Matthews truncated Clinton's comments, ignored others to repeatedly suggest she gave up "chance to dismiss" Obama rumors
SUMMARY: On Hardball, Chris Matthews played clip of a 60 Minutes interview in which Sen. Hillary Clinton said "[o]f course not" when asked if she believed false rumors that Sen. Barack Obama is a Muslim. However, Matthews ignored that statement and other comments Clinton made in the interview, instead highlighting the fact that at one point Clinton said "as far as I know" and repeatedly suggesting that Clinton had left Obama's religious beliefs in doubt.
During the March 3 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews asserted that Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign is "[g]oing after" Sen. Barack Obama "in this Muslim issue" and claimed that she "g[ave] up a clear chance to dismiss these bad stories being pushed by bad people, that he's not the religion he is, clearly to try to disturb people." Matthews added: "She had a clear opportunity on 60 Minutes to clear that up, and she didn't take it." Later in the program, Matthews played a clip of Clinton's 60 Minutes interview with Steve Kroft in which the end of Clinton's answer was cropped such that it did not include a remark in which she clearly stated that she did not believe that Obama was a Muslim and added that she too had been "the target of ridiculous rumors." Matthews then repeatedly highlighted only part of Clinton's comments to suggest that she had left Obama's religious beliefs in doubt.
While discussing Clinton's comments with MSNBC's Joe Scarborough and Norah O'Donnell, Matthews aired a clip of the 60 Minutes interview in which Clinton responded to three questions about whether she believed Obama was a Muslim. In response to Kroft's first question -- "You don't believe that Senator Obama is a Muslim?" -- Clinton replied: "Of course not. I mean, that's -- you know, there is no basis for that. You know, I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that." Matthews ignored the fact that Clinton said, "Of course not," instead choosing to highlight an answer from Clinton that was truncated in the clip he played. In Kroft's third question, he again asked: "You don't believe that he's a Muslim -- or implying, right?" Clinton's full answer was: "No. No. Why would I? There's no -- [n]o, there is nothing to base that on, as far as I know. ... Look, I have been the target of so many ridiculous rumors. I have a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets, you know, smeared with the kind of rumors that go on all the time." However, on Hardball, the clip ended after Clinton said "as far as I know," which Matthews then used to suggest that Clinton was leaving Obama's faith in doubt.
After airing the clip of the interview, Matthews asked: "What do you make of that, Joe Scarborough?" Scarborough replied, "Well, I make that Hillary Clinton says there's nothing to base that [the idea that Obama is a Muslim] on. ... She kept it pretty much down the center and said she didn't think he was a Muslim." Matthews interjected: "As far as I know." After continuing to discuss the "as far as I know" portion of Clinton's answer, Scarborough stated: "I think that Hillary -- I mean, Steve could have asked that question a hundred different ways. I think she answered it sufficiently the first time." Moments later, Matthews said to O'Donnell, " 'I take him on the basis of what he says. I take him at his word, as far as I know.' Are those qualifiers? Do they suggest someone who wants to keep the pot a bit stirred, even if by the bad people in the country?"
The clip of Clinton's 60 Minutes interview as it aired on Hardball:
KROFT: You don't believe that Senator Obama is a Muslim?
CLINTON: Of course not. I mean, that's -- you know, there is no basis for that. You know, I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that.KROFT: And you said you'd take Senator Obama at his word that he's not a Muslim.
CLINTON: Right. Right.
KROFT: You don't believe that he's a Muslim --
CLINTON: No. No. Why would I? There's no --
KROFT: -- or implying, right?
CLINTON: No, there is nothing to base that on, as far as I know.
Matthews went on to play a clip of NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell asking Clinton whether her comments on 60 Minutes were intended to "raise any doubts about his [Obama's] being Christian." Clinton replied:
No, not at all. No, not at all. I mean, obviously, I've been the subject of scurrilous rumors for years, and, you know, it's -- it's hard to get them to go away. And they, you know, they just keep coming back. And, you know, I really sympathize with Senator Obama. It is -- it's -- you know, it's disturbing to turn around and see this all the time. And, you know, obviously I hope that people get beyond it and ignore it.
