Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama tells Clinton to come clean re. "scandalous information" plant

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:20 AM
Original message
Obama tells Clinton to come clean re. "scandalous information" plant
Obama Response to Novak Report

Below is a statement from Barack Obama:

During our debate in Las Vegas on Thursday, we heard Senator Clinton rail against the politics of throwing mud.

At the very same time, in Washington, Robert Novak was publishing a column in which he reported the following: Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the partys presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama

The item did not identify these agents, nor did it reveal the nature of the charge. It was devoid of facts, but heavy on innuendo and insinuation of the sort to which weve become all too accustomed in our politics these past two decades. If the purpose of this shameless item was to daunt or discourage me or supporters of our campaign from challenging and changing the politics of Washington, it will fail. In fact, it will only serve to steel our resolve.

But in the interest of our party, and her own reputation, Senator Clinton should either make public any and all information referred to in the item, or concede the truth: that there is none...

http://thepage.time.com/obama-response-to-novak-report/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. lol, "it's horrible Novack said this without any evidence..."
"But Clinton should answer it, you know, for the good of the PARTY. Cause it sounds really bad, doesn't it? Just sayin'."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. GOOD. Put up or shut up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Uhm, Mr. Obama?
I don't think that Sen. Clinton controls what Mr. Novak writes. And sometimes, Mr. Novak writes his columns with his pen firmly clutched in his sphincter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I am way to visual for my own good!
ewwww...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whirlygigspin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
16. she found out Dick Cheney is his cousin?--eek
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
176. Obama took Novak's bait, hook, line, and sinker. What a fool.
Psstt! Barack? Novak played you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. Perfect response
But has there been any other word on this other than Novak's?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. It's being picked up by Time/Halperin and, of course, Sludge
To sit back and say, yawn, it's just Novak would be naive. Obama's doing the right thing by calling bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. Picked up from where?
From Novak or from Clinton "agents"?

I'm in favor of calling bullshit. I'd like to know who is doing the bullshitting. So have these others also said they heard it from the Clinton camp?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. Nope...it's all Novak right now but story is spreading like wildfire
and the same people who are screaming about Novak were all too happy to impeach Bush over PlameGate, a story Novak broke.

Novak is a pot-stirring political analyst, but he is a credible reporter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #18
47. I agree--he's not an internet crack-pot, much as folks are dismissing him here.
A jerk, but an accurate insider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedda_foil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #18
121. Novak is scum, but his reporting is inevitably well-sourced.
It would be easier if he were the typical flaming wingnut but he's an insider's insider in DC and no Matt Drudge. Remember that the Plame leak was accurate and impeccably sourced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. Heh, I dunno
Obama is *gasp* playing political games.

Who knows. I don't know how you can really answer such a broad smear except to say, "it's not true" to be honest.

Like they would admit it if it were true?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. Put up or shut up is the way to go, I think
Whoever's got it should put it out there or suck in the slime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #17
23. Yep
put up or shut up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #17
27. Thing is...
Obama is making this an issue and demanding that CLINTON answer it.

I can tell you exactly what her response will be:

No, and fuck you for bringing it up. I'm so sad you have abandoned the politics of hope for Novack slime....

:D

Good Times.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #27
29. Well, right or wrong,
putting all emotions aside, you can see how that will play out lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sufrommich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
4. I find it sad that Obama
gives any credence to Robert Novak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
138. Was he incorrect in stating that Plame worked for the CIA.?
He was dead wrong to ppublish that fact, but that doesn't mean he was inaccurate. If he says people are spreading rumpors, I believe him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
6. We're Trusting Novak Now?
How do we know Clinton has scandalous information on Obama. This could just be a nasty rumor by the Right Wing, just like they said Hillary was behind the whole Obama Maddrassa story.

I'm no fan of Hillary, but damn if I'm going to take that traitor's word on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Novak is not pushing that shit just because he came up with it
That rumor has been around for a month now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #14
20. What rumor?
I only saw there is "something scandalous" - is that in itself the rumor that's been around a month?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
73. Come on, Katz, you obviously have some shit on Obama
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:12 PM by Texas_Kat
Withholding it is just wrong! How DARE YOU follow St. Novack's lead and not reveal every rumor you've ever heard!

:sarcasm:

Seriously, you've got to be kidding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #6
49. When has Novak been wrong?
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 11:59 AM by wienerdoggie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #49
145. Novak has been wrong a lot, according to Media Matters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
9. Come clean, Hillary. What do you got on Obama?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sufrommich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #9
15. Wouldn't it make more sense for Obamas' campaign
to put Novak in the hot seat? To demand he put up or shut up when throwing out innuendos that harm the Dems?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. I've hearing about something on one of the major Dem candidates
for about a month now. It's not Novak only...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sufrommich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. Hearing it where?
And from who?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #21
42. ha ha, the point is to spread poison without facts. unlike donnie mcclurkin who does it in public n
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #21
52. The LA Times is supposedly sitting on a big scandal about one of the Prez
candidates (did not specify R or D).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
10. Right -
like any Dem would talk to that asshole. No way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #10
164. I can think of one Dem who would...if she thought it would make a difference...
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #164
172. If her husband would spend 2 hours with Richard Mellon Scaife,
he would speak to Novak. But, the story did not say either did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
12. I wish he wouldn't give credibility
to anything that snake Novak writes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
22. Insidious cheese - Deja Vu - Circa 2004.
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 11:38 AM by AtomicKitten
This is the most insidious of cheese with the insinuation they've got "the dirt" and then trying to claim the high ground by not naming it specifically.

This is precisely what they tried to do to John Kerry in 2004 with the allegation that he was having an affair. I recall Wes Clark saying at a rally that something big was going to come out and take down the Kerry campaign.

It's an insidiously disgusting propaganda campaign.


http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/000780.htm...

February 06, 2004
Rumor: A Kerry Affair & Push Polling

Rumor has it that John Kerry (D) is going to be outed by Time Magazine next week for having an affair with a 20 year old woman who remains unknown. The affair supposedly took place intermittently right up to Kerrys Fall 2002 announcement of candidacy. At present, this is nothing more than a rumor; and after such sordid tactics as the push polling that took place in South Carolina in the 2000 elections, can such rumors be credible during campaign cycles? Could this create a Democratic backlash against Republicans for perceived scandalmongering?

* snip *

It's funny that you are sitting there whining about this rumor has been created by the Republicans. This rumor was created by Wes Clark saying off the record to 12 reporters that Sen Kerry has an intern problem. For anyone who doesn't know, Clark is Clinton's boy. Why would the Clintons benefit from Kerry imploding? I can answer that in one sentenceHillary in 2008. The Clintons for 8 years acted only with there own interests at heart, not there party and certainly not the country. I fail to see why anyone should be surprised at this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #22
37. I am very surprised to see you post that
Not only was it not true about Kerry, but it is not true that Clark created that rumor or that it had anything to do with what he said to those reporters, and all of the reporters on that bus confirmed he did not say it. The rumor was running around New Hampshire where all of the campaigns were talking about it long before that bus thing with reporters ever happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. So, I shouldn't believe my lying ears?
I heard him say it at a rally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #40
45. What rally, when and where?
What did you hear him say?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #45
48. I'm waiting for that answer too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #45
70. It was broadcast on CSPAN.
I have no expectation that my efforts at researching specifics will be received here so I won't bother, but suffice to say at the end of a Clark rally broadcast on CSPAN, Clark with a smirk on his face said the Kerry campaign was about to get hit with something big, wink-wink, hinting at an affair.

This isn't a secret.

A whisper campaign is being starting against someone who is a viable contender as some sort of demented strategy that is deemed perfectly okay by the DC insiders, but doesn't sit well with John Q. Public. I thought it was as cheesy then as these tactics are now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #70
75. Either you have a terrible memory or you're just not being honest
The only time Clark said anything 'off camera' on CSPAN was when he said he'd "beat the shit' out of any Republicans who attacked his patriotism.

It's amazing what people mis-remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #75
79. Yeah, I'll just have to go with my lying ears then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #79
84. Yeah I guess so....
since your 'ears' seem to be hallucinating.......

You think you can get away with shit like this because CSPAN no longer has the video online.

Point to any story about this 'blockbuster' revelation if you can (you can't because it never happened).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #84
93. Here's your link:
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:39 PM by AtomicKitten
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped... /

Clark falls prey to anti-Kerry rumor mill

By Thomas Oliphant, 2/15/2004

WASHINGTON

POLITICS ASIDE, the quick endorsement of John Kerry by presidential candidate emeritus Wesley Clark might best be understood as an act of contrition for two egregious sins that ironically serve as bookends for this month's degrading detour into campaign slime.

The sin of commission occurred during an astonishing, even for a rookie, judgment lapse with the gaggle of reporters covering his campaign on its final day last week. Bantering with them at length under supposedly off-the-record ground rules, Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an "intern" scandal.

* snip *

Clark's rumor-mongering with his press corps about Kerry was the visible tip of an iceberg of rumor-mongering that had gone on for weeks, stirred not only by some of his fund-raisers but also among the press by aides and consultants that "something" was coming. This is how spin doctors feed gossip mills without actually providing gossip.

His comments -- instantly passed on to home offices and then to others, proving why nothing is off-the-record with more than one person in a presidential campaign, and probably shouldn't be. They had the effect of drawing unwarranted attention to a supermarket tabloid clip job on Kerry's private life last week that rehashed the astonishing fact that the senator appears to have been single when he wasn't married.

So where was the rumored "story"? Into the breach stepped the right wing -- Matt Drudge's website and associated radio shows, and right-wing and Rupert Murdoch-owned British outlets, and their tried and true methods all for getting trash into the standards-challenged mainstream press. The absence of a story or even an allegation is no obstacle here; the technique is simply to start a rumor that a story is about to appear.

It worked. By Friday morning, Kerry decided to answer a clear, direct question from Don Imus on his radio program. Asked if there was anything coming or anything to all this, anything at all, Kerry chose to be direct, unequivocal, and on the record: "There is nothing to report, nothing to say." The answer was No.

*snip *

However, the impression fostered more in the press than in politics that the inevitable existence of questions and gaps permits inferences about the answers and about what might be in the gaps is just as pernicious. The fact remains that while Bush is on the record promising a full disclosure he has yet to make, no one has the right to assume the answers to questions for political purposes.

I suspect this campaign is too potentially close not to get ugly, which is regrettable. What is more regrettable, however, is that my business is more likely than not to be a willing participant in the ugliness -- again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #93
101. Debunked
THis story is 'describing' what supposedly happened ON THE CAMPAIGN BUS as initially posted by Drudge. Ryan Lizza of TNR was in the bus participating in that 'conversation' and said Clark said no such thing

See WesDem's post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

None of this was "on CSPAN" and none of it actually happened.

