CNN is running a story right now about Bill Clinton’s new list, “80 attacks on Hillary” by Barack Obama.
Getting past the complete absurdity and pettiness of even keeping a running list, I want to point out a few things. First of all, since Hillary’s self proclaimed comeback last Tuesday, CNN has officially converted to the Clinton News Network. The story in and of itself is a veiled reporting of Hillary’s own attacks on Obama. If you read the article (here) you can see that the topics of the paragraphs alternate strangely. One will comment on an anti-Obama remark made by Robert Johnson on Sunday (while he was at church with Hillary) and the next will be a criticism of the Obama campaign’s criticism of Hillary. Anyone else confused yet? The story also washes over Hillary’s comments over the weekend about how it took a president to get the job done (when talking about Dr. King and the civil rights movement-a story the NY Times reported on fully), reminds readers in a less cryptic manner than Johnson’s of Obama’s drug use, and Obama’s supposedly wishy-washy Iraq voting record. In the story, Bill gets to say, “She didn’t complain about [Obama's attacks]…She just said, ‘I disagree’ and went on.”Hillary gets to say, “I’m so proud of Obama.” And all Obama gets to say is “rewriting.” Reading in between the lines, what CNN is trying to say: Obama is a black pothead who will be able to spark a movement in the US but one that will need to be finished by a president like Hillary. (Did someone fail to respond to Hillary when she made her MLK Jr. remark that it was a white male president she was talking about?)
Secondly, the article completely forgets that it started talking about Bill’s listed of 80 attacks by Obama. Talk about insecure. If I went home everyday and made a list of comments people made against me (that’s assuming that people say anything negative about me at all), my friends would send me straight to a therapist. It’s a presidential race; attacks on opponents are going to be made. And seriously, only 80 attacks in one year? That’s about 1.538 per week. That’s not bad. Especially since in that list, comments that really were made by Obama in defense to attacks from Hillary (such as his “rewritting history” comment) are included. In my opinion, the fact that Bill just mentioned this list (but doesn’t mention everything on it) at all, means that he just made 80 attacks against Obama and the CNN article made a good 20 more. Who’s negative now?
And finally, what happened to Bill? I remember there was a time when we all (yes, you too) labeled ourselves Clinton Democrats. We identified with him. We prospered under him. We pined for him. Yes, he was divisive. But he was charismatic. Yes was a liar, but he was loved. What happened to that Bill? When did he become catty and the type that made hit-lists? He was president of the US during one of the most prosperous decades in recent history; he has no reason to be insecure. So does this mean that Hillary has finally cracked the whip? Did she go to him last Monday, hold him by the nuts and say, “You cheated on me, remember? You humiliated me in front of the entire world. And yet I stayed married to you. Don’t you ever forget that. Now, go out there and do the same thing to Obama and help me win this damn thing”? Granted, that is a highly possible scenario and one that any woman with any sort of back bone would say to a cheating husband. However, it really is low campaign strategy. I think when Hillary entered the race, even those of us who weren’t her most ardent supporters hoped that she might become some mirror of Bill, that, even if her presidency would not be as full of change and new hope as Obama’s, it would still be as glorious as Bill’s. What none of us wanted was Bill to become a mirror of Hillary.
I’m not critizing Hillary for being a woman, for being sentimental, even for being an occasional bitch. I’m accusing her campaign, and CNN I suppose, of violating that double-standard that they keep calling for Obama to be held to. I think now what this is going to turn into is the classic Bush/Martha Stewart scenario. Every time something bad came out about Bush three years ago, we heard something bad about Martha Stewart instead. Only this time, when something good comes out about Obama’s own list (his growing list of major endorsements that include Kerry, Tim Johnson and SEIU Nevada), Hillary’s campaign is going to pull out Bill’s 80. Oh boy, are we in for some fun times.
Ciao tutti,
-Em
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Honestly, Bill really seems like he is trying to take over the campaign. After the Iowa loss can you see Bill ripping Mark Penn a new one while Hillary is trying to keep it together?
After the election maybe years after, a book will come out about how Bill Clinton was the worst thing that ever happened to Hillary ’08. (If all the books have not been outlawed and burned by President Huckabee). I mean Bill has completely gone off the rails.
I Mean I can hear it now… Roger could you pick up the innards of that highly complicated laptop up and leave so we can have a “private” conversation with Mark.
Hmmm. I think you should revisit your Thanksgiving in Boston post. You have definitely found your rage. And, thank you for articulating mine.
Check out http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/ It skillfully includes superdelegates to give Hillary almost double the number of Obama candidates and the “magic number” isn’t really explained. Good conspiracy.
Wide Spread reports of voter suppression. Enough to make you consider never voting for Hillary… even in the general.
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/19/162953/644/790/439573“The Clinton operative herself had a Brooklyn accent and I overheard her mention having been from New York. When she stood to be counted in the middle of the room, I objected and asked her if she was actually from Nevada. She said yes. I talked to the chair and asked him to ask her name and find her on the list. He asked her her name and checked the list, and she was not on it. At this point the chair said, “well, I can’t ask for ID.” I said, “She can’t participate if no one will vouch for her.” At this point a Hispanic man wearing a Hillary shirt said she was his wife. While that’s not impossible, it was also improbable–but I had no way to verify or object further. “
More
“At least one report of two large men standing outside the door checking voters for whom they would support, and telling all Obama people they were at the wrong location.
At least one other report of Hillary operatives doing the check-in, and telling all Obama supporters that they were not on the list, could not register at the location (not true), and that they could not caucus.
At least one report of ballots being filled out in advance for Hillary in mass.
At least one report of Hillary supporters saying that the caucus location was just the Hillary room–and that Obama supporters had to go to a faraway location. “