Clinton's latest attack on Obama

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/16/crowley-clintons-latest-attack-on-obama/

Clinton's latest attack on Obama
Posted: 03:37 PM ET

snip//

Clinton challenged Obama's view of the role of a president in last night's debate, and her campaign continues to push the issue in e-mails.

In her comments today, she argued that the Bush era through a "mismanaged war" and the failure to react quickly to Hurricane Katrina has proved that "government by advisor" doesnt work. The country needs, said Clinton, "a hands-on manager."

There is nothing in Clinton's resume suggesting experience in managing a big bureaucracy. Her time heading the Clinton administration's health care reform effort was marked by criticism of her hands-on management style.

The Obama campaign immediately fought back. “Hillary Clinton may believe this is a race for who would make the best Chief of Staff, but Barack Obama believes this country is looking for a president who has the leadership, vision and ability to bring people of differing views together around a common agenda for change,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement.

The New York senator's remarks Wednesday came in a roundtable discussion on the 25-year-battle over using a site in Nevada's Yucca Mountain as a repository for nuclear waste. Clinton promised Nevada voters that as president, she will take the Yucca issue off the table "once and for all."

this shit is over.

for you. I was directing it towards the inevitable one.

:thumbsup:

I see the POTUS primarily as a manager and a diplomat or rather that the POTUS must at least be that.

the work, I provide the vision. I remember Clark explained exactly why this is wrong - as you now have battling advisers vying of the boss's approval - think all the mess leading to the war in Iraq - the Powell faction, the Cheney faction, the Condi faction.
Mind you, I am not saying Obama would consider THAT kind of options, only that the detached style he espoused leads to infighting and disarray.

its a cute theory, but the other side doesn't want to come together...i think they made it clear

small little box?

Obama can lead the country to embrace Democratic Party ideals. Hillary can't.

What the hell has Obama ever done? I mean, he's a nice guy and all and has a polished speaking voice, but so what? All hat and no cattle is how it looks to me.

His senate record, and his Illinois record. You can repeat your beef bullshit all you want, it's been thoroughly debunked.

Seems like he has been so busy running for president he hasn't had any time. So how is his record different from HC's (apart from being shorter?)

As far as the IL senate goes, I guess I don't care what he did in Cub Scouts.

I am sick and tired of hearing about how much "experience" means to the office.

Reagan was a no good Gov. and a refrigerator door opener.

Eisenhower commanded soldiers, not ordinary people.

We will not even mention the AWOL Clown.

HC was the FIRST LADY and held no elected position until she became Senator. That is fine with me. I won't have any trouble voting for her if she wins the nomination

However,I am trying to recall anything that she did as a Senator that changed the face of the World.

Oh yes, she voted for the War in Iraq, yes she did!

One of her shining moments for me was to say "there is a vast right wing conspiracy in this country." That was brilliant and helped everyone to articulate what was happening in America.

However,while she certainly deserves credit for the statement, here we are in 2008 and we have this very day - "a vast right wing conspiracy" in America.

IMO, the "experience Mime" doesn't hunt.

If she can count being the first lady, then he can count his time in the state legilature.

Sure he can count his state experience, but generally I find that unless state experience is a governorship, no one is going to care about it. Again, it's like putting ones participation in Cub Scouts on a resume.

I've been using people's initials a lot on this website, but I have declined to call Obama "B.O." for obvious reasons. I just hope the Rs avoid calling him B.H.O. But they won't.

Really? When??

Their overall records are good and very similar. I heard they vote together 90% of the time.

Her plan is better than Obama's.

Big difference. And he has the most substantial record of all of them.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jfwiTMvbxKZec4z-ouww5y_5zfhgD8U753I80

..cattle = mule = 30 acres...yep, racist! :sarcasm: :)

Your statement is logically inconsistent. If being 1st lady is nothing, then she was not responsible for the '93 healthcare fuck-up. Of course she was responsible for that because she was Bill C's most trusted advisor for 8 years. Remember all that "co-presidency" crap in the 90s? Well, there was something to that. I'm sure you would consider Chief of Staff, National Security Advisor or Secretary of State to be valid, Federal executive experience. So why not Bill Clinton's 1st Lady? Of course, she was only his wife, so she didn't do anything except refill the coffee and do the laundry.

In addition, this is her 3rd national campaign. And she was in the Senate four years longer than O. And she did not spend her first term running for president.

Here's a list of reasons to think HC is more qualified than O that I wrote for a different web-site.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4086745&mesg_id=4086745

Neither can Hillary and for that I blame both of their lamebrain, infantile supporters.

Keep pushing those COO creds, Hilly. Reminds everyone of the inspiration- and vision-free campaign you're running.

Yeah that's worked so well in the past, just what people want.

She'll be giving us gifts, like she did in the Christmas commercial, and like LBJ did for MLK and civil rights.

She's telling us a Hillary presidency would be all about her power.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." - Yogi Berra

That bottom-up crap is reminiscent of Bush Sr's "thousand points of light." Basically, it was a poetic way of saying let someone else take care of the poor.

:rofl:

Leave Obama alooooooone..you bastards!

and when you finally realize it, I don't want to hear any waaaaaaaaaaaaaa from you.

Buh-Bye barackie...

I put the author of repeated stupid posts on ignore.

some thick..dimwitted Obamabot has me on ignore..whatever shall I do?

is his blog team works for the lowest common denomenator.
The strategy would work on right wingers, but you're dumbing down
for the party of thinking people. Stop talking 'tard talk and you might
make progress. Tho it's probably too late.

web site and ask why is obama associating himself with reagan and reflecting back on reagan and saying he is doing the same in his campaign. What's up with that? HELL, REAGAN WAS A DAMN RACIST.....This is serious and tells me something about the character of obama

Concerning Reagan, a racist is as racist does. I careD, how Reagan treated African Americans in his personal life. I do care that prominent people i e Obama seem to think that he wasn’t really a racist. What I care about is that Ronald Reagan, the patron saint of the Conservative Movement, made a career out of deliberately appealing to the racist vote. it brought him to power and it was a constant tool throughout his career. Ronald Reagan acted in public as a racist acts. He deliberately set out to appeal to racists and continue the odious Southern Strategy. In doing so, he helped to mainstream racism in the GOP and thus the country.

SHAME SHAME SHAME......if it talks like a republican, walks like a republican then most likely you got a republican....and I am fearful obama is just that.....and to me this is not a far stretch for obama to play the race card, in which he has during this campaign.......

If you actually spent 30 seconds googling her resume, you would realize that she has a lot of leadership experience. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton">Hillary accomplished more BEFORE SHE EVEN MET BILL than most people accomplish in a lifetime.

Oh, and I fail to see how this rises to the level of "attack". Any and all criticism of Obama is an attack? Going by YOUR logic, Obama's reaction was also an "attack."

i think that obama has more activist, progressive, and political experience than hillary but not more than bill.

she met him in law school. It's arrogant as hell to make that claim.

She was a national merit scholar in high school. She was the president of the young republicans as a freshman in college, which she stepped down from because of the republicans views on the civil rights movement. She worked on Barry Goldwater's presidential campaign in 1964. After Dr. King was killed she organized student strikes to recruit more black students and faculty. She was president of her colleges government association. She interned at the house republican conference so she could better understand her liberalizing political views. She was a conventioneer at the republican national convention in 1964. It is here that she decided to leave her fathers political party for good, because of the republicans veiled racist message. She was the first student at wellesley College ever to deliver the commencement address, for which she received a standing ovation lasting over 7 minutes. She was featured in an article published in LIFE magazine (because of her speech) as well as nationally syndicated talk shows and the associated press. She was on the board of editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action. She worked as a research assistant in early childhood development. She took on child abuse cases pro bono and provided free legal advise to the poor. She worked on Senator Mondale's subcommittee on migratory labor.

All of this BEFORE meeting Bill. So, no, there is no arrogance in the truth.

not dissing her per se, but I don't understand why this makes her the only or the best candidate. Essentially, her elected public office experience is of being a senator.
nothing wrong with that, but Edwards, Obama and Kucinich have all been senators or in public office at least as long or longer than she.
And she had to carpetbag herself into her district to run there.

:shrug:

Gosh, no way would I wish to work for HRC who does NOT have a "we are a team" mindset. Yes America, it's ALL ABOUT HRC not "the team."

The DLC can hurl shit against the wall ad infinitum, but it won't give their heroine a likable personality. Hillary's got no Elvis!

The American People don't want an "Iron Lady" but "The Genuine Article" that you find in the leadership persona of Obama. :thumbsup:

An added plus about Thatcher is that "her spouse" knew his place. ;)

Spouses of high ranking officials are "looked down upon" when they "run roughshod over" his/her staff, i.e, they are USING rank that they have not JUSTLY earned. :thumbsdown:

It's a dialog. Hillary is more of a wonk; Obama, a coach. So, what do we really need?

Makes sense to me.

--p!

I guess I forget my "faux outrage" decoder ring.

you both can overreact, but in general, the obama camp has more legitimate incidents to overreact to.

as I have pointed out before, she is essentially in complete alignment with Bush's foreign policy, she just thinks she could do a better job.

sheesh, have a xanax

Ahhh, context. The enemy of bullshit spin.

The silly and pathetic spin of simple contrast between candidates into some evil ATTACK is just that, silly and pathetic.

I am just blown away by the sheer attempt to spin Hillary contrasting her view of what the presidency should be with that of Obama into some attack. One would have to twist himself into a pretzel to even get close to seeing that.

wow, just wow - if that is all Obama has going for him is playing victim every time anyone disagrees with him, then I have to wonder...

It's a food fight - and lately, everything in the world that favors hillary 9or doesn't harm her) is a set up by her. Everything!

Do we want someone in the mold of Bush and Reagan who will delegate everything or a hands on manager like Bill Clinton? I prefer the latter. One of the things we should have learned from the Bush years is how easily a hands-off delegator can be manipulated.

That should be the criterion: the candidate him or herself.

--p!

Obama can see the BIG picture - not very many people can! It is the visionary that comes along once in a few years that makes the difference in the status and future of our country. We need one at this time! We don't need someone who is going to micro-manage everything like Hillary would. She makes a good Senator but Obama will make a better President because of his vision and talent with making things happen!:applause:

He is the visionary. He cannot be bothered with the day to day workings of the government. Someone else can handle those. He just needs to think and show his visions to the world.

What a bunch of horse pucky.

Clinton is exactly right

Hillary Clinton is a micro-manager that has problems delegating. Case in point: the way she handled health care reform. It is, as far as I know, the only major issue she was indeed in charge of handling. Not a resounding success. The ability to delegate is ESSENTIAL to anyone in a position of power. It is not a 0-1 issue, there is obviously a continuum. But, in my view at least, Obama's point of view is the correct one. And to equate his statement with Bush and what he has done is at best disingenuous. There was an astounding amount of incompetence among the people that Bush has delegated decisions to. Moreover, Bush is well known for his unwillingness to listen and give credence to dissenting opinions. There is nothing in what I know about Obama, his intelligence, his ability to appeal and gain the respect of other intelligent and competent people, and even his psychological makeup, that would make be believe that he would fall into either of these traps.

even at a local level. The politician hires a director chief executive to manage the books.

the politican is the one who makes and makes sure their policies are carried out and it means negotiating with foreign countries too.

That's NOT an attack. That's simply pointing differences in management style. Is it not valid anymore for an opponent to point out differences? It's not permissible to criticizes the anointed one? Why don't we just crown the guy and get it over with!!!!!! Why bother having an election???

Disgusting........

do you think "having a messy desk", and "needing someone to help with papers" is on the same level, and caused,

"a "mismanaged war" and the failure to react quickly to Hurricane Katrina".

If you do, you are a fool.