Hillary’s Voice

Inspired by Stephen Colbert

Hillary Clinton’s disturbing pattern (by vastleft at Corrente)
Hillary Clinton’s reference to Robert F. Kennedy is just the tip of the iceberg of her worrisome ill intent. Recently, she mentioned Abraham Lincoln. And not just in any context, but as as a pretext to get herself alone on a stage with her political rival, Barack Obama. Thank God, he didn’t take the bait! At this point, is there any doubt that she planned to go all “Sic semper tyrannis” on him?… Tell me, why is it that wherever she goes, Secret Service agents keep their watchful eyes on her?… It would be irresponsible not to speculate.

Obama Abandons ‘Presumption of Good Faith’ (The Note, ABC News)
Ending the “smallness of our politics” is the stated mission of Barack Obama’s White House run. In “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama recalls how he softened his website’s harsh rhetoric on abortion in 2004 after he received an email from a pro-life doctor. “[T]hat night, before I went to bed,” wrote Obama, “I said a prayer of my own — that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me.” No such “presumption of good faith” was extended to Hillary Clinton on Friday. When Clinton referenced RFK’s assassination while discussing previous Democratic nomination fights which stretched into June, she was quickly scolded by the Obama campaign… The Obama campaign’s decision to target Clinton’s RFK reference forced the former first lady to express regret for her remarks. It also ensured that the dust-up would be covered on all three network newscasts.

The kicker: “How’s it going Sunshine? Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you everybody. It’s good to be in Sunshine!” — Barack Obama in Sunrise, Florida.
Of course, many of us realized early on that Obama’s talk about a new kind of politics was a bunch of hooey.

Statement from the Argus Leader
“The context of the question and answer with Sen. Clinton was whether her continued candidacy jeopardized party unity this close to the Democratic convention. Her reference to Mr. Kennedy’s assassination appeared to focus on the timeline of his primary candidacy and not the assassination itself.”

Statement from Robert Kennedy Jr.
“It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June. I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband’s 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June. I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense.”

Are We Overreacting To the RFK Statement? (by Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft)
It turns out that Hillary Clinton said something similar regarding RFK and the 1968 race in a Time Magazine interview in March 2008, but there was not an uproar then.

Obama takes his talking points from Drudge (by garychapelhill at The Confluence)
So where do Obama and Co. and the MSM get their talking points from these days? As incredible as it seems, “the boyz” are following marching orders from none other than one of their former arch-enemies, Drudge. I guess he’s their new BFF since he hates Hillary as much as they do… Clinton has made a similar “long primaries are fine” argument before — once with a more oblique reference to the Kennedy assassination … at a DC fundraiser on May 7th… Where was the outrage then? Where was “Special” K’s spittle ridden rant when she said it on May 7th? Obviously neither Olbermann, the Obama campaign, nor anyone at CNN, MSNBC, etc, was as creative as our friend Mr. Drudge.

The Shrieking of Obamatons (by Larry Johnson at No Quarter)
Wow. Why is it that women get the rap for being a bunch of hysterical whiners, when guys like Senator Obama and his staff are the ones going all wobbly?… [T]he Obama crowd is wetting itself and wailing that Clinton is implying Obama should be shot. Jesus, Joseph, and Mary! So if Hillary makes reference to the bombing of Hiroshima in August of 1945 does that mean she wants to nuke the convention?
And was Obama excoriated for comparing the campaign to the Bataan Death March?  Has he scolded any of the people who compared Hillary’s staying in the race to the obsessed female character in Fatal Attraction?  The answer is no to both questions.

Fake outrage and republican-like behavior (by likelihood zero, an Obama supporter, at MyDD)
[O]ur supporters are saying that Senator Clinton wants and wishes Senator Obama to be assassinated… Let me say this in the most direct way possible and as straight as i can: this is the most dishonest faked outrage i have seen since i got involved in politics in mid-1980s. It is just plain disgusting that we behaved like that. We ought to be ashamed of ourselves. We brought nothing but shame to the campaign of Senator Obama today. We, the Obama supporters, have become worse than the wors[t] of the republicans.
The Obama campaign brought this shame on itself.  It was the campaign that made an issue of Clinton’s remark.  The Obamabots were just piling on.  But it’s not the first time that Obama has used fake controversy to further his aims.  See below.

