Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary echoes Karl Rove in her attempts to make you believe Obama has ties to terrorism

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:11 PM
Original message
Hillary echoes Karl Rove in her attempts to make you believe Obama has ties to terrorism
Over the past few days it has become clear that Hillary and many of her supporters believe that it is perfectly appropriate to take the lowest road possible in their desperate attempts to destroy Obama. We are seeing many Clinton supporters legitimize the disgusting questions that were asked in the debate the other night, and they tell us we are just upset because people say that Obama did not do well. The truth is though that Obama did fine considering the absurdity of the questions being asked of him, Clinton on the other hand put forward a performance so absolutely disgusting that it appeared as if she had used Karl Rove as her debate coach.

In fact Clinton's performance in the debate was even worse than the performance given by the moderators. She not only legitimized questions on Obama's patriotism and ties to terrorism, but she added to what the moderators said and went straight into the Rush Limbaugh playbook by attempting to tie Obama to Louis Farrakhan and Hamas. Here is what Hillary had to say on questions of Rev. Wright's patriotism:

It is clear that, as leaders, we have a choice who we associate with and who we apparently give some kind of seal of approval to. And I think that it wasn't only the specific remarks but some of the relationships with Reverend Farrakhan, with giving the church bulletin over to the leader of Hamas, to put a message in.

You know, these are problems. And they raise questions in people's minds. And, so, this is a legitimate area, as everything is, when we run for office, for people to be exploring and trying to find answers.


But attempting to tie Obama to terrorists once was not enough for Hillary, and here is what she had to say a few minutes later when the questions on Ayers came up:

And what they did was set bombs. And in some instances, people died. So it is -- I think it is, again, an issue that people will be asking about.


And there you have it. Hillary believes that it is legitimate to attempt to tie Obama to terrorism. But the Republicans will do it too, he needs to be prepared she tells us. While it may well be true that the Republicans will engage in this line of attack, it is absolutely disgusting to see Democrats legitimizing Republican attempts to smear our candidates in such a vile fashion.

Karl Rove must be cheering Hillary on right now, knowing that when the fall comes he can trot out this attack again and point to a big group of prominent Hillary supporters and say "look even many Democrats say this is a legitimate area to question Obama on."

It is time for Hillary to drop out of the race and make a public apology to Obama for using these disgusting tactics.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. During the debate I thought she was Giuliani in a Hillary costume.
"9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 -*BREATH*The 90's- 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. Psst.
War is bombs.

:think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. Hillary started apologizing..
for her disgusting tactics way back when this Primary Season started..again, and again, and again. Her apology is worth shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2rth2pwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. If Barack can't cut off ties to the man, he should expect the questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. What ties?
They are neighbors. Does he need to move to some neighborhood where there is nobody with a questionable past? I am sure that every single person you are even casually associated with has never done anything questionable right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2rth2pwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. He can choose which neighbors to be friends with. He should repudiate the
man and move on. If he wants to protect the relationship, he will face questions about his judgment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. What evidence do you have that they are friends?
Edited on Sat Apr-19-08 05:47 PM by MN Against Bush
People are not friends with everyone they have a casual association with.

On edit: Before you say anything about a "friendly relationship" please know a friendly relationship is a lot different than being friends. I have a friendly relationship with probably 99% of the people I know, that does not mean I am friends with anywhere near that many people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2rth2pwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Whatever the relationship is, "friendly" isn't gonna cut it.
If you feel that he can have any relationship he wants with anybody, I won't waste my time trying to change your mind,

but he will have to face the reality that many people think that Ayers is tainted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. And many people feel the Clinton penis is tainted, so your point is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. And I am sure Clinton has no associations with anyone who is tainted.
EVERYONE is associated with people who are tainted. And no I don't "feel he can have any relationship he wants with anybody." Thanks for the strawman argument though. This is not a close relationship, they are neighbors and they aren't at the throats of one another. That is not an inappropriate relationship, and no one has shown any evidence to suggest there is an inappropriate relationship. You should go work for Karl Rove if this is the kind of crap you are going to push.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2rth2pwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. You are missing the point. By not denouncing the guy, he is going to be hit on it.
It is his perfect right to say the guy is just someone he knows and had a fundraiser at his house for him.

It is my opinion that he will pay a political price for that stance. His supporters repeating over and over that he doesn't

need to denounce the guy will not change the reality of the situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Why is it his responsibility to denounce people he has only a casual connection to?
He is a US Senator, every single US Senator is going to be exposed to all kinds of people with shady pasts. If we expect each of our candidates to denounce everyone they know that has a questionable past our candidates would be doing nothing but denouncing people, and our political environment would look a lot like the McCarthy era.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2rth2pwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. They don't have to go around denouncing people. When asked about a
relationship in a national debate, about a person the campaign had to have known would come up,

and stammering out an answer that he his just a friendly old professor, he will take a hit.

Whether you think it's appropriate or not
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. Who can hear her?
You people must have much better hearing than I. I can't hear a thing she says any longer. Hillary long ago went past shrill into the dog-whistle range. I expect tomorrow and Monday, she will be at the industrial strength ultrasonic cleaner range.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClericJohnPreston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
15. What you don't know about politics
would fill an auditorium. Its a good thing you don't pay attention to all the things Obama's hacks,flacks and surrogates say in the name of Obama.

Worry more about the Republicans, huh? That would be novel for Obamites, dontcha think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 01:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC