Anyone who has been paying attention to the news for the last two or three days, and does not agree with me, that the Clintons are at best, passively undermining the Kerry campaign, need to consult a physician.

The fact that Kerry has been continuing to pound on the Swift Boats crowd for so long in defense of his past, has led to the pigeon holing of his campaign. Clearly more than Kerry are steering this vessel into troubled waters. While it may appear to be principled, it is disasterous, and I have watched and listened to several honest Democratic strategists shake their heads in absolute disbleif. But note: none dare blurt out their suspicions. They value their political lives.

And, when you add to this, the midnight news conference following the Bush speech, only the most rabid ABB follower would see any logic there. Responsible Democrat leaders are simply dumbfounded, amazed that the campaign appears to be motoring around in circles. The midnight conference is telling, not only for it's blatant pettiness, but the time factor. Journalists do not enjoy having to be out on the stump that late at night, knowing that they must arise early and follow the campaign minus their refreshing sleep.

Now, if one seriously considers the campaign leadership, it is easily recognized that former Clinton operatives are heading up Kerry's quest. And these folks are indeed no dummies. So why is the quest appearing to be so inept? What is Lockhart doing in charge?

Simply this. Hillary has desires on 2008, and Kerry does not figure into the mix. Plus, Kerry would be the de facto leader of the party as president, not Hillary and Bill. Are you getting this Huey and Thaiquila?

While the Clintonistas are appearing to show loyalty and saying all the right things, this also includes Bill, they are allowing Kerry to screw up royally, and making it appear to be his doing. But in truth, they are allowing him to be steered in the direction they wish.

Mark my words, the Clintons are not friends of the Kerrys. And they are the very best support that Bush can buy; and they do not have to spend a single penny there!

TIMBER!!!!

yes, Clinton faked a heart attack the day after the RNC convention to undermine the Kerry campaign.

nevermind that Clinton's surgery and Hurricane Frances stole virtually ALL of Bush's post-convention press coverage, and buried that horrible Time poll in the process.

yup, this MUST be a Hildebeast conspiracy to undermine Kerry's campaign.



youre a real wacko buddy. and its SICK of u to capitalize on the best living president's ailments for political purposes.

but then again, its just like u Bush supporters to exploit sick or dead politicians..


WIN ONE FOR THE GIPPER!

And what, prey tell, does that have to do with the thesis, you towering bulwark of intellect?

Groping around in the dark room of ideology gains you no leaway whatsoever.

However, your verbal flatulance is good for at least a smile, and at best a hearty laugh.

Pardon me while I LMAO!!!

OK, I'm ready now.

I wondered when one of your resident haters would use Clinton's illness for political crapola. Notice not one nonhater made any remarks about Clinton's untimely illness...because we are sane! It took a hater to bring it up....and we all know if it had been a Republican awaiting heart surgery the haters would have been on it within nanoseconds to call it a lie!

Rush Limbaugh has expressed the thought over the past year that the Clintons would sabotage the democrats run for the presidency, so as to further Hillary's run in 2008. He is very insightful, and a great strategist in his own right. It is in a sense a conspiracy thoery, but a plausable one.

Here's further evidence that you have hit the nail right on the head John.



Tuesday, Sept. 7, 2004 9:40 a.m. EDT
Clinton Call Leak Sabotaged Kerry

Panicked presidential candidate John Kerry had every reason to believe that the conversation he had with ex-president Bill Clinton on Saturday – where the two discussed how to rescue his flagging campaign – would be kept confidential.

But that expectation went up in smoke on Monday when Kerry and his campaign aides found explicit details from the Clinton strategy session splashed all over the New York Times and other media.

Among the most damaging details to surface: Clinton's strong recommendation that Kerry abandon the crown jewel of his presidential campaign – his service in Vietnam.
Kerry himself was plainly mortified over the leak, desperately trying to downplay the significance of the Clinton call by describing the ensuing press coverage as "the most overblown thing."

So, who was responsible for the loose lips?

The Times cited only "officials with knowledge of the Clinton conversation."

The Washington Post was no more helpful, sourcing "those familiar with the conversation."

What is known is that "those familiar with the conversation" include just three individuals: Clinton, Kerry and former Clinton press aide Joe Lockhart. And Lockhart later told reporters he wouldn't comment.

But somebody commented – and whoever it was certainly didn't seem to have Sen. Kerry's best interests at heart.

While we don't pretend to know exactly who it was who spilled the beans, one tidbit that crossed our desk last week offers a clue.

The day before Mr. Clinton entered the hospital for heart bypass surgery, the Associated Press reported:

"With the national political conventions out of the way, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton embarks Friday on a two-day swing with her husband, the former president, that has the trappings of a personal campaign kickoff.

"Sen. Clinton is gearing up for a 2006 re-election bid seen by many as a prelude to a run for president in 2008 should John Kerry fail in his bid for the White House this year."

Perhaps Sen. Kerry ought to think twice about answering the phone next time Mr. Clinton calls with fresh advice on how to save his campaign.

What is interesting is that it is a great deal more common in most circles. Only thing is that Democrats and journalists are afraid to admit it. This is probably the most well know 'secret' around Washington.

Everyone knows it except TQ and Huey.

Being in denial won't change nor protect you from the truth huey. Remember this, the Clintons are loyal to no one but themselves. They realise something your small mind has never even considered and that is that history is written for the future generations. To be the first husband and wife to serve as President would lock up the Clinton legacy forever. Going forward 200 years and looking back to the present time, how could hillary have ever been elected if bill was a lousy President ?

That is how they plan to rewrite history and delegate all of his embarrassing failures as President as implausible accusations from a bitter opposition. Remember that these people you worship are self serving hedonists with ego's the size of texas. They are power mongers with no true desire to serve the American people. But i am just a hateful right wing fascist, Right?

An ego the size of Texas?
Are you talking about the Clinton or the Bush?
Serving the American people, what do you mean by that, what American people are you talking about?

Bluecat, If Bush were Governing by Opinion Polls as Clinton did, we would never have gone into Iraq. He is not treating his job like a popularity contest, he is doing what is right for America no matter what his critics say.

Clintonistas move in for the kill — of Kerry

The Democratic convention failed to give Sen. John Kerry the bounce that he needed and anticipated because, at the end, after Clinton, Obama, and Edwards had oriented the convention to a domestic agenda, he tacked the wrong way and emphasized foreign policy and war to the exclusion of healthcare and the economy.

The Republican convention, by contrast, was carefully aimed at promoting the saliency of President Bush’s anti-terror agenda and emphasizing the dangerous threat under which we all live.

Now comes the third convention: the anniversary of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. This anniversary will rivet national attention on the catastrophe that doomed almost 3,000 Americans to a fiery death, and, by implication, will underscore the need to keep Bush in office to protect us from further mayhem. Even the sports events of this coming weekend will likely all feature memorial tributes to the dead of Sept. 11. Everywhere one turns this Saturday we will be reminded of the grim events of that horrid day.

Kerry, on the other hand, continues to miss the point. By talking about his wartime record — even by rebutting the claims of the Swift boat veterans — he diverts attention from the domestic issues that are his only salvation.Terrorism, after all, is a media event outside of New York, Washington, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Who is going to attack Kansas City?

Every day, Americans must go to the pharmacy to get Mom’s prescription medication and ante up the high copayment or absorb the entire cost if they are without insurance. Every week, workers get an inadequate paycheck or worry about their futures in the face of low cost foreign competition. It is this daily reality, not the media-driven threat of terrorism that Kerry must stress if he wants to get back into this race.

Instead, Kerry has reached out to a set of advisers who do not, really, even support his candidacy. James Carville and Paul Begala have their primary loyalty to the Clintons who, first and last, want Hillary to run for president in 2008. Generally speaking, it is a good idea in politics to hire only advisers who want you to win.

Carville and Begala, if they act in their own self-interest, as they always do, are rooting for Bush. What better place to do so than from within the Kerry headquarters?

If we want any further proof of the Clintons’ intentions in this election, ponder who leaked to the media the now-famous 90-minute sickbed conversation former President Bill Clinton had with the Democratic nominee. Who leaked it to the media?

Not Kerry or his people, who spent the weekend denying that the hiring of Begala and Carville reflected a Clintonian domination of the campaign. The leak came, undoubtedly, from the Clinton people, who wanted to hype the role their former president was playing in the Kerry operation, precisely to cast the senator as weak and dependent on Clinton’s advice.

And let’s remember that neither Carville nor Begala was the operative to whom Clinton himself turned when he needed to win the 1996 election. In 1992, he used them to win the 43 percent of the vote he needed to garner in a three-way race.

Among Democratic loyalists, they are the kings of maximizing the turnout. But for swing voters, their partisan and populist appeals fall flat. Knowing this, one wonders if Clinton has not sent his operatives forth knowing full well that their best and most earnest advice will be bad and will make Kerry’s defeat, and Hillary’s ultimate candidacy, more likely.

If Kerry doesn’t get it, Bush does. He understands that a focus on terrorism and the threats we face are key to his reelection prospects. Beneath the division of Americans into two seemingly equal camps lies a consensus that Bush is the better president for wartime and that Kerry will do better at the peacetime tasks of stimulating the economy, creating jobs, improving healthcare, raising education standards and protecting the environment.

In both of these suppositions, the voters have seen through the rhetoric of each camp and have accurately divined the abilities of each candidate. It now remains only for Bush to prove we are at war — as we are — to vindicate his candidacy.
Morris is the author of Rewriting History, a rebuttal of Sen. Hillary Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) memoir, Living History.
Thehillnews.com

Kerry: Hi, Bill, I'm calling to ask you about the FORGERY?

News Report: Kerry called Clinton to ask him about the SURGERY.

First of all, Bush makes extensive use of opinion polls and focus groups. At least when it comes to how to run his campaign. When it comes to the issues, he doesn't give a whit. For example - the FCC deregulation - there was a record number of concerned letters recieved by the FCC, and 99.9% of them were agaisnt the proposals. Micheal Powell (Colin Powell's son) passed it anyway. This was so bad that even TRENT LOTT stepped in to contermand the FCC.

Second, what is wrong with doing what the AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT? Isn't that what you call a DEMOCRACY? You think it is wrong to listen to the occupants of your country when making a decision? Or only if they happen to be deocrats, in which everything they do is wrong?

Do you really think that anyone, republican or democrat, will rise tothe office of President who is not extremely ambitions and power hungry? You are living in a dream world. Especially if you think that Republicans are not susceptible.

And you want to talk about an ego the size of Texas? How about GWB saying he was chosen by God to lead the US? That ego is a little bit bigger than Texas.

Politophile - I have a question for you. Is Halliburton a good company or not? Do you think they deserved their contracts?