SodaHead Celebrates Green Week

Question US

Bill Clinton says, "I have never attacked Obama" -- Do you agree?

Grace W. Bush February 08, 2008 19:38:53

According to an interview with former President Bill Clinton at WCSH Channel 6, Bill Clinton has said that he has never attacked Senator Barack Obama.

Click here to read the interview
No. Bill is a liar!
Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.
Undecided
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Comment
  • +12 / -1 raves BROOKLYN February 08, 2008 23:01:13
    BROOKLYN

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEFENSE AND ATTACK...

    I'm not a racist just because I vote for HILLARY - THE MEDIA IS NOT BALANCED AT NEITHER IS BHO, One of the many reasons I decided to speak out for HILLARY too!

    MLK interview in PLAYBOY 1965

    The Obama camp did it again. They manufactured yet another issue out of a non-issue when they pounded Hillary Clinton for supposedly defiling Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by minimizing his role in the civil rights struggle. Here's Hillary's terrible sin per the Obama campaign crowd: she said that Dr. King's dream was realized when President Lyndon Johnson shoved the 1964 Civil Rights Bill through Congress. This was anything but a put down of King.

    Hillary paid tribute to King for laying the groundwork for the civil rights bill and gave justifiable credit to Johnson for ramming the bill through a bickering, divided and very recalcitrant Congress. Her point was that presidents that have their public policy priorities screwed on right can make changes, monumental changes, for good.

    If Hillary could be faulted for anything it's that she didn't go far enough. If Johnson hadn't forcefully intervened and jawboned, prodded, arm twisted, and embarrassed the slew of wavering and hostile Congressmen to the bill into supporting the bill, or at least temperin...











    DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEFENSE AND ATTACK...

    I'm not a racist just because I vote for HILLARY - THE MEDIA IS NOT BALANCED AT NEITHER IS BHO, One of the many reasons I decided to speak out for HILLARY too!

    MLK interview in PLAYBOY 1965

    The Obama camp did it again. They manufactured yet another issue out of a non-issue when they pounded Hillary Clinton for supposedly defiling Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by minimizing his role in the civil rights struggle. Here's Hillary's terrible sin per the Obama campaign crowd: she said that Dr. King's dream was realized when President Lyndon Johnson shoved the 1964 Civil Rights Bill through Congress. This was anything but a put down of King.

    Hillary paid tribute to King for laying the groundwork for the civil rights bill and gave justifiable credit to Johnson for ramming the bill through a bickering, divided and very recalcitrant Congress. Her point was that presidents that have their public policy priorities screwed on right can make changes, monumental changes, for good.

    If Hillary could be faulted for anything it's that she didn't go far enough. If Johnson hadn't forcefully intervened and jawboned, prodded, arm twisted, and embarrassed the slew of wavering and hostile Congressmen to the bill into supporting the bill, or at least tempering their opposition to it, King's dream would have remained just that, an empty dream. King recognized that. In a Playboy interview in 1965, he said this about Johnson: "He has demonstrated his wisdom and commitment in coming to grips with the problem (racial discrimination). My impression is that he will remain a strong president for civil rights." History amply proved that, and Johnson despite his Vietnam War tumble from historical grace, still is regarded as the president that did more for civil rights than any other president.

    But I'd go even further still. King gets much deserved praise and is much honored for igniting the national fervor for civil rights and galvanizing thousands to put their bodies on the line in the civil rights battles. Yet, there's an ugly side and often forgotten note to that. The street marches and demonstrations also stirred the first tremors of white backlash. The George Wallace surge in the North, the open hostility of many Northern whites to housing and school integration, and the Republican reawakening in the South was a direct outcropping of the civil rights push. This stiffened the spines of Southern Democrats and conservative Northern Republicans who dug their heels in and flatly opposed the bill, piled amendment after crippling amendment onto the bill initially, and employed every legal and parliamentary dodge and stall tactic they could dredge up to delay a vote on it, if not to kill it outright.

    King could do nothing about this. JFK who introduced the bill couldn't do anything about it either. He was at his wits end after months and months of Congressional ducking and dodging on the bill about how to get it moving. By the time Johnson took office, following JFK's murder, the bill was still born in Congress. There was every chance that it could be shelved. However, Johnson would have none of that. He was a Southerner and he knew the mood and temper of the South. From his decades in the Senate he knew where the political skeletons were buried and how to rattle them. He did what King and Kennedy didn't have a prayer of doing, he got the sympathetic ear of enough Southerners to take some of the steam out of their vehement opposition to the bill. The rest of course is history. The Civil Rights Bill, not King's marches and demonstrations, broke the back of legal segregation in America and became the watchword for progressive, visionary social legislation for decades to come.

    King and all the top civil rights leaders knew that history had been made with the passage of the bill, and that the man that played the towering role in making that history was LBJ A t the signing ceremony for the bill, King and the other civil rights leaders beamed when Johnson handed them the pens after the signing. They effusively praised him for his tireless effort.

    Hillary's statement was a simple, honest, and respectful nod to Johnson for his indispensable part in making civil rights a legal fact and reality in America. This was the same nod that King and the civil rights leaders made more than four decades ago to him.

    This is a nod that the Hillary haters have forgotten or deliberately distorted in their clinical obsession to smash mouth every Hillary utterance. This is a history lesson that Hillary got right about King and Johnson, and one that the Obama campaign flunked badly.

    PEACE
    (more)View thread
Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Comments
  • wolf Sloan August 15, 2009 21:28:17
    wolf Sloan

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    eatin' aint cheatin'
  • Gun665 March 06, 2009 22:59:21
    Gun665

    Undecided

    I don't THINK he did (telling someone to kiss your ass is NOT an attack); but I'd have paid real money to watch him drop Obama like a bag of sand on Pay Per View.
  • GLO July 20, 2008 14:02:46
    GLO

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    moderated...
  • +1 raves
    dragonfli July 20, 2008 12:11:12
    dragonfli

    No. Bill is a liar!

    It is on video!
  • -2 raves
    DeacMeister April 07, 2008 23:54:19
    DeacMeister

    No. Bill is a liar!

    His "attacks" are usually rather subtle, but they are definitely attacks. It's exactly what one would expect from Bill Clinton. I didn't mind when he was doing it to Republicans, but I'm definitely turned off by his statements about Senator Obama.
  • +2 raves
    Roxie April 07, 2008 03:48:51
    Roxie

    Undecided

    President Clinton told the truth as they are.
  • +1 / -2 raves
    William March 26, 2008 17:56:25
    William

    No. Bill is a liar!

    Calling his campaign a "fairy tale" and comaring him to Jesse Jackson (in the way he did) certainly was not a complement.
  • +3 raves
    t March 17, 2008 01:19:46
    t

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    moderated...
  • +1 / -2 raves
    Win March 12, 2008 17:17:21
    Win

    No. Bill is a liar!

    Billary have not changed liars and cheater.
  • +3 raves
    tim605 March 05, 2008 17:33:23
    tim605

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    obama need to grow up a big time ,,like last news inveiw when he run out of it the question was get to hard for him.
  • +1 / -2 raves
    sadiesmom February 23, 2008 05:14:20
    sadiesmom

    No. Bill is a liar!

    and, I have never had...............
  • +6 raves
    sioux~Proud American February 22, 2008 22:11:24
    sioux~Proud American

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    I think that anytime someone says anything negative about Obama or anything they PERCEIVE as negative, they play the race card and say they are racist. Even Mia Angelo, who once said Bill Clinton was the 1st black president, is supporting Obama. Guess she decided she had to have the "real" thing.
  • +1 / -3 raves
    Rim shot February 18, 2008 01:09:00
    Rim shot

    No. Bill is a liar!

    He did not have sex with Monica
  • +5 raves
    Vamp February 17, 2008 01:39:13
    Vamp

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    All he did was speak the truth, of course it blows up into everything else.
  • +4 raves
    Raven February 16, 2008 00:49:48
    Raven

    Undecided

    To be honest I don't give a shit if he did or didn't.
  • +4 / -6 raves
    bobcat February 15, 2008 17:48:36
    bobcat

    No. Bill is a liar!

    Both Bill and Hill are total SCUMBAGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • +9 raves
    Czar Chief Cat ~COB February 15, 2008 16:47:06
    Czar Chief Cat ~COB

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    Clinton is not that stupid. His words are well crafted. Both Obama's are slick lawyers who want to turn his words against him. Clinton is a genius and Obama is all talk.
  • +4 / -2 raves
    crsone Czar Ch... February 15, 2008 20:41:08
    crsone
    Actually, they're all pretty slick lawyers and I don't mean that perjoratively.

    Obama is also extremely bright -- he might sound all talk, but that's because he's a brilliant speechmaker, not because he's all talk. It's an almost lost skill -- oratory, and one I greatly appreciate. Aslo, dummies aren't elected head of the Harvard Law Review, as Obama was when he went to that law school.

    Anyway -- there's just not a point to be made comparing the relative intelligences of the two Democratic candidates and their spouses. They're four very bright people.
  • +1 raves
    Czar Ch... crsone February 16, 2008 00:13:33
    Czar Chief Cat ~COB
    touche
  • +7 raves
    Johns February 15, 2008 16:01:19
    Johns

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    the Clintons have always showed the utmost consideration for the black population. If some people would quit nit-picking everything, you would find the Black population has a great respect for the Clintons.
  • +6 raves
    Czar Ch... Johns February 15, 2008 17:47:27
    Czar Chief Cat ~COB
    Totally agree! Clinton has been thought of as our first black president. If we could just take the 'race card' out of this race, everyone would be better off!
  • -2 raves
    fuzzy K... Johns February 19, 2008 16:55:30
    fuzzy Ken
    Johns,
    ...but this wasn't an attack on the black population, just Obama.
    These were attacks on a candidate that in the Clinton's opinion SHOULD NOT BE. Hillary was supposed to get the White House in exchange for publically sticking with Bill throughout the whole sordid Lewinsky afair, or as Hill called it a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy".
    In the Clinton's eyes she should have been a shoe-in. She had name and face recognition as well as Pat Moynihan's seat in the Senate and all those Hollywood stars as friends. Obama's populatiry came out of left field. Who knew he was so charismatic?
    I wouldn't vote for him, but I would love to hang out with him.
  • +4 / -6 raves
    The Hand of John February 15, 2008 15:37:32
    The Hand of John

    No. Bill is a liar!

    Of course he did...and it backfired on Bill Clinton. In the end I'm just so tired of the spin we get now. He defended his wife's side...just admit it already.
  • +2 / -7 raves
    Teresa February 15, 2008 04:40:20
    Teresa

    No. Bill is a liar!

    I used to respect him - now I've got to say lost a little respect - sorry Bill
    You play dirty!
  • +5 raves
    Johns Teresa February 15, 2008 16:03:54
    Johns
    an unrealistic conclusion.
    I doubt you have any respect except to those who slander.
  • +7 raves
    Gale February 15, 2008 02:51:42
    Gale

    Yes. Clinton states that he never attacked Obama in a personal way, and that he did not say things that were factually inaccurate.

    Bill Clinton was just taking up for his wife as any husband should do. All the publicity that resulted was just politics. Bill Clinton had every right to say what he did. He is a genius and if he had wanted to insult Obama he could have managed to do so. It was not his intention. I don't think Obama can take the heat of politics and all this drama over a husband taking up for his wife just shows he is very inexperienced and I hope he does not get nominated.
  • +1 / -4 raves
    fuzzy K... Gale February 15, 2008 14:56:57
    fuzzy Ken
    Gale, funny how Hillary needs Bill to defend her and yet you say "don't think Obama can take the heat of politics"
  • +4 raves
    Joey fuzzy K... February 15, 2008 18:57:59
    Joey
    All spouses defend their mates in election campaigns. If you think Michelle doesn't look at the dirt she's been throwing.
  • +3 / -4 raves
    crsone Joey February 15, 2008 20:47:35
    crsone
    All spouses aren't ex-presidents.
  • +1 raves
    Gale crsone April 07, 2008 14:53:47
    Gale
    crsone, I did not know their was a protocol that kept ex-presidents from defending their wife. Bill Clinton is a southern gentleman and he did what came naturally to any husband. He did what he should have done.
  • -2 raves
    crsone Gale April 07, 2008 23:50:53
    crsone
    Well -- I said that a long time ago, but I think I'm right. There is something to be said for the respect due the office (I wouldn't have booed Bush had I been in that stadium, for example, even though I can't stand him), and when an ex-President suddenly gets so wildly partisan ... well, I just think it's wrong, that's all. I think there is, indeed, a protocol attaching not to the spouse but to the office.
  • +2 raves
    Gale fuzzy K... February 17, 2008 06:12:27
    Gale
    fuzzy ken, I never said Hillary needed Bill to defend her. I said he was just defending his wife as any husband would do. Please don't put words in my mouth. Hillary is a strong woman, she can take care of herself. I was referring to her husband doing naturally what husbands do.
  • +3 / -3 raves
    crsone Gale February 15, 2008 20:46:28
    crsone
    I certainly wouldn't go that far. Bill Clinton isn't just a candidate's spouse; he's an ex-president of the United States and, as such, simply shouldn't have behaved in such a loud partisan way. I would agree that Bill Clinton is a genius -- a political genius. No one has ever had a better feel for politics than he ... and yet this is also the guy who pointed his finger (very uncouth thing to do) and said, in no uncertain terms, that he hadn't had sex with that woman (since in his heart, oral sex wasn't really sex).

    In other words, he gets carried away when he shouldn't -- this was one of those times and I hope, if his wife continues to do poorly in the primaries, that this Bad Bill doesn't come out again.
  • +2 raves
    Gale crsone April 07, 2008 14:42:02
    Gale
    crsone, I believe Bill Clinton's sex life has been said enough about. I really don't know why people feel the need to still bring it up. I disagree with you, Bill Clinton, had every right to take up for his wife. If Obama can't take that then he certainly does not need to be running for President. I do agree with you that like I said he is a genius, and how cheated this Country will be if Hillary does not get the nomination.
  • -2 raves
    crsone Gale April 07, 2008 23:53:38
    crsone
    You can't really tar me with the Clinton-hater brush -- sorry about that, but I think he was a pretty fine president, and would have been a much better one, in terms of accomplishments, if he'd just kept his zipper shut.

    I think Clinton has a right to speak in favor of his wife; I don't think he has any more right to engage in smears than does anyone else, whether in what he sees a defense of his wife or not.
  • +2 raves
    Gale crsone April 08, 2008 01:18:25
    Gale
    crsone, I never said you were a Clinton hater. I said there is no need to keep bringing up these incidents with women. I just don't see what purpose it serves to keep bringing up this. I think Clinton was punished for that and like we both agree he was a good president. But, I still say he does have a right to defend his wife. I have not heard him say anything else since this Obama incident, so I guess he decided not to go on the defense anymore. We basically both seem to have thought he was a good president, I just don't agree about a husband not being able to defend his wife. Take care.
  • -2 raves
    nailohi Gale February 17, 2008 02:13:45
    nailohi
    Yes, B. Clinton is a genius. Which, is exactly why nothing is said w/o the undertones of a savy, experienced politician meaning that EVERYTHING B. Clinton says is full of double-speak. Nothing is said w/o intent. As a diehard demo, I unfortunatly recognise that Bill DID LIE under oath! As an atty who takes the law seriously, I was totally disappointed at his actions. I'll never trust him again. And, because I practice in the area of criminal law, I'm not exactly naive or trusting from the start. As an atty, Bill also new the signigicance of what he did.
    If you want to defend on the basis of the husband-wife privilege, this is a man who stepped out on his wife innumerable times. As such, either one must question Hill's judgement in her choices of a man, or assume that his power was important enough to put up with his flalandering.....Which is it?
  • +1 raves
    Gale nailohi April 07, 2008 15:07:21 (edited)
    Gale
    nailohi, I believe everyone is aware of the incident with Bill Clinton and I believe everyone is sick of hearing about it. I believe it is Hillary business what she puts up with or not. I think people are people, politicians are justs people. People make mistakes. But one thing that can be said, when Bill Clinton was in office, our economy was wonderful, our country was at peace. Everyone, not just the rich were able to make ends meets. So what you were disappointed in Clinton, that was his personal life, get over it, you will feel better. What goes on between a husband and a wife simply is not any of your business. The only bad thing that can be said about Bill Clinton is his personal life and also everyone ought to remember every one of those sleazy women knew he was married, so yes he did wrong, but they knew he was married so what does that say about them. Get on with you life, this is all old news, I for one am so sick of hearing about it, if that is all you can find fault with then it is not even worth mentioning, because everyone KNOWS IT, no need playing this record again.
  • +1 / -1 raves
    nailohi Gale February 17, 2008 02:32:52 (edited)
    nailohi
    Yes, Bill is a genius, which is why everything he says is based on a politician's savy doublespeak. Let us not forget that BILL LIED UNDER OATH AND COMMITTED PERJURY! As a die-hard demo, I lost all trust for him. As an atty who practices in the area of crim law, I take it very seriously. As an atty, he also know the seriousness of his deceit.
    Furtherly, if you want to defend on the basis of husband-wife privilage, there is even less to defend. This is a man who stepped out on his wife innumerable times and must have lied to her over and over. Or, worse yet, Hill knew about his flalandering and put up with it for 20 years in order to share his power. Either way, what does that say about HER JUDGEMENT??????? Did she stay with him because she was hoodwinked? Or, because the power was worth it?
    Isn't it nice that now that she has a chance for the power, he'll defend her ? Open your eyes and consider the choices these people have made in their personnel lives. If those choices don't give you insight into who they truly are, then you are naive as all get out. Grow up! The way people treat their supposed "loved ones" indicates a great deal about the way they will treat US!Doesn't give me much hope how they/he/she will act if they get more power.....
  • +1 raves
    Gale nailohi April 07, 2008 15:12:24
    Gale
    nailohi, blah, blah, blah, still playing the same record. Maybe we will get us an old man in office that will keep us at war for the next 50-100 years, maybe that will make you happy. Quit playing this record it has already been heard.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 16 Next » Last »
or
Cancel