The Monster: A Loyal Clinton Soldier Turns in His Badge
She has no idea.
She has no idea how many times I defended her. How many right-leaning friends and relatives I battled with. How many times I played down her shady business deals and penchant for scandals -- whether it was Whitewater, Travelgate, Vince Foster, Cattle Futures, Web Hubbell, or Norman Hsu. She has no idea how frequently I dismissed her husband's serial adultery as an unfortunate trait of an otherwise brilliant man. For sixteen years, I was a proud soldier in the legion of "Clinton apologists" -- who believed that peace and prosperity were more important than regrettable personality traits.
And then she ran for president.
After seven years of George W. Bush, America is hungry for change. Big change. And let's face it -- Hillary Clinton, the party standard-bearer and former White House denizen -- isn't it. But even after voters coalesced around Barack Obama, handing him eleven straight primaries (twelve, if you count Vermont), she refused to accept the possibility -though math, money and momentum were clearly against her -- that the Bush/Clinton Family Band might not be #1 on America's Billboard chart anymore.
So, rather than step aside and become the hero of her party, she made a strategy decision to go negative in advance of Ohio and Texas. Not just negative -- personal. She cynically chided Mr. Obama's message of hope. She played the victim card. The gender card. The Muslim card. She cried "shame on you, Barack Obama" for his campaign tactics, while (if we're to believe Matt Drudge) simultaneously floating a picture of him in Somali garb to stir up questions of his patriotism.
She accused Mr. Obama of his own shady business deals (the irony of which nearly ripped a hole in the fabric of space/time). She accused him of being two-faced on NAFTA, when it was her campaign that had winked at the Canadians. She demanded that he "reject" the endorsement of Louis Farrakhan, but remained silent when Rush Limbaugh stirred up votes for her in Texas. And she crafted the now-infamous "3am" attack ad -- which used scare tactics to highlight Senator Obama's perceived lack of experience in foreign affairs. Straight out of the ol' Atwater/Rove playbook. Of course, all of this paled in comparison to her husband's patronizing, racially insensitive comments earlier in the primary season.
Was this the same Hillary Clinton whose husband ran on the idea that hope was more powerful than fear? The wife of a president who had less foreign policy experience than Barack Obama when he was elected? And exactly which crisis is she referring to when she claims to have more experience? And while we're at it, where the hell are those tax returns?
It's clear that Hillary's back in this thing, at least for the time being. But at what cost? Short of some cataclysmic event, there's no way either she or Mr. Obama can reach 2,025 delegates in the remaining contests. That means she's accepted the inevitability of a brokered convention. A convention she'll almost certainly enter with fewer delegates than her opponent. That raises some important questions:
Will she subvert the will of the voters? Will she turn Denver into a series of shady back-room deals and arm twisting? Will she dispatch her husband to pressure superdelegates into switching allegiances at the last minute? Are we in for, as one pundit put it, a good ol' fashioned "knife fight?"
And if she does manage to secure the nomination, what about the scores of disenfranchised Obama supporters (many of them young people with little loyalty to the Democratic Party)? How will she bring them back into the tent? Hillary seems confident that this can be remedied by offering Mr. Obama a spot on her ticket. Really? And what would his motivation be for accepting? Playing third-fiddle to Bill?
However, if Mr. Obama goes on to secure the nomination, she'll have handed his rival a treasure trove of sound bites. All John McCain has to do between August and November is play clips of Hillary questioning Obama's experience and belittling his platitudes. In a way, she'll have become Mr. McCain's second running mate.
She's proven that she cares more about "Hillary" than "unity." More about defeating Obama than defeating the Republicans. She's become a political suicide-bomber, happy to blow herself to bits -- as long as she takes everyone else with her.
On Friday, one of Barack Obama's foreign policy advisors, Samantha Power, resigned after calling Senator Clinton "a monster" during an off-the-record exchange. It was an unfortunate slip, but one that echoed the sentiments of many Clinton apologists like me -- who've watched Hillary's descent into pettiness and fear-mongering with the heartbreak of a child who grows up to realize that his beloved mother has been a terrible person all along.
