Obama is angry about Hillary calling him out on certain points so..

what will he do when he has to deal with republicons? The republicons will say and do much more than what hillary is suppose to be doing...There will be no time for crying...

:sarcasm:

I love this logic: let's spread lies about our candidate because the other guys will do it anyway. This is 2000 all over again, only Hillary is playing the role of GW Bush and Bill is Karl Rove.

Excuse me while I throw up.

And, by the way, spreading lies and distorting is not the same as "calling him out on certain points".

Obviously, I think your characterization of the debate is unrealistic.

the Cons have started on him yet.

The Rs have already done their worst to HC, so nothing will be a surprise to anyone. They have not even started on O.

She is the one candidate on whom they have unlimited ammunition. Everything "clinton" of the past 25 years will be dredged up, rinsed off, and thrown at her again, and what's more, having used it before they know what resonates best with the public.

They've been preparing for her candidacy for the last 8 years. Her nomination would be god's gift to them.

If Gore had run on the Clinton record he would be in the WH today, there would be no Iraq war, probably no Sept. 11 and no recession.

She listed Ronald Reagan as one of her favorite presidents, yet she distorts Obama's words to make it sound as if Reagan was one of his favorites. It's almost comical.

and, yet, they're still supporting her and voting for her. I do hope the repugs dust it off and try and resurrect it, though. She successfully withstood it before and she'll do it again.

But Uh-bama? This Tony Rezko story is a whole NEW kettle of fish for the American People. And I'm sure it'll be more exciting water cooler chat than that played-out Whitewater b.s.

:popcorn:

You typed b.s. I think you meant to type b.j. for blow job. You know, as in adulterous blow job. I'm sure people won't make a connection between the immorality of the Bush administration with that of the Clinton administration.

and still is by large margins, the country did not support his Impeachment and Hillary still managed to be elected TWICE to a Senate Seat in a populous State.

Care to try again?

will people choose the sex story or the shit they can't remember/understand?

Do you really (and I'm not trying to be mean here, really) think people won't connect scandals of all types from Clinton to Bush? It is so simple and easy to do. Maybe I'm cynical but I think people will make the easy choices... and they will be wrong.

I don't follow your assertion about connecting scandals from Clinton to Bush. What do you mean?

People seem to get that Bush is corrupt (so I do have some faith in the American people). However, I think the media is going to bring back all those Clinton "Scandals". Even the ones that came to nothing will not be told in that way. Whitewater, Lewinsky, Foster...all that stuff will be recycled in the most crappy way. My hunch (and if Hillary is the nominee, I hope I'm wrong) is that people will say, "yeah both those previous groups were corrupt. Let's try this new guy." If Obama is not around, that new gut will be the republican nominee.

It seems like we're actually having a discussion here. It's been a while since I've had one of those on DU.

By the way, I just got that notorious "Dead friends of the Clinton's" E-mail from the 90s on Sunday again. I think stuff like that will be all over for the non-discerning voter this October.

Unfortunately, this "new guy" has Tony Rezko around his neck and any "hey, let's try this new guy, he may no be 'corrupt'" will be quickly replaced with "oh, he's just like everyone else"

What you may not be realizing is that the Clinton Scandals so dominated the news during the 1990s that many people have been inoculated to them and, therefore, their efficacy as a true "scandal" has been diluted through over-exposure. For many, it's a collective shrug of the shoulders.

The repugs tried and tried and tried to wound the Clintons with everything under the sun in every possible way and yet the American People still, STILL support them as evidenced by his Poll Numbers and her surprisingly successful bid to be the First Female President.

New gossip is always more interesting than old gossip. Rezko and Obama is new gossip; Whitewater and Lewinsky is "been there, done that, big deal"

going to take place......people have finally woken-up.........

get over it....most people have......

The RW spent 40 million dollars to dig up crap on Bill and all they could come up with was Monica!!

IMO....that makes him pretty squeaky clean....and I don't condone his adultery, I would have given him the boot...but that's their business not mine........

After 8 years of this idiot in the WH, people now realize what a farce it was to impeach Clinton for a BJ, when this criminal president has done the real dirty deeds!

The public won't be fooled again......

Besides, people won't assume someone needs to be a saint in her personal life to be a good president.

You really think the repukes can't come up with anything new?

You are delusional.

Take a bow. :thumbsup:

The conservative hate machine has been vilifying HC since 1992. We have heard it all before.

I really hope O supporters are not expecting a free ride after the nomination is locked up.

I never thought I'd see her so desperate and so driven for the office that she would resort to clear, documentable lies.

If playing hardball keeps a neophyte from blowing it again this year, then I'm all for it.

If you want another manipulating liar as president, then Hillary Clinton is just for you.

My disappointment in her grows daily.

Is there some mystery candidate I don't know about? The only difference between us is that I know that's how politicians always are. No one can please enough people to get elected without being selective in what he or she says. I can't speak for you, but many people want to believe in Obama as some kind of superhero because he makes them feel good. But he just isn't that. I don't care what they say on the campaign trail as long as he or she can do the job and nothing in O's background demonstrates he can.

What happened to that? He has spend his entire Senate term running for president and avoiding controversial votes. As far as I can see, his whole candidacy is a lie. Why are you so confident in him. Nothing in his background suggests he is capable of running this country. Nothing about his solutions are particularly novel. He promises "hope" he can't deliver even if he is elected.

Now H.C. is saying in the last debate that she will withdraw U.S. troops from Ir ag in 6 months after she takes office, as she does her "wink, wink, nudge nudge" to her powerful money source, the neo-cons and the DLCers. She's done a 180 degree turn-around.

She's pretty careful in what she says. She has never been against troop withdrawal, but has never promised a complete evacuation. This would not be any different than Korea, Japan or Germany.

he said the press had not vetted Obama and I agree with the fairytale comment as well. Obama is not, by a long shot the anti-war candidate he wants us to think.

I think he has had a fairytale rise and the clock is about to strike midnight!!

The veneer is slowly starting to come down........

Clinton's campaign to Reagan's what did they expect Bill to do, not say anything?

I see fighting back when another candidate attacks. Will Obama be able to withstand the rightwing attack machine,which will have help from the media who is pretending at the moment to be in awe of Obama.

She spreads lies about what Obama said about Reagan, he corrects her, and she's the victim.

But of course.

she is not a victim. That is your term. Don't believe the media and rightwing hype.

You haven't "heard it all before."

The Repukes can't wait to run against Hillary. And it's not only because of the past.

What goes around comes around.

...the effectiveness of the R tactics.

I believe she is the only one who could possibly lose in the GE. They WANT her to be the nominee so badly, and she will not be able to fight back effectively. Her anger is not pretty, either, and there would be an awful lot of that coming from she and Bill (whose anger is also not pretty).

If we are going to win the GE this year, I am ABC. And, even if she managed to pull it off, which would be difficult enough, it would be another 4 years of repuke attack hell, instead of anything getting done. I can't understand why so many can't see that.

In the national perception - they failed to beat her - and still will.
Also public perception of recent days - Obama is easily rattled. Which is why the MSM - UNANIMOUSLY is cheering for Obama. Same reason Rove was wearing a Dean T-shirt.

:puke:

Nope, Hillary has crossed all the lines. She no longer represents me.

You have no reason at all to think she was pretending to cry. You need to believe it to continue to think of her as some kind of ice queen. That kind of slander is on the same level as the "Obama is a Muslim" email. If this is your idea of bringing people together, then count me out.

In 2004, I was the single most generous D. supporter in this county and my wife was second. In 2006, my wife was and I was second.

I will not lift one finger to assist Obama even if they nominate Huckabee.

Never thought I'd hear myself say that but most Obama supporters are psychos, particularly here on DU.

Obama himself is a fucking sociopath.

:rofl:

a political opponent actually having the unmitigated GALL to call you out on certain points and highlight those times when what you said doesn't match what you assert now despite the fact that you claim you never said the first thing in the first place.

(sigh) How very, very rude of her. Not nice. Not nice at all.

:sarcasm:

he can say anything he wants about her and the media eats it up, they seem to think that she is not suppose to fight back.

unfortunately, as he continues to lose primaries -- SC is his and everyone has kind of accepted that --, it becomes more and more difficult to keep that teflon suit on him. Hillary calling him out on Rezko was HUGE because it's a huge story with massive implications should he be the Nominee and the national media has just ignored it.

Obama should be vetted on it. He did nothing wrong, but his association -- and by association I mean 17 year friendship -- with this guy could be impossibly damaging to the Democrats in 2008. And it's not like Uh-Uh-bama thinks quick on his feet during debates, you know? The repugs would eat him alive with this.

doesn't have the temperment for the slings and arrows of a general election.

he is a Muslim because they heard it somewhere? For example, it would be appropiate IMO if Clinton and Edwards claimed that 15 million people would opt out of coverage under Obama's plan and leave the rest of us holding the bag. That point is debatable and would explain why their plans use mandates. But to claim that his plan leaves out 15 million people is wrong. By repeating that number over and over without explanation, Clinton and Edwards plant the notion that 15 million people who want coverage would not get coverage. If I put a piece of apple pie in front of you and give you a fork, I've given you a piece of pie. If you choose not to eat the pie, it is untrue for you to tell others that I left you hungry.

Others have also determined that Clinton is speading at least white lies about Obama:

http://www.factcheck.org/clinton_vs_obama.html

...is because the Rs have not started on him yet.

She's not taking money from mobsters.

And frankly, we need someone who can deal with dirty fighting in November. O just can't. He's never had too. Rove will cut him to pieces just like he did with Kerry and Gore and like his mentor did to Dukakis.

after she's nominated.

to fight the CONS but, she is not fighting dirty. This is politics.

at full force... but I have much more confidence in his ability to deal with their attacks than Obama.

Nothing near the level of their Clinton hatred but substantial nonetheless. They have nothing on Edwards and Edwards has proven he can handle it.

The Republican/Jesse Helms machine in NC fights about as dirty as they come. Most the attacks on him now are attempted ten years ago and he still won in NC. Between that and 2004, he has faced probably tougher opposition research than Obama.

I don't think that Obama is the candidate that needs your admonition.

"If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen" because it is going to get hotter.

You know what? People don't want that.

When things get hot for her, she wells up and tries to garner sympathy.

Or she dispatches another round of lies.

Or she send Bill out to spread the bullshit.

It ain't pretty or very positive sometimes, IMHO, the Clintons are great campaigners, the best we have. (Of course, the our primary season is not, I believe, all about selecting the best campaigner, at least not according to those who always bring issues, votes, character, experience, vision, etc. into the discussion.) ;)

My post was a response to someone lambasting a candidate for "crying". If they're going to do that, which I don't think is warranted for either candidate, be fair about it.

you certainly are becoming just like your candidate.

"What I meant to say was ----"

Look, I know my intent. Don't try to ascribe meanings that I don't subscribe to. Thanks. Appreciated.

all that Reagan stuff people were mad about will come back to haunt them. Idiot sheeple who don't remember Reagan will hear his name used by the republican nominee. People will forget how horrible he was and repbulicans will compare him all the time to blow job Bill.

And people will say, "that blow job thing was not a big deal...but I am sick of scandals. I don't recall Reagan having any scandals" Ask any non-du person if they know what Iran-Contra was about. Then they'll vote republican.

We are the dumbest political party in the world if we can't see this coming.

" he is a nice guy" they haven't even begun the smears...

"bribe" - nice going there. I'll be happy to see the Reagan vs Clinton debate - as Krugman said - it's time for that narrative to be corrected.
If only for that reason, rooting for Hillary.

is they can't stand to hear anyone mention Bush. It's all a smokescreen to keep the current administration out of the argument, and it's working. Even here people are switching off subject to this "Reagan vs. Clinton" bullshit instead of focusing on the true fight: "all of us" vs. Bush.

:applause:

Sex or indictments? Be honest.

while the Reaganmania ain't exactly making the GOP-ers jump with excitement.
89% of democrats love Clinton - I think the intensity of the reaction of the GOP persecution beats Ronnystalgia. Plus they REALLY like him. Not on DY, not on the Free Republic, RW MSM, but out there - in the real world. I've seen the way he is received wherever he goes - not during the campaign. casual appearances. He is adored.

Hmm...

And it is coming.

all over Obama...

and he's the Nominee, we're in big trouble :scared:

:eyes:

as, so far, he's been getting whiffle balls tossed at him underhand.

go along to get along garbage...

You're delusional.

She's the one who has been carrying Bush's load. She won't back off on her vote for invading Iraq. She's the one who feels that mega-industrial lobbyists somehow represent American voters.

Do you pay attention to her at all?

He'll respond? :shrug:

around as a "truth squad." The country has serious problems and we are treated to this spectacle. I'm voting for Edwards in the primary and expect to vote for Hillary in the general. Obama clearly needs a little more seasoning.

about 8 years worth of Mrs. Dash should do it, I think.

He is not handling the criticism well at all, though... and I too worry how he'll manage should he get the nomination.

:eyes:

I sure hope he takes that method to the republicans.

C'mon, you're better than that.

And when this woman goes on 60 minutes???

... He isnt a Reaganite he has been the strongest campaigner for his fellow Dems and helped them to be where they are today he beleives in the party and all it can be.