what a putz......Obama Blames Bill Clinton

[BenDavid]

In what may be Obama's most direct and aggressive criticism of Bill Clinton's presidency yet, the Obama campaign dropped a new mailer just before Super Tuesday that blasts "the Clintons" for wreaking massive losses on the Democratic party throughout the 1990s.

and how would I respond to this jiveass I would say, mr obama, if the Clintons are personally responsible for every yellow-ass, punk tutu'd Democrat who couldn't come up with the stones to fight the Republican bastards, then I submit the Clintons are personally responsible for everything GOOD that happened in that time period, too.

[LittleClarkie]

1. I would submit that he is at least partially right

as I think the Clinton organization, including people like Carville, is the antithesis of the 50 state strategy.

[Whisp]

2. perfumed republicans = the clintons. nt

[juajen]

9. Who signs your checks?

[Whisp]

15. eh?

[niceypoo]

8. Yeah, Bill Clinton did so horribly against the repukes

He was at 68% approval when he left office.

[LittleClarkie]

13. We're not talking about how he did

but about how many Democrats he was able to bring with him.

He was good at getting himself elected, to be sure. Coattails, not so much.

[Kahuna]

24. And Al Gore still lost. Go figure. nt

[DJ13]

3. "...that blasts "the Clintons" for wreaking massive losses on the Democratic party"

That is the truth.

The Democratic Party suffered loss after loss, from Congress to Governorships to Mayors with our so called "popular" Democratic President unable to provide any coattails whatsoever.

[LittleClarkie]

4. The Clintons were about getting the Clintons elected

and that was about it.

[jackson_dem]

5. Those 1994 losses were because Bill was an agent of change

I guess Obama would prefer Bill not have tried to get universal healthcare and done nothing about gays? That would have been the safe and "unifying" thing. This shows Obama's ignorance or deception. If he is serious about change he will run into the same resistance Bill faced. If he isn't he can remain popular and "win" but he is lying to his supporters.

I don't know where Obama was but in the 1996, 1998, and 2000 elections Democrats made a comeback and even tied the rethugs in the senate by the end of Bill's tenure. Gore ran a lousy campaign that distanced himself from the prosperity of the Bill years and that is why the selection happened. If it weren't for that Dems would have kept the White House and taken back Congress a lot earlier than 2006.

[Maccagirl]

20. Agent of change?

The health care initiative was a disaster and the only thing that unites gays and homophobes is "Don't Ask/Don't Tell"-they both hate it, only for opposite reasons. At the end of the day Bill Clinton changed NOTHING-because he was more worried about Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich than about his core supporters and the people whose interests he was supposed to serve.

[faithfulcitizen]

6. "jiveass"? oy!

[still_one]

16. That did have racial overtones didn't it /nt

[juajen]

7. My God, what perfidy!

The most wonderful years of my life were when the Clintons were in the White House. Glitterbama is going way, way too far. We dems have little to brag about, but Medicare and the Clinton years. Give me a freakin' break!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

25. I don't necissarily agree with you, but you get +100000 points...

...for using my favorite word: Perfidy!

(Actually, it would have been better if you called him "perfidous." That's even better.)

[Straight Shooter]

10. The handiwork of David Gibbs.

Barack, going along with it, hoping to get Bill into the limelight, hoping Bill will say something to boost Barack's ratings again.

Barack said some time ago he didn't know who he was running against. (*whine, whine*) Bill has been pretty quiet since South Carolina, but Barack still thinks Bill Clinton is his opponent for POTUS.

Maybe the Obama campaign can use some of those big-dollar contributions to buy Barack a big effing clue.

[JackORoses]

11. Bill's impeachment sure shwagged Al Gore off

[still_one]

12. Provide the full text so it can be judged on its own merits or demerits /nt

[Pirate Smile]

19. Here it is - accurate and factual but sshhhhh - don't point out these facts.

It doesn't even point out the damage done in the State Houses.

I think this is extremely important. I posted the following the other day when this issue first showed up:

This all leads back to the contrast between the Clinton dislike of the 50 state strategy and Obama's embrace of it.

Obama organizes, campaigns and fights for the votes of Democrats, Independents and even Republicans everywhere.

The Clinton campaign just wrote off all the caucus states - don't even care.

They have been fighting Dean on the 50 State strategy every step of the way and, if they win, it will be gone.

We will be back to only playing in the swing states and ignoring the rest of the country. The DNC will go back to being a mouthpiece for a Dem president instead of a national party trying to build the party and win at the local, state and federal levels.

This is a huge issue for Democrats. Do we want to go back to the old formula or move forward?

I can't believe there is any question about which way to go and who will lead us that way.

[Usrename]

28. Thanks, this is important, and the OP couldn't be more wrong.

Makes me want to ask, "What's wrong with these people?"

This is so simple and straightforward and also easy to verify. Maybe I've fallen into the clutches of some kind of cult or something.

:evilgrin:

[still_one]

33. Thanks, that does say quite a lot /nt

[Pirate Smile]

14. Link - why don't you show what it actually said. Did we not lose all those

Governorships, Senate seats and House seats? I seem to recall losing control of Congress. Is no one supposed to remember what happen to the Democratic party back then?

Triangulation worked great for Bill but not so great for the Democratic Party as a whole.

[JI7]

17. Clintons have no coattails

[krkaufman]

18. NAFTA and other measures are known to have sent voters from the party.

They decided that if neither party was going to look out for their economic interests, that they might as well vote for the party that was speaking for their social interests.

[NastyRiffraff]

21. Well, Obama is right about one thing...

He really doesn't know who he's running against.

Attacking Hillary on issues is legitimate; he's opposing her (as it's legitimate for her to do the same with him). He seems obsessed with Bill, just like the Right Wing Noise Machine was in the 90s.

[johnnydrama]

23. then does that mean

she really has 27 years of experience. You want to include those 8 years as big experience for her, but then when somebody says something about those years, you say that was Bill, not Hillary...

That's a little sketchy.

[kikiek]

29. I agree with someone else who said they are trying to draw him into the race again. Obama's

star is fading despite the hype, and he is obviously worried about the nomination to launch this type of attack. And when you look at the big picture McCain doesn't have to run against any Dem. The so called Democratic party is doing it for them. Pathetic campaign attacks like Obama is doing really is hurting us. His push for the it's me or nobody is bound to fail no matter who the nominee is. As the next generation of kids walk off to war we will only need to look in the mirror to find out who sent them. Egos are not in check. That is what disturbs me more than anything. Karl Rove is laughing his ass off.

[rodeodance]

22. Like i have sas--Obama will do anything to win.

[kikiek]

30. Spot on. It isn't Hillary who feels entitled. I think the whole campaign has an

underlying tone of misogyny.

[Independent-Voter]

39. That would be because you need to get a spine

And people wonder why Dems have a reputation for being pussies!

[Bluerthanblue]

34. wow- that is rich-

even more so, that you believe it-


:shrug:

[cali]

26. take your racist tinged language

and shove it hard up a certain orifice of yours. I wouldn't bother noting it or commenting on it if you hadn't had several threads locked and comment removed because they were blatantly racist. But you have. It's clear what you are. And it's oh so ugly. What a stained little mind you have.

[Radical Activist]

27. Its true.

That's what happens when you don't stand for anything.

[jakem]

31. mods= what about that anti-recommend button?

some of us would like to un-recommend this jiveass post.

[shenmue]

32. The Clinton administration was also responsible for unprecedented job growth and crime reduction.

Throw that back in his face, too.

[REDFISHBLUEFISH]

36. In fact they helped African Americans very much! Despite Republicans garbage!

[no name no slogan]

37. Helped them right into prison

Our prison population took off under the Clintons, even though crime rates in general were down. Young black males in particular were affected.

The Clinton presidency was undoubtedly inspired compared to what followed, but it wasn't that way for many members of America's underclass.

[kid a]

35. dang...i seriously don't know how i missed YOU- IGNORE

[jillan]

38. Blame the Clintons - isn't that a Republican line?

[Levgreee]

40. that doesn't look like an official mailer, what is your evidence that Obama sent it?