Winston Churchill wrote: "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
The big lie -- the "ultimate fear bomb," as Michelle Obama put it -- is this notion that Senator Obama, despite being a Christian and a patriot, isn't who we says he is. I'm referencing, of course, this ridiculous e-mail whisper campaign which continues to make its roundelay through the tubes. In fact, a friend of a friend who continues to inexplicably open anything with a "Fw:" in the subject line actually e-mailed the goddamn thing to me last week. I've since set up an Outlook Express message rule that automatically obliterates any e-mail containing the words "madrassa" and "Hussein." If Outlook was able to somehow sniff out horseshit, I'd be leaning on that message rule as well. Yet between this awful viral blast and the on-going fear-bombing with regards to the senator's name, the fact that he's achieved an uninterrupted lead in the popular vote and the pledged delegate tally is a testament to the unstoppable power of his campaign.
What's more shocking than the psychonaut tenacity of the whisper pandemic about Senator Obama is that it's far more plausible that Senator Clinton is a Republican Manchurian Candidate.
Now, I'm not suggesting that Senator Clinton is really a Republican. As far as I know, and I take her at her word.
But just for the hell of it, let's read the record.
When Senator Clinton was a senior in high school, she was a member of Citizens for Goldwater-Miller. The following year, she was elected president of the Young Republicans at Wellesley College. So, in her youth, there's no denying that she absolutely was a Republican. You won't find this information in her online biography, by the way, so you'll have to ask her about it.
While in college, she became involved in the civil rights movement and rapidly transformed into a liberal Democrat who supported anti-war Democratic candidate Eugene McCarthy for president in 1968. Yet it wasn't until the 1968 Republican National Convention when she finally left the Republican Party... for good? As far as I know. Four years later, during the Watergate investigation, she advised the House Judiciary Committee as they assembled a case for impeachment against President Nixon. I take her at her word that she wasn't a spy.
From 1986 to 1993, Senator Clinton sat on the board of the notoriously anti-labor corporation known as Wal-Mart, founded and operated by far-right conservative Republican Sam Walton.
Fast forward to 2002 when Senator Clinton vocally supported the Bush administration's plans to invade an occupy Iraq. To this day, she refuses to either reject or denounce her support of President Bush and the neoconservative conspiracy for war even though the roster of lies about Iraq is a mile long -- but not nearly as long as the roster of American military casualties: more than 30,000 by the most recent accounting.
Senator Clinton is also a longtime member of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) which is composed primarily of Democrats who routinely capitulate to the Republicans. "Democrats In Name Only" is a pejorative nickname that's often associated with members of this centrist organization. And the senator's historically awkward line, "It's not change you can believe in; it's change you can Xerox," was written for the senator by the DLC's current president, Bruce Reed. Ironically enough, Reed's line was intended to blast Senator Obama for using a line written by his campaign co-chair, Governor Deval Patrick. Score! Good job, Clintons!
And during the course of this year, 2008, Senator Clinton has exhibited a disturbing affection for Republican fear mongering. In New Hampshire, Senator Clinton first invoked the prospect of a terrorist attack and how only she was qualified to handle such an event.
"I don't think it was by accident that al-Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister. They watch our elections as closely as we do, maybe more closely than some of our fellows citizens do. Let's not forget you're hiring a president not just to do what a candidate says during the election, you want a president to be there when the chips are down."
I wonder who wrote that line for the senator? Probably a Democrat on her speechwriting staff, and I take her at her word that it wasn't a Republican.
Meanwhile, during the very same week in which William Kristol recommended to the senator that she use the politics of fear against Senator Obama, Subsequently, Senator Clinton hedged while responding to a question about Senator Obama's religion -- "as far as she knew." The day after Kristol's recommendation, the Kenyan garb photo appeared on the Drudge Report. And, later in the week, her campaign released the 3AM television commercial which could very easily have been a commercial for Senator McCain. It's also noteworthy that Clinton campaign pollster Mark Penn wrote the commercial. Penn has a storied Republican past, as was reported by The Nation:
A host of prominent Republicans fall under Penn's purview. B-M's Washington lobbying arm, BKSH & Associates, is run by Charlie Black, a leading GOP operative who maintains close ties to the White House, including Karl Rove, and was former partners with Lee Atwater, the political consultant who crafted the Willie Horton smear campaign used by George H.W. Bush against Michael Dukakis in 1988.
Speaking of Willy Horton, we're all familiar with the disgraceful instances of race-baiting from the Clinton campaign -- a tactic generally reserved exclusively by the Republicans. Most recently, Clinton finance committee member and former vice presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro said that the only reason Senator Obama is winning is because he's black.
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
Ferraro has yet to resign from her post with the same dignity and selflessness as Samantha Power, Senator Obama's foreign policy advisor, when Power said that Senator Clinton was a "monster" -- a harmless epithet, far less insulting than Ferraro's flagrantly racist comments. And the Clinton campaign has yet to reject or denounce Ferraro's unapologetic bigotry, nor her continued defense and reiteration of the initial trespass. The Clintons are sticking with Ferraro. When have we witnessed this behavior before? Sticking with someone who's clearly wrong?
And then there are Senator Clinton's remarkably obnoxious endorsements of Senator McCain, as well as her desire to follow Bill Kristol's advice (again) -- this time agreeing with his advice to Senator McCain that the general election ought to be framed around national security issues. For the record, AmericaBlog documented her repeated endorsements of Senator McCain and, concurrently, her offenses against the Democratic Party:
"[McCain has] never been president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002."
"I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.""Of course, well, you know, I've got a lifetime of experience. Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience. And you know, Senator Obama's whole campaign is about one speech he made in 2002."
Clearly, the senator's point was that if she doesn't win the nomination (and it's mathematically impossible at this point), she would prefer to see Senator McCain defeat Senator Obama in November. After all, and by her own admission, Senator McCain is more qualified and better equipped to defend the nation against the evildoers. What's more is that Senator Clinton has provided for the McCain campaign enough clips to launch a thousand fear mongering commercials.
SCARY VOICE GUY: Even Hillary Clinton, a liberal Democrat, agrees that Senator Obama isn't prepared to keep you and your kids safe from the terrorists.
CLIP OF SENATOR CLINTON: I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.
SCARY VOICE GUY: Senator Barack Hussein Obama... if a liberal like Hillary Clinton thinks he's not ready, what will the terrorists think?
But I take her at her word that she's not a Republican Manchurian Candidate ready to spring forth another eight years of crazy on an already thrashed and beleaguered nation. As far as I know.
--
UPDATE: I have just been alerted to a March 2 DailyKos dairy written by Hudson. His diary is similar to my post above. I contacted Hudson to assure him that this was entirely a coincidence. With millions of people writing politics on the tubes, it's crazy that this doesn't happen more often.
CORRECTION: I typed 300,000 casualties. The actual number is around 30,000.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Bob Cesca isnt an ass...as far as I know.
I think it may be worse than Hillary being a crypto-Republican. She gave secret testimony at the Iran-Contra hearings. She was working at the Rose law firm in Little Rock (with Jonathan Pollard, no less)when the firm helped get Ollie North's cocaine-smuggling operation access to Mena airport in Mena, AR. What do you think she was testifying about?
"Civilian Material Assistance." Remember them? The ringleader of that little group has a REALLY big house a few miles from where I sit. Not that he made a fortune smuggling cocaine into the country or anything.
GREAT blog!!! You just made a new fan. :-)
That headline made me laugh even though I think the whole '...as far as I know..." thing is a crock of shit.
If you people REALLY want to beat McCain, you better wake up, hold your nose, and support Hillary Clinton, because the swiftboaters are going to destroy Obama with his minister: "God damn America" "the US of KKK" etc etc etc,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q49Ly5CwkvI
This isn't some arm's length Ferraro-Clinton relationship. This is a 20-year friendship, and this is the church to which Obama takes his daughters. No one who doesn't get up, walk out, and find another church after hearing this guy should be President of the US, much less someone who has this guy preaching to his kids. His "sermon" the Sunday after 9/11 is a total disgrace!
BE PRACTICAL! The November election is about the electoral college (again), and the Dems need to win at least one big state in the south or midwest that Gore/Kerry didn't win. Right or wrong, Obama's affiliation with this church for 20 years kills any chance of that.
Be Afraid!!! Be very afraid!!!!
That's all that Hillary Clinton and her supporters have left in their bag of tricks, and frankly, I'm sick of it.
Don't look over here, look over there. Don't listen to what Barack Obama says or what he stands for, judge him by what his preacher says. And even if you don't judge him by that, judge him by what Fox News will say about what Obama's preacher says.
Who cares if you think he'd make the best president. He can't win it because Hillary Clinton's supporters said so. Therefore, the practical thing to do is vote for someone you don't think would make a good president because "they can win" (and that, of course, is assuming that the McCain campaign couldn't dig up equally nasty dirt to fling at Hillary - perhaps you forget, that's what they excel in).
Seems like ol' Hillary likes to play for both teams! Ok i get it, its a smart move. You stay neutral and you have more influence from both of the teams. I bet you she wont admit it to the public! But its the nature of politicians in Washington.
Bob, you wouldn't know a democrat if one were sitting across the table from you, which millions are.
Attila the Hun was also a Democrat. He met with the Pope and decided not to sack Rome. See, that proves that he was a democrat.
Anyone catch that neo-con Jim Woolsey spewing forth on CSPAN this week about why and in what circumstances the US should attack Iran? (Woolsey was Bill Clinton's CIA chief.) Woolsey is REALLY scary - and dangerous. Woolsey blathered on about Iran's being dangerous and how our country should bomb that country if Iran had the audacity to try to develop nuclear energy. (Never mind that the US thought Iranian nuclear energy was a great idea when our man, the Shah, was in power.) Woolsey was a founding member of PNAC (Project for the New American Century). Woolsey is a right-wing neo-con war-mongering rethuglican. So are the Clintons progressives or right-wingers? Check out what Woolsey has espoused all these years. Do we want any more of his ilk? Can we survive any more of his ilk?
Can we just be happy to know that if Clinton wins the nomination it won't be because she was voted in by the people? That will be the true test of the masses. To rise above the fraud and abuse of the voting process and get Obama into the White House. That will be the test of our integrity as a voting force. Will we all be willing to get out, march, and create chaos, if needed? Mark my words: it will happen. Clinton will get the nomination and will it satisfy us to know that just because we couldn't stop it, we can't fight to correct it.
Have you forgotton how razor thin Obama's lead is? Obama supporters talk and act as if he has a landslide which he doesn't. It is a practically even split. If Obama wins, do you really think we Hillary supporters are not going to feel disenfranchised, particularly given the general attitude towards us and our candidate by Obama supporters? How is there going to be unity? Somehow, if Obama wins it is fair and square but if Hilary wins it is fraud. I don't understand that argument at all. There are dodgy issues on both sides... with Obama it is the unfairness of the caucus process where he does well and the super delegate vote; with Hilary it is Florida which clearly chose her and Michigan where she will win if they do a redo and, of course, the super delegates.
No matter what happens, either side will have the grounds to cry foul...... perhaps Obama's team should live up to the talk of unity and perhaps tone down the rhetoric of their supporters... otherwise, his victory will by pyrrhic at best.
Let's not jump the gun just yet. IF MI and FL stays as they are now, Clinton won popular vote (prior to MS). You don't know what PA will do. You don't know the score until the game is played. So shut up, sit down, and watch.
Clinton isn't a Republican. She just plays one on TV.
Senator Clinton is not a democrat, as far as I know!
By their actions, and words, shall ye know them!
No... Hillary is not a Republican, she is a War Hawk. Period.
Hillary Clinton is not a Republican.
Richard Nixon famously gave this advice to Bob Dole when he ran for president in 1996. You run to the right in the primaries, but not so far right that you can't run back to the center for the general election. The opposite advice would apply to a candidate running in the Democratic Party. Run left in the primaries, but run back to the center in the general election. I think Hillary took this advice to heart but missed a step.
I believe that Hillary has been planning to run for president since before she ran for the Senate from New York. Since taking office she has taken care to vote in such a way that her record would appear moderate to the general electorate. She wanted, understandably, to make it difficult for a Republican opponent to portray her as too liberal the way Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, and John Kerry were portrayed. She assumed it was safe to vote as a moderate because she believed her liberal bona fides were beyond question. Then Barack Obama came along and questioned them anyway. He has been very successful running to Hillary"s left. But when push comes to shove there is not much difference in their positions.
As for Hillary"s "endorsement" of John McCain over Obama, I believe what she was trying to say is that she would be a stronger candidate against McCain. There really is no question that out of the three candidates McCain has the most experience. McCain will attempt to use his advantage in experience against whoever is the Democratic nominee. Hillary was trying to say that the experience argument will be less effective against her. I am sure she would say that experience is not the only thing to consider in choosing a president and that for any number of reasons Obama would be preferable to McCain.
A fair criticism of Hillary, however, is that by making her argument the way she did, she weakened Obama. When McCain makes the experience argument it is likely to resonate more strongly because Hillary made it first. Remember, in 1988, the first candidate to raise the issue of the Massachusetts prison furlough program was Al Gore, not George Bush. Perhaps the Democrats would be better served by following Ronald Reagan"s 11th Commandment: "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican" or in their case fellow Democrat. Of course if that happened what would be left to read on HuffPo?
If there is such Commandment for the Democrats, Obama will not be where he is right now. Beating up Hillary with Edward on his side, questioning her judgment, calling for change in Washington DC, is how he got to where he is. But did anyone stop and think for a second, that in order to make change in Washington DC, you will have to vote in a whole new group of Senators and Congressmen. Is that going to happen?
Nixon died in 1994.
I think Randy Rhodes has it right. Hillary would rather see McCain win and screw up worse than Bush so she could run again in 2012, rather then have some other Democrat (Obama) win the nomination and the Presidency!
She will do ANYTHING to win. Fear Monger, innuendo, slime, the Kitchen sink ... ANYTHING to win.
So the super delegates should step in and declare Obama (you know, the one who has the popular vote, the delegate vote and the most states) the winner and cut hillary off at the pass to prevent any more damage to the Democratic Party.
One last item, if I were Black, at this point, I would not vote for hillary.
If you were Black, you would know that you had been voting for a Black man since SC.
Cesca¦.you card.
Just keep in mind that outside of your volunteerism of butchering the English language with such crass, not class mind you but crass, I find comfort that my dear old Aunt Clara who I must say does not possess nor has ever possessed an acute acumen especially now that she's 90, will counter your single specific vote in oh say five minutes by voting Hillary?
Cheers¦
TS
haha.
That picture says it all. Clinton has some serious mending to do if she wants to win this nomination. She has taken decisions that make it easy for many democrats to question her judgment as a democrat. While Obama has also worked with republicans across the aisle he has not given up on his democratic ideals, Clinton on the other hand has crossed the aisle and join republicans on issues like flag burning which no real democrat would do unless you are conservative democrat like Ben Nelson of NE.
In a candid interview via satellite from China, Olympic...
Update: Keith Olbermann had Rachel Maddow on "Countdown" Tuesday night to celebrate...
UPDATE: A day after Roseanne's blogs from below...
"How honest are we if we tell the truth most of the time &...
Joe Lieberman is being vetted as a Vice Presidential...
John McCain said in an interview with Politico on Wednesday "that he was uncertain how many houses he and his...
LOS ANGELES — Barack Obama is getting praise from Nashville, courtesy of one...
NEW YORK — The suspense didn't quite compare to the identity of "Deep Throat,"...
LOS ANGELES -- As founder of the "Girls Gone Wild" franchise, Joe Francis has...
There are over 6 billion people of people on the...
Last year I praised Rebecca Taylor and...
MELBOURNE, Fla. — As if a fourth straight day of rain from Tropical Storm...
Loading comments…
Posted March 12, 2008 | 02:34 PM (EST)