Bill Clinton Swipes At Obama In Remarks Again
In the history of both parties we have seldom seen such a spectacle:
Bill Clinton appeared to undermine Sen. Barack Obama again Tuesday.
The former president, speaking in Denver, posed a hypothetical question in which he seemed to suggest that that the Democratic Party was making a mistake in choosing Obama as its presidential nominee.
He said: “Suppose you’re a voter, and you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”
Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: “This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”
Some have suggested that recent reports about Bill Clinton’s lingering ire were overblown. This remark in public is basically confirmation of the reports about his attitude in private and what’s going on behind the scenes. Rather than campaign for the nominee of his own party, he’s now in-essence campaigning against him and rubbing salt in intra-party wounds. And, if Obama loses, he expects that passionate supporters of Obama are going to forget remarks like this? His speech to the convention should be interesting…
14 Responses to “Bill Clinton Swipes At Obama In Remarks Again”
[...] Original post by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief [...]
O.M.G…
This has nothing to do with what's going on now, huh? I hope this is on tape — or better, on video — because I want to hear his comment in total context. This kind of hypothetical is the thing he does best. I want to watch his eyes, his lips, his hands, his shoulders, when he says it.
Good ol' Billy C. Just can't help himself. Good luck Obama. Your going to need it.
Presumably most of you can see through his latest stunt. Bill Clinton is pathetic.
Besides, the other people (including on this site) are laying the GOP-hatred down thick 'n' heavy, depicting a GOP that will treat Clinton voters better than spies are treated in the Third World (including when no longer needed).
I assume he was referring to his wife as the one who couldn't accomplish anything. Where do I sign up for Hillary-care again?
Well as Sil says, Barack hurt Bill's feelings and Bill's petulant, whinny behavior shows us how Barack is acting like a child.
The best thing Hillary could possibly do to further her career would be to dump this dead-load immediately. It isn't enough for him to publicly humiliate her, he needs to end any viable future she has a Democrat. He must really hate her.
It isn't enough for him to publicly humiliate her, he needs to end any viable future she has a Democrat. He must really hate her.
Or maybe he just yearns for a nice home-made breakfast. Lol!
I'm sorry, that's too snarky. I didn't mean it. But I think in Bill's universe no memory is forever. And how can you blame him? Things looked very bad for him in 2000, but by 2004 they looked pretty good. Unlike Gore in 2000 (who avoided him like the plague) Kerry was very anxious to have Bill campaign for him in 2004. Unfortunately he suffered a very ill-timed heart attack. I'm thinking Bill's thinking that no matter how petulant he acts now, in four years time who will care?
Who indeed. In that respect, again I ask, how can you blame him?
Then again, it's possible that by 2012 we may all have a Google interface embedded in our cortex. So he's taking a chance, lol!
I never said Barack hurt Bill's Feelings.
And as Kathyrn said, “I hate black people..”
How does it feel being purposefully misquoted?
Sucks eh?
Meanwhile, let's focus on anger and “emotional stuff” and ignore the wisdom of what Bill was saying. Remember, he cares deeply about the political party that is about to be led to the slaughterhouse by numerous forces who blindly are united in one cause “anyone but Hillary”. Most of those forces come directly from the GOP's “Obama Trap”.
It's never too late to read up on the Sinclair story. Apparently Bill Clinton has.
My apologies I did misread your quote Sil but I am glad you are coming clean about your hatred of black people.
The fact the Bill might be taking the word of someone under arrest for fraud isn't impressive. But since he is someone guilty of perjury I can see why he might be “attracted” to Sinclair.
[...] The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room, The Hill’s Pundits Blog, The Politico, Ross Douthat, The Moderate Voice, TownHall Blog, Rocky Mountain News, ABCNEWS, The Campaign Spot, Weekly Standard Blog, Wake up [...]
Yeah, if I was Sinclair I'd consent to the arrest. Sudden deaths in jail are usually investigated a bit more than the three murders of alleged gay partners of Obama's late last year who made noise about talking, coincidentally at the real start of the Obama campaign.
Jail probably is the best place for Sinclair at this point. But then all those three murders could just be random “hate crimes” in Chicago. Even if all three dead men, black, gay, dead men, supposedly were connected to Obama..
The weird thing is those guys did die. There are corpses. Obama's church choir director, Donald Young, even was “done” execution-style. And yet when I google the Tribune, I cannot find a single article on it. Weird eh? A high profile church's choir director, friend of Obama gets murdered execution-style and there's no articles on the online Tribune website.
Must just be an oversight. Or maybe I just can't get their search engine to work right..?
Ah yes, the wet behind ears, naive Barack was able to manufacture charges and get the Republican Feds to arrest Sinclair. And the fact that the Tribune hasn't written about this crap would have nothing to do with the fact that it HAS NO BASIS IN FACT.
Tin hat giving you headaches Daveinboca/Silhoutte?
It is in the GOPs best interest to quell this story any way they can until after the vote at Denver. That doesn't need any Obama input whatsoever.
How hard is it for you to wrap your mind around the very simple tactic of promoting the least qualified democrat to run against in order to WIN?
And the GOP will do ANYTHING to ensure Clinton doesn't get that nomination.
They're not taking any chances..
And I'm not necessarily saying Obama had anything to do with the Young murder and the other two either….only that the three men were related in that they could any one, spill the beans too early on Obama's alleged extra-marital activities. Obama is probably as grieved or moreso than anyone as to their deaths..
Again, the GOP doesn't take chances on a loss..
And that should be THE reason we nominate Clinton.
How hard is it for you to wrap you head around the fact that Hillary has only 4 more years in the senate, and being first lady is not the same as being President? Her campaign was badly mis-managed because she let her husband screw it up. Her mild edge in experience is more than outweighed by the baggage, and if experience was the only thing that counted, then Cheney would be the best President ever (oops, sorry Sil/daveinboca you probably believe that Cheney is the best President ever.)