Clinton Campaign Finds a Friend at — Or Do They?

By Lee Speigel

Mar 23, 2008 12:11pm

Bill Clinton’s remarks Friday have created a storm of controversy…what did he mean, if anything? Was he impugning Obama? Is the Obama campaign willfully mis-reading what he said?

The Clinton campaign this morning sent out a  "Must Read" blog post from an unlikely source — the National Review.

Kathleen Parker writes "In Bill’s Defense," saying that the Obama campaign’s interpretation is "nonsense."

Parker, who was at the speech in question, writes, "In no way did I interpret Clinton’s remarks as questioning Obama’s patriotism. Clinton was making the case for his wife’s electability against McCain, who, last time I checked, is the presumptive Republican nominee, and her challenger should she win the Democratic nomination. He may have intentionally bypassed Obama in his leap to match Hillary against McCain, but he didn’t say anything that could be construed as questioning Obama’s patriotism. 

Some Kathleen Parker columns the Clinton campaign won’t be sending out anytime soon:

"Evoking a boomer past makes Clinton ‘so yesterday’"

"The Rev. Hillary’s Tin Ear"

"Clinton, Obama lack foreign policy work"

"When girls insist on playing hardball with the boys, they don’t get to cry foul — or change the game to dodge ball — when they get bruised"

etc, etc…

- jpt

You are using an outdated version of Internet Explorer. Please click here to upgrade your browser in order to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus