Correction on the Hillary loves Reagan and Bush story here?

[Bread and Circus]

Ok, first off I think the Obama comments about Reagan were true but politically stupid to make at this time. However, people getting mad about it is just plain childish and opportunistic.

Well, lo and behold, Clinton's own website has a supporter saying Reagan and George HW Bush were two of her favorite Presidents.

Now, that is an incredulous statement and hard to believe. However, it does serve for a huge laugh as it IS FROM HER OWN FUCKING WEBSITE!

Nonetheless, it's not an actual quote but rather heresay. Either it is accurate, fabrication, or just the guy who wrote the glowing paper about her got it wrong. The third option is what the HILLBOTS are praying to be real, and alas, they might be right.

I did a quick google search and found this "explanation".

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26850

Here is the text of the clarification:


"The problem is that the article is incorrect and they got the story wrong. The co-owner of the newspaper clarified and verified it:


David Cutler, the co-owner of Salmon Press Newspapers, released the following statement:

The question posed was originally what portraits would you hang in the White House if you were President and as the dialogue progressed, who are the presidents you admire most?

She listed several presidents that she admired and mentioned she liked Reagan’s communication skills. She did not say Reagan was her favorite President. She didn’t say anything close to that."

I really like these parts, because they are telling:

who are the presidents you admire most?

she liked Reagan’s communication skills.

because in essence, this is exactly what Obama is referring/alluding to, which is a no brainer for anyone of adult age during the 1980's.

Was Reagan an aweful President? Sure, by almost any liberal standard.

Did Reagan have good communication skills? Sure, by almost any reasonable standard.

Did Reagan inspire the nation during the end of the cold war? Well, about 60% at least (interestingly his popularity ratings and Bill Clinton's popularity ratings were the same).

Did Reagan create more of a transformational shift than Bill Clinton? Maybe, I don't think we are far enough beyond the two to know.

What is really changing America is its demographics and the loins of Mexican American mothers will likely change it more than either of those guys.

But let's get back to what happened.

Obama said some things about Reagan that are probably true but his political timing was really, really bad.

Hillary Clinton and her henchmen jumped on him to make hay for his bad timing.

Hillary got "caught" on her website for "saying things" that went far beyond what Obama said (however this was an inacurrate quote) but in reality Hillary paid homage to Reagan in much the same way, just not as publicly. Somewhere in the mix she may have very well had kind words about GWHB too but we'll never really know.

Obama's error: Being too generous to the symbolic hero of the modern conservative movement during a Democratic primary season. Luckily, nobody died from his statement (though you wouldn't know it from the caterwauling around here (boo fucking hoo I say to all the criers - get some therapy please, this is a discussion board, not group counseling)).

Clinton's error: Being on record for saying some positive things about Reagan too that are eerily similar to what Obama has said. The source has corrected this from "favorite president" category to "he was a great communicator" compliment. They have the advantage of plausible deniability but certainly her praise is an echo of Obama's and said firstly as this was back in NH. Her real problem is another episode of hypocrisy, essentially lampooning Obama for sharing similar beliefs.

So, what's worse?

Bad political timing...

or

hypocrisy...

We report, you decide!!!

[sandnsea]

1. That Obama thinks Reagan was a great communicator??

And because of that was able to set us on a conservative past for 30 years??

Because that's what he said. And that's what she said. Except he said he wants to put us on a whole new trajectory and she said she wants to hang Reagan's picture in the White House.

[rodeodance]

4. She never said that what he communicated was good or bad. Sound familar?

[sandnsea]

5. So you admit the whole Obama uproar was bullshit? n/t

[Barack_America]

9. FYI, I'm waiting for rodeodance to answer this one as well.

:popcorn:

[rodeodance]

18. not really--I have read his book and he talks more of the Savior-disturbing to me. His

short interview is just a prelude.

[Bread and Circus]

6. I think you can parse the subtlety of their meanings all day long...

but if you take 2 steps back you can see what they said is on par with each other.

Up close the HILLBOTS will try to act as if what Obama said is somehow worse and the Obaminations will do the same in reverse order. And if I take your post correctly Sandnsea (and you are currently one of my favorite DU'ers so I mean no offense) you are falling into this trap. Such a tact will go nowhere and moreover I think it would be hard to substantiate with rhetoric or fact.

And even if Clinton's real statements are as mild as venting a respect for Reagan, she is still guilty of hypocrisy of a high degree and is caught red handed by her own website and even the corrected statements from the paper's co-owner.

I have a feeling this thread is going to be ignored by both the HILLBOTS and the Obaminations because the Clinton camp still has egg on their face and the Obama camp can't have as nearly of a hard laugh.

[sandnsea]

8. Except Obama has said much more than that

There is plenty of context to understand his intent and that he wants to get completely off the path of Reagan conservatism.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4111856&mesg_id=4111931

[rodeodance]

2. Salmon Press Newspapers,"She did not say Reagan was her favorite President."

Forum Name General Discussion: Politics
Topic subject Salmon Press Newspapers,"She did not say Reagan was her favorite President."
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4112377#4112377
4112377, Salmon Press Newspapers,"She did not say Reagan was her favorite President."
Posted by rodeodance on Fri Jan-18-08 10:08 PM



http://www.dailykos.com /

from kos website:
Update II: Okay, the author of that editorial says they screwed up:

The question posed was originally what portraits would you hang in the White House if you were President and as the dialogue progressed, who are the presidents you admire most?

She listed several presidents that she admired and mentioned she liked Reagan’s communication skills. She did not say Reagan was her favorite President. She didn’t say anything close to that.

So Hillary didn't say Reagan was one of her favorites either. She just praised his skills. Like someone else suddenly being attacked for doing the same….

From link in above story:
http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=5309


Bad Oppo Alert! Hillary Did Not List Ronald Reagan As Favorite President

1/18/2008 8:55:40 PM

In an effort to divert attention from Senator Obama’s comments about President Reagan and his assertion that the GOP has been the "party of ideas," the Obama campaign circulated an item this evening from the Salmon Press in New Hampshire that asserts that Senator Clinton listed the former President as one of her favorite presidents. In fact, Senator Clinton only complimented President Reagan’s communications skills – an attribute of his that has been widely praised by Americans of all ideological stripes – and did not list him as one of her favorite presidents. She also noted that she respected George H.W. Bush.

David Cutler, the co-owner of Salmon Press Newspapers, released the following statement:

The question posed was originally what portraits would you hang in the White House if you were President and as the dialogue progressed, who are the presidents you admire most?

She listed several presidents that she admired and mentioned she liked Reagan’s communication skills. She did not say Reagan was her favorite President. She didn’t say anything close to that.

[Barack_America]

10. She praises his communication skills. He praises his political skills.

Where's the difference? :shrug:

[sandnsea]

13. His communication skills were his political skill n/t

[rodeodance]

17. I have said--Sound familiar?

[papau]

3. Obama saw Reagan's great ideas - Hillary - not so much

It appears that no one noticed the quote is from an endorsement editorial

The Salmon Press endorsement editorial is their write up of their interview and their interpretation of the words used - but be that as it may - in what the Salmon papers say she said is included:

"But no president can do it alone. She must break recent tradition, cast cronyism aside and fill her cabinet with the best people, not only the best Democrats, but the best Republicans as well.. We’re confident she will do that. Her list of favorite presidents - Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan - demonstrates how she thinks. As expected, Bill Clinton was also included on the aforementioned list.

After all it was during his administration - eight years of peace and prosperity - that Hillary was able to observe, learn and contribute, all at the same time. And though she possesses traits similar to the former president, a great communicator chief among them - the voters of New York State have overwhelmingly validated her abilities - twice.

Sen. Clinton told us she doesn’t want our vote just because she’s a "woman." She wants our vote because she’s the "best." On the Democratic side we agree that she is."

now contrast to Obama's comments:

"I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what's different are the times. I do think that for example the 1980 was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."

I note that Hillary never praised Reagan like Obama did - Hillary just included Reagan with Bill Clinton as presidents with skills -

Not quite the same.

But even more on point is the newspapers own statement:

In an effort to divert attention from Senator Obama’s comments about President Reagan and his assertion that the GOP has been the "party of ideas," the Obama campaign circulated an item this evening from the Salmon Press in New Hampshire that asserts that Senator Clinton listed the former President as one of her favorite presidents. In fact, Senator Clinton only complimented President Reagan’s communications skills – an attribute of his that has been widely praised by Americans of all ideological stripes – and did not list him as one of her favorite presidents. She also noted that she respected George H.W. Bush.

David Cutler, the co-owner of Salmon Press Newspapers, released the following statement:

"The question posed was originally what portraits would you hang in the White House if you were President and as the dialogue progressed, who are the presidents you admire most?

She listed several presidents that she admired and mentioned she liked Reagan’s communication skills. She did not say Reagan was her favorite President. She didn’t say anything close to that."

http://facts.hillaryhub.com

[sandnsea]

7. You're distorting his intention

The country was ready for something different in 1980 and Reagan came along with his ability to COMMUNICATE optimism, dynamism, entrepreneurship - and set the country on a new trajectory for 30 years.

Why would Obama want to change the trajectory if he thought it was a good one?

[Bread and Circus]

11. you can parse all you want, the Obama supporters will do the same

and you can somehow continue to do backflips in your mind to somehow soothe your self that Obama's praise was "more" than Clinton's but the Obama supporters are just as right to do the same.

However, anyone that's not a shill (and frankly we are ALL shilling here) would see 6 in one and half a dozen in the other because there is parity here.

Also, we will never know what was actually said because the editor, who is obviously on Hillary's side, could be lying through his teeth just to save her face because they have total plausible deniability.

But lets just take it at face value and in so doing realize that what they both said is accurate even if it makes us feel less jiffy about them because of all the bad things Ronnie did.

But boiling it down, again for the people who really just don't WANT to get it, this is a case of Obama being politically stupid and Clinton being a hypocrite (and an opportunistic one at that). Obama can never really down play his statements, because he's on tape. Hillary and her supporters can spin it 6 ways from Sunday because it was a private conversation.

But don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. That list was put in there as part of a major Clinton love fest endorsement editorial. The statements weren't in there to harm her and it's really far fetched to think that there wasn't something in the conversation that would lead one to believe that she had some nice things to said about Reagan AND GHW Bush.

[sandnsea]

12. Look bud, you need to read more

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4111856&mesg_id=4111931

and then come back and tell me what you think you know.

[Bread and Circus]

15. I think I have a fairly good grasp on what Obama's

feelings and words are on this matter I just don't think it serves anyone to bog down with that as it quickly becomes very subjective and highly dependent on one's point of view.

I think at some level, aka the macro level, Clinton and Obama probably share the same instinct of respect for a venerable adversary. Despite Reagan's years being aweful in so many ways on a practical level, he restored respect (ugh) to the Republican party and its values. That's some powerful mojo. It set Bush I on his way to the WH and it got the Democrats so shaking in their boots they had to go something stupid and create the DLC (how else to counter the "Free Market will solve anything" (read corporatism) mantra than by adopting it yourselves)?

So, Clinton supporters, face it... your lady respects Ronald Reagan
And guess what Obama fans, your guy is guilty as charged.

And to the Edwards supporters? Well, I'm just gonna go with Feingold on that matter because the guy has a Centrist/DLC record and was THE CELEBRITY CANDIDATE of 2004 (lest we forget...). I just don't buy his rhetoric as anything more than "I'm going to have to outliberal the black guy and the woman". Isn't Joe Trippi on his team? Isn't every Joe Trippi production a populist one? But hey even though he has a really bad record from a liberal standpoint, at least he didn't say nice things about Ronald Reagan. Or did he?

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86502/john-edwards/reengaging-with-the-world.html

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. Thanks for posting a constuctive thread, and for the obvious effort it entailed

Fair is a difficult standard to hold to on DU during primary season. I agree with you that both Obama and Clinton are searching for constructive lessons to be learned about how to bring diverse groups of Americans together enough to actually achieve positive movement toward generally progressive goals. They also both understand that for many Americans, and by no means just rich or racist Americans, Reagan is a positive political figure. And he also obviously was a pretty successful political figure by virtually any "objective" standard.

Teasing out the basis of his appeal out from under his destructive policies is not a simple undertaking. I don't wish ill on any Democrat for attempting that undertaking, but it is one fraught with some risks. And sometime mis steps will occur of lesser or greater magnitude if that is undertaken. And sometimes we will need to debate which are the mis-steps and which are the steps towards moving our shared agenda forward. While engaging in that debate at times I do not lose sight of the fact that all of our Presidential candidates are playing on our team, working to achieve results that will improve America for all of us.

I don't envy being a candidate. There is little or no margin for error under the spotlight.

[Bread and Circus]

16. Thank you for the response, I'm sure many people are hoping

it will sink to page 2 as quickly as possible.

[Bread and Circus]

19. ..but not so fast.