Why was Hillary so quick to imply there COULD be a joint ticket at one time...

when she still had real hope she could win the nomination but now she claims it's too early to think about? Yet another example of saying anything to get elected.

She's already GOT her VP -- Bill! As Joe Biden has famously said,
who'd want to be a VP in her administration? Talk about a nothing
job ...

And I'll never forget when Biden made that comment. So true!

she first realized there was no chance for her to win the nom? And now that she may have been turned down for the VP slot, things have, well, changed.

Or maybe she was just lying. Excuse me, I meant misspeaking. Don't want to be sexist or anything.

I'll go with your last line, though. :)

That seems so long ago I forgot what the atmosphere and commentary was like. Your idea that it was just a tactic to try to woo Obama-leaners and win favor with them is probably on target. Plus, she surely did still believe then that she could win at that time, knowing her. Still, it remains dishonest, par for the course for her. :eyes:

:hi:

about it, she wanted his money. All that damn money from his machine would have been hers to command. That really pissed me off. She was behind him offering him the vp spot.

What a joke. I wish I knew how to post one of those fail graphics.

I know you were replying to the OP, but I just wanted to say this kind of crap makes me sick. It makes me sad and ANGRY to see that the Clintons are appearing to be very much like what the RWers said they were: money-grubbing hucksters. That doesn't justify the RW smears, but rather it saddens me that so-called Dems aren't what they claimed they were and that they make the whole party look bad. All it does is reinforce stereotypes in the public mind that "all politicians are the same" or that "Democrats can't get their shit together, why should we trust THEM?"

I just hope Obama doesn't cave.

about taking VP.

to try to get Obama supporters to switch thinking she would show him the ropes than he could be President in 2016.

:hi:

many funerals they'd have to buy a hearse for his transportation.

and how the Presidents people treated that VP. That times 10.

And Bill, too.

to push a whole other narrative out there in hopes it would fly.

Geez, you guys'll find anything to bitch about.

it became clear that it wouldn't work. After all, she was behind in the race.

she was asked.

Then asked again in an interview.

She said something like, "Many people say they'd like to see BOTH of us on the ticket. Well...that's a posssibility!" (applause)

Hillary's pandering is just like Bush's incompetence. You're just not surprised by it anymore.

They seem to believe everything she says.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/22/115613/276/264/520450

by Bob Johnson

Thu May 22, 2008 at 09:19:35 AM PDT

Bill Clinton, that is.
As usual, Bill upstages his wife and offers her concession speech before she does:
Her husband, for one, seems to have a pretty clear idea what he thinks she should get as a consolation prize. In Bill Clinton's view, she has earned nothing short of an offer to be Obama's running mate, according to some who are close to the former President. Bill "is pushing real hard for this to happen," says a friend.

Thanks, Bill.
So now can we stop all the pretending about Michigan and Florida?
What cynical posturing from Hillary Clinton, her campaign staff, and her virulent surrogates like Geraldine Ferraro.
They know it's over. But they continue with their slash-and-burn tactics, including a plan to send "busloads" of supporters to the May 31 DNC Rules Committee hearing in Washington.
(more)

Bob Johnson's diary :: ::
But since they know it's over by their own admission, why the continued charade? Why all the phony posturing by Hillary, casting herself as the Savior of Democracy© when her husband, and, by extension, her campaign, have admitted defeat?
That's the question superdelegates need to be pondering between now and May 31. Do they want a divisive free-for-all at the May 31 meeting for absolutely no reason?
The destructive behavior of the Clintons is nothing new. My biggest beef with Bill's tenure was that he consistently put "What's good for Bill" well ahead of "What's good for the Democratic Party." No surprise, then, that we ended up losing majorities in the House and Senate under his "leadership."
Time to move on. Give Bill his gold watch for his years of service. But make it clear to him that his days of calling the shots are over. Wish him well and tell him to enjoy his retirement. As for Hillary, her future is in her hands.

But for god's sake, Hillary, please quit embarrassing yourself and the party. What a pathetic spectacle you and your campaign have become.
So, superdelgates, put away the defibrillator paddles. Call it. It's over.
Update <2008-5-22 12:35:4 by Bob Johnson>:
And as I note in a comment, below, Hillary, her campaign, her surrogates and her supporters have accused Obama and/or the media of being "sexist."
But are any of them as sexist as Bill Clinton? He has been unable to let his wife have the spotlight the entire campaign. It's been "All About Bill," all day, every day. A domineering husband shoving his wife out of the way.
Talk about "sexist"...

I KNEW it would be about BILL Clinton. It's ALWAYS about Bill Clinton. :hi: