A Question For Sen. Clinton On San Francisco

11:58 pm EST April 13th, 2008 | Uncategorized | 9 Comments

At Sunday night’s Compassion Forum, when asked about the whole “bitter” episode, Sen. Clinton said the following:

“Someone goes to a closed door fundraiser in San Francisco and makes comments that do seem elitist, out of touch, and frankly patronizing.”

Senator Clinton, what’s wrong with San Francisco? For years you have raised money there, as did President Clinton. The current Speaker of the House, a Democrat, is from San Francisco. Republicans have traditionally made much ado about San Francisco’s liberalism. Have you joined them?

Topic: ,

Related Posts

«
»

9 Responses to “A Question For Sen. Clinton On San Francisco”

  1. merl says:
    April 14, 2008 at 4:08 am

    now she’s starting to piss me off.

  2. z_adura says:
    April 14, 2008 at 5:35 am

    In spite of the fact that Bay Area residents pour $1.87 in tax dollars for every $1.00 we get back in Federal services, we still get cast by a leading Democratic candidate as unpatriotic and elitist.

    I can tell you that this does not play well at all. In fact, I submit that it plays worse with Democratic voters here than anything Obama may have said about Pennsylvanians.

  3. durablend says:
    April 14, 2008 at 6:01 am

    Yes, Ms. Inevitable. That $109 million undoubtedly makes you qualified to “understand” the trials and tribulations the working class have to go through on a daily basis.

  4. Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle says:
    April 14, 2008 at 9:08 am

    Does everyone forget Bill and Hillary’s history? They are both members of the DLC(which is basically an avenue to try and destroy the Democratic party. Hillary was once a Goldwater Girl, and I believe, the head of the young Republicans at Wellesley College. Since the DLC hates the DFH’s with a passion, does this surprise you?

  5. jr says:
    April 14, 2008 at 9:22 am

    the Zell Milleress will do anything to get Thatcherite street cred from the Clear Channelians

  6. O says:
    April 14, 2008 at 12:34 pm

    Because what he used to describe a group of people was “Behind closed doors,” as in behind their backs and was a cheapshot at describing their lifestyle to a bunch of rich people. But hey, to each to their own, if you like people using words that demean you behind your back be my guest.

  7. Plantsmantx says:
    April 14, 2008 at 12:47 pm

    Yeah, I went “What the hell?!” last week when I read a Clinton-supporting blog commenter allude to San Francisco Democrats. I should have been even more surprosed to see Hillary herelf do it, but I wasn’t. Here’s what I wonder- if by some chance Hillary wins the nomination, how can the Larry Johnsons, Taylor Marshes, and even Clinton credibly shift to campaigning against McCain as Democrats after having campaigned against Obama as Republicans?

    Over at Balloon Juice, they had a contest going to see who would guess correctly about which Clinton blog would be the first to approvingly link to Bill Kristol’s smearing of Obama as a Marxist. The person who guessed Larry Johnson’s blog won.

  8. Duros62 says:
    April 14, 2008 at 1:24 pm

    From Robert Shrum:

    Obama’s not running for Sociologist-in-Chief. But there is a powerful element of truth in his comments. The political question here, of course, is whether the Clinton and McCain campaigns can exploit Obama’s remarks to tag him as an “elitist” — a label, their focus groups probably tell them, that can really hurt. Ironically, Obama’s the one raised by a single mother. He’s the one who only recently finished paying off his student loans. He doesn’t know what it’s like to have $100 million. The opponents who are attacking him are the ones who inhabit that financial neighborhood.

  9. Enlightened Liberal says:
    April 14, 2008 at 5:49 pm

    When you approvingly link to Bill Kristol you just may be a Republican…