Comments on: Peter Daou Justifies Hillary Clinton Trashing The Democratic Party

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 06:46:24 +0000

when Clinton campaign officials push stories about Obama dealing drugs

OW, that’s quite an exaggeration.

Why do you need to embellish? The truth supports your position rather nicely. Mr. Shaheen went in front of reporters and suggested that Mr. Obama’s background had not been scrutinized. He pointed out an obvious fact–if Mr. Obama is the nominee, Republicans will say bad things about him.

It was at the next step that Mr. Shaheen went off the rails. Someone asked him: “Like what?” and he went on to speculate and his speculation included some fanciful–but plausible–scenarios on what the GOP noise machine might do. He would have been smart and honorable to forego his speculations.

He was wrong. He did NOT “push stories about Obama dealing drugs.”

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:46:46 +0000

Yet another says in absolute seriousness that Hillary can hold her head up high for not running a negative campaign.

Well, that’s just nutty.
Keith Olberman had a great line about the “monster” thing. he said Obama should have just said, “Well, she’s not a monster….as far as I know.”

By: Crusty Dem

Crusty Dem — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 12:52:00 +0000

Daou sets up a strawman (“Hillary is just drawing a contrast”), followed by an ad hominem (“Obama campaign’s repeated allegation that Hillary will “say anything” to get elected”, link please?), and finishes it off with some specious reasoning. Even if Obama’s campaign has done something like this, and I think he has no evidence of this, it’s merely setting the tone. Contrast with Hillary’s comments, which will almost certainly be a part of McCain’s attack ads in October.

There’s no way Daou is actually that stupid.

By: Megamoze

Megamoze — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 10:35:07 +0000

Hillary’s strategy at this point is that no Democrat but her deserves the nomination, even if means McCain wins over Obama. Repeatedly endorsing McCain over Obama serves two purposes:

1. She gets to wag her “I told you so” finger at all the stupid Democrats when Obama loses to McCain after he echoes her attacks on him.

2. While he is despised for losing a gimme-election to the Republicans, she gets to swoop in and save the party in 2012.

By: bill l.

bill l. — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 08:37:36 +0000

You have to read the comments to truly appreciate the stupidity and utterly psychotic devotion of some of Hillary’s supporters (not to say there aren’t plenty of Obama nutters out there, but the sh*t I’m reading increasingly on many of the pro-Hillary blogs…holy crap). One compares Obama’s political history to FDR and JFK…but not Hillary! Another talks about McCain’s experience in the military and his time as a P.O.W. and goes on to insist that he and Hillary know just what our troops are going through…even though she has never served or been anywhere near a battlefield. Another insists that she has more credibility on security because of her record, but fails to note that her record mirrors McCain’s almost perfectly, including the notorious Iraq vote and the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. Yet another says in absolute seriousness that Hillary can hold her head up high for not running a negative campaign.