Hillary Rodham Clinton is in danger of falling victim to a campaign narrative that, fairly or not, contributed to Al Gore’s political demise -- the serial exaggerator routine.
Once again, a story in Clinton’s stump speech fails to pass scrutiny. This time it is the tale of a pregnant woman denied hospital care. It wasn’t true, and once again the Clinton campaign backpedals. [4/7/08, See Update Below*]
This comes on the heels of Clinton over-selling her trip as First Lady to the Bosnian war zone, falsely claiming that she faced sniper fire.
In isolation, these incidents might be written off as a politician’s allowable sales puffery. But in Clinton’s case, they are adding up to a potentially major hit against her trustworthiness -- a growing concern for some voters and a favorite target for hostile media personalities.
It is tough to shake a damaging narrative once it takes hold, no matter how unfair the storyline might be. Anything that tends to support what the media and the public have come to expect is blown out of proportion well beyond what other candidates might experience. And a reputation for shading the truth, or worse, is about as bad as it gets.
For many voters, Bill Clinton could get away with this stuff. To some, he was a lovable rogue whose tall tales and misdeeds were tolerable. But like Gore in the 2000 campaign, Hillary lacks her husband's offsetting charm.
- Hillary Drops Health Care Tale -- After Press Challenges
- Voter Doubts About Her Honesty Costing Clinton
*An Update (4/7/08): A family member of the pregnant woman in Clinton's story comes forward to say that the senator's version was accurate (Washington Post). Just like Gore's maligned-but-true claims of involvement in developing the internet, the facts might ultimately vindicate Clinton -- but perhaps not soon enough to lessen the impact for those who will continue to insist that she was exaggerating.
Comments
"a favorite target for hostile media personalities. "
That's the money quote. Nothing that Obama says will be questioned. Until the general, of course.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 7:22 AM
Bow -- You'll get this article...it's about musicans in Nashville going without health insurance. And of course, that spreads to musicians and artists all over the country as well as self-employed and so many others. Whatta country.
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080406/ENTERTAINMENT01/804060423
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 8:01 AM
Patsi,
Yep, A big problem, and not just in country music. That is partly why the IBMA (International Bluegrass Musicians Association) was setup. They have a program, the Bluegrass Music Trust Fund, which was created to assist bluegrass professionals in time of need.
Posted by: Bowmanc
| April 6, 2008 8:15 AM
I have to wonder why she says this stuff. Everyone knows that there are fact checkers that can track this stuff down.
I had this friend that always embellished the truth. He ended up with nickname that started with bullshit. Great guy but, nobody believed his 40 virgins story.
Anyway, she has enough accomplishments that she shouldn't have to make stuff up. since she can't criticize Obama without being called a racist, she has to make herself look better than him. She just shouldn't resort to exaggeration and fiction. She is starting to get the Mike Barnicle syndrome, where he made stuff up for his columns in the Boston Globe.
Posted by: Bowmanc
| April 6, 2008 8:24 AM
I agree about bringing up these stories about sick kids etc....I think all candidates do it to an extent. For one thing, they get stories from their staff, which may or may not be entirely correct. But I've noticed that often the stories aren't even as effective as some other examples might be. In Hillary's case, she needs to double check every statement about anything. Because somebody will question it, even if it's obvious how the error came about.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 8:31 AM
By the way, still no excuse for a story not being checked out, but here's a little info:
A Clinton spokesman, Mo Elleithee, said candidates would frequently retell stories relayed to them, vetting them when possible. “In this case, we did try but were not able to fully vet it,” Mr. Elleithee said. “If the hospital claims it did not happen that way, we respect that.”
The sheriff’s deputy, Bryan Holman, had played host to Mrs. Clinton in his home before the Ohio primary. Deputy Holman said in a telephone interview that a conversation about health care led him to relate the story of Ms. Bachtel. He never mentioned the name of the hospital that supposedly turned her away because he did not know it, he said.
Deputy Holman knew Ms. Bachtel’s story only secondhand, having learned it from close relatives of the woman. Ms. Bachtel’s relatives did not return phone calls Friday.
As Deputy Holman understood it, Ms. Bachtel had died of complications from a stillbirth after being turned away by a local hospital for her failure to pay $100 upfront.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 8:38 AM
I keep wondering who is advising Sen. Clinton. So much of what a candidate or even office holder depends on input from their aides and campaign staff.
In a normal work day, the politician has time to say "check this out, vet this, get me more information". In the course of a campaign where they become almost automatons moving from spot to spot 18-20 hours a day, in a constant state of jet lag, doing well to remember the town they are in, their hosts and stump speech, they are much more dependent on the expertise of others.
Clinton's staff just doesn't seem to be doing her any favors. Again I'm wondering if she isn't suffering from a bad case of the managers not trusting or controlling the office staff. The "too few indians" has killed more than one politician.
Posted by: Jamie
| April 6, 2008 8:57 AM
"The "too few indians" has killed more than one politician."
That was a serious problem with Gore's 2000 campaign here in TN. My son was then a Vandy student, and volunteered. He said that the headquarters was filled with people jockying for position, acting like hot dogs and paying no attention to organization or actual work. Everybody wanted to be the one in charge.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 9:05 AM
Obama's 'Sweetie' Problem
"While flirting with female factory workers in Allentown, he called one "sweetie," a paternalistic way to address a woman if there ever was one. It might have worked had he been trying to do his best imitation of Lily Tomlin's Ernestine, the telephone operator, but this was no spoof. This was Obama trying to relate to working-class women in a way that went directly south."
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/2008/4/4/obamas-sweetie-problem.html
Posted by: GORDO | April 6, 2008 9:15 AM
Craig, does your fact checking sister organization do that type of service for candidates? If so, how fast is their turnaround for something like the hospital anecdote?
Patsi's comment that one can't rely on overstressed on-the-road staffers to do fact checking adequately is certainly true.
Posted by: Flatus
| April 6, 2008 9:19 AM
Credibility?
