I had thought the Clinton campaign couldn't sink any lower, but thus far she's really just been giving us the full GOP. Listening to her talk about Barack Obama is like reading a Weekly Standard blog post. The lame excuse that she's making this and that outrageous smear because the Republicans will do it later is pathetic. Maybe they will. But she's the one doing it now.
« Brave New Vacuity | Main | Out of Touch »
Hillary's Turn
16 Apr 2008 08:43 pm
Comments (170)
The Weather Underground. Oh my fucking Christ.
Holy fucking shit. ABC News should never be allowed to moderate a debate ever again. THIS is journalism? My God.
And Hillary is absolutely shameless. Whenever I think she can't sink any lower, she manages to do so.
Is this on Fox?
let's not forget the hamas reference like ten minutes ago
"Do the candidates have a real plan to get out of Iraq?" Might possibly be a policy question. Let's see how ABC fucks it up.
Lmao, Chjarlie Gibson needs to learn that the PRESIDENT is the commander in chief of the army, army commanders are not the chief of the President.
This is a surprisingly toxic "kitchen sink" effort, surprising even to someone who's pretty cynical about Clinton's cynicism. The Hamas reference probably takes the cake.
The sanctimonious tone only makes it worse. Pretty shameful all around.
If I had been in a coma since the Iowa caucuses this would be shocking. For those of us who have been concious for the past couple of months, I think it's pretty clear this has been standard behavior for John McCain campaign surrogate Hillary Clinton.
I'd get arrested if I wrote what I think these fucking scum shits deserve. It rhymes with hot in the lead, though.
"are you saying that General Pateraues is NOT the voice of GOD!? That he has not traveled the timesteam and SEEN THE FUTURE? HOW DARE YOU@2#$%^2@!"
I have been very wary of the Obama rhetoric, not because of a like for Hillary, but do to its vacuity. In fact, I have found myself supporting hillary at times. Tonight, she looked so filthy. Her comment about Ayers is so off-base it shows how little regard she has for the party and the good of the country.
I think Obama will be subjected to this more and more, and I am a bit worried about his chances in the general, but hillary is both unelectable and unconscionable. This is infuriating!
"I'd get arrested if I wrote what I think these fucking scum shits deserve. It rhymes with hot in the lead, though."
Hillary is trying to save the Democratic Party from being taken over by people like this. Ya'll should be grateful.
I would encourage everyone to call your Democratic representatives tomorrow. Hillary Clinton's candidacy must be euthanized NOW.
I think the "Weather Underground" exchange really powerfully illustrates how "kamikazee" this campaign has gotten. What's the upshot? Obama has some vague contacts with the WU, and Bill Clinton pardoned some members.
How could this exchange possibly help EITHER campaign in the long run? It's just point scoring for its own sake.
Well one thing is for sure, you know that anyone who can still defend the Monster after this is a satanic piece of shit.
And guess what, in the extremely unlikely event that she wins the nomination, I'm now converted from a third party voter to a McCain voter, even though I think McCain is a deeply evil madman, far worse than even Cheney. But at this point I'd vote for Satan himself over Clinton.
Hey, did Obama just say that "all options are on the table" when it comes to preventing Iran from getting nukes? So, Obama would "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" if his summit with the Iranians fails?
Is this on Fox?
In lieu of a Faux News debate, Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes appear to have bought the rights to this one.
It's fucking obscene.
Tell me again how this is not the most bitter primary in a century? Tell me again how one stupid idiotic ad against Dean in 2003 possibly, remotely compares to this shit?
I seriously hope anyone inclined to defend Clinton up to now has seen the light. She sunk so low in this campaign there is no comparison.
On the other hand, the whole notion of voting for John McCain in the general is crazy. As much as we all have problems with John McCain campaign surrogate Hillary Clinton, her policies are incredibly better than McCain's.
Stephanopoulos: McCain says you'll raise everyone's taxes. Will you repeat Bush 41's mistake?
I do have to say -- as much as I think that treating simple diplomatic negotiation as a "reward" is a fundmentally moronic position -- I think Clinton had a better answer on Iran. Not that Obama's was substantively wrong, it just wandered a lot and didn't even let him slide off the "treat Israel like Britain" question.
This debate is fucking insane. They went from talking about the weather underground to goading the candidates into war on Israel's behalf to pledges on taxing. Now, Charlie is suggesting that increasing the capital gains tax is regressive.
This is not a debate, this is a reality television program.
Lmao, did he just repeat the bullshit 'Tax revenues go UP if you LOWER taxes!'
Christ, this man just won't let go of it either. He's really making a pissing match out of this. I hope the next $5000 dollar whore he visits bites his dick off by accident.
Gibson: "History shows that when you drop the capital gains rate, revenues go up."
ABC just presented the fucking Laffer curve on national television as fucking fact.
estragon,
Her policies are the same as McCain's, on the whole, on foreign affairs, worse most likely on presidential power and civil liberties. She also is way behind McCain on all character issues (not that I think much of McCain's character, it's basically the difference between a garden variety semi-corrupt politician and one of the most disgusting people in American history).
So she may be marginally more sane on domestic issues. Well let me tell you something - if we are going to have the kind of insane foriegn policy that both Clinton and McCain support, I'd prefer the candidate (McCain) who will be more likely to bankrupt the country so maybe we won't be able to afford to use our military to murder innocents anymore.
According to my elitist DVR, we were in 52 minutes into the debate before a substantive question was asked, i.e., Iraq, not "Barack Obama do you deny that there was this one guy one time who said you might be a jihadist".
It just goes to show just how bad the press is in the tank for McCain.
Honestly, if it wasn't for concern about my family and people living in places like Iran, I would almost wish McCain upon the country, because the ensuing disaster for the U.S. would have a large element of karmic justice.
Just from reading the comments here, I can't believe you people are subjecting yourselves to that drivel. I'm going to go out for a meal and to hear some music.
I'd strongly consider voting for whichever candidate punches Gibson in the face right now, even if it's Clinton.
What in the fuck is this shit?
I am actually insulted right now by this abortion of a debate.
phil wins the thread.
I voted for Clinton for Senate in 2000. Now I regret it. Lazio '12, baby!
Social Security:
This is the kind of exchange that makes me wish we still had a real news media in this damn country. Clinton will form a commission that's not allowed to 1) cut benefits or 2) raise taxes. She says this with a straight face and nobody even asks for more information or anything.
Obama's answer was ok, but rests with raising the payroll tax cap. I don't think he really effectively made the case that it would be more progressive or anything.
ABC : Public discourse :: Weather Underground : victims of Weather Underground
Laffer curve! Weather Underground! Flag pins, Farrakhan, Hamas! Patreus = God! This is the awesomest fucking debate EVAR!
New fact from Charlie Gibson: atheists don't exist!
I didn't say a prayer today because I'm a godless heathen, so bite me Charlie.
Hey, which IS worse; serving on a board with a terrorist bomber who says he wishes he'd done more bombing, or being married to the guy who pardoned terrorists? What would you folks be saying if McCain served on a board with someone who blew up abortion clinics, and had said he wished he'd done more? You don't think ol' Matthew would put up a snarky post or two, and many of you would have chimed in with approval? Just maybe?
ABC/Disney. Follow the money among senior management. Here's something constructive to do about the bias. Spread the word among friends in Pennsylvania:
http://acropolisreview.com/2008/04/top-reasons-to-give-barack-obama-your.html
I actually achieved a strange kind of peace watching this debate unfold. After Obama's heartfelt, reasonable enjoinder to concentrate on the issues that actually matter, ABC went straight to the dumb woman asking about the flag lapel pin.
It is so painfully clear that this country deserves what it's going to get. So I say, let Obama go down in flames, and let the cancer continue to rot us from within; this place dearly needs to get much worse before it gets any better. God sent plagues to Egypt for a reason.
"And guess what, in the extremely unlikely event that she wins the nomination, I'm now converted from a third party voter to a McCain voter, even though I think McCain is a deeply evil madman, far worse than even Cheney. But at this point I'd vote for Satan himself over Clinton."
Your silly posts here do attract a bunch of really good people, Matt. Congratulations.
Hey, y'all remember in the last Charlie Gibson debate how it was all "There's a 50% chance of a major American city bein' blowed up by a nuclear weapon OMIGOD WHUT WILL YOO DOO????"
That was awesome.
Senators, have you stopped molesting handguns yet?
One thing this debate is making me realize. We have got to fight fuckin hard. Charlie Gibson is indicative of the news media and how they are going to limit the discourse. They are going to go gaga for john mccain and patriotism and taxes. We are going to have to got damn fight for this election. These son of a bitches are not gonna let this be easy.
This "debate" should be titled the "BashBarackathon." My God, the flag pin and Bill Ayres! Obama got the Monster good when he brought up Bubba's pardoning of Weather Underground members. How Stephanopolous got to moderate this garbage is beyond me-he worked for them for years. This has been a travesty of a mockery of a sham (thanks Woody).
This "debate" should be titled the "BashBarackathon." My God, the flag pin and Bill Ayres! Obama got the Monster good when he brought up Bubba's pardoning of Weather Underground members. How Stephanopolous got to moderate this garbage is beyond me-he worked for them for years. This has been a travesty of a mockery of a sham (thanks Woody).
If some Democrat would have the guts to put his global warming/ foreign energy source dependence policy where his mouth is, and propose instituting a floor before FICA taxes kick in, a big whopping carbon tax, and means testing for wealthy retirees, I'd register Democrat. Hell, Al Gore proposed something like this; why can't one of these two? Oh yeah, that's right. They want to be elected!
Bill -- I'm with you. There is peace in believing that we'll get what we deserve here.
And in knowing that karma exists for Clinton, just like the rest of us.
Here's what some people may not know: Steph was told to ask some of the dumb question by Sean Hannity on his radio show...check it out.
This was reported on Daily Kos.
So Steph is taking marching orders from Hannity...what's next, from Rush Limbaugh?
Keep in mind that this is every right-winger's conception about how the media should work when functioning properly.
Evie & Bill,
You are both right. When the "white working class" & a few of their middle class brethren are standing on soup lines then, then maybe folks will wake up. It took the Depression to get stuff done.
"The lame excuse that she's making this and that outrageous smear because the Republicans will do it later is pathetic. Maybe they will. But she's the one doing it now."
It's actually worse than that. She's priming the media, the general public and specifically Democrats to view Obama in exactly the terms that McCain will want to characterize him in.
When Hillary makes the same far right smear attacks, she helps to legitimize them.
This is actually worse than if they came from the GOP in a general election. Then Obama would have the full weight of the Democratic party behind him, and the people at this point expect it from the GOP.
It's like when Hillary went racist...that did far more to legitimize racism than any right winger.
Hillary is absolutely sickening, and this debate is one more bit of evidence of that.
Bill -- I'm with you. There is peace in believing that we'll get what we deserve here.
And in knowing that karma exists for Clinton, just like the rest of us.
evie, our way forward is clear: abscond together, we two, to wile away the end times in defiant, hopeless lovemaking, yea even as the decaying edifice commences toppling around us.
Is there one honest person here who will say what they would be writing about McCain if he served on a board with guy who blew up abortion clinics, and said he wished he'd done more? Just one.
Newsflash to the Obamagirlzzz: when a guy with an excellent chance to be President serves on a board with guy who engaged in terrorist bombings, and says he wishes he'd done more, it's going to get some play at some point in scheduled debates, and it doesn't take a vast right wing conspiracy.
Where would you folks set the bar for it being likely to be mentioned; serving on a board with O.J. Simpson?
Bill, you are exactly right. The great empires of history fall because of things like this; they do not collapse from trivial external pressures, but from a rotting of civilization's foundations. This is a classic instance of such a decay.
So how does one reconcile HRC's performance tonight with superdelegates? I've a hard time seeing how this is what they want from their presidential candidate, but who knows.
What's the deal with HRC and the number 35? "35 years of experience..." "35 generals and admirals are backing me..."
Did Penn work out that that number resonates better with voters?
Will Allen, you know your statement is disinfuckinggenuous. Quite frankly, the media is smarter than this, they're just acting stupidly. Your defense of their willful stupidity is no excuse.
I'm willing to be that, should Hillary find her way to the Oval Office, she'll attack Iran because "the Republicans would jsut do it later."
Yeah, Bill Ayers is hugely important, because it's not like Republicans have ever hung out with genocidalists and death squad leaders, like, in South Florida or something.
Will Allen:
Do you understand what a board is, and how it is formed?
So how does one reconcile HRC's performance tonight with superdelegates? I've a hard time seeing how this is what they want from their presidential candidate, but who knows.
It could go either way: either the superdelegates think, "this woman is just vicious enough to make us think she can win and make us fear for our futures if we don't back her" or they'll think, "she needs to be stopped. now. before she does any more damage."
Will:
Bait taken.
Hillary's husband pardoned members of the weather underground, granting them impunity from heir crimes. What do you think is a bigger deal:
Serving on a board--one which you did not choose the members--with someone who committed acts of domestic terrorist or consciously choosing to let someone go free for committing those crimes.
I don't care how great Obama is, Bill Ayers is dispicable and nobody should come close to him with a 10 foot pole.
God, have you people read the comments at Talk left? These Hillary supporters are beyond disgusting. We have been giving these disgusting, loathsome animals far too much credit. They sure as hell aren't MY countrymen. They are far worse than the worst Bush dead ender.
Tyro writes:
It could go either way: either the superdelegates think, "this woman is just vicious enough to make us think she can win and make us fear for our futures if we don't back her" or they'll think, "she needs to be stopped. now. before she does any more damage."
No, it really couldn't go either way. Unless you think that a whopping 80% of the remaining unpledged supers will break for Hillary.
Hey, have any Republicans ever hung out with any members of Alpha 66? Or Luis Posada Carriles? Or any of the other political celebrity right wing Latin American terrorists they love? Might be an issue, except that of course no such questions can ever be asked of John McCain because he is by definition a Magic Maverick who creates perfect barbecue on a magic ranch and floats above all issues and criticisms.
WTF is up with Charlie Gibson getting huffy over the fact that the audience had the nerve to applaud the local TV station?
The crowd seemed pissed at these two after the debate. Is that too much wishful thinking?
I don't care how great Obama is, Bill Ayers is dispicable and nobody should come close to him with a 10 foot pole.
You know, as a person with various academic associations, if I were to serve on a panel at a conference discussing our research, (a) I'm not sure I would know about any crimes any of my panel members would have committed in their past, and (b) I don't really think I would care, unless my co-panelist brought it up.
People were just trying to find an excuse to figure out how to attack Obama for at some point, some time, being in the same room with someone who was a domestic terrorist in his radical past. Slow clap, guys. Slow clap.
joejoejoe, do you frequent baseball sites?
Also, if ABC headquarters burned to the ground tomorrow, I would laugh. They were the same as FOX tonight, that's all there is to it. Fuck the media.
Yeah, Bill, I do. Last I checked nobody was forced at gunpoint to join one that had an unrepentant terorist bomber on the board, or forced at gunpoint to stay on one if an unrepentant terrorist bomber joined. Howza'bout just answering the question, with as much honesty as you can muster? What do you think would be written here, by Matthew or by you and others, if McCain served on a board with a guy who bombed up abortion clinics, and said he'd done more?
Is this the biggest deal in the world? No, I don't think so, but to gnash one's teeth that a likely Presidential candidate gets pressed on this association in a debate in just silly, and the Democrats here are just being dishonest if they pretend they wouldn't applaud it if McCain was pressed on such an associaion with a abortion clinic bomber.
Isn’t it time for Kennedy/Gore/Biden/Pelosi/Ried and the rest of the Dem ELITE to show up in Penn and compare a vote for Hillary is a vote for Bush/McCain.
Time for the DEM ELITE to put a dagger through the heart of the Clinton’s excellent adventure.
It is destroying the progressive movement and 3will insure another Rebulican 8 years and the end of civil rights with thei8r theiocratic judicial appoint,ment.
Obama won hands own. Maybe not on glib lawyer come back, but on charater and class-- a person we can all identify with.
On the other hand, Hillary the Tilla the Hun, 55% Negative, personifies the term FUCKING BITCH. SMUG FUCKING UGLY.
This debate makes me want to JOIN the Weather Underground.
I'm bombing ABC headquarters tomorrow.
Hey, let's hold off the b-word. Doesn't help. Use the R-word instead. Republican. It's a much more vicious insult.
OH MI GOD!
THAT WAS HORRIBLE.
IT MADE ME ACTUALLY WISH THAT TIM RUSSERT WAS THERE.
AAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
It is weird that members of the WU continue to get so much odd respect given the fact that they're, y'know, terrorists.
People my age (or even, like, ten years older than me) can't even get adjunct jobs because they got caught with a joint once in college, but join a Baby Boomer-celebrity terrorist group and your academic career goes off without a hitch! I don't blame Obama for sitting on a board with the guy, but I'm completely astounded by the fact that he was free to get on that board in the first place.
I'm equally shocked by Clinton's pardon. I would be pissed if Bush pardoned an abortion clinic bomber, even one that operated 40 years ago. Why didn't the "respectable" Left turn its back on these dopes long ago?
"What do you think is a bigger deal:
Serving on a board--one which you did not choose the members--with someone who committed acts of domestic terrorist or consciously choosing to let someone go free for committing those crimes."
They're both bad deals. Better to vote for John McCain.
Good grief. I remember when the Ethnic Outreach committees of the Republican Party back in Reagan's time was found to have actual Nazis (Ukrainian Iron Guard etc), and somehow it didn't reach 1/4 of the scandal that Bill-Ayers-Vaguely- Connected-To-Obama-Gate has been.
I don't think so, but to gnash one's teeth that a likely Presidential candidate gets pressed on this association in a debate in just silly,
Pressed by whom? Why is it silly for journalists to press the issue, when the issue is stupid and an invented kerfluffle pushed by a bunch of adled right-wing talking-points-mongers? The guys are both professors at the same university and worked with a similar charity. And you're defending the pushing of this idiotic talking points thing? This is the most tenuous thing I've ever heard. Geez, WTF is your problem? Are you stupid?
jeff, unless Mrs. Clinton lobbied Mr. Clinton on behalf of the Puerto Rican terrorists (maybe she did; I don't know), I wouldn't hold her responsible for her husband's actions. If she did, I'd say she's worse, but it's just silly to be surprised,or take it as a right wing smear, that Obama serving on a board with an unrepentant terrorist bomber would be fodder for debate.
I'm serious; how high would you set the bar for expected debate fodder; O.J. Simpson?
Isn't it time that the Democratic party recognized that in Hillary they have the Rush Limbaugh twin? She sounds exactly like him.
Do Democrats really believe she would in any way represent their interests after her selling her soul?
If she could somehow get elected, Hillary would tear this country apart. And I think in so many ways she would do the exact same thing as Bush or McCain. Hillary has become the opposition...the vast right wing conspiracy...how's that for irony.
What a total disgrace. I know it's hardly novel to talk about how out of touch the media is, but man ... are they out of touch! This country is teetering on the brink of economic meltdown, and we get a freaking hour on Reverend Wright, bittergate, Ayers? Really, nobody cares about that crap except the national broadcast media.
George S. went on Sean Hannity's radio show today and another conservative radio show yesterday, and they both implored him to bring up William Ayers, and George S. obliged. This is not fucking journalism! This was an assault of conscious and decency by a Clinton loyalist posing as a journalist. If there are any decent journalists left, they will take him to taks for this. This was a political lynching!
It is weird that members of the WU continue to get so much odd respect given the fact that they're, y'know, terrorists.
People my age (or even, like, ten years older than me) can't even get adjunct jobs because they got caught with a joint once in college, but join a Baby Boomer-celebrity terrorist group and your academic career goes off without a hitch! I don't blame Obama for sitting on a board with the guy, but I'm completely astounded by the fact that he was free to get on that board in the first place.
I'm equally shocked by Clinton's pardon. I would be pissed if Bush pardoned an abortion clinic bomber, even one that operated 40 years ago. Why didn't the "respectable" Left turn its back on these dopes long ago?
Obama serving on a board with an unrepentant terrorist bomber would be fodder for debate.
Like many right wingers, you seem to advocate a broken, harmful media structure which promulgates these non-stories planted by right-wing operatives. It seems you have a bizarre, almost dangerous conception of the media's duty to inform the public... one that takes the media's role as a mouthpiece of certain unbalanced personalities within the right-wing noise machine. I'm not sure that's really a healthy idea of what the media should be doing and I'm not sure why you feel that way, unless you don't take public policy very seriously.
I just washed my hands of the Democratic Party tonight.
Nope, I'm changing my mind. Have at it with the "Why Is Barack Obama blowing up math buildings in the 1960s and 1970s," and get your *sses handed to you. Pull out every Bill Ayers / Che Guevara / whatever you can. Go for it. Full bore. Give it your best shot.
No, Tyro, you are, because you are too dim to grasp that a likely President serving on a board with an unrepentant terrorist bomber is, well, kinda' weird, because you don't come across unrepentant terrorist bombers, or likely Presidents, all that often, and journalists tend to ask about weird occurences.
Noticed that you still haven't tried to give me an honest answer regarding what would be said about my McCain hypothetical. C'mon, you can do it! It'll only take 10 seconds. What do you think Matthew would write if McCain served on a board with an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber, and what do you think the reaction in the comments section would be? D'ya' think there would rending of garments about the obvious left wing conspiracy in bringing the matter up?
Wiil Allen,
Fuck you and die painfully in a fire. The current president and the presumptive Republican candidate for president ARE unrepentant terrorist bombers. I tend to think that that is one hell of a lot worse than serving on the board with one.
Don't feed the troll.
They're both bad deals. Better to vote for John McCain.
Charles Keating says hi.
Go for it, Will Allen, give it your best. Scream about how Obama showed anti-American judgment via his dangerous terrorist relations with known non-convicted but admitted bomber Bill Ayers. Go for it. And you're going to lose. And you'll wonder why and condemn everyone for their obvious lack of analysis.
And actually, I watched an entire generation of Latin death squad leaders and former tyrants and other terrorists move in and out of the Southern U.S. en masse and the right wing called them "freedom fighters".
And I thought it was weird, but then, I'm craaaaazy, just like how at the time a couple of decades ago I said it was a really bad idea to build up an Islamic fundamentalist drug dealing terrorist warlord gang army in Afghanistan, but this made me unserious and crazy.
Thankfully the sane people who had no "weird" relations on a board with Bill Ayers were sitting in office on September 11, 2001, and had dismissed every possible meeting they were urged to have about terrorism, and they actually permitted the worst foreign attack on the domestic U.S. since the War of 1812, but nooooooo, that's not weird, they're patriot American heroes, but that weird Kenyan madrassa Obama guy once was on a board with Bill Ayers.
Well, if hillary is going to suggest that she played a major role in the Clinton White House, as a senior advisor, it would be likely that she participated in such discussions. You cant run on your immense experience and then down play it when it does not suit your narrative.
On Obama's behalf, he served on a progressive board in Chicago's south side. you dont get to choose who serves on the board.
To your typical, well, it will be brought up in the general. Well, then, Obama should talk about hillary's lesbian love affairs with hilda Solis and her penchant for bestiality. While they may be totally of base, they might be brought up in the general. So lets prepare!
I'll rephrase the question, in an effort to reign in Larry's possibly dangerous psychological association between sex and death by fire:
Do you folks really think that if Olbermann moderated a debate, and McCain had an association like I outlined, Olbermann wouldn't ask him about it? Or Russert?
Will Allen, please, you're being disingenuous. Someone looked for a case where some time, some where, Obama at some point was in the same room as one of his U. Chicago colleagues who also happened to be a former member of the weather underground. Certainly some right wing hacks wanted to make it a news story, but you're somehow claiming that this is an Actual, real issue that deserves a public airing beyond, "this is an invented attempt to make a scandal out of nothing."
I don't see why you're not condemning a media so shallow as to not condemn the right-wing noise machine pushing the story but also went on TV to validate the story during a debate. It's clear that you have a rather bizarre conception about what the duty of a news oprganizaton is. George S.'s job was to tell Hannity, "Wow, you're really an idiot for pushing this non-story." Why are endorsing ABC's behavior, here?
Will,
Just curious, who appointed you the socratic master of the board?
Thanks in advance for your response.
Hillary is a relentless soulless political automaton. She inspires absolutely no trust from me. Barack convinces me he has more heart, but seemed flummoxed and unable to take the fight back to Clinton or the asinine questioners. He has to be able to do so to win the general. I so miss John Edwards.
Don't feed the trolls. Just donate to Obama, or the DNC. Winning is the best counter-argument.
El Cid, the presumably peyote-induced hallucinations which produced your last post has exactly nothing to do with anything I've written.
Will, let me try to explain this to you: I actually serve on a board of an organization. We have a meeting once a month, and sometimes everyone is there, and sometimes a few people are there. I do not know if any of the people I know have a sketchy past. If one of them did, and someone involved in a shady right-wing organization tried to say I was "tied" to a shady character because of his decades-old past, don't you think you would call it "stupid" to try to claim that I am somehow in league with terrorists because our personal/professional duties cross paths at some point? Wouldn't you say, "wow, you're really stretching for a connection here," if someone tried to claim such a thing?
Your problem is that you're shilling for a broken media system, rather than demanding that the media do a better job. I'm really not sure why that is, unless you have some sort of malicious intent for the media or believe it to be the job of the media to validate the viewpoints of a few crazed lunatics on the right. Why are you defending, not condemning George S. for not taking Hannity to task for his strained, bizarre accusations? Once again, I find your behavior in this case really out of bounds, to the point where I cannot possibly conceive that you have the best interests of the public's right to know and the media's duty to inform in mind.
Has the media always been this stupid or is it getting dumber?
Will Allen,
We know empirically nothing like that was ever asked of McCain, despite his close association with the lunatic terrorist bomber Bush. That was my point, beyond my not so fond wishes for your future.
If you want to pretend that Bush isn't a terrorist bomber, then what about the contras? McCain was in congress while we were funding the contras, and voted in favor of such funding. Did anyone ask him about that? I'd think that voting in favor of giving money to terrorist bombers is far, far, worse than being on a board with one. Yet he got a pass on it.
Will Allen -- If HIllary had no role in the pardons, how'd Hugh Rodham get one? Also, why don't we discuss Hillary serving on a board with SAM WALTON. PA's lost a lot of union jobs -- guess what's replacing them. And shouldn't Ayers and Obama both get some credit for supporting a charity?
Not Obama's best night, but he did well enough given how bad some of the questions were. (Even the substantive questions pretty much sucked, in point of fact.) I think HRC's pile-ons fell a bit flat, but loaded questions couldn't but put him on the defensive. These things happen.
The person I feel sorry for is Peter Jennings. Man, does his network now presently suck.
Hillary did not disappoint her detractors: she looks more loathsome as ever with her Republican talking points.
In the beginning of the campaign, I was of the view that Obama is unnecessarily complicating the nomination process, and we should just nominate Hillary.
I feel very relieved to have been so wrong about Hillary. She definitely is Nixon, GWB, and Cheney combined into one. Good riddance to bad stuff.
Will Allen:
You're right. I probably got drugs from Bill Ayers because one time I was on this highway and Sean Hannity appeared in front of me and said that 9/11 wasn't the Bush administration's fault, instead we had to watch out for this Kenyo-Indonesian black guy who was a radical Black Nationalist who was going to blow up math buildings unless I was willing to agree that it was really important to ask him about Bill Ayers on a national debate.
It was good stuff.
And stop pretending to be some sober rationalist. It isn't convincing.
I'm not just disagreeing with the notion that it possibly could be raised as a debate question, just like John McCain gets no serious questions whatsoever 'cause he does barbecue on a ranch.
I'm directly disputing that it's a significant issue. I'm directly asserting that those people "concerned" by the issue are idiots, and that many of those people who are vaguely worried about the dangerous and spooky terrorist allegiances of Barack Obama are too stupid to examine the actual and proven threat that the Bush Jr. administration has already represented to this country.
So, yes, it is entirely relevant to your point: it is an absolutely idiotic point raised by blithering partisan hacks like Sean Hannity.
And also, yes, please, idiot squad, bring it on. Run your little McCain against the Madrassa Reverend Wright William Ayers monster.
And lose. Please. Bring it on. PLEEEEASE.
C'mon, Tyro, just answer the question. With sugar on top? Yes, people who are likely to become President have oppo research done on them, and that research is given to the press. Have you heard of the Lindberg baby? Obama and the terrorist did not cross each other's path in the faculty lounge. Who is being disingenuous here? Obama, likely President, chose to serve on a board with an unrepentant terrorist bomber. That's not the sort of thing one sees very frequently. Infrequent occurences are the sort of things that get asked about.
I don't remember any moderator asking Mike Huckabee about the fact that he pushed for the pardon of convicted rapist Wayne Dumond, who went on to rape and kill a 17 year old girl after he got pardoned.
I have yet to hear any moderator ask McCain whether he still "hates the gooks.”
So I guess I would say that no, they would not ask McCain about his assocations with unsavory indviduals.
We know empirically nothing like that was ever asked of McCain, despite his close association with the lunatic terrorist bomber Bush.
Hell, have we heard anyone ask McCain about his relationship with Charles Keating? Yes, the same guy who helped sink the savings and loan industry is the same guy the GOP says you can trust to help our current housing crisis! But wait look OMG SCARY PEOPLE FROM THE SIXTIES OBAMA UPPITY NEGRO AAHHHHHHH
Y'all should just leave Will alone with the only things he truly cares about: Himself and his money. Maybe the spirits of Christmas will take pity on him someday.
Fox would never have aired a debate this bad. They may be biased but they at least have some shred of dignity, and their pride alone wouldnt let them air such a travesty.
Yes, people who are likely to become President have oppo research done on them, and that research is given to the press.
And it's the job of the press to say: wow, this is really a piece-of-shit group of oppo research you're trying to foist on me to make a tenuous connection. Why aren't you out there claiming that George S. is being a dipshit for not calling Hannity on it?
As I said, your behavior here is inexplicable. You're basically agreeing with the disingenuous attempt to find a reason to make an issue out of the possibility that Obama and Ayers may have been in the same room at the same time at some point. How a thinking person can argue that this story is anything other than a creation of a bunch of crazed right-wingers is inconceivable. I don't think you're really an idiot, you're just trying to explain that the media's stupidity is "the right thing to do."
NM -- Fox found a guy for their focus group who compared Jeremiah Wright to Timothy McVeigh (a propos of terrorist outrage). I see your point generally, but, I think we underestimate Fox at our own peril.
Tyro, let me try to explain his to you. I, too have served on boards. If one of my fellow board members had written in the NYT that he was an unrepentant terrorist bomber, and I had large political ambitions, I'd know it.
No, I don't think this is the biggest deal in the world. I do think that anyone who believes that there has been any time in American history when the press wold not have asked about such an association is nuts.
David you're right, I shouldnt have said dignity.
Will Allen,
Yes, of course if McCain once brushed up against an abortion clinic bomber at a pro-life rally somewhere, some partisan hack would try to make an issue out of it. That's what partisan hacks do. Happy now?
However, since you quite plainly fail to see the actual problem here, that doesn't mean the media should play along. Who Obama, Clinton, or McCain served on a board with has precisely fucking nothing to do with whether or not they'd make a good president, and you, me, and Charlie Gibson all damn well know it.
The fact that you don't seem to get this means Tyro's right, you apparently think the job of the media is to make the public less informed. And that's just pathetic.
Tyro, stop being so silly as to accuse someone of being disingenuous, while claiming that serving on a board with someone = being in the same room with someone at the same time.
Actually, I've been on boards of organizations in which I never met nor known anyone else involved, but then admittedly I wasn't aspiring to be Preznit.
More sickness from the media. No wonder why we got into a war for wrong reasons...no wonder so many don't have healthcare...no wonder why gas prices are going up...no wonder why people are losing their homes...
Phaedrus, not just the media. Precisely because this is the type of bullroar that partisan hacks seize upon makes me wonder what Clinton's doing.
Phaedrus, no I'm not happy, because you are being dishonest. Serving on a board with someone is not the same as brushing up against an unsavory person once at a rally. Why the need to alter the facts, if you are so certain of your position?
Yes, I suppose I could get upset when the media behaves pretty mush as they always have (Oh, if only William Randolph Hearst was still alive!!!!!), and always will. That would be a stupid thing to get upset about, however.
Now, go back and fix your motorcycle....
If she thinks for one minute that if she's the general election candidate that she's going to be able to withstand any attack from the GOP she is dead wrong. After her attacking posture tonight, the GOP is licking thier chops. Obama didn't take any shots at her (except for the pardoning point). She hasn't seen the kitchen sink; they're going to bring it on because they think she'll DESERVE it because she gleefully went after her own candidate and is claiming that everything is open to debate. And it will be worse then any lame Rev. Wright, Ayers, and flag pin wearing crap. Her ass is going to be re-nailed to the wall and it won't be pretty: Lewinsky, impeachment, Whitewater, etc. Do we really want this?
Yes, if we could only have the Pulitzer-winning journalism of Walter Duranty again! Those were the days!
Golly, none of this nonsense would have happened on Col. McCormick's watch! Maybe we could get Dan Rather and Mary Mapes to do an investigation!
Samantha Powers is right:
HRC IS A MONSTER!!
Yo:
ABC = Anti Barack Channel.
Feel free to use in every day conversation.
thank goodness, i deliberately did not watch this debate.
it would have made me physically ill.
after reading these comments, i know i did the right thing.
thank goodness, i deliberately did not watch this debate.
it would have made me physically ill.
after reading these comments, i know i did the right thing.
thank goodness, i deliberately did not watch this debate.
it would have made me physically ill.
after reading these comments, i know i did the right thing.
well, even though I'm a lost fan, guess i'm boycotting ABC now.
I'll manage. I can live without the candy hearts from WalMart, and I'll live without ABC programming.
seriously, fuck ABC. if any HRC fan accepts this debate simply because it attacked Obama, i say 'screw em', heh. because if HRC is supposedly all about the issues, she'd be pissed that flag pins are more important to ABC than waterboarding or education.
Any old timers remember Chuck Colson wanting to bomb the Brookings Institution? Any Republican who has ever met Colson should have to answer for that association. Oh, wait. All together now... IOKIYAR!
As an old school Yglesias commenter from way back in the day, it distresses me to see the new guys engaging the likes of Will Allen. I mean it's not even a subtle troll and yet pages of earnest responses from people stating the obvious.
Just one question after the awful debate I am glad I chose not to watch.
Why is it that Obama gets asked about the flag pin YET, HRC and McSame do not wear(if they do I haven't seen it) and do not get asked about it?
I am so sick of the double standard. I can imagine how difficult it must be for Obama to get questioned about his patriotism all the time while the other candidates are assumed to be patriotic.
Don't tell me that McSame's military history cuts it. Obama's pastor was in the military no?
All the weathermen in the world couldn't help Hillary know which way the wind blows.
Call the New York main number and ask for
212-456-7777
David Westin - President of ABC NEWS
I called and told him what a sham of a debate that was. Disgraceful.
George
Yeah, Allen's seemingly on a par with Chris Ford, Al, Fred, Powell, and the rest of the trolls here.
Not to mention that half the fucking Prime Ministers of Israel have been unrepentant terrorist bombers, and no American President has had any trouble sucking their dicks for the last forty years or more.
You know we expect Ayres nonsense from right wing assholes like Will Allen, but for Hillary to bring it up is obscene.
Remember '92? How the right tried to portray the Clintons as radical anti war activists in the 60s? They used guilt by association to try and tar them with every excess of groupos like the Weathermen. And Democrats (rightly!) defended them and said that this culture war BS was absurd. Opposing the war and supporting McGovern was a perfectly valid position to have taken.
And now Hillary is using the same BS against a fellow Democrat? One who was born in 19fucking61 who was in grade school during the Vietnam War?
Seriously, Fuck her and the fucking horse she rode in on, I'm sorry I ever supported her and will donte money to whatever Dem wants to challenge her in the next Senate primary.
Will Allen makes a good point about pro-life groups breeding terrorists. It should be a campaign issue.
Yeah, I'm just awful. Despicable, even.
I tell ya', though, none of this would have happened in the good ol' days!
our democracy is dead.
corporations bought it and euthanized it.
now they just tell us we participate.
the time to take up arms against a tyrannical government is rapidly approaching.
lighten up, francis.....
"the time to take up arms against a tyrannical government is rapidly approaching."
You're late - I did that in 1993. That's why I spent eight years in the joint.
Now is the time to take up TECHNOLOGY against a tyrannical government.
The Establishment has completely lost it, hasn't it?
You guys whining about ABC being "anti-Obama" are hysterical. The one day a mainstream network doesn't kiss your candidate's ass and treats him as well as they might treat a random Republican and you guys go apoplectic.
Fred,
What fantasy land are you living in? Show us a single example of a republican candidate being subjected to anything remotely close to what Obama, Clinton, Kerry and Gore are.
Good lord, McCain is one of the freakin Keating Five, a corruption scandal so bad it led to campaign finance reform and they don't even bring that up, let alone anything even remotely as absurd as the Ayers stuff.
Sheesh, republicans regularly spout nonsense about balancing the budget, cutting taxes, increasing defense spending and not making any cuts beyond a few token lines about earmarks and no one calls them on it. Contrast that with the way Dems get grilled on Social Security and taxes.
Maybe a minor point: Bill Ayers was never associated professionally with the Univ. of Chicago (contra some suggestions above). He's a professor at Univ. of Illinois at Chicago, which is not at all the same university.
"Show us a single example of a republican candidate being subjected to anything remotely close to what Obama, Clinton, Kerry and Gore"
Bush Sr. in 1992. Also I don't think Kerry was treated worse than Bush unless you count every screwball 527 as "the media." Gore might've been treated a bit worse because the media wants news and Gore wasn't new.
I think the media wanted to love Obama, but the volume from Talk Radio, Hillary Clinton, and Saturday Night Live got too loud to ignore. Of those S'N'L has maybe been the classiest and most pertinent on the issues. What I watched of Hillary she sounded like Hannity, which scared me. She better not be going back to her youth as a Republican, *we have enough problems as is.
*I'm basically independent, but vote Republican more often than third Party. I don't vote Democrat.
Politicians go to church as private citizens not as senators or presidents. Is there a single case of ONE politician who ever left a church because of what their pastor said? Just one? Why ask so of Obama? I thought Hilary sat in the board of Walmart for 6 years when the Chairman was calling workers blood sucking parasites
If Bill Ayers (never heard of him) is so dangerous why is he still teaching American children to this day?
Will Allen,
I wasn't trying to say they were the same. If you had 3rd grade reading comprehension skills, you would have noticed that I used both a fake example of McCain brushing up against a clinic bomber and mentioned serving on a board. I even assigned the weaker example to the liberal side to show I was not making a partisan point, but instead a broader one about the media's failings. I assumed you were bright enough to pick up on that. I apologize for my assumption.
And if your defense of the media is really "but they did bad things in the past too!" then you fail Logic 101. William Randolph Hearst is not a get out of jail free card. The media both today and in the past had both good and bad actors. The proper response is to criticize the bad actors, not give them an "aww, shucks, Hearst did it!" free pass.
The lame excuse that she's making this and that outrageous smear because the Republicans will do it later is pathetic.
Ah--so she's conducting this smear for Obama's own good? Good to know. (Is this an implicit acknowledgment that she's already lost, and that she has no purpose other than as an obstacle course for Obama?)
He's a professor at Univ. of Illinois at Chicago, which is not at all the same university.
Thanks for the correction. I'm not sure whether the news stories I've read got it wrong or whether my brain processed it wrong when I read them.
Well, golly gee, Phaedrus, when you change the hypothetical from the media asking about a candidate who serves on a board with an unrepentant terrorist bomber, to a paid opperative trying to sell a story about a candidate brushing up one time against an unrepentant bomber at a rally, it sure seems like you are discussing something I wasn't discussing.
Look, there has been a lot of commentary in this thread, perhaps not from you, about how the question about Ayers last night broke some sort of new ground, or was indicative of a smear instigated by the right wing. This strikes me as utterly absurd, and indicative of a profound ignorance of American history. Likely Presidents, when they serve on boards with people who set off bombs, and then wrote later in the NYT that they wished they had set off more bombs, are going to get asked about it at some point in the course of multiple debates. To suppose otherwise is on par with supposing that that one day every child will be above average. It is ahistorical ignorance of the highest order. Expecting behavior which would be historically unique, and being upset when it doesn't happen, strikes me as extremely childish.
Now, if the point is the overall tone of the questions last night were more superficial than the norm, I wouldn't necessarily dispute that, but then I was only talking about the Ayers brouhaha.
That must have been some "debate." Didn't watch it, but these comments show it must have gone poorly for Obama. No more softballs for the rookie.
I've said before that Obama supporters will squeal like stuck pigs if he loses. This looks like a preview of what's to come-- if you don't think the moderators or the other candidate treated Obama with the holiness you think he deserves, it's "f!@# this" and "bomb that."
It don't work that way, homies. Quit whining. Nobody likes a whiner.
"He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy." -- Brian of Nazareth's Mother
What would you folks be saying if McCain served on a board with someone who blew up abortion clinics, and had said he wished he'd done more? You don't think ol' Matthew would put up a snarky post or two, and many of you would have chimed in with approval? Just maybe?
If McCain had served for three years or so on a board with someone who had been part of a group that bombed abortion clinics 30 years before but never killed anyone except their own members by accident (the fellow board member hadn't set off bombs himself, mind), and if that terrorist ex-terrorist-group-member had been a model politically active citizen since then... If all that were true, I wouldn't get outraged over someone pointing out the connection for partisan reasons, but no, I don't think I would chime in with approval either. Next question?
Do you folks really think that if Olbermann moderated a debate, and McCain had an association like I outlined, Olbermann wouldn't ask him about it? Or Russert?
Hell no, they obviously wouldn't ask McCain about it. McCain has got campaign donations from someone who helped cover up the My Lai massacre, just for starters. Provide a link to Olbermann or Russert asking McCain about that.
Smarter trolls, please.
Obama started the campaign doing the full dump on Hillary- saying way back when that she was part of the problem in washington. Saying she is involved with lobbyists when he too has them raising money for him and bundling money. Saying you can't believe a word she says.
Saying that she can't dump on him ignores the reality of political life. Is she supposed to be nice because she's a girl? give up with 1500 delegates?
I would be embarrassed if I worked for the Hillary campaign. She has almost no chance of winning the nomination and her Tonya Harding strategy is so tawdry. The Clintons have tarnished their reputation permanently, doing McCain's work for him.
The Republicans will try to their worst but to no avail. Obama will be throwing a big inaugeration day party next year.
And John Edwards can't decide who to endorse? Please...
Cyrus, if you are going to toss around the moronic "troll" rhetoric, at least endeavor to achieve a modicum of honesty, or, being more chartitable, avoid utter and abject ignorance. Guess what, Socrates? When the bomber writes in the NYT a couple decades later that he wishes he'd set off more bombs, that means he doesn't get into the "model citizens" club, because, ya' ol' titan of moral calculus, you, the "model citizens" club only considers the application of terrorist bombers if they, ya' know', acknowledge that terrorist bombngs in a society where you are free to disseminate political messages and thus influence the election of political representatives, is something to be avoided.
Next up, it will be explained to Cyrus why someone who has embezzled funds, and then informs the public that he'd wished he done more, may not be the best person to serve with on a board.
Finally, yes, that Olbermann is really in the tank for McCain. Yup.
How is it that Barack Obama can attack Hillary Clinton with no one saying that he is just giving ammunition to the GOP for the fall?
Hillary Clinton is an evil cunt! She will stop at nothing to destroy the country so long as she personally profits from doing so! Bitch doesn't come close to describing how evil she is acting in her racist campaign to destroy Barack...SHE WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO GET WHAT SHE WANTS THE EVIL BITCH CUNT!!! She wants to socialize medicine and castrate all the men, just for kicks!
What? You are offended at my language, my lack of tact, and my dishonest portrayals of her policy proposals? You think i'm wrong? No, no, no!...don't you see?...I'm just trying to help her out a bit...toughen her up some, you know...only because I care! I'm just preparing her for what the repubs will throw against her if she wins...and only out of the kindness of my heart...my, how great am I, smearing and lying for the common good!
The reductio ad absurdum is so fucking easy.
Come on everybody! Let's all call Hillary an evil Cunt Bitch! If the republicans are doing it, it must be good. Let help the good ol' cunt out, so that she can be in a stronger position for the general!
Finally, yes, that Olbermann is really in the tank for McCain. Yup.
This is what's known as a false dichotomy.
You seem to think that if McCain had ties to people who were party to or supportive of horrible things, the Olbermann and Russert would criticize him for it, loudly, repeatedly and irrationally, as others are criticizing Obama. I pointed out that McCain does have such ties, and asked for evidence that McCain had been criticized, as you seem to expect he would be. Instead of producing evidence, you read something into my comment that isn't there.
No, Cyrus. Please endeavor to read. I said if John McCain served on a board with a guy who bombed abortion clinics, and then wrote in the NYT that he'd wished he bombed more, McCain at some time over the course of multiple debates, would get asked about it. I suspect if the person you mentioned previously penned a NYT op-ed in which he stated that he wished he had done a better job in covering up My Lai, McCain would get asked about that at some point. You are behaving as if 30 minutes was devoted to Bill Ayers last night.
As a God-fearing Bush supporter, I'm appalled by how softball the questions were for Obama! They totally ignored all of the deeply disturbing questions that Americans like me demand to have answered...shame on you ABC! Anyhow, here are the IMPORTANT questions that Good Ole Charlie should've asked:
1) Senator Osama, there have been several rumors about your involvement in Satan worship lately; in fact, many people even say Senator Obama that you are the ANTICHRIST, how do you respond to these rumors that you are in fact yourself the ANTICHRIST? Isn't it true that you did not attend church services this weekend? Just for the record, Senator Clinton was seen attending church this weekend and so was Senator McCain. Don't you love Jesus, Senator Obama?
2) Senator Obama, it has been widely reported that Jane Fonda has endorsed you for President of the United States. As we know, Hanoi Jane is a dirty hippy pinko from way back in the day when she stood on a tank and pledged allegiance to Ho Chi Minh while Senator McCain was being tortured. How do you respond to criticisms that your candidacy has allowed someone like Fonda to support you? Weren't you once at a Hollywood party in which Fonda was also in attendance? How do you explain this association?
3) Senator Clinton has pledged to nuke Iran into oblivion with 200,000 nukes, but you haven't stated yet exactly how many nukes you would consider to be enough to show our indignity. So, Senator Obama, specifically how many nukes do you consider to be proper amount to blast Iran into oblivion? Is it 200,000 or 250,000? Why won't you give a specific answer on this? Why do you keep defending the Iranian interests? Are you an Iranian sympathizer, Senator Obama?
As a God-fearing Bush supporter, I'm appalled by how softball the questions were for Obama! They totally ignored all of the deeply disturbing questions that Americans like me demand to have answered...shame on you ABC! Anyhow, here are the IMPORTANT questions that Good Ole Charlie should've asked:
1) Senator Osama, there have been several rumors about your involvement in Satan worship lately; in fact, many people even say Senator Obama that you are the ANTICHRIST, how do you respond to these rumors that you are in fact yourself the ANTICHRIST? Isn't it true that you did not attend church services this weekend? Just for the record, Senator Clinton was seen attending church this weekend and so was Senator McCain. Don't you love Jesus, Senator Obama?
2) Senator Obama, it has been widely reported that Jane Fonda has endorsed you for President of the United States. As we know, Hanoi Jane is a dirty hippy pinko from way back in the day when she stood on a tank and pledged allegiance to Ho Chi Minh while Senator McCain was being tortured. How do you respond to criticisms that your candidacy has allowed someone like Fonda to support you? Weren't you once at a Hollywood party in which Fonda was also in attendance? How do you explain this association?
3) Senator Clinton has pledged to nuke Iran into oblivion with 200,000 nukes, but you haven't stated yet exactly how many nukes you would consider to be enough to show our indignity. So, Senator Obama, specifically how many nukes do you consider to be proper amount to blast Iran into oblivion? Is it 200,000 or 250,000? Why won't you give a specific answer on this? Why do you keep defending the Iranian interests? Are you an Iranian sympathizer, Senator Obama?
Where is Hillary's flag pin? Where is Charles Gibson's flag pin?
When they brought this lapel pin business up last night as some kind of whether-or-not-you-are-a-patriotic-American sign, Obama was forced to defend himself.
But no one mentioned that Hillary wore no flag pin.
I went back into the web and looked at Hillary in pictures and saw what appeared to be a Senate member ID pin on a lapel in one picture - not an American flag - and in the majority of pictures found no flag pin.
Then I did a Google search on John McCain photos. Guess what? No flag pins.
Gibson and Stephanopoulos must not have noticed these other candidates. And, of course, they were not wearing flag pins either.
Oh the UnAmericanism of it all!
Dear Commentors,
Will Allen is a weenie.
Paul Krugman has explained to us all that most of the vitriol is coming from the Obama campaign.
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Comments closed April 30, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
One would hope that the evil freak would simply spontaneously combust, but no such luck.
Posted by LarryM | April 16, 2008 8:47 PM