Jonathan Alter: "Attacks on Obama insult voters.."
by crackityjones, Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 07:50:48 AM EST
So here we have more coverage. This time its not Time but Newsweek. A piece by Jonathan Alter who I am sure will be discredited withing five minutes. Its always shoot the messenger time around here. Wouldn't want to think about what he's writing! No! He's the mainstream media! Oh yeah and lets get in some insults on people who shop at Wholefoods while we're at it!
We've seen stories in the AP also about basically what amounts to the Clinton's strategy for saying anything and telling us many lies, distorting as many points, sinking as low as they possible can all in order to reclaim the White House. Basically we are seeing stories all over in what amounts to a backlash over the Clinton's slash and burn lie and cheat path to the White House.
The arrogance and hypocrisy being exhibited by the Clintons- and their supporters - just boggles the mind. We are used to seeing this from George W. Bush- with his "I have a mandate" crap- but at least he had won reelection! The Clintons meanwhile who haven't won anything yet are already exhibiting unimaginable levels of hubris. How dare anyone challenge their claim to the White House!
Can you imagine what 8 years under the Clintons is going to look like? Shudder the thought
QUOTES FROM (LINK TO ENTIRE PIECE AT BOTTOM)
The Clintons' Patronizing Strategy
The latest attacks on Obama insult voters' intelligence.
By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 11:29 AM ET Jan 24, 2008
Obama's best hope is that Democratic voters aren't as dumb as Hillary and Bill Clinton think they are. The outcome of the primaries depends on whether, amid their busy lives, voters can get a general fix on who is more often telling the truth about the barrage of charges and countercharges.
This is ironic, because the way Bill Clinton survived impeachment was by betting on the intelligence of the American public. Now he's betting against it.
In South Carolina, Hillary is airing a radio ad that goes back to a theme she pushed in the debate there Monday night: that Obama liked Republican ideas. As Obama pointed out in his response ad, this is "demonstrably false," as referees from ABC News to the Washington Post to factcheck.org have established.
These are completely ordinary comments. In fact, as Obama pointed out in the Myrtle Beach debate, Hillary is considerably more effusive about Reagan in Tom Brokaw's new book, "Boom." Bill has also made manystatements over the years that were much more complimentary toward Reagan. Nobody paying attention thinks either Obama or the Clintons likes Reagan's right-wing politics.
But instead of moving on to another line of attack with more grounding in what Bill Clinton called "indisputable facts," the Clinton campaign decided to bet that this Reagan horse could be flogged for more votes among less educated voters in South Carolina who might be inclined to believe Hillary's preposterous version.
Less educated? Yes, downscale voters are their target group. Obama is stronger among well-educated Democrats, according to polls. So the Clintons figure that maybe their base among less educated white Democrats might be receptive to an argument that assumes they're dumb. Less well-educated equals gullible in the face of bogus attack ads. That's the logic, and the Clintons are testing it in South Carolina before trying it in Super Tuesday states. They are also road-testing major distortions of Obama's positions on abortion, Social Security and the minimum wage.