Lewinski's dress remains in Democratic race's taboo closet

[Maddy McCall]

WASHINGTON - It is the name few U.S. Democrats have dared utter during the party's long and increasingly nasty presidential race: Monica Lewinsky.

In the 15 months since Hillary Clinton launched her White House campaign, the former first lady has rarely been asked in public about the infamous intern and the sex scandal that almost ended her husband's presidency.

But as Barack Obama struggles to explain his decades-long ties to a controversial black pastor, there's new debate about whether it's still taboo to talk about the skeletons in Bill Clinton's closet, or to inquire about Hillary's decision to stand by her man during the darkest period of the couple's marriage.

snip/

The political perils of playing the "Monica card" in the Democratic race were even more apparent last week when a prominent Obama supporter in Iowa, former state party chairman Gordon Fischer, wrote a blog item about Bill Clinton and Lewinsky's semen-stained dress.

Denouncing the former president for a perceived slight against Obama, Fischer wrote that Bill Clinton's criticisms were "a stain on his legacy (that were) much worse, much deeper, than the one on Monica's dress."

When Clinton's campaign seized on Fischer's remark as evidence Obama was playing gutter politics, Fischer quickly apologized and said it was "stupid" to mention Lewinsky.

That an Obama supporter would so carelessly invoke the memory of the Lewinsky scandal shocked many Democrats, because such attacks have long been the near-exclusive domain of conservative Republicans.

snip/

Throughout the Democratic race, the only person willing to talk - even vaguely - about the Lewinsky affairs has been Hillary Clinton herself.

She told TV talk show host Tyra Banks in January that she stayed with her husband because it "was right for my family" and she "never doubted Bill's love for me, ever."

More: http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=c1be3ca3-5491-4089-80e2-fd5fa4392570&k=33644

[GarbagemanLB]

1. Yes, the same campaign that released a photo of Obama in Kenya is 'shocked' at gutter politics.

[Maddy McCall]

2. Nice diversion.

Already proved that that photo was all over the place before Drudge picked it up.

C'mon. Don't you have any new material--you know, stuff that hasn't been disproved?

[GarbagemanLB]

4. Drudge was sent the photo from the Hillary campaign, sorry to inform you.Gutter politics at its best

[Sarah Ibarruri]

8. It was? nt

[dsc]

13. sorry but that isn't what he said

He said, that "people were sending the photo" not that they sent the photo to him. He was very careful with his words, and usually that is for good reason.

[rodeodance]

53. Drudge has NEVER produced any evidence of that. It is all Hersay--And BO got dumped.

[rodeodance]

9. Recall that it was BO who believed the RW slimball Drudge!!

[NJSecularist]

18. Completely false. n/t

[rodeodance]

51. completely true, Poor judgment on BOs part with that issue.

[NJSecularist]

54. Obama never believed Drudge. Quit telling lies. n/t

[rodeodance]

56. no lie---you are telling the lie

[mtnsnake]

24. That was pathetic how Obama jumped on Drudge's band wagon for political gain

Wow was that ever low, but oh well, we've come to expect that of his campaign.

[Olney Blue]

41. Drudge is indeed a slimeball.

Hi rodeodance- I haven't seen you as much lately- did you take a break? :hi: Or maybe I was reading the wrong threads.

[NJSecularist]

3. Too bad the name Ken Starr isn't off limits.

Thanks for that, Howard Wolfson.

[mdmc]

5. I often wonder what Monica is up to

I'm sure she is a true democrat.

[kid a]

46. here you go.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=KDVPq1mYqwI&feature=related

[anonymous171]

6. Biggest skeleton that Obama won't touch. But the GOP will.

[Maddy McCall]

12. Evidently you didn't read the article.

It states, very clearly and concisely, why the dress won't be paraded around this election term.

[Megahurtz]

20. Right.

You can bet on that one.

[rodeodance]

55. Did you read the article--or are just making stuff up again?

The political perils of playing the "Monica card" in the Democratic race were even more apparent last week when a prominent Obama supporter in Iowa, former state party chairman Gordon Fischer, wrote a blog item about Bill Clinton and Lewinsky's semen-stained dress.

Denouncing the former president for a perceived slight against Obama, Fischer wrote that Bill Clinton's criticisms were "a stain on his legacy (that were) much worse, much deeper, than the one on Monica's dress."

When Clinton's campaign seized on Fischer's remark as evidence Obama was playing gutter politics, Fischer quickly apologized and said it was "stupid" to mention Lewinsky.

That an Obama supporter would so carelessly invoke the memory of the Lewinsky scandal shocked many Democrats, because such attacks have long been the near-exclusive domain of conservative Republicans.

[anonymous171]

57. WHOAH! A MENTION OF THE CLINTON SCANDAL! OMG! Hillawy is so badly tweated!

:cry:

[rodeodance]

58. Brought up be the BO camp first. Very RW of that BO advisor.

[rodeodance]

7. Lots of BO fans bring up the dress--just like the RW does.

That an Obama supporter would so carelessly invoke the memory of the Lewinsky scandal shocked many Democrats, because such attacks have long been the near-exclusive domain of conservative Republicans.

[GarbagemanLB]

11. Which candidate used Wright to attack Obama? Which one was classy enough to defend him?

That's right...MCCAIN defended Obama. Hillary tried to use it for political gain and to distract from her Bosnia lies.


But no! Queen Hillary would never dirty herself with such tactics! :rofl:

[Maddy McCall]

15. I doubt that those people are Democrats.

As the article states, Democrats consider it taboo. And Republicans are hesitant to use it because it generates sympathy for Hillary.

[NJSecularist]

22. Democrats consider it taboo. Republicans certainly don't.

As we all know, nothing is off limit for the Rethugs. If they think bringing up Monica will win them some voters, then they'll do it. We all saw what they did to smear Kerry in 2004. Why would it be any different this year?

[Maddy McCall]

25. Because the Republicans want women to vote for their candidate.

It's really that simple.

:shrug:

[anonymous171]

28. It's really really easy to get (many) women to vote for republicans.

It's called the "fear" card. Anyway, as many have pointed out, only Dem/Liberal females really care about Clinton's feelings. The rest hate her guts. These are the people who think she and Bill shot Vince Foster for chrissakes.

[Maddy McCall]

31. You demonstrate your inability to grasp politics with every post like this.

Doesn't even merit a response.

[anonymous171]

45. And yet you respond.

Remember 2004? FEAR won the day. Kerry won women by 3%. I think you underestimate how much the RW HATES the Clintons.

[NJSecularist]

30. It's debatable whether Republican women who hate the Clinton's guts would be offended

by bringing up Monica.

[anonymous171]

47. I agree.

Remember the "bitch" commenter? Not a man.

[karynnj]

59. That connection is just wrong

Monica happened, whether Democrats prefer to speak of it or not - and though it was Bill Not Hillary Clinton, an issue of that magnitude with the first spouse is going to be brought up and would for ANY candidate.

There is a huge difference between Clinton's action - that were dishonorable and senseless and Kerry's service and his career, which show him to be a man of courage and integrity - two words rarely used to describe Bill Clinton.

It made a difference - I am proud that I defended Kerry because it was the right thing to do and was easy given that the truth alone was sufficient to counter the lies. On the other hand, I felt that I was destroying my own integrity arguing that the good in Clinton made up for the bad.

[NJSecularist]

62. I wasn't comparing the two

What I was saying is that the Rethugs have shown that they will stop at nothing to win an election. They smeared Kerry's war record shamelessly. If they have to, they'll bring up Monica. I'm not saying that Clinton deserves to be defended for what he did. And I defended John Kerry in 2004.

[karynnj]

64. I should have mentioned that you are always still defending Kerry

and that I knew you weren't equating them - my comment was very poorly written.

I agree that they will attack on anything - and if there's nothing, they'll make something up. (In Kerry's case the only thing wrong was being genuinely more heroic than Bush) The difference is that - for those of us trying to fight back - it can only be done successfully if it is not true.

[bunnies]

10. Where Bill sticks his penis is personal...

But when he lies to the country its fair game. I guess we should overlook that though, on account of it might hurt someones feelings. Only losers want honest Presidents anyway.

[Maddy McCall]

17. The Clenis!!!11!

The dress doesn't help Obama. Even Republicans won't touch the topic.

But lots of people remain obsessed with the Clenis.

[bunnies]

39. Was I talking about Obama?

Oh. Thats right. I wasnt. Ok then.

[C_U_L8R]

40. Get that nasty old Clenis out of here !

Who knows where that thing's been !

[Bluebear]

21. 'Where Bill sticks his penis' - well that was discrete.

[bunnies]

32. I never claimed to be discrete bluebear!

Tact isnt my specialty.

[Maddy McCall]

34. Obviously.

Class isn't either.

[bunnies]

37. Wow.

Is it the hating hour already?

[kid a]

52. its the hate baiting hour

[Bluebear]

14. Cripes, they utter it here every day!

[Maddy McCall]

19. They aren't Democrats.

They're just trolls trying to stir up shit. The article very clearly details why it's a topic that Democrats won't touch. Even Republicans won't bring it up.

[pscot]

16. Dirty laundry

Dirty little secrets
Dirty little lies
We got our dirty little fingers in everybodys pie
We love to cut you down to size
We love dirty laundry

We can do the innuendo
We can dance and sing
When its said and done we havent told you a thing
We all know that crap is king
Give us dirty laundry!

[americanstranger]

23. I'm sort of mystified as to why you're posting this.

I guess you've got your reasons, but I don't really understand it.

- as

[Maddy McCall]

27. You're trying to read something into my reasons, create motives.

I posted it because it's a recent article that explains why the topic is taboo.

No big mystery there.

[americanstranger]

33. No, seriously, I'm not.

If I wanted to assign a motive, I would have done it.

Like I said, just mystified.

(I won't read anything into anything if you don't. Fair?)

- as

[anigbrowl]

43. Sure you did

Like the reasons it's taboo in the Democratic nomination race aren't blindingly obvious already. I think you did this so you can say 'but she's vetted' and then point to your posting of this article as if it were proof of Clinton's GE immunity from republican attack.

[Maddy McCall]

44. LOL. Either you're projecting or your imagination's working overtime.

:silly:

[marshall]

26. I'm looking forward to the movie

It ought to be a real potboiler. I think Hollywood has been waiting for Hillary's campaign to come and go before tackling it.

[GoesTo11]

29. Really, drop it.

Everyone remembers that incident. Of course O isn't going to bring it up. Why? Because after the primaries he still has to win the general, and potty politics with the Democrats doesn't make that happen.

[Texasgal]

35. I find the dragging out of the Lewinsky scandal

ridiculous!

It is such a non-issue!

IT just goes to show you that this race will get nastier before it gets better.

I am disgusted.

[kid a]

50. Obama won't - He's moved on from the Clintons.

[Debi]

36. One thing we can agree on - Gordon Fischer is a moran!

Before he endorsed Obama he endorsed Tom Vilsack:

<snip>

Prediction: Tom Vilsack Will Be The Next President of the United States

Flat out.

Now, this will sound like I'm bragging, but I'm really not. I am a quite humble person (frankly, I have many, many, many reasons to be humble). But I do have a solid track record for accurate predictions.

In 2005, before spring training, I predicted the Chicago White Sox would win the World Series.

In 2006, as you can see from this site, I was pretty dead on with my political prognistications.

I will write much, much more over the coming days, weeks, and months, but a few reasons for my prediction (in absolutely no particular order):

1. Tom Vilsack's personal story is simply incredible, and will both help readily distinguish him from the pack, and allow him to connect with working families.

2. He has never run in an election he was favored to win, but has never lost an election.

3. On the stump, when he is on, Tom Vilsack is as good or better as any politician out there.

4. He helped -- in fact, I think he was the single biggest reason -- Iowa turned from purple to solid blue. That's a huge feather in his cap, and one that will attract Dems nationally.

5. Tom Harkin. He is simply amazing, and will be a gigantic help.

6. Ditto Sally Pederson and Jerry Crawford.

7. He is a governor. The last time a sitting member of Congress was elected President? John Kennedy in 1960. With all due respect to the other candidates, that is no historical accident.

8. Not only is he a governor, Tom Vilsack has been a great Governor. Especially on issues like schools, health care, clean air and clean waterCities-With-Cleanest-Tap-Water Nov-07 , jobs, and other issues Dems are really passionate about.

As I said, I'll be blogging much more about this, obviously, but for now, I'm predicting it flat out: President Vilsack.

<snip>

http://www.essentialestrogen.com/2007/09/gordon_fischer_issues_new_endo.html


:rofl:

[walldude]

38. Oh shit we agree! Is the space/time continuim going to collapse

in on itself?

I'll give this a K&R. Stick to the real issues, Lewinski shouldn't have been a big deal when Bill was president, the Republicans made it one, are we going to follow their lead?

[Maddy McCall]

42. The internets just went spaz.

:rofl:

Thanks.

[myrna minx]

60. OMG, another Obama supporter agrees: ME!

Are we barreling toward an singularity event horizon? :rofl: It think it's in horrible taste to bring up the Lewinsky affair in this campaign as well as dragging Chelsea onto the muck.

[Zhade]

48. I think Obama has more class than to go down that route.

NT!

[kid a]

49. He's right to stay focused on McCain and let the Clintons sling mud.

[GoldieAZ49]

61. Obama can use it

If he wants to totally rid himself of ever getting any votes from the boomer generation in the dem and indie groups.

Hell he alienates so many voting blocks he might as well add another one.

[merh]

63. I don't understand.

How can she claim to have been Bill's apprentice, yet expect the stains of his administration to not become her own?

How can some here think that the vote for Hillary, and I quote

"she and Bill celebrate the start of 2 more terms"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5346820&mesg_id=5346968

"We know we can do better with both Clintons at the helm, even if you don't!"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5333674&mesg_id=5334075

Those are just two of so many posts that have basically said a vote for Hill is a vote for Bill as if it will be a co-presidency.

If you think the right isn't going to go after her on that issue alone, you are just fooling yourself.

If she claims her experience through her marriage with him, she gets the good and the bad that comes with it.

And attaining a position of power or import based upon your marriage and not upon your individual efforts and experiences is not feminist, in my book.

She has done this to herself.

[Jim Lane]

65. Clinton decided to forgive adultery. McCain decided to commit adultery.

I can't see the Republicans getting very far by raising this issue.

On the other hand, the remark quoted in the OP wasn't an attack on Hillary Clinton based on Lewinsky. It simply asserted the indisputable fact that the Lewinsky affair was a stain on Bill Clinton's legacy. It added an opinion that Bill Clinton had done even more damage to himself by his attacks on Obama.

That opinion is somewhat dubious, in my view. I agree that the attacks have sometimes gone too far, but overzealous campaigning is a lesser offense. Nevertheless, the denunciation of Bill Clinton's campaign tactics is fairly widespread, and I don't think this particular Obama supporter should be pilloried for his way of expressing that viewpoint.

[Vinca]

66. The Clinton campaign is living in a strange, never, never land

and seem to think the blue dress and all the rest of it will never be uttered during the campaign. Don't they realize if she is the nominee we will be treated to Monica, Paula and all the rest of them 24/7 until McCain wins? You might consider it gutter politics, but it happened in the people's house on the people's dime and the Republicans will use it for all it's worth.