Hillary criticizing Obama?

[okie52]

Iraq Exposes Rift between Hillary Clinton, Obama

Monday, 11 Aug 2014 10:32 AM
By Melanie Batley

The rise of ISIS in Iraq and the emerging humanitarian crisis in the region has prompted former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to speak out, blaming President Barack Obama's foreign policy strategy for ISIS's ascent.

In an interview published Sunday with The Atlantic's national correspondent, Jeffrey Goldberg, Clinton said Obama's refusal to "build up a credible fighting force" created the conditions for jihadists to achieve dominance in Iraq.

"The failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against [Syrian leader Bashar] Assad — there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle — the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled," Clinton said.

The comments signal an attempt to distance herself from Obama in advance of a widely anticipated 2016 presidential bid.

Clinton also criticized Obama's broader approach to foreign policy, saying, "Great nations need organizing principles, and 'Don't do stupid stuff' is not an organizing principle."

The interview was Clinton's first major criticism of the president's foreign policy since she stepped down from the administration last year.

A source close to Clinton told Business Insider that her comments were related more to the thoughts she set out in her new book, "Hard Choices," and that she was "merely commenting on world events."

But according to Politico, a source familiar with the interview said Clinton's staff gave the White House a heads-up that it had taken place.

Meanwhile, hostility toward a Clinton run appears to be building from the president's quarters.

Veteran journalist and New York Times best-selling author, Ed Klein, whose latest book, "Blood Feud," focuses on the rift between the Obamas and the Clintons, has said that Obama authorized senior adviser Valerie Jarrett to have secret meetings with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

The aim, he said, is to encourage Warren to mount a challenge to a Clinton 2016 White House bid.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Iraq-ISIS-Obama-Hillary-Clinton/2014/08/11/id/588014#ixzz3A66kKii0
.

[rock on sooner]

Well, how else do you run for president, unless you criticize the one
you want to replace? The operative phrase in that piece is"gave the
White House a heads-up.."

[Turd_Ferguson]

Well, how else do you run for president, unless you criticize the one
you want to replace? The operative phrase in that piece is"gave the
White House a heads-up.."

Or...or, you could say "see what us Dems are doing for this country? Vote for me and I'll keep doing the same". She ain't gonna do that though...is she.

[Curly Bill]

Yeah, Rock on's explanation was dumas! She's not running against Obammy, so she doesn't have to counter what he's done, or contrast herself with him, to swing votes from him. She could easily go along with what he's done, but that would really be dumas!

She's largely saying she's not the same clueless f*ck that he is. Not that I agree, because I think she could be every bit as terrible as he's been, but she of course isn't gonna say that.

[badger]

Realizing that this will largely be a bash-Hillary thread, let's give credit where it is due. Unlike President Obama, who seems to be doing everything he can to make everyone love him (and as a result is not loved by many), Hillary is saying (doing?) something that is not going to be popular among Democrats who wish to be seen as a one-voice strong alliance of like-minded leaders etc etc.

At the same time, Hillary also knows that if she has the Democratic nominee for president, the staunch Democrats would vote for a yellow, blue, orange and green dog simultaneously before they vote for the Republican. So, she's not really doing anything that will alienate her guaranteed voter base.

Now... will she get that Democratic presidential nominee? She had quite a bit of trouble doing that back in 2008

[Curly Bill]

KC//8th will be along shortly to tell us what's really up.

[rock on sooner]

Yeah, Rock on's explanation was dumas! She's not running against Obammy, so she doesn't have to counter what he's done, or contrast herself with him, to swing votes from him. She could easily go along with what he's done, but that would really be dumas!

She's largely saying she's not the same clueless f*ck that he is. Not that I agree, because I think she could be every bit as terrible as he's been, but she of course isn't gonna say that.

While I agree with some of what you say and chuckle at the rest, I think,
seriously here, folks, (and I'm not Hillary bashing...I caucused for her in '08..)
that she is looking at her own party base...there are a lot who disagree with
Obama's foreign policies in the Dem party...and she is positioning herself to
be able to say that she didn't agree with this or that and here's what she'll do
differently...the same with the Pubs...she is looking at an enormously skeptical
electorate, you know, the one that thinks Congress is doing a lousy job...89%
do...only 11% approve...the same ones that think Obama is fairing only slightly
better...somewhere in the 30's. Now, IF she doesn't run, y'all get Warren...hmmm...
Warren against Paul.....whoa, Nellie!

[Curly Bill]

While I agree with some of what you say and chuckle at the rest, I think,
seriously here, folks, (and I'm not Hillary bashing...I caucused for her in '08..)
that she is looking at her own party base...there are a lot who disagree with
Obama's foreign policies in the Dem party...and she is positioning herself to
be able to say that she didn't agree with this or that and here's what she'll do
differently...the same with the Pubs...she is looking at an enormously skeptical
electorate, you know, the one that thinks Congress is doing a lousy job...89%
do...only 11% approve...the same ones that think Obama is fairing only slightly
better...somewhere in the 30's. Now, IF she doesn't run, y'all get Warren...hmmm...
Warren against Paul.....whoa, Nellie!

You're just agreeing with me dufus! Of course she wants to set herself apart from Obammy because he's been epic FAIL!

[Curly Bill]

Well, how else do you run for president, unless you criticize the one
you want to replace? The operative phrase in that piece is"gave the
White House a heads-up.."

Here's where ya lost me, and maybe it's semantics, but I woulda said she's trying to succeed him - not replace him. Romney tried to replace him.

As such, she's really under no imperative to differ from his policies - she could easily borrow them, as he's no longer going to be running on them. Of course his policies suck to the high heavens, so she's trying to distance herself from them.

[SoonerProphet]

Great, so we are going to have the option of dipsh!t interventionist a, who bombs people as a responsibility to protect or dipsh!t interventionist b, who bombs people as a responsibility to leadership. Sounds like more of the same old dipsh!terty here

[rock on sooner]

Here's where ya lost me, and maybe it's semantics, but I woulda said she's trying to succeed him - not replace him. Romney tried to replace him.

As such, she's really under no imperative to differ from his policies - she could easily borrow them, as he's no longer going to be running on them. Of course his policies suck to the high heavens, so she's trying to distance herself from them.

Welp, yep. it's semantics...replace, succeed, be next, follow up, #45,
IDM...fact is, IMO, she has to look/act/speak/ breathe different from
#44 and appeal to a group that thinks/believes that the entire gov't
is messed up beyond comprehension and someone has to figure out
a way to "unmess" it and put that person in the WH...Izzat Hillary?
Dunno...sure as hell isn't Biden, maybe Warren? On the Pub side,
Paul, (least we wouldn't be in war any where) Jindal, who knows?
Rubio, ...which way is the wind blowing?..Christie, mess with me and
I'll stuff it up your ***...Cruz...puh-leeze..Perry...short term memory
loss... Okay, so where are we?

Rilly!? Where are we?

[Soonerjeepman]

Realizing that this will largely be a bash-Hillary thread, let's give credit where it is due. Unlike President Obama, who seems to be doing everything he can to make everyone love him (and as a result is not loved by many), Hillary is saying (doing?) something that is not going to be popular among Democrats who wish to be seen as a one-voice strong alliance of like-minded leaders etc etc.

At the same time, Hillary also knows that if she has the Democratic nominee for president, the staunch Democrats would vote for a yellow, blue, orange and green dog simultaneously before they vote for the Republican. So, she's not really doing anything that will alienate her guaranteed voter base.

Now... will she get that Democratic presidential nominee? She had quite a bit of trouble doing that back in 2008

she didn't do sheeeeet as the SOS...now did she?

I'm sure obama won't say jack...he'd rather the dems get the office then complain about her. As far as her complaining...obama's approval rating sucks..she knows it..and wants no part of that~

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Well, how else do you run for president, unless you criticize the one
you want to replace? The operative phrase in that piece is"gave the
White House a heads-up.."

A famous Clinton ploy...posturing...

[badger]

Objectively... Hillary needs to do much more to distance herself from Obama. Do voters want more of the same that they've seen during the first 6 years of the Obama administration? Probably not, but it likely has nothing to do with foreign policy, although I'm sure that some are concerned about that.

If Hillary really wants to get voters on her side that might be looking for a change from what they saw under President Obama, don't criticize ISIS. Or Putin. Or Iraq. Or Benghazi.

JOBS, dammit. If Dems lose this midterm, it will be because of employment options, being unemployed or underemployed with stagnant or dropping wages and a stagnant or dropping quality of life.

[olevetonahill]

Heh, The HNIC says Horse****.


During a private meeting, President Obama reportedly called criticisms of his Syria policy "horsesh-t."

Hillary Clinton and a number of members of Congress have said Obama could have done more to help Syrian rebels, including giving them weapons. The Daily Beast reports that Obama responded to the bipartisan criticism, arguing the notion that providing weapons to rebels sooner would have helped Syria is complete "horsesh-t."

http://theweek.com/article/index/266240/speedreads-obama-reportedly-says-hillarys-criticism-of-syria-policy-is-horsesh-t

[BoulderSooner79]

Nothing good could have come from helping arm Syrian rebels. Those weapons would have eventually been aimed at our boys in uniform. There was talk of "vetting" some of the groups to arm the ones that would be friendly to the west, but that is a hopeless task. The ISIS types would immediately swoop in and cut off the heads of a couple of "western friendly" rebels and just take the weapons. Anarchy is as anarchy does.

Hilary is just distancing herself from an unpopular president in preparation for her campaign. I'm not knocking Hilary as I wish she would have won the primary in '08, but this move is strictly strategic PR and probably the smart move for her. When she stepped down as secretary of state, I took that as her throwing her hat in the ring. It gives her a long time to claim distance from Obama.

[olevetonahill]

Can we Please STOP these social experiments. Lets get some one who Cares about this country.

[BoulderSooner79]

Can we Please STOP these social experiments. Lets get some one who Cares about this country.

HAHAHAHA - you're killing me, Vet. With our current election system of big money buying campaigns, that mythical person you reference has no chance of even making it as far as the primaries.

[rock on sooner]

Nothing good could have come from helping arm Syrian rebels. Those weapons would have eventually been aimed at our boys in uniform. There was talk of "vetting" some of the groups to arm the ones that would be friendly to the west, but that is a hopeless task. The ISIS types would immediately swoop in and cut off the heads of a couple of "western friendly" rebels and just take the weapons. Anarchy is as anarchy does.

Hilary is just distancing herself from an unpopular president in preparation for her campaign. I'm not knocking Hilary as I wish she would have won the primary in '08, but this move is strictly strategic PR and probably the smart move for her. When she stepped down as secretary of state, I took that as her throwing her hat in the ring. It gives her a long time to claim distance from Obama.

I already said this and CB called me the same as 8th, without even
an apology....:biggrin:

[Sooner8th]

It amazes me that conservatives are shocked that a democrat criticizes another democrat. You have to come up with all kinds of political reasons for her to do it, she did support the war with Iraq so maybe she is just more hawkish than obama? I didn't see any republican criticizing bush in 2006 who was getting ready to run for pres in '08. If anyone had your party would have branded them a rino and run them out of the party.

And you call us lemmings.

[BoulderSooner79]

It amazes me that conservatives are shocked that a democrat criticizes another democrat. You have to come up with all kinds of political reasons for her to do it, she did support the war with Iraq so maybe she is just more hawkish than obama? I didn't see any republican criticizing bush in 2006 who was getting ready to run for pres in '08. If anyone had your party would have branded them a rino and run them out of the party.

And you call us lemmings.

I'm certainly not a conservative - I'd be labeled a centrist in most states outside OK. But it's hard not to project political reasons on Hilary given her de facto leading candidate status. And I'm not saying it's bad - it just is what it is. I'm certainly not going to base my vote on some campaign spin, but every candidate seems to think it is necessary to do it. I'm sure Hilary does differ from Obama on many issues; I just don't see any reason to go public with criticism other than political gain.

[olevetonahill]

HAHAHAHA - you're killing me, Vet. With our current election system of big money buying campaigns, that mythical person you reference has no chance of even making it as far as the primaries.

Dont you think its time we as Citizens say this!

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/t1.0-9/1800193_730804716942054_2388486452391946819_n.jpg

[BoulderSooner79]

Dont you think its time we as Citizens say this!

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/t1.0-9/1800193_730804716942054_2388486452391946819_n.jpg

Absolutely! It's the only thing that would make a difference. But how do you unite 2 groups of people who have been brain-washed for generations to oppose each other? We're all going down with the ship instead of forming a team to bail out the water.

BTW, love that cartoon!

[okie52]

Absolutely! It's the only thing that would make a difference. But how do you unite 2 groups of people who have been brain-washed for generations to oppose each other? We're all going down with the ship instead of forming a team to bail out the water.

BTW, love that cartoon!

Well the amount of independent voters seems to be growing so there might be hope.

[olevetonahill]

Well the amount of independent voters seems to be growing so there might be hope.

But could there ever be a viable Independent Candidate

[okie52]

But could there ever be a viable Independent Candidate

I'd say Perot was since he almost got 20% of the vote in 1992. Of course he had the money to back his own campaign, too. I think Wallace won a few states in the 70's.

[olevetonahill]

I'd say Perot was since he almost got 20% of the vote in 1992. Of course he had the money to back his own campaign, too. I think Wallace won a few states in the 70's.

I have always felt Perot was in it Only to make sure Bush1 dint win. He dropped out after Slick gained in the Poles and only came back after Bush1 regained the pole lead.

[okie52]

I have always felt Perot was in it Only to make sure Bush1 dint win. He dropped out after Slick gained in the Poles and only came back after Bush1 regained the pole lead.

He certainly didn't like bush but I thought he was hurting Slick Willie more that daddy bush...long time ago and I may not remember it correctly. Funny thing was that daddy bush had a 90% approval rating just a year and a half before the election primarily due to desert storm and it all evaporated due to the recession. The economy, the economy, the economy...

[olevetonahill]

He certainly didn't like bush but I thought he was hurting Slick Willie more that daddy bush...long time ago and I may not remember it correctly. Funny thing was that daddy bush had a 90% approval rating just a year and a half before the election primarily due to desert storm and it all evaporated due to the recession. The economy, the economy, the economy...

Perot Hated B1. Him and the Dims Kept hammering home the "Read My Lips" deal . They are the ones who pushed thru the Tax increase's as a rider to another Bill that B1 would have been equally ridiculed for had he vetoed the mess.

Party ****in Politics at its best.

[Sooner8th]

Perot Hated B1. Him and the Dims Kept hammering home the "Read My Lips" deal . They are the ones who pushed thru the Tax increase's as a rider to another Bill that B1 would have been equally ridiculed for had he vetoed the mess.

Party ****in Politics at its best.

Where do you get this stuff at? He agreed to it as part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 that bush not only signed but released a statement saying we can raise taxes while it was being negotiated.

At the end of June, Bush released a statement stating that "it is clear to me that both the size of the deficit problem and the need for a package that can be enacted require all of the following: entitlement and mandatory program reform, tax revenue increases, growth incentives, discretionary spending reductions, orderly reductions in defense expenditures, and budget process reform."

All them dems fault, I have to laugh.

[olevetonahill]

Where do you get this stuff at? He agreed to it as part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 that bush not only signed but released a statement saying we can raise taxes while it was being negotiated.

At the end of June, Bush released a statement stating that "it is clear to me that both the size of the deficit problem and the need for a package that can be enacted require all of the following: entitlement and mandatory program reform, tax revenue increases, growth incentives, discretionary spending reductions, orderly reductions in defense expenditures, and budget process reform."

All them dems fault, I have to laugh.

Moran. I never said It was all the Dims Fault, I said it was PARTY POLITICS
Until we get rid off Idiots like you who think the Democrats are the second coming, this country will continue down the sh1tter.

You seem to have sold out Lock stock an barrel to the Lib Dem mold.
I dont much care for a Lot that the Hard right Pushes nor the Hard left. Lets meet in the Middle and do whats right for this country and the Majority of our citizens.

[Sooner8th]

Moran. I never said It was all the Dims Fault, I said it was PARTY POLITICS
Until we get rid off Idiots like you who think the Democrats are the second coming, this country will continue down the sh1tter.

You seem to have sold out Lock stock an barrel to the Lib Dem mold.
I dont much care for a Lot that the Hard right Pushes nor the Hard left. Lets meet in the Middle and do whats right for this country and the Majority of our citizens.

First you claim dems pushed it through with a bill he wouldn't veto, so yeah you are trying to blame the dems.

I've sold out Lock stock an barrel to the Lib Dem mold? You are the one who is making stuff up and trying to revise history, seems to me you're the one who is the sell out.


They are the ones who pushed thru the Tax increase's as a rider to another Bill that B1 would have been equally ridiculed for had he vetoed the mess.

[olevetonahill]

First you claim dems pushed it through with a bill he wouldn't veto, so yeah you are trying to blame the dems.

I've sold out Lock stock an barrel to the Lib Dem mold? You are the one who is making stuff up and trying to revise history, seems to me you're the one who is the sell out.

Go away boy ya bother me. I aint in the mood to sling sh1t back and forth with ya today.

[Sooner8th]

Go away boy ya bother me. I aint in the mood to sling sh1t back and forth with ya today.

Yeah because you don't have a leg to stand on. Just admit you made it up and move on.

To get to the middle we have to pull the radical party of the right away from thinking eric cantor is not a conservative. What the tea party is trying to do and on some level has succeeded in is to pull the republicans so far right that the right that reagan wouldn't be considered to be far right and bush 1 almost a liberal. The middle ground you speak of now, use to be conservative and we on the left are not going to go for that.

[olevetonahill]

Like I said Im kinda tired of insulting yer ignorant asz, Welcome to Ignore. Bye Bye

[Sooner8th]

Like I said Im kinda tired of insulting yer ignorant asz, Welcome to Ignore. Bye Bye


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yzpd0Yl44ZE