So let me get this straight. When the focus of the national press was erroneous comments Barack Obama’s minister made, you could take the high road and say you didn’t have a comment about it and this shouldn’t be a central issue, but almost two weeks later when everybody’s talking about your “misstatements” now you want to bring it up?
Give me a break.
Oh, I love this Hillary quote: “(Obama releasing his income taxes) is a good first step. Now he should release his records from being in the state senate and any other information that the public and the press need to know from his experience, because I think that, you know, we should continue to make available the information that we have.”
So is that why you haven’t released your income tax records? Or why you haven’t released documents related to financing of the Clinton Library or the Clinton Foundation? Or why you wouldn’t release records of your time as First Lady until a Freedom of Information Act law suit?
Now Bill Clinton is saying that Obama wants to “disenfranchise” Michigan and Floridian voters because he knows Clinton will win them. Want to guess how many votes Obama cast in favor of not allowing early states to be seated? How about the total number of votes Obama cast to move up the primaries? I’ll give you a hint; it’s the total number of votes Obama cast when both states decided not to revote.
The answer to all three, in case you’re delusional enough to actually believe Obama somehow had an active part in the “disenfranchment” of the two states, is zero. But the logic is classic Clinton: “Everybody would know how much voters in each state love Hillary if they stopped allowing Obama to block the vote.”
I really hope at some point in the future the Clintons at least act like they respect my intelligence.