Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars

by JoeCoaster, Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:26:20 PM EST

Eric Zorn states the obvious in his latest column Chicago Tribune 1/22/08)

Hmm. I see no reason to stop short. Bill and Hillary Clinton have lied brazenly about Obama's recent statement about Ronald Reagan.

Let's look at the transcripts (emphasis added):

Eric lays out the actual words used by Obama and the distortions of Bill and Hillary and concludes....

Read it all again if you want, you won't find "better" or "good" in there, or synonyms or implications along those lines.

When the Clintons used "better" and "good" in alluding the Obama's remarks, they weren't paraphrasing, they weren't misremembering, they weren't distorting. They were simply lying.

Bill and Hillary might be making a smart political move here but that does not mean they get a pass. It's Not OK If You're A Democrat (INOIYAD).




Tags: hillary clinton liars (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 35 Comments :: Post a Comment


and I should care what (none / 0)

some person in Chicago says?  I wonder who's putting the screws to him?  Could it be Daley?


ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:34:24 PM EST

Is ABCNews good enough for you? (2.00 / 0)

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:48:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is ABCNews good enough for you? (none / 0)

Hillary Clinton said "this" and Obama said he didn't, end of story, is not good political discourse and it sure as hell does not put the issuie to rest for me.


by americanincanada on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:02:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is ABCNews good enough for you? (none / 0)

I don't understand your point. The Tapper article unbiasly lays out where the Clintons lied about what Obama said. The big problem with all of this is that we complain about politicians being too cautious and only saying what is acceptable. Obama challenges that by referring to Reagan and the Clintons use it as a political football. The Clintons willingness to say and do anything to win is on par with Dubya's disgusting attacks on McCain in 2000 in SC. I am disgusted with both Clintons.


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:12:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is ABCNews good enough for you? (none / 0)

The network of Stossel, Judd, Compton, Greory, Gibson and Sawyer?
Fox-lite before there was a Fox?
No, it is not good enough for me.
by spirowasright on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:35:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is ABCNews good enough for you? (none / 0)

I knew this was coming. Shoot the messenger. Did you read the article? Please point out where it is wrong.  You are no better than a Dittohead. Please go listen to Limbaugh and others regarding the MSM. Ridiculous.


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:40:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Bill and Hillary (none / 0)

have gone off the deep end.  If she does end up winning the nomination - I don't think they will be able to repair the damage.


Listening comes first
by Moonwood on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:36:35 PM EST

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Obama lied on TV last night -

"I only worked with him for 5 hours, and it was in connection with a church group"


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:39:34 PM EST

The Clintons are lying this time (none / 0)

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:50:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why do Obamaut think regurgitatin this helps Obama (none / 0)

Of course the Clinton's overstated what he said. It's happening all the time in Politics. But what does he expect. It isn't very good tactics to appear to be dissing the only two term democratic president and talking up a Republican one that represents all that Democrats don't like. The even bigger mystery is why his supporters think endlessly going over the small print of this dispute is any way helpful to Obama. Guys shut up, this don't help him with Democrats.        


by ottovbvs on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:13:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why do Obamaut think regurgitatin (none / 0)

Nice discourse. I guess I am a nut for supporting Obama and proving that the Clintons are liars. The real damage being done by you and others on this site is being so utterly dismissive and damning of and to Obama supporters. I doubt many of them will stomach voting for Clinton, if she gets the nomination. It is sad. By the way, your advice is classic Clinton, "we will lie and say anything, but don't respond because then you will be in the muck with us and that is how we win." Disgusting. Last thing, proofread your comments. Not doing so makes you look ignorant (which I am sure you are not).


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:23:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Lawdawg not a nut just not very streetsmart. (2.00 / 1)

Firstly the emotionally overheated language, then the personal attacks (always the recourse of those losing the argument), then the exaggerated claims about what Democratic voters may or may not do, then the mis characterisation of what I said, and finally worst of all a critique of my typing skills. Lawdawg you need to grow up little and recognize politics aint beanbag, and insulting people is rather bad manners. It's probably true I'm dismissive of naivete and over emotionalism but then with examples like you I can perhaps be forgiven.  


by ottovbvs on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 06:36:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Evidence?

Obama said he did 5 billable hours of legal work on created the LLC between the Church-based, non- profit and Rezko's company. I am not aware of any evidence that contradicts Obama's statement.


by upper left on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:21:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (2.00 / 1)

How about the fact that, according to the AP as well as other various sources like newspapers in Obama's hometown, talk of a personal and business relationship going back 16 years?!?!?

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iwwA8 26vvaIucJQacWaLasENCiVwD8UB3IQG0

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/18 4540,122306obama.article

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/12 4171,CST-NWS-obama05.article


by americanincanada on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:33:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Is this any different than Hsu and the Clintons? I don't mean to minimize it, but I am not sure the Clintons want to get into a discussion about shady fundraisers.


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:43:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

except they returned all the money raised by Hsu - whereas Obama hasnt


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:58:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Yes he has.  There are questions of interpretation about what money was associated with "Rezko's circle."  The Sun and Tribune reporters give no indication of their methodology for their calculations.


by upper left on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 05:06:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

He was talking about his legal work for Rezko.  

That is the allegation that Clinton made, that he was doing legal work for a slumlord.  He answered her question about the legal work he had done for Rezko.

No one is denying that he knew Rezko.


by upper left on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 05:04:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Well, I'm not familiar with Illinois' code of professional responsibility, but if they are anything like NY's (or anywhere else for that matter) I am pretty sure a lot of his other dealings (especially with purchasing a house) constitute some sort of "legal work"


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 05:30:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)


This is a repost of another comment I made in another thread:

"Obama bought the house on the basis of the advance from his book.  He did not have the money to buy the house and the lot.  

He probably approached Rezko, or perhaps Rezko heard of the situation and approached him.  Obama bought the house and paid 300k under the asking price.  Mrs. Rezko bought the lot at full price.  If Obama got a sweetheart deal because of the Rezko's actions, then he should be criticized.  

My point is that I have seen no evidence that he paid less than fair market value.  I am sure that an appraisal must have been done at the time of the sale or that even now, comparable sales at the time could be used to evaluate whether he paid a fair market value. If he did not receive a "quo" and did not offer a "quid," where is the wrong doing?

I agree that it does not look good and that the Repubs will try to exploit it, but it is not as if HRC is as clean as the driven snow.  It seems to me, we should be talking about relative vulnerability.

Regarding the five hours, Hillary's attack specifically raised the issue of him doing legal work for his "slumlord contributor."  Obama's reply specifically addressed the issue of how much legal work he had done for Rezko.  

If any one has been overreaching, it is the Clintons with their efforts to distort Obama's record on the war, and his comments on Reagan and the Repubs.  Do you think you are applying your standard evenly?"


by upper left on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 05:43:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (2.00 / 1)

I agree with you , the clinton campaign has over represented the argument he was making.

However Obama has himself to blame , while pandering to the board for votes he not only left the impression that he was complimenting the ideas of the republicans , he should have put a caveat in their that the ideas were bad ideas but he also threw Bill Clinton under the bus.

And you think the Clinton's won't come out firing.

LOL.

He basically lumped Bill Clinton and Nixon together and ran a bus over him .

It is fair to say the republicans have been the party of ideas for the last 15 years , he should have put a caveat in their that they were bad ideas.

Thats a lesson in bad pandering he learned the had way.

You don't throw the democrats and the only two term president who is held in the highest esteem under the bus like that because you want to get the endorsement of a right wing editorial board.


When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line
by lori on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:40:24 PM EST

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

I guess it depends on what you mean by "ideas", huh?  


by demmonty on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 03:49:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (2.00 / 1)

its pretty clear he was pandering to independents, right leaning independents, and moderate republicans with those comments, you know, for his "new majority"


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 05:32:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Wake up. The Clintons clearly lied about what Obama said, regardless of Reagan and your memory:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:16:03 PM EST

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Obama + Dems + Indies + Disaffected Repubs = More Dems in Congress = Progressive Majority = Progressive Policy


by upper left on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:17:37 PM EST

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Hillary + Clinton_Dems = 50% + 1 (if we're lucky)


by JoeCoaster on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:21:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

PLUS DEMS?   We are certainly not with Obama, far from it.


by georgep on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:32:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Missouri Democrats Are With Obama (none / 0)

Please explain to me why Claire McCaskill and Jean Carnahan endorsed Obama recently?  Clinton will kill down ticket D's in Missouri. Same in other purple/competitive states: VA (Kaine), Arizona (Napoliatano), Vermont (Leahy), etc. All support Obama. His support is not as limited as you think.


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:38:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Missouri Democrats Are With Obama (2.00 / 1)

I was talking about the rank-and-file Democrats, you know, the "average" Democrat.  I don't see what a Claire McCaskill has to do with that?   I consider myself a die-hard Democrat, have voted nothing but Democratic all my life.  I see many of us not supporting Obama, and I think that is borne out by the evidence we have before us.  So, Obama gets more Independents.  That in no way makes up for his major deficienices with Democrats.  This site is a Democratic site, so pointing out that Obama is quite weak with a majority of Democrats makes sense.  


by georgep on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 07:03:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (2.00 / 0)

If the Clinton's disagreed with how Obama sees Reagan's political legacy they could have made that argument. They didn't! They put words in his mouth and then attacked him.

You don't get to do that and not be called out on it.


by JoeCoaster on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:18:50 PM EST

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

The Clintons have NOT been the only ones making the charge so I guess there are ALOT of lying Democrats.


NY TIMES ENDORSEMENT: "Mrs. Clinton is more qualified, right now, to be president.... She would be a strong commander in chief."
by reasonwarrior on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:27:52 PM EST

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

Any back up for this statement.  The liars seem to be clear in this debate:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html


by Lawdawg on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:42:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Um, it's actually a fair inference: (none / 0)

He did qualify the remark. After saying they were the party of ideas he followed with "in the sense of challenging the conventional wisdom."


by DPW on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 04:35:44 PM EST

Obama shouldn't pander to the right. (2.00 / 1)

I think that blogger is parsing too much: anyone viewing the clip know exactly what he meant to tell the Reno Republican paper-- that Ronald Reagan brought about a change that America was craving.

I submit that America did not crave that change. I submit that Reagan did not represent something America needed. I submit that the Republican party did not go against the 'excesses' of previous times to take us in a new direction the way that Bill Clinton did not.

Obama brought this criticism on himself, and Barney Frank summarized the reaction that a lot of people like myself had to the comment:

I'm stupefied ... This notion that style in the presidency trumps substance is a terrible error.


While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work ~ Barack Obama
by bowiegeek on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 06:58:06 PM EST

Re: Bill and Hillary - Brazen Liars (none / 0)

let me put this in a context you seem to need to under stand. Let me quote a line contexually from harry Potter. Reagan did great things .... Terrible Yes, but great. That is the context that obama was using and the media and the clintons blue out of proportion.


by orin76 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:38 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: