Debunking Clinton attacks
Charlie Burr
Over at the post "A new generation for Hillary Clinton", several Clinton supporters are spreading the false Jay-Z/Iowa victory speech story.
From post author Chris Corbell:
I confess my ability to enthusiastically support Obama ended when I heard that his campaign blasted "99 problems but a bitch ain't one" at his Iowa victory celebration as he entered the room.
From Clinton Steering Committee member Sue Castner:
Just a thought on BHO's use of "99 Problems..." in Iowa: Can you IMAGINE the uproar had HRC used "The Bitch Is Back" in Nevada? Socially acceptable misogyny. Gotta love it.
Here's the problem: It never happened. And it was debunked weeks ago. See for yourself:
U2 is not Jay-Z. And Barack Obama is not Rick Lazio. Let's stay focused on the issues. Most importantly, let's support our candidates without trying to tear opponents down.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Feb 5, '08
Just tonight I have read 2 opinion pieces---one says Hillary Clinton would make an excellent chief of staff, and the other says Hillary Clinton is running a campaign while Barack Obama is staging revival meetings.
The latter column even included a reference to something St.Paul said. The quote was "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (how some define faith).
One writer said Obama represents liberation from fear--fear of Republicans, fear of the electoral map (No one told me there were this many Democrats in Idaho), etc.
Now it may well be that one of them has a better health care plan than the other. But as someone old enough to remember 40 years ago (first year I voted), I can tell you that the debate between Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy supporters was not over such specific plans. And back when communication was radio, telephone, television, and newspaper, there wasn't much discussion of music used at events. There was more oratory (see the post on Mario Cuomo in 1984) and discussion of what the candidates had actually said and done.
But there was a level of passion about those 2 candidates which was never there for VP Humphrey, so when he got the nomination there were a lot of young people who voted but didn't get excited about the campaign.
However, if someone is going to complain about music, I must say that "Taking care of business" is much better Clinton music than the original Celine Dion song chosen in some contest.
1:46 a.m.
Feb 5, '08
I must say that "Taking care of business" is much better Clinton music...
Ugh, NO! I worked on a California statewide campaign once, and we finally had to force the candidate to sit down and listen to the words before he'd believe us that "Taking Care of Business" is a TERRIBLE campaign song.
Why? Because it's about how fantastic it is to be a musician and not have to work. It's taunting regular working people.
Feb 5, '08
I think anyone naive enough to actually believe a presidential candidate played "99 problems but a bitch ain't one" at his rally should be permanently barred from voting, 'cause that's a felony against intelligence and common sense.
How about a href=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYGZ9nn7T-w>Rubber Biscuit by the Chips for a campaign theme.
I like to see someone parse these lyrics.
cow cow lubba 'n a-blubba lubba hell ride hibbin' and a-zippa dippa how luva mail take a-lubba hubba hey ride wanna tak' a-recca brecca ho' low mail take a-lubba hubba hey ride wanna 'n suppa suppa ho' low a mail take a-lubba hubba hey ride a hippin' and a-hubbin' no hi-low 'n sum a-chicka whaa
mm-mh, do that again ! doo doo doo boooh
cow cow lubba 'n a-blubba lubba ow rown hibb'n 'n a-hibba-lu how low lubbin 'n a-blubba-lubba hell ride ricky ticky hubba lubba dull ow de moun' chicky hubba lubba wen down trucka lucka wanna do-uh how low a zippin 'n a-hubba-lu hell ride ricky ticky blubba-lu how low duh woody woody pecker pecker
mm-mh, did you ever hear of a wish sandwich well that's the kind of a sandwich that you supposed to take two pieces of bread and wish you had some meat doo doo boooh
cow cow lubba 'n a-blubba lubba hell ride hibbin' and a-zippa dippa how luva mail take a-lubba hubba hey ride wanna tak' a-recca brecca ho' low mail take a-lubba hubba hey ride wanna 'n suppa suppa ho' low a mail take a-lubba hubba hey ride a hippin' and a-hubbin' no hi-low 'n sum a-chicka whaa
the other day I ate a ricochet biscuit well it's the kind of biscuit that's supposed to bounce off the wall back in your mouth if it don't bounce back
cow cow lubba 'n a-blubba lubba hell low a sum did a-lubba goin' hey ride wan' take a-lubba do how long lon' suppa dubba how low a mail take a-lubba hubba hey ride wanna take a-lubba hubba how low a mail take a-lubba hubba hey down nothin' take a-luva do hey ride a sippin' and a hubba dubba
mmmmmh, the other day I ate a cool water sandwich and a sunday-go-to-meeting bun doo doo bouuh
cow cow lubba 'n a-blubba lubba hell ride ricky ticky hubba lubba how low a wann' suppa dov hay ride sippin' and hubba lubba hell ride a-hubbin' and wan' do hey ride a wanna an' recca brecca ho' low a mail take lubba hubba hey down a wann' suppa dubba please ride a hubbin' gonn' do
what you want for nothin' a rubber biscuit
doo doo doo boooh cooow cooow oo-oooooouuuh
Feb 5, '08
Whoops! Rubber Biscuit
Feb 5, '08
Misogynistic rally soundtracks, vague racial references, tears: isn't it an engrossing campaign season?
Race and gender issues are worth consideration - unless they prevent us from paying attention to more vital concerns. Shrub has submitted a 2009 budget with more military spending:
"The Pentagon yesterday asked Congress for $515bn for fiscal 2009 as US national security spending continues to soar. The request for the 2009 military base budget - which does not include money for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - represents a 7.5 per cent increase from this year, and the 11th consecutive annual increase. Last year, the Pentagon asked for $479bn (£242bn, €323bn) for the 2008 base budget, which covers everything from weapons procurement to military salaries. The Pentagon also asked for $70bn for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan in a partial request aimed at funding the wars from the beginning of the fiscal year in October to January, when the new president takes office. The Pentagon opted against requesting more money for the wars at this stage partly because a new administration will take over, and also because the military has not decided how many troops will remain in Iraq next year."
Both Clinton and Obama have proposed more military spending at a time when the US has by far the world's most powerful military, is seen as a bully around the globe, and has a crippling budget deficit, crumbling infrastructure and a crumbling currency. It is well established that military spending is not much more beneficial to the economy than digging a hole and burying the cash.
Shall we continue to obsess on campaign trivia, candidate personality quirks, and horse race politics while this nation descends even deeper into an insanity that threatens us and the rest of the planet?
Should we soothe ourselves by pointing out that the Republican candidates are just as bad or worse than the Democrats? If this is politics, you can have it. I'm going to start some vegetable seeds for my spring garden and hope that one more spring comes.
10:56 a.m.
Feb 5, '08
Actually the video does not debunk the issue; according to the original report it was a private victory party and the original report stood by it. I may have stretched it by saying "victory celebration", that was my impression.
The Obama campaign's original response was not to deny the song was played but to deny that the song was aimed at Hillary.
However following up I do see that those who witnessed the event refuse to go on record, so fair enough, I'll let it drop; your point is taken. But this was not invented by me, or by the Clinton campaign.
Feb 5, '08
Yea Tom C.!
Remember when the Republicans tried to make a big deal about something Whoopi Goldberg said at a private fundrasier that all Democrats in the country were supposed to feel responsible for?
When I watched the video, the cheering was too loud for me to even make out the melody, so what is the big deal?
Feb 5, '08
I found this W. Post article interesting. NOW sent out an attack email against Obama just yesterday. There aren't a lot of details but it sounds like a pretty inside baseball fight. Still, that kind of thing can hurt if there's no chance to respond.
I'm surprised that NOW would risk their own influence on something like that. It's pretty clear that Obama is pro-choice, but if he's the eventual nominee NOW is just shooting themselves in the foot.
I hate to say it, but I think we're in for more of this from the Clinton camp.
2:08 p.m.
Feb 5, '08
The last comment, and the title of this article, are misleading.
The Jay-Z story, which again was not initially denied by the Obama campaign (merely downplayed as not really being about Hillary), did not come from the "Clinton Camp."
NOW is making a case based on how they perceive the facts and Obama's voting record. This again is not "the Clinton Camp." Tell me, what if a group begins undecided, then looks at something like Obama's record of voting Present on these votes, and then decides to back Clinton - do you really think that means this whole issue was an "attack" from "the Clinton camp?"
Absurd. It's a group with an issue. Though I understand the tactic; if you can discredit anything critical anyone says about Obama or his supporters by saying it came from "the Clinton camp", as if it's some vast conspiracy, then you solidify the zeal of "the Obama camp."
If you lump every supporter of Hillary's who has an opinion into "the Clinton camp" and vilify them for "attacking" every time they criticize Obama, you're dismissing the honest opinions of a huge number of Democrats.
Neither the Jay-Z 99 problems flap nor the NOW opinion amounts to an "attack" from "the Clinton camp." Nor is this comment an "attack" from "the Clinton camp". Americans, including groups like NOW, have a right to question and criticize Obama, and to be concerned about issues that matter to them; I respect your right to meet those criticisms but not your attempt to ostracize anyone who dares raise them and simultaneously cast the Clinton campaign in an undeserved light.
3:22 p.m.
Feb 5, '08
Tell me, what if a group begins undecided, then looks at something like Obama's record of voting Present on these votes, and then decides to back Clinton - do you really think that means this whole issue was an "attack" from "the Clinton camp?"
Well it's sure an unwarranted attack from someone.
Voting "present" on one out of every twenty-one votes cast is hardly grounds for divorce. That's less than 5% of the total votes in question, and has been explained by Obama as the correct apporach in light of obscure parlimentary stuff that only legislators and their staffs can understand on a vote-by-vote basis.
In the larger scheme of things, it wouldn't surprise that an org dedicated to promoting female candidates might take a shot or two at the opponent of the first viable female candidate. It's equally pluasible, given the Clinton campaign history that there was collusion.
As was the case in the last two Bush campaigns, lack of clear fingerprints by punks like Mark Penn and Karl Rove seems to equal total innocence.......
4:42 p.m.
Feb 5, '08
As was the case in the last two Bush campaigns, lack of clear fingerprints by punks like Mark Penn and Karl Rove seems to equal total innocence...
Ah, I forgot what a saint Axelrod was. The double-standards know no bounds, apparently.
Feb 5, '08
I'm surprised that NOW would risk their own influence on something like that.
I'm not surprised at anything the alleged National Organization for Women (NOW) would do. If I recall correctly, the NOW leadership gave Bill Clinton a pass on his sexist attitude towards women. Presumably, they figured it would be to their advantage to sacrifice Monica, Paula and others for whatever political advantage they might accrue.
Feb 6, '08
NOW is making a case based on how they perceive the facts and Obama's voting record. This again is not "the Clinton Camp."
Bullshit. Any supporters of Clinton who issue attack emails ("attack" was in the W. Post headline, not just my characterization) the day before a vote are doing so on behalf of the Clinton campaign, whether there was collusion or not. I refuse to buy into the "independent group" facade whereby surrogates slam someone's opponent, but the candidate they're supporting stays above the fray. The only way we change the tone of politics in this country is to hold candidates accountable for the actions of their supporters.
Did Clinton denounce the attack? No. Did Clinton tell her supporters to keep the campaign positive? No. She is culpable, just like Obama would be if the shoe were on the other foot.
9:53 a.m.
Feb 6, '08
Ah, I forgot what a saint Axelrod was. The double-standards know no bounds, apparently.
I'm not as confused, brain dead, or stupid as you might hope Mr. Corbell and neither I suspect, is the average Blue Oregon reader.
<hr/>I love the whole concept of political gunslingers, and if I had a do over I'd seriously consider the profession.
I can also draw conclusions about which of them are sleazy bottom feeders who have no moral compass, and are proud of it, while realizing that there are a lot of these guys that are in the biz because of their own values.
Do the Google on Mark Penn, Karl Rove, and David Axlerod and you will find a huge difference, if you care about such things.
I care, and I am able to make value judgements regarding consultants as I can with candidates.
Birds of a feather and all that......
Feb 6, '08
As usual, Tom C. has it right.
7:40 p.m.
Feb 7, '08
Charlie,
This Clinton attack is NOT debunked, because there was this OTHER party of which there is no footage, where they were playing "99 Problems." And the Obama camp doesn't deny the existence of the other party, either! Ha!
This story reminds me of the old story about LBJ telling his aides to spread the rumor that his opponent was a "pigf____r." When the aides protested it wasn't true, LBJ's reply was something along the lines of "I know it's not true, I just want to hear him deny it."
Feb 26, '08
The dog eat Clinton's experience?
<h2>The nationwide campaigns of Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton are respectively the largest, most complex, resource consuming, people motivating, and open-ended efforts over which either one of them has ever before presided. Obama’s has been an inspirational model of good governance; Clinton’s is a fractious mess. How come her highly touted experience did not make a difference from day one?</h2>