Are your ears burning yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #101
102. bullshit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #102
105. Ah the last refuge of the incoherent ....
.....insults. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #105
108. Oh, I'm sorry. Are only you allowed caustic retorts?
Wes Clark's 2004 "rumor-mongering" about John Kerry was legendary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #108
114. and debunked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #114
119. If it makes you feel better to say so.
Pay no attention to the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #70
77. Link, please nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #77
100. It was at the rally where Michael Moore appeared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #100
113. Nope... Clark got out of the race on 2/14/2004
Oliphant's 'story' appeared on 2/15/2004. The Michael Moore rally was January 17, 2004.

So you're wrong again. Even Oliphant says" The sin of commission occurred during an astonishing, even for a rookie, judgment lapse with the gaggle of reporters covering his campaign on its final day last week."

So he's definitely talking about the 'on the bus' thing -- even though Oliphant wasn't .... uh.... on the bus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #113
118. Oliphant's story was in February talking about Clark's problem with "rumor-mongering"
... and how that might make it uncomfortable for him to endorse Kerry.

One of Wes' comments was live and out loud on CSPAN.

Nice try.
Thanks for playing.
Drive through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #118
123. Sorry, Oliphant specifically mentions the final day of the campaign
"with the gaggle of reporters covering his campaign on its final day last week."

The only thing Oliphant was complaining about from the Moore rally was when Moore accused Bush of being a deserter.

Did you even read the article in the Globe you linked to? Guess not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #123
142. Oliphant CONFIRMED it .....
http://www.politicalstar.com/john-kerry.html

Wesley Clark Throws Fuel on the Fire

Despite his recent endorsement of Kerry, in an off-the-record conversation with a dozen reporters earlier this week, General Wesley Clark allegedly stated: "Kerry will implode over an intern issue," according to a Drudge story released Thursday.

In a subsequent Boston Globe report, Thomas Oliphant confirms the story saying, "Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an 'intern' scandal."

Talon News is also reporting that Craig Crawford of the Congressional Quarterly said that Chris Lahane, Clark's press secretary and a previous adviser to former Vice President Al Gore, has known about the Kerry affair story for a while and "has shopped around for a long time" to find someone to publish it.

Sources told the Drudge Report - who previously broke the story on Bill Clinton's affair with intern Monica Lewinsky in 1998 - that these allegations are the reason why Dean decided not to drop out of the race after Wisconsin and turned increasingly aggressive against the front-running rival in recent days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #142
148. Oliphant wasn't there
Lizza was.... Lizza debunked it.

Let's see Talon News http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talon_News (Jeff Gannon/Guckert's) 'paper'.... Drudge......oh yeah.... do you actually know who any of these people are?

Give it up.... this is just making you look very foolish and hyper-emotional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #148
151. Ya know how Spitzer retracted the DL thingie?
Do the math. The Clintons are powerful people.

However, Oliphant wasn't bullied and reports:
"In a subsequent Boston Globe report, Thomas Oliphant confirms the story saying, "Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an 'intern' scandal."

And since I actually heard Clark make this comment on CSPAN off the cuff but nonetheless on camera, I tend to believe my lying ears and a reporter who won't be bullied into acquiescence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #151
155. OLIPHANT WASN"T THERE
I don't know what you may have re-imagined you heard, but your grasp of what happened in 04 seems to have evaporated.

You should stick with bashing Hillary Clinton directly because the historical evidence (posted several times by several different people) on THIS subject does NOT agree with you.

Sorry, facts are facts and your fevered imagination seems to have mislaid them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #155
160. He interviewed Clark and quoted him:
"Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an 'intern' scandal."

I prefer actual reporting over blog chatter and I know what I heard on CPSAN. Clearly the Clinton camp are in this up to their necks all over again.

Believe whatever you want, protect at all costs. But when this sh*t is rearing it's ugly head all over again, a review of past history is not only relevant, it is mandatory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #160
162. No where does Oliphant say he interviewed Clark
Now you're just completely making shit up. Oliphant was paraphrasing what Drudge said. Oliphant never claimed to have interview Clark in this article.
.... NOT ONCE.

Jeez... are you really that disconnected?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #162
163. He QUOTED Clark.
This isn't just the run-of-the-mill blog chatter that is considered gospel here at DU (if it says what you want it to say that is).

Oliphant QUOTED Clark, and apparently you don't realize the ramifications of that.

And now you are just spinning your wheels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #163
166. No he didn't... no quotation marks
We know Oliphant knows how to use them because the word "deserter" (Which MM actually said) is in quotes.

Even HE knows that if you quote someone, you use quotation marks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #148
173. I trust Oliphant over Lizza
That based on having seen things (on CSPAN usually) that they reported on.

I don't think this shows that Clark started it, but it does say he was willing to pass it on - and did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #173
175. Except the reporters on the bus say he did not
Oliphant was not on the bus. Oliphant says Clark said it, yes, but he does not prove it and cannot know it without confirming it with those who were present. If you look at the Columbia Journalism Review piece in this thread, they checked with the reporters who were on the bus, as did Lizza and as did Conason and others. Oliphant nowhere says he checked with anybody; he simply repeats the Drudge lie. The CSPAN issue is entirely separate. Not even Oliphant says Clark said anything about Kerry at all at that rally in New Hampshire. It's all about Bush and his being AWOL. We know he said something about Kerry a month later on the bus, which Oliphant refers to incorrectly, but the reporters who were there confirm Clark said nothing about Kerry and an intern. This was a way bigger smear on Kerry, God knows, but it was also a smear on Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #40
56. If true, my opinion of Clark just dropped about 80 percent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #56
62. I'm very confident that
Clark did no such thing, but I'd like to hear all the details of this event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #56
64. He never said it
Campaign Journal
by Ryan Lizza
02.17.04

HE DID SPELL JOHN KERRY CORRECTLY:

Just in case anybody was still wondering whether anything in the original Drudge item about John Kerry was accurate, I can confirm that Wesley Clark did not say what Drudge says he said at that off-the-record conversation with reporters in Nashville one week ago.

I was there when Clark spoke, and just to make sure I didn't miss anything, I've also checked with other reporters who were there. Since it was off the record (sort of), I can't get into what Clark actually said (let's just say it was not his finest moment on the campaign trail), but I can report that the quote Drudge attributes to him--"Kerry will implode over an intern issue"--is not accurate. He never said that.

posted 2:10 p.m.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/campaignjournal?pid=1337
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. "Off the record" conversation? Not his finest moment? Sounds like he was spreadin' dirt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #68
74. He said it live and out loud on CSPAN at the end of a rally.
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:15 PM by AtomicKitten
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #74
78. I'm hoping this was just his political newbie-ness coming out, and not
real malice or a Clinton scheme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #78
83. Be careful what you believe
I've seen pretty much all of Clark's appearances on C-Span, and I've never seen anything remotely like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #83
95. see response #93
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:38 PM by AtomicKitten
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #95
124. See response #122
The article you are basing your argument on was factually incorrect as is your interpretation of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #124
128. Really?
The Boston Globe article disagrees. We'll just have to agree to disagree that my interpretation of what I heard with my own ears on CSPAN from Wes Clark's own mouth is wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #95
130. I read it,
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 01:02 PM by seasonedblue
I've read everything written in response to you also.

edited: I won't mention what I'd like to say at this point, and I'll leave it at that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #130
133. More proof -
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 01:09 PM by AtomicKitten
http://www.politicalstar.com/john-kerry.html

Wesley Clark Throws Fuel on the Fire

Despite his recent endorsement of Kerry, in an off-the-record conversation with a dozen reporters earlier this week, General Wesley Clark allegedly stated: "Kerry will implode over an intern issue," according to a Drudge story released Thursday.

In a subsequent Boston Globe report, Thomas Oliphant confirms the story saying, "Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an 'intern' scandal."

Talon News is also reporting that Craig Crawford of the Congressional Quarterly said that Chris Lahane, Clark's press secretary and a previous adviser to former Vice President Al Gore, has known about the Kerry affair story for a while and "has shopped around for a long time" to find someone to publish it.

Sources told the Drudge Report - who previously broke the story on Bill Clinton's affair with intern Monica Lewinsky in 1998 - that these allegations are the reason why Dean decided not to drop out of the race after Wisconsin and turned increasingly aggressive against the front-running rival in recent days.


On edit: I echo your sentiments right back at ya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #133
146. How is that proof?
Thomas Oliphant couldn't confirm the story because he wasn't there. The reporters who were there denied the story in three separate articles I've posted. Why are you doing this? I have never known you to be so fucking dense. Talon News? Drudge? Come on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #146
149. So, you are equating Oliphant with Drudge? Oliphant confirmed the story.
In a subsequent Boston Globe report, Thomas Oliphant confirms the story saying, "Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an 'intern' scandal."

And I have never know you to be some goddamn rude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #149
153. Oliphant was NOT THERE
The other reporters who WERE THERE are the only ones who can confirm a goddamned fucking thing and they DENY IT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #153
156. " ... in what (Clark) inelegantly called an "intern scandal."
Oliphant confirmed the story after interviewing him.

"Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an 'intern' scandal."

And the fact that we are seeing all over again in deja vu kind of way this kind of insidiously cheesy whisper campaign attributed to the Clinton campaign speaks volumes.

Believe whatever you want; I really couldn't care less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #156
167. Except Clark did not call it an "intern scandal" inelegantly or otherwise
Nor did the reporters to whom Clark spoke ever say he did, but said he did *not* say anything about an intern scandal. You are repeating a lie again and again but it will never be true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #167
168. So, you are saying Mr. Oliphant is a liar or just me?
Ya know, you can believe whatever you want and clearly do, but it is against DU rules to accuse people of lying. I'm sorry you don't like the reporting that is contrary to what you want to believe, but it is what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #168
170. As I said
You are repeating a lie again and again but it will never be true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #74
80. Untrue, completely and utterly untrue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #74
90. Put up or shut up
That's the theme of the day, isn't it? LINK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #90
97. here you go:
It was at the rally where Michael Moore appeared.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped... /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #97
122. That article does not say what you say
The Michael Moore thing had to do with Bush being AWOL, not the Kerry-intern pseudo scandal.

You have not shown that Clark said any such thing at a rally.

In addition the Columbia Journalism Review refuted the Boston Globe article in relation to the bus and reporter incident:

Echo Chamber
The Drudge Report: The Gift That Keeps on Giving

Back in February, Matt Drudge wrote an undocumented story claiming that one of John Kerry's interns had fled the country at the candidate's request, just as Kerry was fighting off a "media probe of recent alleged infidelity." In the piece, Drudge claimed that Wesley Clark had told a group of reporters that "Kerry will implode over an intern issue" in an off-the-record conversation.

The Kerry intern story turned out to be bogus, as did the claim that Clark had spread the rumor. As Campaign Desk noted at the time (and has written about subsequently as well), The New Republic's Ryan Lizza and reporters we spoke to on background who were present for the comments all confirm that Clark never said anything about an intern during the conversation in question. The retired general did say he believed there was a story coming out that might damage Kerry, but, according to one reporter, he didn't seem to have any idea what it might be.

Thankfully, the rumor about Kerry's infidelity seems to have faded into the ether. But, maddeningly, the claim that Clark spread the rumor has endured. An alert reader emailed us today about a Boston Globe piece by Peter Canellos containing the following paragraph:

Then the last days of his campaign, Clark reportedly told a few reporters he was hanging on because he heard Kerry might be exposed as having had an affair with an intern. The affair never materialized, but Clark may have revealed a problem of his own, not being able to keep his mouth shut.

The irony here is that Clark did show, in the episode, that he sometimes says things he probably shouldn't. He just didn't say what Drudge, and subsequently Newsweek, the Associated Press, and, now, The Boston Globe, say he did. The rest of Canellos' story is excellent, and far from a hit piece: It concludes with the statement that "Kerry could do far worse" than selecting Clark as his running mate. It's just too bad he didn't bother to check up on the validity of a claim that's been debunked many times -- and that originated with a source who pegs his own accuracy rate (generously) at 80 percent.

--Brian Montopoli

Columbia Journalism Review, Campaign Desk, May 18 2004
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #122
125. Your assumption is that was only that occasion that Clark is alleged to have said this.
The Boston Globe article shows that that is not the case.

And I heard him on CSPAN with my own ears talking about an upcoming bombshell, an 'intern problem,' that would take down the Kerry campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #125
141. The Boston Globe article does not say what you say
That Clark said something about "an upcoming bombshell, an 'intern problem,' that would take down the Kerry campaign" at the Michael Moore rally filmed by C-SPAN. It just doesn't. It makes the (untrue) claim that he said it at an entirely diffrent time in an entirely different place, on the bus with reporters at least a month later than the Michael Moore rally, which was refuted by the Columbia Journalism Review and denied by every single reporter present. In fact, he did not say it on the bus or at the Michael Moore rally.

You are under an obligation to provide backup for your claim or you are simply regurgitating an old Drudge smear against a Democrat. Prove it. If you can't, retract it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #141
144. Oliphant CONFIRMED it.
Sorry you don't like it, but it is a fact.

http://www.politicalstar.com/john-kerry.html

Wesley Clark Throws Fuel on the Fire

Despite his recent endorsement of Kerry, in an off-the-record conversation with a dozen reporters earlier this week, General Wesley Clark allegedly stated: "Kerry will implode over an intern issue," according to a Drudge story released Thursday.

In a subsequent Boston Globe report, Thomas Oliphant confirms the story saying, "Clark actually said he was still in the race because he thought Kerry's campaign was going to implode over what he inelegantly called an 'intern' scandal."

Talon News is also reporting that Craig Crawford of the Congressional Quarterly said that Chris Lahane, Clark's press secretary and a previous adviser to former Vice President Al Gore, has known about the Kerry affair story for a while and "has shopped around for a long time" to find someone to publish it.

Sources told the Drudge Report - who previously broke the story on Bill Clinton's affair with intern Monica Lewinsky in 1998 - that these allegations are the reason why Dean decided not to drop out of the race after Wisconsin and turned increasingly aggressive against the front-running rival in recent days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #144
150. Oliphant does not prove your case
Oliphant does not even prove his own any more than you do yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #150
152. Yeah, that's what I thought.
You ask for links and then summarily kick them to the curb.

Rinse, lather, repeat.

We're done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #152
154. You bet your sweet ass we're done
Dishonesty is one thing I do not tolerate in friends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #154
157. well, we clearly aren't friends
because my friends can discuss issues without getting ugly

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #157
165. Look to yourself
You've posted nothing but ugly. I paid you the courtesy of examining your empty sources and using credible information in response, which you've completely ignored. I can't imagine how you could have supported this terrible man once you heard what you heard "with your own ears," but to present evidence that in no way backs up your unsubstantiated claim is plain dishonorable.

Anybody who reads this subthread can make their own evaluation of whose argument has been substantiated. I'm moving on from this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #90
98. dupe
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:38 PM by AtomicKitten
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCarolinawoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #74
104. I taped every c-span appearance he ever made. I don't remember anything like that.
It's certainly something that one wold take note of!

My memory is that someone told Clark of this "Kerry affair" thing and Clark mentioned (on the campaign bus) that he had heard about it. He and Kerry later spoke to each other about this. The Kerry and Clark families remained close throughout the general election, and even AFTER the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #104
109. Did you watch it to the very end of the broadcast
when he was milling about in the crowd? That's when he said it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #74
116. nope... Clark got out of the race on 2/14/2004
Your timeline is skewed... unless you're living in the Twilight Zone....

oh wait....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #116
120. Your reading comprehension could use some work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #68
88. He was under no obligation to be talking nice about Kerry
Kerry sometimes was not so nice about Clark, either. However, Clark did not start or spread the Kerry-intern rumor as claimed. In fact, what he was talking about was a Philadelphia Inquirer article that was set to come out at the time, which I don't recall the subject of, but which was not the Kerry-intern scandal.

Chris Crawford then of MSNBC was victim of a leak in his office:

Within 10 minutes after Drudge posted the Kerry intern item, Crawford sent a memo to his superiors that said the story was "something Chris Lehane (clark press secy) has shopped around for a long time." According to Crawford, someone at MSNBC promptly leaked his memo to Drudge. But when Lehane called Crawford with a loudly indignant denial, the MSNBC columnist quickly issued a public retraction. He said:

"The comments attributed to me are from a private email to television news associates based on conversations with Democratic campaign operatives. I did not consider any of it confirmed enough to report or publish. I can only verify that Chris Lehane's rivals in other Democratic campaigns made these claims and I have found no independent source to confirm it. Which is why we did not go with the story. But then someone sent my email to others, which is the only reason it got into the public domain." In other words, there is no proof that Lehane circulated the rumor, let alone that the rumor has any basis in reality.



http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2004/02/13/drudge /






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #40
169. Then you were the only one
Receiving such telepathic messages.

You think the rest of us wouldn't have heard of, oh, Wes Clark spreading rumors in front of a crowd at a rally, for chrissakes?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #169
171. Really?
I have some researchers I have access to locating this CSPAN moment. Be prepared to apologize to me (although I'm quite certain you won't). Until then, bite me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
24. Is Obama trying to kill his candidacy,.,
statements like this will do it...

So desperate to equate his negative attacks with something on Hillary he seriously is expecting her to comment on an anonymously sourced hit piece from right wing shill and Valerie Wilson outer Robert Novak...


Pathetic...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Good, hope she takes that approach
because if there's anything your girl isn't very convincing at, it's taking the high road.

Seems to me she could win a lot more friends by firing the person who is responsible than by pretending she's a goody-two-shoes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sufrommich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. There would have to be a "real person" to fire first.
Taking Novak at his word is insanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. And you believe Obama just read the papers and made a staement?
Due diligience has been done here; the Obama campaign has access to Novak, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. Exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. So Obama and Novak have conspired in your opinion...
To bring Hillary down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. exactly. I smell a set up. Rovian tactics.
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 11:45 AM by Evergreen Emerald
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sufrommich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #30
36. You don't know that.
There are 3 possibilities here:
1. The Clinton campaign planted a story with Novak
2.The Obama campaign is using an unsubstantiated rumor to attack Clinton
3.Novak is purposely creating malice among Dems.
Until I have proof of anything else,I'll go with # 3. I'm amazed anyone is jumping to conclusions with Novak involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #30
38. I'm not sure what that means,
but if he has access to Novak, he should quote the original source, otherwise it comes across as rumor mongering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #26
32. It's pretty sad Obama supporters are so desperate...
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 11:44 AM by SaveElmer
That they are willing to get into bed with Robert Novak and Matt Drudge to try and gain some kind of foothold...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #32
46. Are you serious?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #46
50. Absolutely...
When you depend on "scandalous" revelations from Novak and Drudge to revive a flagging campaign...that is exactly what it is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. So in your opinion Hillary has nothing to do with this
and it's all a ploy by Obama?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #54
61. It'a a ploy by Novak...
That unfortunately Obama decided to give credence...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #32
59. Robert Novak is not the same as Matt Drudge--he's an asshole, but a credible journalist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #59
65. He is a right wing partisan...
And after the whole Joseph and Valerie Wilson incident...calling him credible is stretching the meaning of that word to the breaking point...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #65
71. The only thing that makes someone lose credibility with me is if they
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:11 PM by wienerdoggie
spread information that is proven to be false--I don't care what their partisan biases are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #71
81. They lose credibility when they demonstrate they have no scuples...
No central morality...

Novak has demonstrated that on numerous occasions...from endangering American lives in the Plame affair...to flacking for the Swift Boat Veterans in 2004...by hawking a book that was published by his son's company...

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/10/01/nova...

If this is truly the people Obama wants to rely on to win the nomination...he is an even bigger fool than I thought!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #81
92. Lack of journalistic ethics does not equal "liar". Novak likes to
stir up the shit and prove that he's on the "inside", and thus he's a leaker, but that doesn't mean he's making up the fact that he heard something from someone connected to the Clinton staffer. Again, the only way to lose credibility with me is to generate false information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #81
99. heh....talk about a straight line.
They lose credibility when they demonstrate they have no scuples...No central morality...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #99
107. Straight to Obama it looks like...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #107
129. It would seem to apply to many, both those running and those supporting.
To be clear though, I'm not talking about you personally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #59
161. "credible?" how far have we fallen when a biased-right-wing-hack
is deemed credible?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #32
82. If Drudge is so bad why has Hillary been playing footsie with him?
NYT: Clinton Finds Way to Play Along With Drudge

By JIM RUTENBERG
Published: October 22, 2007
WASHINGTON, Oct. 21 As Senator Barack Obama prepared to give a major speech on Iraq one morning a few weeks ago, a flashing red-siren alert went up on the Drudge Report Web site. It read, Queen of the Quarter: Hillary Crushes Obama in Surprise Fund-Raising Surge, and, $27 Million, Sources Tell Drudge Report.

Within minutes, the Drudge site had injected Senator Hillary Rodham Clintons fund-raising success into the days political news on the Internet and cable television. It did not halt coverage of Mr. Obamas speech or his criticism of her vote to authorize the war in 2002, but along the front lines of the campaign the hourly, intensely fought effort to capture the news cycle or deny ownership of it to the other side it was a telling assault.

Mrs. Clintons aides declined to discuss how the Drudge Report got access to her latest fund-raising figures nearly 20 minutes before the official announcement went to supporters. But it was a prime example of a development that has surprised much of the political world: Mrs. Clinton is learning to play nice with the Drudge Report and the powerful, elusive and conservative-leaning man behind it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/us/politics/22drudge....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #82
85. Oh please...
Your desperation is getting really pathetic...

