Comments on: Is Obama Naive? http://donklephant.com/2007/12/26/is-obama-naive/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:03:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: BernieO http://donklephant.com/2007/12/26/is-obama-naive/comment-page-1/#comment-387718 BernieO Fri, 04 Jan 2008 01:44:03 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2007/12/26/is-obama-naive/#comment-387718 I think Obama's blather about reaching out to others, etc. is extremely naive. He also implies that Bill Clinton did not do this and was attacked as a result. On the contrary, one of Bill's biggest mistakes was reaching out to the other side and appointing the Republican Louie Freeh to head the FBI. The media rhpasodized about Freeh, called him a choirboy, etc. How did Freeh repay Clinton? Freeh undermined his presidency at every turn, sucking up to the right wing nutters in Congress (His dream was to be on the Supreme Court). He was a big factor in promoting the bogus scandals against Clinton, as well as the Wen Ho Lee debacle. This was also tied to trashing Clinton in an effort to support the entirely bogus charge that the Clinton campaign had sold secrets to the Chinese in return for campaign cash. (The secrets he supposedly gave them were actually obtained by China during previous Republican administrations. On top of all that, Freeh was a terrible FBI director, refusing to computerize, showboating by having Richard Jewell treated as a suspect in the Olympic bombing, etc. I think Obama’s blather about reaching out to others, etc. is extremely naive. He also implies that Bill Clinton did not do this and was attacked as a result. On the contrary, one of Bill’s biggest mistakes was reaching out to the other side and appointing the Republican Louie Freeh to head the FBI. The media rhpasodized about Freeh, called him a choirboy, etc.
How did Freeh repay Clinton? Freeh undermined his presidency at every turn, sucking up to the right wing nutters in Congress (His dream was to be on the Supreme Court). He was a big factor in promoting the bogus scandals against Clinton, as well as the Wen Ho Lee debacle. This was also tied to trashing Clinton in an effort to support the entirely bogus charge that the Clinton campaign had sold secrets to the Chinese in return for campaign cash. (The secrets he supposedly gave them were actually obtained by China during previous Republican administrations.
On top of all that, Freeh was a terrible FBI director, refusing to computerize, showboating by having Richard Jewell treated as a suspect in the Olympic bombing, etc.

]]> By: jules http://donklephant.com/2007/12/26/is-obama-naive/comment-page-1/#comment-387225 jules Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:47:13 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2007/12/26/is-obama-naive/#comment-387225 How did i miss your lengthy commentary on Clinton's "experience"? At least you mentioned one very notable and truthful thing about Hillary- her "experience" has just been a marketing message. I continue to be stunned that Americans are SOOOO stupid that they just blindly believe the marketing campaigns of the candidates (Hillary in particular) and ignore the facts. It's mind boggling. This is the first primary I've ever paid attention to, and i am truly amazed by how stupid democrats are. Amazing. They think Hillary's the most experienced, but the truth is that Biden Dodd and Richardsen cream her in that regard. Dems think she's the most electable (WHAT????) even though all the polls show that Edwards or Obama are. Do democrats pay any attention at all to facts or reality? Just wonderin'. How did i miss your lengthy commentary on Clinton’s “experience”?

At least you mentioned one very notable and truthful thing about Hillary- her “experience” has just been a marketing message.

I continue to be stunned that Americans are SOOOO stupid that they just blindly believe the marketing campaigns of the candidates (Hillary in particular) and ignore the facts. It’s mind boggling. This is the first primary I’ve ever paid attention to, and i am truly amazed by how stupid democrats are. Amazing. They think Hillary’s the most experienced, but the truth is that Biden Dodd and Richardsen cream her in that regard. Dems think she’s the most electable (WHAT????) even though all the polls show that Edwards or Obama are.

Do democrats pay any attention at all to facts or reality?
Just wonderin’.

]]>