At least Hillary Clinton hasn't been cozying up to Richard Mellon-Scaife for no reason. Instead, he's got his papers running crazy articles about how crazy black man Barack Obama and his crazy black church pastor are personally responsible for high rates of crime in the African-American community.
« Iraq Forever | Main | Jersey Judges »
Paying Off
01 Apr 2008 08:41 am
Comments (48)
When is the devil Monster Clinton up for reelection? We really need to find someone to mount a primary challenge to the evil creature.
Did anyone see Bill Maher this past weekend? He put the whole Wright thing in context and pointed out just how f--kin' dumb the TradMed in this country is.
I am so glad Matt linked to this in the proper context. Real Clear Politics had linked to it as recommended article! And I also can't believe not many people are paying attention to the Sciaffe relationship Clinton has now developed.
I don't get how that guy gets away with being an economics professor with only an MBA.
He's also a full-blown loon and for some reason his school is proud of his having "unyielding support of the Republican party." Sounds like a joke of a university. I searched for his name in JSTOR with no results. On Google Scholar I found one op-ed about Black Capitalism and the Crayfish Syndrome (one crayfish tries to get out of a bucket and the rest pull him down) and one on the anti-capitalist mindset of Clintonomics.
Hillary Clinton: now part of the new and improved Vast Right Wing Conspiracy! With even stronger bleaching power! Teeth, skin, political parties - everything is cleaner and whiter with the new Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!
Get yours today!
(Not available in caucus states, small states, red states, or Illinois. Money back guarantee, except for small vendors in Iowa and health benefits for employees of New Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Not responsible for change in party affiliation. Lifetime warranty available only in Arkansas.)
So it's clear now: the Clintons despise the "vast right-wing conspiracy" only when it attacks them. When it assassinates someone else's character, it's a fine thing. Day after day, the Clintons prove that they care about nothing other than their own ambitions. Not only is Hillary in danger of losing the presidential nomination, she's in danger of losing any shred of credibility she has in the Sentate and the Democratic Party. Who's going to want to deal with her at any level after this campaign?
And yet, Rasmussen has Obama within 5pts in PA today. Go figure.
If helping John McCain become president is a reason for Hillary Clinton to cozy up to Scaife, then yes, all this hasn't been for no reason. If she's doing it because she thinks it will help her win the nomination, then it is for no reason.
Hillary's embrace of the VRWC has the smell of desperation. At this point, we're just a couple of days away from the old bag of stale bones going on Limbaugh's show to read out passages she didn't like from Wrights sermons.
A friend of mine's business was once robbed about 5 years ago and he believes it was a black guy what done it.
I await Barack Obama's apology, denunciation, rejection, and other things.
So if I'm understanding this correctly, the Trib is saying Jesus kills. Too bad no one reads that rag.
Simply amazing.
I, for one, am eagerly awaiting a Michael Moore interview of Dick Cheney followed shortly by a full-length documentary about how Mike Huckabee is personally responsible for Islamic terrorism.
So let me get this straight, the next time someone has their house burgled the cops should assume Barack Obama did it?
So Scaife, who is clearly no friend of Democrats, plays Hillary? Quel surprise! Scaife realizes that Clinton has virtually no chance of being nominated. He also recognizes that continuing the uncertainty, fear and doubt of the Demcratic primary helps the Republican cause. So he "befriends" Clinton and starts attacking Obama. And yet Clinton friends such as Lanny Davis applaud the "change of heart" that Scaife had. There is no change in Scaife just a realistic appraisal of who the Democratic nominee will be and how to best ruin his prospects. If Clinton was leading then he would try to use Obama in a similar way.
You wouldn't be seeing this if Obama hadn't cozied with crazy Reverend Wright. Put the responsibility where it belongs.
Perhaps Mathew could explain the causality a little more clearly? Clinton meets with an editorial board and now she's responsible for all the BS coming out of that paper? Or just the increased BS? If it is just the increase, how do we know whether this article is part of the baseline or part of the increase?
Is the effect true for all papers or just the right wing ones? If she met with The Atlantic would she then be responsible for Andrew Sullivan's silliness?
Can we get more of this trenchant analysis in Heads in the Sand?
Good news for defense attorneys! Your black client who was recently arrested for breaking and entering can now claim "Rev. Wright made me do it! He and Barack Obama brainwashed me into thinking that because the government and white people hate me I have to get back at them by robbing the neighborhood pawn shop. I watched three days of Fox News 24 hour coverage of Rev. Wright's sermons and I heard the call to commit a crime. Go arrest the real criminals - Wright and Obama!"
Matt, you should probably update your post to reflect that you do not believe that Hillary Clinton conspired to have RMS & the Tribune-Review smear Obama and his church. Unless, you do believe such, in which case, I think it may be time to have an intervention.
"You wouldn't be seeing this if Obama hadn't cozied with crazy Reverend Wright. Put the responsibility where it belongs."
You tell them obahamabominconicans, Undecided!
They should have known that going to a church with a controversial pastor is unacceptable to those unwilling to make up their minds. What's an indecisive person to make of new information that might imply the person they might wish to consider potentially voting or not voting for is involved in a complex relationship with someone who they've known for twenty years. It is clear that Obama should have realized twenty years ago that befriending someone with controversial opinions negates any positive work said figure has performed and provides an inscrutable conundrum to those unwilling or unable to form an opinion as to how said figures works are balanced or unbalanced by said statements and works. It's a dilly of a pickle, no doubt.
Add to that that the other candidate has been counseled by said controversial figure during a particularly difficult time in their marriage and the undecided are moved from indecision to pure dumbfoundery.
Thank you for your honest and unbiased evaluation of the current campaign dynamic. Without your objective analysis and calm, rational reflections, the obominatorians found here would be ill-prepared to not make the most important decisions of this presidential election.
Why don't we see any Clinton supporters around here anymore? Is it because they've turned their attention elsewhere? Or do you suppose it's because Clinton has shamed them into submission?
I had the pleasure of having the Scaifes for neighbors a while back. A few years ago I was picking up my car at the local service station and Wife-of-Scaife was doing the same. WoS refused to leave the office until the middle aged black lady outside finished putting her Talbot and Pottery Barn bags in her minivan and drove off. Methinks they have a racial hangup or two, new found Hilary respect aside.
"You wouldn't be seeing this if Obama hadn't cozied with crazy Reverend Wright. Put the responsibility where it belongs."
since Rihilism took the high road, i'll take the low one:
Shut the Fuck Up, Undecided, you idiot racist know-nothing. How do you type a comment with your head up your ass like that?
Oh, good. Fighting Scaife in the main election.
To clarify: if Scaife fights against Obama in the primary, and if Obama wins, why would he (Scaife) stop fighting Obama in the main election?
It seems Scaife ranks candidates as Hillary, McCain, Obama. Which of course is his right.
By the way isn't Scaife a little bit of a racist?
"By the way isn't Scaife a little bit of a racist?"
Just a teensy bit...
You tell them obahamabominconicans, Undecided!
Don't get hung up on the name. I started using it a month ago and didn't feel like changing.
I've stated previously, my intention at this time is to vote for Hillary in the Pennsylvania primary and whoever the Dem nominee is in in November. Even if I overlook his many emotionally fragile supporters, there are still too many question marks about Obama for me to give him the nod over HRC.
The bowling thing was the final straw...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZXdGS6WCGs
Well, I don't know exactly how much Scaife is afraid of black people, I seem to have read it somewhere. I suppose I should do some research.
It's interesting that Undecided wants to talk about something else.
"I've stated previously, my intention at this time is to vote for Hillary in the Pennsylvania primary and whoever the Dem nominee is in in November."
Ah, yes, the old bait and switch. Good job, well done.
"Even if I overlook his many emotionally fragile supporters, there are still too many question marks about Obama for me to give him the nod over HRC."
Emotionally fragile! Too many question marks! Bowling! Oops, you forgot to mention Wright.
Nonetheless, brilliant stuff, Undecided! Reasonable, reasuring, and wrap it up with a playful dig! I'd score a 9.5 out of 10.
Thanks for the link! I took the time to e-mail rrreiland@aol.com and enlighten the author. Let's stuff his mail box!!!
"Your opinion piece was grossly ill-informed. I'm sure much of this is due to the fact that you do not live in Chicago and may have little or no first-hand knowledge of the South Side and its churches. It also seems clear that you have not taken the time to read and/or watch entire sermons of Rev. Wright nor investigate his standing. I strongly recommend that you read the following, written by one of Wright's longtime congregants, in its entirety: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-oped0326trinitymar26,0,7143430.story Another enlightening piece was in a recent Newsweek. When its author spoke on the piece, she began to choke up while describing the warm welcome she received at Trinity UCC.
"Rev. Wright is anything but a racist. His church has white members and his congregation is universally seen as accepting by all its visitors, regardless of race or creed. An esteemed theologian, Rev. Wright counts among his good friends the renowned theologian, Martin Marty, a frequent guest at Trinity UCC. From your resume, you do not to have great study of theology, so perhaps you need to be for fully informed before making snap judgments on black liberation theology. An enlightening discussion was held on Boston NPR - I highly recommend you take the time to listen: http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2008/03/20080318_a_main.asp
"I hope these links can be of help. As a white woman (vintage 1958), it saddens me to read such defamatory opinions in print. It behooves us all to gather as much information as people. I, too, was struck by Rev. Wright's comments, but I took the time to investigate. Though I've lived in Chicago for nearly a dozen years - over half on the South Side - the only information I had was on their deeply compassionate social ministry. In fact, the most controversial head of a black church here happens to be a white priest, Michael Pfleger. Over the last month, I've wondered what the reaction would have been if Obama were a member of St. Sabina's, where similar speech comes out of the mouth of a red-headed white man?
"Thank you."
Thanks for the link! I took the time to e-mail (elided)@aol.com and enlighten the author. Let's stuff his mail box!!!
No, let's not do that. It's better to make an argument in public than stuffing mailboxes. Writing the newspaper is also good.
I'd score a 9.5 out of 10.
Cool ... thanks! I try.
The Reiland piece is patently outrageous. (He's a local restauranteur??)
But Obama, not Hillary or even Scaife, is responsible for the attention being given to Wright.
the worst thing about this Wright debacle is that it gives every person who simply won't vote for Obama because he's black a more "justifiable" reason not to.
undecided, if you think Hillary is a better candidate than Obama, fine. i think you're as wrong as humanly possible, but fine. but the fact that your first comment goes right back to the Wright thing tells me at least all i need to know.
it's hilarious how white people like Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan (who, of course, are VERY white, copy paper white) are ok with black people, as long as they don't display any sort of over-the-top anger. that's simply unacceptable.
good to know black people's feelings need to be filtered through what people like those two knuckleheads find acceptable.
white people like Hagee, Falwell, Robertson are allowed to say any sort of stupid, wrong, horribly racist, sexist, or homophobic stuff and people just shrug their shoulders. but when a black guy says some over-the-top stuff, all of a sudden its HIDE THE WHITE WOMEN, LOCK THE CAR DOORS!
but the fact that your first comment goes right back to the Wright thing tells me at least all i need to know.
It should tell you that Matt linked to an opinion piece centered around Wright. Wright goes off track in some places but his "anger" doesn't offend me personally one bit.
It's a close call but I prefer Hillary for the nomination.
"But Obama, not Hillary or even Scaife, is responsible for the attention being given to Wright."
For real, for really and twue?
Shoot!
But, of course, that would imply that Hillary is responsible for all the stories about Vince Foster. Seems terribly unfair and unreasonable, dontcha think? Kinda ridiculous, extreme and overwrought. The kinda thing that would make a reasonable person say,
"Hey, that's silly. That person can't control what another person says or does and just because they love that person doesn't mean they somehow become responsible for that person's words/deeds.
And what exactly is the story here? Maybe I should do some research and find out a little bit more about that person and what it is they actually believe or did or din't do and in what context. Judge not, lest I be judged, I always say. And who am I to cast the first stone (repeatedly).
People might assume I was being disingenuous, downright non-forthright if I were to parrot accusations that I didn't even agree with or beleive or consider important or found offensive. Honesty is the best policy, mom used to say, and I wouldn't want to do anything to besmirch her good name..."
Yglesias,
What they said:
Carl @ 10:13 AM & dry_fish @ 11:01 AM
Really, reconsider going there, it's going to come back and bite you. You yourself take invitations from Fox News, and you're not even running for president, and Obama, well, he says he will talk to anyone....
p.s. to my last,
it occurs to me that I shoulda followed up the segueway there to Bill Clinton who pronounced in sometime, I don't remember exactly when in the middle of impeachment rumblings that he will still be glad to talk to anyone on the issues, and sat down with Newt Gingrich in front the press....I always thought his job approval ratings all through that time were partly due to that attitude, that Americans overall really like "fighters" and "enemies" who can "shake hands" before and after matches.
Which leads me to a favorite thought to ponder, why haven't we had actual violence break out between members in the halls of Congress since the 19th century, while one regularly sees those video clips of brawls breaking out in Parliaments across the world? We're supposed to be such a violent country and all...
Clearly you're not familiar with the paper, Matt. This is standard stuff for them. Please don't imply any sort of Clinton-Scaife quid pro quo that isn't there.
Artappraiser and Susie -
I don't think it's a QPQ becuase she'd be cray to trust him. But please explain to me why she's doing this. Why is she (in the name of all sanity) meeting with the Scaifemeister?
Is this why?
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/ickes_confirms_hes_been_pushin.php
Because encouraging (I might argue, legitimizing) Scaife seems to fit with Ickes' superdelegate strategy. Now, Ickes may be doing his own thing here and not speaking for Clinton. But if he's not, do you think pushing the Wright story is a good idea? Please, help me out with this one, cause I think this strategy is absolutely nuts.
You've got a choice between a black guy who knows a preacher who's occasionally pissed at whites vs a white woman who is a member of a powerful right wing Christian political organization with ties to murder squads and dictators around the world and who regularly lies like a rug in public (Bosnia) and whose husband takes money from fugitives in exchange for pardons.
I can't wait for May when the book on "The Family" comes out linking Clinton to these clowns.
You think Wright is a problem? Clinton is toast when this stuff becomes generally known.
“Why do I have to keep proving to people that I am not a liar?!”
-Hillary Rodham Clinton, 2000
I think there's even more stuff to know about Hillary Clinton. Show me a liar and I will show thee a thief, says the old adage. Perhaps no truer words were ever spoken. But lying on a grand scale, for political gain runs the entire gamut. Many people believe FDR orchestrated Pearl Harbor; that, if he hadn't he should have. Yes, Hillary is a manifest liar. She will continue to lie. But, thank goodness for that. “Chill out” and let this woman lie. She's going to get caught; just you wait and see: http://theseedsof9-11.com
I may be in the minority, but hey, welcome to my life. Undecided, you ARE right about one thing, "But Obama, not Hillary or even Scaife, is responsible for the attention being given to Wright." Faux News virus strikes again--um...shouldn't we know this by now? Not that Hillary hasn't felt obliged to jump on the bandwagon--but to underestimate the Fox News virus is to lose an election. The media has been relentlessly taking turns beating the stuffing out of our candidates, and now they want us to start beating the stuffing out of each other. How many O-camp vs Hill Camp how many will vote for McCain polls have you seen lately? GOP's are stacking the deck for November--and we are busy hate blogging another Dem.
Another thing Undecided--I am for an Obama vs Hillary bowling match, if there is also an Obama vs Hillary basketball one on one match--whad'ya say?
Hey guys,What would you say if an unknown white guy comes on the scene to be our prez, and you were impressed. Shortly thereafter, you find out there's KKK meetings in his history---twenty years worth of KKK, but he didn't agree with them but just went there because he wanted the Grand Klu Klux for his spiritual advisor and political base. This morning someone said Obama didn't call for the firing Of Imus. Wrong. He did, and said he'd have no one on his staff that said such things. Then Rev. Wright comes out of the closet.
Sara
Hey guys,What would you say if an unknown white guy comes on the scene to be our prez, and you were impressed. Shortly thereafter, you find out there's KKK meetings in his history---twenty years worth of KKK, but he didn't agree with them but just went there because he wanted the Grand Klu Klux for his spiritual advisor and political base. This morning someone said Obama didn't call for the firing Of Imus. Wrong. He did, and said he'd have no one on his staff that said such things. Then Rev. Wright comes out of the closet.
Sara
Hey guys,What would you say if an unknown white guy comes on the scene to be our prez, and you were impressed. Shortly thereafter, you find out there's KKK meetings in his history---twenty years worth of KKK, but he didn't agree with them but just went there because he wanted the Grand Klu Klux for his spiritual advisor and political base. This morning someone said Obama didn't call for the firing Of Imus. Wrong. He did, and said he'd have no one on his staff that said such things. Then Rev. Wright comes out of the closet.
Sara
Hey guys,What would you say if an unknown white guy comes on the scene to be our prez, and you were impressed. Shortly thereafter, you find out there's KKK meetings in his history---twenty years worth of KKK, but he didn't agree with them but just went there because he wanted the Grand Klu Klux for his spiritual advisor and political base. This morning someone said Obama didn't call for the firing Of Imus. Wrong. He did, and said he'd have no one on his staff that said such things. Then Rev. Wright comes out of the closet.
Sara
Well, Sara. I'd say that you are remarkably ill-informed, you are highly susceptible to fallacious arguments which make use specious logic and false moral equivalence, and that you need to be more patient with the post button.
Oops, should have been " use of specious..."
Comments closed April 15, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Yes, Reverand Wright is insane and incendiary to suggest to impressionable young black people white America would deliberately inflict members of their race with disease. Just plain nuts!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Study_of_Untreated_Syphilis_in_the_Negro_Male
Posted by steve duncan | April 1, 2008 8:56 AM