Posted on 11/20/2007 8:59:49 AM PST by ConservativeMajority
Conservative columnist Robert Novak caused quite a stir over the weekend writing that a Democratic operative told him that the Clinton campaign possessed a cache of scandalous information about rival presidential candidate Barack Obama, but had decided not to use it. Before long, the camps of the frontrunner and her closest challenger were trading accusations and denials, much to the delight of bored reporters and pundits looking for something to spice up the dulling march to Mrs. Clinton’s coronation as the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee.
The ensuing discussions about the source, timing and substance of the claims gave rise to myriad conspiracy theories and psy-ops intrigues. Is there a traitor in the Clinton camp? Did Obama’s people float the rumor to make Hillary look bad? Had Robert Novak made it all up to cause a controversy among Democrats or to burnish his reputation as the “Prince of Darkness”? These are so many questions that most Americans could not care less about.
Candidate Clinton will not be required to comment on whether her operatives participated in such things as the campaign sloughed off the whole affair as yet another manifestation of the “vast right-wing conspiracy.” Obama on the other hand is left to defend himself against the whispering campaign. Reporters will question him as to what might be contained in the dossier and rampant speculation in the press will drown out any discussion of policy or position from the candidate in the final weeks before the crucial test in Iowa. Obama can rail against the dirty politics, but the noose has already been slipped over his head. What I find interesting is that even the race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have not spoken up for Obama.
However, the incident highlighted a key concept that may resonate in the minds of voters long after Obama and the other pretenders fade into Super Tuesday. It does not seem to be too much of a stretch to think that Hillary Clinton would attempt a “high-tech lynching” of her African-American rival or anyone else who stood in her path back to the White House. Many Americans still recall the smear campaigns the Clinton White House ran against political foes as well as the female victims of Bill’s sexual marauding.
In an environment of anti-incumbency and the desire expressed by voters in 2006 against “politics as usual”, Clinton is most vulnerable since she represents the Washington establishment more than any other candidate. The stain her husband put on the office of the presidency combined with the revival of the pair’s particularly nasty brand of “politics of personal destruction” could undermine her campaign if character becomes an issue.
It does not seem to be too much of a stretch to think that Hillary Clinton would attempt a “high-tech lynching” of her African-American rival or anyone else who stood in her path back to the White House. Many Americans still recall the smear campaigns the Clinton White House ran against political foes as well as the female victims of Bill’s sexual marauding.
::::::::
Their record is clear. They will do ANYTHING to ANYONE for the sake of empowerment.
She is just leaking that out to let him know that it is there.
Rev. Al and Jessah will not come to his aid because he is Irish. Just afrolike.
Character an issue?
I think that the best advice is one Karl Rove gave: namely, to call for change from the insider Washington mentality - go forward, not backward, new faces, new ideas and no Capital Hill folks in the White House. They’ve done nothing to prove they can lead in Congress, why would we vote in someone from that worthless venue to lead the country?
this is her twisted way of assuring (in her backhanded way) that she will always cut the plantation dwellers (talking willing dem types, here) slack............it ties Obamas hands so profoundly that all he can respond with is “I’m not going to tolerate this”, without raising the plantation-used-against-himself part......
FWIW, according to political journal, the “dirt” that Hillary clinton has, involves (please, do not laugh, but do enjoy the irony) Obama and a real estate deal that benifited him, in exchange for legislative favors, when before he was a senator.
I thought I was told about a million times in 1992 that "character doesn't matter". I'm confused.
Actually, the mantra was “sex doesn’t matter”...
Thank you Robert Novak for sticking a firecracker in her shorts!....anything helps!
What’s your point?
“sex doesn’t matter” was during the Lewinski era.
“The candidate’s character is not an issue” was one of the mantras of ‘92 (that, and the lie about “worst economy in 50 years”).
Hadn’t seen Jeff Gannon’s name around in a while. Wonder what he’s up to?
I’m kidding...don’t tell me.
Gotcha. So many things didn’t matter during the Clinton years: the rule of law, military preparedness, national security, intelligence, Osama bin Laden...
Was Novak duped by Clinton operatives or given a real piece of news through the back door?
We will probably never know for sure but it will be interesting to see what happens if Obama seriously threatens Hillary's march to the White House.
But here is a comment from the article that speaks loud and clear:
"....if character becomes an issue."
And therein lies the crux of the matter; with the Clintons character is never a concern and the major media never make it an issue for them. Among Clinton enablers and hangers-on it is just generally accepted that the normal rules of civil conduct do not apply to them.
If the republicans do not succeed in making character a major campaign issue for Hillary no one else will.
Wikipedia...the source of all troofs/sarc
Personally I have trouble taking the guy seriously, but note that I didn't make any comment other than posting a link about background. Others can draw their own conclusions. I have to admit his writing is better than I expected.
Not sure what a troof is. That is a well-referenced article and Mr. Gannon has not denied any of the allegations discussed in it. Wikipedia is a very useful resource. Of course you should take whatever you read in it with a grain of salt, but that is true of everything you read.
Its fun watching Hillary Clinton make rookie mistakes on the campaign trail. All she’s managed to accomplish in the last month is remind Americans of what they dislike about her, and her husbands Administration.
Works for me.
And the best part? Hillary Clinton’s own arrogance won’t allow her to admit the mistakes, therefore she won’t correct them.
Consider it a gift that keeps on giving.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.