The Alan Grayson Page

The Anthony Weiner Page

Guest Contributors


  • BN-Politics' administrators respect, but do not necessarily endorse, views expressed by our contributors. Our goal is to get the ideas out there. After that, they're on their own.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2007

Blog Catalog

  • Liberalism Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory



« Carville on the Ingratitude of Bill Richardson | Main | Note to my Fellow Dems: Lighten Up, or It will be Raining McCain (Illustrative Video Included) »

March 22, 2008



I'll be voting for Obama but I think McPeak should not have said what he said. It's ridiculous.

However, I'm also very tired of both Clintons unending praise of John McCain. I don't understand why they continue to build up McCain in order to tear down Obama. I just don't get it.


I like Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. That's why I don't like the back and forth between their campaigns. They are a FORCE together on the ticket. Plain and simple.


Read Kathleen Parker's comments (you may have to scroll down). She was there and says Bill did NOT smear anyone.

ruthinor K. Parkers comments


Maybe I can get this right: go to:

scroll down and read K. Parker


You seem to be applying McPeak's comments to the Obama campaign itself. I thought only the Obama campaign played that rhetorical trick! (I realize the linked report is calling him an Obama "aide", which is odd since he his no more connected to Obama than Ferraro is to Clinton.) Seriously, let's please not pretend this is an Obama talking point.

I've seen a longer clip of McPeak's comments in context, although I can't find it online anywhere (thankfully, both campaigns seem to be officially ignoring this one). He is broadly positive toward both Bill and Hillary, noting that Bill faced similar attacks in 1992. The McCarthy comment is dumb, but has been taken a bit out of context and was intended more as an analogy than as a direct attack on Bill.

This, much like Bill's original comment that led to it, seems more like a media-hyped "gotcha" moment, as oppose to an incident that means anything about anything.

D. Cupples


You just can't escape me! I think you're right about the gotcha thing -- and also that McPeak may not be speaking for the campaign (though the media certainly did impute Ferraro's words to Hill).

It is a crazy time, isn't it?

D. Cupples

That and any comparison (analogy) to McCarthy is pretty bad. McCarthy did horrible damage to this country.

One thing Clinton was always good at was allowing people to criticize him (even Molly Ivins said so, despite her many complaints about BC). the only time he got really upset was when the right wing made fun of a teen-aged Chelsae, which was out of bounds.


Yeah, it's good to remember that nobody will remember stories like this one in a month.

Of course, it wasn't just the right wing making fun of Chelsea. She got some nasty attacks from SNL and others, as well. I remember people I knew (I knew a bunch of people who were two years ahead of her at Sidwell) wearing "leave Chelsea alone" T-shirts. I do get a little kick out of seeing her campaigning.

D. Cupples

I had no idea non-right wingers were making fun of Chelsae. It's so weird. I mean, she was a kid.

She couldn't help going through awkward age and had no choice as to who sired and bore her. I've always felt bad for kids who get picked on.


There was a Wayne's world sketch where Mike Myers and Dana Carvey unveiled their "Top Ten Reasons Why We're Happy Clinton Was Elected President." After drooling a bit over the Gore daughters, they took a few potshots at Chelsea's preteen looks. IIRC the worst line was "nature has thus far been... unkind". SNL later apologized and pulled the line from re-runs.

D. Cupples


You seem dialed into internet lingo. What do IIRC and IMO mean?


LOL sorry ;)

IIRC = if I recall correctly

IMO = in my opinion (alternatively, IMHO = In my humble opinion).

The comments to this entry are closed.