Are the conservatives right about the Clintons? Will they do and say anything to get elected?
I don't know.
All I know is...I'm through apologizing.
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
Thanks for the article.
The thing that stings me most is: where was my reciprocity for all of those years of support? Or even acknowledgement. For as much as I wanted Democrats from ANYWHERE in the White House (I'm a red state girl), never have I felt that the party put much value in my vote or my voice. Especially not from the Clintons. I realize that this comes off as a pretty whiny, "what have you done for me lately?" statement. But, in a representative democracy, that is actually what it's supposed to be about. Please Hillary, listen to the voters you claim to want to represent (and those include not just the ones that voted for you) and consider giving this race a graceful ending.
Thank you Seth!
I started out neutral on Hillary. Her crowing to Katie Couric "i WILL be the nominee" was a turnoff. (This is an election not a coronation
Are you listening Pennsylvania?
I think that she'll destroy what should have been an easy Democratic victory for the Presidency this fall. That is, if she hasn't already. It begins to look like Democratic voters need to vote for Obama just to clean house and add a good dose of new blood. HOW CAN A CAMPAIGN THAT MAKES SO MANY RACIST REMARKS (SEE GERALDINE FERRARO's LATEST) CONTINUE TO HAVE SO MUCH SUPERDELEGATE SUPPORT? I'm DISGUSTED with the Democratic Party right now. The 50 superdelegates that were supposed to make that announcement for Obama last week should do so right now. They need to show that while there may be racist Democrats, they don't have a lot of power within the party. This latest racist outburst from the Clinton side needs be the last straw that will end her campaign right now. There is no way a Democratic candidate for the presidency should have such a blatant racist edge to so many of her top advisors and supporters.
I'm a 50-ish suburban white woman who will NOT vote for Hillary if she's the nominee. What would I be showing my kids? That I'll drink the KoolAid like we've chided the Republicans for doing and vote for something that I do not condone?
All of the campaigns that appeared this racist on the Republican side are long gone. The Republican voters did not support them! Why are Dems supporting this?
Many are starting to wake up to the Hillary Hoax, her false resume, her false positions, her track record of utter failure with Health care, and her disgusting bid for power in this race. Not to mention the fall of Bill Clinton's image as party father. Just watch the returns.
Well said. It's obvious she will descend to the cesspool of hell to get the nomination. She does not care about the party or the country, and will do anything, even illegal, to undermine Obama.
Her mouthpiece Wolfson did it for me. I voted for her in California. I sent her money. I was torn between she and Obama all the way to the polls. I regret my vote. When Wolfson said that Obama used Ken Starr tactics, and she backed him up, I called her headquarters and threw in the towel with them. I no longer respect someone who says that she and her friend McCain are much better qualified to be president than Obama. We are sick of lies and manipulations. We do not need to be told about her experience abroad. Lies all lies. I am now an Obama supporter. Hillary Clinton sounds too much like the Bush administration to me. We are sick of the lies! We are sick of the intimidation! We are sick of the fearmongering!
There are many of us who feel personally cheated by the Clintons. Like you say, we were their supporters and defenders. Unfortunately, the republicans are worse and I wonder what tricks they will come up with if Obama wins the nomination. I just hope Obama and his campaign can withstand the onslaught because as someone who has observed this nomination race closely, I can say with certainty that the republicans will stop at nothing to destroy anyone who challenges the status quo. All of us progressives will have to stand as a shield and make sure that our candidate does not sink.
What you are seeing now is Obama's reticence to return fire on a fellow Democrat and that's admirable. He's been responding to more egregious attacks from Hillary and her sock puppets but when he's going head-to-head with McBush, he will be able to blast away with impugnity if need be. Of course he wants to speak about the issues, but he'll respond the second a swift boat-like charge is leveled. he won;t be like John Kerry in 2004. Obama will come out swinging. Not with mud, because he doesn't have to go there. McBush has enough real problems without having to make a robocall about his Bangladeshi daughter, etc. like the Bush campaign did in 2000.
This is exactly the way I feel.
As a democrat, I for one will not stand for the superdelegates deciding this election, at least if it runs contradictory to the will of the people. The nations democrats have spoken, Barack Obama is our choice. It would be extremely unwise for the superdelegates to go against this choice by backing Clinton, and such a choice would undoubtedly disenfranchise voters, and cause massive demonstrations and riots this summer in Denver. I live in downtown Denver, and i'm telling you, to go against the will of the people in this election, would be BAD bews for the entire party. I have faith that our superdelegates are already aware of this, and will adjust their votes accordingly. It is after all, the DEMOCRATIC way to do things.
I need to get this straight: you will not stand for superdelegates deciding the election unless their decision goes your way? You are going to riot in the streets unless your candidate is nominated. Shades of the past. I thought something new might be evolving around Obama's candidacy, but this sure doesn't sound like it.
If Mr. Obama has declared that he wants to compete for the nomination of the Democratic Party, then he has to play by their rules. If he doesn't want to play by his party's rules, then he should have run as a third-party candidate.
Then I'm sure you would agree that the Michigan and Florida delegations should not be seated for the same reasons. The parties are private organizations, not government entities, and they make their own rules as to how they conduct internal business like nominating candidates. All the candidates and state parties knew the rules going in and Michigan and Florida defied them after having been told the consequence. Mrs. Clinton will, of course, abide by that implicit agreement.
This was obviously written by a Hillary supporter. You know the "win at all costs" voter. Listen pal, Hillary hasn't won the most votes, she hasn't won the most delegates, and she hasn't won the most states. Even in a week where she supposedly won, she only tied in delegates.
Read Richard the III and you will see a perfect example of what Hillary has to do to be the nominee. She will cut a bloody swath to the White House and destroy the party doing it.
I'm one of those people that won't vote if she is the nominee. I won't vote for McCain because I don't think that is an option, but my vote is more important to me than holding my nose and supporting a candidate who I believe is wrong on the issues and wrong for the country.
If Mr. Obama has declared that he wants to compete for the nomination of the Democratic Party, then he has to play by their rules. If he doesn't want to play by his party's rules, then he should have run as a third-party candidate.
It seems to me it's Clinton that doesnt want to play by the rules ...given her pledges regarding Fla and Mi and her actions since. As for the superdelegates Jerry4 Obama only said things would get ugly if the SD's went against the peoples choice...O
A Hillary sock puppet lecturing ME about playing by the rules? Like her continued campaign, that's LAUGHABLE! The rules say don't move up your primary (which would have given Clinton an advantage had the delegates counted) yet Michigan and Florida did just that. People question why Obama took his name off the Michigan ballot rather than why Hillary left hers on. Simple answer: HONOR. I thought something might be evolving around Clinton's candidacy - something that approached class - but I was wrong. The fact that we're even considering a revote in Michigan and Florida just rewards bad behavior. the DNC should split the votes down the middle, let the delegates party in Denver with the rest of us and be done with it. But Hillary should be careful what she wishes for. When Obama is allowed to campaign in a state he usually wins or cuts her big leads to even up. She may actually end up losing Michigan and perhaps winning Florida by a few points. Afterall, she did beat Sen. Uncommitted in Michigan by just 15 points.
So they say 'hell hath no fury like a women scorned.'
Stop with this crap. This has nothing to do with her being a woman, this has to do with her being a Republican in Democrats clothing.
What he said.
"...Clinto
I would take Seth Grahame-Smith a lot more seriously if he had not ended his piece on this note. She's a politician and a politician's wife. The real, hard-core deal. I don't happen to think she "descended" anywhere. She was down already. So sad to have one's idealism dashed on the rocks of realworld. Sorry man, but she is what she is.
One of the reasons this election is exciting is because so many young people are involving themselves in the process. And young people tend to idealize, to make heroes out of good people, and villains out of opponents. They are crushed when the little tin god they have created falls off its pedestal--but this is inevitable. Sadly, Barack Obama supporters are going to experience a let-down when convention time comes around, unless he walks out and runs as a third-party candidate. I guess it's a political rite of passage to deal with disillusionment.
On this website, I have read comments from young people comparing Obama to Martin Luther King, Ghandi, Mandela. None of these men were politicians. None of them campaigned for elected office as President of the United States. They were transformative thinkers, inspirational charismatics who used passive resistance against state violence. If his supporters want Barack Obama to be the leader of that kind of movement, then they should NOT elect hiim to the White House. They should follow him out into the streets and have the courage to engage in direct confrontation with corruption--as did all of these noble men.
You are right: she is what she is. And may be his statement was a little melodramatic.
But haven't you ever become terribly disappointed in someone? And remember, this election is, for most voters, about ushering in something better than Bush, much better. So hope is running high, and then you find out the person you always knew you'd vote for, if she ran, is a bitch. And worse.
And she has descended, in something, and here it is. Her and Bill were always suposed to be the friend of blacks; but in this race, she has descended into race-baiting statements from Bill and now the same from Ferraro. Not to mention the muslim innuendo.
Of course, if being the friend of blacks was all a lie, then she hasn't descended, she was always at that level---and you'd be right.
No, no, no, this is not a street fight....I didn't call the woman a bitch. I said she was a hard-core politician. I don't agree with you that her husband's comments were race-baiti
Finding out unpleasant truths about someone you respect and admire, is one of the hardest things in life. It is just crushing, especially if you have defended them, as this soldier says he defended Hillary,
or have actually worked for them in a campaign. I wonder how manyworkers Hillary has who, today or tomorrow, will wake up to what she is, and have to go through the crushed thing.
Thanks Hillary.
Did Hillary hurt your feelings? Get a grip. If she were a man you would never, ever say this crap. My family, friends and I are GOTV for her and we are proud to do so. Along with millions upon millions of others.
Obama is the one you should be saying this about. We wouldn't vote for Obama if he were the last politician on earth. He lies all day and all night long. Wake up!
Popular Vote (w/FL & MI) - from realclearp
Obama 13,601,217 47.3%
Hillary 13,620,611 47.4%
Hillary with +19,394 voter advantage
So Hillary is in the lead with people who actually went to the polls and voted. To bad for the cult. And if there is a re vote Hillary will beat Obama by a larger spread.
w/ FL & MI? More dishonesty. Are you giving Obama the "undecided" vote in MI since he wasn't even on the ballot?
What an unconscionable comment!? Barack Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan!! How can you even include it in the tally??? Anything for a (perceived) win, huh?
Barack Obama has a lead in the national polls, he leads in pledged delegates, in total delegates, in popular vote (yes, with or without FL, he leads). You cannot possibly count MI because the ballot didn't even have his name on it! Such underhanded, deceptive and sneaky tactics are the hallmark of what I have come to expect from the Clinton campaign, their surrogates and blind followers.
This includes totals from MI in which Obama's name was not on the ballot. MI is even in the polls and there's a good chance she can lose there. She's behind in the popular vote.
I am so sick of this "if she were a man" crap. There are many republicans who have the same feeling about MR. bush after supporting him.
To make this short and easy, please name one night lie and one day lie. I'm really curious about what you think are lies he's made.
Ok, so lets not waste any more money on Florida. Americans have wasted enough money on attempts for them to vote and not look like a banana republic. Hillary can call that sham a win and Obama will not lose much of anything in delegate count. We'll leave it at a 47.3/47.4 split.
Done, next issue.
There's a polite petition asking her to drop out of the race... maybe folks would like to sign it and send it to their friends, etc.
http://www
"Dear Senator Hillary Clinton,
This petition respectfully and humbly requests that you make what may be the hardest decision of your public life and withdraw from the 2008 presidential contest. Your service to this country, passion about the issues and qualifications to be President are recognized by any fair-minded observer..
transformer08
Y O U & Y O U R P E T I T I ON A R E N U T S !!!!!
And unAmerican and you can take your crappy dictatorship petition and you know what you can do with it. Understand english? And kissing up to Hillary before you "ask" her to leave the race is sick and a con.
Keep it up and someone will start a "get out of the race Obama petition." With all of Obamas
lying, not being able to win big states, Hillary winning more primaries than Obama, the millions and millions of voters that will never vote for Obama and many will leave the DEM party. Also, Hillary is leading in the popular vote counting FL and MI, Obama race baiting and Obama stealing the AA vote.
Obama should leave the race now. How do you like that?
Kennedy relax, do you honestly think Clinton will pay any attention. You need to calm down we know you support Clinton we have been privy to your vitriol for a while, but seriously you are staeting to lose it. Good Grief and again you can only count Michigan is you are prepared to advocate for dictator style elections.
Exactly which part of Arkansas is your trailer located in?
Hey Kennedy -- of course petitions, schmetitions are not going to work, nothing will stop that evil witch from destroying the Democratic Party. NOTHING!
I stopped drinking the Clinton Kool-Aid in 96 and sat out that vote . My suspicions were right on - everything got worse after that !
Now, with this Peter Paul trial coming in Nov 08 - people will have buyers remorse if she steals this nomination . The math does not help her - so all she can do is steal the Nom.
Thanks again Clinton family for ruining what was once a great political party.
I cant even watch them on TV - I change the channel every time .
God Forbid the country go for a man that talks about the positive things WE as citizens can do . Maybe the country is just too lazy to change the way things get done in DC .
Your thoughts mirror my own. I voted for Clinton in '92 and even went to see him give a speech (horrors! a speech!) and believe it or not, drove down with my husband to visit Clinton's boyhood home in Hope, Arkansas. By '96 I sat out the election; completely disillusioned by what I perceived as a republican in the white house when I thought he was a democrat. It was a hoax as far as I'm concerned. I won't be fooled again. Actually, Hillary Clinton's behavior has just reinforced my negative perception of them.
The only Kool-Aid is Obama special blend of crazy.
And sure you supported the Clinton's. (LOL) What a load of crap.
And Obama wouldn't know positive if the word slapped him aside the head. His speech writers are just throwing words out there to see what will stick. You have fallen for a con. Stand up and be proud of the lies you have fallen for. Get out your checkbook. I have some swamp land to sell you. You will buy anything.
There is nothing special about Obama. He is the same old dirty con politician.
Um...speak
"While Hillary Clinton battles Barack Obama on the campaign trail, a judge in Los Angeles is quietly preparing to set a trial date in a $17 million fraud suit that aims to expose an alleged culture of widespread corruption by the Clintons and the Democratic Party.
At the conclusion of a hearing tomorrow morning before California Superior Court Judge Aurelio N. Munoz, lawyers for Hollywood mogul Peter F. Paul will begin seeking sworn testimony from all three Clintons – Bill, Hillary and Chelsea – along with top Democratic Party leaders and A-list celebrities, including Barbra Streisand, John Travolta, Brad Pitt and Cher.
Paul's team hopes for a trial in October. The Clintons' longtime lawyer David Kendall, who will attend the hearing, has declined comment on the suit.
The Clintons have tried to dismiss the case, but the California Supreme Court, in 2004, upheld a lower-court decision to deny the motion."
The above quote is taken from one of many, many, many links about this. Just google "peter paul and hillary clinton" or "peter paul trial" the hits are numerous and troubling. Do we really need to go through this again? I've had it. We democrats cannot afford "a roll of the dice" on Clinton.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
