Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Clinton Campaign's 'Monster' Fundraising

Even though the candidate herself is offended by the comment, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-N.Y.) presidential campaign is having a field day with the "monster" gaffe by rival Barack Obama's campaign.

Mere moments after foreign policy advisor Samantha Power resigned for calling Clinton a "monster," Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe sent out an e-mail far and wide alerting anyone with money to make a contribution now -- "even as little as $5" -- to "stop the Obama attacks."

"Just one day after Senator Obama promised to begin attacking Hillary, a senior Obama advisor has called her a 'monster,'" McAuliffe wrote, adding in bold letters for emphasis: "That's right -- a 'monster.'"

"This is not the politics of hope -- it's the usual attack style politics that we have seen time and time again," he said.

So, good people, get out your credit cards, go to the Clinton campaign Web site and "show the Obama campaign that there is a price to this kind of attack politics," McAuliffe wrote.

McAuliffe added this "p.s." to the end of his email: "Calling Hillary a "monster" isn't the only attack we're seeing from the Obama campaign. We've seen deceptive radio attack ads and deceptive mailings in Texas and Ohio -- and now in Wyoming and Mississippi. Let's stop these attacks now -- make a contribution today."

Stay tuned to see whether the Obama campaign issues a fundraising pitch to stop the Clinton campaign from comparing Obama to Whitewater prosecutor Ken Starr -- who, let's face it, is considered a monster in certain Democratic circles.

By Mary Ann Akers  |  March 7, 2008; 2:24 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Cosmic Campaign Meltdown?
Next: Did Spitzer's New York Snobbery Doom Him?


Will the REAL Hillary Rodham Clinton, Please Stand up:

A March 12, 2007 article written by acclaimed Washington columnist Robert Novak sheds a very revealing light on the true sentiment of Hillary Clinton during the peak of the Civil Rights Movement. Clinton recently was found to have minimized the great and monumental strides taken by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by stating that it was Lyndon B. Johnson, then president, who should receive the credit for the civil rights progress including the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The fact is, in 1963, not only was Hillary Clinton a republican, but she was also a staunch supporter of  republican Senator Barry Goldwater, well known as a segregationist and one of the most vocal senato rs adamantly against the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is why he lost in his presidential bid to Lyndon B. Johnson. Novak writes ' then could she be a 'Goldwater Girl' in the next year's presidential election?' He continues, '...she described herself in her memoirs as 'an active Young Republican' and 'a Goldwater girl, right down to my cowgirl outfit.'

She has worked extremely hard to hide many truths about her past, including ordering that her 92 page college thesis that she wrote at Wellesley College be 'sealed' and unavailable to the public, an order forced upon the college by Bill Clinton while president, although all senior thesis' at Wellesley have been available for public reading for over 100 years, except one....Hillary Rodham Clinton's.

Posted by: nerakami | March 7, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Its not a money issue, its an illness issue; the cancer of lobbyst's money who drive the Clintons and their pundits in the news agencies and in the establishment of the DNC. The Clinton II tax returns would illustrate this.

If the establishment of the DNC elect Clinton II, a political monster, a scenario would be for McCain to have Obama's supporters votes this fall. After all, Clinton II and her pundits spent a lot of their time endorsing McCain recently, so it's just natural for Obama to also endorse McCain if Obama is not the nominee.

However, if the establishment of the DNC elects Clinton II as their nominee, it will be because the establishment will have accepted a nominee running on lies, on mistatements and on fear. In this case, a second scenario would be for Obama and his supporters to start a new independent party, better financed than the DNC and the Clinton II campaign, and to try to unite red states and blue states instead of dividing them.

Posted by: Benoit | March 7, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

It would be nice to hear a few words about Obamas' accomplishments,it might make interesting reading,the Hillary bashing just gets very boring.....

Posted by: justcolours | March 7, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

I never cease to be amazed at the zeal the Obama fans have in writing their tales of Senator Clinton. For clarification, Senator Clinton did not say President Johnson gets all the credit for the Civil Rights Act. She said that it was Dr. King's wisdom and awareness to work with President Johnson to get the Bill passed. She further stated that Dr. King did all of the hard work to get the movement to that pinnacle moment. Unfortunately, in everyone's zeal to support Senator Obama, they have universally across any of the political blogs available, come up with tales of Hillary that border on the lore of the UFO's and other mythical tales. With something as important as a Presidential election, people need to calm down, regain some common sense and have rational thoughts on who to support.

Posted by: mjo | March 7, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's efforts to raise 4 million within a few days online is pretty good. Yet Obama consistently pulls in more;

Hillary vs Barack-
Nationwide Analysis on the Democratic Candidates Internet Efforts:

Posted by: davidmwe | March 7, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama did a lousy job for the people he represented in Chicago. During the debates, Obama LIED about his relationship with Slumlord Rezko, and it was a whopper. Why should anyone believe anything he says, or elect him to any office?

The American people are getting tired of Obama-mania. They are starting to find out what kind of person Obama really is, and that he is not the kind of person they want as their President

Anyone who still supports Obama should look at video from a chicago TV station covering the story.

Posted by: svreader | March 7, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Here's a clickable link to the Chicago TV station's report on the lousy job Obama did for the people of Chicago when he was a state senator and his ties to Slumlord Rezko

Posted by: svreader | March 7, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama's theme song:

I waffle with the winds
I hate NAFTA in Ohio
I love NAFTA in Canada

I don't know Rezko
But we bought house and land
On the same day next to each other
I bought 10 ft of Rezko's land
Now Rezko can not build his house on the land
My kids can only play in Rezko's land
But they hate Rezko too

I am white in Iowa
Black in South Carolina
Regan lover in Nevada
Clinton hater in Texas
Hispanic lover in California
Asian hater everywhere else
I fight the senator from Punjab

I am everything for everyone
But in the end I am all about me

Posted by: SeedofChange | March 7, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

She IS a monster. And a big F*****g baby.

Posted by: Truth Guy | March 7, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

So why was this Obama aide not fired instead? OH YEAH! that's right, Obama doesn't fire anyone who fouls on his team, just like Bush!! Hillary has held every last one of her aides accountable for this kind of thing, Obama has shown every time on the other hand what he would do as President, protect his cronies and never fire them and hold them accountable!! just like Bush!! Voting for Barrack Obama is a HUGE mistake! Hillary Clinton has the integrity to lead honestly and fairly as this one of many examples like it once again proves.

Posted by: Hillary08 | March 7, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

svreader, thanks for YouTube link. It's very disappointing. I thought Sen. Obama was different, if only because he hasn't had enough time to be "like all the rest." Looks like he learned fast.

Posted by: Mandelay | March 7, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey Nerakami:

You can see her thesis at

Posted by: mona | March 7, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary has so much experience (since an embryo), shouldn't she be experienced in our corporate media bias? To cry and wine about how unfair she is being treated is completely disgusting to watch. Why does she always talk out of both sides of her mouth? What a fake! I am so tired of the lies and deception in washington. Its time for Change.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 7, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Don't know why the media is making such a big deal about Hitlery Clinton being called a "monster"!? SHE IS A MONSTIER & she plays dirty politics -- both Clintons play dirty politics when they don't get their way!!!!

Posted by: DeeLynn53 | March 7, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

"So why was this Obama aide not fired instead? OH YEAH! that's right, Obama doesn't fire anyone who fouls on his team, just like Bush!! Hillary has held every last one of her aides accountable for this kind of thing, Obama has shown every time on the other hand what he would do as President, protect his cronies and never fire them and hold them accountable!! just like Bush!! Voting for Barrack Obama is a HUGE mistake! Hillary Clinton has the integrity to lead honestly and fairly as this one of many examples like it once again proves."

I'm assuming you're either kidding or haven't been following the news.

The Obama aide who said this WAS fired.

Hillary's aide who called Obama Ken Starr WAS NOT fired.

It can't get any clearer than that.

Posted by: Fed Up | March 7, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

I am tired of nasty attacks on Sen. Clinton by Obama supporters. Primary/caucus victories by Sen. Obama in Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Idaho, Alaska, Utah, etc. can not be repeated in a general election. In several recent general elections, going back more than twenty years, these states have been reliably republican. So Obama fans should stop exaggerating Obama's general election potential in these states. It would be good for the domocrats if both camps would call a truce this week and start figuring out a way to get both of them on the same ticket.
Go Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton!

Posted by: Business Scholar | March 7, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

It looks like both sides of the hate machine are quick to mobilize their forces when a new blog entry is made on the Washington Post about Hillary or Obama.

You guys aren't winning the election for anybody.

Posted by: pacer | March 7, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

If Hilary has held every one of her aides accountable, tell me where did the aide who released the turban photo of Obama go? Better check your facts, Hilary 08.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 7, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

A personal message to Obama and Clinton, from John McCain:

THANK YOU!!! The White House is mine!

Posted by: Skippy | March 7, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

As for Hillary's experience, I say, to be a "Lady-in-waiting" is no qualification for being the queen. Besides, what mother needs a daily reminder of that sordid affair, the stain that is permanent on our national pride. We must put that grotesque and obscene event behind us. The women who want a female as president for its own sake have lost their rudder and priorities. It is a common sense to elect Obama for his promise and potential.

Posted by: Julian | March 7, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

master-manipulater drama queen unrealistic plays victim refers to husband infidelity ..if a male canidate did that he would be gone in a hot second.
hides records including her college thesis ..won't release her tax returns from 2006 and before never mind 2007...destroyed vince fosters records ...need more? her brother was paid $400,000 to lobby bill clinton for the pardon of a COCAINE SMUGGLER..
bill's pardon of FALN TERRORISTS in peurto rico!!
NO WHITE HOUSE YEARS RECORD RELEASE OF HER "experiance" as co-president??
her legislative record as senator ??? she mainly has named a few post offices talk about playing it safe!!
waco waco waco...don't tell me she didnt have more than a few conversations with bill and janet reno over how to handle that fiasco in the end they burned children alive with bradley fighting vehicles..
all to show how tough they are great...
OSAMA BIN LADEN runs free because her and bill took the eye off the ball and didn't address actionable intelligence. need more??
bill and hillary DEREGULATED THE BANKS in the 90's because ross perot split the 92 vote and they needed big doners to get re-elected those are all her easty trust fund friends from wellesley college whos familys own the banks in new york city ..where she has her donor base....
$$$$ 130,000,000 million dollars paid as a brokers fee from a canadian mining corp for a URANIUM contract in KAZHSTAN to her husband bill clinton who happened to be in CANADA the day before that mystery NAFTA memo surfaced.
whose wife just happened to in a crucial swing state battle with nafta as a big issue wonder she won't release her tax returns.

Posted by: alan | March 7, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

A vote for Clinton is a vote for More of the Same Lies, Policies, War without end, Corporate greed, NAFTA, and Bill Clinton! - With that, she is a Big Scary Monster.

Posted by: Tanya Shlanya | March 7, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead. But I wouldn't call it a monster.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 7, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Yes, she is scary monster, and a baby, and a liar - agreed.

Posted by: Mike | March 7, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

I have heard that she is a Bit*h too!

Posted by: James McFadman | March 7, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

How can anyone still support Obama, now that we know what a lousy job he did for the people he represented in Chicago?

According to his own local Chicago Newspapers and TV stations, he was a lousy State Senator.

If he couldn't even handle being a State Senator, why would anyone in their right mind trust him with the Presidency???

Posted by: svreader | March 7, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Why do all of you folks on both sides of this mess get so worked up about statements made by either side. ALL politicians and or their staffs, and I mean ALL, inevitably make stupid statements based on nothing more than personal opinion in an effort to get their personal choice an edge. In the end it always ends up blowing up in their faces.

I would suggest that they implement what my father taught me 70 years ago: "Engage your brain before running your mouth."

It is well and good to be a staunch supporter of your personal choice but for goodness sake don't resort to stupidity.

Posted by: dharper | March 7, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Who are americans kidding with the all the hoopla of the elections and democrocy. Its Israel stupid that selects the american president. Obama has no chance of wining, my recommendations for him is to fold the tent and go back to Nigeria. American elections have also been decided by the one who proclaims the love of Israel. Hilary will be the president of the united states of israel.

Posted by: Nugster | March 7, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

The monster comment is extremely troubling. The Obama people are beginning to portray Hillary as subhuman, like so many personality cults have done to their enemies in the past. This is scary, because once you dehumanize your opponent anything, including extreme violence, is acceptible. The extreme case is the Nazis and their dehumanization of the jews.

Posted by: Cyberprof2007 | March 7, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

One thing is for sure. Americans have short memories bordering on amnesia. This has become a fight which advantages Hillary because she will throw sand in your eyes and then kick you where it hurts. While I am a Republican and don't like McCain. I am afraid he will win this election because the Democratic party will implode. Why do you think that she is peddling the Clinton-Obama ticket. She is trying to con for votes. If in fact Obama wins ( I don't think that enough people owe him favors )and Washington is all about favors.If it's true that she and Bill had a co-presidency
( I would hold Presidential historians to hold him to that whether she wins or not.
Why would she accept a demotion to vice president ?

Posted by: Rene | March 7, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: C L | March 7, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Clinton campaign is not a monster, but a diguesting immoral pompous negative ugly monster.

They compared Obama to Ken Star and Karl Rove. Tell me that's not negative, Clinton campaign.

They attacked him on the NAFTA accusation. And now new sources have shown that it was the CLINTON campaign that gave Canda the wink-wink.

Where is the media to cover the new NAFTA foundings? Where is the media to correct themselves that Clinton did no twin Texas but OBAMA did?

Posted by: Amber | March 7, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Obama supports funneling our limited public school money to his private religious school friends. Since there is barely enough public school money as it is, I think this is bad policy whether done by Bush or by Obama. Keep public school money where it belongs.

Posted by: hhkeller | March 7, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is a Political Monster--Big Time--and a regular old angry one two. She says and does "whatever" as the Aide of Obama said to the world--She can spin it anyhow she likes--the name/title and even some of her facial expresions look like a monstrocity when she is going after Obama, which she know simply, the NUMBERS DON'T ADD UP--BUT KNOWING THE OLD CLINTON SPIN--THE TWO MONSTERS WILL PUT THEIR HEADS TOGETHER TO FORM A HUGE TWO-HEADED MONSTER, and try to CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME. SO SORRY, AFTER THAT DEMS ARE SPLIT, MC CAIN WINS--BUT ONLY A MONSTER WOULD RATHER HAVE MCCAIN IN OFFICE THAN HER OWN PARTY MATE--WHAT A WITCH OF A MONSTER SHE REALLY IS!!!

Posted by: Faye | March 7, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Monster? Pfft... FDR was called the Anti-Christ. But perhaps not by the aides of his political opponents, in interviews.

Posted by: hitpoints | March 7, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton dynasty is running a monstrous campaign--a truth-eating, young Dems-consuming, party-destroying, personal-destruction machine on the rampage. The party can expect McCain for 2008!

Posted by: lin | March 7, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

This video clip a report about Obama from Chicago's most respected TV news station.

I'm sorry to burst Obama's supporters bubble, but Obama's much worse than any of us thought. He wasn't even any good at being a state senator.

How can anyone still support Obama, now that we know what a lousy job he did for the people he represented in Chicago?

According to his own local Chicago Newspapers and TV stations, he was a lousy State Senator.

If he couldn't even handle being a State Senator, why would anyone in their right mind trust him with the Presidency???

It really is "game over" for Obama.

Sorry. Even I didn't expect him to be this incompetent and corrupt.

Posted by: svreader | March 7, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

To Fed Up... Wake up and SMELL reality! The Clintons are the BIGGEST crooks & liars in the history of this country! OBAMA HAS INTEGRITY! The Clintons don't have a clue what the word integrity means! They trashed the Whitehouse when they moved out! They have NO RESPECT for America or it's fine people! They've abused their power to the hilt for 35 years! The political history of the Clintons is filled with lies & deception. Go to YouTube and Google "Bill and Hillary Clinton Exposed" and you'll think you're reading about the worst mafia figures in our history!

Posted by: DeeLynn53 | March 7, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

I can say why poll could not predict her success. I guess the obamaniacs are wasting too much time on the internet instead of working hard for living.

Posted by: Skylark | March 7, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Obama has tried to run a positive campaign, Hillary has run a filthy one. Hillary, please explain: Why haven't you explained the reason YOUR STAFFER told the Canadians to ignore YOUR RHETORIC about NAFTA? Where are you tax returns? Why are you protecting staff members who have perpetrated dirty tricks against Obama? We have a candidate in Obama who gives us hope, who makes us want to work together; and Hillary just dragging everybody down into her swamp.

Posted by: rose | March 7, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Why does it seem that every other day some hack is putting his finger down donors' throats, hoping to evoke another contribution? This faux-offended response to an obvious slip-up, with the hat held out, is the ultimate insult to the intelligence of contributors. Stay with the substance.

Posted by: More nonsense | March 7, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

An aside to a previous post.

For all those who wish to have a woman as president you should do a thorough research of the Billary's in Arkansas. Their "reign" there was on the same plane as Huey Long and Edwin Edwards of Louisana.

There is a reason that BC has sealed all his and Hillary's history.

Somewhere in this vast United States there are competent and insightful women of integrity to fulfill this void in our history. We don't need anyone as deceptive and power hungary as Billary (and whether they admit it or not it would be a co-presidency because Bill CANNOT and would not remain in the background for very long.)She might even divorce him over the power struggle and that would really be a first for a Whitehouse occupant.

Posted by: racing56 | March 7, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Insulting the former first lady is not a very loyal thing to do. I know that in a democracy we have the right, or even obligation to question our government. However, baseless comments that are not constructive reveal more about this "Harvard professor" than they do about Hillary. I dont think people who criticize the government should get out of this country - but people who do not show their loyalty to America by demeaning a strong American woman make me sick. The fact that this person happens to be a woman makes me think she hates herself and her gender. Nice hiring practices Obama!

Posted by: hillary for president | March 7, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

"..Baseless comments that are not constructive reveal more about this "Harvard professor" than they do about Hillary. .."

".. The fact that this person happens to be a woman makes me think she hates herself and her gender. Nice hiring practices Obama!"

I think your baseless comments reveal more about yourself than they do about Obama.

Posted by: pacer | March 7, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Obama supporters are going to have to find a new cause to believe in.

Its over.

Watch the clip. Its from Chicago's most respected TV news station.

Obama couldn't even handle being a "State Senator"

He did a lousy job for the people who elected him.

His own hometown Newspapers and TV stations say so and give graphic evidence of his incompetence and what the results were for the people who made the mistake of trusting him.

Nobody is going to vote for Obama anymore.

Its over.

Posted by: svreader | March 7, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama:

Dear Madam, and Sir,

A Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama ticket is what we want. And that is what we need to take back the Whitehouse. We want a smart, tough, idealistic, seasoned veteran of many battles fighting for the American people (Hillary Clinton). With a young, passionate, smart, open-minded, hard-working idealist fighting for the American people (Barrack Obama). The DREAM TEAM!

You are both fabulous candidates. And we, the American people are very fortunate to have each of you. Taking back the Whitehouse is critical for the American people, and the world at this time. And I think the American people have been saying loudly, and clearly that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket is the best way to do this.

I think the American people have made it very clear that they feel Hillary Clinton is the one best able to lead the ticket against John McCain at this critical, and desperate time in America, and around the world. These dramatic comebacks are testament to Hillary Clinton's skill, and experience as a fighter for the American people. They are also a testament to the strong desire of the American people to have both of you fighting for the American people at this time of midnight in America.

Typical of the Clinton's is an uncanny ability to see and understand what the American people want. And then to try and get it for them. Even if they have to go through three political near death experiences to try and get it for the American people. This is classic Clinton's. They are the best I have ever seen.

We are desperate out here. Millions of us are suffering greatly. And tens of thousands of us are dying needlessly every year. Men, women, children, and babies. We need help! As Hillary Clinton said "It's not a game". We need the two of you together on our side fighting for us, and for the American dream for all. Not fighting against each other anymore.

It's time for you Senator Obama to join forces with Hillary Clinton as her running mate so that we can all focus our energies, and resources on taking back America for the American people.



Posted by: jacksmith | March 7, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I am getting just about sick and tired of this female manipulative campaign that Hilary is running here. I am a female and know how maniplative women can be. Obama can't stay true to his ideas for running his campaign in focusing on what he is looking to do for this country because he has to keep coming up against the manipulation of this female. I don't care who does not like what I am saying. Freedom of speech is still for everyone, not just a select few. She says whatever she wants about Obama, including throwing all but the "kitchen sink" at him, but he and his people are SUPPOSE TO BE CAREFUL about every word they say about her, or lose their jobs. That is some soft, female, "stop talking about me, or I'll get you" mess! Do the people of this country want that soft, ready to cry at a pin drop, personality running this country? With the terrorist of this world and their lack of true respect for women, I would think not! She should get the revelation, while smiling so broadly about her latest wins, that many of the people she thinks are voting for her are not actually voting for her. But, instead, they are voting against Obama. As if minorities just enjoy seeing "white" people always making the political decisions for them all there lives. She keeps talking about experience. Experience in what? The SAME KIND OF POLITICS that has almost ran this country in the ground. Do we need or want more of that same "smear campaign" mess that she is accustom to. This is why Obama can't run the way he wants to, because of her smear campaign, "highlight his blackness, because of her own underlying prejudice" "experience". If I were that aide, I would not have resigned. She had every right to exert her "freedom of speech" just as Hilary is doing in this campaign. What's good for the goose ought to get good for the gander. If Hilary can sling the kind of mud I have see her sling at Obama, then she ought to be able to take it. I am absolutely unimpressed with her, and DO NOT WANT TO WITNESS HER RUNNING THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. While it would be great to see a female as president one day, I really do not think this is the right one for the job at this time. She has some "power and control" issues she needs to deal with politically as well as with her own personal life. The mediators of the debates had to all but force her to stick with the questions they asked instead of her trying to take the conversations where she wanted them to go. People talk about Bush wanting to have his way in this seat, you let a manipulative female like Hilary get in that seat and watch what happens. As Joe Clark of Eastside High School said, "and that all I've got to say"!

Posted by: Alice Marie | March 7, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

I guess it depends what "monster" is. I'd consider the wingnut politics of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, etc. to be more heinous than anything Clinton has done. In other words, it's all relative.

Unless Obama wants to go the way of Kerry after being swiftboated, he'll have to start answering: Where's the beef?

McAuliffe seems like a nice guy, but Dean is the one who revived the Dem party. That's in terms of strategy, fundraising, and the DNC website.

Comparing Obama to Kenn Starr is laughable, because there's no link. Ken Starr was a Republican hack and a little bit of a nuisance to Dems--nothing, nothing more.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | March 7, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Everytime I read any quote attributed to Clinton, or to members of her ridiculous and poorly managaged campaign, I send another check to the Obama campaign. After seeing how much more money Obama raised last month than the Clintons did, I believe that I am not the only one who is doing so. Harold Ickes has probably raised more money for Barack Obama than anyone in the Obama campaign has.

I had better begin saving for when she begins to contest the DNC rules.

Posted by: Arlington, VA | March 7, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

response to: (Alice Marie | March 7, 2008 04:16 PM)

You make some valid points. I'm certainly no male chauvanist, but the excpression "hell hath no fury as a woman scorned" comes to mind. Also, the fact that conventional wisdom says that Obama can't appear too irate--for fear of looking like an angry black man--says more about some lingering racist sentiments in America, than Obama himself.

Dems are the party of ideas. This horse race is probably the best thing for the party. You'd expect Repubs to have a coronation and then start raising money from their millionaire and billionaire frat buddies. The plus of the Dem race being extended is that the candidates can now have the spotlight and talk about the issues. Expact McCain to keeps shoveling more SSDD rhetoric about Dems being weak on defense--proving that he's essentially Bush Jr, part 3. Hopefully Clinton and Obama will stay above that and show some cogent plans for fixing the mess that George W. Bush--bankrupter of every company he's been CEO of---has made. There's nothing wrong with Hillary wanting to win the nomination. But is she willing to go the way of Repubs, and put winning above everything else? The argument that Hillary probably can't win the nomination at this juncture, without essentially splintering the party -- is a valid one.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | March 7, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The difference between Huey Long/Edwin Edwards and the Clinton's is this: Huey got shot in the Capitol in Baton Rouge - Edwards went to prison in Texas.

The Clinton's lied their way out of the whole mess with the aid of the DNC and their monied friends. If I had Bill Clinton's history I would simply slide into the background and live on my pensions- both federal and state and be as inconspicuous as possible. Hillary is in the same league - perhaps she can explain with clarity how you can invest $1000 and turn it into $100,000 in six months - the rest of us should be so fortunate.

And to think that the people of New York allowed this "carpet bagger" to represent them in the Senate - come on New York, you are more intelligent than that. (Aren't you?)

Posted by: dharper | March 7, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The monster comment is extremely troubling. The Obama people are beginning to portray Hillary as subhuman, like so many personality cults have done to their enemies in the past. This is scary, because once you dehumanize your opponent anything, including extreme violence, is acceptible. The extreme case is the Nazis and their dehumanization of the jews.

Posted by: Cyberprof2007 | March 7, 2008 03:43 PM

Very good observation.

Obama has done this to his previously competitor as well.

Obama destroyed carrier of his previous Democrat competitor and marriage of his Republican candidate.

Obama is urgin to the violent instincts of his supporter.

Posted by: Seed of Change | March 7, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

It would seem that everyone is being played by the media and politicians.

The media swings from one side to another to keep the momemtun building to sell advertising. They selectively release stories at convenient time. Stories are buried just below the surface and time to maximize sales. The stories are fed to the media by the politians. We are all just being played.

Who asks: "How does a urban organizer, turned state senator with a wife working at a university and several children afford a $2 million home? Check out Obama's Senate Financial report.

What about Hillary and Bill's tax returns for 2006?

How much have he Clinton's make from the media in the last 5 years?

How much does Mike Hukabee charge for a speach today versus a year ago?

There are dozens more of questions that are lurking about all three candidates.

Why does'nt anyone ask?

Posted by: Enough - | March 7, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Arlington, VA | March 7, 2008 04:30 PM

If it's true that 90% of his donations were $100 or less, that's probably the most amazing thing about the numbers he keeps putting up.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | March 7, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

I saw the Clinton's ad regarding the 3am phone call to the White House and who is going to answer that call.My question is.
Did Hilary answer the phone when someone called to tell her about the monica affair?
What is @ 3am or 3pm?????? I wonder if she was in control that time??????????

Posted by: rtc | March 7, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

When will people realize that Obama is the messiah. He will make all our dreams come true. He will stop all that is bad. He doesn't want us to go down, he wants us to go up. He isn't interested in the politics of division, but the politics of adhesion. He is like a political Bandaid for our national booboos. I love Obama so much. He is handsome and talks real nice.

Posted by: Josh | March 7, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

It is interesting how an unknown first term senator got $1.9 million advance on a book and purchased an approximately $2 million house.

Posted by: Abe 23 | March 7, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

It's interesting, and sexist, and hateful, for people to make fun of Hillary because of Monica Lewinsky. As if SHE did something wrong? Not much different how in certain Muslim cultures if a woman gets raped, she will be blamed, beaten or killed.

Posted by: Josh | March 7, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse


Now lets talk about a shady real estate dealings people.

Posted by: cablorincan2000 | March 7, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

I don't know where some of you have been for the last several weeks, but it's obvious to me that Clinton is the one who has been playing dirty. Obama is so far ahead in delegates that the only way Clinton can win is to somehow upend the results of the primaries.

I am a lifelong Democrat who will vote for McCain if Hillary manages to steal the election. So much is made of the fact that Hillary "won" Texas and Ohio, when in fact she was so far ahead a month ago she actually lost ground prior to the primaries.

Posted by: Marcus Pryor | March 7, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Whitewater, houses, Keating 5, lobbyists, book advances, speakers fees, hundreds of millions of dollars of campaign contributions (your money) to promote themselves and their freinds to generate more fees, property, royalties, and advances.

Why does an election to a job (president) with a salary of $400,000 and a VP at$186,000 cost $500 million?

We are all being played by the system.

Posted by: Enough | March 7, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton (or Clinton II) and her pundits are running a typical campaign of lies, mistatements and fear. They are typical political monsters who will do anything they can for power and the money that comes with it. Their lobbying have used medias effectively to brainwash the voters with their propaganda. A ticket involving Clinton II would be everything that Obama and his supporters stand against. If the establishment of the DNC elect Clinton II as their nominee, Obama's supporters should either vote for McCain (who is not a political monster) or press Obama to launch a new independent party aiming to unite people instead of dividing them.

Posted by: Benoit | March 7, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

"It is interesting how an unknown first term senator got $1.9 million advance on a book and purchased an approximately $2 million house."

It's really pretty simple; Obama was hardly unknown. He had been the editor of the Harvard Law Review (the first African American to do so)and had been the keynote speaker at the 2004 Democratic convention.

I think it's fantastic he was able to demand a $1.9 advance. It says a lot about where we have come.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 7, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

"Monster gaffe"? There is truly a double standard when the media and Clinton supporters focus on a speck in Obama's eye when Clinton has a giant redwood in hers. But good will triumph in the end, unless we all go to hell. And if McClinton wins, that's where we'll go--that is, where the uneducated and the lower paid will go. The rest of us--solvent and educated--will merely chuckle at those who elected McClinton as they gnash their teeth in anguish. Take solace in McClinton, if you can.

Posted by: edwcorey | March 7, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

It is interesting how an unknown first term senator got $1.9 million advance on a book and purchased an approximately $2 million house."

It's really pretty simple; Obama was hardly unknown. He had been the editor of the Harvard Law Review (the first African American to do so)and had been the keynote speaker at the 2004 Democratic convention.

I think it's fantastic he was able to demand a $1.9 advance. It says a lot about where we have come.

Posted by: | March 7, 2008 05:49 PM

I accidentally left out my name in this post. I didn't intend to remain anonymous.

Posted by: Marcus Pryor | March 7, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

I guess every senator gets a $2 million advance when they are elected or if you are a Clinton you get millions more. (Of course every Harvard Law Review editor also gets $2 million.)

Maybe I am cynical, but what a great way to promote a book by running for president. Win or lose, you make a lot of money and position yourself for even more.

Better than most book tours.

Posted by: Abe 23 | March 7, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

"I guess every senator gets a $2 million advance when they are elected or if you are a Clinton you get millions more. (Of course every Harvard Law Review editor also gets $2 million.)

Maybe I am cynical, but what a great way to promote a book by running for president. Win or lose, you make a lot of money and position yourself for even more."

Not every Harvard Law review editor is African American. He was and is a proven book seller and the money was a business decision.

Posted by: Marcus Pryor | March 7, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton IS a monster.

She is an Obama-eating, happy, election-winning, brilliant female policy-detail spewing monster in a pantsuit who will kick butt while having fun on comedy shows and lighting up the screen with that big, mischievous grin of hers!

Obamatons fear her. Ha ha. Now that is funny.

This is the best election year ever. It's like "American Idol" or "The Apprentice". It's a reality show called "The Candidate".

Don't forget to send donations, however small, to Let's keep this show on the road... Every state they hit, they sign up more Democrats and reintroduce Red Staters to Democratic ideas and values!

Posted by: Annette Keller | March 7, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

"Why does an election to a job (president) with a salary of $400,000 and a VP at$186,000 cost $500 million?"

Because we are a huge country. Actually $1.50 each for all of us isn't too much to pay to get the message out to the whole country.

Posted by: Marcus Pryor | March 7, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

More power to Obama but, come-on let's be realistic.

Your new in Washington and it is going to difficult to support you and your family on a senator's income. You need some additional income so your agent gets you a great book deal with $1.9 million ADVANCE (not royalties) and another $370,000 from an earlier book.

If your going to run for president, you need a house fitting the part so you make some other deals with a friend's wife ....

Maybe I am cynical, but all three presidential candidates seem to have similar stories to acquire fame and fortune. McCain divorces his first wife to marry into a wealthy and connected family in Arizona. Clintons make millions through connections (Of course we do not know how much either McCain or Clintons make since they will not tell us).

As an observer, it is interesting to see what is discussed and what is simply accepted because everyone is doing it.

Posted by: Abe 23 | March 7, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"The usual attack style politics that we have seen time and time again" from the Republicans and from the Clinton Campaign. Spin, distort and misrepresent. Yup, that is the style of Politics that the Obama supporters are rejecting. Despicable.

Posted by: thebobbob | March 7, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

justcolours said:

"It would be nice to hear a few words about Obamas' accomplishments,it might make interesting reading,the Hillary bashing just gets very boring....."

I agree justcolours, the ad hominem nature of the anti-Hillary attacks is depressing.
It boils down to name-calling, and it reflects poorly on the writers of such posts. I too wonder what Mr. Obama has ever accomplished, and I haven't seen much in the way of convincing answers.

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

At the end of "Hamlet," the invader Fortenbras arrives only to find a bunch of Danish nobles who slaughtered each other. Guess who's standing at the end - Forntenbras. We Democrats can throw mud at each other and our respective favorites for the nomination, but the end result will only help Senator McCain. People need to chill, get this campaign up several levels from where it is now, and start showing the voters that we have plans and vision to go forward. It sure can be satisfying to call each other names, but it is not helpful and it won't help us retake the White House and extend Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.

Posted by: Karl Shipps | March 7, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

The economy will be the most important issue in November and Hillary Clinton is the most experienced candidate to deal with the economy problems we are facing.
Experience counts, Obama is not ready to lead is WEAK AND LACKS EXPERINCE.

Posted by: Antonn | March 7, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

But the real question of the day is why won't Clinton show us her tax returns? If she really is of good moral character and we can trust her to stand up for working people. Got Halliburton????????

Posted by: hotpoet66 | March 7, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY CLINTON IS A MONSTER if we add up all her dirty tactics in her campaign "to get job done" for destorying her opponents, especially Sen. Obama who is ahead of her.
Samantha Power was a high educated and intellectual professor. She spoke the truth. I am sorry about her resignation. I hope she will help Sen. Obama when he is elected.
Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe take advantage of Obama campaign's loss to ask contribution is a cowardly reaction. It will get backfire because he is spreading "HILLARY CLINTON IS A MONSTER!" to her admirers and blind followers.

Posted by: Judy | March 7, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Everyone who thinks Barak Obama is great should look at how the Crown family use their General Dynamics fortune to be amongst the biggest fundraisers and contributors to the "anti-war" candidate. He's a smart politician, a good politician, but he is just a politician. Not a savior.

Posted by: jaywpat | March 7, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Dream Ticket:

McCain/Obama 08

Posted by: Starry Eyed | March 7, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

Bill Bradley revealed the other night on PBS that Hillary didn't have a security clearance during her years as First Lady. So, I'm wondering just what national defense policy experience she thinks she has? A two week vacation to Africa doesn't count at foreign policy experience either, especially when one realizes that Barack did the equivalent or better mission as an elementary school student in Indonesia.

Posted by: alan | March 7, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a dirty Chicago style politician. America beware!

The proof is in the pudding.

Posted by: James Madiston | March 7, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

Truth is always a defense to any remark. Hillary clearly is a monster in every respect. She is using every play right out of the Karl Rove playbook and she is every bit as vicious and destructive to the Democratic party. If she gets the nomination, it will be a continuation of the Bush/Rove/Cheney politics as usual. I am begging the Democratic Party bureaucratic powers that be to choose Obama, an honest man with vision, over the politics of destruction for the sake of our country and our party. If they take away the choice from the pledged delegates and change the rules for Michigan and Florida after the fact for the sole reason of forcing Hillary on the party, it will give the Whitehouse to the Republicans in the year we should have had a sure thing.

Posted by: Cupcake | March 7, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Every time someone looks at Hillary Clinton the wrong way she demands apologies and complains about a conspiracy against her. First, it was the right-wing, then it was the media, now it is Obama's campaign staffers. How does she keep this Stalin-like list of enemies straight? Could it be, Senator Clinton, that people just don't like you? OUCH! I just felt myself added to the spiral notebook of enemies

Posted by: Ann, MI | March 8, 2008 12:20 AM | Report abuse

What's up with this Peter Paul guy?

Posted by: Hillary/Bush/Cheney/Rove/McClain 08' | March 8, 2008 1:02 AM | Report abuse

"We just can't trust the American people to make those kinds of choices ... government has to make those choices for people." Page 20 of the book, "I've Always Been A Yankees Fan", by Thomas D. Kuiper. Clinton's remarks to Dennis Hastert in 1993.

Posted by: tanaS | March 8, 2008 1:14 AM | Report abuse

Prof. Power should not be punished by telling the truth. Hillary is a political monster programmed to do just one thing - returning to the White House.

Now Hillary is copying McCain's campaign tactic by using an attack to promote special fundraising. This isn't original.

Posted by: dummy4peace | March 8, 2008 1:20 AM | Report abuse

Power's only problem was trying to say those things off the record... Hillary is a monster that will stop at nothing before separating the democratic party. She's clearly a very selfish person who doesn't really care about the American people.

Posted by: Liz | March 8, 2008 2:45 AM | Report abuse

This video clip a report about Obama from Chicago's most respected TV news station.

I'm sorry to burst Obama's supporters bubble, but Obama's much worse than any of us thought. He wasn't even any good at being a state senator.

How can anyone still support Obama, now that we know what a lousy job he did for the people he represented in Chicago?

According to his own local Chicago Newspapers and TV stations, he was a lousy State Senator.

If he couldn't even handle being a State Senator, why would anyone in their right mind trust him with the Presidency???

It really is "game over" for Obama.

Sorry. Even I didn't expect him to be this incompetent and corrupt.

Posted by: Truth about Bastard Husein Osama | March 8, 2008 3:08 AM | Report abuse

She's not a monster, as far as I know.

You'll have to ask Bill.

Spread it around.

Posted by: pauster | March 8, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

This man obama is truly a crook. How one minute he want to act all civil then in the next minute he wants to throw sideway attacks. He is truly a "politician" in every sense of the word. Hillary is smart, tuff, and truly a superwoman. You go girl!
hilllary 2008!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Ryan | March 8, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Hilary will stop at nothing to bore her way into the presidency.She is a lying ,conieving piece of crap and more so is her campaign president and advisors,they are the Pot calling the Kettle BLACK.

Posted by: mark | March 8, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: MARK | March 8, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

hilary clinton is a MOnstar!
the lady was right and should not have appologized or resigned...why should she after all the misleading inuindos and lies that hillarys campaign is putting out about obama?
she claims innocent and unknowing ,when she knows good and well she is approving any and all that the scum guys and gals in her campaign are doing and saying ...and she wants to be presindent....excuse me i have to go and throw up right now....REMEMBER HOLARY SUPPORTERS WHITEWATER AND THE PEOPLE ENDING UP DEAD

Posted by: mark | March 8, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Unbelievable,,,I actually am seeing posters here using the word INTEGRITY and Hillary in the same post...Some even put Bill in that post..

The elitist Clintons either are not aware of the word INTEGRITY, or just plain feel it does not apply to them.

And Pleaze,,Hillary 08 hope I got that close to right,,,to rail at Obama and or his staff for lying is totally ingenuous..Hillery has to work hard to tell the truth about anything.. The Clintons would sell everything, parents, child, dogs, you name it to gain POWER,,Its all they want,,,AND will stoop as low as necessary to get it...

So lighten up plz....This is Politics and lying is what they do..

Posted by: HawkCW4 | March 8, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse


I can't believe someone offered a traitor like Robert Novak for reference. LMAO

News Flash!

Hey, Clinton groupies. Like your BushBot counterparts, you have a problem with math. Now I'm no mathematician, but I think I can handle this.

1) Obama leads Clinton by 150 pledged delegates and that number will only increase.

2) Out of 750 super delegates, Obama needs only 325 to win the nomination. He has 210. That means he needs 115 more yet Hillary needs at least 180. She won't get it.

So all you Status Quo lovers out there are keeping this party divided over nothing. Abandon your Bush Lite candidate and get on the bus for the big win. You're more than welcome. ;)

Posted by: captainkona | March 8, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

From today's "Head of State"

"Saturday, March 08, 2008

How Obama Can Win and Win Strong

I am aware of the delegate math.

I know that, unless the Clinton team runs roughshod with regard to superdelegates, the numbers are unassailable.

However, for Obama to not only win, but to win strong, and thus to be in the best position for the general, he must step outside of the box created when Clinton tactics were applied to his own admirable stance.

By declaring himself the candidate of the new politics, putting the politics of Rove et al. aside for a politics of honesty, straight-forward decency, and strength, he has putatively left the field open for Clinton et al. to lob innuendo after innuendo. If he responds, he is in violation of his commitment to the new; if he continues with his current path of non-response, he will be taken down by a series of attacks, that however false or fantastic, will eventually raises doubts in the mind of the electorate as to the validity of his new politics, and will, in the great viscera of the electorate, so responsive and so easily changed, appear "weak."

If he attacks, it is said, he betrays himself; if he continues on the same path, he is whittled down by rumor and insinuation.

Clinton's current strength is her ability to attack, however true the nature and content of the attacks. Obama must turn this very behavior into its own negative. To do so, Obama must relentlessly name what she is doing and anchor it--calling for an "end to the era of 'kitchen sink' politics, i.e.:

"It's about time that we left the era of "kitchen sink" politics, of distortion and insinuation, behind us. We have all seen it before this--a period where it was often difficult to tell falsehood, rumor, and misinformation from truth. It was this type of politics that contributed to a war in which we have lost the best of our national treasure, our nation's men and women. It is this type of politics that our opponents not so long ago decried. And it is this type of politics that, more than anything else, signals weakness--the inability to base one's statements and actions on the firm ground of truth, on our collective and honest dedication to the construction of a new and positive future--and instead, on a retreat into the politics of personal destruction.

It's time to take out the dirty dishes; It's time to empty the kitchen sink. After an era where it was often difficult to distinguish fantasy from truth, it's time to put that era behind us, to base our future efforts on strong and honest desire to build a new and better future."

What Obama can create is his own "There you go again" moment--one that will both define Clinton (someone, after all, has to do it), and place the Clinton camp in their very own box, of their own making: Where any attack will immediately be associated in the voter's mind, and will be accompanied by a roll of the voter's eyes, as another example of Clinton's "kitchen sink" politics--of the chaotic, inconsistent, contradictory and frantic willingness to say or do anything to be elected, be it the changing of one's personality, tone, degree of honesty--or one's degree of tolerance or gusto for the politics of personal destruction.

Without a single attack, this demonstrates the nature of the Clinton camp: in a moment of crisis, and in danger of loss, rather than respond with strength, principle and authority, they throw the "kitchen sink" at the issue, abandoning principles and frantically strewing innuendo as they do so.

With powerful moral force, it names exactly what the Clinton camp is doing, and anchors it both to the politics of the past Administration, and to the very political tactics that Clinton herself has denounced and disavowed. It provides direct evidence--thus far, the only direct evidence--of how a Clinton Administration would likely govern in times of chaos, crisis, and other "3 a.m. moments" (thus disempowering her already shaky claims to superior foreign policy judgment): With a "kitchen sink" approach of tumultuous, changing, disorganized and contradictory attack, rather than with consistent purpose and moral authority.

Obama must persistently name what the Clinton camp is doing rather than complain, and he must then link it to the very essence of an old politics that has been lived through by all of us, and denigrated by most, over the past 8 years.

Thus named, and thus defined, Obama can then invite Clinton up to the higher ground--to a debate based on policy and principle--or she can choose to stay in the box that she and her camp have created.


