Jimmy Carter's advice to Barack Obama: Forget Hillary Clinton as veep
Former President Jimmy Carter, who endorsed Barack Obama on Tuesday night after weeks of acting coy, says picking Hillary Clinton as Obama's running mate "would be the worst mistake that could
be made." The reason? "That would just accumulate the negative aspects of both candidates."
Carter told England's Guardian newspaper that he believed an Obama-Clinton ticket would merge behind John McCain two groups: those who dislike Clinton -- he set her unfavorable rating at 50% -- and those who would not vote for Obama for a variety of reasons.
"If you take that 50% who just don't want to vote for Clinton and add it to whatever element there might be who don't think Obama is white enough or old enough or experienced enough or because he's got a middle name that sounds Arab, you could have the worst of both worlds," Carter said.
So who should Obama go for? Carter has a formula: "What he needs more than a Southerner is a person who can compensate for his obvious potential defects, his youthfulness and his lack of long experience in military and international affairs." Carter's pick: former Sen. Sam Nunn, the onetime chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Nunn also happens to be, like Carter, a Georgian.
-- Scott Martelle
Photo: John Bazemore / Associated Press
Johanna Neuman is a veteran Washington correspondent for both The Los Angeles Times and USA Today, having covered presidents and politics as far back as Ronald Reagan. A former president of the White House Correspondents Assn., she authored a book on media and foreign policy, “Lights, Camera, Wars.” Most recently she was co-author of the
I have always admired and respected Jimmy Carter. Now I do so more than ever.
Posted by: N.E. BodybutHillary | June 04, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Is Carter senile? Do ex-presidents get cognitive tests for Alzheimer's before they shoot their mouths off? The Hamas stunt was strongly suggestive; he needs to be reined in.
I bet Carter is a closet sexist and just can't bare the thought of a woman anywhere near the Presidency.
Posted by: alee21 | June 04, 2008 at 01:19 PM
Oh, Nunn is 70 years old, is this the balance Carter wants? An inexperienced youngish politician with someone who is old enough to be his father? I guess in Carter's book the VP would look just like Cheney.
Carter really needs his head examined.
Posted by: alee21 | June 04, 2008 at 01:24 PM
YES BARACK, LISTEN TO JIMMY CARTER!!!
You shouldn't put someone who's a stronger candidate than you as second banana...
BE LIKE ME, (Carter says) SO YOU CAN HAVE THE 2ND WORST DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENCY IN THE HISTORY OF AMERICA!!!
You deserve it!
Posted by: BJ | June 04, 2008 at 01:50 PM
Hillary Clinton is STUNNING!!!
You have just witnessed the greatest political campaign fight in American history. One for the textbooks, and the history books. Hillary Clinton fought her heart out against all odds to win for all of the American people . While at the same time doing her best to prepare Sen. Barack Obama to win in November if he was the nominee. STUNNING!!! WELL DONE HILLARY CLINTON. WELL DONE! Your AMAZING! :-)
Sen. Obama could not have had a better opponent than Hillary Clinton. Nor could he have had a better opponent to prepare him for the battle royal to come against John McCain and the Republicans ahead of the November elections. Hillary Clinton was like a big Mama cat determined to teach her kitten how to hunt, and hang with the big dogs for the fights ahead.
And how about Bill Clinton, Chelsea, and th whole Clinton team. They were magnificent. They really showed their metal. BRAVO! TEAM CLINTON... BRAVO!
And how about YOU! my fellow Americans. I'm so proud of you. And proud to be one of you. You showed what you are made of. And what makes America so great. You never gave up on your Champion Hillary Clinton. Time, and time again you eagerly waited your turn to vote for Hillary Clinton. To pick her up and pass her along down the line to the rest of your fellow Americans.
You never gave up on her. Just as Hillary Clinton never gave up on you. No matter how many times they counted her out. No matter how many times they brutally knocked her down. You knew she would get back up. And you were ready to support her when she did. AMERICA LOVES A FIGHTER. AMERICA UNDERSTANDS A FIGHTER. AMERICA IS A FIGHTER. I'M PROUD OF YOU AMERICA!
Hillary said she would accept the VP spot on the ticket if ask. And I am thrilled to hear that. I think it would be crazy not to take her up on that offer. You could not have a better VP than Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is Sen. Obama's best chance of winning the Whitehouse in November. And it is essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse.
The American people are in a very desperate condition now. George Bush has wrecked America, and much of the world.
YOU MADE US VERY PROUD HILLARY CLINTON! :-)
WE LOVE YOU...
jacksmith... Working Class :-)
p.s. I really liked Sen. Barack Obama's speech in Minnesota. I think he just maybe ready now for the Bush Republican attack machine, dirty tricks, and vote fraud machine. :-)
Posted by: jacksmith | June 04, 2008 at 01:51 PM
Clinton has too many issues with her. Judging by her speech last night, how could you trust her. She seems to want the job by any and all means necessary. Who knows what she may do to obtain the TOP Office.
Posted by: CeeCee | June 04, 2008 at 02:03 PM
If Obama insists on making Clinton his Veep then he better get a food taster.
Posted by: BRIAN | June 04, 2008 at 02:11 PM
Shame on Jimmy Carter, another white male who cannot stand the thought of a woman becoming president and now will not even allow her to be the VP. She is a million times more qualified than Barack and received more of the popular vote but alas she is a woman.
Posted by: CAL | June 04, 2008 at 02:12 PM
Stick to growing Peanuts and smoking Pot with your friend Willie Nelson... and please SHUT UP for God's sake!!
This man had the worst presidency of the century, yet he continues to blab like the village idiot that he is. The Obama - Clinton ticket would unify Democrats who would not vote for Obama without her. I am one of them.
Posted by: Hillary is still the better candidate | June 04, 2008 at 02:15 PM
Heard on the news a couple of days ago that, over the past 15 years, while "Rev." Wright has been spewing his hate-filled, racist, anti-American, anti-white speeches, and Obama has "not-heard" any of that, their "church", which recently gave a Lifetime Achievement award to Louis Farrakhan, has quietly been the recipient of $15,000,000 of our tax dollars! They are probably still getting it!
How'd they arrange to get that much of our tax money, who set that up, do you think? Separation of church and state? Has that been repealed? Do you think anybody should ask Obama if he had anything to do with getting that "church" this money? If he didn't, who did? Shouldn't we know?
Posted by: lightnin | June 04, 2008 at 02:18 PM
I believe Barack is way too smart to consider her. He'd need a 24 hour food taster just to make sure no "accidents" happened. He does not need this bull’s-eye of a liability tapped to his back. As an independent I point out that Dem's and Republicans don't win elections by themselves without the help from independent voters. She is way to polarizing to pull in the independent vote.
Her sleazy campaign has demonstrated her complete lack of character and integrity. She's come back time and time again changing the rules with Clinton-half-truths that anyone's grandmother would call lies, plain and simple.
She has squandered her capital and credibility in her blatant lust for power. Why would he divert his impeccable campaign and risk his credibility with her broken moral compass?
How could he run on the change platform by selecting a VP who (second to Bush and Cheney) is perhaps the most polarizing, corrupt figure in American politics???
Posted by: dan | June 04, 2008 at 02:19 PM
I seriously doubt Obama would be stupid enough to take on Hitlery as VP. Can you imagine willingly choosing to spend four years working with that woman? And on top of that she's already brought up the idea of assassination three times already!! It's pretty obvious what's on her mind right now...
So, is the LA Times going to bother covering the Bilderberg meeting that's going on right now in Virginia? Naw, why should anyone care that the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world are meeting in secret. The slaves have no need to know.
Posted by: TruthIsTreasonComplianceIsPatriotic | June 04, 2008 at 02:24 PM
Carter is right. There are so many people who can't stand Hillary that havng her as a running mate would be a dangerous gamble. Besides, Obama is strong enough to champion the general election without Hillary, even though some angry white females will defect.
Posted by: shakespeare | June 04, 2008 at 02:30 PM
For a man who 'gave away' the Panama Canal, Jimmy Carter should keep quiet about any other politicians short comings. I'm an Independent and have watched disturbed in the last few years, to the fact that Communist China has heavily invested in this sea passage that joins the two oceans.
Ferdinand de Lesseps built this marvel and now has become a security risk to America. Carter Ultra Liberal disguised as a Democrat should stay in the shadows, and not demonize Hillary Clinton on anybody else about any issue. Nor should the Bush Administration, who have tried to sell port infrastructure, interstate highways and airlines to foreign governments and financial speculators. Even today as Obama and McCain enter the final race, both are liable to sell cheap labor in the form of AMNESTY. Hopefully both potential candidates will care about the legal citizens of the country and not be another puppet to big business. American taxpayers cannot afford to subsidies the world anymore.
Our military is stretched thin, trying to nation build for Bush and police the world. I want my taxes to support the border wall, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to police our fence, instead of us funding a Israeli Palestinian wall.
Posted by: Brittanicus | June 04, 2008 at 02:33 PM
Does anybody see the irony here? Ted Kennedy backs Barack Obama, so does Jimmy Carter.
Both Kennedy and Jimmy Carter apparently would like HIllary to just give up even though Ted Kennedy defied Jimmy Carter back in 1980.
So we know why Jimmy C is against Hillary, but what about Ted Kennedy? I believe the Democrats are trying to get rid of Hillary as soon as possible to cover up the Edwards, Richardson, Obama triangle in Iowa. MSNBC is just assaulting Hillary all day long, on every show for doing nothing more than what Ted Kennedy did in 1980.
http://www.CaucusCheating.com
http://www.Hillary-Wins.com
http://www.Florida-Michigan.com
http://www.CaucusConfession.com
Posted by: Alessandro Machi | June 04, 2008 at 02:45 PM
Aren't you the jacksmith that has been posting all over the internet that anybody who thought positively about Barck was an idiot?
Posted by: Dennis | June 04, 2008 at 02:57 PM
VP Clint on would solve the problem as to how to unified the Democratic Party, if you ride on statistics alone. Obama should be concerned that Democratic groups that are loyal to Hillary may not come back to hime- He needs the votes from blue collar, Jewish, and senior Americans to win this.
This article says it pretty clearly:
http://www.greenfaucet.com/hanlons-pub/aipac-speech-highlig hts-a-big-obama-problem
The left should be a little concerned here..
However, combined Obama and Clinton would be a nightmare. The first issue: Would it be Obama Clinton 09, or Clinton Obama 09. Both candidates have huge egos, so putting Clintons name second on the ticket may destroy the partnership before it starts.
.. But seriously, it wouldn't work for a variety of reason: different agendas, the double negative: a black man and a white woman ticket bring up obvious complications within areas of the population not ready for change...
it goes on and on.
Posted by: jmr09 | June 04, 2008 at 03:14 PM
Regarding Hillary as VP?
Just say "No"!
Posted by: Katie Rose | June 04, 2008 at 03:15 PM
hillary clinton is the most ambitious person i've ever seen in my life, and that's not a compliment. she campaigned far too long, she couldn't except reality.
i will not vote for obama if he chooses her as a running mate.
Posted by: jb | June 04, 2008 at 03:16 PM
With kind regard Mr. Past President Carter. No one asked you for your advice. As a Hillary Clinton Supporter and like Millions and Millions more Clinton Supporters feel Hillary Clinton did not Loose. Hillary Clinton Won- She won support from many many Americans. She listened to us and stayed the course. Thank You and BRAVO for a job done honestly with great incite and Leadership. If not now- then in 2012.
I will take my chance on McCain- I would only vote for Obama if Hillary Clinton is VP.
Posted by: jheckerman | June 04, 2008 at 04:08 PM
PART 2 of 2: These aliens are the very least educated in their home country, so they further dilute US educational standards and slow classroom progress. Aliens send US $ back home increasing the strain on the US balance of trade. So the sending country benefits in 2 ways. For Mexico they dump their illiterate population & it’s their 2nd largest “industry” now competing with 1st-place Mexican oil sales in decline (peak oil). Cash flow out of the US adds to the US treasury debt. So which candidate will address these problems?
Why do Americans today still want more help from our broken Government? Why do candidates pander for votes by offering more government handouts? Remember JFK: Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country? Working on all the above is a good start. Which potential leader sees the real problems facing America’s decline? country benefits in 2 ways. For Mexico it’s their 2nd largest “industry” now competing with 1st-place Mexican oil sales in decline (peak oil). Cash flow out of the US adds to the US treasury debt. So which candidate will address these problems?
Why do Americans today still want more help from our broken Government? Why do candidates pander for votes by offering more government handouts? Remember JFK: Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country? Working on all the above is a good start. Which potential leader sees the real problems facing America’s decline?
Posted by: Allen T | June 04, 2008 at 04:46 PM
PART 1 of 2: This was an epic contest. Jimmy makes valid points. I love America. We need a very great leader in these troubled times as our great country shows cracks and poverty in all directions. It’s not just the people that are broke; it’s the county that’s really broke and broken.
Jobs leaving offshore daily. The US dollar is very weak making oil expensive. The balance of trade is astoundingly negative still running for more than a decade. Our recent problems via subprime/foreclosures have top focus and are straining our financial system. Some claim the Fed is bailing out the US financials, when in fact those institutions are near collapse and NEED to be propped. Our precious population is in academic decline. Kids in school learn less year-over-year occurring for nearly 2 decades. So the US grows more non-competitive. The growing number of single families hurt kids because they lack direction and stability. Drugs and/or unprotected sex by KIDS and ADULTS affect 2/3 of US families reported United Way – a new phenomenon. 20 million illegal immigrants now in the US are draining US services while paying little more than sales tax and are forcing the US to become bilingual at great expense. What a government expense and future burden just to have cheaper labor today.
Posted by: Allen T | June 04, 2008 at 04:48 PM
The issue Democrats now face is what has been described as Sen. Clinton's "delusional narcissism" for not conceding gracefully (something promised this coming Friday), which could result in the Balkanization of the Party as her supporters refuse to accept reality and splinter or threaten to vote for Obama’s opponent.
Through a sense of group hysteria and refusal to admit defeat, Clinton supporters have effectively subdivided the Democratic Party into yet another faction consisting largely of middle-aged white feminists who see Mrs. Clinton as their standard bearer.
Hillary Clinton is guilty, through either her delusional narcissism or listening to bad advice, of turning a slam-dunk election for the Democrats into a very iffy affair indeed. She has done more for the McCain campaign than all the Republican lobbyists could ever hope to accomplish.
Posted by: C. Marcus Parr | June 04, 2008 at 05:24 PM
I agree with Mr. Carter but for a different reason. As a Hillary presidential supporter from Florida, I wouldn't vote for Obama even if he did put her on the ticket. I'm becoming an independent and voting for John McCain. (Heeding well all those Obama bloggers who have kept saying if you don't support Obama you don't belong in the Democratic party.)
Posted by: Suzy | June 04, 2008 at 05:50 PM
maybe not Sam Nunn. Maybe better Senator Max Cleland.
Check out his UTube videos. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLUN1miFDpc
Posted by: john burnette | June 04, 2008 at 06:05 PM
Obama should pick someone else. Then, for the first time in a long time, we will have no Bushes or Clintons involved in the campaign for the White House, & no older Baby Boomers, either. Should be a lot quieter...I hope.
Posted by: tlsmith1963 | June 04, 2008 at 06:07 PM
Whatever one may dislike about Jimmy Carter's presidency, one should also recognize that he has been the longest-serving and most distinguished statesman amongst former presidents. He is honest and forthright. He speaks his mind. And he is correct in his assessment of the damage that would be done by choosing Hillary as Veep.
Hillary has had her say. She has strutted and fretted upon the stage. Let her do the honorable thing now and go back to her duties in the Senate.
Obama needs a running mate who complements his obvious deficiencies in statecraft, economics and management. The US government is not the streets of Chicago, the Illinois senate, or the US Senate. It is a huge, sprawling monster that gobbles resources by the millions of dollars per second. Let him choose somebody to run with who knows how to manage this mess.
Posted by: Stephen Swain | June 04, 2008 at 08:24 PM
IAre there Cheating Republicans on this blog or are the Obamamites still spitting hate.
The only way Obama will win is with Hillary Clinton.
Together with all our votes it is a force.
She is a workaholic and very detailed policy wonk so he needs her. She has served on the armed service committee for 4 years.
If not, he loses all the 18 million because they feel The DNC made a scam decision Saturday by giving Obama 50 Delegates(from reading the minds of imaginary people)and stole an additional 4 Delegates (offending the Hillary voters) from Hillary. Hillary for VP,,,,,YES!
Posted by: Guardian Angel | June 04, 2008 at 08:39 PM
I'm writing in Hillary's name in November. She shouldn't take the VP position. Let Obama win or lose on his own.
