"I Refuse to Join any Club That Would Have Me as a Member"
I've been as outspoken as anyone over the last week in pointing out Hillary Clinton's dishonesty, but theWall Street Journal's glee over Clinton's emerging reputation as a serial exaggerator is incredibly disturbing :
Hillary Clinton's been all the news this week, after she "misspoke" about Whitewater, Travelgate, missing files, suspicious pardons, Johnny Chung and cattle futures. Oh wait, after she "misspoke" about Bosnia. Oh wait, same thing.I take no pleasure in pointing out the hypocrisy of the Clinton campaign. In fact, I've even found myself invoking a Democratic version of Reagan's 11th Commandment, biting my tongue instead of leveling criticism, lest I find myself in a situation in November in which I support a candidate that I've spent months slamming. As an Obama supporter who has written multiple posts highlighting Hillary Clinton's dishonesty, let me go on the record as saying the characterization above is absolutely false.That's one way to make sense of the unrelenting, unforgiving, 24/7 news coverage of Mrs. Clinton's fictional telling of Bosnian sniper fire and the subsequent debunking of her every word. In a nasty primary battle that has already featured racial slurs and Chicago slum lords, missing tax documents, and a "monster," you might expect this slip-up to have been yet another blip in the media cycle.
But that would have been to deny the press, the pundits, Democrats, and even Barack Obama, the catharsis of finally -- finally! -- getting a chance to confront the Clintons' questionable mores. Hillary's and Bill's scandals have been the elephant in the primary room ever since she first signaled a run. Yet up to now everyone has been too scared, or too loyal, or too weary to touch the ugly past. Her Bosnia misspeak is now serving as proxy for all the truths about the Clintons' non-truths, allowing even liberals to break free from their Clinton dependence.
There's a big, big difference between the criticism that Clinton is receiving now and the nasty, prurient, partisan muck of the 90s. The fact that there are people who have been breathlessly waiting for a return to the days of the Whitewater, Travelgate, and the Lewinsky scandals is a de facto admission of sleazy and trivial journalistic instincts that are better suited to write Penthouse Letters than grace the op-ed pages of the most influential media outlets in our nation. Indeed, the threat of a return to this gossipy media landscape is one of the reasons I feared a return to the Clinton years in the first place.
Having said that, with Clinton's recent embarrassment regarding Tuzla, NAFTA, and others, she's simply being hoisted by her own petard. Put aside the biggest difference (that these new charges are true and the older ones are almost universally false), the fact is that Hillary Clinton has based her own campaign around her (a) toughness and (b) experience. That her campaign is now being tripped up by the latest string of revelations is a good indicator that both claims are hollow.
Taking the "toughness" claim first, Hillary has spoken endlessly on the campaign trail about how she's been sent through the ringer by the right-wing noise machine and that she questions whether or not Barack Obama is tough enough to win a general election. While this is undeniably true (see above), the implication is that Clinton isn't easily tripped up by personal attacks. Yet here we are seven months before the general election and Clinton has been making one demonstrably untrue statement after another on the campaign trail. Considering how well documented her life has been since 1992, lying about her accomplishments is incredibly stupid. These are the kinds of mistakes you'd expect of a political rookie, not someone who claims 35 years of experience.
That "experience", upon which she's built her entire campaign, is the trait she's used to take out her Democratic rivals, so when it's revealed that she's been lying on her resume, it's the kind of hypocrisy that's fair game, especially in the no holds barred style of politics in which Clinton excels. The experience candidate lying about her experience is every bit as relevant as an anti-gay crusader trying to get laid in an airport men's room or a straight-talkin' campaign reform maverick letting lobbyists run their business from his campaign bus. Clinton's lies aren't merely embarrassing. They contradict the core reason for her candidacy.
So going back to the WSJ piece, let me once again "reject and denounce" (to quote Obama) the implication that the world has been waiting to relive the mainstream media, scandal-of-the-week circlejerk of the Clinton years :
Reporters have dug up every last person who accompanied her on the sedate trip to pour a little more salt in the wound. "The Audacity of Hoax," yelled a blog posting in the liberal Nation magazine, which innocently asked: "What else is she fibbing about?" Bill Burton, Barack Obama's spokesman, gleefully noted that Mrs. Clinton's recent attacks on his candidate were designed to deflect attention away from her "made up" Bosnia story. Heavy emphasis on the "made up" part. No need to mention Vince Foster, Red Bone, Marc Rich or Webster Hubbell. All this will do.Ummmm...no. I know you guys have been waiting for the opportunity to return to the tabloid-a-go-go 90s, but you and your army of Maureen Dowds will have to find some one else to gossip with. Don't use the "enemy of my enemy" trick to draft Obama supporters into your vast right wing conspiracy. As much as I dislike the Clinton campaign now, it's nothing compared to the seething contempt I have for the pseudo-journalistic scum who dragged this nation through the mud in the 90's.
Loading comments…
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
Okay, she's a phony. Now let's just ignore her and concentrate on specifics. How to undo the harm of twelve years of Republican chaos.
It wasn't just the theatrical deliveries of the Bosnia lie, it was the curt, churlish brush off when she was caught. If Obama had responded to anything similarly, he would have been slashed to ribbons. Let's face it: the Clintons are who they are and we're just finally realizing it.
I agree with Saunders that the 90s scandals, except for those involving Bill's sexual issues, were contrived in the imagination of the vast right wing conspiracy that did exist. What we've witnessed lately is something else entirely. Overcompensation, someone wrote recently.
What definitely haven't been vetted are
1) the pardons,
2) the library donors,
3) their income taxes,
4) exactly what she knew and when she knew it re: al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein, Iraq WMDS's, bin Laden, etc. (i.e., she knew what she needed to know and still voted for War, for incredibly costly political expediency),
5) flag burning ban,
6) REAL (National) ID and other post millenial odds and ends.
Personally, I hate to see this stuff go through the wringer. It's doubtful that Obama will press more than the first three of these or point out that the history of the 90s is, in fact, a huge liability for Clintons in a general election. But #4 for me is checkmate among true progressives, and 5 and 6 should also be ennervating.
The Republicans, of course, would revel in the 90s during a general election.
If she some how wins the Dem nomination, I guarantee a McCain 2008 win. I can see it now, McCain saying you know I remember when my plane was under enemy fire its not something you misremember. Notice how fast McCain got rid of that lobbyist. Shed loose so badly.
That is precisely why she won't win. The writing is on the wall for all to see. The Clintons are as crooked as a snake in a path. If she wins the nomination, it will be by hook and by crook. Let's have a Democrat in office for a change. No DINOs.
Could HRC really have fallen so far so fast....? No. Morality has to do what other people think is right; Integrity is about what you personally thnk is right. The truth seems to be that we "the belivers" were duped. No one can take away that she has been on the "correct side" with regard to many issues, but the good MESSAGE she carried resonated then, and now we see that the "MESSENGER," is just another rotten politico.
DOES ANYONE KNOW/HAVE MORE INFO ABOUT " THE FAMILY?" I''D APPRECIATE ANY DATA ON HER CHURCH.
Here is the full story of the Fellowship!
http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/expose-the-christian-mafia-parts-1-2
Harper's http://www.harpers.org/archive/2003/03/0079525
Mother Jones http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/09/hillarys-prayer.html
"As much as I dislike the Clinton campaign now, it's nothing compared to the seething contempt I have for the pseudo-journalistic scum who dragged this nation through the mud in the 90's."
Then, as now, Hillary brought it upon herself. You may be too young to remember, but many of us remember it quite well. The scandals of the past were well fueled by the same sort of chronic mendacity we're seeing today. In fact, that's been the problem with the Clintons all along. And, as we've seen this week, it will ever be so...
This, of course, is absurd. Hillary brought nothing on herself in the past. She has done so now, but what she endured during Bill's presidency was brought on my relentless sliming by Republican liars. Those old enough to remember know the truth.
Bill Clinton, stand by your man!!!!!!
"As much as I dislike the Clinton campaign now..."
"The Hunting of the American President" (?) and "Blinded by the Right" did excellent jobs of exposing the vast right wing conspiracy that did in fact hound the Clintons and coax lies out of every corner of their lives. Richard Mellon Scaife funded much of the work, much of which was written by Ted Olsen (W's lawyer to the Supreme Court in 2000), published in The American Spectator, The Pittsburgh Tribune, The Washington Times, repeated verbatim by The NYT, embellished by Rush Limbaugh et al, and seized by Newt Gingrich and Tom Delay as established fact. Once Ken Starr had been assigned, of course, the rumors stuck in the echo chamber for years.
No. The 90s attacks were despicable, premeditated and fabricated. Did Bill likely have affairs prior to Monica? Probably. But of truly substantive issues, there were none but those contrived to hobble the Clinton presidency and concoct an impeachment, which they effectively did.
Which is why it is stunning that 1) there are Dems who want to invite a repeat and 2) Hillary went to Richard Mellon Scaife to disseminate Wright White Fright lies to conservatives across PA.
The recent rehash of the 90s by the media was just a small sampling of what will happen if Hillary becomes the nominee. Obama has resisted going there, but the Republicans won't and they will have a field day on their scandals. I am disgusted that the Clintons have taken our country hostage again with all their drama. Haven't we had enough yet?
I like that Obama is not trashing Clinton's personal life. When someone has said something that is deemed below the belt, he's gotten rid of them He has not attacked her personally. He is however saving the real fire power for McCain. McCain will be as weak as Dole once Obama is the nominee.
I must admit Obama has run a classy campaign. But there is no love in politics. I think he is making a mistake. It's like having Mike Tyson on the ropes and then letting him up to take another swing at you. He only needs one shot to put your lights out and if Obama keeps dancing with Hillary he may end up on his back staring at the ceiling. If he can't knock her out of the race by now then what makes you think he stands a chance against McCain?
I think that Obama is playing it right now. I have no doubt that he can get down and dirty against McCain if he needs to. He doesn't have to get deep into Clinton's problems because he is ahead in everything. He is about to beat her in Texas with delegates, so he is going to let PA finish and then North Carolina and then it will be over. He is playing his cards right. She will ruin herself with this expanding debt and the lies.
If Obama runs his Presidency as skillful as he is running his campaign..........he will not have a problem...........you can touch the spots of the lepoard.......but you can't change them.
First off, it doesn't matter if he gets rid of people quickly or not. THe fact that words were spewed, means the damage was already done.
Oh good grief......his latest talking point is that she's not ethical enough to be president.
You're so off the wall.
I agree, whole-heartedly. Who wants to go backwards. Obama represents the future. A clean break from all that was scandalous in the 90s as well the stench of the past seven years. Be gone, Clintons and Bushs.
Hillary's "35 years of experience" claim was never intended to face this kind--or any kind--of scrutiny. The primary was supposed to be over on February 6; her assertion of experience and competence held up that long, and that's how long the warranty lasted.
I completely concur with your sentiments about the media and the Clinton years.
Why give an undisciplined pack of mindless rabid dogs red meat to feed on? The smell of blood only triggers their most primitive instincts and makes them even more dangerous.
*
I'm also not a fan of Hillary's, but yes, the WSJ piece you quote is arrant and malicious nonsense.
“In politics if you have integrity, nothing else matters.
And if you don’t have integrity, nothing else matters.”
So – what is Integrity?
I don’t personally believe integrity is misspeaking on three separate prepared venues. I don’t personally believe integrity is mocking a fellow candidate because of a middle name or family tree. I don’t personally believe integrity is making media statements under false pretense towards the competition.
I believe integrity is listening to a variety of perspectives with decency and respect. I believe integrity is honoring each person, each religion, each race, each country and focusing on positive strengths. I believe integrity is courage under fire, rather than whining and quibbling when an assumed outcome does not result.
And I believe in the Power of Respect, the Power of History, and the Power of Hope.
The moment is now in history for a New type of Leader to step forward. A Leader with Integrity, Compassion, Moral Strength, and with a Knowledge of history and how to use these lessons to move our country forward. A Leader who "Holds these Truths to be Self-Evident".
That leader is Barack Obama.
Integrity is when your public face and your private face are congruent.
So true..........and Hillary doesn't know what make-up to put on what face when she awakes every morning.
What was it the Clinton supporters said over the last three weeks of non-stop All Wright All the Time coverage? Oh yeah. If your candidate can't stand up to media scrutiny and spin now, what will it be like in the general election, when the Republicans get their knives out?
Well, right back atcha guys.
Not to fear. Just keep telling yourself this isn't happening. Clinton's been FULLY VETTED remember? I know because she told me so.
Hey, Hillary's been getting this kind of shit treatment for 6 months now. What's the dif? She'll handle it. Unlike Obama who's been under fire for about 3 weeks now and he's already run away to be in seclusion for a week to lick his one little wound.
First, he went on vacation for 3 days - so you are LYING. Next, what's the dif? The dif is that Hillary, like you, is a bald-faced LIAR.
Hillary tried to prove Barack couldn't withstand the withering assault that the GOP would enact against him, by employing their own Rovian tactics herself.
Why is she crying about the withering assault of criticism now, after being caught in such outrageous falsehoods? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, isn't it? Or is she now going to cry " I'm a woman, you're not supposed to hit a woman!".
You can't play in the boys tree house and invoke the double standard. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.
I don't think she's as tough as she claims. I think she's confused toughness with unfettered ambition, and in doing so has thrown a fellow Democrat under the bus by endorsing the enemy John McCain. Well, Hillary, you and Mr. McCain, your partner in crime need to tell this country just what our intentions in Iraq are now.
Oh, you intend to get out of Iraq? Because WMD were never found there right? Thats the reason you voted for the resolution that got us into war. But you stand beside John McCains experience, and assertion that we should stay another fifty years? No? Than why did you tout his experience over a man whose career you reduced to one speech?
Why did you sell out your own party Hillary. As much dislike I have for the scum journalists who dragged this country through the mud in the 90's, I have a ten times that for turncoats.
Don't say anything bad about Maureen. I love Maureen. She's completely evil (she might actually be a witch) but I truly love Maureen.
I'll second that, ddeagler. She is every intelligent man's fantasy of sex and brains wrapped up in a 21st century Dorothy Parker.
I'm plenty smart, but as Parker was a miserable lush in the flesh, Im figuring the sex would be more comatose than sizzling, and as Maureen Dowd is an unalloyed horror, my fantasy is to be well out of the way of both and giving back to the community, like maybe teaching nubile Nigerian entrepreneurs how to use the internets.
I don't get Maureen. I can appreciate her intelligence but so often - like today 's column - it just seems like she's all about talking just so she can listen to herself.
*
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
