Obama (nicely) accuses President Clinton of lying

If Bill were half as vicious towards George Bush in 2004 we would be talking about President Kerry's 2nd term right now. It's disheartening to see President Clinton attack a fellow Democratic in this manner.

Robin Roberts: Anything else you that want to set the record strait that he said one thing about you and you're now saying that's false?

Obama: President Clinton went in front of a large group, said that I had claimed that only republicans had had any good ideas since 1980.

-
Is Obama lying here? I tried googling that quote and couldn't find an exact comment by Bill, only a link back here to the Swamp.

Bill Clinton shouldn't be this involved in the campaign. I back Obama, but of course I will support Clinton if she wins. Having Bubba use his star power in this way is tacky and over the top.

Obama's just now discovering that Clinton is a serial liar?

Where has Obama been the last 15 years? Including 1992 and 1996, when Obama voted for Clinton.

In related news, Obama tells the press the sun rises in the east, water is wet, and winter is colder than summer.

So Obama went on GMA today to whine about how the Clinton's are being too mean to him?

Pass the smelling salts!

Someone needs to inform the Obama's that this is Presidential politics. Further, if this is how Obama is going to over-react to what has been a very, very, mild and civil campaign, it gives me no confidence in his ability to withstand the the ruthless GOP attack machine.

All of the candidates have spouses who are strongly advocating for their respective spouses. Bill Clinton has every right to make his case as he sees fit.

Further, whatever the media thinks about Bill Clinton is irrelevant. Ultimately, it's for the voters to decide.

And if the the election results and exit polls from NH, MI, and NV are any indication, the voters seem support the conclusion that Bill Clinton knows what he's doing.

To Bruce Y - nope, that's exactly what WJC said. They showed the footage on the Sunday morning shows. It was reprehensible, to be frank. A complete and surely knowing misrepresentation of what Obama said.

Is Barack Obama's war position inconsistent?

Senator Barack Obama, then an Illinois state senator, delivered these remarks October 2, 2002 at the Federal Plaza in Chicago:
"I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.
I Don't Oppose All Wars
I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil. I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.
Opposed to Dumb, Rash Wars
I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
On Saddam Hussein
Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power…. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors…and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.
I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.
I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.
You Want a Fight, President Bush?
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that…we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.
Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair."
Barack Obama delivered his powerful speech at the Federal Plaza in Chicago October 2, 2002 against the US beginning war in Iraq while later that same month Hillary Clinton voted for the authorization to begin US military action in Iraq. Once US troops were actually in Iraq and fighting a war, of course, it would be irresponsible for Obama to be against funding the troops. The key is that Barack Obama had the judgment to see the dumbness of the war in October 2002 and clearly said so. Hillary Clinton did not and voted to start it.

Bill and Hillary Clinton's tactic of trying to paint Obama's war position as "a fairy tale" or as "inconsistent" is merely "Clinton politics" and clearly demonstrates why America badly needs the enormous breath of fresh air Barack Obama provides. At one time Senator Kerry from Nebraska referred to the Clinton's as "clever liars" several years before President Bill Clinton told America: "I did not have sex with that woman!" or as Jay Leno quipped, "He didn't have sex with her, she had it with him!"
Goodbye Bill and Hillary Clinton. Hello Barack Obama.

Bruce Y -- a Clinton video with quote is easily found on Youtube.

So, no Obama is not lying.

Bruce, I saw the clip on Meet the Press yesterday.

There are several typographical errors in this article. They made me re-read the sentence to make sense out of it.

As is usually the case with Obama, his choice of words displays simultaneously his mode of "fighting" - that is, criticizing his opponents - and his mode of "uniting" - acknowledging the element of legitimacy in his opponent's efforts. His tone was more-in-sorrow-than-in anger, his stance that of an adult calling timeout when a child's game overheats. Almost every allegation was couched in either praise of (Bill) Clinton or acknowledgment that his support for Hillary is itself legitimate.

Welcome aboard Senator Obama, most of us have known he's a liar for 16 years now.

un beleavable

Obama used his entire sermon Sunday in Atlanta attacking unnamed opponents saying they believe MLK's dream was "wishful thinking." Talk about lies!

Take a look at the end of Obama's sermon in this video where he bows his head and refuses to sing one verse of "We Shall Overcome." Why did he do that when in every other verse he sings ever single word?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8x-1v1MIbs

Any one who thinks this issue has not been a mischaracterization by the Clinton camp, read the MSNBC political blog at http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/18/589131.aspx. I think the tactics of the Clinton camp alone, which are beginning to resemble the "Swift Boaters" and the Republican talking points of the day are reason enough not to believe she is worthy of the White House. The Swift Boaters told us something very important about George Bush, and we didn't listen. And I think her tacit approval of this twisting and mischaracterization of the truth tells us something very troubling about Hillary. And this time, we should definitely listen.