As a great man once said (by vastleft at Corrente)
“Who is playing to win? Winning is important. The last thing we can afford as a country is another 4-8 years of continued Republican rule… Clinton was the only top-tier candidate to refuse the ultimate Iowa and New Hampshire pander by removing her name from the Michigan ballot. That makes her essentially the de facto winner since Edwards and Obama, caving to the cry babies in Iowa and New Hampshire, took their name off Michigan’s ballot. Sure, the DNC has stripped Michigan of its delegates, but that won’t last through the convention. The last thing Democrats can afford is to alienate swing states like Michigan and Florida by refusing to seat their delegates… So while Obama and Edwards kneecap their chances of winning, Clinton is single-mindedly focused on the goal… Who is tested against the Right Wing smear machine? Clinton, by far… Obama has made a cottage industry out of attacking the dirty fucking hippies on the left, from labor unions, to Paul Krugman, to Gore and Kerry, to social security, and so on.” – [today’s Hillary hater] Kos, 1/2/08

Barack is not the messiah (by Cinque Henderson, an African American, writing in The Australian)
It’s worth remembering that most blacks still think O.J. Simpson is innocent. And, in times like these, when a black man is out front in the public eye, black people feel both proud and vulnerable and, as a result, scour the earth for evidence of racists plotting to bring him down, like an advance team ready to sound an alarm. Barack needed only a gesture, a quick sneer or nod in the direction of the Clintons’ hidden racism to avail himself of the twisted love that rescued O.J. and others like him and to smooth his path to victory and, therefore, to salvage his candidacy [from a possible loss in South Carolina, which would have doomed his presidential hopes].

After media commentator and former Al Gore presidential campaign manager Donna Brazile, a black, and House of Representatives Democratic whip James Clyburn, an Obama supporter and also black, started to cry racism, Barack was repeatedly asked his thoughts. He declined to answer, allowing the charge to grow for days (in sharp contrast to how he leapt to senator Joe Biden’s defence a month earlier). But, while he remained silent about the allegations of racism, he gave speeches across South Carolina that warned against being hoodwinked and bamboozled by the Clintons. His use of the phrase is resonant. It comes from a scene in Malcolm X, where Denzel Washington warns black people about the hidden evils of the white man masquerading as a smiling politician… As soon as I heard that Obama had quoted from Malcolm X like this, I knew that Obama would win South Carolina by a massive margin.

NARAL’S BAD CHOICE (by Pat Racimora at No Quarter)

On May 14th, the national leadership of NARAL (National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws Pro-Choice America) made the stinging decision to endorse Senator Barack Obama for President. The state affiliates were not allowed to participate in this myopic decision, which tells us something about how NARAL does its business… Millions of women are as angry as bees whose hive has been ransacked, and rightly so. Many of these have written NARAL off as an organization they can no longer trust.

In most inclusive count, Clinton has the numbers (by Jonathan Last, Philadelphia Inquirer)
Lost in the excitement of Barack Obama’s coronation this week was an inconvenient fact of Tuesday’s results: Hillary Clinton netted approximately 150,000 votes and is now poised to finish the primary season as the popular-vote leader. In some quaint circles, presumably, these things still matter… The superdelegates will determine the nominee and there’s no telling what will sway them… But if they were to deny the popular-vote champ the nomination, there is a real question of whether Democratic voters would reconcile themselves to the decision… Clinton’s path is both obvious and simple: Win the popular vote and force Barack Obama and his cheerleaders to explain why that doesn’t matter.

Democratic Party’s process undemocratic (Gibbs Knotts and Christopher Cooper teach political science and public affairs at Western Carolina University)
Although the makeup of superdelegates was never intended to be representative of the general population, a close look portrays an elite group unreflective of the populace… In a political system where states matter, we were surprised to find the disproportionate influence of certain states and territories. For example, the District of Columbia, with a population smaller than all states but Wyoming, has 24 superdelegates. This is one superdelegate for every 24,000 D.C. residents, as compared to a ratio of 1:521,000 in North Carolina. Puerto Rico has eight superdelegates, more than the number of superdelegates in seven states…

Women also are underrepresented as superdelegates. Nearly two-thirds of superdelegates are men. This is troubling for a party supposedly concerned with gender equity. The gender balance is particularly stark among superdelegates labeled as party leaders — an astonishing 95 percent of whom are male.

“The festering is over, this is a declared war.” (by v at No Quarter)
[Thursday] three top Florida Democrats filed suit in Federal Court to force the DNC to seat the delegates from Florida at the National Convention — no compromise, no half-way BS. Steve Geller, the Florida Senate Minority Leader, is an undeclared superdelegate and he is joined in the lawsuit by two other plaintiffs — one is a delegate for Sen. Hillary Clinton and the other a delegate for Sen. Barack Obama.
Click through to watch the video of Lou Dobbs interviewing the Florida Democratic Party leader, Steven Geller.  The suit recognizes that the Party has the right to make its own rules on how the Democratic nominee is chosen, but says that it doesn’t have the right to break its own rules in regard to Florida.  In the video, Geller points out that three states were given waivers to the early primary rule, but that Florida and Michigan were not.  It also asserts that the DNC didn’t follow its own procedural due process.  There was supposed to be an investigation before stripping a state of its delegates, but no investigation was done.  The third point was that the DNC told Florida to have a post-primary caucus to decide the delegates, but Florida can’t do that on its own.  It would need pre-clearance from the Justice Department.

Newsweek
Clinton (48%) vs. McCain (44%)
Obama (46%) vs. McCain (46%)

Saturday: Are Obama and the DNC working for Hillary? (by riverdaughter at The Confluence)
As we get farther along in this primary season, I am becoming more and more convinced that the DNC is using Barack Obama’s campaign to make Hillary look like a more credible candidate… It is working brilliantly. Hillary went from looking like an overachieving former first lady and US senator to a strong, scary smart, tenacious, poised, confident tough-as-nails future first executive and the voters are loving her. The DNC knew they had accomplished the impossible when, in spite of the “Mission Accomplished” meme of the past several weeks, Hillary subjected Obama to not one but *two* humiliating defeats in West Virginia and then Kentucky. Women, working class, gays, hispanics and admiring men all over the country are saying, no, demanding Hillary as their Commander in Chief or they will vote for McCain. They are turning their backs on Obama in droves.

Pressure Persuades Obama to Talk About Florida (by Taylor Marsh)
Hell just froze. Or maybe somebody sat down the good senator from Illinois to show him his recent poll numbers in Florida. Obama’s interview with the Palm Beach Post…: “… [W]e’ve said to the DNC that we want the Florida delegation to be seated, and I’m confident that it’s going to be worked out sometime in the next 10 days…” [Clinton has] been battering Obama day in and day out about COUNTING THE VOTES, but that couldn’t move him. What did is finding out that McCain is creaming him in the Sunshine State.

Obama’s Offer on FL and MI Amounts to Nothing (by Jeralyn at TalkLeft)
Obama’s statement [Friday] on FL and MI [is] woefully inadequate and nothing he and the party haven’t said before. It doesn’t address the issue. The issue is not seating the delegates at the convention. It’s counting their votes and awarding delegates based on their votes BEFORE the nominee is chosen… Saying they can be seated at the convention means they can cheer for the nominee and sit in on party platform and rules meetings. Big deal. If they can’t have their votes count in determining the nominee, it’s a shell game.

GOP strategists mull McCain ‘blowout’ (by David Paul Kuhn at Politico)
It sounds crazy at first. Amid dire reports about the toxic political environment for Republican candidates and the challenges facing John McCain, many top GOP strategists believe he can defeat Barack Obama — and by a margin exceeding President Bush’s Electoral College victory in 2004… “The broader environment clearly favors the Democrat,” said Whit Ayers, [a] veteran GOP pollster. But Ayers argued that “a state-by-state analysis actually makes McCain a narrow favorite to win the Electoral College majority.”  “That would certainly run against the grain of history, if he pulled that off,” Ayers added. “But it’s also clearly plausible and a manageable outcome partly because of John McCain’s strength among independents and partly because of Obama’s weakness in culture, ideology and association.”

Electoral-Vote.com, May 23, 2008 (270 needed to win)
Clinton     315        McCain     206        Tie     17
Obama     242        McCain     272        Tie     24
Click through to see the maps.  The Monte Carlo simulations at Hominid Views give Obama only a 32.7% probability of beating McCain, and give Hillary a 99.9% probability of beating McCain.  And the Republicans haven’t even begun to trash Obama yet.

Tainted love: how *not* to make Clinton supporters your sweeties (by vastleft at Corrente)
Air America Radio host Thom Hartmann sent this out in an e-mail blast…: “…The first thing Obama should do if nominated is put Hillary on the ticket…” Why must your peace offering ratify the notion of “bad blood in the water due to some negative campaign strategies on the part of the Clintons,” casting Obama’s prospective understudy as a naughty, tail-between-her-legs bitch, a tough-tough junkyard dog who will bare her fangs so Obama can remain classily “above the fray”? Even Richard Mellon Scaife is repentant, yet you insist that the GOP will have “a field day with her on the ticket.”… You want to start healing wounds? Don’t insist that we never had a right to our concerns. Tell us that you know our tears were never fake and that we’re more than likable enough. Do you actually think we won’t notice that you’re still treating us like damaged (and damaging) goods? Us Bubbas may be stupid, but we’re not that stupid.

Rove Protégé May Dig for Dirt on Obama (by Jason Leopold at The Public Record)
Timothy Griffin, a central figure in the U.S. Attorney scandal and a protégé of Republican political guru Karl Rove, reportedly has been hired to dig up dirt on likely Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama… Griffin’s return to the RNC as an opposition researcher – a post he held during the Bush-Cheney campaigns – would seem to mark a return to a “dirty tricks” style of campaigning that John McCain has vowed to avoid… The controversies over the [Department of Justice] prosecutor firings and the alleged “voter caging” led Griffin to resign from his post as acting U.S. Attorney rather than undergo a bruising confirmation hearings. But the RNC appears to value Griffin’s political talents enough to bring him back onboard to look for derogatory information that might damage Barack Obama’s campaign. Griffin is “one of the best political operatives in the country,” a Republican source told NBC’s FirstRead.

Viral e-mails attack Obama’s life story (by: Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin at Politico)
What began as a demonstrably false attempt to cast Obama as a Muslim has now metastasized into something far more threatening to the likely Democratic nominee. The spurious claims about his faith have spiraled into a broader assault that questions his patriotism and citizenship and generally portrays him as a threat to mainstream, white America… The anti-Obama e-mails now bouncing around the Internet have multiplied and are difficult to track, though the website Snopes.com has catalogued and debunked many of them. But the themes are similar: Elements of his biography make him too exotic, or unknown, to be president… Voters widely and repeatedly cite information that has been gleaned directly or indirectly from the e-mails to explain why they won’t support Obama.
And they’ve only just barely gotten started.

Not now, not ever – A repudiation of Obama and the New Bolsheviks and an Interesting Possibility (by Craig Della Penna at No Quarter)
What if Hillary (and Bill) thought to themselves: “Why am I busting my ass for the Democrats? They’ve made it perfectly obvious that they hate my guts and resent everything I’ve done for the party for the past 30-odd years. We could have had a universal health plan in 1994 if the Democrats hadn’t voted against it… what the hell am I doing here?” I’ve been saying for years that we need a viable third (and fourth and fifth) party… What if, in an act of staggering political courage and brilliance, Bill and Hillary formed the “Centerline Party” (just a suggestion)? Formed for people who are sick of the ideologues on both sides, who want practical solutions to real problems, who want corporations to live up to their responsibilities to the people who made them great and powerful, who believe that government can be a great agent for change which benefits us all, who know that we truly are all in this together.
Della Penna sees the main movers behind Obama as “new Bolsheviks”, as ideologues determined to take over the Democratic Party.  Based on my understanding of Illinois politics, and Evelyn Pringle’s exhaustive study of the Illinois Combine, I believe that there’s no ideology involved here.  Idolatry, yes, worship of power and the almighty dollar.  An Obama administration would be very similar to the Bush administration—using the power of government to further enrich the few.  But, apparently, Carl Icahn hasn’t yet been clued in.  See below.

Billionaires differ on Obama (Political Intelligence, Boston Globe)
Call it the battle of the billionaires. Warren Buffett, the wealthiest person in the world, likes Barack Obama, who is on the verge of winning the Democratic presidential nomination. But investor Carl Icahn says Obama would be a “terrible’’ president who would wreck the economy, Bloomberg is reporting today… “I personally think he would be a terrible president,’’ Icahn said, arguing that Obama would probably go on a “huge spending spree’’ that “the country can’t afford right now.’’
Of course, no REPUBLICAN would go on a huge spending spree.  Like the one in the White House right now.

Obama Courts Jewish Vote in Florida (by Jeralyn at TalkLeft)
Today Obama said he knows [Palestinian advocate Rashid] Khalidi because he taught at the University of Chicago, he’s had a conversation with Khalidi and their kids attended the same school program. He doesn’t mention the fundraiser Khalidi held for him at Khalidi’s home or his warm testimonial remarks about their dinners together at Khalidi’s home, or his voting to fund money to an organization headed by Khalidi’s wife. His minimization of his association with Khalidi is something I think pro-Israel Jewish voters should consider in deciding whether his pitch for their vote is sincere and truthful.
Khalidi, in a recent column in The Nation, referred to the “Palestinian Question” is a “running sore”.  And in a recent interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, published in The Atlantic, Obama referred to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as a “constant wound” and a “constant sore”.  A coincidence? Probably not.  The two have probably had discussions on the subject.  But why not admit that?  A truly transformational leader ought to be able to bring the two sides together, not repudiate one or the other.

The Obama Learning Curve (by Kimberley A. Strassel at Potomac Watch, Wall Street Journal)
In a July debate, [Barack Obama] was asked if he’d meet, “without preconditions,” the “leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.” It was an unexpected question, and Mr. Obama rolled with his gut: “I would,” he said, riffing that the Bush administration’s policy of not negotiating with terror-sponsoring states was “ridiculous.”… Mr. Obama has since been scrambling to neutralize his former statement. A week ago, in Oregon, he adopted the “no-big-deal” approach, telling listeners Iran was just a “tiny” country that, unlike the Soviet Union, did not “pose a serious threat to us.” But this suggested he’d missed that whole asymmetrical warfare debate – not to mention 9/11 – so by the next day, he’d switched to the “blame-Republicans” line… And so it goes, as Mr. Obama shifts and shambles, all the while telling audiences that when voting for president they should look beyond “experience” to “judgment.” In this case, whatever his particular judgment on Iran is on any particular day.

Kennedy Talked, Khrushchev Triumphed (by Nathan Thrall, a journalist, and Jesse James Wilkins, a doctoral candidate in political science at Columbia, writing in The New York Times)
IN his inaugural address, President John F. Kennedy expressed in two eloquent sentences, often invoked by Barack Obama…: “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.”… But Kennedy’s one presidential meeting with Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet premier, suggests that there are legitimate reasons to fear negotiating with one’s adversaries… [H]e embarked on a summit meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna in June 1961, a move that would be recorded as one of the more self-destructive American actions of the cold war, and one that contributed to the most dangerous crisis of the nuclear age.

Why did CNN hire Castellanos, who has a history of using “racially charged” tactics? And why won’t it note he’s advising McCain? (by Jamison Foser at Media Matters)
On CNN this week, Republican strategist and CNN contributor Alex Castellanos responded to criticism of a joke that referred to Hillary Clinton as a “bitch” by saying, “[S]ome women, by the way, are named that and it’s accurate.”… Castellanos is best known for creating a 1990 television ad for Republican Sen. Jesse Helms… So, with Barack Obama within reach of becoming the first African-American major-party presidential nominee in U.S. history, CNN decided it would be a good time to hire as a contributor the maker of what is considered “one of the most racially charged political commercials ever.”
Obama fans who have refused to stand up against the sexism aimed at Hillary Clinton will have NO STANDING to criticize when the racial hate brigade gears up.

DNC blunts GOP microtargeting lead
After years of struggling to catch up to the Republican Party’s sophisticated microtargeting efforts, the Democratic National Committee appears to have come close to parity.

Bush begins raising money for McCain
WASHINGTON - President Bush starts raising money for John McCain’s campaign next week, but the three fundraisers are closed, so there will be no news media cameras photographing the outgoing and incoming Republican party leaders together nor reporters observing their joint appearances.

Poor ticket sales, expected protests scuttle Bush-McCain fundraiser at Phoenix Convention Center (Phoenix Business Journal)
A Tuesday fundraiser headlined by President Bush for U.S. Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign is being moved out of the Phoenix Convention Center. Sources familiar with the situation said the Bush-McCain event was not selling enough tickets to fill the Convention Center space, and that there were concerns about more anti-war protesters showing up outside the venue than attending the fundraiser inside.

McCain releases wife’s 2006 tax form; she made $6 million (McClatchy)
WASHINGTON — Call Cindy McCain the Six Million Dollar Woman. McCain, the wife of Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, earned more than $6 million in 2006, according to tax returns the McCain campaign released late Friday afternoon…. The McCains, married for 28 years, keep their finances separate and file tax returns separately under a prenuptial agreement.

Lots more really good stuff at MakeThemAccountable.com.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com