Hillary Clinton Called Obama To Say She Wasn't Trying To Attack Him

[DonViejo]

Last edited Tue Aug 12, 2014, 04:18 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: TPM

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called President Barack Obama Tuesday to stress that she was not trying to attack him in a recent interview with The Atlantic, Politico reported. A Clinton spokesman told Politico that the presumptive 2016 Democratic frontrunner called Obama to “make sure he knows that nothing she said was an attempt to attack him."

The interview garnered significant press attention for Clinton's comments in which she seemed to disparage Obama's guiding foreign policy principle: "Don't do stupid stuff." Some top Obama advisers subsequently responded to Clinton's comments publicly. Progressive groups issued critical statements.

The Clinton spokesman noted that Clinton and Obama had "honest differences on some issues" while she was serving in the Obama administration. He noted that the pair would see each other Wednesday night during a social gathering in Martha's Vineyard.

"Some are now choosing to hype those differences but they do not eclipse their broad agreement on most issues," the Clinton spokesman said. "Like any two friends who have to deal with the public eye, she looks forward to hugging it out when she they see each other tomorrow night.”

###

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-calls-obama-atlantic-interview

---

Despite foreign policy criticism, Clinton to meet with Obama at Martha’s Vineyard party

By Agence France-Presse
Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:16 EDT

Hillary Clinton may have distanced herself from Barack Obama’s foreign policy, but he doesn’t seem to have taken it personally: the two will meet at a party later this week.

Obama and the presumptive frontrunner for his Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nomination are due to attend the same soiree on Martha’s Vineyard on Wednesday.

And the White House told AFP both the US leader and his wife Michelle were “very much looking forward to the occasion and seeing Former Secretary Clinton.”


The First Family is spending their summer vacation on the swanky Massachusetts resort island. Clinton, meanwhile, will be there for a signing of her memoir “Hard Choices.”

The social gathering will be held at the home of Vernon Jordan, a former adviser to ex-president Bill Clinton, the White House said.

more
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/08/12/despite-foreign-policy-criticism-clinton-to-meet-with-obama-at-marthas-vineyard-party/

[TwilightGardener]

1. Get your point out, and then take the heat and say "I didn't mean it".

Kind of like when she said during the primaries in 2008 that she was the candidate of "hard-working people....WHITE people..." She and Bill know you plant the seed (ISIS is Obama's fault, not mine, even though I was SoS and wanted to arm rebels in Syria and he really didn't) and then stand back and hope it grows on its own.

[billhicks76]

23. More Games

Ok. But why go to the press to say so? If she really just wanted to assure him she wouldn't make a PR move like this. More BS from an untrustworthy politician who is too spoiled rotten to even notice her transgressions outside her bubble.

[candelista]

2. Oh, really?

Politician's remorse.

[coldbeer]

35. Good-bye Hilary

You are now history!

[candelista]

44. Don't speak too soon!

Anything can happen. In 2016, we might all have to start getting used to her personality, and to being surrounded by it in the media, all the time, for years.

[peacebird]

52. Sorry, but the very thought makes me retch...

[Stellar]

70. hear, hear...

agreed!

[Ash_F]

81. Well, when you say it like that, it doesn't sound so bad!

[regnaD kciN]

3. Too little, too late…

We now know what to expect from HRC, and it ain't pretty.

[totodeinhere]

15. Why? Can't she criticize Obama if she wants to. Or do you expect her to be an

Obama clone?

[Divernan]

20. She ridicules him to international coverage; then tries to walk it back.

US foreign policy isn't Saturday Night Live, and she's no Emily Litella.

Emily Litella: What's all this FUSS I keep hearing... about endangered feces? Now, that's outrageous!! Why -- why are FECES endangered?! How can you POSSIBLY run out of such a thing?! Why -- why, just look around you, you can see it ALL OVER the place!! Besides, who wants to SAVE THAT, anyway?! My goodness, where would we KEEP it?! It's DANGEROUS, especially in the Summer!! Then -- then, it could REALLY hit the fan!!

[ Emily begins to laugh, unable to stop, as Jane gives her a dirty look ]

Jane Curtin: What's so funny?

Emily Litella: Ohhh... oh, my joke! [ she continues to laugh for a moment ] Oh, come on, Miss Curtin, didn't you ever hear that one about "hitting the fan"? [ Jane remains silently annoyed ] Oh, come on, you old shiksa! Where have you been?

Jane Curtin: Species.

Emily Litella: What's that?

Jane Curtin: Species! The list of endangered species! Not feces -- species@

Emily Litella: Ohhhh! I-I-I must have gotten carried away. [ turns to the camera and smiles ] Never mind!

[ the audience applauds ]

Jane Curtin: It's wearing thin, Emily.

Emily Litella: What is?

Jane Curtin: The "Never mind" thing. You've been doing it for close to two years. At first it was cute, then it was tolerable; now it's annoying.

Emily Litella: Oh, I'm sorry that you feel that way.

Jane Curtin: You're ruining "Update"'s responsibility as a credible journalist.

Emily Litella: Oh, my goodness, I -- Miss Curtin, I wouldn't want to do anything like that.

Jane Curtin: I'm sure you wouldn't. [ smiles maliciously ] So, why don't you just quit "Update" and try your hand at something else? We can get along fine without you!

Emily Litella: Perhaps you could -- bitch!

Jane Curtin: [ stung once more, faces the camera ] That's our news for tonight. Good night, and have a pleasant tomorrow.

[totodeinhere]

24. Oh come on. She did not ridicule him. She had some constructive criticism of some

of his foreign policy and her criticism was mild compared to criticism of Obama that we read almost everyday here at DU. And she didn't walk back anything. She was responding to criticism of her remarks and she indicated it was not meant as criticism of Obama. But she didn't change any policy declarations.

[hedgehog]

38. How many here at DU are serious candidates for the 2016 Presidential Race?

How many at DU criticize Obama for being unwilling to commit US troops?

[frylock]

40. any DUer that made the same comments Clinton made would be called out as a ratfucker

[totodeinhere]

43. It's ironic that the prohibitive frontrunner for the Democratic nomination would

make comments that you would attribute to a rat******. I would hope that DU would have a bit more tolerance for differing opinions than that. But I guess I'm not too surprised since President Obama himself has been called not much worse than that.

I am not a big Clinton fan myself, and she is not my first choice for the nomination, but this constant piling on is going much too far IMO. It really will be interesting to see what the attitude around here will be if she gets the nomination. I don't consider her a shoe in and I agree with Bernie that there should not be a coronation. But we can't dismiss the possibility that she will get the nomination. Then what?

[still_one]

53. In fairness she informed President Obama that she was going to do the interview criticizing some of

his policies.

I also wonder if the "headlines" were not an accurate description of what happened. The way the media was reporting it was using words such as "disses", or a "failed foreign policy"

Yes she criticized the President, but from what I have seen it was not as broad brushed as the MSM would like you to believe.

Just look how the media covered the ebola situation, and is there any wonder why many critical thinkers have a skeptical view of the media

[totodeinhere]

59. Yes, and there are those who like nothing better than sowing divisions within the Democratic

Party. And they will play this for all it's worth. The fact is that Clinton and Obama have broad agreement on many issues. But if she is going to run for president she also must show that she is her own person.

[MADem]

76. There's no such thing as bad press, really--spell the names right and let it rip.

When Obama continues to support HRC for the nomination, the people who liked Obama and didn't like HRC will listen to Obama's guidance on the matter. The people who didn't like Obama and liked HRC will still like HRC.

Make a contretemps, then follow it up with a reconciliation, the press follows along, sucking it all up and reporting it with OOOH LA LA delight, and the end result is that a candidate's foreign policy views get articulated. There won't be a person in the world that doesn't know that HRC has nuanced views on the conflicts in the ME...and elsewhere.

It's free advertising, wrapped up in a little bit of faux controversy.

[hollowdweller]

4. Her people polling and monitoring the blogs must have sensed too much blowback.

[candelista]

5. Yeppers.

[closeupready]

6. Well, then, maybe she should have given her remarks more thought.

Then again, maybe she DID give her remarks plenty of thought, and she said what she wanted to say, for whatever reason, but her remarks, as printed, were precisely correct.

[azurnoir]

7. ***cough*** say what?

[elleng]

8. Well isn't that nice!

"Some are now choosing to hype those differences." No shit, sherlock!

If she's being advised on her public comments, we're in for a long and painful couple of years which we could live without.

[TwilightGardener]

27. She knew what she was doing.

[elleng]

28. which makes it more painful

(for some, at least.)

[Cha]

47. Yeah, they're the

victims. See how that works? SMH

[flamingdem]

9. If this isn't a wake up call for HRC

then doom. She has to change up her bag of tricks.

[tularetom]

10. I guess the trial balloon she sent up over the weekend didn't have a lot of air in it

For the umpteenth time she has inserted her foot firmly in her mouth.

She really is kind of an inept politician and not at all what the country needs in the white house.

[trublu992]

11. Yeah Right, in other words just testing the waters to see how far I can go.

[global1]

12. Mission Accomplished......

How many people that agree with her comments will ever find out that she called Obama and said she wasn't trying to attack him?

This way she has covered herself on both sides. Mission accomplished.

[Boomerproud]

16. Did he take the call?

You're still deciding whether to run in 2016, right Hillary? I thought she was supposed to be so savvy and smart. Uh Huh.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

13. Did she call at 3AM?

[LittleBlue]

14. Yeah right. I'm sure these were all honest mistakes

[flpoljunkie]

17. David Axelrod defends his old boss...

ByTOM KLUDT
August 12, 2014, 11:28 AM EDT

David Axelrod may no longer work in the White House, but he's still willing to go to the mat for his old boss.

The former senior White House adviser and close confidant to President Obama proved as much on Tuesday with a jab at Hillary Clinton's foreign policy record.

"Just to clarify: 'Don't do stupid stuff' means stuff like occupying Iraq in the first place, which was a tragically bad decision," Axelrod tweeted.

The tweet was a response to Clinton's recent interview with The Atlantic, in which the former secretary of state criticized the Obama administration's foreign policy maxim.

more...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/david-axelrod-hillary-clinton-iraq

[Kelvin Mace]

18. How does the punchline to that old joke go?

"Who are you going believe? Me, or your lying eyes?"

[AngryAmish]

19. So she takes a dump on Obama's foreign policy...

then wipes her ass with Obama's legacy...and he is supposed to like it?

From what I see her main objection is we did not arm ISIS in time.

[H2O Man]

21. Cheap.

I would have an extraordinarily hard time voting for her for president.

[wyldwolf]

22. of course, Hillary didn't really dismiss Obama's 'stupid stuff' quote.

In the same interview:

“… I think (Obama) was trying to communicate to the American people that he’s not going to do something crazy."

The left has a history of (purposely?) taking quotes out of context even when the context is plainly in view from the source.

Remember the whole Joe Biden brouhaha when he said Sen. Obama was clean and articulate? There seemed to be no end to the poutrage over that when it was clear Biden meant the Senator had no skeletons in his closet (clean) and he was very well spoken.

But it isn't unheard of for a sitting President to be criticized by people running for his party's nomination. Ted Kennedy's attacks on Carter were particularly brutal. Al Gore had a few choice words to say about Clinton. And, even though it isn't quite the same thing, Walter Mondale made sure to distance himself from Carter.

It's politics. The real issue here is some are pretending this instance is somehow special. And they'll continue piling on because they believe they found a way to knock Clinton down.

[freshwest]

55. MSM is paid for sowing division. Fortunately, PBO and HRC live on a realm of experience that allows

them to have differences of opinion and not need any flattery.

Axelrod responded more to the GOP being emboldened by seizing on a complex difference of opinion on something that may or may not have ever come to pass, to urge a war now. It's so predictable, they will scour for a source or edit to make their case for going to war, always.

Too many people fall for it just as it's intended by RW media - meaning MSM. We have people jumping on the outrage train and posting videos from 2008 that HRC since explained why she was wrong and how she grew to value PBO's method.

One poster apologized for doing so as it was leading those who saw it to bash HRC unfairly. That takes integrity, to give up the kudos of the crowd like that.

We have threads full of people now saying they will vote third party or not vote on DU. Based on errors, hyped and unverified stories.

Often from sources that consistently disparage Obama or Democrats. It's a lot easier to go with the crowd, but that media crowd is well paid. We must think for ourselves.

If not, the RW mission is fulfilled and we lose.

[karynnj]

73. Then again - consider that many here simply do not agree with the Clinton expressed differences

1) Syria - Was there ANY support for doing what she said. You can look at the responses to McCain requesting almost the same thing and see the IDEA was strongly rejected.

2) Iraq - Was there ANY unhappiness expressed when the last troops left Iraq? I didn't see it.

3) Iran - Clinton has stood on the fence on this - sometimes taking credit for opening the back channel negotiations - and sometimes expressing reluctance to reduce any sanctions. Here, she completely aligned herself with Netanyahu. Though less clear than 1) and 2), I suspect the bulk of DU prefers Obama's efforts.

4) Israel - Here, I think she likely has some support. What I dislike is that there was at least an implicit attack on the administratio by Netanyahu, whom Hillary endorses completely. I think Israel's attack on the US (Kerry and Obama) was unseemly and ginned up by Netanyahu for political reasons. They deserved more respect and it is pretty clear Netanyahu stabbed them in the back. I also think there was nothing wrong with showing concern for the loss of innocent lives.

[wyldwolf]

75. those are honest disagreements

The reaction to Clinton's interview isn't.

[karynnj]

77. Who's disagreements are honest?

Clinton's to Obama's,

Many Duers to Clinton ( and to Obama in some cases),

Or both?

I think the reaction to Clinton's interview is honest -

The reasons range from:
- surprise in some cases that she was so consistently more hawkish than Obama (This would reflect that many Democrats really were not thinking of issues as much as their own history with HRC - from First Lady to nearly Presidential nominee to Secretary of State. Among Democrats, I suspect that the % thinking Obama to have intervened more than they wanted is greater than those who wanted him to be more hawkish. Now there might be a dissidence between them supporting Clinton and their own views.)

- Surprise at the timing. There are election in three months, is this the time to raise these differences? What compelling reason is there to do this now rather than in 3 months?

- Disloyalty. Imagine the reaction of a President Clinton - either one - to someone they gave a high position to who then disagrees with them. Governor Richardson, anyone? Personally, I disagreed with the attacks on Richardson that he "owed" the Clintons anything other than respect. These comments are not personal - so I don't see them as lacking respect for Obama. However, using the CLINTON standards of what they expected from others, Hillary is not being a loyal former Secretary of State.

[wyldwolf]

79. yours. The ones you listed.

[karynnj]

80. Thanks both for that assessment and answering.

[Dems to Win]

25. I'm sure Obama responded graciously.

He's a big person.

I'm going to continue my call for a new leader to step forward to challenge her in 2016.

In 2008, I didn't want to vote for anyone who had voted to go to war on Iraq, same is true in 2016. Hillary's interview has reminded me, forcefully, why I don't support her quest for the Democratic nomination.

[Cha]

64. Actually he said "horseshit".. not to Hillary when she called but to those

critics who said he should have armed Syrian rebels. He said it before her interview came out but pretty sure she got the message.

"Apparently President Obama has had it with the argument that he should have armed the Syrian rebels during the early days of the civil war. The old complaint was revived as the situation in Iraq worsened last week, most famously by Hillary Clinton. In an interview with The Atlantic, Clinton noted that she urged the president to intervene in Syria, and said that failing to arm the moderates "left a big vacuum," which ISIS filled.

Now the Daily Beast reports that when Republican Senator Bob Corker raised the issue during a meeting with Senate and House leaders on July 31, the president became "visibly agitated." He concluded his lengthy response by telling Corker that the idea that early U.S. intervention would have led to a better outcome in Syria was "horseshit." Obama wasn't alluding to Clinton, as her remarks hadn't been published yet, but it seems he's so frustrated by the criticism that he's forgetting to let his anger translator Luther do the cursing."

THe rest..
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/08/obama-syria-horseshit.html

[albino65]

26. She's just showing her Clintoness

Arkansas...Texas, what's the difference?

[1StrongBlackMan]

29. I don't think President Obama much cares ...

WHAT she is saying ... he's too busy doing the job.

[Cha]

48. Excellent Point, 1Strong.. but, before her remarks were made public he

already had called the criticism "horseshit". I like the timing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=869237

[karynnj]

74. Except, her positions may impact the world's response to his negotiations

For example, in Iran, where it has always been said that "hardliners" on BOTH sides will try to derail an agreement, do you think it helps Obama negotiate, when the DEMOCRAT most likely to be President in 2017 could opt to re impose any sanctions removed? Not to mention, Obama/Kerry worked very hard to keep the Senate from voting in new sanctions that would - in and of themselves - ended the negotiations. How much harder will it be to continue doing that, if the perceived future leader of the party, Clinton, is seen as disagreeing?

Not to mention, consider that Obama's own leverage will decline as he becomes more and more of a lame duck and as his own approval numbers fall. It is normal for numbers to fall after the President wins reelection as there is no longer a vested interest among his/her party to respond "yes" when they have some disagreements. (There IS a reason to do so prior to reelection)

Obama has been hit with many things not of his own making since 2012 - notably the entire Snowden thing. Whether you agree with him or not, I assume you would agree that his revelations have hurt Obama internationally and at home.

It is about 3 months until the 2014 elections. It would have been better had ALL prominent Democrats worked together through that time. It was not necessary for HRC to differentiate her foreign policy view now. She could have waited three months! (Shades of Bill Clinton putting out his autobiography in June 2004 - because it really helped to have the main discussion of the summer being Clinton's answer "because I could" to why Monica as the main news story other than the death and canonization of Reagan.) Does it help Democrats that they will likely be asked if they agree with Obama or Clinton -- where either answer carries a cost?

[1StrongBlackMan]

78. Your first two and final points are well taken ...

and in my view correct.

[otohara]

30. Hey Hill - Stop Doing Stupid Stuff

the last time it cost you the presidency.

[Cha]

49. Really, otohara.. Stupid stuff like..

Twitter
Just to clarify: "Don't do stupid stuff" means stuff like occupying Iraq in the first place, which was a tragically bad decision.
https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod?original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Ftalkingpointsmemo.com%2Flivewire%2Fdavid-axelrod-hillary-clinton-iraq&tw_i=499193669975834624&tw_p=tweetembed

cal http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025373902#post11

[Phlem]

31. who F'ing cares what she says,

She's turd way, all the way.

[BeyondGeography]

32. She should take her mouth on vacation until next February

[bigwillq]

33. I hope she takes that mouth on vacay longer than that

How about FOREVER! LOL

[Arkana]

34. Then what would she call it, I wonder?

Trying to run to Obama's right isn't going to win her any friends among Obama's coalition.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

36. She basically just needs to shut the fuck up because clearly she can't talk

without slipping up and saying things that she *supposedly* doesn't mean.

I call BULLSHIT!!!

She knows exactly what she's doing.

[humbled_opinion]

37. She certainly picked the wrong

subject to criticize Obama on... I mean It's bad enough he is taking a measured approach with the bombing now but she sounds like she was championing WWIII a couple years ago... Maybe she needs to reflect on exactly how her approach would have worked sounds a lot like she gets counsel from John Mccain.

[Sunlei]

39. I think its just stupid media drama, again. She was due to meet at Martha’s Vineyard on Wednesday,

That's tomorrow. They've always had their differences. But she, along with several others are inner-loop friends and always invited to share some 'working' vacation time.

[flpoljunkie]

41. How can if be a 'failure' if HRC admits she doesn't know if arming Syrian rebels would've worked?

JG: Do you think we’d be where we are with ISIS right now if the U.S. had done more three years ago to build up a moderate Syrian opposition?

HRC: Well, I don’t know the answer to that. I know that the failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against Assad—there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle—the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled.

They were often armed in an indiscriminate way by other forces and we had no skin in the game that really enabled us to prevent this indiscriminate arming.

more...

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/

[blkmusclmachine]

42. I don't believe her.

[Divernan]

45. Shades of HRC's Bosnia Sniper Fiasco

It's not HRC's critics hyping what she said. HRC does the job of hyping her own experiences. So what's HER foreign policy? Shoot your mouth off first; then back off from what you said at your leisure.

Flashback 2008: Hillary Clinton Exposed for Lying About Being 'Under Sniper Fire' in Bosnia

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/10/16/flashback-2008-hillary-clinton-eIxposed-lying-about-being-under-sniper#ixzz3AD5uauFA

HRC claimed she and Chelsea had to duck and run for cover when landing at Tuzla airfield in Bosnia and cancel a welcoming ceremony. Videos revealed HRC and CC standing and smiling out in the open on the airfield while a little girl kissed her cheek and read a poem. As all the covering reporters later reported, there were NO shots, NO snipers, NOBODY ducking and covering.

The first lady's schedule, released on Wednesday by the National Archives, confirms that she arrived in Tuzla at 8:45 a.m. and was greeted by various dignitaries, including Emina (whose name has mysteriously been redacted from the document). Footage from CBS shows Clinton walking calmly out of the back of the C-17 military transport plane that brought her from Ramstein Air Base in Germany.

Among the U.S. officials on hand to greet Clinton at the airport was Maj. Gen. William Nash, the commander of U.S. troops in Bosnia. Nash told me he was unaware of any security threat to Clinton during her eight-hour stay in Tuzla. He said, however, that Clinton had a "busy schedule" and may have got the impression that she was being hurried.

Sinbad, who provided entertainment on the trip along with singer Sheryl Crow, said the "scariest" part was deciding where to eat. As he told Mary Ann Akers of washingtonpost.com, "I think the only 'red phone' moment was 'Do we eat here or at the next place?' " He questioned the premise behind the Clinton version of events. "What kind of president would say 'Hey, man, I can't go 'cause I might get shot, so I'm going to send my wife. Oh, and take a guitar player and a comedian with you'?"

Replying to Sinbad earlier this week, Clinton dismissed him as "a comedian."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/21/AR2008032102989.html

[Cha]

46. Didn't President Obama say the other day that it was "horseshit" about those

saying he should have armed Syrian Rebels?

"Apparently President Obama has had it with the argument that he should have armed the Syrian rebels during the early days of the civil war. The old complaint was revived as the situation in Iraq worsened last week, most famously by Hillary Clinton. In an interview with The Atlantic, Clinton noted that she urged the president to intervene in Syria, and said that failing to arm the moderates "left a big vacuum," which ISIS filled.

Now the Daily Beast reports that when Republican Senator Bob Corker raised the issue during a meeting with Senate and House leaders on July 31, the president became "visibly agitated." He concluded his lengthy response by telling Corker that the idea that early U.S. intervention would have led to a better outcome in Syria was "horseshit." Obama wasn't alluding to Clinton, as her remarks hadn't been published yet, but it seems he's so frustrated by the criticism that he's forgetting to let his anger translator Luther do the cursing."

THe rest..
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/08/obama-syria-horseshit.html

Too bad Hillary's comments hadn't been published yet.. he still called what she said "horseshit".. whether she was attacking him or not.

Mahalo Don~

[Thinkingabout]

56. It is called pile on and let those who researches the truth before they pile on with out facts.

They hang on to every word in which they can twist into more RW talking points. They don't have a candidate who has the experience Hillary has so it is nitpick time.

[Phlem]

57. ...

[riverwalker]

50. I am done with her

Have no interest in a Clinton/Netanyahu presidency. In the Atlantic article she blames the world reaction to the dead children in Gaza to their “stage-managing". In other words, she is borrowing Bibi's "telegenically dead". I find her repulsive, and am beyond disappointed.

[alp227]

58. "Clinton/Netanyahu presidency"?

Could you please edit out that statement? It's dangerously close to what DU ToS call "claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel", which is explicitly forbidden. To see what I'm talking about, do a Google search (and I warn ya of the horrid crankery ahead) of Jewish control of US government or something like that phrase.

[whereisjustice]

60. disagree, Israel is largest recipient of military weapons and cash with undeniable influence

over our domestic and foreign policy. Israel is also the most disproportionally violent of our allies.

Addressing the relationship between US and Israeli politicians is fair game, just as the relationship between Clinton and Wall Street is fair game.

In some cases, the former president’s speaking fees have been astronomical. Last year, the Jewish National Fund, the Israeli organization that owns or controls a significant part of that nation’s actual real estate, offered to pay President Clinton $500,000 in return for the president’s speaking at Israeli President Shimon Peres’s 90th birthday celebration. After an outcry in Israel and in the U.S., the JNF withdrew its half-million-dollar offer. That sum, though, is a quarter-million lower than the highest fee reportedly paid to President Clinton: $750,000 for an address to the telecom company Ericsson in Hong Kong.

From the hardly anti-Semitic nonprofit quarterly.

https://nonprofitquarterly.org/philanthropy/24491-the-philanthropic-problem-with-hillary-clinton-s-huge-speaking-fees.html

I don't want a Clinton/Wall Street presidency. That doesn't mean I hate women.

[alp227]

61. I didn't say anything about misogyny.

That said, it's still bigoted to assert that Israel has nefarious influence over the US govt as opposed to pointing out concrete, neutral facts like you linked.

[peacebird]

51. What a backstabbing schmuck..... Lost.Any.Respect.for.HRC

[neverforget]

54. Just trying to establish her war hawk street cred.

[Beacool]

62. Hillary is not obligated to agree with every aspect of Obama's foreign policy.

That goes for any other Democrat.

[karynnj]

72. Of course she doesn't and just as people can disagree with Obama's policy --hers can be attacked too

Obama has never been attacked for being too non aggressive here. He was blistered for calling for a target attack on Syria due to their use of chemical weapons. That was the right of anyone here who disagreed. I disputed many who equated what Obama was speaking of to a full fledged war - in some cases, speculating about boots on the ground. Now, there are many who are 100% against ANY action being taken in Iraq.

Hillary CAN take any position she wants - that is her right and privilege. However, just as it is completely the right of anyone to question Obama's positions, they certainly can question Hillary's. He is our elected Democratic President, she is the most likely (but not yet selected) future Presidential nominee. We are entering, not the general election, but the preprimaries. This is a time when people can and will discuss and advocate for the nominees.

It has always been clear that DU is more antiwar and more liberal/progressive than the Democratic party. If DU is more to the left than Obama, it will likely disagree with Hillary on ALL four major disagreements she had on foreign policy - as she is FURTHER from them (us) than Obama is. There is not a huge amount of support here for having done more on Syria. You were here last year, I assume you remember the anger against the less aggressive Obama and Kerry. This is not people attacking Hillary because she is Hillary, this is attacking Hillary because she is advocating things we disliked when McCain advocated them. On Iraq, did you see many unhappy when US troops were completely out? I didn't - yet that was (per Hillary) her position. People here trashed it as McCain's position. Iran is more complicated, but again, I think more people support the Obama goal of working with the P6 to solve the problem -- and against the Netanyahu led effort to derail it. (Here Hillary had been on the fence - poised to claim credit or attack Obama - in this article it seems she has decided to align with Netanyahu.) Only on Israel, will she find some - but not majority support here. The fact is that Obama/Kerry have tried - more than others in the past - to be honest brokers and Israel's response was disgusting. Nice time for Hillary to pile on!

[fbc]

63. I don't care if she disagrees with Obama. I do care that she's a war hawk.

[Stellar]

71. Agreed!

[peacebird]

82. Yup. That's it in a nutshell

[truthisfreedom]

65. When Obama was first up for election there were only 10% of the right wingers there are on DU now.

We need to filter out the anti-liberal "voices". ASAP. There is no time, people... fall is coming, and we don't want to fall. Clear out the wingers from our midst. Learn how to identify them... they turn us against ourselves.

[Ichingcarpenter]

66. Clinton: ''I did not have sex

with that talking point"


Also
The book signing ''coincidence'' on the same small island as Obama is on, at the same time, was just a coincidence that came out of a random chance in the universe that explains the singularity of the Higgs particle's contribution to quantum physics.

[kelliekat44]

67. Just kidding! nt

[INdemo]

68. Horseshit

Hillary Clinton is a Republican lite and she did mean what she said

[Faux pas]

69. Right out of the

right's playbook. Bad form hrc.

[c588415]

83. Hillary Clinton is entitled to her opinion though I side with Pres

Obama's position pertaining to Syria. The Clinton's support and respect the president. Remember the rousing speech Bill gave at the DNC which I believe helped Pres Obama get re elected? With that said, Hillary will make an excellent commander in chief. She is highly intelligent in addition with being tough. Hillary will be our next president in 2016.

[Cha]

84. If Hillary wasn't trying to "attack President Obama".. I hate to see what she'd be saying if

she were.