Hard-pressed to find analogues?

Okay: how's this? Dropping "Hamas" in a debate for no good reason. Dropping Farrakhan not once, but twice, in a debate. Having Geraldine Ferraro go on the war path for a week straight. Leaking photos to Drudge. Bob Johnson with his drug-user insinuations. Hillary's "as far as I know" reaction. Hillary's insistence that Bill Ayers nonsense be probed.

Blah.

Well, the Clinton campaign constantly makes statements which are absurdly false. It's really embarrassing and insulting frankly. So I don't see why anyone would believe this tripe. It's about as honest as Hillary claiming "more people who cast ballots voted for me" implying she won the popular vote -- when in fact she's entirely ignoring people who caucused (who she has long claimed "don't count")

They have zero credibility. And it's clear that she's run a much more negative campaign. Jesus.

The Hillary Clinton 2008 campaign...refuge of fantasists, liars, truth-twisters and distorters.

Still smarting from the smack down Axelrod laid on him on MTP. Now who's whining?

"I know you are, but what am I?"

He's full of shit, but the larger point is this:

When are we going to become a serious country again?

This is so absurd. "Stop whining" was her mantra since the debate last week, and now she is campaigning for Whiner-in-Chief?

Oh, Goody! It's Up is Down and Wrong is Right Day!

Obviously, they're either confusing or purposefully obfuscating the terms "negavity" and "fear mongering". A campaign advertisement can play to (and benefit from) a prospective voter's worst fears without ever mentioning an opposing candidate. That's fear mongering, plain and simple.

Does this fathead really believe that anyone who picks up the WaPo and actually reads his op-ed will buy one ounce of the shit he is shoveling?

Oh, OK. And she's ahead in the popular vote! And she's got plenty of money! But even though HE's the negative one, he's not tough enough. He's unelectable. It's her turn.

She is finished in politics, and no one has to follow her over the cliff.

He should've just taken out a full page ad that said "NO U"

Does he think anybody is stupid enough to buy this crap?

Everyone knows who has been using the Kitchen Sink Strategy. All he is doing is proving that he too, like everyone involved with the Clinton campaign, is an out and out liar.

And that includes gottalife, dembolic, another reader and all the brain washed Hillary boosters here on TPM.

Yet one more example of how Clinton's entire strategy in this campaign has boiled down to the simple WWRD (What Would Rove Do?) formula.

Are you catching some heat for running a negative campaign? Is your opponent looking better to the electorate because he runs an overwhelmingly positive campaign and stays out of your muck?

If so, WWRD? Clearly, attack your opponent for being the very thing he is not, but that you ARE. Wait for the message force multipliers in the traditional media to pick up and run with the ball.

Rinse, repeat.

It's into The Looking Glass time: Welcome to the ClintonTwilight Zone.

Hillary "can not stand the heat" and has run screaming from the kitchen to WHINE in the Washington Post.

Hillary admits to the Washington Post that Senator Obama is better at standing up to the Republican Attack Machine, because he has beat her at that game.

WHINE ON, WHINE ON, OBLITERATOR LOON!!!

Dont think i saw much or any Clinton support in the comments. Guess the truth is to apparent in this case for anyway to raise a valid argument defending this outright lie.

(Like the sewer pipes joke. Was thinking they're down to what remains of the roman sewers now.)

Wank wank wank wank wank wank.

Could we see something besides a bare claim about this so called negative campaign of Obama's please?

Saying it don't make it so.

War is Peace

Lies are Truth

Up is Down

caveat-less

price-less

This just in!

Top Hillary Strategists will say things predictably aimed toward getting Hillary sympathy and therefore, votes.

Stay tuned for more updates, as Ed Rendell claims Hillary is taller than Obama, and a better basket ball player.

Now, to Bill Clinton claiming Obama plays the race card.

Bill?

The question I have is why the WaPo gave Clinton free advertising space.

And I thought that Mark Penn was bad, he is worse...

Garin's argument is totally specious. Not one example. The guy's a loser. Anyone see him on Meet the Press last weekend? Axelrod wiped the floor with him.

Beyond that, the Clinton fanatics are screaming "unfair" everywhere. It's delicious. A shrieking, quaking, fear-filled fest. How dare Clyburn! In not so many words, the gist is he's another uppity you know what. But now it's staring them in the face. The fun and games are over. They've basked in the light of being the center of the past few primaries. The working class, America's "real" people. Hillary's hard working, honest, and upright WHITE base.

How dare anyone not realize they are the center not only of this country, but of the earth? How dare anyone even dare to analyze their voting habits. Mon Dieu!

Meanwhile, black voters (and progressives, by the way) can suck eggs. Who gives a crap, right? Well Clyburn now makes it clear: the black electorate gives a crap. And now the Clinton camp's got to face their oops. No, you can't give the wink wink to racists and expect to get away with it. You can't help to trash a man like Jeremiah Wright, and make every effort you can to keep the racist malarkey about him in the news cycle, trashing the very concept and style of black Christian worship in the process.

Then, finally, you can't keep playing character assination tricks on the black candidate (and I will give examples: madrassah smear, "not a Muslim as far as I know," the turbaned Obama picture, William Ayers, slumlord (as Clinton put it) Tony Rezco, out of touch elitist...). So good for Bill Clyburn. Hooray for him two times. The news that those of us with brains have understood all along is official now and in front of the dimwits' characterless white faces: Hillary Clinton can't win.

Like the Bushies in their heyday, they are trying to create their own reality.

This is also consistent with the "heads she wins, tails he loses" strategy. If Obama stays above the fray, the Clinton sycophants say "he's too weak to fight against the Republicans." If he counterpunches, he's a mysogynist and a hypocrite ("what happened to the politics of hope?"). I don't think the Democratic primary electorate is stupid enough to fall for it. Certainly the good people of my home state are not.

Get the real news about THE OBLITERATOR at the following site. They expose the dirty news about her, that the Corporate Media does not report.

http://www.hillaryproject.com/?/en

the thing geoff garin doesnt understand is that truth is the ultimate defense. David Axelrod isn't assassinating hillary;s character when he says she doesn't have what it takes to bring about real change in washington, he's speaking the truth. Is Axelrod supposed to tell a lie on national television just because the truth might hurt Hillary's feelings?

You can't change washington if you take more money from lobbyists and special interests than anybody running. You can't change washington or raise the level of discourse when your whole campaign is based on a "kitchen sink" strategy designed to throw as much dirt and mud on your opponent as possible.

Thats not real change. Thats the way Washington has been run the last two or three decades.

I just finished reading the Op-Ed. What mush! There's no there there.

The day before this ad went on the air, David Axelrod, Barack Obama's chief strategist, appeared with me on "Meet the Press." He was asked whether Hillary Clinton would bring "the changes necessary" to Washington, and his answer was "no." This was in keeping with the direct, personal character attacks that the Obama campaign has leveled against Clinton from the beginning of this race -- including mailings in Pennsylvania that describe her as "the master of a broken system."

Clinton and her campaign have a habit of either deliberately misinterpreting Obama's words or being too dense to understand them. This is a classic example. The changes necessary in Washington, as Obama and his supporters see them, involve a fundamental redistribution of power. It involves taking power away from lobbyists and keeping power broadly distributed and dependent on the grassroots. It involves opening up the processes of government and exposing the system to the light of day.

The only change that Clinton thinks is needed is replacing the autocratic Republican president with an autocratic Democratic president. She does not view lobbyists as a problem. She has no problem with the influence of money. She has no problem with secrecy (even though it's one of the things that doomed her healthcare reform attempt).

So yes, the system is terribly broken, and yes, Hillary Clinton is a master of that system.

Now I have to go make my brain cells do some push-ups. I swear, reading that article sucked 5 points off my IQ.

I've got to say this about Clinton:

She's clearly not the evil spawn of Satan, at least as far as I know...

She's right about that. The only problem is that thus far Obama has been very good at painting Hillary as the negative one. Her feisty style compared to (until recently) his soft-spoken style plays into that image. But if you look closer, Obama has been going negative all along. He simply blames Hillary when he does it.