Head of State

Posted by: Robert Hewson | March 8, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

It's ugly when someone bases his/her support on ignorance and lack of education of a portion of the public.

The goal is to have a highly educated public, not to take advantage of their ignorance and lack of education.

I thought that was reserved only for the Republicans to use.

Posted by: Linh_P | March 9, 2008 5:50 AM | Report abuse

She is a monster. Did everyone forget about Vince Foster? Look it up on wikipedia, you will see a picture of her face next to the "theories" section concerning his MURDER.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 9, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

I just read "Target, Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton" by Kathleen Willey, who as a young White House volunteer was groped by the president. According to Willey, whose book is loaded with tons of source footnotes, Bill is a sick sex addict and Hillary not only condones it, but enables him with sleasy tactics of attacking and discrediting his victims or willing sex partners with threats and intimidation to keep them quiet. This goes back to Bill's years as governor of Arkansas. Obama may not be perfect, but he's our best hope for the future. If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, I cannot vote for her. I like John McCain, but I do not want another Republican in the White House. I also do not want another Billary. So I guess I'll have to throw my vote away on Ralph Nader.

Posted by: Virginia voter | March 10, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Come on; wake up people! Hillary and Bill are laughing themselves silly at the end of every day at the way they are pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. We don't have much to choose from this election, but I am so weary of women wanting a woman in the White House so bad, they are willing to overlook everything and vote for this particular one.

Posted by: Elizabeth | March 10, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Benoit says: "It would be nice to hear a few words about Obamas' accomplishments,it might make interesting reading,the Hillary bashing just gets very boring"

Well, I've been a supporter of Barack's for many years (I live in his state senate district) So let's go backwards -

1) Sponsored in the US Senate (i.e. took the lead in drafting, negotiating & gathering the votes for) a "gold standard" ethics reform bill that is widely seen as the most comprehensive ethics reform in over thirty years. Besides pork for her own state, do you want to chime in here someone on even one major bill that Clinton got passed?

2) Served as a very successful state legislator in one of the nation's largest state senates working across party lines on numerous pieces of very difficult
legislation, such as the videotaping of police interrogations of murder suspects following the death-row inmate crises in Illinois (where over 1/2 of the inmates on death-row were later found to be innocent based on DNA testing). Gee, it sure would be nice to be able to see the records of what exactly Hillary did while in the White House, since Obama clearly has much more experience as an elected official and legilator then she does.

3) Taught constitutional law at one of the top law schools in the country. Considering the numerous constitutional issues in question between the current congress and administration I would think that this law experience would be vitally more important than let's say serving on the board of Wal-Mart (of course this must have been the perfect venue for Hillary to change the world).

4) Took his Harvard law degree (where he served as the Harvard Law Review's 1st black president) and put it to work as a community organizer in some of Chicago's poorest neighborhoods instead of cashing it in at a top law firm which he easily could have done. What did Hillary do with her law degree?

5) I could go on, but would somebody please tell me - WHAT ARE HILLARY CLINTON'S MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS?

Posted by: Nate Zeke | March 10, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Yo svreader - you are entitled to your own oppinions, but not your own facts. Obama was a widely successful state legislator. I live in his district and don't know anyone who thinks othewise. He was regularly re-elected by the widest of margins. What's more, his political base was a collection of independent political groups (like the IVI-IPO) that operated outside of the Chicago democratic political machine led by Mayor Daley. Finally, he has answered every question asked of him regarding Tony Rezko and has explained in detail his stupid (his words) mistake in buying a couple hundred square yards of the property next door (bought by Rezko after Obama purchased his house in Hyde Park) in order to extend his yard. Rezko is a major sleeze bag, but there is absolutely nobody except the Hillary camp alleging anything improper happened with this guy. Of course, as it has been with both the Clinton and Bush administrations, if you keep repeating a lie enough times....

Posted by: Nate Zeke | March 10, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

You are wasteing your time talking to these radical Obama supporters.They claim to be uniting the people of this country.Who hasnt noticed that they have divided our party more than any time in our history?They claim to be running a clean campaign,yet their representatives call their opponent reprehenceible and deroguetory names.This is a clean campaign??At the same time they accuse their opponent of being dishonest?Obama,during one of their debates said that he would renegotiate the NAFTA deal with Mexico and Canada,the very next day one of his campaigh advisors contacted a canadian official,and told him that"whatever Obama says while campaigning is "just campaign rhetoric and not to be taken seriously".When this came to the attention of the public,Obama's people denied the allegation and started the rumor that it was the Clinton camp that contacted the Canadian government.That proved to be false and then Obama declared that his cohorts had made a mistake.Now I dont know what other people choose to call a dirty campaign,but as for myself I would say that Obama's camp has been taking pages from Karl Roves book or has Rove on the payroll.

Posted by: Nannie Turner | March 10, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

First of all, if these types of personal attacks were seen on any Blog against Obama, there would be cries of 'racism" ringing thru the land.
I was part of the fundraising campaign in that I gave money, because I support Clinton, not because of anything that was said about her. But the questions these campaign statements by campaign advisers raise is a serious issue, which can't be deflected by these disgusting hate speech attacks by all of you who support Obama.
Since the stakes are high, and Obama is saying the opposite on the stump, are you suggesting that we have no right to campaign AGAINST HIM OR ASK QUESTIONS?
Hey folks, guess what? Answering a question with an attack so personal and vicious is not an answer.
Obama has used this to change the subject, and so far he has gotten away with it. But it won't last forever. ADULTS are asking questions, and we have every right. The low brow response from the Obama campaign and their mob of followers is wearing thin, and when he is called to the stand to defend REZKO it's going to implode.
If you don't have anything factual to say about the issues, stop trying to make your point with these foul personal attacks, because they really do point to an army of 13 year olds crying on the Blogs, not mature political discourse.

Posted by: suziefromatlanta | March 10, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Hillary and Bill,

As a lifetime Democrat, I humbly ask you to release your income tax filings from 2000 to 2006. Surely THEY have been filed by now! I will even humbly settle for a release of one of those years. Just trying in my humble way to keep the political process honest.


Posted by: grannyone1 | March 10, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Why in the world is the media discussing whether Obama's senior foreign policy advisor called Hillary Clinton a "monster", when in fact the real issue is that Samantha Power said that her man Obama couldn't deliver on the Iraq withdrawal timetable that he is using to sell his candidacy?

Posted by: darlenedeminSoCal | March 10, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse


There are various notes in this section, praising and deriding Senators Obama & Clinton.

This , eventhoug not uncommon, is a practice that could be dropped, eliminated for the sake of Decency and Respect for the citizens, whose favor the candidates are competing for.

Senator Obama who has been running in a clean tune, has lately been subjected to a series of dirty attacks. And a dilema he is facing, either he counters this attacs deemed very dangerous for his campaing, or goes on in the clean way he started, which is considered also not much promising as campains use to go.

I dare to recommend Senator Obama, to keep cool and remaing clean.

But the consideration of the peril posed by the contenders campaing, can not be ignored, thus I urge the citizens that thik, Obama is the best choise, to do something.
This thing is good for the campaing but also, is a way of improving the way politics are practiced, and campaings are run.

This could be an invitaion to the People, who like Obama and clean politics to, acting as third party, to invite the candidates , including Senator Mac Cain, to reject, in actions not words, any dirty trikcs in their campaings.
Trowing mud to a conteder, ussually back fires, and the mud ends in the deliverers face.

This is a humble invitation, from an unknow person, but

The WASHINGTON POST is a well known institution in the United States of N. A.

Then I invite th Washington Post to take this as a campaing for Fairness and cleannes in politics.


Posted by: Emilio ABANTO -PEREYRA Lima-PERU S. A. | March 10, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

Just to clarify, the comments in this blog about Hillary downgrading Dr. King's contribution to the civil rights movement is absolutely false. She said that with the help of Lyndon B. Johnson, the civil rights bill was passed. Which is actually what history says happened. So All you Barack supporters that feel you have to distort words and facts, get a life and actually do some research. And why in the world are we still talking about this. Instead of scrutinizing Hillary who is one of the best people in politics we have today, investigate Barack Obama and all will find that his campaign for "change" is a shallow campaign slogan.

Posted by: Mani, NJ | March 11, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Hillary And Bill

What is the problem with releasing your income tax forms ? If you are not concealing anything, What's the problem ?

Posted by: Obama 4 President | March 11, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

She won't release her tax forms.

She won't mention the fraud suit pending against she and mr clinton in the los angeles superior court.

She overinflated her travels with the pres to make it appear she was actually in charge of something. Articles are surfacing now with comments by world leaders that say her role was a social one, not a leadership one.

She's done business with Norman Hsu.

She's still needing to deal with an FEC problem in the contributions to her Senate race.

NPR reports that if the returns from the texas caucus continue as they are now, Obama will win Texas. they are still counting votes.

The list goes on - but the biggest reason the majority won't vote for her is HILLARY and of course, BILL.

Posted by: Lynne | March 11, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

they are all monsters

Posted by: Anonymous | March 11, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

For Elizabeth/3/10/08 - You may be sick of seeing some uninformed women voting for Hillary just because she's a woman. Where is your same disgust for some uninformed black voters supporting Barack just because he's black? Does the expression double standard ring a bell with you?

For all of you name callers out there, you don't have to worry about the Republicans using dirty smear tactics, you are doing the work for them.

One last thought to the vitriolic Obama supporters and Hillery haters, If and I say IF, she was seriously involved in the Whitewater scandal then she has to be the most brilliant candidate for president in years. After at least 4 years of investigations and how many millions of dollars, all the Starr commission could come up with was nothing to link her with any wrong doing. Either everyone but the Hillary haters are morons, she is the most politically brilliant candidate in history or God forbid, she just might not have done anything illegal and you all might be full of hot air.

One last thought. If you think that winning the Democratic primary in exclusively red states ( even though the Democrats have brought out some new voters) is going to make those states vote Democratic in a general election is naive even for the most unexperienced political supporters. It is the traditional blue states and those that are fairly evenly split that will vote in the next President of this country

Posted by: Dorothy | March 11, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Judging by Hillary Clinton's behavior, no wonder another woman called her a monster because she behave like one. Remember in Iowa when she was upset about some flyer from the Obama's camp regarding her stance on NAFTA.

Also, she complain about not getting much media coverage. The truth is that Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, and Hillary Clinton are all getting media coverage which more than triple Obama's time. Obama Is much greater because he is fighting Chelsea, Bill, Hillary, McCain and George Bush, at the same time and I found it all incredible one man (Obama) has stood up against them all and won.

I Remain Neutral


Posted by: | March 11, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

The only way that Clinton has so called momentum being in second place is that the guys in the press put her there, but not Jack Cafferty, the idea that there is a race in Mississippi, and other states before PA, but the press seems only to care about the goal post that Clinton she sets, if she is not winning in a state, she leaves, she has already discounted the other states by going to PA, which is unfair to them, the governor of PA has blatantly stated many times that Obama would not win over white voters in PA because he is black, much as he ran his campaign against the Black GOP candidate that ran against which is racist, but it is the presses responsibility not to let Clinton change the goalpost and they follow like puppy dogs, she is in 2nd place all over.

It amazes me that on every station and program the press keeps coming up with different scenarios on which she can win, because you want Clinton to win, but they don't take all the blame because the officials of the Democratic Party they are also letting Clinton state what is important and what is not by not going for Obama who has won more states, 33 not including Texas after the caucuses are all counted up, in the popular vote by over 600K, and the delegates, they are all still sitting on the fence with the presses help of course, but the democratic party has always shot themselves in the foot, and if they go behind closed doors and chooses Clinton , many people will stay home.

I have an 85 year old mother that has voted all of her life, but states resoundingly that if Clinton is chosen after Obama has played the game fair and twice as good coming from behind, SHE WILL NOT VOTE OR WILL CROSS OVER AND VOTE FOR MCCAIN, but Jack here is a question that you need to ask, if Obama was in the same place as Clinton would he be treated as Clinton is being treated by the press or the Democratic Party right now , I can guarantee you that this campaign would have been over many states ago, the idea that Obama won twelve in a row, and was only 10 points behind in Ohio, less than 3 in Texas but when finished it will show more of the popular vote and delegates, ask the question who exactly is being treated unfairly in this campaign.

Posted by: BevSims | March 11, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Interesting clips from the Chicago news.
Never have seen these before. No wonder OB got upset in San Antonio when Chicago reporters kept asking him questions about Rezko.

A man who has campaigned that his experience is based on his ability to make the good judgements is questionable now.

Posted by: concerned | March 12, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

I guess HIllary08 can now eat her own words. Your heroin has decided instead to let Ferraro do the dirty work and shrug it off. In fact no one is getting fired off the Clinton campaign. There you have it.

Posted by: shan5196 | March 12, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

When is Hillary going to distance herself from her advisor, Geraldine Ferraro? Better still, deprive her of her "advisor" status? Her comments about why Obama is doing so well were racist, inaccurate, and way more offensive than the "monster" slip.

Posted by: Fair is Fair | March 12, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse


The reason Barry Goldwater lost the 1964 election was that he was to honest to be a politician. When he said he would use tactical nukes in Vietnam, I believed him and that was the main reason I did not vote him. Then there were all those people who believed having the name Goldwater meant he was Jewish, then there were all the people who simply did not agree with his conservative fiscal policies. His failure to condemn the John Birch Society and decline its support did not help him, but that was not the only reason he lost the 1964 election.

Despite his own sometimes dubious past of accepting segregation support LBJ already had a lock on the black and liberal vote due to his support of the 1964 civil rights act, and that on LBJ's part was a true act of political courage.

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

Powers went off the deep end, and made the remark (hardly shocking, given HRC's race-baiting and hesitation about Obama's religeion and putting him below McCain on readiness for office). She also asked that it be off-record, forgetting the gutter level of UK journalism.

Obama fired her, bingo, done. Not good enough for HRC? Good enough for me.

Posted by: sisyphusinsoho | March 12, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

hqel jmgdu wflnxao dezfikh eiasvl efcdjyoi yeimusl

Posted by: nxlkgfpwu dblq | March 21, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

mjyxuri kwqvnurd prjgb sibtea opbienscd ubxfewd urpvq

Posted by: znuviwh huicxtekj | March 21, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

If Obama can't win with working class white voters why should he be the nominee? If he cannot win PA or Ohio why should he be the nominee? If he can't win in Florida, Michigan, California, or the states that really matters what good is he? Why can't he close the deal? The argument that the person who wins the most states is garbage. In November the winner takes all Electoral College heavily favors Clinton. "Super Dems" be smart and choose the hill that is where you will fine a win for the houses.

Posted by: Marlon | April 23, 2008 7:18 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company