Clinton Obama Texas Debate: Studious, Some Fireworks But No One’s Alamo

It was billed as what could potentially be a debate for the political ages: a debate in Texas, where polls show Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in a dead heat — a debate where some predicted Clinton would have to pepper Obama with zingers, provoke him into some kind of overreaction, or hit a home run herself.

But in the end, it proved to be largely a studious debate that was surprisingly (and refreshingly) issue-oriented. Clinton’s home run didn’t quite materialize but she gave an answer about adversity that brought the crowd to its feet — but it is unlikely to prove to have been a major vote-changing, election-turning response.

And the prepared zingers everyone was waiting for?

Clinton hit Obama on the plagiarism issue with what was clearly a prepared-in-advance zinger and the result showed that sometimes zingers are perhaps left un-zinged. The Washington Post’s
Chris Cillizza:

Asked about his lifting of lines from Gov. Deval Patrick (Mass.), Obama sought to dismiss the charges of plagiarism as the sort of politics the American public is sick of. “The notion I had plagiarized from someone who is one of my national co-chairs who gave me the line and suggested I use it I think is silly,” Obama said. “This is where we get into silly season in politics and people start getting discouraged about it.”

Clinton, however, clearly believes this is a political weak spot for Obama and went after it — hard. “If your candidacy is going to be about words, they should be your own words,” said Clinton. “Lifting whole passages is not change you can believe in, it’s change you can Xerox.”

That line, obviously prepared in advance of tonight’s debate, fell flat. The crowd went silent and then a smattering of boos rang out. Obama shook his head and muttered to himself.

Here’s the YouTube of the moment:
YouTube Preview Image

But it that proved to be the put-him-away-zinger that wasn’t, its negative impact was likely offset by Clinton’s closer. CNN’s Bill Schneider:

The audience loved Clinton’s first response when asked about a time she had been tested – a deliberately vague answer that drew a knowing laugh from many in the audience.

She then laid out a very eloquent response, essentially saying that her crises are nothing compared to the problems average voters confront.

It’s one of the few debate answers to get a standing ovation.

The New York Time’s lively The Caucus blog did live blogging and describes the ending high-note this way:

What moment of crisis has tested you the most? Mr. Obama answers broadly, saying that in his youth, he made mistakes and was “off course” but learned to take responsibility for my own actions. Mrs. Clinton pauses and surprises here, actually responding with a reference to the crisis that certainly sprang to our mind: “Everybody here knows I’ve lived through some crises and some challenging moments in my life.” She then offers a lengthy, slightly maudlin peroration on the idea that whatever problems she has faced, they pale in comparison to what other people go through.

And then in the final surprise of the night, she reaches over to shake hands with Mr. Obama and says she is honored to be here with him. And the crowd goes wild. It ends on that note.

Here’s some of the AP’s take on the event:

Hillary Rodham Clinton accused Democratic presidential rival Barack Obama of political plagiarism Thursday night and said he represented “change you can Xerox.”

Obama dismissed the charge out of hand, adding in a campaign debate, “What we shouldn’t be doing is tearing each other down, we should be lifting the country up.”

NOTE: That response will play well with independent voters. The plagiarism issue was a skyrocket issue that burst into the political sky, then flamed out and was overshadowed in news cycles by the current old and new news media coverage of the John McCain/New York Times scandal/non-scandal (pick one) battle (which will also likely fizzle out soon). It was an example of a zinger that was used beyond its realistic news cycle shelf life. MORE from AP:

The exchange marked an unusually pointed moment in an otherwise civil encounter in the days before March 4 primaries in Texas and Ohio — contests that even some of Clinton’s supporters say she must win to sustain her campaign for the White House.

In a university auditorium in the heart of Texas, the two agreed that high-tech surveillance measures are preferable to construction of a fence to curtail illegal immigration.

They disagreed on the proper response to a change in government in Cuba in the wake of Fidel Castro’s resignation. Clinton said she would refuse to sit down with incoming President Raul Castro until he implements political and economic reforms. Obama said he would meet “without preconditions,” but added the U.S. agenda for such a session would include human rights in the communist island nation.

They also sparred frequently about health care, a bedrock issue of the campaign.

Clinton said repeatedly that Obama’s plan would leave 15 million Americans uncovered.

But he, in turn, accused the former first lady of mishandling the issue by working in secrecy when her husband was in the White House.

UPDATE:
Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson says Clinton’s final statement says it all:

Spokesman Howard Wolfson highlights Clinton’s final statement of the night: “What we saw in the final moments in that debate is why Hillary Clinton is the next President of the United States. Her strength, her life experience, her compassion. She’s tested and ready. It was the moment she retook the reins of this race and showed women and men why she is the best choice.”

Some quick impressions of the debate:

–The bulk of it was well-mannered.

–You get the feeling the plagiarism zinger was set up to try to fluster Obama, make him lose his cool and perhaps respond in a way that could be used against him. Instead, if you watched the debate (and video) it feel flat and then got boos. It was sort of like a comedian doing an x-rated joke at a church gig.

–Clinton was much better at letting her passion come through but became grating when she would not stick to asked questions and went back old topics.

–Obama’s discipline was notable in not biting the baited hook set out for him several times by Clinton. On the other hand, will this mean some Democratic voters will feel he doesn’t have the go-for-the-jugular instinct needed in a Democratic nominee? His answers were detailed and assertive.

–Specificity was an underlying issue and Obama handled it well. Anyone watching the debate who was not a Clinton partisan would conclude he was talking about specific programs and issues, not just aspirations.

–Clinton’s best setting is the debate setting. Obama’s has usually been his weakest. Both performed well.

–Democrats will salivate at having either Clinton or Obama at the head of their ticket due to their positions on issue. Many Republicans will, too — due to their positions on issues. As in the mid-terms, independent voters will likely hold the key to victory — but with President George Bush’s approval rating hitting 19 percent in one poll, the Republicans’ job will be tougher.

UPDATE FINAL THOUGHT: Several bloggers say they felt Clinton was sort of giving her swan song. I didn’t get that impression but if that was it remember: if Obama gets the nomination and loses and Clinton eventually drops out rather than splitting up the party, she’ll be in a good position to launch another Presidential nomination bid in 2012. The key question is whether she (and her husband) feel it’s all or nothing now or, if she loses upcoming primaries and can’t win, that she’s best off leaving the race gracefully and relaunching a 2012 candidacy the day after Election Day if Obama loses.

WEBLOG REACTION:

Cyrus Truth:

I am so sick of people claiming victory for Clinton after every single debate. Tonight she came out against Obama swinging and making sharp comments about Obama and specially the plagiarism issue that her campaign has worked so hard to stick to Obama. At the end, she managed to steal, yet again, another Edwards line. In fact, savvy reporters were able to find the exact line that Edwards used to close his debate a while back. What Clintons are trying to do is not plagiarism. It’s trickery, and Clintons should be ashamed of themselves for using every tactic under the sun to win a stupid campaign.

Flopping Aces on the zinger:

I do not want anyone mistakingly saying one of us “evil conservatives” made this up. It is fun to watch Hillary Clinton’s claws come out against someone else for a change instead of the fantasy “Vast Right Winged Conspiracy”.

I “hope” Obama is ready for the claws out Clinton. Now, as to if those claws have lost their effectiveness, that will be decided at the DNC Convention and the fallout afterwards. All of that promises to be ugly with two disenfranchised states and the superdelegates.

The Reaction has live blogging. Read it all but here’s the conclusion:

Well, that’s it. No gaffes, no real blows, no nothing. I can’t see how this changes the equation at all. If this is the case it must be called a loss for Hillary, because she is the one who needed to make a splash.

Marc Ambinder thinks Obama won the debate and Clinton won the final moment:

Almost wistful … acknowledging reality… but forcefully asserting her humanity … extremely, seemingly, genuine. And at the right time… at the end… earning one of the only standing ovations in the 40-plus hours of debates.

If this moment makes the debate for her, she will have pulled out in the end.

….It was Obama’s debate for most of the night. HRC needed him to stumble; he did not.
At this stage, though, the debates are mostly about moments, and Obama had the second-best I think, when he rebutted Clinton’s assertion that Democrats needed to “get real” about his candidacy. Obama’s answers were well plotted — a veggies-to-desert pivot, first recounting empathetic encounters with hurting citizens and then saying that Washington as currently constituted couldn’t solve that problem.

–Fraters Libertas poses an intriguing question to its readers about Clinton’s final answer.

Taylor Marsh, who has emerged as one of the most reliably pro-Clinton bloggers, points to Clinton’s excellent final answer and gives the You Tube of it. Some of her other reaction:

During the first forty-five minutes they talked in depth about issues, with the conversation polite. I think people who like Clinton will stay in her court; same for Obama.

But in the next segment, Clinton got off the line of the night. It will be repeated on newscasts across the country. That’s something that benefits Clinton.

As for Obama, he has improved significantly. But once again, he can not find an end to his meandering explanations. I’m beginning to doubt if he could find a concise point on a Scrabble board, with a finite number of letters. His rambling is an obsession at this point and gets old quickly.

….At the end, the audience jumped to their feet. It was in great part because of Clinton’s close. It’s what people will be talking about. Women will be moved by her. She showed the same grace that came through in New Hampshire. Tremendous moment on which to end.

TNR’s The Plank:

Obama had a very good debate and kept his momentum despite Clinton’s marvelous final answer. I would just add that there were a couple of moments where Obama’s cockiness was extremely off-putting. His comment about “very good” speeches was tonally wrong, and he needs to stop saying “I was right” about matters of foreign policy (especially when the subject is murky questions like what to do about Pakistan). Still, it’s probably fortunate for him that the main soundbite from the night will be Hillary’s attack on the plagiarism charge, which fell very flat.

Both Ben Stein and Josh Marshall suspect Mrs. Clinton was using someone else’s words (so will reporters ask her if she has a Xerox machine?)

Allahpundit on Clinton’s zinger:

She may not be a good campaigner, and she may not have any qualifications for the presidency, and she may not be nearly as smart as she’s cracked up to be, and she may not have a hope in hell of remaining viable after March 4, but our gal came up with a honey of a line here. I laughed for a good two minutes afterwards.

I wonder who wrote it for her.

John Amato:

I thought they both did quite well tonight outside the line above. Debating is a very good platform for Hillary and she shined—especially her closing statement, but so did Barack. This used to be a weakness for him in my mind, but he’s improved dramatically and is quite comfortable going one on one.

Ed Morrissey looks at and analyzes the zinger (he also has the YouTube):

It’s a good line, but she’s the wrong messenger. Hillary has spent the last year campaigning as the re-run of the Clinton administration, claiming all of the experience from those eight years while taking none of the responsibility for its failures. If anyone is the Xerox candidate, it’s Hillary.

….Note the bad timing here. Obama spends his time talking about changing the tone in politics and focusing on solutions, and he gets a big response from the audience. Hillary tries the zinger and pretty much validates everything Obama just got done saying.

Firedoglake:

Hillary had a good open and very strong close. She tried to ding Obama on the speech thing and health care, but I’m not sure she landed any real punches. Obama didn’t make any mistakes and did a good job deflecting Hillary’s (few) attempts to really engage 1-on-1.

My bottom line: I didn’t see a major Obama mistake tonight, and though Hillary did well, she also got booed when she went after the “plagiarism” thing, which was kind of clumsy.

I score it a narrow win for Obama, who settled down after a slightly nervous start.

Red State:

You can just feel the annoyance she has that Obama can say “dog feces is good for you” and people will faint, wake up, and immediately run out to consume the poop.

By the way, John Edwards’ name came up twice tonight. Both times by Hillary Clinton singing his praises. You think she’s wooing him for a last minute endorsement? It’d probably help her in both Texas and Ohio, more so than it would help Obama were he to get the Edwards nod. And it would really make Edwards the Queen Maker.

Patrick Appel:

Clinton getting booed for saying, “that’s change we can Xerox,” trying to zing Obama on the alleged plagiarism charge, shows just how little that line of attack resonates with voters. She was good tonight. He was better. Her response to the final question was the most emotional I have seen her give in a debate (it was a good moment for her), but I didn’t see anything sufficient to stop Obama’s momentum. We’ll see what the voters of Texas in Ohio thought soon enough.

10 Comments

  1. I thought Hillary's closing was amazing and reaching over to shake Barack's hand (and her words) was just great. What great manners. I wish that all of us in America- Hillary supporters, Barack supporters, Republicans and everyone else, could display such good behavior towards their opponents (or supporters of their opponents) at least part of the time. We may all have differences, but at the end of the day we're all in this together. Such moments are important to have for the sake of civilized society. They're all too rare.

  2. It was great manners because she has come to realize that it's over. She attacked on the Xerox thing. She was embarrassed and her voice cracked for the next 20 minutes. Then she came to realize she had lost and let her real emotions come out in the end. She can bow out gracefully.

  3. I want to just note here what a great duo these two candidates are. I'm happy to vote for either, though I've expressed support here in the past for one over the other. That opinion hasn't changed. This was a pretty susbstantial debate (especially compared with the Republican “rush to the bottom” debates that were truly disturbing to me) and it's good to see two good candidates appeal to the best in us as opposed to the lowest common denominator.

    Good for you both, Sens Clinton and Obama! May the best candidate win – the presidency.

  4. Fellas, fellas, you should know by now there's only two reasons for Hillary Clinton to get emotional, and neither of them is genuine. She's probably on the verge of tears or some'at because of Mike Bloomberg, and his suggestion that maybe 80 districts having 0 votes for Obama in New York doesn't add up. I get upset too, when I see voter fraud.

  5. “I thought Hillary's closing was amazing and reaching over to shake Barack's hand (and her words) was just great.”

    Appomattox Court House?

  6. DLS: well…. I suppose if Obama offered her the VP spot it would be. He would be generous and she could do much to unite the party.

    I'm not suggesting that she be VP, I'm just trying to find a similar analogy for this situation.

  7. fwd:

    The Real Barack Obama

    Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:06 AM

    By: Ronald Kessler

    Michelle Obama’s comment that, for the first time in her adult life, she feels proud of America helps crystallize who Barack Obama is.

    To be sure, the wife of a candidate is perfectly free to have views that are distinct from her husband’s. But on a matter that is so fundamental to one’s being as love of country, it is difficult to imagine that Michelle Obama would publicly twice make such a statement suggesting disdain for America unless she felt it comported with her husband’s views.

    Equally important, her statement aligns perfectly with the hate-America views of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama’s minister, friend, and sounding board for more than two decades. On the Sunday following 9/11, Wright characterized the terrorist attacks as a consequence of violent American policies. Four years later, Wright suggested that the attacks were retribution for America’s racism.

    “In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01,” Wright wrote in his church magazine Trumpet. “White America and the Western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.”

    Wright has been a key supporter of Louis Farrakhan, and in December, honored the Nation of Islam leader for lifetime achievement, saying he “truly epitomize[s] greatness.”

    Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews, whites, America, and homosexuals.

    Those who think two of the closest people to Obama could publicly make anti-America statements unless Obama himself felt that way, are fooling themselves. To date, Obama has proven himself to be nothing more than a great orator, rendering the statements of those around him even more important in illuminating his true character and agenda. During his Senate career, he skipped 17 percent of the votes and sponsored only one bill that became law. That bill was to promote “relief, security, and democracy in the Democratic Republic of Congo.”

    Bereft of official accomplishments, Obama has distinguished himself mainly by being against measures that protect American security, such as finishing the mission in Iraq. If we were to leave Iraq quickly, as Obama vows he would do, it would become a launch pad for al-Qaida attacks on the U.S.

    Obama avoided voting on extending the Protect America Act, thus putting America at risk when immediate interception of terrorist communications is required. Last August, Obama voted against a measure that would have allowed the U.S. to continue to monitor overseas conversations of terrorists like Osama bin Laden without first obtaining a warrant.

    If his radical vote had prevailed, bin Laden would have been given the same rights as Americans.

    To this day, Obama has not distanced himself from most of Rev. Wright’s comments. In a statement supposedly issued to address the matter, Obama ignored the point that his minister and friend had spoken adoringly of Farrakhan and that Wright’s church was behind the award to the Nation of Islam leader. Instead, as outlined in a Jan. 17 Newsmax article, he disingenuously claimed he thought the magazine bestowed the award on Farrakhan for his efforts to rehabilitate ex-prisoners.

    Neither Wright’s encomiums about Farrakhan nor the Trumpet article mentions ex-prisoners.

    Similarly, after John McCain’s wife Cindy responded to Michelle Obama’s remarks by telling a Wisconsin rally, “I have, and always will be, proud of my country,” Barack Obama told a radio interviewer that his wife did not say what people think she said. He then proceeded to rewrite her comments, claiming that she had meant she was encouraged by the “large numbers of people” who have gotten involved in the political process. Michelle Obama then made a similar revision of her remarks.

    In her speech in Milwaukee, Michelle Obama said flatly, “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”

    And what has been wrong with America up to now? That it gave Michelle the opportunity to attend Princeton and Harvard Law School? That it gave Barack Obama the chance to attend Columbia University and Harvard Law School and become a U.S. senator making more than $1 million a year from book royalties?

    Was it that America stopped Nazi Germany from continuing to murder millions of Jews? That America has provided Africa and other countries with $15 billion to combat the spread of AIDS/HIV and that another $30 billion is on the way? That 46 percent of all Americans classified by the Census Bureau as poor own their own homes, 76 percent of them have air conditioning, and 75 percent of them have at least one car? Or that America allows us to express our views freely without fear of being put in jail, as is the case in Russia?

    A lawyer, Michelle Obama is perfectly capable of expressing herself precisely. In fact, she spoke from a written speech.

    Those who do not want to believe she meant what she said — and that Barack Obama could not be so close to Rev. Wright if he did not himself believe in much of what he has said — are in denial.

    The real Barack Obama is starting to emerge, and for those of us who are grateful to America for everything it represents, it is not a pretty sight.

    Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com. View his previous reports and get his dispatches sent to you free via e-mail. Go here now.

    © 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

  8. Do we want a leader who demonizes the opposition and is prone to manipulation? The recent Ohio mailings are part of a continued pattern.

    Obama struck the first aggressive blow in this race with the manipulative, scare tactic commercial depicting Hillary as a Orweillian dictator or have we forgotten that?

    Is Obama a true leader?

    Well, let's see; He belongs to a church whose minister, Rev Jeremiah Wright, who has allied himself with the anti-semitic Louis Farrakhan and himself has said the 911 attacks were justified.

    Obama did not denounce those statements, like a true leader would, and has continued in his friendship with Wright and membership in that church.

    Obama's campaign subtly (and not so subtly) compares him to Kennedy and MLK, yet Kennedy was a war hero and both leaders actually listened to those whose views differ, something Obama has not been prone to do.

    Obama keeps spewing there needs to be a change in the way we do politics, yet his own campaign is perfectly aligned with old world dirty politics of
    attacking and demonizing his opponents and he needs to be called out for it in a debate.

    He consistently refers to the Clintons as old world politics and cries we need change.

    Yet, the economy was good when the Clintons left office and the progressive changes they were seeking to put into place were first sidetracked by the conservative faction, then regressed during the Bush years.

    Hillary seeks to pick up where we left off in 99 and continue the push forward and, instead of reiterating all the years of experience (no one calls McCain old world because he doesn't focus on the number of years)
    what needs to be forcefully reminded is Hillary's unbroken record of being a fighter for change.

    This needs to be said loud and clear.

    RE; The War.

    Who, in their right mind actually believes the tyranny of Saddam Hussein needed to be ignored?

    What was wrong was the 'continued occupation' of Iraq.

    Obama claims to have been against the war for the start, yet he was not even in office when the vote was cast in 2002 and in 2004 he said his view on the war was no different than Bush's.

    Why hasn't Obama been called out for this hypocrisy loud and clear, especially in a debate?

    Why is he allowed to keep painting some sort of misleading, fictional halo around himself?

    He needs to be called out and it needs to be said 'Well, you keep saying that, but here's the black and white truth of the matter'.

    Too, Hillary shows the wisdom of moderation.

    Obama, like Bush, is an extremist, in his own way.

    When Hillary was leading, Obama and Edwards launched their attacks, yet Hillary stated 'They are not attacking me because I am a woman, but because I am ahead”. Yet when Bill Clinton stated the indisputable facts regarding Obama's war voting records, Obama's camp cried “racist”.

    No, Bill's point was made because Obama drew first blood and because he is a political opponent, that's all. Do we really need this kind of manipulative defense mode in the White House?
    It's certainly not a progressive step forward for any of who are of mixed race.

    It's time for an aggressive calling out of a manipulative campaign of Hollywood style over substance.

    We don't need to trade one brand of extremism for another.

    I agree with Hillary Clinton that what happened in 2000 was a tragedy of epic proportions because the intelligence of Al Gore probably would have made for the greatest presidential term of all, probably even surpassing F.D.R.

    Gore absorbed Bill Clinton's moderate policies.

    Obama could eventually go down as a president of wisdom and moderation, in another 8 years and I'd love to see him absorb what he needs to in those years as a v.p in the White House.

    Fantasy because it's not gong to happen.

    No, the American public has always been pretty superficial and right now we are dazzled by Obama's all star line up.

    He WILL win the democratic nomination and he will either lose to McCain in 08 or will win the White House, only to lose it in his 2012 rebid.

    It's as predictable as has been the Iraq war and i'm with the extreme few who felt so even then in 2002, when it was absolutely not popular to say so (proving what is often popular is usually dead wrong).

    I will hate saying I told you so in a few years, not that it would do any good.

    After all, has anyone ever officially told the Dixie Chicks they were right after all?

  9. JOHN LEWIS, COWARD = THE PRESSURE OF RACIAL BIAS.
    Racial Bias is of the same hue as racial bigotry and one would think we would have learned from the mistakes of Male White Anglo Saxon Protestants. Instead, we repeat the mistakes.
    Case in point; JOHN LEWIS, who is nothing more than a JUDAS COWARD!
    JOHN, I was taught you stick by your friends, especially when they are down, even if it's not popular to do so.
    JOHN, YOU ARE A COWARD of the worst sort, right up there with the white cowards of the 1950s who sold out their friends, family and colleagues to McCarthysm or the pro-war thugs from 2002 who were beating up on those of us who voiced doubts about the Iraq invasion.
    Some of us, not in the majority right now, remember what the Clintons did for us in the 90s and are staying loyal, DESPITE the fact that some of us are not showing support based on racial bias.
    As a loyal democrat and what the party stands for, I will vote for Obama, IF Hillary loses the nomination.
    However, my support for Obama has been reserved from day one, ever since his campaign released a manipulative, scare tactic commercial depicting Hillary Clinton as a 1984 dictator.
    Two thoughts occurred to me then ” I was around in the 90s and I sure don't recall being in an Orwellian state” .
    Secondly, I cast a doubt towards ANYONE, White, Black, Republican , Democrat who will use such demonizing, manipulative scare tactics right up there with the propaganda of the 1940s.
    I predicted then that Obama's camp would start subtly pulling the race card and far too easily, it has come to pass.
    JOHN, racial bias hurts our cause rather than progresses it and only fans the flames of tension, you said so yourself once. If you had voiced your support for Obama from the beginning, this would be different. Instead you are a shameful coward.
    As for the rest of us, well it’s pretty predictable, just as the eventual outcome of McCarthysm was predictable, just like the reign of Bush was predictable and just like the Iraq invasion was predictable.
    Some of us though will refuse to bow to populist pressure!

  10. Calling out Obama, his supporters and the media for misogynist attacks on Clinton.

    The 21st century & still age of Misogyny.

    What kind of progressive American leader would stand silent, supporting with the cold reserve of ambition the disgracefully sexist, blatantly anti-feminist attack on a well- respected woman of the same party, a political foe perhaps, but a national Democratic leader?
    Barak Obama so far.

    Unless Obama speaks out, his campaign’s chilling acceptance of the gender bias stirred by our national media will also remind many of Reagan’s acceptance of the race-baiting southern strategy-because if Obama accepts the presidency, at least in part, because of abject sexism, a brutal gender attack on a female rival-the most famous female Democrat in history-he will set feminism in our country back a generation.

    Obama has benefited mightily from sexism in this campaign, and has remained silent.

    Journalist Tom Watson.

    “The default candidate for Democrats in this race was always going to be Hillary Clinton because she’s Hillary Clinton as opposed to Hillary Rodham” Obama Oct 12, 2007.

    Barack and Michelle Obama strolled triumphantly into his victory party in Des Moines, Iowa on Jan 3rd. Jay –Z’s “99 Problems” was blaring. In it, Jay-Z raps “I got 99 problems, but a b–ch ain’t one”.

    “Stay out of my village B–ch” anti-Hillary t-shirt for sale by Obama supporter.

    Rudov, during discussion of Clinton, said “ The woman is not called the B-word because she’s assertive and aggressive; she’s called the B-word because she acts like one”. (Would this be tolerated if it was said about Obama?)

    F..K Hillary. God knows she needs it. Anti-Hillary sign peddled by Obama supporter.

    “ There were tears that melted the Granite State. And those tears that Mrs. Clinton cried on that day, (it) clearly moved voters…But those tears also have to be analyzed. They have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things Mrs. Clinton died not cry for.
    We saw something very clever, we saw a sensitivity factor. Something that Mrs. Clinton has not been able to do with voters… Not in response to voters, not in response to Katrina, not in response to other issues that have devastated the American people, the war in Iraq, we saw tears in response to her appearance,. So her appearance brought her to tears, but not Katrina”. Obama campaign Co-Chair Jesse Jackson, jr., Jan 9, 2008.

    “Sister Frigidaire tries to ice MSNBC” headlined article Huffington Post, Stephen Kaus.

    “Obama has real gravitas, not artificially created, focus-grouped, poll-directed, rehearsed gravitas…Obama doesn’t go on tv and have crying fits; he isn’t discovering his voice at 60”. Obama advisor, Retired Gen. Merrill A. McPeak Feb 2, 2008.

    “Life’s a b–ch, so don’t vote for one” Anti-Clinton sticker from Obama supporter.

    “ You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out” Obama to Clinton at Tulane, Feb 7, 2008.

    “ I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically, when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal.” Obama Feb 15, 2008.

    “ What a whore Geraldine Ferraro is! She’s a F___king whore…Hillary is a big, f___king whore too” Radio host Randy Rhodes at an Obama rally in San Franciso, March 22nd 2008.

    NPR’S Rudin: “Hillary Clinton is Glenn Close in ‘Fatal Attraction’ . She’s going to keep coming back and they’re not going to stop her”.

    On May 9th, 2008, when asked whether Hillary should get out of the race on FOX 13’s Good Morning Memphis program Obama supporter, congressman Steve Cohen said “Glenn Close should have stayed in that tub”.

    For over 20 years , Barack Obama sat quietly while his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright, maligned America, Jews and advanced conspiracy theories from the alter.
    Over the past year, Obama sat quietly while the media and his supporters unfairly used sexism as a means to attack Hillary Clinton. Is this the leader, the unifier, the agent of change we’ve been waiting for?

Submit a Comment