If coercing a divide between Jewish and black voters is ACCEPTABLE to you as a Dem primary tactic

[blm]

then come right out and say so, instead of telling those of us who BELIEVE in airing the facts around the tactic and demanding an accountability moment for those responsible for bringing that tactic into our Democratic primary race to just 'forget it and move on' as if there has been no permanent harm.

This is not temporary damage. That tactic is the reason that McCain is expected to have a much easier time in a blue state than he ever would have had that tactic NOT been employed. We are the ones who will be facing the fallout and have to work harder to counter the fallout.

Some of you seem to think otherwise so dare to go on record that the tactic used by TeamClinton to deliberately seek a Jewish-black divide in that state is acceptable to you as a Democratic activist and voter.


<<<U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, who supported Hillary Clinton throughout the primary season, disclosed he received a phone call shortly before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary from a top member of Clinton's organization and that the caller explicitly discussed a strategy of winning over Jewish voters by exploiting tensions between Jews and African-Americans.

"There have been signals coming out of the Clinton campaign that have racial overtones that indeed disturb me," Andrews said at his campaign headquarters in Cherry Hill Tuesday night after he lost his bid for the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination.

"Frankly, I had a private conversation with a high-ranking person in the campaign ... that used a racial line of argument that I found very disconcerting. It was extremely disconcerting given the rank of this person. It was very disturbing."

Andrews said the phone call came after he angered the Clinton camp by making some positive comments about Obama. He would not disclose the caller's name because of the private nature of the conversation>>>


http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/topstories/index.ssf/2008/06/andrews_says_he_heard_racist_s.html

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. Dude, the only one stirring up stuff seems to be you. n/t

[blm]

3. So you are on record that using this tactic is NOT harmful and is acceptable to you - fine.

It did NOT increase a divide in Pennsylvania that Obama will have to face going into the general election against McCain. So all Dems should just ignore what was done.

[papau]

6. Nope - but what is true is that you are one of the few that see Hillary as doing an AA/Jew split

[leveymg]

17. Not so few. Others here have seen it, too.

So have I, and it reminds me of the viscious fighting, innuendo, and mind-games that went on this board during the Israeli incursion into Lebanon.

[Leopolds Ghost]

92. BenDavid got banned recently

For what I do not know. A lot of these folks, especially in the NE, are "Reagan Democrats" = their parents were die-hard Dems UNTIL the Party started "sucking up to inner city black people" who are blamed for the peak-oil collapse of the US domestic manufacturing and small business economy (ironically engineered by center-right elitist globalists) in the 1970s-1990s. It is NOT just Blacks v. Jews. It is blacks v. white ethnics in general who feel disrespected. And yes it is all carefully engineered by fascist infiltrators in politics and the media.

[blm]

24. A congressman who supported Clinton and revealed it happened is not credible?

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/topstories/index.ssf/2008/06/andrews_says_he_heard_racist_s.html

You really prefer to believe he is lying? If he is then you should want him exposed as a liar, as this tactic would be unacceptable to you should he be telling the truth, eh?

[hokies4ever]

30. Just going off a quote from a supporter of Hillary

running for Congress. If it's true, then Hillary's campaign really IS despicable. Too bad that he didn't tape the conversation.

[papapi]

44. Not so few, I should think.

[leveymg]

15. No. You're wrong. There's been a lot of that going around.

No sense in pretending otherwise. The gig's up.

[NorthernSpy]

20. well, you've clearly been doing your bit these past months...

But like I told you, it's not 1984 anymore.

[Catherina]

38. Oy the irony! n/t

[PoliticalAmazon]

41. Wrong. As a Party we need to stand up and declare that bigot-pandering...

and reversing the racial tolerance progress made in our country is WRONG.

The DNC has been silent on confronting this, implying they agree with bigot-pandering as a campaign tactic. This has only worsened the divide between the A-A Democrats and the Party.

If we, as members and voters of the Party, also remain silent, it will be further implication to A-A's that we think it is okay to use them as the target of bigotry when bigot-pandering during a campaign.

It is WRONG to do what the Clintons did. We stood up to bigotry in the 1950s and 1960s, but it doesn't mean our job is finished. We cannot allow our Party to undo what we have all worked to accomplish with the civil rights movement.

Dem politicians should be taking a strong stand against this, and they haven't. I think they do this at their own political peril.

[ampad]

59. I wish I could rec a response

Excellent!

[BlooInBloo]

2. Move on. Don't forget it, but move on. We're going to see puh-lenty more of it.

That's my $.02 at any rate.

[blm]

5. Moving on with NO accountability for the deliberate USE of the tactic means it's ALLOWED

and can be used successfully in other primary races should the Dem see it's usefulness as the Clintons did.

[BlooInBloo]

11. Uh... except that it WASN'T successful.... Obama *won* - remember?

In any case, race-baiting isn't exactly a secret. White folks have been doing it for decades. There's no cat to keep in the bag.

[blm]

19. No - should other Dems employ the tactic on local and state races, it's acceptable and expected.

It WAS successful for Clinton where she targeted it to be successful and pushed McCain's numbers up at the same time.

You want ALL Dems in Penn and states like it to assume this tactic is acceptable for their races?

[PoliticalAmazon]

52. It doesn't matter that it wasn't successful. The tactic is unacceptabe...

and the Democratic Party and its voters need to stand up and say it is wrong. We need to apologize to African-Amerians and demonstrate to them that it won't be tolerated in the future.

The fact that so many of our Dem politicians continued to support Hillary after her using A-A's as bait for the bigots to which she was pandering is heinous. Those politicians need to get with the program, or prepare to suffer the consequences to their political career.

[BlooInBloo]

58. Of course it's unacceptable. You know perfectly well that I've been among the loudest voices saying

so.

All I'm trying to make is a *practical* point, not a philosophical point (which we agree on). Getting white folks to refrain from race-baiting tactics when running against black folks is CERTAINLY the desired goal. But we're a long way from that world, unfortunately.

For now, from a practical standpoint, we've got bigger fish to fry than lingering over Clinton's race-baiting. We won, and *for the moment*, that's enough. (Indeed defeating a race-baiting campaign is itself cause for celebration - heh!)

We've got an election to win - that should be be our sole and unique focus, imo. After we've won, I'll be happy to spend all the time analyzing Clinton's (and anybody else's) race-bating tactics.

In any case, keep in mind that if we differ, it's *only* on the practical-what-should-our-next-step-be side, not the philosophical side.

[blm]

68. UNDOING the damage done in a crucial state before November requires truth about

how it came about so it can be carefully countered more effectively than it was carelessly executed.

[PoliticalAmazon]

89. Understood. The election takes priority, but this issue can't be left to just fester. n/t

[seaglass]

14. I hope that you were a little more concerned about sourcing

and motivations before you came to your conclusions about BCCI/Clinton/Bush/Kerry. You are really losing some credibility here.

[blm]

21. A Congressman who supported Clinton saying that the tactic was deliberate

is unacceptable to you? There are several threads on this about the news report and this thread is asking what tactics YOU accept as a Dem.

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/topstories/index.ssf/2008/06/andrews_says_he_heard_racist_s.html

BTW - you should look into BCCI yourself if you are skeptical of others views - Dems shouldn't need any other motivation to care about their duties as citizens but the fact that they CAN access the information out there through the National Security Archives should they decide knowing the facts matters.

[seaglass]

26. I read the story, not just the threads. I also read input from

people who know the congressman and know his motivations (one of them an Obama supporter). I do not believe the story has enough information to be taken as truth. It may turn out to be true but with the info I have right now I am a skeptic.

IF it is true, it's not acceptable.

[blm]

34. If Andrews is lying then he should be held accountable. If he's telling the truth then

the TACTIC should be examined for the damage it causes to future races and those who employed it should be held accountable.

[seaglass]

62. Agreed. n/t

[PoliticalAmazon]

50. We can't "move on" from the Clintons behavior until the issue is addressed...

and steps taken to heal the divide between African-American and the Democratic Party.

That won't occur as long as, by our silence, we are telling the A-A community that using them as the bait for Hillary's bigot-pandering is wrong, ask their forgiveness, and demonstrate steps we are taking to make sure it doesn't happen again.

In an instance of workplace discrimination, usually a company will have an educator come in to explain to employees what is appropriate and what is not, and the repercussions if discrimination is inflicted on another.

I don't know if that would work with Dem politicians, but by God something needs to be done.

We can't "move on" from this just like we can't "move on" from Bush/Rove's theft of the 2000 election. It will aways haunt us, until the country states this is not acceptable, until an apology is given to voters for the vote theft, and until the system is fixed so it can't happen again.

I view the demands to "move on" from the CLintons bigot-pandering the same s I do Bush/Rove's demand that we "get over it" and "move on" after the 2000 vote theft: an insult, a slap in the face, telling us we have to accept as allowable the violations against Americans.

[ecstatic]

4. This hurts some of us more than others

It's easy for those who are not part of the targeted groups to say to just "let it go."

[papau]

10. Try again - there is no targeted group - Obama played the race card -not Hillary

[leveymg]

18. How so?

[blm]

25. So you believe Andrews should be held accountable for lying about this horrendous tactic

as Clintons did NOT employ it? Demand accountability for his lies, papau.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

32. Can you substantiate your slanderous claim? We will be anxiously awaiting your proof.

[Catherina]

39. Bull. And you on this site had many posts deleted when you played that same game

I alerted on many of your hateful, racist posts.

If you want people to overlook it, stop it.

[still_one]

7. no it isn't acceptable, but I also will not try to divide the party any more after this campaign

than has already been done

The Supreme Court, Iraq, healthcare, jobs, economy, and so many other issues are at stake

we know exactly where mccain stands, and that is to continue the bush policies

After we secure the three branches of government, I will be more self-critical

[dsc]

8. some of us, due to knowing mr andrew's character, don't believe what he said

Mr. Andrews has a history of being a lying opportunist. The fact he is now trashing Clinton in the WSJ, and refuses to say who the person who talked to him was, plus his known history of being a lying opportunist leads me to believe he is lying now.

[blm]

27. Then demand accountability for his lie against the Clintons. Because if it is a lie he should be

held accountable, just as if it is the truth the Clintons should be held to account for it. Either way - accountability is in order. Or else it signals acceptance.

[AuntPatsy]

77. My response to you though not directed toward me would be for you to prove

its the truth since so far it is nothing more than rumor from questionable sources and yet, you have no problem at all using it without first being able to prove the validity of your outrage, amazing, I guess when it comes to the Clintons they are quilty until proven innocent...sheesh..

[blm]

82. It's not a rumor, it's a charge made by a congressman involved in the conversation.

Hold HIM accountable for his charge if you are certain he is lying. If he is being truthful do you ACCEPT this tactic for Democratic races?

[AuntPatsy]

84. Dont have to, he has proven he is untrustworty, if you choose to spread

a rumor and demand I believe it, then you prove it..that is if you can.

[blm]

86. Then why would a CONGRESSMAN go on the record publicly with a certain lie? He

The fact that he said it on the record should lend more credibility than those who spread rumors without going on record.

I do not demand you believe what he said, but asked for examination of the damage the tactic brought about if his charge is accurate.

[AuntPatsy]

109. Your kidding right? After all the lies we have been forced to hear given up on record

from so many politicians I have lost count and you wonder how I can think that?I feel like this, your repeating a rumor, it is up to you to ensure your repeating accurate information to give others, not for me to prove whether it is true or not, if true, I agree with your outrage but this guys word is not enough proof for me nor should it be for you.

Lets be for real here, The Clinton's have been lied about so much the past ten years its nothing new that it would continue to happen, its the gop way, repeat repeat repeat and soon it becomes reality whether it be true or not and alot of people fall for it sadly.

Far too many good people have been either ruined or made to sit back and not say a word for fear such tactics might be used against them since its obvious the media has no problem spreading rumors without ensuring its factual time after time.

[blm]

111. You feel it's a rumor, though it's said on the record by a congressman in a news story.

The fact that there is a post #87 in this thread that refers to DU threads from last April at the time this was happening validates what the congressman charged.

If you want to declare he is lying then hold him accountable for that, but are you spreading a rumor that he is lying when there are posts from last April that point to the credibility of his claim as in Emit's post #87?

[AuntPatsy]

110. if its the truth than no but i want proof not inuenda's have had enough

of them to last me a lifetime

[blm]

112. #87

.

[dsc]

83. He lost his primary, for which I am grateful

presumedly he had to give up his seat to run in said primary, so he is now out of office. Legally he may tell lies about public figures with pretty much impunity. I fail to see what else needs to be done.

[dailykoff]

9. I see no reason to sweep the divisive strategies of the Clintons under the carpet.

They need to be exposed and addressed just as you've suggested because the Clintons have no intention of knocking it off unless they're forced to. K/R

[papau]

12. You really beliewve Obama's David smears and lies about Hillary? - amazing

[dailykoff]

16. They've been pulling this shit for five months.

So, yes, I believe it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. The Clintons came to power by "triangulating" to the right. This is just more of the same.

[BzaDem]

22. Oh baloney.

Obviously it is not an acceptable tactic. But you can't find any evidence it happened aside from one person's thoughts, which have been debunked. Stop treating lies as fact please.

[EFerrari]

23. How have they been debunked? I missed that part. n/t

[blm]

29. Show us the debunking. If it is a lie hold the liar accountable for it.

.

[Vicky Polonia]

28. We have no evidence

That someone made this phone call.

[hokies4ever]

31. But it's a hell of a circumstantial case

because it's a very damning accusation, period. Doesn't matter if it's true or not, he did the damage as soon as he spoke those words about her campaign.

That's the problem when your candidate has an honesty problem. People are hesitant to believe your side of the story on controversial issues.

[blm]

33. Then demand this Congressman be held accountable for his statement because this tactic would be

absolutely unacceptable to you as a Democrat if it were true.

[jasmine621]

35. It is totally unfair to blame Hillary for this.

And I really don't like the attitude that blacks are the cause of the divide between Jews and blacks. Blacks hold no economic leverage over Jews or any other group in this nation. Bakke was not acting on behalf of blacks nor was AIPAC when they campaigned to get McKinney ousted. Obama seemed to be placing the onous of the perceived or real divide on the black community.

[blm]

37. But, if this charge IS true you absolutely believe the tactic should get a full review

and have an accountability moment by a Dem PARTY that rejects this type of campaigning and will not ACCEPT its use, right?

Isn't accountability what's being called for here?

[Catherina]

46. Oh hush child. You missed the boat by over a mile. n/t

[NorthernSpy]

49. I think Hillary Clinton could literally spit in your face...

... and you'd insist it was raining.

[AtomicKitten]

36. Racially divisive politics has no business in the Democratic Party.

The denial of same by Clinton acolytes is as insidious as it is absurd, particularly their blustery admonitions about believing them or our lying eyes.

I've had about enough of the kind of exhausting batshit crazy ugly politics the Clintons brought to the table in this election. It has no place in our party. That's not how we move forward as a nation.

K&R

[blm]

40. The apologists don't realize that this is a moment where THEY show what is ACCEPTABLE to them.

Accountability goes all ways - if Andrews is lying he should be called for it - if he's telling the truth then they should demand accountability from those they trusted.

That is all. They can spin it into anything else they want but they reveal themselves and their level of integrity in the process.

[AtomicKitten]

65. The Clinton camp was caught with their pants down circulating the "Muslim" emails

... yet there is complete denial about that, like it never happened. But it did. Repeatedly.

Links here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6296588&mesg_id=6298514

I recovered from a bad case or pervasive denial ;) being confronted with facts here at DU and can only hope people OPEN UP THEIR EYES!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

42. Divide an conquer tactics have always worked. This election...

it will be:

1. Blacks against Hispanics
2. Blacks against gays
3. Blacks against "hard-working" whites
4. Blacks against Jews
5. Blacks against white women

The underlying objective is to siphon off votes from historically winning-coalition for Democrats. Democrats cannot win without the support of these critical groups. Therefore, divide them, as I believe Hillary Clinton, tried to do so that they either stay at home or vote Repug. And many of them will! When Obamaloses, she can then turn around and go "I told you so!"

Interesting how it's always "blacks against ". Playing the race card always works.

[blm]

43. Which is exactly the point of my thread. The RESIDUAL DAMAGE from the tactic has to be countered

And if we lose states like Pennsylvania because it was successful tactic for Hillary's campaign, then what does that say about the tactic itself? That it IS acceptable to a Democratic party who will not hold those responsible for its use to account..

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

74. Becomes a self-fulling prophecy...

If one repeats a lie often enough, the lie becomes the truth and people buy into it. That Obama can't win "hard-working" white people may actually cause white people not to vote for Obama. I'm a political scientist by trade and can honestly say that these tactics work and have always worked. Sad thing, however, is that it's usually the Repugs who use race, gender, religion to divide. The fact that it's a Democrat is utterly disgusting to me. :(

[Catherina]

45. IT IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE & ONE OF THE MOST SHAMEFUL TACTICS

they took.

I'm furious about this because AA/Jewish relationship deteriorated for reasons we're not going to discuss because we'll take care of our dirty laundry ourselves thank you. It was SHAMEFUL to cynically play on these for political gain.

One thing that made me so happy during these primaries is that most AAs and Jews REFUSED to take the bait. Obama is appealing to our higher instincts and reminding us of the time we marched hand in hand fighting for equal rights.

Jews were lynched and murdered along with Blacks. SHAME on people who tried to destroy our healing relationship and introduce that hate to a whole group of young voters who want nothing to do with hating anyone based on the color of their skin or their religion.

It is not acceptable and SHAME on anyone excusing it or pretending it wasn't done. We outsmarted the haters this time.

[blm]

47. Exactly - those who want it to go unexamined are acting the 'good german' role that has never

been useful to society and its future. Accepting is accepting and reveals who YOU are as a person and as a Democrat.

[Divernan]

56. It's the Roseanne Rosanadana school of politics: just say, "Oh, never mind!"

And I don't accept it for one minute. The Clintons deliberately stirred up racial bigotry among poor, i.e., "hard-working" whites. The Clintons appealed to the fears and insecurities of poorly educated people. The Clintons brought out the worst in too many of their supporters. Putting those genies back in their bottles will be very difficult,if not impossible between now and the General Election, and can hurt many minority candidates in coming elections.

Racist attacks are NOT the same as attacking an opposing candidate based on some policy disagreement. Hillary missed many prime opportunities during the primary to take a stand against racism and her silence was deafening. Whatever she says now will be like a newspaper's correction on the bottom of page 27 of a substantive error published in bold type headlines on the front page - way too little and way too late.

[crickets]

67. *psst* It's Emily Litella

But I agree with your point. I also think that someone other than Hillary is going to have to bridge the divide on this. She's spent her cred and made her bed on this issue. A candidate like Obama can reach out with understanding to those willing to listen. Those unwilling to listen were never going to change their views - or their votes. The difference is that some of them, the Harriet Christians of the world, actually reached a point where they were willing to admit their bigotry out loud, as though it were acceptable. It is the Dem party's duty to point out that bigotry is NOT acceptable, and Hillary can come along for the ride or not as she chooses. Whatever. I'm done with her and would just as soon know we'd seen the last of her during this campaign.

[wvbygod]

48. Sorry, unamed sources does not a divide make

Without a name to put on such an outrageous statement it is just gossip. Way too much gossiping
going on to take serious offense to rumor.

[blm]

51. From a CONGRESSMAN supporter of Clinton. If he's lying he should be confronted. If he's truthful

then the TACTIC should be exposed and declared unacceptable and out of bounds for any future Democratic race, right?

[wvbygod]

53. right. n/t

[blm]

54. That is accountability. Let's demand it for a change instead of excusing it. It never does any good

in the long run to stick our heads in the sand on serious matters like this. It only helps matters get WORSE, not better.

[Divernan]

60. Accountability: life's most important lessons: there are bad consequences to bad acts.

That is the lesson which sociopaths, megalomaniacs and narcissists are incapable of learning.

[frickaline]

55. Very compelling smear campaign

And something many would like to believe despite the lack of actual evidence.

I see this as very similar to the 'whitey' tape. Pony up or shut up! ^^

[blm]

61. If the congressman is lying hold him accountable. If he's being truthful then where do YOU stand

on the acceptability of that TACTIC in the Democratic playbook?

[frickaline]

63. I find it unreasonable to comment on hypothetical situations

particularly in this situation where the point seems only to further divide the Democratic party. If real proof is produced, I will have plenty to say at that time.

[blm]

66. It's not hypothetical once the charge is out there from a congressman who had access to the Clinton

campaign as one of its supporting delegates.

YOU want it to be called hypothetical to escape coming up with a postable answer which tells me that you are uncomfortable with the tactic and loathe accepting that it happened.

[frickaline]

69. Last I checked "Innocent until proven guilty" was a Democratic principal

Accusations without proof are nothing but slander.

You, right now, are slandering. If you have proof of your accusation, show it, by all means. I have no problem believing facts, it is only speculation that offends me. You should hold yourself and your judgment to higher standards.

[blm]

70. The CONGRESSMAN made the charge. You are slandering him as a liar. He can be held accountable

IF he is lying. IF his charge is accurate then it is you doing the slandering to hide the use of a tactic your conscience knows is unacceptable.

[frickaline]

71. So do you believe the 'whitey' tape exists then?

By your same logic, this wasn't a smear either.

Sorry but you are completely off-base here.

[blm]

72. No. But there has never been an on the record charge by an Obama supporter that it exists

because they heard it themselves, is there?

Straw men don't work with logic-based posters, frick.

[frickaline]

73. How can you know its a Clinton supporter when you don't know who it is!!

Seriously, stop and think about what you are saying.

I know the 'article' upset you and you are angry, but making this irrational statement and lashing out at people with no evidence is ludicrous. Seriously, walk away from the computer. You are too wrapped up in this and have lost perspective.

That's the last post I'll make on this. :hi: Peace.

[blm]

78. The congressman was a supporter, he reported it happened.

believe what you need to get by...

[StevieM]

99. Yep, it just another lie. It is amazing how far some people will go. This makes me not want

to support Obama. I will probably vote for him, but I am already looking forward to the 2012 Democratic Primaries.

Steve

[blm]

104. Wrong - #87 has a post from April that validates this current story.

.

[Skwmom]

57. Many seemed to have no problem with trying to pit Blacks against Whites and Blacks against Hispanics

What's wrong with inciting racial discord if it will get the Clintons back in the Whitehouse?

[Catherina]

75. Sad and sickening. I'd weep for my country if we didn't have living proof

in Obama's win that most people have come further than that.

LET'S NOT HANG BACK WITH THE KNUCKLE-DRAGGERS.

[JVS]

64. NO

[MethuenProgressive]

76. One guy trying to suck-up to Obama spews a HillHate rumor and you fall for it?

You're the target audience, evidently.

[blm]

81. good germans have ignore, good citizens assess and have accountability moments.

.

[GarbagemanLB]

79. As an Obama supporter: THE RACE IS OVER. Shut the fuck up about Hillary.

Do you really want to unite the party? This sort of shit (looking backwards) sure doesn't help. Our goal is to win in November. This does not help move us towards that goal.

[blm]

80. Do you really want to work on COUNTERING the damage done before November?

Then it needs to be assessed honestly.

[apocalypsehow]

97. I guess I missed the Admin's resignation post that put your cranky ass in charge of things at DU.

:eyes:

[Dhalgren]

85. Democrats have race-baited plenty of times

in the past. So have the Republicans. It does not make it right or acceptable, but it is true. Democrats are not the sinless bunch of innocents that everyone would like to believe. Democratic politics, historically, have been filthy; it probably won't change...

[Emit]

87. Given the content of this old post, the recent news does not surprise me in the least

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5592032

[blm]

88. May I suggest reposting that post and ADDING the recent report for weight and relevance?

The connection needs to be made clear to those fluffing this off.

[Emit]

90. I'm at work now blm and have many hours to go, so I can't

(I can only post quick responses during breaks and stuff ;))

But, you are welcome to use that information and re-create a new post -- as I will not be available until later tonight. :hi:

[blm]

91. Nope - it's yours buddy. This one can last till you can reconstruct yours.

Sometimes folks really can't put puzzle pieces together on their own.

Your post will force them to do it.

Besides....you don't even want to know how many ignore lists I'm on. heheh....

[vaberella]

93. I strongly agree with BLM this is an issue that needs to be addressed.

People think this is relegated to Hillary-hate. It's not. This is unscrupulous methodology used in campaigning which undermines the vote of the American people. I do not tolerate people abusing my vote as a citizen.

This maybe unsubstantiated by way of whom the Clinton surrogate was speaking of, he however did mention it and say he heard it. This is not him overhearing two people speak. This is him having a conversation with an insider in how they were planning on running their campaigning. This is detrimental to any campaign, to the voters, and I consider it a crime against the American people.

These things should not be tolerated and with all the corruption we've seen in relation to campaign's from 2000, to 2004, and currently the mentioning of corruption in campaigning (since I find this a scandalous action in campaigning in which I would hope to vote for an honest candidate) I want it thoroughly investigated.


I find people are taking this situation far too lightly and scream party unity or calll this Hill-hate. If this was labeled in the Obama campaign I would want it investigated just as much. I am disturbed by this and see it as a slap in the face of myself as a citizen that people such as my self are being mis informed by the people we are too trust with four years of our prosperity---if that.


Please keep us up to date BLM

[DogPoundPup]

94. "unscrupulous methodology " = Rovian

Hillary has certainly made a pretty bad name for herself. "Conquer and Divider"

I am grateful that Obama will have the time to campaign against McLame without HillBill tailing him throwing their poisonous spears at his back.

[blm]

95. Maybe not openly.... but look what they did to Kerry when Dems had no idea what they'd do

to keep Hillary2008 on schedule.

Historian Doug Brinkley commented about the backstabbing as early as April2004:
http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Bill's summer2004 booktour he defended Bush mightily against the very criticisms Kerry was making of Bush's decisions on Iraq.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

Carville sabotaged Ohio Dem voters on election night - for...who?
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward


You can't make this stuff up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

It's when they are NOT being watched that you really need to worry.

[vaberella]

96. This is not about Hillary in any way shape or form. My statement was to move it away from Hillary.

This is the fact that these sort of tactics are used in campaigning and if they are true in relation to Clinton's campaign or any other Campaign during this year it should be discussed, and these people should be focused on as committing an injustice to the American people. I have seen divisive tactics from the Clinton campaign, Ferraro wasn't speaking of unity and love. I'm not saying McCain is any gem.

But in relation to the article it is a man who was supporting Clinton's camp and was quoted as saying that it came from her camp. He needs to be investigated and his ACCUSATION should be investigated. He could have said it about Mickey Mouse, if MM was running. I want a full investigation because this is an insult to me as a voter.

[blm]

98. I believe Emit's reply in #87 gives additional perspective to the intent at the time.

.

[vaberella]

101. Thanks BLM.

[StevieM]

100. It's not acceptable. Fortunately, Andrews is lying. We are living in a new McCarthy era (eom)

[sfam]

102. Don't believe your lying eyes...these are not the droids you're looking for...

Its fairly amazing that you'd spout off with certainty that this guy is lying. McCarthy era indeed!

But regardless of how despicable this tactic was, the contest is over. We really do need to move along.

[blm]

105. the contest for Penn is not over....fallout has to be dealt with. Pretending something serious

didn't happen here is not going to help assess the fallout and how best to counter it going forward.

[StevieM]

106. It should be easy to move on from a non-existent despicable tactic (eom)

[blm]

107. Post #87 shows you are incorrect about your assertion the tactic did not occur.

.

[blm]

103. Wrong - Reply #87 from Emit has an April post referring to the tactic.

Nailed.

[democracy1st]

108. kick the truth