Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Must Read via Rolling Stone: ABC's Jake Tapper: Clintons Putting Words in Obama's Mouth.

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
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:37 PM
Original message
Must Read via Rolling Stone: ABC's Jake Tapper: Clintons Putting Words in Obama's Mouth.
Edited on Tue Jan-22-08 08:48 PM by flpoljunkie
http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/index.php/2008/01/22/abc-clintons-putting-words-in-obamas-mouth/

(Emphasis mine.)

Obama v Clinton/Clinton

January 21, 2008 8:13 PM

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told South Carolina's The State newspaper that former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, are lying about him and his record purposefully.

“There is a concrete strategy by the Clintons,” Obama said.

Any objective review of how Bill and Hillary Clinton have been twisting comments Obama made about Ronald Reagan and the Republican party would concur.

As we've previously reviewed, Obama, asked by the editorial board of the Reno Gazette-Journal, how his being the nominee might help down-ballot candidates, such as Senators and Congressmen, get elected, said: "I think that we're shifting the political paradigm here. And if I'm the nominee, I think I can bring a lot of folks along on my coattails. You know, there's a reason why in 2006, I made the most appearances for members of Congress. I was the most requested surrogate to come in and campaign for people in districts that were swing districts, Republican districts where they wouldn't have any other Democrat.

"That was based on their read of the fact that, you know what, this is somebody who can reach out to independents and Republicans in a way that doesn't offend people…I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what's different are the times.

"I do think that, for example, the 1980 election was different. I mean, I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like, you know, with all the excesses of the 60's and the 70's and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating and he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is, people wanted clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamic and entrepreneurship that had been missing, alright? I think Kennedy, twenty years earlier, moved the country in a fundamentally different direction. So I think a lot of it just has to do with the times.

"I think we're in one of those times right now. Where people feel like things as they are going aren't working. We're bogged down in the same arguments that we've been having, and they're not useful. And, you know, the Republican approach, I think, has played itself out. I think it's fair to say the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last ten, fifteen years, in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom. Now, you've heard it all before. You look at the economic policies when they're being debated among the Presidential candidates and it's all tax cuts. Well, you know, we've done that, we tried it. That's not really going to solve our energy problems, for example. So, some of it's the times. And some of it's, I think, there's maybe a generation element to this, partly. In the sense that there's a, I didn't did come of age in the battles of the 60's. I'm not as invested in them.

"And so I think I talk differently about issues. And I think I talk differently about values. And that's why, I think we've been resonating with the American people."

You can watch the whole thing HERE.

Sen. Clinton twisted this into: "I have to say, you know, my leading opponent the other day said that he thought the Republicans had better ideas than Democrats the last ten to fifteen years."

That's not what Obama said.

And in Buffalo, N.Y., former President Bill Clinton twisted this into Obama "said President Reagan was the engine of innovation and did more, had a more lasting impact on America than I did. And then the next day he said, 'In the 90s the good ideas came out from the Republicans. Which it'll be costly maybe down the road for him because it's factually not accurate.”

What's factually not accurate is what President Bill Clinton said.

I know he wants his wife to beat Obama. And it seems that unleashing the Big Dog seems to be working for the Clinton campaign.

Perhaps some voters are even touched by his passion.

But let's be clear -- Bill Clinton is spreading demonstrably false information.

There's winning ugly, and there's winning with honor.


Does it matter? Or is all fair in politics and war?

-- jpt

January 21, 2008

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. It sure is nice to know someone is telling the truth out there. Rec'd. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. Jake Tapper: One of America's finest and sharpest political observors.
K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
3. Tapper's right-
Edited on Tue Jan-22-08 08:45 PM by depakid
and that sort of blew me away, because there wasn't any need to distort the statements. An accurate analysis was just as damning.

Now the Clintons look like they're engaged in smears- they've opened themselves up to attack, while ameliorating a valid controversy.

For all their experience, sometimes this pair just seems self-destructive. Or perhaps one can simply chalk it up to arrogance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Windy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Clinton continues to play dirty ...Hes out there again today. Same nonsense.
He will lose votes for his wife if this crap continues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kelligesq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Obama whining again. He never heard of Harry Truman.
"If you cant take the heat, get out of the kitchen"

I've said it before , I'll say it again

O is not ready for prime time....and thank goodness he's never going to be president, hopefully NOT during my lifetime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Windy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. This is not HEAT, its distortion and dirty politics. Clinton is desperate to regain the wh
Just like bush was desperate to keep it in 2004 and trashed the record of a war hero... a man who never served got away with assaulting someone who put his life on the line.

Now a known and proven, not to mention ADMITTED LIAR is making egregious, false statements about a fellow democrat. A former president of the US behaving like a schoolyard bully...

Reminds me how much of a CHILD Clinton is.

Not to mention his overt narcissism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sadie5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Not looking for a fight
Obama is way outta line, he DID say this. Why not quit whining and try to be honest for a change. Obama needs to watch making remarks like this, if he continues to do so then he needs to defend why he said such. In other words, quit wagging his finger at others and simply own up to his mistakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chieftain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. Thanks for posting and thanks to Tapper for actually
performing the way journalists are supposed to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OHdem10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. Obama was too unanced. You have to be in Obama's head
to realize he does not approve of Regan. Using "excesses of 60s"
I have heard Newt Gingrich say this so much --I thought it was
one of his originals. Lumping Pres. Clinton in with those who
made no change are some things that raise Democrats hackles.

IMO, Obama in an effort not to offend the GOP was typically nuanced
and expected Democrats to be able to read between the lines.
The unfortunate truth is most of us do not know Obama.

I find it puzzling that Obama would even give so much time to Regan
if he really understood the Democratic Party.

There is nothing that says. I do not approve of Regan Policies
but I admire his style and ability to form coalitions.

Perhaps Tapper knows obama and therefore knew how to read the
article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
10. Funny - but Maddow disagrees and says it is Hillary that told the truth - interesting.
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 Tue Apr 30th 2024, 08:09 PM
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