A friend emails me that his Windows Mail program keeps trying to replace "Obama" with "Osama." He notes that he bought the computer in December 2007, when Obama was already a well-known candidate. A bit odd, though I suspect just a glitch (but you never know, programmers are wacky people). Kind of a funny one, though. Oh, and when you type in Clinton or McCain, you get bupkis. But when you type in "Klingon" you get "Clinton." (But, as reader Rob, who discovered this, notes: "At least the Klingons joined the Federation.")
Speaking of which, here's a funny story about a Wired.com writer whose spell-check keeps keeps trying to change his name "Zjawinski" to "Lewinsky."
"I've been tested. I've been vetted. I've been in the political arena in our country for 16 years. There are no surprises." - Hillary Clinton, 12/14/07
Here we go again.
Slate just published a piece about a new book about Bill Clinton, called "The Clinton Years." Slate reports that the book includes an "old rumor" about Bill Clinton continuing his philandering. While the Clinton campaign has done a good job of embarrassing the press, and the Obama campaign, away from mentioning these rumors, the Republicans won't be so reticent in the fall. To paraphrase Clinton surrogate Evan Bayh, this is the kind of thing that Swift Boats are made of.
This is the first time a lot of people are hearing about this particular rumor. (Though Joe and I knew about this particular rumor a good year ago. We also know far more details about the rumor than Slate has revealed. But Joe and I chose, until now, not to report on it because, well, we still find ourselves pulling punches for Hillary's scandals when nobody on her team pulls punches for Obama's.) Because this rumor is new for most people, for most of you, that means this rumor, this baggage, isn't "vetted," to use Hillary's vernacular. It's not good, and if it's true (hell, even if it isn't true), it could doom our chances against McCain in the fall were Hillary to be the nominee. Why? Because were Hillary to somehow become our party's nominee, the Republican 527s, and GOP state parties like Kentucky and North Carolina, would ensure that we spend the entire fall discussing who Bill Clinton is sleeping with, and whether we're going to have more Monicas when he's back in the White House, rather than discussing why John McCain is too old and too conservative to be president. Just imagine the jokes Republicans, and the late night shows, would make about Hillary and that 3am phone call now that this is out there.
Now, the Clinton campaign will say that it's just horrible that anyone would dare mention rumors about Bill Clinton continuing to philander, and how horrible it is that Slate (or I) would even write about the new book (but I suspect they wouldn't deny the rumor, for fear of inviting another "Monkey Business" a la Gary Hart). But you have to remember, Hillary was the one who said that dropping the "kitchen sink" on a fellow Democrat is totally acceptable.
Before the critical primaries in Ohio and Texas on Tuesday, her campaign had vowed to throw the "kitchen sink" at Obama to derail the momentum that had led to wins in 11 straight contests.
Hillary is the one who has said that personal scandals, and personal relationships, of fellow Democrats are fair game in this nomination battle. Hillary is the one who said that vetting these scandals now, rather than letting the Republicans vet them in the fall, is a necessity and is actually doing our party a favor, giving us a chance to see how well the potential nominee will fight back against such sleazy revelations. So, I publish this link to Slate in order to help Hillary become a better candidate, per her own request, per her own standards of conduct. So spare us the outrage from the Clinton campaign. They made their bed. Now, unfortunately, we're going to see who's sleeping in it.
Pages 103 and 104: Clinton and Ron Burkle, the supermarket magnate, have been buddies since 1992. Felsenthal repeats the old rumor that "Burkle and Clinton are … partners in philandering." She also quotes an unnamed source alleging that "Burkle and Clinton spend time together doing things that Hillary would not want made public" and reports that Burkle calls his private plane "Fuck Jet."
The president's relationship with Ron Burkle has been the subject of widespread speculation primarily concerning Bill Clinton's private life. Over a year ago, Patrick Healy wrote in the New York Times:
Mr. Clinton is rarely without company in public, yet the company he keeps rarely includes his wife. Nights out find him zipping around Los Angeles with his bachelor buddy, Ronald W. Burkle, or hitting parties and fund-raisers in Manhattan.
Is it true? I have no idea. Has it been vetted? Not at all.
I always assumed she did it to further her career, which is fine with me (though other women have told me that "you should put your self-respect before a job"). She helped make him what he is, she deserves a little reciprocity. But now Hillary is saying she stayed with her husband because of her faith and her commitment to family?
In the forum Clinton shared few personal stories, including one about her and her husband trying to break open a coconut. She was also asked about how she endured “through really difficult times” in her marriage.
“I obviously was fortunate to be able to rely on and be grounded in my faith, which has been an anchor for me throughout my entire life,” she said. “I also really believe in family and believe in the importance of family, and believe that family is the core of your relations. … When you are in a difficult situation, oftentimes you feel like you just want to withdraw into yourself, and you want to just shut the world out. Now if you have to do it in front of the world, that’s a little hard to do.”
Okay. But she's entering some dangerous territory trying to somehow get "credit" by subtly invoking Monica and her marital problems. I.e., she's claiming that her scandals make her a better person. That opens the door to not only discussing Monica and the Clinton scandals, but it also opens the door to discussing how she handled those scandals and what her motivations were, why she stayed with her husband, etc. She can't invoke Monica, et. al., to her credit then turn around and say that discussing Monica is off-limits. Of course, that's exactly what she'll do because she'll say anything and do anything to get elected, like endorsing a GOP gas tax plan, saying she opposed NAFTA when she was really for it, and on and on and on.
Joe is being nice in his post below. See, even when discussing what a frightful, awful, nasty mess Hillary has become, how she's even willing to race-bait Obama a la willy Horton, Joe is still too nice to use the M-word. Lots of Democrats are too nice too. Obama is too nice. His staff is too nice. His surrogates are too nice - note that Claire McCaskill didn't detail even one Clinton scandal (but you'd better believe the Clintons will flay her alive, nonetheless). Hell, even the blogs supporting Obama, and Netroots groups like MoveOn, are too nice. None of these people want to mention Monica Lewinsky even when they're talking about the kind of nasty issues that Republicans will throw at Hillary in the fall. That reticence, that decency that comes naturally and innately to non-Clinton Democrats is what Joe is talking about.
Hillary hasn't had to defend herself in years against all the Monica Lewinsky crap, against rumors about her husband, rumors about herself (see, even I'm being nice and hedging here by not giving you details about the rumors - but you can bet they're gonna go public in the fall), about Whitewater, Travelgate, Filesgate, cattle futures, and on and on. When Hillary is pulling racist crap on Obama, trashing black churches, comparing him to Jesse Jackson, she likes to talk about how she's really doing it to help him and help the party - you see, she's preparing him for what's coming in the fall. She's "fully vetting" him. But who is fully vetting Hillary? The last time she came under the full onslaught of the right-wing conspiracy it destroyed her likability in the public eye, and made her one of the most hated Democrats in America. And she's still paying a price today with horrendous disapproval ratings that she's been carrying for a decade.
If Hillary manages to steal the nomination, the Republicans are going to throw every Clinton scandal in her face, and then some - you can rest assured that they won't be afraid to say the M-word. And when the country is yet against forced to talk about Monica and oral sex 24/7, Democrats will be looking back at Rev. Wright as the good ole days.
"You can't do a tougher question for Senator Clinton than 'six out of 10 Americans don't think you're honest.' "
Oh please. How about any question that starts with the words "Monica Lewinksy."
The fact is that ABC thought it would be rude and boorish to ask anything about Monica or Bill Clinton's affairs, even though we will most certainly be hearing about them in the fall should Hillary be the nominee. (And after all, isn't that ABC's standard for smut? If it's going to come up in the fall, we'll ask it first!) And it didn't have to be a sex question for Hillary, it could have been a character question.
For example... I spoke a short while back with a women's rights leader about Hillary, and asked her why she was upset with Hillary for not leaving Bill Clinton. I argued - believe it or not - that Hillary was right to get some return on her investment in this marriage in order to finally help her career too. The women's leader responded: "Your self-respect is more important than a job." That's the kind of Monica question ABC could have asked Hillary, one that would have been relevant to her character. But they didn't.
ABC went there with Obama - I mean, come on, asking him if his pastor loves America? - but ABC didn't go there with Hillary. I'm not sure going there with both candidates would have made anyone happier, but please don't insult our intelligence and suggest that there were no harsher questions you could have asked Hillary. ABC decided to make no topic untouchable in Obama's life. But they did in Hillary's.
I'm gonna go on a limb here and say that Jesus did not die on the cross for Hillary's superdelegates.
Again, you have to keep in mind that this is the week that the Associated Press finally went there and talked about Bill Clinton and Monica having relations in the White House while Hillary was in the house. So, it's understandable that the Clintons and their allies are throwing everything they can at Obama to change the subject, even going so far as to use Holy Week - the crucifixion of Jesus - for their own partisan gain.
It's funny. The Clintons have criticized Obama for saying that Hillary would do anything, say anything, to win. I think abusing the crucifixion for political gain, the day before Easter, ranks pretty high up in the say-anything-do-anything category.
“An act of betrayal,” said James Carville, an adviser to Mrs. Clinton and a friend of Mr. Clinton.
“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” Mr. Carville said, referring to Holy Week.
AP would have you believe that General McPeak was just an Obama "aide." In fact, he's the former Chief of Staff for the entire Air Force. Even better, he's a Republican who served for nearly 2 years as Bill Clinton's Air Force Chief of Staff. He's also a co-chair of Obama's presidential campaign, but for AP to refer to him as an "Obama aide" hardly does the man justice. This isn't some kid we're talking about. And McPeak was none too pleased with Bill Clinton's comments last night suggesting that Obama wasn't "patriotic." Then again, the Associated Press did just publish a rather large and embarrassing article about how Hillary was often in the White House while Bill Clinton was asking Monica for oral sex, so it's understandable why the Clinton campaign is now trying to change the subject. I suspect that come the fall, were Hillary our nominee, the Republicans will be talking about Monica and Bill's sex life 24/7. And trying to call John McCain unpatriotic in order to stop the Monica sex talk just isn't going to cut it. The Clintons need to explain to the superdelegates and the country how they're going deal with the Monica problem come the fall. It's not a nice topic, but it's one that's going to come up, early and often, and as Hillary always reminds us, it's better to vet the scandals now so we can see how well our candidates will truly do against the Republicans. So, let's vet.
