Is Hillary in control of her campaign?

[Joe the Revelator]

or is she taking the George Bush motto of "The Buck Stops Anywhere but Here".

So far in the last week, Team Hillary has put out a number of lowly, pathetic hit jobs on Obama. After each one backfires, Hillary backs away and blames it on a single staffer.

The fact of the matter is, almost nothing, especially comments about an opponent, get out of a campaign without some over site.

So one of two things is happening.

A. Hillary is lying through her teeth when she says that she had nothing to do with any of these comments, emails and/or leaks.

B. She has no control of her campaign and lives in a bubble a la GWB.

Either way, I think she's making a lot of people sick.

[bunnies]

1. Agreed.

And if she cant control her campaign... hows she going to control the country? And/Or... why do we need another liar in the White House?

blech.

[Joe the Revelator]

2. Exactly. If she really has lost control of her campaign...

then it will be amature hour with her in the white house.

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. wow--low pathetic hit jobs. It appears that anything Obama has done

can not be addressed, or discussed. But, every e-mail, question, suggestion, wink of Clinton's is dissected and attacked ad nausem.


Who made the rules around here?

[TheWraith]

15. Are you suggesting that the "Obama as Muslim Manchurian candidate" story is true?

Or are you suggesting that fully disclosed drug use when somebody was a teenager is something that seriously belongs in a presidential campaign? Because I'm thinking that if "past stuff the other side might bring up" is the criteria here, Clinton is going to lose that argument.

[Evergreen Emerald]

18. Fully disclosed? By whom? How do you know it was fully disclosed?

What were the circumstances? How has he changed? Should someone who admits to law violations be President? How often did he do drugs?

Absolutely it should be discussed. Or is it only Clinton's past that can be vetted with a fine-tooth comb? And frankly, not even her past. You guys freak-the-fuck-out at every e-mail, every blink that Clinton makes.

[whistle]

4. Actually Felix George Rohatyn is in charge...follow the money

<snip>
The Real Deal: Felix Rohatyn's Financial Holocaust
Tuesday, 21 January 2003, 12:00 pm
Column: Catherine Austin Fitts

Catherine Austin Fitts The Real Deal

Felix Rohatyn's Financial Holocaust

<snip>
Here is the Real Deal on Felix Rohatyn and his proposals to solve your financial holocaust with more dependency on federal subsidies and debt paid by you and your credit and controlled by Washington.

In the late 1990's, Felix Rohatyn's friend and fellow Council on Foreign Relations colleague, Dick Ravitch was talking to me about his lobbying for large federal increases for domestic subsidy to ensure that his real estate projects would get more subsidy and he could sell them for big profits. We were sitting at dinner the Jockey Club in Washington and he said, "As long as I can get government subsidies, what do I care if people have education or jobs?" In addition to his private interests, Dick was the chairman of the AFL-CIO housing trust that also stood to benefit from more federal subsidies available to "help" poor people in times of trouble.

What Felix is doing is proposing lots of federal government money and contracts to protect the financial interests of the rich from any impact that results from increased narcotics trafficking, financial fraud, corporate takeover of government functions, the deterioration of small business and the movement of jobs and businesses off shore. The rich will not have to worry that the economy does not work --- they will have a pork filled soft landing.

Rather than spending more of our tax dollars, why does Felix not mention all the things that we can stop doing that save us money. We could stop money laundering, we could stop financial fraud, we could stop government corruption, we could stop corporate takeover of government functions, we could apply our anti trust laws to corporate crime against small businesses and our pension funds, we could stop dumping narcotics into our neighborhoods and schools.

<snip to end>
The federal government has been hijacked by financial terrorists -- as a practical matter we no longer have a sovereign government as the federal government has limited if any control over their finances and information systems --- and anything that increases the federal power will promote criminal enterprise in your neighborhood and throughout the world.

<MORE>

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0301/S00080.htm

[bunnies]

7. uuhhhhh. What?

:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

5. she learned that from the master - Barack Obama

[Forkboy]

8. But he's new to the game isn't he. He has no experience like she does.

[wyldwolf]

9. and boy does it show!

[Forkboy]

11. And yet HRC is the one making the missteps at the moment, after she pretty much had it locked up

Unless you think the last few weeks have been smooth and successful for her?

[wyldwolf]

12. the only people who argue Clinton ever had it locked up is the media and...

... and the only other people who engaged in that argument was the left.

[Joe the Revelator]

20. Yeah, those were the only ones...

my eyes don't roll back quite far enough to fairly respond to this post.

[wyldwolf]

27. as you just demanded below: Back up your charges

[denem]

10. If Barack is the master of dirty play

while maintaining his own halo of plausible deniability, that would seem to be a clear advantage in the GE to me. Or perhaps you were being sarcastic?

[wyldwolf]

13. he's the master of doing what the OP claims Hillary is doing - blaming his staff for missteps

[TheWraith]

16. Point me to the email where a high level Obama staffer accused Clinton of murdering Vince Foster?

Oh right--you can't.

Project much?

[wyldwolf]

17. why would I want to do that? The OP never made a reference to that

:shrug:

[Joe the Revelator]

19. I made the OP. Back up your charges. When has Obama been caught attacking another candidate then...

blame his staff when the backlash started?

[wyldwolf]

26. right here...

Sen. Obama Blamed His Research Team For Releasing The Memo Calling Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) A Senator From Punjab. "'It was a screw-up on the part of our research team,' Obama, a U.S. senator from Illinois, said during a meeting today with Des Moines Register editors and reporters. 'It wasn't anything I had seen or my senior staff had seen.'" (Thomas Beaumont, "Obama: Campaign's 'Punjab' Remark Was 'Stupid'," The Des Moines Register, 6/18/07)

:rofl:

[Joe the Revelator]

28. He was wrong then. It doesn't make Hillary innocent....

at least he used the pronoun "our".

[wyldwolf]

29. but that isn't what you are charging in your OP and subsequent posts, is it?

Based on the reasoning in your OP, Obama is clearly not in charge of his campaign based on the instance I listed and several other ones where he blamed his staff for screw-ups.

[Joe the Revelator]

30. I do not know of "several" other ones, furthermore

Hillary does nothing to fix her staffs apparent problems.

Even furthermore, Obama's staff does not attack other opponents in the media without his knowledge. Apparently Hillary's does, or she condoned it.

I lean towards the latter.

[Joe the Revelator]

31. Not to mention he owned up that it WAS his responsibility

"Although I was not aware of the contents of the memo prior to its distribution, I consider the entire campaign -- and in particular myself -- responsible for the mistake."


Something Hillary is unwilling to do.

[wyldwolf]

33. You just said Obama's staff doesn't attack without his knowledge,then you quote Obama saying...

"I was not aware of the contents of the memo."

I guess Obama is lying?

[Joe the Revelator]

35. That wasn't an attack.

It is something that hurts Obama more then Hillary. Do be on the same level as Hillary, he would need to have a staff member stand in front of the press and imply that she was a murderer.

[wyldwolf]

37. it was an attack that backfired. Sorry, you don't define the terms

[Joe the Revelator]

39. If it was an attack it was the stuidest one in history.

Only Hillary would make a gaffe like that and think it would help her.

[wyldwolf]

40. stupid is as stupid does. And you say Obama knew about it

[wyldwolf]

32. and that means they didn't happen? LOL

Yesterday, he blame a staff member for filling out a questionarre for him.

In May, he blamed his staff for not being able to attend The International Association Of Fire Fighters In New Hampshire. "Barack Obama threw his staff under the proverbial bus last Friday during his call-in with leaders of the International Association of Fire Fighters in Portsmouth. 'My staff had already scheduled some things and they couldn't wiggle out of it,' he said, according to CNN. 'They heard from me a little bit because I wasn't happy I couldn't be there personally.'" (John DiStaso, "Richardson Puts Together His NH Team," The Union Leader, 5/17/07)

In Feb, he blamed his staff for getting into a dispute with Hillary Clinton's campaign over David Geffen's remarks. "'I told my staff that I don't want us to be a party to these kinds of distractions because I want to make sure that we're spending time talking about issues,' Mr. Obama said. 'My preference going forward is that we have to be careful not to slip into playing the game as it customarily is played.'" (Adam Nagourney, "In A Clinton-Obama Skirmish, A Detour From The High Road," The New York Times, 2/23/07)

Hillary does nothing to fix her staffs apparent problems.

What does Obama do?

Even furthermore, Obama's staff does not attack other opponents in the media without his knowledge.

So Obama was lying when he said he had no knowledge of the punjab remark or the dispute over David Geffen? :rofl:

[Joe the Revelator]

34. So when did Obama's staff imply Hillary was a murder?

Got a link for that, because if not, your argument hold little water. You're posting everyday campaign stuff here.

And the Punjab slip obviously hurts Obama more then Hillary. You wouldn't purposly put out something that alienates an ethnic goup, So try again.

[wyldwolf]

36. when has anyone claimed that?

[Joe the Revelator]

38. When did anyone other then Hillary and her staff claim that Obama sold drugs?

What evidence even remotely points to that.

[wyldwolf]

41. I don't know. So when did anyone make the charge you keep spewing?

[Joe the Revelator]

43. That Hillary is a murderer?

More people think that then think that Obama was a drug dealer.

[wyldwolf]

45. no, that someone has said the Obama campaign implied she was a murderer. You've asked it twice

[Joe the Revelator]

47. Well if they haven't done that, we're comparing apples to oranges

[wyldwolf]

49. you've asked it twice: "when did Obama's staff imply Hillary was a murder?"

When has anyone said or implied Obama's staff implied Hillary was a murder?

[Joe the Revelator]

50. Why are you acting so dense?

[wyldwolf]

52. second time you've made a pesonal attack in this thread. Is staying on topic that hard for you?

[Joe the Revelator]

53. That was in no way a personal attack. In fact, it was a compliment.

I know you're smarter then your pretending to be in this conversation.

[wyldwolf]

54. actually it iwas. And I know you don't believe anyone has accused the Obama camapaign...

...of implying Hillary is a murderer.

[Cha]

6. I don't think so..too

much evidence oozing out that says, otherwise..too many advisers who are dinos.

[TheWraith]

14. Agreed, including me. K&R.

[creeksneakers2]

21. No candidate can keep charge of the microscopic stuff

If its something big she's responsible. Hillary cannot prevent every volunteer from sending out offensive E-mails. I think Obama used the out of control volunteer story before too. Wasn't that the case with the D-Punjab missive?

[Joe the Revelator]

23. But having a high ranking staff member attack an opponent in this matter, in the press....

isn't under her control either?


Come on, seriously, this is GWB stuff here, pure and simple.

[creeksneakers2]

25. The drug story is much bigger

It should never have happened and if the staffer who did this is a loose cannon he ought to be fired. Whoever's idea the drug attack was should be fired too. If it was Hillary's idea, she can't fire herself but she ought to apologize.

Hillary's campaign is being hurt by negative campaigning. They said a few days ago they were smart enough to figure that out but it just happened again. Somebody ought to go but due to a quick response to another story that Hillary's campaign is in disarray, Hillary said nobody would be fired. Now they are trapped.

[tabasco]

44. I believe most people will view the drug attack as scurrilous.

It will hurt the Clinton campaign, IMO.

[proudmoddemo]

24. But a candidate should be able to control

A candidate can and should be able to control what the New Hampshire co-chair, and husband of the fmr. Governor...one of your most important supporters...says. This isn't some lowly staffer. It's one of Clinton's top and most important supporters in the country that went to the Post.

[proudmoddemo]

22. C. Both

She wanted people to attack Obama, but she couldn't control what her over zealous staffers put out there. Hillary's campaign has quickly turned into the third most vile and disgusting campaigns I've seen in my life. (We know which ones the other two were--Bush II's).

[Maven]

42. Gosh, with those two options, how could I not respond to this intellectually honest post?

:eyes:

[Joe the Revelator]

46. You have a better hypothesis? Why not offer it?

Instead of being a pretentious ass?

[Maven]

48. Yet again, you set the tone for honest debate by namecalling.

You're not even worth it, thanks.

[Joe the Revelator]

51. You've yet to add anything substantive to the conversation....

aside from your personal critique of me. It's time to shit or get off the pot.