Comments: Michelle Obama Not Sure If She'd Support Hillary

The Obama's are Democrats of convenience.
Time to stop buying into the fiction that they are Progressive. Obama will not implement UHC, and probably will privatize SS.

Posted by MarkL at February 4, 2008 12:07 PM

trojan horse- always has been.

Posted by at February 4, 2008 12:08 PM

This is only the second place I've seen a reference to this, the other was at TalkLeft. The MSM isn't interested in Mrs. Obama's imperiousness, just Hillarys. Sen. Obama has also been saying that he can get Hillary's votes but she can't get his. Charming people these Obamas.

Posted by Ann at February 4, 2008 12:14 PM

Does Josh Marshall have the Youtube up on TPM? I mean, after all, if Bill said something like this it would be up in an instant.

Posted by xht at February 4, 2008 12:24 PM

Wow, all class, that one. No wonder the Republicans are supporting Obama.

Posted by iamcoyote at February 4, 2008 12:25 PM

Dude, relax. Her husband is running for president so naturally she is ALL invested in him right now. It was a bit of a stupid question to ask someon who is investing their heart and soul in a campaign. What Bill did was different... especially the South Carolina/Jackson comment which pissed me off. And I like them both, just for the record!

Posted by Ron at February 4, 2008 12:37 PM

Sorry, Hillary supporters. You aren't guaranteed Obama's votes in the general election when Hillary takes the nomination. That's reality, and it doesn't matter how ugly or how unfair it is. That's life.

There will be consequences if the Democratic party and its members choose Hillary and ignore the wishes of its left-wing and minority members. You want her, you have to live with the consequences of that. And calling us names won't help change our minds.

I don't see anything wrong with what Michelle said. She's just telling it straight.

Posted by Brian Bell at February 4, 2008 12:41 PM

There will be consequences if the Democratic party and its members choose Hillary and ignore the wishes of its left-wing and minority members.

One of the voices of "unity"?

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 12:48 PM

Sorry Barack supporters, you aren't guaranteed Hillary supporters either. Although I think you will get most of them because they DO put party unity first. Me, I am seriously considering McCain if Obama wins the nomination. Never in my life would I have thought that after 8 years of Bush. But the double standard of Barack and his supporters leads me to believe that these so called progressives have not learned their lessons on what it takes to have Democrats win elections, and more importantly restore America’s standing in the world.

Posted by SeaMBA at February 4, 2008 12:56 PM

I post there (TPM) all the time and I doubt it will make the page. I have been trying to make a unity pitch but it is getting nowhere. It might later on but for now it is falling on closed minds.

Posted by Kefa at February 4, 2008 12:58 PM

Vote however you want. We can win without the ficklers, and should ignore them anyway; it's how we got into this mess in the first place.

I have faith that a Hillary candidacy will hit a lot of people at home. I don't know about you, but my mom is a woman. Everybody's mom is. And they make up over half the population. I'm counting on that more than I am a population that numbers 12% at most, and more than the 'old enough to vote but too young to research' crowd, too.

And if that's not enough, she's a damn good fighter. I have more faith that she'd win a contest she's behind in than one in which Obama is ahead.

Unity, my ass.

Posted by blogtopus at February 4, 2008 12:58 PM

There will be consequences if the Democratic party and its members choose Hillary

So, we're down to threats, now, are we? It appears to me that we're now dealing with people who put the person over the party in much the same way the 25%ers for Bush have done. Brian seems awfully proud of that fact, too. Is your ego so fragile that you'll applaud the possibility of far right judges just because people don't agree your guy walks on water?

And what's really funny is two days ago, Brian here was hoping McCain would win, and was calling Obama a corporate whore. Sheesh.

Posted by iamcoyote at February 4, 2008 01:04 PM

Cowote:

Why are you always on the wrong side of things?

Posted by angryman at February 4, 2008 01:10 PM

I like Michelle for the most part, but she'll be a liability for Obama in a general election. The electorate does not like a strong woman as first lady (part of the Hillary hatred). They like someone who smiles nice and shuts up. McCain's wife looks the part.

Posted by CG at February 4, 2008 01:28 PM

Cowote:

We demand full disclosure: Are you being paid by the Clinton for President Campaign?

How else can anyone follow so blindly behind a candidate. Even in the face of overwhelming logic; you defend your candidate. Hey I have already voted and my original candidate had suspended his run. You are like a "mad dog after a bone" when you defend Clinton.

Posted by angryman at February 4, 2008 01:28 PM

"There will be consequences if the Democratic party and its members choose Hillary"

...so YOU were one of the Obama peeps that were riding around threatening AAs thru bullhorns who were holding Hillary signs on election day in SC!

"Why are you always on the wrong side of things?"

...I wish I had a dollar for every time Cheney and the chimp have asked that question!

Posted by TIKI AL at February 4, 2008 01:31 PM

Someone should stick to "angry".

Cause "comedyman" ain't working.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 01:35 PM

Um, TPM has it up because Paul Krugman linked to the very same thing.

I agree that everyone is getting off the rails here. But I've seen BOTH Clinton supporters and Obama supporters threaten to sit it out if their candidate didn't win. Everyone is at fault here.

Posted by Mike P at February 4, 2008 01:39 PM

There may be consequences if Senator and Mrs. Obama continue to go down this road. Not all Democratic voters like Senator Obama and both he and his wife have sanctioned not supporting the Democratic nominee. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Also, I will let you in on a little secret. Not all independents voters are male.

Posted by MO Blue at February 4, 2008 01:39 PM

snark great response. UnityTM only applies to repukes.

There will be consequences if the Democratic party and its members choose Hillary and ignore the wishes of its left-wing and minority members. You want her, you have to live with the consequences of that.

So a continuation of radical wingnut and repuke policies and ruthless unconstitutional treasonous war crimal dominance that are even to the right of the current Bush policies aren't enough of a consequence. Because that is where Mr. 100+ years in IRaq Bomb, bomb bomb Iran McCain, and MR. we need more tax cuts for the wealthy and more Guantanomo's Romney are coming from but hey whatever floats you're boat because you'd rather cut your nose off despite of your face...Wow...just Wow! I know after reading Obama supporters commentary and hearing Michelle Obama make this comment that this unity schtick thingy is just more political Bushit...it's not meant for true progressives like myself. Thanks for doing your best to turn me off of Mr. Obama....but hey you're happy now because you're threatening anyone who isn't an Obama cult member...jeebus kerist on a popisicle stick...how freaking juvenile. But you know what although you cult members continue to do your very best to antagonize undecided voters like myself with these childish comments and threats, I know I will never vote for a repuke in the upcoming election, a person who is most certainly 100 times worse than even Mr. Obama or his supporters.

Posted by emal at February 4, 2008 01:45 PM

Jeff,
Look at the comment thread here. I think you've already got your answer about a possible fracture in the party.

Posted by Mike P at February 4, 2008 01:47 PM

BOTH Clinton supporters and Obama supporters threaten to sit it out if their candidate didn't win.

Supporters, yes. The Clintons? No.

Hillary Clinton has said unambiguously that she will do everything she can to support whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is. Barack Obama stood up and gave a stump speech in which he put the concept of his supporters not supporting Clinton in their heads as something that would be understandable or acceptable. And now you have Michelle Obama hedging on a very basic question of supporting the Democratic Party if Barack does not get the nomination.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 01:53 PM

snark,
Good point. But you know that BARACK OBAMA, the one who is running for president, said the exact same thing as Hillary, right?

Posted by Mike P at February 4, 2008 01:55 PM

If Hillary gets the nod, pissed off republicans will hold their breath until they turn blue and automatically turn into democrats.

Posted by TIKI AL at February 4, 2008 01:56 PM

It's mind boggling. Yes, if Bill were to say anything even close to this, it would be front paged everywhere.

If Murdoch owned newspapers were endorsing Hillary at the rate they're endorsing Obama, progressives everywhere would be outraged.

And what of this?

FROM THE CHI SUN TIMES:

The Obama campaign has tapped Melissa Winter, a veteran of two presidential campaigns, to serve as her chief of staff in the campaign's Chicago headquarters. For the last 10 years she has worked for Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), serving as his executive assistant. Winter was also was part of Lieberman's 2004 Democratic primary bid.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/03/sweet_column_michelle_obama_st.html#more%22

Can anyone fathom the disgust if Hillary had hired this person?

And we are to dismiss the number of Republicans singing Obama's praises? The media tiptoeing around anything to do with Obama? The very same people and media that has spent the last 20 years destroying anything liberal, progressive or Democratic are now to be believed???

I'm somewhere between scared and sad at the willful blindness at places like kos that they don't see we're being set up for another loss.

Posted by jen at February 4, 2008 01:59 PM

But you know that BARACK OBAMA, the one who is running for president, said the exact same thing as Hillary, right?

Ohhhh! Right. I forgot, the things that SPOUSES say in support of the one's actually running for president are of no import to the race. Silly me! How could I have gotten such an idea.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 02:06 PM

...can anyone explain this?

Um, Bill Kristol is an asshole?

Posted by bartcopfan at February 4, 2008 02:07 PM

Well, the difference between Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama is that one is a former president and is still generally thought to be a head of (if not the head of) the Democratic Party. So, yeah, it probably would make more news (and rightly so).
Give this a day or so. You might get your wish and this will be everywhere.

I really think this is much ado about nothing. Barack has said he will back the eventual nominee:
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/11/obama_would_endorse_clinton_or.html

I'm pretty sure his wife would as well.

Posted by Mike P at February 4, 2008 02:07 PM

Cause "comedyman" ain't working.

Heh.

Posted by iamcoyote at February 4, 2008 02:09 PM

"I'm a Democrat and I'm going to support the Democratic nominee, especially since it's going to be me." -Barack Obama.

So he's especially gonna support the Democratic nominee if it's him. That's encouraging I suppose. ;)

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 02:12 PM

Give this a day or so. You might get your wish and this will be everywhere.

I have no such wish.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 02:14 PM

Iamacoyote &Snark are actually very humorous. They can snark & slime. They call Obama voters Republicans,LOL. I called them that for their attacks on Obama supportors. They personalize their attacks like emmm republicans. Yes Hillery can lose, you expect Obama supportors to fall in line like the conservatives are doing for McCain?
The fight for the Presidency, with Hillery as the nominee will not be about the future of this country. It will be about Monica, Bill the Impeachment, Whitewater and Hillerys vote for the IRAQ WAR.
Hillery knew what would happen when she voted for the authorization of GWB to go to war with Iraq. almost 4,000 dead young americans and thousands wounded,disabled and mentally haunted.
None of the Hillery supporters express any remorse over her vote, remorse, regret, a sense of loss???
I just attended a rally at Giant Stadium, Barrick Obama spoke to us of hope for the future, and regret for the losses of our soldiers in a war of lies. He can speak with a clean mind to John McCain in Nov. What will Hillery say? John & I agree war for the next 100 years could be necessary, we both signed the Bomb Iran, Kyl Liberman Amendment.
Get real Hillery supporters the war is for me the most defining issue I cannot support for President someone who sent those soldiers into a quagmire. She knew.She voted against the Levin Amendment.
Yeah some Anti War people will not vote for Hillery. In honor of those dead soldiers.

Posted by rm forsyth at February 4, 2008 02:16 PM

Thank you, Mrs. Obama. For that, if I was voting in your election, your husband would lose my vote. How can supposedly "smart" people be so stupid and narrow-minded?

Posted by jra at February 4, 2008 02:19 PM

They call Obama voters Republicans,LOL. I called them that for their attacks on Obama supportors. They personalize their attacks like emmm republicans.

I've never made any sort of personal attack against you or any other Obama supporter.

None of the Hillery supporters express any remorse over her vote, remorse, regret, a sense of loss???

Why should anyone express remorse for something they had nothing to do with? You don't know anything about the personal situations relative to the war of anyone who posts here. Hillary Clinton is not the one who ordered the invasion of Iraq. Many seem to be determined to believe she did. I do not.


Yeah some Anti War people will not vote for Hillery. In honor of those dead soldiers.

And the thought of president McCain is somehow more comforting to you? Gonna honor the dead soldiers by facilitating the election of a guy who supports 100 years of war in Iraq? Who jokes about "bomb, bomb, bomb" Iran? I'm sure they'll all be honored. Good luck with that.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 02:29 PM

Boy, these Obamabots play fast and loose with the facts, don't they? Tomorrow, they'll be saying Hillary personally flew the planes that dropped the bombs on Iraqis.

And forsyth, snark never personally attacks anyone - I got on your case for your god-awful writing. And it is god-awful.

Posted by iamcoyote at February 4, 2008 02:37 PM

Poor ole Michelle Obama.

She thinks people give a rat's a** what Oprah Winfrey says. LOL

Verrrry arrogant, Mrs. Obama.

Tacky. Petty. Classless.

But then again, if Obama can't control his family, how can he control the country?

Posted by Mary at February 4, 2008 02:39 PM

Sounds to me like the same people who gave us Bush (via the Nader vote), would like to do it again (either via a vote for McCain or by sitting out the election). Some people never learn. Hasn't the last the last 8 years been enough? Experience counts, vetting matters!

Posted by Kathy at February 4, 2008 03:10 PM

snark,
Come on now...he did said he WOULD back the nominee. We'd be saying he was lacking confidence if he didn't think he was going to be the guy. ;-)

Seriously, though. I have no problem with Clinton as the nominee and she would get my vote if she wins. I do think some of the Obama supporters are a little too wrapped up in this, but there are Clinton supporters who are pretty heated about things as well right now.

Paul Krugman just posted a link the mentioned some of Clinton's advisors think this will go to the convention. He hopes it will be over before then. After the last month or so, I do too. This isn't good for the party, IMO.

Posted by Mike P at February 4, 2008 03:21 PM

oh for fuck's sake. She's not threatening to endorse John McCain. Barack Obama, as a prominent Democratic politician, is morally obliged to actively campaign for Hillary Clinton. Michelle Obama? Not so much. That's her business.

Posted by Katherine at February 4, 2008 03:25 PM

Well, now we know where Obama's base get their ridge attitudes. Michelle Obama supports the thinking that if it isn't Obama then well.......
This from the wife of 'the uniter?' Evidently the wife of the uniter doesn't see any reason to unite if the election doesn't go her husbands way. Why am I getting a double message here?

Fuck Kristol!

Posted by Judith at February 4, 2008 04:25 PM

Statement One: Michelle says she'd have to think about it.

Statement Two: "MICHELLE OBAMA: You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. I think that we're all working for the same thing. and, you know, I think our goal is to make sure that the person in the White House is going to take this country in a different direction."

Simma down folks.

Posted by Mike P at February 4, 2008 04:31 PM

Much of the trouble we find the country in is due the the "party before country" attitude of many in the electorate. Why does one have to be committed to either party?

If I, or Michelle, feel that Hillory would be bad for the country, why blindly support her? She has demonstrated time and again that she is a calculating politician, not a leader.

I could vote for Obama, but never Hillory. Than's just the way it is. Sorry I'm not a Democratic Party stooge. And please, refrain from the usual name calling reserved for those who don't tow the party line.

Posted by brisa at February 4, 2008 04:40 PM

That would be "Hillery"....sorry.

Posted by brisa at February 4, 2008 04:41 PM

I think you're missing the big picture here. I'm not running for president or first lady because I don't have the stomach or maturity for it. But if you're going to throw your hat in the political arena, you really should have both. Bill and Hillary have both pledged to support the Dem. candidate in November, whoever that may be. Obama is running on a "unity theme", so for his wife to say she won't vote for Hillary is quite immature, and pretty much blasts her husband's "unifying" skills right out of the water. If Hillary can work with the likes of Newt Gingrich and Lindsay Graham (people who voted to impeach her husband) to get health care and benefits for veterans, then I think Michelle should suck it up and say she'll support the Democratic candidate. Otherwise, she has no business being in politics, and much less being First Lady. I think the woman needs to grow up.

Posted by sky at February 4, 2008 04:42 PM

November's a long way away. BushCo'll see to it that people will want whomever has a D behind their name, methinks. These weird "threats" are pretty childish.

Posted by Sharon at February 4, 2008 04:46 PM

I think Michelle's comments are a pretty clear indication at how well Obama will do in uniting Democrats with Republicans. He's clearly naive.

Posted by Camilla at February 4, 2008 04:49 PM

rmf: I agree with you, coyote and snark ARE very humorous!

brisa: Did you spell Hillary wrong twice on purpose?

Just got another call from Hillary for President.(that makes 10 total)
A polite young female campaign worker. Still none from Obama, Romney, or McCain.

Posted by TIKI AL at February 4, 2008 04:57 PM

I agree with everything you said except we don't have two equally good candidates. We have one terrible one for a general election..Barack Obama will be demolished in a general. A white man, let alone a woman would never get a pass with his minimal qualifications. Is this some sort of affirmative action initiative for President? Why is he equally qualified? Because he is African American, graduated from Harvard Law School and is articulate? Where has he demonstrated he is a leader? What has he led?

The problem is that we don't have two equally qualified candidates. And the sooner Democrats recognize this, the better we will be. Go back and read history. See how Democrats nominated McGovern and gave the election to Nixon, who would have lost against Humphrey. Look at over confident Dems who nominated Dukakis. And those candidates had qualifications superior to Obama's.
The general public will not elect a candidate because of his My Space factor. Get real...this man has divided the Democratic party more than any previous Democrat. He is a walking disaster.

Posted by lily15 at February 4, 2008 04:58 PM

Hey, I'd love to have Hillary as my president. Too bad we can't divide the country. Obama people get to live off of good speeches. And the Hillary voters can prosper—I understand the premiums for Congressional health care plan are quite cheap. And how about only the Hilllary voters get the benefits of the balanced budget like they did in the 90's. The stock market did great, and it was easy to buy a home, and more jobs. Yeah, I'd like to have Hillary for president. I don't give a rat's ass about the trumped up scandals. I'd like to have more money in the bank like I did in the 90's. And Obama voters can just eat cake.

Posted by Jamie at February 4, 2008 04:58 PM

Jamie--

I love that line...let Obama supporters eat cake.

And if they cause us to lose this election, we should all be talking about what punishment they deserve...especially to all the blogs who lied to us and failed to inform us...

Posted by lily15 at February 4, 2008 05:02 PM

If Obama wins, I will support him.

If Hillary wins, I will support her.

I WILL NOT TOLERATE another republican in the White House.

Posted by AtomicDog at February 4, 2008 05:14 PM

If I, or Michelle, feel that Hillory would be bad for the country, why blindly support her? She has demonstrated time and again that she is a calculating politician, not a leader.

Why blindly?

I'd like you to support her, if she gets the party's nomination, with your eyes wide open, in hi-def. Warts and all. What aspect of the fact that, come November, one of 5 people (Obama, Clinton, Huckabee, McCain or Romney) is going to be elected the next president is not clear to you? Do you honesly think it's not going to make the least bit of difference to the country if McCain or Huckabee or Romney get elected instead of Hillary Clinton?

I'm all for reforming the system and improving the democratic nature of how we select our leadership but it ain't gonna happen between now and November. And 4 more years of a fucking Republican installing judges all around the country is not going to help anything remotely like reform happpen.

But you sit up on your high horse and comfort yourself with the thought that you can tell everyone you didn't vote for so and so, the calculating politician.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 06:23 PM

Mike P.,

What you left out of your synopsis is very important though.

GMA: That's not a given?

The reaction to her comment that she was going to have to think about whether she'll support the party's nominee if it's Clinton was one of surprise that "it was not a given". That's why she changed her answer. Her first response was genuine. Her second response was her covering her ass. And she couldn't even bring herself to say "she" would support Clinton. Rather she used a generality about "everyone in the party" supporting "whoever the nominee is".

It's just really sad coming from the wife of the "unity" candidate.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 06:33 PM

To be fair, that was a very difficult situation she was in. There she was talking about her husband's campaign & she's asked about "WORKING TO SUPPORT" Clinton's nomination.

She has already specified her views of what politics should be about. The Clintons' political obsession to what is good for themselves (instead of for the American people) is totally anathema to Michelle Obama's idea of politics. Given that, it stands to reason that it would indeed be extremely difficult for her to betray her principles and put herself on the line for Hillary Clinton.

Yet, in spite of that, she did say this: "You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is." But then the angst flowed in when it came to "working to support" Clinton and that is quite understandable.

Bottom line: She NEVER EXCLUDED support for Clinton and it's dishonest to present her position on the subject in any other way.

Link

Posted by Gene at February 4, 2008 06:41 PM

The Clintons' political obsession to what is good for themselves (instead of for the American people) is totally anathema to Michelle Obama's idea of politics.

What a load of crap.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 06:52 PM

But then again, if Obama can't control his family, how can he control the country?

Anybody do a double take on this statement?

Posted by Seven of Six at February 4, 2008 07:07 PM

Sure did, Seven of Six. It's why I typed it.

Queen Michelle Obama said the SAME thing about Hillary.

Now.....Michelle is rude and tacky.

Well....if Obama can't HIS family, how can he control the country?

Perhaps Queen Michelle should look in a mirror or at the log in her OWN eye, eh?

GRACIOUS, she clearly is not.

Posted by Mary at February 4, 2008 07:17 PM

And furthermore, since Queen Michelle has set the standard...

If Obama wins the nomination, will I support him?

I'd have to think about that.

Goes around, comes around.

Posted by Mary at February 4, 2008 07:21 PM

Sorry, Hillary's office has called my house three times tonight. Obama none.
And she has called our house twice before. Obama none.

She's doing the pimping, not Obama. I'm not voting for Hillary unless it's GE.

Posted by Seven of Six at February 4, 2008 07:26 PM

I wonder why Obama doesn't care about you SoS?

;)

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 07:32 PM

Pimp the vote! Hillary's new slogan.

Posted by Seven of Six at February 4, 2008 07:35 PM

I don't get it. Aren't the campaigns supposed to call to get out the vote? Aren't they all pimping?

Posted by iamcoyote at February 4, 2008 07:56 PM

Well now I'm pissed.
"Obama why don't you call me?"

At least he respects my privacy.

Posted by Seven of Six at February 4, 2008 08:03 PM

Snark, crap indeed! Your words, not mine. Here's an example:

A cynic might look at the Clintons and the Doles and say that what is involved is a form of family protection racket. The wives speak out publicly from the floor of the US Senate, warning of “security concerns” over the Dubai port deal, and thereby raising the cash value of the services their husbands perform privately for the emirs. - Link

Sure, you can kill the messenger but then that will mean that you don't at all mind getting screwed by them again and again ... and in this campaign, too. Sad, don't you think? For here you are sweating and fighting to send them back to where they can do it again to you.

I wouldn't mind that much. After all, consenting adults and all that, you know. Only you will not be the only one getting screwed. The whole of the country will get it as will the rest of the World. I do not like that.

Posted by Gene at February 4, 2008 08:09 PM

Gene,

How exactly was Hillary Clinton's opposition to the Dubai World Ports deal good for her or for Bill CLinton. Bill CLinton had a relationship with UAE following his presidency. No one tried to hide that. They asked for his advise on how to deal with the opposition in the US government. He advised them to submit to the 45 day review and to include the most stringent of security measures in their contract. That's what they did. And still Congress, Hillary Clinton included, rejected the deal. So is it your contention that the Dubai World Ports deal would have been good for the American people if only the Clintons hadn't interfered to stop it?

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 08:49 PM

May I humbly suggest that you ask them? Little me wasn't in the loop.

Posted by Gene at February 4, 2008 08:59 PM

Little me wasn't in the loop.

Right, like I said, a load of crap.

Posted by snark at February 4, 2008 09:02 PM

(beats head against wall, prays for November to arrive very, very soon)

Posted by Mike P at February 4, 2008 09:33 PM

Can anyone fathom the disgust if Hillary had hired this person?

She hired Mark Penn of Blackwater fame. I don't see your problem.


Statement Two: "MICHELLE OBAMA: You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. I think that we're all working for the same thing. and, you know, I think our goal is to make sure that the person in the White House is going to take this country in a different direction."

C'mon, Mike. The Hillary Hive assclowns have to have their Fox moments. When you don't take her comments out of context what Michelle said seems reasonable. But you must take them out of context. Otherwise you are simply a misogynistic Hillary hater.

Posted by phidipides at February 4, 2008 09:39 PM

NEWS UPDATE :

Bill Kristol is Still an asshole.

**We now return to your regularly scheduled blog.

Posted by mparker at February 4, 2008 11:05 PM

"There will be consequences if the Democratic party and its members choose Hillary."

What are you going to do. Put McOld in the WH? Thata show us, won't it.

Posted by Judith at February 5, 2008 03:01 AM

The question wasn't "will you support Hillary" or "Will you vote for Hillary". It came after she was talking about hard she's working for Obama. Maybe she meant that if Hillary is the nominee, she wasn't sure if she would work the same--I can't imagine the spouse of a candidate traveling around the country, leaving their little girls, WORKING for another.

Posted by Beth at February 5, 2008 08:31 AM

This sounds like propagandistic BS. What was she supposed to say?? Her husband is in the political fight of his life for the most important job in the world. It is an unfair question to ask at this time -- in the middle of a hellish political battle.

Why would she say anything that makes it seem as though she would cast a vote for Clinton, at this time? If she had said "yes", then you'd be blogging about how she is pulling for Hillary or that secretly she doesn't want her husband to win or some such other propaganda. She said what she should have said -- that Barack is the only person for the job! That she is only supporting Barack. period. Of course she'll vote for the democratic nominee, whoever it should be.. the woman ain't stupid.. she's smart and loyal, just what anyone with any sense would expect.

Posted by lp007 at February 6, 2008 01:50 PM

This isn't the first rude thing she's said. It was incredibly stupid, and she does not come across as a nice or genuine person. The reason why republicans win year after year is that in the end they know that in order to win the white house they have to present a unified front. The Kennedy's knew that. That's why they picked Johnson. Obama has said similar comments and its downright stupid and politically naive. It's all about putting a democrat in the white house. You don't say I don't know that I'd support them, then if you lose the nomination, expect your supporters to vote en masse for that person. This should be the easiest election for Democrats and should be a "slam dunk." Even if you love Obama, Clinton is light years better than anything the Republicans have to offer. But at the rate the Democrats are going especially the Obama's constantly saying they don't know if they'll support Clinton if she gets the nomination, it'll be another 4 yrs with a Republican in the white house.

Posted by kacey at February 6, 2008 04:23 PM

I endorsed Hilton because IMO she is the best democrat to be able to beat Mc Cain and get anything done (right) when she is at the White-House.
Totally inept and selfish comments like this is a reflection of their extreme political ambition, selfishness and lack of substance

I will not endorse OBAMA should he win the nomination.

Posted by tomy at February 20, 2008 04:44 PM
Post a comment
HTML Tags:
<b>Bold</b> = Bold
<i>Italics</i> = Italics
<a href="http://www.url.com/">Linked text</a> = Linked text

Note: comments from signed in commenters will show up right away. If you are not signed in, your comment will not appear until it has been approved.




Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)

In order to post a comment, you must answer the following question.