TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | swiftboating

Republicans Turn to Lies, Race Baiting and Swiftboating

By on 05 October 2008


Republicans are smearing the Democratic nominee? So what else is new?

Well, the McCain team warned us they were going to start hitting. Bill Kristol backed them on it. So let the smearing begin.

Sarah Palin started it off by teasing that Obama is not quite as American as
she is or the crowd to whom she was speaking. AP’s
analysis rips Palin for the “racial tinge” of her comments:


By claiming that Democrat Barack Obama is “palling around with terrorists”
and doesn’t see the U.S. like other Americans, vice presidential candidate
Sarah Palin targeted key goals for a faltering campaign.

And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was
unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself
may come to regret.

… “Our opponent … is someone who sees America, it seems, as being
so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he’s palling around with terrorists who
would target their own country,” Palin told a group of donors in Englewood,
Colo. A deliberate attempt to smear Obama, McCain’s ticket-mate echoed the
line at three separate events Saturday.

“This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America,”
she said. “We see America as a force of good in this world. We see an
America of exceptionalism.”

…Palin’s words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another
subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee “palling
around” with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience
that he doesn’t see their America? …

Imbedded in a Human Events email received today.

This is something I warned about during the primaries, which infuriated Obama
supporters everywhere, though I didn’t care, because I was telling the truth.
I’ve obviously been proven correct. I wanted Democrats to get out in front of
it: If past is prologue, the Republicans are set to make Ayers Barack Obama’s
Wille Horton. That’s a summation I made during the primaries. It’s what’s
about to happen right now. Palin is more than willing to get in the dirt, urged
by her conservative benefactors, while John McCain obviously approves. Because
we all know Palin wouldn’t say anything the campaign didn’t condone.

Here is a list of links I received via dueling McCain camp emails today, never mind that I’d already
seen the onslaught coming: Washington
Post; New
York Times; Chicago
Tribune; AP;
Reuters; Politico; ABC The Blotter; NBC
First Read; ABC
News; CBS;
Fox
News; CNN.
No doubt local news outlets will parrot this “palling around” lie,
because the traditional press covered it. It’s out there again in the political
bloodstream, just as the McCain campaign planned.

Don’t get me wrong, the traditional press’ job is to cover what’s happening
on the campaign trail and when McCain’s vice president says outright that their
opponent “is not a man who sees America like you and I see America,”
while talking to an all white audience, obviously race baiting, while simultaneously lying that he is “palling
around with terrorists,” the news outlets must cover it. They also
need to cover whether it’s true. The
New York Times covered it yesterday, finding nothing of note about Ayers.
AP
called Palin out on her the “racial tinge” of her comments, including
Ayers. CNN
said what Palin is asserting is false.

Imbedded in a Human Events email received today.

All of this follows something that happened in Virginia, which the LA
Times writes about today. Bobby May, treasurer of the Buchanan County
Republican Party who is also listed as the county’s representative on McCain’s
Virginia leadership team, according to the Times, wrote a column that
is race-baiting
at its lowest, complete with the usage of Obama’s middle name, as well as
intoning Ludacris to “paint it black” to drive his point home. Truly
despicable stuff coming from the Republicans who are losing traction in Virginia.

That McCain-Palin are losing their grip with the electorate entirely is why the campaign and the Republicans are willing to channel the worst of political tactics, even as the American economy slides into a deep recession that could turn into a depression. But since McCain-Palin can’t solve our challenges, they’ve decided to go dirty to cast a dark shadow on Obama-Biden.

But the pictures imbedded in this post punctuate the conservative playbook
the final weeks of the campaign. They are compliments of a Human Events
magazine email on Obama and ACORN. But it’s through “AmericaPac, American
Political Action Committee” in the email subheading where the pictures
appear.

These smears are coming at a time when the general election is at a tipping
point and right before Tuesday’s debate as well, which will be a townhall. People
are moving to Obama, as all the polls suggest, but decisions aren’t set. So people will bring Obama up in
their minds to evaluate a second time to see if he indeed passes as someone they want to be president, giving Obama one last look. The McCain campaign wants Palin’s
words that he’s “palling around with terrorists” to be part of that
last assessment, punctuated by her racially tinged judgment that Obama “is not a man
who sees America like you and I see America.” Casting one last aspersion on his character.

It’s up to Obama-Biden to not let these slurs and lies stand, combating every one of them, then hitting back just as hard.


More important is the negative message. The McCain campaign has to convince 51 percent of the voters they can’t trust Barack Obama to be our next president. This has an ideological component and a character component. – Bill Kristol

The wind may be at O-Biden’s back, but this race isn’t over yet. Nobody should take anything for granted.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The Olbermann Train Wreck

By on 08 September 2008

This was inevitable.


MSNBC tried a bold experiment this year by putting two politically incendiary
hosts, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, in the anchor chair to lead the
cable news channel’s coverage of the

That experiment appears to be over.

After months of accusations of political bias and simmering animosity between
MSNBC and its parent network NBC, the channel decided over the weekend that
the NBC News correspondent and MSNBC host David Gregory would anchor news
coverage of the coming debates and election night. Mr. Olbermann and Mr. Matthews
will remain as analysts during the coverage.

It began when Keith Olbermann began to personally target Hillary Clinton during
the primaries.

As I said not long ago, it’s a shame that Olbermann was so over the top with
his commentary, because Democrats had never had anyone so openly in our corner.
So, just when Democrats and Obama need it, Olbermann’s commentary is being questioned
in every way. It was bound to happen, due to the outrageous coverage that Keith
often offered, targeting Clinton personally and viscerally for months. But he
was by no means the only one involved. Richard Wolfe of Newsweek, Eugene
Robinson of the Washington Post, Jonathan Alter, all of the men Keith
continually had on delighted in tearing down Clinton. That it was all about helping Obama was blatantly obvious.

It’s not just that Olbermann, who led with the bias on “Countdown,”
was openly backing Obama, which he was. It was that he wouldn’t admit it.

This same behavior, however, was repeated throughout the traditional media,
extending to new media, with some of the biggest blogs pretending they were
unbiased, when they were not. It was nonsense, as was proven here, as well as
other places, particularly by Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft, an Obama supporter
who was able to most of the time heap scorn when it was due. Classic point to
prove this fact is his post tonight about Oprah, the biggest public Obama supporter
of them all. BTD calls out others on the Oprah – Obama issue, for ignoring
her partisan preferences for Barack. Now, there’s nothing wrong with that, especially
since she declared in the primaries. But to say that Oprah not having Palin
on isn’t because of her Obama support is ridiculous. She’ll have to pay the price, though unlike Olbermann, at least her choice was stated.

As for Chris Matthews, the other anchor slapped by the NBC, well, his Hillary hatred,
as well as his deep bias against Bill Clinton, has been obvious for a long time for anyone paying
attention. But any grown man
who is willing to talk about a tingle down his leg when hearing a politician,
and do so on camera, deserves whatever his network boss levels.

During it all, I continued to watch “Countdown,” though it was difficult,
as well as “Hardball.” I saw it unfold, then unravel. I wrote about
it often and at length, with more links in my archives than I can possibly offer.
So this latest development doesn’t surprise me at all.

Keith Olbermann is why I dropped any interest in supporting the Fox boycott.
Because Fox’s Bill O’Reilly had the ratings and the reach out, so when Hillary
needed to get both and draw attention to her primary fight, they were there
and fair. Yes, I realize the larger Fox network anchors never miss a chance
to hit Democrats, almost always unfairly and below the belt, but O’Reilly treated
Clinton with respect, something she could never get on “Countdown”
or “Hardball,” two of the top rated shows on MSNBC.

Chalk this one up as a win for the GOP, who knows how to work the refs and has a huge team
behind them to help, including right-wing and Christian broadcasting. This is
going to raise the media bias issue, the “liberal media” canard even
higher for the public. It’s called blowback, which plays into Palin’s candidacy
and further helps John McCain.

Read full story · Comments are closed

A Word About the Anti Clinton Media

By on 28 August 2008

Reporting from Denver



Howard Wolfson went to Fox for a reason. Keith Olbermann, once again, illustrated
why. Anyone going at Wolfson for being on Fox definitely didn’t see the primary
media coverage through Hillary eyes. Fox will never be pro Democratic, but they
were fair to Clinton during the primaries, along with CNN, which Olbermann and
his fellow Clinton hater, Chris Matthews, were not.

NBC and MSNBC deserve better than what Olbermann and Matthews serve up, especially
on the Clinton score. It continues to be the network I move to, though I’ve
not been privy to any MSNBC Democratic convention coverage, because the Courtyard
Marriott doesn’t have it. But Olbermann’s recent slap at Wolfson was not only
wrong, but petty and small, something that continues to describe Mr. Olbermann,
who at one time showed much promise, but whose Clinton derangement revealed a lack of editorial judgment rarely seen in someone featured so prominently on air.
This lack of independence is unfortunate, because now Olbermann is basically
worthless in helping us in the general. The only people now watching him are
the already converted. He’s done it to himself. But when it comes to coverage,
he’s not alone.

Take The
Nation magazine, whose Clinton derangement comes close to matching
the unhinged fringe. You will likely never see credit where it is due from that
crowd.

Bob Somerby presents MoDo
as she really is: There’s that “top Democrat” again! The
one who might not quite exist! Another anti Clinton media disseminator
who never lets the facts get in her way. Her spinning in the face of reality
would get most people fired. She’s finally laid to rest any doubt that her Clinton
delusion has rendered her rhetorically unstable.

Carl Bernstein made the same point on CNN today, blasting away that the media
was more interested in their concocted Clinton – Obama soap opera than the real
story playing out at the Democratic convention: UNITY. Oh, but if the two camps
are issuing statements of unity it must not be so! What else are they supposed
to do when the press is pushing a story on a foundation of MoDo lies? So, in the
process, the media, including many blogs, didn’t catch up to the story until
it was completely played out.

In order to concoct a story to drum up ratings and clicks, the people charged with writing the story missed the story and the truth. I’m proud that we weren’t part of that pack.

One thing is clear after Hillary then Bill Clinton delivered for Barack these
last couple of days. They’re both class acts and know what’s important, but
also can put it into action when called, when everything is on the line. They
know we need to win in November and they’re going to do their part to get it
done. Message sent, with heart.

The rest is up to Barack, though the media will likely miss that story, opting
for their own optics instead.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The Media’s Clintonitis

By on 26 August 2008

Reporting from Denver


John Harris
has got it and it’s lethal.


… .. It also requires them to embrace a generational transition in which
the Clintons — whose political personas once stood for youth and the
excitement of change — are cast as sunset figures, two conventional
politicians in their sixties being shoved aside by a charismatic young celebrity.

“They are both going to do what they have to do,” said one veteran
of Bill Clinton’s White House who remains close to them. “That
does not mean they will enjoy it.”

But Obama, too, is part of the Denver psychodrama. Some Democrats with high-level
ties to both the Clinton and Obama camps said they were surprised that Obama
has not done more to make the Clintons more enthusiastic about his candidacy.

The Hill adds more.

Only in America’s media world would the only two-term president since F.D.R., and
the only woman to ever get 18 million votes and almost win the nomination, be
considered “sunset figures.”

Newsflash: This continual storyline is not helping the Democrats unite. That’s
the point. The American press want to make this all about the Clinton’s “passing,”
as Obama takes the helm. Guess what, the Clintons aren’t going anywhere. I know
this will come as a shock to many, but as I wrote yesterday, there are two camps
in the Democratic Party now, Clinton and Obama. We need them both to win.

But going forward, no matter what happens, Hillary’s star is not dimming. There
are two many of us who continue to believe in her to give up on her role in
Democratic politics. We are supporting Obama because he’s our nominee and we
absolutely know we have to elect a Democrat. But our belief in Hillary Clinton
remains strong. Tonight you’re going to see why.

On the other side you have Barack Obama who is the nominee and deserves all
Democrats to jump on board to beat John McCain. It might not be enthusiastic
for everyone, but a vote is a vote is a vote. It doesn’t register in passion.
It registers against an unacceptable alternative.

Hillary will give a magnificent speech tonight. Afterwards it will be all Clintonites
(who care about changing the course of this country) and Obamamaniacs on board
for a common purpose. Keeping John McCain out of the White House should be enough to unite us. If it isn’t, well, considering the stakes, then we deserve to lose.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Mike Allen Reports Old News in Order to Hit Hillary

By on 22 August 2008

Reporting from Santa Fe, New Mexico

Bad journalism gets a lot of attention. That’s especially true on a day when everyone is waiting for veep news. There’s nothing yet to report. So, some rehash old stories.

Via Mike Allen.
Clinton was never vetted. The dream team is dead. This
was reported weeks ago by Mike Allen’s own Politico colleague, Ben
Smith, who got the story first, straight from Howard Wolfson’s mouth in early
July. Allen rehashes the story again today anyway.


Obama has often said, most recently on NBC’s “Meet the Press”
on July 27, that Clinton “would be on anybody’s short list.”

But apparently not his.

“She was never vetted,” a Democratic official reported. “She
was not asked for a single piece of paper. She and Senator Obama have never
had a single conversation about it. How would he know if she’d take
it?”

The official also said Clinton never met with Obama’s vetting team
of Eric Holder and Caroline Kennedy. …

But let’s be clear, Mike Allen doesn’t just want to relay the information,
which again we already have heard, from a pretty good source. He wants to make
the entire event as insulting to Hillary Clinton as possible. “Hillary
gets stiffed” is as harsh as it gets. It may have the virtue of possibly
being true, but Mike Allen didn’t exactly get it story first.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Bill Clinton, Race Baiting and Phallic Symbols

By on 05 August 2008





“I am not a racist.” – William Jefferson Clinton (Interview
with Kate Snow, ABC News)

You know Democrats are in trouble when the only two-term Democratic president
since F.D.R. is reduced to stating he’s “not a racist.” Especially
when this president was championed by the African American community during
his presidency, right up until Jesse
Jackson, Jr. questioned whether Hillary Clinton cried for Katrina victims,
the primary moment when the baiting
over race began. But once someone like Bob Herbert starts drawing out phallic
symbols and juxtaposing “call me” references from Harold Ford days,
when there are none, you know we’ve all gone down a rocky one way road. Can
Keith Olbermann bringing up the phalluses be far behind? Nope, he did that last
not; yet another moment when Mr. Olbermann chose his anti Edward R. Murrow persona
that lurks within. You’ll have to figure out why Bob
Herbert also selected the role of being James
Clyburn of the general election. It’s certainly not
going to do Barack Obama any good at all. But John McCain’s got to love
it.

Everyone knew we had racial issues in this country, but what we’re seeing play
out from the primaries to the general election isn’t coming from American voters.
It’s coming from Democrats, politicians, analysts and strategists, including liberal columnists and media
types, including bloggers who jumped the race gun, all because Richard Nixon, the
GOP’s southern strategy, followed by Lee Atwater, once divided to conquer in
order to win the presidency, back when race baiting was the thing.

However, when you have William Jefferson Clinton feeling compelled to say in
an interview that he is “not a racist” after a tough Democratic primary
season, you know that whatever sins the GOP delivered before (and will again),
they’ve now been passed along to Democrats and so called progressives in an
effort to either get ahead of what is believed to be coming, or to draw a line
on a dare that challenges people who are afraid to stand up to false race charges, because in America, we all know the prejudice
is there, especially if you’re willing to conjure it up, ala Bob Herbert.

Not
even William Jefferson Clinton is safe. Can anyone doubt why he holds fury?

Jon Stewart had a blast with all of this last night. It made my heart sing
to see him roundly reject the race baiting, while ridiculing the players on
both sides. Because Democrats have lost our race cherry, which in a year
that was supposed to be a walk, we seem intent on making it a slow, embarrassing
crawl.

But what this whole affair does for Democratic nominee is something quite horrifying.
Not only does this recent back and forth on race belittle the candidacy of the
first African American who began this general election with an overwhelming
advantage. It hands John McCain a shield, protecting him and his party from
all the scurrilous things that will no doubt continue to be said, emailed and
whispered about Barack Obama. Because when the politically astute hear an African
American Democratic candidate telling a crowd that his Republican opponent will
ask “Did I mention he’s black,” when his opponent has done
no such thing, we hear ugly
things echoing forward, as a disquieted wolf cries. It also rips the scab off
memories, which many of us are trying to put down for country.

So, let Bob Herbert trot out imaginary fiction of phalluses in McCain ads,
citing scantily clad white women, in rhetorical flourishes of race baiting that
would make someone prejudice blush at the audacity. Keith Olbermann can ask
Jonathan Alter about them, too, because he long ago proved he has no boundaries
on his type of “journalism.” However, when on the same day William Jefferson Clinton is compelled
to insert into the political blood stream that he’s “not a racist,”
the combination of sound bites meets up in a fusion so explosive for Democrats
that it becomes a gift of dynamite for Republicans that could propel them to
a racial high road they don’t deserve to hold.

“I am not a racist” is something William Jefferson Clinton should
never feel compelled to utter. That he did sends a message to John McCain, which
was delivered loud and clear when Obama stated “Did I mention he’s
black?” Republicans won’t make Democratic mistakes, because they don’t
care what you call them, as long as they win. It’s repetitive, but it’s also a reminder.

This all traces back to the Democratic primaries. It also traces back
to Rep. James Clyburn, who inflamed
it because he could and he knew it would work, though it left carnage behind that’s not long forgotten. Oh, and by the way, like Bob “fantasy phalluses” Herbert, neither
of these guys are white. Just in case you’re keeping score. McCain is and right
now it’s his advantage.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The Race Issue, Up Front and Ugly

By on 01 August 2008


The latest salvos between these two camps started when John McCain’s ad “Celeb”
hit the airwaves. People said it was such a silly ad. Unfortunately, it worked,
because Barack Obama took the bait and then amped
it up.


“Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges
we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me,”
Obama said. “You know, ‘He’s not patriotic enough, he’s got a funny name,’
you know, ‘He doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the
dollar bills.’” …

… .. Obama often makes references to his distinctions as a candidate, such
as saying there are doubts among some voters because he has “a funny
name.” At times he refers to his race as well, saying he looks different
from any previous candidate but then adding that the differences are not just
about race. Addressing supporters Tuesday night at a fundraiser in Springfield,
he said, “It’s a leap, electing a 46-year-old black guy named
Barack Obama.”

Obama said it in Missouri, a place that has had more than its share of racial,
let’s just call them, challenges. I grew up in Missouri, spending my
teen years in St. Louis. I remember high school, with kids being bussed in from another high school. Missouri has its history. Talking about race there means something.

Rick Davis accused Obama of playing the race card, “from the
bottom of the deck.” It was like I was rocketed back to that
1990s trial, Johnny Cochran, “If it doesn’t fit…” More
like it’s just not fitting. I’m not
the only one who heard it that way.

So, here we go.

However, what I didn’t hear, see or sense in the first place from McCain’s
“Celeb” ad, was the racism people were screaming about, with some
diving over the rhetorical cliff. It was about celebrity, but The New York
Times felt it important to add fuel to the fire by bringing Harold Ford’s senate race into the mix. “Celeb” was not “Fancy Ford.”
Not by a long shot.

I’ve been here before. But this time it was Obama
who had to back it up.


… “Say whatever you want about Bill Clinton,” Schmidt said, “but it’s deeply unfair to suggest his criticism of Obama was race-based. President Clinton was a force for unity in this country on this subject. Every American should be proud of his record as both a governor and president. But we knew it was coming in our direction because they did it against a President of the United State of their own party.”

A former chief strategist to Hillary Clinton, Howard Wolfson, echoed
Schmidt’s comparison.

“I think the McCain camp watched our primary on the Democratic side
very carefully and they know that any accusation of racial divisiveness can
be very, very harmful for a candidate’s prospects,” Wolfson said on Fox
News Thursday, adding that the allegations against Clinton were unfair. “They
heard something that Senator Obama said and they felt they had to respond
quickly to make sure that nobody got the impression that they were engaged
in those kind of racial politics.”

Schmidt said McCain’s aides felt forced to talk about race, and that they
don’t plan to do it again.

But the aftermath of this campaign flashpoint — which began with a
McCain ad using Paris Hilton and Britney Spears to paint Obama as a preening
rock star — indicated points were scored for the Republican side.

Obama’s campaign quickly put out a statement Thursday retracting the candidate’s
suggestion that McCain had improperly used race, and, while on a conference
call with reporters, campaign manager David Plouffe declined repeatedly to
revisit any aspect of the question of race.

“We weren’t suggesting in any way he was using race as an
issue,” Plouffe said of McCain, though he didn’t explain how Obama’s
words could be taken any other way. He also declined to engage speculation
that McCain was responding so forcefully to highlight Obama’s race. …

No one can doubt that Republicans have used the fear card over and over again
since 9/11. Democrats were so afraid of being called cowards they launched us
into a bad war to prove they had the spine to fight “the war on terror.”
So Obama got that part of his campaign patter absolutely correct. But then he
blew it, over-reaching and interjecting, “It’s a leap, electing
a 46-year-old black guy named Barack Obama” into the political
bloodstream.

Nobody doubted that race would be an issue in this campaign. But being a lily
white Irish-Scots broad who grew up in Missouri during certain times, I have
no problem standing up, speaking out and pushing back when someone’s using the
race card because they’re getting criticized and they don’t like what I’ve written
or said. Being white doesn’t make me stupid.

The “Celeb” ad was about the culture of celebrity,

hitting Obama hard, which obviously struck a nerve because they’ve been on the defensive ever
since. Obama threw a couple of word bombs. McCain’s team sent a message back.
Obama then backed up.

Republicans don’t care what you call them. They just care that they win, and
they never bring knives to a gun fight.

UPDATE: ABC News gets Axelrod to state the obvious:


But Obama’s chief strategist, David Axelrod, acknowledged on “Good Morning America” Friday that the candidate was referring, at least in part, to his ethnic background. When pressed to explain the comment, Axelrod told “GMA” it meant, “He’s not from central casting when it comes to candidates for president of the United States. He’s new to Washington. Yes, he’s African-American.”
Read full story · Comments are closed

ObamaSmear-o-Rama

By on 19 June 2008



Malik Obama gives an interview to Israeli Army Radio. The Jerusalem Post listens and crafts quite a yarn. It’s now being spread, with the media and bloggers and wingnut radio hosts playing a bad game of telephone.



“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” – Mark Twain

Jake Tapper does good work debunking the baloney.

From the Jerusalem Post, which has now scrubbed the story, but these days nothing is ever scrubbed.


Barack Obama’s half brother Malik said Thursday that if elected his brother will be a good president for the Jewish people, despite his Muslim background.

“Muslim background,” huh. Accordingly, anti Obama zealots went into action.


This suspicion reared its head in Israeli blogs and the blogs of supporters of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and Sean Hannity fan sites and Free Republic and slut.”
During the 1992 campaign, Bill Clinton regarding Gennifer Flowers going public
with their long affair (High Crimes & Misdemeanors, p. 80). The ever-sensitive
Hillary once said that she would “crucify” Ms. Flowers (Hillary’s
Choice, p. 13).

“That little Greek motherf*cker!”
Bill Clinton angry with Michael Dukakis after the Dukakis team ridiculed his
long-winded speech at the 1988 Democratic National Convention as endless and
self-serving (Partners in Power, p. 439). For perspective, many Democrats
criticized Clinton’s speech for the same reasons.

“He couldn’t get a whore across a bridge.”
Bill Clinton displaying his self-proclaimed sensitivity for others’ pain as
he discusses Ted Kennedy’s “accident” at Chappaquiddick (Bill &
Hillary, p. 238).

“Larry, unless they have pictures of me with a goat, I’ll deny it.”

Bill Clinton telling state trooper Larry Patterson what he would do if anyone
brought up any of his gargantuan amount of affairs.”
[More Than Sex, The Secrets of Bill and Hillary Clinton Revealed! By Larry
Patterson]

“Larry, it’s kind of like Beauty and the Beast, isn’t it?”
Bill Clinton, while hugging Paula Jones in the Rotunda of the Arkansas Capitol,
to state trooper Larry Patterson – [More Than Sex, The Secrets of Bill and
Hillary Clinton Revealed! By Larry Patterson] This occurred after Bill had
exposed himself to Paula. Bill has denied having even met Paula Jones, much
less dropping his pants to her, exposing his privates and asking her to “Kiss
it.”

“Larry, I am the governor of the state of Arkansas. I work really hard
and the laws that apply to everyone else shouldn’t apply to me.”
Bill Clinton to state trooper Larry Patterson – [More Than Sex, The Secrets
of Bill and Hillary Clinton Revealed! By Larry Patterson]

“I can do any goddamned thing I want. I’m the president of the United
States. I take care of my friends and I fuck with my enemies.”
Bill Clinton to his staff who challenged him after he said he wanted every
member of the Independent Counsel’s office audited by the IRS. [Doug Thompson,
"Bill Clinton is a violent, profane man who wants to 'kill' his enemies,"
Capital Hill Blue.com, April 8, 1999]

“The devil’s in that woman.” Miss Emma, the cook at the Arkansas
governor’s mansion, referring to Hillary during one of Hillary’s profane cursing
fits.
[Ronald Kessler, Inside the White House, p.246 ]

“Everybody in politics lies, but [Hillary and Bill] do it with such ease,
it’s troubling.” – David Geffen, 2007

” Clinton’s an unusually good liar. Unusually good. Do you realize that?”
Democratic senator Bob Kerrey speaking on Bill in 1996

“Aw, hell, Mike. Everybody knows the Clintons want the White House and
will do anything to get it. We know about the cocaine. Hell, we’ve picked
it up before with Lasater when he was worried about going on to Little Rock
Air Base to get it.”
Buddy Young to Mossad operative Michael Harari ( 3/15/85) [recorded by CIA
helicopter pilot Gene "Chip" Tatum]

The reason people do not like Hillary is because she and Bill have personally
violated so many people over a period of decades. The Clintons are sociopaths.
Here is what a recent focus group of New Hampshire Democrats had to say about
Hillary:

Hatin’ on Hillary: N.H. Dems lambaste Clinton
By Brett Arends
Boston Herald Business Columnist

Monday, August 7, 2006 – Updated: 09:36 AM EST

MANCHESTER, N.H. – Dick Bennett has been polling New Hampshire voters for
30 years. And he’s never seen anything like it.
“Lying b**** . . . shrew . . . Machiavellian . . . evil, power-mad witch
. . . the ultimate self-serving politician.”

No prizes for guessing which presidential front-runner drew these remarks
in focus groups.

But these weren’t Republicans talking about Hillary Clinton. They weren’t
even independents.

These were ordinary, grass-roots Democrats. People who identified themselves
as “likely” voters in the pivotal state’s Democratic primary. And,
behind closed doors, this is what nearly half of them are saying.

“I was amazed,” says Bennett. “I thought there might be some
negatives, but I didn’t know it would be as strong as this. It’s stunning,
the similarities between the Republicans and the Democrats, the comments they
have about her.”

Bennett runs American Research Group Inc., a highly regarded, independent
polling company based in Manchester, N.H . He’s been conducting voter surveys
there since 1976. The polls are financed by subscribers and corporate sponsors.

He has so far recruited 410 likely voters in the 2008 Democratic primary,
and sat down with them privately in small groups to find out what they really
think about the candidates and the issues.

His conclusion? “Forty-five percent of the Democrats are just as negative
about her as Republicans are. More Republicans dislike her, but the Democrats
dislike her in the same way.”

Hillary’s growing brain trust in the party’s upper reaches already knows
she has high “negatives” among ordinary Democrats. They think she
can win those voters over with the right strategy and message.

But they should get out of D.C., New York and L.A. more often, and visit
grassroots members.

Because we’re not talking about “soft” negatives like, say, “out
of touch” or “arrogant.”

We’re talking: “Criminal . . . megalomaniac . . . fraud . . . dangerous
. . . devil incarnate . . . satanic . . . power freak.”

Satanic.

And: “Political wh***.”

(Note: I don’t usually like reporting such personal remarks, but in this
case you can hardly understand the situation without them. I have no strong
personal feelings about the senator.)

There are caveats. Any survey can be inaccurate or misleading. And 55 percent
of ARG’s sample was either neutral or positive about Sen. Clinton. Thirty-two
percent currently say they plan to vote for her in the primary.

But Bennett says he’s never before seen so many N.H. voters show so much
hatred toward a member of their own party. He’s never even seen anything close.

He believes top national Democrats are missing this grassroots intensity.
Instead, he suspects, they are blinded by poll numbers, which give Hillary
a big early lead based on her name recognition.

Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia ‘s Center for Politics,
agrees.

“There is far more anti-Hillary sentiment in the Democratic Party than
the pollsters understand,” he says. In the race for the nomination, “she
is ripe for plucking,” he says.

Sen. Clinton’s team could not be reached for comment.

New Hampshire is small, but it’s a bellwether state with clout.

Its primary probably holds the key to the Democratic nomination. And New
Hampshire, alone, swung from Bush to Kerry in ’04.

It’s hard to see any Democrat winning the White House without carrying the
state in the presidential election. And it’s hard, right now, to see Hillary
carrying the state.

“I want you to get rid of all these bitches he’s seeing … I want
you to give me the names and addresses and phone numbers, and we can get them
under control” – Hillary to Ivan Duda in 1982.

“I believe that Bill Clinton had my father killed to protect his political
career.” Gary Parks, whose father, Jerry Parks, was murdered in cold
blood on 9-26-93. Hillary and her boyfriend Vince Foster had hired Jerry Parks
to spy on Bill for years and Jerry Parks knew a LOT about the Clintons.

“Oh, that’s good L.D., that’s good.” Bill to C.I.A. operative L.D.
Brown, also Bill’s favorite state trooper, after L.D. said he was going to
Mexico to kill Terry Reed. Terry Reed knew about Bill’s involvement with the
C.I.A.’s contras/arms/drugs back to USA scheme of the 1980′s.

“My God, I can do it again.” – Bill to Juanita Broaddrick
before he raped her for second time on April 25, 1978.

“You better put some ice on that.” – Bill to Juanita after
he had raped her and referring to her upper lip that Bill had chewed on with
his teeth.

“You will never believe what the motherfucker [Bill] did now, he tried
to rape some bitch!” – Hillary in 1978 referring to Bill’s rape of Juanita,
as related by close advisor Larry Nichols.

“We want to thank you for everything you do for Bill,” Hillary to
Juanita Broaddrick at a political event just 3 weeks after Bill had raped
Juanita in 1978, as Hillary kept holding Juanita’s hand, then Hillary repeated
“Everything you do for Bill.” [meaning shut up, don't talk]

“That’s too bad. Bullseye was his name wasn’t it? … You’re just
not getting the message, are you?” – Hillary’s goon to Kathleen
on 1-8-98 and referring to Bullseye, her pet cat of 13 years, that had Hillary’s
goons had stolen.

“I was very, very, very terrified” – Kathleen Willey, referring
to the time Hillary’s goon approached Kathleen while she was alone walking
her dogs, after her cat Bullseye had disappeared and 3 of her car tires had
been nail-gunned.

“The only regret that I had about that whole thing was that Hillary
did not pay me in a timely fashion.” Jack Palladino, who Hillary had
hired to run a terror campaign on Kathleen, to Melanie Morgan in 2003.

“Is Gennifer Flowers the sort of person who would commit suicide ?”
– Hillary’s goon Jack Palladino to the former roommate of Gennifer.

“They looked like [ Arkansas] state troopers, I’ll say that.” –
Gary Johnson referring to the 3 big, beefy men with short haircuts who savagely
beat and nearly murdered him on 6-26-92.

“We have to destroy her.” – Hillary referring to Gennifer
Flowers.

“We have to destroy her story.” – Hillary referring to Connie
Hamzy and speaking to George Stephanopolous.

“Hillary let that old man of hers call me a liar … I might be a
slut and a whore. But I am no liar.” – Connie Hamzy

“If you cooperate with the media, we will destroy you.” –
Walter Kyle, Clinton campaign worker, in 1992 to his sister Dolly Kyle Browning,
who had an affair with Bill for decades.

“Bitches,” “Whores,” “Sluts,” “Trailer
Trash” who must be “destroyed ” – how Hillary refers
to Bill’s sex victims and girlfriends.

“Yes, I was physically scared. We are talking about the presidency of
the country here, and between the friendly calls on one hand telling me to
get out of town for my own good and then talking about smear tactics on the
other, I got scared. Yes, physically scared. There were always veiled threats.
Always.”
– Elizabeth Ward Gracen on the harassment campaign that Hillary’s goons subjected
her to in 1997.

“Marilyn Monroe got snuffed.” – from an intimidation letter
sent to Sally Perdue who had an affair with Bill in 1983.

“I thought it was the coolest thing in the world that we had a governor
who got high.” – Sharlene Wilson referring to Gov. Bill and his
cocaine use.

“Got to get some for my brother [Bill], he’s got a nose like a vacuum
cleaner.” – Roger Clinton buying cocaine and referring to Bill.

“Sure you don’t want some of this? This is good shit. We sure do grow
lotsa good things besides watermelons here in Arkansas.” – Bill
to Terry Reed and who Bill was trying to talk into going to Mexico for the
C.I.A. Gov. Bill was commenting on the quality of the dope.

“Go on. I’m the commander in chief here; you won’t get busted.”
– Gov. Bill to Terry Reed and offering a joint.

“Aw hell, Mike. Everybody knows the Clintons want the White House and
will do anything to get it… We know about the cocaine- hell! I’ve picked
it up before with Lasater when he was worried about going on Little Rock Air
Base to get it.”
– Buddy Young to Mossad agent Mike Harari (taped by Chip Tatum) on 3/16/85
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MENA/TATUM/tatum.html (accessed
5/12/07)

“I wouldn’t put anything past Bill Clinton .” – Kathy Fergusen,
who Bill had once pinned against the kitchen counter in the Governor’s mansion.

“It looks like someone has shot out all your tires with a nail gun; is
there someone out there who does not like you?” – the mechanic
of Kathleen Willey in the fall of 1997.

“Suck it,” Bill referring to his penis in 1979 and speaking to Carolyn
Moffet who ran out of the room.

“Would you kiss it for me?” Bill referring to his erect penis and
speaking to Paula Jones.

“Crooked and hard and gross” – Bill’s penis as described by Paula
Jones to her sister Lydia Cathey.

“Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what
you’ll find.” Clinton aide James Carville referring to Paula Jones.

“I was sitting there crying and so upset at the time … I felt like
the next person coming through the door [was coming] to get rid of [my] body.
I absolutely could not believe what had happened to me.” – Juanita
Broaddrick referring to the aftermath of Bill’s rape of her.

“[Bill] ministers to troubled people all the time. He’s done it dozens
if not hundreds of times. He does it out of religious conviction and personal
temperament.” – Hillary to Sydney Blumenthal.

“I don’t mean abusive. I mean very over the top, out of control, physically
powerful, where he would repeatedly say to Monica, ‘I’m not hurting you, am
I?’ And essentially he was, but she didn’t say he was.” – Linda
Tripp describing Monica’s account of rough sex with Bill. [NewsMax 2-10-01]

“That cat, he was a nice cat. Bullseye was his name, wasn’t it?”
Kathleen added, “He asked me about my children by name. He said, ‘How
are your children, Shannon and Patrick?’ It was a very insidious thing and
it was meant to scare me.” – Kathleen Willey referring to her experience
with Hillary’s goon.

“I gotta get in Rose [Law Firm] … I’m gonna fuck [Webb] Hubbell.”
– Hillary, 1978, in the presence of Larry Nichols, Bill and others

“Larry, unless they have pictures of me with a goat, I’ll deny it .”
– Bill to Larry Patterson and referring to his gargantuan philandering

“He is my friend. He will lie for me, steal for me, cheat for me, kill
for me …You have to do the same to cover for me.” – Bill
to Larry Patterson and referring to another state trooper

“Come on, Bill, put your dick up. You can’t fuck her here.” –
Hillary to Bill at a political event.

“What the fuck do you think you’re doing? I know who that whore is.
I know what she’s here for. Get her out of here.” -Hillary, in front
of Bill, speaking to Larry Patterson who had brought along one of Bill’s girls
to a going away ceremony in January, 1993.

“These are not your average girls. Some of them have worked with Bill
Clinton.” – Las Vegas madam Esperanza Brooks promoting her call
girls in spring, 2007 to an undercover Las Vegas police officer. She said
her clients ranged from “Shaquille O’Neal to Bill Clinton.”

“It is God’s law to kill babies.” – Hillary to pro-life activist
Lurleen Stackhouse, while in AME Church, on 1-21-93.

“The devil’s in that woman.” Miss Emma, the cook at the Arkansas
governor’s mansion, referring to Hillary during one of Hillary’s profane cursing
fits.

“Bill owes me.” – Hillary to anyone who would listen for years.

“Goddamn it, Bill, you promised me that office.” – Hillary
to Bill, on Inauguration Day, 1993, and referring to the office of Vice-President
Al Gore.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama Swallows Prince of Darkness Swill

By on 17 November 2007

I guess after Thursday’s pounding, Mr. Obama and his team are ready to grasp at anything. We’ve now entered the moment where leading Democrats would rather listen to right-wing rants than give the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination the benefit of the doubt. Not very impressive on Mr. Obama’s part, I must say.

The guy who dropped a dime on a covert CIA operative is back and Mr. Obama
is buying into his baloney. The conservative cauldron is sure bubbling today.
Question is why is anyone paying attention to this guy?


Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles
that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party’s
presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, but has decided not to use it.
The nature of the alleged scandal was not disclosed. … ..

Hillary vs. Obama?

Yeah, yeah, Clinton agents are everywhere trying to destroy Obama. News flash to the ignorant: In case you hadn’t noticed Clinton is a little busy still trying to convince voters that she’s got answers to their problems. Her focus is not on Mr. Obama. It’s on you, the primary voters in Iowa, but far beyond Iowa as well. She doesn’t have a one-state primary strategy. Ya dig?

But let’s swallow Novak’s National Enquirer
gossip regurgitation in one gulp, shall we? Evidently, the Obama campaign needed a snack today.


“During our debate in Las Vegas on Thursday, we heard Senator Clinton
rail against the politics of ‘throwing mud.’

“At the very same time, in Washington, Robert Novak was publishing a
column in which he reported the following: ‘Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton
are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information
about her principal opponent for the party’s presidential nomination, Sen.
Barack Obama…’ … ..

But in the interest of our party, and her own reputation, Senator Clinton
should either make public any and all information referred to in the item,
or concede the truth: that there is none. … ..

Obama
Statement

Excuse me, but there’s no proof whatsoever Novak has anything valid. Secondly,
why is Mr. Obama automatically firing at Clinton because of some screed from
the Prince of Darkness? How desperate is he anyway? But most importantly, Mr. Obama is impugning Hillary Clinton’s integrity based on an unattributed rumor in the opening paragraph of a syndicated column from a Republican operative. A man who was so mad that Joseph Wilson blew Mr. Bush out of the water on the Iraq war he was willing to out a covert CIA operative (who just so happened to be working on WMDs, let me add), in order to send a message across her husband’s bow.
Since when do
Democrats take the word of a Republican over a respected member of our own party?

From Howard Wolfson:


Once again Senator Obama is echoing Republican talking points, this time
from Bob Novak.

This is how Republicans work.

A Republican-leaning journalist runs a blind item designed to set Democrats
against one another. Experienced Democrats see this for what it is. Others
get distracted and thrown off their games.

Voters should be concerned about the readiness of any Democrat inexperienced
enough to fall for this.

There is a campaign in this race that has engaged in the very practice that
Senator Obama is decrying, and it’s his.

We have no idea what Mr. Novak’s item is about and reject it totally. Instead
of pointing fingers at us, Senator Obama should get back to the issues and
focus on what this election is really about.

This is exactly correct. It’s a blind item from a wingnut slipped into Saturday’s
media stream targeting Clinton — last time he targeted Valerie Plame Wilson
— in the belief that one of her opponents would gobble it up without chewing
it.

Another distraction targeting Clinton from the right-wing because they know
her opponents have no political impulse control and are so desperate, especially after Thursday’s
shellacking, that they’ll grab at anything; even if it hoists us all on some
wingnut petard.

UPDATE: Peter Daou, Clinton’s Internet director, has addressed the suckering of Obama by Novak, if that’s what it is. But given the track record it’s not wrong to wonder. Seriously, who’s actually swiftboating whom? It’s not like Mr. Obama and his team haven’t traveled in pushing this stuff themselves. I covered Obama’s “D-Punjab” smear of Clinton back at June that was also covered in the New York Times, as well as the smear on Bill Clinton that Politico covered in “Oppo Bounty.” Then there was his “oops” apology for it. There was also Obama’s team trying to dig up dirt at the Clinton library. Two more from Daou are below:


Obama communications director compiled list of opposition research stories on Hillary that he was pitching to reporters. “Lizza writes while visiting the office of Obama communications chief Robert Gibbs at the national headquarters on Michigan Avenue. ‘I couldn’t help but notice some of what he had scrawled on a whiteboard hanging on his wall: HC Bio › NY Post HC Travel (AP?) Tax Returns (Balz?) Darfur investments (HF) JE 527 HC is, of course, Hillary Clinton… These were obviously notes about stories the campaign was pushing or anticipating…’” [Chicago Sun-Times, 8/14/07]

The Obama camp took credit for the attack on Hillary regarding Norman Hsu. “In August, Obama’s team scored a significant hit by helping to place a story in several newspapers revealing that Norman Hsu, a major Clinton donor, had skipped town after having pleaded no contest to a charge of grand theft 15 years earlier and still faced an outstanding warrant… (Hsu had also contributed to Obama.)” [Atlantic Monthly, 12/2007]

But let’s not forget Andrew Sullivan Marc Ambinder, who in the print copy of his Atlantic Monthly love letter to Obama offers this beauty: At a campaign event in Iowa, one of Obama’s aides plopped down next to me. He wanted to know when reporters would begin to look into Bill Clinton’s postpresidential sex life. The part in bold was in red in the print edition. Funny how it didn’t make it in the online posting. (Thanks to reader JoeCHI – Quoted correctly, but attributed the wrong article. Now corrected.)

The Clinton campaign has responded to yet another try from Obama’s team to make Novak’s charges stick (also in “>Daou’s update):


It’s telling that the Obama campaign would rather spend the day throwing mud in Bob Novak’s sandbox than talking about the issues.

Our statement was crystal clear: Democratic voters should be concerned about any Presidential candidate inexperienced enough to fall for Republican talking points. The Clinton campaign has nothing to do with this item.

Read full story · Comments are closed

‘How do we beat the bitch?’

By on 14 November 2007


via Greg Sargent and Salon.com

Inquiring minds want to know.

But don’t forget that McCain respects any nominee of the Democrat
party. Oh, but come to think of it “that’s an excellent question.”
And people wonder why I’m willing to continue to take flack for providing
the facts on Clinton, even as others do not and attack me for all manner of
imagined sins.

This is on “The Page,” hack
central for Mark Halperin:


Voters see Clinton as electable panderer ready to be president.

Halperin makes this “analysis” from reading a piece written by Adam
Nagourney (and reported by others as well) for The
New York Times. The actual text from which Halperin scribes his hackery
is quite a bit more complex, but Halperin, famous for his wingnut scribblings
on ABC’s “The Note,” would rather use a one line zinger. Notice he
doesn’t say anything else about any other candidate in this post, only Clinton. I mention
this because of the general election, because if, and it’s not
over yet, but if Clinton is our nominee we need to understand
what we’ll get from Halperin, who has quite a reach. Jot it down.

Then there’s this from TNR:


Despite all the grumbling, however, the press has showered Hillary
with strikingly positive coverage.

Bunker
Hillary

What’s Crowley smoking? Wrong on the facts. But that’s nothing new where Clinton
is concerned.



Just five candidates have been the focus of more than half of all the coverage.
Hillary Clinton received the most (17% of stories), though she can thank the
overwhelming and largely negative attention of conservative talk radio hosts
for much of the edge in total volume. Barack Obama was next (14%), with Republicans
Giuliani, McCain, and Romney measurably behind (9% and 7% and 5% respectively).
As for the rest of the pack, Elizabeth Edwards, a candidate spouse, received
more attention than 10 of them, and nearly as much as her husband.

Journalism.org

In the same story, Crowley points out just how tough the Clinton camp can be
on the press: And so, the Clinton team let Times reporter Patrick Healy,
who covers the Hillary beat, know about their “annoyance” with the
story, as Healy later put it.

“Annoyance”? Poor baby, how does Mr. Healy stand that kind
of heat. The Clinton team is really mean! This from a guy who continually
covers the Clinton marriage like he’s an ace reporter from Soap Opera Weekly.
Insert a picture of Chris Matthews drooling here.

While we know very little about Barack Obama and just what he wants to do as
president. Steve Soto covered this yesterday, touching on the lack of what
does Mr. Obama believe on policy? ** insert crickets here ** just look at that face!:


It’s normal for a neophyte candidate on the national stage to get puffed
up from his own glowing “anyone but Hillary” press clippings and
on-air fluffings from the likes of Matthews and Russert. But if Obama is going
to campaign between now and Iowa on this “put me on a pedestal”
theme, then the Hillary campaign can make some hay over Mr. Obama’s infalliability
and righteousness. Of course, when Hillary brings it up, Obama will adopt
his own version of the “they’re ganging up on me” defense by saying
she’s resorting to the politics of destruction. But the more and more Obama
talks about himself as a righteous, never-wrong truth teller with correct
instincts, who runs away from Washington, the more and more he resembles another
candidate who bamboozled us back in 2000.

Obama: “I
Don’t (Make) A Lot Of Mistakes”

Obama’s halo is still in place because the traditional media has fallen in
love with him.

Does anyone else care that the press is ignoring Edwards rising up again in
Iowa? Or that Obama’s guy David Plouffe is ripping Edwards from the back? The hack pack
press is too enthralled with Mr. anti-Washington, even though that candidate
is actually John Edwards.

But nothing comes close to the recent Obama love-fest from Chris Matthews.
If you didn’t see “Hardball”
on Monday you missed quite a spectacle. It was a continuation of Russert’s
what are you going to do about air travel – what are you going to wear on
Halloween – and while we’re at it, what do you think about life beyond earth?
softballs. Smoking was optional afterwards.


MATTHEWS: You know, I got to say this, in watching this, in scoring this,
I got to say bull‘s-eye, bull‘s-eye, bull‘s-eye, bull‘s-eye,
bulls-eye, every one directly at the heart of Hillary Clinton‘s campaign.
I‘m not making it personal and your guy‘s not making it personal.
But every one of those charges is directly targeted at what I would consider
objectively the nature of the Clinton campaign.

(snip)

MATTHEWS: Good for you.

AXELROD: … for doing a great job.

MATTHEWS: Good for him. David, let‘s get—let‘s get a little
more of your candidate. Here‘s Senator Obama again…

AXELROD: OK. Love to hear him.

(snip)

MATTHEWS: David, I wouldn‘t have believed it possible, but I think
I heard Bob and Jack and Martin all at once there.

(snip)

MATTHEWS: … growing up in a church, but that had the rhythm, the cadence
of a black church, as much as I‘m familiar with one, I got to tell you,
from politics. And I got to tell you, there was a bit of Martin King in that
guy, Martin Luther King. I heard that plaintive call for hope at the end.
It wasn‘t just Bobby and Jack, it was this other voice I heard for the
first time Saturday night. It was—it was great stuff. And I‘m
as romantic as anybody else in this business. I don‘t mind admitting
it. I‘m not some cold-hearted guy…

And he calls his show “Hardball.” Hah!

At least Matthews didn’t ask Axelrod how they were going to beat the b—-.

Read full story · Comments are closed