Hillary Clinton: Mudslinging hypocrite (smears John Edwards)

[geek tragedy]

Everyone remember from the debate how Clinton decried the alleged use by John Edwards of 'mudslinging?'

Well, the Clinton campaign is showing us exactly what mudslinging looks like:

"If John Edwards really cared about working people, he wouldn't have taken a $500,000 salary from a hedge fund that is foreclosing on working people around the country," said Clinton campaign spokeswoman Hilarie Grey. "Sen. Edwards should spend his time talking about how he's going to help those people instead of launching ridiculous attacks against Sen. Clinton."

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2007/nov/16/111610804.html

[global1]

1. Mudslinging Is OK - When You're The One Doing The Slinging.....nt

[Tellurian]

17. Your headline is misleading..Hillary NEVER said it!

Mind telling the Truth?

Or is that JUST too much to ask from you? And BTW...this isn't mudslinging OR a smear. It's the Truth..

See post #20 for the details of how John Edwards helped Americans during his Senate tenure!

[karynnj]

19. Though note, SHE is not doing it, the Clintons never do

It is as smart as it is nasty, the Clintons themselves have rarely (if ever) done anything themselves that is a dirty trick, but they have people surrounding them who are and have been associated with dirty tricks.

This is not a dirty trick - it is a public comment, that hurts because Edwards DID earn $500,000 from a hedge fund for relatively little work. Edwards has, of course, done things for people - but this doesn't say he hasn't. This is within bounds of truth - remember that Edwards himself is saying Hillary is corrupt. Given that, whining about her people bringing up the hedge fund job is not wrong.

[geek tragedy]

23. The claim is that he doesn't care about working people.

It's character assassination.

[Tellurian]

25. This is the caption in your link: "Edwards chides Clinton for trade comment"

You have completely convoluted the gist of the posted link... when the posted caption in the OP is a response to an Edwards Attack.. How clever...not so much when you get caught convoluting facts!

[karynnj]

35. It's more ambiguous than that because of the "if"

and because the stated reason(the hedge fund) is real. It is also clearly opinion, which everyone is allowed to have. Is Edwards comment that HRC is corrupt character assignation? That is similar in that it is opinion. In both cases, it would be fair for the opponent to make those cases using facts.

I think that the top three candidates need to take a "time out" and look at the charges that all their campaigns are throwing around. At this point, none can claim innocence. In part, this was signalled back in 2005 (or 2006) when Wolfson spoke of how the lesson of 2004 was that swiftboating works. Even then there were signals that they would use such attacks - I naively thought they meant against the Republicans. (I far prefer Kerry's reaction, which was to himself fight back for each of the vets attacked. They were all elected. Without Kerry's joke, one story of 2006 could have been that the country was sick of swiftboating.

[Windy]

2. She's clearly the one playing dirty...

between accusing Edwards of mudslinging when he was only pointing out the difference in their policies is frankly dirty politics. Now this latest stab not to mention the whispering to the media about Obama just to get the conversation rolling about a possible scandal when there is none.

She clearly is afraid that she can't win on the issues alone so she has to resort to dirty tactics.
Its really a shame.

[geek tragedy]

3. The Clintons play dirty.

Always have, always will.

[Tellurian]

27. No, YOU play dirty.I suggest everyone read the link citing an example of YOUR attempt to dupe DU'ers

[maddiejoan]

4. Pathetic

Edwards WAS mudslinging by calling Hillary CORRUPT. An accusation leveled with no proof.

Attacking Edwards' position as the workingman's candidate, however, when he IS drawing a 500K salary from a Hedge Fund that actively works at foreclosing on the working people is a statement of FACT.



If you can't see the difference between the two, then I'm truly sorry for you.

[geek tragedy]

6. Claiming Edwards doesn't care about poor people

isn't mudslinging?

Cherry or grape?

[GreenArrow]

21. John Edwards cares about himself.

Poor people are to use.

