Dep't of Terrible Ideas: Obama Surrogate Questions Hillary's Tears
| Wed Jan. 9, 2008 7:38 PM PST
Slamming Hillary Clinton for crying didn't help John Edwards any in New Hampshire. In fact, it probably hurt him substantially. What makes the Obama folks think questioning those tears' authenticity will do anything other than cause a backlash?
Really? We're supposed to think that because Hillary Clinton didn't cry publicly over Katrina, these tears were part of a political calculation? This is stupid and weak.
Is assuming the worst on the behalf of your opponents part of the politics of hope?
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
Submitted by rawdawgbuffalo (not verified) on Wed Jan. 9, 2008 9:45 PM PST.
y .... poor mr or mrs next president
as lame and calculatedly cynical as that clown's comments were, why didn't the "newsperson" there call him on it? that wasn't news, that was an obama-infomercial. here we go with this crap again, and the msm is assuming the position just in time for another presidential election...
Ugh i hate this crap. what a slimeball. The main reason Hill started to tear up was that she was exhausted and traveling hundreds of miles a day on the trail. She didn't even cry! She just got a little choked up. For all we know she may have cried over Katrina- but at that time, there wasn't MSM coverage of her every move 24hours a day so it probably happened in private- as most people's tears do. If she had called a press conference so she could cry for the cameras over katrina would that have made people happier?
