G.O.P. Bloggers Gird for Obama
MORE
Joe Conason
For the next month or so, the conservative valentines will arrive every day at the headquarters of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. The Illinois senator’s image will be illuminated by the bipartisan aura of admiration from prominent Republican commentators and strategists, as they savor the promise of his victory over Hillary Clinton, long the object of their hatred. He may well imagine that they really like him—and surely some of them do, at least for now.
Such happy feelings are easily conjured these days, when William Kristol hopes Democratic superdelegates will do “the good deed” of pledging their ballots to him, and when George Will urges Democrats to choose him as “the party’s most potentially potent nominee,” and when Peggy Noonan promises that he will be “bulletproof” against Republican attack.
Meanwhile in the bleaker precincts of the blogosphere, lesser figures prepare to welcome the Democratic front-runner should he secure his party’s nomination. Evidently they will celebrate his triumph with poison gas and bombshells rather than confetti and champagne.
If you listen closely, you can already hear the test rounds exploding.
The target is Mr. Obama’s favorable but hazy persona, which Republican operatives must redefine in negative and even frightening terms. Assuming that the Republican nominee will be Senator John McCain, they will aim to contrast his tough, aggressive stance against Islamist terrorism with his opponent’s alleged weakness and naïveté. But as usual they will do worse, spreading slurs and smears that depict Mr. Obama as a dupe or even a sympathizer of Islamic radicals.
False accusations about Mr. Obama’s religious affiliation have surfaced in anonymous we-mail campaigns, with little impact so far. But easily denied charges about his supposed Muslim upbringing are gradually giving way to more concrete allegations. The latest round involves his political intervention in Kenya, the home of his late father, where violence between ethnic and partisan factions has erupted in the wake of a disputed presidential election.
As usual, the right-wing narrative melds half-truths and lies with facts to create a seamless indictment.
Leading conservative blogs and publications charge that Mr. Obama has recklessly aligned himself with opposition leader Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM). Followers of Mr. Odinga, a member of the minority Luo tribe, have perpetrated horrific atrocities against members of the Kikuyu tribe, because incumbent president Mwai Kibaki and the nation’s ruling elite are Kikuyu. One of the worst incidents occurred in the village of Eldoret, where dozens of Kikuyu Christians burned to death when they sought shelter in a church that was then set afire by their rampaging pursuers.
These events are set within a broader story line of an alleged Muslim plot to overthrow the Kibaki government, which is friendly to the United States and the West, and replace the secular constitution of Kenya with sharia law, creating a haven for Al Qaeda—which blew up the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi a decade ago and still operates there, according to American diplomats. During the Kenyan election, the Christian evangelical movement in Kenya circulated a “memorandum of understanding” allegedly signed by Mr. Odinga and a group of Muslim clerics that would commit his government to instituting Muslim strictures against pork and alcohol, setting up sharia courts and ending cooperation against terrorism with Western governments.
Denounced as a forgery by Mr. Odinga and the Muslim authorities in Kenya, which it almost certainly is, that document nevertheless still circulates via the Internet and is quoted by American publications. The point is to raise questions about Mr. Obama and his connections with Mr. Odinga, who claims to be his cousin—and to infiltrate those doubts into the mainstream media.
It is true that Mr. Obama, whose family is Luo, lent support to the opposition leader during a visit to Kenya two years ago—and that they have maintained contact ever since. While that gaffe infuriated the Kibaki regime, it proved only that Mr. Obama lacked diplomatic experience. During the current crisis in his homeland, he has tried to play a constructive role by taping radio announcements for the State Department that urge both sides to stop fighting and resolve their differences without violence.
Yet the outlines of the coming assault on his fitness and character are clear enough, just as the Swift Boat campaign against John Kerry opened fire many months before the public noticed. The Kenya tale is a single aspect of a multifaceted strategy to portray Mr. Obama as a callow politician with dubious associations, who cannot be trusted with power. He will be subjected to the same ruthless treatment as the last Democratic nominee. Let’s hope he is better armored to withstand incoming fire.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
A Dem is A Dem. Take the empty black suit version or the over stuffed pant suit version..........it is the same old story. The supposed party of Hope is really the party of haters, race baiters and endless victims.
Isn't amusing that even France has figured out this type of phoney politics in their country. Our elite Dems always know better than the people who actually have to pay for these silly little slogans of change.
It will be even more amusing when the Clintons try steal the nomination with backroom deals and the court fight over delegates will cite Gore v. Bush to uphold the rule of law.
The Republican record is a disgrace. Period. George W. Bush is the WORST President in U. S. History. The Republicans should clean up their own house/record and be accountable for what has occurred on THEIR watch and stop slinging mud. There are some patriots left in their Party. They are called Obama-kans. They care more for their Country than ideology -- and have a conscience about what has occurred on Republican watch. They also KNOW the Clintons and their FALN terror pardons while Hillary was currying favor from the local Hispanic politicians in NY -- isn't something we can have circa 2008. Turn the page -- for America. Our kids need to remain involved so they can prepare to assume leadership and take responsibility for the stewardship of our Nation through the 21st Century. They are being left a ton of problems by the Republicans failed policies/ideologies. Disgraceful to consider more of the same going forward for ANY reason.
I really don't know what point I am supposed to take from this essay.
The Republican Smear Machine operates without conscience. It will unload all of its venom on the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is. I know this. You know this. And Barack Obama knows this.
It seems that Mr. Conason is attempting a "warning" not unlike those issued by Clinton surrogates regarding Sen. Obama's admitted teenaged drug use ("The Republicans will call him a druggie!") or the fact that he is African-American (The Republicans will call him a black guy!"). The message: don't nominate Obama, or the Republicans will say ugly things about him and he might lose.
But this argument takes at face value Sen. Clinton's assertion that she is immune to such right-wing attacks due to her having endured them for most of the last twenty years. "I'm vetted," she says. For the sake of argument, let's say that's true.
Does anybody think that if the Republicans can't think of any fact-based smears to unleash on Hillary, that they won't simply start making stuff up? The swiftboat attacks against John Kerry were lies. So were the accusations that Bill Clinton was the kingpin of a cocaine ring in Arkansas. So were the accusations that Hillary Clinton killed Vince Foster. Does Mr. Conason believe the VWRC will operate with any greater restraint against Sen. Clinton this year than they have in years past? Can he be that naive?
If you think Hillary Clinton will be the better president, vote for her. If you think Barack Obama will be the better president, vote for him. It is pointless trying to divine which of the two the Republicans will attack with the greater degree of savagery. The answer is: whichever one gets the nomination.
To anonymous:
I love it when you right wingers post on here. Your words always sound like they came from Rush Limbaugh. Please try coming up with something original. Try reading a book or watching something other than Fox News.
Race baiters, haters and endless victims? Don’t you really mean blacks, gays, hispanics and other minorities?
That’s hilarious coming from a white guy who belongs to the party of rich white men.
Republicans are clueless.
Your pal
Steve G.
Hey Steve G. you're snapperhead, Republicans aren't the ones who brought up Obama's race; I seem to recall the Clinton's using this; I seem to recall "prominent" blacks two months ago saying that Obama isn't "Black" enough. If that's not racist, I don't know what is. Hillary's team just admitted this week that Fox News is more balanced reporting her than MSNBC; but only five people watch MSNBC, so I guess it doesn't matter; it's still a telling remark.
Enough with the Rush and Fox comments, they are tired and old. It's true, Demoncrats are always using the same tired, old shibboleths to create division and rancor.
I hope the Democrats win this cycle. So many pressing problems are going to come to a head over the next eight years; it's best that a Dem oversees our fall from superpower to second world country. It's going to be exciting! I can't wait until China and Japan stop buying our Treasury Bills! Collapse!
Make sense that the Dem would think that Obama is not 'black enough' -- since only the educated (as well as educated blacks), the afluent (afluent blacks), the upper class (upper class blacks) that are voting for Obama. Unlike hillary who is begging for votes from the lower-class and poorly educated class. Also, make sense since the media is breaded to believe that only the aforementioned classes that are voting for hillary should be the one voting for Obam; which should say he is 'black enough' -- i recall that the Clintons were black America' president -- hmmmm how do you spell color-blind?
Obama is a MAN whose complexion ideas represent America.
The point is that Democrats need to wise up. I am amazed at the number of Obama supporters who believe there will be no partisan rancor because he will be uniter. They clearly believe a lot of the right wing smears against the Clintons (many cite them as a reason to hate Hillary) and think the Clintons brought all this on themselves. Somehow they conveniently forget the trashing of both Gore and Kerry and the media's complicity in this. The attacks against the Clintons were worse only because Bill actually won.
Hillary does not claim to be immune to right wing attacks, just better prepared to handle them. Obama and his supporters better get ready for a major propaganda effort if he does get the nomination. There is no way he will charm Republicans out of it. They had no problem with spreading vicious lies about Kerry's war record so it is ridiculous to think that they will not go after Obama with everything they can find or dream up. Maybe this time the media will not go along, because they clearly love Obama. On the other hand they are also enamored of McCain and he promises to protect their big fat tax cuts so I would not bet on it.
Hey Asshole I mean Assblaster,
When our economy does collapse you can blame Bush and the Republican congress for creating huge deficits and huge trade deficits with China. Party of fiscal responsibility my ass. That’s why you’re going to lose the presidency and more Congressional seats because America doesn’t trust Bush or the Republican Party anymore.
I can't help it if you and Anonymous can't come up with original thought outside of what Fox News and Rush tell you.
Go back to sleep and your name certainly suits you Jackass.
Steve G.
To Steve G.
You are absolutely right. I apologize for being such a Dick. I'll try and think for myself from now on instead of having it breast fed to me by Ann Coulter.
Goish I'm an ass!
Gaylord Assblaster
Why do you refer to Kenya as Obama's homeland? He's an American whose father happens to be Kenyan. That's a subtle way on your part to imply he's not "American enough."
Steve G. stands for gay. ha ha
Hey Steve Snapperhead,
you still didn't comment on how Demoncrats started the race thing Obama, hmmm. Can't answer that can you, snapperhead.
And you didn't comment on Fox being more fair to Hillary than MSNBC, hmmm. Can't answer that one either, huh.
You should go back to your internet porn since you're so fond of assholes, and leave the important stuff to adults.
Snapperhead.
The point is why are all the republicans...Fox...Kristol..Peggy N on and on
maybe even Chris Matthews and the 24/7 MSNBC love Obama give him a pass channel. Think about it... concerning the republicans its not to be nice, the truth is they are not saying it but they dont think a black man can be elected.Get real thats
whats going on. Concerning Chris Matthews Im not sure who his man is...maybe John McCain, he always says how much he loves McCain.Thus if Obama lose's due to his race he gets McCain.Im not sure if Obama can be elected. But I dont think he is qualified for the job over Hillary intellect.
Fix my type-o's
gray
I am not a fan of Dick Chency but I was listening to
Ombama speak the other night when he said he was
embarassed when he found out Dick Chency was his 8th
cousin. Mr. Chency would have been called a racist
had he made that remark.
I hope whomever wins for the Dems comes out fighitng. Sure they'll call Obama a druggie, but the cocaine habit of George W and his DWI as an adult and those of his daughters' all get swept under the rug by the "holier than thou" attitudes of the Republicans and their media control. Bush is the closest thing we've ever had to a tyrant in the White House and yet the killing machine that is the Republican (let's all have guns and let's go bomb someplace) Party continues unscathed. It's time to show them for who they are, masters of smoke and mirrors - Let's all pay attention to Iraq and other corners of the world rather than ever helping and caring for the people of the United States, which was most apparent in the aftermath of Katrina. $90 billion dollars a year in Iraq while many of the people of New Orleans are still homeless - that's the republican way, smoke and mirrors - it's a load of BS and I hope Obama or Hillary can make it clear to the American people, especially those in many rural parts of the country that voted for George W. because they simply didn't get it.
According to you, since I live in the rural area I do not know what is going on. You're dreaming if your two candidates are going to set any straight.
Isn't "the race thing" a valid issue? After all, Mr. Obama is a long-time member of a bigoted black racist Afrocentric church, which chose for its "Man of the Year" equivalent award in 2007, none other than Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the black racist "Nation of Islam. Mr. Obama has publicly declared that the racist pastor of his church is his, Mr. Obama's, mentor.
I won't address in detail other verities, such as a corrupt land deal involving an Arab businessman of which Mr. Obama was a beneficiary, Mr. Obama's involvement in the drug trade, his career as an agitator utilizing racial and class divisions, which will become matters introduced into the campaign to determine if Mr. Obama is a suitable candidate after his beliefs, actions, and character become matters of attention.
HARK HERALD, ANGELS ARE SINGING “GOD BLESS AMERICA”
NEO-CONS SUPPORTING MC-CAIN, AND NEO-LIBS SUPPORTING HILLARY, SHALL BOTH BE DEFEATED IN THIS 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION BATTLE OF THE AMERICAN CULTURAL WAR. MC-CAIN HAS AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE REPUBLICAN FIRING SQUAD; AND HILLARY HAS AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE DEMOCRAT LYNCHING PARTY. HARK HERALD, ANGELS ARE SINGING, “GOD BLESS AMERICA”!
Right on, as always, Joe. If he is the nominee, Obama will have a terrible smear campaign waged against him, and he will deserve none of it.
I have one problem with Obama, though, and it is a major one.
While he has every right to campaign hard against Clinton, he has unquestioningly piggybacked off of the wholly unfounded Republican attacks against Hillary. (Not every criticism of Hillary, of course, is unfounded; but the Whitewater-style attacks on her character are entirely manufactured.)
Obama does not realize that the same will come his way. (Or he does realize it, and just manifests cynical indifference.) No doubt his land deal with a Rezko associate is inherently just as questionable--probably far more--than Whitewater. Does he not expect the same treatment.
So, Barack, for you to offer a "new politics" that is founded on "hope" and rejects "cynicism" is fantastic. But, your willing participation in this protracted effort to tear apart the Clintons belies your inspiring rhetoric.
If Sen. Obama can withstand the Clinton smear and race-baiting machine, he can certainly withstand the Republicans.
It's always a curious phenomenon to me when Sen. Obama is accused of 'attacking' Sen. Clinton, by merely stating her record. She just said in an interview that votes count in terms of telling you about a candidate's judgment. Oh the irony.
She voted for the war in Iraq. She voted against the Levin Amendment. She supported the 'limited' use of torture (of course, she claims to no longer support it). She supported Bush's stance on military action in Iran. She supported 'No Child Left Behind' - so much for her work with Edelman who's 'Leave no Child Behind' campaign was misappropriated by the Bush administration.
Sen. Obama isn't using baseless Republican accusations against Clinton. He's not 'giving them hell'... he's simply telling the truth and it seems like hell... (to borrow a phrase)
I totally agree with you, the brutal attacks on Clinton are mostly unfounded and based on Republican talking points, which Obama sometimes follows. He certainly voiced no objections to any of the viciousness coming out about Hillary Clinton from his supporters, while he expected her campaign to denounce any criticizm of Obama even based on facts. He also did not seem to deal well with criticizm - his defensive attack on Hillary during one of the debates illustrates his thin skin.
The fact that Obama does not have much of a record will not stop the Republican smear machine from manufacturing attacks - and he has no idea what is coming his way. He claims to be immune, because he faced the "Clinton machine" - but that was fact-based, not manufactured slime that is coming his way from the right. I just hope the Democrats will be able to help him beat the onslaught if he is the nominee.
Dear Memphis,
Read carefully before you comment. He never said Kenya is Obama's homeland or that he is Kenyan or that he is not American. OK? He only mentioned that his father is from Kenya, which is true and relevant to the story.
Here is his exact quote
"The latest round involves his political intervention in Kenya, the home of his late father, ..."
You see?
JohnK.--The article says (read a little further down): "During the current crisis in his homeland, he has tried to play a constructive role by taping radio announcements for the State Department that urge both sides to stop fighting and resolve their differences without violence."
Memphis asked a perfectly good question--it struck me as an off note in the article as well.
Mr. Conason's helpful advice to the Obama campaign is merely a veiled attempt to re-introduce slander and untruths which have already failed in the right wing media. I'm wondering if Mr. Conason believes he can serve up these warmed over lies as a disguised "helpful warning" to Obama's supporters and thereby divert them to Hillary's withering campaign. I wonder where Mr. Conason will be on March 4, during the Texas Primary? My guess is he will probably conducting "push polls" for Hillary informing the electorate of Barack Obama's Al Queda ties. Shame on you Joe!
Shame on Joe Conason for INCORRECTLY identifying Kenya as Barack Obama's "homeland". He must know that one must be born in the US to be eligible to run for president. Obama was born in Hawaii.
Hey Kids t let’s take a look at what Asshole er I mean Assblaster said in his last post:
Gaylord Assblaster (not verified) says:
Hey Steve Snapperhead,
you still didn't comment on how Demoncrats started the race thing Obama, hmmm. Can't answer that can you, snapperhead.
And you didn't comment on Fox being more fair to Hillary than MSNBC, hmmm. Can't answer that one either, huh.
You should go back to your internet porn since you're so fond of assholes, and leave the important stuff to adults.
Snapperhead.
Wow. Impressive. I know your mommy stayed up all night to help you write that. I didn’t respond because the points you raised were so ridiculous.
A black person saying that another black person isn’t black enough has more to do with cultural and political rather than color of skin. I remember a black friend of mine once told me he thought Bryant Gumble wasn’t black enough and my friend certainly wasn’t a racist.Ever heard a black person accuse another black person of acting white? That doesn't imply superiority of one race over another but then you probably don't have any blacks friends being the right wing asshole that you are.
Racism is the inherent belief of the superiority of one race over another. I don’t remember those “critics” saying they thought that Barrack was infererior because he wasn’t black enough. It’s another right wing talking point, Hannity and Limbaugh spent time on their respective radio and/or TV programs pointing this out so thanks for proving my point about you getting your marching orders from those two morons.
As far as Fox news being more fair to Hillary, so what. They completely trashed Obama which is why he boycotted Fox News. Gee I guess Fox News is racist then huh?
You’re the dumbass that picked Assblaster for a name so maybe it is you who should go back to looking up porn.
You’re still a Jackass.
Steve G. the Liberal
I think you're right, Joe. Republicans will likely play the same nasty political games the Democrats do. What a shock.
The thing is, with Obama we shouldn't have to. Sure, the goons will pull their race/religion canards, as they always do, and as you always remind us. But you're wrong to think that Obama won’t be fought on more substantive grounds. His wispy, ultra-left voting record is one example. His short list of accomplishments (for a presidential contender) is another.
And in less politically hysterical times, that would be enough to defeat him. But, as it is, we have a sad number of people growing tired of their Hollywood idols and are looking for another celebrity to give meaning to their lives. And for the time being they think they've found him.
All I want to say is " bring it on".
The best ticket the Republicans had was when
NONE OF THE ABOVE" got most of the votes. Now if they were smart with a VP pick my, Mother In Law would have filled out the ticket perfectly.
Now they could have named Jesus H. Christ to a cabinet post but I heard how he's still laughing.
I am always amazed at slurs heaved at Dems by Republicans. Can any Republican point to any GOP based administration in the past 50 years that was nor riddled with criminals and corruption? Has any Republican administration left office without any of its resident thieves not going to jail?
In this country corruption can be defined as any GOP member in national office. All are liars and scoundrels. None will do what is bets for the country if there is any chance it will interfere with the thievery they are involved in. They are on the whole chickenhawks who learned all about war in movie theaters. Maybe 1% of GOP politicians have ever been in combat and that is all that will ever be. They will send others to die and boast of their patriotism while depriving the wounded of adequate care.
These are the exemplars of American heoism who will besmirch anyone who runs against their current liars and thieves.
Dear (conspicuously) Anonymous: I can't point to any spanking clean GOP administration, and you can't point to any similar Democratic administration either. But for your "GOP politicians that have ever seen combat," the numbers are probably representative of the US population as a whole, or better.
Just to name a few, though: Eisenhower, Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, The elder George Bush, Chuck Hegel, Colin Powell, Ted Stevens (R-AK), John McCain, former Homeland Security secretary Tom Ridge, Sam Johnson (R-TX), Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), Strom Thurmond, John Warner (R-VA).
I could go on, and I'm sure you can name as many Democrats who experienced combat, as well. But altogether they might not number more than your one percent.
So what is your point? Would you insist that lawmakers serve as policemen in big city slums before passing crime bills? After all, police get gunned down too.