WaPo Criticizes Axelrod and Obama For Bhutto Assassination Remarks

The consequences of David Axelrod's offensive remarks linking Hillary Clinton to Benazir Bhutto's assassination continue to reverberate. Today, the Washington Post editorialized:

Mr. Obama . . . began by offering bland condolences to Pakistanis and noting that "I've been saying for some time that we've got a very big problem there."

Then Mr. Obama committed his foul -- a far-fetched attempt to connect the killing of Ms. Bhutto with Ms. Clinton's vote on the war in Iraq. After the candidate made the debatable assertion that the Iraq invasion strengthened al-Qaeda in Pakistan, his spokesman, David Axelrod, said Ms. Clinton "was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, which we would submit was one of the reasons why we were diverted from Afghanistan, Pakistan and al-Qaeda, who may have been players in the event today."

When questioned later about his spokesman's remarks, Mr. Obama stiffly defended them -- while still failing to offer any substantive response to the ongoing crisis. Is this Mr. Obama's way of rejecting "the same Washington game" he lambasted earlier in the day? If so, his game doesn't look very new, or attractive.

By making a defense of David Axelrod the centerpiece of the Obama campaign's reaction to the Bhutto assassination, the Obama campaign has allowed this story to fester for 3 days. He is sure to face more questions today after this WaPo editorial. Axelrod is killing the Obama campaign. Instead of serving his candidate, Axelrod has chosen to serve his own ego. What a terrible mistake.

< "Building A Coalition To Govern" | A Tribute To Gilly >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    and sen. obama's (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 29, 2007 at 11:58:55 AM EST
    campaign continues to implode. my take: yet another example of the senator's lack of experience on the national stage.

    Blame (none / 0) (#2)
    by BDB on Sat Dec 29, 2007 at 12:08:15 PM EST
    At least now if Obama loses Iowa and/or New Hampshire he has a staffer to blame.  Heh.

    Although I'm not sure how much any of this is resonating in Iowa.

    Combine this ... (none / 0) (#3)
    by chemoelectric on Sat Dec 29, 2007 at 02:37:14 PM EST
    Combine this with Obama's media-stenographer-like choice of Iran as the big threat, rather than Pakistan, China, or Russia, let's say, and the picture further develops of an inexperienced, smart-alec kid trying to fast-talk his way to the top.

    So Clinton is to blame ? (none / 0) (#5)
    by RedHead on Sat Dec 29, 2007 at 04:16:48 PM EST
    Fish rots from the head up?

    So Clinton is to blame for Shaheen's comments?

    So Hillary is to blame for Bill's comments on being "opposed to Iraq War from outset" and doing a world wide good will tour with 41 and Bill's Cayman Islands investments?


    This is what BTD talks about - Obama criticizing Clinton on an issue that he, himself, is vulnerable.

    Don't forget (none / 0) (#6)
    by RedHead on Sat Dec 29, 2007 at 04:21:03 PM EST
    "Mr. Harvard Law Review" -??

    Do Obama/Edward supporters hit Hillary for being valedictorian of Wellesley ??

    New Bhutto assassination video government cover-up (none / 0) (#7)
    by Aaron on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 07:16:33 AM EST
    New video appears to show Bhutto being shot

    This second video in this clip, which I haven't been able to find unedited yet for download, shows Benazir Bhutto being hit possibly twice, the last appears to be a spinal shot, judging by the way she falls. The shooter who is on the left, seems to go unmolested by the body guards and police around the vehicle as he raises his weapon.

    Also CNN aired a picture of the seat in the vehicle where Bhutto was sitting, and there was a large puddle of blood on it.

    It's interesting that the Musharraf controlled government has been trying to convince people that she fell and hit her head, even providing supposed x-rays of Bhutto's skull, in contrast to what the doctor who examined her wounds stated.

    This is obviously a cover-up, and we need to ask ourselves who had the most to gain by her death.