Clinton: I'm not interested in attacking my opponents

[bigdarryl]

this was said on 11-10-07. And she has a nerve to question someone else character talk about FLIP FLOPPING!!!

[journalist3072]

1. She's not attacking her opponents.....She's drawing a significant distinction

between she and Obama on specific policy matters, i.e. health care.

What's more, as she pointed out, she's been attacked for months now, while Obama and Edwards haven't had to answer specific questions about themselves. They've been left unchallenged.

[bigdarryl]

3. she didn't say he had a policy problem she said he has a CHARACTER problem

[durrrty libby]

7. Addicts and so-called ex- addicts have character flaws.That's the way it is

[rufus dog]

17. so you are saying that Bill Clinton has character problems?

Nice class act!

[durrrty libby]

22. Hardly....maybe you need to come out of the purple haze and buy a clue

[dionysus]

26. Obama is a fucking drug addict now?

man, you just went from the gutter into the sewer with that post...

[karynnj]

28. How exactly does this relate to Obama or Edwards - neither of whom are ex-addicts

Bush is - at least with regards to alcohol. The fact is that there are character flaws that have nothing to do with abused substances. A tendency to lie is a character flaw, a tendency to use and abandon people, etc ie no one ever said Guilliani abused anything - and I bet all of us could list character flaws.

[journalist3072]

8. Just in case you missed it, the Clinton camp asked Obama to take down his health care ad

It claims his plan will ensure everyone, when in reality it will leave 15 million uninsured.

[karynnj]

29. It does OFFER everyone a way to have health insurance,

it does not force anyone to have it. Both sides are being a little dishonest here. Reading both Paul Krugman and Robert Reich on it would help.

None of those three plan is universal healthcare, as a tax funded benefit for everyone in the US. All are major improvements over the current situation and the Republican plans of medical savings accounts or tax deductions. All have features that are close to Kerry's 2004 program, which was far broader than Edwards' 2004 plan - that like Obama's plan did not force people to buy insurance. It is interesting that in 2006, in his Fanueil Hall speech on Healthcare, one tweak he made in his plan was to include that by 2012 having insurance had to be mandatory. (This was before Edwards or HRC put anything out) The reasons he gave were essentially those explained well in the Krugman column. However, the 2012 date for it reflected a need to make the costs reasonable before mandating it.

I suspect that whoever is President, the plan enacted will NOT initially have a mandate. A plan with a mandate would be harder to push through Congress than one without it - the Republican commercials write themselves. But, in the long run, the system needs the mandate for the reasons Krugman lies out. (Not to mention, a doctor will not refuse to treat an otherwise healthy young adult with a sudden medical problem (ie appendicitis) who gambled on not getting sick - those costs are therefore in the system with no counterbalancing payments.)

The same Senators and Congressmen, working with the same pool of policy experts, will write the actual plans. It does matter who the President is because that will determine where they will actively fight for this, passively back what a Democratic Congress puts together in conjunction with their people, or fight it. All Democrats will do one of the first two and it is likely all or most Republicans would do the last. In the 1990s, it was not the President's health care plan that passed, but the Senate proposed S-CHIP that was a Kennedy/Hatch compromise based on a Kerry/Kennedy proposal modelled on what MA had put in place - it needed Clinton's approval to pass and it was HRC that pushed BC to the middle category instead of covertly fighting it by not putting it in the budget.

In 2008, EVERY candidate has made this a priority and has said they would fight for it. The mood of the country in 2008 is more supportive of the idea than it was in 1993. This leads me to think that ANY Democrat will fight for it.

[Nedsdag]

11. Flip-flop

Flip-flop!

[Azathoth]

14. Digging up dirt on Obama's kindergarten years is "drawing a significant distinction"?

:rofl:

[LeftCoast]

19. Clinton was clearly attacking Obama

I saw the video today on Olbermann.

[mtnsnake]

2. How about a link so we can at least get context. The last person said she "vowed" which was a lie

and it was proven she never vowed to not attack opponents.

So, bigd, at least provide a link so we know where your coming from.

[Lucinda]

9. bumpin your post for his link...

[ClarkUSA]

4. She's a Hillaryous hypocrite in all things -- that's why Iowans don't trust or like her much

Rovian mudslinging won't help her win -- but it will speed her decline in Iowa. ;)

[mtnsnake]

5. Let's just pray that Wes Clark doesn't see you using his good name for your handle

He'd puke his guts out.

[ClarkUSA]

6. So says the alleged Kucinich supporter who spends most of his time defending Her Royal Hillaryness

:eyes:

[LittleClarkie]

10. So she attacks them in a sort of disinterested fashion

is that it?

[saracat]

12. Yeah, thats the ticket! Disinterested attacks! Snicker! Hey did Ya hear about her

disinterested "attack" on a kindergarten essay? Wonder what Clinton wanted to be in kindergarten? Hmmm?

[IndianaGreen]

13. Hillary can talk from both sides of her mouth, just like Nixon

Her husband is far more skilled in serving warm bullshit and calling it steak.

[MonkeyFunk]

15. Oh grow up

these aren't "attacks". they're normal politics.

I swear, this is the first election for most DUers.

[gmudem]

16. So when Clinton supporters were crying about

Edwards distinctions in policy that was just normal politics right?...Right?

[MonkeyFunk]

24. Yes

I'm not directing this at any one group. EVERYBODY needs to stop pretending to be oh-so-deeply offended that a few elbows are thrown in a political campaign. It's natural, normal, and expected.

[LeftCoast]

20. The speech I saw on Countdown today was clearly an attack

Yeah, pretty normal politics...but poorly conceived and poorly executed at the very least. I just don't think it's a good strategy in any case.

[PretzelzRule]

18. ...even though I do it every day

n/t

[cleveramerican]

21. Even as the words were coming out of her mouth......

Nobody, but nobody believed her.

[sundancekid]

23. can be seen on youtube - her speech at JJ dinner in Iowa

this link will also get you the facts

http://www.hillaryattacks.barackobama.com/

[cuke]

25. So what?

She didn't promise not to attack and if you thought it was, then that was naive

[Skip Intro]

27. I believe it's more fighting back than it is attacking. She's been on the recieving end for months

I don't see how anyone can fault her for refusing to be a punching bag.

[Catherine Vincent]

30. To be honest, none of the candidates are attacking each other.

None of them can appear weak. This is all politics. May the best man (or woman) win.