[cali]

5. It's mudslinging all right.

And he's been doing it to- not everything he's done is legitimate criticism of her, no matter how much you may insist it is. It's a shame to see this happening at such a fast and furious pace.

[Adelante]

7. That's mudslinging?

Okayyyyyyy.

[geek tragedy]

8. Claiming that Edwards doesn't care about

poor people?

Yes, that is mudslinging. Worse than anything Edwards has said about her.

[maddiejoan]

10. Mudslinging is leveling an accusation

with no proof.

Hence --NOT mudslinging.

Attacking a candidate on "issues versus deeds" is not mudslinging

[geek tragedy]

13. Where is the proof that John Edwards doesn't

care about working people?

[maddiejoan]

16. What has he done for poor people?

From his voting record in the Senate, I sure don't see anything that backs up his populist rhetoric.

From the way he talks, you would think he'd be another Kucinich --but I don't see it.

[mtnsnake]

18. He is no Dennis Kucinich

and Kucinich made sure everyone knew that the other night when he pasted Johnny Boy's ass but good, painting him to be the hypocrite he is and causing all that artificial tan color to drain from his face like someone opened up the faucets. I thought Edwards was gonna faint.

[Cameron27]

26. You've got that right

he's no Dennis Kucininch, and I'm so happy that Dennis isn't going to allow him to pretend that he is.

[GreenArrow]

24. He's used them as props for his campaign,

that's what he's done for poor people. Poor people are a talking point.

[mtnsnake]

9. Payback sucks, eh John?

Edwards should have known better than to start the mudslinging tactics against someone twice as smart as him like Hillary. Sweet vengeance!

[wyldwolf]

11. So if you slap me and I slap you back, I've done the wrong thing? Ha ha. Not in politics

Payback suck, John. You're not real good at this.

[Mass]

12. Please, continue like that. This will leave a chance to Obama and Biden

to win Iowa. May be after that, we could have a run between two honest politicians.

[mtnsnake]

14. OUCH!!

[Inuca]

28. My thoughts exactly

Thank you!

[William769]

15. Keep making Edwards look like the wuss that he is.

He's already proven , he cowers in her presence.

[Tellurian]

20. A very apt description of the whiner, Edwards helping to Bankrupt Americans..

which makes the middle class highly susceptible to Poverty.

Remember who Co-Sponsored the Iraq Vote?.. John Edwards in case you've forgotten..

and promoted the Iraq War for two years on the White House website?

How can anyone support Edwards' despicable Voting Record? He doesn't even mention it in his speeches.

* Edwards supported a bankruptcy bill that was vetoed by President Clinton. In 2000 John Edwards voted for the Bankruptcy Overhaul bill. While this bill included a slight increase of the minimum wage, its major design was to revise bankruptcy laws to make it easier for courts to force debtors to repay their debts, while before the law had allowed debtors to discharge their debt. 12 Democrats and 2 Republicans rejected this bill, including Chris Dodd, Ted Kennedy, Paul Wellstone, and Tom Harkin. President Clinton eventually vetoed this bill because it was too hard on debtors.

* Edwards voted for the same bill in 2001, again choosing financial interests over working families. In 2001 Edwards voted for a similar Bankruptcy Overhaul bill that again required Americans facing bankruptcy to undergo debt repayments instead of debt relief. Specifically, the bill required debtors able to pay $10,000 or 25% of their debts over five years to file under Chapter 13, which requires a reorganization of debts under a repayment plan, instead of seeking to discharge their debts under Chapter 7. Edwards voted with nearly the entire Republican caucus in supporting this bill, as well as voting to end debate on the measure. Chris Dodd voted to reject this bill, joining Senators Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry, and Wellstone. In all, the bill was rejected by 13 Democrats and 2 Republicans.

* Edwards would not allow relief for people who were forced into bankruptcy from medical bills. Edwards also sided with the entire GOP caucus to vote against the Wellstone amendment to the 2001 bill. This amendment would have provided an exemption for debtors who were forced to file for bankruptcy due to medical expenses, under the rationale that health expenses are often unpreventable and can be an especially debilitating cost to low and middle income families. Chris Dodd was one of the 34 Democrats who voted for this amendment?a group that included Senators Clinton, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry and Wellstone.

* Edwards rejected a means test amendment that would have protected debtors from sudden financial misfortune. On the same bill, Edwards again voted with the entire GOP caucus to reject an amendment that would have included a more consumer friendly means test than that included in the original bill. The amended means test would have used the average of a debtor's last two months of income to determine their ability to pay a certain threshold amount of debt, instead of the last six months of income. The amended means test was designed to protect debtors who face financial difficulties from sudden job loss or disability. Paul Wellstone, who authored the amendment, said the original test "will make it impossible for families to rebuild their lives." 22 Democrats supported this amendment, including Chris Dodd. Dodd was accompanied by Senators Clinton, Durbin, Feingold, and Kennedy.

* Edwards supported the final version of the Bankruptcy bill that "punishes the vulnerable." Months later, Edwards again voted for the similar version of the Bankruptcy bill that emerged from negotiations with the House of Representatives. He also voted to limit debate twice on the bill, stifling further amendments or arguments. This version was not substantively different from the earlier versions, as it still made it significantly harder for working Americans to discharge their debts through the bankruptcy system. Chris Dodd rejected this bill, along with Senators Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry and Wellstone. 14 Democrats and 2 Republicans voted against the final measure.

The bill Edwards supported "punishes the vulnerable and it rewards the big banks and credit card companies for their poor practices," said Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., a leading opponent of the legislation. "We are heading into hard economic times and we're going to make it hard for people to rebuild their lives."

Edwards has been part and parcel of the GOP agenda all the way. Edwards voting record is one of the worst of our Dem Senators. Edwards is helping create poverty in the middle class with his bankruptcy vote and earning millions for himself when working for the Hedge Fund sector. The same Hedge Fund sector that was buying sub-prime mortgages for their investment portfolios.. The same "POVERTY" he now professes to help as the centerpiece of his presidential campaign. It must be hard for Edward's supporters to understand the meaning of the words "poverty" and "hypocrisy", when their candidate, John Edwards exemplifies it so well.

Why shouldn't he, he voted for it!

[Clintonista2]

22. Thanks for the facts Tellurian! n/t

[maddiejoan]

29. Maybe he'll help the Middle Class

--AFTER he makes us all poor!

[karynnj]

36. The Senate record seems to say that HRC voted for this too

"Edwards voted for the same bill in 2001, again choosing financial interests over working families. In 2001 Edwards voted for a similar Bankruptcy Overhaul bill that again required Americans facing bankruptcy to undergo debt repayments instead of debt relief." It is fact was not just similar - but far worse than the 2000 bill was in the Senate.

[Bitwit1234]

30. SO every word out of their mouths is slurring HIllary

THEN if she so much as defends her self SHE is the one mudslinging. Typical response...guess they have nothing good to say about their candidates so they start on Hillary. I think with all the mud they have thrown at her she has been very reserved in what she has said to defend herself. But then the Hillary haters are always out in force they are so darn jealous that their candidate is falling so far behind they are constantly changing their shorts.

[geek tragedy]

31. You must not have read the post.

Her campaign claimed that John Edwards doesn't care about working people. That is a character attack, not defending herself.

[William769]

32. Excuse me, but his voting record proves that.

[cali]

33. I have little sympathy for Edwards even though I agree that is

mudslinging. What goes around comes around. He's done plenty of mudslinging in this very same vein himself.

[geek tragedy]

34. Edwards is a politician, so there's going to be

some dramatization. But the claim that because he made some serious cash that he doesn't care about working people is bogus and nasty.

Edwards is not my personal favorite by a long-shot.

[cali]

37. it's no more bogus than the absurd and nasty claim

that Clinton was laughing about NAFTA or his suggesting that she's corrupt.