Matthews then stated: "Let me ask Joe Scarborough again: What do you think is going on here with her answers to these questions? The second one was more self-regarding about her own challenges in facing down stories about her, but she said, 'Well, this is the business we have chosen,' basically seemed to be the answer. Tough, it's tough out there." In fact, Clinton used similar language in her response to Kroft, saying: "Look, I have been the target of so many ridiculous rumors. I have a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets, you know, smeared with the kind of rumors that go on all the time." Additionally, ignoring the fact that Clinton told Mitchell, "[O]bviously I hope that people get beyond it and ignore it [the rumor that Obama is a Muslim]," Matthews said, "I don't know why we don't simplify this and end the conversation. Why is there an attempt to keep the conversation going with these long answers to the simple questions?"
Concluding his discussion with Scarborough and O'Donnell, Matthews asserted: "[I]t looks worse in print than she does when she says it. It sounds quite reasonable the way Senator Clinton made the statement." Yet later in the show, speaking with Clinton campaign adviser Kiki McLean, Matthews returned to the subject and stated: "But she said 'as far as I know.'... I'm just curious. Why would you -- why would people talk like that?" McLean replied: "I think people are picking hairs because they're looking for something to fight over." Matthews then said: "No, no, I'm asking -- I mean, I was -- this was pointed out to me, about why she wouldn't just say, 'Of course he's not a Muslim, he's a Christian.' Why didn't she just say that?" McLean answered: "I think she believes she said that, and she said that. I think other people are picking apart words."
From the March 3 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:
MATTHEWS: Chrystia, it does seem to me that if you look at the Senator Clinton campaign over the last couple of days, over the last -- they are really doing the kinds of things that politicians do when they're losing. This very tough, "3 a.m. in the morning" thing suggesting that Barack Obama's not to be trusted at 3 o'clock in the morning. I don't know how you can read it any other way. Going after him in this Muslim issue -- we'll get to it in the next block of the show -- giving up a clear chance to dismiss these bad stories being pushed by bad people, that he's not the religion he is, clearly to try to disturb people. She had a clear opportunity on 60 Minutes to clear that up, and she didn't take it.
CHRYSTIA FREELAND (Financial Times): Yeah, that's absolutely right, and the fact is, they are losing. The Clinton campaign has tried quite hard to talk about this notion that there is a media bias against Hillary Clinton. But in one respect, I think she has really benefited from a nice media, which is, after losing these 11 straight primaries, people are still treating it as a two-horse race.
[...]
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to Hardball. The crunch time in the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has come upon us, and all bets are off. Joining me now is MSNBC's chief Washington correspondent, Norah O'Donnell, who's up in New York, and the host of MSNBC's Joe Scarborough. Joe, you're with us. Joe, let's take a look -- let's all take a look at this. Here's Senator Clinton last night on 60 Minutes:
[begin video clip]
KROFT: You don't believe that Senator Obama is a Muslim?
CLINTON: Of course not. I mean, that's -- you know, there is no basis for that. You know, I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that.
KROFT: And you said you'd take Senator Obama at his word that he's not a Muslim.
CLINTON: Right. Right.
KROFT: You don't believe that he's a Muslim --
CLINTON: No. No. Why would I? There's no --
KROFT: -- or implying, right?
CLINTON: No, there is nothing to base that on, as far as I know.
[end video clip]
MATTHEWS: What do you make of that, Joe Scarborough?
SCARBOROUGH: Well, I make that Hillary Clinton says there's nothing to base that on. It doesn't seem to me that she's got the affirmative responsibility to jump up and down and point her fingers and get upset. I think she did all that was required of her. She did not veer off the road to strike anybody. She kept it pretty much down the center and said she didn't think he was a Muslim.
MATTHEWS: As far as I know.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, yeah, sure as far as I know, Chris.
MATTHEWS: OK. Well, Joe --
SCARBOROUGH: Well, you know, I --
MATTHEWS: You're on television with me right now, as far as I know.
SCARBOROUGH: You know, I am -- I am as far as I know. I don't know what's in your heart, but I think -- again, I think that Hillary -- I mean, Steve could have asked that question a hundred different ways. I think she answered it sufficiently the first time.
MATTHEWS: Well, suppose I said Albany is the capital of New York, as far as I know.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, but that's actually an objective fact. But it --
MATTHEWS: Yeah. Isn't the fact of a person's religion an objective fact?
SCARBOROUGH: Well, that's more subjective. That's in their heart. They know whether they are or not. If he says he is, then -- he said he is, and she said that, yeah, as far as she knows, he is.
MATTHEWS: Norah O'Donnell, "I take him on the basis of what he says. I take him at his word, as far as I know." Are those qualifiers? Do they suggest someone who wants to keep the pot a bit stirred, even if by the bad people in the country?
O'DONNELL: Well, that's what critics of Senator Clinton are saying today. It was an unusual question, and it was an unusual answer on the part of Senator Clinton. This issue about whether Senator Obama is a Muslim or not is sort of a strange undercurrent in this entire campaign. He's responded to it just today saying he's a Christian, a devout Christian, even saying he prays to Jesus every night. I'm not sure what the suggestion would be to even asking the question, as if there were something wrong with being a Muslim. But that is sort of the undercurrent, and as some have pointed out, even Republican strategists, that it may play to Americans' xenophobia and may play to other fears that Americans have. Nevertheless, it's been -- it was a strange question.
MATTHEWS: Yeah, well, the answer was a bit hesitant, I think, "as far as I know," and "take him on the basis of what he says." I don't think it was very helpful to Obama the way she answered it, but maybe Joe's right. Why should she be helpful to Obama, except that those people concerned about the Middle East, Jewish voters, for example, hear that the guy is an Arab sympathizer or whatever. This is fraught with peril for him. Anyway, here's Senator Clinton today when asked about it by Andrea Mitchell.
[begin video clip]
MITCHELL: The question is, were you trying to raise any doubts about his being a Christian?
CLINTON: No, not at all. No, not at all. I mean, obviously, I've been the subject of scurrilous rumors for years, and, you know, it's -- it's hard to get them to go away. And they, you know, they just keep coming back. And, you know, I really sympathize with Senator Obama. It is -- it's -- you know, it's disturbing to turn around and see this all the time. And, you know, obviously I hope that people get beyond it and ignore it.
[end video clip]
MATTHEWS: That's Gail Sheehy sitting over there, her biographer. Let me ask Joe Scarborough again: What do you think is going on here with her answers to these questions? The second one was more self-regarding about her own challenges in facing down stories about her, but she said, "Well, this is the business we have chosen," basically seemed to be the answer. Tough, it's tough out there.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, sure, it is tough out there. And Barack Obama, if the worst thing that he can have happening to him is for his opponent at the height of a primary season saying, "No, I don't think he's a Muslim," then Barack Obama's got it pretty good. And Hillary Clinton -- and, again, I was part of a Congress back in the 1990s that went after her nonstop. She has been through the gauntlet, she's been through the wringer. She's -- it's hard to think of anybody that's in public life right now that's had a tougher run of it than Hillary Clinton. So, I'm sure she can sympathize with Barack Obama. But my gosh, this is child's play compared to what Hillary Clinton has endured since 1992.
MATTHEWS: Yeah, but suppose I said if --is Hillary Clinton a Methodist? And you'd -- and I would answer, "On the basis of what she says, yeah, as far as I know." Doesn't that seem a little bit more complicated than simply, of course, just saying, "No, he's not"?
SCARBOROUGH: Well, again, I --
MATTHEWS: Again, I don't know why we don't simplify this and end the conversation. Why is there an attempt to keep the conversation going with these long answers to the simple questions?
SCARBOROUGH: You know, Chris, I said earlier in this election season that I thought Mike Huckabee, a guy I liked very much, I thought Mike Huckabee was playing on some doubts regarding the Mormonism of Mitt Romney. I did not pick that up here. I didn't think it was quite as --
MATTHEWS: Yeah.
SCARBOROUGH: -- I didn't think it was quite as crudely used as Huckabee's attempts to raise doubts about the Christian beliefs earlier of Mitt Romney. I just -- I just see it that way personally.
MATTHEWS: It does look worse -- it looks worse in print than she does when she says it. It sounds quite reasonable the way Senator Clinton made the statement. Here's Senator Obama, by the way, explaining his own religious faith to put this thing to rest, at least tonight.
OBAMA [video clip]: I am a Christian. I am a devout Christian. I have been a member of the same church for 20 years. You know, pray to Jesus every night, and try to go to church as much as I can when they're not working me.
SCARBOROUGH: Ugh.
MATTHEWS: Wow. Well, this weekend -- what? What, Joe? What is the hemming and hawing about?
SCARBOROUGH: Oh, my God, I -- talk about a religious test. I mean --
MATTHEWS: I know. I don't like this. I don't like this part of our country.
SCARBOROUGH: I don't like this at all. The guy -- the fact the guy --
MATTHEWS: This is not what we do in this country.
SCARBOROUGH: My God, the fact that this guy has to go out and say he's a devout Christian, he tries to pray to Jesus every night --
MATTHEWS: I don't want -- it's what I don't --
SCARBOROUGH: -- it makes me wince.
MATTHEWS: We are a free country, and that First Amendment should guide us, freedom of religion.
[...]
MATTHEWS: What about the Muslim thing? Is that a question? Is that one on the list of questions?
McLEAN: No. No.
MATTHEWS: So you think Hillary Clinton put that to rest yesterday?
McLEAN: I believe so, absolutely.
MATTHEWS: But she said "as far as I know."
McLEAN: I think -- I think -- people -- people are picking --
MATTHEWS: I'm just curious. Why would you -- why would people talk like that?
McLEAN: I think people are picking hairs because they're looking for something to fight over that's --
MATTHEWS: No, no, I'm asking -- I mean, I was -- this was pointed out to me, about why she wouldn't just say, "Of course he's not a Muslim, he's a Christian." Why didn't she just say that?
McLEAN: I think she believes she said that, and she said that. I think other people are picking apart words. I think that's not what this campaign is about, Chris. I think this campaign is about national security and the economy. I think Senator Clinton has been leading on those two issues, and I think that's why she'll do very well tomorrow night in Texas, in Ohio, in Rhode Island, and Vermont.
At this point I think it is relevant to point out the media is being easy on McCain and tough on both Hillary and Obama. Further I have no doubt that Mathews distorts.
However I understand Mrs. Clinton said something to the effect that she has more respect for McCain than Obama. I will get the exact quote and a link.
This could really get out of hand and at this point Hillary seems to be giving ammunition to the Republicans and the media.
My opinion of Hillary is slowly declining.
"I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002," Clinton says.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Clinton_on_Obama_and_McCain.html
I was willing to overlook everything I've felt about Bill and Hillary since South Carolina in order to help the Dems win in 08, but not this. Hillary and Bill care about Hillary and Bill, period. They don't care who they have to run over and at this point, I would drive the bus to run them over. Not today, tomorrow or even for the Supreme Court appointment will I vote for Hillary.
Pearlene, you're a phony. You've never liked her at all.
The Clintons have done nothing wrong. Nothing at all-- and that's the point of many of MMFA's psotings.
Your odd, racially-based adoration of Obama is what this is all about. Face it-- if he were White, would you still be as much of a fan of his?
Oh I know, get outraged and indignant, you Obama supporters. Start calling us Hillary supporters names. You're all good at that, but it's no substitute for rational thinking.
I've never been a big fan of Hillary and have posted here SEVERAL times that I would "hold my nose" and vote for her. IF you had paid attention you would have realized that some time ago.
As Bill Richardson said, you don't bloody up your opponent in the primary just because you want to win. You don't hand the opposition party a perfect comment to use in an ad against the nominee of your party, an ad with your face and your voice speaking against your party's nominee IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE PARTY!. If your concern is just yourself you do as Hillary has done, make an comment explaining how much experience (ha ha) she has and how much experience McCain has and Obama simply has a speech. If she loses the primary guess what ad McCain will be running, what am I saying, he's already running the comment. Hillary and Bill care about Hillary and Bill, PERIOD!
As Bill Richardson said, you don't bloody up your opponent in the primary just because you want to win. You don't hand the opposition party a perfect comment to use in an ad against the nominee of your party, an ad with your face and your voice speaking against your party's nominee IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE PARTY!.
I thought that 3AM commercial was disgusting. I don't know why she thought fearmongering tactics would work on Democrats. It completely turned me off.
"You're right. I don't have the exact words, either, but it was something like, "I have a lifetime of service, Senator McCain has a lifetime of service; Senator Obama made a speech."
My opinion of Hillary is slowly declining."
That's phony and sanctimonious. You never liked her in the first place.
Hillary made a great, funny comment. And it's true. Obama is continually slamming Clinton, but that's OK? What a double standard.
I'm just amazed at the phony piety of so many Obama supporters. It's really shocking.
What is amazing is whenever someone criticizes Hillary Clinton they are automatically slammed with the "hate Hillary", or "you never liked her EVER!" mantra. That is phony, and ridiculous. One can criticize her and not hate her. Newsflash.
Yes Tommy, but they HATE her. That's the problem.
They also miss the point of this MMFA article. Rather than realize that this criticism of the Clintons is phony-- that's MMFA's point-- they use these postings as an opportunity to criticize them for the very things that MMFA is refuting here!
You know why? Because they are irrational. That's at the heart of the Obama campaign. They haven't even read the MMFA article here!
Criminy, like you have any room to talk here. Have you read some of your own posts about how crazy and irrational Obama supporters are, and how they're going to be the downfall of the entire party?
But you want to criticize Pearlene for phony piety? It seems you have no self-awareness whatsoever.
I'm hardly pious about it. What bothers me is this outrage and self-righteousness that many Obama supporters lather themselves into, whenever he gets criticized.
It's gotten to the point where Hillary is not allowed to criticize him at all, and when she does, watch out, she's either "going negative" or she's being "divisive" and unethical.
You guys have a thin skin. This recent campaign tactic against him, this commercial, is hardly "awful." If you can't handle Hillary, how are you going to handle the Republicans?
And why is it that whenever MMFA runs a posting favorable to Hillary-- like this one-- Obama supporters always use it as an excuse to bash her-- completely missing the point of it?
I never see that happen when Obama gets a favorable MMFA posting-- you never see Hillary supporters here using it as an opportunity to bash him.
What is it about Hillary that makes her such a target of hate and intolerance, let alone unreasonableness?
You're hardly pious? To hear you talk about Obama supporters, one would think the end of the world is coming.
People are criticizing her because she's running a nasty campaign. She's promoting scare tactics about Obama's unpreparedness and saying she's the one who can handle Al Qaeda. That's the same sort of thing we've criticized Bush and other Republicans for, so that's consistent on principle. I don't accept it when Republicans do it, so I don't accept it when she does it, it has nothing to do with any ability to handle anyone. And propping up McCain over Obama is ridiculous. You never talk better about the opposing party's candidate than your opponent in the same party. If she ends up losing then that's giving ammunition to the opposition, such as McCain saying in a debate "Hillary Clinton said I have a lifetime of experience while Senator Obama has a speech". If that seems somehow acceptable to you, maybe you should evaluate your level of support.
I don't care if Obama is criticized. I want it to be fair, though, the same way I want it to be for Hillary. You're the one who can't seem to handle reasonable criticism of your candidate, so maybe you should grow thicker skin.
I'm just amazed at the phony piety of so many Obama supporters. It's really shocking
GROW UP! You don't have to hate Hillary to support Obama. I don't hate Hillary I'm simply disgusted at her campaign tactics. I'm disgusted that her primary concern seems to be for Hillary and not making sure that we don't have another 4 years of Republican rule. I disgusted that she has not learned not to give the opposition party ammo to use against the nominee of your party in the general election. I simply disgusted with both Hillary and Bill. I don't hate anyone, I leave the hating up to you.
The Republicans hardly need Hillary to remind them of Obama's lack of qualifications and experience. It's a valid issue, and there's nothing wrong with her pointing it out.
From the same crowd that accused the Clintons of being racist a few weeks ago, nothing should surprise me. You all have a thin skin when it comes to your candidate.
Face it-- he lacks experience. It's a valid issue to bring up in a political campaign. Sorry about the news here.
WHAT is Hillary's vast experience? She spent 8 years in the White House? Did Hillary have Natl. Security Clearance? NO Did Hillary receive the Presidential Daily Briefing? NO Was Hillary allowed to sit in on Natl Security discussions? NO, she wasn’t even allowed to be in the room because she didn’t have security clearance! WHAT is all this experience that makes Hillary ready to be commander in chief? Name one thing that makes Hillary's qualified to deal with Natl. Security issues? Hillary couldn't name one but you give it a try.
IF you are a Democrat FIRST your loyalty is to your party and your teammate NOT the OPPOSITION! Hillary ENDORSED John McCain! John McCain the Republican, the party we are trying to beat. The party that has thrown crap at her for 20 years! The party that has destroyed this country's credibility around the world! She endorsed McCain who PROMISED to continue the Bush policies! McCain who plans to have us in Iraq for 100 more years and thinks NOTHING of staring another war with Iran! HILLARY ENDORSED HIM! And you think that's OK? Are you freaking serious? All your whining about how Obama was going to destroy the Democratic party didn't have a damn thing to do with your concern for the party. If you were really concerned about the party you would be incensed that Hillary went out and ENDORSED A REPUBLICAN! SHE WENT TO FAR! IF Hillary's the nominee how does she expect the party to come together and support her? Why should anyone support her? Because of the Democratic party? She doesn't care about the party, only IF she's the party's nominee. Hillary is out for Hillary and when she said this crap about McCain she crossed a line that she can't go back on. Hillary is no different than Joe Lieberman, they both claim to be Democrats but are ENDORSING MCCAIN.
I'd actually prefer that every politician's first loyalty be to their country, not their party. If that was the case, maybe the Republicans would have cared less about their team winning the big game and more about whether they actually agreed with his policies and what he was doing to this country. I don't want elections to be about supporting teams, because then it's just about winning, period, regardless of whether the team is pursuing policies that actually improve our lives. That kind of "my team against your team" thinking just leads to cynical politics that is all about holding onto power and nothing to do with governing.
You were talking about Clinton's supposed endorsement of McCain, which would be about the GENERAL ELECTION (hey, I can use all caps too!) and saying that a Democrat's FIRST loyalty should be to their party. I think that's bull, their first loyalty should be to their country, PRIMARY or NOT.
FWIW, I don't think Clinton should have made that statement for a number of reasons. I don't think she should sound supportive of McCain because they disagree on policy and governance. Experience only matters to me if it has led the candidate to the policies that I believe are best for this country. I also don't think she should have trivialized Obama in that manner because it's clearly not true and makes her look disingenuous.
But, both she and Obama should stop going after each other and instead focus on McCain. Not for party, but for country -- Obama's and Clinton's policy positions are so similar, if they believe those policies are right for the country and that McCain's are not, then they should start explaining why he is wrong and why they are right (the part of the debate the Dems don't always follow through on) . That has nothing to do with putting party first, though.
You were talking about Clinton's supposed endorsement of McCain, which would be about the GENERAL ELECTION (hey, I can use all caps too!)
I was talking about Clinton and Obama who are Democrats running in the Democratic Presidential PRIMARY race. Hillary made the comments against her opponent in the PRIMARY race for the Democratic party. The goal is to end the Bush policies which McCain has promised to continue. Giving McCain a compliment IS NOT THE WAY!
Congratulations on learning to use caps.
Again, your comment was about where a Democrat's first loyalty should lie. Whether it's the PRIMARY, the GENERAL ELECTION, or GOVERNING, I say it should be with COUNTRY first, NOT party. She was wrong to compliment McCain because of his policies, NOT because it somehow offends party loyalty.
Even though Hillary is often treated unfairly by the press, I found this particular comment from her rather snarky.
Hillary's comment was a good one. It's true-- she and McCain have much more experience. Obama's full of speeches about a vote he never had to make in 2003.* That's it.
Sometimes the truth hurts.
*a vote, by the way, that had a popular mandate-- which will not help him come November....he'd be in the position of telling the electorate that he was right and they were wrong. Nobody wants to hear that. They want to hear how to get out gracefully.
Werner: "However I understand Mrs. Clinton said something to the mistake that she has more respect for McCain than Obama. I will get the exact quote and a link."
Nerzog: "You’re right…it was something like, ‘I have a lifetime of service, Senator McCain has a lifetime of service; Senator Obama made a speech.’"
No, Nerzog, you and Werner are both wrong — not as to Sen. Clinton’s quote (which Pearlene_Scott has kindly provided above with link) per se, but as to the Senator’s meaning. One of the running themes of the Clinton campaign has been, and continues to be, that Sen. Clinton has the experience to lead, Sen. Obama does not. This Clinton experience-McCain experience-Obama speech comparison is not (as you two, and many others, mistakenly suggest) Sen. Clinton saying that Sen. McCain is a better person than Sen. Obama or would be a better president than Sen. Obama; it is simply an extension of the same experience vs. inexperience theme. In other words, "Who is the better candidate to challenge Sen. McCain and his experience? Me (Sen. Clinton) with experience of my own? Or Sen. Obama and his 2002 speech?"
MATTHEWS: Yeah. Isn't the fact of a person's religion an objective fact?
Yes, Chris, as far as I know.
To follow up on the above you can go to politico,http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Clinton_on_Obama_and_McCain.html#comments
She said: McCain has a lifetime of experience and Obama has a speech. I think this is shameful on her part. I really don't prefer Obama but she has no business saying such things.
McCain has a lifetime of experience and Obama has a speech. I think this is shameful on her part. I really don't prefer Obama but she has no business saying such things.
Shameful? Please explain. I would love to hear what Obama has done.
I am a little tired of Hillary offering up her evaluations of everybody's experience, ad nauseum. If she wants to tout her own, fine, it's up to the voters to determine that. But her constant drumbeat of Obama's inexperience and how he won't be ready on day 1 like she will be, it's worn out, in my opinion.
After all, both are relatively inexperienced when it comes to elective office, and she uses her 8 years as first lady as some sort of elective job on her resume', it's not.
Let these candidates sell themselves, their own judgement, and their own experience, and leave the critiquing of their opponents out of it. That is up to the voters.
Let these candidates sell themselves, their own judgement, and their own experience, and leave the critiquing of their opponents out of it.
Tommy, the best way to sell something is to explain how it is better than the alternative.
So when McCain campaigns against the Dems in November, he should leave "experience" out of it, and not evaluate his opponent's qualifications in this regard?
If he doesn't, I fully expect you to express the same sentiments then.
I'm a registered Democrat. I did not vote in my state's primary which happened on Super Tuesday because I wasn't sure who was more electable and I wasn't sure who would make a better president. It is shameful because Hillary appears to have more antipathy for a fellow Democrat, Obama, than she does for McCain who is at this point a supporter of all of Bush's policies. I wasn't actually pleased either when Obama said he said he would include Republicans in his cabinet as Bush has never done anything so "bipartisan". The Democrats continue to wave a white flag. I think this is relevant to media matter's mission.
It is shameful because Hillary appears to have more antipathy for a fellow Democrat, Obama, than she does for McCain who is at this point a supporter of all of Bush's policies.
But she is not running against McCain yet. She is running against Obama. She needs to highlight those differences if she hopes to face McCain in November.
Yeah, I don't get this idea of "shameful." But remember, this is coming from the same people who don't want her to win in the first place.
She hasn't done anything wrong here ethically. Never has. It's all sanctimonious cant from unhappy, thin-skinned Obama supporters.
This whole campaign of his is propped up on some kind of illusory moral plane. That, sadly, seems to be its major appeal: we're the good, they're the bad.
Except if she doesn't face him in November, then she's propped up a Republican over her fellow Democrat. That's the problem. And there's no argument that this is necessary in order to beat Obama, she can leave McCain out of the comparisons and make whatever point she likes.
For starters, you can check here:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/20/201332/807/36/458633
This isn't fair criticism of Matthews. I saw the end of Hardball last night and what I saw was Matthews saying that after he looked at the 60 Minutes clip, it appeared to him that Mrs. Clinton was being genuine, that she was not fanning any flames at all. Perhaps he came around during the program.
If anyone else saw it I would be interested to see if you got the same from Chris that I did?
I saw it Tommy, & I'll give Matthews kudos for saying it, BUT it hardly cancels out the mud he's thrown at her this entire campaign.
Are you giving Matthews "kudos" for saying something along the lines of Clinton being genuine and sincere in answering questions about her knowledge of Obama's faith?
On the other hand, if Hillary happens to win the nomination, we know all the lies they have stored up about her.
We're screwed.
Nerzog,
It's way too early to be screwed.....McCain is not the strongest candidate and I am not sure the hard right is that motivated to slime Obama or Clinton when their choice is McCain, who many do not like. It isn't like when they had Bush and they loved him.
Besides, I do have a little faith that McCain just will not stoop that low, I really hope not. He wants the job he's seeking, but I don't believe he does at any expense.
Well, you probably have a point. I am sure this will be highlighted here shortly but a caller on today's Limbaugh program said her daughter thought Obama looked like Curious George - Limbaugh laughed, of course......and then later issued an apology to Obama.
Perhaps one can't blame this on Limbaugh specifically, but it's his program and he could have stopped it from airing with the delay that his callers are on. He is responsible, and it is reprehensible. There are no depths to which he will sink, apparently.
McCain will stoop just as low as he feels he needs to. He lost all claim to "maverick" status when he groveled and kissed the "rings" of those he had correctly labled agents of intolerance. Now we know that he actively sought the support of the hate-mongering Hagee, and refuses to "denounce and reject" Hagee's venom, which is at least as repugnant as Farrakhan's. I'm waiting for Russert and the msm to go after McMaverick on Hagee as hard as they went after Obama on Farrakhan. I'm sure I'll be waiting 'till Decemaber.
Nerzog,
I don't see how you think it's the Republican attack machine that is going after Obama. Sheesh. This is the primary season. Instead of a knee jerk reaction, as far as I can tell, it is Hillary and NBC.
In today's Times, Dowd said the following:
Exit polls have showed that fans of Hillary — who once said they would be happy with Obama if Hillary dropped out — were hardening in their opposition to him, while Obama voters were not so harsh about her.
Three Hillary volunteers, older women from Boston, approached a New York Times reporter in an Austin, Tex., parking lot on Tuesday to vent that Hillary hasn’t gotten a fair shake from the press. They said that they used to like Obama but now can’t stand him because they think he has been cocky and disrespectful to Hillary.
The division is there. Like I said, Republicans win if Dems stay home.
Yeah, you're right. The hateful GOP spun HC's 3 a.m. commercial to mean that she thinks Obama lacks the experience to be president. They also spun HC's comments that BO plagiarized to mean that she thought BO plagiarized. What's more, they're now spinning HC's comments that McCain has more experience than Obama to mean that she thinks McCain has more experience than Obama. And weeks ago they construed Mrs. Obama's comments about her ambivalence towards possibly voting for a clinton ticket to mean that she'd be ambivalent about voting for a clinton ticket. It's terrible how these attack dogs are creating rifts where none exist. Moreover, Obama would be crazy to pick HC as VP. Moderate republicans and independents like Obama, many will probably vote for him. Attaching HC to his horse adds nothing in terms of general election support.
Hey Tweety, on the same 60 Minutes was a piece on doctors volunteering their services and people driving for miles and miles because they can't afford a mammogram or to get a tooth pulled. How about some coverage of that?
I'm sick and tired of this "horserace" crap. But then again, these talking heads need something to discuss 24 hours a day. I guess it's takes less brain power blabbing about this fluff than issues with real meaning.
On topic, Hillary is an idiot to even use the words "as far as I know", no matter what the context.
"as far as I know" is just an expression, an emphatic, like 'do you know differently? because you keep asking me this same question over and over again.'
It's not an equivocation, as the Hillary haters want to make it.
She had already answered the question in the negative at least eight times before these words.
a pot the conservative press loves to stir...
IF SHE WINS I WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN
IF HE WINS I WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN
i am an EDWARDS democrat and since MY LITTLE CANDIDATE didn’t win the primary i’m going to take my balls and go home and cry and pout and kick the floor, holding my breath until i turn colors and mommy comes in to rub my back and tell me it will all be okay
IT IS NO WONDER THE CRYBABY DEMOCRATS CAN’T WIN AN ELECTION…
… THEY RUN HOME AND DON’T VOTE IF THEY DON’T GET THEIR ITSY BITSY WAY
BOO HOO HOO….. TIME TO CALL THE WAAAAAAMBULANCE!!!
----as for McCain helping resolve the COLD WAR... i don't know but he does have experience which could prove that true..... he was around during the ICE AGE.... he was alive for the Civil War.... not hard to believe he could have added insight for the Cold War