Hillary ran for the nomination of the wrong party

[NJmaverick]

She clearly is more in line with right wingnut repuke thinking

UPDATE: The Clinton campaign emailed around harsh comments from two Republican pundits:

Grover Norquist: 'That sentence will lose him the election... He just announced to rural America: I don't like you.' "Grover Norquist, the anti-tax activist who leads an influential weekly meeting of conservatives, went as far as to argue that Obama's line would cost Democrats the White House. 'That sentence will lose him the election,' Norquist told ABC News. 'He just announced to rural America: 'I don't like you.'"

Republican strategist Ed Rollins: Q: "On a scale of 1 to 10 how damaging is this?" Rollins: 'Ten.'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/11/clinton-mccain-respond-to_n_96318.html

Fortunately there is still one DEMOCRAT we can nominate

The Obama campaign, meanwhile, emailed out a CNN segment where Gloria Borger, Jack Cafferty, and Jeffrey Toobin all defended the comments:

[TwilightGardener]

1. LOL! Hillary using right-wing strategists to try to extract maximum

damage (a TEN!--no, a ten would be videotaped sex with dead goats, but thanks, Ed). She's pretty chosen sides against the Democrat in this election.

[Stephanie]

4. When you've got to pull Grover Norquist out of the trashcan to back you up you're in bad shape

Every time I think she can't sink any lower, she does.

[TwilightGardener]

8. Yes, latching on to the words of utter RW loser has-beens to attack

the guy in your own party is pretty much scraping bottom.

[Stephanie]

2. This commentary from your link is good - Toobin, Borger, McCafferty all think it's ridic

BLITZER: All right, Gloria, he's already being hammered by Hillary Clinton and John McCain for that matter for supposedly being an elitist and speaking ill of the people of Pennsylvania by suggesting that the economic problems there are causing them to become bitter and buying guns and becoming xenophobic and all of that. What do you think? Is this a real issue out there?

GLORIA BORGER: Well, Hillary Clinton said today, you know, I don't see bitter people out there, I see struggling people or whatever it is, but she said the people aren't bitter. But I think the people are angry – and maybe Obama's terminology was in artful but I think he's expressing a sentiment of mad-as-hell-voters, not going to take it anymore, that we've seen throughout this election. And that's why perhaps voters are saying over and over again that they want to change. So I think Hillary Clinton is trying to make him into the elite candidate but he's talking about people being angry.

BLITZER: All right, and Hillary Clinton responded to the Obama comments this way; Jeff. Let me play her little sound bite.

HRC: It's being reported that my opponent said that the people of Pennsylvania who faced hard times are bitter. Well, that's not my experience. As I travel around Pennsylvania, I meet people who are resilient, who are optimistic, who are positive, who are rolling up their sleeves. They're working hard every day for a better future for themselves and their children. Pennsylvanians don't need a president who looks down on them.

BLITZER: All right, Jeff. What do you think?

JEFF TOOBIN: I think that is so ridiculous. I mean that is not at all what Barack Obama said. I just think this is an example of how a campaign between the two of them can be purely destructive. And not elevate either candidate. I mean, Hillary Clinton is clearly distorting what Obama said. And by the way, what Obama said is factually accurate. It's been true throughout history that people who have economic problems lash out against various others. I mean, I just think it is an embarrassing for the Clinton campaign to hang on this as if it's some sort of gaffe by Obama.

BLITZER: It's not just the Clinton campaign, Jack it's also the McCain campaign. They issued a statement saying it's a remarkable statement and extremely revealing it shows an elitism towards and condescension towards hard working Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking. It is hard to imagine someone running for president who is more out of touch with average Americans.

JACK CAFFERTY: Really? And this is from John McCain?

BLITZER: No, this is from Steve Schmidt a senior adviser for John McCain.

CAFFERTY: Look, Jeff's right. They call it the rust belt for a reason. The great jobs and the economic prosperity left that part of the country two or three decades ago. The people are frustrated. The people have no economic opportunity. What happens to folks like that in the Middle East, you ask? Well, take a look. They go to places like al Qaeda training camps. I mean, there's nothing new here. And what Barack Obama was suggesting is not that the people of Pennsylvania are to blame for any of it. It's that the jerks in Washington, D.C., as represented by the ten years of the Bushes and the Clintons and the McCains who have lied to and misled these people for all of this time while they shipped the jobs over seas and signed phony trade deals like NAFTA are to blame for the deteriorating economic conditions among America's middle class. I mean, I'm a college dropout and I can read the damn thing and figure it out.

