Multi-Headed Hydra

GOP concern troll Edward Klein, who, along with other notables such as Axis of E-ville author David Frum, is busily trying to stir up discontent among Democrats well in advance of the presidential race, has published another excerpt from his upcoming fantasy novel. This chapter alleges that history’s greatest three-headed monster — President and Mrs. Obama plus Valerie Jarrett — are colluding to pit Hillary Clinton against Elizabeth Warren in the 2016 Democratic primaries. Cat fight!

“Barack, Michelle, and Valerie have been talking about Elizabeth Warren for quite some time,” says an Obama administration source. “Valerie has told Warren that Obama is prepared to throw a great deal of money and organizational support behind her.

“The Obamas believe that Warren sees things from the same ideological point of view as they do. She is a committed progressive who, like Obama, wants to transform America into a European-style democratic-socialist state.”

What is behind the wingnut obsession with Jarrett? Is it a racial thing? A misogynist thing? A Chicago thing? An all-of-the-above trifecta? In addition to inspiring Klein to scale new heights of the fantastic, Jarrett makes Drudge’s fedora spin like a possessed schoolgirl’s noggin and seems to cause Glenn Beck’s partially descended testes to migrate back into the fuselage. Why?

POTUS and FLOTUS are by their job definitions high-profile and controversial, so the wingnut hysteria that surrounds them is unsurprising if regrettable. But Jarrett seems to toil in obscurity more often than not. I bet not 10 in 100 Americans could identify her from a photo array or offer anything other than a random guess on what she does. The focus on Jarrett seems odd, even in the context of wingnut fanfic.

278 replies
  1. 1
    J.D. Rhoades says:

    Jarrett seems to toil in obscurity more often than not.

    Which makes her the perfect bogeyman (bogeywoman?) for conspiracy cultists.

  2. 2
    Alex S. says:

    Maybe they dream of Jarrett being either Barack’s or Michelle’s (or of both) secret lover.

  3. 3
    Princess says:

    Jarrett is that thing that is even more frightening and dangerous to some white men than a black man: she’s a black woman. Put her together with Michelle, and they are uncontrollable.
    No, I don’t get it either. She seems like a perfectly nice, intelligent, ordinary person to me.

  4. 4
    hildebrand says:

    Oh, absolutely, a ‘Obama Administration source’ would definitely use the phrase, ‘wants to transform America into a European-style democratic-socialist state.’ Yeesh.

  5. 5
    Baud says:

    FWIW, Warren was the Obama’s clandestine point person on Benghazi, so this story has a ring of truth to it.

  6. 6
    Schlemizel says:

    Sillys! She was born in Iran, she is a black woman with a law degree from Michigan – before the court ended raced-based admission criteria (well, there always was raced-based criteria but it was correct when it excluded people of color and women so the courts wanted them to go back to that criteria I guess), she does something in the administration that is an enigma Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs what the hell even is that?. She is the perfect blank screen for the wingnuts to project whatever they want to against.

  7. 7
    Baud says:

    @hildebrand:

    “Obama administration source” literally could mean just about any federal government employee.

  8. 8
    c u n d gulag says:

    The NY Post isn’t fit to wrap a dead fish in, because it’s and insult to the intelligence of that poor dead fish.

    And if you line your birdcage with it, and PETA finds out about it, you’re dead meat, because you’re torturing that poor bird by making it look down at that shitty excuse for a newspaper when it poops!

  9. 9
    MattF says:

    Well, who was Vince Foster? And what was his actual job?

  10. 10
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Princess:

    She seems like a perfectly nice, intelligent, ordinary person to me.

    Hmmm… All the intelligent people I ever met were extraordinary, not ordinary. ;-)

  11. 11
    aimai says:

    They were nearly just as unhinged about the previous Black Woman, whose name I can’t remember, who served in the White House for a few years (or months). The thing is that there is the same fixation on “the power players” for every Democratic president–a conviction that second string or nefarious outsiders (Arkansans, Georgians, or Chicagoans) is being brought in to manage, unprofessionally, what should be the purview of older white males of the Republican party. From the get go coverage of both Rahm and Jarrett focused on the idea that they were aggressive, outsiders, power mad, and too intimate with the President and First Lady–which was a way of saying that the lines between family/friends and professional staff was being blurred.

    There is, of course, an extra horror at seeing a Black Woman piled on a Black President and First Lady–it seems like it was a sign that the Obamas had the confidence of their class and education and didn’t need to have their hands held by some fictional white grownup class of managers.

  12. 12
    Poopyman says:

    … seems to cause Glenn Beck’s partially descended testes to migrate back into the fuselage.

    Dammit! Busting out laughing at work when everyone is quietly trying to sober up from the weekend is bad etiquette.

    @OzarkHillbilly:

    All the intelligent people I ever met were extraordinary, not ordinary.

    You really need to get out of the Ozarks. Seriously.

  13. 13
    Svensker says:

    @Princess:

    No, I don’t get it either. She seems like a perfectly nice, intelligent, ordinary person to me.

    Some of her grandparents may have been communists, so she is doubly tainted. (And what reason in hell would any respectable negro intellectual in the 1930s-1950s have to be communist? Didn’t they love America? When they weren’t dodging lynchings? I don’t get it.)

  14. 14
    Ramalama says:

    @MattF: My thoughts exactly.

  15. 15
    dmsilev says:

    @aimai: Are you thinking of Desiree Rogers, who was the White House Social Secretary for the first two or three years of the administration? She got hounded out for, more or less, “acting above her station”.

  16. 16
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Poopyman: I do. Regularly. Ordinary people are not especially intelligent. That’s what makes them ordinary. Or didn’t you notice?

  17. 17
    Wag says:

    @J.D. Rhoades:

    Which makes her the perfect bogeyman (bogeywoman?) for conspiracy cultists.

    Make that the perfect bogie on reggae woman

  18. 18
    Bex says:

    @Alex S.: Well, just Michelle’s. Ask Joan Rivers.

  19. 19
    Ramalama says:

    Also this irks me: Obama thinks he and Warren share ideologies? Wouldn’t Warren have done something about the massive fraud by the banks (ie taken whole swaths of them to court)? Done more to usher out those who got it wrong, and replaced them with Democrats? Maybe liberal Democrats?

    Or am I falling for ye olde strawman arguments….(likely)

  20. 20
    Botsplainer says:

    @hildebrand:

    Yeah, that struck me as “wingnut fantasy”. Either Klein is a confabulating liar, or, more likely, a raging incompetent who got an email from a yahoo account with the subject line “I’m an anonymous high-ranking official in the Obama Administration”, and ran with it as a scoop.

  21. 21
    pamelabrown53 says:

    @Botsplainer: Let me go out on a limb by positing that Klein is BOTH a “confabulating liar” AND a “raging incompetent”.

  22. 22
    aimai says:

    @dmsilev: Yes, thank you, I could not remember her name or job description so when I googled I couldn’t locate her. She definitely was hounded out. It reminded me of the hazing the Clintons and their Arkansas friends took at the start of the Clinton years. There was such a bizarre circling of the wagons by Washington and the permanent press/court corps against the very idea of arrogant/uppity/rubes/blackpeople coming in and trying to staff a new administration.

  23. 23
    Botsplainer says:

    It just occurred to me – irksomely, I share a fantasy with the wingnuts.

    The Obama they think and wish he was is the same Obama I wish he was – FEMA camps, death panels, creeping multicultural socialism, gun confiscation, persecution of white Christians in the heartland, lots of environmental regulation….

  24. 24
    Keith G says:

    @J.D. Rhoades: Exactly. The price of public reticence is the ability of others to fill in the blanks. I think that is is usually a better strategy to be a bit more out front and fill in many of those blanks on one’s own terms.

    That said, this type of speculation/attack is not uncommon and is even bipartisan, though the GOP do it better and with more vigor.

    The first time that I became aware of such was the phrase Georgia Mafia used to describe the insiders that Jimmy Carter brought with him to the White House.

    For years later, the worm had turned.

    When Ronald Reagan moves into the White House, he will be accompanied by a number of longtime aides already dubbed the California Mafia

    @Ramalama: It would have been a bit better had he possessed a few more of her views on this, but we can’t have everything.

  25. 25
    Cacti says:

    @aimai:

    Yes, thank you, I could not remember her name or job description so when I googled I couldn’t locate her. She definitely was hounded out. It reminded me of the hazing the Clintons and their Arkansas friends took at the start of the Clinton years. There was such a bizarre circling of the wagons by Washington and the permanent press/court corps against the very idea of arrogant/uppity/rubes/blackpeople coming in and trying to staff a new administration.

    And now they pretend to remember the Clintons fondly.

  26. 26
    lol says:

    I’m not sure what’s funnier in this quote. The anonymous administration source who totally knows stuff but talks like a wingnut, the notion that Warren is going to challenge Clinton or the idea that the Obamas would be putting her up to it. Warren is one of Clinton’s biggest supporters and everyone in Obama world is already working on various Clinton campaign things.

    The only way Warren runs for President is if Clinton doesn’t. And frankly, I doubt she’d run even then. She knows how much power and influence she can accrue in the Senate.

  27. 27
    Brian R. says:

    “She is a committed progressive who, like Obama, wants to transform America into a European-style democratic-socialist state”

    Oh for fuck’s sake. If a member of the Obama administration actually said that, I’ll blow Lindsey Graham in the middle of Times Square.

    ETA: I see Hildebrand already beat me to that. I mean, seriously, there’s projection and then there’s just laughable insanity.

  28. 28
    cleek says:

    @lol:
    plus, she’s flatly stated, about 8,003 times, that she is not interested.

  29. 29
    Alex S. says:

    @Keith G:

    Presidents always take their ‘posse’ to the White House. And they always complain about their successors. I guess it’s part of the game. Though sadly, there will be no legacy of Obama people. They’re all too quiet and technocratic. The Clintons knew that when they got to the White House they had to replace the old people and build their own power base (the GOP knew what was going on and created Travelgate). And you still see Clintonites showing up everywhere, Ed Rendell, Harold Ford, Terry McAuliffe, Harold Ickes and so on. The Republicans are just better at maintaining the continuity between the Nixon people, the Reagan people and the Bush people. They knew they had to shatter the old Democratic networks when Nixon took over and so they did (because Roosevelt had destroyed the old Republican Party). Reagan managed to use the old Nixon people along with his own, especially the supply-side Chicago boys.
    I remember someone saying that with Carter, the Dixiecrats came to the White House. And that must have been the last time the Democrats could still be called the party of the South, and the Republicans the party of the Northeast.

  30. 30
    scav says:

    By focussing all the frothing tea-crazed attention upon a targetted few, these fantasist bogey-buster heros may, in fact, be in fact collaborating, allowing (us) neighbor-level moles, worms and zozialist-loving race- class-& continent-traitors even greater ‘freedom’ to introduce the unbelievably toxic attractions of health-care, not to mention dreams of functional infra-structure and goverment to the yoofs and other untrustworthy elements in local civic meatspace. All these on-stage soul-baring wardrobe malfunctions they intend as alluring may not be emitting the hi-grade pheromones they imagine.

  31. 31
    Anya says:

    Wingnut obsession with Valerie Jarrett is an odd thing. I cannot understand how this mild-mannered and a very classy lady continues to engender such strong feelings. She’s so forgettable.

  32. 32
    lol says:

    @cleek:

    We all know “I’m not interested in running for President” is code for “I’m running for President because Obama is big fat liar sellout”.

  33. 33
    AnonPhenom says:

    You’d figure the Right would have no problems finding enough rats to fuck on their own side, what with the civil war within the Republican Party and all. I guess it true what they say about a ratfuckers job never being done.

  34. 34
    Patrick says:

    @hildebrand:

    Oh, absolutely, a ‘Obama Administration source’ would definitely use the phrase, ‘wants to transform America into a European-style democratic-socialist state.’ Yeesh.

    Yup. They give it up right there. The ONLY people that uses that type of language are the tea baggers. IOW – the source is garbage and thus the article is garbage.

  35. 35
    SRW1 says:

    @scav:

    “…neighbor-level moles, worms and zozialist-loving race- class-incontinent-traitors…”

    You seemed to have problems with that place holder there. Fixed that for ya.

  36. 36
    J R in WV says:

    While I wish there were several Democratic party members with national recognition as potential Presidential timber, I can’t name 3 or 4 or 5. Maybe this is a failure of the Democratic Party, maybe it’s just the way things are in 2014, I dunno.

    I would vote for Warren in a primary (my Grandmother was from a family of Warrens out of Giles county, Virginia, probably no connection to Senator Warren whatsoever.) given the chance. I would vote for Ms Clinton if she seemed like the best choice out of a group of also-rans. I would vote for Al Franken if he had the Dem nomination. Or any of the young and dynamic Dem Senators.

    Come the November, 2016 national election, I will vote for the Democratic nominee, I will be voting and working for the Democratic nominee fer sure!

  37. 37
    Botsplainer says:

    @Brian R.:

    Oh for fuck’s sake. If a member of the Obama administration actually said that, I’ll blow Lindsey Graham in the middle of Times Square.

    It’s safe to say you’ll never have to pay off on that bet. It’s like being dealt aces, seeing an ace and two kings in the flop, then an ace on fourth street. You can safely go all in against the guy blinded by his kings.

  38. 38
    Fair Economist says:

    Yeah, one of the hallmarks of wingnuttia is demonizing obscure non-objectionable people like Rogers, Jarrett, and, for that matter, Alinsky. It’s almost like a membership badge in the Alice in Wonderland society – you have to believe 6 impossible things before breakfast to be a qualified wingnut. These are mostly the people who believe the world was created ex nihilo 6,000 years ago (along with all the light that appears to have been traveling from distant galaxies for 13,999,994,000 years before that), so there’s a certain consistency to their inconsistency.

  39. 39
    scav says:

    @SRW1: Well, pamper yourself there in your preferred fashion statement, but I’m a European Zozialist fan, and even flirt with other large land-masses so continental is my scale of traitor-elan.

  40. 40
    Belafon says:

    @Ramalama:

    Obama thinks he and Warren share ideologies?

    If you’re going to split hairs this fine, you’d be a Democrat for sure.

  41. 41
    El Caganer says:

    Ah, yes, The Scary Socialist Obama makes another appearance, the Obama who only selected Tim Geithner as Treasury Secretary because Leon Trotsky wasn’t available (being all, y’know, dead and shit). I’m starting to think that the Kleins of this world actually believe the shit they write.

  42. 42
    Anybodybuther2016 says:

    @lol:

    The only way Warren runs for President is if Clinton doesn’t

    And that’s the problem. Who the hell is Hilary to dictate who gets to “run”. Reason # 72 why she will never be president.

  43. 43
    Belafon says:

    @Anya: Sort of like ACORN!. Republicans keep making sure they defund it.

  44. 44
    Belafon says:

    @Anybodybuther2016: I realize your hatred for Hillary runs deep, but Warren decided that she’s not going to run against Clinton. Clinton didn’t tell Warren not to run.

  45. 45
    Comrade Scrutinizer says:

    POTUS and FLOTUS are by their job definitions high-profile and controversial,

    Just when did FLOTUS become a “job”? I don’t remember ever having voted for a FLOTUS, and I’m pretty sure its not a position listed on the General Schedule. Now granted that presidential spouses may be important politically, that’s not the same thing as an executive position, Edith Wilson and Nancy Reagan to the contrary.

  46. 46
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Comrade Scrutinizer: It’s a thankless job, but in a very real sense, being the FLOTUS is an official position complete with a supporting staff and agenda, regardless of the lack of paycheck or votes.

  47. 47
    Kevin says:

    It’s definitely a race thing. Who was their favorite super villain before Jarrett? Van Jones. What do those two have in common besides being completely bland and unimportant to normal observers?

    And why are those two the only close or formerly close aides I can seem to name? How come the right wing noise machine doesn’t get this conspiracy minded about any number of white men or women working for Obama? The people the right hates associated with Obama are:

    Valerie Jarrett
    Van Jones
    Eric Holder
    Susan Rice

    All minorities. I mean, if you want to go after a puppet master type character, wouldn’t it be some of his campaign managers? Or is their whiteness not threatening to the Fox viewer?

  48. 48
    StringOnAStick says:

    ….wants to transform America into a European-style democratic-socialist state.”

    Having spent some time around Europe and their democratic socialist state, I would love, love, love to see the same happen here. Without the ‘socialist’ bugaboo word, most ordinary American’s prefer it when it is explained to them.

    I have a Polish friend who plans to move back to Poland for her retirement because she has family there for one, but mainly because she sees the basic structures in Europe (like mass transit, livable cities, socialized medicine) as being a whole hell of a lot more senior-friendly than the US is. Yes, I know Medicare is our socialized medicine; there are demonstrable differences though.

  49. 49
    Botsplainer says:

    Katherine Miller at buzzfeed has done a masterful job of shredding Klein’s work as fiction filled with insane passages.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/kather.....d?s=mobile

    Last week, FoxNews.com ran another piece by Klein, headlined, “Hillary down in the dumps: Is Clinton about to drop out of 2016 race?” The piece ran in the opinion section. It also featured this quotation, attributed to one of the Clintons: “I know the country needs us, but they aren’t acting like they deserve us. Just f**k ‘me.” (One assumes it was supposed to be “fuck ’em.”)

    The slate of Klein pieces is pegged to the release of Blood Feud, which debuted behind Hillary Clinton’s Hard Choices on the New York Times best-seller list this past week.

    And let me tell you: Blood Feud is the kind of book you should read with a loved one. Aloud.

    After the wild success of his previous effort, the thinly sourced The Amateur, Klein signed a two-book deal with HarperCollins. That deal was later terminated. (Two publishing sources attributed the split to concerns about the quality of Klein’s reporting.)

    Blood Feud’s tale is a timeless one: Spurned by Oprah (sure), David Plouffe and Valerie Jarrett tell the president to make a deal with Bill Clinton to win the 2012 election (“Plouffe wanted to win more than he needed to hate”) in exchange for Obama’s support for Hillary 2016, but then — dun dun dunnn — Obama tells Bill Clinton that he’s giving away all the campaign data to OFA and mentions Benghazi in passing, so now it’s all ruined, and Bill Clinton is frail and dying. Seems rock solid!

    Almost every chapter has something truly insane in it: At one point, Klein accuses Michelle Obama and Jarrett of believing that “the Clintons, like most white people, were racists.” Another chapter cites as gospel Sy Hersh’s report in the London Review of Books late last year that the Obama administration withheld information about Syrian rebels’ ability to make sarin gas. (Hersh’s report was originally intended to run in the Washington Post, but did not.)

    These more troubling issues aside: Because the book is largely a simple retelling of known information about the 2012 election and the Benghazi attack, Klein instead promises the sordid, inside details of arguments between the Obamas, Clintons, and Jarrett. What he delivers reads like stilted fan fiction, featuring dialogue that no human has likely said or will probably ever say until you read it aloud to friends and family.

    Look, let’s cut right to the chase here: Blood Feud is the funniest book of 2014. Maybe ever. On nearly every page, you’ll feel like yelling “BLOOD FEUD!” over a guitar solo (think “Panama” by Van Halen) while an eagle flies out of an explosion.

    Earn this. Savor this. Believe very little of this.

    Every paragraph is a gem.

  50. 50
    Senyordave says:

    I think wingnuts would like to turn Valerie Jarrett into a modern day Saul Alinsky.

  51. 51
    rikyrah says:

    I like Senator Warren in the Senate, but would have no issue with her running. I keep on getting told by Hillary acolytes that she doesn’t expect to be CORONATED, so if she doesn’t, then it shouldn’t matter if the President, FLOTUS and Valerie Jarrett are pushing Senator Warren. Competition IS good for the party, RIGHT? I mean nobody is looking to be CORONATED…….right?

  52. 52
    burnspbesq says:

    @Ramalama:

    Or am I falling for ye olde strawman arguments

    Nope. You’re assuming facts not in evidence.

  53. 53
    Valdivia says:

    @Botsplainer: was going to drop that link. Truly a gem as you say.

  54. 54
    Patrick says:

    @Ramalama:

    Also this irks me: Obama thinks he and Warren share ideologies? Wouldn’t Warren have done something about the massive fraud by the banks (ie taken whole swaths of them to court)? Done more to usher out those who got it wrong, and replaced them with Democrats? Maybe liberal Democrats?

    Any candidate looks perfect until they actually are President and have to compromise. Needless to say, the same people who are negative about Obama would very quickly also become negative with Warren when she actually has to deal with Congress and idiots in her own party.

  55. 55
    JPL says:

    @El Caganer: The Klein’s of the world, never take the time to self reflect.

  56. 56
    MattF says:

    @Kevin: I agree, but I’d modulate the accusation a little. It’s cynical racism. Sure, there are real, heart-on-my-sleeve racists out there, but the right-wing writers and opinionistas are working the crowd before they pass the hat.

  57. 57
    ruemara says:

    She’s a black woman in a position of power, in an administration lead by a black man. What other fucking reasons do they need?

  58. 58
    rikyrah says:

    I will point out once again that the Hillary acolytes have said that they were sitting out the 2014 elections. Once they were called on it, they mumbled some bullshyt about being misunderstood. But this is JULY and I don’t see any proof that they are doing anything for the November elections. Remember, if the Dems do well in November and the President gets to continue with his vision, then we don’t need HILLARY THE SAVIOUR for 2016, we just need a Democrat committed to the policies that this President has begun. Funny how none of the HILLARY-stans can point to anything substantial that she is doing for November.

  59. 59
    Amir Khalid says:

    I suspect this Edward Klein guy is really just Dan Brown writing political (fan) fiction under a nom de plume.

  60. 60
    Botsplainer says:

    @Senyordave:

    I always like how any discussions about the Kochs turns into “but George Soros”.

    The Kochs use money to fund
    Efforts to restrict voting rights, strip benefits, wipe out financial and environmental protections and to greatly enhance their own economic and political power at the expense of everyone else. Soros uses his to expand voting rights, economic opportunity and social mobility, yet he’s the villain.

    Then there’s the camp thing. He gets vilified for surviving; meanwhile, Ratfucker the Pope gets a pass on Hitler Youth membership followed by a career of putting the boot on the neck of left populist Catholics even to the point of silence on death squads used against Leftist clergy for the crime of speaking out.

  61. 61
    g says:

    Well, they didn’t have a problem with Bush’s black woman in the White House, but she had an “R” after her name.

  62. 62
    Betty Cracker says:

    @rikyrah: Now you’ve done it: An angry swarm of pedants will descend to attack you for using CORONATED rather than CROWNED.

  63. 63
    D58826 says:

    It was a bad week last week, so maybe a bit of humor to start this week. From Dick Polman’s blog

    Our saga begins on July 2, when a satirical website, National Report, posted this deadpan dispatch: “White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest announced today that President Obama will be visiting a Washington D.C. area Mosque on the morning of July 4 as a good will gesture to Muslim Americans….According to Earnst, following his visit to the Mosque, the President will host the traditional White House July 4th cookout. Several influential Muslim leaders have been invited…”

    And yes the trolls, tea party and other suspects went for it hook line and sinker. Even when one of their web sites labeled it as satire they still went into full misspelled outrage. On the bright side if it ruined a few rightwing picnics maybe it served its purpose.

    According to the full article the National Report has been concentrating on the tea party types since they are so gullible. In a way kind of unfair – like shooting fish in a barrel

  64. 64
    Belafon says:

    @rikyrah: You can see it in the Newsmax headlines that what Republicans need is the Democratic party in disarray. They are 1) trying to convince themselves and other Republicans that the Democrats actually are fighting with each other, and 2) hoping that sites that carry their headlines will actually fight because of them. They really do fail to understand that very few people in the Democratic party think that 2016 will be anything like 1968 or 1980, and that a real primary would be a good thing.

    I do think Clinton would like to not have to campaign like she had to in 2008, but, even though I am fine with her becoming president, I think she needs to be challenged.

  65. 65
    g says:

    @Botsplainer: Hilarious review! Love it.

    Elsewhere, I read that Klein’s last hatchet job on Hillary was based on the “fact” that she’s a wild-eyed raving radical leftist, which allowed the moderate Obama to win. His new book is based on the “fact” that Hillary is too conservative for that wild-eyed raving radical leftist, Obama.

    He’s certainly counting on his fans’ short attention span to earn his royalties.

  66. 66
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @rikyrah: Why are you running with the ravings of a right wing troll in support of your Clinton concerns?

  67. 67
    PurpleGirl says:

    @Anya: She’s a highly competent political woman from Chicago. She’s also a near. She’s a trifecta of sorts.

  68. 68
    Belafon says:

    @rikyrah: Sorry, I have not heard anything about Hillary people sitting out 2016. Sources?

  69. 69
    piratedan says:

    @JPL: well there’s a reason for that, they’re all political vampires, so no self-reflection is possible….

  70. 70
    Sherparick says:

    It is the NY Post. It is Ed Klein, It does hit all the current Wingnut hates (race, Black: Check; sex, woman: Check; University Educated with a Law Degree: Check; from “Chicago:” Check). And of course the troll bait works, just like Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes dream every night that it will work. (Mentions in MSM which will then be crossed mentioned on Faux News to corroborate the “credibility” of Klein’s piece). It is a great grift they have there.

  71. 71
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Betty Cracker:
    Curses! Foiled again!

  72. 72
    Botsplainer says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    If you look at the first passage quoted in the buzzfeed takedown, it really does read like Dan Brown dialogue.

  73. 73
    Eric U. says:

    @D58826: trolling tea partiers would be funnier if they would die of apoplexy. Particularly if one of them was Scalia.

    I just got something on my facebook feed from my tea partier aunt about how all the racists in U.S. history were Democrats. They pass this stuff around like it’s some sort of revelation, or else I would think it’s trolling. I can’t imagine something like that fooling anyone who might choose to vote based on the relative racism of the two national parties

  74. 74
    Ben Cisco says:

    What is behind the wingnut obsession with Jarrett? Is it a racial thing? A misogynist thing? A Chicago thing? An all-of-the-above trifecta?

    YES.

  75. 75
    Kevin says:

    @MattF:

    Oh, no doubt about that. But cynical racism and regular racism just leads to the same result, so can’t really give them a pass.

  76. 76
    lukeallen1 says:

    Watched a multipart civil war documentary and world war documentary over the weekend. In it they had quotes from politicians and newspapers calling Lincoln a mongrel, idiot, weak blah blah. How he was bumbling his way into a huge mess and was trying to destroy the country. Same thing with FDR in the other documentary.

    So I found it rather comforting that Obama is more or less getting the same treatment as these other historically great presidents.

  77. 77
    Belafon says:

    @Belafon: I meant 2014.

  78. 78
    rikyrah says:

    I do think the insanity about Valerie Jarrett comes from that she is a well educated Black woman that happens to be close to both the President and First Lady. They have no ‘in’ with Jarrett, who is the obvious gatekeeper to the West Wing, and is Michelle Obama’s eyes and ears of the West Wing. The story has been that FLOTUS doesn’t go to the West Wing often. She has never had to because Valerie Jarrett is there. Add in that Jarrett is OKOP, and the Village has no clue as to how to deal with her.

  79. 79
    Belafon says:

    @Eric U.: Did American history stop after Reconstruction?

  80. 80
    PurpleGirl says:

    @Betty Cracker: I would say it solidified as an unofficial official job with Eleanor Roosevelt. Whatever the state of their marriage and relationship, he needed someone to represent him and who had beliefs very close to his. Eleanor was perfect for the role. She had loved him as life itself, and even though she felt betrayed by him on a personal level, she had come to a certain political understanding of what she could do married to him. And she continued working with and for him. His political base became her political base.

    ETA: Can you tell that I like Eleanor Roosevelt. My grandmother called her a communist.

  81. 81
    rikyrah says:

    @Belafon:
    Go back a few months with an interview with Axelrod and he put it out there. They responded that they had been misunderstood. The Superpac with Begala began backtracking, but I see no proof of November 2014 involvement.

  82. 82
    scav says:

    @Amir Khalid: “foiled again”? Careful, she’ll make an art of that.

    @Botsplainer: It is sort of a low-rent reality where that prose is taken as true-to-life dialog. Granted, as fantacists tend toward mimicry in their cos-play lives, maybe the intended audience do all aim to talk like that as a stab at authenticity.

  83. 83
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Botsplainer:

    Either Klein is a confabulating liar, or, more likely, a raging incompetent

    Is there any reason why he can’t be both?

  84. 84
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @g:

    Elsewhere, I read that Klein’s last hatchet job on Hillary was based on the “fact” that she’s a wild-eyed raving radical leftist,

    That certainly explains her youthful obsession with Barry Goldwater.

  85. 85
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Belafon:

    They are 1) trying to convince themselves and other Republicans that the Democrats actually are fighting with each other, and 2) hoping that sites that carry their headlines will actually fight because of them.

    It’s projection.

    Again.

  86. 86
    Cassidy says:

    She runs the Suicide Squad.

  87. 87
    Botsplainer says:

    @scav:

    Brown’s explanatory dialogue drives me nuts. Real life people don’t talk like that when they interact, and Klein’s purported “reporting” sounds exactly like that.

  88. 88
    gorram says:

    @Schlemizel: This. She has the connections to Muslim groups that Obama does and Michelle’s gendered otherness. That she’s also Black and also from Chicago just makes it even easier to cry “conspiracy”.

  89. 89
    shelley says:

    Multi-Headed Hydra

    Was that title inspired by the showing of ‘Jason and the Argonauts’ on TCM last night? ;-)

  90. 90
    hoodie says:

    The Obamas believe that Warren sees things from the same ideological point of view as they do. She is a committed progressive who, like Obama, wants to transform America into a European-style democratic-socialist state.

    God save us from that. People who know what “democratic socialism” is probably go to Paris for a vacation, presumably to slum it in such a dysfunctional hellhole. Same people who bitch about Ivy Leaguers but would jump at the chance to send their kid to Yale instead of Liberty.

  91. 91
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Eric U.: I’m always amazed at how conservatives think that the Democratic party used to be full of racists would be news to people on the receiving end of racism. I’m pretty sure that if you’re affected by racism you’ve at least given the history of racism in the USA some thought.

  92. 92
    patrick II says:

    who, like Obama, wants to transform America into a European-style democratic-socialist state

    It sounds terrible — McDonald’s workers getting $20/hr, free health care, free college, six weeks vacation, generous unemployment. I know that, speaking as one working person, that would be enough for me to vote against any Democratic presidential nominee who promised such a hell on earth.

  93. 93
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Botsplainer:
    As unconvincing as it is, at least Dan Brown’s writing comes already labelled as fiction. With Edward Klein’s writing, the reader is left to figure that out for themselves.

  94. 94
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @SatanicPanic: I think I see the problem here. Conservatives assume that people affected by racism don’t give the history of racism in this country some thought. Because they’re just like conservatives, you know….they wouldn’t bother to study actual history, only a fantasy history.

  95. 95
    Cassidy says:

    @Eric U.: It’s turtles all the way down. Trying to make sense of their fevered imaginations makes no sense.

  96. 96

    All of the villager so-called scandals have involved African Americans. Van Jones, Shirley Sherrod, Jarrett. Its more than a coincidence.

  97. 97
    MomSense says:

    @Belafon:

    I think it started from Priorities USA saying they were sitting out 2014. And then Axelrod and others commented on it. Now we are observing that Warren, O’Malley and others are campaigning for Democrats. It remains to be seen whether Hillary will decide to campaign in the midterms.

  98. 98
    MattF says:

    @⚽️ Martin: You forgot Janet Cooke. Since she wrote (and won a Pulitzer) for the WaPo, that’s as Village-y as you can get.

  99. 99
    Just One More Canuck says:

    @shelley: I watched that with my 9 yo daughter last night. Very enjoyable in a cheesy sort of way

  100. 100
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: It also shows how narrow their understanding of history is. Someone challenges them to explain something about US history and they come up with some factoid.

  101. 101
    shelley says:

    @Just One More Canuck:
    The scene of the skeletons sprouting from the Hydra’s teeth still gives me a momentary chill.

  102. 102
    gene108 says:

    @MattF:

    Well, who was Vince Foster? And what was his actual job?

    I believe Vince was the bagman for the Clintons. He knew where they kept their cocaine smuggling money and knew where the bodies of the teenagers, who the Clintons had murdered for finding out about said smuggling operation, were buried.

    Hillary had to have him murdered to so the public at large would not learn what the people of Arkansas already knew; a decade of living under the fear of retaliation from the Clinton Death Squads, should anyone get out of line.

  103. 103
    rikyrah says:

    @PurpleGirl:
    Loved Mrs. Roosevelt. She died before I was born, but just reading about her,she was an extraordinary woman. She is the gold standard for First Lady.

  104. 104
    askew says:

    I am less concerned about wingnut conspiracies and more concerned with Hillary trotting out Obama insults from 2008:

    “I mean, some people can paint a beautiful vision,” she said. “And, thankfully, we can all learn from that. But then, can you, with the tenacity, the persistence, the getting-knocked down/getting-back-up resilience, can you lead us there?”

    I don’t know if it is bitterness that Obama cleaned her clock in 2008 or that Obama doesn’t worship her husband the way she wants or if it is jealously that Obama got more done in 4 years than Bill got done in 8, but there is something driving her need to take these cheap shots at Obama. This was a bullshit argument in 2008 when Obama got more done in the Senate in 2 years than she did in 8 and it is a bullshit argument now. What’s even more annoying is that it is a completely unnecessary argument. Obama isn’t going to be running against her in 2016 and it makes no sense to attack Obama when he is popular with the Dem base. But, she is already pivoting to the general election and ignoring the base.

  105. 105
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    I think everyone here is forgetting Jarrett’s suspicious Iranian connections.

  106. 106
    Botsplainer says:

    @SatanicPanic:

    My personal favorite is how those negatively affected by generations of racism are supposed to now go out on a playing field that’s tilted upward on an angle akin to Mt Everest, and to advance the ball upward while the defenders of the privileged position get to say “my dad, granddad, great granddad, great great granddad built that. You can’t have any of it because it’s all mine now. What’s the matter? You’re free and equal now, what cultural defect prevents you from competing? Why don’t you respect these 150 year old deed grants, my family worked here for generations.”

  107. 107
    Cassidy says:

    @askew: This place will be Rand Paul central by then anyway.

  108. 108
    Belafon says:

    @MomSense: I’m not sure that Clinton not campaigning means much. I don’t remember Obama campaigning for others in 2006. As for Warren, I think she knows the value of keeping the Senate in Democratic hands. Too many Democrats think its all in the White House.

  109. 109
    Belafon says:

    @askew: Didn’t Bill’s continually reaching out almost ruin their marriage.

  110. 110
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Botsplainer: I just finished Eric Foner’s Reconstruction and it was darkly funny to see people making the same claim in 1866. “You’re free now and it your fault if you don’t succeed!”

  111. 111
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Botsplainer:

    my dad, granddad, great granddad, great great granddad built that

    Actually, it was built by their slaves, but they don’t count.

  112. 112
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: What, she can point to where Tehran is on a map?

  113. 113
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @gene108: Oh, please. Much simpler than that. Vince Foster was Hillary Clinton’s lesbian lover.

    Get with the program.

  114. 114
    catclub says:

    odd, even in the context of wingnut fanfic

    I laughed.

  115. 115
    rikyrah says:

    @askew:
    With a political party that CHOSE to commit ECONOMIC TREASON against this country beginning January 20, 2009
    And with President Obama using his first term for cleaning up mess that originated in Bill Clinton’s Presidency….
    He has done more than Bill Clinton.
    She just will not stop with the cheap shots.

  116. 116
    Botsplainer says:

    @Cassidy:

    This place will be Rand Paul central by then anyway.

    Colored folks won’t be able to vote, you’ll have to open your backyard to frackers, sluts will be shamed by operation of law, there’ll be a registry of menses of all women just to be sure and every white home will be required to have an assault rifle in each room. But on the freedom side, your cell and wireless provider will be free to sell or publish your data and chat logs to anybody free of government interference.

    Liberty!

  117. 117
    jheartney says:

    Re: FLOTUS, it’ll be interesting to see what Bill Clinton does with that position. And will it become non-gendered as SPOTUS? And how many years till we get a gay-married POTUS?

  118. 118
    Hill Dweller says:

    @Belafon: Obama did a lot of campaigning for Dems in ’06. In fact, he was arguably the most sought after campaigner and certainly the party’s biggest attraction. His skills as an orator certainly didn’t hurt.

  119. 119
    Cassidy says:

    @Botsplainer: But, our front pagers will be living the dream with no NSA snooping or drones.

  120. 120
    Amir Khalid says:

    @jheartney:

    And how many years till we get a gay-married POTUS?

    I’m sure you’ve heard what was said about President James Buchanan.

  121. 121
    rikyrah says:

    @Belafon: um, ok. She expects the Obama coalition to support her, but it’s ok that she doesn’t seem to want to campaign in 2014. Ok, now. I remember Senator Obama stumping for a number of candidates in 2006.

  122. 122
    catclub says:

    @Belafon: in 2006 Obama was not seen as the head of the party.
    Obama is now, but he is poison in some states and districts.

    Hillary is closer to being head of party than Obama was in 2006, as well as now. She should be out campaigning for House and Senate candidate who ask her. Joe Biden should be, too.

    ETA: After reading 121 and 118. What do I know? you get what you pay for.

  123. 123
    El Caganer says:

    @askew: No, it certainly makes no sense. The calculation seems to be that she’ll pick up some huge number of voters in the I’d-love-to-vote-for-a-Democrat-but-(s)he-has-to-be-white category that will offset the huge number of actual Democrats that she’ll turn off. That sounds like a pretty fucking stupid gamble to me, but not being a political analyst or a Democrat, what do I know?

  124. 124
    askew says:

    @Belafon:

    @MomSense: I’m not sure that Clinton not campaigning means much. I don’t remember Obama campaigning for others in 2006. As for Warren, I think she knows the value of keeping the Senate in Democratic hands. Too many Democrats think its all in the White House.

    Obama campaigned his ass off in 2004 and 2006 for other candidates. It’s one of the reasons that Reid and others wanted Obama to run in 2008. They knew he’d be great for the rest of the Dem slate in 2008 if he was our nominee.

    O’Malley is following the Obama playbook very closely so far. The only thing he hasn’t done was release a book.

  125. 125
    lol says:

    @Anybodybuther2016:

    Elizabeth Warren supports Hillary Clinton for President. Why would she be running against someone she wants to be President?

    Warren was one of the people that rounded up all the female Democratic Senators to sign that letter urging her to run.

  126. 126
    Corner Stone says:

    @⚽️ Martin: Susan Rice as the Benghazi Blitzer.

  127. 127
    Botsplainer says:

    @Cassidy:

    I can taste the freedom already.

  128. 128
    askew says:

    @rikyrah:

    @askew:
    With a political party that CHOSE to commit ECONOMIC TREASON against this country beginning January 20, 2009
    And with President Obama using his first term for cleaning up mess that originated in Bill Clinton’s Presidency….
    He has done more than Bill Clinton.
    She just will not stop with the cheap shots.

    @askew: No, it certainly makes no sense. The calculation seems to be that she’ll pick up some huge number of voters in the I’d-love-to-vote-for-a-Democrat-but-(s)he-has-to-be-white category that will offset the huge number of actual Democrats that she’ll turn off. That sounds like a pretty fucking stupid gamble to me, but not being a political analyst or a Democrat, what do I know?

    It’s like she is trying to re-do 2008 instead of win in 2016. It does her no good to trash Obama especially since he gave her the SoS job. Otherwise, she’d be a backbencher in the Senate right now and no one would be talking about her running for president in 2016. It just makes her look out of touch with the base and petty.

  129. 129
    Just One More Canuck says:

    @shelley: The effects, considering they were from 50 years ago, were pretty cool – I’d rather watch that than most of the blow-em-up good CGI stuff

  130. 130
    JGabriel says:

    @Keith G:

    When Ronald Reagan moves into the White House, he will be accompanied by a number of longtime aides already dubbed the California Mafia …

    That California Mafia label never really caught on though, did it? I seem to remember that the usual nom d’imbecile for the Reagan administration was Confederacy of Idiots.

  131. 131
    Shortstop says:

    @SatanicPanic: I don’t think they’re even thinking about what black people know; they’re assuming they’re bringing big news to white liberals. Because the “Demonrats are the real racists!” crowd never heard of Dixiecrats or the Southern Strategy, nobody else must have either. No US experience exists until it’s been given a thorough revision for dumbed-down distribution among resentful white people who couldn’t pass a junior-high history class.

  132. 132
    Corner Stone says:

    Now we’re using a TPM summary of a WSJ article where Hillary talked about WJC’s presidency as some way to get our grudge on against Hillary?

    There is nothing in that TPM article that even comes close to bashing or insulting President Obama.

    Really?

    Really?

  133. 133
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: She was born there.

  134. 134
    Shortstop says:

    @JGabriel: and wasn’t Kennedy’s band of Boston consiglieri — Dave Powers, Kenny O’Donnell, etc. — known as his Irish mafia?

  135. 135
    Patrick says:

    @El Caganer:

    The calculation seems to be that she’ll pick up some huge number of voters in the I’d-love-to-vote-for-a-Democrat-but-(s)he-has-to-be-white category that will offset the huge number of actual Democrats that she’ll turn off.

    Sounds stupid to me. If she decides to rehash the 2008 primaries again, I bet there will be a lot of Obama supporters who will simply sit out 2016. There was a poster here recently who thought it was a good idea to rehash the dumb claim that Hillary won the popular vote in 2008. Controversial claims like that stemming from 2008 makes my blood boil.

    If she is going to alienate a big portion the Dem base, I’m assuming she thinks she can win an even bigger shares of Independents.

  136. 136
    Shortstop says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: I was going to mention it, but someone else did up near the top.

  137. 137
    Not Adding Much to the Community says:

    @rikyrah: “I will point out once again that the Hillary acolytes have said that they were sitting out the 2014 elections.” Who? Which ones? All of ’em said it? Or some comments in a blog somewhere said it? Citation needed, mu’fu’.

  138. 138
    Botsplainer says:

    @Shortstop:

    Haha, stupid libturds. Teh demoncraps were the party of racists, slavery and succession, all of which were fine and I don’t know why your whining. And Robert Byrd was grand dragon of all the KKKs, which was really just a concerned group of white Christian patriots. Freedom! Eleventy!!!!

    Stupid libtards.

  139. 139
    MomSense says:

    @Belafon:

    As others have said, Obama was in heavy rotation all across the country campaigning for Democratic candidates. As a voter, I would like to see which Democrat’s message and campaigning are most effective in the midterms before choosing my preferred candidate for 2016.

    Yeah, there are definitely districts where the President would not help if he were to campaign there but shouldn’t we find out if other potential 2016 nominees are helpful in some of those swing districts??

  140. 140
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @askew: I read the piece. While “some say” it is an attack on Obama, I think one has to be looking for an excuse to be offended to read Clinton’s remarks that way.

  141. 141
    amk says:

    Heh, if the kenyan muslin is rooting for Ms Warren, I am all for it.

  142. 142
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Oh, so she CAN point to Tehran on a map!

  143. 143
    gwangung says:

    @SatanicPanic:

    I’m always amazed at how conservatives think that the Democratic party used to be full of racists would be news to people on the receiving end of racism

    I’m even more amazed that they think POC are too dumb to realize where it’s coming from NOW.

    I don’t think they’re even thinking about what black people know; they’re assuming they’re bringing big news to white liberals. Because the “Demonrats are the real racists!” crowd never heard of Dixiecrats or the Southern Strategy,

    Or talk to any black people themselves.

    Hm. Projection.

  144. 144
    askew says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Did you read the quote that I pulled because she was clearly insulting Obama in it? It’s obvious because it is almost the exact wording she used to attack Obama in 2008 and that Romney used to attack Obama in 2012.

  145. 145
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @gwangung: This is part of the insanity concerning Obama; on one hand, he’s a ni*CLANG* and therefore stupid, lazy, and shiftless and must use a teleprompter to deliver a speech, but on the other hand he’s the most conniving, clever, and subtle manipulator of events who has ever lived, who is constantly outmaneuvering his obvious intellectual and moral superiors such as John Boner and Yertle the McConnell.

  146. 146
    Corner Stone says:

    @askew: I read the entire article and the piece in the WSJ. You have to be addled to take away from that gossip piece that Hillary is bashing or insulting or attacking Obama.
    There’s no rational reading of it that could get one there.

  147. 147
    paulw says:

    @Baud: for all we know its the f-cking janitor with twenty years experience there

  148. 148
    JGabriel says:

    @gene108:

    He knew where they kept their cocaine smuggling money and knew where the bodies of the teenagers, who the Clintons had murdered for finding out about said smuggling operation, were buried.

    C’mon, that’s just unfair. Some of those teenagers didn’t know anything about that cocaine-smuggling – they were killed to keep them from talking about the sexual affairs they had with Clinton when he was governor.

  149. 149
    Corner Stone says:

    Since we’re doing gossip pieces today, here’s a link to HuffPo but it’s really from Reuters:
    Democrats Clamoring For Face Time With Hillary Clinton Ahead Of 2014
    “”I’ve heard from virtually every incumbent and candidate that she is at the top of their list,” said New York congressman Steve Israel, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.”

    “Hillary and Bill Clinton can go into any battleground district in the United States and be an asset,” Israel said. “She helps turn out our base, she helps with independent voters, she helps with fundraisers.”

  150. 150
    Cassidy says:

    Oooh! Another thread of white dude’s telling POC what they “should” be thinking! Give me a second to finish making my nachos cuz this should be funny.

  151. 151
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    That TPM piece points out that HRC did mention Obama’s efforts to “reach out”, but there’s no shortage of bitter PUMAs eager to refight ’08 and suggest that she would have been/will be more successful than Obama:

    That was the operative phrase given by Carter Eskew, chief strategist from Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign.
    “Here’s the thing I think works in her favor: What people think about her is she’s going to be a competent president. She’s going to be a strong leader,” he said. “She may not be as good on the issues, but she’ll get shit done… You can see a way that she becomes the perfect antidote to Obama.”

    Tweety’s been banging this drum off and on for the last few months, of course he’s more mercurial dingbat than PUMA

    anybody know why WP randomly eats posts?

  152. 152
    paulw says:

    @Amir Khalid: well he never MARRIED so…

  153. 153
    Corner Stone says:

    @JGabriel: Cocaine-fueled sexual affairs with the Clintons!
    Let’s be accurate here, people.

  154. 154
    trollhattan says:

    @MattF:
    IIRC Vince Foster ran the WH travel agency Whitewater desk.

  155. 155
    askew says:

    @Corner Stone:

    So, why isn’t Hillary doing these fundraisers then? Too busy hawking books I guess.

    O’Malley is doing another fundraiser for 2014 this time for House candidates:

    The July 20 fundraiser — which will feature House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — will take place during a meeting of supporters of O’Malley’s federal political action committee.

    The fundraiser, first reported by The Washington Post, will benefit Reps. Tim Bishop of New York, Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona and Ann McLane Kuster of New Hampshire.

    The event will also benefit two Democratic challengers, Amanda Renteria, of California, and Andrew Romanoff, of Colorado.

    O’Malley has been a fundraising force for Democrats in recent years, speaking at state party dinners and bringing in cash for gubernatorial and congressional candidates across the country.

  156. 156
    Uncle Cosmo says:

    @JPL:

    The Klein’s of the world, never take the time to self reflect.

    That’s because vampires don’t have reflections, self- or otherwise. Not even low-grade linguistically-inept ideologically-inbred vampires like Klein (which FTR is German for “little” & that’s about 5 sizes too large for his intellectual “prowess”).

  157. 157
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: anybody know why WP randomly eats posts?

    Obama.

  158. 158
    GregB says:

    People should be real circumspect about giving in to the endless efforts of much of the media to set some sort of Clinton vs. Obama narrative.

    90% of the sourcing is unknown and much of it is designed to ratfuck the Democrats, and liberals and their agenda.

  159. 159
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Gin & Tonic: A ha! Now we know what Valerie Jarrett’s real job is!

  160. 160
    catclub says:

    @Patrick:

    I bet there will be a lot of Obama supporters who will simply sit out 2016

    Obama will not be one of them. I would take that bet. 91% black support rather than 93% is fine.

  161. 161
    Uncle Cosmo says:

    @piratedan: Aaaaand yet another reminder to read the whole Galt-damned thread before tossing out a witticism…sorry, pd.

  162. 162
    Corner Stone says:

    @askew:

    So, why isn’t Hillary doing these fundraisers then? Too busy hawking books I guess.

    Probably too busy constructing a voodoo doll of President Obama. Then she’ll possess 5/6ths of the needed evil charms to finally vanquish him once and for all!!
    I hope the Secret Service is on their toes because that 6th evil charm…well, that’s a real doozy.

  163. 163
    Alex S. says:

    Sarah Palin wants to join ‘The View’:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....63407.html

  164. 164
    Corner Stone says:

    @GregB:

    90% of the sourcing is unknown and much of it is designed to ratfuck the Democrats, and liberals and their agenda.

    They don’t care what the sourcing is. They would uncritically repost a column written by Zombie Breitbart if it gave them a chance to get their hate on.

  165. 165
    askew says:

    @Corner Stone:

    So, you don’t have an answer then? Interesting. You post an article about how Hillary is the greatest thing since sliced bread and all Dem candidates want her to stump for them. But, when asked why Saint Hillary isn’t campaigning for 2014, you can only crack a joke.

  166. 166
    Kevin says:

    @Cassidy: …are you saying that the front pagers should support Rand, or that the commenters will?

  167. 167
    WaterGirl says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    but she’ll get shit done…

    Yeah, right. She’ll get shit done when hell freezes over, or when we get a democratic house and senate that doesn’t obstruct everything, whichever comes first.

  168. 168
    askew says:

    @GregB:

    That may be true, but I used a direct quote from Hillary for my criticism. Or are you now saying that the media is making up Hillary’s quotes?

  169. 169
    Patrick says:

    @catclub:

    I bet there will be a lot of Obama supporters who will simply sit out 2016

    Obama will not be one of them. I would take that bet. 91% black support rather than 93% is fine.

    What I wrote was: “I bet there will be a lot of Obama supporters who will simply sit out 2016”.

    BTW – If you think it is just African-Americans who will be pissed, you are in for a big surprise.

  170. 170
    askew says:

    @WaterGirl:

    Considering she got nothing done while in the Senate for 8 years, I find it a little rich that her supporters and the white media’s narrative that Hillary is a hard worker who will get shit done unlike that Obama.

  171. 171
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    I can’t imagine the Clintons won’t be out in force as the campaign season picks up, that’s what politicians do, especially them: They gather chits and build support networks.

    I don’t think the danger wrt Bubba and his true believers (Carville, Ed Rendell) stirring up trouble is Dems staying home, it’s creating unnecessary and counterproductive media drama.

  172. 172
    Corner Stone says:

    @askew: You like to post gossip pieces so why not join in the fun?
    Your uncritical assumption that she is going to sit out, and encourage her supporters to sit out, 2014 is laughably unsupported. But maybe TPM will piece quote the WSJ some more in the future.

  173. 173
    Kevin says:

    @askew: I’m sorry askew, but you are the one who seems to be trying to relive 2008, not Hillary. Get over it.

  174. 174
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Shortstop:

    No US experience exists until it’s been given a thorough revision for dumbed-down distribution among resentful white people who couldn’t pass a junior-high history class

    I want to frame this

  175. 175
    WaterGirl says:

    @askew: Different people have different strengths. I think she was a fine secretary of state, but I do not think she is a leader.

    But yes, I will vote for her if she is the democratic nominee.

    edited to make more sense.

  176. 176
    Patrick says:

    @askew:

    Considering she got nothing done while in the Senate for 8 years, I find it a little rich that her supporters and the white media’s narrative that Hillary is a hard worker who will get shit done unlike that Obama.

    It is rich considering there is no explanation whatsoever how she will get stuff done when there is a Republican house (highly likely) and/or a Republican senate. She will have the very same problems as Obama has faced. Or does her supporters/campaign not understand how the constitution works?

  177. 177
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @WaterGirl: Not a coincidence, I suspect, that that phrase echoes Tina Fey’s rant about “bitches get stuff done”. The Clintons loved that bit. To me it just underlined that HRC, who at the time was arguing that a Clinton v McCain race would be all civil and collegial and would thus embiggen America, was not a fighter, and did not get stuff done

  178. 178
    askew says:

    @Corner Stone:

    I am not talking about some future event. I am asking why she isn’t already working for 2014. O’Malley, Obama, Pelosi and Warren are already working for 2014. Why isn’t Hillary? Just because she might at some time in the future help out the Dems for the midterms, doesn’t mean she gets a pass for doing nothing now.

  179. 179
    Cassidy says:

    @askew: Planning a coronation takes time.

  180. 180
    askew says:

    @Patrick:

    It is rich considering there is no explanation whatsoever how she will get stuff done when there is a Republican house (highly likely) and/or a Republican senate. She will have the very same problems as Obama has faced. Or does her supporters/campaign not understand how the constitution works?

    The Clintons built an entire made up narrative around that in 2008. Hillary is the hard worker that gets stuff done. Ask what that stuff is and get called sexist.

    What I find baffling is that after losing on that strategy in 2008, she is using it again. That isn’t going to endear her to anyone but the beltway media who loves the idea of a lazy, do-nothing President Obama.

    @Cassidy:

    @askew: Planning a coronation takes time.

    Finally, an answer that makes sense.

  181. 181
    Corner Stone says:

    @Patrick:

    What I wrote was: “I bet there will be a lot of Obama supporters who will simply sit out 2016″.

    They hate so much that having a Republican in the WH is a positive alternative? More federal judgeships being nominated by an R? Maybe a SCOTUS or even two?

  182. 182
    Rhoda says:

    This Klein guy is stupid; but, I think he’s just peddling the conventional wisdom. It used to be that Obama and Clinton made a deal @ the convention for 2016. Now, as they watch Warren out there stumping for red state candidates (as Obama did in ’06), and they realize Liz Warren could actually get the same national fundraising base Obama did, and recognize she has a platform to run on…well WARREN 2016 is a real possibility no matter what she said.

    Hell, Obama did the same thing.

    Also, Warren is closer to Obama than most here acknowledged. She advised him as a senator, was with him in ’07/8, and the CFPB is her baby and happened because the president bought in and championed it.

    I can see a lot of Obama people jumping her way if she runs; and I think she could easily beat Hillary.

  183. 183
    hoodie says:

    @askew: Getting shit done? You mean turds like RFRA, DADT, and repeal of Glass-Steagall? I’m all for Warren taking her on, if only to make her answer to the parts of the party that are reliable democrats, not just aimlessly searching for the “center.”

  184. 184
    burnspbesq says:

    @⚽️ Martin:

    All of the villager so-called scandals have involved African Americans.

    Not exactly. Lois Lerner is very melanin-challenged.

  185. 185
    Belafon says:

    I stand corrected. Obama did help others campaign.

  186. 186
    askew says:

    @hoodie:

    While those are all turds, she had nothing to do with getting them done. That’s all her husband. Though she has tried to take credit for his successes before and I am sure she will again.

    I don’t think Warren runs. She just doesn’t strike me as having the ego necessary for the run. I am backing O’Malley for now. He’s clearly running and I think he’s learned the right lessons from 2008.

  187. 187
    Patrick says:

    @Corner Stone:

    They hate so much that having a Republican in the WH is a positive alternative? More federal judgeships being nominated by an R? Maybe a SCOTUS or even two?

    I wouldn’t vote for a Republican in a million years. But if the Dem alternative is awful, I would consider sitting out. It is really up to her. Go back to the idiotic 2008 arguments or try something better without insulting half the party.

    She voted for the Iraq war, so she isn’t perfect by any means. So not voting for her would not be a big deal to me. Either way, I would hold my nose if I voted for her. And I know for a fact that I’m not alone in thinking this way.

  188. 188
    Kevin says:

    @Corner Stone:

    I think it’s definitely 2. RBG and Kennedy for sure. Breyer also looks possible. So, the Dems need to win. That is two from their column. If Republicans can turn it from a 5-4 to 7-2, with young conservative justices, just pack your bags and move if you didn’t vote for Hillary because of your deep seated hatred of the Clintons. Seriously, anyone who sits out with those stakes is an unprincipled asshole.

  189. 189
    The Thin Black Duke says:

    @Patrick: Not voting at all is a stupid idea, man.

  190. 190
    Kevin says:

    @Patrick:

    Thankfully, you are in a very small minority of Clinton hating Dem’s. Most seem to love them now, which is good, because if you were in anything approaching a real movement, and she won, and you and your ilk sat out, well, I’m guessing white male, so maybe the court stuff wouldn’t effect you much. But for the majority of the Dem coalition, it could be devastating.

  191. 191
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Kevin: Scalia is 78, obese and at least a few years ago a fairly heavy smoker.

    Not that I wish anything bad on anyone…
    ETA: wasn’t there a rumor (so FWIW) in ’04 that Scalia was going to resign if Kerry was elected because he didn’t want to be in the minority?

  192. 192
    handy says:

    @Patrick:

    So not voting for her would not be a big deal to me.

    Yeah I think preventing another Gooper from letting the lunatics run the asylum is a pretty damned big deal.

    Either way, I would hold my nose if I voted for her.

    Holding your nose or not, you do realize that the alternative is far worse if she runs

  193. 193
    Rhoda says:

    @rikyrah: They are frothing over the fact that the Obama gatekeeper is a black woman, the old school friends are black, and that there is no one they can point to as the white puppeteer.

    It is galling on a level beyond the white trash angst the Clintons and Carters brought; this directly destroys the white man’s ice is colder narrative and upended the power structure of official Washington. The village rolled out the carpet for the Obamas and they politely declined; this is why DC elites hate them. And I choose the word hate purposefully; the President and First Lady declined to be their black friends. That shit still hurts; no offered the city to Bill and Hillary or Jimmy and Rosalynn.

  194. 194
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Belafon: Yep. Thankfully, if she were to leave her seat, Massachusetts is such a Democratic Stronghold(tm) that those voters would never vote for a republican to replace her. Never. Nope. Wouldn’t happen…

  195. 195
    handy says:

    2008 just feels so quaint now, what with one of the two national parties hell bent on burning down the world.

  196. 196
    askew says:

    @Patrick:

    See when you say stuff like that it just gives the Clinton supporters an excuse to disregard any criticism of Hillary. I think Hillary is mediocre at best, but if she’s the nominee I’ll vote for her.

  197. 197
    Kevin says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Ah, didn’t look up his age. OK, then you have a potential 4 for a 1 term president, and if you are a two term, you are definitely reshaping the court.

    So, potentially, if a R wins, you could have a 7-2 split for more than a decade. If a D wins, you could have a 6-4 Dem majority for that same period.

    Choose whoever you want in the primary. Fight for your candidate, but realize the stakes in the general. That right there is huge. After the past week, anyone who says otherwise is just not someone to take seriously.

  198. 198
    Corner Stone says:

    @Patrick:

    Go back to the idiotic 2008 arguments or try something better without insulting half the party.

    For a chunk of people here it does not matter if HRC was asked if she liked tuna fish, and she said “Sometimes.” they would be trumpeting it as an insult to President Obama, or what a phony fakey faker panderer she is. It doesn’t matter if it was printed in the WSJ, DrudgeReport or National Enquirer.
    We would be treated to another treatise on what an evil bitch the Hildabeast is. And did you know she never did anything in her entire life?
    Except have cocaine-fuled oral sex with another women because she’s a murdering lesbian drug runner, don’t you know.
    The divisiveness the R’s and their media outlets have steadily drummed into the ether has found root and now some here are happily doing the R’s work for them.

  199. 199
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @askew: I could be wrong, I never thought America would elect the black guy in ’08, but the President Warren stuff strikes me as a bit of “all the blogs I read agree…” wishful thinking

  200. 200
    Kevin says:

    @askew:

    Sometimes mediocre is just good enough. I won’t pretend to think she is the best for the job. But given her massive popularity, I see her winning, and I really don’t have a problem with that. If it means another 8 years of semi-competent leadership, I’ll gladly take it.

    Warren just aint running. You can see it in the way she talks, the way she ran her campaign. She seems almost a reluctant politician. And, she led the freaking women in the Senate begging Hilary to run. No way does she go against her now.

  201. 201
    gene108 says:

    @rikyrah:

    Funny how none of the HILLARY-stans can point to anything substantial that she is doing for November.

    The Clintons did make campaign appearances for Terry McCauliffe, in the VA governors race in 2013.

    In the other governors race, in NJ, the Clintons, the Obamas and half the NJ Democratic Party decided to either actively not campaign against Christie, totally ignore he had an opponent, or give him their support.

    I personally hope Hillary drops out of politics. She’s too polarizing a figure with the Democratic base.

  202. 202
    hoodie says:

    @askew: She constantly puts on the mantle of the Clinton legacy, and they both act like it was a team effort. The reality is that, while I actually like Clinton, he generally was a disappointment from a policy perspective. Obama has done more with more solid GOP opposition. Granted, ACA was passed by a Dem congress, but it was a herculean task to keep it alive and relatively viable in the years that have followed. In the face of that, Clinton (Bill) would likely have folded like a cheap suit. Imagine how Clinton might have handled inheriting two wars from Dumbya. He’s a smart and likeable guy, but not exactly a profile in courage. Hillary has more potential, but we really haven’t seen it. She flubbed her first opportunity in the build up to the Iraq invasion.

    A big problem with O’Malley is that he’s relatively unknown and is in a weaker position to exploit what should be a ginormous gender gap in 2012 in the wake of things like Hobby Lobby and looming vacancies on the Court. Warren has more visibility. I don’t think she can knock Hillary off, but maybe she could make Hillary uncomfortable enough to actually define the “shit” she says she’s going to do. Obama actually has a decent policy legacy and there’s a lot to protect there. Hillary has to be held accountable to do that, not just repeat her husband’s triangulation.

  203. 203
    Patrick says:

    @Kevin:

    But for the majority of the Dem coalition, it could be devastating.

    So then don’t run a campaign that will make a part of your base angry. Focus on running against Republicans than Obama. Focus on the USSC. Focus on the enemy. Don’t make Obama your enemy again. Why is that so hard? For me it will come down to the less of two evil. I really don’t want to relive the 2008 campaign again.

  204. 204
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Now, now, there’s no need to fight. No matter who becomes the n+1th Democratic President, let’s agree right now that we’ll all be terribly disappointed with hir many obvious and embarrassing failures of leadership, strategy, and vision. At least the nth Democratic President accomplished things! For fuck’s sake, even the n-1th did things! Not like this one, who sucks.

  205. 205
    Elie says:

    @askew:

    Hillary could really hurt herself by “distancing” herself from Obama this early.. as you alluded, she needs to get close to the base and also do things like help out with the November campaigning for Democrats. There will be plenty of time to “triangulate” her positions later but if she disses or is seen to diss him too soon, she will kill the enthusiasm for her candidacy among Democrats.

    You know, I have never been overly impressed with her strategic thinking… she does tend to over react and over reach…

    If she is the Democratic candidate, I will vote for her. But there is a lot she needs to avoid doing that can hurt her now and leave scars that might hamper her overall success later….

  206. 206
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @gene108: You’re mistaking who the base is. Loyal rank and file Democrats love Clinton. Liberals aren’t the base. People who think Obama is too far right aren’t the base, and people who think Clinton is too far right aren’t the base.

  207. 207
    askew says:

    @Kevin:

    @askew:

    Sometimes mediocre is just good enough. I won’t pretend to think she is the best for the job. But given her massive popularity, I see her winning, and I really don’t have a problem with that. If it means another 8 years of semi-competent leadership, I’ll gladly take it.

    Warren just aint running. You can see it in the way she talks, the way she ran her campaign. She seems almost a reluctant politician. And, she led the freaking women in the Senate begging Hilary to run. No way does she go against her now.

    O’Malley is running and is definitely not mediocre. He’s someone I can get excited about backing. He’s had success as governor and mayor in implementing progressive policy that improves the lives of millions. Hillary just has pretty speeches. She hasn’t gotten one major policy in place due to her leadership. I am looking for a leader who can get stuff done and Hillary just isn’t it. And she is a mediocre politician with a tin ear. I don’t have faith in her ability to win a general election or run a WH efficiently.

    I don’t think Warren has any interest in running for president. I love the woman’s economic policies, but she isn’t going to run.

  208. 208
    Betty Cracker says:

    @gene108:

    She’s too polarizing a figure with the Democratic base.

    On blogs where people obsess over politics, maybe, but I really don’t think that’s true in general.

  209. 209
    Alex S. says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Yeah, I think she wants to appear more populist, as opposed to the more intellectual Obama. That must be the root of ‘she will get things done’. I mean, she needs to give a reason why people should vote for her, and she cannot distance herself from Obama on substance, so it’s got to be on style.

  210. 210
    askew says:

    @hoodie:

    I don’t think it matters that O’Malley is unknown at this point. He’s been getting a great reception in Iowa and he’s been getting a lot of exposure there in the media. I’ll start paying attention to polling in fall of 2015. Before then, it just doesn’t matter.

    And Warren isn’t going to run so I need to find someone to back and O’Malley is a great candidate.

    O’Malley could do a real contrast of his accomplishments versus Hillary’s empty record.

  211. 211
    hoodie says:

    @FlipYrWhig: To me, “base” includes the groups that most loyally support the party’s candidates and turn out no matter how much GOP-laid bullshit they have to trudge through. You’re right, that ain’t white liberals, but it also ain’t white swing voters. Clinton shitting on Obama could do more damage to her than anything she gains from it. It’s the lazy way to try to court those voters, she can appeal to swing voters without doing that.

  212. 212
    SRW1 says:

    @scav:

    I kind of had a non-geographical meaning of incontinence in mind.

  213. 213
    askew says:

    @hoodie:

    Stuff like her shitting on Obama will hurt her in the primary as well as her not showing up to help out in 2014. O’Malley was the only one of the possible 2016 candidates to show up in person at Harkin’s event for Iowa Dems and it was noticed by the Dem activists. Hillary did a video speech where she talked about herself for the most part. And Biden was Biden. O’Malley got a prolonged standing ovation.

    I am seeing some of the misreading of the Dem base that the Clintons did in 2008 again. I think they just don’t get today’s Democratic Party and keep trying to chase after the white vote. It worries me that she is already making so many simple mistakes.

  214. 214
    lol says:

    @MomSense:

    It’s also hella early in the cycle. If Clinton is still on the sidelines after Labor Day, people should feel free to complain.

  215. 215
    Betty Cracker says:

    Anyone who runs for the Democratic nomination in 2016 is going to have to put some daylight between him or herself and President Obama. That’s just the way it works, more so if POTUS’ poll numbers remain underwater. Even if the gates of hell yawn open and reverse-Rapture the teabaggers, the eventual Dem nominee will distance him/herself from Obama, if only to prove that he/she is his/her own man/woman.

  216. 216
    Elie says:

    @lol:

    Precisely

    It IS still early in the cycle and therefore she should avoid stupid mistakes and go for the things that will definitely help the Democratic cause. Labor day is a bit late for her to get going on this– esp since the landscape is quite complex and dramatically important due to the recent horror show brought about by the Supreme Court. She could really benefit from doing some stem winder speeches about those issues which would avoid the need to kick Obama in the shins, but most importantly , get the base fired up. That is what she needs — a fired up base — not separating herself from Obama. Who does that target?

  217. 217
    Cervantes says:

    I think “all-of-the-above trifecta” is right (for certain values of “a Chicago thing”).

  218. 218
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @hoodie: I don’t know where you live, but I live in Virginia, and there are a lot of non-liberal faithful Democrats here. It’s not a play for “swing voters” if it shores up the category of “Democrats on the right-hand side of the party spectrum who voted Obama grudgingly and think he’s too liberal.” Which is not a small category. I think it’s substantially bigger than “Democrats on the left-hand side of the party spectrum who voted Obama grudgingly and think he’s too conservative,” which dominates the blogosphere and IMHO distorts the picture of who the voters, and hence who the base, actually are.

  219. 219
    Calouste says:

    @Cassidy:

    Only took about two weeks in Spain last month to plan the coronation.

    One of the modern ironies is that the investiture of a new monarch in Europe is a relatively modest affair (see the recent ones in the Netherlands, Belgium, and Spain, but with the possible exception of the UK) and only happens every three decades or so, while the inauguration of a new president in the United States is a massive event and happens every 4 years.

  220. 220
    Elie says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    No argument there but when do you start that? Now or later? What is going to help her most — building the Democratic brand first or going for the differentiators btw her and Obama? We have a lot to be working on as Democrats and distancing herself from Obama doesn’t do much for that

  221. 221
    Shortstop says:

    @FlipYrWhig: actually, Hillary is currently polling strongest with self-identified liberals. (I know; I was surprised, too.) So the people “she’s polarizing” are an even smaller subset of the electorate than we thought.

    I’ll try to find some links to those recent polls; the third baseman is having cardiac ablation and I’m distracted, low on juice and forgot my charger.

  222. 222
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Elie: I’m not as convinced as some that HRC is lobbing veiled insults at Obama now. The WSJ and the rest of the wingnut Wurlitzer is certainly pushing that meme, but they’re cherry-picking quotes to do so. HRC has praised Obama 10 times for every time she’s hinted a teeny-tiny bit that she would handle things differently.

  223. 223
    Shortstop says:

    @SatanicPanic: why, thank you! I don’t mean to micromanage, but I’m thinkin’ a simple black metal frame with a wide, off-center mat. All about the negative space.

  224. 224
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @hoodie: He’s a smart and likeable guy, but not exactly a profile in courage.

    I’m in the minority, but he grates on me. I never liked the lip-biting and pain-feeling, but now that he’s decided he’s an elder statesman and so hammily plays the grand old man, I like him even less. Even in the nineties, I liked Hillary better than Bill, and I think he appeals to all the lesser angels of her nature, from the Broderism of her early career, including her Iraq vote, to Mark Penn, to the bitterness of entitlement rejected of ’08. I hope she has more perspective on his advice now.

  225. 225
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Betty Cracker: That is the way it appears to me. Conservative media and right wing operatives would love to gin up a internecine fight of epic proportions on our side of the aisle. I say that we should ignore those efforts and have a good, hard fought primary.

  226. 226
    Corner Stone says:

    @Betty Cracker: The article in the WSJ that gossip-monger TPM used as a source uses some variant of the word “suggest” four times.
    suggesting that she would do more
    suggested that Mrs. Clinton’s distancing strategy
    suggested that her husband’s administration offers a more viable model for governing in polarized times
    suggested at the Colorado event

    It uses the word “contrast” three times, and “distancing” twice.

    The article is a bullshit gossip hit piece, and some are delightfully going along with it.

  227. 227
    Kevin says:

    @Patrick:

    Point me to where she has been campaigning against Obama and I’ll agree 100% with you. But you can’t. Because she hasn’t. Because we are over a year away from serious campaigning to even start. This is just nonsense that a certain (thankfully small) subset of Dem’s are happy to lap up when the Republicans pass it out.

  228. 228
    askew says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    See Martin O’Malley’s Iowa speech for how to put distance between yourself and Obama without shitting on a president who is incredibly popular with the base of the party.

    And putting distance between yourself and Obama should be your lowest priority in the 2016 primary not the first thing you do.

  229. 229
    askew says:

    @Elie:

    It targets white people who are pissed that Obama beat Hillary and the media. That’s it.

  230. 230
    Elie says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    I would personally LOVE to hear her give a speech on what has been happening re: supreme court. That could only help her and get everyone’s juices flowing. There are lots of things to talk about and its easy enough to sidestep the set up divisive goading from the press. Lordy, she aint used to how to manage that yet? She could turn stuff around with humor or just not answer directly.. politics 101…

  231. 231
    Kevin says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Ultimately, I don’t think it matters too much, as was displayed last election, the market for these inter-party wars is tiny. You have like 3 people here who despise her with a passion and think she just called Obama the n word, but otherwise, people who like Obama tend to like Hilary, and vice versa.

    I’m sure Cole will write another “wah, I don’t like her because Republicans hate her and they won’t be mean to any other Dem’s”, but that mindset isn’t shared by too many. And those that do should be shamed to voting for her if she is the nominee.

  232. 232
    Kevin says:

    @askew: She has yet to “shit” on Obama though. You are taking one tiny quote of a larger piece, and using it to bludgeon her, but as Betty mentioned, she overwhelmingly praises Obama. I mean, that isn’t even farting in his general direction.

    At best, the quotes you are using to tar and feather her are the equivalent of her drawing stink lines on a picture of Obama in her diary.

  233. 233
    Corner Stone says:

    @askew:

    Just because she might at some time in the future help out the Dems for the midterms, doesn’t mean she gets a pass for doing nothing now.

    And when she does engage with potential candidates you’ll question her choices and say she should have been doing something different, somewhere different.
    And when she and WJC are all over the place, as at least Bill has been for every election cycle of the past 20 years, you’ll carp about how they act like the D party belongs to them. And catty bullshit about why is she trying to steal the spotlight from Obama. And all kinds of just fucking nonsense.

  234. 234
    Patrick says:

    @Kevin:

    Point me to where she has been campaigning against Obama and I’ll agree 100% with you. But you can’t. Because she hasn’t. Because we are over a year away from serious campaigning to even start. This is just nonsense.

    I can’t. Do you know why? Because I never said such thing that you are implying. I said “if…

  235. 235
    Elie says:

    @Kevin:

    Okay okay — maybe she isn’t bludgeoning Obama. But she isn’t starting to really talk turkey about the issues of the day important to Democrats either. She should be starting to build a “story” about her whole viewpoint and who she is — not the shit like “we were broke when we left the White House”, but stuff like a passionate statement of what is happening to women, unions and blue collar interests… again, starting to craft a core message and branding to help the Democrats first, then herself, of course…

  236. 236
    JaneE says:

    I would prefer to see Warren president rather than Clinton, but I will take either over any Republican I can think of. That said, anyone who thinks that Obama and Warren are on the same wavelength is freakin’ nuts.

  237. 237
    Patrick says:

    @JaneE:

    That said, anyone who thinks that Obama and Warren are on the same wavelength is freakin’ nuts.

    How do you know what a Warren presidency would look like if he had to deal with the same Republican Congress? How do you know that it would be any different than Obama?

  238. 238
    TresL says:

    @Corner Stone: It is possible to hate HRC without any prodding from right-wingers.

  239. 239
    TresL says:

    @askew: O’Malley could do a real contrast of his accomplishments versus Hillary’s empty record.

    Thank you. I agree and will look forward to it.

  240. 240
    TresL says:

    @Betty Cracker: That might be true if PBO had a record like W. He has many great accomplishments that are intentionally being shielded from the public. Fake scandals are discussed for weeks. Tangible progress and good news barely gets a mention. The Democratic nominee will be smart to run on PBO’s many successes and not fall victim to polls of uninformed, ignorant and racist respondents. A smart nominee will find a way to carve out his own vision without taking gratuitous and unnecessary shots at PBO. That’s the person I’ll be supporting in 2016.

  241. 241
    WaterGirl says:

    @Patrick: Was your “he” a typo, or do you not know who Warren is?

  242. 242
    Patrick says:

    @WaterGirl:

    Typo. I walked a way too early before I could fix it. Yes, I know who Warren he is.

  243. 243
    Corner Stone says:

    @Patrick: Earl Warren for President!

  244. 244
    Corner Stone says:

    @TresL:

    It is possible to hate HRC without any prodding from right-wingers.

    I agree! Thank you!

  245. 245
    rikyrah says:

    @TresL:

    You don’t even have to hate Hillary Clinton to think she’s a bad candidate, and that the Democrats can do better. A lot better. Someone without her considerable baggage.

  246. 246
    rikyrah says:

    @TresL:

    That might be true if PBO had a record like W. He has many great accomplishments that are intentionally being shielded from the public. Fake scandals are discussed for weeks. Tangible progress and good news barely gets a mention. The Democratic nominee will be smart to run on PBO’s many successes and not fall victim to polls of uninformed, ignorant and racist respondents. A smart nominee will find a way to carve out his own vision without taking gratuitous and unnecessary shots at PBO. That’s the person I’ll be supporting in 2016.

    What Barack Obama has accomplished in the face of unprecedented obstruction is amazing. This list of accomplishments are numerous, and a smart Democrat would point that out and run on them – how they could be the foundation for a terrific country in 2016.

    There is a way to run on PBO’s accomplishments and carve your own way out.

    What you can’t do is insult the President, and expect his most loyal base to not look at you with a side eye.

  247. 247
    Corner Stone says:

    @rikyrah:

    What you can’t do is insult the President

    Where?

  248. 248
    Betty Cracker says:

    @TresL: I agree PBO gets bad press that he doesn’t deserve, but running as an incumbent president’s third term is just a dumb political strategy, and no top tier candidate will do it. Campaigns have to be about the future and telling the candidate’s story in a way that resonates with voters.

    Now, there are certainly smart and stupid ways the 2016 crop of Dems can differentiate themselves. PBO remains popular with Democrats, and candidates who take overt shots at him (like Brian Schweitzer) are shitting in their own hats. But “stay the course” is not going to be anyone’s campaign slogan.

  249. 249
    Corner Stone says:

    Obama gets two terms. That’s what voters voted for.

  250. 250
    nellcote says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    HRC has praised Obama 10 times for every time she’s hinted a teeny-tiny bit that she would handle things differently.

    Link(s) ?

  251. 251
    MomSense says:

    @rikyrah:

    What Barack Obama has accomplished in the face of unprecedented obstruction is amazing. This list of accomplishments are numerous, and a smart Democrat would point that out and run on them – how they could be the foundation for a terrific country in 2016.

    There is a way to run on PBO’s accomplishments and carve your own way out.

    The fucking Republicans would be planning to carve his visage on Mount Rushmore if they had a President with his record. I expected the Republicans to lose their minds with President Obama–but the level of disrespect our President gets from the media and from other Democrats is appalling.

    ETA: Republicans will run ads in every district tying the Democratic candidate with Obama and Pelosi anyway so the Dems might as well wear the President’s record like a badge of honor. They should be bold and aggressive and stop being so chicken shit.

    Sorry for the swears–I’m just sick of this BS.

  252. 252
    Corner Stone says:

    @nellcote: How about the reverse? If Obama feels like HRC is a positive force for politics in America then who are we to disagree?

  253. 253
    Corner Stone says:

    @MomSense:

    and from other Democrats is appalling.

    Beyond Morning Joe regular Harold Ford and Gov Schwartzer, which Democrats?

  254. 254
    Omnes Omnibus (the first of his name) says:

    @Corner Stone: Bad link.

  255. 255
  256. 256
    Kevin says:

    Anyone who thinks Hillary is going to run far from Obama is crazy. The Clintons will want Obama and his machine to help turn out, and Obama will gladly help. Because none of these people are stupid, and none would risk letting Republicans back in for some petty message board nonsense (which is what I think all these complaints are. I’m sorry, but Hillary has done nothing to garner your hate, and if those are the words you use, the problem is with you, not her).

    Bill Clinton was everywhere last election helping Obama get re-elected. You don’t think Obama is going to do the same in areas where it will help? You think Clinton will say “nah, we got this”. Last guy who did that ended up “losing”, and we got Bush as a result.

  257. 257
    TresL says:

    @Betty Cracker: It isn’t dumb if the things PBO has accomplished are in danger of being reversed if a Republican (or a certain corporate Dem) were to win the presidency. What’s wrong with embracing Obamacare fully and pledging to continue its implementation and improving it where necessary. No candidate can run as though the government reverts to a clean slate after a presidency ends. GHW Bush basically won Reagan’s third term and Gore might have been able to do the same were it not for Clinton’s indiscretions, a butterfly ballot and the SC.

  258. 258
    Corner Stone says:

    @TresL:

    of being reversed if a Republican (or a certain corporate Dem) were to win the presidency

    They’d reverse it and then what? Pass something like universal health care through the sheer force of pony rainbows?
    Do you get for even a second how fucking stupid you sound?

  259. 259
    Corner Stone says:

    When the Thousand Armies of the Clinton Empire descend upon you, their press releases will block out the sun!

  260. 260
    Betty Cracker says:

    @nellcote: The WSJ post linked above as proof of HRC’s anti-Obama animus, for one! She explicitly gave PBO kudos for continuing to reach out to the GOP assholes. All the negative spin comes from GOP interpretations of what she really meant.

    @TresL: There’s nothing wrong with embracing Obamacare — any Democrat who runs will do that. But they’ll also create daylight. You suggested a smart way to do so right there in your response: They’ll tell how they’d tweak it to make it better.

  261. 261
    another Holocene human says:

    @catclub: oh yeah, Obama is poison in a majority white state like Virginia, that’s why Terry Macauliffe is in Arlington right now shopping his resume looking for work oh wait.

  262. 262
    Corner Stone says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    All the negative spin comes from GOP grudgefuckers’ here interpretations of what she really meant.

  263. 263
    Corner Stone says:

    The most powerful man in the world consistently has the most sensitive camp followers imaginable.
    One wonders how he has survived so long?

  264. 264
    another Holocene human says:

    .@Corner Stone: True, it is not 2016 but 2020 which is a disaster for the Dems and the progressive coalition if hrc is nominee.

    It’s not even her so much for me as her supporters and her entourage.

    She is the last thing we need at such a critical moment.

    I like Deval Patrick but O’Malley is winning me over. As long as he picks a Castro brother as running mate.

  265. 265
    Corner Stone says:

    @another Holocene human: Because she’s the next Jimmy Carter?
    Bad things, man! Bad things!
    Go fuck yourself.

  266. 266
    Corner Stone says:

    O’Malley will never be president. Some people need to get this, sooner rather than later.

  267. 267
    another Holocene human says:

    @Shortstop: ie older people, younger ppl are more likely to identify as progressive or even call themselves left or one of those forbidden words. When I was coming up liberal was a dirty word, you wanted to be a moderate or a libertarian. Then the latter kind of achieved its goals and was left to the trolls and the termprogressive was taken back by queer activists and young labor activist of color. So your liberals are going to be boomers and older.

    I’m a younger end of GenX and I still remember HRC being involved in censoring video games while Tipper ran a crusade on music. That authoritarian “liberal” shtick does not appeal to me. Show me your bleeding heart, Hillz. Stand with migrant workers and underage refugees. Maybe you’ll change my mind about you.

  268. 268
    Ramalama says:

    @Patrick: Um, name a Republican president who hired a Democrat for any top position. Can you really believe that a Republican president wouldn’thave done something about the economic meltdown if say bank executives were notoriously Democratic, liberal?

    In Canada, calling for an investigation or a trial for something really huge is not yet partisan. But Canada’s 20 years behind in some respects.

  269. 269
    Patrick says:

    @Ramalama:

    Um, name a Republican president who hired a Democrat for any top position.

    Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta…

  270. 270
    TresL says:

    @Corner Stone: I see reading comprehension is not your strong suit. “…if the things PBO has accomplished are in danger of being reversed…” “Things” applies to more than just Obamacare.

  271. 271
    Corner Stone says:

    @TresL: Pretty sure I got your meaning, dog.
    Preciates ya’s.

  272. 272
    nellcote says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    She explicitly gave PBO kudos for continuing to reach out to the GOP assholes

    That’s one(?) where are the other 9?

  273. 273
    central texas says:

    ..which is why he and his collection of corporatist whiners worked so hard to keep Warren out of the government. Give the outcome, I suppose we should thank Mr. Summers for that fuckup, but it was not the intended result.

  274. 274
    Kevin says:

    I can’t understand being a Obama lover and a Clinton hater, or vice versa. On the major things, they are basically the same. Yes, Obama was against Iraq when he was in the Chicago senate, who knows what he would have done in the US Senate, but he was publicly against it…

    …but in all other respects, they are virtually identical. Want to know who Hilary will use for her economic brain trust? The same people Obama used. Who are the same people Clinton used. Healthcare? Hilary as the first lady tried desperately to get that passed. I mean, i don’t see the difference between the two, they are corporatist, left of center Democrats. To hate one while loving the other is just weird.

  275. 275
    David Koch says:

    Carter Eskew, chief strategist from Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign: “she may not be as good on the issues, but she’ll get shit done… You can see a way that she becomes the perfect antidote to Obama.”

    So he’s saying: “she’ll suck and suck alot”.

    Eskew bills himself as an advertising “image maker”. Yes, that’s exactly how Don Draper would sell Hillary.

    Aside from Carville, is every Clinton operative retarded? Or just Dick Morris, Mark Penn, Mandy Grunwald, Howard Wolfson, George Stephanopoulos, Paul Begala, Dee Dee Myers, David Gergen, Harold Ickes, and Carter Eskew?

  276. 276
    Betty Cracker says:

    @nellcote: You can find examples 2-900 or so in her book, which I haven’t read in its entirety (and don’t plan to), but excerpts in which she praises Obama to the skies are widely available via the Google.

    My comment is based on my impression from reading those and seeing clips of speeches here and there in which HRC always praises the administration she served in, and then wingnut outfits like the WSJ swoop in and cherry-pick quotes to sew discord among Democrats. And hey, why not, it works!

  277. 277
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Kevin: Reminds me of Sayre’s Law: Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low.

  278. 278
    Ramalama says:

    @Patrick: D’oh. I stand whited out.

Comments are closed.