EUGENE - Sen. Hillary Clinton defended the critical and sometimes harsh exchanges between her presidential campaign and that of rival Barack Obama, saying, “It is not a coronation, it is a contest.”
“I don’t take any of it personally, and I don’t take most of it seriously. That’s what happens in politics,” she said at a rally in Eugene, Oregon, on Saturday.
“If you can’t stand the heat, don’t run for president because it’s a really hot kitchen in the White House, I’ll tell you that much,” she said.
Her comments came in response to a young man in the crowd who said he was an Obama supporter. He asked if anything said by her campaign might have hurt the Illinois senator and might merit an apology.
“I think this has been, by and large, one of the most positive and civil campaigns I’ve ever been a part of or know about,” she replied. “For those who are new to politics … it can be eye-opening especially when you choose sides and you’re for one or the other of us, that you can take very personally anything anybody says.”
“Elections are about choices,” she continued. “You’re supposed to present your case, and you’re supposed to critique the other case. That’s what you do in an election. It is not a coronation. It is a contest.”
Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage
Photo: Reuters/Rebecca Cook (Clinton supporter at campaign stop in Detroit)
Trackback
38 comments so far
Previous | 2 | 1 | Next
[...] If I use Hillary’s own words, will I be called a misogynist? I sure hope not: [...]
- Posted by Balloon JuiceIf voters had memories, Hillary would be out of the race. Her big job in the Bill Clinton Whitehouse was health care. She failed. Everything she touched became a scandal. Do you remember travel gate? She was put on the back burner. She used her husband’s name and connections to get on ballot in New York and tranformed instantly into a “New Yorker.” She came out of the gates horribly as a senator. Her approval rating after 9-11 was lower than Bush’s as president. Then she writes a book “Living History” and casts herself as a vicitm. Then she runs a negative and dishonest campaign and Americans (with no memories to draw upon) buy her sales pitch. She was the one who complained at the debate about getting the first question and about the press coverage and referred to Saturday Night Live. Now she says Obama is the complainer who can’t stand the heat. Please America engage your brains and try to draw upon some memory cells when evaluating the candidates. Obama is not perfect by any means. He associated with some bad and questionable people. That should be taken into account as well. But Hillary is what she is. She has a long track record of doing and saying anything to get elected and retain power. She makes up stories about herself and lies about her opponent to win. It is that simple. If she is what you want as a President, what does that say about you? gk
- Posted by gk[...] Clinton: If you can’t stand the heat, don’t run for president (Reuters) EUGENE [OR] - Sen. Hillary Clinton defended the critical and sometimes harsh exchanges between her presidential campaign and that of rival Barack Obama, saying, “It is not a coronation, it is a contest.”… Her comments came in response to a young man in the crowd who said he was an Obama supporter. He asked if anything said by her campaign might have hurt the Illinois senator and might merit an apology… “Elections are about choices,” she continued. “You’re supposed to present your case, and you’re supposed to critique the other case. That’s what you do in an election.” Too many Obama supporters are kids who have no idea what elections are about. [...]
- Posted by Make Them Accountable / MediaGiven all Hillary Clinton’s so called experience, why did her attempt at rectify health care fail back when Bill was President. Why did she have to embellish her trip to Bosnia, regarding ’sniper fire’. Empathy - where is it? She is arrogant, unpredictable in manner, and does not conduct herself well as a states person domestically nor internationally.
I have had the benefit of foreign travel, and I can assure you that Hillary is not perceived well overseas. America cannot stand alone. Obama brings a unifying presence that far outweighs experience. For his so called lack of experience, how is it then, he is able to raise far more campaign funds than Hillary, how is it that he has galvanized the youths and others in this nation to be as politically aware as they are now; no other campaign has done that! Look at his bravery and courage to address race in this country throug his speech, “The Perfect Union”.
Remeber, a leader gets things done through other people and not necessarily him or herself. Barack’s ability to inspire in addition to being surrounded by competent individuals who have the public interests foremost in their minds like he does, will move mountains. This is evident by people like Mahatma Gandhi, MLK, Winston Churchill, Nehru, and other prominent leaders got things done. Many of them had not so called experience that we all tout that it takes to be president. It is leadership ability and the ability to take the high road. And most of all, a belief in Unity. Hillary is divisive. Look at the divide within the democratic party.
Take a detailed look at Hillary’s history and you will find gross embellishment. Ask her why her thesis at Wellesly has been sealed? Ask her what she has done to improve race relations in this country. Healthcare, children’s program, etc., are all well and good but cannot and will never fully succeed without a true leader. Hillary does not possess the qualities of a leader. Research the leaders of nations and you will see that she pales by comparison. Obama has what it takes!
- Posted by Cely BelyObama’s rhetoric is first rate, but it is nothing more than promises. He has not done enough to warrant the US presidency at this time. Give me experience and empathy - Senator Hillary Clinton has consistently fought for health insurance, children’s programs and justice. We need her now more than ever.
- Posted by K Vacca80% of Europeans do support OBAMA. I support him too because he is honest, correct & sincere. He talks about “time to change things which Hilary & Bill have not thought
- Posted by Jean Michel Nehmeof during the 8 years of reign in the White House!”. He means so from the bottom of his heart, while Hilary keeps
on talking RUBBISH!
The more I listen to Obama, the better I judge his ability to lead the USA. I question Mrs. Clinton where
was she as the phone rang at 03:00 hours & was notified of
her Husband being busy with his Monika L. & how did Hilary
react? Did she get up so to judge the situation & make a decision? Or she thought: ché sera sera? So her follow
Americans should judge her electability. JMNehme
Well,,
I am not for either candidate on the democratic side, so my viewpoint comparing the 2 is untainted. I think it is laughable that Hillary mentions with a word about the ability to stand the heat in the hot kitchen, that is the White House. Obama is not the one who broke down crying in the middle of a speech in a last ditch effort to “humanize” herself, and steal some votes. Last time I checked, crying is not showing strength, no matter the reason she cried. Obama did not start the mudslinging, she did, as far as I can remember back (she threw the first verbal knife I heard about being reported on the news). And lastly, Clinton is the one suggesting Obama step down and let her be the Democratic candidate, while losing in both the popular vote and electorate vote by a reasonably wide margin. Well, if that doesn’t echo an attitude of “coronation” rather than “contest” from her camp, I don’t know what does.
Her response to this question echo’s of the old school politics taking place on both sides of the fence in Washington, and that needs to stop. It definitely won’t happen with her in office.
- Posted by notforeitherofthese2What’s amusing to me is it has been Hillary and Bill who have been firing out the most insults this whole campaign. She also is the one who has been discovered to lie the most and still has somehow gotten away with Whitewater Conspiracy issues. Obama is not perfect. No candidate will ever be perfect because we are all human. However, he seems to be the one who earnestly wants to try and give his all while Hillary plays passive aggressive. I hate to say it but she makes all of us women look bad with that attitude and when she gets things shoved back she tries to divert it. In the end, she may have lost more of Ohio votes had she done what they said for her to do which was release the White House records and her tax information that should have been public in the first place. She waited and then was caught in a slew of lies. Way to secure votes and deceive people that actually asked for the truth ahead of time. She plays politics nasty and really we do not have to be this way. I hope she does lose just to prove to others in the future that many Americans are sick of this stupidity and slicing down of others. Barrack Obama has taken it well. When it’s Hillary’s turn, we will see. She’s all over Wright but I note that anything said against her really has been light in comparison. She should shut up.