Equating leaking her fundraising numbers early (if that is what happened), to the rumormongering and scandalmongering that characterizes Drudge...a man who admits he only gets it right about 60% of the time...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #85
91. Why is the Clinton campaign cultivating him, then?
==Mrs. Clintons communications team, led by Howard Wolfson, is not leaving Mr. Drudge to the Republicans. Five current and former Democratic officials said Mrs. Clinton has on her side the closest thing her party has ever had to Mr. Rhoades in Tracy Sefl, a former Democratic National Committee official, who has established a friendly working relationship with Mr. Drudge and through whom Mrs. Clintons campaign often worked quietly to open a line of communication.==

As for desperation, that pretty much describes your posts in this thread. The next thing I expect you to say is, "whatever happened to the politics of hope?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #91
106. Politics of Hope went away a long time ago...
Please continue to dance with Novak...I am sure doing so will endear Obama to most non-DU Democrats...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #106
110. And continue to avoid the issue of why Hillary is dancing with Drudge
You've got nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #110
112. Continue to believe that if you like...
Equating leaking fundraising numbers to use Drudge...

To getting in bed with him to slime a fellow candidate is apparently a moral distinction Obama supporters are unable to grasp...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
25. Does anyone find this "Scandalous Information" on Obama ironic?
This is actually kind of funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #25
111. a whisper campaign is as good as it will get for them
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
34. Hillary can't respond to every nasty rumor
If she responds to too many that will just encourage people to spread more nasty rumors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
39. So now he's attacking her for something that ROBERT NOVAK wrote?
Mind boggling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #39
44. i am with you on that comment!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
41. Novak: Agents of Hillary claim 'scandalous information' on Obama; decided not to use it...
Forum Name General Discussion: Politics
Topic subject Novak: Agents of Hillary claim 'scandalous information' on Obama; decided not to use it...
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3730219, Novak: Agents of Hillary claim 'scandalous information' on Obama; decided not to use it...
Posted by TeamJordan23 on Sat Nov-17-07 10:38 AM

Hillary vs. Obama
by Robert Novak

Posted: 11/17/2007

Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, but has decided not to use it. The nature of the alleged scandal was not disclosed.

This word-of-mouth among Democrats makes Obama look vulnerable and Clinton look prudent. It comes during a dip for the front-running Clinton after she refused to take a stand on New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's now discarded plan to give driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

Experienced Democratic political operatives believe Clinton wants to avoid a repetition of 2004, when attacks on each other by presidential candidates Howard Dean and Richard Gephardt were mutually destructive and facilitated John Kerry's nomination.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23467
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #41
87. Ah, the 'somebody told me somebody said they were told that somebody said"
type of 'reporting'.

Anyone who believes shit like this is just.... gullible. There's only one thing worse in the world than a gullible reporter, that would be a gullible candidate who gives this kind of stuff credence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
43. Oooff. This is getting ugly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
51. Seems to me that Novak is the guilty party here.
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:56 PM by rocknation
"...Robert Novak...reported...'Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the partys presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama' The item did not identify these 'agents,' nor did it reveal the nature of the charge. It was devoid of facts, but heavy on innuendo and insinuation..."

Well, that's Novak's fault, isn't it? And since it was he who so honorably outed Valarie Plame, why should stock be taken in ANYTHING that he says? While I'm glad this statement came directly from Obama, he's shooting at the wrong target. Novak's the one who needs to put up some real facts or shut up.

Hillary's reputation is her business. I scolded her when she tried to get Obama to apologize for someone else's remarks. Now I'm scolding him.

:headbang:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #51
63. He has ethical problems, but unless you can show he provided bad info
about the Plame case, he's still credible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #63
89. He's a partisan shill, an accessory to treason
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:34 PM by rocknation
and the LAST person the a Dem would approach if they wanted to plant an anti-Dem smear! I mean, look back at the madrassah smear--it allegedly came from the Clinton camp to Insight magazine! INSIGHT MAGAZINE??? :rofl:

If you ain't ethical, you ain't credible. And when all is said is done, credibility is the ONLY thing a journalist really has.

:headbang:
rocknation

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #89
96. No--you CAN be credible and be unethical. Facts, and the ethics involved
in determining if, how, and when to report those facts, are two seperate matters. Every journalist has a partisan bias of some sort, every journalist has to decide what to do with the information he receives. That doesn't make the information untrue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #96
134. WHAT information?
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 01:07 PM by rocknation
There's NO INFORMATION AT ALL in Novak's story! THAT'S the problem--it would get laughed out of a junior high school journalism club!

:headbang:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #134
136. Yep--he likes to say "I heard something from somebody"--remains to be
seen if there's an actual story here, but I don't automatically dismiss him, either. Beltway types use him purposefully for leaks--they know he'll run with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
53. ''nameless AGENTS'' and robert novak --
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #53
57. " It was devoid of facts, but heavy on innuendo and insinuation... "
And the Obama people are using it smear Hillary....

In my best Joseph Welch voice "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency? "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. Obama is doing the right thing: responding quickly to any
swift-boating attempt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sufrommich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #58
67. He responded to the wrong person.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #58
69. He's Going After The Wrong Target
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 12:10 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
The source of the rumor is Novak...

If he was pres and the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor he would probably have declared war on Norway...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
55. Occam's Razor
When you eliminate all the possibilities the most likely possibility is true...There is no scandal and if there was this great scandal Obama wouldn't be running for president lest the scandalous story comes out...

But , hey, it's another chance to throw shit on Hillary... She's used to it...She's been taking it for almost thirty years now...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
60. oh stop it
This crap is turning off good Democrats. Just stop it. Campaign on the issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyLib2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #60
72. Gotta agree, but

I sneak peaks at the tabloids, too. Side issue: what would the public actually perceive as "scandalous" by now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #72
76. See 55
If there was this deep , dark secret I suspect he would have chosen a public life...

To start guessing what it might be without any factual foundation is as bad as the smearing Obama and Novak are doing to Hillary Clinton...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
66. Novak Matlin Carville.Circle Jerk.
Now if only Obama would actually challenge the politics of Washington...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
86. Like the madrassa story a few months ago...this is the latest example of RW disinformation..
Designed to divide Democrats...

And we fall for it every time...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamJordan23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #86
159. And the Clintons don't like to divide for their own personal benefit?
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 01:40 PM by TeamJordan23
Mark Penn is no different than Karl Rove. And very similar to Clinton alum, Dick Morris.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Basileus Basileon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
94. It seems "plant" has joined "meme" and "frame" as trendy words to use incorrectly. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
103. I'm beyond hesistant to take anything from Novak seriously.
I like Obama's response though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #103
115. He shouldn't have even dignified Novak's column, imho
rightwing garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #115
132. "Right wing garbage" is redundant.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
117. Typical Mark Penn actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
itsrobert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #117
127. and Terry MacCulliffe, and James Carvielle
in the swamp we go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #127
139. If You're Going To Slime People At Least Spell Their Names Right
DSB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #117
137. More Nasty And Baseless Accusations From You Based On Rank Speculation And Conjecture
While you're here can you tell me how you felt watching Hillary take Johnny Boy's head off the other night?

If Johnny Boy does it again he can expect the same unless Hillary wants to keep him around to divide the anti-Hillary vote...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #137
143.  Mark Penn is corrupt and is Hillary's chief adviser.That is not "conjecture".
Edited on Sat Nov-17-07 01:15 PM by saracat
As we speak, Penn is defending the lead based toy manufacturers as well as Blackwater. I refer you to Penn's website if you want to see what he is proud of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #143
147. Do You Have Proof That Mark Penn Is Linked To This Current Action Which You Implied Is The Case?
I'm waiting...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #147
158. I said he probably wrote the rebuttal! Sheesh.And it is circular reasoning just like him.
This is not about the Novak st ory but the campaign response to it! OTOH. nothing would surprise me about Penn.What proof do you want that he is associated with the rebuttal? he is her cheif advisor?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
126. Clinton campaign's response to Obamas statement on Novak hit piece...
Forum Name Hillary Clinton Supporters Group
Topic subject Clinton campaign's response to Obamas statement on Novak hit piece...
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
445, Clinton campaign's response to Obamas statement on Novak hit piece...
Posted by rodeodance on Sat Nov-17-07 12:54 PM

Forum Name General Discussion: Politics
Topic subject Clinton campaign's response to Obamas statement on Novak hit piece...
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3730742, Clinton campaign's response to Obamas statement on Novak hit piece...
Posted by SaveElmer on Sat Nov-17-07 12:49 PM


"Once again Senator Obama is echoing Republican talking points, this time from Bob Novak. This is how Republicans work. A Republican leaning journalist runs a blind item designed to set Democrats against one another. Experienced Democrats see this for what it is. Others get distracted and thrown off their games. Voters should be concerned about the readiness of any Democrat inexperienced enough to fall for this. There is only one campaign in this race that has actually engaged in the very practice that Senator Obama is decrying, and it's his. We have no idea what Mr. Novak's item is about and reject it totally. Instead of pointing fingers at us, Senator Obama should get back to the issues and focus on what this election is really about."



Democrats again fall for a rw disinformation campaign...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #126
135. Thanks for the reality check
I can't believe this is a discussion on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #126
140. His Amateurishness Would Doom Us In The General Election
DSM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
131. Novacula? Plame participant? known liar?
Wow! Aren't sources of ill-repute banned here?

Jeez - desperation brings out the worst in people. Did you also happen to catch Faux "news" opinion on this matter? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #131
178. "Aren't sources of ill-repute banned here"
I don't know if they're banned, but if they support innuendo about Hillary it seems like all her many naysayers welcome them with open arms. Even Fox is used if it runs an anti-Clinton article.


Novacula

lol!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
174. Clinton accepts money from Murdoch, feeds stories to Drudge; why not plant a rumor with Novak?
Hillary will do anything with anybody if it helped her be the Democratic nominee. And Chris Lehane, Mark Penn, and
Harold Wolfson know damn well that Novak is an inveterate gossipmonger par excellence who will spread maliciious
stories without a blink of an eye (see Valerie Plame).

F*ck them for swiftboating a good Democrat!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
toughboy Donating Member (78 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
177. Obama is very, very desperate it would appear.
This is typical Novak bullshit. Why Obama would respond except to create anti-Hillary sentiment is beyond me. Once again, Obama demonstrates he will do anything to get the nomination. That is just not going to happen. But it's not surprising to see his people are willing to destroy all seeds of hope for restoration of this country. Little ego problem there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
179. Clinton unleased over 100 people on Iowa the same weekend she smears Obama.
connected? I think so. they are tied in the polls and Obama is very strong there with an awesome organization.
She is admittedly very worried about Iowa. So, on the weekend she says she is going to fight for it she comes out with this smear campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 22nd 2014, 05:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC