Thursday, January 10, 2008

Hillary & Bill Clinton's Dirty Politics and Revisionist History As She Slams Martin Luther King

Anyway it seems the Clintons are determined to win and will use whatever tactics they can in order to do so. Even if that means having Hillary tear up for the cameras or bringing up the specter of more terrorist attacks and even mushroom clouds over America if the electorate were to vote for Obama or anyone else other than Hillary.Besides a conservative quasi-liberal rich white woman in their view trumps an idealistic black man any day of the week.In the end it is all about power and preserving the status quo.

Bill Clinton Attacks Barack Obama; The Big Fairy Tale

As we see Bill Clinton knows how to play dirty in the game of politics. It is odd that Hillary claims that others see the presidential race as merely a game whereas she being such a sincere believer in America and that she loves her country takes the race for president seriously while the other candidates do not or are misguided or are charlatans. Such a speech on her part shows how far she is willing to go to get elected. Her moment of sincerity looked rather staged .
We should keep in mind that as Keith Olbermann reported on Countdown that Hillary said it was President Johnson who signed the Civil Rights Bill and not Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.. So the Civil Rights marchers , the beatings, killings, and imprisonment of Civil Rights Activist, the massive demonstration in Washington D.C., Martin Luther King's speeches all played a minor role in achieving some of the goals of the Civil Rights Movement .In the end a white southern male signed the legislation . So what exacly is her point . So does she believe that Americans shouldn't be celebrating Martin Luther King Day but Lyndon B. Johnson Day. What sort of revisionist history is this.

January 8, 2008 The Clinton Camp Unbound By Kate Phillips

Obama in response to Bill Clinton's charges against him was quoted as saying :

“It is a little frustrating for the president to _ the former president _ to continually repeat this notion that somehow I didn’t know where I stood in 2004 about the war. He keeps on giving half the quote. I was always against the war. The quote he keeps on feeding back was an interview on Meet the Press at the National Convention when Tim was asking, `Given your firm opposition to the war, what do you make of the fact that your nominee for president and vice president didn’t have that same foresight.’ And obviously I didn’t want to criticize them on the eve of their nomination. So I said, `Well, I don’t know what _ you know, I wasn’t in the Senate. I can’t say for certain what I would have done if I was there. I know that from where I stood the case was not made.’ He always leaves that out.

“And you know, I understand why he’s frustrated. But at some point since we’ve corrected him repeatedly on this and he keeps on repeating it, you know it tells me that he’s just more interested in trying to muddy the waters than actually talk fairly about my record.”

Barack Obama Concedes New Hampshire to Hillary
january 9, 2008
Don't Count Obama out yet

And here's a commentary by Gary Hart who sums up the situation and dilemma for the Democratic Party and for America in the Presidential Race and election.
Gary Hart The Democatic Crossroads: Stay With the Known or Accept a New Generation of Leadership January 9, 2008

For the party of the status quo it is always easier. Who best represents "stay the course." The only complication this year is how to be the candidate of stay the course without mentioning the president from whom you are inheriting the course.

For the party of reform, it is always more complicated. If it really were about who best represents change it would be easier. But there is also the human factor of power. For better or worse not everyone gets into politics to carry out reform. Some seek power, what most people think politics is all about. For those who have had power and seek to keep it or recapture it, they can claim to be for change and reform but they cannot bring it about because there are too many old arrangements, too many deals, too many old networks. They all prevent transition to a new age.

The Democratic party is once again faced with a decision: whether to stay with the known, the familiar, and the "experienced" or whether to accept a new generation of leadership composed of those who have not had power or the experience of governing. If you believe, as I do, that the early 21st century is an age of huge transition -- of globalization, of information, of failed states, of climate change, of rising new powers, and so on -- then leadership hamstrung by old arrangements and commitments will not do.

The contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is further complicated by unusual factors. Her gender. His race. Many women will vote for her simply because she is a woman. Many minorities will support him simply because he is an unusual black-American. That is human nature and to a great degree understandable. But gender and race cannot and should not obscure the larger realities. America is stuck...we are also stuck because our leaders cannot see over the horizon ("the vision thing"). They do not see that we are living in an age of huge revolutions. They refuse to understand that we cannot resolve complex security issues merely by changing America's character and making this Republic an empire of unilateral intervention and occupation.

Democrats and Americans are faced with a big decision. Will we play it safe? Or will we embrace the future? This is not a time to put gender or race above what is best for the country or to make superficial choices. We have huge debts and deficits. The climate is rapidly approaching a tipping point. We are stuck in the Middle East. Most of the people in the world do not like us or trust us. Our education system is declining. And the list goes on.

Only a new generation of leaders can solve these new challenges, because only a new generation of leaders is unbound by old policies, old commitments and arrangements, old deals and old friendships. This is a time when America must leave old politics behind. This election is about transition not power. We will either move forward or we will go back.
For example see:
Obama fires back at Bill Clinton
Democratic contender counter-punches ex-president on experience issue, By Tom Curry
National affairs writer MSNBC Dec. 15, 2007

Obama cites 'over a decade' of experience
“And I’ve been involved in government for over a decade,” replied Obama.

The Illinois senator said he had "the experience that the country needs right now, of bringing people together, pushing against the special interests, of speaking to the American people about what needs to be done to move the country forward."

When asked about Sen. Clinton’s reference to possible “surprises” coming out about her rivals for the nomination, Obama said, referring to the senator and the ex-president, “The argument they’re making is that they’ve been around a long time. So whatever negative information is out there, people already know about. The assumption, then, is that lurking in other candidates’ pasts that haven’t been around for 20 years there might be something.”

But Obama said “I’ve probably been more reported on than any political figure in the country over the last year … I hardly think that I’ve been under-exposed during the course of this race.”

He added, “I understand there’s a history of politics being all about slash and burn…. I recall what the Clintons themselves called the ‘politics of personal destruction’ -- which they decried. My suspicion is that that’s just not where the country is at right now. They are not interested in politics as a blood sport; they’re interested in governance and solving problems” such as job creation and product safety.

also check out at The Chicago Tribune Frank James' article The Swamp: Bill Clinton and the Obama ' fairy tale 'January 8,2008

The problem for Sen. Clinton is this. She didn't need the distraction of her husband attacking Obama.

Everyone can understand the former president's desire to stand up for his wife.

But by wading in the way he did, he once again eclipsed her. Why would he want to do that in the hours before such a crucial election?

Another problem: when he gets angry as he did Monday night, he reminds people of some of the worst moments of his presidency, especially the infamous, finger wagging performance when he asserted that he didn't have a relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

That's poison for the New York senator's campaign. The downside of the Clinton years and the specter of a repeat of such messy drama in another Clinton White House is what makes many voters reluctant about voting for the senator.

Obama is riding a wave of a public hungry for change and more than a little leery of extending the dynastic string of presidents. All the former president's anger at the media, or fate, won't change that.
And here's video of Chris Mathews rebuts Bill Clinton's Criticism of Obama

CNN Interviews student who asks Hillary a Planted Question:

If she is willing to plant questions how much of what we see of her is scripted and does it include her tearing up moment of female compassion and sincerity .

take care,

No comments: