The problem is not that Hillary said that Obama was unqualified

[paperbag_ princess]

The problem is that Obama has not been able to defend the criticism. That is why everyone is angry. She has just poked at what was already a weak spot.

You can rant and rave and call her a witch and a monster. You can scream from the roof tops that she is dividing the party and has crossed some imaginary line....but the simple truth is...

If Obama can not easily defend himself by explaining what makes him qualified then we have no business sending him up as our nominee.

[redqueen]

1. No... the problem is that she said McCain is more qualified.

Unbelievable that that is still being dodged.

[paperbag_ princess]

4. he is more qualified to lead this nation

He will just lead it in the wrong direction..

[zulchzulu]

11. So if you're an old codger who's pro-life and a warmonger, you're "qualified"?

James Buchanan had LOTS of experience. So does Dick Cheney... is that "qualified"...

[paperbag_ princess]

24. why are Obama supporters intentionally obtuse about this?

There are many qualifiers to be president.

Experience is one of them...Are they qualified to lead? The very next question is...Where will they lead us? dems=good rethugs=bad

or you can ask them in reverse:

Where does Obama want to lead us? A: good place
Is he qualified to lead us there?

[walldude]

28. Name all of Hillary's foreign policy accomplishments.

Please, if she is so much more experienced please list her accomplishments in foreign policy. Her staff couldn't do it can you?

[walldude]

29. Name all of Hillary's foreign policy accomplishments.

Please, if she is so much more experienced please list her accomplishments in foreign policy. Her staff couldn't do it can you?

I agree that Obama is inexperienced, which is exactly what Obama supporters want. Something new and fresh. Good luck with your status quo vote :eyes:

[zulchzulu]

71. Being in DC a LONG time is not necessarily a reason that someone can be President

As for qualifications to lead, Obama has proved that with his 12 years in legislative positions. He is also someone who many find inspirational and a change from the has-beens.

Put it this way. Let's say you have three people at your place of work who are candidates for an upper-management position. One has been there a lot of years and is for taking the company in a direction that will not be good for the future of the company. Another pads her resume with her husband's gig at the company and is on record agreeing with the older dude. The other candidate offers a real change in direction as well is a fresh start from the old crap.

Who is more qualified? If the company wants to veer off course, pick the old guy. Or pick the resume padder if you want nothing to get done. Or pick the one that is actually MORE qualified than the resume padder AND gets along with more people.

[democrattotheend]

27. I disagree

He does not have any more executive or management experience than Clinton or Obama. The only thing any of them has managed is their campaign (well, and their Senate offices), and of the three campaigns, Obama's is the only one that has not gone bankrupt.

In terms of national security, McCain may be more qualified in terms of years of service, but I don't think experienced and qualified are the same thing. McCain has been known to have a bad temper, and I am not sure he has the right judgment or temperament to be a good commander in chief. He has also made a lot of bad decisions as a senator, such as his decision to be a cheerleader for the Iraq war.

What I really like about Obama is his willingness to seek different opinions before making a decision. Groupthink syndrome has been one of the biggest problems with the Bush administration, and Obama's willingness to listen to dissenting opinions and even seek them out tells me that he has the right approach to making critical decisions, including national security emergencies at 3 in the morning.

[jgraz]

60. He IS more qualified.

Unless you count character and judgment. And sanity.

[cali]

76. Wrong. Experience does not always equal qualified.

There are dozens of long serving law makers who have "experience". That doesn't make them qualified. It's just absurd to think it does.

[Recursion]

2. To me, the biggest problem is that she thinks she is qualified

And they make the media shut up anytime they ask her to justify that.

[Alter Ego]

8. Exactly.

This nebulous claim of "experience" is going to lose steam fast, and it will be completely deflated if by some stroke of fate Hillary gets the nomination and has to face McCain.

The Republicans claim that they will make the Smear Boat Liars like a public service announcement if Obama gets the nod, but they have spent YEARS planning for a Hillary candidacy. Don't fool yourselves into thinking she'll walk to the Presidency.

[paperbag_ princess]

12. She stands up much better to McCain on this issue

but you are right that it is an uphill battle for her.

My real concern..is not what the RW is going to use for smear...they would find and twist anything....

My real concern...is that we should not be sending up a nominee with no experience. It is not just about whether or not we can win...it is about actually doing a good job when you are there!

I am sure Obama's intentions are good...but what does that matter in the scheme of things?

[elehhhhna]

72. THANK YOU! She wouldn't be in the race had she not been one of the women Bill slept with.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

94. she is thifty with the truth

she pumps herself up about her experience but one day it's going to burst.

[TwilightGardener]

3. He has explained himself, and made a case for himself, time and time again,

and everywhere he goes. He's made it very clear that good judgment on foreign policy and war is more vital than "experience" like Hillary's and McCain's that leads to bad decision-making. Remember, it was Hillary that now says Bush was fooling her, Condi was fooling her, she thought she was voting for inspections and diplomacy, she thought she was voting for the Hagel version of the IWR, etc. etc. McCain thought the Iraq War would be a glorious cakewalk. That's the kind of experience Obama uses to prove his point.

[paperbag_ princess]

5. I have heard what he is saying

He is saying experience is not neccessary...I think that completely false....as do many many Americans.

[Drachasor]

9. So Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy are no good?

Because they didn't have much experience either. Many of them less than Obama.

Check your dang facts!

[paperbag_ princess]

19. most Americans imo are not willing to just go on faith

that Obama will be one of the greatest presidents ever....we live in the information age....they want proof and assurance

[Drachasor]

25. You mean like Buchanan or Hoover (two of our worst Presidents ever)? Experience means little

Highly experienced candidates have been our worst Presidents. Ones with little experience have been some of our best. Maybe Obama will be somewhere in the middle, but the point remains that it is a poor indicator of Presidential performance. Judgment seems like a better indicator, in all honesty, and perhaps how well you run an executive position (which Hillary, Obama, and McCain have never had) -- that said many of our great Presidents were never executives and some of our worst were.

"Experience" is so overrated it isn't even funny.

[paperbag_ princess]

41. we haven't had any opportunity to even see his judgement

He is basing it on the fact that he opposed the war...but has said publicly that he did not know what he would have done.

That is his big proof of judgement...otherwise we just have to believe him.

I don't hold mistakes against candidates...imo it is the body of work...and that is what I want to see in a candidate before he is put up as our nominee.

[Drachasor]

47. That's not true at all

He said he opposed the war, and he did. When he said he wouldn't know what he had done, that was while Kerry was running for President (and it was a political necessity that he didn't undermine Kerry).

He is a huge proponent of open government and transparency. That's good judgment.

He said we should go after terrorist targets wherever they are. Hillary/McCain have disagreed, but military experts agree with Obama. The current administration went after such targets in Pakistan and no one on the planet thought that was out of line (even the Bush administration gets things right sometimes). That's good judgment.

He gets rid of people that say outrageous things, rather than keeping them around out of misplaced loyalty. That's good judgment.

Time and time again he's shown very good judgment and his ability to learn from mistakes very quickly. Those are qualities we need in a leader (the fact that he is so inspiration is a huge boon as well).

[amborin]

88. those are not examples of good judgement

they're statements of what Obama says he wants to do

but what has he accomplished already, and what decisions has he already made and acted on that indicate good judgement?

what are some examples of these?

there are actually actions which suggest he has "boneheaded bad judgement"

such as participating in ANY real estate transaction with Rezko, long after knowing Rezko was corrupt

[Drachasor]

89. Having a platform and statements you make certainly can be evidence of good judgment

And if the best you can do is have one example of bad judgment, then that certainly speaks well of his judgment overall. You can look at his senate record for examples of good judgment as well. He started and helped pass the most comprehensive ethics reform since Watergate. He noticed the problems with our military hospitals and helped fix them. He voted for banning cluster bombs in civilian areas (Hillary voted for it). He has numerous examples of actions, positions, words that support his good judgment (and in particular the fact he has better judgment than McCain and Hillary).

He has also run an excellent campaign, and that requires a number of management and judgment skills. This compares quite favorably to Hillary's campaign management/judgment too.

[amborin]

92. good judgement === good decisions, implemented

no, i can list many examples of poor judgement

such as watering down the nuclear waste in the drinking water bill....after accepting lobbying donations from a major illinois nuclear reactor corp, exelon.....thereby crossing out the language in the bill that would require advance notice to illinois citizens if there was a spill in their drinking water

and many other examples.....

the probmem is, his senate record is very thin...

so you would need to provide much more evidence than simply saying he helped do this or wanted to do that......

having a platform is one thing: having acted on those is another

running a campaign is not solid evidence: candidates have a multitide of handlers and campaign operatives...the candidates and their legislative history are separate

[BlackVelvet04]

61. You're changing the argument....

by saying experience isn't necessary.

[Drachasor]

77. Did you even read the post I was responding to?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5042669&mesg_id=5042767

"He is saying experience is not necessary...I think that completely false....as do many many Americans."

[RaleighNCDUer]

63. There is never ironclad proof. There are no assurances.

There are no guarantees in life.

And experience is no guide for future accomplishment.

James Buchannan was one of the most experienced men in the nation. And his experience gave us the Civil War, which killed more Americans than any 3 American wars combined.

[emilyg]

22. JFK had lots of experience.

[Drachasor]

30. 8 years in the senate is not "lots of experience"

Also he had no experience in the State senate (so Obama actually has more experience in political office, for what little that is worth).

[oasis]

26. Each of those 4 presidents had a long list of accomplishment before achieving

the presidency. They weren't media creations like Rock Star Obama..

Check those facts.

[Drachasor]

33. A long list of accomplishments? Maybe Theodore Roosevelt, but none of the others. Check YOUR facts

Abraham Lincoln was a one-term STATE senator and a lawyer. He got famous from the Lincoln-Douglass debates for Congress (but he lost the election) or accomplishment.

JFK wrote a book (that he won the Pulitzer for) and had 8 years as a Senator. Beyond that he was in the military. That's not lots of experience or accomplishment.

Franklin Roosevelt was a State Senator for 3 years, and then became the assistant secretary of the navy. He then worked as a lawyer after being a Vice Presidential candidate once. That's not lots of experience or accomplishment.

Theodore is the only exception to that.

[oasis]

84. Um sorry,but the accomplisments of past presidents doesn't diminish on your say so.

Duh! JFK was a war hero in the "Big One". :dunce:

[Drachasor]

90. Their short records speak for themselves

He performed well in the Military, but those accomplishements don't really pad his experience resume. Not in the sense that Hillary Clinton and others talk about experience.

I assume you agree with me regarding Franklin Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln, however. Two presidents is more than enough to prove my point.

[oasis]

91. You have proven your point in your mind only. And please don't

assume that I agree with you on Lincoln and FDR. You have also deflated their accomplishments in order to elevate Obama.

Your flimsy argument falls apart under the weight of the scores of autobiographies that were written about those four presidents.

And yes, many dealt with their history before they became president.

Not one of them was catapulted to greatness on the basis of one speech in front of a partisan audience.

[amborin]

86. jfk was not a good president, despite the myth

[TwilightGardener]

13. He actually has some experience. He does sit on the FRC, and

he has a degree in International Relations. He has more foreign policy experience than Bill Clinton and GWB, and more than John Edwards did.

[paperbag_ princess]

16. I didn't support Edwards for the same reason

GWB lack of foreign experience got us where we are today...not a strong argument.

at least Bill had some executive experience ...of which Obama has none.

[TwilightGardener]

21. Hillary doesn't have much foreign policy OR any exec experience--

so...that's not much of an argument. Unless you count her Sinbad trip, or her "peace-brokering" in Ireland, which the Irish are now mocking as a lie. She is on the Armed Services Cmte., but that's not really foreign policy, and it's not military strategy either.

[amborin]

87. the Irish are praising Hillary's participation

in the peace talks ...no time now to provide articles...but they are

and she's traveled worldwide and interacted with world leaders on numerous occasions

she has a very strong senate record, and she's brilliant

she's viewed by the electorate as a tough fighter, that also helps her

[amborin]

85. but

what good judgement has Obama shown on foreign policy that really holds up to scrutiny?

yes, he spoke out against the war....but did he vote against it?

if he had actually voted against it, that would count a lot

just making a speech about it doesn't add up to that much

Obama has only made one foreign trip as senator, to London, very briefly

other than that, zip

yes, he's lived as a child in indonesia

but i've lived places, too, as a child and it doesnt' make me or anyone qualified to go around the world negotiating with world leaders on various issues

[Bigleaf]

6. No, the problem is our 2nd place finisher in the Primary wrote and will star in

a John McCain GOP Commercial fucking over our nominee. That's the problem.

[paperbag_ princess]

7. that is BS

She has said over and over that McCain will lead this country in the wrong direction.

[Bigleaf]

10. Unfortunately that's not all she said.

[paperbag_ princess]

14. what she said is the truth..

I happen to agree.

[Bigleaf]

15. What she said is a crock of shit.

[paperbag_ princess]

17. dupe- sorry nt

[paperbag_ princess]

18. lol ...whatever nt

[dbmk]

80. So the truth is ..

that _all_ Obama has is a speech from 2002?

Talk about mocking your teammate in comparison to your, supposedly, common adversary.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

20. Apparently, the problem is that you only LISTEN to Clinton

If you actually listened to what Obama says, you wouldn't be making the claim that he "can not easily defend himself".

[paperbag_ princess]

31. not true

I am not an Obama hater. I think he is brilliant and talented.

His answers are that he has judgement and therefore does not need as much experience...and that if he had Washington experience then that would have meant that his ideas had all died...and that he was a state legislator and community organizer...

oh and the newest one is that Hillary doesn't have experience either.

I just think that our nominee should have a strong resume and not have to explain away his lack of one.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

32. Obama has more elected experience than Hillary

So explain why Hillary insists it's the opposite?

[paperbag_ princess]

39. because most people including myself don't give a hoot

about state legislator experience. I am sure that there is a local town council person somewhere in America who has been elected 20 times and served their whole lives...that doesn't mean that they are qualified to be president.

[DearAbby]

23. Lets see what she said

Experience list

McCain: Lifetime of experience....................check
Clinton: Lifetime of experience...................check
Obama: a speech in 2002........................... ?

Obama just born 6 yrs ago? Has no lifetime experience? Just fell out of the sky and delivered a speech? What she did was unforgivable. She endorced a Republican candidate over one of her own party. And what is worse, it was a blatant lie.

[paperbag_ princess]

35. she has said over and over and over and over

that McCain would take us in the wrong direction. I believe in taking a candidates message as a whole. Obama has not met the expectations of many voters in regards to experience. It is a fair comparison...and if Obama can not convince people otherwise then he has no business running.

She did not endorse McCain...you are intentionally misrepresenting her message for a gain for your candidate of choice.

[DearAbby]

43. Obama on his experience won me over...his MESSAGE has won me over.

What experience is Hillary claiming she has? Can you list them...just pretend you can win my vote by your answer. List for me Hillary's accomplishments, why you support her.


Edit: SHE ENDORSED MCCAIN, I dont see how in the hell you can defend that. She endorsed a REPUBLICAN over another Democrat. That is totally unforgivable.

[paperbag_ princess]

73. you are missing the point

You are not the only one he has to win over.....and how do we know that your standard isn't too low?

You keep saying she endorsed him...but that does not make it true.

I am not going to waste my time convincing you...nothing will and that is fine..but it was widely accepted that she has plenty of experience until Obama's experience was questioned...then instead of explaining why Obama is experienced and answering the question at hand, people have just tried to tear Hillary down.

Obama should be able to explain why he is qualified on his own merit. That is the point of the thread.

[DearAbby]

81. I have yet to see a fine list of Hillary's 35 yrs of accomplishments

I see yet another Clinton supporter avoiding this question. My standards in how I vote, are mine. I myself, is the only one I have to answer for. I believe my standards are high, It is the only time I have a voice in my government, and I don't take that vote for granted. Obama has earned my respect and my vote. His message and his manner in how he handles himself, against this smear campaign Clinton has been waging against him.

I was for Kucinich, then Edwards, now Obama. He was not at the top of my list. After researching and listening to him, I feel he is the better candidate for my vote. He meets my standards. Clinton does not.

But again, lets pretend you can sway my vote. Please list for me Clintons vast 35 yrs of accomplishments. Why does she and not Obama deserve my vote?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

56. Must you rely on facts? Is that all you have?

[paperbag_ princess]

74. or you could use all the facts and refrain from cherry picking her message nt

[Utopian Leftist]

34. You're totally wrong!

The PROBLEM is that she tacitly endorsed John McSame by claiming that his experience is more relevant to the Oval Office.

Amusingly, Barack has already brilliantly foiled her on this issue since he pointed out that his experience was valid enough to make her offer him the VP slot. I'd LOVE to see her try to weasel out of THAT flip-flop in a debate!

[GOTV]

36. I'm not angry n/t

[cali]

37. The problem isn't a problem for Obama, princess. Hilly screwed herself

but good by saying that McCain was qualified but Obama wasn't. And I love watching hilly screw herself. The blowback has arrived, princess. It arrived in the form of Pelosi's acerbic words yesterday. Antagonizing the most most powerful dem in the pary? Bad for poor dear hilly, and great for Obama. Pelosi controls a large block of House SDs. Now we know that they'll be voting for Obama. I saw hill's words as yet more proof that she's politically tone deaf. Thankfully, she won't be the nominee. She's a failure of a candidate.

[paperbag_ princess]

42. the problem is for our party and nation

There are those of us who still believe that someone should be qualified before being our nominee and our potential president.

[cali]

48. There are those that believe that Obama is qualified including people who know more than you

I trust Pat Leahy more than anyone else in Congress. He endorsed Obama. Ted Kennedy endorsed him. Generals have endorsed him. Lots of people who have far more information than you or I endorsed him. I personally do not think hillary clinton is one bit more qualified than Obama. I look not only at experience, but temperment and judgment. She fails miserable in the latter two categories. And you failed to address my point about blowback and Hillary's political tone deafness.

[rucky]

38. Nor has Hillary made the case that she's any more qualified.

but we know the implication is that when the red phone rings at 3am...

"Bill, could you get that?"

Which isn't really a bad thing. She should actually use it to her advantage, because if she tries to play the "more qualified" game on her own, it may win her the nomination, but she'll lose to McCain.

[paperbag_ princess]

45. tell that to the American publlic

They think she is ....which is my point.

I know that Obama supporters think that he is qualified...but just because he meets your standards doesn't mean that he really is qualified.

[cali]

49. Why do you think YOU are more qualified to judge that

than people like Kennedy, Dashle, Hart, Leahy, Feingold and hundreds of others? That's hubris. Oh, and you provide no evidence whatsoever that the American public at large agrees with you.

[paperbag_ princess]

52. I am just looking at all the polls of people who are voting based on experience

they are not going for Obama...

I get to be qualified to decide because it is my vote and my responsibility. He has to convince me...if he wants my vote. He has yet to do that.

[cali]

54. Most people aren't voting on the premise that experience is

most important. Furthermore, just because the majority of voters see her as more experienced, doesn't mean that they don't see him as experienced enough. And anyone who won't vote for the dem this fall is simply foolish.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

62. And only votes based on "experience" matter. nt

[rucky]

51. They do?

Or do you think they do?

I think the voters aren't concerned with experience. If they were, we'd have Biden vs. Richardson right about now.

I also think it's short-sighted to try and make the primary about experience, because both would lose to McCain on that quality.

[Raffi Ella]

40. ah,wow -

what a breath of fresh air in this mess of a forum - Thank you!Excellent post paperbag_ princess. :patriot:


K&R.

[Avalux]

44. Why should he defend such an absurdity? He addressed it and has moved on.

What makes Hillary so qualified - sleeping with Bill for 35 years? She's only attacking Obama on this because her experience doesn't pass muster.

[paperbag_ princess]

55. He has moved on..

but I mull over things awhile before I speak on them...in 2 weeks I will post about the race baiting lol

I have addressed her time a first lady in the thread already...we disagree obviously

[RaleighNCDUer]

46. He's a native-born American over 35. He's qualified.

I'm qualified.

Most people I know are qualified.

Most people I know are not capable. I believe he is capable.

Qualified and capable are two different things, and the requirements, qualifications, to be president are set real low.

How do you see him as being incapable?

[paperbag_ princess]

50. legal standards

Sure ...most all of us meet them...
but most people have a standard set for who they "hire" through their vote that is a bit higher.

every person's standard will be a little different....obviously Obama has met the standard of his supporters.

I would like to see proof of his judgment other than his war position.

That is where experience comes in....it is proof of judgment ...good and bad and how he would deal with his mistakes (which everyone makes)
I want to see proof that he is capable...I don't want to have to just believe him.

[MattBaggins]

64. He has to prove his worth?

I'm sorry but where exactly is the proof of Hillary's capabilities? What has she done to show me, she has met the standard?

Experience is a nice catch phrase, but Bush has had 8 years of experience as CiC, yet is still woefully unqualified for it. Hillary has engaged in behavior lately, that seems to indicate she is willing to rip apart our party to get her way. Why would she do less to the country? Her actions since Texas leave me seriously questioning her judgment.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

53. I think Hillary has said a lot more than just that Obama is unqualified. But if he is . . .

why would Hillary even CONSIDER Obama for VP. Hillary showing her true Rove colors again.

[paperbag_ princess]

66. I wanted him for VP

I wanted Edwards for Kerry's VP.

I personally think that a bit of training as VP is fine....others feel that they have to be ready day one...I disagree..

[SeaLyons]

57. Hear Hear!!!

:kick:

[libbygurl]

58. !

:kick: and rec!

[OnionPatch]

59. She hasn't proven that she's qualified, either.

In fact, she helped get us into this Iraq War mess.....I consider that a huge military and national security mistake. The facts show me that SHE is the one who is not qualified.

[ProSense]

65. No, that's your spin. The only people "angry" are whiners who can't accept that Hillary is losing

Obama's experience is out there (and is why he's leading):

It's the message, the movement and the management

It's 3 AM, and Hillary is exaggerating

Today he put Hillary on the defensive.

Obama: “Tough Talk is Not a Substitute for Sound Judgment”

[Tom Joad]

67. warmongers like clinton ain't fit to shit.

much less be president.

[hulka38]

68. I can explain to you that Hillary was either an idiot or a coward for

authorizing the invasion of Iraq and you can continue to think that that vote makes her more qualified. Likewise, Obama can't simply change the minds of the dimwitted and narrow minded. Unfortunately, there appears to be many more of these people within the party than I thought possible until recently.

[cbayer]

69. What a relief to see this thread.

Thoughtful discussion on an important topic with both sides behaving civilly (with just a few exceptions).

Must be nap-time for the bullies and thugs.

[Utopian Leftist]

70. It's over

The discussion of his experience is OVER. Get used to it. Hillary and several others in her campaign have implied that Barack would make a suitable Vice President. And common sense dictates that a VP MUST be ready to serve from day one.

So do Hillary supporters then confess that she lacks enough common sense and JUDGMENT to pick an appropriate Vice President or are they willing to admit that the whole "experience" (non) issue has been nothing but a red herring from the start?

Or do they perhaps just think that the American people are too stupid to recognize Hillary's hypocrisy on this subject yet?

[uponit7771]

75. Hillary has won the best campaign?!?! My goodness!!!

[dcindian]

78. quite honestly Clinton is unqualified to make that statement.

Remember Clinton is only one person and she is not Queen of the United States of America. Clinton may not like the fact that we run a democracy and it is we the people who get to make the choice of whether or not someone is qualified to be president.


I know democracy sucks but either live with it or leave. Maybe Clinton can buy an Island with all that Saudi oil money and be queen there.

[metalluk]

79. The problem is

that he IS underqualified and ill-prepared. McCain will hammer on the point incessantly.

[libbygurl]

82. Ssshhh...don't tell them that. 'Cuz he can walk on water, y'know. nt

[Tennessee Gal]

83. Absolutely right!

He is not ready.

I fear for the Democratic Party.

I fear for this country.

[Seabiscuit]

93. I wonder how he will defend himself when the media starts bringing up Rev. Wrights words. nt

[bling bling]

95. The problem is that Hillary needs to concede. That's all anybody wants to hear from Clinton.

Obama doesn't need to defend himself against Clinton anymore because she is not going to win this nomination. She can scratch and claw at his back but he's looking forward and just trying to ride this nightmare out until she finally gets the boot.

In the meantime, the Clinton supporters call him sexist and claim he "attacks" white women when he defends himself. He doesn't want to touch Clinton with a ten foot pole right now because she and her surrogates are hysterical toxic reactors and she has loud-mouth parrots everywhere that regurgitate her madness.

Obama is in a lose-lose situation if he says anything to Clinton. This is his party after-all. At least ONE of them remembers that we're all better off if we're not divided.