About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

New Yorker's Lizza "gall[ed]" by Clinton's 60 Minutes response, but reported only small part of it

March 11, 2008 3:22 pm ET

SUMMARY: In a column about Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign, The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza stated that Clinton's "disingenuous remark on '60 Minutes' that [Sen. Barack] Obama was not a Muslim 'as far as I know' was especially galling." However, Lizza did not include Clinton's full comment, which made clear that she believes Obama is not a Muslim.

80 Comments

In a March 17 New Yorker magazine column, Washington correspondent Ryan Lizza stated of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, "Her disingenuous remark on '60 Minutes' that [Sen. Barack] Obama was not a Muslim 'as far as I know' was especially galling." In fact, during an interview on the March 2 edition of CBS' 60 Minutes, Clinton repeatedly made clear that she believes Obama is not a Muslim and likened the false rumors about Obama's religion to false rumors about her, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented. Clinton's first comment in response to 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft's initial question of whether she believed Obama was a Muslim was, "Of course not," and she followed the comment that Lizza reported by noting that she, too, has been the victim of "ridiculous rumors."

In addition, Lizza stated: "To watch Hillary Clinton during the final two weeks of the Ohio and Texas primary campaigns, as she defiantly ignored the pronouncements of her political demise and pounded away at her opponent in one more interview, at one more rally, was to bring to mind Jason or Freddy Krueger or the sitting governor of California, those Hollywood cyborgs and zombies who, despite bullets and stakes and explosions, will not under any circumstances be vanquished." Media Matters has documented other instances in which media figures have compared Clinton to a "zombie."

From the March 2 edition of CBS' 60 Minutes:

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.

KROFT: It's just scurrilous --

CLINTON: 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.

From Lizza's March 17 New Yorker column:

To watch Hillary Clinton during the final two weeks of the Ohio and Texas primary campaigns, as she defiantly ignored the pronouncements of her political demise and pounded away at her opponent in one more interview, at one more rally, was to bring to mind Jason or Freddy Krueger or the sitting governor of California, those Hollywood cyborgs and zombies who, despite bullets and stakes and explosions, will not under any circumstances be vanquished. Clinton's public performances were marked by an eerily unflappable persistence as she executed an ungentle two-pronged attack: raising doubts about the readiness of her young opponent, Senator Barack Obama, to be Commander-in-Chief and challenging the depth of his commitment to the bread-and-butter concerns of the middle class.

[...]

Clinton's victories and her rhetorical tactics have challenged Obama's principled refusal to play the rough-and-ready game which he brands "old politics." Her disingenuous remark on "60 Minutes" that Obama was not a Muslim "as far as I know" was especially galling. One foreign-policy adviser, the professor and author Samantha Power, betrayed a taste of the Obama campaign's anger at Clinton when she told The Scotsman that Clinton was "a monster. ... The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive." (Power, who also writes for The New Yorker, apologized and resigned from the campaign last Friday.)

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by snoopy (March 11, 2008 3:33 pm ET)
         
      And while we keep discussing what Hillary said, the republicans keep getting a free pass on their muslim comments to the press. What liberal media?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by socal7425 (March 11, 2008 6:15 pm ET)
           
        Seems to me that what is driving some of the Obama-loving pundits crazy is that Hillary didn't just give up and let Obama's anointment take place.  There is a desperation in their tone that says to me that they're scared to death the scenario won't play out exactly as they have scripted it.  As for the 60 Minutes interview, there is just nothing there.  When they start trying to read nuances into every utterance out of Hillary's mouth they just look ridiculous. 
        Report Abuse
        • Author by watershed (March 11, 2008 6:18 pm ET)
             
          The fact that the voters are defining the story of this campaign and not the media is truly a wonderful thing. But it has been happening to both sides. Clinton was all but the President a year ago.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by socal7425 (March 11, 2008 6:39 pm ET)
               

            The fact that the voters are defining the story of this campaign and not the media is truly a wonderful thing.

            Absolutely!  And you'd think the chattering class would get out more and talk to real people.  If they did they would find out that those of us on the Democratic side feel we have 2 first rate candidates and really prefer to let them pursue their campaigns without having the media run interference for either of them.  Whenever you have 2 quality candidates engaged in a tight race things always get heated..nothing wrong with that.  Whoever wins will have proven that he or she has what it takes for the general election in November.  What is NOT needed is for a commentator or network to take one candidate's campaign up as a crusade.  Thanks for the help and all that but really we'd rather you just BUTT OUT!

