Gossip is pernicious and vicious because you cannot tell truth from fiction because there usually is some truth in the fiction. That is the unintentional main lesson of the new Mark Halperin and John Heileman book about the 2008 elections, “Game Change“. The truth and fiction is fairly easy to separate in Game Change however. Whenever there are many witnesses to an event, it is likely there is truth to the story. When it is a conversation between two interested parties – watch out. The interpretation of “quotes” is also very suspect.
There are a whole lot of lessons for Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton and their supporters in this book which we will discuss below. There are lessons for Sarah Palin and her supporters too.
But as we wrote yesterday, the main lesson to be taken from “Game Change” is that Barack Obama continues his not-so-secret war on Hillary Clinton. We hope that Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton are once again fully reminded of Obama’s treacheries and do not for a moment forget or excuse what happened to them and us in 2008. We hope that Bill and Hillary Clinton re-evaluate all their friendships and associations in light of what they have learned these past few years.
All Americans should also finally realize once and for all that the Democratic “establishment” was out to destroy Hillary Clinton and impose Barack Obama on us. The culprits, such as Harry Reid, are now admitting this is so.
Harry Reid was one of many out to destroy Hillary Clinton and plant stooge Obama in the Rose Garden. The treacheries and lies of Ted Kennedy and others in 2008 were brutal. Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton must realize that Ted Kennedy was the secret power behind Obama well before Iowa – a fact almost never mentioned (contrary to myth John Kerry endorsed Obama before Iowa and Kerry would not have acted without Ted Kennedy’s approval.)
Yesterday we wrote:
The Book “Game Change” is a hit on Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton and everyone who Obama wants to destroy. The sources in the book are obviously from Obama and his thugs.
Evidence of our assertion that Barack Obama is at war with Hillary Clinton can be found in “Game Change”. Gossip mongers make themselves the heroes and those they hate the evil ones. Obama-loving Politico spotlights the obvious:
Having dug into the book — which is quite good — a bit, one disparity was hard to miss. The Edwardses, Clintons, Giulianis and others are depicted as vastly different from their public images. John and Elizabeth are a vain empty suit and Lady Macbeth; Hillary is as calculating, hard-edged, maladroit, and ideological as her critics have always maintained.
The one character who appears in the book as he’d like you to see him: Obama. Which, one way or another, explains why he won: He was either untroubled by the deep contradictions that dogged his rivals; or he was better at concealing them. (He is also the only candidate whose staffers remain with him, deeply invested in his image and unwilling to dish, which helps.)
One of the most ballyhooed pieces of twaddle in “Game Change” is Hillary attacking Bill Clinton “as a problem” in a conversation with Barack Obama. Who is to believe that Hillary would confide in treacherous windbag Obama? That Hillary might say that Bill would be an object of attack is plausible, but that is not the impression left by the authors. According to the authors Hillary “can’t control” Bill and Bill is like a destructive storm. That Hillary can’t control attacks on Bill Clinton is a possible caveat she told treacherous Obama. But that Hillary would tell Obama that Bill is a “problem” in the sense that he is destructive force Obama must beware of – that is not to be believed by anyone with any sense.
The other nonsense in the book designed to drum up sales is the latest “racism” charges against Bill Clinton. Supposedly Bill Clinton asks Ted Kennedy for an endorsement of Hillary in a private conversation and then much later Ted tells his friends that Bill said blah, blah, blah. We’ll let Ben Smith act the fool on this one:
One of the enduring mysteries of the 2008 campaign was what got Ted Kennedy so mad at Bill Clinton. The former president’s entreaties, at some point, backfired, and the explanation has never quite emerged.
I’ve finally gotten my hands on a copy of Game Change, in which John Heliemann and Mark Halperin report:
[A]s Hillary bungled Caroline, Bill’s handling of Ted was even worse. The day after Iowa, he phoned Kennedy and pressed for an endorsement, making the case for his wife. But Bill then went on, belittling Obama in a manner that deeply offended Kennedy. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.
We have several times said that Barack Obama is not fit to manage a 7/11 store let alone manage a 9/11 style crisis (haven’t we been proven right after Obama’s Hawaiian performance on the Christmas Day attempted crashing of a plane into Detroit?), so we don’t know what the hubbub is about. But the point to remember is that these are third hand accounts supposedly originating from Ted Kennedy, who of course wants to portray himself as a big homie hero and friend of the black man.
Bill Clinton is also supposed to have confronted Ted Kennedy when Ted Kennedy called (during the South Carolina primary) to inform Bill that Ted was endorsing the boob. Bill Clinton, it is gossiped, told Kennedy that Kennedy was endorsing Obama only because he is black. This is supposed to be controversial? It is very clear that Ted Kennedy made up the racism charges to bolster himself and to destroy, not just hurt, but to destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Several campaign books and articles have made clear what we reported years ago – that John Kerry privately but not publicly endorsed Barack Obama before the Iowa caucuses but that Obama wanted him to wait for a more opportune moment to administer the coup de grace to Hillary’s candidacy. But Hillary Clinton won the New Hampshire primary and Kerry’s endorsement of Obama in South Carolina was a wash.
Junior Senator John Kerry would not have privately endorsed Obama before the Iowa vote without the approval of Ted Kennedy. We have previously written about Ted Kennedy’s motivations for endorsing Obama. We pegged Ted Kennedy as the Barzini of the Obama campaign. All the talk about Kennedy being angry at Hillary for crediting Lyndon Johnson, not JFK, for civil rights laws, is just a bunch of lies. Ted and Barack wanted to destroy Bill and Hillary and they wanted to do so by calling them racists to remove them as an electoral political force – forever.
[For a laugh, this is what Kerry said when endorsing “uniter not divider”
Bush Obama: “Who better than Barack Obama to turn a new page in American politics, so that Democrats, independents and Republicans alike can look to the leadership that unites to find common ground.” How did that work out John?]
The supposed Bill Clinton gossip about “coffee” and unqualified Obama – and Obama was and is NOT qualified to be president, is probably a Ted Kennedy rumor designed to continue to try to destroy Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton is the victim of vicious rumors by Obama and his thugs for saying pretty much what Joe Biden apparently blared in front of Big Media witnesses:
The tensions began in September of 2008 word got back to Obama’s campaign headquarters that Biden had told reporters on his campaign plane that he was more qualified than his running mate to be president.
“A chill set in between Chicago and the Biden plane,” Halperin and Heilemann write in the book, to be released Monday. “Joe and Obama barely spoke by phone, rarely campaigned together.”
And when Obama campaign manager David Plouffe was asked about having Biden dial into the nightly campaign conference call, he responded: “Nah.” Instead, Biden had his own call with Plouffe and senior campaign adviser David Axelrod.
Obama himself was growing increasingly frustrated with his running mate after Biden let loose with a string of gaffes, including a statement that paying higher taxes amounted to patriotism and criticism of one of the campaign’s own ads poking fun at John McCain.
But when Biden, at an October fund-raiser in Seattle, famously predicted that Obama would be tested with an international crisis, the then-Illinois senator had had enough.
“How many times is Biden gonna say something stupid?” he demanded of his advisers on a conference call, a moment at which most people on the call said the candidate was as angry as they had ever heard him.
For his part, the authors write, Biden wasn’t pleased with the campaign’s direction.
After a prep session for a “Meet the Press” appearance following the Democratic convention, Biden was incredulous when he was briefed by campaign aides about the ticket’s tax policy. He told them: “Well, it’s your campaign. I’ll say what you want me to say. But after Election Day, all bets are off.”
Clearly these anecdotes are coming from Obama and Obama thugs. Most of the stories in the book are coming from Obama and Obama thugs. Alleged one-on-one conversations (Hillary and the boob) and conversations with Obama and/or his thugs are reported with best light and best interpretation on Obama. All the embarrassments are designed to clear the stage of people Obama feels inferior to or believes he would be better off without.
Obama’s anti-Biden attacks might be due to Joe Biden never apologizing for calling a boob “a boob”.
When the ticketmates talked a few days after Biden’s prediction that Obama would be tested, Obama lit into his running mate. But Biden didn’t apologize – or even indicate he understood why his comments in Seattle were problematic, though McCain’s campaign had already cut an ad featuring the dark warning.
Speaking to his own staff, Biden insisted that it hadn’t really been a gaffe. And feeling a bit defensive, he invoked one of the worst memories of Obama’s primary campaign.
“I guess it’s a good thing I didn’t say anything about bitter people who cling to their guns and religion,” Biden cracked, the authors paraphrase.
Joe Biden better watch his back along with Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. All bets are off indeed.
* * * * *
Harry Reid, in an interview with Mark Halperin, apparently had a George Allen “Macaca” moment. Bill Clinton gets attacked as a “racist” for saying non-racist truths, but Reid can say what he will:
Republicans say they plan to press reporters to ask Reid what he really meant when he described a “light-skinned” African-American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”
Republicans are upset that Reid is getting away with what their leader Trent Lott presumably could not. But what Reid said is closer to George Allen’s “macaca” comment. The Reid “Negro” comment is offensive but he will not be attacked as Bill Clinton is attacked – by Dimocrats. Obama owes Reid so Reid is protected. The Democrats are terrified so they too are protecting Reid.
Reid, by his own standards is not worthy of protection:
Lott said that Mississippians were proud to have voted for Thurmond in 1948 on the pro-segregationist Dixiecrat ticket.
Asked if the episode would serve as a warning to weigh his own words carefully, Reid said: “You play how you practice.”
“If you tell ethnic jokes in the backroom, it’s that much easier to say ethnic things publicly. I’ve always practiced how I play.”
We now see how Obama and Reid play what they practiced. Reid pretended to be neutral but secretly he was supporting Obama and out to get rid of Hillary. We’ve seen the Reid duplicity during the health care debates. Reid and Obama have practiced and played pretend support for universal health care. But they play like they practice – with deceit.
Reid pretended, along with Sharpton, Brazile, Pelosi, etc. to be neutral. But Reid was a behind the scenes plotter for Obama:
In both Reid’s book and in “Game Change,” Reid is shown as an early supporter of Obama’s presidential run — even though publicly, Reid insisted he was staying neutral in the race.
In Reid’s book, he writes that a 2007 conversation developed into whether Obama could be the next president.
“If you want to be president, you can be president now,” Reid says he told Obama. Reid says Obama replied, “I don’t know, Harry. I don’t think so.”
But in their new book, the reporters say that Obama was summoned to Reid’s office in July 2006 — and that Obama thought that he was about to get scolded by the majority leader.
As soon as Obama took his seat, the authors write, Reid told Obama: “You’re not going to go anyplace here. I know that you don’t like it, doing what you’re doing.
Obama sure did not like the U.S. Senate. It meant work. Obama wanted to be a show horse.
The authors write that Obama was not sure what Reid was talking about initially when he made clear that he didn’t think Obama was going to have a long career in the Senate. The two men spoke for 20 minutes, and Obama later was asked by his aide Robert Gibbs what they did wrong.
“Nothing,” Obama replied. “Harry wants me to run for president.”
“That whole meeting was about you running for president?” Gibbs said.
“Yeah,” Obama said, then grinned. “He really wants me to run for president.”
Reid was as neutral as Big Media. They were all in on the gang rape. They were all in on the cover-up.
* * * * *
We started this article by saying that “Gossip is pernicious and typically vicious because you cannot tell truth from fiction because there usually is some truth in the fiction.” The danger with gossip is that you get misinformed and confuse friend with foe or foe with friend.
We hope Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton “walk the dog backwards” and reevaluate what happened in 2007/2008/2009 and make the necessary connections and necessary analysis of who was doing what when. It won’t be pleasant, but it should be done. A lot of things happened in the past few years that never made sense (reportedly Hillary believes, like her supporters that dirty deeds did occur. Hillary reportedly also understands what we wrote repeatedly about at the time, that Obama bussed in supporters from Chicago to Iowa). A lot of people were believed and possibly trusted (like Bill Nelson) that should not have been trusted because they were supporting Obama behind the scenes.
In “Game Change” Halperin/Heileman wrote that Charles Schumer, the senior senator from New York and a powerhouse in the Democratic Party stabbed Hillary in the back. Hillary, according to the Daily News does not believe this betrayal occurred.
Hillary Clinton and her campaign insiders don’t believe reports that Sen. Chuck Schumer stabbed her in the back – despite reports in a blockbuster book that he did just that.
“Game Change” by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin revealed that Schumer and other powerful Dems urged Barack Obama to run – knowing that Clinton planned to. The pair wrote that Schumer even told Obama pal Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) to “take a two-by-four” to Clinton in 2007.
One source said the secretary of state and Schumer (D-N.Y.) talked by phone yesterday and she told him that she “paid it no mind.”
“She said it was just one of the many things in the book that she didn’t believe was at all true,” the source said.
The usually talkative Schumer, pressed on the report, refused to comment yesterday, but vehemently denied the account over the weekend. Several sources said Camp Clinton knew Schumer encouraged Obama to run, but that he also warned the future President he’d back Hillary once she jumped in. And they say Schumer delivered.
We have tangled with Chuck Schumer in the past so it is possible that our views are colored by that past. We’ve had friends who have tangled with Schumer too so our views are most definitely colored by that past. We hope Hillary is right and that Schumer did not stab her in the back as so many others have. But we wonder…
We recall what Jon Corzine said about Schumer, in jest:
“Sharing a media market with Chuck Schumer is like sharing a banana with a monkey,” Sen. Jon Corzine, a New Jersey Democrat, lamented last year in a joke-filled speech at the Washington Press Club Foundation. “Take a little bite of it, and he will throw his own feces at you.” Corzine meant this lovingly, but Schumer didn’t take it that way and Corzine later apologized.
The danger of gossip is you can’t distinguish friend from foe. It was Bill Clinton (quoting Harry Truman) who said, “If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.”
[More tomorrow in Part II, on Halperin and the rest of the Freak Show.]