Posted on 01/21/2008 8:21:58 AM PST by OESY
After last week's release by Judicial Watch of internal documents of Hillary Clinton's Health Care Task Force, many of us waited to see the national news media cover their disturbing contents. No surprisingly, none of them did so. Despite the proposals to use smears against critics of the government and to turn the DNC into a domestic espionage unit for the White House against its opponents, the mainstream news media has shown little interest in even noting the fact that this evidence appeared in a microscopic sample of the three million documents that have been blocked from public scrutiny.
Let's recall what the media has ignored. The following comes from my earlier posts on the subject.
Senator Jay Rockefeller proposed that the federal government conduct smear campaigns against the opponents of the plan:
A “Confidential” May 26, 1993 Memorandum from Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) to Hillary Clinton entitled, “Health Care Reform Communications,” which criticizes the Task Force as a “secret cabal of Washington policy ‘wonks’” that has engaged in “choking off information” from the public regarding health care reform. The memorandum suggests that Hillary Clinton “use classic opposition research” to attack those who were excluded by the Clinton Administration from Task Force deliberations and to “expose lifestyles, tactics and motives of lobbyists” in order to deflect criticism. Rockefeller had allies in mind for this effort:
Senator Rockefeller also suggested news organizations “are anxious and willing to receive guidance [from the Clinton Administration] on how to time and shape their [news] coverage.” Rockefeller also offers a little intellectually honest advice at least twice. When discussing abortion, he gets very terse (emphasis mine):
Response concepts: ... Full Reproductive Services. Do not engage on this topic. And remember, this isn't a political action commitee or an electoral office campaign. This was the elected government of the United States discussing how it would steamroller opposition to nationalizing an entire industry by smearing them and by avoiding discussion of the policy itself.
The HCTF anticipated a tough debate over its proposal to nationalize American health care, and it proposed some specific remedies -- including using the DNC to conduct intelligence operations.
A February 1993 memo to Hillary Clinton from Alexis Herman and Mike Lux proposes that the HCTF -- a White House policy group -- enlist the DNC for several purposes, discussed on page 5:
C. The DNC Role The DNC clearly has a critically important role to play in the campaign. I would suggest the following roles ...
3. The DNC can be instrumental for us in intelligence gathering and opposition research. Their staff will hear talk about things that may never reach us inside these walls.
All of that falls into the category of "politicizing" the White House, and much more than having Karl Rove as deputy chief of staff. But this goes beyond mere politicization. The HCTF foresaw using the DNC to "gather intelligence" on political opposition -- a way to gain information to intimidate or extort their critics. It's bad enough when electoral campaigns do this, but having the White House use the DNC for these purposes doesn't border on abuse of power but invades it with a vengeance.
And this memo came to Hillary Clinton a mere two weeks after her husband's inauguration. The impetus for this kind of political warfare existed within the Clinton administration within the first hours of its birth.
Where are the media organizations that style themselves as the bulwark against governmental abuses of power? Why haven't they reported on these memos, which clearly delineate a type of attack on government opposition that hasn't been this baldly proposed since the Nixon administration? Given Hillary Clinton's campaign for the presidency -- one on which she relies on her experience in her husband's administration for her qualifications -- isn't all of this terribly relevant to the question of how she will run the White House, and what kind of treatment her critics can expect to receive?
The silence from the Fourth Estate is deafening. It screams either cowardice or collaboration.
Just damn.
Senator Obama? Call your office. Put some people on it.
“It screams either cowardice or collaboration.”
Correction.
It screams cowardice in addition to collaboration.
There is and has been media collusion with the DNC and Democrats. Foleygate, the forged National Guard memos, and the story of how the Abu Ghrab scandal broke...
We don’t have a “state run” media but we have a media run by the Statist Party Democrats.
That is the ONLY way for this information to get out along with Rush etc.
Obama can't attack hillary on "reproductive health" issues or socialized health care, because he's even further to the left that she is.
Just the other day in New Hampshire they had a shouting match over which of them could kill the most babies.
And 95% of the media are pro-abortion, including even many of the "conservative" outlets like the Wall Street Journal.
Conservative writers continue to make money documenting “journalistic malpractice” failing to recognize it as ad copy written for the DNC.
The ignorance from Mr. Morressey is dumbfounding. It screams either cowardice or collaboration.
Well, we know that Hillary used the FBI for opposition research. How many times has the FBI files scandal been mentioned so far in this campaign? Zero?
I’m glad the MSM didn’t publish this. I would have probably had a coronary from the surprise that the truth finally matters to them.
These are the people we elected to office to represent us. Do you htink we made a big mistake? I thought so! So what do we do? We continue to remain uninformed, we continue to listen to the kooks in hollywood and Oprah, we do not hold any of them responsible, we do not demand they open the books and allow us to see all the behind the scenes corruption and debauchery, AND LAST AND MOST IMPORTANT WE RE ELECT THESE CRIMINALS AGAIN AND AGAIN! SHAME ON US! YOU GET WHAT YOU VOTE FOR!
Get used to it. We are probably going to see it in action for the next 9 years.
As I just posted on another thread:
Hillary has already shown that she will use Stalinist tactics to take down any political opponents. Barry Obama hasn’t.
While both are socialists, one has the brutal determination to abuse the system to see that she gets her way. Obama may not be as effective in pushing for his agenda.
Socialism isn’t sold in the marketplace of ideas. It does not win in a debate. It must be forced on the people. The shackles of socialism do not come off easily.
Oprah isn’t a distraction from the power grab. Oprah is PART of the power grab. She dictates what books American housewives read. She controls the debate on her tv program.
And she held a media event that was a well publicized endorsement of Barry Obama (D) even though Rush Limbaugh has drawn bigger crowds with less media fawning.
Hillary has stuff on reporters and commentators and they don’t want it made public, so they report what Hillary wants reported. At one point they thought she might lose and they got a little uppity, but now they are afraid again and back in their holes double-deep.
“Barry Obama hasn’t.”
Isn’t the thread discussing Barak Hussein Obama?
Who is Barry Obama?
“Senator Obama? Call your office. Put some people on it.”
While Obama might not have agreed with the tactics regarding opposition- I’m betting he had not problem with the task forces ideals.
Obama’s wife certainly would have approved of the more virulent pro-abortion aspects.
Barry is the name he used as a kid in Indonesia, when attending that “secular madrassah” that so interested ex-senator Kerrey...or maybe when he attended a Catholic school there.
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.