Video of Clinton '92 (and '08?) advisor Mickey Kantor referring to Indiana residents as “shit” and “worthless white ****s” has surfaced.
Kantor claims it’s doctored.
This is interesting.
One thing about the gas tax is that oil companies simply cannot react to something that near term by increasing production. It’s not like there’s some spigot turned off right now, and all they need to do is turn it on. And besides being unable to increase supply, they certainly won’t do that for a 3 month period-- there isn’t some spigot that they can just turn off in Sept. In fact, there are very few (if any) commodities where a 3-month change in the tax code could affect the supply.
So, supply stays the same, and demand increases. Econ 101, folks.
From Hillary? I’d sooner inflict myself from head to toe with paper cuts and bathe in gasoline.
I would like to say “Who gives a fc?” Except in this campaign, the words of the candidates’ associates seems to really matter to people.
So in that case, I really, really hope this makes the front pages of all the news sites and becomes the lead story on the TV news. Those voters in Indiana need to hear that Hillary’s close associate for the past 20+ years and current advisor said that they’re “shit” and “white n*ggers.” Do we really want those kinds of arrogant and racist dirtbags with access to the White House? Hillary and Bill have been close with this guy for a long time; unless Hillary denounces this guy and cuts all ties with him immediately, it’s pretty clear to me that she feels the same way about people in Indiana, and possibly all people in the heartland of America. These people are “shit” until the Clinton campaign needs their votes.
I watched the video, and I find it incredibly unlikely that he said what is being transcribed. It is just the power of suggestion. If you listen to it without the suggested transcription, it sounds just as much like “how would you like to be in the White House right now?” And I find entirely plausible his explanation that he was referring to the pollster when he said “these people are shit.”
I will be very disappointed if the Obama campaign makes any hay out of this, unless some further evidence is revealed.
Obama will denounce it. Hillary will demand that he both reject and denounce it.
The video that shows him saying white N#*&(**, when compared to the original seems unlikely in context. Although the “those people are shit.” was pretty clear.
Either way, it’s a non issue to me, and I’m very pro Obama. It’s the kind of offhand remark that people need to quit glomming onto.
ETA: I also reject it and expunge it. 
Of course. No reasonable person could possibly favor McCain. Anyone who votes for him is an idiot.
Why even have an election, really? The experts know what needs to be done.
He didn’t just say Obama was right; he said “It’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard in an awful long time from an economic point of view.” 
I find your premise (an absurd, childish caricature of the two men’s political positions) to be flawed, to put it lightly. A conclusion based on a faulty premise is no conclusion at all.
Heh. Yup, it seems more and more people are agreeing that it’s doctored (or very badly captioned.
Rather exciting way to start the day, at any rate.
Masochist, huh? Not even for the novelty factor? Not even if she wore a blue dress? Really?
A pig with makeup is still a big fat stinky oinker. 
Please note - he is also saying that McCain is very wrong on this as well as Hillary. Bloomberg holds some weight among independents concerned about the economy and soft Republicans. Maybe not the ones likely to be voting in Indiana but still. Which way he’ll fall before the general is very much in the air but this bodes well for his lending his support to Obama’s side of the fence.
Let’s be honest here. Obama has been flubbing it for a while now. He’s been trying to just run down the clock but not controlling the ball. And for that while I’ve been saying he needs to aggressively get out front telling us what his Presidency will look like in very specific terms, including making specific promises of how he’ll reach across the aisle. I’d love to see him come out this week-end talking up Republicans like Bloomberg and others and stating categorically that there would be places for them in his administration if they were interested.
The gas tax issue can be a chance to contrast himself as the believable straight talking one. Try this out:
“McCain and Clinton are both pandering trying to buy votes; what’s worse is that they think $30 is the going price. Wotta insult! But that’s the way politics as usual is done. It’s a dumb idea. But while pandering with dumb ideas is something that candidates in both parties can do, pointing out their stupidity is something that leaders on both sides can do as well. Michael Bloomberg, for example is one such leader and I’d to say right now that, if they are interested, there will be a place for Republicans like him in my administration.”
Highlighting Bloomberg’s comments over the week-end talk circuit can accomplish both goals at the same time. Just no "Uhh"s please!
So those are reasonable positions? Tripling Bush’s tax cuts? Staying in Iraq forever, no matter how it goes?
O-kay.
How did I mischaracterize McCain? Those are the actual tax cuts he’s for, and their actual costs. $5.7 trillion, with a T.
And I am not responsible for the caricature of Obama, thankyewverymuch. That’s been everywhere I turn for the past several days.
For one, there is more to McCain’s campaign positions than you stated, and that he differs from Bush on some policy issues. Also, there are legitimate criticisms of Obama’s positions, beyond the Rev Wright issue. The idea that your 3 sentences will somehow frame the comparison between the two candidates is a gross oversimplification. At first I thought it might be a joke, even though it wasn’t funny. As a serious debate point, though, it’s a hoot.
Haven’t read most of the 6 pages, so I may have a repeat here: I saw a bumper sticker yesterday (beside the rebel flag decal) on the rear window of a pickup truck: “Life’s a bitch. Don’t vote for one!”
Yuck. Misogyny has no place in a principled opposition to Clinton’s campaign. Of course, this isn’t a repeat in any of the 22 pages of the thread.
Daniel
I have found you to be a reasonable guy for the most part, even when we disagree. Surely you aren’t really suggesting that this is McCain’s position? I’m quite sure there are aspects of his actual position that people can reasonably disagree with, but this isn’t another “McCain wants 100 more years of war in Iraq” misstatements, is it?