FellOnEarth said:
Well, she's definitely getting desperate. I think Obama's response was a slam-dunk on the issue. Her characterization of his political mailers as "Republican tactics, right out of Karl Rove's playbook," may be accurate, but it's no different then what her campaign has been doing after months of attacking Barack. Is it disappointing that he's stooped to her level? No. He's simply leveling the playing field and is justified in using the truth as leverage, highlighting their differences. By saying that Obama is being unfair because he isn't pushing universal health care is besides the point. He does have a health plan, it just doesn't require everyone to pay into it. If she supported NAFTA touting it as one of the great successes of her husband's presidency, he has all the right to make that fact know, especially if it's hurt American jobs.
Now that he's fighting back and giving her a taste of her own medicine, she's crying foul when there is none.
My 3D analysis: Desperation, Death-Throes, Destruction. Hillary's campaign is past it's peak, plateaued and is now failing fast.
If being of "Karl Rove's playbook" involves showing some class, not making outrageous claims that are just one short step shy of claiming aliens ate my homework, not being shrill and relying on childish name-calling, and not racing to the first tv camera when someone insults you or makes some outrageous claim, then ALL politicians should be proud to use it. Unlike that lunatic Sheryl Crow attacking him at a "dinner" (sorry folks, that was just no class).
Uh, yeah... I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I don't exactly see how anything related to Karl Rove could be remotely synonymous with "class". I'm not even sure if I can figure out what your point is, but since were on the subject... If being classy means that your interpretation of the Hatch Act is to hatch your political plans from within the walls of the White House, then Rove is your man.
Sorry. Doesnt fly. Karl Rove was a Bush appointee, who, had he remained until the last day of Bush's presidency, would have immediately been replaced by a similar apointee of his successor. The Hatch act of 1939 was a law written to keep bureaucrats like State Department, FBI, CIA, Treasury Department and other employees WHO ARE NOT REPLACED every time a politician is replaced, from actively engaging in promoting anti-constitutional activities.
Fixed, emphasis added. Wheels within wheels, he was the enabler for multiple violations by federal employees working on his and the President's behalf, that is undeniable. Sadly, Congressional committees have been unable to penetrate the deception, obstruction or stonewalling of an administration thats about as transparent as the inside of Karl Rove's butthole*...
Actually, *I* got the impression that the Iraq invasion might have been preordained BEFORE 9/11. But Clinton was claiming that (and still does) Iraq was dangerous even during his administration.
LOL, MartinJ, when talking about Iraq, anything that happened during the Clinton administration doesn't count, and isn't supposed to be apart of the narrative!
Actually, *I* got the impression that the Iraq invasion might have been preordained BEFORE 9/11. But Clinton was claiming that (and still does) Iraq was dangerous even during his administration.
LOL, MartinJ, when talking about Iraq, anything that happened during the Clinton administration doesn't count, and isn't supposed to be apart of the narrative!
Actually, *I* got the impression that the Iraq invasion might have been preordained BEFORE 9/11. But Clinton was claiming that (and still does) Iraq was dangerous even during his administration.
LOL, MartinJ, when talking about Iraq, anything that happened during the Clinton administration doesn't count, and isn't supposed to be apart of the narrative!
What really inspires me to laugh out loud is when people use blog posts from 2004 to simplify Bill Clinton's stance on Iraq as some broad approval on Clinton's part of how badly Bush has fucked up the occupation and reconstruction of Iraq.
But hey, since you're both now big fans of Bill Clinton's take on Iraq policy, I guess you agree with him that there needs to be a "substantial drawdown" of U.S. military forces on Iraq. right?
"People agree with Clinton except for all of the things they don't agree with him about."
It's odd when people can come up with any number of extremely strained reasons why it's okay that Bush did this or that, but they act like it's some huge "gotcha" that Bill Clinton ever talked about Iraq being dangerous. I hear he made a slight miscalculation on which intern to go for, too.
Coyotemike
USA
May 2006
FEB 24, 2008 12:02 PM