We heart hot mics

Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2007 1:50 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Democrats

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum and Carrie Dann
Hillary Clinton was the victim of an unknowingly unsilenced microphone after this morning's NAACP forum in Detroit. Junkies might just blow their eardrums out trying to catch what she was saying to John Edwards during the 45 seconds that her microphone was hot, but the audio was mostly drowned out by thanks from host Russ Mitchell and by an organist's rousing rendition of "God Bless America." But here's the tantalizing pieces that we picked out of the cacophony:

"But we've got to (inaudible) ... They are just being trivialized... You know, I think there was an effort by our campaign to do that. Somehow we got to get back to it. Because that's all we are going to do."

She then shared a quick handshake with her No.1 rival, chirping "Thanks, Barack!" and then another "Thanks Dennis!" to Kucinich.

Here's the kicker for the pundits and conspiracy theorists: Clinton turned back to Edwards and concluded, "So, our guys should talk."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

CLinton/Edwards in 08. LOL! The Queen of mean and the King of Clean.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 1:57 PM)

Don't think so, Jerry. My guess is she's interested in ginning up a united front for not doing some gay issues debate. Still can't believe somebody came up with that idea, lol. And talk about putting the Democrats in a box - do we go or not?

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:06 PM)

Jerry,

They are as opposite as oil and water. Plus Hillary Clinton will not run with a man that is better looking that she is.

Peggy, Mississippi (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:14 PM)

Paul, I heard they are doing the Gay debate next month, Hillary, Edwards and Obama. Unless things have changed in the last 24 hours. After all that firestorm about remarks about gay people earlier in the year, Edwards must be out of his mind for going on that debate. He will be grilled and served on a platter. Hillary will be grilled over the "don't ask, don't tell" law of her husband. And Obama, I really don't know what his stance is on gay issues, he would be the wild card in that debate

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:20 PM)

edwards/clinton might work for me, although I may have to swallow a little vomit while casting my vote, the more I see of clinton's cold calculating and deceptive campaign the more I realize she is the wrong person for the job, too replulicanist for me, reminds me of bush in way too many ways, but if she were vp she could be kept at bay when she goes off the deep end, it would be better for all concerned if she just dropped out, if she wins the nomination your next president will be either the repulsive rudy, or mitt the dog hater, man I would give $100 to know how much mitt pays for that hair-cut, reliable sources put it in the $3500 range, but it's a non-issue with the repubs candidates, the cost of the lexapro to keep that dog still on top of the car still is probably also quite burdens

MK,MO (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:28 PM)

Peggy, while she is doing the gay debates next month, maybe she can do with a makeover. I'm sure there will be lots of men offering both candidates expert advice for both.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:29 PM)

Yeah, I can't believe a bunch of tax-paying, candidate-contributing, rights-deprived election-year scapegoats would want a debate of their own, right Paul? How dare they...

Who exactly would such a debate hurt? Democratic candidates gladly take "gay" money and volunteers. They should address key issues to that community, just like they would to women, African-Americans, Hispanics, Jews, Catholics, etc.

The only gay-related questions asked in "regular" debates are "raise your hand if you believe in gay marriage." As citizens, gays deserve better (and don't all Americans?)

Gary, Des Moines, IA (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:29 PM)

Maybe she should ask Helen Thomas, that will put an end to the "looks" issue.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:31 PM)

I love the way Hillary gets Jerry's underpants all tied up in a knot. Face it Jerry boy ...america is ready for a BIG change .... we've given a white male conservative republican the chance to run this nation and what did we get in return .... a "make believe" war and almost 4000 dead americans. Laugh all you want ..... change is coming ...it will be a woman or person of color running this nation. You white male conservatives will just have to deal with it :)

Ricardo in California (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:36 PM)

Why is this posted? Tantalizing? Am I missing something, what conclusions can possibly be drawn from what you've posted?

mj, Milford, MA (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:38 PM)

Jerry's mirror must be a scary place!

Just Saying, Here, Now (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:42 PM)

Gary, not saying gays don't deserve their own debate. I'm just saying it isn't a good move for the Democratic field. Nothing personal, just politics.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:44 PM)

From a "make-believe war" (bush) to a "make believe president" (Hillary).

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:44 PM)

with a "make believe" president we may actually be able to minimize american deaths. Oh I forget that's not a concern of yours Jerry!

Ricardo in California (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 2:52 PM)

Ricardo, I don't know. Clinton never said the decision to invade Iraq was a mistake. She only criticized the management of the war. So why should we think she wouldn't make the same blunder? She might be tempted to show the Republicans how to do one "right."

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:04 PM)

The snippets heard with the mic still on can be speculated from now until the cows come home. But, the real peice of info to be had from those encounters is this: Hillary needs to step outside of her box to win. There is too much warmth in Obama and Edwards and Richardson for her to ignore. She has some baggage as anyone would have coming from a situation like hers. However, she can turn it around with some real public warmth. Her cold attitude will help her defend her positions with any of the GOP candidates (or, even with Newt, should he enter the fray). No one can snuff-out Hillary and get away with it. She can be one tough lady. However, she needs to also appeal to those people who are for Obama, Edwards and Richardson before she can win the nomination. Money alone will not win the primary. She will need to change her tune on Iraq and admit she made a mistake in voting for it since she was as hood-winked as anyone else in Congress with a (D) by their name.
It's anyone's guess who will win the nomination. I hope for an Edwards-Obama ticket, but I would also go for an Obama-Richardson ticket. Who will Hillary choose if nominated? Probably Richardson.

Nick, Ohio (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:11 PM)

Just another piece of S--- reporting from Applebaum and Dunn. If you can't substantiate a story while in the hell speculate on any of it? Why don't you two go work for The Star.

David, Chattanooga, Tn (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:34 PM)

David, this isn't reporting; it's blogging. Sure this is a little more gossipy than some of the blog entries, but anytime where a candidate tells another candidate "our people should talk," well, at least its interesting gossip.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:53 PM)

Paul, What we do is blogging. What they do is called reporting.

David, Chattanooga, Tn (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 4:18 PM)

This is not just gossip. By the end of the day, an expert in sound engineering will have eliminated the organ music from this tape, and we'll know exactly what they were discussion. If it's revealed that the two of them are teaming up already, Hillary's Black, female support will dry up immediately. They are only supporting her out of misguided affection for Bill Clinton and gender loyalty, but if it appears that the they are ganging up to defeat Senator Obama, they will abandon her. Let's see her take South Carolina or Flordia w/o that voting block.

Dee of VA (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 4:39 PM)

I saw the tape of this moment and as an Obama supporter I have to say nothing suspicious seemed to be behind the conversation.
Both Dennis Kucinch and Barack Obama were around for part of the conversation to shake hands and neither clinton or Edwards made any attempt to hide what they were talking about.
My guess is it probably has to do with something not so sneaky.

diane (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 5:05 PM)

By the looks of things, Paul is here all day long. This is probably his only way to communicate with the outside world. Leave him alone.

Gary Summerville, Provo UT (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 6:19 PM)

John Edwards said, "We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group."

I agree. The debates need to be smaller groups.

Hillary Clinton said "We've got to cut the number...They're not serious."

Clinton was more blunt. I'd like to know what John Edwards' response to her "they're not serious" comment was.

ST (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:13 PM)

Clinton and Edwards, caught by the "fire in the whorehouse".

Mark in Arlington (Sent Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:31 PM)

OMG... They weren't talking about teaming up in the sense that ABC was slanting it... Geez. Even FOX Noise got the story right... Here's the link (you may have to copy and paste):

http://www.update08.foxnews.com/

They were talking about possibly changing the debates and how they would like to have smaller debates, perhaps sometime in the fall, and that the campaigns should talk about it...

It's not a VP thing, it's not an Obama ouster thing, it's not a huge conspiracy...

It's simply about there being a lot of candidates on the stage and that leaves not much time to discuss actual ideas - it only leaves time for sound bites.

Geez guys...

--poligirl

poligirl, LA, CA (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 7:40 AM)

Lol, Gary. Have I struck a nerve?

ST and Poli - from the one time I saw this on video, it seemed like Edwards initiated the conversation, too.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 8:57 AM)

Paul Miller,

That's what I was just thinking about before I came here. I have followed John Edwards since 2002, so closely that I know his mannerisms, even from when he will rub his chin, to when he will make that stupid face after he says something that he thinks is clever, to when he will lose his breath when he's trying to "attack another candidate without attacking".

With that said, I have rarely seen him initiate a conversation "OUT OF THIN AIR" in the way that the ABCNews video showed him initiating this one, so I have to assume that this was a continuation of some other conversation that we did not see, possibly before the forum or some other time in the past, hence the, "get back to it" references by Clinton.

I agree that there needs to be smaller groups, as I said before the first MSNBC debate where I said it would be a waste of time, because 30 seconds to 1 minute is not enough time to say anything.

I do not believe that it is John Edwards' intention to silence Kucinich or shut him out of debates. Just that there be a better format.

What I don't think serves John Edwards well is appearing "TOO CLOSE" to Hillary Clinton. If he wants to lose most of his netroots support, go there.

ST (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 9:43 AM)

What Clinton and Edwards were really talking about?

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2007/02/02/top_democrats_seek_to_limit_joint_appearances.html

ST (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 10:11 AM)

It's kind of cute, but does anyone else ever notice how Paul writes complimentary posts to himself using fictitious names?

Or then again, maybe it's just sad.

Dennis Waldron, Bishop, Texas (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 10:24 AM)

Dennis, are you talking about me? I don't use fictitious names, and actually don't see too many complimentary posts about me, lol.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 10:49 AM)

Check out the 'Obama Embraced" thread.

The fictitious posts always start with something like 'I don't post much around here, but'.

More like never.

Paul, find something else to do. Take a walk, watch game shows, something, anything.

It is really pathetic to watch.

Dennis Waldron, Bishop, Texas (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 11:04 AM)

Wow, hadn't seen that before. Sorry Dennis, but I'm none of those people. Not that you couldn't find a whole different set of reasons to think I'm pathetic, lol, but that's not one of 'em.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 11:45 AM)

Come on face it folks, you all feed on this kind of "character-free" politics. It amazes me that no one seems the least interested in anything but the same old, tired status quo!
Is it any surprise that candidates with new or even different ideas get no attention at all?
If we could just get Ralph Nader to start scheming and talking trash.

dean (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 2:42 PM)

The powers that be should dump the unelectables from the stage. Specifically, everybody but Hill and OBamO. Sorry libs, no other dem stands a chance. The Breck Girl stands no chance at all of being elected to anything.

Jack Rookard (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 5:34 PM)

I have always been a big supporter of John Edwards but after this i have lost all respect for him. I will no longer support his candidacy in the least bit as i think this was an extremely cowardly thing to say and shows that he is a despicable human being who does not deserve to be president or even stand on the same stage as people like Mike Gravel or Barack Obama or Dennis Kucinich who are actually trying to change things and willing to openly debate issues.

Julian Langness Seattle, Washington (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 5:36 PM)

Oh shut up. All Clinton and Edwards said is that they believe debates should be smaller. Stop creating a vast conspiracy out of this statement.

Stanley, Madison, MS (Sent Friday, July 13, 2007 9:52 PM)

I'm withholding judgement on John Edwards unti; I hear more. Mike Gravel has already stated that he has no intention of running for president then was casting slurs about Bill Clinton. Obama breaks the rules by using notes.Hillary and Edwards know what the other cadidates are doing. EDWARDS; HE STANDS TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF MORE PEOPLE.

Elaine N. Ramey; Kissimmee,,Florida (Sent Saturday, July 14, 2007 1:51 AM)

Our country has serious issues and in the 2008 campaign we need serious candidates. At this point, we need to know what the candidates who have a shot at winning would do in office; not a Congressman from Ohio or a retired man from Alaska. Judging from some of the comments I read below (i.e. “Queen of mean"), I think some voters need to get serious too. Grow up or shut up! This is our country's future we're taking about here. You should feel ashamed for being so callous.

Mike B, Manchester NH (Sent Saturday, July 14, 2007 11:07 AM)

These are the champions of the "Fairness Doctrine", demonstrating once again just how much of a blow to free speech that would be.

Kade, Arlington, TX (Sent Saturday, July 14, 2007 12:20 PM)

I believe it in the candidates self interest, and more importantly--in the interest of winning the election over the "Fair & Balanced" crowd--to control their message and maintain focus on the big picture game plan.

Don't get me wrong -- I love the notion of disclosure, and more in uncovering the potential foybles of a candidate before they attain office. I don't appreciate the notion of offering the opposition free ammunition though.

Politics is what it is -- but the American people have been abused and rolled over wet so often it is not funny. "Fair and Balanced" is akin to a magician using the distraction of a pretty bauble or assistant to keep the paying public off balance and loose focus of the real issues at stake.

I for one, as a proud American, am tired of being played the fool.

As the guy on TV used to say -- Just the Facts Ma'am... Impress me with that!

PK, Bavaria (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 12:45 AM)

Hillery is looking tired and old and several months to go- Will she hold up Health wise?

ANNA TOLBERT OROVILLE , WA (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 1:15 AM)

All this fuss about who is going to lose in 08 is a waste of time... Dems still can't get unified = Loss in 08!

REALITY USA (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 1:29 AM)

Instead of trying to limit the numbers, Hillary should have been getting Edwards Hairdressers number!!

Barrack O Washington, DC (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 2:11 AM)

Hey guys fighting on a thread is like wining the special olympics... yea you win, but your still retarted. No offence to the special olympics intended, but it seems the only way to make you get the point. Anyway, carry on with your repugnant, self serving,mindlessness.

C.K Stewart Cape Coral Florida (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 3:00 AM)

C.K Stewart Cape Coral Florida (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 3:01 AM)

Go Hilary go!!!!!! I am Canadian and even I feel sorry for American's! Enough with George Dubya and enough lives have been lost! Change is a must!!

mellissa donnelly, regina, sask. (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 3:04 AM)

We might have yet another male president: Hillery
Clinton. I can't seriously even consider voting for
her.......to think, Bill Clinton as first husband?
hahahahahaha................
Little boy Edwards is out. Watching Obama closely.

Danni Studebaker (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 5:06 AM)

Dem's are tired, weary of all the debating, perhaps it's time for them to accept they don't have the energy or the sustainablity to maintain what it takes to do the job. If they are this tired this soon, I would tell them adious!

Mike, Lee, NH (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 9:22 AM)

I think Clinton and Edwards are correct to some degree. Too many candidates limit the debate to quick answers from all concerned. Personally, I'd like to see the democrats "weed the garden" of candidates a bit. I know, they are all granted the right to be candidates, and I respect them all. However, focusing the debate on half as many candidates would help everyone decide. On the subject of "hot" mics. Although what those mics pick up can be tantalizing, interesting and, at times, sensational, I think it may be an invasion of privacy to use what is heard as "news" or talk show fodder.

Steve, Madison, WI (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 9:26 AM)

John Edwards lost any support he may have gotten from me. Anyone who is afraid of REAL debate... the more involved the more democratic is more elitist than he wanted us to believe....must be the hair.

john doe (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 1:51 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=267951