Clinton Says She Must Counterattack

Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday she must respond in kind to attacks from rival Barack Obama even though she'd rather keep the race for the Democratic presidential nomination focused on their differences on public policy issues.

"I try not to attack first, but I have to defend myself -- I do have to counterpunch," Clinton told NBC's "Today Show."

"I took a lot of incoming fire for many, many months and I was happy to absorb it because obviously, you know, I felt that was part of my responsibility. But toward the end of a campaign you have to set the record straight," the New York senator said.

Clinton, Obama and their campaigns have exchanged increasingly hard-hitting jabs in recent days over race, his relationship with a Chicago developer, her vote on the Iraq war, and other issues. Clinton stopped airing a South Carolina radio ad critical of Obama on Thursday and Obama took down his radio response in an attempt to cool the angry public spat.

"I have tried to make it clear that this election has to be about the future," Clinton said. "It is perfectly legitimate to draw comparisons and contrasts. I think both Senator Obama and I have made it clear we do want to focus on what we each would do for our country. It has been obviously an incredibly intense campaign. ... But I do want to make it clear that our campaigns have to stay focused on what you know the legitimate differences are so we can give voters information."

Keep reading.

Comments

[ALMAL]

This night i watched 360 for 5 minutes,
there were 2 white persones and 2 persones of color with Anderson Cooper.
Whites were republicans and colored were progressives.
So he asked progressives about somebody,who named Bill Clinton first black president.
First guy ansvered,that it isn't true,and black writer ,who named Bill Clinton First Black American President,did disservice for people of color and shame on him.
Then woman continied telling that only in one it may be true,becouse Clinton eat junk food and chited on his wife.
Than all of them laughed.
I don't know ,why those two white republicans laughted becouse of ansvers,or becouse of stupidity.
I could think about republicans,who just laughted,whatever i want,but
what to think about this to progressives?

[GhostOfSchlesinger]

Hillary and Bill Clinton's team has not denied that they sought to brand (a carefully chosen word here) Barack Obama as the "black candidate." I can't imagine how they feel about it, but the whispered and confirmed truth - one that the statesmanlike Obama will wisely deny - has revealed an "any means necessary" mentality that should frighten us.

Unknowingly (one fervently prays), the press has played a role, too, by quietly flipping the Obama story from one revolving around an important new voice in American politics to one about "possibly the first black president" - a matter of emphasis represented by a uniform shift after the Iowa Caucuses.

There are many reasons that we should be more than a little uncomfortable with this less-than-­fortuitous (a monumental understatement) turn of events. For, plowing in to a discussion of race in South Carolina is nothing less than chilling as regards the American collective unconscious (read the last as both Jungian AND colloquial).

Elie Wiesel - my old professor - must be shaking. For, here in America, with an ease that screams national ignorance or denial or worse, we have peeled open a sticky page in our history. Our holocaust (one of them) lasted 246 years. So, I am of the opinion that any discussion that revolves around this horrific portion of our national story should be understood as a sort of cemetery walk, a procession across sacred ground - not, mind you, as a matter of political correctness, but as a matter of human decency.

So, the Clinton's, who didn't "play the race card" (a reductionist rhetorical Lego) but did use race as a political wedge should feel a stirring in their conscience. For, shrugging and explaining away their recent machinations as a matter of contemporary realpolitik falls far below the ideals to which we want to believe they aspire.

CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH FOLLOWS . . .

[moonjumper]

The Clintons attack, then say they're being attacked. They throw mud, then say the other side is doing it too, only worse.

The Clinton crowd is being played.

Jonathan Alter's Newsweek article today hits the nail on the head. Basically it comes down to this: the Clintons are banking on voters being too dumb or uninformed to actually figure out what's going on.

The Clintons' Patronizing Strategy - The latest attack on Obama insults the voters' intellegence.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/101173

[Zhonni]

Oh no, Hillary never attacked anyone. She is a fairy or shall we say a saint?

Hillary has run one of the most negative campaign I have ever seen. Trying to capitalize on those who are less informed by twisting other peoples words for political gain.

The only time Obama first attcked Hillary was during the last debate but that was after he was attacked falsely for a whole week or so. I am glad he did what he did, except it would have been better had it been in reponse to her.

[dumbosrus]

Yet another entertaining, and non-informative, evening on the HP.

What did we learn.....­.....nothi­ng.

What do we still know......the following.

Billary: Electing her president is like giving Alec Baldwin a day care license.

Obama: Still not qualified. But I like his attitude. If he doesn't get the nod this year, he needs to work his butt off in DC and achieve something - without becoming corrupt. May be no excuses after that.

McCain: As my own senator, I can safely say the guy is a complete fraud - like Edwards. But he has bamboozled the older generation into thinking he's for them. If they only knew.....

Dumbacrat sheeple: Still ripe for the picking, and they don't even know it. Somewhere Rove is lurking......

Good night all of you members of the Left Wing Hate machine. Try to do better next time, here, on the HP.

[anghiari]

All of Hillary's female supporters ought to read this
Clinton's womanizing:
Why it still matters
Shocking new expose covers Bill and Hillary's intimidation machine

----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------
Posted: May 27, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Editor's note: The price on "Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine" has been reduced to below Amazon!

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com


What injustices did women who got tied up with Bill Clinton suffer? What kind of tactics were used against them? What really happened between Clinton and the many women whose names have hit the media in the last 15 years?
Those questions and more are answered in clear detail in Candice E. Jackson's new book, "Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine," which covers many of Clinton's "womanizing" cases and explains why, with his wife eyeing the White House, we should still care about them.

[TimN]

Hillary Clinton will be the DNC nominee, and probably President.

Get used to it.

[nellie]

What was the first attack from the Obama campaign? I remember several Clinton staffers having to resign because of inappropriate comments about Barack.

[anghiari]

what can anybody say about two people who are so obviously and totally corrupt? Oops...did Chelsea get the gene ?

[Jacee]

Always the poor victim-Hillary. I just don't understand how she has held up under all this attacking..sniffle.

I am so sick of her manipulation and poor me crap. She attacks like a train Rove Doberman and then says this. Just creepy.

Poor me manipulative victims always make fine presidents.

[zull2]

What the hell? As far as most can tell, Hillary Clinton was the first to get personal with attacks. If she was "defending herself" against being debated on the issues by resorting to cheap personal attacks, then she isn't cut out to be president, period. Otherwise, she's still playing the same game of blaming someone else for her own foibles, just like her Iraq war vote. She won't apologize or take responsibility for it...she just blames Bush for tricking her. When she attacks someone, gets attacked back, then realizes that her attacks are hurting her credibility, she then blames other people for starting it. This is not the kind of attitude and sense of responsibility one would look for in a leader at all.

[Gilda]

I think these posts are very revealing in exactly how divisive the Clintons are.
Republicans must be thrilled.

[wildbill999]

She must respond. Kerry tried not to and look what happended to him. Swift boated.

[Indyfromny]

DaRight (See profile | I'm a fan of DaRight)
....

What appens if Bill deposits his DNA in or about the White house this time.....

Let me guess... You want first dibbs on licking the carpet?

[PAT0512]

I think a Hillary/Mccain ticket would be cool.