Posted by: goldenstate | June 04, 2008 at 09:50 PM
You are one of my heros, Mr Carter, but I politely disagree with you and I think you are making a mistake in backing Obama. Obama is unelectable. It will be four more years of Republicans if we don't get Hillary in as NOMINEE. I agree, she shouldn't go for the VP, why should she get the scraps?
Posted by: Kate | June 04, 2008 at 11:16 PM
Pres. Carter is still eligible to be Sen. Obama's running mate.
There isn't a better man on the planet to take the VP spot that Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter.
As President, Obama can send VP Carter to stand before our our most hate-filled enemies and ask them what they want. VP Carter can give it to them, then we can have world peace.
Posted by: GEAH | June 04, 2008 at 11:39 PM
The idea of an Obama/Clinton ticket would be hideous. Every Clinton smear of Obama would be trotted out by McCain and Obama invited to argue with his deputy. Bill would probably take a perverse pleasure in causing mayhem, since if Obama lost Clinton would be on for 2012.
Obama ran against 'the beltway' and having a member on the dynasty on the team would undermine that claim. How can you be for change with two Clintons in tow?
People don't vote for a President because they like the VP anyway, and if they did, a lot just don't like Hillary. The VP is supposed to be a competent person who appeals to a consitituency you need. Obama is from the city and the north, so he probably needs someone who is from the south, popular, no-nonsense, maybe a governor and connects with rural people. But Clinton? Imagine the extras from the deliverance movie rubbing shoulder with extras from "Beaches". Can someone called Cleetus pronounce that with out getting slapped?
If Obama's pitching to mend fences with the sisterhood he could do worse than Sebelius of course. In the end though, will any genuine feminist vote for someone who wants to overturn Roe V Wade and continue blocking US aid to organisations that provide abortions? It's hard to imagine. So Obama probably needs Hispanics and southerners more than he needs women.
Then again, it's hard to imagine many will vote Republican this year. They are in tatters. 70% say the country is headed in the wrong direction and McCain is the heir to that. The economy is tanking and McCain has no policy to deal with that. McCain talks about a 100-year occupation of Iraq -- an occupation that is costing about 10 billion and 15 dead Americans each month. Some Republican said that if there brand were dogfood it would be taken off the shelves. The first debate with Obama, and McCain will look like chopped liver.
Jenny
Posted by: Jenny | June 05, 2008 at 01:35 AM
Poor Jimmy Carter. He just doesn't get it. By the way, Sam Nunn won't take the VP under any circumstances. He would have to relinquish his membership at the Augusta National.
Posted by: GeorgiaDem | June 05, 2008 at 06:14 AM
Clinton supporters whining like spoiled children that she won because she may (or may not) have gotten more votes is like deciding the Super Bowl by determining which team scored the most touchdowns during the season. We understand that you think the rules don't apply to her even if it was her team that wrote the rules. Obama should promise her she can be Ambassador to France or some other far away country.
Posted by: janda | June 05, 2008 at 08:19 AM
Obama will give us food, he will give us national health insurance, he will give us.... where will he get the money? This man is a Marxist!
Posted by: Steve Rodriguez | June 05, 2008 at 09:46 AM
I wasn't a fan of Obama but depending on his VP he could possibly get my vote. If it's Clinton though McCain will get my vote. Hillary is only out for personal gain and will gain nothing from me. Although most politicians are liars she and her husband are the ultimate liars and they don't even attempt to get good at it. Go away Hillary...
Posted by: Jim | June 05, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Carter is a failed "has-been "who is always looking for cheap sensationalist ways of getting into the press.
Figures show that the elderly , middle class and women support Hillarly Clinton , while the young , educated and black minorities support Obama.
Whenever Carter comes to mind , memories of crashed military planes in an Iranian desert, come to mind . That about summed up the success of Carter's long efforts to free the American embassy hostages from the hands of the Iranian revolutionaties and also sums up the efforts of his failed administration.
His book "Palestine Peace Not Apartheid" shows a total lack of understanding of the basic principles of Islam, which does not tolerate a western society in the Middle East, and ignores the obvious, that despite Israel's giving Gaza to the Palestinians, the situation for Israel has only brought the enemy closer to its borders.
But what does Carter care? People that support Israel (especially failed Presidents ) don't get written up in the press!
Posted by: Jonathan Freier | June 06, 2008 at 06:07 AM
LETS GET A FEW THINGS STRAIGHT..
1ST,ALL THIS TALK ON WHAT HAPPENED TO HILLARY AND HOW SHE LOST IS SIMPLE..
SHE GOT BEAT!!
SHE GOT BEAT BY SOMEONE WHO PREPARED BETTER,FOUGHT HARDER,AND WAS SMART ENOUGH NOT TO ATTACK HER LIKE SHE DID HIM AND COME OFF AS A BULLY BEATING ON A GIRL..
2ND, FROM THE DAY SHE ENTERED THE RACE,SHE HAD NAME RECOGNITION,8 YEARS AS 1ST LADY,POLITICAL POWERHOUSES AS FRIENDS,AND MOST OF ALL.. MONEY!!!!
SHE DID NOT PREPARE OR RUN HER CAMPAIGN FOR THE LONG HALL LIKE HE DID..
HE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE INTERNET,HIS ORGANIzATIONAL SKILLS,AND HIS ABILITY INSPIRE PEOPLE AND MOVE THEM WITH HIS SPEECHES..
3RD,SHE RAN ON THE SAYING,"I HAVE OVER 35 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE"..WHAT EXPERIENCE????
THE SAME PEOPLE WHO WERE IN CLINTONS CABINET AND ADMINISTRATION HAVE SAID THAT SHE DIDN'T HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN FOREIGN POLICY DECISIONS,OR EVEN SITTING IN MEETINGS CONCERNING THE ECONOMY,OR EVEN VOTING ON ANYTHING..
BUT AS U PUT IT,SHE HAS EXPERIENCE..LMAO,GIVE ME A BREAK PEOPLE..
OBAMA,RAN ON JUDGEMENT..
REMINDING ALL,THAT THE SAME PEOPLE WHO CLAIM EXPERIENCE,LIKE SHE AND JOHN MC CAIN,AND ALL THEIR EXPERIENCE,GOT US IN THE WAR AND PREDICTAMENT THAT WE ALL ARE IN NOW!!
3RD,BE HONEST..THE REASON I SEE ON THE INTERNET,HEAR ON TALK SHOWS ON THE RADIO,AND SEE ON TV ABOUT HOW U CAN'T VOTE FOR OBAMA BECAUSE U ARE AFRAID,IS WEAK..AFRAID OF WHAT???
U GOT A BLACK MAN WHO HAS FACED PREJUDICE,LIKE HILLARY,AND OVERCAME IT..
HE GREW UP POOR AND ON FOOD STaMPS,UNLIKE
HILLARY AND MC CAIN,aND OVERCAME THAT TOO!!
HE GREW UP WITHOUT KNOWING HIS FATHER WITH HIS SINGLE MOTHER AND GRANDPARENTS RAISING HIM LIKE MOST YOUNG KIDS DO NOW,AND U SINGLE MOTHERS OUT THERE THINK THAT HILLARY KNOWS BETTER OR BEST FOR U???
SHE HAD PARENTS AND MONEY...
SO DID JM AKA JOHN MC CAIN...
OBAMA KNOWS WHAT ITS LIKE TO BE POOR..
BUT DID HE RAISE THIS AS AN ISSUE OR COMPLAIN ABOUT IT???
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HE STAYED HEAD STRONG,WAS SELF MOTIVATED,AND WHAT DO U KNOW,ENDED UP AT HARVARD!!!
MS.CLINTON,WOULD SAY OR DO ANYTHING FOR YOUR VOTE..
4TH..THE LIES aBOUT GETTING OFF A PLANE UNDER GUNFIRE,THAT SHE REPEATED ON MORE THAN 2 OCCASIONS..AND HER SUPPORTERS CLAIMING THAT THE MEDIA WAS ATTACKING HER BECaUSE OF THE STATEMENT..WELL,SHE SHOULD NOT HAVE LIED,AND TRIED TO COMPETE WITH JM TO SAY SHE TOO HAD COMBAT EXPERIENCE,LOL...WELL....
5TH..HAVE U CLINTON BACKERS EVEN LIFTED A FINGER ON YOUR KEYBOARD TO SEE JUST WHAT SHE'S DONE IN THE SENATE????
SHE HAD ONE MEANINGFUL BILL SHE SPONSORED,AND IT WAS ABOUT HEALTHCARE...THAT WAS IT!!!
THE OTHER 19 HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH NOTHING..LIKE,NAMING POST OFFICES AFTER SOMEONE..WHAT THE HECK???
OBAMA HAD MORE EXPERIENCE ON HIS 1ST DAY IN THE SENATE THAN CLINTON DID..
AND HAD WRITTEN,SPONSORED,AND PASSED MORE BILLS THAN SHE DID..
DON'T BELIEVE ME,WELL....
I was blown away as I started going through his record. I've already mentioned his bills on health care and energy. In addition he had introduced bills on Iran, voting, veterans, global warming, campaign finance and lobbyists, Blackwater, global poverty, nuclear proliferation, and education.
On Iran: S.J.RES.23 : A joint resolution clarifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq, any resolution previously adopted, or any other provision of law.
On votingPassed out of Committee and now on the Senate Calendar for Feb. 22, 2008
S.453 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections Please check this out! This is a great bill. We need this. I can't believe that this time voter intimidation is not already illegal.
On veterans and military personnel: S.1084 : A bill to provide housing assistance for very low-income veterans;
On global warmingS.1324 : A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuel sold in the United States;S.1389 : A bill to authorize the National Science Foundation to establish a Climate Change Education Program; S.AMDT.599 to S.CON.RES.21 To add $200 million for Function 270 (Energy) for the demonstration and monitoring of carbon capture and sequestration technology by the Department of Energy. (This last one passed both the House and the Senate as part of the budget bill.)
On campaign finance and lobbyists S.2030 : A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require reporting relating to bundled contributions made by persons other than registered lobbyists; and S.AMDT.41 to S.1 To require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, or political parties for whom they collect or arrange contributions, and the aggregate amount of the contributions collected or arranged.
On Blackwater S.2044 : A bill to provide procedures for the proper classification of employees and independent contractors, and for other purposes, and S.2147 : A bill to require accountability for contractors and contract personnel under Federal contracts, and for other purposes.
On global poverty S.2433 : A bill to require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.
On global nuclear proliferation S.1977 : A bill to provide for sustained United States leadership in a cooperative global effort to prevent nuclear terrorism, reduce global nuclear arsenals, stop the spread of nuclear weapons and related material and technology, and support the responsible and peaceful use of nuclear technology.
I counted nine education bills, but it's getting late and I've got to get my kids ready for bed.
As I mentioned earlier, Clinton is a frequent co-sponsor on many of Obama's bills. So is Ted Kennedy. So are a number of Republicans.
Finally, Obama appears to have a better record last year in the Senate on getting his bills and amendments passed than does Clinton. I've listed everything that passed the Senate for each them at the end in boxes. But check out Thomas.loc.gov for yourself. I may have missed something.
In my eyes Obama is the superior choice in every way. He cares about more of the issues that matter to me. Kids and health care are important but so is the issue of global warming, on which Clinton introduced not a single bill last year.
Obama is a leader. With bigger majorities in Congress, much of his agenda should sail through. He can inspire this country to change course on so many things, from health care to global warming, where attitudes have to be changed first. I remember Bill Clinton's endless laundry lists of small, focus group approved initiatives. For those who say Hillary will not govern like Bill did, I respond that the people who were doing the market testing of his proposed policies were Dick Morris, of course, and Mark Penn, who is now running Hillary's campaign.
It's Obama for me! I just sent him $100. My first donation this election.
Yes, We Can!
Posted by: THE TRUTH.. | June 07, 2008 at 02:59 PM
Wow! I cannot believe the vitriol against Jimmy Carter in a number of the responses above. Yes, Jimmy Carter made plenty of mistakes as president, but as for the following,"Whenever Carter comes to mind , memories of crashed military planes in an Iranian desert come to mind," I've always wondered: HOW WAS THAT HIS FAULT?
Certainly the attempted rescue of the Iran hostages was organized by the military; he just gave the go-ahead!
At any rate, Carter's 28-years-and-counting of being THE BEST ex-President ever count for more, in historical terms, than his four years in the White House.
(Not to mention that his analysis of a potential Obama-Clinton ticket is spot on, in my opinion. I'd love to know what's behind these specious accusations of 'senility'.)
Posted by: LMorland | June 08, 2008 at 07:30 AM