Hillary Crossed the Line
It may be true that an untidy cat box could beat sad sack John McCain this year.
But.
Senator Clinton, please shut up.
Every charge you angrily hurl at Barack Obama gives the Republicans a talking point.
On yesterday's 60 Minutes, you crossed an unforgivable line:
"You don't believe that Senator Obama's a Muslim?" Steve Kroft asked her.
"Of course not. I mean, that, you know, there is no basis for that. I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that," she replied.
"You said you'd take Senator Obama at his word that he's not...a Muslim. You don't believe that he's...," Kroft said.
"No. No, there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know," she said.
As far as I KNOW? What if the situation were reversed?
"Sen Obama, What about those smears that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian who likes to skinny dip with her Iranian 'assistant...' and 'gal pal.' What do you think about those rumors?"
"She is a heterosexual happily married to former President Bill Clinton, as far as I know," Obama responds.
Who are you, Senator Clinton?
You are doing exactly what the Republicans do when they campaign.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Proper response from Hillary: "He's not Muslim. He's Christian."
Simple!
Better answer from Hillary: "He is a devout Christian, and attempting to smear him as a Muslim is something I nor my campaign would ever do."
Still simple!
The actual answer from Hillary sounded like she wanted to add: "As far as I know... I mean, we're kind of forced to trust him on this, right? I mean, that would be shocking and disruptive to American society if that were true. But it's probably not! But still, I'd be pretty shocked... but probably not tru as far as I know."
Let me ask you this.
If a person is asked about a married couple who have been living together for a long time, whether you think they love each other, what would you say? You know nothing about what goes on inside their home, you are only an observer. Let's say even if you know this for one, can you say the same for the other? I think it is really difficult to answer that without any mistake. Now, apply this on the Clinton family and give us your answer. Surely, even you won't be so sure of your answer, based on all the illogical things that can easily happen in this world.
My man, your analogy falls apart because Clinton knows Obama is Christian. Yet she clearly tried to answer Kroft's question in a way that allowed doubt to remain. What is not to understand here?
How Clever! Suppose you know for a fact that they do love each other. Unless you want to destroy their marriage by rumor and insinuations why would you hedge? Clinton gave a self serving political reply aimed at sawing doubts in the minds of Christians who support Obama. You know it, The questioner knew what she was doing that is why he had a follow up question. All you are trying to do is provide a rationale for despicable politician trying to take advantage of baseless rumors. Why couldn't she have simply said that Obama is a Christain period. She could have even emphasized that the question about religion was really irrelevant because the Constitution does not require a religious test for those running for president.
Better answer from Hillary: "He is a devout Christian, and attempting to smear him as a Muslim is something I nor my campaign would ever do."
If she were the type of person to actually say and mean that, she may have gotten my vote. But she chose to channel Rove instead, sad.
And what have you been elected to that Hillary should take advice on Q & A from you?
How exactly is Hillary supposed to know thatnhe's devout? Just because Obama's supporters can read minds and continually tell us what he really meant doesn't mean everyone has that power.
Proper response from Hillary: "What's wrong with being a Muslim?"
Simple!
I am voting for obama. I am not a clinton supporter but this is getting a wee bit out of hand. everything hillary does is over analysed and blown up now. every tiny little thing.
So she said "as far as she knows"
big deal....some people are really over sensitive about anything to do with barack obama.
be careful....that type of thing can turn people off someone.
like keith olberman having problems with john stewarts little joke at the oscars.
lighten up...seeming all uptight and making someone seem untouchable can really put you off.
I personally believe obama is unbeatable if he gets the nom.
when mccain and obamam stand on the debate stage the difference is going to be so clear that I just do not think mccain can win.
but I am starting to feel alittle sorry for hillary now.
she is being treated pretty unfairly by all sides now..the right and the left.
the hillary bashing is a little out of control
Cart,
Like your tone and your even-headedness. Thanks for trying to calm this idiocy down.
I must disagree on the winner in November though and I'm a lifelong dem.
McCain will carry the election by 35+ states -- BO is what the Repugs have been praying for -- there wasn't a way to screw up this election other than this one.
Never in my wildest dreams would another term of the Kumquat-in-Chief be imaginable until now -- the independents and rerugs who have given him at least 6 of the last eleven and in totoal 10-12 of his overall primary victories will run back to the safety of what they know -- McCain. Trouble is, many dems will too.
The McCain campaign and the repugs fear Hillary and that is what they are saying behind the scenes. All these polls about who faces up right now are worthless tripe, they mean nothing. BO will be dispatched to the ash heap of history before October 1st if he is the nominee.
I think we have to be realistic here -- the ill-will and anger directed at Hillary does nothing but embolden the ABC theory (Anybody but Clinton) -- well all that enmity is going to get them a Pres. McCain.
Prolix,
If what you are stating is true, then how come Rush Limbaugh is getting the Republican to vote for Hillary in the states where you can vote for either party. The republicans already have their man with McCain, and they know that if Obama wins the nomination, then he will much harder to beat at the National election and the Democrats will win back the White house. Rush hates the Clintons more than anything, and he wants to see Hillary humiliated at the national election and that's his strategy behind his daily plea to his listeners!
I started out liking Hillary. With her antics, i've ended uploathing her. I'm not alone. Her insulting treatment of Obama supporters is insufferable. She can't even win over Dems. how's she gonna win over indy's.
I think you may want to consider these points ...the polls says Obama fairs much better against McCain and Limbaugh is telling people to vote for Clinton and he seems to get his instructions from the neo-cons who made the calculation that Clinton will be easier to beat.
Anyone Limbaugh is for I am almost certainly against... Obama is the better candidate and will make the much, much better president.
I agree that all this back and forward is getting tiresome. The Cliton and supporters, are over the top. The negative campainging is not going to fly. Thanks to Senator Obama. It's fair game, if the Clinton campaign throw negative os being thrown at him, he is well within his right to respond in kind. Which he does quite well. It's driving the Clinton campaign crazy that Senator Obama always go one better on their negativity. The American people are not in the mood to listen to all of the negative campaigning from the Clinton Campaign.
As a lawyer and a politician, Mrs. Clinton understands that words and the parsing of words are important. She knew exactly what she was saying. She is losing votes by the second.
Well, hell! As far as "I" know he's not a Muslim. He says he's not, he goes to a Christian church, he prays to Jesus. WTF! If he says so I'll take him at his word...since I don't accompany him to church and kneel beside him as he prays. WTF is wrong with that?
You people are insane...shows just how insecure you are about your candidate and your support of him that you get whacko off the chain whenever Hillary utters a word! If Obama has a problem about his Muslim roots (LOL) that's HIS problem, not Hillary's. And oh, yeah....he'd better clear up that little white lie about the Canadian government while he's at it.
It's amazing to me that you don't see a problem with exploiting prejudice to win an election. By saying that she cannot know for sure, she reinforces the mistaken belief that Obama is a closet Muslim.
What many of you are neglecting to mention is the context.
The right-wing hate machine launched millions of emails that spread many lies about Obama. What Hillary did last night was to verify to the people who believed that email, that those lies were true.
If one part of it is true, the rest of it is too.
Remember, millions of people voted for George W. Bush in 2004, so there are people who will believe anything.
Only to the irrational did Hillary verify any lies about Obama. If one part is true, the rest of it is too? What logic class did you take? You have made a mountain out of a molehill in a pitiful attempt at diverting attention away from Obama's big, fat Canadian lie.
Get with the program degjack. The press, and the Canadian government, has already cleared this up. This was clearly a tactic by either Hillary or the GOP.
degjack:
You are all so clever! The truth of the matter is that you know what she was doing. I for one could care less if Obama is or is not a muslim. But I would have been just as angry if Obama had answered a question about the rumors about Hillary's sexual orientation the same way she did about the rumor about him being a muslim. Respectable candidates should never dignify themselves by seeming to buy into rumors no matter how cleverly they frame their answers.
Just a teensy, whimsy, tiny question; Like Nancy Reagan's itty-bitty gun that she kept under her pillow: Is it not time that we had a real president? What the hell, I will ask a few more: A man who truly connects with people? A man, who like a pundit said, because he blew his nose, receives adulation and cheers, which Mao Tse Tung would have killed for? Have we not suffered enough electing these dead-weights that keep dragging America down? Is it not time we elect somebody who is comfortable in his own skin? Is it not time America had a president who the people, real people love, and show their love by putting their money where their love is? This is no Al Gore, Walter Mondale, Mike Dukakis; John Kerry; George McGovern, this is a real person; who just by his actions and demeanor shows that he cares; and by his campaign shows that he is an effective leader and manager?
Barack Obama has won eleven primaries in row; and all Hillary can say is that she is getting warmed up? Tomorrow night it will be 15 in a row (You are reading it here first). She will grow cold pretty soon; in fact she is almost getting to soon. Oh, regarding the adulations and cheers, because he blew his nose in front of 25,000 people and the rest of the world? Have any of you ever seen, anybody, including politicians, be as real, and be himself, as Barack Obama does? That is why people were cheering. Those of you that call us a cult the reason it looks like a cult, it is because no
man or woman had ever addressed what we really wanted: An America that truly cares
for all of its people. We have been hungry and thirsty for that. It is what Barack Obama is offering to us.
In Barack Obama we will be getting a smart tough president, who is thoughtful, diplomatic,
skillful, presidential, moral, respectful, and will bring about a sea-change in American life and politics.
He has already done a great deal to change perceptions of many things-you have seen nothing yet.
If Barack Obama is a muslim-Wao!-let us all become Muslims; If Barack Obama is a christian-Wao!-let us all become Christians and so on and so forth-and if English, single mothers, and grand-parents can do such a great job-I wish my mother had been English.
It is about time we had a real president.
Enough said.
It is time we stood up for something.
Yes, We Can!
I missed the part where he walks on water. You're kinda creeping me out there, hoss.
Let's not raise him to the status of sainthood. He's bound to make mistakes, we all do, and I don't want to either deny they happen or conversely desert him when it does.
Me, I'm voting democrat, doesn't matter who it is. Trying to conclude who would be better against McCain, think it must be Obama. A winning way, whether we want to admit it or not, goes a long way.
Very well said, thank you. Let us hope that Hillary can come to grip with the fact that she cannot assembly enough delegates to win and has the grace and leadership to bow out and support Barack in his quest for the presidency.
Yes, We Can!
You do realize that when Obama gets to the convention, he won't have assembled enough delegates either, don't you? That's why his campaign is whining about the superdelegates. All he has to do to solve the problem is win 2,025 delegates. Any less and neither he nor Hillary have gotten enough. It's that simple.
I will vote for him if he's the nominee, but no, I don't want someone who is applauded for blowing his nose. AS FAR AS I KNOW, he's not a crazy extremist like the creep in the White House now, but power corrupts, and when everyone around you is telling you how wonderful you are, it becomes awfully easy to start believing your own hype. I always hope that he (or anyone who gets in) can avoid ending up in the bubble surrounded by yes-men (and -women) but I'm sure it's awfully hard, even for the most down-to-earth person with the best intentions.
See
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-loeb/does-clinton-cross-ethica_b_83075.html
I got nothing against Hillary, but, like McCain, the answer was "No." Nothing more, nothing less. Just, "No."
She did say "No!" immediately and with emphasis and sincerity. When the interviewer just sat there I guess she took it that he wanted amplification, so she says "...he goes to a Christian church, ...". Then the interviewer asked as soon as she finished with "...goes to church and he's said..." "Well, you don't really believe he's a Muslim...' and just let his voice trail off. That's when she started wandering. And, unless you can read minds, how can anyone say what she meant by "..as far as I know."?!
The subtle planting of doubt while pretending to make a direct statement is politics. Hillary's use of this kind of tactic is one more reason why Obama will win.
She crossed the line long long long before that my friend.
This woman is no better than bush or rove. Plain and simple. And if she wins the nomination, we'll have the same old crap. Another point: both Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein back Hillary. You know, the two fuckups who blessed us with Mukasey. I have no doubt she will not bring our troops back from Iraq and she will not get anything done for healthcare. This woman is a true danger to the Democratic Party.
i'm so tired of rebuking morons who say Hillary is no better than Bush or Rove. She's not my candidate, but she isn't even in the same time zone as those two traitors to the Constitiution, who are also war criminals.
If this commentor isn't banned for slandering and lying about a member of the the HuffPo community, which Hillary must be, since she had a post up here yesterday, then HuffPo's standards of acceptability have no meaning at all.
i'm so tired of rebuking morons who say Hillary is no better than Bush or Rove.
__________________________________________________________________
I'm an Obama supporter and have come to dislike Hillary Clinton intensely during this campgain. I was never crazy about her, but my respect for her on a personal level has dropped through the basement.
But I do agree with you. It's stupid to say she's no better than Bush or Rove. I mean, why stop there? Why not compare her to Hitler, like Bill O'Reilly has been doing with Arianna? I believe the important thing right now is for those of us who favor Obama for good and valid reasons to retain our sense of perspective, which is why I am going to try to stop bashing HIllary. I can't promise I'll succeed, but I'm going to try to be a little more objective toward her.
The thing is, that for all my invective against Hillary of late, I know that my dislike for her is largely personal, and I can separate that from her politics and policies. She may do a lot of things I hate, like keeping the war going, but I'm reasonably sure she won't be giving us any more Alitos or Roberts on the Court, and that in itself is enough to give me pause when I think of voting for McCain or Nader, just because I think that both of them have more integrity than Hillary. Bill Clinton had virtually zero personal integrity, but compared with Bush at any rate, was a great president ... though he sucked compared with say FDR. It's all relative, you see.
I think we're all very used to voting for the lesser of two evils (or the evil of two lessers, as Morth Sahl called it) and it may be we will have to do that a while longer. If Hillary wins the nomination I will probably swallow my bile and vote for her, though I think she won't have much chance against McCain and Rovians, who will eat her lunch.
As much as I admire Obama, as much as I think he is far and away the best presidential hopeful I've seen since RFK, it may well be that the country simply isn't ready for someone like this as yet. It may be that as a country, we're not quite ready to get him. We are just so plugged in to politics as an adversarial thing, as us against them. You're either with us or against us, liberal or conservative. Among other things, Barack Obama is suggesting we need to try something else, because this shit is simply not working. To me and many others, since has become way more inspiring than Hillary's promise to be "a fighter." A fighter for what? I can't help wonder. Do you think the Republicans would roll over any more for you than they did for Bill?
As to how exactly Obama would change this paradigm, I can't say for sure, but I like the message and am ready to take a chance. I know his programs are at least as good as Hillary's because I've read about their positions on their web sites, and really they are very close on almost everything. So it really is about style, about personality, about attitude and, yes, about heart. And this is where I think Barack Obama is head and shoulders above Hillary Clinton.
If the nomination does elude him, though, I take hope in the fact that he is young enough to try again. His popularity with young voters is a very hopeful sign that a real shift in political consciousness is underway in this country. I wish it were coming a little quicker. Like many of us, I'm tired as hell of waiting.
Arguing over supernatural beliefs is irrational.
When someone says "As far as I know..." she is indicating some doubt in her mind. It is too bad that Steve Kroft did not follow up on that doubt. If I had been in Hillary's shoes -- especially since this arose from a citizen of my hometown, Chillicothe, Ohio who expressed his belief that Barack was a Muslim -- I would have said this:
There is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama is a Christian. Also, even if he were a Muslim, it would not matter. We not the the kind of country that uses religious tests as a qualification for the presidency. It is in the Constitution. But more than that, there is a lot of ugliness happening in our country around the issue of religion. I hope that we can agree that we believe in religious tolerance and the First Amendment which suggests that we should not even be asking these kinds of questions during a campaign for the Presidency of the United States.
Alas, she did not say that. Her answer was strange as was the question. I just wish that I could hear from her something noble and true instead constantly wondering if she is trying to score political points.
I don't think that's what it means at all. I thought she was thinking, like me, "What a stupid question." Why would you ask her about his religious beliefs?
In any case, she completely was gracious when she pointed out that she's been the target of many false rumors herself.
Of course, you are correct, Ann, but debating these Barackpots is like arguing with Scientologists. Not only doesn't it work, they will seek and destroy you. It's frightening.
She was being completely gracious? You really need to learn to interpret what politicians say. She wasn't being gracious. By pointing out that she herself has been the target of similar attacks, she was saying, "These kind of smear tactics are part of the game we play - deal with it, bitch." She has deliberately made use of the malicious rumor that the reichwing keyboard commandos have been spreading in order to scare people away from supporting Obama and told Barack to lump it or leave it. Karl Rove would be proud.
Actually, I saw that interview and I agree with you. I found her flat denial credible, and I also found her statement that she'd been the target of nasty smears herself to be credible.
I have no idea who has been spreading these rumors, but considering they're coming through Drudge, it could be anybody. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.
. . . which, just to make it clear, means, "no, I do not think she was trying to imply anything."
To me the question is, why did Steve ask this question in the first place? 60 Minutes, which used to be a pretty good show, is now Fox-lite? The only people who believe that Obama is anything but a Christian are the dittoheads and brain-dead who live in fear of their shadows and aren't going to vote for him or her. Why didn't he ask her, Do you believe that John McCain has a black love child? This question's in the same category. In the meantime, stop beating up on Hillary, stop beating up on Obama, save it for the guy who wants a hundred years of war. Or just get used to living in the Union of Consumer Corporate States. Comrade.
Why stop there? She should have used the whole interview to defend Obama. Why else would she appear on the show? I think the fact that she's not out campaigning for him right now is further proof that she's only interested in herself. Everyone knows that it's a sin to campaign against God's chosen candidate.
Islam is one of the major religions. Why is it a smear to be a member of it?
You people should listen to yourselves. You sound like the Taliban in condemning everyone and everything non Obama.
Just look at yourselves. You throw stones and defame a woman Hillary just like those tribal leaders.
Just listen to yourselves.
Excellent point, but don't expect them to get it.
Ah , they never listen to themselves....
I loved the article where John Kerry mildly supported Hillary's nonreading the NIE.
Immediately, the packobamas seized upon John Kerry and he was shredded in the first 15 comments. For mildly supporting a collegue and to speak truth and bring sanity...
and Kerry is on their team, by endorsing Obama.
Novice recruits in the O camp prolly never saw an election outside of Homecoming Queen, I suspect.
Please. The Hillary camp has promoted the Obama is a Muslim, Obama's middle name is Hussein and hey look at this picture of Obama wearing Muslim style clothing to play on the ignorance, bigotry, fear and arrogance that is all too prevalent in American culture.
The Clinton campaign intends it as a smear in order to gin up the ignorant mentality that views Islam and all Muslims as one big giant terrorist group and the Eurocentric arrogrance that lacks respect for the cultural traditions of non-European countries (e.g., the Somali dress that was given to Obama as a token of “honor”).
The offense is the fact that Clinton intended it as a smear. The offense is the fact that in so doing she is appealing to the worst in the electorate rather than our best -- say and do anything to win seems to be her mantra. This is precisely why I long for the day when we are free of the Clintons'. I hope that day comes on Tuesday, March 4, 2008.
"Islam is one of the major religions. Why is it a smear to be a member of it?"
...In a perfect world, it would not be a smear. You know that.
Listen to what Obama actually said about Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFLuOBsNMZA
Now read what Hillary Clinton SAID Obama said:
"...he thought the Republicans had better ideas than Democrats...."
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/18/589131.aspx
This is why we need a change. Hillary Clinton is part of the same old Washington. Dirty tricks. Lying to gain political advantage.
Sigh.... Every time I see Hillary, my mind replays that Jack Nicholson scene where he plays Melvin Udall addressing a group of depressed psychiatric patients and calls out: "What if this is as good as it gets?"
We already saw what Jack thinks of Hillary... and I smile....
She will be one fantastic CIC.
hillary can't handle the truth!!
col jessup
This is ridiculous. How many times can you be asked the same question? I'm a perfectly normal person and I saw absolutely nothing remotely wrong with the repeated answers Clinton gave. What exactly were you looking for? Was there some coded phrase that she didn't say and that would have made you happy? Is she somehow supposed to jump inside his prayers and dig around looking for terrorists? What's wrong with you?
I don't know what religion you are but if you tell me I'll take you at your word. I'm not going to go out and look up your records to make sure. Give us a break.
Simple fact that the question was posed shows us the mentality of the media and the ignorant masses that watch television. Some people will not vote for Obama, just because his name is not common.
I have noticed and it is pissing me off beyond belief than since Hillary cried foul and she had a couple of wingnuts agree with her about the MSM slighting her there has been press coming out the ass supporting every damn thing she says and plastering all over like a God edict! How the hell did the fair and balanced which most agreed she was getting change to this level of insanity. And the free press and tv has been out of this world. SNL and her 3 am video shown over and over and over on regular news and the news on cable. I am sick to death of this free ride for her and to top it Jon Stewert is giving her another free ride tonight. Too much for her at this point in the race when she might be a bit poor but she has a slant beyond what I can believe in her favor. It isn't ok for the MSM give her this much when she cries foul. When there is no foul.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
