General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsQuote from Hillary's book(Hard Choices).. The O Team's Rebuttal..
First off.. I want to like Hillary and did when she was SOS.. I've stuck up for her many times when the a$$hole gop stupidly goes after her. I want a Dem Prez elected again in 2016 whomever it is.
But, this kind of shite just pisses me off.. A WTH was she thinking Moment?! I didn't think it was true at the time I read it back on June 5th and now there's this from David Plouffe..
"Hard Choices"..
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5056655
Clinton Wasnt Told to Attack Palin, Obamas Plouffe Says
snip//
"President Barack Obamas 2008 campaign manager denied that he or others directed Hillary Clinton to pounce on Republican Sarah Palin as a vice presidential nominee designed purely to appeal to women, rebutting a claim in Clintons new memoir Hard Choices.
We never tried to do that, said David Plouffe, appearing on Bloomberg Televisions Political Capital with Al Hunt, airing this weekend. We did want her to go out there and speak, but not about Sarah Palins gender.
MOre..
Clinton Wasnt Told to Attack Palin, Obamas Plouffe Says
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Not in the least surprised.
I so hope that we don't have to settle for Clinton, we've come so far.
Cha
(298,014 posts)"It doesnt make any sense for her to propagate this lie. Is she trying to burnish her credentials with uneducated white women? Just another indication that she struggles to express the truth with any semblance of authenticity."
Another quote..
"Reminder of the 2008 Primary lie by Hillary that included Chelsea of ducking bullets and running for life when leaving plane in war zone. Photos of Hillary receiving flowers from small girls on the Tarmack came out refuting her lie. Compulsive liars do it so frequently they are not even aware of it. Involving her daughter to me is inexcusable."
Damn I'm disappointed.. she could really do this without making shit out of thin air. And, trying so hard to distance herself from the President. This will Blowback. DAMN it HILLARY---
My caps were stuck> sorry.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)She claims the Obama team wanted her to attack Palin for being a woman who appeals to women?
Cha
(298,014 posts)to the President at all during these last 6 or 7 years knows he wouldn't attack palin like that or any woman. He would answer her "Community Organizer" attack though. palin is her own worst enemy, Hillary. All you have to do is expose her quotes.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,071 posts)I will never forget how they treated Clinton. And I have no doubt they they would want to appeal to women voters and mitigating Palin's gender effect.
Edited cause it's from iPad and hard to write.
No Vested Interest
(5,167 posts)It's all a matter of perception.
To HRC, it seemed as she says, to Plouffe et al., it seemed as they say.
Cha
(298,014 posts)to. Hillary's a proven liar. I believe David Plouffe. I'm just pissed at her for taking advice from someone who thought this was a good idea.. Like her "dead broke" thing. I want her to be smarter than this.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,125 posts)Cha
(298,014 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)She was requested to speak against Palin because she's a woman not that she was supposed to actually mention gender in any way. And she felt put off by the idea of having " Our Woman" be selected to respond to " Their Woman". That makes sense. The problem is it isn't true. Hillary has a habit of making thing up to embellish her established narrative. We don't want a nominee who does that as the electorate would punish her with a loss just for that.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Is a bit much.
It is a given in politics there is the "unvarnished truth" and there is the "political narrative."
I'm not excusing a/the lie ... Just explaining it.
Cha
(298,014 posts)Hillary trying to build her "experience" resume back in the day..
--Hillary Clinton, speech at George Washington University, March 17, 2008.
"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base. But it was a moment of great pride for me to visit our troops, not only in our main base as Tuzla, but also at two outposts where they were serving in so many capacities to deactivate and remove landmines, to hunt and seek out those who had not complied with the Dayton Accords and put down their arms, and to build relationships with the people that might lead to a peace for them and their children."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=77096
Hillary Clinton has been regaling supporters on the campaign trail with hair-raising tales of a trip she made to Bosnia in March 1996. In her retelling, she was sent to places that her husband, President Clinton, could not go because they were "too dangerous." When her account was challenged by one of her traveling companions, the comedian Sinbad, she upped the ante and injected even more drama into the story. In a speech earlier this week, she talked about "landing under sniper fire" and running for safety with "our heads down."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html
Veterans react to Clinton's Bosnia lie (Updated w/video of C-17 pilot from trip)
snip//
Summary of pilot's comments:
No evasive landing... There was a steep descent because the airstrip is surrounded by mountains.
No bullets or sniper fire...We never would have landed there if there were any such thing.
No "sitting on flackjackets.." The only place I've ever heard of that was in the movie Apocalypse Now.
"When you're running to be Commander-in-Chief, it's never a good idea to lie, but to lie about coming under sniper fire in a war zone when in reality you were greeted by children and flowers is particularly offensive to veterans.
dkos
Btw, I wish it weren't so..
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,125 posts)I wish HRC all the luck in the world but she isn't making this any easier.
Cha
(298,014 posts)http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10025052968
And, this was common knowledge in 2008!
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,125 posts)Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)That sounds absolutely ridiculous and doesn't seem like something the Obama campaign would do at all - mostly because it's a stupid political move.
Cha
(298,014 posts)all these years. It's also obvious that the O Team was a lot smarter politically than Hillary and Mark Penn. SMH.
I just researched this post on her Bosnia lie back in the day.. I'm sure you remember.. another smh.
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5130208
I would think she has enough going for her without all the devious calculations.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)I could see the Obama campaign approaching her to maybe discredit Palin BECAUSE Hillary was a woman, and really, Palin being picked was entirely to get a rise out of Hillary supporters who weren't 100% behind Obama at the time. But they're not stupid enough to say, "hey, attack Palin for being a woman!"
I'll vote Hillary if she's the nominee. But I'm not going to lie, the Clintons rub me the wrong way. I don't really trust 'em.
Cha
(298,014 posts)the Obama Campaign Strategists.. David Plouffe for one. lol My guess David would advice her.. stick to the facts, Hillary. You won't have to cause a shitstorm and say you "misspoke" later.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)I think that Clinton is too, shall we say, dorky? Off base? Off message? To really pull off a Plouffe campaign. Plouffe had with Obama someone who would stay absolutely 100% on message. Clinton, she's all over the place, and way too defensive.
LuvLoogie
(7,069 posts)I wasnt going to attack Palin just for being a woman appealing for support from other woman, Clinton wrote. I didnt think that made political sense, and it didnt feel right.
Against the denial (from Bloomberg)--
President Barack Obamas 2008 campaign manager denied that he or others directed Hillary Clinton to pounce on Republican Sarah Palin as a vice presidential nominee designed purely to appeal to women, rebutting a claim in Clintons new memoir Hard Choices.
She wasn't saying that the Obama campaign asked her to attack Palin for "being a woman"
But for being a political tool designed to appeal to women.
People are very quick and willing to assign all kinds of sinister designs upon Hillary's motives.
This reminds me of when GOPers seized upon "What difference does it make?!" and condemned her for it.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)I wasnt going to attack Palin just for being a woman appealing for support from other woman,
Again, I really doubt Obama's campaign went up to Hillary and said, "hey, will you attack Palin for being a woman?"
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)But I suspect it was implied in one way or another.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)I could see them asking Hillary to go after Palin because she held credibility as a woman. But that is not even remotely the same as asking Hillary to attack Palin for being a woman.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)Not that they said it explicitly.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)It's entirely conjecture with no validity and sets up the idea that Obama's campaign was sexist in its response.
Frankly, I don't trust much of what Hillary says, anyway. So, whatever she got from that conversation could have been entirely made up.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/01/us/politics/01clinton.html
Though she likely was able to get the SoS position due to it.
But since you "don't trust much of what Hillary says, anyway" no further discussion is necessary. Frankly I think she's a calculating politician and this is just more evidence of that. If it wasn't implied by the Obama camp, fine, she felt it was, and didn't cede to it. So what? If she felt she was being asked to do something unethical, and she didn't do it, isn't that still a plus? Oh, it's only a plus if only if she interpreted correctly and it's wrong of her to not do something unethical that wasn't being asked of her? Yeah, reread that sentence. That's what you're saying. If she interpreted incorrectly and didn't do the wrong thing, so what, she's untrustworthy anyway.
I frankly think she interpreted correctly but didn't fall for it.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Obama's campaign proved much smarter than Hillary's in 2008. It's hard to believe they would, certainly long before the wounds of the primary season were healed, approach Hillary and ask her to attack Palin for being a woman - knowing full well there could be some potential blow back for even considering something so sexist.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)Mrs. Clintons campaign event in Florida, her first for Mr. Obama since the Democratic convention, will serve as a counterpoint to the searing attacks and fresh burst of energy that Ms. Palin injected into the race with her convention speech on Wednesday, Obama aides said.
With the McCain-Palin team courting undecided female voters, including some who backed Mrs. Clinton in the Democratic primaries, Obama aides said they were counting on not only Mrs. Clinton but also Democratic female governors to rebut Ms. Palin and, by extension, Mr. McCain. Those governors include Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/us/politics/05dems.html?_r=0
Perhaps the message was mixed, but I believe Clinton's interpretation over Obama's campaign. This is Washington. This is politics. The message may not have been literal, but it was most certainly implied. Politics is nasty business.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)It's her statement that the Obama campaign asked her to attack Palin for being a woman. I don't believe that at all. In fact, Plouffe's quote is exactly what that article states: they asked her, as a woman, to rebut Palin. It's a strategy any campaign would use because it's far more politically tolerable for a woman to attack a woman than a man to attack a woman.
Cha
(298,014 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)And that they reached out to her. You can find articles in fact where not only the Obama camp but even Biden and Clinton praised the "Palin pick" while disagreeing with her policies. The original Obama's response to the Palin pick was completely dismissive in retrospect ("zero foreign policy experience" .
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/08/obama-campaign-responds-to-paul-ryan-pick.html
What Hillary is indicating here is that the Obama campaign asked her to specifically attack Palin for being a woman. I don't buy that at all. And Hillary declined.
It also suggests, what Hillary is saying, is that Obama's campaign was sexist in their response. Don't agree with that, either.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)You rightly say it was conjecture on her part, due to the language and implications at the time. The media at the time was also pushing that narrative. I remember well. The PUMA purge hit DU at that time as well. It all had the same basic underlying sentiments.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)That being said I find Hillary's claim very hard to believe. It's the sort of thing I have come to expect from her.
I know someone that lies this way. It's very hard to deal with.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)It flies in the face of rationality.
Hillary at this time was probably still very upset over losing to Obama. Let's be honest, there was a lot of hatred between the two camps. When the primary ended, it wasn't even known if those two factions could ever come together to win in November. It was probably the most bitter, hateful primary election in modern presidential history. So, we're to believe Obama's campaign, who, I think, proved to be pretty damn smart, approached her, knowing she still most likely held some resentment toward Obama and his staff, and probably still believed 'em sexists, and basically told her to attack Palin for being a woman? What.Ever. Seriously. Why would Obama's team risk pissing off Hillary when it was clear at this point they needed her help? Why would Obama even dare entertain the idea of attacking Palin for being a woman knowing everything that had just gone down during the primary process?
It makes no sense.
JI7
(89,287 posts)Obama winning the nomination in 2008.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)It's to appeal to these women...
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Sort of OT but the subtitles on that clip are like fucking salvador dali lobster phone wonderful.
Cha
(298,014 posts)the Obama supporters?
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Cha
(298,014 posts)Obama wanted to be mean to womanhood but little ol me wouldn't let that happen. Super Hillary!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Is this the kind of crap we can expect in lieu of actually staking out real policy positions?
Lame-ass appeals to some "middle" that doesn't exist, like disgruntled Bible thumping "values voters".... and Palin supporters who might vote for Hillary Clinton? Sure, that'll happen.
Oh, yeah, and 'inevitability'... Dont forget that one.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)her and they both benefited from their new alliance...why begin to break from that success?
A few of the excerpts from her book, not just this one, give me pause as to which
population she is trying to find appeal. I will leave my personal opinion of her political
policies aside, my comments are more about her strategy..if this is any indication of
one, she should reconsider.
Cha
(298,014 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)Her turd way advisors have convinced her that the way to the WH is through the gazillions of "moderate" voters out there that reject the "extremism" of "both sides". And she believes that the "extremists" on the "left" will come out and vote for her anyway because the lesser of two evils and all that.
Well, not that she cares but I'm having a problem with the whole "lesser of two evils" thing. I'm in a blue state and she will undoubtedly get our electoral votes, but if she keeps having such a tenuous relationship with the truth, I'm going to have difficulty checking her name on my ballot.
Bill Clinton let me down big time, Obama somewhat less but still a disappointment. There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, fool me once, shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again.
Cha
(298,014 posts)I think she and her advisors are going to be sorry dividing the Obama supporters again(if that's their plan) and running from President Obama.
I want a Dem president and right now hoping Gov O'Malley can give her some competition..
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10025132194
Whisp
(24,096 posts)We've read about that little black book of enemies, and Obama's name is on it for daring to interfere with their grand plans.
They are slippery and conniving and liars. What else to expect from them but that.
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)feel the need to do it!