            Report Abuse
            • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 6:53 pm ET)
                 

              Actually most of us DO NOT want this dragged out beyond what is absolutely necessary

              The math is in Obamas favor and with proportional delegatation he will still be ahead come convention and in the meantime McCain gets to chill out, raise money and enjoy the show

              and this is how we lose 08

              Report Abuse
              • Author by doggone-ga (March 11, 2008 7:10 pm ET)
                   

                "Actually most of us DO NOT want this dragged out beyond what is absolutely necessary"

                I do.  I want them to HAVE to campaign in EVERY state.  I'm tired of primary campaigns like the GOPs.  What reason does their annointed candidate have to do any more than token campaigning in the remaining states?

                I want EVERY state in the union to have a say in who the Dem candidate is.  EVERY STATE.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 7:19 pm ET)
                     

                  Even if the math says Obama wins anyway

                  Look, Hillary is a G-damn major name, that she is behind against an upstart no one really heard much of before says it all...she had her chance to win and blew it

                  Now all Obama is doing is wasting money and time on something that is statistically over and again...McCain is free and clear

                  Is it worth it even if we lose???

                  And Iraq continues and another 1000 kids die in the sand

                  Just for one politicians ego?

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 7:21 pm ET)
                       
                    If this was tied right now I wouldn't push for her to step aside, to be clear
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by doggone-ga (March 11, 2008 9:00 pm ET)
                       

                    "Is it worth it even if we lose???"

                    Yes, it is.  Make them BOTH realize that every state counts, every vote counts, every VOTER counts.

                    "And Iraq continues and another 1000 kids die in the sand"

                    What does that have to do with the primaries?  The process is what it is and those kids will die regardless.  Cutting the primary season short will have no effect on that...but having in continue may have a GREAT effect on the election in November.

                    "Just for one politicians ego?"

                    I don't care one whit about anyone's ego.  I'm looking at this from the country's perspective.  Democrats have got to be made to realize that they need EVERY state, EVERY voter...and they need to fight for them.

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by classicliberal2 (March 12, 2008 4:08 pm ET)
                         

                      "Is it worth it even if we lose???"

                      Yes, it is.  Make them BOTH realize that every state counts, every vote counts, every VOTER counts.

                      You're missing the point, Doggone-GA. Hillary Clinton can not win, at this point--numerically, she has been out of this race for five weeks, now. Obama has a big lead in delegates, a big lead in the popular vote, and, as of Mississippi, has now won the majority of the states--that's only going to continue as this goes on. Clinton's strategy, for at least the last five weeks, has been merely to suck up enough votes to ensure that Obama can't get a clear win--something at which she has now succeeded--in the hopes of going to the convention and getting party bosses--the superdelegates--to overturn the democratic outcome. By saying this should continue, IOW, you aren't making sure that "every state counts, every vote counts"--you're actually enabling a situation in which the votes of the public could be taken away by party bosses.

                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by classicliberal2 (March 12, 2008 4:07 pm ET)
                         

                      "Is it worth it even if we lose???"

                      Yes, it is.  Make them BOTH realize that every state counts, every vote counts, every VOTER counts.

                      You're missing the point, Doggone-GA. Hillary Clinton can not win, at this point--numerically, she has been out of this race for five weeks, now. Obama has a big lead in delegates, a big lead in the popular vote, and, as of Mississippi, has now won the majority of the states--that's only going to continue as this goes on. Clinton's strategy, for at least the last five weeks, has been merely to suck up enough votes to ensure that Obama can't get a clear win--something at which she has now succeeded--in the hopes of going to the convention and getting party bosses--the superdelegates--to overturn the democratic outcome. By saying this should continue, IOW, you aren't making sure that "every state counts, every vote counts"--you're actually enabling a situation in which the votes of the public could be taken away by party bosses.

                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by billyblog (March 11, 2008 9:33 pm ET)
                       
                    Eden, I think I just saw you imply that because Hillary Clinton is continuing to run for the Democratic nomination she will be responsible for:

                    * A loss by the Dems in November 2008;

                    * The Iraq War continuing and another 1,000 of our kids dying in the sand.

                    If I have correctly interpreted what you wrote, let me ask whether you consider this statement:

                    1.  A measured judgment on your part?

                    2.  Just a wee bit over the top?

                    3.  Way over the top?

                    4. Your audition script for a guest appearance on The Colbert Report?

                    If the answer is 1 or 2, do you think you might provide a principled argument for this position?

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 10:35 pm ET)
                         

                      Dogone-

                      So how does she win mathwise?

                      And since she cannot win mathwise what exactly is the value of the wasted campaign money and time better spent smashing McCain...if you haven't noticed even Bush beat us so I think we may need to be a tad more concentrated this year.

                      If McCain gets the advantage he needs, because Hillary can't put the party before herself, knowing full well she lost in states and delegates and can only be HANDED the nomination via Super Delegate fat cats, and McCain eeks this out then YES...100 more years of war guy will get people killed.

                      Losing is not an option

                      NOW BILLY

                      Good use of humor

                      Now read above and reply to the actual contention...and no, fretting over a thousand more dead is far from being overblown

                      but I thank you for playing and as a parting gift you get this 8 track player

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by doggone-ga (March 12, 2008 10:17 am ET)
                           

                        It is my understanding that as of the currect position NEITHER of them can get the delegates they need to win outright and no matter who has the higher count it's STILL going to come down to the Super Delegate.

                        And I would still want them to HAVE to campaign in EVERY state and put their case for the nomination before EVERY voter.

                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by classicliberal2 (March 12, 2008 4:00 pm ET)
                       

                    Just for one politicians ego?

                    You've hit the nail right on the head, Edenscape. Bravo.

                    Report Abuse
              • Author by socal7425 (March 11, 2008 9:14 pm ET)
                   
                I disagree.  During the time remaining in the campaign the Democrats get all the coverage and McCain clamors for media attention.  When the race is decided the Democrats will unite behind the candidate and Obama and Clinton will join hands and sing Kumbaya.  Regardless of how many wonks think this is getting so negative most citizens are not as wrapped up in it as we like to think.  When the general election comes and people really start paying attention I think you will see a major surge of support for the Democratic candidate..particulary if the economy continues to tank and McCain runs on a war platform that looks like Bush on steroids..which is what he appears to be planning.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by carlileb5935 (March 11, 2008 6:27 pm ET)
             

          "There is a desperation in their tone that says to me that they're scared to death the scenario won't play out exactly as they have scripted it."

          So true Socal. The proof is right here at MMFA-- the Hillary-haters have regrouped. Their venom and outrage at any criticism of their candidate has become really intolerable the last week or so.

          They are clearly on the defensive-- and they have very thin skins, the whole lot of them. 

          I can't believe some of the paranoid nonsense I have been reading here about "the Clintons." Because of these people, we will lose in November.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 6:55 pm ET)
               

            How can we be desperate is we are WINNING states and delegates

            BTW has Hillary told the media that Texas no longer counts as she just lost it or is it a given

             

             

            Report Abuse
            • Author by socal7425 (March 11, 2008 9:19 pm ET)
                 

              How can we be desperate is we are WINNING states and delegates?

              Exactly!  Why not settle down and let the process take its course.  If you really are winning what's the problem?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 10:37 pm ET)
                   

                Its called wasted money, it doesn't grow on trees

                And you will see the Clinton slings at Obama recycled via the McCain campaign, nothing like being dissed by someone on your own dam team to highlight in tv ads

                Report Abuse
              • Author by classicliberal2 (March 12, 2008 4:14 pm ET)
                   

                Exactly!  Why not settle down and let the process take its course.  If you really are winning what's the problem?

                Y'know, I keep telling myself that Hillary Clinton supperters, even though their support for Clinton is evidence of a serious character flaw, can't possibly be as cretinously stupid as they sound. When one of them asks a question like that, though, it does sort of reinforce the conclusion to which I've long been leaning.

                Report Abuse
    • Author by Governor (March 11, 2008 3:35 pm ET)
         
      It's a little known fact that Lizza thought Lincoln's "...AS WE UNDERSTAND IT." close to his "Right Makes Might" speech to be totally distasteful and a real slap in the face to the American people.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by markcyst20051409 (March 11, 2008 3:46 pm ET)
         
      and the hits just keep on comin
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (March 11, 2008 3:52 pm ET)
         
      Jeeez, I wish this story would just go away...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by anotheramerican (March 11, 2008 3:58 pm ET)
           
        Irony, they gotta keep playing the 'victim' card. By my count this is the fifth thread on the same subject... and we haven't even gotten to a K.O.'s WPITW.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Governor (March 11, 2008 4:02 pm ET)
             
          It's the 10th thread, as there have been 10 false media reports on the 60 Minutes interview.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 4:16 pm ET)
         
      this could all be avoided by simply quoting the entire conversation,  it is not that long.  you can pull a couple of words out of any conversation and make it seem what it is not.  those doing so are the dishonest ones.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Clevenative (March 11, 2008 4:57 pm ET)
           
        And that's why they deserve a story here. You can't use logic with liars, so don't even try. Life's full of sensible logical solutions that people refuse to see.:(
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Appleboy (March 11, 2008 5:02 pm ET)
           
        I'm not even sure it's dishonesty. I believe most of the fools in the media have not even heard Hillary's entire answer... and the others who have are indeed dishonest.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Chromium (March 11, 2008 5:17 pm ET)
           

        this could all be avoided by simply quoting the entire conversation,  it is not that long.  you can pull a couple of words out of any conversation and make it seem what it is not.  those doing so are the dishonest ones.

        I could not agree with you more!!

         

        In fact, Mefirst, I am going to cut your words and will be ready to paste them into one of my responses the next time a PROGRESSIVE site does it to a CONSERVATIVE! 

         

         

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 6:00 pm ET)
             
          good, you go for it.   when someone complains about things taken out of context on here, someone else will point out the extensive transcripts available.  so i assume your complaint is not here.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 6:48 pm ET)
               
            by the way, obama himself today directly accused the "clinton campaign" of sending that photo to drudge.  if he knows, he needs to let hillary know, because she said she would fire anyone who did so.  if he does not know, he needs to withdraw the accusation.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 6:57 pm ET)
                 

              Well she didn't fire Wolfson over the Ken Starr bit

              and Ferraro is still on the trail

              so I'm not so certain that she will fire anyone.....but I digress, if Obama said it and I haven't seen it yet then yes, he should ante up proof

              Report Abuse
              • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 8:17 pm ET)
                   

                here it is.  in the last debate he said the matter of the photo was closed, now he is directly accusing her "campaign" of distributing it.  not to mention that obama's campaign manager has said she has an "inexplicable unwillingness" to say obama is not a muslim. 

                http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5017324

                Report Abuse
                • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 10:39 pm ET)
                     
                  cool, agreed, he should supply the proof
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by classicliberal2 (March 12, 2008 4:21 pm ET)
                       

                    cool, agreed, he should supply the proof

                    He didn't make the assertion. Drudge's cited source was an email from Clinton staffers. Clinton insisted she, personally, knew nothing about it, and he took her at her word, but he's never absolved the Clinton campaign of the deed. 

                    Report Abuse
                • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 11:25 pm ET)
                     
                  and obama accused clinton and her campaign of "leaking" the photo.  what has become totally clear since drudge put it out, is that the photo has been around for awhile.  it was hardly any secret. 
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 11:31 pm ET)
                       

                    I do wonder why I've never seen it before...

                    But again, if Obama has no proof that she leaked it or propogated it in any way then he should retract that statement, I don't disagree

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 11:46 pm ET)
                         
                      I also believe Ferraro should be removed for her ridiculous comments, so far Clinton has denounced them, hopefully Ferraro will just step down tommorow...saying someone is winning just because they are black, what kind of BS is that
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by mefirst (March 12, 2008 7:03 am ET)
                         

                      the photo was used by the tabloid national examiner weeks before it appeared on drudge and was being posted on right wing web sites before.  hard to be "leaking" anything that was already out there.  but in any case, hillary said she would dismiss anyone who was involved.  so let's see if the press is as dogged about asking obama to put up or shut up. 

                      http://www.nypost.com/seven/02262008/news/nationalnews/pic_is_turban_warfare_99303.htm?page=0

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by mefirst (March 12, 2008 7:16 am ET)
                           

                        and it was obama's chief strategist who said that hillary has shown her "own inexplicable unwillingness" to deny obama is a muslim, which is totally untrue.   why is he not being questioned about that statement?

                        http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/11/obama-adviser-says-clinton-must-repudiate-backers-comments/

                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by edenscape246494 (March 12, 2008 7:49 am ET)
                           

                        Again, I'll say unless he has direct proof that the Hill machine put this photo out he ought not make the claim, however, after reading your article I can see why he was suspicious...the same reason I am

                        From your NYPOST link 

                        "In December, two Clinton volunteers in Iowa resigned after forwarding e-mails stating Obama is a closet Muslim planning to destroy America. "

                        Now I have a question for you, with volunteers, staffers and fundraisers all saying things that are off color do you believe A. that it is still far far fetched to take Hills soft denials with a grain of salt or do you think she is having trouble in all her experience hiring competent, manageable people

                        Obama's monster spouting moron was let go, Wolfson and Ferraro still have jobs...

                         

                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by classicliberal2 (March 12, 2008 4:33 pm ET)
                             

                          Again, I'll say unless he has direct proof that the Hill machine put this photo out he ought not make the claim, however, after reading your article I can see why he was suspicious...the same reason I am

                          From your NYPOST link 

                          "In December, two Clinton volunteers in Iowa resigned after forwarding e-mails stating Obama is a closet Muslim planning to destroy America."

                          Again, Drudge's cited source was email from Clinton staffers. One can rightly slam Obama for taking Drudge at his word (an admittedly dubious business), but Drudge--not Obama--is the source for the claim that it came from the Clinton campaign. The pose of offended innocence from Clinton's supporters, after they've run the kind of campaign they have, is hilarious, at best. 

                          <>
                          Report Abuse
            • Author by classicliberal2 (March 12, 2008 4:27 pm ET)
                 

              by the way, obama himself today directly accused the "clinton campaign" of sending that photo to drudge.  if he knows, he needs to let hillary know, because she said she would fire anyone who did so.  if he does not know, he needs to withdraw the accusation.

              He isn't the one who made the accusation. Drudge's cited source is an email from Clinton campaign staffers; that's what it's been all along.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by IRONY 101 (March 11, 2008 5:34 pm ET)
           

        Perhaps it might end if Barack Obama simply said: I do not believe Hillary meant any harm...as far as I know.  ;>) 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (March 12, 2008 1:39 am ET)
             

          Perhaps it might end if Barack Obama simply said: I do not believe Hillary meant any harm...as far as I know.  ;>) 

          LOL

          Report Abuse
    • Author by doggone-ga (March 11, 2008 5:45 pm ET)
         
      Personally...I don't think the mistake was in saying "as far as I know"...*I* think the BIG mistake she made was in trying to answer the FIRST question.  The whole thing should have been, and should be, dealt with by saying: "it's not my opinion that matters.  If you want to know if he's a Muslim, why don't you ask HIM?" and then refuse to answer at all any further questions on the subject.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by watershed (March 11, 2008 5:58 pm ET)
           
        Well, actually, since her campaign had been using "Muslim" in their letters, and possibly sending out pictures of Obama in a turban, the question is well deserved.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 6:02 pm ET)
             
          could you name those in her "campaign" who were doing what you claim?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by carlileb5935 (March 11, 2008 6:29 pm ET)
               

            Don't even try to deal with these Obama maniacs. They just make things up.

            That's all they've got. Fantasies about their messiah.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 6:52 pm ET)
                 

              Carlil do you have anything to back that up with...we Obamamanaiacs are ahed in the polls, we are winning both states and delegates, gonna win again today

              And Hillary is behind and the only way she can win now is if the superdelegates HAND it to her, you know, fat cats and party insiders like her husband and Spitzer

               

              Report Abuse
              • Author by carlileb5935 (March 11, 2008 8:39 pm ET)
                   

                Big whoop Obama wins today. Blacks in Mississippi engage in reverse racism, nobody else supports him there, and that means something...?

                Like what Carville said yesterday on CNN-- great point-- just how many Idahos are equal to California....? 

                Report Abuse
                • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 9:05 pm ET)
                     
                  i am going to disagree on the reverse racism.  inappropriate. 
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 10:41 pm ET)
                       

                    I agree ME that Carlil comment is overblown

                    Now Carlil, riddle me this, no matter who the nominee is, don't we always win California?  That's like getting excited that Hillary carried that big swing state Massachusetts...get a grip.

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 11:22 pm ET)
                         
                      don't you think the fact that obama proposed banning handguns will hurt him in the red states?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 11:38 pm ET)
                           

                        I'm not sure guns will play this year

                        Here's what I picture...Obama gets any state we always get, the tried and true blues...I feel he has a great chance at picking up a few swings against McCain and possibly a Red or two

                        See McCain has the same problem Hillary has...McCain has a maverickish record, hardcore GOPers may sit this one out, Hill is a hawk, hardcore peace Libs may sit this out

                        After the 04 lose to Bush I believe we need every vote we can get

                        Guns may play though...me I think Obama goes a trifle far there but it does reinforce his lib creds which is ok by me

                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by watershed (March 11, 2008 10:49 pm ET)
                       

                    It is innappropriate. Then why is Geraldine Ferraro, in the Clinton finance committee, saying it?

                    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/12/2187222.htm?section=world

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 10:50 pm ET)
                         
                      Yep...Clinton must fire that nut or she'd look like a 'monster' to reference recent news
                      Report Abuse
        • Author by doggone-ga (March 11, 2008 6:21 pm ET)
             

          "Well, actually, since her campaign had been using "Muslim" in their letters, and possibly sending out pictures of Obama in a turban, the question is well deserved."

          No, it isn't...and it never will be.  If they want to know if he's Muslim ASK HIM.  Who cares what anyone else THINKS about it?  She fell into the trap on the FIRST question...but even the questioner was too stupid to see it and thinks the "trap" was the answer to the last question.

          If they want to know about what her campaign sends out...then ask about THAT, don't ask what she THINKS about his religion.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by watershed (March 11, 2008 6:23 pm ET)
               
            If her campaign has been directly invovled in smearing him by playing off fears of Muslims, by spreading, yes, the belief that he is a Muslim, the question "Do you believe he's a Muslim?" is absolutely justified.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by carlileb5935 (March 11, 2008 6:29 pm ET)
                 
              I love the 'If."
              Report Abuse
            • Author by doggone-ga (March 11, 2008 7:16 pm ET)
                 

              "If her campaign has been directly invovled in smearing him "

              "IF" isn't good enough.  Where's the proof?  No proof, no justification.  And even IF it's true...why should anyone care what she THINKS about his religion?  If you want to know, ask HIM...not her.

              You want to know about smears?  Ask about THOSE...not about what she THINKS of his religious beliefs.  Again, and always, if you want to know that...ask HIM.

              Report Abuse
    • Author by watershed (March 11, 2008 6:06 pm ET)
         

      http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/12/05/clinton_campaign_volunteer_out.html

      Report Abuse
      • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 6:45 pm ET)
           
        a "volunteer county coordinater in iowa"?  whom she fired.  that's your proof?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by watershed (March 11, 2008 6:48 pm ET)
             

          Why, is it not valid?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by mefirst (March 11, 2008 6:59 pm ET)
               
            how many thousands of people do you suppose have been involved in these campaigns on a county level?
            Report Abuse
        • Author by watershed (March 11, 2008 6:53 pm ET)
             
          This "county coordinator" is also a member of Clinton's Iowa Women's Leadership Council.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 10:49 pm ET)
               

            We cannot just dismiss this because its a small timer

            There is also Wolfson and Bill Shaheen and Ferraro

            I agree that Obama should not say Hill leaked the photo without proof

            But on the other hand I cannot say that three plus staffers doesn't either A. suggest a pattern of dropping bombs through underlings or B. hiring incompetent folks you cannot manage

            neither is good

            Report Abuse
    • Author by solonswine (March 11, 2008 6:29 pm ET)
         
      http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/03/11/beck.liberal.media.cycle.cnn
      Report Abuse
      • Author by edenscape246494 (March 11, 2008 7:00 pm ET)
           

        YO  SWINE

         

        Did you just link to Beck and think that was gonna get traction in these parts...man alive, are you serious, I clicked the link and after he said Liberals seven times in one sentence I clicked it off

        Beck makes CNN look bad

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (March 11, 2008 6:58 pm ET)
         
      IT"S Back. And apparently short of breath. Find a mate and a lot of that discomfort will go away.
      Report Abuse