BORGER: You know, in this case the Hillary Clinton campaign and the John McCain campaign have the same goal and that is to portray Obama as this sort of (inaudible) elitist who doesn't understand the real working class people or independent voters. And so they're both on the same side on this one and it's obvious why.

BLITZER: Go ahead, Jeff.

TOOBIN: I just think it's remarkable that Barack Obama, this guy who grew up in a single-family household with no money, who lived in Indonesia, who came from very modest upbringings, somehow he's the elitist? That's really a pretty extraordinary sort of contortion of his background. I mean.

BORGER: It's that Harvard, Yale thing.

CAFFERTY: He did not make $109 million in the last eight year did he?

BORGER: Right.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

30. Damn straight its not her experience, shes a fricking gazillionaire

and she is all about lying or saying anything to get elected.

[Bigleaf]

3. What a fucking traitor. Fuck her! Fuck Bill! Fuck Bush!

[KAZ]

5. Damn straight. Hill is a Puke's best friend.

[GarbagemanLB]

6. and Hillary supporters here wonder why some of us find it difficult promising to vote for her in the

general...

[KAZ]

9. Or even talking to them. Most of her supporters on GDP are ..

.. disgusting. But there are some really good ones who are drowned out by the whack-jobs. Kind of sad.

[Nay]

7. It's amazing to me that Clinton and McCain are attacking Obama

for talking about the facts that everyone can see with their own eyes. Like some of the TV commentators, I fail to see anything odd, wrong, strange, or attackable about his very straightforward speech about what's going on in the Rust Belt. It's called the Rust Belt for a reason, you know. Except that Clinton and McCain don't seem to know. Demostrating once again how out of touch they both are.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

31. Why? Hillary and McSame have the same advisory firm

of course Mark Penn and his bud are working the ends against the
middle.

And he and his fat are jiggling all the way to the bank.

[Nay]

36. I'm not surprised that Hil and McC are attacking O -- I'm surprised

they are attacking him on his very truthful observations that certainly will resonate with a lot of average people. Hil and McC are making themselves look like out-of-touch idiots. Which they are. Why was anything he said even remotely remarkable? Hell, my family is in that fabled top 10% of income, and I can surely see the truth of every word O said. What has happened in this country to make plain speaking reprehensible?

But I'm surprised Hil can't see the truth of his words. It's scary, actually. What on earth could Hil's advisors be thinking, to let her attack a speech so obviously true? And further, how could her advisors (or she, for that matter) think there was anything to attack in that speech?

[kevinmc]

10. Hmmm .. Obama just showed he can beat Hillary and the Rightards at the same time .. n/t

[Nay]

37. Agreed. He's the only one who's not afraid to speak plainly. That

is an amazing fact all by itself. Although I originally wanted Kucinich or Edwards because they were plain speakers also, I certainly will have no problem voting for Obama. There is simply no choice. After watching Clinton attack what was, to me, a plain-fact sort of speech, as if Obama had said something horrible about average people by saying they were 'bitter,' well, I can see that she and I will never be on the same page.

[1776Forever]

11. The MSM is going to try to build this up to the top level -

I saw some idiots on Lou Dobbs (he was not there but the woman who takes over for him was) that all said this comment was a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10 for trouble for Obama and one of them (a supposedly Democratic expert) said it was an 11! What BS!!! I think we need to tell them they are not going to be able to make this into something it is not!!! I am tired of the MSM when it comes to trying to influence people without telling them the full story!!!

[krkaufman]

24. God, I almost do hope they blow it out of proportion ...

... and force Obama to do another ass-kicking, historical speech on poverty in America and how Americans' needs have not been met by either party for the last 30 years. (continuing his earlier comments that Bill Clinton had effectively continued Republican policies)

pleasepleasepleasepleasepleaseplease

[cali]

12. I can't begin to express the contempt

I feel for her campaign.

[niceypoo]

29. I cant begin to express the gullibility...

...of Obama supporters who will believe any unsubstantiated rumor that comes along...

A smear campaign is an intentional, premeditated effort to undermine an individual's or group's reputation, credibility, and character. "Mud slinging", like negative campaigning, most often targets government officials, politicians, political candidates, and other public figures. However, private persons or groups may also become targets of smear campaigns perpetrated in schools, companies, institutions, families, and other social groups.

Smear tactics differ from normal discourse or debate in that they do not bear upon the issues or arguments in question. A smear is a simple attempt to malign a group or an individual and to attempt to undermine their credibility.

Smears often consist of ad hominem attacks in the form of unverifiable rumors and are often distortions, half-truths, or even outright lies; smear campaigns are often propagated by gossip spreading. Even when the facts behind a smear are shown to lack proper foundation, the tactic is often effective because the target's reputation is tarnished before the truth is known.

Smears are also effective in diverting attention away from the matter in question and onto the individual or group. The target of the smear is typically forced to defend his reputation rather than focus on the previous issue.

Smear tactics are considered by many to be a low, disingenuous form of discourse; they are nevertheless very common.

[DemBones DemBones]

13. She's not the one who praised Raygun, that was BO.

Hurts to admit it, doesn't it?

[Lou Queb]

15. carefull, you could be flamed for taking words out of context

[cali]

20. Hill dearest has praised Reagan for real

Obama analyzed his impact on American politics. Hill slobbers over McCain and relies on slime like Grover Norquist. Hill dearest sucks up to fuckwad Scaife and Drudge and Murdoch.

But hilldroids are fine with that. You probably love Grover, hill's new bff. Doesn't hurt at all to sell out to slime, judging from hillbots.

[BlueIdaho]

21. One more time

He recognized Raygunn's ability to take the nation from center left to center right - not his policies, not his programs, not his core beliefs. I beleive he was trying to point out that we need that kind of leader to take the nation back to center left again. Its not enough to occupy the White House - we need to change the paradigm from "I got mine fuck you" to "pull up a chair there is always enough room at the table."

If you don't understand the difference perhaps you are too young to remember what America looked like when real liberals were in power.

[quakerboy]

22. Actually, she is.

[PresidentObama]

14. She knows she can't win, so she's trying to sink his chances so she can run in 2012.

[AtomicKitten]

16. She's most definitely running like a Republican against Barack.

Her campaign is like a car wreck. It's so spectacularly inept and outrageous you just can't look away.

[PresidentObama]

18. I really am starting to believe she wants to sink his chances to run again in 2012.

[Nitrogenica]

17. SO much truthiness is easy to spot now. We've all dealt with it so often it is

easy for average people to see it for what it is.

Spin alley is not going to matter as much this time.

[Upton]

19. Clinton, Lieberman, Norquist, Rollins

In my eyes she's no more a Democrat than the other three.

[Frank Booth]

23. She's quite the piece of work.

First she cozies up to Scaife, now she's lauding Grover Norquist. Doesn't she make us Democrats down right proud?

[cooolandrew]

25. Under Hillary's America these will be called fine liberals ready to drown government in the bathwate

How sweet.

[Political Heretic]

26. Say anything, do anything, be anything, use anyone campaign is why I don't support Clinton

[NJmaverick]

35. Is it any wonder why the Clintons draw such strong negative

emotions? They earn it

[anigbrowl]

27. Hillary is quoting Grover Norquist?! Fuck that shit!

She's no better than Lieberman. Go ahead Hillary, run as McCain's VP.

[Eric J in MN]

33. Her campaign, not her personally. NT

NT

[niceypoo]

28. Gossip as news...

A smear campaign is an intentional, premeditated effort to undermine an individual's or group's reputation, credibility, and character. "Mud slinging", like negative campaigning, most often targets government officials, politicians, political candidates, and other public figures. However, private persons or groups may also become targets of smear campaigns perpetrated in schools, companies, institutions, families, and other social groups.

Smear tactics differ from normal discourse or debate in that they do not bear upon the issues or arguments in question. A smear is a simple attempt to malign a group or an individual and to attempt to undermine their credibility.

Smears often consist of ad hominem attacks in the form of unverifiable rumors and are often distortions, half-truths, or even outright lies; smear campaigns are often propagated by gossip spreading. Even when the facts behind a smear are shown to lack proper foundation, the tactic is often effective because the target's reputation is tarnished before the truth is known.

Smears are also effective in diverting attention away from the matter in question and onto the individual or group. The target of the smear is typically forced to defend his reputation rather than focus on the previous issue.

Smear tactics are considered by many to be a low, disingenuous form of discourse; they are nevertheless very common.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

32. They are the dirty little parasites lingering in her kitchen sink

heck, she even pulled Richard Mellon Scaife out of that filth
to try to slam Obama.

[FrenchieCat]

34. Yes she did!

[HooptieWagon]

38. Yes, she did.

With her pro-war/ pro-corporation/ pro-outsourcing stances, and cozying up to Murdoch, Scaife, Penn, and now Norquist and Rollins; she is definately in the wrong party. Irony of that is, given the poor options the pukes had, and the general decimation of that party - she likely would have won the puke nomination handily. Go figure...