Saturday, September 11, 2004

Kerry Sold Out Part III: Clinton's Backstab,

Look at these graphs from the NYT:

These friends and former aides ... are agitating for the candidate himself to answer what they called the character-assassination attacks ... They are pushing for Mr. Kerry to make a dramatic statement of his own to settle voters' doubts about Mr. Kerry's Vietnam War period.

Officials in the campaign, however, including both longstanding consultants like Bob Shrum and new additions like Joe Lockhart and other veterans of the Clinton administration, have balked at such a move, saying it could be a disaster and alienate too many swing voters who would view such an approach as mean-spirited. They said Mr. Kerry would do better to concentrate on issues where he outperforms Mr. Bush in polls, like jobs and health care. [emphasis added]

One thing about Clinton I have good to say about him, he never hesitated to attack someone, though he was generally smart enough to distance himself from it. Remember during the impeachment scandal when Henry Hyde's old and very messy affair with a married woman came out? Or the number of people who just mysteriously dropped dead conveniently. I have to say, the man was a master.

Just as now he's clearly putting the dagger in the back of Kerry. One of the things that's true in politics as in life, you have to remember who your friends are - your real friends. Easy to say, but hard to do in the heat of the moment. On the balance the expertise of the Clinton handlers is outweighed in this case by their divided loyalties.

Anyone who remembers Carville, the real Carville please, has got to know that this is a complete setup. That man never backed down a day in his life, he's part bulldog - and looks it too. And let's remember he's married to Mary Maitlan, and what it takes to be a man in that marriage with that woman - no there's no way in hell this is anything other than a setup.

What about Shrum? He's just a loser. He should do sell insurance or something. But the Clinton people, they know better than this.

Look at this NYT review:
The Democrats cried foul, but of course there's no referee in politics. And neither party has a monopoly on ruthless, unscrupulous campaigning. It just seems that the Republicans are, today at least, more adept at the black art of attack politics, according to historians and flummoxed Democratic partisans.

"I don't think there's any question they're better at it than we are," said James Carville, the Democratic warrior-consultant who admitted to being envious of his Republican counterparts' merciless brand of campaigning. "But I'm fixing to do what I can to change that slightly."

As I said, let the real Carville step forward. Still Carville is clearly being handicapped. Not selling out Kerry exactly, just going less all out than his full wily cunning bulldog normal. Sad to see it and sad to see Kerry falling for it, but if he's not smart enough to listen to his real friends then there ain't nothing that can be done for him. As a friend of mine said unsolicited on the phone last night to paraphrase him, "It's impossible to discuss real stuff in a campaign. He should just say whatever it takes to get elected. If he won't, then I wish he wouldn't get my hopes up." Heh. "Help is on the way," - first help yourself John Kerry.

In life you just gotta know what people's interest are before ya trust them. For instance the oldman's interest is that he pathologically hostile toward fraudulent authority, he despises it. The second thing about the oldman is that he makes sure he's ready to go all the way before he puts the dagger in someone's back. So when I'm taking the government to the woodshed over GDP you can be sure that the oldman has dotted his i's and crossed his t's, because he's a cunning ruthless sob who's got it in for anyone caught fibbing from a podium.

I'm not your friend, but I hate it when the powerful lie and that's reason enough to know what I'm bringing you is on the up and up. More on that later. To be honest, I haven't presented it all yet because it's so blatant it's so egregious that it's shocking. Just been damned depressed over what it means for our current economic state. Had my own Soilet Green, moment - remember I used to be a proponent for the technology/IT revolution and relied on GDP numbers a fair bit in the past. What a waste. But that's life, knowing your wrong and learning from it.


At September 11, 2004 at 12:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

IMO Oldman is onto something here. Carville is indeed throwing the game to some extent. This is not same Carville that Clinton unleashed against the GOP and Clinton's detractors like Paula Jones.

The fact is the long I think about the Clinton crew the more I don't trust Clinton's people one wit. They gutted the Democratic Party in 8 years. They went from majorities in the House and Senate to minorities. One of Clinton's top strategists ToeSucker Morris even defected to the GOP afterwords.

In short they are no ones friends except the Clintons who have their own designs which are not in the best interests of the Democratic Party.

At September 11, 2004 at 4:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Or the number of people who just mysteriously dropped dead conveniently."

Jigga what?

You belief that stuff, oldman?

At September 11, 2004 at 5:02 PM, Blogger J Thomas said...

National politics. There can be billions of dollars riding on the outcome of some minor scandal.

I don't know how much of that sort of thing to believe. I'm struck by how many people who were *very* inconvenient to Clinton who *didn't* drop dead. He might have had a few people killed but on the whole he was very very merciful.

At September 11, 2004 at 8:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Or the number of people who just mysteriously dropped dead conveniently."


Oldman, in your old blog you quipped that Paul Krugman should stick to economic analysis because that is what he knows. Perhaps you should take some of your own advice. The accusations you posted today are not factual. I look forward to your GDP analysis.

Regards, Lukas

At September 11, 2004 at 11:11 PM, Blogger J Thomas said...

Of course Oldman doesn't have facts showing that Clinton had people killed. If he did have those facts he'd have great blackmail material provided he was confident he could stay alive.

Oldman has been pointing out that in some contexts and in some ways the winners are ruthless. Having inconvenient people killed and getting away with it would fit right in with that. He isn't suggesting that any of us should get to the level where that would be an option. But believing that it doesn't happen is just more of the "politicians are nice guys who play by the rules" thinking.

Just try out the idea. Suppose that many powerful politicians are the sort who would have inconvenient minor people killed. They can't afford to have people killed that they'd be accused of. Note the accusations that LBJ had Kennedy killed, that Clinton had Vince Foster killed, etc. You sure don't want those stories getting a lot of attention when they're true. But people like, say, blackmailers who haven't yet gotten media attention....

That sort of thinking has no immediate practical use except if you get involved with politics, lobbying etc, you'll want to be careful who you become inconvenient to, and if possible arrange to be even more inconvenient to them dead.

But thinking that way might help set the emotional tone about what sort of people are likely to be political winners. They just might be as ruthless as old british kings. Imagine campaigning against Richard III or Henry V with the starting assumption that the other side will run a clean campaign and so will you....

At September 12, 2004 at 12:11 AM, Blogger Oldman said...

People have a way of dropping dead around politicians. When the corporate scandals, Enron etc, came down, there was a guy who "committed suicide". Thing was, he was one of the holdouts interestingly enough. What did he have to fear? Why didn't he lawyer up like everyone else? If he was one of the holdouts, what did he have to fear? He could have always struck a deal with the prosecutors.

But as far as I can tell, no one has ever questioned his death - except that we are to believe that he was so noble that he took his own life.

Over the past decade there have been a series of disturbing deaths of key or prominent individuals, often at crucial moments. They fall on both sides of the political spectrum. If there's someone out there whacking people, it's not to protect an individual President but a long term op behinds the scenes.

But I'll stick to GDP, since I get less insults that way, even though as I've noted economic analysis was always the neglected child of my portfolio of skills.

At September 12, 2004 at 11:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are you shitting me?

Don't you dare stick to GDP exposes.

You might be dead wrong about your thesis that Kerry is being setup to be gutted but you're fun to read...a faint taste of Hunter S. Thompson in your posts.

Also, it is your blog.

By the way, am I the only one who could cast the players to a head in WS's Julius Caesar?

At September 13, 2004 at 12:34 AM, Blogger calmo said...

Oldman has incited quite a few replies here.
Would you say that is or is not like the provocative elements of "Bull-dog" Carville? [For those who say not, like THAT woman, his wife then?]
Again I am confronted by that odious thought that who ever slings the mud the best, wins.
Leadership. Statesmanship. Only in America.

At October 19, 2005 at 1:32 AM, Blogger unixlinux said...

Nice blog. Check out my arizona wild cat blog.

At November 6, 2005 at 9:16 PM, Blogger Roberto Iza Valdes said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At January 12, 2006 at 4:54 PM, Blogger Roberto Iza Valdes said...


At February 13, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

urbanity alton hmvs geollegue ruma faxafloi


Post a Comment

<< Home