Thursday, April 3, 2008

Wow... the Clinton People Never Stop Spinning...

I don't know what it is with these people but they are just boldfaced liars and spin so much that sometimes I think the Clinton house has to rest on a perpetual Merry-Go-Round just so that they never have to leave their comfort zone.

After the brouhaha over Bill Clinton's angry Bill Richardson comments in the meeting with California Superdelegates, Bill Richardson wrote an Op-Ed defending his decision and maintaining his respect for the Clintons.

Although this line managed to slip in there:

I, of course, called Sen. Clinton prior to my endorsement of Sen. Obama. It was a difficult and heated discussion, the details of which I will not share here.


That line made it clear that the Clintons were pretty angry with Bill Richardson for his decision. Although ABC News would later uncover that in the conversation Hillary asserted that Obama "cannot win".

Now I have no problem with candidates saying they have a better chance of defeating the opponent from the other party. I have no problem with them believing they are more qualified and even pointing out their qualifications in commercials and stump speeches. Barack Obama has said he feels he is the candidate that stands a better chance against John McCain.

That to me is fine. It's not disqualifying Hillary's chances altogether. It's just saying he thinks he would do better than her. And statistically that statement is possible even if Hillary beat McCain head to head that Obama might have polled higher. That doesn't mean he thinks she would lose to him or at least he would never openly admit that. And it doesn't mean he's campaigning in a way that says, "if you nominate Hillary, we will lose in November".

However that's exactly what she has basically been saying by trying to imply that Obama isn't "ready from day one", is unable to answer the hypothetical 3am call, is less qualified than John McCain.

To blatantly campaign in such a fashion only shows your indifference towards doing what is best for the party. Should she lose the nomination and chances are incredibly high that this will happen, she has declared that there is no way the Democrat will win and in repeating that meme before Obama is the candidate she is helping reinforce that notion to undecided voters for the General Election.

It's rather low and despicable at the very least.

But in typical Clinton fashion they lie and spin their way out of what they said and try to blame Richardson of all people. Just like how they tried to claim that the pro-war, pro-long term bases Hillary is somehow the "peace candidate" who will actually get us out of Iraq (as opposed to Obama, who has been against the war since day one, I guess), they have taken something they are clearly guilty on and tried to lie their way out of it by claiming the exact opposite of what happened.

It makes the already completely bogus "flip-flopper" John Kerry accusations from the last presidential campaign cycle look so unbelievably pale in comparison just by the level of deception and the speed and force of how these about-faces are done by her campaign.

From Salon.com:

Time's Mark Halperin reports on the account of one unnamed "Clinton associate" who says it was Richardson, not Clinton, who suggested that Obama could not win in the general election. Halperin quotes this Clinton associate as saying, "Bill Richardson is clearly embarrassed that he broke his promise to them. He should come out and tell the truth and admit that he told both Clintons that Obama wasn't ready and can't win."


It should be noted that Mark Halperin has been anti-Obama for some time and more notably anti-liberal.

To clarify here Bill Richardson had openly questioned Obama's "inexperience" while he was wavering between Clinton and Obama for the endorsement. But after he heard the "race speech", the wavering ended and he saw the leadership Obama could provide.

Since that point there is no question Richardson supported Obama outwardly by doing the public endorsement and publicly defending Obama from attacks. In politics you don't do those things publicly and then go to the other candidate and say he can't win. When you endorse in the fashion Richardson did, you tie your horse to that candidate's wagon. If they fail, you have damaged your own political career to some degree. Al Gore suffered a good amount of political damage when he endorsed Howard Dean and Dean subsequently lost all but his home state in the primaries. It took the success of "An Inconvenient Truth" to erase that from memory.

So to say that Richardson said otherwise after the endorsement is complete and utter lies.

Just to reiterate here's the context of what was said in the conversation between Richardson and Clinton according to the ABC News Report:

Sources with direct knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Clinton and Gov. Bill Richardson, D-N.M., prior to the Governor's endorsement of Obama say she told him flatly, "He cannot win, Bill. He cannot win."

Richardson, who served in President Clinton's cabinet, disagreed.


If he didn't disagree then he's completely stupid for possibly damaging his own political career by endorsing someone who he believes "cannot win". Of course the reality is that the Clintons, much like their Bush friends, have no connection to reality. That connection seems to have been severed at the very latest in the mid-1990s.

-Rp

No comments: