Author of the Pulitzer Prize winning book "A Problem fron Hell: America and the Age of Genocide" and a Professor of Human Rights policy at Harvard's JFK School of Government.
You've probably already heard about this…..
Hillary advisers and surrogates called on Obama to fire senior foreign policy adviser Samantha Power for calling Hillary a "monster."
"Personal attacks are not the way to convince voters that you're capable of being president of the United States," New York Rep. Nita Lowey, a key Hillary surrogate, said. "We're calling on Senator Obama to make it very clear that Samantha Power should not be part of this campaign." Source
Ms. Power did resign.
The sentence I emboldened, however, is a piece of work. Hillary Clinton, through the use of non-stop meritless and trivial attacks delivered repeatedly by craven media personnel, is in the midst of convincing headline-hearing voters, that she's capable of being president. So, "personal attacks" ARE the way to go. This is a transparent example of how the Rovian, "we create reality", model of politics expresses itself. It's the same dishonesty and duplicity that Americans have come to loathe politicians over. Accusing your opponent of doing what you are doing.
Watch the same media Padders that chuckled along with the "how can we beat the bitch?" question addressed to Mr. McCain. Watch these same chuckleheads put on their stern and serious faces about a candidate who would have a person on his team who actually would call Hillary a "monster".
No matter how Obama responds, he loses.
The media loves the "old politics" they have nurtured into existence all these years since Ronald McDonald's tenure. They love this type of politics. This type of politics offers absolutely no value to the American public. If there's one thing the media is good at, it's producing valueless content. Only the media and those politicians who are in incestuous, yet professional, relationships with the media, benefit from the "politics of personal destruction". What Hillary's campaign, in co-ordination with the Wurlitzer media scum, is in the midst of doing is making the point(?) that if Obama won't play dirty politics, like Hillary does, he's not qualified to be president.
The seemingly only qualification needed for any public office anymore, let alone the presidency, is the ability to embarass yourself and the nation by inflating shallow pettiness to the point where there's no reasonable oxygen left in the political discussion. That's where we're at right now.
What Hillary has successfully done, recently, is prove that totally substance free appeals to nonsensical and trivial stupidity combined with the use of fear tactics like the neo-conservative's have thrived upon, works. It works because establishment Padder People produce content daily that's usually substance free, nonsensical, trivial but professionally mixed with appeals to their viewers enabling them to stay scared. Viewers have been trained to follow along with the soap opera silliness driven by all that corporate sponsor loot.
This junior high style of running for president of the only superpower matches perfectly with the junior high style used by most Knee Pad members in reporting on presidential campaigns. It's not so much that it's dangerous or evil any more than any other piece of evidence offered up in support of the premise that America is in decline.
It's just that it's so embarrassing.
{ 17 comments… read them below or add one }
The embarrassing thing for Obama should be the fact he lets someone unschooled in dealing with media speak for him. Not very sound judgment there by the guy who keeps bragging about how great his judgment is. Power got "schooled" this week by the media and then abandoned by her campaign and its leader. Her resignation should not have been accepted. She should not have been left twisting in the wind. Obama comes off looking weak instead of as the "hope candidate" (what a joke!), the guy who gives people second chances and won't be pushed around by big, bad Hillary.
You know who Obama is giving "hope" to? Dmitri Medvedev, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-il, and just about anyone else in the world looking for U.S weakness to exploit. They must be licking their chops in anticipation of a Barack Obama presidency.
He should have asked Rezko for advice.
I like how people like you think Obama is above it all – a different kind of politican. He is not. I wonder what happens when he has to start getting to dirty in the next few weeks to stop the Clinton momentum…..will his supporters be dismayed?
I'm really enjoying how the left has just started to notice how the Clintons do things, after they've been doing them the same way for all these years. Y'all are a bit slow, aren't ya ?
Listen up newslamp….You are oh-so-correct. When Knee Padders Attack in their zombie-like formation, as they began doing immediately following Super Tuesday, there's NO newbee spouting truth to power who won't be run over by their "schooling". No question about that.
Think Florida election 2000, think the Swiftboating of Kerry.
Add up any or all of these non-newsworthy "monster", NAFTA, CinC, Day One….inanities and lies….and ya' got nothin'. Doesn't matter, I realize that,….not when media "school" is in session.
Yeah newslamp, shine on my friend.
Yessir, giving other nation's leaders an impression that America is willing to avoid killing and destruction through the use of open channels of communications would not be a hopeful thing for Americans, would it?
No, it would appear that newslamp finds more hope in a unilateral, imperialistic, old Soviet Union mentality of isolation. Lots of hope to be found there, I imagine.
Some folks look at the last 7+ years and see hopefulness for America. They want more of the same.
I just don't see what the 35%, who favor authoritarianism, are seeing, but then again, that's the problem, isn't it?
larry: You know….I studied up on the Rezko/Obama stuff…the real estate thing, etc.
Obama didn't do anything illegal. He also did not do anything that benefited Rezko. He didn't.
But because Obama and Rezko dealt with one another, and there are campaign contributions involved, then Obama gets the guilt by association routine.
The problem will be, once again, a double standard. Rezko has had many dealings with Hillary, you probably saw their picture together…..but the Knee Padders, against Hillary until Obama threatened…..will only recycle the Rezko/Obama connection.
The corporate/political powerbrokers in this country simply cannot tolerate a progressive candidate the likes of Obama. There's way too much insider money involved. Knee Pad Media, giving whores everywhere a bad name, one of the key players in the corporate/political powerbroker game, refuse to allow an Obama presidency.
The cynic in you knows that.
Ben: Obama is a politician. Just because he hasn't wanted to act all Rovian, like Hillary has done out of desperation, doesn't change the fact that he is a politician….and I don't see anyone saying anything to the contrary.
But what really scares the establishment corruption bunch, led by GOP'ers but not without some Dems, is a politician who can bring in new swathes of voters. A politician who dares to shake up the two parties' so-called coalitions. That's the threat of Obama to establishment Washington.
In spite of the old politics dynamic, I don't think Obama will go after Hillary. He's going to, I predict, go more and more after McCain. That projects the sense of inevitability.
King: On the query on whether we all were a bit "slow" over the Clinton's tactics.
Do you think Obama could have arrived where he is today if his supporters were "slow" about concluding Clinton's tactics were very much Rovian in their style?
The Democratic Party is much more engaged in the process then you give them credit for. Republicans, on the other hand, would rather have an authority figure TELL them who to vote for. It's a lot easier that way….less of a fuss.
Hey, Reverend–
Was that a positive or negative response to my post?
Shine on!
I do think King is right, to a degree. Many Dem-leaning Americans held the Clintons in a higher light than they deserve – much as the Republicans do with Reagan. In fairness, the Clintons gave power to the Democratic Party that they lacked for a long time.
However, many who like(d) the Clintons didn't quite understand how they operate and the manner in which they tend to capitalize off grouping people.
They're not as bad as some on right, but its clear many Democrats are starting to realize certain unsavory things about the Clinton political machine.
I think perhaps Obama should have given one of Hillarys lines as a response . Like Well I really don't have any reason to believe Ms Clinton is a Monster , there is just no basis for that. Why would I? There's nothing to base that on. As far as I know.
Rev,
You asked, "Do you think Obama could have arrived where he is today if his supporters were "slow" about concluding Clinton's tactics were very much Rovian in their style?"
First of all, I always laugh when a liberal calls a Clinton or Democratic attack "Rovian". Clinton attacks are "Clintonian", nothing else. They don't take their cues from anyone else, and certainly not from Rove. Nice try, though.
Second, your question is mostly moot until very recently, because Obama was spared the usual scrutiny candidates receive until very recently. He was literally handpicked by the Democratic power structure. Hillary was afraid to attack him because of his race until it was evident she was going to lose if she didn't and she got desperate. That's when the 'kitchen sink' strategy started. In my mind, the real media scrutiny of Obama only started a few weeks ago. He largely got a pass prior to that, and the media was openly adulating him, until their prejudice became so evident that people began to criticize the media for their irresponsibility and failure to do any vetting of Obama. Once Obama did start to get the hard scrutiny everyone else gets (and that Republicans are subject to nonstop), it shook him and he faltered.
Personally, I'd never slander anybody but Obama might be a hot tempered wife beater for all we know. Or a polygamist.
Andrea: EXACTLY
King: I must say I get a kick out of "failure to do any vetting of Obama" part. There's nothing being hidden. He's been a public figure and out in the open for a long time.
What you are talking about is that Obama hasn't been subjected to the Kewl Kidz/establishment media sh*t throwing machine yet. That's what you must mean by the highbrow sounding word "vetting".
"Vetting" in today's fantasy world means asking as many "when did you stop beating your wife" questions and then blaming you for not being able to answer. Must be hiding something. Must be anti-press. On and on. And you know this to be true.
They got nothing on Obama. So Hillary helps 'em by suggesting what gotcha questions of irrelevancy they should ask.
And just for larry: Hey, maybe McCain got all those alleged war-wounds from angry husbands beating his ass with clubs when they found him doing their wives. I don't know for sure….but maybe.
Who knows, Reverend. Maybe he got caught with two or three of the Manchurian's wives and some of Rezko's thugs gave him the what's what.
larry: No doubt. Have you called FOX News yet to inform them of this new possibility?
In today's .1% world of neo-con nonsense, I suppose, a .1% chance that Obama has multiple wives and yet still can't get enough of Rezko as well…..is all close enough to declare as being factual.
I mean, hell…..if it's good enough to justify savagery and torture…..it surely is good enough to destroy a possible establishment enemy.
Facts? Who cares about that silly stuff?
Smart site- Will come back,,