On Wednesday, April 25 from 9:00 to 10:30 p.m. PBS will air a Bill Moyers documentary on Bush’s lies to sell the Iraq war and the complicity of the media in propagating those lies.
In Oedipus Rex, the very ancient (more than 400 B.C.) drama by Sophocles, Oedipus damns with a curse – himself. The story about the orphaned Oedipus begins with him as a grown man led by pride to slay the man who unknowingly is his biological father. The well known tale develops with Oedipus proclaiming a curse on the man who murdered his father. Eventually, the truth emerges that Oedipus himself is the killer. Oedipus, his eyes finally open to the ugly truth of his patricide, gashes out his eyes with his suicide mother’s golden brooches and goes into exile. The story, to say the least, is charged with irony. This leads us to 21st century America and Barack Obama.
We have warned that lazy journalists and self-interested “progressives” are the great danger to Democrats in winning the White House in 2008, not discredited right wing propagandists. We are reminded of that warning after reading Saturday’s Colbert King piece in the Washington Post. King is an Op-Ed columnist for the Washington Post, the formerly great, formerly liberal, newspaper. Colbert King is an African-American and alleged “progressive”. Colbert King is also a lazy researcher at best or he is dishonest and attempting to mislead his readers at worst.
This is what CK wrote:
“Put me in the camp of those who implore Sen. Hillary Clinton to give it back — “it” being the reported $800,000 that’s sitting in her presidential campaign coffers thanks to a fundraiser hosted in her honor March 31 in the Pinecrest, Fla., home of a huge Clinton fan who refers to himself as Timbaland.”
“You would not be reading about Clinton or about Timbaland — who entered this vale of tears 36 years ago in Norfolk under the name Timothy Mosley — were it not for the fact that he is a well-heeled hip-hop producer and noted performer of the kind of misogynistic and denigrating lyrics that informed Don Imus’s derogatory comments about the Rutgers women’s basketball team.
Mrs. Clinton, you may recall, took umbrage at Imus’s remarks, branding them “small-minded bigotry and coarse sexism.” His words, she said in an e-mail to supporters, “showed a disregard for basic decency and were disrespectful and degrading to African Americans and women everywhere.”
Good for her, I say, except it must be asked why she was down in Florida making nice to — and pocketing big bucks from — a rapper whose obscenity-laced lyrics praise violence, perpetuate racist stereotypes and demean black women.”
What King was too lazy about, or intentionally decided to mislead his readers about was an inconvenient fact that would distract from his energetic anti-Hillary rant. Here is what we quickly found about Hip Hop cash recipients after lazily googling for facts and finding them at the Chicago Sun Times:
“Obama also received donations from at least eight executives from Island Def Jam executives, whose artists include the rapper Ludacris, whose song lyrics have been criticized for promoting sex, drugs and violence. Ludacris, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, appeared with Obama at a rally in Atlanta last month. The rapper met with Obama in Chicago last November to talk about AIDS awareness.
I am mentioning this because, in the wake of the Don Imus controversy in which the shock jock smeared the Rutgers basketball team with racial and sexual slurs, Obama in South Carolina last Friday said at a rally, in response to a question, that some rappers are “degrading their sisters. That doesn’t inspire me.”
Colbert King did not write about the appropriateness of accepting cash from Hip Hop stars and producers. He might have a point that contributions from them should not be acceptable to presidential campaigns. But no, he decided to denounce Hillary for accepting Hip Hop cash before Imus made his controversial comments, while ignoring completely another candidate for doing exactly the same thing. It was not very Hip of King to Hop to conclusions about someone else’s alleged Hypocrisy without doing the research necessary; it is King who appears to be the Hypocrite.
Senator Hillary Clinton spoke at Reverend Al Sharpton’s National Action Network yesterday. One thing she said struck us: “You know, what is it about us always having to clean up after people? ? But this is not just going to be picking up socks off the floor. This is going be cleaning up the government, clearing out the dead wood.”
Hillary could have been speaking about Democrats in general or the Clintons in particular. In either case, she was correct.
Old George Bush destroyed the economy of the country and Bill Clinton had to ride in to fix it. And fix it he did, ending up with budget surpluses instead of the deficits the country had grown used to. The “clean up” did not end with the economy. The whole country and its relationships had to be repaired and President Bill Clinton did just that.
One of the most persuasive arguments for a Hillary presidency is that she has the experience necessary to be president. Hillary has already served a full term in the Senate. For 8 years she was also at the right hand of the successful presidency of her husband Bill Clinton. She knows the problems, the solutions and the players worldwide as well as all the problems, solutions and leaders in every field in this country.
Why is the “experience” argument so persuasive? Because after the disasters this country and the world has endured in what is without argument the worst presidency and the worst president in American history we need emergency repairs domestically and internationally. At a town hall meeting in New Hampshire today, Hillary Clinton said that when she is elected president she would make Bill Clinton an ambassador to the world and employ him to restore the battered and torn reputation and image of the United States. “I can’t think of a better cheerleader for America than Bill Clinton, can you?” Bravo. So, not only is Hillary prepared with the most direct and best experience to get the country moving the minute she is elected, but she will have the additional expertise of Bill Clinton at her disposal to assist her. We expect she will employ all former Democratic presidents and the best persons from her vast network of friends and the absolute best former officials of the Bill Clinton administration. And let’s understand, Hillary can discern the “best” from the merely “good” because she knows these people from many years of working with them. After the incompetent Bush crony administration, hiring the best will be important and a big relief to Americans tired of watching this country circle the drain.
Yesterday at a speech before the World Affairs Council in New Hampshire Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd said, according to the Boston Globe, that the presidency wasn’t a place for on the job training. He stated “We need leadership and we need it now” . We agree with Senator Dodd. .
We long ago gave up any hope for Edwards and his hapless campaign. We now feel about him the way we feel about other losing candidates – just go away.
We complimented his stumbling, bumbling campaign the other day due to some hiring decisions that were OK. However, when stories are published, like the $400 haircut being posted on his campaign expense account, and that the campaign either did not think this would be noticed, that it mattered, or worse that it does not have a mechanism to detect and prevent this type of embarrasment from happening it makes us want to throw dirt into the grave.
Surely, “two Americas” Edwards must realize that $400 haircuts and huge compounds to live in are a dagger pointed at the throat of his campaign message. We do not begrudge Edwards having a massive house, nor having expensive haircuts. His hair is lovely enough that he should give it all the care and attention in the world and we would love a weekend or longer invitation to luxuriate in the “house”. Hell, didn’t Biden spend a fortune on follicle migrations from the back of his head to the front of his head and don’t most presidential candidates live in very comfortable circumstances? The complaint is not that Edwards has the right to live in the manner he chooses, but rather doesn’t Edwards realize the actual message his campaign is sending with $400 haircut headlines? Don’t they realize that this is simply a message disaster? Doesn’t Edwards remember Kerry windsurfing and skiiing (instead of humble everyday, everyman sports like basketball, or touch football), and the way that was exploited by Republicans? We know that the Republicans will create attacks out of nothing; they do that to Hillary every day. But it is not wise to supply them with so much ammunition.
The final nail in the coffin for the Edwards campaign is the news that Joe Trippi is joining the campaign. Hillary got Ethan Geto of the NY Dean campaign, who, though thought by many to be obnoxious, did a good job for Dean in NY. Joe Trippi is another story. He should be kept away from campaigns.
We found these 2 comments on TalkingPointsMemo which recall some of the Trippi legacy:
“Don’t you think a lot of “Deaniacs” despise Trippi and hold him responsible in good measure for blowing all the money (and taking a good chunk for himself)? I know I do. I contributed to the Dean campaign and I was disgusted by how they mishandled EVERYTHING, especially the money.”
“I wasn’t an early supporter of Dean, so I had no soft spot for him after Iowa. But when I heard Joe Trippi calling into CNN from his car phone while driving East cross country heading back to wherever, I think it was Boston, to announce he had defected from the campaign, I thought to myself, “What a piece of junk.” If you want to abandon your candidate, fine, but what a rat!”
Ben Smith at Politico.com broke the code the other day. The occasion for this ooze of truth-telling was a new ABC News/Washington Post poll which was released on April 19, 2007 (we have it posted on the right hand side of this page). The truth-telling shock generated by this poll was that Hillary was still beating Obama by 17 points – 37% to 20%. As fists slammed into palms BSmith wrote: “Damn polls. Just when you think you’ve got a narrative…”
The narrative referred to of course is the great collapse of the Hillary campaign and the mighty rise of the omnipotent Obama. Only problem with the narrative is — it ain’t so.
