Bill Clinton Says Obama Isn’t Ready

[ckramer]

Source: nyt

Former President Bill Clinton made an unusually direct attack Friday night on Senator Barack Obama, one of his wife’s leading rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, suggesting that voters who would support someone with Mr. Obama’s experience were willing to “roll the dice” on the presidency.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/us/politics/16clinton.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin

---

Come on Mr. Clinton.

How ready is GW Bush in 2000?

It's the direction that matters. Everyone can learn on the job.

[babylonsister]

1. Good think he's completely objective. nt

[tekisui]

2. But, what he meant was,

"Holy shit, I think we're gonna lose."

[maddiejoan]

3. GW Bush wasn't ready in 2000

That's rather the point isn't it?

[yellowcanine]

11. And still isn't, even after 7 years. That is really the point.

[rolleitreks]

4. Oh, but the former first wifey is ready . . . lol n/t

[rsmith6621]

5. And Bill Was??????

......I have news for Bill....Hillary is going to lose steam very soon.

[aquart]

6. Okay, this is a pure consider the source thing.

However, when I remember Bob Dole endorsed someone OTHER than his own wife (and my mind still boggles at it), I feel a gratitude for the normalcy and rightness of it.

Oh, and Bill? It's a GOOD thing that you know you owe her big time.

ckramer: Using Bush as an example of job readiness may not be what you want to use in, say, ads.

[raebrek]

45. That was before his Viagra commercials. n/t

[bemildred]

7. "I did not have sex with that woman!" nt

[rocktivity]

8. Is he speaking as a former President

or as the spouse of one of Obama's opponents?

:shrug:
rocknation

[yellowcanine]

9. No one is actually "ready" to be President. A VP is probably most "ready" and after that

a governor. But the point is not whether someone is ready or not. It is whether they have the necessary judgment as well as some ideas about governing. In that sense, Obama has at least as good a claim as Hilary.

[karynnj]

58. I'll give you VP,

but as to whether Senator or Governor is most ready likely depends on the times. As Governor you have executive experience, but no real foreign policy experience. Even someone as bright as Clinton was NOT ready in terms of foreign affairs in 1992. In both 2004 and 2008, foreign policy is of massive importance as is being CIC. A Bill Clinton, Arkansas governor, would not have been as good a candidate in 2004 or 2008 as he was in 1992 - because he didn't have any FP experience and positive contacts with the military.

Everyone running for President will have some deficiencies and the question is how would they deal with them.

[Raven]

10. This sounds like desperation and it's very destructive.

We need a democrat in the WH...any one of them, in my mind. The Clintons have all the right in the world to attck another candidate's positions on the issues but this attack is below the belt and will end up undermining Obama if he is the Dem candidate. Are the Clintons so ambitious that they would hand the presidency to a repub?

[THUNDER HANDS]

13. it's their legacy

of course. that means more to them (ie, him) than if anyone else wins in '08.

It the future of the Democratic Party. Clinton has been the leader since the 90s began. Now he views it as slipping away from him and he doesn't want to give it up.

[Moondog]

28. Are the Clintons so ambitious that they would hand the presidency to a repub?

Yes. The sense of entitlement is so thick it is obscuring their vision.

[SIMPLYB1980]

60. You could ask the same about Obama.

[PretzelzRule]

54. You bet they would

n/t

[OHdem10]

12. "Everyone cam learn on the job.". This election the Candidate

is facing a more than serious, but critical set of problems.

When Bill Clinton ran, there was a notion that the deficit was a
problem. Even the Clinton Adm was shocked and had to change their
plans when they found out what serious financial problems were
being hidden from view. GWB has run a very secretive operation.
Naturally, I hope everyone is prepared for the worst.

Our Military is stretched to the brink.The Military has to be entirely
rebuilt.

Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan still to be dealt with.

The Economy for those making 75,000 and below is a basket case.
This is huge majority almost 3 quarters of the American people.

Something must be done about these Free Trade Policies or the
country will nose dive as it continues on a downward spiral.

Engergy and Environmental Policies and Actions cannot continue
to be delayed.

This is only a small list of problems facing the next President.
There will be a lot of rank and file voters looking for experience
and competence.

Timing is everything--I have said this all along.

Hey I did not even mention Health Care.

[Windy]

14. John F. Kennedy.... n/t

[michaelwb]

26. No comparison

JFK was elected to the US House of Representative 3 times (serving from 1947 - 1953)

JFK was elected to the US Senate 2 times (serving from 1953 - 1960)

He served in the Federal government in the House and Senate 14 years - compared to Obama's single election at the Federal level with barely 2 years of service before running for President.

JFK 5 times the number of Federal level elections of Obama.

JFK 7 times the number of years at the Federal level versus Obama.

No offense to Obama (or Obama supporters) but really - pointing to Kennedy as an example of lack of experience is an extremely misguided argument.

[coalition_unwilling]

37. Abraham Lincoln . . . n/t

[dave29]

15. to receive oral sex in the oval office? Surely there is some otj training

right?

[OHdem10]

17. No disrespect to Obama but he is no JFK.

[Mz Pip]

21. True, but neither is Hillary n/t

[Solar Power]

31. Who Knows? you know the future?

He could be better than JFK..Who knows?

[SoxFan]

63. Perhaps not, but

Ted Sorensen and Harris Wofford, who know a thing or two about JFK, are out campaigning for Obama.

[0007]

16. That is indeed a classless statement.

I guess Obama will have to work harder on that pedigree Impediment degree like the Hillary has.

[durrrty libby]

18. He is correct. Obama is still a newbie senator

[Auggie]

19. I'm disappointed by Bill. I thought he had more class than that.

[quickesst]

20. Reminds me...

of one of Oprah's speeches. "Some say, it's not his time. They say he should, wait his turn." The connotation was clear. The actual reality behind those sentiments, inexperience, was conveniently omitted. DU, at times, is simply afraid to speak honestly on some subjects, and I suspect, will not change any time soon. My opiion.
quickesst

[Lance_Boyle]

22. Doesn't Obama have several more years' experience in elected office?

Counting his state senate experience, it would seem to me he has several years more experience in elected office than Mrs. Clinton. She and her supporters (and apparently also her husband) seem to forget that "first lady" is not elected office.

[krabigirl]

23. I agree with him. He doesn't have the experience, yet.

[laureloak]

24. Agreed. Obama is NOT ready. But Edwards IS! n/t

[Raster]

25. Bill, please, sit down and shut up. You had your eight years. Thank you.

Now please, give it a rest.

[Solar Power]

27. So, now Bill is an expert..Bill, was Lincoln Ready???

So, Bill is an expert, governor of what was it...... Arkansas? Was he ready?...

Let's look at Abe Lincoln..he failed at almost everything one could imagine.
So ..Bill was Abe ready.?
.Not according to your standards. eh Bill?
....great..a real expert..eh?...............about Lincoln being ready..
..so if Abe was running Bill knows...sure...


According to William S. Banowsky, the story of one of America's greatest leaders is actually a story of repeated failures and dogged persistence:

In 1831 he failed in business.

In 1832 he was defeated for the state legislature.

In 1833 he failed again in business.

In 1834 he was elected to the state legislature.

In 1835 his sweetheart died.

In 1836 he had a nervous breakdown.

In 1838 he was defeated for Speaker.

In 1840 he was defeated for Elector.

In 1843 he was defeated for Congress.

In 1846 he was elected for one term to Congress.

In 1848 he was defeated again for Congress.

In 1855 he was defeated for the Senate.

In 1856 he was defeated for Vice President.

In 1858 he was defeated again for the Senate.

In 1860 he, finally, was elected President of the United States. And these are just a few of the rough spots in the life of Abraham Linco

[Cronus Protagonist]

29. Damn he's good at politics!

Really, if there's one thing that he's very, very good at it's politics. That was a FUD statement, Fear Uncertainty and Doubt - what the ad agencies use to sell everything from soap suds (what kind of bacteria are crawling on YOUR skin today?) to Hummers (What if you needed to drive over a mountain to get away from danger?).

Slick, very slick, and I admire him for his skills, even if I don't agree with his message. I'm not a fan of Obama, preferring Edwards at this time, but I don't think Obama is such a greenhorn that he won't do well as our president. I think Obama might not win if we nominate him, but I have no doubts about his sincerity and capability once there. It looks to me that Bill is Hillary's best weapon and he's sniping with unfailing accuracy.

[Solar Power]

30. Well....He is good if it works.

This shot at Obama may not work. It might fire back at Hillery. Actually if this message from Bill was approved by Hillery, then the fight will be that Hillery is accusing Obama of not being qualified.
.Now, if Bill did not get Hillery's approval, what the hell is Bill mouthing off for.

So as pointed out before, this may be a double negative for Hillery. In fact this may be ...the...double negative that does her in..think about it...

[Cronus Protagonist]

34. I hear you but...

..FUD is not dependent on the messenger or the source. Think about it. The message "I wonder if he's too green" is now in people's minds. The reason FUD works so well is that the source is irrelevant. People still worry about bacteria on their countertops, not because the bacteria is dangerous, not because the Chlorox people told them (consider the source), but because they had an emotional reaction to the message, which then becomes the internal "source" for that thought. Now, the recipient of the message owns the message and the source is discounted and not even up for consideration.

I study this stuff a lot, so I'm quite clear on how it works, and Bill just made a masterful move. Not so strong as to be attackable, not so weak as to be ineffective, just plausible enough to cause concern in some people's minds and politics is about tipping the scales with the few, not convincing the many all at once.

Once again, Bill is a master politician and this is him working at his best.

[Kolesar]

32. The trend ain't your friend--Hillary's been a fuck up in the US Senate

Her work on committees hasn't yielded squat. Has she written any legislation of consequence?

Her international relations have been a disaster, giving support to RW arguements.

[Imagevision]

33. Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton = 24 years of the Bush/Clinton dynasty...

We can expect Jeb to step up to the plate after Hillary?!? Enough already!!!

[BestCenter]

35. Nah, it'll be either George P. Bush or the smarter Bush twin

followed by Chelsea Clinton.

[karlrschneider]

36. How is that an "attack"? Not that it matters, Obama cannot be elected.

...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

38. Obama= 11 years in public office. Hillary= 7.

:freak:

[coalition_unwilling]

39. Hillary voted for the Iraq War. Obama opposed it when it was

politically risky to do so. So much for experience. QED.

[Rosie1223]

40. Jeez, Bill How much international experience did you have when we elected you??

Lived for a year in England during college?

And I think you did a pretty good job as president.

[BlueStater]

41. Was he ready in '92?

I find this recent attitude from him about experience to be exremely arrogant. 15 years ago when he was running for president did experience matter?

Cheney and Rumsfeld had 30+ years of experience and we all know how they turned out.

[David Zephyr]

42. And this will backfire against the Clintons. They are self-destructing.

Elevator going down.

[ronnykmarshall]

43. How DARE he???

:sarcasm:

[BenDavid]

44. Hell, Bill was stating the obvious about obama and in

relation to bush. The press was so head over heels for bush they convinced the morons bush did not have to be the smartest man in teh room or have much experience and knowledge. Obama is the same as bush and I suspect the american people this time round will not vote for someone they perceive as not having the experience and the knowledge to lead this country out of the morass it has been in all these years. That is why HRC scores so high when it comes to leadership, experience and knowledge....Obama would be a roll of the dice and a crap shoot just as bush and we all can agree we do not need another bush or someone to have to ask " what do I do now".

Ben David

[Samantha]

46. The same was said of Bill Clinton in 1992

The number one overriding complaint was that he had zero foreign affairs expertise (and the sleaze factor was the number two complaint). That's why he chose Al Gore to run with him -- Gore was known for his expertise in foreign affairs, had a reputation as a hawk (hard to believe, isn't it) and had a squeaky clean personal creditability image. That's why Clinton coaxed Gore to run with him, to offset his (Clinton's) two huge perceived deficits and offered him a co-presidency as a reward.

Funny, isn't it, Clinton never mentions that private deal he made with Gore, who had publicly bowed out in 1992, but chooses instead to mention his wife's exposure to the national scene while serving as First Lady.

We have had many discussions here on her literal "experience" and it is obvious people will continue to disagree. My bottom line on this subject is that Hillary is serving in her second term in an elective office, and that's the extent of her "experience." Obama served on a state level in an elective office and publicly says he has been involved in politics for 20 years (his words, not mine). I do not think Hillary can play the experience card against Obama with any kind of straight political face. And Bill Clinton can't either, yet he continues to do so.

The truth of the matter is the probable most qualified candidates the Dems are running are Biden and Dodd (and perhaps Kucinich), but that literal truth is seldom mention in the horse race, either.

So this election, if it boils down on our side of the aside is narrowed to Clinton, Obama and Edwards, will all hinge on issues other than experience, such as judgment, credibility and trustworthiness. That's it in a nutshell.

[BenDavid]

61. In wanted to run in 88 but knew he was not ready and that is all

I meant. Obama needs to check is ego and what happens when Obama loses to HRC? Will he then be damaged goods or will he try again in 2016?

Ben David

[Samantha]

65. Yes, Gore thought it was too early but jumped in at his father's urging

His campaign came to an end in New York. Gore, I think, was only 39 and did not think it was his time, but yielded to his father's wishes until inter-party dirty tricks took him out.

I don't have a horse in this race, I am just observing things as they go on. So I am not inclined to get into any impassioned arguments on this Board this year since I personally feel no passion for anyone running. I don't have a problem with Obama, Edwards, Dodd, or Biden and it truly would not bother me to see anyone of them take it. Each, I think, has something going for him. I will go so far as to say I am not a Hillary proponent in the least -- I admired her stick-to-it-ness during the impeachment debacle, but I do not admire some of her Senate votes and her reluctance to speak out against Bush* during these last 7 years. I feel she has not done so out of purely political personal reasons. But the real zinger (of recent days) which I feel has badly impaired her image was that CBS (Katy) interview in which she smugly said "But it will be me" when questioned about how she would deal with defeat should it not be her. You mentioned ego -- I thought that remark showed a tremendous amount of shameful hubris.

In short, I do not know the answer to your question regarding should Obama lose to Hillary, will he be damaged goods in 2016. My gut tells me this guy is going places at some point in the future regardless of what happens in 2008. And should Hillary lose, she too might take another shot at it in the future. That's what Al Gore did!

[ozone_man]

47. What's that Giant Sucking sound I hear?

Perot was right. It's the sound of jobs being outsourced due to Clinton's NAFTA. We still haven't recovered from the damage caused by that. The Bush economy is just the Clinton economy eight years later. Before Clinton left office, the stock market had crashed and the recession was looming. The miracle of the 90's was an illusion that we'll be paying for throughout the rest of our lives and our children's. Bush made it much worse certainly.

Was it lack of his experience that was responsible for NAFTA or just that he was in the pocket of corporations? Time for a change. No more corporate candidates, experienced or not.

[JeanGrey]

48. Sure Bill. No one is but Hill, right?

ROTFLMAO

[boricua79]

49. NObody really knows before they become President...this is a false argument

Bill Clinton certainly didn't know what it meant to be a President before he got the "Football" and had to understand the Presidential protocols. It's sad that Bill Clinton is engaging in the same type of Republican smearing tactics. There have been plenty of Presidents who have come from much more humble beginnings and who have done great things for our country.

This is low-blow dirty politics...and I've lost respect for Bill because he has engaged in it.

[fshrink]

50. Yes. Let's roll the dice.

At least, I've got one chance out of six to have someone who's not an hologram. Zero the other way.

[MilesColtrane]

51. Obama was certainly experienced enough not to vote for the IWR.

Hillary doesn't even rise to the level of experience to apologize for her misguided (or politically expedient) vote.

[Jim Sagle]

52. As ready as Bill was. But hey, that was then and this is now.

Bill is telling us that now is not the time for an empty suit.

It's the time for an empty pantsuit.

;)

[avrdream]

53. Exactly! Dubya WASN'T ready and look at things.

Bill is right.

[silverojo]

55. I'm tired of writing how much I hate Bill Clinton, so I'll keep it simple:

Dear Bill Clinton: Fuck you and the cigar you stuck in Monica Lewinsky. Go crawl back under the Republican-lite rock you came from.

[deacon]

56. Obama is running a damn good campaign. He seems up for the job. n/t

[Orsino]

57. Hope he's right.

Most of the other candidates are a little too ready to take the presidency. I'll take Barack over Hillary any day. Washington has had fewer years to make him "ready."

[karynnj]

59. So, when does he endorse Biden or Dodd?

Not to mention experience isn't everything.

[truebrit71]

62. ...."I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky..."

...roll those dice indeed....

Sorry mate, you don't get a pass just 'cos you're sleeping with your favourite candidate...

[Little Star]

64. Bill's right! Even though he may be biased.

He lacks the judgment not to write a book that shoots himself in the foot for one! He opened the door for the R's to take him down with that one bad judgment!

[IndianaGreen]

66. White racists always used the same argument to keep people of colour down

Interesting to see Bill Clinton resort to the same language used by the likes of Jesse Helms and Orval Faubus.

There are no limits to the Clinton sleaze!

[TheFarseer]

67. What does it matter?

Dick Cheney is probably the most qualified to be president and who the hell wants that!?!?