Once again Bill Clinton spins out of control in an attempt to build up his wife's experience as an effective politician. Seems Obama got the endorsement of a key union (culinary) and that makes him an "establishment" candidate. WOW .... the Clinton dynasty has gone from coronation to change to now what?? The anti-establishment, OUTSIDER campaign?? Talk about absurd flat out spin (Hillary is the personification of careerist politician and Washington insider). This just proves once again ... Bill Clinton will "Say Anything".
Full Text:http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-15-bill-clinton-nevada_N.htm
The former president trumpeted New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's accomplishments while painting Obama as the "establishment" candidate who would bring only the "feeling of change."
"One candidate says you should vote for me because I've not been involved at all in the struggles of the past and therefore we need to turn over a new leaf and (try) something absolutely new. And if you want the feeling of change, then that is the person you should support," Clinton said in a 75-minute speech to about 300 people in a YMCA gymnasium.
"The other candidate says vote for me because I spent a lifetime making change, raising hopes and fulfilling dreams for other people," he said about the former first lady.
In a speech to nearly 2,000 people in neighboring Reno on Monday, Obama portrayed himself as the candidate for change, his campaign's theme from the onset.
"You got to ask yourself, 'Who is best equipped to bring about this change you are hoping for?" said Obama, who later campaigned in Fallon and Carson City.
"I know how hard it is going to be to provide health care to every American. ... to fix our schools or reduce poverty. I know because I fought these fights," the former civil rights lawyer said.
After trailing Hillary Clinton by a 2-1 margin in Nevada as recently as November, a poll published this week showed Obama had moved into a virtual tie with her and former Sen. John Edwards.
I am trying my darndest to be emotionally and intellectually honest during the primaries -- I know that, to some degree, all the candidates put out little lies much of the time to try and draw distinctions between their own position and that of their partisan rivals.
But the Clinton lies just irk me more, much, much more. The
Clintons were the ones that instituted the modern version of media spin doctoring (Hi!, Paul Begala, James Carville, et al.), of releasing bad news to the press on Friday nights, &c., &c. Seeing the ex-Prez out there making fibs about and defending the lawsuit to prevent Strip union worker caucus sites from happening this Saturday is about all I need to remind me why we need a change, and not a redux.
Campaign rhetoric should be seen in a statement such as "Obama is a careerist politician and an establishment politician and will go along with the big money, when push comes to shove. My wife, Hillary, will not, as she has shown when she fought the...." This is typical campaign rhetoric. It is not trash talk and it has been the usual yadayada since Pontius Pilate stole the election from Rocky Graziano. the roman rocket.
A lie would be, for example, a statement such as this: "I have always been against the war in Iraq. I voted for funding the troops, that is true, when a vote against funding could have brought them home, OUT OF HARMS WAY. But I didn't want those boys and gals to be without bullets, so I decided to keep them armed." That's a little lie, a fairy tale, if you will, because we all know that if you were REALLY against the war and were not afraid of voting your principles because you might look bad or lose your Senate seat, you could have voted against funding--the money was still around to keep our troops fighting for months. ALL experts have said so. But this lie/fairy tale can be excused since all pols use such tales for their betterment. ALL USE IT. But, nevertheless, note that when Bill Clinton said that Obama's statement was a fairy tale, he was talking about the discrepancy between (1)saying you were ALWAYS against the war and (2)your votes to keep the war going. Even though all pols use this type of lie, it still is a lie. YOU just CANNOT be against something and vote to keep it going. For pointing this out, Bill Clinton was called racist! Along this line of thought, I remember one responder to a diary of mine calling either my writings or me "close to anti-Semetic." There are 15 pages, 15 pages, of possible relatives with my unusual last name, all killed in the Holocaust, on the Yad Vashem site on the internet. I'm not anti-Semetic, nor is Bill Clinton racist, nor would he make a racist remark.
The damnable lies are those lies which are really whoppers. A fictional example might be: "Among the 300 attendees in the YMCA gym listening to Bill Clinton was Larry Craig, observed working the crowd, although a Republican." Or this example, fictional but close to what people have said for years: "There have always been rumors about Hillary Clinton's lesbianism [Rush--I heard this more than once]." Or: There are many unanswered questions about Vince Foster's death/murder, Hillary's involvement in it, and her possible affair with him." I heard that, too, many times on Rush. Then there are the "scandals." To the Clinton haters/bashers, ALLEGATION = SCANDAL. Whitewater--how much did he make out of that? Travelgate, Filegate. The "rape" accusations by women who, a day after the supposed horror, were out working for the dreaded groper. The Paula Jones accusations--God, read the trial transcript and see how decent Carvill was in calling her "trailer park trash"--it was far too nice for her. And there is the 20-year-old Gennifer Flowers deal, which the "public had a right to know about" more than the allegations that Bush used coke 20 years earlier, maybe not a damnable lie but also not well proved by the publicity hound wannabe. The spin on voting records might be classified as damnable lies if they involve anything truly substantive, but people still blithely accept those lies as truth without checking, and many times with suspension of belief, and such lies are now par for the course.
Then there are the slanderous lies, such as those used against McCain by Bush surrogates in South Carolina. Or the Swift-boat lies which trashed Kerry's military service. Or the new (and older) lies about McCain dealing with his captors and giving away information.
Politics is sordid, but we owe it to all not to fall for allegations about anyone, including Bill, whether you like him or not. That's why remarks like "Now I remember what I hated about them 16 years ago" kill me. It's not that they are wrong, it's that they are stupid, unless shown to be based on some facts, and, MOST IMPORTANTLY,the type of things that you would NOT hold against a different politician.
Where's the BEEF??
From a reporter of USA Today we get an analysis that reports Bill Clinton is "painting" (my term is spinning) Obama as an Establishment Candidate which is an Extraordinary Irony to me. I mean really .... Bill Clinton and cast is a small industry in and of itself .... very well ESTABLISHED and part of an old Democratic establishment which many want to leave behind. The Clintons carry lots of negative political baggage with them. Luggage that nobody wants to open anymore. It's part of the reason that the "experience" message doesn't play as well the "change" message with the public ... we've "experienced" a Clinton presidency before.
When you actually see the former Mr. President get pissy with a local reporter over a very legitimate question about the whole Caucus law suit blunder one clearly remembers the negatives that come with a Clinton candidacy .... in short a striking POLARIZATION of the electorate. Hillary's campaign is quickly polarizing the Democratic party itself.
No where in my post did I mention Hillary rumors or Bill Clinton escapades ... I only talked about (really referred to news reports) Bill Clinton's campaigning technique which I think is founded upon cynical rhetoric. That seems to be an important part of the Clinton campaign.... If Hillary wants to unite the party and promote positive change .... she should tell hubby to tone it down. Last I looked Barrack Obama and John Edwards are running against her, NOT BUBBA.