"The next video (above) is of Barack Obama telling the public (via a news conference) that he would have more credibility as a President (around the world) because his “grandmother lives in an African village” and because he lived many years “overseas” in a Muslim country. Notice how he struggles to omit the fact that he was also a ‘born and practicing’ Muslim for most of his young life. What is interesting about his entire premise is that the Media does not ‘call him out’ for utilizing his African grandmother (who by the way is not related to him by blood but instead is one of the MANY wives his grandfather had as a Muslim) for political expedience, and that he assumes that said characteristics are a “positive” around the world.
Has someone told him that living in a Muslim country and having a poor African and Muslim grandmother is not ‘necessarily’ an enticing fact to most Russians, Chinese, and Latin American leaders? Since he is an educated man, we must assume that he probably knows that most people around the world do not live in the “wishful thinking” society in which he would love to place most of the American populace, since it would make it quite easy to vote for an inexperienced and egocentric politician like himself."
http://savagepolitics.com/
Posted by: GORDO | April 6, 2008 9:30 AM
This is garbage about Hillary being HONEST. Someone needed to read the entire story of the landing in Bosnia. There were snipers and there were bombs in the distance and they did have to fly low and they did have to be moved to an part of the plane that was safer. Just another Hillary bais story. Now the story about the woman who died in Ohio because of no health care.
LET me tell you, I had a 18 year old student in my office on Friday, she is living with her parents, and a senior. Mother took her off her insurance to save money. This girl had a bad stomach pains and was very sick. Her boyfriend took her to the hospital. The hospital WOULD NOT TREAT HER. They have her some pills and would not exam her. She thinks it is her cysts on her ovaries, but it may be worse. If she DIES the hospital is morally wrong.
So Hillary's story is true, the hospital just wants to deny they would not treat her. IF THEY had treated her why is she dead and why is the baby dead.
The media needs to get off Hillary's back and let her run unbias.
Posted by: Carol
| April 6, 2008 9:36 AM
Actually, it was Jamie's comment. One of these days I'll remember that the poster's name follows the comment. (Does that practice make any sense?)
Posted by: Flatus
| April 6, 2008 9:37 AM
"Everybody wanted to be the one in charge."
Unfortunately, that is the problem with too many campaigns. One campaign I remember, the press people would get info from the research people who got direction from the campaign manager. So information would pass through all of these ambitious hands belonging to glory hounds. A day later as office manager on the front lines dealing with news people and volunteers, I would see the press release.
Errors were so common, that I begged to see releases before they went out. Sometimes I got them, others not.
Anytime you see this accuracy syndrome in a campaign, you can almost absolutely bet that no one with a long view, heavy on general knowledge, or research expertise has ever laid eyes on the material.
Posted by: Jamie
| April 6, 2008 9:39 AM
"To be sure, there is no official diagnosis of death by blogging ... "
NY Times story on recent deaths of 2 tech bloggers, and the high pressure world they inhabit. Blogging for profit as today's digital sweatshop.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/06/technology/06sweat.html?_r=2&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
Posted by: dog's eye view
| April 6, 2008 9:42 AM
It's not HIllary's fault. Someone told her a story, and she believed it.
Like when Bush told her he wouldn't invade Iraq unless there was no other option.
Posted by: nash
| April 6, 2008 9:44 AM
I don't know what's funnier, Hillary's lies or watching her supporters try to spin it or blame everyone under the sun but the candidate. Hillary is just a liar, plain and simple. That's how she's put together. Just another form of Clinton hubris.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 9:54 AM
The Clinton economic plan. (It's an infomercial that runs on cable at 2 AM.)
WJC: "Are you tired of working in a low-paying job?"
HRC: "Do you have trouble paying bills?"
WJC: "Then you need our new training course on how to get rich the polictial way."
HRC: "We'll show you how to get elected to public office by pretending to be progressive."
WJC: "Then we'll show you how to sell out to corporate interests."
HRC: "Legal fees, book deals, seats on boards of directors, it's all covered in the course."
WJC: "And if you sign up now, we'll tell you about how to get cash in paper bags for granting pardons."
Call 1-800-COR-RUPT for Bill and Hillary's "Get Rich the Political Way." Only ten easy payments of $39.99. (10% discount for superdelegates.)
Posted by: nash
| April 6, 2008 9:55 AM
Here's a youtube clip of Hillary telling "the hospital story." Notice the fake "folksy" accent she's adopts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rq5BwOujrNQ
Posted by: nash
| April 6, 2008 9:59 AM
What kind of fact checking has been done on the hospital's version of this story? They can't share medical information that is confidential. It seems like the hospital has more to lose, like their reputation, by this story than Hillary has to gain by telling it. She could tell a million stories like this and be truthful. I could give her one from my in-laws so it's not like she had to jump on a remote possibility of a story to give her healthcare plan credibility. I 'm just saying that it seems like a story with no legs unless the hospital is covering something up. People are being turned from emergency rooms (like my father-in-law)when they are either uninsured OR on Medicaid because hospitals only reserve a percentage of space for those patients. At least that's the reason they gave for turning away my father-in-law.
Posted by: iris | April 6, 2008 10:01 AM
Nash did you catch her speech in memphis, where she was on the verge of crocodile tears the entire time?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:01 AM
iris go read the times article regarding this Hillary lie. The person who told the story even admitted he didn't tell her what hospital it was, she's been caught spinning tales yet again.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:03 AM
Seriously, this should not happen to a candidate like HRC. This is a fatal flaw in her campaigning. HRC should be able to find out where the story was twisted, and let her staff know that it is counter-productive to put forth false stories. Especially since the Clintons have known from the start that the MSM is extremely tilted against her and they will dig every day to prove her wrong.
It does keep her in the news, but only in a negative light.
Posted by: unlikely_burrito
| April 6, 2008 10:05 AM
Ohio Hospital Contests a Story Clinton Tells
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/us/politics/05woman.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin
pesky things those facts, enjoy the read Iris.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:07 AM
Not only did the Clintons make $109 million over the past seven years, BOTH of them had 100% free health insurance, paid for by many taxpayers who have no insurance.
If Clinton is really serious about health insurance, why doesn't she propose that all we all get the SAME coverage she and Bill have?
The same can be said for Obama. His "plan" for health insurance is as weak as Hillary's.
We need 100% government financed health care, just like Canada & Western Europe have. (THEY think we're all nuts with the way we do health care here.)
Posted by: nash
| April 6, 2008 10:10 AM
Amen nash, amen. My hope is that we are about to enter into the first step towards just that goal. This is the problem of life in post Ronnie America. Americans now expect not to pay taxes at all. It's why our infrastructure is falling apart, it's why our schools suck.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:12 AM
In other news...
At 10:11 PM, Saturday evening, physicians were finally able to pry the gun out of Charlton Heston's cold dead hand.
Posted by: nash
| April 6, 2008 10:12 AM
""To be sure, there is no official diagnosis of death by blogging ... "
NY Times story on recent deaths of 2 tech bloggers, and the high pressure world they inhabit. "
ROFL! I know the blogging story shouldn't be funny...but it reminds me of when a friend of mine was told she had to stop watching Orrin Hatch interviewed on television. Her home nurse had been checking her blood pressure and it SOARED when Hatch appeared.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 10:13 AM
"We need 100% government financed health care, just like Canada & Western Europe have. (THEY think we're all nuts with the way we do health care here.)"
Right on.
But Nash, I don't see how you can support any politician who ever made a dime if you resent Clinton so much. If Bill Clinton had put his brain power and charisma into private enterprise, he'd have been a CEO worth ten times as much as he's now worth.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 10:16 AM
Brian: It may be that Ametica's love affair with conservative ideology has finally ended. I've been waiting for this since 1968.
Posted by: nash
| April 6, 2008 10:17 AM
This is not in regards to Craig's story - because his post is accurate.
This IS in regards to this hospital BS
Again...everyone misses the bigger issue - health care in this country. The thing Hillary is fighting for and has been fighting for - so we can ALL get care no matter who we are.
I work just blocks from skid row in downtown Los Angeles - now notorious as the dumping ground of homeless patients who can't afford health care...I'm sure you've all seen the video of the homeless lady being dumped on the streets in nothing more than her hospital gown. This is not the only incident...this happens all the time.
I also work not too far from King Drew where a woman went the emergency room asking for help and died while she was waiting even after people begged for the hospital workers to help her. This is not the only type of incident like this at King Drew. King Drew is famous for its problems.
People see what they want to see - Hillary uses an analogy to talk about the need for ALL AMERICANS to have coverage and be given access to health care and all anyone cares about is if she dotted all her 'i's" on the story. Who cares? These types of stories play out every day all over this country. People ARE dying because they can't get the health care they deserve or afford the medicine they need to stay alive. That's the point - and that's the point Hillary makes. Her story was a "nameless girl" the girls baby was a "nameless baby" the hospital was a "nameless hospital". Hillary is making a point about the kinds of nightmares that DO play out in this country when it comes to health care or should I say the lack of health care.
But it's much easier to miss the point so it fits into the Clinton bashing narrative everyone so enjoys. I'm glad there are over 12 million democrats who voted for Hillary so far that actually do get it - with the intellect to see through the BS in the media.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 10:19 AM
iris: I agree with you. There are plenty to true horror stories about the uninsured out there. I just wish that Hillary had found one.
Posted by: nash
| April 6, 2008 10:21 AM
Brian wrote: "Hillary is just a liar, plain and simple."
Yep just like your pal Obama - in fact Obama lies more as was proven after a little trip over to Politifact.com yesterday.
How do you reconcile it bashing Hillary and then supporting a bigger liar?
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 10:24 AM
"If Clinton is really serious about health insurance, why doesn't she propose that all we all get the SAME coverage she and Bill have?"
Ummm...well...see...SHE HAS! That is exactly what her proposal is. Open up the Congressional plan to ALL Americans.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 10:27 AM
Windy take it up with Craig, I don't set the topic around here. And I really don't see Obama telling any big whoppers. That's the job of your side.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:35 AM
Oh god Ed Rendell spinning the electoral map matrix on MTP. Bob Casey is doing a great job.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:37 AM
a little something to lighten the mood:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NMrjxWLmgA
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 10:39 AM
Brye
What would I take up with Craig? I'm fine with the topic. I think it is an important topic - health care should be a real concern of all of us.
If you don't see Obama's "big whoppers" clearly you have your eyes closed.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 10:43 AM
Nash
If Clinton is really serious about health insurance, why doesn't she propose that all we all get the SAME coverage she and Bill have? "
She has.
Posted by: Jamie
| April 6, 2008 10:45 AM
Maybe it's time for the Clinton campaign to "destroy" Obama. Use whatever opposition research has uncovered. The justification would be "if we don't do it now, the Repubs would do it later." They can both go over the cliff together. Hand it to the Repubs - the Obama groupies would get what they deserve. Unfortunately, the rest of us would have to endure 4 more miserable years. But it would be worth it - the system has been rigged for Obama. Hillary needs to stop him anyway she can. I will not get into the "tin foil hat" reasons - Obama as POTUS would be far more dangerous for the country and planet than McCain.
Posted by: GORDO | April 6, 2008 10:48 AM
Gordo, you and Brian are both wearing the same kind of blinders, just pointing in different directions.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 10:52 AM
A day without Gordo is like a day without toxic waste.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:52 AM
Gordo, you and Brian are both wearing the same kind of blinders, just pointing in different directions.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 10:54 AM
New InsiderAdvantage Poll
Pennsylvania poll shows Clinton campaign on life support
http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_43_318.aspx
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:55 AM
Sorry about the double post....I got a message saying the post didn't go through.
Posted by: Patsi
| April 6, 2008 10:55 AM
Patsi how the puppies coming along? Shouldn't be long before you can make that coat!
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 10:56 AM
GORDO, best put on your kevlar for that suggestion. But I would like to see all the stuff the opposition research has uncovered.
Posted by: Bowmanc
| April 6, 2008 10:57 AM
Gordo is as believable as the candidate he supports.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:00 AM
Are we now waiting for a Chelsea Clinton document-dump?
http://www.newsweek.com/id/130612
Posted by: MadMustard
| April 6, 2008 11:01 AM
MM wanna bet Chelsea's answer when asked about that will be "that's none of your business".
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:04 AM
Many of you are "on stage in a fantasy world" - I am "back stage in the real world". There is so much you don't know!
Posted by: GORDO | April 6, 2008 11:08 AM
Brian
The Clinton campaign said that they will respect the hospital's version. The reason the story was so plausible in the first place is because things like this happen all the time. There are two very different stories coming from Pomeroy, Ohio and that usually means that something is missing. It should be asked of the hospital , "what is your policy if a person shows up for an emergency without insurance or on Medicaid ? " If the answer is , "you are treated no matter what your circumstances" then the family and deputy should not have passed on this story. On the other hand, if they require $100 then the family and deputy knew this figure because it was asked of her.
Posted by: iris | April 6, 2008 11:10 AM
"I am "back stage in the real world"."
Is that what the voices tell you Gordo?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:12 AM
Keep spinning Iris, maybe eventually you'll actually come up with something creditable.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:13 AM
And another thing Iris the entire $100.00 is just laughable, that's about the cost of two tylenol at the average hospital. Boy for a woman who's so smart she sure gets caught in a lot of stupid lies.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:16 AM
Obama made up composite figures in his first book.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/01/chicago_suntime.
He has changed dates etc to add to the "glow of his life story"
Lied about his father lied about his relationship with Rezko lied about taking money from lobbyisgts, lied about his relationship to the energy industry
And now he is weasing on his Iraq position. Letting his aids circulate stories that he is more moderate on Iraq while still preaching immediate withdrawal on the college campuses.
Big Fat Liar
not exactly wedded to the truth
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:19 AM
The tust gap has nothing to do with Clinton.
The media is the problem.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:20 AM
[sigh]
Talk about moving the goal posts.
Media Idiot #1: Well...nothing in the schedule to hit Clinton on...at least nothing that will stick...
Media Idiot #2: Hey....let's get the tax returns!
Media Idiot #1: Darn...tax returns show they are actually quite generous and give a lot to charity unlike Obama...damn..
Media Idiot #2: Hey...maybe there is something in Chelsea's senior thesis...let's get that!!!
[And when the thesis confirms Hillary's role as George Mitchell has confirmed it on several occasions and backed up by the Prime Minister of Ireland. What will the media idiots do then?]
Media Idiot #1: Hey...think there is anything in Chelsea's Pre-K drawings that might reveal whether Hillary is lying about all the stuff she did while First Lady of Arkansas?
Media Idiot #2: I don't know...let's see if we can get Chelsea's Pre-K drawings released and find out.
Media Idiot #1: Yea...good idea.
Headline: Why Won't the Clinton's Release Chelsea's Pre-K Drawings - What Are They Trying to Hide About Hillary's Role as First Lady Of Arkansas?
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 11:20 AM
Nash & Brian,
I agree with Nash about the folksy delivery. It probably plays well in the room, but seems to always look disingenuous when it's replayed. Both Hillary and Barack use the technique, so that's probably a wash.
I'll have to replay the clip, but I didn't hear anything there at appeared to be a lie compared with the sidebar story Craig made available below his report. I didn't read anything about the patient being air-lifted, so if that's an embellishment, she's either lying or mis-remembering and I'll agree with Brian that she's lying. But if she's just repeating what the Deputy Sheriff told her, she's not lying, even if the Deputy's story is not entirely true.
As Carol, and possibly others have indicated, the story of being turned away because of no insurance and no "current emergency" is not all that far fetched. It supports her campaign issue regarding health care, so it's understandable that she'd use it if she could. The lack of insurance pushes people to emergency rooms, and puts the emergency room staff in the unenviable position of trying to triage these cases and decide who stays and who gets turned away. That's the legitimate part of Hillary's use of this case as anecdotal evidence of the need for a better system.
Posted by: EdVB
| April 6, 2008 11:22 AM
*watches the Clintonista try to spin, and just sits back and chuckles*
This is really funny.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:25 AM
Jamie:
I agree Clinton's staff has let her down. But either blame or credit for the campaign's performance starts with her (even if it does not end there).
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 11:25 AM
Warren - I've wondered where you've been.
I'm sure you weren't around yesterday because you were going over Hillary's taxes with a fine-toothed comb. I know how long you've been waiting for them to be released.
What did you find?
Oh...that she gave 10% to charity unlike your guy Obama who in true form was worried about his own needs rather than the needs of others.
;-)
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 11:29 AM
Nothing about the story is true, even the deputy sheriff said he didn't mention the name of the hospital because he didn't know it. Also the poor woman in question had medical insurance, her death was not an economic issue. There is something about this entire affair that is akin to grave robbing. Frankly this may be one of Hillary's most disgusting lies. I'm sure the poor woman's family is just thrilled to have their family tragedy now the subject of public debate. I hope Hillary at least had the class to apologize to the family, but I doubt it.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:30 AM
As opposed to Brian's earlier post celebrating the death of Charlton Heston...sort of dancing on someone's grave.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:31 AM
Dear Craig, Everyone:
Good morning to all :-))
Craig thank you for your comment to my post yesterday. I partly agree but not totally, i think freedom of speech has been taken to extremes and as I see it Craig if you clean up what Randi said, she basically called Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton prostitutes. I see that as being mean, vindictive and insulting and not so much a freedom of speech issue, however I respect your viewpoint and how it differs from my own because you are looking at it through a journalist's perspective I suppose
In any event Craig I just want to thank you taking time out from your busy schedule to respond to my post. I deeply appreciate that very much Craig, thank you :-))
Sincerely,
Heather :-))
Posted by: Heather
| April 6, 2008 11:34 AM
I don't think Fascist Heston is in the grave yet dear, but when he is I will gladly do a watusi over it!
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:35 AM
Remember...in Hillary's version of the story the hospital, baby and woman were all "nameless". So...Hillary didn't make-up a hospital name...she repeated the story as the Deputy told it to her.
Talk about trying to spin it...someone here keeps saying that "even the deputy sheriff said he didn't mention the name of the hospital because he didn't know it."
Well...Hillary didn't mention the name of the hospital either...because she didn't know it.
The HOSPITAL identified themselves. The hospital is assuming they are the hospital being talked about. Why would they assume that? Perhaps because it went down pretty much like the deputy said it did.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 11:36 AM
What disturbs me most is that both the media and those who support Sen. Obama will not tolerate even the most minor of criticisms without going off the deep end. Sen. Clintons supporters while equally avid just seem more tolerant of conditions.
I genuinely see the media and Obama crowd as the difference between spoiled teenagers having a total "It's Not Fair, you just don't understand snit fit while stomping out of the room in a huge huff" while the supporters of Sen. Clinton tend to be overworked and overstressed women who sort of view life as "Shit happens, I'll fix it."
The idealist vs. the realist
They are two sides of the same coin, both wanting to change the world and they need each other to make it happen. This is why I always saw the Clinton/Obama as a great team to be followed by Obama/ ? in order to fix the mess created by the last eight years.
Now that seems impossible simply because of what I view as media interference to create antipathy charged excitely (and ratings) on all sides.
Posted by: Jamie
| April 6, 2008 11:37 AM
THE BOTTOM LINE: Someone who lies habitually about objective facts, someone who fabricates a family history, someone who trashes his ancestors and diminishes them with false claims, is not someone that most of us would trust to be in the Oval office.
The truth about Obama is there in plain view. It is there for all of us, and especially the media, to see. But there are “none so blind as those who will not see, none so deaf as those who will not hear.” And none so stupid as those who consciously avoid the truth because they want to keep on reporting Obama’s lies.
Both Mr. Obama and the mainstream media owe the American people an explanation and an apology. But don’t hold your breath. Obama’s too busy making up new lies to even know what the truth is any more.
Obama is not part of any “Joshua Generation.” He has been “joshin’” us all along, and we keep taking it. He may be a Kool-Aid salesman. But we keep buying and keep drinking.
Two and a half years ago I held a news conference in Chicago to denounce Obama as a fraud. Events since then have all corroborated my facts and confirmed my conclusions. I told you so. In 2004.
http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=747
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:37 AM
KGC
Also akin to bashing Hillary and calling her a liar while at the same time turning a blind eye to Obama's lies.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 11:37 AM
"Someone who lies habitually about objective facts, someone who fabricates a family history, someone who trashes his ancestors and diminishes them with false claims, is not someone that most of us would trust to be in the Oval office."
Hear! Hear!
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 11:40 AM
So what is it Jamie Hillary's low life campaign staff or the media? You're spinning so fast I hope you're taking care not to break a hip.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:40 AM
Gordo is as believable as the candidate he supports.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | April 6, 2008 11:00 AM
And Obama is as big an as-hole as you and as free with facts and as quick to call names.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:41 AM
Brian said:
"Amen nash, amen. My hope is that we are about to enter into the first step towards just that goal. This is the problem of life in post Ronnie America. Americans now expect not to pay taxes at all. It's why our infrastructure is falling apart, it's why our schools suck."
On that I totally agree with Brian where we disagree...is that I think Hillary is best equipped to resolve that problem
--Heather
Posted by: Heather
| April 6, 2008 11:41 AM
Wendy,
"Hillary didn't mention the name of the hospital either...because she didn't know it."
This is all part of the Clinton destruction machine. Make up a story that makes her look as horrid as possible, vaguely mention the truth once as rapidly as possible, and then go with the made up story courtesy of the hospital press release.
It's disgusting. I would love to see someone from her side pull clips of the news people doing the story from this fake angle and blasting the beejeesus out of the person doing it by show, name, date, and time and keep screaming until the protest becomes a major story. Clinton's campaign is suffering from lady like behavior.
Posted by: Jamie
| April 6, 2008 11:42 AM
Gordo:
"Maybe it's time for the Clinton campaign to "destroy" Obama. Use whatever opposition research has uncovered."
I would be curious to see what, if anything, the Clintonites are holding back. It seems as if Ickes' talking points to the Super D's mirror your posts G-man.
"I will not get into the "tin foil hat" reasons - Obama as POTUS would be far more dangerous for the country and planet than McCain."
This unsupported paranoia does no one any good - including yourself.
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 11:42 AM
This is the problem of life in post Ronnie America. Americans now expect not to pay taxes at all. It's why our infrastructure is falling apart, it's why our schools suck
Obama luvs him some Ronnie Raygun he thinks he is the best ex president. I doubt Obama is equipped to do abything but lie and collect money from special interests.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:44 AM
May favorite funny blogger uses his "Sunday Disservice" to lay Heston to rest with
http://bagwine.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Jamie
| April 6, 2008 11:44 AM
If Brian celebrated Heston's death, then he obviously had another SMUCK moment. Heart attacks have been striking bloogers....beware Brian.
Let's hope he recovers. How many times must I list the substantial lies of Obama? These lies are not exagerrations, but lies. Yes Obama will now hide behind the progressive label;
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/04/05/obama-campaign-mccain-is-not-a-warmonger/
SNL put the NYT front page CLinton income story is great perspective and Obama is certainly a CMF, isn't he? And Craig, I'd take the exaggeration meme over the Wright stuff any day. Obama lied about Ayer's fund raiser and did he give that money back? He lied about Rezko. He lied to AIPAC, He lied about taking oil money.....too long a list here.
Yep, lets put a liar in office and burn the exaggerator.
Posted by: Maxtrue | April 6, 2008 11:48 AM
There KC goes attempting to spread lies again, Obama never said Ronnie was the best ex anything. You really are lacking in any sense of morality aren't you KC? I can see why you're drawn to the Clintons like a moth to flame. You all have the same back alley sense of integrity.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:50 AM
Now that Obama is so close to the Democratic nomination, the scrutiny he faces on issues like these has grown intense. It will stay that way--for him, for There are more questions than answers right now. Hillary Clinton, and for John McCain--as long as they keep running. The stakes couldn't be higher, and voters want to know.
