First the good news this day before Independence Day.
Hillary Clinton Supporters Count Too Ohio organizers had a meeting last night. Here’s what happened at the meeting:
Our meeting with organizers from Central and Southern Ohio was a success. Teams split between organizing travel to Denver and planning the Ohio Event. Everyone present agreed to write, call and email CREW urging an inquiry into Obama’s favored status loan from Northern Trust and the Rezko connection. I hope our efforts can help. Everyone present also asked to be added to Ricki Lieberman’s Electability Newsletter.
Clinton Supporters Count Too is going to Denver. We will all celebrate Women’s Equality Day in Denver and across the nation (Ohio is already organizing events). Many Hillary supporters from around the country are organzing debates and town halls to be held on August 26, Women’s Equality Day. The trashing of women in general and Hillary in particular will be a focal point for these events.
Hillary supporters in the Denver area are needed by groups organizing travel to Denver. Organizers need Denver Hillary supporters to assist with various kinds of research and information particularly regarding hotels and other accommodations. Contact us at admin@HillaryIs44.org if you are a Denver resident willing to assist the organizing groups.
Clinton Supporters Count Too also sent this bit of Denver information:
Btw just a side note, there is a huge (150,000sq.ft.) exhibit of Presidential Memorabilia in Denver from 8/22-8/29. Sounds really cool with a lifesize replica of the oval office and appraisers on site to estimate the value of any old campaign souveniers you might want to evaluate.
We will let Obama have the replica of the Oval Office, Hillary Clinton gets the real thing.
* * *
Clinton Supporters Count Too at their meeting agreed to assist us with Action Item 4.
Action Item #4: Let’s communicate via blogs and emails and articles and posts and comments the need for the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate Barack Obama and his Chicago Culture of Corruption (read today’s Washington Post article from today, below).
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics filed a complaint which triggered an initial inquiry into Senators Dodd and Conrad. Let’s ask Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics to file a similar complaint regarding Barack Obama (for which they will probably be called racists by the Obama Hopium denizens).
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics website HERE. Email Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics HERE. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, 1400 Eye Street NW, Suite 450, Washington, D.C. 20005, 202.408.5565
Along with the assist from yesterday’s Ohio organizers, influential activist, Ricki Leiberman, mentioned our efforts to get a Senate Ethics Committee investigation in her excellent, must read, Electability Watch newsletter (lots of good information in Ricki’s newsletter such as news regarding a fundraiser for Hillary supporter Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, and sample letters to Superdelegates. Subscribe to Electability Watch by emailing Ricki Leiberman at firstname.lastname@example.org ).
* * *
Hillary Clinton supporters are true Democrats who will hold Republicans AND their own political party to account on core principles such as the right to vote and to have your vote count the way it was voted. The U.S. Supreme Count in 2000 disenfranchised all Democrats, indeed all Americans, when the Court selected George W. Bush to occupy the White House. This year Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee imitated George W. Bush and disenfranchised Florida, as well as Michigan, voters. The fact is that we were all disenfranchised by the Democratic National Committee this election cycle.
PINO (Progressives In Name Only) websites cheered as voters were disenfranchised. These PINOs abandoned all principles. These PINOs particularly abandoned core Democratic principles. The history of the ugly PINO blogs is slowly being written. The history of the ugly PINO blogs and their misogyny and their attacks on Hillary is slowly being written.
In 1998, as six years of a national campaign to demonize First Lady Hillary Clinton — funded by conservatives and rooted in profound anti-feminism — was reaching a fevered crescendo, then-conservative David Brock (now of Media Matters) penned a book called The Seduction of Hillary Rodham. The publisher’s note for the tome says of its subject: “No public figure in contemporary life has elicited more polarized reactions than Hillary Rodham Clinton. The first presidential spouse who pursued a major policymaking role, the beleaguered first lady has been a heroine and role model to her feminist allies – and a malevolent, power-mad shrew to her conservative foes.”
Sometime in the last decade, her liberal foes evidently decided that whole “malevolent, power-mad shrew” thing sounded pretty good, too.
Political courtesan Arriana Huffington hated Hillary when Huffington was a in bed with Republican Newt Gingrich. When Newt realized Arriana was a nut he dumped her. Arriana quickly hopped in bed with PINOs and declared herself their leader. Arriana still hated Hillary. Arriana and the Head Kook at DailyKooks and other self-described “left libertarians” attacked true progressive Hillary Clinton.
Throughout the course of the Democratic primary, it was neatly repackaged as “wildly ambitious person who will do anything in her voracious quest to win including destroying the Democratic Party while cackling monstrously and whose womanness totally doesn’t matter we swear.” The classic misogynist charge once used against Clinton by the vast right-wing conspiracy became the rallying cry of large swaths of the erstwhile reality-based community.
Without a hint of irony.
Clinton was suddenly a bitch, a witch, the Queen of Hearts “who has parasitically attached herself to the legacy and record of” her husband, the screech on the blackboard with an elitist trademark laugh. “Hitlery,” “Hildebeast,” and “Billary” – staples of 1990s criticisms of the feminist First Lady have returned with a vengeance. She was a monster, the devil in a pantsuit, targeted with dehumanizing and eliminationist rhetoric to which liberal bloggers used to object when the right used it against liberals, but apparently now consider okay, as long as it’s only directed at a candidate they don’t like.
In a spectacular ballet of aggressive misogyny, attacks on Clinton’s femaleness masquerading as critiques of Clinton’s policies and campaign failures (separate altogether from legitimate critiques of Clinton’s policies and campaign failures), and indifference to the former, the liberal blogosphere – once a proud conglomeration of feisty challengers to Republican memes – embraced as its own one of the most pernicious strategies of the 1990s anti-Clinton conservatives.
And they didn’t stop there.
From our very first post we noted that the danger to Hillary Clinton would not come from the right wing media but rather from so-called “progressives” who repeat Republican propaganda to undermine Hillary or any of our candidates. We were on target from our very first post. [Note: We stopped defending Obama or even giving him the benefit of the doubt and publically stated so. We stated at the time that we would no longer defend Obama when Obama spread anonymous ugly memoranda attacking Bill and Hillary with smears. Lately Republican Big Media outlets claim Obama as one of their ugly own running for Bush’s third term.]
In a complete 180-degree turn, the same members of the left who had once defended Clinton against the attacks of the right wing – the trumped-up scandals and dug-up dirt that led to endless hours and millions upon millions of dollars wasted in fruitless investigations of the Clintons, their business dealings, their friends, not to mention the peculiar features of Bill’s twig and berries – adopted the frames of those attacks as their own. Everything old was new again. Call it political retro chic.
One diarist on Daily Kos even provided a helpful guide to all the scandals of the Clinton years, with ratings from one to 10 based on scandal level and the level of Hillary Clinton’s involvement. The “Level of Scandal” for some of the scandals listed is artificially inflated by the diarist, JohnKWilson (author of a book on Obama), to reflect the impact of the “cover-up,” thus adding five scandal points to Hillary’s level-two-rated cattle-futures windfall for the alleged cover-up, and a whopping seven scandal points to level-one-rated “Travelgate”, based only on Wilson’s conclusion that, despite the charge not having been substantiated, that Clinton must have lied under oath.
Wilson acknowledged that Clinton has never, even after years of being investigated at great cost to the taxpayers, been charged with any sort of crime; however, that did not prevent him from concluding nonetheless, unhindered by the lack of evidence, that she has behaved unethically, that her judgment is lacking, that she lied under oath, that she is secretive, that she padded her legal bills (or lied about them), and that she must have participated in Bill’s “abuse of power.” The source for many of these allegations are books by Carl Bernstein and Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta, both of which were previously considered to be hit pieces containing a great deal of speculation and not much new information (in spite of the hype).
The scandals of the 1990s – Monicagate, Travelgate, Whitewater, and, more importantly, the hovering specter that Hillary Clinton has something to hide, and the ability to reflexively and repeatedly invoke them under the guise of what the GOP would use against her – came to serve a number of purposes for her detractors, even those within the Democratic party. The financial and political scandals, in particular, were used to fuel the meme that Clinton is a liar and a cheat who was trying to steal the election away from Obama, that she’d so anything to win, is secretive and was hiding unsavory business associations (this was a particular rallying cry prior to the Clintons’ release of their joint tax records, which incited a small flurry about how much they had made in the past seven years) and a great deal of uninformed commentary about the family foundation, as well as Clinton’s daily records from her years as First Lady).
Some of the scandal mentions were deployed defensively, in order to deflect attention away from Obama’s own alleged scandals: When the press began to pay attention to Obama’s association with Tony Rezko, supporters raised the complaint that insufficient attention was being paid to Whitewater, the Clintons’ fateful failed Arkansas land deal, despite a multi-million dollar investigation that found no wrongdoing having been completed a decade earlier.
By April, the blogfather Kos himself was agreeing that Clinton wasn’t even to be considered a Democrat anymore.
The Head Kook, a self described “left libertarian” said Hillary was not a Democrat. The Head Kook fooled the DailyKooks and the YearlyKooks while he laughed all the way to the bank.
The Kooks, the HOUNDS, the DUDDs, the DNC, Obama/Dean/Brazille/Pelosi think we are as unprincipled as they are , that we would ever accept the unacceptable Obama – especially after they and Obama smeared Hillary and Hillary Clinton supporters – even as they disenfranchised Hillary voters.
It was an indication of how thoroughly the left co-opted the use of the GOP and media-created scandals, to smear Hillary Clinton during the presidential primaries, that the Republicans weren’t even mentioning them much anymore, content to let the Left do its dirty work. There was little reason for GOP operatives to get their hands dirty reviving the villainous First Lady Macbeth caricature, when many liberals were happy to do it for them.
Not content to merely destroy the entire Democratic party single-handedly, Hillary Clinton was hell-bent on murder. Evidently having failed to satiate her bloodlust after murdering Vince Foster – or such was the claim of her ideological enemies, a charge still being chanted like a demonic incantation by rightwing pain-maker Rush Limbaugh – now she was openly lusting for the assassination of her opponent, Barack Obama. (That is not to suggest there were no legitimate concerns about her statement.) And Randi Rhodes – a “progressive talk radio personality” – fresh from calling Clinton a “fucking whore,” fanned the same flames when she announced fearing for her life after delivering the insult to someone who routinely has her enemies whacked.
“Billary”, the two-headed monster created by the rightwing to demonize the “two-for-one” presidency of Bill Clinton and his feminist, advisor wife Hillary Clinton, also stumbled out of its grave, given new life by liberals who defended the Clintons against the very same attack when it was her being used against him during his administration, but now found it politically expedient to use him against her. Billary was back in vogue, and infamous Clinton-haters in the media like Maureen Dowd or Chris Matthews (who remains as fixated on Clinton scandals, especially the Lewinsky matter – the scandal that made his career – as ever) accused Hillary of being nothing without her husband, only having come within inches of the presidency because her husband had cheated on her. The progressive blogosphere largely remained silent, or, worse, acquiesced by suggesting there was some truth to the categorisation.
After the 2000 election heart-broken and angry Democrats went to what they though were progressive blogs in the same way troubled souls go to a friendly bar to be surrounded by friends and good cheer. The “progressive” blogs eventually uncloaked and revealed themselves to be PINO blogs devoid of any sense of purpose other than their self-promotion and self-advancement and self-enrichment. Their goal this election cycle was to promote the biggest PINO of all – Barack Obama; and to trash a great woman.
Other sources of the attacks of the 1990s found fresh credibility, as long as they were smearing the Clintons. Many of the Clintons’ foes on the Left uncritically accepted rumors and claims pushed by Matt Drudge and Rush Limbaugh because they reflected poorly on the Clintons, rushing, for example, to condemn Hillary Clinton for disseminating a photo of Obama in Somali garb, not considering that the source of the claim that the photo came from the Clinton campaign was none other than Matt Drudge (a claim that has since been debunked, but persists nevertheless). And many eager to find fault with the Clintons believed that Bill Clinton had appeared on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show and granted an interview to his guest-host, Mark Davis (the interview was actually recorded by a service and sold so that local interviewers could dub their own voices over the interviewer’s questions). In addition, they swallowed whole Limbaugh’s claim that his “Operation Chaos,” in which he asked his listeners to vote for Clinton in the primaries in order to mess with the nominating process, was effective and believed that this was tantamount to an endorsement of Clinton by the right wing.
Meanwhile, a hatchet job on Bill Clinton in Vanity Fair – rife with rumor and speculation, either unsourced or anonymously sourced, precisely the kind of journalism the Left blogosphere would once have almost universally rejected, irrespective of its target – was peddled by some progressives as though it were fact. And we were meant to care what the Moonie Times had to say about ancient Clinton scandals.
Increasingly, it looked as if many on the left had never spent a moment believing those attacks to be untrue, or the Clintons defensible, in the first place. And eventually came the posts of regret for having ever defended the Clintons in the 1990s, a curious position if those defenses were merited in the 1990s.
Perhaps the left had never defended the Clintons on the merits, instead merely playing a game of partisanship that once required rejecting rightwing frames, even while they internalised them. Perhaps the “vast right-wing conspiracy” had reached further than we once imagined.
The PINOs trashed Hillary and are only now discovering that
Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.
Have we said enough that Obama can’t be trusted?
While PINOs discover that Obama can’t be trusted, Hillary Supporters are organizing – on the road to Denver.