OBAMA ATTACKS: Adviser Politicizes, Blames Hillary for Bhutto's Death

[DemKR]

Barack Obama has reached a new low in American Politics. Politicing a Tragedy. Has he been taking Giuliani 101?

His head advisor, David Axelrod, Has Blamed Hillary Clinton for Benazir Bhutto's assassination in Pakistan.

Bhutto’s death will “call into issue the judgment: who’s made the right judgments,” Axelrod said. “Obviously, one of the reasons that Pakistan is in the distress that it’s in is because al-Qaeda is resurgent, has become more powerful within that country and that’s a consequence of us taking the eye off the ball and making the wrong judgment in going into Iraq. That’s a serious difference between these candidates and I’m sure that people will take that into consideration.” . . . “She was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, which we would submit, was one of the reasons why we were diverted from Afghanistan, Pakistan and al-Qaeda, who may have been players in this event today, so that’s a judgment she’ll have to defend,” Axelrod said.

America cannot trust Barack Obama.

TIME Link: http://thepage.time.com/axelrod-on-bhutto-assassination/

[ronnykmarshall]

1. Link please

or is this from The Onion?

[Perry Logan]

2. One member of DU has already used Bhutto's death to smear Hillary. Very Freepish.

[sandnsea]

16. Bayh has already politicized this for Hillary

And Hillary and Biden supporters attacked Obama almost instantly after the assassination.

[EFerrari]

3. We can't trust him because he's right about Senate complicity?

Okay. :eyes:

[malta blue]

7. ahem ...

:applause:

Thank you.

The persons to blame for the assassination are those who actually committed the heinous act, however, the aggression in Iraq surely has helped Al-Quaeda prosper in regions that we have chosen to ignore.

edit: typo

[EFerrari]

12. Not to mention, our herding all those ideologues over the border

into Pakistan. And ignoring that our so called "enemies" are being protected by the Pakistani intelligence agency.

Al Qaida is building the world's biggest and most tech advanced tech training center in the tribal region right now. They have a LANGUAGE SCHOOL there so they can train anyone from anywhere. Your tax dollars at work.

:shrug:

[malta blue]

28. All for the conquest of Eye-Rak.

:puke:

[progressivebydesign]

39. "Senate complicity"? Apparenlty Hillary is the only member of the Senate now? n/t

[EFerrari]

45. Overstatement. n/t

[H2O Man]

40. It does get

confusing sometimes: are some of our friends saying Senator Obama is wrong to say that there are differences in his positions and those of Senator Clinton? Because if he is wrong, wouldn't that mean Senator Clinton is also wrong when she says those differences exist? Or is Senator Obama wrong and Senator Clinton right?

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we reached the level of maturity required to say there are some differences, and to just put the cards on the table and discuss them openly and honestly? Some people will agree with Senator Obama; some people will agree with Senator Clinton; and some will no doubt say that they are both corporate democrats, and there isn't any more significant difference between them than between a Big Mac and a Whooper?

Personally, I'm less interested in what any of the campaign aides have to say about today's events. I am very interested in hearing what the various candidates have to say. I believe that any one of them would be a huge improvement over the clown in the White House now.

[glowing]

4. Where's the quote where he says that she was a direct cause of this.

I think that these sort of actions are the consquences of a pro-war agenda.... which has lead to more recruitment of al-Qaeda and instability. I think it is a good thing that Obama recognizes our hand stirring the pot, has created a lot of the mess.

[ccpup]

6. with his votes to continue funding the war in Iraq

he's had quite a few turns stirring that pot, as well.

[Marrah_G]

70. He didn't say it- one of his staff did

It was pretty obvious and I was really surprised when I saw it. If I were Obama I would be pissed at the staffer. I am not a Hillary supporter and I thought the comment made Obama look badly. His advisers need to think before they speak.

[ccpup]

5. wow! this is surprising

even for Obama! It might help the Obama campaign to realize before they attack that Hillary -- in Benazir Bhutto -- lost a friend as well as a voice for Democracy in Pakistan.

