http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/polit ... obama.html

A lawyer in a predominantly Democratic suburb of Cleveland relates this tale to The Swamp on the day before the all-important Ohio primary:



The lawyer says he was "stunned" and tells The Swamp the call originated from the Clinton campaign in Columbus. Are the dirty tricks ramping up as we get down to the wire? Swamp readers in Ohio and Texas, relate your own encounters with the Clinton or Obama campaigns if you've had them.

Hillary cant control everything her people say.

She can clearly lay down the rules for her phone volunteers and tell them to strictly go by the literature provided to them.

thats true, but im sure there are hundereds of people on both sides who are like this.

I've called for Obama and the instructions tell you not to mention the other candidate when talking about Obama's policies. If the person says they are a Clinton supporter, you are supposed to thank them for their time and say good bye.

im sure she does too; the person prob. just went off

oh who cares. Redfire, you need to pull back your Obama love just a little bit man. This isnt despicable or anything, it's typical politics.

Typical? Calling someone Osama bin Laden is typical? By the way, is this the same Jayhawk that supports Huckabee?

Obama's name has been so abused this election already that yes it already is becoming typical. I hate dirty politics and wish we didnt have to see them but we going to this election and every other election, just kind of have to move on.

Yes I am the same Jayhawk, but I've accepted McCain is getting the nomination and am now supporting him.

Did you vote for Bush? If so, then you apparently weren't tired of dirty politics back then. His fear-mongering is probably some of the most obvious since the "daisy" mushroom cloud ad back in the day. Karl Rove is a very effective fear-mongerer.

Yes I voted for Bush. I didnt vote for him because I was swayed with what he aired. I voted for him because John Kerry was so far left, him and I shared very little in common. I'm ultra-right. Me voting for someone who is ultra-left is simply not going to happen.

Bush's spending habits are about as far left as can be. Pretty funny how the conservative movement has been hijacked recently by big spending neo-cons. Bill Buckley, a conservative icon, recently died and he was vehemently against the ridiculous spending in the Bush administration. We need more conservatives like him in the country because right now the Republican party has been hijacked.

I completely agree. I'm not one of the 30% that approves of Bush.

The despicable part of this story is that it is being spread by Obama and his workers.

you forgot to add the full name Barrack Hussein Obama. Quite unbradley like

I believe you mean 19%.

Wow! Dirty politics! What a novel fucking concept!

Perhaps you could quote my one reference to that here on KJ - - I believe you'll find it different than you are implying...

I'm all for a Democrat in the Whitehouse, I just don't like the unquestioning nature of the Barackult members.

Unquestioning? WTF? Call him out on REAL issues, don't call him Osama bin Laden...Rezko = real issue. NAFTA = real issue. Iraq War votes = real issue. Those are real things that Obama should be hammered on. But his name, his effing name? You've gotta be kidding me.

Gosh, you guys really are cult-like in your devotion. Jump to attack any perceived slight on your leader. Of course, you could try reading what I just wrote above before attacking, but that requires independent comprehension rather than blind faith. Anyways, I'll do ya's all a favor and requote myself from this earlier thread for posterity:

Attack? If you consider that an attack, you've got issues. And second of all, how is it blind faith for me to sit there and say that Obama should be attacked on the issues I just mentioned? The dude is by no means perfect and has plenty of skeletons in his closet that he should be attacked on by other politicians. And he IS just a typical politician, no matter what he says. He's not a true agent of change, no matter what he says. He's a member of the two-party system and represents very little change in the grand scheme of things, just like Clinton represents very little change. Nader is a real agent of change, whereas Obama very much plays by the rules in Washington. So where is my blind faith? Oh that's right, you're so busy stereotyping that you can't actually read and comprehend what I'm saying. Why don't you drop the diatribes and add something useful to the discussion?

lol

Dirty tricks during a political campaign? What a novel concept!