Circling The Drain
By Mitch Berg
Nothing official, of course, but that’s what the Clinton campaign is doing.
She’s got a few weapons left — brass knuckles at tomorrow’s debate, 527s taking off and strafing the Messiah in Texas and Ohio — but that won’t roll back the advance. It’s our dumb luck that we finally get the Clintons in an election where we can beat them … and they flame out in the primary against a superior candidate. Even in defeat, they end up making our lives harder.
Anyone want to offer any Hail-Mary optimism this morning or should we pause at last to exult in her failure, electoral consequences be damned?
Or as Slublog puts it:
I do hope the Tics drag it out a bit lot longer, of course.Every time a Tic spends a dollar campaigning against a Tic, an angel gets his wings.
February 25th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Ohhhh Bill Bennett played a Hillary tape this morning. It could have been Michael Savage and not Hillary from what she said. She went into this sarcastic rant about how the sun will shine alot more and whatnot if Obama is elected. It would have been a little funny if a Republican commentator was saying it. But to me it came accross as who was suppose to be the annointed queen suddenly found herself about to be buried by someone who makes Dan Quayle look like Henry Kessinger.
February 25th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Every day the presumptive Democratic nominee isn’t identified is another day the Right Wing SmearBoaters have to plan an attack on two people. Furthermore, they have to hold off on their mud a smear till later in than they would have hoped. They’ll have this years lies so confused they will struggle with keeping them straight.
February 25th, 2008 at 10:07 am
“Swiftboat” – Verb: To tell the truth about a Democrat.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Who taints the image of the great Christopher Lee?!?!?!
February 25th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Mitch Dictionary
truth – Verb: ‘because I said so’; historically inconsistent with reality and documented indisputable facts at the time of said event.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Apparently, the vets who called out Kerry were incorrect in part, is that what you are saying Flash?
February 25th, 2008 at 11:59 am
“inconsistent with reality and documented indisputable facts at the time of said event.”
Gosh, Flash, and here I thought you’d never bring up Kerry’s ‘Winter Soldier’ testimony.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Without totally hijacking this thread. if I have the same person who has two different inconsistent statements, I would tend to favor the statement that was made at the time of the incident, over their statements made many many years later when their was a political vested interest in play. I also think most reasonable people would do the same. I am not totally exonerating Kerry of every single attack, but a vast majority (90+%) of them.
You set for the RUSH presale!
Flash
February 25th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Furthermore, they have to hold off on their mud a smear till later in than they would have hoped.
Happily the New York (Democrat) Times can start the smearing right away. Hypocrite much, Mr. “Centricity”?
February 25th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Anyone who is paying attention knows that the story itself was a flank from the Right, and the Times was a convenient tool. Besides, I didn’t know they were a 527.
I don’t deny the Left does the same thing. I also admit they are blatantly sloppy at it. If they stuck to the facts and didn’t attempt to embellish it would be a different story. The Right , on the other hand, is great at it. and when they are caught in their lies, they move the goal posts, and build strawmen, another tactic at which they are masters of. The lazy media, cowering already due to the faux claims of Liberal Press, play right along. It is a very predictable cycle.
Flash
February 25th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
I can’t argue the lazyness of the media. They seem to compensate by sheer volume however. If the story was a “flank from the Right” why put it on the front page? And how do you figure the “Right” is really great at lies? Do you really believe that the “Left” doesn’t perpetuate falsehoods and misrepresentations?
February 25th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Rush presale… when when when?
😉
February 25th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
“believe that the “Left” doesn’t”
Everyone does it to some extent. I said the Left isn’t very good at it
“”“flank from the Right” why put it on the front page?””
Because Romney only suspended and Huckabee is still there. You guys wouldn’t want this stuff coming out n October. Let it come out now and be dealt with when you have more control over the news cycle and story line. If McCain remains viable, so be it. But if not, you have plenty of time to regroup behind a different presumptive. Remember. The secret meeting at Union station has not been denied by anyone on either side of the dispute. We also know the primary source is Weaver, McCain’s former staffer. The deeper you look there isn’t many if any blue fingerprints on this at all, but an awful lot of Red ones.
That is why I wish Hillary would hit Obama with everything she has. Because whatever she has, you know it is only a fraction of what the Right will do. Obama needs to feel the pain and get some practice. Should he got the nod he will be fresh meat. At least with Hillary you have run her through the ringer so many times people are pretty much set in where they stand. She would be pretty immune to SmearBoat tactics
February 25th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
badda, E-Mail me
anokaflash at gmail
February 25th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I said the Left isn’t very good at it
I disagree. Saturday Night Live. Every major new organization (with the possible exception of Fox). The Education Minnesota/DFL junta. They all are very effective in promoting their meswsage and demonizing their opposition.
They are far more effective in the omission than the exposition. It’s very subtle and extremely effective.
February 25th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Wait, do I have this right? The story about McCain was planted from the right? Is that correct? Since when did the NYT start carrying the rights water for them?
February 25th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Buzz-
There is a theory that the NYT story was the result of infighting between two camps within McCain’s advisers, hence the ‘attack came from the right”.
A very odd way of looking at things. If a similar story came from a faction within Obama’s campaign and the (small) right wing press picked up on it, the Usual Suspects would never claim that the story had its roots in the left — instead it would be explained as more of the right wing noise machine in action.