Guardian UK: The writing on Clinton's wall

[marmar]

The writing on Clinton's wall
US elections 2008: As the campaign wears on, Hillary's hypocrisy is growing - and the public and media are starting to recognise it
Dylan Loewe

April 3, 2008 9:00 PM | Printable version

The last week in March was, with little doubt, one of the most trying for Hillary Clinton's campaign. Her quest to gain superdelegates was blunted by Bob Casey and Bill Richardson, two major party players who have clearly recognised the writing on the wall.

The core of her experience rationale was called into question when it was revealed that, on multiple occasions, she had dramatically exaggerated her experience landing in war-torn Bosnia. It was also revealed that she had almost nothing to do with the S-Chip programme she claimed to have created, with a number of those involved describing her accounts as straining credulity. She still hasn't released her tax returns, without explanation or justification. And, she was quoted as taking credit for lobbying for the Family Medical Leave Act's passage, though it had passed the House and Senate before her husband took office.

Her insistence on making her candidacy about experience has shed light on parts of her character that might have been better left in the dark.

The tone and tenor of her campaign has also taken a surprising turn, becoming more and more a vehicle for open hypocrisy. Out of one side of her mouth, Hillary argues that all remaining contests should be completed before a decision is made and that Florida and Michigan ought to be seated for fear of their disenfranchisement. Out of the other side, she argues that the delegates that were allocated based on state primaries and caucuses should actually ignore their obligation to support the candidate to which they were pledged. She is uncomfortable disenfranchising Florida and Michigan, but perfectly content tossing out the other 48.

It would be silly were it not so serious. .......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/dylan_loewe/2008/04/the_writing_on_clintons_wall.html

[Yael]

1. Bobby Casey has NEVER gotten this much press!

LOL!

[Hieronymus]

26. Bobby? Oh, grow up.

[pathansen]

28. This was not a professional writer - just another blogger posting a comment

[AX10]

2. Does the press ever say anything skepitcal about Obama?

[Zachstar]

3. Yes

Next question!

[ProSense]

5. Well there were two supposedly campaign ending events according to some:

when Obama said Cousin Pookie and Uncle Ray-Ray and his association with Rev. Wright.

When the RW media stirs up a controversy, the rest of the media turn into a RW echo chamber.

Then there are the detractors.

[Hieronymus]

14. You obviously haven't been paying attention.

[Ken Burch]

19. Survey says..."All the freakin' TIME!"

n/t.

[Lucky 13]

24. Every god damn day.

But you Hillfolk only hear what you want to hear.

[bobthedrummer]

4. "Inconvenient truths about the New Democrats, the Third Way, Democratic Leadership Council, etc."

an archived GD thread from 3-7-2008 that goes into more depth about the truths that the Guardian article states.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2973191

[bobthedrummer]

10. HRC is the Chair of the DLC's American Dream Initiative

according to the DLC Leadership page at their web site
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=137

That dream doesn't include most of US. Funny how the UK understands that-maybe they learned a lesson from the horrible history of "New Labour".

[democracy1st]

18. Thanks for your DLC piece

keep up the good work

[Anarcho-Socialist]

6. Thanks for posting

Recommended

[intaglio]

16. Just a sidelight Anarcho-S

but is your sig line in recession or is it a full blown depression?? :+

[Cha]

7. The US m$$$m is always the last to know.

"The core of her experience rationale was called into question when it was revealed that, on multiple occasions, she had dramatically exaggerated her experience landing in war-torn Bosnia. It was also revealed that she had almost nothing to do with the S-Chip programme she claimed to have created, with a number of those involved describing her accounts as straining credulity. She still hasn't released her tax returns, without explanation or justification. And, she was quoted as taking credit for lobbying for the Family Medical Leave Act's passage, though it had passed the House and Senate before her husband took office".


"open hypocricy" as opposed to their usual behind the closed door hypocricy".

"She is uncomfortable disenfranchising Florida and Michigan, but perfectly content tossing out the other 48".

This stuff is pure descriptive gold by Dylan Loewe..why doesn't the US write like this about the hilary campaign?

Is the following true?..

"The media has finally come around to this reality, and has begun to cover the campaign with accuracy for the first time since voting began. There will likely be nothing more punishing to the Clinton campaign. Until now, Clinton has been able to keep her supporters from defecting by convincing them that the race is exceptionally close and victory well within reach. But as Clinton supporters begin to realise that she cannot actually win, the tactics that she has shown comfort in deploying will become unpalatable".

Thanks marmar..I don't think I've read such an accurate description of hilary's campaign mess. Rec'd!

[bobthedrummer]

8. k

[Rosa Luxemburg]

9. The British press can see it too

meanwhile........

One noteworthy item that has been under the radar is the slow but steady movement of the superdelegates towards Obama. The table below shows the estimates of various news sources of Barack Obama's lead over Hillary Clinton on March 6 (thus after the Texas and Ohio elections) and today. Two things stand out. First, the spread is much less. The various sources are beginning to converge on the same numbers as more and more superdelegates announce their positions. Second, Obama's lead is slowly but inexorably growing. His lead has grown by 30 in the past month. After Pennsylvania and North Carolina vote, it will probably still be something around 120-130 because Clinton's expected win in Pennsylvania is likely to be cancelled by Obama's expected win in North Carolina. CQPolitics has a story on the math. Bottom line: Obama has the holy trinity on his side: most delegates, most states, and most popular votes. To convince the remaining superdelegates to go for her, she has to take the lead in at least one of the categories by doing very well in the remaining primaries and caucuses.

http://www.electoral-vote.com

[Hieronymus]

15. They adored the Clintons at one time, as did I. No one wants their crap now.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

22. it would seem the Clintons are in the 'doghouse'

[StevieM]

11. More lies from the pro-Obama media. Hillary did help with the Family and Medical leave act

It was in news accounts at the time. The GOP were trying to attach an amendment regarding gays in the military that threatened to derail the legislation. It was a huge story at the time, and led off the news for days. It was the first big story of the Clinton Administration.

I don't even know where this garbage about the S-Chip came from. But it's Obama who was recently dressed down by Senate colleagues for claiming partial credit for a bill that he had nothing to do with.

Steve

[sandnsea]

20. He signed it 16 days after he took office

It had already passed. Clinton promised to sign it when he was campaigning. She had nothing to do with it. Just like she had little to do with SChip. Kerry wrote it, Kennedy tweaked it, and he and Hatch pushed it through.

She's been in the Senate for 8 years. Doesn't she have any of her own signature legislation?

[StevieM]

23. I remember the debate at the time. The GOP and conservative Dems almost derailed it

by adding a provision about gays in the military. It was the first big story of the Clinton Administration, and not one that they wanted. Her lobbying to keep the issues separate did make a difference, and it was reported in the media at the time. Not that FML was ever a big part of her campaign or an issue she made a huge deal about. This is just another smear against her by a genuinely bad man.

Steve

[sandnsea]

25. *sigh* It was the first bill Clinton signed

Please. Hillary did not "save the day" on this bill any more than any other thing she says she did. I was 35 in 1993. If the first bill a new President signed was saved by his wife, lol, I mean get real.

[Zhade]

30. How does it feel to be such a huge fucking liar? Can you tell us?

Or should we ask your candidate, who repeatedly lied about proven nonexistent sniper fire?

[totodeinhere]

12. This is very telling coming from an objective British source with no particular axe to grind.

[Mother Of Four]

13. This was in the comments...

I about dropped my drink-

"Media: Bring out your dead!
Democratic Party: Here's one.
Media: Ninepence.
Hillary: I'm not dead!
Media: What?
Dems: Nothing. Here's your ninepence.
Hillary: I'm not dead!
Media: Here, she says he's not dead!
Dems: Yes she is.
Hillary: I'm not!
Media: She isn't!
Dems: Well, she will be soon. She's very ill.
Hillary: I'm getting better!
Dems: No you're not. You'll be stone dead in a moment.
Media: Oh, we can't take her like that. It's against regulations.
Hillary: I don't want to go on the cart!
Dems: Oh, don't be such a baby.
Media: We can't take her.
Hillary: I feel fine!
Dems: Well, do us a favor.
Media: We can't!
Dems: Well, can you hang around a couple of days? She won't be long.
Media: No, I've got to go round the Republicans. They've lost dozens.
Dems: Well, when's your next round?
Media: June.
Hillary: I think I'll go for a walk!
Dems: You're not fooling anyone you know. Look, isn't there something you can do?
Hillary: (singing) I feel happy... I feel happy.
(whop)
Dems: Ah, thanks very much.
Media: Not at all. See you in June."

(Edited to show the whole of it)

[SunsetDreams]

17. k&r

Very informative article. The media here is definitely picking up on this too. It's no longer Obama supporters saying she can't win. People in her own camp are having doubts.

It's just a matter of time. Did anyone see Tim Russett talk about the electoral college tonight on Dan Abrams? It was highly informative. Against Hillary, McCain would have 173 safe electoral votes. However against Obama, he would only have 133. Obama makes him work hard, which is what we want. He puts more states into play, and he doesn't need to win Fl or OH. Also, they said in this election, we can't possibly compare the 2000 and 2004 electoral college votes, the scheme has changed.

From the your link to the article, I too, would like these questions answered.

"After all, if she cannot win, why should Clinton supporters be comfortable with her aggressive attacks against Obama? If she cannot win, why has she been going out of her way to praise John McCain as being strong and ready and able? If she cannot win, why is she willing to take the party and the country through a painfully divisive convention fight, the outcome of which could be a weak and damaged nominee? If she cannot win, why is she still soliciting donors like they were an ATM on the bridge to nowhere? If she cannot win, why should they still support her?"

[Scurrilous]

21. Good article.

:thumbsup:

[pathansen]

27. These are just a bunch of lies and this is just a blogger, someone posting a comment

just like they do hear.
Obviously another one of those biased Hillary Haters

[Zhade]

29. She didn't exxagerate, she flat-out lied. Repeatedly.

Video evidence proves this.

(I know, the Guardian was being nice.)