Video of Axelrod's remarks

Because, as bad as Axelrod was and it was bad, it was clearly an answer to Bayh promoting his candidate on the back of Bhutto's assassination.

If I want somebody experienced in the sense Bayh said, I will choose Biden, not her.

Sadly, neither Bayh nor Axelrod had the decency to wait a few hours to use a tragedy for electoral purposes. Really sad and disappointing.

because no one is talking about it.

I can understand though that Hillary's supporters did not hear it.

Bayh (as tasteless as his comments were) is just another politician with a big mouth. Politicians aren't always known for staying 'off camera' but employees sure should.

Obama's campaign will take a hit on this one.

BTW, it's one reason Bayh would never be on a Presidential nominee's ticket as VP.

He was speaking FOR HILLARY.

Of course, I understand that Hillary's supporters do not want to hear that, but the lack of decency remains.

but you get the prize.

Bayh didn't 'speak for Hillary'. He's so busy trying to get on the ticket, he let his mouth overload his other end. I expect HC was unimpressed, since it certainly wasn't the response anyone in their right mind would give. No staffer would have said it.... Bayh just can't seem to help himself. Vislack has the same problem though not in this case particularly. Half the job of staffers is to keep politicians from saying stupid things when they're campaigning.

It happens that surrogates say stupid things.... particularly when (as a politician) they get quoted on TeeVee. They can't pass up an opportunity, can they? Staffers are supposed to have better sense. Alexrod should be in the doghouse -- and he should have known better.

people like Bayh to do the dirty work for her campaign.

As much as I dislike him, Bayh is just another politician. They always have their own agenda and seldom deviate from it. In this case, Bayh wants to be VP. He seems to want to do just about anything to ingratiate himself.

He stepped over the line, and I expect he knows it.

It has been going around for a while. I don't think anyone else would have him, but he makes sense on Hillary's ticket.

There aren't enough adjectives for me to describe just how bad an idea it is to let him get a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

As far as I can tell, Bayh has been relegated to the 2nd or 3rd tier of VP choices.

If I had proof, I wouldn't be telling DU, I'd be off trying to get paid for the scoop.

The rumor started gaining momentum around October, when Bayh started rounding up Indiana Dem endorsements for Clinton. He's a popular Dem in a red state, very moderate, and a former governor. It's gonna be Bayh or Kerrey if Hillary gets the nom.

but seriously....is he an empee of Obama's campaign?

n/t

What about Obama's statement for the War?

Axelrod and friends conveniently blame Clinton for everything while giving themselves and the other candidates a free pass.

and he is right. Hillary did vote to invade Iraq, and that caused us to take troops out of afghanistan, led to the return of Taliban and al qaida there, and along with her vote on Iran, caused the US to fuck over that entire region. It is partly her fault and she bears some responsibility. Now, for those shills who try the rovian bullshit of repeating a lie over and over, trying to make hay out of their own instructions and imagination,

please stop. you are only embarrassing yourselves. and you know who you are.

I don't take anything he says seriously.

Hillary should be held accountable for her IWR vote.

He...the blond one?:eyes:

I'm glad someone pointed this out. It's mild compared to what the pukes would say.

...deserving whatever sorry fate they receive in the GE.

:shrug:

Clinton/Bayh

Yeesh...how close to predicting the outcome is that...

news dump. By New Year's Eve it will be forgotten....maybe/hopefully not.

Thankfully, Obama just confronted Wolf on this and cleared THAT up!

Obama look bad. He was rude by butting in to stop Wolf Blitzer from reading Axlerod's comment about Hillary Clinton. Wolf ended up reading the comment anyway so Obama's desperate attempt to short-circuit it didn't work at all.

Obama tried to spin it for all it was worth but I, and I'm sure many others, was amused at his rambling attempts to make himself look good.

What a laugh.

He wanted to make clear that Axelrod was RESPONDING TO A QUESTION. Wolf was going to, once again, play ONLY the response, not even saying it WAS a response to a question, but implying it was an unprovoked statement. I'm VERY glad Obama kept interrupting him to get the FACTS out first.

If Hillary supporters can't handle the truth, then too damn bad.

Axelrod was spot on. Thanks for posting the video.

Right after a horrible event where people died is not the time to go on national TV and say that someone in our country did something that contributed to that horrible event. Politics for Dummies, page 9.11.

That man needs to be fired immediately and replaced with someone with a brain.

George bush not invaded and given iraq the time to response he was supposed to, we wouldn't be stuck in iraq. false, if she had voted and we'd gone in there and left 2 years ago, we wouldn't be stuck in iraq.

My only criticism of your post is that the video does not include the question.

A little context is always helpful, don't you think?

CNN didn't include the question in its coverage.

Obama will take a HUGE hit on having that idiot on his staff.

Any idiot knows that after a terrible incident where people have died...is NOT the time to blame anyone at all. NOT the time to play the blame game. People are all caught up in sympathy and grief and horror and all, and not even all the facts are out yet. Investigations are still at the beginning stages. EVERYONE in politics knows you don't go on camera and say that anyone in our country did anything, or failed to do anything, that contributed to the horrible event.

Why was he making any comments on the situation at all, in the first place?

That man doesn't belong in politics, period. They need to show him the door.

And yes, the Iraq war has contributed to instability in the region.

If you have a problem, then contact the employer of the reporter who asked the question.

stupid questions. If that is his excuse, "the reporter made me say it," then he needs to go back to school.

Blame the reporter. (Sigh, and head shake)

It's no excuse that he was "tricked" into saying that.

Politics for Dummies, page 9.11. And I quote, "Immediately after a global-news event has occurred, which shocks the conscience of millions of people and has caused the deaths and/or injuries of people, no American politician, or anyone in his employ or otherwise affiliated with any campaign or political office, shall, on national TV, make statements within 7 days of such event, in which the person states or implies blame for said event, and particularly when the blame is directed at one of our countrymen. This shall apply particularly when all facts are not immediately known. This time period shall extend past 7 days, should investigations and all causations not be clearly known by many people within those 7 days. Should any person fail to obey this basic political and human decency provision, said person shall lose the right to speak to a national audience on behalf of any American politician, said person by such failure being deemed to be too stupid to trust in front of a camera."

only in the land of Hillary do accurate facts hurt.

geez, you people really need to get a dose of reality.

what politics is all about. Ever hear of the word "diplomacy"? Well, I hope any future President has. Part of diplomacy means that you don't go on national TV in the heat of a moment, right after a assassination, and start spitting out of your mouth. You take a deep breath, you decide how best to handle the situation, you maybe confer with your advisors, then you make a presidential, professional, authoritative statement that makes the citizens feel secure, proud, that you've got it under control, that you know what the import is for us, that you know how to best handle things going forward. Then, later, others can start blaming your opponents, after the dust settles.

Then, when you DO seek to blame...you don't foolishly state on national TV something stupid like one of your opponents is partially to blame. That's idiotic. What he SHOULD have said, if anything at all, is what others have indeed said and didn't get in trouble for...which is that this Al Qaeda situation, if that's who did this although the facts aren't in yet, might be better if we hadn't taken our eyes off the ball and diverted our attention and resources to Iraq instead of to Afghanistan and the surrounding areas. That IMPLIES fault by those who voted for the IW. It is also a true statement.

But to state that any one congressperson is to blame for the assassination is an inflammatory statement, and nothing more.

Why was this staffer giving opinions, anyway? It's not his place. He's not a candidate. Who does he think he is that the American public gives a rat's __s what he thinks, any more than what any other American thinks.

Shoulda kept his trap shut.

Ferrer, Edwards, Obama. The man knows how to stank up a campaign, for sure.

It was a hit on her so-called foreign-policy expertise and her choice to be complicit with Bush's war agenda. It *wasn't* an ad hominem smear attack on her character or what she did when she was in college.

The fact that we have been so focused Iraq is a big reason we have not had the attention or resources to adequately deal with the problems in Pakistan and Afghanistan and the global aspects of terrorism.