Obama originally said that "I think it is fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time over the last 10-15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom".

Bill Clinton responded by spinning those words as follows: "Her (Hillary's) principle opponent said that since 1992, the Republicans have had all the good ideas."

Then Obama's campaign responds by extending Clinton's statement from 1992 back to 1980.

Bill Clinton accussed of lying? Say it ain't so. No surprises here, Clinton once perjured himself under oath, so I can't definitively say that this accusation from Obama is entirely false.

But on the other hand, perhaps Oprabama should be discussing his initiatives if he becomes President rather than stooping down the Clinton's level of dirty politics. But then again, Obama has no plans, or initiatives, or a record of experience for that matter to discuss.

Here's the quote from clinton Obama was referring to:

Bill Clinton: I can't imagine any Democrat seeking the presidency would say they were the party of new ideas for the last 15 years. But it sounded good in Reno I guess. So now it turns out you can choose between somebody who thinks our ideas or better or the Republicans had all the good ideas.

I am quite disturbed about what Clinton is attempting to do to Sen Obama. How come someone ( Oh!, that's me) doesn't come out against Mr Clinton and speak about the way he was a draft dodger and war protestor. I find this to be troubling on many levels. Mrs Clinton says she supports Veterans, laughable at best. Personally, I take offense to Mr Clinton being a draft dodger while I served in Vietnam losing friends practically everyday.

Obama repeatedly said he was going to finish his senate term and not run for president in 2008. Was Obama lying?

Obama consistently denied that he had done any favours for Rezko. Until the media unearthed two letters Obama wrote to state officials in 1998 urging them to grant extra funds for Rezko's project. Was Obama lying?

Obama says he is a "uniter" and his campaign had nothing to do with attacking Bill Clinton over use of "fairy tale" as supposedly being racist. That is, until a four-page memo outlining Obama's racial strategy was leaked by his campaign and held up by Tim Russert during the SC debate. Was Obama lying?

Obama promised us "change" also, but has done precious little since becoming our U.S. senator but posture and campaign for the presidency and cut deals to enrich himself and his wife. Was Obama lying?

Well we all know Bill Clinton has lied to us multiple times before.

In addition, you can compare Bill Clinton's remarks against Obama's orginal comment:

Barack Obama: The Republican approach I think has played itself out. I think it’s fair to say the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time over the last 10 or 15 years, in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom. Now, you’ve heard it all before. You look at the economic policies, when they’re being debated among the presidential candidates, it’s all tax cuts. Well, we’ve done that, we’ve tried it.

I believe the direct quote was the Republicans were the "party of ideas", no good or better was attached to those ideas. He was putting it in context of why Americans were so on-board with the Reagan era policies. The ideas put forward were in concert with American sentiment at the time. Just as the current sentiment is "change".
Here is a link to the interview. Other than the sound it is good.

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070216/VIDEO01/70216029

Bruce Y,
No, Obama is not lying. They played old Bill's quote - directly from his lying mouth - yesterday on "Meet The Press." I must say I am ashamed to have ever voted for Bill, he has no respect for the truth, nor does his nepotist wife. I will not support her if she gets the nomination - I will hope Bloomberg runs if that transpires.

I am tired of mud slinging and rude comments and mistruths. Why can't the candidates tell us truths about what they will actually do and stop the other stuff...we are all tired of it! In reality, if someone digs up stuff to try to gain an advantage, I automatically dismiss that individual from my consideration.

I hope President Clinton does not "take the bait" here and respond off the cuff. Didn't David Axelrod have something to do with the former President's campaign here in Chicago? If so, he would certainly know how to push his buttons.

As a strategy I think Mr. Obama should publicly challenge Bill Clinton to a debate.

The press release could go something like this:

"As part of his wife's Presidential campaign Bill Clinton continues to attack my credibility by distorting the facts. It is also becoming clear for all to see that a Hillary Clinton White House will in fact be a Bill Clinton/Hillary Clinton White House.

Since Bill Clinton seems very eager to be part of this Presidential campaign and the next White House, and since there is no mechanism for including him in the formally scheduled debates, I and my team hereby offer to arrange a public debate between Mr. Clinton and myself. Let's debate the issues that matter to Americans and the future of this country, and let's debate about how Bill Clinton thinks he will solve those issues should he once again win the White House."

Something along those lines anyway.

Obama's team should strike while the iron is hot, before Bill Clinton retreats from the news, only to return later once the fuss has died down.

Its a shame that a giant like Bill Clinton should denigrate himself to lying, just because he wants to return to the White House, do they honestly think that people like me would have amnesia and suddenly vote for Hilary in the General Election. And a very shameful thing is, the Hilary Supporters, instead of being truthfully are also lying along with Bill and saying stupid comments like he didn't say "We Shall Overcome." America is one of the most hated countries in the world, Democrats and Republicans are spliting apart and people are no longer believing in the American dream. Lets vote Barack for president, or else it would be another 4 years of a republican

I hope that the candidates get it together, and focus on the issues. Fault finding is NOT on my agenda of topics of interests when choosing the next US President.

As a lifelong Democrat and Clinton supporter, I find what he is doing in this case extremely disturbing. Bill Clinton is a liar, both on big issues and on small issues.

This campaign gives me a good sense of why so much of the country has such hatred for both of the Clintons.

Everybody has the right to have people out there speaking on their behalf, but if they don't speak the facts, then they shouldn't be speaking on behalf of the campaign, because then the campaign isn't speaking the facts. More importantly, Bill is a FORMER PRESIDENT, a highly admired one at that, what he says is supposed to carry some credibility, and he is descending to the level of quoting half of Barack's sentences, chopping quotes in half, all in the name of political point scoring. Barack has the right to be angry, he is out there speaking the truth, and here comes Bill saying Barack said things he never said.

For example, he never said "good ideas" in reference to the Republican party since Reagan, he said they were the party of ideas, and then went on to talk about how their ideas didn't really work for America.

The Clintons are crooks.

www.hillcap.org

Come on! Whose the liar? Bill told us a few months ago that Bill himself was against the War from the start. In that case there is very clear concrete documention that Bill was lying. Whenever Bill Clinton says " and that's no lie" he is lying and if you look back at Hillary's videos, whever she looks down and to the side she is lying.

I've lived in Chicago for the last 7 years and everybody knew that fundraiser Tony Rezko, a Chicago businessman was corrupt, was under federal investigation for influence-peddling and bank fraud charges. And Obama used his money to get elected senator and now, that he got caught decided to return some money back? Give me a break. All his talk about change is nonsense. Let's be honest and agree that he is as corrupt as all the politicians in this country are.
But, like the Clintons and just about any other American politician, he has assiduously done just that. According to the Washington Post, Obama has raised $78,915,507 and relied heavily on people such as Kenneth Griffin, a Chicago-based hedge-fund manager who reportedly earned $1.4bn last year. Obama is a con man — nothing more.
It should be illegal for Obama to donate these funds to charities of his choice. He may donate money to agencies that will give him a political gain. How is this ethical coming from Mr Ethics Obama?

Is Obama lying here? I tried googling that quote and couldn't find an exact comment by Bill, only a link back here to the Swamp.

Posted by: Bruce Y | January 21, 2008 11:30 AM

BRUCE,

SEEKER OF ALL THAT IS TRUE. We're waiting!

Apparently it must be true and you've just wasted our time - AGAIN!

Next time, have the evidence ready before you post a half-baked theory. Do your research in advance.

Wow, I didn't realize it was so nasty between the actual SUPPORTERS of Clinton and Obama. This is great to me ... it will just make it that much easier for John McCain to win the Presidency when the real election comes around. Please keep beating each other up as much as possible! Bill looks like a bully on the playground and Barack looks like someone who passive-aggressively attacks someone instead of directly confronting the tomfoolery.

Wait until everyone finds out he's more liberal than Ted Kennedy. =)

"And you know, Michelle is out there doing the same thing on my behalf,"
"Well, you know, there's no doubt, having President Clinton on the trail, and attacking -- spending most of his time attacking me, it can be a distraction during the course of the campaign. But anybody who's heard my wife Michelle on the stump knows that she's an incredible asset. I feel like it balances out."

Michelle is out there doing the same on his behalf--attacking, spending most of her time attacking...Alright so why spend the time crying about it? Tough cookies Hillary has a former president backing her up. Maybe Obama can look into getting another could have been former president-- to add credibility to attacks by his campaign, Kerry. But, no. His first response on anything is always--have the upper hand, "define my enemies." Instead of let's--see how we can match this--to add to our issue of our credibility-- my wife v a former president.

"It's disheartening to see President Clinton attack a fellow Democratic in this manner."

Yes it is also disheartening seeing a woman (Michelle) attack another woman (Clinton) from the same party (Dems). Let's not pretend running for president doesn't involve some ironies. Otherwise, how are people who run for president within their own party supposed to define themselves from each other.

So we're back to the no one can call Obama out or point to his weaknesses phase. He said the Republicans were the party of ideas for the last 15 years. It's logical to ask: And the Democrats weren't? Oh, but doing so is an attack on Obama, so we'd better not.

Marko, that's an excellent point.

Proves that the Clintons don't care about their party or the country. All the Clintons care about is winning. It's like Bill thinks his own reputation is at stake.

Obama accuses Bill Clinton of lying. It is hard to believe some one would accuse "Slick Willie" of lying. He has been accused of this before. The results were an impeachment trial. He was also disbarred for lying to a Federal Grand Jury. Obama should ask Bill Clinton what he means by the word "is" is.

I'm glad Obama is calling Bill Clinton on the carpet, and he's doing it in the right way, only I wish he had been doing it about a week or two ago.

By the way Gladstone, I'm sure Obama has known about Clinton's veracity problem all along. But there's a little thing called "social skills" that you apparently lack; there's a time and a place to make remarks when you will get noticed in a good way, and a time and a place where you will get dismissed as a crank. And if Obama had piled on Hillary a year ago when Bill was invisible and the media narrative was all about how wonderful Hillary was, it would have backfired. Or are you so blinded by the intensity of your Clinton hatred that it has to be all attack, all the time? I think that's how the Republicans lost seats in 1998 during impeachment when they should have gained seats, no?

Today on GMA, at the opening of the program, we saw weeping, crying, pitiful Obama complaining about the Clinton's. Is this how he will act if President - run to the media to fight his battles? I thought the interview was useless, and Robin Roberts led in on every question in his defense. This was journalism at its poorest! If GMA was that concerned on civil rights, and Obama, they should have opened the program with Dr. King celebrations. Stop crying Obama and stick to the issues

I'm not sure I agree with the poster who asked how Obambi will respond to big stuff if he's this upset over little stuff.

This is the stuff that Obambi must discuss when interviewed because what else is he going to discuss? His ideas? His platform?

All he can do is parrot change over and over. What kind of change and how are you going to do it never gets answered in any way that is more than just lip service.

Unless I've missed it?

With all the issues both foreign and domestic , and how these unfair trade policies have hurt working class entreprenuers like me , that can't compete with the Cheap Imports caused by Currency manipulation like how china pegs 18 cents to our dollar , and is actually devaluing our dollar now because of these unfair trade policies , , Trade agreements need re-negotiated to include provisions that state to the Importer that if they want tariff free duty into the USA then we need a fee charged to the imported goods and services , that is paid too the SS and Medicare fund , because of the loss of this deduction that is a result of the items not being produced in the USA that our Labor would have paid .

This should have been Provisions that Bill Clinton should have made sure we had , when he signed into law the WTO trade policy he did , and if Lobbyists for Big business influenced the Republican and Democrat Government to agree to leaving this out of the agreement , then they all should be relieved from duty , because never before in the history of the USA or the world , have we ever had a more Wealth Generating period of time than the last 20-25 years , more wealth was generated over this period than all the past , so if we were to have been able to of made the SS and Medicare system solvent it should have been now .

Can Bill Clinton and the Experience Hillary is claiming , claim this Trade Policy a Success for America as a whole or just for some in certain circles of our society , that have fed off others like vultures preying on helpless Americans of a Trade Policy gone bad ????

The High Cost of the China-WTO Deal: Administration's own analysis ... It wasn't long ago that the Clinton Administration claimed that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) would create both a large number of U.S. ...
www.epinet.org/Issuebriefs/Ib137.html - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

"Someone needs to inform the Obama's that this is Presidential politics. Further, if this is how Obama is going to over-react to what has been a very, very, mild and civil campaign, it gives me no confidence in his ability to withstand the the ruthless GOP attack machine."

Very, very mild and civil? Have we even been watching the same campaign, JoeCHI? To anyone who has been paying attention, it's obvious that the Clintons have been pulling out every smear, every underhanded, dirty tactic in the book. And yet it's somehow out of bounds for Obama to even defend himself from all this sleaze? Would you feel he was tougher if he simply allowed himself to be buried by this avalanche of mud?

"All of the candidates have spouses who are strongly advocating for their respective spouses. Bill Clinton has every right to make his case as he sees fit."

No, JoeCHI. He doesn't have the right to distort, misrepresent or lie. He doesn't have the right to present his own personal "version" of the truth (if he even knows what that word means anymore), as if it was fact - and get away with it. Not anymore...

Since there appear to be Clinton supporters out there practicing the art of selective memory, here is a quick reminder of the values embraced by the Clinton team. The holder of the office of chief executive of this country must be held to a higher standard than each of us.
I did not make this up. This is part of history. Recorded for anyone who cares about the truth:

News of the scandal first broke on January 17, 1998, on the Drudge Report website, which reported that Newsweek editors were sitting on a story by investigative reporter Michael Isikoff exposing the affair. The story broke in the mainstream press on January 21 when it hit the Washington Post. The story swirled for several days and despite swift denials from Clinton, the clamour for answers from the White House grew louder. On January 26, a visibly flustered President Clinton, standing with wife Hillary Rodham Clinton, spoke at a White House press conference, and issued a forceful denial while wagging his finger:

Now, I have to go back to work on my State of the Union speech. And I worked on it until pretty late last night. But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.

Pundits debated whether or not Clinton would address the allegations in his State of the Union Address. Ultimately, he chose not to, which may have helped his image with the American people through his strategy to appear more "presidential" and above the fray. First Lady Hillary Clinton publicly stood by her husband throughout the scandal. On January 27, in an appearance on NBC's The Today Show she famously said, "The great story here for anybody willing to find it, write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president."

For the next several months and through the summer, pundits and the media endlessly debated whether an affair had occurred and Clinton had lied or obstructed justice, but nothing could be definitively established beyond the taped recordings because Lewinsky was unwilling to discuss the affair or testify about it. On July 28, 1998, a substantial delay after the public break of the scandal, Lewinsky received transactional immunity in exchange for grand jury testimony concerning her relationship with Clinton. She also turned over a semen-stained blue dress (which Tripp had encouraged her to save without dry cleaning) to the Starr investigators, thereby providing a smoking gun based on DNA evidence that could prove the relationship despite Clinton's official denials.

Clinton admitted in taped grand jury testimony on August 17, 1998, that he had had an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky. That evening he gave a nationally televised statement admitting his relationship with Lewinsky which was "not appropriate".[1]

Still in denial? ask yourself this question:
Who is actually running for 'president'? Who will make the decisions/tell the 'truth' to the American people? Wherever you get your morality system from, give yourself a minute and think about it. Do you embrace the morality of hypocrisy?

If he is going to confront Bill--disbarred for perjury--Clinton every time Bill lies, Obama is going to be the busiest man in America.

We know the Clinton's plans on the economy, war, and foreign affairs. I have not heard much about Obama's plans other the there will be change.

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) www.gmaonline.org

Here is a Lobbyist group that was Influential to Trade policies that should have had provisions in Trade Policy that allowed for a Fee to be paid for the labor loss of deduction from loss of wages for similar type work by US labor forces , every time a Job is done with outside labor and it results in a Loss of labor deduction here in the USA , it is a Loss to the SS and Medicare Fund . These issues would have been apparent to a Trade Group , and there assessment of these neglect ions , and to say it was not obvious would be very hard to claim

http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/issuebriefs_ib137

February 16, 2000 Issue Brief #137

The High Cost of the China-WTO Deal
Administration's own analysis suggests spiraling deficits, job losses

by Robert E. Scott

No one can predict the future. But the Clinton Administration is confidently forecasting that the huge U.S. trade deficit with China will improve if Congress accords China permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) in order to accommodate Beijing's membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO). President Clinton claims that the recently signed trade agreement with China "creates a win-win result for both countries" (Clinton 2000, 9). He argues that exports to China "now support hundreds of thousands of American jobs," and that "these figures can grow substantially with the new access to the Chinese market the WTO agreement creates" (Clinton 2000, 10). Others in the White House, such as Kenneth Liberthal, the special advisor to the president and senior director for Asia affairs at the National Security Council, echo Clinton's assessment:

Unity in the Government is what I am interested in , so something can get done , I see Hillary only continuing the fighting between Republicans and Democrats , so it will be a reverse of what is going on now , because of the way Hillary is always saying she is the only one that can take on the Republicans . We need someone that is not saying things that are so polarizing , like both Hillary and Bill are always on the offense against the Republicans , and this battle has resulted in nothing getting done now for a very long time . I am a Republican , and I don't see anyone on my party side that's talking Unity either , I am however seeing and hearing the word Unity coming out of Barack Obama , and for me that's what I am wanting to see in our country . The differences on issues between the 2 parties is so extreme that it is time for Unity , to get a little bit of the issues that everyone wants for all . It can't continue to be one extreme to the other , it just is not working , as we can see this over the past 20-25 years . Its time for Unity , its time for Barack Obama . With all the issues both foreign and domestic , Trade agreements that need re-negotiated to include provisions that state to the Importer that if they want tariff free duty into the USA then we need a fee charged to the imported goods and services , that is paid too the SS and Medicare fund , because of the loss of this deduction that is a result of the items not being produced in the USA that our Labor would have paid . This should have been Provisions that Bill Clinton should have made sure we had , when he signed into law the WTO trade policy he did , and if Lobbyists for Big business influenced the Republican and Democrat Government to agree to leaving this out of the agreement , then they all should be relieved from duty , because never before in the history of the USA or the world , have we ever had a more Wealth Generating period of time than the last 20-25 years , more wealth was generated over this period than all the past , so if we were to have been able to of made the SS and Medicare system solvent it should have been now . Can Bill Clinton and the Experience Hillary is claiming , claim this Trade Policy a Success for America as a whole or just for some in certain circles of our society , that have fed off others like vultures preying on helpless Americans of a Trade Policy gone bad ????

Hillary and Bill are nothing but liars. Why do we need Hillary and Bill for another 12 years? Come on folks...NO MORE CLINTONS.

http://chocolateice1.blogspot.com

New Obama ad.

"Inspiring":
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid353515028/bctid1385609375

Obama has a lot of gall calling anyone a liar.

What isn't mentioned in this thread is the way in which McCain is a huge liar.

He lied about McCain-Kennedy, claiming that it was NOT an amnesty bill, when it would have demographically flooded this nation with millions more illegals, and legalized the millions that are already here.

He lied about McCain-Feingold, when he claimed that it didn't offend the constitution. He was attempting to blatantly undermine the first amendment with that garbage.

McCain also lied when he cheated on his loyal first wife and married the one he had an adulterous affair with, who is his current wife.

It was nice of Robin Roberts and Barack Obama to write your article for you. Your fingers must be tired from all that typing.

I am so glad to hear Senator Obama speak to the fact that the Clintons' distortions and outright lies have damaged our country. Their style of politics has dominated for far too long, creating alienation, fueling cynicism, and turning folks away from participating in our democracy. It's also turned folks away from the very idea of public service. Bill Clinton: Liar, liar, pants on fire!

Two additional notes:

I urge folks to think about this---Do you really think it's good for our country to have a dynastic presidency?

And, I think we all need to carefully consider what the ramifications might be of Bill Clinton involving himself in his wife's presidency. He's proven himself to be an undisciplined loose cannon on the campaign trail. Do we really want another Hillary and Bill show in the White House?

Clinton is just showing his true colors. After all he lied under oath, so why would a campaign trail receive better treatment.

Hopefully this country will wake up and put an end to the Bush/Clinton White House dynasty which stretches all the way back to 1980. It's time for a change. Obama 08!

At first it was exciting to watch the competition btwn Obama and Hillary play out; now, it’s down right frightening. Obama is putting up a fantastic fight. He works twice as hard to beat 2 Clintons! AND Obama uses eloquent logic, while the Clintons consistently regurgitate corrupt spin. I’m a middle aged white woman, liberal democrat. IF HILLARY IS OUR ONLY OPTION, I WILL VOTE OUTSIDE MY OWN PARTY. A vote for Hillary/Bill would be a vote for the same old BS that’s plagued our nation for years. Best the Republicans remain the poster child for deception, not Democrats.

Obama's a little baby whiner! They're picking on me - whah!! So sorry that Obama with his Daley machine politics can't continue to laze around his ill gotten mansion while his constituents freeze in unheated buildings while the taxpayers are ripped off to the tune of 43 million dollars, but has to put on some big boy panties because he's in a Presidential campaign! His little indicted Syrian friend/ pretend neighbor/ fundraiser Rezko at least has the guts to keep his mouth shut. I long for the days of Bill Clinton - when the press was on him for everything because there was nothing else to complain about and all that they could come up with was Lewinsky!

What about Obambas 527 ads telling the people of NV they would be disenfranchised if they vote for Hillary. Granted Obamba can give an eloquent speech what else does he offer? Certainly not a UNITER he is more of a Divider. Let's see what happens in South Carolina. Any bets the vote will DIVIDE along racial lines!There are millions of eloquent speakers the used car lot are full of them. SHOULD THE BE PRESIDENT? Millions of people spoke out against the war. Should they be president? It is far easier to be an agnostic then a uniter. His speech against was one of an antagonist. Will someone PLEASE SHOW ME where he has united people of differing philosophies? Please show me his accomplishments that warrant the reins of the most powerful country in the world.

But I want to say one thing to the American people: I want you to listen to me. I'm gonna say this again: "I did not tell lies about that man--Mr. Obama; I never told anybody to lie--not a single time--never." These allegations are false, and I need to go back to work for Hillary's campaign.

If Obama can't stand up to what's being said about him now wait until he gets into the White House....IF he gets into the white house. Who is he going to whine to then?

Martin Luther King, Jr., talked about his dream of living in a nation where people will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Barack Obama ran and won in the Iowa caucus by promising to unite “red” states and “blue” states in a common national cause.

Then he was ambushed by the Clintons, who knowing there are more white voters than black voters in the country, sought to define Obama as the “black” candidate.

( As Newsweek is reporting, Sen. Ted Kennedy has accused Bill Clinton of injecting race into the campaign. See: http://www.newsweek.com/id/96385)

Frankly, it makes me sick to my stomach that race is being used–in 2008!–in a Democratic contest.

And now the Clintons parade in front of MLK Day celebrations, claiming that it was all one big misunderstanding.

We know what the meaning of “is” is. And this “is” wrong!!!

looking4truth
how was the economy under bill clinton who else diverted world war three without one american death? Who stopped the genocide in Serbia as a moral issue? I ask you now what was bad about the Clinton Presidency but the Republican Right Wing Nut Jobs!

Dream Deferred

What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?

Langston Hughes

Just one more instance of Obama the hypocrite. How can anyone take this guys garbage seriuos. He always says one thing and does another. So it is ok for him to attack Hillary but not for her to fight back. It is ok for him to twist HIllaries words but they cant attack his words. His campagin started the whole Hillary is a rascist thing and he even attacked them during his speech at the MLK church. This guy is pure Cook County sleaze. I am gald that most of the country seems to get it and Mich/NH/Nev are not buying his garbage. I think his using the race card may help in SC but it will cost him the nomination imo.

Bill Clinton is probably the most intelligent president we have had sofar in the history of this country. He lied to protect his family and his self. The republican hypocrats who were hell bent for leather to discredit him worked fevorishly to do so. He is a great man and history will prove it so.
Hillary Clinton is the ONLY candidate that will be able to win the election against the Republican self rightous candidates. Obama is a good man but alas, he don't stand a chance.

Looking4Truth:

It is amazing that President Clinton got anything done during his tenure with all of the personal attacks. The 1990's were better for me economically as I am sure they were for the rest of the country. Who would Obama's advisors be if he won the presidency? He would be just another Jimmy Carter. We sure cannot afford that.

Let's look at this on a larger scale. Clinton is involved now in muddying the waters for his wife's benefit. Do you think this stops if she wins the election? How does she control him once in office? I am not comfortable with an un-elected Bill Clinton back in the White House having off the cuff conversations with leaders in the middle east and the rest of the world. Won't they assume as a former president and current First Man (?) that his comments are fact? He'll muddy Hillary's power and ultimately cause confusion for the U.S. being led by 2 presidents vs. 1.

Hey looking4truth :

Presidents have no direct effect on the economy. It was the "internet boom" that propelled the economy in the 90's. That said, the Clinton era was assuredly preferable to the incompetency and corruption of the Republicans. Yet, it was an opportunity lost more than anything else. If ol'lying Bill could have kept his pants on, maybe he could have gotten something done about health care, education... But, he didn't, and ended up as, at best, an "okay" second-rate president. The important question is, why would we want the nepotist wife of a second-rate president as our president? Are we really that retarded of a country?

A Hillary/Bill regime will only promote more division for this country. If she can't keep her man in tow and talk about issues (health care, poverty, war, job security, trade, and education) now how will she be able to handle him when he butts in during a presidency? Michelle Obama speaks about her husband's platform on the issues. She doesn't holler and lie about things that we all know are just not true.

For a person running as a uniter-- strange how no one seems to realize that Obama's merely running George W.'s first campaign
-- it's interesting that Obama would invoke one of the most devisive period's in recently political history. What's more shameful than Cinton lying about an affair is the fact that we live in a country so stupid and shallow that it would allow the opposition party to investigate and impeach him for it. Clinton impeached for lying about cheating; Bush, despite Iraq war, is the teflon don. Give me a break. Remember Michelle Obama already implied that Hillary shouldn't be elected because of Bill's infidelity. Obama should be prepared for backlash. For #1 the cheap tactic; and #2 more importantly for making a claim impossible to defend. Should be an interesting debate.

Hey Jerry,
A great man doesn't screw his interns.

Hillary has distorted the facts as well. See factcheck.org. She passed around a flier in New Hampshire and Nevada stating that Obama was going to impose a 1 trillion dollar tax "on hard-working people." Obama only said he might consider "raising the cap" from $97,000 to $200,000. ONly 6 percents make over $97K so no tax increase there. People who get $200K get SS too. SS is just funded largely by middle class. Hillary lied about Obama voting for an Energy bill that gave tax breaks to oil and gas companies. FALSE. Oil and gas taxes will gradually increase. There more and more. I don't want a president who misleads voters to win. I WANT CHANGE. It amazes me that people on TV just shrug it off as "politics as usual." That's the last thing I want. Hillary also voted for that bankruptcy legislation favoring credit card companies, etc. Her health care proposal would have college kids buy their own health insurance while Obama would have them stay on their parents plan. I think it's more accurate to state that she would have 15 million more paying for health insurance not left out.

Is missing in action the same as no good ideas? Just wondering. Bubba's comment in 2002. "Mr. Clinton, second-guessing the strategy employed by Congressional leaders, said that to many Democrats and independent voters, ''we were missing in action on national security and we had no positive plan for America's domestic future.''"

If you're worried about who Senator Obama is going to cry to when he's in the white house don't you think you should worry more about Senator Clinton. She is behaving like a damsel in distress. "If you're mean to me I'm going to trot out my husband and he'll give you a piece of our mind." Just who are you supporting when you support Senator Clinton? This is an insult to women who have fought the hard fight without resorting to having their husbands jump in when the going get tough. You're not breaking through the glass ceiling Hillary if Bubba is on the ladder in front of you with the ax.

Unite the republican party, vote Clinton.

I think it's great that Obama is responding to the Clintons' lies in such a calm and articulate manner.
Someone said that all he does is whine about being attacked because he doesnt have any ideas, but the irony of that statement is that usually when he is defending himself it is because the Clintons lied about what he said when he was talking about ideas.

The Ronald Reagan statement is a perfect example. He went beyond talking about "hope" and started getting specific as to what he means by "change" and "bipartisanship". He did this by citing a Republican who managed to pull together a working majority even though his party controlled neither of the legislative bodies. Both the substance of his statement, and the spirit of it give a clear picture of what the he means by "hope" and "change". What he is clearly saying is that respect for others and lucid assessment of history (even when it means giving the other side some points) are what is critical to hope and change actually happening. The Clintons, with their lying, hateful, dogmatic style will not be able to bring real change because they don't know how to work with people, only against people.
With regard to policy, reading his speeches, interviews, and web materials show considerable substance and thought, and that is what we need, not empty promises and demagogy.

I think the real "fairy tale" is that Obama has nothing but the mantra of "hope" and "change". Anyone who really listens to him can see that his statements are a lot deeper than that.

RickB
Clinton did a lot of good during his presidency. I can't deny that. But, there were a lot of things that went wrong (free trade agreement, don't ask don't tell fiasco with the military, lying under oath, and of course but not his least his views on Haitians). This elections is about Hillary and Obama. If we are so preoccupied with him now what do you think it might be like if Hillary wins a nomination. I'll back Obama any day. I want 1 president in the White House not 2.

Shaka Hislop writes : "Remember Michelle Obama already implied that Hillary shouldn't be elected because of Bill's infidelity." When exactly did Michelle Obama make this implication? Again, this is another Clinton supporter pulling "reality" right out of their #$%. It is reminiscent of Rush Limbaugh and his vast &*% of "facts."

Bill doesn't lie, he just redefines the truth to his liking. Rememeber his infamous "I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN". When caught he just redefined oral sex as "not sex". If his definition was actually true lots of "solicitation" & "prostitution" arrests would be false arrests. Bill learned to lie to cover up all his philandering. He's a disgrace as a former president. It's going to fun to watch him destroy Hillary's campaign from the inside.

A pledge not to vote for Hillary Clinton for President is gaining numbers.

You can view the pledge here: http://notforhillary.blogspot.com/

The stated goal of the pledge: to send a message to the DNC and the press in advance of Super Tuesday primary voting that the Democratic Party will lose votes by nominating Senator Hillary Clinton.

"Welcome aboard Senator Obama, most of us have known he's a liar for 16 years now."

Posted by: Terry

...most of us have known he's a liar for 16 years now.

...most of us have known he's a liar for 16 years now.

Gee, and what do you think the Republicans will do to either candidate?
Obama went through a similar Senate race in Illinois and didn't seem to have the same tough primary problems then, of course, Tony Rezko wasn't a problem back then either.

Well, I guess it all depends on what the definition of the word "is" is, right?

hey walden says who? You have no idea who is getting screwed right now! GWB screwed us all. What is worse lying to protect a fling or fink the whole world.

I see when Obama found out you need political experience, and the more you have the better and in what environment to correlate where you are headed, he decided experience is a bad thing.

When Obama found out threatening to go into another country if the country won't cooperate reminded people of President Bush, Obama decided he was being "new" in his approach.

When Obama was trailing behind Hillary by double digits at the beginning, Obama decided polls don't matter- ignore them.

When Obama found out race is an issue in this country for white versus back and also black v black, Obama decided race doesn't mater-it's my character that counts.

When Obama found out he would have to go up against a former president... Obama realized we can't say Bill is a bad thing(some people still adore Bill and could care less about the mans private life or what it resulted in), Obama decided we can't call our attack on Bill "new" and "upcoming", Obama decided we can't ignore Bill,Obama decided we can't unmake or redefine Bill a president that would go to our character--oh let's cry about our luck. Life is not fair. It's not our fault Bill is President and carries credibility as president in the eyes of some. Bill should know better we, the Obama camp, can't work with what we can't change to benefit us. So lets tell him to stay out of it, and "hope" no one will notice this "change" in politics.