I would love to support Obama when he attacks those who try to swiftboat him.

[Tom Rinaldo]

The problem is I never see him do it unless he can find a way to tie that into some attack on Hillary. Right now I am witnessing an orchestrated swiftboating of Hillary Clinton unfolding and Obama's official campaign is up to their necks in pushing it.

It is almost like they have an unspoken policy to accuse her of what they themselves promote. The fake outrage over the "Obama Dressed" photo is the perfect example of that to me. "Fake outrage" is a charge that Obama supporters tag on Hillary all of the time. Most recently when she got angry over Obama campaign literature that has in some cases been out there for weeks.

Well now comes the Obama "outrage" over the distribution of photos of Obama in traditional African garb - against the Clinton campaign. What is known is that Drudge "obtained" a copy of an internal and private email shared between some Clinton staffers (no claim was made that it was widely shared). Even Drudge had the journalistic integrity to not state that the email was distributed to him intentionally - and lord knows he could have gotten more mileage with such a claim. Many embarrassing documents and memos are "obtained" from political campaigns in mysterious ways that those campaigns would never have wanted let see the light of day. I would not call this instance "distributing" a photo that could be used against Obama.

So what exactly was that email? Was it a template for distribution to the public in an underhanded way? Did it consist of language that can be used to dupe the public into believing Obama had ties to Al Qaeda? Did it say "Proof that Obama is a Muslim"? No, none of that. It was more on the order of "Hoo Boy, the Republicans will get some mileage out of this one if Obama gets the nomination. And that happens to be true. Were it false there would be no outrage being expressed over distribution of that photo now.

Is this a photo that is now coming to light for the first time because Drudge "obtained" an email between some Clinton staffers (left undefined is how senior or lowly those staffers might be)? No it is not. In fact this is a photo that was screaming from a paper over two weeks ago. Not only was this photo published and widely DISTRIBUTED, but it was accompanied by a full page story with a headline that read: "Obama's Al Qaeda Link".

When that story with that photo was published, what did the Obama campaign have to say about it? How much outrage did they express then? Who did they blast? Who did they accuse? Who did they even bother TO CORRECT? No one. They couldn't find a way to use it against Hilary. But now that Drudge has given them an opportunity to do so on a silver platter, they seize it eagerly. The act outraged that anyone could think of distributing that photo KNOWING FILL WELL that by blowing this up into a prominent campaign issue that photo will now be seen by tens of millions of voters who had no clue that it existed. The Obama camp has willing joined the marketing campaign for distribution of that photo, making sure that it jumps off the sordid pages of the Drudge Report and into the main stream media.

If they really cared about that photo being seen they would have objected the first time when millions saw it actually being used as part of a hate campaign against Obama. They don't care if millions more see it now, if by so doing Obama can win tens of thousands of additional Democratic Primary Votes next week from people who they can turn against Hillary Clinton by blaming her for an electoral challenge - smears based on his name, his heritage etc. that he knows full well he will need to face himself if he hopes to be elected President in November.

It is ugly politics, just about as ugly as it gets, but the swiftboating taking place now is ugly politics being played BY Barack Obama.

[HeraldSquare212]

1. The Clinton campaign's known relationship with Drudge makes it hard to think it was all innocent.

And it's consistent with the attempted 'radical' smear last week. So, I don't think it's time for Obama to turn his attention to Reps just yet.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. It isn't time for either of them to turn their attention to Repubs just yet

I agree with you there. Both of our candidates are being tested by this process but I still strongly believe whoever wins will have sharpened the tools they will need to wage a winning campaign against the Republicans; which will have ten times the negative content of this primary campaign.

[HeraldSquare212]

8. I agree with that - it's been a useful primary season, however it ends.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. Your argument is insane

You think the Clinton campaign placed this with Drudge? (Drudge doesn't say that.)

Is this how the Clinton campaign would like the picture presented... as part of a hit-piece on Clinton alleging a smear campaign?

Think Harder.

[HeraldSquare212]

9. I'm only pointing out the relationship. Given that, it's hard to just dismiss the idea.

And her campaign had no problem trying the radical smear last week out in the open, so I'm not so sure they're worried about criticism for trying. It's just in this case, they got blasted early.

[Tom Rinaldo]

2. I know some of you saw this posted on a thread before

But I agred to a request to make this a seperate OP

Obama supporters can take comfort in the fact that I just used up my third OP post for the day in this forum :)

[HeraldSquare212]

10. Damn, I almost feel compelled to offer you one of mine.

[Tom Rinaldo]

15. LOL Thanks, I'll take that tongue in cheek but sincere either way

Nah, I am wasted from posting this much in one day anyway. Every thread sets off numerous follow up posts anyway. I have my hands full already :)

[mrreowwr_kittty]

3. Considering the swiftboating has come from Clinton, I don't see your point. nt

[TheDebbieDee]

30. I think the Obama Campaign "swiftboats" themselves

and blames it on the Clinton Campaign because they like portraying themselves as the victim of Clinton's negative campaigning.

This theory makes just as much sense as the Clintons having a relationship and planting info with that Drudge puke.

[jillan]

4. Thank you for this Tom! That is what I keep saying.

Obama is doing a terrible job dealing with all of this.

Instead of whining all day about the photo - WHY didn't he come out with a statement explaining how
he was honoring the country he was visiting?? Wouldn't that have been more presidential than blaming Clinton? It is he, that is keeping the story alive.

And Michelle's comments - how many days did it take his campaign to respond?

Maybe the Obamadrama will help him in the primaries, but it is NOT going to help him in the GE.

[anamandujano]

39. If his disposition in the campaign had the slightest incline toward positive

instead of the way he's been running it, this would have been his response.

I hope the blacks start to realize how badly they're being played by this guy.

If they were smarter, they'd hire you for PR. (Please don't take the job if they offer it to you.)

[high density]

5. I'm not following.

Obama is swiftboating Clinton, because he's responding to attacks that she has been brewing up?

Sorry I may be biased in my support for Obama, but I don't see how that logic works. Cause and effect. She's being attacked because she's going on the attack herself. Obama seems to have generally run a pretty tame campaign until an outside force requires him to come out and defend himself.

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. Our opinons can and likely will differ but

Clinton did not leak that photo to anyone, nor did her staff. It was first published in 2006, and it was widely distributed over two weeks ago in a national publication. Drudge did not claim that anyone in the Clinton campaign gave him that internal email of a discussion that a few staffers were having about the photo. He just said he "obtained it". There are many ways to to obtain memos and information from a campaign, and most do not meet with that camapaign's approval. The email in question is not like the hit email that keeps circulating around the country from many many sources against Obama making a case that he is a radical muslim. This was a few staff people sharing their thoughts about a photo that was already out there - and possibly lowly staff people at that. It wasn't something to email out to wide mailing lists to be copied and sent on. It was an electronic chat, more private than the ones we are having here. Were it not for arche Republican henchman Drudge we would not know about it nor would anyone else

However that same photo WAS widely distributed AND used in an OVERT attack on Obama right before Super Tuesday, and Obama never said a single word about it. It could not be blamed on Clinton then.


In truth both campaigns have been pretty tame for a hard fought Presidential primary, and two week old puppy mild compared to what awaits either Clinton or Obama against McCain. I would not care about this very much were it not for the fact that Obama is usually treated like a teflon candidate and Clinton is usually treated like a velcro candidate when it comes to any negative charges.

[Straight Shooter]

11. Not even 5 minutes ago I was saying exactly the same thing to a visiting friend.

I made exactly the same points, stressing that the photo has been out since Feb. 4 and not a peep from Obama's camp about it.

The timing is highly suspicious, in light of Hillary's publicized anger about the flyers and in light of Farrakahn's "embrace" of Obama, that something needed to blow those stories off the front page and replace it with inflammatory accusations against Hillary.

We believe there is a mole in the Clinton campaign.

[earthlover]

12. You make some good points...but....and it is a BIG BUT....Hillary's team still forwarded it to Drudg

They, of course, if they knew what on earth they were doing...which according to you they obviously didn't, they would not have leaked this to Drudge individually or in unison or at all! So, if you are upset about giving Obama an opportunity, then be mad at your campaign!

Again, Obama shows how adept he is at responding to being swiftboated. Of course it was just some folks in her campaign, not Hillary herself, easily denied and warded off with a resignation if got caught. But Obama not only did not get sucked into this, he actually came out ahead!

I am glad he is likely to be the nominee. It will make me breathe easier not worrying about someone like a Clinton being swiftboated and sputtering in response.

It think the Bullshit of the Year award goes to the Hillary spokes person who criticised Obama for using this issue to distract away from the issues. Well, dumbkopft, your campaign was the reason the distraction occured in the first place. How fucking Orwellian!

[maddiejoan]

17. He's not adept at all

The attack should have been on DRUDGE.

There is no evidence of this being from Clinton.

In fact --if there is such a cozy relationship between Drudge and Clinton --why is SHE being smeared at all?

Why would Drudge do that to Clinton if they were cozy?

I swear you all have rocks in your head.

[anamandujano]

40. Don't overload them with logic, they're having a bad enough time as it is.

[guruoo]

18. And what do you base that on? -Drudge's word?

:rofl:

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. Your header sentance contains an untruth

You say "Hillary's team forwarded it to Drudge" but Drudge never said that. He only said that he "obtained it". Well thieves "obtain" possession of the contents of a safe also. Some sloppy journalists have fudged words intentionally or unintentionally (I think both). Obama's campaign has fudged words to when they say things like Clinton's staff circulated the email without noting that they circulated it among themselves. And when the Clinton campaign did not deny the story, it was the Drudge story that they did not deny, and all that story did was say they had a copy of an email sent between some Clinton staffers. The Clinton campaign did not deny that such an email had been sent between Clinton staffers. That is all.

Here is one tidbit from ABC News that I caught on The Raw Story this morning:

"ABC News political tip sheet The Note says the photo flap could be a result of "frustration" from the Clinton team, but it notes there is some question over whether her team distributed the photo:

(If it really is the work of someone associated with the Clinton campaign, it has atypical fingerprints all over it -- and it's an interesting call on a day where Clinton is giving a "major" speech on foreign policy.)"
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Obama_campaign_blasts_Clinton_over_photo_0225.html

[redqueen]

20. Why would Drudge out her that way?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/oct/23/usa.hillaryclinton1

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/us/politics/22drudge.html?scp=3&sq=clinton+drudge&st=nyt

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. I glanced at your links. Even if I shared your total view of them

they make no difference. Why? Because there are no lasting alliances with the media unless it is really your own side's house journat; like Rush Limbaugh's radio network if you are a Republican other than John McCain, and even that now is starting to change since they are being forced to accept him.

Drudge fights mostly for the other side - the Republican side and everybody knows it. He has done infinately more hit jobs on the Clinton's than anything helpful to either one of them. Since most of the major media in this country is right leaning, Democratic operatives have to negotiate the minefield of working with the media as it is, but Drudge has NO love of Democrats. Here he got the perfect chance to damage BOTH of our Presedential candidates while getting a lot of media attention for himself. Lucky him.

[redqueen]

27. He didn't just get the chance. It was handed to him.

It's been reported that her campaign had (or has) a liaison for Drudge.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. Obama could also and you just don't know it yet

At the national level right wing and left wing sources get scoops from both sides at different times for different reasons. And there are times when rivals withing the same party use outlets on the other side to hurt rivals on their side, but it is not always what first meets the eye. Sometimes the best dirt you can use is supposed evidence of an opponent acting dirty toward you. Espionage and counter-espionage.

People we are talking about some of the ultimate keys to power in the most powerful nation on earth. Double agents do exist. Of every stripe you can imagine, but some things still are possible to know, and one of them is that Drudge is no friend to any major Democrat.

[earthlover]

38. Well, assume for a minute that the entire thing is as you say, why hasn't Clinton camp clarified?

They have not denied that they directly gave it to Drudge. If this were true, what harm in saying that?

Tom, I have a lot of respect for you, but you gotta admit...after all the crap that the Clinton campaign has leaked over the past few weeks/months....there is a point where one more "leak" from of course a campaign worker is just one more thing that is believable because so much shit has already been thrown it fits a pattern!

Still, as hard a position as it may be, I feel that it is up to the Hillary campaign to condemn what has been shown, and so far the silence is deafening on that score!

[Tom Rinaldo]

47. There's sort of a big debate tomorrow

I expect each side is lining up all their ducks and crossing all their T's. I am sure both campaigns would love to get a good gotcha moment. Then there is the matter of the news cycle, and this is added evidence against Clinton "leaking" a photo (that was already in the hands of Free Republic and published nation wide); I haven't had time to check on it but didn't Hillary Clinton deliver a major foreign policy speech today? They only get so many minutes of news coverage to get a message out you know. ABC commented on that very aspect. I think I included that in another post on this thread.

P.S. Plus Clinton would rather keep the focus now on the Flyers Obama put out that many media observers are agreeeing contain false charges against her. This is not the diversion she needed right now. Obama, perhaps.

[redqueen]

14. Sorry, no sale.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/oct/23/usa.hillaryclinton1

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/us/politics/22drudge.html?scp=3&sq=clinton+drudge&st=nyt

[Occam Bandage]

16. Just like with South Carolina, I'm finding it very hard to be sympathetic to the camp that

started race-baiting, and whose first reaction was to blame their opponent for their race-baiting. If they had from the very start apologized on behalf of the staffer, denied it was an official campaign action, and denounced the idea of using Obama's heritage as an attack, then this would have been a complete non-issue.

[Skidmore]

21. "I never see him do it unless he can find a way to tie that into some attack on Hillary...."

Perhaps that's because Hillary's people are the ones doing the swiftboating. There's a pattern of swiftboating from them.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. This photo was already widely circulated

It was used to illustrate a national newspaper story with the title "Obama's Al Qaeda Link". That happened over two weeks ago. What did his campaign have to say about it then?

[Occam Bandage]

46. Campaigns do not make it a priority to comment on third-tier supermarket tabloid hit pieces.

The National Examiner? Who the fuck cares?

[Tom Rinaldo]

48. I saw the Obama campaign comment on an anonymous email campaign

against him, and here I am not talking about him doing so in the context of Clinton volunteers in Iowa having to be "fired" for passing them on. It was after that. He said he could not allow those types of rumors about him stand uncontested. I think he was right. I think the approach Jon Stewart took last night was spot on. And the suggestion made in this thread that he should have milked the photos in a positive vein as an example of being Presidential and well received around the world made good sense too.

[Occam Bandage]

49. So, you're in favor of

Obama attacking ugly smears when spread by tabloids, and when spread by email. You complain when Obama attacks ugly smears when spread by Hillary's campaign.

The vast majority of the coverage I saw on this today was not favorable to Sen. Clinton's campaign. You may be frustrated, but he won today's exchange.

[Tom Rinaldo]

50. Here. Meet me on my other thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4764356

And we can talk about how Obama should deal with the attempted smears on him that everybody knows are circulating all the time both above and below ground against him, and which will only intensify if he becomes our nominee if he doesn't find a better way to deal with them then sh/blame.

[JimGinPA]

22. Drudge Claims The Email Came From Hillary's Camp - Who Should He Blame?

:shrug:

[Forkboy]

23. Do you really only see this behavior on one side?

I don't get how anyone can't see the shit being leveled by both camps...unless they're choosing to see what they want to see and shutting out what they don't, something most partisans do here regularly.

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. The tide today was flowing very heavily against Hillary

That has a lot to do with my own postings today. I do think that both sides look for every advantage, and it is not always pretty, but a whole lot of people here think only one side does it, and of those the overwhelming majority tend to believe it is only the Clinton side that does.

[Forkboy]

34. I don't know Tom.

of those the overwhelming majority tend to believe it is only the Clinton side that does.


I'm seeing that from Hillary supporters an awful lot too. I honestly have no horse in this race. Neither one does much for me, so I can see how both sides act. It's gone back and forth as to who does it more since last Spring. Most of last summer there were some real nasty Hillary supporters that were brutal on ANYONE who didn't think she was the right choice. I could name two posters especially, if rules allowed, that really seemed to sink the attitude here. They were the one who antagonized Obama supporters at every turn. Now, sadly but understandably, those people are firing back. I'd rather they took the high road and win graciously, but human nature is human nature. People who are shit on tend to shit back. Now I see no difference between the two camps at all.

I've said before that trying to decide which camp has been worse is like arguing over which twin is uglier. But, keep in mind, as ugly as both get there are still a lot of good people on both sides, and I try to keep that in mind when I feel myself getting too upset at one side or the other. The good ones don't deserve to be lumped in with the idiots that both camps are churning out now.

[Tom Rinaldo]

35. How about I just take out the word "overwhelmingly"?

But Obama is the one who aired TV Ads saying Clinton "would do anythig to get elected" you know, and the general accepted truth around here is that it is Clinton running a negative campaign while Obama runs a positive one.

And the tide on DU the last couple of days has been bard against Clinton.

[Forkboy]

37. It has definitely been more against Clinton lately.

I think the reasons are two-fold. One, there's simply a lot more Obama supporters here. Two, as her campaign struggles more and more people are looking to be on the winning team, bringing even more people in against Hillary. It's snowballing now.

[robbedvoter]

28. It started with that whole memo "not distributed to the press" which MSGOP was

executing point by point - the one sharptonizing the Clintons.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html
It continued to a second memo - seeking to gain sympathy as Clintons' victim in red states
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/obama_and_clinton_to_clintons.php
Eventually strategy-to-press materials stopped being published - but we kinda got the idea....

[Maddy McCall]

29. Thank you, Tom.

K/R

[RazBerryBeret]

32. I think he does

an awesome job responding to the attacks. he is calm and has habitually turned it around whenever possible. for example...in recent days he has been attacked for not being "patriotic" enough by the GOP. here is how he responded

"A party that presided over a war in which our troops did not get the body armor they needed, or were sending troops over who were untrained because of poor planning, or are not fulfilling the veterans' benefits that these troops need when they come home, or are undermining our Constitution with warrantless wiretaps that are unnecessary?
"That is a debate I am very happy to have. We'll see what the American people think is the true definition of patriotism."

if he can continue to do this, I'm with him all the way.

[Armstead]

33. Frankly, I give Obama's campaign a free pass after this weekend

Personally, I'm fed up with all of these "outrages of the day" on all sides.

Hillary's faked "outrage" over an existing Obama flier followed by her condescending imitation of Obama was ridiculous.

The photo flap seems ridiculous too. But after this weekend (especially so close on the heels of Hillary's "conciliatory" closing remarks in the debate) the Obama campaign can be given some slack if they get overzealous too.

[anamandujano]

44. So what's new about you giving him a free pass? Lehrer just did

the story and showed that the fliers were false.

[AZBlue]

36. But the first time we all saw the photo it wasn't in a context of fear-mongering

or smearing anyone.

Plus, even if the Clinton staffers were passing it amongst themselves as a "private joke" it's so very wrong and offensive. I would hope no Democrat would condone that kind of behavior, especially anyone involved in the political process. If an equally offensive e-mail about Hillary were to be distributed among the Obama campaign, it would be just as wrong.

[anamandujano]

41. Drudge put the spin on it.

[AZBlue]

51. What spin?

If they were passing it from one to another, that's not spin. If they were planning to launch it across the internet as a smear campaign, that may be true or false, we'll probably not know now.

[lojasmo]

42. These are some delusional Hillary supporters here.

Damn near as bad as the Clark supporters in 2003/2004.

[Tom Rinaldo]

45. Like me and FrenchieCat?

I picked one from both current sides for balence :)

[bigtree]

43. hence, Maggie William's reply

nice post, Tom.