Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered By Matt Drudge

"I find it interesting that in a room of such esteemed journalists that Mr. Drudge has become your respected assignment editor."

-Hillary Clinton spokesperson Phil Singer speaking at a breakfast this morning with reporters covering the campaign.

I know what y'all are thinking.

If what Matt Drudge said about Hillary's campaign was false, then why didn't she come out and deny it?  The primary reason is that the Clinton Camp was damned if they did and damned if they didn't.  

If Hillary had denied leaking the photo, the news story would've been "Hillary Clinton denies leaking Obama 'Muslim' Photo." If Hillary camp had kept their collective mouthes shut (which they did for most of the day yesterday), then the news story would've been (and it was, by the way) "Why hasn't Hillary denied leaking this photo?"

To borrow some words from TPM's Greg Sargent, Based on the strength of confirmed-fact-inventor Drudge's word and nothing else, the Obama camp attacked Hillary for dirty politics [...] By the end of the day, all the major news orgs were carrying this story [...] Even though no evidence ever emerged beyond Drudge's word that it had happened.

So let's just be honest here and face the facts...

...If you were one of the many people who jumped up and condemned Hillary to death based on something that Matt Drudge wrote, then you along with the Obama campaign and the mainstream media had the old "okie doke" pulled on you.  

To put it very bluntly, you were hoodwinked, bamboozled and suckered by a known Republican.  For that dubious honor, y'all deserve a round of applause for not thinking for yourselves.

Tags: Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Comments

62 Comments

Re: Let's face it...

Hillary's campaign did, in fact, deny leaking the photo.

by americanincanada 2008-02-26 01:41PM | 0 recs
Barack Hussein Obama....

Barack Obama has had the kitchen sink thrown at him, throwing out his middle name in a negative way, accompanied by a picture of Obama dressed in Somali garb -- "Got-Cha" politics, which is the worst kind of politics which only tends to divide and incite fear, it's called divide and conquer.

However, Obama can be of use to America by addressing the need of some to sow divisions and exploit our differences, instead of building on that which unites us, and "The world can use him too, with his reach to the Muslim nations and his middle name making it impossible for the US to walk away from one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in history. A restructuring of this overall policy is due after the demolition of the World Trade Towers.  Some people think it's cool to be cynical. They deride those who show overt respect, admiration, and optimism. Those who still believe they can make a difference. Those who know they have power. This campaign has proven that cruelty is no longer desired as political style in the United States. The people now have a choice. A choice between magnifying the negatives or using the positives.  I will say this. Obama has the potential to be one of the greats, but only if the people participate in molding his leadership. That's the task at hand.  He, himself, invites others to recognize his faults not letting them interfere with the work. You can see how the people's support has molded him already in his quick evolution from weak debating events to the beautiful, strong, elegant, debate he delivered last night.." From: Blogger, J.M., Raging Universe
Hillary Clinton, a consumate actress, is the old-time party politics.  She likes to Fight while Barack likes to Unite.  The Past or the Future, that is our Choice!

by bacalove 2008-02-27 03:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Supporters Have Been Suckered

They've been feeding stuff to Drudge all along.  

Read it and weep.  

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/us/pol itics/22drudge.html?_r=1&scp=1&s q=drudge+clinton&st=nyt&oref=slo gin

by wonderama 2008-02-27 07:42AM | 0 recs
Novaked has

a better ring to it -

Plus, Novak hoodwinked the Obama campaign first

by sepulvedaj3 2008-02-26 01:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered By Matt Dru

Fair enough if true.

by Drummond 2008-02-26 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

There was another path she could have chosen.  She could have flatly denied they were behind it and gone on to condemn the photo and the intention to play on Muslim fears.  She could have in one fell swoop, condemned Drudge and condemned the Muslim e-mails and appear to be a uniter of the Party.  That would have done her some good.  Instead, her playing the naif and saying I don't see what's so bad about the photo anyway, just reinforced her negatives.  There's a reason why she's begun to lose all her superdelegate support and this is a perfect example of why.  She is showing once again, she either getting terrible advice or has bad political instincts.  Or perhaps both.

by Piuma 2008-02-26 01:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

OK. I agree with some of that. Up to the "would have done her some good" anyway.

Could you give me your analysis of the political sophistication of the Obama camp embracing a right wing canard and going after Clinton for something they had no proof that she was behind.  Was that particularly astute?  ... In the long run...???

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

Obama camp has made it clear they will not sit back and be swift-boated.  They will give people a short time to deny responsibility and then if there is no response, they will answer back swiftly and forcefully.  The long run gameplan of that is to remove the idea that they can bullied in the general due to inexperience.

by Piuma 2008-02-26 02:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

There was also a way for Obama to talk about and dimiss the photo without buying into Drudge's obvious Clinton lie. LMAO

That photo alone is not swiftboating...buying into the spin was. He could just have said, it was a polticial function, I did what all politicians do, and moved on.

by americanincanada 2008-02-26 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

The photo doesn't exist alone and you know it.  Showing a picture of Hillary in a veil is not the same as showing Barack in a turbin and you and everyone else knows it.  It is precisely their refusal to play dumb as to the meanings behind lame attacks like this one which shows their strength.  

by Piuma 2008-02-26 02:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

Of course, you are beliveing Drudge that Clinton is behind the 'circulation.'  What if she wasn't?

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

Swift boated by whom Piuma?

Clinton did deny responsibility, but the Obama campaign still attacked her.

What if--as is most likely--this is a right wing Drudge swiftboat?

How does it reflect well on Obama if he is lashing out against the wrong attacker?

I can think of a million analogies:

Say, Tommy comes home and notices someone has eaten all the cookies, Billy (a known liar) comes running in and says that he saw Suzy eating cookies. Suzy says she didn't do it, but Tommy goes off and clocks Suzy silly.

How does Tommy look to you? Tough or stupid?

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

You have your timing off.  She didn't deny it right away, they issued a non-denial denial trying to play cute.  But this discussion is making it into a bigger deal than it is and a much bigger deal than Obama's campaign made it.  I'm just saying the campaign strategy on Obama's part is to be swift and demanding in their responses to smears.

by Piuma 2008-02-26 02:25PM | 0 recs
No...

They chose to buy into the media rhetoric of a "non-denial denial." They denied it and kept denying it. Now they are saying the initial denial was not a good enough denial.

It's like Tommy saying that Suzy didn't look sincere enough for him as a justification for smacking her.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

Swift and demanding doesn't work if you fire on the wrong target.

by Denny Crane 2008-02-27 04:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

re;  "lashing out at wrong attacker"

kinda like Bush invading Iraq for 9/11, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.  

or the DNC disenfranchising its own voters, who themselves had nothing to do with breaking primary date rules.  unbelievable.

by moevaughn 2008-02-26 02:45PM | 0 recs
Sounds Like An Iraq Strategy...

..."Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing."

-President George W. Bush, 3/17/2003 Address to the Nation

"They will give people a short time to deny responsibility and then if there is no response, they will answer back swiftly and forcefully."

-Piuma, 2/26/2008

Ruined reputations and lost lives are what you get when you rush to judgment.  Are you sure you want to adopt that line of thinking?

To quote President Clinton, "You can always kill someone tomorrow or next week or next month; we can't bring them back to life..."

That's what he said on March 8, 2003 about the war in Iraq and I'm saying it today.  You can always   "kill" someone in the media tomorrow or next week or next month, but you can't bring them back to life, so what is wrong with doing a little independent thinking and a little independent research to get things right the first time.  

by Andre Walker 2008-02-26 02:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Sounds Like An Iraq Strategy...

You've pushed this to absurdity.  I'm not going to play along.

by Piuma 2008-02-26 02:27PM | 0 recs
Nah...You Pushed It There...

...When you chose to abdicate your critical thinking skills in exchange for juicy gossip.

by Andre Walker 2008-02-26 02:33PM | 0 recs
Not absurd at all...

By you version Obama appoints himself arbiter of what constitutes a sufficient denial, then acts based on his decision that the denial was not sufficient. Seems very familiar...

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:34PM | 0 recs
Is Barack "The Decider"?

by Andre Walker 2008-02-26 02:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Sounds Like An Iraq Strategy...

EXACTLY. What ever happened to, "RIGHT on day one"? He was clearly wrong is his assumption here. Is this the quality of research we can expect from him as president? because we all know how you run your campaign is EXACTLY how you will be as president. Right?

by americanincanada 2008-02-26 02:34PM | 0 recs
Clarifying question

So "Obama camp has made it clear they will not sit back and be swift-boated" does mean "embracing a right wing canard and going after Clinton for something they had no proof that she was behind?"  Does the desire not to "sit back" for "swift-boating" makes it smart to believe Drudge?  Moral to attack your opponent's character without good evidence?

p.s.  "When did this "short time to deny responsibility" and waiting for a response happen?  Between 3:30 and 5 a.m. Eastern? Because the Obama camp was squawking to the media this morning like roosters.

by Trickster 2008-02-26 09:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

Incredible.  Please analyze your response in terms of whether you are such an Obama advocate that nothing pierces it (think: the old Bush supporters) or whether you can acknowledge a teensy weensy mistake.  Hmmmm?

by christinep 2008-02-26 03:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

The blind loyalty of Obamabots IS very similar to Bushies.

by annefrank 2008-02-27 07:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered By Matt Dru
Let's face it you all have been suckered by Bush..
Where and what are you willing to do in March?
by nogo war 2008-02-26 01:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

Oh give me a break, Piuma. You know damn well that if she would have condemed the photo they would have said, you included, that she was anti-muslim. she would have been painted again as a racist.

There is nothing to condem with the photo. Nothing wrong with being muslim. Nothing wrong with wearing ceremonial dress as a politician.

You all got punk'd...deal with it.

by americanincanada 2008-02-26 01:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

Nonsense.  There's a way to condemn the photo on what it's purpose is without being anti-Muslim.  We all know the intent of the photo is to try to reinforce the Manchurian Muslim meme. She had a golden opportunity to rise above the fray and she failed miserably.  If anyone got punked it was her.

by Piuma 2008-02-26 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

OK AIC maybe I'm wrong below.

Piuma, what are you talking about?

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

Obama could also have stayed above the fray and not bought into the Drudge spin. He didn't and it makes him look foolish to non-koolaide drinking people.

by americanincanada 2008-02-26 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

Hmmm...

I think Piuma was saying that she should have condemed Drudge for using the photo to play on Muslim fears, not acknowledge that there was anything wrong with wearing the costume.

But you have an excellent point. You can count on the media to take anything she says--any response at all--and twist it into something negative.

If she says what Piuma says they would have painted her as anti-Muslim even though that's not what Piuma meant at all. We'd be seeing headlines like "What Does Clinton Have Against Muslims?".

If she aggressively attacked Drudge, they'd trot out the old "Angry Hillary, She Can't Take It" narrative.

Anything, any response at all they'd have a counter attack.  I'm certain that they mapped it all out before they struck.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

I think you're being too hard on the Media.  It was a perfect time for her to actually attack the Muslim email as well as the not Patriotic enough attacks which are going on.  She could have played the Party leader which in general gets her good responses.  If she had done that, the Media would have fallen over itself to praise her.

by Piuma 2008-02-26 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

Why should she have to step up and fight Obama's battles for him?

by americanincanada 2008-02-26 02:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

She doesn't have to.  What I'm saying is she could have, she had the opportunity to do that, and I think it would have been a smart move.  

by Piuma 2008-02-26 02:20PM | 0 recs
No...

It is impossible to be too hard on the media.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Suckered By Matt Drudge

Yes, the media has a long history of falling all over itself to praise Hillary Clinton.  I'm sure that's exactly what would have happened.

by Denny Crane 2008-02-27 04:38AM | 0 recs
Whatever

This is my first - and my last - comment on this 'issue'... unless you count the comment I made yesterday agreeing with Jerome that I've never visited Drudge, I never will visit Drudge, and I put no stock in anything someone says based on what they supposedly read on Drudge.

I actually agree with Maggie Williams - it was a stupid "issue", but then trying to score 'points' off it.

I cannot help, but neither do I CARE - that Plouffe more or less attempted to score 'points' off it.

This was a dumb diversion, fed by both blog and cable teevee silliness.

It was asinine when it broke.  It's asinine now.

I proposed a "cite Drudge = autoban" rule yesterday... I still support one.

by zonk 2008-02-26 02:00PM | 0 recs
Here is what James Carville

would have said on Monday morning:

"Nobody in a position of responsibility with the Clinton campaign had anything to do with this disgusting smear, which has all the signs of a right-wing job.

Obama is on the defensive, trying to justify their attempts to mislead voters about Hillary's history of opposition to NAFTA, and her support of true Universal Health Care.  It's actually kind of comical how they are grasping at something that comes from the biggest conservative smear merchant there is to try and avoid the gutter tactics they are engaging in."

This is how the game is played by people who know how to play.

The Clinton people do not.  

by fladem 2008-02-26 02:16PM | 0 recs
Agreed...

...and Obama never should have embraced the Drudge canard.

Which is a worse mistake?

Politically?

Ethically?

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:24PM | 0 recs
He attacked the smear

which is what he should have done.

They (Obama) have nothing to apologize for, and Wolfson knows it - which is why he was still talking about it in the afternoon hours after Maggie Williams issued the first statement.  

I can't emphasize this enough - the Clinton people do not know what they are doing.  

by fladem 2008-02-26 02:31PM | 0 recs
No he didn't!

He attacked the Clinton campaign for the smear.

He chose to believe Drudge in absence of any proof and despite the Clinton campaign's denials.

I'm not saying Clinton couldn't have responded better, but let's talk about Obama's behavior. Tell me why his is the right response given that he has absolutely no proof that the Clinton campaign was behind the photo and some very good reasons knowing Drudge to suspect a right wing rat. Why is that the right move?

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:40PM | 0 recs
The initial Clinton

response neither denied that the photo came from them, nor condemmed the tactic.

They were well within their rights to fire back, and the Clinton campaign's refusal to condem Drudge's use of the picture was immoral.

In the real world when you opponent doesn't deny that they were the source of the photo, you go after them.

by fladem 2008-02-26 09:05PM | 0 recs
Re: The initial Clinton

They did deny it. Then they denied it again. Then they denied it again.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-27 07:03AM | 0 recs
Allow me to refresh your memory...

"On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we've seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it's exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world," said Obama campaign manager David Plouffe.
"Her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we've seen from either party in this election;" that's what was said by the Obama campaign.

There was no proof that anyone in the Clinton Campaign was responsible for what appeared on the Drudge, excuse me, Sludge Report.  However, the Obama camp, the media, and yes, even the bloggers rushed to judgment without asking any tough questions or thinking for themselves.

by Andre Walker 2008-02-26 02:48PM | 0 recs
Because if it fits their narrative re Hillary

is all about smear and dirty tactics, it must be true, never mind where it came from...Obama owes senator Clinton an apology, which we will obviously never see. The more I learn about Senator Obama, the more I am sickened at the thought of him winning this nomination. His tactics in this campaign puts to shame anything Hillary's campaign has put forth. I hope to see her get in his face tonight and call him on this crap once and for all. A new kind of politics indeed...

by Rumarhazzit 2008-02-26 03:06PM | 0 recs
In the adult world

William's initial response was an admission.

I am a former Prosecutor - had Williams been on the stand she would have been torn to sheds.
Note also the Williams statement says nothing about the ethics of using the photo the way Drudge did.

You don't get ot - the Clinton people created the impression through their own incompetence that they were the source of the picture.

Obama owes Clinton nothing.

by fladem 2008-02-26 09:08PM | 0 recs
Typical Obama campaign bob and weave

Has anyone ever noticed that rather than admit that they overreacted or that Obama made a choice he should not have made, Obama supporters always critisize Clinton for not responding to Barack's misstep in the right way.

This is exactly why people call you guys cultists. Rather than make the minor concession that everyone jumped the gun a bit too quickly, Obama supporters claim that Hillary didn't respond to a baseless accussation the right way. So she didn't respond to a vague warrantless attack which had no proof oir facts behind it...shame on her! Right...

Hillary could have made the absolute worse response to the accusation ever. That doesn't excuse, or disprove, the fact that like an unruly mob, Obama supporters and the media parroted a serious accusation from a source that is heavily biased and historically of questionable character.

by world dictator 2008-02-26 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Typical Obama campaign bob and weave

I generally don't make a habit of apologizing for things I neither did nor have any control over.

I find it sets bad precedent.

by zonk 2008-02-26 02:38PM | 0 recs
Get real, people!

Obama was HAPPY to have Drudge report something - anything - that he and his campaign could blame on Hillary - period. And all the "outrage" was pure theater.

It has NOTHING to do with whether or not it was true - it has EVERYTHING to do with Obama getting the headlines and the news cycle for the day, tainting Hillary Clinton, and getting all his brainless bots, all over the blogs, to run with the accusation.

It's all so very Rovian on Obama's part. You can't trust him any more than you can trust his mentors, the repukes.

by Firefly4625 2008-02-26 02:39PM | 0 recs
Yup...

And just watch what happens--is already starting to happen--as he becomes the sure nominee.

The long knives will turn on him.

Even this issue cuts both ways. By embracing this Drudge slime he keeps the picture in the news fanning the racial issue that the Thugs want to push. He demonstrates that he is more than willing to adopt shifty tactics, undermining his credibility and regard for the truth. And worst, he gives the Thugs something to hold over him.

If they make you they can break you.

I'm afraid Obama is very naive about the media and how he got to the position he is in. This is going to get very ugly very soon.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:46PM | 0 recs
Just wait til next month...

Once they have disposed of Hillary, they will turn their guns on Obama.

It's a simple divide and conquer strategy and it is working like a charm.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 02:49PM | 0 recs
And you know what?

I don't think I'm going to have the energy to fight that fight.  I'm tired of Hillary being excoriated by "fellow" liberals following the RWNM paradigm like Pavlov's dogs.  When the RWNM takes aim at Obama, I think I'll let Obama supporters handle it themselves.

by newhorizon 2008-02-26 05:48PM | 0 recs
Unfortunately...

Two Supreme Court seats are up for grabs.

There is no way we can let John McCain decide the future of this country.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Unfortunately...

I have thought about doing a diary on the Supreme Court issue.  I'm so tired of the "Sky if Falling!" approach on the Supreme Court. You know, despite McCain's red meat to conservatives about wanting to overturn Roe his actually doing so is pretty limited.  Supreme Court nominations typically come from those already on the federal bench.  The Bushes have appointed a very large number of current judges.  It is likely that Obama would have to choose from a lot of Bush-appointed judges (which makes sense when you hear his criticisms of Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party).  Whether we have a McCain or an Obama administration, we will likely have fairly conservative judicial nominees who will get the widest possible support from Congress.  The real battleground is Congress (the Senate specifically with regard to the Supreme Court).

Overall, the best success for the right wing has been killing Roe with the "death by a thousand cuts" rather than a direct reversal.  Considering that there is not likely to be a huge change in the numbers in the Senate (neither Obama nor McCain seem to have long coattails--for differing reasons) appointing any type of extremist is not likely.

Of course, the other issue is that the history of the Supreme Court is filled with examples of appointees whose judicial philosophy runs counter to the expectations of their appointing president.  That goes for liberals too.

The Supreme Court is becoming the liberal "fear card" and I don't like it.

by newhorizon 2008-02-27 06:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered By Matt Dru

I watched that panel where Wolf asked John King, Jack and Glorida Borger is they were fair. Of course they all said no.

But what struck me was the absolute insanity of CNN interviewing itself about whether or not they are fair. Especially just after Howard Kurtz basically said the media had indeed NOT been fair.

by americanincanada 2008-02-26 03:01PM | 0 recs
That was pretty funny...

Gloria was particularly viscious.

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 07:04PM | 0 recs
Her 'friends' call her...

"Bugeyes"

...but she doesn't like it, and it is not very nice, so don't call her "bugeyes"...

by MediaFreeze 2008-02-26 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered By Matt Dru

Tom Ashbrook had a realy good show today on this very topic with guests including Geraldine Ferraro and Pat Schroeder.  They were terrific and really let the media, including Tim Russert, have it. Did you hear it?

Go to onpointradio.org to replay it.  I forget the title, but whatever today's show on Hillary (and gender), that's it!

by moevaughn 2008-02-26 03:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered

What I want to know is why "garb gate" became such a huge non-story but the MSM is sitting on the  story about Obama's ties to William Ayers.

by grlpatriot 2008-02-26 03:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it...Y'all Got Suckered By Matt Dru

This Drudge-disliking Obama supporter recommends.

by Nathan Empsall 2008-02-26 09:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Mr. Grouch Jack Cafferty

Some months after the "fairy tale" meme had been thoroughly debunked, I saw that nitwit make the claim that African-Americans were voting against Clinton because Bill was calling Obama's campaign a fairy tale.

He is disgusting.  He has no respect - no respect whatsoever - for truth.  

by mgee 2008-02-27 05:49AM | 0 recs
I think..

she answered the question sufficiently during last night's debate.  Case closed.  

by JustJennifer 2008-02-27 08:33AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads