In a recent (04/01/08) post by Greg Sargent at TPM Election Central, senior Clinton advisor Harold Ickes discusses Reverand Wright and confirms that he has been discussing the issue with super delegates.
"Super delegates have to take into account the strengths and weakness of both candidates and decide who would make the strongest candidate against what will undoubtedly be ferocious Republican attacks," Ickes continued. "I've had super delegates tell me that the Wright issue is a real issue for them."
In a reference to Wright's controversial views, Ickes continued: "Nobody thinks that Barack Obama harbors those thoughts. But that's not the issue. The issue is what Republicans [will do with them]...I think they're going to give him a very tough time."
Asked whether he was specifically bringing up Wright to super-delegates, Ickes said: "I've said what I've said...I tell people that they need to look at what they think Republicans may use against him. Wright comes up in the conversations."
Ickes is probably correct in his assertion that Republicans would use Rev. Wright should Obama win the nomination. But what if Clinton were to win the nomination? What could Republicans possibly bring up against her? Hmmm? Let's think shall we? What untrue, half-true, unfavorable thing could the Republicans possibly bring to the forefront against Hillary? I can't think of a single... oh wait, here's one:
Vince Foster - Hillary killed Vince Foster. Or had him killed. Vince Foster is one of the many people that the Clintons have killed over the years.
Here's another:
Hillary is a lesbian. L-E-S-B-I-A-N. She has sex with women. That's why Bill has affairs don't you know. Becasue she's a lesbian and can't satisfy him.
And because Bill needs sex so bad:
Juanita Broaddrick. Juanita Broaddrick alleges that Bill raped her.
Don't forget Whitewater. Or Travelgate.
Undoubtably a Clinton supporter will make the accusation that this post is full of lies and that I'm trying to start up a rumor mill or otherwise disparage her and/or campaign. That would be false. I have no desire or intention to do so. Rather I seek to point out the idiocy of Ickes' comments. No matter whom Democrats nominate, a flurry of lies will be directed at that person in an effort to ruin a reputation and win an election. This is SOP for Republicans.
My greatest concern when the primary season started was with what the Republicans could and would throw against Clinton. They've spent almost 2 decades slamming her, her family, and her husband. For many people, the dislike of Clinton is reflexive. Mention her name and they feel a negative response. It's not fair, nor is right. It however is true.
I will admit that I'm an Obama supporter and have been disturbed by the remarks made against him by the Clinton camp. My dislike for the comments is not that they were made against Obama, but rather that they were made against another Democrat. Hey if Hillary is the better candidate, fine, let her and her team prove it by presenting her in a positive light and contrasting her positions against Obama's in an critical way. But to malign a fellow Democrat is unacceptable to me (unless it's Zell Miller or that Lieberman dude).
So if Harold Ickes is so concerned that Republicans are going to use underhanded tactics against Obama should he be the nominee, I sure hope he has a plan for beating back the almost twenty years of attacks and lies that have been directed against Hillary, Bill, and even Chelsea along with the new set of smears that are most certainly going to come out. ***SNARK ALERT*** Judging from Mr. Ickes efforts to date, I doubt he'll get the job done and we'll all be able to welcome President McCain to the White House.
My final thought is this. I really want politics in this country to strive for a higher level. Where our contests are truly based on ideas and the debate of those ideas. It's an ideal I know. But I also know that in order to achieve that ideal (as if that were actually possible) we need to support campaigns that aspire to that kind of politics. As soon as we elect individuals that run positive campaigns, the negative ones will stop. They may go out kicking and screaming, but they'll stop.
UPDATE: Per a suggestion by edg
I seem to have started a bit of a firestorm and I apologize if you felt insulted, but not so much for the firestorm.
Ickes is an advocate for Clinton and that's great. She is a truly gifted person that has a real desire to be a public servant and I think would be an effective leader. I probably wouldn't agree with all of her decisions, but would agree with the direction.
My post wasn't meant to be an attack against her. My attempt was to point out that the statements being used by Ickes are destructive to a progressive movement. His position is, to me, that Obama can't win because of the Republican's use of Rev. Wright. Maybe that's true. But if that type of arguement can be used against Obama why couldn't it be said of Clinton as well? Look in either case the issues presented will be trumped up, exaggerated, and often out and out lies. Ickes deserves to be called out on this because the attacks against Hillary are going to be severe and his implication is that somehow the Rev. Wright thing is worse than what might be said against her doesn't hold water.
The items I cited are not my doing, but they will be repeated by Republicans. They are outrageous and false. They've also been around for a long time and will be used again and again should Clinton win the nomination. Is the press going to knock them down? Will DK be able to reach the millions of people that will hear these things and reveal the truth to them? Ickes is putting out another meme that hurts a Democrat's chances. Ickes believe's in his candidate, I have no doubt. He should tell the super's all about Clinton's positives ( And she has many ) rather than playing a BS card against Obama
Campaigns of a higher order are few and far between in today's politcal world. That much is sadly true. Although I didn't witness Wellstone's campaigns, my impression is that it was run from the grass roots up and run in a manner we would appreciate. Wellstone worked hard to get his ideas out and to run on those ideas. If that's what we want, then we should speak up when it isn't happening on our side as well as on the Republican side.
Peace