[RaleighNCDUer]

Never mind that Obama didn't say it, an advisor did, and that Bhutto

agreed with Obama on his statement about dealing with terrorist camps inside Pakistan. It's not "blaming Hillary" to say that congress was complicit in taking the focus off Afghanistan and AQ in favor of attacking Iraq. It's just a fact. It is also a fact that while he was not in the senate at that time, he has since joining the senate voted with the majority on funding the war in Iraq, making him also complicit, though to a lesser degree.

Which is why I support neither of them.

[Flabbergasted]

8. He's right. nt

[BeyondGeography]

9. No there there

He's being pushed on why Bhutto's assassination isn't good news for Hillary, which is the talking point du jour for the MSM. He responded that the CW diverted our attention to Iraq and we took our eye off of al Qaeda. Today's events are not validation for those who supported this diversion, including Hillary.

Good answer. End of story.

[JuniperLea]

26. Link? eom

[dbackjon]

10. OK Obamanation - what is the excuse this time???

[LSK]

23. so the Iraq war is NOT taking the eye of the ball??

Hillary didn't vote for the IWR?

Hillary didn't vote to label Iran's Military a terrorist organization???

WHAT IS YOUR EXCUSE? Besides not reading the actual quote?

[dbackjon]

31. It was - but to blame HRC for the death of Bhutto is a stretch

[LSK]

36. I do not see Obama blaming her

Care to point that out in the quote?

[BuyingThyme]

11. Decisions have consequences.

Too complicated for Hillary and company?

[OzarkDem]

13. If media is pushing Dem candidates to respond

The last thing they should do is blame each other, but point the finger right where it belongs - at Bush and the GOP.

Any Dem who blames a fellow Dem candidate isn't playing with a full deck.

[sandnsea]

14. I alerted, that's an outrageous subject line

Nowhere in that article did anybody blame Hillary for Bhutto's death. Absolutely outrageous lie.

[demnan]

15. I sure will be glad when the primaries are over

and we don't have so many posts like this.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LSK]

21. no kidding

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[progressivebydesign]

48. Why should they lock it? he DOES blame her...

Are you people not reading the same thing I'm reading on the OP??? Are you are so blinded by your hatred of Hillary Clinton that you can't comprehend the paragraph:

Bhutto’s death will --->>>“call into issue the judgment: who’s made the right judgments,”<--- Axelrod said. “Obviously, one of the reasons that Pakistan is in the distress that it’s in is because al-Qaeda is resurgent, has become more powerful within that country and that’s a consequence of us taking the eye off the ball and making the wrong judgment in going into Iraq. ---->That’s a serious difference between these candidates and I’m sure that people will take that into consideration.” <-----. . . ----->“She was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, which we would submit, was one of the reasons why we were diverted from Afghanistan, Pakistan and al-Qaeda, who may have been players in this event today, so that’s a ---->JUDGEMENT<----- she’ll have to defend,” Axelrod said.


Notice the little arrows to assist you in comprehending what he's said? Basically, in case you missed it... he is equating "who made the right judgments" regarding supporting the war in Iraq and how supporting that war allowed other areas to fester, which (by his incredible stretch) caused the death of Bhutto. And he goes on to say that "the difference between the candidates" is that she was a "strong supporter of the war" (which is kinda bullshit, she did not support the war per se, but approved a resolution to explore all options, but hey), and that focus caused the death, and he REPEATS the "JUDGEMENT" word, and says that Hillary will have to "defend" that.

You tell us all how he is NOT blaming Hillary specifically for this?

btw, if Hillary voted for a war, not a resolution to try various things to get Iraq to comply, then why does everyone seem to call it an "illegal" war. If it's an illegal war, then apparently those that are villified for supporting the Resolution made the war "legal" with their vote. If it's illegal, then she didn't vote for a war, did she? get it?

Face it.. Obama's guy completely screwed the pooch on this one. He should resign. Hillary fired people for less when it was against Obama.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

18. That's right, blame the DEMOCRATS for the scumbag administration's disaster Obama

asshole

[DemKR]

19. I'm not changing the subject line. Like Giuliani,

He is using the tragedy for political purposes.

[Windy]

33. All talking points no substance... HRC supporters can't think past a headline

There is nothing but truth in that statement. Actions have consequences. Your candidate has proven time and time again that she is incapable of exercising good judgment based upon forward thinking.

The OPs post is nothing but emptyheaded flamebait

[sandnsea]

34. Evan Bayh already led the attack

Nobody said he was blaming Bhutto's murder on Obama. That's a sick sick line and the kind of politics Obama is trying to end.

[LSK]

20. what is not true in that statement that he said???

Did she not support the Iraq war?

Did the Iraq war not distract us from Afghanistan?

Did the Iranian wild goose chase (which she supported) not distract us from Pakistan?

[Flabbergasted]

22. He thinks he's helping Hillary get elected. It doesn't matter how dishonest he is.

sarcasm.

[LSK]

25. any DUer can see right through his absurdity

He should stop. Hes making himself look like a total ass.

[AX10]

24. Obama should be ashamed that he has a Rovista on his time.

But Obama has none whatsoever.
:thumbsdown:

[WilliamPitt]

27. I make in my pants sometimes.

[LSK]

29. I hope you wash them rather quickly afterwards

:D

[anitar1]

30. Glad I do not support either one of these power

hungry corporate creatures.

[NoodleyAppendage]

35. HILLARY DU PLANTS ATTACK: Read the original post for a fine example of a Hillary-backed sabotage.

America cannot trust Hillary Clinton.

And, to the poster...will you relinquish your DU screen name and current account if your candidate (if chosen as the Dem rep) loses the general election? Which she will. BET ON IT.

J

[DemKR]

71. por favor, don't flatter me :)

[progressivebydesign]

37. WTF? Then he needs to be fired. Hillary fired people for much less.

What an asshole.

[dysfunctional press]

38. where's the part where he BLAMES Hillary for Bhutto's death?

:shrug:

[progressivebydesign]

42. He states it QUITE clearly that he is blaming her...

I read it quite clearly. He even is gauche enough to use it to show "the difference between the two candidates", and goes on to talk about HIllary Clinton. What part of that didn't you get?? Or are you so blinded by your support of another candidate that you've forgotten how to read?

[LSK]

44. projection is a wonderful thing

"are you so blinded by your support of another candidate that you've forgotten how to read?"

:rofl:

[dysfunctional press]

52. blinded...? moi...?

:eyes:

[LSK]

43. its hanging out with Santa Claus on the North Pole

It doesn't exist.

[ElizabethDC]

41. Just saw the Axelrod clip on CNN

I wouldn't quite say that he's blaming Hillary for her death, CNN said that some are interpreting that way. Even though I don't think he was trying to blame HRC, I think that he was definitely trying to politicize Bhutto's death, which I personally think is inappropriate for any of the campaigns to do.

[sandnsea]

46. The OP is politicizing the death

They've all made statements. Bayh releasd a statement warning about experience and be very afraid. The poster is the one who has taken the politization to a whole new level with this wild accusation. Why don't you confront the inappropriateness of this kind of smear politics?

[ElizabethDC]

50. Is the OP Hillary's campaign spokesperson?

I said that I didn't think the headline was accurate. What more do you want me to do? But as I was typing my previous post, I heard the reporter on CNN say that some felt that Axelrod was blaming Hillary for Bhutto's death, so it's not as if the OP is the only person interpreting it that way.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DS1]

49. ugh. pound fucking sand, dickhead

[sniffa]

85. right on

:thumbsup:

[DemKR]

51. It's not about just vote for Hillary anymore, guys. It's about holding Barack to the same standard.

[dysfunctional press]

53. seems to most that they do share the same standards...and they can have each other.

corporatist fuckwad dlc dinos.

[DemKR]

54. these kind of attacks just sadden me. No Karl Rove style politics allowed in the DEM PARTY!!

[matcom]

55. why are you against doing something about Global Warming?

x(

[blogslut]

56. When is a Hillary supporter ever going to say something positive?

All they seem to do on here is attack. It gets so tiresome.

[DemKR]

57. Why is someone else's words, a HEAD advisor no doubt of the Obama folks, our fault?

[blogslut]

59. Blah blah blah blah blah

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blahBlah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blahBlah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blahBlah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blahBlah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blahBlah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[uppityperson]

58. Why keep posting this over and over?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=3116175
etc etc etc. Yes, I can search. Bah to you.

[DemKR]

60. I think a lot of people are just frustrated.

For someone to suggest the posts were coordinated is absolutely ludicrous. You can't seem to grasp that so many true blue progressive DUers are outraged at this madness that the Obama campaign has injected into Democratic party politics. These kind of attacks aren't going to be let go anymore.

Obama has been given a free ride for a year--no more. Time to accept the fact that your candidate is held to an equal standard.

[matcom]

61. and many more are just idiots

[DemKR]

62. Explain

[matcom]

63. i like to use visual aids

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2539491

[DemKR]

64. why does reality bother you?

[matcom]

66. bothered?

LOL!

HIGHLY amused. trust me.

:rofl:

[DemKR]

75. won't be amused come caucus night im sure :)

[LSK]

68. see post 23

You must have missed it.

[uppityperson]

69. Bwahahahaha. Boy you sure jumped to a lot of conclusions & attacks there.

1. Suggesting the similar posts is "coordinated" (means I'm ludicrous)
2. I can't seem to grasp True Blues are outraged (means I'm an imbecile and not True Blue)
3. My candidate is Obama (and that I'm not holding anyone to an equal standard)

And I got all that in 1 response to my question of why you keep posting this. Wow.

[ShaneGR]

65. I don't understand the extreme negativity

Obama is lashing out in two directions, both at Hillary and at Edwards.

[DemKR]

72. I understand it.

I think it's an act of pure desperation. Either that or he gave the "politics of hope" to Michelle for safe keeping.

[AntiFascist]

67. One reason al Qaeda is resurgent is because...

the heroin industry is doing so well. We know how Clinton/Bush look the other way when it comes to drug trafficking.

[uppityperson]

73. WHERE did Obama attack? Seems an adviser did.

American cannot trust those who make false claims like this.

[DemKR]

74. Where are all the calls for Axelrod's resignation?

[uppityperson]

76. Patience grasshopper. Maybe you should start a topic on that instead.

There is a difference between " OBAMA ATTACKS!" and "Call for Axelrod's resignation!"

[DemKR]

77. The campaigns attacks used to surprise me, but not anymore

[uppityperson]

78. Personally I prefer more accurate headlines, and putting the blame where it belongs.

The adviser.

[DemKR]

79. Obama didn't oppose the comments n/t

[uppityperson]

82. He didn't make them either. Put the blame on the person who did it. nt

[Dems Will Win]

80. There won't be any. Because he just said Hillary had such poor judgement she let Bush invade Iraq

When we should have remained focused in Afghanistan. Don't forget Barack said about Iraq, that the Dems were being fooled by Karl Rove and the neo-cons to move focus from Afghanistan to Iraq:

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, 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.

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain.

I don’t oppose all wars.

After September 11th, 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 a tragedy from happening again.

I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. 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 arm-chair, 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.

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. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. 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, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, 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 US 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 today. 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 the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation 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.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

[LanternWaste]

81. That's an attack?

That's an attack? It seems to me to be more a softball critique of policy than anything else. However, I do understand the tendency to view any critique, regardless of how valid as an attack by the candidate's supporters. Playing the victim gets a lot of air-time in election-cycles these days, so I can easily see why it's a popular game.

But, since I've neither chosen nor ruled out a candidate yet, I think I can safely call the statement a 'critique' rather than an attack.




"America cannot trust Barack Obama. "

Really? You have absolute knowledge of America's collective needs, wants and trusts? Truly that's an amazing gift-- one I'm sure we all envy.

[matcom]

83. oooooo KICK to get this one close to your NEWEST masterpiece!

:kick:

[Swamp Rat]

84. ALIEN LIZARDS ATTACK!: Mind control particle beam penetrates Earth's atmosphere, confuses humans.