RW Neocon columnist admits: GOP is dying to run against Hillary

[HamdenRice]

From the LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/la-oe-goldberg23oct23,0,5528341.column?coll=la-util-opinion-sunday

Jonah Goldberg

Candidate Hillary: the GOP's dream

A campaign against Sen. Clinton may give Republicans the best shot at running as the party of change.

October 23, 2007

The most interesting thing to come out of the umpteenth Republican debate Sunday is confirmation that the GOP is dying to run against Hillary Clinton. Like Don Rickles flaying a heckler, each candidate whacked at Clinton as if she were a pants-suited piñata. When they were done with their one-liners, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee deadpanned: "Look, I like to be funny. There's nothing funny about Hillary Clinton being president."

No, but there's something deeply advantageous about having her as an opponent. So far, the commentary about the Republican offensive against Hillary has focused mostly on how it reflects poorly on the GOP (those Clinton-hating wing nuts are at it again!). What's not been fully grasped is how Hillary gives the GOP its best chance at being the party of change.

...

In the general election, audiences will remember Whitewater, travelgate, illegal fundraising, bimbo eruptions and impeachment. If they don't, you can be sure Republicans will remind them. Fair or not, the Republicans' intense dislike of Hillary will underscore the idea that a vote for her is a vote for more of the same rancor.

Hence the irony of the Clinton candidacy. Liberal activists keep saying that they want a candidate who is pure, who speaks from the heart and refuses to "triangulate" on core principles the way Bill Clinton did. But Hillary Clinton is Clintonian in more than just name. On national security in particular, she has been alternating between reflexive anti-Bushism to bouts of outright hawkishness on Iran. Desperate to win, Democrats have been willing to overlook that -- so far. But such shifting costs her credibility and passion.

<end quote>

So there you have it. They are practically giving away their playbook. They know they can't win on the issues in the general election, so it's going to be a nasty, personality driven campaign designed to dredge up all the fake scandals that led to "Clinton fatigue," despite all the peace and prosperity of that administration. They are going to make the campaign so nasty that most independents and non-political types will simply turn off to the election -- this analysis, by the way, coming from a sleeze who actually played a major role in creating the Lewinsky scandal. And since Hillary will be busy triangulating, refusing to take bold policy stances -- for single payer health care, or against the war, or for an end to our fossil fuel addiction -- for fear of alienating one business interest or another, she will play right into their hands, because she will be running mostly on the her identity, the very quality that the Republicans plan to spend all their time trashing.

If Hillary gets the nomination, get ready for the vast right wing redux of Whitewater, missing billing paper, bimbo eruptions, missing "W" keys, travelgate, etc., etc., not, as Goldberg says, because the electorate will "remember" them, but because the right wing spin machine will shove it down our throats and the complaint, lazy, brain dead mainstream media will play along for laughs. All that quality time that Hillary has spent with Fox owner Rupert Murdoch will be revealed to have been to sucker the Democrats into the trap.

Look at their debates. Read what their ideologues are writing. They're already telling you what they're going to do.

[DS1]

1. Party of "Spare change?"

cause we're all going to be out on the streets

[Lerkfish]

2. yup. I've been predicting this.

if you have to stand in a lightning storm, why carry a long metal pole?

[gatorboy]

3. NBC's already hard at work to help the right.

Last night on NBC news ALL they showed were the Hillary jokes. Nothing else from the debate.

[DangerDave921]

4. Neocon?

Is there a working definition of a "neocon"? The term seems to be bandied about on here a lot, and I have to admit I don't really know what it means. Is it the same as right-wing? Or worse?

[HamdenRice]

7. Neo-con

In recent years has to do with foreign policy -- the idea that American power should be unilaterally projected around the world and especially in the middle east. It is those Republicans associated with the views of the Project for a New American Century -- Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al.

Goldberg is neocon in addition to being RW because of his support for the Iraq War (until we lost).

[ProgressiveFool]

27. not just a neocon, Goldberg is a Neo-Con

He's firmly entrenched in the Neo-Con power structure, as the son of Lucianne Goldberg. His current employment is all due to the fact that he is his mother's son, another fine example of Neo-Con-Nepotism, like the Podhoretzes, Kagans, and Kristols.

[Rhythm and Blue]

11. Thank you for asking instead of simply using it.

It's very frustrating to see the terms "neoconservative" and "neoliberal" applied by people who have only a vague idea of what it means.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

Read. Enjoy.

[Bandit]

5. Talk about desperation

Party of Change..ROFLMAO Hillary would mop the floor so badly with any GOP candidate that it would blemish their party forever. If this is all that could motivate Republicans then Democrats have absolutely nothing to worry about ever from these wimps...

[Bumblebee]

6. So let them die. Since when do you trust Jonah Goldberg? Or since when

what he says matters here? You probably (I hope!) are indignant that when Bush and Cheney invoke "terror" and "patriotism," Dems fold. So now we are all supposed to fold because Jonahs of this world are invoking their joy of running against Hillary? And, ya, all that old crap is really going to stick so much -- esp. if she runs against the whistle-clean former mayor of NYC... :sarcasm:

Plus, he does not "admit" -- he is actively engaged in fanning the flames in OUR circles, not his. If they were really cherishing running against her, they would be very, very quiet about it, not to affect those who may vote for her...

Nothing too personal, but I am really sick and tired of posts like that...

[Rhythm and Blue]

8. And...you believe them? Look.

I'm sure they'll run a nice, clean campaign against Obama, right?

Look: They absolutely destroyed Al Gore. They had 60% of all voters, including a large number of liberals, thinking he would "say or do anything to win."

They absolutely destroyed John Kerry. From swift-boats to flip-flops, they lowered his favorables down to Bush territory.

Now. People certainly do remember the scandals of the Clinton years. Here's what the right wing is hoping you'll forget--even during all those "scandals," Clinton still had high approval ratings, both personally and performance-wise. Why? Because the Clintons know how to fight back. Hillary is an entirely known quantity right now. There's not a voter in America who doesn't remember the Clinton years, and who doesn't know who Hillary is, for better and for worse. They know what they don't like about her and they know what they like about her. And even though the Republican candidates are spending almost as much time attacking her as they are talking about themselves, she's still kicking their asses nationwide.

They're scum and they'll run a scummy personal-attack campaign no matter who we run. We know Hillary is capable of shrugging it off--she already has before. They know Hillary is capable of beating them, even at their own game. All these pieces are is chest-puffing "yer not so tuff" posturing.

The last thing the Republicans want is for Hillary to seem like the inevitable victor--the media would begin portraying her as the winner (and everyone loves a winner), their base would become demoralized at the prospect of hopelessness, and the Democrats would rally in triumph. They're running scared, not cackling in glee.

[unpossibles]

17. great point

most of the scandals involved Bill more than Hilary. yes. the ditt-iots have hated her for years, but they hate anyone who is not a rich white male. I'd say that even though she has a lot of detractors on both sides of the aisle, she also has a lot of supporters on both sides. I'm not in the Hilary camp - I am a Kucinich man myself - but I think she'd probably do fine, both in the election and in office.

And more importantly why would anyone believe they're showing us the real playbook? That's an ancient trick - the feint.

[Justitia]

9. Jonah Goldberg? Who cares what that FREAK has to say?

Why would we care what this perverse twit has to say regarding ANY Dem, much less the Clintons?

This weirdo is preternaturally obsessed with them.

[MidwestTransplant]

10. I am not sure if I would support her in the primaries but the RW is PETRAFIED of her.

[unpossibles]

12. "a nasty, personality driven campaign designed to dredge up all the fake scandals"

so, business as usual then? So much for the party of change. And seriously, how a "conservative" can be for change is just too... mind boggling. I guess in theory one could want to "change" back to the good old days of 50-100 years ago, but I'd hardly call that progress.

[sharp_stick]

13. Jonah Goldberg is a lying POS

why do people all of a sudden believe this prick when he says this? Goldberg needs to be, in the words of the Rude Pundit, cock punched repeatedly.

I sometimes wonder why the RW smear machine is trying so hard to convince Democrats that they really want to run against Clinton. Looking at the pack of fucking losers running for the pukes I think we could probably run anybody and take it.

Personally I think they are terrified of Clinton for the simple reason that they would have to put up with her for 4 or probably 8 years stuffing their lies back in their faces.

Fuck Jonah Goldberg and all his skivvy readers.

[cali]

14. You & Jonah both look

desperate.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. For those paying attention, FOX started pushign her the day

after the 2006 election.

But then again, most people don't pay that close attention

It is the GOP strategery to have her running

[bryant69]

16. They are going to do that to whoever we nominate though

I mean we could nominate Jesus Christ, and they would run him through the mud.

I'm not a Clinton Supporter (I like Edwards) but there is also an argument to be made that she is one of the best among our candidates to stand up under this shitstorm, having already been in it for years.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Peregrine Took]

18. Yes, but with her they have SO MUCH baggage all packed up and ready to

throw. They don't need to do any "oppo" research.

[Bumblebee]

21. and that is why it will NOT work. Been there, done that. New baggage is

so much more exciting, and Giuliani has quite a lot of that. No contest. Other than Giuliani, no GOP candidate would even be remotely competitive -- and Jonah and his ilk are fully aware of that. Stop being fooled - eevn if your dislike for Hillary matches theirs.

[MidwestTransplant]

22. What can they possibly say about her that people haven't already heard/

If she is beating them now, she will cram them once the mud is thrown at the Republican nominee.

[HamdenRice]

33. A replay of what we've already heard

It's remarkable what repetition of what we already know will do.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. She will bring out the BUT CLINTON crowd

that might stay home otherwise

[JHB]

19. "...will remember Whitewater, Travelgate, ..." etc.

Earth to Jonah: Yes, people will remember those. But not the way you think they will.

They'll remember how trivial those things were, how Republicans huffed and puffed and acted like the sky was falling, but in the end there was nothing to them. They'll remember how Republicans insinuated "where there's smoke, there's fire", except in hindsight now they can tell how much of the "smoke" was just the steam rising off of great heaping piles of elephant dung.

They'll see the price of everything going up thanks to high oil prices and a falling dollar, and they'll be reminded of two things:
1) what a manipulated load of crap all those "scandals" were; and
2) how everything is **worse** since Bush won in 2000.

And if you're real lucky, Jonah, you may even remind them to take a good hard look at the "Bush won in 2000" part, now that you've reminded them of all the other Republican evildoings...

[northzax]

20. Of course they do.

Hillary solidifies the GOP base, they hate nothing so much as a strong woman. And they think that what people want is a redux of the past. They are wrong. They want another crack at a clinton because they can't stand her, or him. They can't stand someone beating them, and they are wrong, again. I welcome a Hillary-GOP campaign, bring on Rudy, i think it was 60-40 last time, in the state that knows Rudy best. They think Hillary is 5ore, or -erry, afraid to strike backShe's not. She's a clinton, she has seen the worst they have to offer and is daring them to bring the heat. It will be a mean, nasty, trench warfare campaign, the Clinton war room was a beast, wait for 2.0she will raise unheard of amounts of money,, and will be ready and able to return the favour to any who attack her.

it's time we had a knock down drag out fight for the soul and future of this country so bring it on.

[OHdem10]

23. The GOP debates on Sunday laid out their game plan.

C Wallace asked: Is Hilary Clinton fit to be commander in chief??
Thunderous roars of NO NO NO from the 3,000 person audience interrupted
the candidates?
In turn the candidates -EVERY ONEOF THEM- except J. MCain. gave
a loud no--- McCain did say I respect her and will work with her.

The TV Visual of all these candidates and the audience yelling no
HRC is not fit to be commander in chief.

This will be first theme, then HRC has never even run a corner store
and she wants to run a(?) Trillion Dollar government enterprise.

All kinds of blasts from the past, and name calling "socialist" etc.

No ,this is not fair. However, this can be their Mo no matter who
is our candidate.

I say this only to warn. Our side had best be prepared on how we
plan to stop them in their tracks.

[leftchick]

24. ironically if she did somehow get elected

the business interests and neocon/AIPAC foreign policies that they worship would continue right along with her. For them it is a win win scenario!

:(

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. i feel like similar opinions were expressed about dean.

i think they are going to continue to belittle the frontrunner/

[HamdenRice]

28. The difference

Hi Lioness,

The difference is, as several have pointed out, that there is already a lot of ready made dirt about her.

They will try to villify Edwards, Obama, or any others, but the plain truth is there isn't much they have on them.

Hillary is a known quantity, yes, and that quantity has a lot of stuff that can be spun into spurious "scandal."

[bridgit]

29. Jonah Goldberg? I'm sorry but...

:spray: Talk about pissing into the wind, you go bow-IEEE :rofl:

[MyNameGoesHere]

30. Damn DU sinking to new lows, Linking to bat shit crazy Jonah "I hate the Clintons" Goldberg. n/t

[HamdenRice]

32. Know thine enemy nt

[MyNameGoesHere]

36. Already know enough about that human piece of garbage. n/t

[Initech]

31. That's what I have been saying this whole time!

Hillary nomination = GOP victory. Anyone else = Dem victory.

[Neshanic]

34. And?

[DFW]

35. Reminids me (in reverse) of Brer Rabbit and the Briar Patch