But the questions are serious ones about character, judgment, and close personal associations. If the answers turn out to be damaging, this won't be a Swift Boat. This will be a whole fleet.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20080331/cm_rcp/four_stumps_in_the_water_for_o
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:51 AM
Wendy:
I was away for a bit.
The tax returns proved just what I expected. The Clintons are super-rich and have been for awhile now.
It is easy to give a lot of money to charity when you are rich. They obviously didn't look like they were suffering.
It is also curious that they did not release the 2007 return.
And there are already questions being raised about some large contributors to the Clinton piggy bank - contributions that make Rezko seem like small potatoes.
I did not think the tax returns would be a fire-storm - just a few more nails in the coffin...
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 11:52 AM
To the Reno-Journal Gazette in January, Obama said: "I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it ... he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 11:54 AM
OK Brian,
You clearly are not in this to listen to anyone's personal experiece such as the one I mentioned about my in laws in my first post. As Wendy said, the big picture is about her healthcare proposal that is meant to prevent this type of situation. Enough said because I'm sure you have a cliche ready to use as a retort no matter what the "pesky little facts" are. And speaking of hyperbole, you're not bad at it yourself. Congratulate yourself.
Posted by: iris | April 6, 2008 11:57 AM
K you ring true this morning. I would say lighten up, but then I can feel your pain. You show exactly why I am often humorless when I come here and why as a loyal Democrat I will reject NeoLIberalism and go with the candidate showing the most honor, experiance and love for his country. Obama and Michelle love what they want to make this country into, not what Liberals like the CLintons have stood for for generations. Sham is the best way I can descibe the Obama Machine, a true Obamination of proressive thinking with a hundred revolting surrogates that make Ferraro seem nice.
Posted by: Maxtrue | April 6, 2008 11:57 AM
Thanks for proving my point KC. Now come up with some other lies to try and spread.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 11:57 AM
Warren:
It's not about a lot of money or not...it's about percentages.
The average person gives around 3% to charity.
The Clinton's being as generous as they are gave 10%
The Obama's being as selfish as they are (did they really need that 2 million dollar home?) only gave 1%
And Warren...you're back pedaling - you obsessed about the tax returns - you kept warning us...wait until the tax returns come out...wait until the tax returns come out...wait until the tax returns come out.
Well...they're out...and it just shows they are generous people who care about helping others. Their fortunes have improved dramatically since 2000 because of Bill's speeches and their book deals and they are sharing the wealth. Good for them.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 11:58 AM
Iris your personal experience have nothing to do with the today's thread, the state of health care is not the topic of today's thread, Hillary's a liar, that's the point of today's thread. Got it?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:00 PM
As opposed to the Obama tax returns which showed Michelle Obama got a big raise for her husbands election to the senate and his willingness to get earmarks her hospital.
And they stepped up their charitable giving when he ran for office kind of like when he paid off his 20 year old parking tickets,.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:01 PM
What To Do When The Democrats Ask You For Money
"We all get them.
Those pleading requests in the mail from Pelosi, Dean and other Obama- Primary fixers.
...they aren’t exactly raking in the dough compared to the GOP. I speculate that this is because more people are donating directly to their candidates.
Every Hillary Clinton supporter I know has decided to send his or her money directly to Hillary. I mean, why give money to the very people who are sabotaging her?
What the Obama campaign and the Democratic Party Fixers don’t understand is, if they think we are pissed off now, they don’t know pissed-off. Our anger today will seem like a day at the beach compared to what we will be feeling after The Fix."
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/06/what-to-do-when-the-democrats-ask-you-for-money/#more-2079
Posted by: GORDO | April 6, 2008 12:02 PM
Murtha on Wolf Blizter. Now take note KC, I can still respect Murtha even though I think endorsing Hillary is a mistake. I don't feel the need to destroy him, and am curious to hear what he has to say. BTW I'm still waiting to read your take on Russ telling us he voted for Obama. I know how much you respect him.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:03 PM
Iris your personal experience have nothing to do with the today's thread, the state of health care is not the topic of today's thread, Hillary's a liar, that's the point of today's thread. Got it?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | April
shall we go through and pick out your posts on other threads which were off topic
more attempts at do as I say not as I do
Did you get a message from your "back channel" there
has been a violation of our idea of The Rules."
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:05 PM
KGC
Yes...how many millions of dollars of earmarks did he try to bamboozle the Senate with for his wife's hospital?
As a tax payer I'm glad they saw through his little hospital kick back scam. Phew.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:05 PM
Gordo I hope you're wearing gloves, I'd hate to think of you injuring your knuckles as you scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:06 PM
"We wear the chains we forge in life," from Nobody's Fool another of Russo's books"
Bowman, You do know that he appropriated that from Charles Dickens' Jacob Marley?
Posted by: Jamie
| April 6, 2008 12:07 PM
Breaking News, Obama tries to get money for a hospital. Details at 11:00
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:08 PM
Point of the post.....
It is tough to shake a damaging narrative once it takes hold, no matter how unfair the storyline might be.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:08 PM
Warren, Obamas were so rich they had no mortgage on their new house? Where did the money come from? And 1% of the Clinton's income would have been far more that 1% by Obama. Instead they gave 10%. And think of all the inner city children Obama could have helped. He got khalidi money at Woods Fund and Khalidi paid him back in spades by having fund raiser for Obama. This quid pro quo WILL be part of the Republican attack ads and knowing how Obama reacts when faced with truths he buried, he will sink. Being Independent means having an Independent mind, yes?
Brian don't make me post here Obama's entire speech on Reagan. What exactly did Obama do in talking about Reagan? The lie of course in Obama's pathetic spin was that Reagan was somehow not a reaction to the very Carteresque approach Obama would shove down our throats again. He actually proves the case against him! He is NOTHING like Reagan in rheltoric or policy and all Obama's talk was about, was a lame attempt to fool Independents and put Bill next to Nixon. NO ONE bought it, not Kos, not conservatives nor Liberals, just the already mentally-impaired. I believe Speilberg was so annoyed he switched to Hillary.
Posted by: Maxtrue | April 6, 2008 12:09 PM
Breaking News, Obama has read Dickens, details at 11:00
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:09 PM
Not just any hospital the one where his wife works
but he doesn't bother to get heat for poor Chicago residents living in Rezko slums.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:11 PM
Breaking News, Obama has read Dickens, details at 11:00
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | April 6, 2008 12:09 PM
Off topic
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:12 PM
Yes his wife worked (s) there. Does that mean the money wasn't needed for a worthy causes? Isn't it the job of our govt. officials to make sure our tax dollars get spent where they will do good?
Breaking news, Obama does his job, details at 11:00
(going to be a busy news cast tonight)
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:14 PM
Not 'A' hospital
The hospital his wife got a HUGE - several hundred thousand dollar - raise from just as she was packing Obomie's bags to send him off to the Senate.
Had it been for another hospital to say open an inner city free clinic then that would be quite admirable. But...just like with his "still" friend Rezko - Obomie doesn't do anything for anyone that doesn't do for him first.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:15 PM
KC when Gordo is finished scraping the bottom of the barrel ask to borrow his gloves. Actually I've been thinking you two would make a good couple, any plans for you two hooking up?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:16 PM
"Actually I've been thinking you two would make a good couple, any plans for you two hooking up?"
This is what happens when Brian has nothing...which is most of the time.
ROFLMAO @ Brian
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:17 PM
I just want to offer my respect and condolences to the Heston Family. I deeply admired and respected Charlton Heston he was one of my favorite actors and one of the precious few that had class.
What has not been mentioned was that he marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and actively and passionately spoke out against racism. Having Native American lineage Charlton Heston could relate to that.
Brian just displayed a total lack of class and the height of immaturity in bashing Mr. Heston for all that great man has contributed to America
And with Brian may not be aware of is that early in Mr. Heston's career:
"Heston campaigned for Presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and John F. Kennedy in 1960.[9] When an Oklahoma movie theater premiering his movie was segregated, he joined a picket line outside in 1961.[10] During the civil rights march held in Washington, D.C. in 1963, he accompanied Martin Luther King Jr. In later speeches, Heston said he helped the civil rights cause "long before Hollywood found it fashionable."
So early on he was a liberal and in later years turned more conservatives as is the case with many Americans.
Ironically I did a post here where I paid tribute to Mr. Heston and William Wyler. In the movie I learned the real meaning of what it is to forgive in the movie Ben Hur it is a lesson I shall never forget...it's easy to forgive those we love and far more difficult for us to forgive those we have intense dislike for.
Mr Heston was the recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom which is the highest civilian award one can receive.
Regardless of our political ideology in unity I hope we can honor and respect Mr. Heston for his valuable contributions to American Society. God Bless You Mr. Heston.
--Heather
Posted by: Heather
| April 6, 2008 12:19 PM
Btw, Wendy - I don't spend my time combing through the Clinton tax returns.
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 12:21 PM
"Yep just like your pal Obama - in fact Obama lies more as was proven after a little trip over to Politifact.com yesterday."-Wendy
Do you a link for this..you omitted it yesterday too.
Typical.
Posted by: Rezdog
| April 6, 2008 12:21 PM
In among them was a request for $1 million in federal funding in 2006 for a new pavilion at the University of Chicago Hospitals, where his wife, Michelle Obama, was a vice president at the time. The request was not ultimately included when Congress passed spending legislation that year, according to the Obama campaign.
http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/michelle_obamas_hospital.html
Windy you really don't want to play the pork game. Money for a hospital or money for a Woodstock museum. Now what do you think has a better ring to it?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:21 PM
That is what the media is for...
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 12:21 PM
Out of the million for the hospital
200k was for Michelle
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:24 PM
Come on Windy anyone can see that KC's and Gordo's pathology would mesh beautifully.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:27 PM
Warren:
Shocked! You were so obsessed with them for so long.
You do have a tone of disappointment in your posts about them though. Sorry the release of the tax returns showed that they actually pay their fair share of taxes - even not taking write offs they could have taken and gave a considerable amount to charity - more than the average American.
Take heart dear Warren. The media will find a way come hell or high water to put a negative spin on the Clinton tax returns and it will brighten your day.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:27 PM
http://www.woodstockmuseum.ca/index.php?menu_id=331
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:28 PM
Well unless you can show that a group of Hippies gave Bill Clinton a big raise before she asked for the earmark....
It's all about the kick backs for Obama Brye.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:29 PM
Like I said Wendy - the tax returns did just what I expected. It shows that are filthy rich.
And even though you Clintonites want to focus on what generous souls they are - people still struggling about who to vote for may see something else in those tax returns (i.e., just another rich politician pandering to the downtrodden).
The Clintons are also going to look shifty because they have held back their 2007 tax return.
Misson accomplished.
btw, how are the recent PA polls looking? Is the average still a 16 point lead for Clinton?
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 12:30 PM
"Obama was promoted to vice president for external affairs and had her annual salary increased from $121,910 to $316,962.
Hospitals spokesman John Easton told the Tribune that Michelle Obama's salary is in line with those of the 16 other vice presidents at the not-for-profit medical center."
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2006/09/hospital_offici.html
Chump change compared to what lawyers of her background make.
Breaking news, Michelle Obama forgoes multi-million dollar earnings to work for a non-profit. Details at 11:15
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:31 PM
How are things in Indiana and South Carolina and Kentucky
and according to Pa statewide polls stilla 10%
lead. Given the Bob asey endorsement, the 4 million ad buy and the bus tour...he has made very little gain
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:32 PM
"The media will find a way come hell or high water to put a negative spin on the Clinton tax returns and it will brighten your day."
They already have. The big focus on the charitable giving is only taking place in Hillaryland. The rest of the world is talking about how rich they are and which unsavory characters have been currying favor with who they thought would be the next President and co-President of the US....
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 12:34 PM
Rez
Politifact.com. It's linked from the CQ Politics site
and no...I didn't omit it yesterday...I stated my source quite well
Truth-O-Meter
I think you had a smart remark about that but didn't read the follow-up that said you could find the Truth-O-Meter over at CQ Politics Politifact.org...
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/04/stop-the-word-police.html#comment-63478
That you chose not to click on a CQ Politics link is not my problem.
You'll have to do some math as well...but I'm sure you have a calculator.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:34 PM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_wesley_little/what_if_democrats_used_winner_take_all
Reality check for those who think Democratic means the will of the majoirty...LOL
Posted by: Maxtrue | April 6, 2008 12:35 PM
Jamie wrote, "Anytime you see this accuracy syndrome in a campaign, you can almost absolutely bet that no one with a long view, heavy on general knowledge, or research expertise has ever laid eyes on the material."
I think you nailed it right there, Jamie. Dems in general better start taking the long view or prepare to lose the White House once again.
I also think the mainstream media is harder on Clinton to an unfair degree, however.
Posted by: Mary Kitt-Neel
| April 6, 2008 12:37 PM
god you clintonista are getting desperate, really folks, this is really sad if this is the best you got, lets see so far we have Obama has read Dickens, wife's work on behalf of the sick, Gordo's claim of doom and gloom. Is that the best you got? You people are as effective in selling your case as your candidate is at convincing SD's to support her.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:37 PM
Breaking news, Michelle Obama forgoes multi-million dollar earnings to work for a non-profit. Details at 11:15
Changed to Michelle now.. When the story first came out it was about him and he had to retract it because no one had offered him a big salary\
and just for a little fact ce3ehcking. She did take a mutilmullion dollar career path with a big law firm and later switched careers.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:38 PM
I am off to walk Lucy.
Have fun playing defense Wendy - with Bosnia, the tax returns, sinking poll numbers and the Super Delegate move towards Obama - it looks like you have your hands full.
btw, Hillary also cheapened any endorsement from Edwards by dangling the Poverty Czar position. Thanks again to the Clinton campaign from the Obama supporters!! The Clinton campaign is good at attacking and demonizing - and that is pretty much it.
Posted by: warren
| April 6, 2008 12:40 PM
All these distractions from the big fat liars story.
Posted by: Rezdog
| April 6, 2008 12:41 PM
Credibility? In Obama We Trust
http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=20080404_barack_obama.htm
Posted by: Maxtrue | April 6, 2008 12:41 PM
"It shows that are filthy rich."
Compared to what...you?
earning $109 million dollars over 6 years (over 30% of it went to taxes and 10% of it went to charity.)
They gave away over $43 million dollars - to the people of the US and other worthy organizations. Looks like WE ALL got filthy rich right along with the Clintons.
In the end...the Clinton's came away with about $10 million per year...FAR LESS than say someone like Oprah or even Britney Spears or Lindsey Lohan.
Grasping at straws Warren. I'm sure most of us knew their income went up after he left the White House...most x Presidents do because they get book deals and speaking engagements. This is not some big mystery. And they are not filthy rich...they are wealthy but I think we all suspected they were.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:44 PM
Rezdog
What is the story.
Repeating the media narrative not the facts of what happened. The media doesn't always tell the truth.
Who created the narrative. The rightwing which does not want Clinton elected while they seem perfectly comfortable with Obama.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:44 PM
Exactly Rez, what's scary is they think they're effective.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:44 PM
Well as much fun as this is I have to go clean the toilet, not much different than hanging out here when you come to think about it.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC
| April 6, 2008 12:46 PM
btw, Hillary also cheapened any endorsement from Edwards by dangling the Poverty Czar position
Clinton never mentioned Edwards that is your assumption of course it is probably based on the obvious pandering Obama did just last week\
when he offered Gore by name a cabinet position.
More examples of it's ok if Obama does it.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:47 PM
Still waiting for that Edwards endorsement for Obama Warren...I guess his glibness and getting into a snit with Elizabeth Edwards didn't help his case for getting an endorsement.
And I'm sure Edwards applauds her poverty czar move...it's what he asked of her when he left the race.
What's Obomie been doing about poverty...
[chirp chirp chirp chirp]
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:49 PM
Well as much fun as this is I have to go clean the toilet, not much different than hanging out here when you come to think about it.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | April 6, 2008 12:46 PM
And just to set the record straight and this will be my last post here, my decision to leave has for the most part nothing to do with the people who post here but the host of this blog. I find his repeated claims to be unbiased without foundation, he takes shots at Senator Obama every chance he gets, any "compliment" of Obama he has made is delivered in the most back handed of manner. His trailmix entry of "Obama vs. Florida and Michigan" was pretty much the last straw for me and I now understand why the only TV outlet he now appears on is that of the king of racial jokes Don Imus, water seeks it own level. Over and out!
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 21, 2008 10:28 PM
Begs the question. Why are you here?
Posted by: Gnome de Plume | April 6, 2008 12:51 PM
Everything is on topic here today.
Craig's post includes the line: "It is tough to shake a damaging narrative once it takes hold, no matter how unfair the storyline might be."
Interesting when Obama supporters have nothing left and they're empty arguments have been batted down, they say Clinton supporters are off topic.
[shrugs]
Typical
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:54 PM
"their"
darn-it - did it again. argh.
Posted by: Wendy!
| April 6, 2008 12:55 PM
Wendy
When the earmarks for Michelle issue came up before Obama supporters said we shouldn't discuss earmarks at all because McCain didn't take any.
There is a difference between setting aside money for projects in your state and projects which benefit you personally.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| April 6, 2008 12:58 PM
If it requires a "kamikaze" attack, Hillary needs to "destroy or cripple" Obama. A few days ago, Jamie asked some very important questions about how Obama got to this point. I'll not go into the "tin foil hat" explanation. Even some long time Hillary haters that I listen to and read have said it is her patriotic duty to prevent Obama from getting the nomination.
Posted by: GORDO | April 6, 2008 1:01 PM
"There's one way to find out if a man is honest: ask him. If he says "Yes" , you know he is crooked." - Groucho Marx
Posted by: Corey
| April 6, 2008 1:01 PM
Well it's that time again:
Yankee Baseball Time:-)) Yanks have lost two straight games I think they will win today Chien-Ming Wang two time 19 game winner will take the mound. H