(CNN) -

Former President Bill Clinton told CNN's Wolf Blitzer Tuesday that it would be a "mistake" for Democrats to underestimate the Tea Party movement.

Now, for Clinton to make such a public declaration. . . . the horizon must be truly bleak for the party.

. . . or maybe Clinton is applying reverse psychology?

Hey, I wouldn't put it past the Player-In-Chief! You know him too well.

Haha . . . Player-in-chief.

You heard Hillary's comments few weeks ago right? about how America's increasing debt is becoming a threat to national security as it forces alliances and concessions that would not normally be had.

I took that as the first battle shot at Obama.

Haha . . . Player-in-chief

and what does that mean? were you an intern?


I can't believe Hillary made that statement! She is patronizing the Zionists with that comment on detour from traditions. She would have to join the the Tea Party Movmnt if she is still ambitious about the White House. . . .there is a new horizon since she last campaigned and it's ruled by Palin!

Negro_Ntns:

and what does that mean? were you an intern?


I can't believe Hillary made that statement! She is patronizing the Zionists with that comment on detour from traditions. She would have to join the the Tea Party Movmnt if she is still ambitious about the White House. . . .there is a new horizon since she last campaigned and it's ruled by Palin!

what do zionists have to do with that statement

Negro_Ntns:

and what does that mean? were you an intern?

lol. They turned down my resume, thank God

I can't believe Hillary made that statement! She is patronizing the Zionists with that comment on detour from traditions. She would have to join the the Tea Party Movmnt if she is still ambitious about the White House. . . .there is a new horizon since she last campaigned and it's ruled by Palin!

Here's the video -
[flash=500,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqJmK-MM38k?fs=1&hl=en_US"[/flash]

I dunno about Hillary becoming a tea partier tho lol

this thread is typical of the drivel we are continously served on fox news. Comments taken completely out of context, poorly understood . . . red herrings meant to pander to the conservative base.

1.

Negro_Ntns:

(CNN) -
Now, for Clinton to make such a public declaration. . . . the horizon must be truly bleak for the party.

That's only if you took that one line and ran away with it without bothering to read the rest of his comments. Actually he was advising the Dem party to NOT underestimate the gullibility of the American public in voting for tea party candidates who have absolutely no principles beyond opposing everything Obama. Read his comments before making frivolous statements.

2.

JeSoul:

Haha . . . Player-in-chief.

You heard Hillary's comments few weeks ago right? about how America's increasing debt is becoming a threat to national security as it forces alliances and concessions that would not normally be had.

I took that as the first battle shot at Obama.

and somehow she still retains her seat as secretary of state? Seriously? This is a report on the same speech - She said US President Barack Obama understands this.

"You can see it in the new economic initiatives that he announced this week and in his relentless focus on turning the economy around," Clinton said.

How is it that folks have so poor a grasp of the issues they purport to debate?

Yes all brilliant David we have heard you. We have absolutely no grasp of anything we're saying. Thanks for pointing out our ignorance in classic David fashion.
You conveniently plucked one post and left the other where the entire video interview - in context- was posted. Surely we're trying to mislead and misrepresent. Gosh, this means all conservatives are so so evil and conniving and tea partiers are silly and gullible. Thanks for educating our ignorance. Please come back and teach us again ehn

JeSoul:

Yes all brilliant David we have heard you. We have absolutely no grasp of anything we're saying. Thanks for pointing out our ignorance in classic David fashion.
You conveniently plucked one post and left the other where the entire video interview - in context- was posted. Surely we're trying to mislead and misrepresent. Gosh, this means all conservatives are so so evil and conniving and tea partiers are silly and gullible. Thanks for educating our ignorance. Please come back and teach us again ehn

Out come the escapist sarcasn when they cant defend their own baseless comments.

1. The video you posted is absolutely unreliable. Its a mishmash of CAREFULLY EDITED comments from an interview with the DELIBERATE intention of distorting her views. For starters when Hillary talks about debt posing a national security question . . . it is NOT (as you falsely claim) a shot at Obama. One critical statement by Hillary that you and "propheticseer" maliciously leave out in the bid to further your own agenda is this - "You can see it in the new economic initiatives that he announced this week and in his relentless focus on turning the economy around," Clinton said.

Is that a statement from a woman who is taking shots at the president? Even in the clip it is CLEAR she is making a play for why it is imperative that this administration tackles the rising debt. Funny . . . one wonders where you and propheticseer where when Bush was turning a surplus into massive debt. No videos then?

2. Propheticseer of course starts his video with dishonest intents then continues to lie anyway, Not surprising that he also buys into the rightwing falsehood that Obama has outspent even Bush 5 times over . . . first off . . . Obama has only had 1 budget so far . . . secondly its easy to see why this administration has overspent that of Bush . . . they chose to start placing the cost of the wars on the books rather than hiding it like that past regime.

3. When you asked whether i watched the video you posted i actually thot i was going to watch a serious video . . . i chose to go READ the transcript of the speech. I guess its better to do that rather than spending too much time watching rightwing crap.

Its quite strange. You take everything remotely critical or negative said against Obama so serious and personal.

