Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrude If this is coming from the Republicans, it would be a smart way to "smear" them both at the same time |
Indeed I think the Republican Party is more capable of smear campaigning than the Clintons. The Republican Party has a HISTORY of just that, with the following to examples which are now widely accepted by the media:
1) The Republican Party's smear (via Rove) against their own, John McCain, in order to promote George W. Bush prior to the 2000 primaries and caucuses; and
2) The Republican Party's smear of John Kerry in 2004 with the Swift Boat Vets... They basically ruined John Kerry's reputation with all those lies; and
3) The Republican Party's smear of Al Gore in 2000 by spreading rumors that he claimed to "invent" the Internet.
These 3 smear campaigns were all tremendously successful. Do do you remember the Kerry smear? The Swift Boat Vets were started by the Young Republicans in Texas in a very well timed, successful attack just before the party conventions. None of the "Swift Boat Vets" were with Kerry in Vietnam. By the time the public found out it was a fabrication, the damage to the Kerry campaign was done and Bush had won the election. But they attacked Kerry because GWB had very little experience and insight into being a soldier... so they attacked him on the one big credibility item Kerry had over Bush.
Same with the smear of Gore. Of course Gore is smarter than Bush, so what did the Republicans do? They successfully made this intelligent and thoughtful senator look like an ass. Because he was very wooden in his speeches, the ridiculousness of the claim to "invent the internet" - which he never did -- completely succeeded in discrediting him. But my, look how well he has salvaged his tarnished reputation since 2000! Unfortunately, most of the idiots who voted for GWB are too stupid to even comprehend their dreadful mistakes.
So be careful of any rumors, especially those perpetuated by Fox News and neocon think tank type sources. The neocon media machine is rather clever, which is why the idiocracy demographic continues to support them (just talk about "murdered" unborn babies and it's all over as far as rational thinking is concerned). People love to attack the Clintons. I think that despite any personal or personality-type issues people have with them, it's best to look beyond the snipy stuff -- after all, how well is any American going to know ANY candidate-- and look at the issues that they have historically supported. Truth is that politically, Clinton and Obama are relatively similar. Obama might win because the public finds his persona more palatable. Maybe he would be a good leader... who knows.
I can see the Republicans killing two birds with one stone: make Hillary look like a ruthless, dirty politician, and, for less of a better idea, take cheap shots at Barack Hussein ("must be a cousin of Saddam") Obama (sounds like "Osama").
This is just one small taste of what's to come. Wait till this summer. The Republican claws will be out and ready. Stay strong, question everything negative that is said, and don't fall for the cheap shots