is, the guy is weak on terror. Everybody knows that.

If we get attacked between now and the election, people will be reminded of that and will be less likely to vote for him.

So why do they want to draw attention to the fact? I'm not sure. The only thing I can think of is he wants to make discussion of national security issues off-limits, which would help him a lot.

Posted by: ZZim | June 24, 2008 4:34 PM

That's right. The story isn't McCain saying he needs UBL to strike America to make him king of amurika like it did Georgie, it's Billary's fault.

There always seems to be a Clinton to blame.

Posted by: It's Clinton's fault | June 24, 2008 4:36 PM

Black must resign NOW. What he was doing is calling for some nut to hear him on TV and commit a terrorist act to help the repukes. Calling all Tim McVays the republicans need you!

Posted by: gilesjp | June 24, 2008 4:40 PM

So why the uproar? The guy said something that is true--if there is another terrorist attack, many people in this country will go toward the GOP out of fear and ignorance. Forget the fact that under the GOP, OBL is still chillin' in some cave on the Afghan-Pakistani border. Forget that under the GOP, AQ has more converts with fighting experience because of that immoral and illegal war in Iraq. Forget that under the GOP, Iran and North Korea feel free to thumb their noses at the US while continuing to build nuclear weapons.

So what if he told a simple truth? One of these days the people of the United States will want the truth instead of simple sound bites. Punishing people who tell the truth is part of the reasonwe are in the economic and international messes that we are in.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2008 4:41 PM

"Fact is, the guy is weak on terror. Everybody knows that. "

OH? Well, you claim to know that, anyway....

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2008 4:44 PM

Apparently, McCain himself thinks Republicans stand to "benefit" from terrorists and terrorism:

"I think it's very helpful to President Bush," said McCain, R-Ariz., while stumping in Stamford for U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays. "It focuses America's attention on the war on terrorism. I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, but I think it does have an effect."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0608/National_security_events_helping_Republicans.html#comments

No wonder the Republicans didn't care about taking our eye off of Bin Laden. They want to keep using him to scare up votes.

Posted by: No more fear | June 24, 2008 5:45 PM

Another strike from the McCain Stream Media....

Seriously, what is the point of this story? Clinton isn't a candidate anymore. The only point I can think of is to prop up the media favorite in the public eye.

It's really getting embarassing. Does the McCain Media know any shame? Or are they all just eager to deliver donuts on the bus?

Posted by: Alex | June 24, 2008 5:49 PM

Only using 25%er logic can you equate two major terrorist attacks on the GOP's watch as somehow making the Dems the ones who are soft on terror.

I for one never understood how it is that the GOP is the one who is strong on terror. They were asleep at the wheel on 9/11 and have only gotten sleepier.

Osama bin Forgotten comes to mind as example #1....

Posted by: dan | June 24, 2008 5:51 PM

Hillary Clinton made a common sense observation. But it seems to be the political wisdom of 2008 to twist and distort an opponent's words in a disagreement rather than respond with logic and intelligence.

I find this approach most often taken by the Obama team and its supporters.

Posted by: ichief | June 24, 2008 5:56 PM

McCain and Clinton share a common trait, thinking within the box. No judgement.

Only Obama talks about attacking the Afghan border region of Pakistan. He has been called naive in suggesting this by Little John. Osama bin Laden sure appreciates McCain's sophistication.

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 24, 2008 6:30 PM

Reality is what it is despite all wishes to the contrary. Anyone who thinks reality will not influence the election is not making decisions about the presidency based on the proper assessment thereof. We are not engaged in American Idol choices here. We are electing a president, Obamacans.

Posted by: bjbprice | June 24, 2008 6:48 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2008 6:52 PM

Of course she did. She ran like a Republican.

Posted by: Max | June 24, 2008 7:05 PM

Clinton made a lot of comments during the primary that the McCain campaign will use in the general..her goal was to win at any cost and she did not care if she hurt the Democrats chance of winning in Nov; if she did not get the nomination. But, hopefully the American voters will see through those tactics and vote on the issues and with a brighter future for America uppermost in mind.

Posted by: lg. | June 24, 2008 7:06 PM

Zzim wrote: I don't know why the Obama folks are politicizing this.

Obama himself said we shouldn't be talking about this from a political standpoint. The fact is, that's what happens in America. Remember Swiftboat?

Posted by: amaikovich | June 24, 2008 7:11 PM

Is it a similar statement, if I say "my brother will greatly benefit when my father will die". same statement made by my brother "I will greatly benefit if my father die". One is expression of fear and the other is an expression of a wish

Posted by: Syed Hassan | June 24, 2008 7:13 PM

I believe, the manner by which Hussein Obama tackles a problem is, let things happen first, then find a solution. He doesn't believe in long-range planning. He & his cohorts are on the same brain wave- lengths. Any ideas not postulated by them are not acceptable. But, what do we expect? He and his followers have not traversed in unchartered seas. What a pity. . .

Posted by: the fighter | June 24, 2008 7:36 PM

What a pathetic paper....what a pathetic report and what a hypocritical reaction. Please, had there not been a 9-11 Bush would not have lasted through a second term. He wouldn't have had a chance in hell to re elect himself.
Now stop this nonsense and be responsible journalists. If there is something out there that you must report and don't have the courage to do so, then shut up!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2008 7:37 PM

Hillary Hillary Hillary. You discredited yourself when you endorsed Obama. Do you endorse racism and hatred for our country like he does? BAD MOVE - we will never forget you betrayed America by endorsing this dangerous man.

Posted by: OBAMAJAMESCONE | June 24, 2008 7:46 PM

Clinton also said anything could happen between June and September and Tim Russert was horrified that she should state the obvious.Well it did.

Posted by: Andrew O'Donnell | June 24, 2008 7:51 PM

Are all you people smoking crack? If we are attacked before the election, it's on the head of Bush and his lackey John McSame. Why should McCain benefit if we are attacked again under Bush? Remember, Bush was the President who ignored "Bin Laden determined to strike in US". John McLame has supported Bush and his war of lies in Iraq for six years, while letting Osama hide out in Pakistan.

And Clinton said the same thing? So what. She said she and McCain were the only ones who had passed the Commander in Chief test. That's right, the only ones in the race stupid enough to give Smirky McChimp authority to send American kids to die in Iraq so Exxon could get a no-bid contract for Iraq's oil. Heckuva job, Hill & John.

Posted by: truth | June 24, 2008 9:03 PM

Hillary really is engaged in a bungling attempt at her own rehabilitation after running a race-baiting, carpetbagger campaign that appealed to the worst in white Americans. Hillary knew white American's history of slavery, lynching, Jim Crow laws, violence againsr black churches, segregation, Klan violence and genocide against Native Americans, and she tried to rub the scab off of a very raw sore, just to pander for a few white votes.

Did anyone see her pathetic pandering to African Americans in a southern church with her "I ain't noways tired" routine?

Hillary and the fat headed political hack Bill Clinton owe every election victory that either has had to heavy support from African Americans. They threw African Americans under the bus and all three Clintons should pay with their political careers.

The Clintons have shown their racist side, and they need to be put out to pasture. The less heard from any of them the better.

Posted by: DCSage | June 24, 2008 9:38 PM

"So Clinton was right, and so was Black. The only difference is that Clinton was horrified at the idea, and Black seemed to welcome it. Posted by: EGGArgost "

Exactly!!

Posted by: Krishna | June 24, 2008 9:54 PM

That's the kind of thing that probably many people have discussed and worried about privately, but it's not polite or patriotic talk in public. And that's b/c McCain really does have the national security advantage and Obama truly has no experience - and a trip to Iraq or Afghanistan won't equip him.

Posted by: Lesley | June 24, 2008 9:55 PM

Yes and we pounded the snot out of her for it too.

We should not invite terrorists to change our politics, like they did in Spain.

Posted by: bruce Becker | June 24, 2008 10:58 PM

Lesley
We dont need to visit scenic Iraq to know that it was a sham from day one. Experience doesnt matter when the point of the war, according to McClellan, was for Bush to be able to say that he had been president during a war. The US Senate has published a document that states clearly that Bush lied to the public and to the Senate and made up false pretenses to get us into the war.

No amount of experience has anything to do with that pack of lies by Bush. Common sense and decency are all that is needed.
McCain has no common sense and appears to have lost his sense of decency when he approved torturing prisoners.
That is against the Geneva convention and our constitution, with good reason, as it puts our troops at risk for torture, just as Bush's unprovoked 'pre emptive strike' puts the US at eternal risk from every paranoid with a bomb, for all of time.

Where does experience come into play? The war was made up to support the political CAMPAIGN advise of Karl Rove, to win the elections that followed and it worked on people just like you.

Posted by: Bruce Becker | June 24, 2008 11:03 PM

Terror works
Want the redneck vote?
1. Scare the pants off them.
2, Wrap yourself in the flag.
3. US VS THEM!!! (see French fry jokes and anti Muslim jokes)

Read Prometheus Rising by Dr Robert Anton Wilson.
Its the right wing play-book.


Posted by: Bruce Becker | June 24, 2008 11:22 PM

To the poster who says that the Republicans are the only ones who can say they have experience fighting terrorism due to the magnitude of 9-11

Consider the following

The CIA trained bin Laudin. 10 years. trained, paid and supported.
9-11 happened while Bush was reading a book to school children, conveniently in Atlanta, 680 miles away from the planned target zone of Flight 93. If you think that was a coincidence watch the video of Bush reading to the kids, and notice when he is informed that the first of the twin towers was hit and he sits back down and reads the book to the kids some more.
No attempt to defend the Pentagon, the White House. Just sit back down and read a book to the kids. Ever wonder why? If you were COMMANDER IN CHIEF would you not have leaped up and spoken to the Air Defense Command and stayed on thephone until there was a resolution? You think?
It all went according to plan.
Why do you think we went on the wild goose chase in Iraq when Bin Laudin is 500 miles from there? Because Bush NEEDS Bin Laudin out there, making videos to scare you.


Posted by: Bruce Becker | June 24, 2008 11:27 PM

A terror attack before the election somewhere against Americans is very likely.

Why wouldn't Obama use it as evidence Bush didn't make us any safer? That OBL is still out there calling in the attacks?

Seem strange the politics of this event would "benefit" the GOP. It would be a demonstration of failure.

By the way, if elected, Obama will wake up every morning in dread of the attack that will certainly come to challange him, exactly because he will fear the charge of having failed on his watch.

Posted by: Bill Baar | June 25, 2008 6:17 AM

EGG was exactly right:

"The WPost loves to beat on the same dead horse over and over again. We get it, you hate the Clintons." exactly right and so do Obama supporters.

Apparently Andrew, an avid Obama supporter, finds this cute and another excuse to trash Hillary.
Good Luck with that in Nov.

Posted by: Leichtman | June 25, 2008 12:38 PM

As a life long democrat, I would find it repulsive if the republicans made any attempt to reduce their viligance to prevent an attack. I don't believe they would. I think the comment was related who would be better able to handle the situation if there were an attack, not a desire for one. On that basis, I agree that McCain would be more trustworthy and taht it would help his campaign. It is time to face the reality.

Posted by: Bill O'Callaghan | June 25, 2008 12:53 PM

Bill that is a pathetic explanation to a repulsive comment that even McCain agrees was dispicable. There are many truisms in politics and while the statement may be politically correct it was beyond the pale and no right thinking political operative would dare utter such sentiments, other than a complete idiot, which Black obviously is. Personally he should be fired by McCain, for harming his candidate's campaign.

Posted by: Leichtman | June 25, 2008 1:15 PM

We here in Edmonton have done more than any other million man town agin them thar lawless. Perhaps its our background( British Commonwealth) or maybe because weve faced greater foes in the past but people here are committed,to going forward and dragging the rest ot the world with us,you shouldbe too.

Posted by: E.Hess | June 25, 2008 2:43 PM

how Obama can fight with terrorists???
Hillary was right on money, and so Mr.Black. We lost Mr.Kennedy and no one was thinking about, then!!!
Obama must live Christians OUR Bible and our beliefs alone!!!
Stop taking attention from real problems, and start talking about issues. All He does is critisizing McCain, that is all. I fergot, He is changing His mine on many promises, and this is only start!!! Primaries are over, WE have a new BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA. Any one hear anything about Obamas birth certificate???...

Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 4:07 PM

DA Sage... You live Hillary alone, stick with Idol and beg off!!! for once and for all.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 4:13 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company