One last comment and then I'll leave you to yourself - If you would stop long enough to think beyond your blind devotion, you would see that suggesting Hillary may want to run for president in 2 yrs is not altogether a thought strange or unique to one party. Democrats as well as repubs have suggested the idea - and I'm not sure how that is an insinuation so provoking you have to gate-crash a thread, guns blazing, calling everybody else's opinion 'drivel' 'silly' etc . . . but then, I guess that is just your style - hot-air and no manners. If not for I respect you so much I wouldn't even bother at all.

what do zionists have to do with that statement

Bawo, beside the support of AIPAC, which other voter group packs sufficient influence to defeat her run? Definitely not the minority base - black or hispanic! Palin got whites by their snout at the moment. . . .

On a different note, . .Did you see what they did to Obama at UN? Scheduled his speech to run on their holiday so their diplomats would not have to sit in his audience. Never has that been done to any US President at a UN general meeting. You think this is random? Check back in 2012.

JeSoul,

. . .did I hear you say she will not join Tea Party? Put that thermometer in her mouth and guage her temperature a second time - Hillary wants that position so bad she will make a convincing case for switching if the conversion will get her the win.

On one hand, there are two camps in DNC already! One led by Bill and the other by Obama. The rumor is that, as a consolation, Hillary will go next in 2012.

. . .watch the developments, the forecast will be more meaningful once the November mid term results come out.

Negro its the spambot that axed your last post . . . I've sent a pm to the admin to untag it.

Meanwhile I still no gree oh. Hillary pitching tent with the tea party? not in a million years. Na me talk am. She's proven to be a fantastic secretary of state though. I've been very impressed by her no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach when she's in the company for foreign leaders. Her testicular fortitude is indeed much greater than we all estimated lol.

Me complimenting Hillary? kai! the world is upside down 

JeSoul:

  Its quite strange. You take everything remotely critical or negative said against Obama so serious and personal.

This is absolute nonsense. To insist on FACTS instead of regurgitating right wing talking points is not synonymous with taking things "personal". I'd have the same reaction too on another thread that had nothing to do with Obama. Collin Powel said it best this week - by all means criticise Obama on policy . . . but enough of criticizing him on nonsense.

JeSoul:

One last comment and then I'll leave you to yourself - If you would stop long enough to think beyond your blind devotion

more rubbish. Blind devotion in what sense? I have NOT endorsed any of his policies so far on this thread and i have my own reservations on the HC bill like most progressives.

JeSoul:

you would see that suggesting Hillary may want to run for president in 2 yrs is not altogether a thought strange or unique to one party. Democrats as well as repubs have suggested the idea - and I'm not sure how that is an insinuation so provoking you have to gate-crash a thread, guns blazing, calling everybody else's opinion 'drivel' 'silly' etc

That is not the issue at stake, what i brought out is simple - you tried to take a Hillary quote in isolation to insinuate she was attacking Obama. Of course i cant say i'm surprised because THAT VERY SAME quote was used on Fox to arrive at the same conclusion.

Hillary is free to stand in a primary against Obama in 2012 but remaining in office and attacking her employer would be completely ludicrous. Besides, if you bothered to read the entire transcript of her speech rather than relying on decietfully edited rightwing bull you wouldnt arrive at such an erroneous conclusion.

JeSoul:

. . . but then, I guess that is just your style - hot-air and no manners. If not for I respect you so much I wouldn't even bother at all.

i'd rather have no manners than let air-headed bull be posted around the forum. I have no apologies for that.

Its instructive to note that out of 3 responses . . . not once did you even attempt to address the issue.

Negro_Ntns:

JeSoul,

. . .did I hear you say she will not join Tea Party? Put that thermometer in her mouth and guage her temperature a second time - Hillary wants that position so bad she will make a convincing case for switching if the conversion will get her the win.

On one hand, there are two camps in DNC already! One led by Bill and the other by Obama. The rumor is that, as a consolation, Hillary will go next in 2012.

. . .watch the developments, the forecast will be more meaningful once the November mid term results come out.

i'm a regular on many progressive websites and i follow the news quite closely . . . this rumor exists only in your mind.

on second thots jesoul, i'm sorry for being rude. ma binu joo. thanks.

Her testicular fortitude

LMAO! . . . .she is one of only three democrats worthy of that attribute. Beside herself the other two are her husband and Nancy Pelosi. Every other demmy beside these three got a po-ssie.


Ater careful thought on the party switching, yeah, you are right. . .as a former first lady on democrat ticket, she has a legacy to protect

David nothin do you jare, issall good. As you rightly noted, I didn't respond to the points you raised earlier - and I did so on purpose. Reasons I hope be already obvious.

  Anyways . . . you are right in that Hillary's quote is rendered considerably less potent when taken in context of the transcript. I first heard the story in passing, and looked it up on youtube. I even tried to get the longest video - and not from FN self - I could find so as to get the whole story (who goes searching for transcripts of speeches anyways? only David perhaps?  )

So thanks for bringing in a broader perspective - that I appreciate as me I no get anything to lose now. So while the quote is less potent when not standing on its own, I would insist that it is still not impotent. To say something like that and insert "Obama knows this" still takes guts and is indicative of the fact she's not chicken about speaking her mind - something she's done consistently since becoming SOS.

---

Negro_Ntns:



LMAO! . . . .she is one of only three democrats worthy of that attribute. Beside herself the other two are her husband and Nancy Pelosi. Every other demmy beside these three got a po-ssie.


Ater careful thought on the party switching, yeah, you are right. . .as a former first lady on democrat ticket, she has a legacy to protect

I think in any election, for a prospective candidate, the biggest challenge is to simply present themselves as a viable replacement for whoever is currently in office. And when you have a perfect political storm like we do now - its anyones game.

  And oh, I don't share the same respect for Pelosi. I think the woman is . . . . weird . And don't ask why, but I like Joe Biden a lot. Of all the prominent Dems, I trust him . . . erhm as far as a person can "trust" a politician that is.

JeSoul:


Anyways . . . you are right in that Hillary's quote is rendered considerably less potent when taken in context of the transcript. I first heard the story in passing, and looked it up on youtube. I even tried to get the longest video - and not from FN self - I could find so as to get the whole story (who goes searching for transcripts of speeches anyways? only David perhaps? )

classical fox news followership methodology, here's another example of fox news 'editing' about a speech made by a democrat.

e.g

fox news story: obama says---> taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next yr for everybody

unedited statement by obama ----->under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next yr for everybody


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3hMODMyed8

Finagling, editing and finetuning of speeches or comments is now common practice among ALL News networks. It is not a crime unqiue to FN only. I watch pretty much all the networks and have seen spins on a single story from all kinds of directions.

Journalistic integrity is lacking in all manifestations of the media - from print to tv to internet. The only way for the average person to get the whole story is to have been there - so in other words, its almost impossible for us to know the whole truth oftentimes.

Jesoul, say the truth and the truth shall set you free. This is not about spinning or whatever language you call it. It's an outright lie. Can't you see?

He said Obama said something that he knows Obama did not say. That is a pure lie and dint cover it up. I challenge you to bring evidence of a similar lie by msnbc or CNN. I challenge you.

There is spin and there are lies. I chalenge you to bring one outright lie by msnbc
A lie is where false information is given intentionally despite knowing the truth.
a lie= when one intensionally gives wrong infomation despite knowing the truth.

See this boy lol, if you're expecting me to defend FN then I'm going to have to disappoint you.

I have seen outright lies and mis-information deliberately peddled as news by ALL the networks because I watch all of them. If you've convinced yourself that its only FN then I'm happy to leave you with that belief. Me, I have seen all of them lie and spin.

Just one evidence of an outright lie by CNN or NBC etc even MSNBC

just one incontrovertible evidence of an outright lie, you can call tayo to help out.

My eyes and ears have beheld the evidence I need. Me I am convinced. I have no desire to convince you Prez, sorry ehn.

We are exchanging ideas, kinda debate, bring your facts. You are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts bc facts are facts and are independent of opinions, you can't just say " I believe this therefore it is so" get the evidence, show me one, only one, wether CNN NBC ABC CBS etc just one evidence and this debate will end.

All cable outfits spin news, but when it comes to outright lies, I have sound proof of fox news. Now just give me one proof of any other tv group. Just one.

The pres-elect challenge. No debate, give me one proof. Of outright lie.

pres-elect:
"I believe this therefore it is so" TO ME!!!!!

If it is not so to you then no problem at all. I said I have seen it and see it all the time as I watch all the networks - to me, they all lie. I do not need you to believe me Prez, and I frankly have no desire to go youtube rampaging trying to find "evidence" that will convince you, especially as you're already heavily prejucided in one direction.

E do ehn. You believe A, I believe B. God no vex.

Now if you want to debate/discuss another matter, make we carry on .

@pres. Okay just to humor you. What do you think of CBS and Dan Rather use of false documents to derail the GW Bush campaign in 04. Please analyze the issue and don't give your opinion. I know you probably believe what Rather was trying to allege (probably worse  ). But the documents were proved to be false, Rather suspected it and still went on air with it. That to me falls under heading of outright lies.

Montelik
in 2004, I was in owerri, trying to find a job.We had no cable and I watched IBC and NTA. Who be Dan?

Jesoul,
it's okay. I just thought we were debating but since we are not, we can have our own opinions and let peace reign. After all, some people believe there is no god, others think otherwise.

pres-elect:

Montelik
in 2004, I was in owerri, trying to find a job.We had no cable and I watched IBC and NTA. Who be Dan?

Try use google small. At least now you have the capabilities to do the research. . Dan Rather former employee of CBS. Let me not tell you the facts since I might be biased. Read it up if you can.

Since you are so much interested in what some mr Dan did in 2004, why don't you google it up and let me read it WHEN I HAVE TIME, IF I WANT TO. You made the accusation, you own the burden of proof.

Montelik humoring Pres. lol.

Prez, both sides Democratic and Republicans play dirty all the time. I guess my problem is I have a hard time, very hard time, taking seriously anyone who insinuates that its only one side that is guilty of wrongdoing and trickery. How can you look at the current media and political climate and arrive at such a conclusion? beats me.