Smith wrote about this increasingly unhinged hallucination by the media and so-called “progressive” blogs on April 10:
Gallup has some numbers out which diverge pretty sharply from the developing media storyline of Obama’s surge.
If anything, Hillary seems to be solidifying her frontrunner-hood, while Obama ticked down a few points in the poll. And Hillary’s lead increases when Gore isn’t in the race.
“Sen. Hillary Clinton remains the dominant presidential front-runner among Democrats nationally,” Gallup reports, adding that the “survey results suggest that while Obama may have had a great deal of financial momentum in the past quarter, it was not matched by any increase in voter support.”
Today we have yet another poll. This one has Hillary beating Obama by 21 points and Edwards continues his driftwood-like float away from land. The nutroots as usual are denouncing this poll, this time because it is from Fox News. The nutroots are not happy with any of the thus far unanimous polls showing Hillary is the likely nominee of the Democratic Party in 2008 .
Let us all understand what the narrative means. The great threat to Democratic victory in 2008 will not come from Fox News nor any of the other right wing news outlets. These fakes news outfits are discredited and losing influence with every passing day. The danger to Democratic victory in 2008 will come from journalists and pundits, whether lazy or malevolent (Chris Matthews and Arriana Huffington come to mind), and from self-interested, so-called Democratic “progressives” now huddled in their blog fortifications lobbing Republican propaganda grenades at popular Democrats like Hillary.
Graphic From Politico:
|April 10, 2007
The Supreme Court yesterday returned abortion and the reproductive rights of women back to the center stage of political life with its ban of so-called “partial birth” abortions. It also returned the Supreme Court itself as an issue. For the first time since Roe v. Wade the court rejected the sensible Clinton position – both Clinton’s – of “safe, legal, and rare”. Right-wing Republicans delighted in the decision which will now be used as a major weapon when they move into state legislatures to attempt to make abortions dangerous, illegal and nonexistent – and to hell with the health of a woman. As Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention stated “This decision is a powerful and timely reminder of presidential elections and their pivotal impact on the makeup of the Supreme Court.”
All major Democratic candidates issued clarion calls against the decision including Hillary. She said
“This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman’s right to choose and recognized the importance of women’s health. Today’s decision blatantly defies the Court’s recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.”
Senator Obama also issued a clear denunciation of the decision. However, can he be trusted on this issue?
You see, unlike the U.S. Presidency, the buck does not stop at the Illinois legislature. In the Illinois State legislature a politician who wants to hide from an issue can vote “Present” instead of “Yes” or “No” and thereby avoid responsibility and the inevitable loss of support that comes from actually taking a stand.
In 1997, when it mattered, when he actually had a vote not just a microphone, when the issue of partial birth abortion came before the Illinois State legislature Obama twice gave a “Present” to abortion opponents. On House Bill 382 and Senate Bill 230 – bills that prohibited “partial birth” abortions, Obama took a dive. Like a character from Dr. Suess, Obama did not vote “no,” he did not vote “yes,” he gave a “present”. Obama did not take a stand in 1997. He did not take a stand in 2001. Then House Bill 1900 and Senate Bill 562 – on parental notification, Obama instead of voting “yes” or “no” voted – “present”.
Same thing with Senate Bill 1093, Senate Bill 1094, and Senate Bill 1095 which also dealt with abortion. No leadership, remain popular. No “yes”, no “no”. Let’s all get along and not vote on issues that matter. The audacity of being Present. The lightness of being.
Here are links to reference Obama votes in the Illinois Legislature:
Welcome to our website – Hillary is 44.
We started this website because we believe Senator Hillary Clinton will be an excellent 44th President of the United States. Senator Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President because she is not only the best candidate running, but she is also the one candidate that will without doubt beat the Republicans and restore sanity to the White House.
For the next year, we will bring you news and commentary of the 2008 race for president. Our focus will be on Senator Clinton and the Democrats. Once Senator Clinton wins the nomination we will turn our focus to the Republican nominee.
Although we feel that Senator Clinton will be the nominee (we thought that way back in March 2006), the race, as always in a democracy, will be an exciting one. We will have lots to say especially with regards to the media and blog coverage of the campaign. We will keep an especially sharp eye on “progressives” or Democrats who repeat Republican propaganda to undermine Hillary or any of our candidates.
At the left hand side of our website we have posted permanent commentary pages on certain issues such as Iraq which we will continue to update.
Feel free to comment on our posts and to send us any tips, which we will keep confidential.