Another lies from the Clinton's machine. When are they going to stop lieing? I can't believe he will risk is little credibility on Hillary.

Another lies from the Clinton's machine. When are they going to stop lieing? I can't believe he will risk is little credibility on Hillary.

Actually Clark, it is clear who started the attacks.  It is when Clinton called Obama "naive".  

So, she knows how to end the war, yet she won't even admit her vote was a mistake.  She knows how to avert war with Iran, yet her vote recently on Iran gave Bush and Cheney an excuse to go after Iran, and call it bipartisan no less.

You know what Hillary, you and all your goons (Vilsack, Clark, Penn, and even Bill) can quit lying to us.  Just be honest, you really don't have a positive record of accomplishing anything.

Obama '08

The AFSCME ad is excellent too.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1207/PRES_AFSCME_CHILDS_FUTURE.rm


Van

I'm a huge admirer of General Clark, but I believe that his endorsement of the Hillary and defense of her mud slinging fellow democrats is unwise.
Clark made the first mistake in skipping Iowa in 2004, he's making another one now in supporting Clinton on her "fun trip" of negative, false unsubstantiated, attacks on fellow democrats.

We all knew all along that when the going gets tough, Hillary would go negative, so we're not altogether surprised and that's how we also know that she cannot win a general election.

Hilary and her campaign needs to stop whining about being attacked.  I believe that her whining about the "guys piling up" on her cost her some votes, now she has Clark still talking about being attacked. She's out there attacking obama, should he have a surrogate make a video about being attacked by Hilary?  Give me a break.  Women, if you're so strong, quite complaining about being attacked.

I used to like Bill and Hilary and I would have loved for them to be back to running this government again. But the more I see and hear them, I'm really turned off.  I could never support her now.  I don't like what I see, read or hear from or about them.  Not anymore!

It's really pretty irritating when MSNBC adds a whole bunch of new items but doesn't bother to update any of the comments for hours on end.  Just a thought - instead of adding new info, update the existing info.

who was it that said "naive and irresponsible" this summer?

does clark have a short memory or something?

or he is just like the rest of the clintons...patently disingenuous...

Methinks that the general and many of the Dem establishment are showing a political tin ear and that's why they consistently snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Hillary is losing in Iowa and elsewhere for a reason; she doesn't represent change. Clark lost in 2004. Endorsing a sinking ship like Hillary isn't going to help his political street cred.

yep, it's Obama who started the attacks because he was flat in the polls.

There's NO sane person who can deny that Barak used personal and negative attacks to up his poll ratings.

He's "special"

As a former huge supporter of General Clark for President and also for Vice President under Kerry, I am disappointed he made the decision prematurely to endorse Hillary over Barack.  Had he waited another month he would have realized he wasted his endorsement with a loser in Hillary.  
As a democrat though, I do admit that Gen. Clark would be an excellent choice for Hillary's VP for many reasons.  However, I can't help but think that is the reason Hillary promised you a position in return for your premature endorsement.
Get with it Wes - Obama is the one who will Unite America!  You would serve well in the Obama administration too.  At least he Will win in Nov. 08

"... he says in ad. "That’s politics. What this country needs is leadership""
Regardless of who is attacking who or who started attacking (as the word attack is rather ambiguous).  Clinton, according to her surrogate failed to show leadership by attacking back in kind or worse.  "That's politics."

I'm not saying attack politics: drawing policy distinctions and mudslinging is specific to her.  But why is she surrounding herself with people who make such silly statements and people who undermine her credibility.

Clinton did much better speaking for herself than through surrogates.

CLINTON SLEAZE WILL INVIGORATE GOP, DISPIRIT DEMOCRATS AND SINK DEMOCRATIC TICKET
.
It is possible that Senator Clinton is the best candidate.  However, even though many may like the policies that Senator Clinton proposes, they should also consider her record, just as Senator Clinton insists.
.
The last Clinton Administration, when faced with the fact that protection rackets where assaulting, torturing and murdering people with poison and radiation, chose to avoid its responsibilities to incarcerate the criminals and to protect the citizenry.
.
Instead, they made a deal with the criminal gang stalker protection rackets to leave them alone and to consequently abandon the citizenry.
.
Do we want a President who sells out the citizenry for votes?
.
Do we want a President who sends a \"crime does pay\" message to society?
.
Would you vote for a President who signed nonaggression deals with the KKKlan or the Nazi party? Gangs that torture with poison and radiation are much like the KKKlan and Nazi Party.
.
We do not need a sellout President. We need a principled leader President.
.
If you are one of the few who do not know what the above refers to, do a web search for “gang stalking” to see the tip of the dirtberg.  Please do it before you decide to reply to my post. Here let me make it easy for you: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22gang+stalking%22.
.

I THOUGHT I felt the earth move.

It's really pretty irritating when MSNBC adds a whole bunch of new items but doesn't bother to update any of the comments for hours on end.  Just a thought - instead of adding new info, update the existing info.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Wednesday, December 05, 2007 4:38 PM)

Yep. I second that.

Wes Clark(from Arkansas) has a relationship going way back with the Clintons. Didn't Wes Clark bypass Iowa in his 2004 prez election bid?. Why would they care what he thinks?

I am so glad to see people pointing out that she was the one who actually started this nastiness. She is the one who is perpetuating it, while he responds. It was all of that "naive" nonsense that changed this campaign. Which was very strange, because it was also the beginning of her downward slide.

Chuck, so now you're talking about typos. Well now you can join the ranks of Chris Matthews who talks about Hillary"Why does she clap so much?She looks Chinese, her low-cut blouse, look,look,she's reading from the paper. I can only hope you don't begin to get that saliva in the corner of your mouth or sweat like the big buffalo Tim Russert waving a paper in the air and screaming. If you men could only see yourselves.  If you don't like Hillary's isues fine, but please stop the personal attacks. You are supposed to report the news.

GREAT!!!!! Good for you WES CLARK!!! Thank you.... I am still bummed that Oprah switched teams... I wish someone would play the video of her Telling Hillary to please run, what just a year ago....talk about flip flopping.
Keep Colin Powell in mind too... I think he would be a great VP.  He is just a good guy......
Janel

Hillary Clinton will restore honor and glory to America.
Hilary stayed above the fray until the attacks from her opponents moved her to respond.
Because of her
.experience (30+ years in public service is an awful lot of experince to empower her to lead this nation)
.resolute focus on what needs to be done to make us a great nation again ( offering prudent solutions for mortgage crisis, health care, education, environment crisis, economy, stem cell research etc etc)
.forgiving attitude (she did what is right by saving her marriage)
Hillary is going to be president. It will be good for America.

Bee, I can't believe you are risking any credibility you might have had quoting Crackpot Chris Matthews earlier today.

So don't go throwing mud at General Clark supporting Clinton.

This is the message I had in my e-mail when I arrived at work this morning. It came in at: ,12/04/07 10:45 PM

Dear Friend,

General Clark will be campaigning in Iowa tomorrow, December 5,
for Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign for president. We hope
that you will be able to join him!

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2007

Meeting with Activists
Savvy Coffee & Wine Bar
417 E Haganman Ln.
Solon, IA
9:30am - 10:15am

Meeting with Activists
Frontier Family Restaurant
112 North Iowa Ave
Washington, IA
11:30am - 12:30pm

Meeting with Activists
Campbell Steele Gallery
1064 7th Avenue
Marion, IA
2:00pm - 3:00pm

Meeting with Activists
Pizza Ranch
1195 Boyson Rd
Hiawatha, IA
3:30pm - 4:30pm

We hope that you'll be able to join General Clark at these
events!

Sincerely,

Catherine Grunden
Executive Director
WesPAC - Securing America's Future

*****************
Paid for by WesPAC - Securing America's Future

He's going to small venues at late notice, and I doubt  will have many people show up. Most of his 04 supporters are Obama supporters now, which is a bit ironic.

General Clark I supported you in 2004.  I wish you had choosen your candidate a little better.  But I understand why you did it.  I don't like it but I understand it.  Long time friends with the Clinton's regardless of the circumstances.  

Interesting that Senator Clinton's campaign would send out Wes Clark to decry negative campaigning on the same day that it is revealed that as of two and half weeks ago Clinton campaign staffers were sending out e-mails to Iowans filled with vile falsehoods about Senator Obama.  And just think yesterday Clinton's campaign was complaining about rude push-polls and calling on Senator Obama to stop it, but when a reporter asked her chief strategist Mark Penn whether he had any proof of any one of the campaigns being behind it, he said "No."  Get with it Wes, Senator Clinton is the one deserving of your complaints, not Senator Obama  

I am so glad to see people pointing out that she was the one who actually started this nastiness. She is the one who is perpetuating it, while he responds. It was all of that "naive" nonsense that changed this campaign. Which was very strange, because it was also the beginning of her downward slide.

Jack, Greenville, SC

The problem isn't the open criticism, the problem is the sleazy dirty campaigning that Hillary's campaign has been engaged in for the last 9 months.

For everything that is publicly disclosed you can assure yourself that is not even the tip of what they are doing.

Getting caught planting the question, and her other tactics have hurt her in Iowa, and I don't see her stopping the slide. She can bring in a 1,000 more paid staff, and in the end 70% of Iowa caucus goers are looking for someone other than Hillary.

Bee, I can't believe you are risking any credibility you might have had quoting Crackpot Chris Matthews earlier today.

So don't go throwing mud at General Clark supporting Clinton.
disgusted
----------------------------------------------------

Check this out, who has better credibility between these figures. Hillary Clinton or Chris Matthew?

Bill Clinton or Chris Matthew?

I'll let you decide

Rose, Palisades,Park,NJ

You have no clue what you are talking about. Is it ok to lie about Senator Biden to have your staff tell 04 caucus goers who say they are leaning towards him, that polls show Americans won't elect a candidate in his 70's. and then when the person asks how old Biden is they are told any where from a low of 71 to a high of 77. Biden just turned 65, and is less than 5 years older than Hillary.

Or is it ok for one of your high level staff members to tell people leaning Richardson that he has a real women problem, and a closet full of skeletons, that would sink him in a general election.

Or that Obama's race prevents him from winning a general. Even if you think that may be true, is that right for their campaign to tell 04 caucus voters when calling undecided Democrats?

Or that Edwards should have dropped out and taken care of Elizabeth.

If you think this is Ok then you have no problem with Hillary's tactics. I think it is inexcusable!

lol, obama supporters hate the military, they're a lot like the bush wingnuts in that respect

I can't believe how childish much of this discussion has been. Wesley Clark would be a great VP candidate for Clinton, Obama, Edward, or anyone else in the Democratic Party. We are all adults and we are all entitled to take sides in the nomination process. It would be wrong from Obama, Edwards, or any other Democratic nominee not to look as carefully, as possible for the best running mate, someone like Wesley Clark, regardless of who that person favored for the nomination. This is a political process! People make choices and decisions during every political process. Will wonders never cease?

Quote from Bee:
"Check this out, who has better credibility between these figures. Hillary Clinton or Chris Matthew?"

I'll take Hillary Clinton hands down over Chris Matthew and any Republican in the Presidential Race!

Lol, this is too good. So an ad with Wes Clark saying we don't need attacks, we need leadership is going to hit the airwaves now?

This after Clinton (who paid for the ad) is currently executing the series of attacks on Obama, which she publicly telegraphed just a few days ago? Is this campaign nuts?

Hillary Clinton chose to attack Barack Obama by mocking his kindergarten dream to be president one day.  Mrs. Clinton managed to insult every voter all at once.  Because who among us didn't have childhood dreams?  Whether to be an astronaut, teacher, or even president of the United States the chance to realize our dreams is something that defines America.  Mrs. Clinton, who previously insulted just all male voters when she played the "victim" of a debate pile-on by the male candidates, is proving to be a poor campaigner who is ultimately unelectable.

I did not know that pointing out differences in policy was attacking.  that is solely what Obama did.
it was HRC who went on personal attacks.   She just couldn't help herself in flashing back to the 90s and the politics of personal destruction.

Clark, supporting the Democratic party line, promptly surrendered to the terrorists.

Ben Smith of the Politico has disclosed that those nasty smear emails regarding Obama as a muslim plant is from the Hillary clinton campaign.  this is huge and needs to be exposed to voters


've obtained a copy of the email sent to Jones County, Iowa Democratic Chairman Gary Hart, by a Clinton volunteer.

[UPDATE: A Clinton staffer who also received the email responded instantly by denouncing it, but didn't forward it to campaign-higher ups, a copy of his email indicates.]

It's one of a couple Obama-Muslim-smear emails circulating widely, and one of the ones Jonathan Martin and I wrote about in October. It's probably the most vicious of them: It states the underlying hint -- that Obama is some sort of Muslim Manchurian candidate -- explicitly.

   Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.

   The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the U.S. from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States , one of their own!!!!

The email was sent by someone identified only as "Judy" whose email address begins jcheroke. The Clinton campaign has said they are now asking a volunteer county coordinator to leave the campaign when the email came to light.

But the email thread indicates that along with Hart, a Clinton staffer named Ryan Callanan received the email back on November 21. Filings confirm that Callanan is a staffer, though I wasn't able immediately to confirm his role on the Clinton campaign, and he didn't respond to an email.

To be clear, he was a recipient of the email, like Hart, not the sender; there's no evidence he forwarded it to others on the campaign, or even read it, though I'm asking those questions.

The email, with the people's email addresses and the names of other recipients removed (by me) is below.

UPDATE: The Clinton campaign forwards Callanan's immediate response to the email which, though he didn't pass it on to the campaign, reflected his disgust at it:

   From: Ryan Callanan
   Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:49 AM
   To: 'Judy'
   Subject: RE: Meet Barack Obama]

   I’ve gotten this forward before. It’s racist and ignorant. I can’t believe that people believe this stuff.

   Ryan

UPDATE: The email address for the sender is associated online with the name "Judy Rose," and there's a Judy Rose as one of 250 members of Clinton's Iowa Women's Leadership Council.

To: [Gary Hart]
From: Judy <jcheroke@xxxxxxxxx.com>
To: xxx xxxxx, Ryan Callanan , xxx xxxxxx,
xxxx xxxxx, Gary Hart ,
xxxx, xxxx, xxxx
Subject: Fw: Meet Barack Obama]
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 01:19:38 -0600

X-MSMail-Priority: High


----- Original Message -----
*From:* JERRY NANCY SINN <mailto:jlsinn1@msn.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, November 20, 2007 7:42 PM
*Subject:* Meet Barack Obama]

Hillary is ready to be president on day one!!

Hey whats all the Romney garbage about, he knowingly employeed illegals. Furthermor Romney tries to sweet talk and sweetly embrace media. Out with his wife going for horse rides, whats that. Guiliani is on war front keeping in mind what it takes to keep us all safe. Thanks for time, Wayne

I am so glad Wes Clark joined the winning party!! WE need good folks like him.
Hillary will be an outstanding President.  Not sure you will find anyone that knows more, and will work harder. Thank you Hillary for running.  To be honest I am not sure why anyone today would really want to try and lead this country... it will take a ton of work.
God Bless the USA

Hey, Hillary staffers - please pass this message along to her.  I never thought it would come to this; I fully expected to vote Dem in '08 regardless of the nominee.  But the way Hillary and her campaign have acted lately, I might not vote for her if she gets the nomination.  My current image of her is as a cat with its claws out, hissing even at her own kind because she isn't getting what she wants.  It seems now as if she is much more focused on gaining power for herself than in furthering Democratic ideals and making the country a better place.  Gone is the talk about her positions on issues; all we hear now is her putting down her own colleagues, who by the way share many of her positions on the issues.  I won't be at all surprised on Jan. 3 when the non-viable candidates' supporters step over to the Obama or Edwards camp, and at least one of them tops Hillary.

Hillary will know where the plates and forks are stored on day one.

This whole "Ready on Day One" slogan from Hillary is exactly that and nothing more than a slogan.  She makes it sounds like she will solve all of the country's problems "on day one."  If you think about that seriously, not only is it ridiculous (presidents can't solve problems without the support of Congress, etc.); think about what Day One is.  It's Inauguration Day.  A couple of speeches and a slew of parties to attend.  No President even thinks about solving our problems, much less gets anything done for us on Day One.

I did not know that pointing out differences in policy was attacking.  that is solely what Obama did.
it was HRC who went on personal attacks.   She just couldn't help herself in flashing back to the 90s and the politics of personal destruction.

diane (Sent Wednesday, December 05, 2007 6:41 PM)

One of the clearest indications of blind partisanship is characterizing the same behavior that you justify for your side, as heinous when performed by your rival. A disinterested observer would likely see no difference between any of the things said by any of the candidates critical of the other. I am also sure that you are absolutely convinced that you're being totally objective...:)


Van

I did not know that pointing out differences in policy was attacking.  that is solely what Obama did.
it was HRC who went on personal attacks.   She just couldn't help herself in flashing back to the 90s and the politics of personal destruction.

diane (Sent Wednesday, December 05, 2007 6:41 PM)

One of the clearest indications of blind partisanship is characterizing the same behavior that you justify for your side, as heinous when performed by your rival. A disinterested observer would likely see no difference between any of the things said by any of the candidates critical of the other. I am also sure that you are absolutely convinced that you're being totally objective...:)


Van
vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:29 PM)


AMEN Van!

But you can not talk to Diane, she is always objective in being blind, hateful and destroying America.

Keep up the good work Van.

Hillary has the strength and experience to lead.  

Hey, Hillary staffers - please pass this message along to her.  I never thought it would come to this; I fully expected to vote Dem in '08 regardless of the nominee.  But the way Hillary and her campaign have acted lately, I might not vote for her if she gets the nomination.  My current image of her is as a cat with its claws out, hissing even at her own kind because she isn't getting what she wants.  It seems now as if she is much more focused on gaining power for herself than in furthering Democratic ideals and making the country a better place.  Gone is the talk about her positions on issues; all we hear now is her putting down her own colleagues, who by the way share many of her positions on the issues.  I won't be at all surprised on Jan. 3 when the non-viable candidates' supporters step over to the Obama or Edwards camp, and at least one of them tops Hillary.
Kevin, Cedar Rapids
----------

By doing that you just give your vote to Republican, not bad move.

Diane, I have to give you credit and send Obama a good reportcard because you are here for him so hard, day and night, sometimes you are so tired and you don't know what you are talking about.

I just want to tell you that save some energy and brain for you. You worry too much, it is very stressed, not worth it.

A suggestion from a nurse happen to have a same name

Pathetic Obama fans!

Whovever started it, and I still remember Obama starting the whole negativity, the fact is, Hillary Clinton has said nothing inaccurate about the Obama camp.  The Obama camp has had to pull down inaccurate stories about Clinton a number of times and has refused to correct some inaccurate statements they made even when they've been corrected.  Clinton has moral ascendancy over Obama on so many issues.

So, if it were a choice between Obama and Hillary, Wes chose very wisely.  Oprah chose color, Wes chose competence.

She is ready to go "on day one". Great, so every president has to have been a former president or a first lady in order to be ready. That is asinine. It is a terrible slogan and ridiculous. It actually reinforces the dynastic narrative that they at the Clinton Camp are fighting, out of the other side of their mouths that is.
They say, Trust us, we get the system and you don't... I say, anyone who has ever been in the less-than-insider, less-than-privileged position in their lives should know how that sounds, and she is getting her fans to shout it.

It's lying, Bee.

Iran *is* supporting terrorism and arming them in Lebanon, Hamas against Israel, and in Iraq. They are the enemy, they should be defended against not given kissy kissy by wuss Democrats.

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