Did meeting lead to Shaheen ouster?

Posted: Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:32 PM by Mark Murray

From NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan
JOHNSTON, IA -- In the spin room after today's debate, Obama adviser David Axelrod said that Obama had told Clinton today that "leadership came from the top" in regards to negative attacks and campaigning.

Axelrod said that the two senators spoke for about 10 minutes today, during which Clinton apologized for the comments made by her New Hampshire co-chair Billy Shaheen, who told the Washington Post that Obama's past cocaine use would make him vulnerable to GOP attacks. "Senator Obama expressed to Senator Clinton it's important for campaigns to send a signal from the top as to what type of campaign they want to run. If you send a signal that negative campaigning is the fun part of campaigns and treat it as a sport, then you are sending a signal down the line that it's all okay. They have to decide if they want to send a different signal and certainly by asking Mr. Shaheen to leave that would be a different signal," Axelrod said.

Axelrod went on to say that leadership in campaigns "flowed from the top down," and Clinton's previous comments that the "fun starts" when candidates begin to attack each other set a tone that allowing negative attacks were okay.

The announcement of Shaheen's resignation came just fifteen to twenty minutes after Axelrod's comments in the spin room. The Obama campaign has benefited from Shaheen's comments in more ways than one -- by 1) showing the Clinton campaign as anxious to tear down their opponents and 2) as a money making tool among their own supporters. David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, sent out an email requesting supporters to donate to demonstrate their disapproval at Shaheen.

Shaheen's comments on Obama's past cocaine use, however, also gave reporters an opening to question Obama's campaign about the extent of his past drug use and how they would respond to Republican attacks on the issue. Regarding Obama's past drug use, Axelrod told reporters today that he only used drugs up until age 20, and that Obama had not sold or shared drugs with friends.

He went on to add that the campaign would effectively respond to Republican attacks by being upfront about Obama's past. "Honesty is how you respond to the attacks. He's been very straight forward about this. This isn't some expose of some vault somewhere. This is something he wrote about in a book 12 years ago."

*** UPDATE *** "It is clear that the politics of false attacks and innuendo are being rejected by the voters from New Hampshire and around the country.
Barack Obama is focusing his campaign on the positive change he is going to bring to America as President," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

I am sorry to say this but I am extremely dissapointed in the Clinton election "juggernaut". They are shooting themselves in the foot and making Obama come out in roses. How are the mighty fallen? Tell it not in Des Moines publish it not in the cities of New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Bable Nut (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:39 PM)

WOW. Obama has a morale compass...

Grant, Durham, New Hampshire. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:48 PM)

Priceless......

Go Obama 08

Lyn, MD (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:51 PM)

Let me get this straight:

1. Obama admits he used drugs when he was a teenager.
2. A Clinton campaign aide makes the comment that Obama's past drug use will make him vulnerable to attacks from Republicans.
3. The Clinton campaign aide, who didn't use drugs and who simply stated the bloody obvious, is pressured to resign?

It kind of reminds me of John Kerry -- the guy who actually served in Vietnam and had the purple heart to prove it -- being labeled unpatriotic by Bush's surrogates while Bush, the patriot, hid in the Texas National Guard (instead of going to Vietnam) and, even then, avoid drilling in order to campaign for someone in Alabama. Something's a little screwy here.

raf (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:52 PM)

Wow. I can't believe the Clinton campaign actually followed Obama's advice. It was an incredibly poignent statement from Axelrod, one that hits the issue to the core. Clinton DID declare the new "phase" of her campaign (attacking Obama) "the fun part"... literal quote. What does she expect her campaign to do when she declares that negative attacking is fun? They followed her lead.

Maybe she -isn't- ready to begin leading on day one. Presidents do not relish negative politics. They answer rediculous suggestions honestly and truthfully, and they set an example by disapproving of and condemning negative mudslinging. Obama hit the nail on the head.

This, combined with Hillary's absurd sarcastic remark during the debate that "I[Hillary] want to hear that [Obama's response]" to a question about former Clinton advisors advising Obama, to which he answered that "Well, Hillary, I'm looking forward to having you as an advisor as well... I want to gather up talent from everywhere."..

These two moment could very well be the moments that finishes Hillary's campaign.

Ron, TX (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:53 PM)

"It is clear that the politics of false attacks ..."

False attacks? That's like swiftboating, right? Something attributed to Kerry losing to Bush and leaving our country in hot water.

--NSMSNBC (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:54 PM)

My question is if Shaheen will actually be gone! Hillary would be getting rid of the most powerful democratic operative in the state. She is way to smart for that. I am sure Billy Shaheen will stay on behind the scenes. Absolutely sure of it. It would be torture for him NOT to be involved. And a total waste of his talent and skill in NH politics.

Grant, Durham, New Hampshire. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:55 PM)

Another Clinton (or Clinton surrogate) attack leads to another Obama win. And for Clinton to dumbly make that "fun part" comment just invites the obvious comeback, when Clinton tries to say her campaign had nothing to do with... x, y or z.

By the way, remember that Novak "dirty trick?" How he was "lying" about a Clinton staffer offering up "scandalous" information on Obama?

Today Novak offered a pretty convincing follow-up. He states names, not only from the campaign but also other media types they approached. And he talks about the content of the "scandalous" info.

What was it? The leadership PAC thing. You know, the one that Obama used to contribute to other Democrats' campaigns. The same one that contributed to Clinton, who know calls it a "slush fund."

Shocking! A Democrat runs a PAC to raise money for other Democrats! Lol. The only real shock here is how amateurish the Clinton campaign is suddenly looking.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:00 PM)

I see a pattern here in the Clinton campaign... attacks on the dreams of a 5 yr old, 2 workers for the campaign recently emailing the false claims that Obama is a muslim, and the NH co-chair implying that Obama is a drug dealer. This is a disservice to the whole democratic party no matter whom you support. "Fun"? Not so much.

Anne, Columbus, OH (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:07 PM)

Obama has gotten off easy. It is if he is teflon. I want to know more about him. I want to know more about his old friend - the ex con who now lives in a car, I want to know about his drug use, those suspicious looking stock purchases, the whole nine yards.

Obama wants to be President of the United States. We have to vet this guy. Why did he change the names of his friends and associates in his book, and why is he hesisitant to talk more about his past, except on his own term, as in his book.

Who is Barack Hussein Obama?

Sorry for double-posting, I just thought of something.

[The media should do its job, stop fawning over this pol, and ask him some tough questions for a change.
Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 12:21 PM)]

"He went on to add that the campaign would effectively respond to Republican attacks by being upfront about Obama's past. "Honesty is how you respond to the attacks. He's been very straight forward about this. This isn't some expose of some vault somewhere. This is something he wrote about in a book 12 years ago.""
**Maybe it is B.H. Obama's honesty that deflects these criticisms and will likewise in the general election. Sounds like a strong general election contender. Or it could just be that everything being tossed at him right now seems to be relatively meaningless. Drugs--not the issue they once were. Surveys--never were very important.

--NSMSNBC (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:12 PM)

Obama is right. Any company and it's employees actions and attitude are a direct reflection of how the top is.
If the company is nasty towards people you know it has either ineffective or nasty leadership up at the top.
And especially a campaign that is a reflection of the candidate.
and concider the smear emails from 3 chairpeople in Iowa from Clinton's camp who resigned last week.
There is far too many incidents for it to be just a renegade person doing their own thing.

diane (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:15 PM)

it is a sign of leadership in it's most definitive sense for obama to approach hillary inn this manner instead of taking it to the media. it speaks to his character, his ability to bridge over disagreements and find a solution. it takes more than just fighting.

his actions speak to his sensability and good judgement. imagine if the shoe had been on the other foot.

during the campaign season and heat of battle this gentleman approached hillary with respect and class instead of dwelling in sewer politics. this approach is an eye opener as to how he may run the country and close the divide between republicans and democrats.

this true leadership in it's purest form folks.

ace p washington, d.c. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:27 PM)

Game, Set, Match !!

Which one is the 'experienced' candidate ?
Obama's campaign just ran circles around Hillary's !!

Suck on this:

'..."Senator Obama expressed to Senator Clinton it's important for campaigns to send a signal from the top as to what type of campaign they want to run. If you send a signal that negative campaigning is the fun part of campaigns and treat it as a sport, then you are sending a signal down the line that it's all okay...'

Hillary is now effectively handcuffed !!

Say bye bye to the 'Queen of Mean' !!

Sierra, SF (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:33 PM)

I think a man who writes candidly about his youth and his experimentation with drugs as a means to ease the anguish he was feeling, as Obama has explained in "Dreams of My Father." I think a man who writes a book that is a bestseller -- so thousands upon thousands upon thousands have read it -- has demonstrated his honesty and forthright attitude, his authenticity and transparency.

Senator Clinton on the other hand continues to be as secretive as she was in the 1990s. Nothing has changed.

We are ready to move on. Put another way: we have already crossed the bridge to the 21st century. We don't need to go back and cross it again so Hillary gets her photo op.

We do want "change agents," we want CHANGE. We want Barack Obama in 2008.

jade7243 (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:48 PM)

Just think,the American attention span is down to 28 minutes.So if you wonder why postings are delayed one to two hours,there is no sense in you reading this post.You have allready forgotten what you thought.Try to tell me the Media does not run your life.

docrock,tx (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:55 PM)

Clinton's right on one thing: this IS the fun part!

wheeeeee! (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:16 PM)

It was a racist statement pure and simple. When someone can point me an article where Bush and Clinton were asked if they sold drugs then I will eat crow. Hillary has just lost the black vote and if she becomes the nominee, she will lose the south and any other state that black votes are crucial. This was all over black talk radio this morning. We may forgive, but we won't forget. Never!

sonya, atlanta,ga (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:19 PM)

Here's this little tidbit. Knowing that the National co-chair had resigned, Hillary's campaign manager (I think) Mark Penn, mentioned cocaine on Hardball twice this evening. You talk about DUMB!!!.

" DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER"

Rick,ky (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:27 PM)

i think the drug issue is a mute point. he was a teenager at that time. how old was bill clinton when he didn't inhale????? clinton's best leave this alone.

the slush (pac)fund. it was disclosed that one of the contributions went to bill shaheens wife and another to hillary's senatorial reelection campaign. what slush fund?????

the guy being referrd to as an ex-con. he isn't a con yet, but will likely be soon. let's look at this as well. this guy owned property along barack's property. barack purchased the lot with a legal contract of purchase and sale for real property to expand his lot holding. this transaction has been investigated and nothing found wrong nor illegal. barack also said that him and this guy were friends (not close friends) and was not aware of his illegal activities. this has been checked into as well (nothing was found). i'm sure we all have associated with someone that we didn't know all that they were involved in. nothing there!!!!!!!

as far as the stock purchases are concerned. i find this posting most hilarious. when a candidate is running his or hers financial dealings are looked into prior to running and the entire time they are running. their tax returns, investments, and more stay under scrutiny from the sec and more. nothing there either!!!!!

look, the truth is you aren't ging to find dirt or skeletons in obama's, edwards, biden's, richardson, dodd or kucinich's closet. it is a waste of time and endeavor to try to do so.

this is why nothing has stuck. not because he is teflon, but he is clean and practices what he preach. i would say the same for edwards and the others.

it is this reason the republicans will have a hard time against obama or edwards.

ace p washington, d.c. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:29 PM)

Now the other half knows why over 50% of Americans would not vote for Hillary under any circumstances. She knows everything going on and knew of this. Every time she opens the letters L_I_E_S comes out. Of course her pervert Bill never inhaled, and we all know what he does with cigars. How did she even become a candidate?

David Anders Pharr, Tx (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:30 PM)

I think it is quite rich for Mr. Obama to try to suggest that Mrs. Clinton is in some way responsible for the behavior of her subordinates when just this week he is on record claiming that one of the people who worked for him filled out a survey when he was running for the State Senate completely without his knowledge. This was his explanation when he was confronted with past poltical views that he had espoused that could clearly hurt him in the general election. How nice for him. If this story is true it means essentially that Mr. Obama defrauded a voter group into endorsing him based on lies about his positions. Nice to see that Mr. Honesty didn't take the time to correct this misperception until he was running for president. It also seems to that he has failed to apologize for defrauding this group. I am amazed that people are dumb enough to believe that he is somehow a different kind of politican.

Also, in reference to Mr. Novak's colum it should not be suprising to see him working to try to advance Mr. Obama. Mr. Novak fails to focus on the real problem represented by Mr. Obama's PAC- the fact that it takes money from lobbyists and PACs. It may not simply be a slush fund, even though it certainly has been used to aid Mr. Obama's presidential bid which is both ehtically and legally questionable. The bigger point is that Mr. Obama is doing the very thing that he has criticized Mrs. Clinton for while misleading people into believing he didn't do it. As Mr. Obama comes under more scrutiny we will begin to see his act for the hypocrisy that is. This is a deeply dishonest campaign of false hope and if democrats are dumb enough to fall for it the Republicans will actually have a fighting chance this fall.

JT (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:35 PM)

One second -

Senator Obama expressed to Senator Clinton it's important for campaigns to send a signal from the top as to what type of campaign they want to run.'

But wait wasn't it Obama who said a staffer answer the questionaire (with all those crazy positions) and that wasn't his fault - and wasn't there another memo this summer from Obama that blamed clinton for being in the native american lobby - where he used a naughty word... and blamed that on another staffer - WAIT does it sound like someone wants it both ways????

You decided

Michael, Los Angeles CA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:35 PM)

And how about all the wrong memos coming out of Obama camp and every time, the answer was the staffer's response was not vetted?

Is that coming from top?

Double standards make hypocrites lovely:-). Politics as usual with no hope.

Simon, IA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:36 PM)

if experience on foreign policy and domestic issues is such a grave issue then why is washington in the state of gridlock it is in????????

why is our reputation in the world so damaged? why is our image on human rights so bad? why are we in this 10n trillion dollar deficit? why if the folks that have 15,20 and 25 years plus experience are so valuable the country has gooten worst instead of better?

i think we need change. i think we need a new mindset. i think we need a new philosophy. i think we need new ideaology. i think we need new leadership. we need a person that will build a bridge from the republican coast to the democratic coast with independents crossing that bridge with the new president.

we need change, good judgement, class, respect, honor and yes strength. strength to say the things needed not wanted. courage to go in the lions den (detroit for example) and stand tall.

there are some that have these qualities. there are few that fit the description.

ace p washington, d.c. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:40 PM)

Dirty politics and Dems go together Anyone ask the Holier than thou Edwards how he made millions off of the "corporations" he fought "all his life", class action suits is how. One of the biggest fraud games lawyers play. I would rather vote for Mickey Mouse than any of these low level liars.

Marty CR Iowa (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:43 PM)

It was a dumb thing to say...

but everyone has a case of short-term memory. Anyone REALLY think the GOP is too classy to create illusions about candidates with fautly information is certifiably insane!!!

And if you think the media is going to give a fair and balanced look at it, you are even MORE insane.

Who the hell is watching this stuff / paying attention to these websites? Literally tens of thousands of political junkies who've already made up their mind.

the national poll has Hillary up by 30 points. Yeah, I know that doesn't mean much in a primary state, but general perceptions aside, it's anyone's game this is not a knock-out error. though, it's still an error.

and while I fret who the dems nominate, judging by the GOP circles I talk to, it won't matter much. Now THAT is a depressed group.

Joe, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:54 PM)

Raf, this is classic old-time slime politics. Put your fall-guy out there to make a slime statement, apologize later (after the impact has already been made), and then have your candidate claim she knew "nothing about it."

The only problem for Hillary? That stuff worked in the 90s. It's now a transparent hack-job and only the latest reason why we need a real change.

Bill, California (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:55 PM)

Racist? Gimme a break.

Dale, Denver (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:58 PM)

The fact of the matter is that if Senator Obama wins the Democrat nomination for President in '08, the Republicans are going to eat him up and tear his private and personal life to shreds. Obama supporters better hope and pray that Obama has never dated a white girl because if he has the Republicans will find her so as to stir up racial prejudices against mixed relationships and there are enough ignorant white folks who will not vote for Obama just for just such a reason. I live in Tennessee and just insinuating that Harold Ford dated white women cost him the Senate race. Shaheen told the truth. Obama can't win the general election in '08 despite his idealism and charm. In my opinion the only Democratic candidate that can win in '08 is John Edwards, the white Southerner that cares for all Americans.

Roosevelt Evans III, Nashville, Tenn. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:02 PM)

Looks like honesty and integrity to me. From Hillary's people. Although the drug question will be out there for the next year if he wins the nomination.

More importantly, democrats need to stop making excuses for Obama in the primary. Clinton's 30% and Edwards' 30% don't buy the "judgement" and "hope" garbage and i gusrantee 100% of repubs and 75% of independents won't buy it either in the general election. And think about what you do, because if Obama get the nomination and loses (which he will) he will never get another chance because the anger at him for wasting our chance in 08 will be worse than anything felt towards Nader or Kerry. It will take another generation to get another Obama, why take the chance? he can wait 8 years can't he? he's only 46.

Simon, IA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:10 PM)

Clinton campaign keeps bringing up cocaine.

http://thepage.time.com/penn-and-trippi-get-snippy-on-msnbc/

Yiannis, Baltimore (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:16 PM)

I sit hear and laugh (sadly) at how so many of you are being led by the Obama train......half of you couldn't even state where he stands on any of the important issues - yeah, just what we need - another "outsider".....please, doesn't anyone remember Jimmy Carter???!!! It would be funny if it weren't so sad. As a lifetime Democrat it pains me to think that I will actually be voting Republican next year if this neophyte is lucky enough to ride the press's momentum....If people think Hillary was going to be unelectable, then just sit back and watch as they chew up and spit out what is left of the skinny kid with the funny ears from Illinois....Tragic, just tragic......

ANYONE BUT OBAMA, NY, NY (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:19 PM)

I'd like this sorted out but by whom? The Wall Street Journal is the only newspaper we can trust !!!

R.W. Cranston (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:26 PM)

If Obama gets the nomination, the republicans will bring up his past drug use. Bill Shaheen did not imply that Obama was a drug dealer. He simply stated a fact, that the questions about Obama's drug use would come up during the general election.

Hillary's comment on "Fun" meant that all the time she had been silent while she was hit with attacks from Obama and Edwards and now she was going to hit back. So what's so unfair about that? They're allowed to pile on her but she can't defend herself?

Obama was going around to schools and telling America's youth that he did drugs when he was their age. These young people look up to him and think it's ok for them to do drugs because Obama did drugs and look how well he turned out. That goes against the teachings of their parents, teachers and mentors who tell them that drugs are bad, that drugs will screw up their lives. They tell their kids "Don't do drugs" over and over again, and here along comes Obama telling them the opposite of what they have been hearing.

Not exactly the kind of role model I would want for America's youth.

Tareli, Fuquay Varina NC (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:30 PM)

Jade, Ace,

Very well put. BHO performed very well today, as did Sr. Axelrod. I look forward to how this all shakes out in the end.

M, Saint Paul, Minn. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:35 PM)

Ms Hillary best not forget that Billy the slick willy dodged the draft smoked pot and who knows he might have sold drugs ???
This shows what type of person she really is ,anything to win her election, ANYTHING !!!!
Hillary is stepping on thin ice when she tries to act like her and slick willy are as clean as the white driven snow (NOT A WAY IN HELL ARE THE CLINTONS In any position to be a judge and jury against anyone.
Hillary sees her chances slip sliding away and she will pull anything to try to change the tide of defeat !!!!

Ken Collins/ Wagoner, Oklahoma (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:36 PM)

What the Clinton's are saying is that no matter what a person who is black accomplishes in their life they should always be held responsible for what they did as a teenager. Obama went to College and Law School, worked as a community Activist, went on to be a Constitutional Professor, became a State Senator and a U.S.Senator. We should forget all that and throw him under the bus because he did what I would guess three fourths of the kids in America have also done. Is that what we want to say to our kids? You can never get past your mistakes because some holier than thou person will come along some day and throw it in your face. This is a racist attack. The Clinton's act as if they are the best friends of the black people but they despise Obama for running against Hillary. One of their supporters in an article posted on another web site called Obama uppity for taking on Hillary in the primaries. My vote and my money will go to Obama.

Nancy Abraham (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:39 PM)

Hillary's New Years Resolution during the debate included "running a campaign that Democrats can be proud of"... guess she realizes she hasn't been doing that and has been damaging the Democratic party.

MR (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 10:03 PM)

74% say:most wouldn't vote for Pres who used cocaine

In a New York Times poll in June, 74 percent of respondents said they did not think most people they know would vote for a presidential candidate who has ever used cocaine.

"In the few polls that explicitly ask about cocaine use in a presidential candidate (as opposed to the softer more generic 'Drug Use,')" says one Washington, D.C. insider, "Seventy-four percent say cocaine use makes a person unfit to be president. It's the highest negative apart from 'no government experience.' Put differently, never in the history of the presidency has a front runner openly admitted to using cocaine. So now that Obama is talking about the drug use more often, I am absolutely certain it's because he and his team know that the cocaine issue is going to roar forward. It will be a major issue if he is the nominee.The GOP will ride it hard and he is trying to inoculate."

Full article from Iowa paper on 12/6
http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1594

If this sentiment is correct about EVER then this was a great move by Hillary. People have to remember best seller books don't sell that many copies. Also the media is so ashamed of their past drug use they feel the topic is off limits unless there is some linkage to public duties. So now every paper across the country has the story that Obama used cocaine.

I give Sheehan credit for taking the public hit to his reputation. He can bounce back with a White House appointment.

craigfarmer,bowie,md (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 10:03 PM)

Okay, I'll admit it. Sometimes I flick over to Fox to see what they're talking about. Tonight I'm glad I did. Hannity and Colmes had a segment with Frank Luntz.

By the way, I thought Luntz was with MSNBC. What happened there?

Anyway, he had a focus group discussing this drug dealer thing. I was stunned - it was like the attacks have just reached some sort of critical mass.

If this focus group was at all representative of Democrat caucus and primary participants, Clinton won't win a single state. And I say that not thinking anything of the kind before the segment. Of course that's only 20-some people, but... wow.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 10:07 PM)

"Oh, give me a break. Because he is black, you can't ask the extent of his involvement with drugs? That's the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. You can't play the race card when you choose, and then claim that race doesn't make a difference when it suits you.

I don't think that race factors into this AT ALL. The bottom line, to me, is that he used a very dangerous and very addictive drug, and I think he should have to answer questions about it. I would say the same of any of the other candidates had they admitted to using cocaine.
Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:22 PM)"

Carrie I have a HUGE problem with your statements. I know it is from a differnt post but I can't let this go on. Hillary's team was suggesting Obama was some crack dealing thug. The image is George Bush and Bill Clinton might use drugs but they would never stoop so low as to sell them. They probably used it in a party setting where it was a harmless environment. The image of Obama per the Clinton camp is envoking images of "American Gangster". They might as well asked if he shot anyone. Is he friends with Frank Lucas? I have NEVER EVER heard any white candidate that has admitted drug use asked if they were a dealer/distributor. That's the racist part. I have no reason to think Obama would lie. The man is honest peroid. This is the type of person who would tell the truth even if it hurt him. Something the Clintons or Bushes would EVER do.

sonya, atlanta,ga - Amen to your post.

Mark, NC (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 10:26 PM)

People! Just say no to drugs!!

Nancy R. (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 10:40 PM)

the never-ending Media-Obama lovefest. Firstread repeating Axelrod talking points verbatim. By the why didn't the media ask the questions that Mr Shaheen had to raise...Oh they were busy critiquing Hillary's laugh.

Boston, MA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 11:01 PM)

It is plain to see, Clinton is just like Bush when it comes to hurting people who appear to represent a threat. Clinton is claiming that she has leadership experience yet so many news reports are posting that a Clinton "aide" rather than Clinton, herself, is on the attack. What nonsense. Clinton hides behind aides like Bush hides behind his underlings. What a coward. No way is she fit to be America's leader. Morally, Clinton is a failure. Strategically, she is an idiot. How does she figure on carrying the black vote, if she did manage to pick up the party's nomination, when she unfairly dumps on Obama? Look at the support that black America offers the Democratic Party, +90% voting in each election. Look at the support black America had given Bill Clinton through good times and bad times. Now look at the total disrespect Clinton shows Obama. Bill Clinton now travels to black America and tells blacks essentially not to support Obama, while poll after pool talks about women's support for Clinton. Why is a certain demographic issue important for her but not for Obama? It won't add up in the end AND IT SHOULDN'T. The Democratic Party in general, and black democrats, in particular, were very generous to the Clintons, but here they come for more power. Just like the Bushes. Is it the female issue that should propel her campaign or a true reflection of her so-called leadership skills? You never hear about Obama playing any cards. It doesn't add up. How much power is enough for these people? More importantly, Clinton is always on the wrong side of important decisions. Something is very wrong here. We were warned that Bush would be horrible on foreign policy matters and look what we got. Clinton is proving that she is both horrible at foreign and domestic issues. There are a whole lot of things, on a whole lot of levels, wrong with the campaign involving Clinton. What a clown.

Kurt Munroe, Philadelphia (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 11:37 PM)

As a Republican who started the College Republicans on my college campus in Iowa in the 1980s. I can guarantee you that the Republican party will use Obama's drug usage against him. The resignation of Shaheen which was probably forced by Hillary, just shows that she has no balls.
In fact, an ad set in the style of the 1970s show basement with a bong and three teenages would be very effective. The first teenager would say "Dude, Obama is one of us!" The second would reply, "Yeah, man! He inhaled!" The third would then yell "Bong hits for Obama!!!" The tag line would be something like: "Vote of Mike Huckabee, he's a good Christian opposed to Drugs" or "Vote for Rudy Guiliani, he put drug lords away when he was the U.S. Attorney!!"
Neither Obama nor Clinton can win. If this was a uncontested Republican Caucus like the 1984 election, College Republicans would go to the Democratic Caucus and vote for Obama or Clinton, just like they did in 1984 for Jesse Jackson. The Republicans want a candidate they can defeat. However, this year the Republicans have a huge selection of their own.
As a moderate Republican, the only Democratic candidate I would vote for is John Edwards. In fact, I perefer him to any of the Republican Candidates. He is more like Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt. The current Republican party has lost its way and become once again the party of Grant, Harding, Taft, graft and corruption. Edwards is the only hope for America. Indpendents and Moderate Republicans will vote for him. It would be a cold day in Hades if I ever voted for Hillary Clinton. She is the most unamerican candidate ever. The Handmaiden of Wal Mart, the Handmaiden of China, and the Handmaiden of India.

KWH,. CA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 11:45 PM)

A couple of thoughts from a Conservative:

1) It amazes me to hear the Clinton's complain of media bias.
2) Shaheen tried to deflect his slime politicking on to the GOP by claiming they would use Obama's past drug use against him when truth be told he was trying to use it to save Hillary's fat ass.
3) I'd take a person of principle and honesty over Boss Hogg in a pant suit even if I disagree with his positions on issues I deem important.

Go Barack OprahBama

Jimmy Z Wexford, PA (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 11:48 PM)

Novak is back with a vengeance

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23958&s=rcmp

Last summer, a few Clinton insiders -- headed by her Senate chief of staff, Tamera Luzzatto -- paid a presumably social visit to the Cape Cod, Mass., vacation home of a prestigious Democrat reported to be in Obama's corner. Luzzatto warned that Obama was ethically challenged because of his leadership PAC. My sources indicated that this was not an isolated incident, and the slush-fund story was spread widely.

In a later incident, a Democrat, not on Clinton's Senate or campaign staffs but close to her, a month ago approached a party activist who has not made a commitment with this message: Skeletons in Obama's closet would make him vulnerable if nominated. He did not elaborate and said the Clinton campaign would keep its anti-Obama information to itself, remembering mutually destructive assaults between Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt in 2004 that enabled John Kerry's nomination.

Yiannis, Baltimore (Sent Thursday, December 13, 2007 11:56 PM)

The beautiful aspect of the "Leadership flows from the top" comment is that it is reminiscent of the issues the Bush Administration is experiencing with the torture controversies. Bush and Rummy set the tone and look at how some in the military and CIA and other agencies took it to mean open season on "the enemy".

Same concept here. Same tactics here.
Ready for a change?! Obama '08!!!

Roberta, Greensboro, NC (Sent Friday, December 14, 2007 12:02 AM)

Some of you folks need to get outside and get some fresh air. Your perceptions of the world are so narrow that it's obvious you eat what the media feeds you every morning. Travel the world a little, starting with your own country. Read some books. Educate yourself and quit being such a stupid American.

Obama just taught, yes TAUGHT, Hillary about the basic principles of leadership today. Obama is man-handling a self-proclaimed "Republican killer", and some of you don't think he can win the general? He has been forthcoming with everything, and yet you think he needs to be vetted more? He has parried with grace every attack Clinton has thrown at him, including strong character attacks, and everytime he has come out for the better, yet you think the Republicans will tear him apart?

Ridiculous. It's people like you who cause all the BS the rest of us have to deal with simply because you refuse to think beyond or expand your perception of the world. What do I mean?

It's people like you who vote for Bush because he's one of the "good ol' boys", yet it was plainly obvious that he was one of the least intelligent candidates for the presidency in recent memory, besides the fact that he rode daddy's curtails. Boy that sounds like a familiar storyline.

Speaking of, you are also the type that wants to vote for Clinton because she's "tough" and can fight Republicans, yet you forget about the trauma she and her husband brought this country in the 90's, you forget about all the drama she has unnecessarily brought this campaign season, and you forget that constant fighting is not the answer to forward progress. The Democratic field has a number of good candidates. There's no good reason to vote for Clinton.

Like I said, quit being a Stupid American and start owning up to reality. In the big scheme of things, Clinton is one of the worst candidates this year and the Democratic party could do a lot better.

Kevin, Florida (Sent Friday, December 14, 2007 12:28 AM)

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=515318