Hillary wins, media flagellates self
The media takes on itself after Hillary Clinton's win in New Hampshire. Who does it best?
The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz has the most comprehensive take, calling this a "Dewey Defeats Truman" moment before listing what all the major papers said before polls closed:
As the evening dragged on, the commentators had to consider the possibility that Hillary's "showing of vulnerability," as Tom Brokaw put it, might have helped her, and that Bill Clinton might have boosted her chances after all. In other words, that the coverage had missed the point.
This was delicious. The coverage had been so out of control there was speculation about when Hillary might have to drop out.
Brian Williams on MSNBC says pundits missed all the pro-Clinton clues, and that doesn't stop him from doing some more predicting:
There will be numerous deconstructions over the days to come. Theories about how African-American candidates for office have confounded pollsters (see: Bradley, Wilder, Gant, Jackson) will receive a thorough airing, and deservedly so. We in the media will beat ourselves (and deservedly so) for reaching conclusions before the voters have spoken. A further prediction? Give us a few weeks — we will promptly forget the lessons of this debacle in polling, predictions and primary politics. We will all live to screw up another day, though our performance in New Hampshire will be hard to beat.
John Podhoretz had harsh words:
The next day, Obama compared himself to Martin Luther King — and nobody batted an eye. But when Hillary sought to use his analogy to her advantage by pointing out that it took an experienced politician named Lyndon Johnson to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act — thus making her case that there is a place for words and a place for actions — she was deemed desperate, even possibly racist.
A bizarre double standard had emerged in the media, under which Obama could say anything while Hillary could say nothing. Her efforts to get herself a victory in New Hampshire were interfering in the most blatant media effort I can remember to impose a coronation on the body politic.
Tommy Christopher on AOL turns the MSM's favorite phrase for Hillary's emotive episode against it by asking "Is this the media's Muskie moment?"
But who needs the media to question itself when Bill Clinton does it so well?
Greg:
Get real! By that logic, we can't take Barack seriously because he did cocaine! Yeah, you're right - all these decades have been a lie, in actuality, she has been a republican sleeper cell, just waiting to become a goldwater girl again!
Every child is indoctrinated with her or his parents' religion and party affiliation. Hillary was raised in a Republican family. Even though she came from privilege and could have taken the easy road, she started focusing on how life was for other people.
Before she was even of voting age she broke with her parents and became a democrat and started fighting for civil rights.
Now. What has Barack done for women? Let's not have a double standard here.
Posted by: cj | January 19, 2008 at 07:39 PM
Blacks Learn Hillary Was AGAINST the Civil Rights Act of 1964
While a Republican and "Goldwater Girl"....feel deceived !!!
A March 12, 2007 article written by acclaimed Washington columnist Robert Novak sheds a very revealing light on the true sentiment of Hillary Clinton during the peak of the Civil Rights Movement. Clinton recently was found to have minimized the great and monumental strides taken by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by stating that it was Lyndon B. Johnson, then president, who should receive the credit for the civil rights progress including the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In an attempt to attract black support Hillary Clinton regularly shares her 'civil rights experience' during every speech given to black audiences.
Novak writes of one such speech at Selma's First Baptist Church on the 42nd anniversary of the "bloody Sunday" freedom march there, where Sen. Clinton declared: "As a young woman, I had the great privilege of hearing Dr. King speak in Chicago. The year was 1963. My youth minister from our church took a few of us down on a cold January night to hear [King]. . . . And he called on us, he challenged us that evening to stay awake during the great revolution that the civil rights pioneers were waging on behalf of a more perfect union." But Novak's article states that there's a big problem with her statement. The fact is, in 1963, not only was Hillary Clinton a republican, but she was also a staunch supporter of republican Senator Barry Goldwater, well known as a segregationist and one of the most vocal senators adamently against the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is why he lost in his presidential bid to Lyndon B. Johnson. Novak writes "...how then could she be a 'Goldwater Girl' in the next year's presidential election?" He continues, "...she described herself in her memoirs as 'an active Young Republican' and 'a Goldwater girl, right down to my cowgirl outfit.'
Novak adds, "As a politically attuned honor student, she must have known that Goldwater was one of only six Republican senators who joined Southern Democratic segregationists opposing the historic voting rights act of 1964 inspired by King. Hillary headed the Young Republicans at Wellesley College. The incompatibility of those two positions of 40 years ago was noted to me (Novak) by Democratic old-timers who were shocked by Sen. Clinton's temerity in pursuing her presidential candidacy." Novak adds, "What Hillary Clinton said at Selma is significant because it betrays her campaign's panicky reaction to the unexpected rise of Sen. Obama as a serious competitor for the Democratic nomination.
Clinton's plans were transformed by the advent of Obama, an African-American threatening the hard allegiance of black voters forged by Bill Clinton. On one hand, the Clinton campaign has attacked Obama and his supporters. On the other hand, she has sought to solidify her civil rights credentials.
While Clinton was re-inventing her past, her road to the White House is not going as planned. Instead of a steady procession to coronation at the Denver convention, she is involved in a real struggle against credible opponents led by Obama. No wonder she and her handlers were tempted to imply the existence long ago of a young lady in Chicago's suburbs who never really existed," Novak concluded. As the fact is being exposed that Hillary Clinton is falsifying her civil rights history, Black support is quickly dwindling nationwide. Her 'Goldwater Girl' days have been a major topic on various national black talk radio programs and a highlighted subject on many news outlets.
Greg Jones
(To Read Novak's original article simply Google ' Hillary, King, Goldwater '. His article is everywhere.)
Posted by: Greg Jones | January 18, 2008 at 03:32 PM
The Element of Surprise: A Prescription for a Democratic Landslide Victory in ‘08.
The Democrats have a way of losing, especially when it appears they are winning. Let’s “move on” and not rehash the past and the numerous instances of such horror, shall we?
So, in order to thwart this "Cubs Curse" phenomenon I have devised the following prescription for a sure-fired Democratic National Committee (DNC) landslide victory in November of '08.
Instead of allowing the current field of democratic presidential candidates to continue fighting each other, which makes all of the candidates look awkward, hypocritical, indecisive, unauthentic and incompetent (hence weakening the party), the DNC should announce that it is abandoning the republican's Grand Old Party (GOP) paradigm of negative-individual-competition-politics in favor of the cohesiveness and power of the group (i.e., the ticket).
This would result in the DNC immediately abandoning the pursuit, adoration and cult of individual personality by announcing a “power-ticket” of togetherness, humility and love right now, today.
A semi-fair way to do this would be to announce the 2008 DNC presidential ticket in descending order according to the national polls as they stand today. This translates into the following: President Hillary Clinton, Vice-President Barrack Obama, and Secretary of State John Edwards.
In addition to announcing this primary powerhouse ticket which shatters every sexist, racist and classist paradigm long-employed by GOP stalwarts like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, David Duke, William Bennett, Trent Lott, Joe McCarthy and various members of the KKK (who no doubt are "conservative" and vote Republican), the following "secondary ticket" of cabinet posts and diplomats should simultaneously be announced to the voting public: Secretary of Defense General Wesley Clark, Head of the EPA/Secretary of the Interior Al Gore, Secretary of the Treasury Ron Paul, Ambassador of Middle Eastern and International Affairs Bill Clinton, Head of CIA Valerie Plame, Head of Consumer Protection Ralph Nader (in addition to Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, David Geffen and Steven Spielberg in various supporting and diplomatic roles). George Clooney (Sudan), Angelina Jolie (Africa and Southeast Asia), Brad Pitt (New Orleans), Wynton Marsalis (public music education), and Michael Moore (healthcare) will also head up several socially conscious humanitarian projects for a DNC led U.S. government to address their respective causes.
Then, as a final crushing blow, appoint Oprah Winfrey as moral liaison and public spokesperson for "The New DNC" (having her be the one to hold an internationally televised press conference announcing the above paradigm shift in DNC strategy).
If the DNC were to present this entire ticket/strategy tomorrow to the American people and then say, "Go ahead, now choose America... Us or Them?" the result would be phenomenal, virtually guaranteeing a democratic lock on the U.S. federal government for decades to come.
If this were done immediately it would not only throw the Republican presidential nomination process into complete chaos, it would also free up the DNC and its members to spend the coming months attacking GOP/Bush policies instead of each other. The party could also spend its precious time developing a clearly focused public sector platform that embraces civil rights, environmental protection, electoral reform, separation of church and state, public education, government sponsored healthcare for every American child, affordable housing, workers rights and healthy food for all Americans.
If the DNC had a comprehensive and detailed ticket like this now it could stop the internal bickering it calls "debates," and instead focus as a group on the above platform and following GOP critiques:
1) 911 happened on the Republican's watch. The New DNC ticket should never veer off topic from this. This is the talking point. Blame all Republicans completely and utterly without compromise. Anytime they mention "security" just respond, "Yeah, but 911 happened on your watch." Repeat this mantra over and over and over again. When they reply, "Well, we haven't had another 911 since 911," you as a democrat reply, "But we never had a 911 before 911, so what's the relevance of your point? And please don't mention Pearl Harbor, that was not a 911-style terrorist attack." When they say, "Bill Clinton," you say, "Yeah, but 911 happened on your watch."
2) Global anti-American sentiment has dramatically increased under Bush/GOP ideology and policies making Americans less safe. Immediately following September 11, 2001, the world's people were mostly on America's side. An outpouring of sympathy from the global community proceeded the devastating 911 attacks. However, as a direct result of the current administration's illegal unilateral preemptive war doctrine, coupled with its arrogant unwillingness to take any responsibility for the root causes that have given rise to twenty-first century political extremism, world sentiment has turned against the United States. This has made Americans less safe (and increased the total number of terrorists and hence the overall number of terrorism related attacks).
3) Republicans knowingly break laws with impunity. Dick Chenney (not submitting to a sobriety test immediately after a hunting accident involving a firearm), Scooter Libby (perjury), George W. Bush (domestic spying without a warrant), Larry Craig (soliciting gay bathroom sex), Duke Cunningham (fraud), Ted Haggard (methamphetimine possession and gay prostitution), FEMA Press Secretary Aaron Walker (fraudulent "news" briefings), David Vitter (prostitution), the ultra-conservative Catholic priesthood (institutionalized pedophilia), Alberto Gonzalez (perjury/suspension of Habeas Corpus), Gov. Bob Taft (fraud/corruption), Bernard Kerik (corruption/tax evasion), Abu Grieb torture, Gitmo torture, Bill O'Reilly (sexual harassment), Rush Limbaugh (illegal drug possession/use), Mitt Romney (hiring of illegal immigrants), Jack Abramoff (fraud/corruption) and the list goes on.
4) Iraq is a catastrophe because the mission to "Bring our way of life to them," is/was "Mission Impossible"; therefore, the goal always was and continues to be unachievable. Mainly, this is because of the deeply selfish, ego-driven ideology of a few wealthy, Christian, heterosexual, married, white men with children who cannot admit that race, gender and economic geography are intrinsically connected to levels of education, "status," family dynamics (i.e., "culture"), power and personal wealth. In the case of the illegal invasion of Iraq what happened was that too many like-minded American white men generated too few solutions to a very complex set of global problems involving billions of nonwhite people. The result was a collective cowboy "rescue complex" steeped in narcissistic delusions of euro-patriarchal grandeur. This is also known as "Groupthink." Wikipedia defines Groupthink as: "A type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. During Groupthink, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking. A variety of motives for this may exist such as a desire to avoid being seen as foolish, or a desire to avoid embarrassing or angering other members of the group. Groupthink may cause groups to make hasty, irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the group's balance. The term is frequently used pejoratively, with hindsight.” Sound familiar?
5) The poor state of the economy is directly related to the GOP’s illegal Iraq “experiment.” Since the day the neo-con Bush administration preemptively struck Iraq gas prices have tripled, the U.S. dollar has tanked on the international market, and the U.S. treasury has/will be drained of three to five trillion dollars. To not draw constant and unwavering parallels between the cost of war and the state of economy is one of the biggest blunders of the current DNC platform.
6) The Republican Party is latently classist, racist and sexist because they only run rich, white men for the offices of president and vice-president of the United States. In other words, the DNC must play the race and gender card. Not against each other, but against the GOP who fought MLK and the entire civil rights movement every step of the way. The DNC must continually ask the question publicly: “Why has the GOP never had a women or non-white person run for president (sans the self-promoter Alan Keyes who’s bid was not seriously supported by the party)? When does the GOP expect to run such a candidate for the highest office in the land?”
6) Every time you speak call the Republican Party "The Republic Party." This is all in the name of good fun (with a smidgeon of revenge politicking :). When your conservative friends correct you, just say, "Oh yeah, the republic party" again. This will drive them crazy (and possibly get them to stop calling us the "democrat" party).
Happy WINNING in '08!
Posted by: Brad Ctibor | January 15, 2008 at 09:37 AM
The Washington media's triumph in achieving the McCain resurrection in New Hampshire has gone missing from the New Hampshire story. Seventy two year McCain, who had been left for dead just months ago, overcame heavily favored Mitt Romney's barrage of advertisements to prove that our national press can make some things come true.
Posted by: Richard Thompson | January 13, 2008 at 11:26 AM
The longer the campaigns continue the more convinced I become that the US will benefit from the clear thinking of Hilary Clinton for the Democrats. Leaving aside the Republicans for the moment, the Democrats are faced with trying to win the White House after two defeats.
Senator Obama has failed to add substance to his claims for change. His camp has complained about the use of 'fairy tale' by others. The Senator himself is not being accused of weakness here, merely being reminded politely that fairy tales are about fantasy and not reality. His speeches are becoming increasingly more distant from reality, dominated by slogans and spin. He must expect voters to think of his speeches as fantasy if he is unable to put substance to them.
John Edwards seems the opposite. Few doubt that he has substance, that he tries to think out policies, yet he just can't seem to get this across. He runs a close second to Hilary.
I had hoped Bill Richardson could have gone on for longer and continued to add to debates.
As the campaigns gear up it is a little discomforting to hear murmurings of the Obama camp now ready to play the race card and accuse the Clintons of being racist. If this happens it will portray Obama as a man who challenges and raises tensions. He could take race relations back decades with any outburst of this nature.
When the Clinton campaign discovered someone in their camp who tried to falsely accuse Obama of being a muslim, Hilary removed that person swiftly. Hilary Clinton is not a lady who would support a smear campaign.
There seem to be elements in the Obama camp who do support the smear tactics. He needs to act smartly and clear the rot before it festers and destroys his campaign. I am sure he would not want to be remembered as the candidate whose campaign reverted to the sort of negative politics that have spoiled past elections.
Maybe that is why I have so many doubts about him. He just seems to so closely tied to the politics of the past that his claim to be a candidate for change actually comes across as cynical. He seems to treat voters as if they were ignorant, as if it is an affront to challenge him. I am sure he does not want to project that image, but until he provides substance his words are like a fairy tale and we would be telling Hilary Clinton and John Edwards the same thing if they tried to woo us with sound bites and spin.
Posted by: David Hopcroft | January 12, 2008 at 03:27 PM
I seldom see any facts criticizing Hillary, usually only vitrolic voices filled with hate and little common sense or facts. Because I don't listen to talk radio, I am unable to identify the source of the words but I am quite sure that they are 'parrot talk.'
I wish that all of the people who hate her would stop and think for themselves instead of being goose-stepping GOP goobers.
The old saw that Clinton commited adultry with a young woman and Hillary is a tough cookie who didn't want to be a house cleaning, cookie baking housewife so therefore they are the spawn of Satan doesn't hold water any more.
Bush created a war that has killed thousands of people, women and children included. The GOP is trying to revert our lives back to the Dark Ages with their anit-abortion no matter what, no stem cell research, creationism crap. Ignore and deride science; let's take away birth control as long as they are at it.
Hooray for a womanizer instead of a dry drunk power hunger self appointed crazy who believes that God talks directly to him. Where is the media now?
Why isn't the media speaking to the insanity in the White House? How can I believe anything that they say when the silence is speaking volumes?
Posted by: Abby | January 11, 2008 at 11:01 AM