Clinton Camp Won't Say How Hillary Disagrees With MoveOn

There was a significant dose of stonewalling on Monday's conference call with aides to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Asked to explain what areas of disagreement the senator had with the Democratic activist group Moveon.org -- which Clinton said she had clashed with -- Howard Wolfson, the senator's chief spokesperson, declined to even broach the question.

"I appreciate your effort to extend your exclusive story but we've said all we are going to say about that, and I say that as a proud member as Moveon.org," he told The Huffington Post.

But when it comes to answering questions about Clinton's comments, they haven't really said anything at all. Indeed, when asked about the story on Sunday, the campaign's new top strategist, Geoff Garin declined to specify areas of disagreement between the group and the senator. And when pressed to discuss when, as Clinton claimed, MoveOn had "flooded" caucuses and "intimidated" voters into supporting Obama, he cited his short time with the campaign in sidestepping the query.

Over the weekend, moreover, Wolfson did not respond to a Huffington Post email request for comment.

The entire issue arose late last Friday, when The Huffington Post reported that in a private fundraiser, Clinton blamed her caucus contest losses on an energized activist base with whom she disagreed.

"Moveon.org endorsed [Sen. Barack Obama] -- which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down," Clinton said at the meeting of donors. "We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them."

There were two issues with the statement. For starters, Moveon, according to their director Eli Pariser, never opposed the invasion of Afghanistan. The other, of course, is that, at least in public, Clinton has advocated many of the same policies as MoveOn. As Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos queried: "I'm curious though, what part of our foreign policy approach doesn't she agree with? The ending the war in Iraq part?"

Wolfson would not engage: "We've said all we are going to say about your story."

This, however, was not the only duck and dive of the conference call. An earlier question came from Mother Jones' David Corn who, for the second time in less than a week, wanted to know what Sen. Clinton thought about her husband's pardoning of two members of the Weather Underground. Noting that Wolfson's first response - "she thinks it's a pardon from the president" - was "close to a non sequitur," Corn asked for a more detailed response.

"I'm not aware that she had an opinion," said Wolfson. "I don't have any more for you than what I've given you."

Comments

[FlowerGirl]

What I'd like to say to Hillary is: Move On!
I've seen too much of her. It sickens me!
I must admit that I dislike liars -- even the greastest of them.
And Hillary lies more than anyone I've ever heard of.
I wouldn't hire her to run a beauty shop.

[MaBJ]

HuffPost is so pathetically biased they make MSM look good.

For starters, they don't bother to check facts about this story - they just print whatever somebody says. MoveOn DID oppose the war in Afghanistan, regardless of what Pariser said.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010929190620/http://www.moveon.org/justice/

RE: Wolfson's and Garin's comments about caucus voter intimidation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nROKBU_KlZw

ALSO: Washington State is quietly investigating complaints filed by Clinton supporters all over the state about pushing, intimidation, voter fraud, manipulation of precinct registration information, disappearance of voting materials, and underage voting.

The problem with Obama's followers is that they refuse to accept facts about him and his campaign, choosing instead to make HRC evil incarnate. This tells me something: When you have to smear, dismiss, deny, mislead, outright lie, and use slurs to win, it's not "Change We Can Believe In." It's fear tactics and it's the worst form of politics (aka Chicago-style, for anybody who has forgotten the Mayor Daly years).

OTOH, keep spinning the magical fantasy about Obama and his "change" and "unity" mantras. He's no more a "change" agent than Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Sam Nunn, Jay Rockefeller, Lee Hamilton, or Financial Times. Why do you think they endorsed him?

The Republicans won in 1980, 84, 88 on the evils of government. They then tore it apart.

Obama has adopted their line: government is the problem.

He's Republican-lite; the con man this time.

Thanks but no thanks.

[MaBJ]

Wrong link in above post:

CORRECT LINK:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010929190620/http://www.moveon.org/justice/

[poeticjustice4all]

Oh . . . and thanks for the "General Betray Us" ad. That inspired bit of PR from the Moveonites gave Republicans just the cover they needed. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.

[MetalCanuck]

She did it again! The NIEE on Iran says NOTHING and she is doing this again, look at this 2002 video:)

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=cZcY6TGfAxE

[brend]

Now I know McCain will win in the fall. Hillary blasts move-on.org, and Obama, has the backing of Michael Moore, and rev. Wright, and Farakkhan.

[pilgrim7]

Just more money in my pocket should the Clinton machine & superdelegates succeed in overthrowing the will of the majority.

[drzoon]

In her remarks on the Senate floor, hilary stressed the need for diplomacy with Iraq on the part of the Bush administration and insisted she wasn’t voting for ‘any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for unilateralism.’ Yet just a few hours after her speech, Clinton voted against an amendment to the war resolution that would have required the diplomatic emphasis that Clinton had gone on record as supporting — and that she now says she had favored all along…. Clinton has never publicly explained her vote against the Levin amendment or said why she stayed on the sidelines as 11 other senators debated it for 95 minutes that day."

[zull2]

This is the thing...she doesn't just "disagree" with MoveOn. She's attacked them numerous times. The first time actually was when they ran that ad about Petraeus last year. Now she's attacking them again for doing a bunch of unspecified things that she can't really prove...and it's mainly because she lost the endorsement for MoveOn. MoveOn has its own vote for where it pledges its endorsement, which strikes me as considerably more democratic in nature than most endorsements...but because Hillary lost, she's trashing on them. Maybe 8 years ago, playing the middle might have worked for her, but it won't work today. People want to get away from Bush's policies as much as possible, and MoveOn are in line with that.

[PresumptuousInsect]

And of course, she is using Karl Rove's LIE about MoveOn. She shamelessly repeated his bullsh*t charge that MoveOn was against the war in Afghanistan.

Yes, she will say anything to win.

[PresumptuousInsect]

Oh, I see.

Obama has to explain, EVERY SINGLE DAY, why he used the word "bitter" at a closed fundraiser.

But Hillary, well, she doesn't have to explain ANYTHING to 3.2 million devoted Democrats.

I see.

[poeticjustice4all]

I just wish MoveOn would take their own advice. They're the neo-cons of the left wing. It's all a single issue . . . war . . . for these people. War. War. War. The one and only issue is war. Just as the neo-cons ruined the Republicans with their exclusive focus on war, the neo-libs are holding the Democrats hostage to the single issue of war.

Hillary Clinton is arguably the most noted lefty in American politics. She certainly no pro-war hawk. But MoveOn decided to back Mr. Obama because Clinton "voted for the war." Never mind the many, many speeches she gave at the time, and everything else she's said or done -- the Moveonites respond: "she voted for the war." We all must suffer so they can punish Hillary Clinton for that single vote -- which was in fact a vote to AUTHORIZE President BUSH to take the NATION to war.

If the Democrats lose this next election to McCain -- it will be entirely the fault of MoveOn.

[drzoon]

Bob Graham, the Florida senator who was then the chairman of the intelligence committee, said he voted against the resolution on the war, in part, because he had read the complete N.I.E. report. Graham said he found that it did not persuade him that Iraq possessed W.M.D. As a result, he listened to Bush’s claims more skeptically. ‘I was able to apply caveat emptor,’ Graham, who has since left the Senate, observed in 2005. He added regretfully, ‘Most of my colleagues could not.’”

SHE DIDN'T READ THE N.I.E.

there were plenty of others who knew that was a bad bad bad idea... like her then good friend.. ted kennedy.

she was just insecure about her "political image" and felt she had no choice but to vote for it (even al gore asked her to stand up against the resolution. and he had the very same intell that bill had)

its the most important vote you could ever cast. and.. she blew it. she blew it because she lacked the political courage to vote "no".

and for the record: i am not a moveon.org person. i just think on this thing.. they are right. just like they were when the tried to defend her husband!

[drzoon]

that is so true sharonb. so so true

[poeticjustice4all]

Fine. She didn't read it. SO WHAT? That would've changed nothing. The senator from New York was not going to part with the 75% of the rest of congress, and the nation at large, that AUTHORIZED the President to do what he thought needed to be done.

That's that. Get over it and stop punishing everyone just to get back at Hillary Clinton for being a politician. She's a politician who did what politicians do -- politics. If you really wanted peace you'd stop FIGHTING and THROWING BOMBS.

You don't want to move on -- you want to move backwards.

[SharonB]

The war is the main issue. It has ruined our economy, it has ruined our reputation around the world and it has ruined the lives of the loved ones of those who have died.

[PhilosophicalPotato]

She dissagrees with MoveOn eh?

That must be why many members of MoveOn voted (YES VOTED) not to endorse her.

So if WE voted to endorse Obama in the first place, then what makes her think we were going to Cacus for her anyway?

Stupid!

P.S. That "flood of money" is right Hillary. Millions, and millions of small Donations (just like Obama's campaign). And it's because we're sick and tired of her kind of nonsense! It's High Time to reckon with We the People Hillary, and this is just further proof that you only like We the People when We vote for you. Your true colors are showing...

[Gasparilla]

Obama got a little testy again with reporters in Pa. He said why can't you just let me eat my pancakes. Because it's an election and reporters will ask questions. The whining isn't helping.

[lisakaz2]

Is he not allowed to eat? I ain't following,

[poeticjustice4all]

Professor Obama can eat all he wants but he better get used to the fact that many of us are starving to take over that White House. It's time for the dreamer to wake up and start acting like someone who's hungry to take charge. He says he's going to bring big changes and offer a new kind of politics -- well LET'S SEE IT. What's he waiting for? B-Rock said he was fired up and ready to go -- well GO!

[drzoon]

i think she tried to say that barack got "testy" with some press when he was trying to eat his pancakes.

stupid stupid stupid. what are people thinking? it has NOTHING to do with being "testy". i can't believe anyone even thinks its worth a moments thought when the stakes are so much higher!!

[drzoon]

are you kidding me? is that what you are worried about? IF .. IF IF IF it even happened?

are you really worried about pancake-gate?

the freaking country is at war! our economy is in a place we haven't been in .. in a long long time (if you get my drift)... our kids barely speak one language. gas is four dollars and headed for six!

and you come up with "he got testy over pancakes"?

man! what i really want to tell you.. would only send me to hell. so i'm going to try to use my sense of better judgment and say....

are you freaking kidding me??

[Gasparilla]

"IF IF IF it even happened?" I saw the exchange myself, so the fact that you want to question it like that indicates that you just make a knee jerk reaction to anything you see as criticism. And maybe you need to read a little better. I didn't say "he got testy over pancakes". I said he got testy with reporters and said why can't you just let me eat my pancakes. See the difference? The comment was in line with the fact that he complained about the questions after the debate. Right or wrong, he's going to get questioned by reporters and if he responds with being surly and acting like he's picked on, that will not play well. Get it?

[Tamalpais]

Obviously Gasparilla is gasping at straws. Probably doesn't like pancakes either.

[RussnCA]

Thanks for trying to breath some life into the MoveOn story... I am sure she agrees with a lot of the things MoveOn does when it isn't functioning like a caucus.

[Bertha40869]

Since Hillary is so outraged about Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan, let's look at the other end of the spectrum, let's have Hillo explain her love of the Daughters of the Confederacy and the KKK.

http://digg.com/politics/Senator_Hillary_Clinton_Must_Explain_The_Praising_of_KKK_Grp

Of course, she won't because right now she doesn't give a tinker's behind about what black people think.

[madmaggie57]

I am a member of Move-on.org because they have stood up for so many issue that I believe. But I have to admit that I've only been a member for a few months, so I might have missed alot. I'm a Hillary supporter, but that doesn't sway me away from Move-on. In the end, I will support any candidate that wins the Democratic nomination. Our alternative is frightening. We can disagree on the road, but the end should result in Dems coming together to avoid a Bush third term. Move-on posted 10 things you should know about McCain that weren't flattering...in fact,, I found them to be ourageous. They stand -up for veterans which is a very important issue to the spouse of a combat wounded veteran. The organizations does much good work. Just because I do not support their candidate, does not mean, we don't have common ground.
We are all Americans. We must do what we feel best to help our country to regain its footing at home & in the world. I guess it's only natural for Hillary to dislike Move-on...they don't support her!!!I'm down with that. But, I also want to move this country forward, and this, I believe, Move-on does in many ways that I do support..

[PhilosophicalPotato]

Well said.

I became a member after the controversial Patraeus Ad they put out (which was factually correct. They listed all the sources on the ad even, which they always do). I thought they caught him in a critical hypocrisy and instead people were trying to put their fingers in their ears and go "lalala!"

When the candidates were gaining steam they sent out an email asking us to vote for who MoveOn should endorse. Since MoveOn has over a million members, it was a pretty big deal. I voted for Obama and so did the majority of the members - hence - the Obama endorsement.

By the time my Caucus rolled around, all they did was send me another email telling me exactly where to go for my Caucus and that's it. They did not intimidate me into voting Obama and I seriously doubt they did to anyone else. It was just good organization. That's all.

Move On doesn't dictate to us what to believe. Instead, they ask us what WE think! And then they act accordingly. I know it's amazing, but it's true.

[lifebylisa]

I'm sure she feels they OWE her their loyalty because they were formed at a time to defend HER husband from the republicans. I'm sure it'll be declared that they aren't a formidable force and mean so little in the scheme of the election.