A liar and who will do anything to get elected!

Did anyone see the statements from this article:

"In most instances listed, Hillary Clinton's misstatements are more than verbal miscues. Rather, like SNL's Liar, Clinton can't resist misappropriating someone else's life experience as though it were his own. Her alleged trip to Bosnia to visit the war-torn areas? An outright lie. Her alleged role in the development of the Children's Health Insurance Program? An outright lie.   Her alleged involvement in securing peace in Northern Ireland? An outright lie. Not exaggerations. Not misstatements. Not malaprops. Just lies."

"By contrast, the listed misstatements by Obama are all cases of exaggeration at worst, and more often of mere malapropism."

This sounds pretty recent, doesn't it?  But this article wasn't written recently.  It was never written at all.  At least not with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama being the subjects.  It was written in 2000.  Here is the actual passage from an article that was printed on October 14, 2000 entitled: CALL THEM WHAT YOU WANT, BUT GORE'S MISSTATEMENTS ARE LIES.

"In most instances listed, Gore's misstatements are more than verbal miscues. Rather, like SNL's Liar, Gore can't resist misappropriating someone else's life experience as though it were his own. His alleged trip to Texas with the FEMA director to visit the disaster areas? An outright lie. His alleged role in the development of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? An outright lie. His alleged childhood tradition of going to sleep to the "Look for the Union Label" song as a "lullaby"? An outright lie. Not exaggerations. Not misstatements. Not malaprops. Just lies."

"By contrast, the listed misstatements by Bush are all cases of exaggeration at worst, and more often of mere malapropism."

The Republicans were on to something, right?  It sounds like a winning theme for 2000 to RNC's Terry Holt:

"What our two spots attempt to do in the closing stages is temper (Gore's) attacks with the reminder that Al Gore will say anything to get elected.  We are reinforcing that this week because he's saying a lot of strange things this week," (Foskett, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 10/31/00).

And guess what?  The RNC didn't have to work too hard.  They got a lot help from the trusty New York Times.  Here's a sample of New York Times headlines from its 2000 news pages:

* Tall Tales; Is What We've Got Here a Compulsion to Exaggerate?

* Focusing on Gore Hyperbole

* Questions of Veracity Have Long Dogged Gore

* Gore Admits Being Mistaken But Denies He Exaggerates

* Tendency to Embellish Fact Snags Gore

Now let's throw in that oh-so-witty Maureen Down to perpetuate the sliming of Al Gore:

"Like his father's, W.'s basic message is: Trust me--I've been bred for this job. Like Bill Bradley, W. is counting on Mr. Gore's smarmy, Eddie Haskell personality to rub people the wrong way." (3/19/00)

But Obama is different right?  He represents a new kind of politics based on hope and change, right?  He said it himself, "I do not want to see research that is involved in trying to tear people down personally."
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/arch ives/2007/12/obama_on_negative_campaigni ng.php

But, wait, something doesn't seem quite right:

* Obama campaign memo questions Hillary's 'willingness to adhere to the truth.' http://thepage.time.com/obama-camp-memo- on-clintons-exaggerations-in-her-domesti c-record/

Obama Campaign Manager accuses Hillary of having a 'real character gap' http://thepage.time.com/2008/03/23/obama -shes-just-trying-to-tear-me-down-and-th ats-not-the-kind-of-politics-weve-been-a bout/

Obama Campaign says Hillary failed the test of having 'the integrity to be consistent in her views.' http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsm emo.com/2008/03/obama_camp_blasts_hillar y_on_n.php

Obama campaign manager says Hillary is one of the 'most secretive politicians in America today.' http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 308/Plouffe_You_have_to_wonder_whether_s hell_be_open_and_honest_with_the_America n_people.html

Wow.  These all sound like the very same talking points that the Republicans and George W. Bush said about Al Gore in 2000.  And now Senator Obama is doing the same thing to Hillary Clinton?  

What about when the Obama campaign calls Hillary Clinton Senator Punjab and then initially denies that they put out the memo?  Here is the memo: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pd f/politics/memo1.pdf

And here is more background: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/6/15/ 0634/74618

Does calling Hillary Clinton and her husband racists qualify as "tearing people down personally"?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12 obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html

Apparently Obama thought is was wrong that his campaign did that.  Here is the story from the debate in Las Vegas:

Asked by moderator Tim Russert whether, in hindsight, he regretted "pushing this story," Obama said, "Well, not only in hindsight, but going forward. I think that, as Hillary said, our supporters, our staff get overzealous. They start saying things that I would not say. And it is my responsibility to make sure that we're setting a clear tone in our campaign, and I take that responsibility very seriously, which is why I spoke yesterday and sent a message in case people were not clear that what we want to do is make sure that we focus on the issues."

But let's not take too much responsibility.  Senator Obama will just blame one of his staffers.  Again.  Besides, it's too late.  It's already out there.  The Clintons are racists. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/010 8/7944.html

In his big "race speech," Senator Obama equated the comments by Geraldine Ferraro with the comments of his pastor, Jeremiah Wright.  Ms. Ferraro gave an interview to a small newspaper in California where she probably didn't articulate herself in the best way but she stated that Senator Obama is lucky because of his race during this Presidential campaign.  Let's take a look at Senator Obama's speech:

"On one end of the spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action, that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap," he said. "On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation -- that rightly offend white and black alike.  We can dismiss Rev. Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias."

Is Ms. Ferraro's statement the equivalent of, "not God Bless America, but God Damn America"?  And was Ms. Ferraro really that off base in her statement?  Not according to Senator Obama in 2005.

"Obama acknowledges, with no small irony, that he benefits from his race.  If he were white, he once bluntly noted, he would simply be one of nine freshmen senators, almost certainly without a multimillion-dollar book deal and a shred of celebrity. Or would he have been elected at all?"

That article is on Senator Obama's website: http://www.obama.senate.gov/news/050626- when_it_comes_to_race_obama_ma

This post isn't about tearing Barack Obama down.  It is intended to point out that Barack Obama doesn't practice what he preaches.  In fact, he does the complete opposite of what he preaches.  Would that be considered calculating?  Or is that term just reserved for Hillary Clinton?  

Democrats point to the 2000 election as the election where Al Gore, the Democratic Party and the American people saw the Presidency stolen by George W. Bush and the Republican Party.  During that election the Bush Campaign and the Republican Party made an all-out effort to call into question the character Al Gore.  In 2008 we are seeing Senator Obama employing the same strategy and he his aided by a complicit media.

Put a stop to it Democrats.  Put a stop to it now.  Look behind the curtain.  Don't be bamboozled.

Update [2008-4-7 16:56:32 by polson]: And here is the link to Obama's very own website where he states that he benefits from his race: That article is on Senator Obama's website: http://www.obama.senate.gov/news/050626-when_it_comes_to_race_obama_ma/

Display:


The blogger doth protest too much (2.00 / 1)

Wow.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/04/in-oregon-clint.html


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:34:23 PM EST

Re: The blogger doth protest too much (2.00 / 4)

You missed the point of the post.  Actually you didn't.  You proved my point.  Nice work.

Oh and it turns out the Ohio hospital story was true:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/04/is-hillarys-muc.html

Wow.


by polson on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:48:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The blogger doth protest too much (2.00 / 4)

wow!!!  And you'd think the media would learn not to lick their chops so much after the egg on their face after the "Passport-Gate" incident where Olbermann got a hard-on when the name Clinton came up.  

And the MSM has the NERVE to call Hillary "Tonya Harding" in reference to knee-capping?

They are the ones doing the knee-capping.

The MSM OWES Senator Clinton a major apology for this and the Passport-gate and the horrible secrets that their tax returns didn't hold

I won't be holding my breath.


by colebiancardi on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:53:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

off topic (2.00 / 2)

and ps... Tapper has been in the tank for Obama for months and this article is Obamabot spin.


DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008
by TeresaINPennsylvania on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:53:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nailed. (2.00 / 2)

The hypocrisy of the particular brand of Obama 'hope' and 'change' and 'audacity' knows no bounds.

Of course, pointing this out factually as you have will surely get you absolutely nowhere.  They simply just will not see it.


Hell's bells, even the GOP didn't have to crucify Eisenhower's record in order to make Reagan their 'saint'. We can have two great ones, you know?
by emsprater on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:43:19 PM EST

honesty valid debate topic (none / 0)

sorry, but honesty is a worthwhile subject for political debate. Al Gore didn't lose just because the GOP attacked him unfairly, he lost in part because he gave them so much ammo to use against him. Clinton is even worse than Gore. (she's better than McCain, but that's not saying much.) FAR TOO MANY AMERICANS DON"T TRUST HER TO TELL THE TRUTH! that is a real liability, some belive it makes her unelectable.

to ask us to ignore this vital issue of whether a candidate can be trusted is to ask us to make a VERY important decision with blinders on.


the time to rise has been engaged.
by catchaz on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:54:43 PM EST

Honesty debated *honestly* might be (none / 0)

Hillary called out the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy years before it became common knowledge, but instead of thanks, she gets mocked. Corporate Media and the Corporate Party in cahoots.  They don't need ammo.  They can spin and splice anything to look any way they want it to look, including making America think Al Gore lost when he won.  The cure for fifteen years of concerted attacks isn't blaming the victim.  It's closing ranks and defending our own.  Otherwise no Democrat will ever be safe.
***A
by adrienne4dean on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 02:13:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A liar and who will do anything (none / 0)

Spot on.


Purity! Or else!
by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:58:09 PM EST

Re: A liar and who will do anything to get elected (none / 0)

Don't forget to add in this week's talking point about how "arrogant" Sen. Obama is.


Tony Romo for Secretary of Awesome
by kasjogren on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 05:14:30 PM EST

Re: A liar and who will do anything to get elected (none / 0)

The stupidest attack I ever heard is the, "He/She will say anything to get elected".

Well, yeah.  They ALL will say anything to get elected.  It's called campaigning.

They spend hundreds of millions of dollars researching the exact "anything" to say.


by wblynch on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:02:34 PM EST

Who's lying now?? (none / 0)


If the topic is about a liar who will do anything to get elected, read on:

HRC Colombia ties don't stop with Penn
By: Eamon Javers
April 7, 2008 07:21 PM EST

Mark Penn isn't the only Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter on the wrong side of the Colombia trade agreement.

The Democratic-leaning advocacy firm the Glover Park Group, former home to Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson, signed a $40,000 per month contract with the government of Colombia in April of 2007 to promote the very agreement that Clinton now rails against on the presidential campaign trail.

That means Glover Park Group was arguing the same position on the free trade agreement as has Penn, the contentious Clinton strategist and Burson-Marsteller chief executive who lost his campaign job over the weekend after The Wall Street Journal revealed that he'd met with Colombian officials to plot strategy on the pact.

Several other Glover Park employees have deep connections with the Clintons, including founding partner Joe Lockhart, who served as the White House press secretary under President Bill Clinton, and Joel Johnson, who was a senior communications adviser in the Clinton White House.

Six employees of Glover Park Group contributed a total of nearly $20,000 to Clinton's campaign in 2007, according to data kept by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Wolfson, who is set to take over many responsibilities from the departing Penn, resigned from Glover Park last year to avoid conflicts of interest but retains an equity interest in the firm.

The tangled web of connections on the trade issue inside the Clinton camp illustrates the thin line in Washington between private and political advocacy.

Top campaign aides often spend their off-election years inside large firms with a complex array of clients. The benefit of such arrangements is that a party or candidate's political brain-trust remains largely intact and ready to assemble quickly for the next political battle.

Republicans have trotted down this path for years. Republican presidential hopeful John McCain's campaign is led by current and former lobbyists, some of whom are connected to such political boogiemen as subprime lenders.

But it's a trickier course for Democrats since their candidates often adopt populist themes that can conflict with a corporate client list.

Indeed, the latest Clinton brouhaha is a classic example of that.

The New York senator is using an anti-trade message to win over working class voters in Pennsylvania, a presidential primary most observers believe she must win big on April 22 to stay competitive with Democratic challenger Barack Obama, who also opposes the deal.

"We've got to have new trade policies before we have new trade deals," Clinton said last week. "That includes no trade deal with Colombia while violence against trade unionists continues in that country."

To avoid tarnishing either candidates or clients, many advisers take on voluntary campaign roles so the two can't be directly linked. Others seek to distance themselves from their private employers while working in the public arena. And a few, like Penn, try to walk a tightrope by keeping both jobs at the same time.

Over the weekend, Penn tripped. After taking a break from Clinton's anti-trade campaign to meet with his pro-trade Colombian clients, both parties dropped him.

At the time Glover Park got involved in the Colombia trade issue, Clinton's position on trade was less clear.

As it signed its contract last spring, Congressional Democrats seemed to have struck a deal with the White House to push it and three trade deals through Congress. That subsequently fell apart after labor leaders objected.

At about the same time, Wolfson's leave of absence from Glover Park became effective.

He and his wife realized income of between $1 million and $5 million from selling part of their equity stake in Glover Park Group in November of 2006.

But the couple still maintains an equity stake in the firm valued at from $500,000 to $1 million, according to a recent Capitol Hill financial disclosure filing.

Wolfson's wife, Terri McCullough, is the chief of staff to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

In an e-mail to Politico, Wolfson said "I took a leave from the firm last year and have no client contact and receive no salary from the firm." Several Wolfson allies, who declined to be named, argued that his distant relationship with Glover Park Group was far different from Penn's ongoing involvement at Burson-Marsteller.

According to the Glover Park Group contract, which was disclosed to the U.S. Department of Justice last year, the firm was to work with ProExport Colombia, an entity of the Colombian Government Trade Bureau, in developing a strategy to promote the free trade agreement.

The contract called for Glover Park to identify the key concerns of members of Congress, develop a comprehensive government relations strategy, and pinpoint reporters, academics, and business leaders who could help make Colombia's pro-free trade argument, all in close coordination with Colombian government officials.

The contract was set for five months, beginning on April 2, 2007. But it is not clear from public documents whether this is an ongoing effort.

Glover Park's report on the lobbying was to be addressed directly to the Colombian minister of trade and the Colombian ambassador to the United States, among other officials.

The contract was signed by Carl Smith, who is Glover Park's CEO and was previously chief of staff for Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign.

Smith declined to comment for the record.


by lion king on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:52:47 PM EST

This diary should be taken down! (none / 0)

It is nothing but misinformation and typical Obama baloney.  Todd, this is the kind of thing that you objected to when the shoe was on the other foot.  You need to look at this.


by macmcd on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 08:53:58 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.