Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Show

Barack Obama spent the majority of his public appearances since Wednesday's debate talking about how tough it was, and how unfair the questions were, what a great job he did, how little it bothers him, etc. Personally, I think his focus on rehashing the debate sends exactly the opposite message, because obviously it DID bother him. A lot. He looked extremely uncomfortable during the debate, and all this Monday morning quarterbacking doesn't exactly inspire confidence in his claim that the debate was no biggie.

In contrast, Hillary's take on the debate is that it goes with the territory. People who want a job like this one need to be ready for the pressure. REAL pressure, not George Stephanopolous chewing on your ankle.  Mark Halperin has her comments on a Philadelphia morning TV show when she was asked about this


here:

 

Q: Obviously, the war in Iraq is one of so many issues that you dealt with at the debate Wednesday night. I want to get your thoughts on this, we talked about it yesterday, its on the front of so many papers, I'll show you this one, it's the Philadelphia Tribune, it says `viewers upset with ABC debate', it's got Barack Obama's picture right there on the right. Yesterday he was saying for 40 minutes or so it was all about who said what and who did this, and you really didn't get to the key issues until almost the second hour of the debate. What did you think about the debate on Wednesday night?

HRC: We were both asked some pretty tough questions and that's part of what happens in a debate and in a campaign. And I know he spent all day yesterday complaining about the hard questions he was asked. Being asked tough questions in a debate is nothing like the pressures you face inside the White House. In fact, when the going gets tough, you just can't walk away because we're going to have some very tough decisions that we have to make. I think we need a president who can take whatever comes your way. You have to stand strong; you have to fight for the American people - because it will not be easy to stand up against the special interests.

Q: So you were fine with the debate, did you see any problem with it?

HRC: Well, can I say that I've been through, what 23 of these debates? And as I recall, I was asked some pretty tough questions in nearly every one of them. That goes with the territory, having been inside the White House, I know the pressures inside the White House, I know how hard it is every single day. When the going gets tough you can't run away. And it's going to be tough going to deal with these hard problems; getting out of Iraq in the right way, turning the economy around, getting universal health care, ending our dependence on foreign oil. The special interests are going to be a lot tougher than 90 minutes of questions from two journalists and we need a president who is going to be up there fighting everyday for the American people and not complain about how much pressure there is, and how hard the questions are.



Display:


Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 13)

You mean Hillary Clinton hasn't been complaining about negative press and unfair debates all along?  Because if anyone saw Saturday Night Live a month ago I was wondering if anyone would like to offer Hillary Clinton a pillow. [audience boos].


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:06:02 PM EST

Great Job Camp! Highly RECd! (2.00 / 14)

Ya beat me to it buddy - thanks for firing this up.

Hillary is already back to talking about how to get things back on track - here is her plan to bring our troops home...

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/relea se/view/?id=7161


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:24:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Job Camp! Highly RECd! (2.00 / 10)

She's a fighter and she'll fight for us!


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 01:24:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She is freakin' terrific (2.00 / 3)

There is no way this woman can lose.


by internetstar on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:43:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama keeps shooting himself in the foot... (2.00 / 3)

what is this?

what is this?


Health Care: WHY do we pay MORE and GET LESS?
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/con tent/full/hlthaff.28.1.w1/DC1
by architek on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 11:32:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

well... (2.00 / 2)

....that looks like a sad attempt by someone to make a mountain out of a molehill.

It's funny how someone can project their darkest prejudices (and not I'm not talking racism, I'm talking about pre-judgement in general) into a photo and hold it up as some damning testement to the character of a person they already hold in LOW esteem.

But it's only damning to people who have already make up their minds that Obama is an asshole.  Everyone else is just shaking their heads wondering what happened to the intellegence and superior judgement and moral quality of the left.

If I had to guess.


by DawnG on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:10:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well... (1.50 / 2)

right. clearly the crowd knew what that was about - they cheered his 'scratching' and he paused to get the dramatic effect. no interpretation needed. who the hell scratches with the middle finger anyway? seriously? he is a jerk with the whining and then this scratch, and the degrading 'your likable.... enough' remark. it's a real pattern of a jerk.


by swissffun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:50:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well... (2.00 / 1)

They were cheering because he said "she looked in her element" (in the debate).  Watch it and the cheers start before he even reaches up to scratch his face. Loosen the strap on your tin foil hat a bit.


by matchles on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 01:24:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well... (none / 0)

ah ha. you prove my point with your "He is a jerk" comment.

You've felt that way before any of this finger flip nonsense happened.  For you, this picture is nothing more than validation of your own pre-conceived notions about Obama.  

But just because you want him to be a jerk, doesn't mean he is.  


by DawnG on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:38:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well... (1.00 / 3)

because he's given enough evidence for me to decide he's a jerk before this incident doesn't mean this isn't a reaffirmation of that. you are a seriously silly logistcian.


by swissffun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:45:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well... (none / 0)

People rarely ever see more than they want to see.  Can you look me in the eye (metaphoricly) and honestly say you have found NO evidence that indicates that Obama is not a "jerk"?

Because if you can honestly say that, then I can honestly say you haven't seen it because you don't want to see it.


by DawnG on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:10:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama keeps shooting himself in the foot... (none / 0)

He's done this before in other appearances.  Not a big deal, although it looks bad here.

But, here, you can clearly see two fingers.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll11/ moreperfectunion/TwoFingersABC.jpg

Two fingers


by Kiku on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:34:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Thats a different picture.. (2.00 / 1)

Unless you were synchronizing the two exactly in time, I don't think it means anything.

The think that bothers me is that Bush showed the same kind of haughty contempt for the people and impatience, when he was younger.

Not a good sign for Obama that he lets, as the diarist says, a few minutes of hard questioning  faze him.


Health Care: WHY do we pay MORE and GET LESS?
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/con tent/full/hlthaff.28.1.w1/DC1
by architek on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:48:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Narcissists can be the sweetest people... (none / 0)

in the world..

WHEN THEY WANT SOMETHING FROM YOU...


Health Care: WHY do we pay MORE and GET LESS?
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/con tent/full/hlthaff.28.1.w1/DC1
by architek on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:51:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thats a different picture.. (none / 0)

Friends, isn't this all getting to be a bit much?
by Bargeron on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:27:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama keeps shooting himself in the foot... (none / 0)


by Kiku on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:35:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She is freakin' terrific (none / 0)

Actually, I can think of two ways she can lose (paraphrasing Hemingway): gradually, and suddenly.


by deminva on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:11:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary will fight for us.... (1.50 / 2)

dilusional.  Nuf said.


by sedagive on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:52:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 7)

Actually, Hillary never "complained" about getting asked tough questions from moderators in October. She said that she understood why her opponents were targeting her and she welcomed it. She said, "I think they are piling on because I'm winning. And I understand that." Hillary added " I anticipate it's going to get even hotter, and if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. I'm very much at home in the kitchen."

According to PolitiFact, Hillary's comment that she almost always is asked the first question was true. Hillary said, "I just find it kind of curious that I keep getting the first question on all of these issues. But I'm happy to answer it."


by polson on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:03:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why bring it up? (1.50 / 2)

Come on...she was filing a complaint...there was not other reason to bring it up.

She thought it was unfair and wanted it to stop...pure and simple.


by JoeCoaster on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 05:25:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

did you see Obama flip HRC the finger? (2.00 / 1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DygBj4Zw6 No


by internetstar on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:47:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 5)

Exactly.  

And Barack was not complaining about his treatment.   In NC, he said "that's OK", and "you have to expect that".  His complaint was the lack of substance.  Hillary (once more) just puts words in his mouth that he thought it "was too tough" then makes fun of him for something he didn't say.  Sadly typical of her.


Stop H8
by mikeinsf on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:04:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WORM (1.87 / 8)

he says it's substance, now how many of us believe it's substance he's whining about? His campaign has been to defer substance and go with inspiration, empathy, hope and the great need of this country to be healed by him.  It's always something with him, he's a man who begs for explanations.  He doesn't handle questions well, did you see him on Colbert? How embarrassing?  Right when he's accused of being haughty he does a smack-down of Hillary for 'fixin'g his monitor for him, smirk, smirk?  I think she needs to fix everything before the country can afford to take the chance of a newbie know-it-all.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:18:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WORM (2.00 / 1)

You do realize that both Clinton's and Obama's appearances on Colbert were scripted, right?


Stop H8
by mikeinsf on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:57:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

then he's a fool (2.00 / 3)

I realized Hillary's was, and Edwards was, but Barack looked like an interview to me.  Did he really have a chance to write that, he might have refused and been pleasant instead?  I mean, he was trying to look like an arrogant guy who liked to chicago slap down the girls, who have to do the 'fixing' work for the big guys? Is that really possible?  Hillary's was putting herself down, Edwards was putting himself down, but Barack was putting HIllary down, could that have been scripted? And, why?  


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 04:08:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: then he's a fool (2.00 / 1)

These things are written by the show's writers. Edwards' was a real interview, but Brack's and Hillary's was scripted by the writers.  That's why there were props ready: the broken TV, and the "distractions" on notice board.  Am I really having to explain this to you?


Stop H8
by mikeinsf on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 04:19:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: then he's a fool (2.00 / 3)

explain why? how come they got to be charming and cap on themselves and he had to appear like a jerk, ready for the girls to wait on him?


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 04:33:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you purposely obtuse? (2.00 / 2)

Sheesh. Thanks for the TR for my snark!


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 04:55:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WORM (none / 0)

Just an idle question: Does Colbert have any women writers on his show?


by Jeter on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:06:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

she's made a few jokes (1.75 / 4)

but she's never complained, she's always said that it comes with the territory.  I was complaining, I didn't like it and lots of women thought they were too aggressive, and the guys on stage piled it on, but she said it's part of running for office. I think Bambi should complain about Stephen Colbert.  It seems Barack can't have his turn until Hillary's fixed things. We all need her to fix government, and Stephen made a great joke out of that. Obama didn't get it, he was too busy preening, thinking he'd put one over on her cause she went first and fixed things for him.  Clever guy Colbert.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:11:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: she's made a few jokes (2.00 / 1)

Man are you folks grasping for any thing you can call positive in this whole fiasco!  Justifying tearing down a fellow dem is never acceptable.  What this debate illustrated for me was desperation and dirty politics.  Plain and simple, Hillary needs to "get it or get off the pot."  The people of this country are tired of same old same old and the MSM playing this game just reinforces the meme.  That she encouraged the "low road" talk during the debate, with a smile, demonstrated to me that nothing will change with her style of politics.


by sedagive on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:08:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Um (2.00 / 1)

Clinton actually complained during a debate when she quoted the SNL line about getting Obama a pillow.

Months earlier, when some perceived that Edwards and Obama were ganging up on her, the Clinton campaign tried to make hay about it.

She has complained when it suited her purposes.  When it suits her purposes to make others' complaints into signs of weakness, she does so.  Not particularly admirable, but also far from unique among politicians.


by deminva on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:17:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 0)

Hillary writes SNL now? Wow, she must be awfully busy.


by LakersFan on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:41:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (none / 0)

It hasn't been very funny for a long long time.


by Bipolar Disorder Democrat on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 06:16:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia (2.00 / 13)

Smart answer on her part.  We'll see how successful it is next week, but, without taking sides, it was a politcially smart answer.

There now are demonstrations being done agaisnt ABC.  I would not be surprised if this is subtly orchestrated or encouraged by the Obama camapign.  

I agree with you.  I don't think it helkps Obama, but he has done just fine without my advice, so his campaign must think that Markos' comments excommunicating Clinton and the blog attacks on ABC are useful.  

I don't like the Ayers attacks and I wish Clinton would repudiate that.  I disagree with some of the wright attacks, but that's tough politics.

I think hse is very smart with this move. The message is that she is tough and will fight.

With Clinton's negatives among some, that might work to get votes" "you may not like me a lot, but when the crap hits the fan, you want me fighting for you" is the message.

The converse is pointing to Obama's more detached and academic personality.

The two persoanlity types appeal to different people in different ways.

Tuesday should be interesting.    


by TomP on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:06:34 PM EST

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia (2.00 / 8)

Well said Tom :)


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:30:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I disagree (2.00 / 1)

and I don't think the Clinton campaign has ever really come to grips with the race they are in.

One of the things I noticed on the ground in Iowa was how she frequently she walked right into the frame that Obama was trying to create.  When I was working for Edwards in Iowa, I heard repeatedly concerns that Clinton is a "divider" who cannot win.  Some of her tactics (and some of Edwards tactics as well, but that is a different story) were almost tailor made for Obama to take advantage of.  

For Clinton the embrace of the personal attacks (Wright, Ayers) have been a disaster because they play directly into her biggest weakness.  The attacks that have worked for her have been based on what I would call real issues (the NAFTA flap before Ohio).  

In Presidential Politics you frequently only get one theme to campaign on.  For her that theme should have been policy knowledge and experience dealing with economic change. This was, I think, a potentially winning hand.  In this sense Ayers and Wright actually offered her an opportunity to play the uniter in way that could have addressed her underlying weakness while simultaneously dimishing Obama's stature. Consider if she said this in response to questions about Ayers or Wright:
"This is the sort of irrelevant stuff the press is always bringing up in the course of presidential campaigns.  These charges are absurd, and don't make me respect Obama any less than I did before. If you want to be President, you have to be able to distinguish the irrelevant from the important if you are going to get things done.

But Clinton has never realized the opportunity she had in front of her.  Instead she has tried to have it both ways on things like Ayers, and frankly she looks petty as a result.  


by fladem on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 04:08:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I disagree (2.00 / 2)

Interesting thoughts, but I have to say that Obama also wants to have it both ways.  He wants to embrace Wright but also denounce him (or at least many things he has said).  He wants to be thought of as brilliant but he doesn't want to deal with hard questions.

His campaign has done well in the Democratic primaries, though I have to wonder why spending three times the money since the primaries started gets him only a very small advantage - not even enough to win outright on the first ballot.  I think what happened is that the campaign played things very well at first, but it's going off the track a bit now.  That's because Democrats will back off in ways that Republicans won't, come fall.


by Montague on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:39:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excellent Point (none / 0)

I thoroughly agree.  How much more mileage would Clinton have gotten if she were responding to debate and media queries about Wright, flag pins, et al., by saying that she wasn't interested in the silly stuff.  In trying to raise Obama's negatives, she has ensured that hers will always be higher.  And when she runs ads about bittergate, she demonstrates that she's not as interested in serious issues as she would have us believe.


by deminva on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:22:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not that the questions were tough... (2.00 / 5)

...it's that they were trivial.  I'm listening to a town hall meeting right now and Obama's being asked tough questions about health care and intelligence gathering and how to create jobs in Erie and he's answering them just fine.

His problem (and mine) was that the lapel pin issue doesn't put food on anyone's table or take any troops out of Iraq.  


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:07:00 PM EST

Funny Thing Is... (2.00 / 8)

Voters have this pesky habit of deciding what issues are important to them all by themselves.

Without any direction from BO.

And like it or not - a lot of folks were put off by his announcement  that he would no longer wear a pin.  

The mods in that debate were checking to see how he fielded that question and I thenk we all saw the result.  He stumbled - badly.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:36:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (2.00 / 2)

Is it voters or is it the press that's interested?  I don't see voter interest as much as I see a pundit interest because they assume the voters will be interested.


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:51:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (2.00 / 2)

"alot of people" . Please provide proof of that statement. As you well know alot of people find Hillary un trust worthy. To me that's a much bigger issue then Obama wearing a pin.


by venician on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 01:07:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (none / 0)

He said that, and then he swept every contest in February and is likely to win the nomination as a result.

But a lot of voters were put off.  k


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:01:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (2.00 / 3)

So now a flag pin has become the yardstick to measure a presidential candidate's patriotism?

What if he has Abe Lincoln napkins, boxers, and towels at home; and a huge flag in his breakfast nook, would that be enough to satisfy the patriotism police? Or is that damn pin the only yardstick you'd like for him to use?


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:47:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (2.00 / 2)

the question is, why is he going out of his way to pick a fight with people who are proud of their country? after michelle obama's remarks, it's not a very smart move.


by campskunk on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:51:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (none / 0)

Uh, the lapel pin came off months and months ago. Yawn.


by amiches on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 08:40:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (2.00 / 1)

It's a dumb yardstick and personally I think flags should be burned every now and then just to remind us all that the flag stands for our right to speak out by burning it.

But I'm not running for president.  I'd never win, because I have too many stances that would run afoul of too much of the electorate.  Same thing for Obama - his flag pin stance was foolish. He chose a bad battle.  It doesn't matter whether he explained it, or whether I agree with him that it doesn't make him unpatriotic (and I do indeed agree with him on this issue).  Presidential politics aren't fair.


by Montague on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:43:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (2.00 / 1)

A lot MORE folks were put off by the fact that this line of questioning is given the same time and therefore importance as questions about healthcare, national defense, human rights and the environment.  Maybe you and your petty police are more concerned about outward appearances of patriotism but the rest of us want our damn government back.  


by zadura on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:41:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (none / 0)

And amazingly, they don't really seem to care about silly issues like lapel pins!


by amiches on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 08:39:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny Thing Is... (none / 0)

No, most voters do not care if he wears a pin or not. that is a non-issue.  Does Hillary or mcCain wear a pin every day?  I think not - why not???
That question was the number 1 negative according to the polls.
by mariannie on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:48:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Not surprising (none / 0)

Obama did say that Clinton was in her element at the debate.

I think it was 21 debates now.  Not sure, though.  I've only seen the past five or so.

It should also be noted that Clinton took perhaps 1/3 of the "pressure" questions, and she stumbled badly on her Bosnia response.


The pebbles have voted and the avalanche has begun.

President-Elect "That One"

by Dracomicron on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:07:13 PM EST

Re: Not surprising (none / 0)

She admitted to lying, but in an incredibly awkward way, like "I said things at odds with what I knew to be the case and had written on previously".  I'm omitting the 'ums'.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:16:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not surprising (2.00 / 3)

Oh yes...let's count candidate ums...shall we? I can assure you Obama will come out on the losing end of that count.


by americanincanada on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:20:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You misread (none / 0)

Mostly is omitting "ums".  


The pebbles have voted and the avalanche has begun.

President-Elect "That One"

by Dracomicron on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:27:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 1)

lol even morning joe made fun of hillary for this,

Morning Joe laughed at Hillary and Bill saying she didn't whine.

That sums it up.


Dream for tomorrow but fight for it today.
by TruthMatters on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:08:04 PM EST

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 1)

Exactly.  It's far too late for her to say "I can handle the tough questions - Obama can't."  It was less than a month ago that Howard Wolfson was snarling at reporters and Bill Clinton calling the press treatment of him as "a mugging" and Hillary Clinton actually in a debate complained about the fact that she'd had to go first twice in a row.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:18:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

but she didn't (2.00 / 3)

they can say she did, but you won't see any tapes, cause she didn't. She joked about it, she told jokes, and she acknowledged it one or two times, but she never complained, she said it goes with the territory. I complained, her husband complained, but she did not. She's not a whiner, she's a doer. He's complaining and he thinks the questions were tough questions. His opinion that they were trivial is just an opinion, I thought they were very important as those are the things he'll be charged with by the pugs, and his voters need to know what's coming, and how he can handle those questions. We found out - he needs practice.  We also found out he hasn't a clear Iraq exit plan, and he isn't sure about economic issues, and he doesn't think raising the payroll tax will be a tax increase on middle Americans, and that he thinks it's fair to count capital gains as income even though that will mean less in taxes, and he also doesn't think that will raise taxes for middle Americans, because he's promised to not raise taxes but cut them, and to 'save' social security by raising the cap, and tax capital gains at a higher rate.  We found out quite a bit on his non-substance, no?  


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:28:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but she didn't (none / 0)

Anna, Charlie Gibson didn't know what the fuck he was talking about with the capital gains tax, so I wouldn't go there.

"Moderator Gibson also made a dubious claim that cuts in capital gains tax rates raised government revenues."

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ taking_liberties_in_philadelphia.html


by shalca on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 06:04:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think it's right (2.00 / 1)

people trade more when the rate is fixed, they take more chances and that generates more revenue.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 06:09:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think it's right (none / 0)

So you choose a journalist with no economic background over the Congressional Budget Office's economists?

"The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded in 2002 that cuts to the capital gains tax rate 'may not be enough to produce additional receipts over a long period.'"


by shalca on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 07:39:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

because they can't' project (2.00 / 2)

that it will continue to bring in more revenue, that means we have to go back to the old ways?  It's already taxed like income if you sell within a year. After that people tend to hang on, and they don't trade as much.  I think the budget office confirms the gain, even if they're not predicting it'll last forever. So what, right now we know it'll decrease tax revenue and we'll pay more in taxes, it's lose lose. And Obama defended it as a fairness issue, even if it is lose lose it has a 'fairness' quality to it.  And it'll lose him all those cross-over pugs he won, who do not want to raise taxes, especially if raising taxes won't lower the deficit.  He's weird on this one.  


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 08:16:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: because they can't' project (none / 0)

Hmm..holding positions outside of what's politically expedient?!?! What a concept!


by amiches on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 08:42:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

or poorly thought out (2.00 / 2)

if something 'feels' fair but is a tax increase that catches the middle class, and costs the government money to boot, and turns off pug's who crossed over (i know one, and i don't know that many people) to vote for him, what's the point? Why punish some because it seems fair to others?  And he wants the nom, why doesn't he want to win the GE?  


what a relief
by anna shane on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:22:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Except he hasn't been complaining (2.00 / 3)

What he's been saying is that the debate was a fine example of politics-as-usual, and a good reason we need to get away from that. Hillary, on the other hand, is fine with politics-as-usual, well, unless it's her being attacked, in which case she whines during the debate, or Bill goes out and complains that the "boys are ganging up on her."


Your old role is rapidly aging. Please get out of the new one if you can't lend a hand, for the times they are a changing.
by Travis Stark on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:09:33 PM EST

Obama didn't complain about (2.00 / 4)

unfairness until it was directed at him. Hillary never complained about the unfairness, but her surrogates did, especially after the October 30th mugging. That debate was far worse than the one a couple days ago. Obama and Edwards were actually being asked by Williams/Russert to critique Hillary's answers. I commented on it below, in "7 of the first 9 Debate Questions were Hillary Gotchas':

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/11/3/1231 5/8652#readmore

Anyway, it's better for the candidate him/herself to take the high road and focus on what he/she will do to get us out of our horrible economic mess. That's what Obama should be doing.

Whining makes your supporters feel good but is not a good move as far as people on the fence are concerned. You have to be real careful because people tend to personalize things. And a lot of people actually 'know' and like the big media celebrities more than they do Obama/Hillary. ("Is he saying George is an a-hole? I've always liked George!")


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:19:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama didn't complain about (2.00 / 2)

"Hillary never complained about the unfairness"

Excuse me?  In the very last debate she said she couldn't help but notice that she'd had to go first, and asked if anyone had seen the Saturday Night Live skit and wondered if the moderators would like to offer Barack Obama a pillow.  Plus her appearance on Ellen and all the soft news shows.

Obama isn't complaining about unfairness anyway, he's complaining about silliness.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:22:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama didn't complain about (2.00 / 4)

Half-joking off-hand comments are not exactly making this not very important issue a centerpiece of your speeches. Obama would do well to stop complaining about the unsubstantive politics now, conveniently timed to just after he was the victim of it (we never heard a whisper about this during the Bosnia silly season), and just talk about the issues.


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:55:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama didn't complain about (none / 0)

It wasn't limited to half-joking off handed comments - it was the centerpiece of her campaign through most of February.  It was her angry letter to MSNBC that complained not just about David Schuster but about "a pattern".  It was her campaign conference calls lecturing reporters day in and day out.

I mean, I will give you photos of demonstrators outside of NBC with leave-Hillary-alone signs next if you would like.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:04:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

To be truthful (2.00 / 3)

While those debate questions were actually tough, they were fair, because they were about policy.

The first half of this week's debate had no policy whatsoever.


The pebbles have voted and the avalanche has begun.

President-Elect "That One"

by Dracomicron on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:30:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9 Anti-Hillary or Hillary Gotchas (2.00 / 8)

Just read the transcript. There had never before been and I hope there will never be in the future such a mugging pretending to be a debate. Did Obama or Edwards pip a squeak about this obscenity afterwards? No.

QUESTION 1.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Senator Obama, we'll begin with you.

You gave an interview to The New York Times over the weekend pledging in it to be more aggressive, to be tougher in your campaign against your chief rival for the nomination, the leader among Democrats so far, Senator Clinton, who is here next to you tonight.

To that end, Senator, you said that Senator Clinton was trying to sound Republican, trying to vote Republican on national security issues, and that was, quote, "bad for the country and ultimately bad for the Democrats." That is a strong charge, as you're aware.

Specifically, what are the issues where you, Senator Obama, and Senator Clinton have differed, where you think she has sounded or voted like a Republican?

QUESTION 2.

TIM RUSSERT: Senator Edwards, you issued a press release, your campaign, and the headline is "Edwards to Clinton: American People Deserve the Truth, Not More Double-Talk on Iran." What double-talk are you suggesting that Senator Clinton's been engaging in on Iran?

QUESTION 6.

RUSSERT: I want to ask each of you the same question.

Senator Clinton, would you pledge to the American people that Iran will not develop a nuclear bomb while you are president?

[Question 6 follow-up to Clinton]

RUSSERT: But you won't pledge?

[Question 6 follow-up to Clinton]

RUSSERT: But they may.

[Other candidates asked the silly question, but not the badgering follow-ups}

QUESTION 7.

WILLIAMS: Senator Clinton, elsewhere in the region, let's talk about Iraq. One of your military advisers, retired Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy, while campaigning for you in New Hampshire, was recently quoted saying, quote, "I don't oppose the war. I have never heard Senator Clinton say, I oppose the war," closed quote.

Senator Clinton, do you oppose the war in Iraq?

   [Obama asked to evaluate Clinton's response to Question 7]

WILLIAMS: Senator Obama, was Senator Clinton's answer to the opposition of the Iraq war question consistent, in your view?

   [Edwards asked to evaluate Clinton's response to Question 7]

WILLIAMS: Senator Edwards, same question.

   [Rebuttal for Clinton]

WILLIAMS: Senator Clinton, 30-second rebuttal.

   [Intermission]

QUESTION 8.

WILLIAMS: . . . And we're going to start with another subject at the top of this segment. Senator Clinton, it will go to you. It speaks to electability.

Earlier this month, Republican presidential front-runner Rudolph Giuliani said this about you, quote, "I don't know Hillary's experience. She's never run a city. She's never run a state. She's never run a business. She's never met a payroll. She's never been responsible for the safety and security of millions of people, much less even hundreds of people. So I'm trying to figure out where the experience is here." End of quote.

Senator, how do you respond to the former mayor of New York?

QUESTION 9.

RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, I'd like to follow up because, in terms of your experience as first lady, in order to give the American people an opportunity to make a judgment about your experience, would you allow the National Archives to release the documents about your communications with the president, the advice you gave, because, as you well know, President Clinton has asked the National Archives not to do anything until 2012?

   [Russert follows up Question 9 to Clinton]

RUSSERT: But there was a letter written by President Clinton specifically asking that any communication between you and the president not be made available to the public until 2012. Would you lift that ban?

   [Obama allowed to comment on Question 9 and Clinton's response]

RUSSERT: Senator Obama, your hand's up?

   [Edwards allowed to comment on Question 9 and Clinton's response]

RUSSERT: Senator Edwards had his hand up. Then I want to give Senator Clinton the chance to respond.



We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9 (2.00 / 5)

Thank you for posting this. It totals nails it.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 01:26:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9 Anti-Hillary or Hillary Gotch (none / 0)

No, but Hillary Clinton, her campaign, and her supporters did.  And that is the point.

She cannot say "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" now, or pretend that she's never complained.  It will get her laughed at.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:05:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And these are unfair questions how? (2.00 / 1)

1. Obama being asked about something he supposedly said. (A little iffy in tone and definately trying to get him to say something inflammatory, but borderline compared to Tuesday.)

2. Again asking Edwards to back up his statement.

(Questions 3, 4, and 5 I assume were either to the other candidates or unimportant since you don't include them.)

6. Trying to get a straight answer out of Hillary sometimes is like pulling teeth.

7. "Do you oppose the war?" There is no more basic and important question.

8. A gimme for Hillary! She's running on her experience and they gave her the opportunity to expound at length on it. Should have been a softball question.

9. The Clintons have specifically stonewalled both this information and the list of donors to the Clinton Library. This is a very, VERY valid question and one that should be asked more.


Your old role is rapidly aging. Please get out of the new one if you can't lend a hand, for the times they are a changing.
by Travis Stark on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 04:39:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama is a fines example of (2.00 / 1)

politics as usual.  


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 06:57:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 5)

Obama wasn't saying the questions were too "tough".  He was saying that they were stupid gotcha politics, which distracts from the real issues in the race.

He repeated, specifically called them "media driven manufactured distractions".

And they are ON NOTICE!


by bawbie on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:10:01 PM EST

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV (2.00 / 1)

Obama was great on Colbert.  You know the repugs and the Clintons are using the same comments on Obama in the debate.  If anyone thinks that the repugs would rather have Obama than Hillary, listen to how McCain and Hillary are always on the same page. Obviously McCain would rather go against Hillary than Obama with all the support he has.  


by Spanky on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:19:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV (2.00 / 3)

I think McCain would rather go against Hillary because he respects her.  I think he would rather go against Obama because he sees the opportunity to (potentially) blow him out in a general election.


by mikes101 on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:28:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV (2.00 / 1)

Yeah right. The right believes they have a much better shot against Hillary.

Enter: Rush's pet project 'Operation Chaos'


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:00:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV (none / 0)

Operation Chaos isn't intended to benefit Hillary, it's intended to cause as much harm to the Democratic party as possible.

Luckily, Rush is a short-sighted idiot who doesn't see that Obama is going to be very well known and "unpaintable" after this because he has personally introduced himself to voters in every state in the nation.


by bawbie on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:51:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV (none / 0)

McCain and the Republicans want to run against the easier contestant not due to any respect but rather because it would be easier to win.  This is basic game theory.


by zadura on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:47:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 1)

Got any links?  I tried to call Peter Salinger yesterday to ask why George and Charlie didn't wear flag pins on their lapels, but his mailbox was full.

I'd like to do something a bit more constructive though.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:20:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (none / 0)

You bring up an interesting point.  If Obama hadn't pointed out that he doesn't wear a flag pin, who would even have noticed?


by Montague on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:32:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 3)

Selective outrage doesn't play well.


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:52:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (none / 0)

There's absolutely nothing selective about it.  When Hillary Clinton has been "picked on", it's always been policy related.  She's never had to deal with a barrage of bosnia/norman hsu/kazakhstan/terrorist pardons/dishwashers donating 1000 to her campaign...

all in an hour, one after the other.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:08:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Policy related" (2.00 / 2)

Yeah, like when the media picked on her hair style, her makeup, her clothes, her laugh, her voice, her husband's sexual pecadillos, her Bosnia statements, "filegate" "travelgate," Vince Foster, her tax returns, her husband's library's donor list, her defense of a "child rapist" 25 years ago, whitewater, her stock purchases. . .

Yep, all "policy related." Hillary has NEVER been subjected to the kind of searing, unfair, personal scutiny that Obama had to face for the first time in at the debate. In fact, the media has been in Clinton's corner from the beginning! Give me a break!

Wah-wah-wah
Wah-wah-wah
All Obama-bots go
Wah-Wah-Wah!


by freemansfarm on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 06:33:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Policy related" (none / 0)

Looking forward to you pointing out when those things have been brought up in a debate setting, beyond the Bosnia stuff. Thanks in advance.


by amiches on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 08:46:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Policy related" (2.00 / 2)

And thank you for conveniently restricting the discussion to the "debate setting." Silly me, I am going to take into account the totality of the press treatment of both candidates. Your candidate has been given the Royal Treatment; mine has been treated like dog shit. Only now, at this last debate, has your candidate been given one tenth of the unfair treatment that my candidate has lived with, not only since this campaign started, but since 1993

And, in any event, as many posters have pointed out on the numerous debate threads, your candidate has gotten a free ride in basically all the previous debates, while my candidate has, once again, been treated like dog shit. That's what the skit on SNL was all about, that is was so obvious that even a comedy show couldn't help but take notice of the gross double standard.


by freemansfarm on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:02:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Policy related" (none / 0)

Well, no, none of that is at all true, but okay!


by amiches on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:38:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia (2.00 / 2)

Yes, as President he will be forced to answer a barrage of questions about flag lapel pins and his pastor.  I'm not surprised that Clinton would try to spin the moronic questions as "tough" questions, and then say that being President is also "tough," (it's the same word, see?) but I wouldn't expect the people here to fall for such vapid and transparent word games.


by rfahey22 on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:18:44 PM EST

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 4)

Wait a minute - in the videos I saw of Obama on the stump in NC he said exactly that - that this was to be expected in debates and you just have to "brush it off" and go on.  No biggie. Surely you remember that.  He also pointed out that it was divisive but Clinton seemed in her element. Sounds like she's agrees with him.


by Becky G on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:20:36 PM EST

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (none / 0)

Exactly,  Obama is an adult, and knows full well the field that he has to play on.  He doesn't have to like it, but kudos to him for taking it in stride and "brushing it off" as just more distraction from the issues.  Funny how Hillary is trying to spin this that Obama is somehow whining about being mistreated.  

It's not whining to call out our journalists for shoddy work.  ABC has decided to appeal to the lowest common denominator.  You can accept that, as Hillary seems to have done, or you can challenge that and stick up for the people whose intelligence is underestimated by this kind of journalism.  This is what Obama is doing, but all the while taking it in stride, and working hard with our help to improve the playing field.
But please don't just take my words for it, go read Robert Reich's endorsement of Obama and his take on the issue of divisiveness in politics.


by haystax calhoun on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:09:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

adults do not flip off (1.75 / 4)

the opposition.


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 06:58:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: adults do not flip off (none / 0)

and they don't troll diaries with juvenile accusations.


by haystax calhoun on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 08:29:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: adults do not flip off (none / 0)

I'm not one to put credence in stuff like pajamas that say NIG or jump to a conclusion about a cheek-scratching as a subtle flipping of the bird, but I watched the video of Obama and I think he did it on purpose.  I could be wrong.  But I don't think so.

If he did it on purpose, it's extremely juvenile and insulting and foolish.  Since it's hard to know for sure, however, it's probably best to let it slide.


by Montague on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 01:43:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: adults do not flip off (none / 0)

Debunked, and it's easy to know for sure if you try.
Go to camera #2.
by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:36:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: adults do not flip off (none / 0)

Haven't seen camera #2, and you may indeed be quite right.


by Montague on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:01:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So disappointing. (2.00 / 2)

She had the opportunity to note the obvious: it was a shameful debate, nearly free of real content.

I'm so unimpressed that she chose to turn this question into an attack.


by McNasty on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:59:53 PM EST

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 5)

That's my president.  Strong & tough on issues.  Always compose and never choke regardless of what is throwing at her.


by JoeySky18 on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:09:02 PM EST

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (2.00 / 1)

"She's strong and tough on issues"

Sure, now  that its been determined that flag pins, a retired pastor and a former Weatherman turned professor are the strong, central issues of the day....


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:09:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Comments on Philadelphia TV Morning Sh (none / 0)

Now, now.  Not what was meant.  Hillary is indeed strong and tough and DETAILED on issues about the economy, Social Security, etc.


by Montague on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 01:46:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama looked disgusted at the debate. (2.00 / 2)

Not uncomfortable. Things I don't care about are, Hillary's lie about Bosnia and what accessories Obama wears. Or how they both have six degrees of separation between themselves and others with questionable pasts or have made disagreeable statements. I care about the war, the tanking economy, the housing crisis, the healthcare crisis, the fact that our leadership is discussing when it is OK to torture and when it is OK to wiretap citizens, and how the us ranks among the top 5 executioners in the world alongside Iran and China. I care about our country, not how Obama accessorizes. ABC ought to be ashamed for not doing there job. Those of you who are gloating over a perceived HRC win must know deep down this was very a shallow victory.
by grasshopper on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:22:07 PM EST

Hillary gets it (2.00 / 4)

The issue is not whether we care about lapel pins and "bitter" comments and Rev. Wright.  Or whether we give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

The issue is that MOST people out there do care about these types of character issues, and Hillary understands that.  You can say "well, I don't care" and that's great, but for those of you saying that "I know Pennsylvanians don't care about these issues" - to you I say "prove it".

Protesting at ABC and flame wars at DailyKos ain't gonna help.  Obama's continued avoidance of these issues does not help either.  Two words Obama - "I'm sorry" - learn them because you'll need them if you make it through to become the nominee.


by mikes101 on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 02:33:12 PM EST

Re: Hillary gets it (none / 0)

Hillary gets it as long as she's not a target of it.  Whenever she is, it's complain complain complain.


by Mostly on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:23:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary gets it (2.00 / 1)

Why the fuck should he say "sorry" to you?  Because you want to cheapen our democracy like ABC does?  A year ago, this place was interesting.  Now, it's like we are all arguing over what was long ago settled.  

Democracy will fail as a political force if we lose our ability to use it to serve our ends.  In the end, it doesn't matter whether our politicians got a little extramarital action or refused to wear a $0.29 Chinese manufactured lapel pin.  It just doesn't matter.  The only reason that it is even in the news is because the lazy press presses on.  And people like you provide them cover.  Incredible.


by zadura on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 03:56:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary gets it (none / 0)

Well how come we haven't heard on these associations with Hillary

Norman Hsu,  Hsu bundled more than $850,000 for Hillary's presidential campaign and $260,000 for Clinton's Senate races.
Hsu parlayed his charming, obsequious personality into a spot as one of the top twenty Democratic fund-raisers nationwide. Problem is, he turned out to be a convicted felon, on the lam since 1992 due to a grand theft conviction. Then, this December, Hsu was indicted for running a pyramid scheme that defrauded investors out of at least $20 million and that made $25,000 a year in fraudulent political donations.

Marc Rich, fugitive American businessman

Aaron Tonken

Peter F. Paul

Yah Lin "Charlie" Trie, Taiwanese-Arkansan restaurateur-turned-fund-raiser.


Toot, thank you for raising such a terrific person...You done good and we will have you in our hearts.
by hootie4170 on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:35:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary gets it (none / 0)

Sorry???  That's a good one...why in the world should he say sorry to anyone?  give me a reason?  (and not the bitter apology-he already apologized even though I didn't think he needed to)


<