About Channel '08  |  Blog Partner: PrezVid.com  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed  (What's RSS?)

Should Obama Clarify Comments on Detroit Speech?

UPDATE: Please refer to the new follow-up post, in which we address the concerns that came up in the comments section.


****

Sen. Barack Obama may have to retract a claim he made at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Indianapolis on May 8.

In the 30-minute speech, Obama discussed the usual "challenges facing people across Indiana and all across this country are growing by the day," i.e. housing crisis, the economy and health care.

However, the key phrase to listen for is this (23:24):

"We're going to have do what I did when I went to Detroit and told the automakers that they're going to have to raise fuel-efficiency standards on cars. We can make more efficient cars right here in the United States. There's no way they have to be made in Japan. But, it requires that Detroit changes its ways. And I have to say that when I delivered that speech, nobody clapped. The room was really quiet. But that's OK, because that's part of what is the task of the next president."

Why is this the key phrase?

The speech that Obama refers to is from May 2007 when he spoke to the Detroit Economic Club. Despite what he said at the J-J Dinner and several other moments on the campaign trail, Obama was applauded by the audience when he proposed setting higher fuel efficiency standards.

The YouTube user, ObamaDetroit, splices together Obama's speech from Indianapolis and compares it to the speech he gave at the Detroit Economic Club.

ObamaDetroit joined YouTube one week ago and only has this video on the channel.


Obama's misstatement, caught on tape, is somewhat reminiscent of Sen. Hillary Clinton's story of landing under sniper fire in Bosnia. Clinton had recounted the story of her 1996 trip to the Tuzla Airport several times along the campaign trail, saying: "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

Eventually, a video surfaced of Clinton strolling down the tarmac, giving a hug to a little girl and observing the military. Under pressure by the media and whistleblowers, Clinton admitted in an interview with the Philadelphia Daily News that she had indeed, misspoke.

Should Obama be put under similar pressure to clarify his statements? Let your thoughts be known in comments section.

-- Emily Freifeld

By washingtonpost.com |  May 15, 2008; 5:15 PM ET
Previous: New McCain Web Ad Predicts Rosy Future | Next: New Ads for Clinton in Kentucky and Oregon

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



You know Obama doesn't mean what he says or doesn't say what he means. Every bonehead statement he makes he is taken out of context. When is this bonehead going to be held accountable and not excused by the MSM. It's past time.

Posted by: Chief | May 15, 2008 6:12 PM

Emily, Emily. I think Obama first needs to repeat the statement for a couple of months like Hillary, make a few changes in his story like Hillary, then deny what the tape shows like Hillary, and then , say in October, say he was tired and mis-spoke. Just like old Hillary and the sniper fire.

Posted by: svbreeder | May 15, 2008 6:12 PM

Really...should he clarify? Should he clarify whether people clapped or not? Are you kidding me?

Come back to the real world and start covering the campaign...

Not.This.Time.

We will not be distracted.

Posted by: justmy2 | May 15, 2008 6:12 PM

Other people who heard senator Obama's 2007 speech to the Detroit Economic Club confirm that his remarks received a cool reception. Whether a few people clapped does not create a Tuzla-like scandal. But it's pretty clear that Ms. Freifeld is looking to manufacture one.

Posted by: Elon | May 15, 2008 6:15 PM

somebody clapped, obviously...I wonder though if there were other moments in the 30 minute speech where he did mention higher fuel standards without any reaction. That's not something the DEC crowd is usually happy to hear....

Posted by: ghost | May 15, 2008 6:18 PM

Oh Please! Senator Obama was roundly criticized from those in attendance,the Mayor of Detroit, and most MI op-Ed pages for taking on the auto industry that day.

Posted by: Dawn | May 15, 2008 6:22 PM

The Detroit Economic Club...?

Wheres the punchline...?

Posted by: Gobama | May 15, 2008 6:23 PM

Please make it stop, mommy! It hurts!

Oh, my god!! Please, Washington Post, stop Emily Freifeld before the national discourse devolves into a slap-fight!

What has happened to our nation? Just because we have the interweb at our fingertips doesn't mean we should blog about every possible angle. USA Today had a piece today about the hold music on each candidates headquarters telephones! How low are we going to get?????

Will someone please pull the plug on Ms. Freifeld before she makes a complete ass of herself and a mockery of the campaign for president. This is a very, very important election and puerile stories like these are an irrelevant distraction.

PS - I am not an Obama supporter. I just don't want to play anymore of these absurd games!

Posted by: Lisa Risdell | May 15, 2008 6:23 PM

way to go. more "Gotcha!" politics, distracting us from real issues. get a conscience.

Posted by: Paul | May 15, 2008 6:23 PM

There is a very serious double-standard at work here. The slightest, most trivial inconsistency uttered by a Democrat is immediately met with calls to "clarify" or suggestions that the Democrat is lying. But the Republican candidate can make statements that are demonstrably at odds with the facts and they are never called to account for it. I cite as Exhibit A the allegation by Arianna Huffington that John McCain told people at a dinner party that he didn't vote for George Bush. Three independent witnesses have confirmed that John McCain made the statement. McCain nevertheless denies it. Where are the calls for John McCain to account for his false statement? Why is John McCain's integrity not being called into question? Emily, I'd like to know, since you seem to be dedicated to sniffing out possible false statements uttered by the presidential candidates, did you write a similar column with regard to John McCain? If not, why not? Do you only care about inconsistent statements when they come from Democrats?

Posted by: CaLawyer | May 15, 2008 6:23 PM

Soon Obama isn't going to have any time for anything but his defense: he's about to be indicted in the Rezko scandal because he's a cheap little hood:

Curtain Time for Barack Obama - Part III Evelyn Pringle 05/15/2008 7
Curtain Time for Barack Obama - Part II Evelyn Pringle 05/13/2008 10
Curtain Time For Barack Obama - Part I Evelyn Pringle 05/12/2008 32

Posted by: John Ryskamp | May 15, 2008 6:26 PM

Low week, Eh??
What is the issue in Obama's Detroit speech?
You don't care, isn't?
By the way, how many people did actually applaude; and how many have put in practice the deal that Obama was proposing??
You don't care, isn't?

Posted by: Mark Webb | May 15, 2008 6:27 PM

"Obama talks tough on Detroit
Criticism of auto industry could make winning support an uphill battle":

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080514/BUSINESS01/805140387/1014

"Obama's Tough Talk Backfires in Motown":

http://www.newsweek.com/id/34740

"Bill Ford, Jr. Miffed by Obama's Criticism of Auto Industry":

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,277013,00.html

Hmmm, doesn't sound like there was much "applause" as reported by reporters on the scene!

Posted by: Dawn | May 15, 2008 6:28 PM

Oh its okay in Missouri he attributed languages to Afghanistan that they don't even speak but of course he will be excused from making those errs. After all, Jesus ain't got nothing on the brother. Its either a bonehead mistake, he will apologize and the "idea" that is Obama will just have smooth sailing.
Democrats and the media are too inlove with him Obama is obviously a case of , " Beauty is in the eye of the beholder," Well, I behold him to be the worse political mistake America has made thus far, yes even worse than George W. Bush.

Posted by: mona | May 15, 2008 6:29 PM

What a real disservice you are to the profession, Ms. Freifeld.

Facts evident from the video:
1. At Indiana, when he mentioned higher fuel efficiency standards, there was immediate clapping from the audience. Obama reacted spontaneously by saying that in Detroit, the audience was quiet at this moment.

2. The video of the audience clapping in Detroit was at the end of Obama's speech.

Subject to interpretation:
Did the Detroit audience clap in response to the fuel efficiency remarks, or were they clapping Obama's overall speech? The video can't distinguish.

There is substantial evidence that the Detroit automotive industry has fought tooth and nail any past and recent effort to raise CAFE standards. There is substantial evidence that they have banked on larger cars, SUVs, and hence they have opposed higher fuel efficiency standards. And in Bush/Cheney, they have found willing partners in this wrong headed direction.

In light of this, it is not improbable that the sentiment in Detroit, at least among the business leaders, is still not enthusiastically for higher CAFE standards. So is it so hard for you to understand that Obama's specific points about this issue might not have got the same degree of applause in Detroit as in Indianapolis?

It seems a blatant attempt on your part to manufacture a controversy when there is little justification for it. You should be ashamed!

Posted by: suvro | May 15, 2008 6:30 PM


You gotta be kidding,

you have a politician that is able to get applause from automakers while proposing them to change their entire production chain

and you want him to apologies ???!??!?!?
and you write an article about it ?????

+ it sounds like 20 people clapping

it s a joke right ?

Posted by: giab | May 15, 2008 6:31 PM

Apparently anything is a target. Emily's an idiot.

Posted by: Joe | May 15, 2008 6:33 PM


Great hatchet piece from Emily Freifeld.


Worthy of the National Enquiror not the WaPo...

Posted by: Vote Obama and save a soldiers life... | May 15, 2008 6:37 PM

Let's give Obama a pass on his inaccurate statement. After all, he is the media's darling and the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party - no matter that he is an inexperienced, unqualified, condescending neophyte with no record of accomplishment. Catching Obama in a lie is just another pesky ol' distraction that we don't need. What's a little white lie here and there? Let's all join together and applaud his charisma. After all, he is THE MAN and he wants to be president really, really bad.

Posted by: Debbie | May 15, 2008 6:39 PM

I think every Obama supporter should ask and answer this question:

Which version of the Rev Wright response do you believe?

1. I never was in the pews on 'those' days at the church. What controversial comments?

2. I was there and I was aware of the controversial comments, but I can no more disown Rev Wright than I could my white grandmother.

3. Rev Wright does not know me and I do not know him. I hereby denounce, divorce and annul my relationship with him, just not the church with the new pastor.

All within three weeks, in fact, which excuse do you believe, Week one, two or three.

And yeah, I know that legitimate criticism can be called racist.

Posted by: thelaw | May 15, 2008 6:42 PM

Would you rather debate Rev. Wright, or vote for Obama and save a soldiers life...

Posted by: Vote Obama and Save a Soliders Life... | May 15, 2008 6:46 PM

Do you get paid money to distract people from the issues?

Posted by: Arjuna9 | May 15, 2008 6:49 PM

didn't you get the Obama dictum

"No More Distractions"

in other words

"print what I want you to think"

Posted by: lucci8 | May 15, 2008 6:49 PM

No, WaPo. This time we will not be distracted by non-issues. You will not cause us to vote for another moron like Bush. Not this time. Better luck in 2012.

Posted by: Mike | May 15, 2008 6:52 PM

ms. Freifeld is a moron.

Posted by: miked | May 15, 2008 6:55 PM

Wow, what a silly story.

Posted by: Brendan | May 15, 2008 6:59 PM

............worthless distraction

Posted by: Obama2008 | May 15, 2008 6:59 PM

The new phenomenon of the Obama campaign seems to be that the voters simply no longer fall for every non-issue his opponents are coming up with. Even the mad preacher didn't work. It shows the frustration of the Clinton campaign that they had to resort to ridiculous items like the flag pin. Apparently the Clintons are scraping the bottom of their mud bucket.

Posted by: Bodo | May 15, 2008 7:03 PM

They clapped at the end of the speech. You are being fooled by the editing. Such a stupid non-story. Give me a break. Why don't you go out and ask John McCain why he claims to be an environmentalist when he has voted against every significant piece of environmental legislation before the Senate?

Posted by: Bubba | May 15, 2008 7:04 PM

OH MY GHOD you're kidding, right?

Clinton's REPEATED lying about running for cover in Bosnia, and INSISTING the press were hounding her unfairly, only to be outed as a LIAR is on par with... WHAT?

...Levels of applause?

Really, Emily. Your candidate is weak in every important measure or we would have voted her the nomination.

Posted by: JBE | May 15, 2008 7:04 PM

Obama's claim that he "stood up to the oil companies" by demanding more fuel efficient cars was featured in his ads here in California before the February primary. He also claimed in that ad that "the room fell silent" when he made this bold proposal. There is nothing new in this story except the media making a belated attempt to cover this smart, ambitious politician who devised a winning strategy with the help of a complicit press that hates the Clintons. I didn't know anything about the reality of his actual speech to the auto industry, but I recognized it as the BS that it is because I know that the auto industry has finally quit fighting higher fuel efficiency standards. The industry has figured out that they are doomed if they don't compete in that arena. When John Dingell quits fighting the CAFE standards, you know that the game is over. So....thanks for this non-news that is a day late and a dollar short. Now that you have saddled the Democrats w/ this candidate, you should just be quiet.

Posted by: Yellow Dog | May 15, 2008 7:05 PM

Saddle me up, & vote Obama and save a soldiers life...

Posted by: Vote Obama and save a soldiers life... | May 15, 2008 7:08 PM

What a piece of investigative journalism! Like already noticed by readers who seem to be more informed than you, in the end, you might end up beeing the one having to retract your paper

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 7:09 PM

Obama supporters and the media don't care about facts. They are too busy believing that corporate America is evil and enjoys our energy dependance.

Posted by: Bob | May 15, 2008 7:15 PM

Really, Emily. Your candidate is weak in every important measure or we would have voted her the nomination.

-------------------------

Yeah, the best candidate always gets the nomination right? That's why we got John Kerry in 04.

Posted by: lib | May 15, 2008 7:17 PM

Oh, I see. Now clap is the same as sniper fire. Pathetic little Hillary supporters are getting pretty desperate, aren't they!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 7:22 PM

Is Emily Freifeld a WP reporter or a Hillary collaborator? I've never seen such drivel before!

Munir

Posted by: Munir | May 15, 2008 7:30 PM

This story is complete idiocy. Everyone who follows the news, even casually, knows that Obama got a VERY cool reception from the Detroit audience for his straight talk and refusal to pander.

Posted by: David D'Andrea | May 15, 2008 7:32 PM

Emily,

Are you an intern at the Post? Was this your project for the week? You've got to be kidding me regarding whether people actually clapped or not. Why don't you also look into whether he said they were serving chicken or beef. That's another potential scoop for you.

Posted by: Steve | May 15, 2008 7:32 PM

does the washington post seriously pay you as a journalist?

Posted by: ike | May 15, 2008 7:33 PM

More manufactured tripe. Equating sniper fire with getting (or not getting) applause? Try covering the actual news. There really are many more important things going on in the world--some of them even affect your readers. If you want scandal, I'm sure American Idol is on at some point tonight.

Posted by: tellthetruth | May 15, 2008 7:33 PM

Emily, you are a poster child for what is wrong with our media. Never mind the fact that reporting at the time confirms Obama's remarks (which a real journalist would have found before writing a story and smearing someone), we have 2 disastrous wars going on that McCain promises to continue forever, we have an economic collapse coming that McCain proposes more of the same failed Bush policies to "fix", we are TORTURING PEOPLE, which used to bother McCain, but he's now just as depraved as the rest of the Republicans, our entire government has been gutted and replaced with conservative hacks hellbent on destroying the idea of good, functional government, and you want to talk about a few people clapping for an Obama speech. Disgusting.

Posted by: Jason Pellett | May 15, 2008 7:39 PM

"Should Obama be put under similar pressure to clarify his statements? Let your thoughts be known in comments section."

Emily sweetie, you seem to be unaware of the Rules of Engagement for this campaign. It is okay to play Gotcha politics with Hillary Clinton, but you can't with Obama.

What are you, a racist?

If you have any doubt, check with Eugene Robinson, Colbert King, Dana Milbank, EJ Dionne, .....

or with Chris Obama Matthews of Hardball, Keith Obama Olbermann of Countdown, Tim Obama Russert of Meet the Press, Dan Obama Abrams of The Verdict, Katrina Obama Vander Heuven of The Nation, .....

Posted by: Krishna | May 15, 2008 7:41 PM

I remember when Senator Obama spoke to the Detroit automakers. I recall the story on the evening news - or at least some televised newscast. I recall thinking "now that took some courage." The newsstory, in fact, at the time was talking about how "cool" his reception was - and he did tell them what he said he did. Probably they applauded out of politeness. I can't imagine there was wild joy at what he was saying. I do believe the "spirit" of what Senator Obama was saying remains valid. He did tell them what he said he did.

Posted by: Larry J | May 15, 2008 7:41 PM

If Democrats actually cared about the soldiers lives instead of just being there for the political wins. That line of argument would ring true.

The dirty little secret is that Iraq is simply the conduit to power. Then the real redistribution of wealth can begin.

What do you think will happen with the morons in Congress right now get veto proof majorities and a President that will be so beholden to them that he will never veto any stupid carbon tax legislation. Obama will be the Carter of the new Century. Green jobs will be a 1 for 4 trade. 4 real jobs for on 'green' job. You think things are expensive now, just wait until Obama is President

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 7:43 PM

What an inaccurate piece of nonsense. Does the Washington Post have any journalistic standards left? Is this what jouralism has come to? Troll YouTube and rush to write a gotcha piece? Please look into the facts first.

Posted by: SameOld SameOld | May 15, 2008 7:44 PM

Nice to know Hillary is still doing Oppo research.

Posted by: jimmy | May 15, 2008 7:47 PM

Hey, Obama Zombies, since you are all so college educated and smart and all, please refer back to Psych 101, lying to make yourself look better and other character flaws. It doesn't make any difference what the lie is. In fact, less significant lies beg these questions; "Why stretch the truth at all? Are you really that insecure about your accomplishments?"

Posted by: frodo2you | May 15, 2008 7:48 PM

The applause were more than sparse! Very few applauses in comparison to a normal speech. Are we trying to split hairs???
Sorry, it is not comparable to Hillary's speech! Hillary who?

Posted by: CommonSensePlease | May 15, 2008 7:49 PM

oh please! Don't you understand that by observing a potential and trivial problem that BHO has created for himself opens you to accusations of racism? Where is your brain, ms. reporter? God forbid you raise a serious issue....

Posted by: forces | May 15, 2008 7:57 PM

I definitely think that You Tube is rapidly replacing the media as a source of information.

If Hillary was held to a standard of having clear memories, then the same standard needs to be applied to Barrack. Why should he be allowed to overtly embellish his memories and not get shot down the same as Hillary?

This campaign has repeatedly highlighted the double standard applied to women in America. Racial slurs are ardently denounced, while sexual slurs are snickered at on the evening news. It is a sickening double standard - and this situation is no different.

From one former Democrat who will be supporting McCain with my vote in 2008.

Posted by: Mary | May 15, 2008 8:07 PM

How dishonest is to compare a blatant fictional story of something that never happened but in the delusional mind of a narcissist liar, designed to inflate her miserable resume comparing with a lack of acknowledge of clapping response to a real speech in a real situation. His perception that a few claps were not a standing ovation is not a lie. Where is the video of the standing ovation? A repeated LIE against a perception? Be real Emily.

Posted by: JORGE MORENO | May 15, 2008 8:07 PM

Gosh, it's amazing how many Washington Post readers just happened to be in Detroit that day!
The alternative is that there happen to be a lot of Obama trolls spewing out the spin given to them by their local campaign manager.
Since you are all so college educated and smart and all, please refer back to Stat 101 regarding most likely scenarios.

Posted by: frodo2you | May 15, 2008 8:08 PM

Wow, digging deep for that, eh?

Yes, it's exactly the same as saying that you were being shot at.

Are you done trying to manufacture stories to keep this on life-support?

Posted by: ep thorn | May 15, 2008 8:09 PM

Chances that people are spamming the boards: less than 10% (this isn't a Ron Paul story)

Chance that people realize what a non-story this is (as is bringing up the sniper thing now): 90+%.

It shouldn't take a college degree to figure that one out, but I guess I'm too elitist with all ma book-learnin' to be American! Of course, at least I can locate Iraq on a map without having to invade it first...

Posted by: ep thorn | May 15, 2008 8:13 PM

Obama is not qualified to be president of the 57 states. He is unelectable and I don't trust him. It is not over vote smart, vote Clinton.

Posted by: Tobias | May 15, 2008 8:16 PM

Well, the Repubs may want to use this in the fall, since they have little substance of their own to run on, but is the amount of applause related to the bullets overhead in Bosnia?

And now the memory and truth test goes beyond the content of a sermon in church (yawn!), or a specific conversation a year ago, when Obama speaks to multiple audiences daily, to recall a particular audiences reaction to a comment?

While it's good to hold the bar high, this is not even close to sniper fire.

I hope there's some real news to report soon, but I wonder how much research did it take to reach this "a ha" moment and revelation?

Posted by: DonJulio | May 15, 2008 8:18 PM

Obama is not qualified to be president of the 57 states. He is unelectable and I don't trust him. It is not over vote smart, vote Clinton.

Posted by: Tobias | May 15, 2008 8:19 PM

Clinton supporter here, there is absolutely no story here. Gimme back my minute.

Posted by: Steve | May 15, 2008 8:21 PM

Wow, Emily. You can't even do a simple story on a gaffe by Senator Obama without turning into a hit piece on Senator Clinton. How unbelievably gratuitous. Have you named your first son Barack yet?

Posted by: Politicus Finch | May 15, 2008 8:24 PM

Thorn, that's really scientific the way you pulled those numbers right out of the air. You must be a behavioral scientist. And your assumptions about my thoughts on the war in Iraq are about as far off as your numbers.
We could fence degrees but that does not appeal to me tonight.
It is common knowledge that the Obama campaign sends the orcs out to counter every piece of bad press. They are really good at it. It's almost scary how well they have protected their man from his own faults. We'll see how well this works when the shields come down.

Posted by: frodo2you | May 15, 2008 8:26 PM

If Obama misspeaks to make himself look courageous, it's a distraction or it's silly. Now, if Clinton misspeaks to make herself look courageous it's a major character flaw that completely disqualifies her from the presidency and fits a pattern of lies, deception and general pathological monster-like baby-eating behavior! And of course Frank Rich will have to dedicate his column to it as well. Oh yeah and did I mention how racist she is!

Posted by: Joe | May 15, 2008 8:27 PM

Are you kidding me!!! I think GUNFIRE being shot over my head is a FAR more reach than ignoring some people who may or may not have been clapping. You actually paid a reporter to print this trash???

This country is in a world of hurt, and it is going to take SIGNIFICANT CHANGE to fix it, thank goodness OBAMA decided to run, can you imagine the last 24 year BUSH1,CLINTON,BUSH2, Clinton2 thank god it didn't happen.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

Posted by: Dennis | May 15, 2008 8:29 PM

LOL. a bit of a stretch remembering the applause in crowd versus being SHOT at By SNIPER FIRE.

Posted by: dawd | May 15, 2008 8:39 PM


I would take it to mean that the task of the next President is to do the right thing in spite of the vested interests of corrupt corporatism.

Of course he was greeted with silence.
He was, in effect, telling them that they needed to get their act together.
Nobody likes to be told that, but it's vitally necessary for our country's survival.

The cancer in our nation won't go away without surgery.

Posted by: wardropper | May 15, 2008 8:40 PM

When I read the denials by the senator's worshippers as to the importance of this Misstatement I'm reminded of the zealotry they so disliked in the Republicans. Zealotry is zealotry whether it is that of evangelical Christian following the Republicans and denying science, abortion, or gay rights or if it the denial by a supporter of the senator that he "misspeaks".
The "truth" is always out there and if you open your ears you will learn.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 8:46 PM

Obama makes a gaffe, lies about an incident of one year ago regarding the room being silent when in actuality it wasn't and he did receive applause as shown by the You Tube video and it is ok to all of his supporters, that to bring it up is a distraction, that people are racist for talking about it, it is a non-issue.

But Hillary mis-recalls an incident from 12 years ago and it is Armaggedon, according to Obama supporters is on the verge we all need to discuss it 24 hours a day for a month. Hillary's Bosnia trip was 12 years ago and she had three different landings that day, Sinbad and Cheryl Crow were not with her on all of them. It seems she got them confused, because as the news said on that day of March 25, 1996, there were reports of snipers in the hills and she was surrounded by Marines with weapons when she flew off the secure base and landed on the front line areas to visit fortified posts. I know you don't want to hear that so you will continue to repeat the lie that seems to give Obama more traction. The articles are below.

Obama met his sister from Africa some years back, a memorable time if he was excited to meet her as he wants us to believe. he writes in his book he met her at the airport, she says he is wrong that he met her at a greyhound bus station. Isn't it funny that he would put into words and not even remember where he met his sister for the first time?

Associated Press, March 25, 1996:

MARKOVICI, Bosnia-Herzegovina - PROTECTED BY SHARPSHOOTERS, Hillary
Rodham Clinton swooped into a military zone by BLACKHAWK HELICOPTER
Monday to deliver a personal "thank you, thank you, thank you" to U.S.
troops.

"They're making a difference," the first lady said of the 18,500
Americans working as peacekeepers in Bosnia. Mrs. Clinton became the
first presidential spouse since Eleanor Roosevelt to make such an
extensive trip into what can be considered a hostile area, though others
have visited hot spots. . . .

But the highlight of her trip were visits to TWO FORTIFIED POSTS OUTSIDE
THE U.S. BASE IN TUZLA. Even President Clinton, restricted to the base
by bad weather in January, did not see as much of this war-wracked
region as Mrs. Clinton did Monday.

The troops seemed to appreciate it: cameras chirped like a thousand
crickets as she chatted with mine-disposal experts, examined huge tanks
and met a hero or two. Chelsea, 16, kept her usual low profile but
remained constantly at her mother's side, posing for soldiers or talking
softly with them.

Watching the first lady troop around in muted trench coat and pants,
Sgt. Michael Tucker of Miami said, "She's a very important person. For
her to take time to come and see us means a lot."

And in another account:

Another contemporaneous account:

At a second outpost, Camp Bedrock, Mrs. Clinton visited a M.A.S.H.
unit, the only full-service U.S. Army hospital in Bosnia. The three-hour
tour of the FRONTLINES of the international peacekeeping mission were
filled with the gritty reality of a military operation, a far cry from
traditional first lady photo opportunities, and Mrs. Clinton seemed more
than comfortable with that. CNN, 3/25/96

Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a
military zone by Black Hawk helicopter Monday to deliver a personal
"thank you, thank you, thank you" to U.S. troops.
...
RIFLEMEN RUSHED TO THE BRUSH LINE as the helicopter landed AND
SURROUNDED HER AS SHE walked into the post. Located in a "separation
zone," the U.S. outpost nestles between two tree lines. Just months ago,
one was Serbian territory, the other Bosnian.

Security was tight - fighter jets accompanied her C-17 cargo plane to
Tuzla - but officials said the first lady took no extraordinary risks on
the trip.
Lexis - By Ron Fournier,, Associated Press, March 25, 1996

The reason the supporters of Obama remind us of Bush supporters is because you like to dismiss the truth when it is in your face and you think that your candidate should be able to live with a double standard. Obama is bad for America.

Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 8:46 PM

Too bad he owns a gas guzzling Detroit Chrysler 300 that gets 17 city and 25 on the highway! Oh my god, the room fell silent.

Posted by: Jack | May 15, 2008 8:48 PM

This is a joke, right?

Posted by: PLewisBethesda | May 15, 2008 8:49 PM

He does own the car. But I forgot Obama supporters have no sense of humor.

Posted by: Jack | May 15, 2008 8:52 PM

An empty suit. A bitter hero in his own mind.

Posted by: Geraldine | May 15, 2008 8:52 PM

I guess Emily is another upset Clinton supporter, just like Emily's list.

Posted by: jkev | May 15, 2008 8:52 PM

Hmmm, looks like some serious content-starvation is occurring in media land.

Posted by: Portnoy | May 15, 2008 8:53 PM

This is possible the stupidest thing I've ever read in the Post. You have a responsibility to be better than this.

Posted by: JG | May 15, 2008 8:55 PM

The Obama supporters are hard at work. Of course, the comments don't matter. Remember Obama transcends politics, humanity, the Earth, Washington D.C., etc. He doesn't answer to the same things Hillary answers to because she posed as a human, Obama poses as God.

Posted by: Lynn E | May 15, 2008 8:56 PM

You think this is stupid try listening to Obama supporters go on for a month about Bosnia. I guess that wasn't a "distraction" but solid journalism. Hahahahahah!

Posted by: Frank | May 15, 2008 8:57 PM

I cannot tell a lie; my supporters won't let me.

Posted by: frodo2you | May 15, 2008 8:58 PM

Poses as god, he is god! More of a beam of light than an actual human.

Posted by: Frank | May 15, 2008 8:59 PM

For all of the "democrats" threatening to vote for McCain: you really need to take a breath. Think about what you'd be voting for. Neither of the Dems is perfect, but McCain is really a horrible choice. If you can justify voting for an anti-abortion war monger then get the hell out of the party.

Posted by: JG | May 15, 2008 8:59 PM

Applause-gate. Hilarious.

(But please stop this nonsense).

Posted by: Jess65 | May 15, 2008 9:01 PM

Emily - - What are you talking about?

Posted by: Dee, Washington, DC | May 15, 2008 9:01 PM

And this poll says it all. You won't believe these results!

http://www.votenic.com

Posted by: votenicks | May 15, 2008 9:02 PM

I have no idea who Emily Freifeld is, i have no axe to grind, and i have never in my life replied with comments to this or any other website. But this is without a doubt the worst article I have ever read. The reasoning is specious and the analogy to Clinton sniper fire make believe story is extremely tenuous.

Although i agree with the above 'there is absolutely no story here, give me back my minute' i'd add that it is quite irresponsible to publish trash like this on an award winning newspaper's website. It gives me a very negative view of the author and of the Washington Post. Take some responsibility for your journalism.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 9:02 PM

I'm a 60 year old woman Hillary supporter who will be voting for McCain. What do I care about abortion? These young woman Obama supporters didn't support the first woman to have a shot at the presidency, deserve what they get.

Posted by: Joan | May 15, 2008 9:03 PM

Interpretation of applause is way different from dodging gunfire. Is Emily Freifeld a Post employee or a paid shill for that disgusting fraud Hillary Clinton?

Posted by: RealChoices | May 15, 2008 9:06 PM

Who has never misspoken or had a faulty memory, or padded the truth to illustrate a point. Stop harping on this petty crap and cover real issues.

Posted by: Whaaaaaaaaaaaa? | May 15, 2008 9:12 PM

This was news worthy?

HaHaHa I never thought I'd see the day WaPo was trying to act like Fox News. Are they hiring their rejects.

They clapped? They didn't clap? And these are the people who vote?

Posted by: Terry | May 15, 2008 9:12 PM

So it looks like the Obama supporters are suddenly forgiving of "misspeaking". How convenient.

Posted by: Jack | May 15, 2008 9:13 PM

An article on misogyny and misspeaking all in one day. It looks like Hillary's nuts are cracking.

Posted by: Hillareeznuts | May 15, 2008 9:21 PM

TO all Barack Supporters - male or female , To all folks who called HRC a liar -

I challenge you all to read through this article -

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/?page_id=15

I dare you to read the article and claim that OBAMA is still as truthful as he is made out to be

Posted by: Ash | May 15, 2008 9:22 PM

Emily, I'm sorry, you did ask a question didn't you. Forgive my rudeness, now to answer your question - - Hellll no!!!

Posted by: Dee, Washington, DC | May 15, 2008 9:26 PM

PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID PEOPLE ARE STUPID

Posted by: Wotta Waste | May 15, 2008 9:30 PM

i cant beleive i am reading the washington post
more games, even here.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 9:30 PM

Sincerely doubt any presidential finalist ever will have drawn the scrutiny and scolding directed at Barack Obama. Today also brought forth a video in which he's caught calling someone "Sweetie." (He apologized.) If such things count as experience, Obama no longer qualifies as inexperienced.

Posted by: FirstMouse | May 15, 2008 9:31 PM

Joan====while Right to Life in Indiana took out $1.3 million of anti- Obama advertisement against Obama for his pro-choice stance, they never said one word about Hillary. It seems that Obama was doing the heavy lifting while Hillary was sitting back smirking and getting comfortable with the people that broke in the window on Obama's headquarters. Nice! The Democratic Party works 45 years for equal opportunity and the Hillary supporters are going to take their marbles and go home. Remember that if he loses and she tries to make a comeback in 4 years, paybacks are hell.

Posted by: oldman&theC | May 15, 2008 9:31 PM

Wow Emily. Make sure you marry well or if you are married, make sure your husband has a good job.

If this article is any indication, then you sure are not going to make it as a reporter and you do have to eat and pay the rent. Now I see what is wrong with the Washington Post.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 9:32 PM

Let's see: what is easy to forgot vs. hard to forget?

a) Being fired upon by snipers: Hard to forget

b) Being applauded or not: Easy to forget

c) What does this do with the American soldiers who were killed in Iraq this week: apparently easy to forget.


Could we go back to debating flag pins? By contrast to applause-gate, THAT was a really big issue.

Posted by: egc52556 | May 15, 2008 9:33 PM

Joan, sweetheart, there does not seem to be any evidence that Hillary is/was the first woman to have a shot at the presidency. Your hypothesis does not have any shred of evidence that would lead anyone to believe that statement. And for the record I would love to have to see a woman with a creditable opportunity to become the first woman president - - just not this woman. There are some women that I would be proud to vote for in this capacity. The first to come to mind is Kathleen Sebelius, Governor of Kansas - - now that "girl" is sharp, just an awesome prospect. There are several others also, so please stop trying to be on a guilt complex and insult the intelligence of the women of America for having the courage to stand up and disavow somewhere that would not represent our gender with honor and dignity.

Posted by: Dee, Washington, DC | May 15, 2008 9:35 PM

The issue is not Sen. Obama and his supporters or Sen. HRC or her supporters. The issue is John McCain! Now the war will be WON by the time he leaves office, 2013.

GWB drives a wedge in Israel today to help McCain who agreed today with GWB and your worried about a clap? Maybe piecing 1 second of either candidates speeches into a 3 second speeches would leave everyone speechless.

The issue is jobs, healthcare, self sustainable energy, out of Iraq, talking to our enemies, just like the previous Secretary of State Colin Powell or Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has stated in public and recorded on TV talk shows.

Posted by: jerry rubin | May 15, 2008 9:41 PM

I've head Obama repeat this story several times, so you'd think he'd be pretty sure about the facts. But since he's just another politician, I doesn't surprise me.

Posted by: Wolfcastle | May 15, 2008 9:43 PM

Only male reporters are allowed to post these questions, sweetie.

Posted by: Keith | May 15, 2008 9:44 PM

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted by: omyobama | May 15, 2008 9:46 PM

He was joking.

He wasn't saying he was under sniper fire, he just meant it was a tough audience. Which it most likely was - people in Detroit expressed a lot of ambivalence on this stuff.

If you think focusing on this stuff is the media's obligation to the public during an election than you need to find another job.

Posted by: David | May 15, 2008 9:49 PM

Ms Freifeld

Clearly, Obama did not claim he put his life in danger in the course of his duties as a Senator.

But Clinton did.

Frankly, this borders on the ridiculous. You'll have to do better if you want to succeed as a blogger, or columnist, or whatever you are trying to be...

Posted by: cestfini | May 15, 2008 9:50 PM

Of course Obama's comments should not be scrutinized. Whatever he says is truth, and we all defer to his transcendent, ineffable wisdom. He is, after all, the Chosen One.

Posted by: carol anne | May 15, 2008 9:51 PM

Senator Obama, as we all know but some refuse to admit, will say ANYTHING to get a vote or a superdelegate. He is one of the most unethical people who has been a candidate for president in my lifetime. He will lie at the drop of a hat. But his loyal supporters and the press brush these things off as insignificant because there's absolutely no way that Obama could explain away his lies. And they really don't care about that...he's a young black man who can speak words that were written for him in an eloquent manner. He gets into trouble when he adds his own words. David Axelrod knows how to write the words, Obama knows how to speak them. Without Axelrod, he is just someone who lies to make a point. And he does it routinely.

Posted by: hazwalnut | May 15, 2008 9:55 PM

The applause in Detroit at mention of higher fuel-efficiency standards sounds fairly tepid even on this recording. From the vantage point of the camera we cannot discern the level of enthusiasm, if any, in the room.

There is a detectable cut between the two Detroit takes. These are clips separated in time but made to look contiguous. Check it out. Sniff the rat. The not so thunderous "standing ovation" is therefore for the speech as a whole, not the fuel standards in question. Once again, the vantage point leaves much to the imagination. Are some of these people simply getting up to leave? Are any auto execs leaping to their feet, bashing their palms together? Show me.

The leading nature of the editing makes clear that the video was created for partisan purposes. It views like a political ad. That may be OK for a YouTube video, but The Washington Post has higher standards to meet.

Can the Post reporter vouch for the authenticity of the audio? What other edits or enhancements for effect might be going on here?

Equating what seems at worst a rhetorical exaggeration on Obama's part, one that accurately captures the attitude of America's automakers, with the outright falsity of Clinton's Bosnia account is an incredible stretch. A Great Moment in Journalism this is not. Rather, what we have here is a typical swift boating event whereby mainstream journalists are manipulated into gratuitous amplification of political mischief. Or so it appears to this observer.

Posted by: Rand | May 15, 2008 9:56 PM

Emily, you need to run more authoritative video than some anonymous YouTube poster. Not long ago, someone ran a video that had Clinton supporter Kantor denigrating Hoosiers, four days before the primary. It got a lot of traction for a few hours. The audio, shall we say, was not the original version. I'm not saying THIS version is trumped up, I'm just saying get your video from reliable sources.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 10:04 PM

For all of the "democrats" threatening to vote for McCain: you really need to take a breath. Think about what you'd be voting for. Neither of the Dems is perfect, but McCain is really a horrible choice. If you can justify voting for an anti-abortion war monger then get the hell out of the party.

Posted by: JG | May 15, 2008 8:59 PM
------------------------
All I have heard since Obama got in the race that everyone else is old, uneducated and racists why should I any longer care about being pro-choice. Maybe some of you youth, the girls gone wild crowd, who have no respect for themselves or others maybe should lose some rights that so many of us fought for for so many years and let you obtain them yourselves.

I am not voting for Obama if he is the nominee, I will vote McCain. I will vote straight Democratic on the legislators but not for him.

Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 10:05 PM

Emily, you just don't get it, do you? Probably spending too much time at the fancy dinners the Washington press corps gives where they laugh at the issues that mean so much to the lives of the rest of us poor slobs. Forget it, Emily. We're not going to let you and your "gotcha" Beltway press pals steal another election from us. Barack Obama is our next President! We can do it!!!

Posted by: Richard | May 15, 2008 10:06 PM

yeah, clapping, sniper fire, what's the difference.

are you kidding? someone put a lot of time writing this ridiculous post. unbelievable.

Posted by: jrcjr | May 15, 2008 10:11 PM

I once gave a speech in which I thought no one was laughing. It turned out I killed. People were talkinga bout it for weeks, but I had tunnel vision.

Also... the reaction of a crowd, as Dean's scream showed, is pretty hard to capture on video. I've taped plays where you can't hear the actors, but the crowd reaction is huge... or sound like they're shuffling because the mics in the audience. If you're taking it in directly from a mic on stage, you might not hear how loud the crowd actually is.

In any case, it's a huge jump to claim this was intentional fabrication on Obama's part. The fact is, he spoke truth to a group he though would not react well. They fact that they might have applauded does not necessarily mean Obama is lying here because the lie doesn't really improve the story. It's just as impressive if he took the risk and was well received.

What is not disputed, though, is that Obama told an audience what it needed to hear, not what it wanted to hear.

Posted by: Memekiller | May 15, 2008 10:14 PM

Is this post a parody or is this really the Washington Post? I'm seriously asking.

Posted by: Vito | May 15, 2008 10:14 PM

Crap

Posted by: mike in Spring Valley | May 15, 2008 10:15 PM

Emily, your trying to equate a speech in which the speaker asserts they were fired at by snipers with a speech where the speaker claimed to have received no applause when they actually did, is not only idiotic but absurd. You obviously nothing better to do with your time than waste your readers' time with this drivel.

Posted by: str8talk | May 15, 2008 10:15 PM

Emily Freifeld = dumb as a bang of rocks "reporting" about politics and the election.

Posted by: Focus on real issues | May 15, 2008 10:16 PM

Should the Washington Post have to clarify whether they pay Emily Freifield to write such ridiculous dreck?

Make it stop. None of us want to see this junk. People can't afford medicine and eggs and their mortgages and gas for their cars to take them to work. Emily Freifield, no more writing for you.

Posted by: SB | May 15, 2008 10:17 PM

My thoughts? This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. You are to be congratulated for setting a new precedent in box-of-rocks stupid.

Posted by: urizon | May 15, 2008 10:18 PM

So this is what we are reduced to? This is the best we can do? Applause. Tragic.

Posted by: mandrake | May 15, 2008 10:19 PM

John Ryskamp

You're either an ignorant moron, or a lying moron. I'll let you choose.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 10:19 PM

Obama got a very few claps when he mentioned that cars don't have to be made in Japan. Nobody clapped at all when he said we had to change Detroit's thinking. Nobody clapped when he said we have to raise fuel efficiency.

His story is actually completely true.

BP

Posted by: billpaustin | May 15, 2008 10:20 PM

A lie is a lie is a lie, he said no one clapped but the evidence shows him to be a liar. What is so hard for you people to undertand?

Thanks for making this an issue, Emily, Obama's faults need to be pointed out. His bullying supporters just don't like you to do it because it shows him to be just what he is, a lying politician.

Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 10:21 PM

The next time you see that bratty unpopular high school girl who takes small comments she overhears in the hall and starts a gossip campaign for no other reason than to feel important about herself....tell her that the Washington Post is hiring and is looking for someone just like her for their political blog. This is worse than tripe, and I'm sure the Post's quarterly numbers reflect it.

Posted by: Matt | May 15, 2008 10:21 PM

Generally, I don't remember which particular lines people clapped for when I give a speech. I DO remember every time that I've been shot at, though.

Posted by: Vito | May 15, 2008 10:24 PM

If Joshua Hussein Marshall thinks this story is stupid, then it's not.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 10:24 PM

Sweet Jesus, are you f-ing kidding me?

We have real issues to deal with in this race. If only we had some real journalists to cover them. You people are pathetic.

Posted by: TR | May 15, 2008 10:24 PM

I think you should take the expression "nobody clapped" to mean a tepid reaction by the automakers, in other words, a euphemism. This, in no way, belies the point that he made that when calling for certain sacrifices to be made, Sen. Obama makes the call in front of the interested parties, the ones he calls to make the sacrifice. Emily, your piece and point look very amateurish. Almost to the point of water-carrying.

Posted by: allen goyne | May 15, 2008 10:25 PM

Hi Emily,
Did you lose your Mommy, honey? Do you want me to help you find her so she can take you home?

Posted by: Eric | May 15, 2008 10:25 PM

I agree with Josh Marshall. This is part of the media-incited stupidity we'd all be better served by ignoring. Who CARES if they clapped or not? It's not a character issue... it's a campaign anecdote... it might be massaged to make a point, but (really) who gives a damn about stuff like this... or Hillary saying she was under sniper fire... except, of course, Silly Emily and the Rest of the Media Mudheads... and the declining number of lemmings who follow their every word -- ignoring the reality of our country's growing troubles. It's criminal Emily even spent TIME on this drivel... we could have actually read about something (anything) important.

Posted by: Lee | May 15, 2008 10:26 PM


Channel 08? Is the number for the IQ of the reporter?

Posted by: John | May 15, 2008 10:26 PM

Emily:

You're entirely correct. However, Obama's misstatement is completely forgivable when compared with the lie you tell people when you introduce yourself as a journalist. My baby cousin who scribbles "daddy likes poo" on the wall with crayons has more of a claim to legitimate journalism than the useless and even damaging junk you are being seriously overpaid to copy and paste from Matt Drudge.

Posted by: Matt | May 15, 2008 10:27 PM

Who is ObamaDetroit? The video of Hillary in Bosnia was released by CBS. Come back when you have a reliable source and maybe it will be taken seriously.

Posted by: Paul | May 15, 2008 10:27 PM

I'm a Hillary backer, but I have to agree -- this is a moronic non-issue.

Posted by: Susan R. | May 15, 2008 10:28 PM

I'm an Obama fan who'll be happy to vote for Hillary if she can win the majority of delegates.

The people who say they'll vote for McCain instead of Obama aren't really Democrats...and that sort of underscores why Hillary might not be our choice to win the nomination.

BTW, this is 'expose' crap, like all of the media hatched 'gotcha' stories we've had to endure on our Democratic candidates. Meanwhile, McCain gets a pass on everything.

Posted by: Innocent Bystander | May 15, 2008 10:31 PM

The Newsweek article someone posted on the comments section makes it pretty clear it WAS a cool reception in Detroit. The thing with YouTube is video can be sliced and diced - just because it's on YouTube doesn't make it true.

Even if the YouTube thing panned out, it's so PETTY. Politicians fudge. They all do it to some extent. The media's role is to call them out on it when a certain line is crossed, when the fudging becomes a violation of the public trust.

It will be a sad day if this election is dictated by YouTube, a website filled with dancing-kitten videos.

Posted by: mike | May 15, 2008 10:33 PM

Given stories like this, is it any wonder why the traditional media are dying?

Posted by: Danton | May 15, 2008 10:34 PM

Congratulations! This piece is so stupid you got a shout out from Josh Marshall.

Posted by: Matt in Costa Rica | May 15, 2008 10:34 PM

Don't you think it would be more important to consider whether what he says about the American automobile industry is correct? Whether people clapped or not is a very trivial point to write a column about.

Posted by: Sempringham | May 15, 2008 10:34 PM

The media never stops spinning our heads. I remember vividly when Obama made that speech, all newspapers said it met cold reception. So if Obama needs to retract, the media needs to apologize for lying to us too.

Posted by: kemi | May 15, 2008 10:35 PM

Talk abou hypocrisy. Suddenly Obama is wearing the US Flag pin on his lapel." a man of conviction" Ha Ha. and not just once at a Veteran affairs gathering

Posted by: Dino Gius | May 15, 2008 10:37 PM

Great idea! Similarly, John McCain claimed that one of Chelsea Clinton's parents was Janet Reno!

He really claimed that, honestly, in June 1998. http://mediamatters.org/items/200702070007

He should be forced to present evidence as to why he believes that Janet Reno is Chelsea Clinton's parent!

Posted by: Alfred | May 15, 2008 10:38 PM

The general consensus seems to be that lying about applause is okay.

Welcome to Obama Land!!

Posted by: Meat Sweats | May 15, 2008 10:39 PM

This is a ridiculous comparison. When someone's life is threatened, they don't forget it. Hillary has never been under sniper fire in her life. What she reported was not a "misspeak" but rather a premeditated lie designed to make her look good. It was repeated at least four times. We're not talking about confusion or exaggeration here as is the case with Obama's example. We're talking about premeditated lying.

Posted by: trekbikie | May 15, 2008 10:40 PM

The issue here what is the definition of "applause"?

The concept of "applause" is quite nuanced and also depends on your definition of what "is" is.

Bottom line, Obama is a liar . . Get over it.

Posted by: Mitch | May 15, 2008 10:41 PM

Dear Emily,
I hope your internship is ending this month and you'll go back to your junior high school and finish your education so you can finish growing up before you pursue actual journalism.

By the way, does your mommy know where you are?

Posted by: Bill Randle | May 15, 2008 10:41 PM

Poor Emily can't even get the city in Bosnia correct. It's Tuzla, not Tulza. Looks like your emulous stab at journalistic mortality has fallen a tad short of Woodward & Bernstein territory.

Posted by: Pinson | May 15, 2008 10:42 PM

I can't believe the way all you WaPo bloggers are treating poor Emily. She's just trying to make a name for herself in politics, or journalism, or entertainment, or porn, or one of those highfalutin fields, and you meanies are standing in her way!

I'm taking all of youse guys off my Christmas list right now!!

Meanies!! I hate all of you!!!!

Posted by: Fitz | May 15, 2008 10:44 PM

I think this post is a joke. Really. It's snark, right?

Posted by: jweb271 | May 15, 2008 10:45 PM

Is this person a journalist, or a candidate's hack? Journalistic ethics and professionalism should require that those reporting have some understanding of the Public Good when following a story. This reporter evidently did little, if any, verification to back up her "story." And besides that failing, how is this sort of "story" relevent at all? To show that the media is light on Obama? Give me a break. With all these daggers out for Obama, its obvious that he's the one with the most potential to shake things up. That's the first step if we are to revive the Republic.

Posted by: silva66@suddenlink.net | May 15, 2008 10:47 PM

My Dearest Emily Freifeld,
My mama always told me to find a good looking but very dumb woman to marry, and I'm wondering if you could publish a photo of yourself so I could figure out if you could be right for me.

I have a feeling my mama's gonna like you real good...

Posted by: Bobby D. | May 15, 2008 10:47 PM

This is shamefully stupid.

Posted by: Jotham Stavely | May 15, 2008 10:47 PM

Are you a "friend" of David Vitter's? I mean, what else could you be doing in Washington?

Posted by: cord522@msn.com | May 15, 2008 10:48 PM

I am embarrassed for the Washington Post right now. This is beyond low.

Posted by: Jeremy | May 15, 2008 10:51 PM

You ain't no journalist Ms. Freifeld. Find a moral. Get an ethic.

Posted by: Merle | May 15, 2008 10:54 PM

Misstatement? His point was that Detroit was unhappy with his proposal, which it clearly was from all media reports. The applause was tepid, and came at the end of the speech. This is not an issue.

Posted by: Jim | May 15, 2008 10:54 PM

Oh my God. I thought the media had hit its nadir of inanity with their unmedicated obsession with the Wright soundbites. This one takes them lower. Congratulations, Post.

Obama has given how many hundreds of speeches over the past year? And he remembers the applause level wrong on one of them. Uh-oh! Time to lynch him again.

Yep, that's our crack media. The same one that was all OVER the Iraq WMD hoax, like... well like sleeping lapdogs on a... sunny afternoon.

Posted by: Mark | May 15, 2008 10:55 PM

This is pathetic. Is this what the supposed "party of ideas" is about now? It's pathetic.

Posted by: George Colombo | May 15, 2008 10:56 PM

"he's a young black man who can speak words that were written for him in an eloquent manner."

You forgot that he loves fried chicken, hazwalnut. Do you think he didn't write his 2004 Convention Speech-- you know, the one he delivered before hiring Axelrod? Do you think Obama didn't write his two books? Or is it just that young black men by definition can't do so?

Anyway, Bush is a middle-aged white man who can't even speak the words given him, and certainly hasn't written any of them. But I'm sure you love him and his original thinking.

Here, hazwingnut, read and learn from Cass Sunstein.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-oped0314obamamar14,0,7185898.story

Posted by: Warshow | May 15, 2008 10:57 PM

As you said Emily, the video was SPLICED!! The keyword here is SPLICED. If one was SPLICED who is to say the other was not also SPLICED. Senator Clinton LIED (no getting around it) about the flying bullets incident, on several occasions. Please try to do some real reporting and quit trying to distract his supporters (and those who are on the fence) by trying to dig up dirt on Senator Obama. Taking cheap shots is not reporting.

Posted by: Ohreallynow | May 15, 2008 10:58 PM

"rarely is the queston asked, "is our journalists learning?"

Posted by: nice jounalism there | May 15, 2008 10:58 PM

No, he does not need to clarify. What needs clarification is why the Washington Post is giving a platform to a punk kid like Emily Friefeld who hasn't even graduated from college yet (American '08)to spread these idiotic innuendos. Google her, people: she's just some kid given the opportunity to "blog" because the old men at the Post haven't figured out new technology.

There's no story here. Just some brat with a keyboard and too much latitude from her bosses.

Posted by: Bob | May 15, 2008 10:59 PM

Hillary's Bosnia trip was 12 years ago and she had three different landings that day, Sinbad and Cheryl Crow were not with her on all of them. It seems she got them confused, because as the news said on that day of March 25, 1996, there were reports of snipers in the hills and she was surrounded by Marines with weapons when she flew off the secure base and landed on the front line areas to visit fortified posts. I know you don't want to hear that so you will continue to repeat the lie that seems to give Obama more traction. The articles are below.

BTW, Obama met his sister from Africa some years back, a memorable time if he was excited to meet her as he wants us to believe. he writes in his book he met her at the airport, she says he is wrong that he met her at a greyhound bus station. Isn't it funny that he would put into words and not even remember where he met his sister for the first time?

Associated Press, March 25, 1996:

MARKOVICI, Bosnia-Herzegovina - PROTECTED BY SHARPSHOOTERS, Hillary
Rodham Clinton swooped into a military zone by BLACKHAWK HELICOPTER
Monday to deliver a personal "thank you, thank you, thank you" to U.S.
troops.

"They're making a difference," the first lady said of the 18,500
Americans working as peacekeepers in Bosnia. Mrs. Clinton became the
first presidential spouse since Eleanor Roosevelt to make such an
extensive trip into what can be considered a hostile area, though others
have visited hot spots. . . .

But the highlight of her trip were visits to TWO FORTIFIED POSTS OUTSIDE
THE U.S. BASE IN TUZLA. Even President Clinton, restricted to the base
by bad weather in January, did not see as much of this war-wracked
region as Mrs. Clinton did Monday.

The troops seemed to appreciate it: cameras chirped like a thousand
crickets as she chatted with mine-disposal experts, examined huge tanks
and met a hero or two. Chelsea, 16, kept her usual low profile but
remained constantly at her mother's side, posing for soldiers or talking
softly with them.

Watching the first lady troop around in muted trench coat and pants,
Sgt. Michael Tucker of Miami said, "She's a very important person. For
her to take time to come and see us means a lot."

And in another account:

Another contemporaneous account:

At a second outpost, Camp Bedrock, Mrs. Clinton visited a M.A.S.H.
unit, the only full-service U.S. Army hospital in Bosnia. The three-hour
tour of the FRONTLINES of the international peacekeeping mission were
filled with the gritty reality of a military operation, a far cry from
traditional first lady photo opportunities, and Mrs. Clinton seemed more
than comfortable with that. CNN, 3/25/96

Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a
military zone by Black Hawk helicopter Monday to deliver a personal
"thank you, thank you, thank you" to U.S. troops.
...
RIFLEMEN RUSHED TO THE BRUSH LINE as the helicopter landed AND
SURROUNDED HER AS SHE walked into the post. Located in a "separation
zone," the U.S. outpost nestles between two tree lines. Just months ago,
one was Serbian territory, the other Bosnian.

Security was tight - fighter jets accompanied her C-17 cargo plane to
Tuzla - but officials said the first lady took no extraordinary risks on
the trip.
Lexis - By Ron Fournier,, Associated Press, March 25, 1996

Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 11:00 PM

That applause sounded pretty tepid to me. What a silly post.

Posted by: Josh E. | May 15, 2008 11:01 PM

If the editors and publisher of the Washington Post (and other mainstream papers) wonder why they're losing readership to independent blogs and other alternative sources of information, they need not look any further than this article. As indicated by previous comments here, it's trivial, it's poorly researched and it throws the supposed "quality control" advantage of edited, mainstream media out the door.

Posted by: Steve | May 15, 2008 11:01 PM

You dare to suggest that Barack Obama is required to tell the truth? You are indeed a silly woman, well deserving of the scorn these commenters are heaping upon you. We'll have no single standards here, young lady! Go back to picking apart any and all Hillary speeches, like a good girl, and find us something else that can be used against her.

Posted by: jeff | May 15, 2008 11:01 PM

Tepid applause or not, he said there was none. He is a liar.

Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 11:02 PM

Such sad dying gasps from Clintonistas. The dream is slipping away, and they won't be happy until everyone around is damaged to their fullest.

Posted by: Richterscale | May 15, 2008 11:04 PM

Obama supporters like Blogs that are for Obama and hate any other news because they like to keep their heads in the sand and not listen to reality or truth. If you are against their messiah, then you must be bad. They really want to idolize another human in such a manner, and think the rest of us are going to drink their kook-aid, they are crazy.

Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 11:04 PM

Is the reporter trying to say that actually the Detroit Economic Club is in FAVOR of higher fuel efficiency standards? I think we need some evidence of that other than polite applause during a guest's speech? If the automakers have come around to Obama's position, and that Obama is manufacturing a non-existent conflict, then that would be a big story. Please follow-up.

Posted by: Vito | May 15, 2008 11:05 PM

Wow. This is such a scandal! Let's run it 24/7 on Fox News. But I do wonder....how many times has Channel 08 had such an extensive coverage of any of the numerous misstatements made by John McCain? Or have I just missed them? For starters....how about asking John McCAin if the 3 different times and places when he claimed AQI (Sunnis) were being trained in Iran was what he actually believed at the time or was he deliberately misleading his audience? Either way, it doesn't look good for his so-called strongest asset. And no one in the MSM has ever, to my knowledge, asked him that question. Guess the bus is too comfortable.

Posted by: Don | May 15, 2008 11:05 PM

The people here are picking on Obama are racist.

When you think of the 400 years of oppression of black people, why not cut him some slack when he tells a fib?

When will white people get it?

Posted by: LeBron | May 15, 2008 11:06 PM

I challenge all BO supporters - male or female to read the article below and still claim that BO does not lie

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/?page_id=15

Can you read through all of this and yet claim that BO is a saint after all !!

Posted by: Ash | May 15, 2008 11:06 PM

Is the reporter trying to say that actually the Detroit Economic Club is in FAVOR of higher fuel efficiency standards? I think we need some evidence of that other than polite applause during a guest's speech?
Posted by: Vito | May 15, 2008 11:05 PM
-------------------------
The reporter is saying nothing like that at all. The reporter is pointing out that Obama lied. That he said he received no applause, that no one clapped, when the evidence shows otherwise. She is pointing out his embellishment and lies about a story as he panders to people.

Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 11:07 PM

Obama passed gas when he sneezed the other day but he covered his mouth with a hankerchief...

Posted by: justanotherwoman | May 15, 2008 11:07 PM

Stop trivializing this election.

Posted by: meta | May 15, 2008 11:08 PM

Good grief. How hard would it be to, you know, cover policy? Do you know anything about fuel emission standards? Do you care? If you don't, it's nothing to be ashamed of, but maybe you're in the wrong line of work.

Posted by: Ted | May 15, 2008 11:09 PM

Sweetie. This clapping thing is a real big story for a professional 'journalist' like yourself. Hold it close and own it 'cuz it's really gonna change a lot of folks minds. Yeah. Sure. It's the big story of the day.

Posted by: Fred Dodsworth | May 15, 2008 11:09 PM

First Obama calls a female reporter "sweetie", now this gaffe.

It's going to be a 40 state blow-out for McCain. It's Raining McCain!

Posted by: Mitch | May 15, 2008 11:09 PM

Just drink the kool aid.

Posted by: getalife | May 15, 2008 11:10 PM

Also for the people who claim the Clintons are racist , wait until you hear what the Republicans are trying to dig up on Michele Obama ...

read this article

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/

Posted by: Ash | May 15, 2008 11:11 PM

Even watching the Youtube, it is very tepid applause. Polite, but obviously what I would call icy.

Posted by: Memekiller | May 15, 2008 11:11 PM

Obama told an audience stunned into silence after greeting him with a standing ovation."Whenever an attempt was made to raise our fuel efficiency standards, the auto companies would lobby furiously against it, spending millions to prevent the very reform that could've saved their industry. Even as they've shed thousands of jobs and billions in profits over the last few years, they've continued to reward failure with lucrative bonuses for CEOs."

A smattering of applause after a standing ovation would sound like no one clapping to someone on a podium. Everyone who says he is a liar is an idiot.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 11:11 PM

This article seems petty. The point was that the speech received a cool reception, which was true. This is very different than what Hillary did with the sniper fire story.

Posted by: Lee | May 15, 2008 11:12 PM

Danielle -- oh, okay. I just thought there would actually be a point to the story if Obama was lying about this being an example of telling people what they don't want to hear. So he was right about that. Thanks for providing confirmation.

Posted by: Vito | May 15, 2008 11:13 PM

Tepid applause or not, he said there was none. He is a liar.
Posted by: Danielle | May 15, 2008 11:02 PM

I am tired of your tedious obsessive rant. If he is, he can't hold a candle to the egregious, flagrant, and pathological lying that is the embodiment of your political corpse of a candidate.

Posted by: getholdof yourself | May 15, 2008 11:17 PM

I challenge all BO supporters - male or female to read the article below and still claim that BO does not lie