Tell us something we don’t know

Barack Obama attacked Hillary Clinton in negative campaign leaked memos show

“Change We Can Believe In”, a key Obama campaign slogan, was meant as a slur against Mrs Clinton’s personality, intended to highlight how she “couldn’t be trusted or believed in when it comes to change”, according to a memo seen by America’s New Yorker magazine.

“She’s driven by political calculation not conviction, regularly backing away and shifting positions … She embodies trench warfare vs Republicans, and is consumed with beating them rather than unifying the country and building consensus to get things done. She prides herself on working the system, not changing it,” the October 2007 memo added.

The memo was written by David Axelrod, a political adviser, as Obama’s nomination campaign stalled against Hillary Clinton during the height of the 2008 Democratic nomination process.

Rather than fight out their differences in policy, Mr Axelrod told Obama that the only way to secure a defeat was to attack Mrs Clinton’s character. The goal was to paint Obama as the “authentic ‘remedy’ to what ails Washington and stands in the way of progress” and to discredit his main rival in the process.

Gee, I’m shocked. All this time I thought all that Hillary-hate was spontaneous.


It’s really hard to fight out differences in policy when you steal hers and claim it as your own. He couldn’t beat her in debates and had no record of accomplishments to point to, so what other choice did he have if he was going to win? It was his time and that old bitch was in the way. Don’t hate the playa, hate the game.

So how did that all work out, anyway?

This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Tell us something we don’t know

  1. yttik says:

    “Rather than fight out their differences in policy, Mr Axelrod told Obama that the only way to secure a defeat was to attack Mrs Clinton’s character…”

    I think that’s kind of Newt’s appeal to many voters. They know Obama is going to attack the candidate’s character and in Newt’s case it’s like, what character? Before you can attempt to destroy somebody’s reputation, they have to have one.

  2. HELENK says:

    this is something a blind man could see during the primary.
    Why are the stories coming out now????

    backtrack blaming Hillary for the keystone pipeline veto, when even his own bunch said she had nothing to do with it.

    this story.

    just what is going on??? Do you think the dems are having buyers remorse and trying to get do over from 2008?

  3. OldCoastie says:

    Why is it when I read that block quote, I think “when you point a finger, there’s 4 pointing back at you”?

    oh wait… that’s right… Axelrod was really writing about Obama.

  4. Lulu says:

    Obama even with scurrilous character attacks still could not win without cheating and having the party fixers and press drag his unaccomplished and fictionalized ass across the finish line at the convention and general election. So the character attacks did not do the trick very well either.

  5. DandyTiger says:

    Saw a CNN interview with John King interviewing Nancy Pelosi. She said with intense range in her face that Newt will not be President. No matter what. That she knows things.

    So there you have it. No matter what the voters want, it can’t possibly happen. And the scary thing is, I believe her. Something will be done somehow to make sure that can’t happen.

    If you’re not part of the party machine establishment, it simply won’t be allowed. Not ever again. Big Dawg will be the last ever.

    At least that’s their point of view. And they’re now right up front about it.

    That was news, right on camera, and no one will probably pick up on it.

Comments are closed.