- Posted by ZarthusThe more Obama opens his mouth the more clear it is that he is a pathological liar. He is an opportunistic empty suited wonder, and I wonder why ANYONE in their RIGHT MIND would vote for him. It is clear he has no idea sometimes of what he is saying he either reads it from a written or past speech from someone other then himself, or he rides someone else’s , like Mc Cain or Clintons coat-tail. I can not understand what these SUPER DELEGATES are thinking. It is clear that some of them must have been promised something or they MUST NOT want the democrats to win in November. Dean, Reid, Kerry, Kennedy, Richardson, Daschle, Dodd, Pelosi all will be sorry in the General Election,. this guy is beyond idiotic. CAN Someone Please tell CASEY it’s Clear what he wants, he looked like a JOKE defending the Obamboozler on Meet The Press. It was clear that most of his answers were disingenuous, and Hillary is not suppose to count POLLS when the are in her favor but when it reflects Obamboozle we all are suppose to do as the News Media and CHEER. No everyone is in bed with all the News Media, NOT everyone wants a Male Chauvinist, Disingenuous, Opportunistic, PATHALOGICAL LIAR for PREZ.
- Posted by VotersIssuesIf this happens and people start once again jumping behind this IS PURE BAMBOOZLE FOR SURE, WE DEMOCRATS SHALL MAKE THEM PAY IN NOVEMBER and whom every comes up FOR RE-ELECTION SHALL NOT WIN. HOW DARE THEY.
That is right Senator Clinton!! Sock it to him! Obama will be defeated in Pensylvania Primary by at least 15%, and that victory will lead to many more until you get the Democrat nomination; then, Senator Clinton will defeat McCain in November 2008. On the other hand, if Obama is the Democrat nominee, McCain will easily defeat Obama in November 2008 because McCain will carry California and other Reagan democrat states; its a no-brainer!!
- Posted by Jameswe repeated a bush now we’re regreting;
- Posted by peter ogbidiwe cannot repeat a clinton this time,
this look more like a democratic coronation
to me.
The 22nd amendment to the US constitution defines term limits for a person serving as president.
Its purpose has been detailed as to avoid the abuse of power that comes with individuals holding political office for an extended period of time.
An adjusted amendment should exist which should include not only the President and Vice President, but several other elected and appointed positions in the executive branch.
As I see it, much of the abuse of power that has happened in the last 50 years stems from Presidents using their connections developed from other positions in and around the executive branch.
Consider the CIA and George Bush Sr. in contrast to the Iran Contra dealings. I believe his previous CIA position as director provided him with an abnormal amount of data and access to data that a president should be abstracted from. It is his team of advisor’s, who should separately work with agencies, who perform their own independent analysis of data. This should apply to all concerns security and economic.
Not having this abstraction allowed for the well discussed illegal activities of the Iran/Contra activities as well as the hearing which proceeded them.
Therefore the 22nd amendment should apply to several members of the executive branch and some agencies as well as the presidents immediate family.
The Presidents family should be included to avoid having a monarchy, wherein leadership merely continued through another family member. I realize people can indeed have different values from their parents. I also realize that the Presidency is not merely passed on to these people I speak of.
This may curb the likelihood of a President being in a position, where they are working only within their immediate group of advisers. It is important make decisions based on information that is factual and impartial. It appears regardless of the party this is not happening.
With this understanding, Hillary Clinton should not be a candidate.
Lastly, party membership has become an outdated ritual. Not only are the vast differences in the the beliefs of the members of the party, but the intrusive goal to maintain party control now outweigh the freedom to vote and elect an individual. For many Americans, party membership is a crutch to disconnect research and thought, when considering a candidate. Rather that truly seeking to find all the traits in a candidate, we are continually choosing a party and then liberal or conservative.
With the number of issues that exist today, these definitions don’t mean much for free thinkers and teach younger Americans to NOT think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seco nd_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Consti tution
- Posted by Read the lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy
As a former supporter of both President Bill Clinton and also Hillary Clinton it pains me to see both of them stooping to use Karl Rove-type political tactics in their campaign against Senator Obama. If Mrs. Clinton is nominated I plan to leave the Democractic Party as a registered voter of 40 years. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances.
- Posted by Daniel EvreuxGood to hear, gotta have a thick skin to be in poltix, there…
- Posted by BertHey! Why leave out the last bit of her answer? Hillary Clinton continued to say, “This country is worth fighting for, and I am going to fight for it. I’d rather you be involved and not for me than to be apathetic and not involved.” Ellen Wulfhorst: you haven’t been fair.
HRC has stolen most of what has worked for Obama. Her slogan Yes She Can, was not hers slogan at the start of campaign season. It became her slogan later.
She has now figured out that what is different in the two campaigns is that he is challenging Americans to get involved, HER campaign was initially, don’t worry, Hillary will take care of you.
Well I don’t want a candidate that steals someone else’s campaign slogans and positions, any more than I want one who embellishes and calls it a misspoke - which is hilarious because people get PTSD for going through what she described as what happened in Bosnia but didn’t.
She’s an image people, as they all are to some extent. But her image is fluid and constantly changing with the polls. At least McCain and Obama are consistent.
And the person talking about vitriol? HR’s supporters, not on this site but in smaller newspapers, were the most bigoted responders I ever heard. I was sickened that they were a part of this country.
I too wish we could discuss issues, and FACTS, not twisted facts, but actual facts. Like the thing that was floating around about the passage of legislation, and when you look at Clinton’s it was mostly for naming public buildings. Sorry, I don’t consider that legislation, I consider that Congress wasting my money and their time.
No wonder the country is a mess.
- Posted by JulieMs. Kay,
“Hillary Clinton is an example of all that is good in this country. That you can rise from nothing to be something.”
Rise from nothing? Who are you kidding?
She grew up in Park Ridge, an affluent, all white suburb of Chicago!! I grew up in an affluent, all white suburb of Chicago. My class in high school was the first one that was integrated. She’s older than me. She didn’t “rise from nothing.”
BTW, I loved the quote on King’s anniversary that she was so upset when she heard he died “she threw her BACKPACK” on the bed of her dorm.”
Her backpack? Who had a BACKPACK in 1968, anyone? Can we have a show of hands? At Wellesley no less, which I’m sure was a bastion of rich girls working for civil rights. How many black kids attended Wellesley in 1968 - anyone know?).
The class of 2010 is projected to be 45.9% white, 26.5% Asian/Pacific-Islander, 5.6% African-American, 4.3% Latina.
That’s today, and in conjunction with, from the college’s website, “This diversity is made possible, in large part, by the College’s need-blind admission policy. Students are accepted without consideration of their ability to pay. Once admitted, those with demonstrated need receive financial aid through a variety of services.”
So if African-Americans and “Latinas” are still in need of financial aid, how is it that all the poor kids in Brookline, Ma aren’t going there on scholarships? Wouldn’t you think they’d all be welcome, maybe even recruited?
Can you imagine 1968?
- Posted by JulieBO’s campaign is all technics, tricks, words,nothing true.The sooner you realise theat the better for the country.
- Posted by VickyI bleed blue, and will support either candidate. I’ve been on countless left-leaning websites lately, and have seen scores of Obama supporters trash Mrs. Clinton and her supporters in the most personal way. I don’t see a critique of policy, which would be legitimate; instead, I see a lot of shouting and denunciation of anyone who supports Hillary, not to mention the ugly personal attacks against Mrs. Clinton. I see Hillary supporters derided as “low information” voters (read: working-class, people who didn’t attend college, or older white adults–and this IS what they say), who are spoiling the election for the enlightened. I see the choice presented as one between change and a continuation of the status quo, even though HRC and BHO have positions that are a micron apart, and both have a history of working within the system. Heck, even Nader thinks they do. Obviously, HRC supporters are passionate as well, but I don’t honestly see the same kind of vitriol lobbed against Senator Obama. We can have civil discourse without the name-calling, and I wish we would.
- Posted by Tina