Clinton blessed with inept enemies — redux

Honestly, if I didn’t know better, I’d say the Bush gang actually wants to help Hillary Clinton get elected. It’s good to have skills, it’s better to get lucky, but it’s the best when your enemies are hopelessly inept.

This week, the Clinton campaign unveiled its first TV ad of the season, which hit the Iowa airwaves yesterday. It’s a pretty good spot, featuring Clinton delivering a speech to a wholesome group of folks. “If you’re a family that is struggling and you don’t have health care, you are invisible to this president,” she says. “If you’re a single mom trying to find affordable child care so you can go to work, you’re invisible too. Americans from all walks of life across our country may be invisible to this president but they’re not invisible to me and they won’t be invisible to the next president of the United States.”

It seemed like a rather straightforward ad — nice music, simple theme, easy-to-embrace message. No muss, no fuss.

Except, the White House, showing absolute no message discipline at all, complained bitterly about it yesterday. A reporter asked Dana Perino if she wanted to respond to the ad. The obvious response is to take a pass, tell reporters that the White House doesn’t do advertising critiques, and steer clear of the 2008 race. Indeed, Perino initially seemed to realize the dynamic, telling reporters, “Well, this is going to be tricky going into the campaign season, when people start running ads, because as tempted as I am to take that head on, I think I will refer to the RNC for the specific — for answers on the politics of it.”

But then Perino just couldn’t help herself.

“[A]s to the merits of [the Clinton ad], I think it’s outrageous. This is a President who, first and foremost, has helped millions of seniors across the country have access to prescription drugs at a much lower cost. That system that the President put in — helped put in place, with the help of both sides of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, Medicare Part D, is helping millions of people, and working better than anyone would have expected. In addition to that, the President has tried to take on the issue at the root cause of it, and tried to change our health care system so that we actually are helping provide less expensive but still great quality care to people all over the country.

“And as to whether or not our troops are invisible to this President, I think that that is absurd, and that is unconscionable that a member of Congress would say such a thing.”

Perino might as well put gift-wrapping on it, with a little note for Hillary that read, “Your welcome.”

Clinton, naturally, was thrilled with the response and the White House’s whining.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said she thinks she struck a nerve with her new TV advertisement that accuses President Bush of ignoring certain Americans.

In the advertisement, Clinton says families without health care and single moms trying to find affordable child care are being treated as though they’re invisible to Bush — and so are soldiers who serve in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Apparently, I’ve struck a nerve. The White House just attacked me a few minutes ago saying how dare I say that Americans weren’t visible to the president,” Clinton told a crowd of more than 800 in Dubuque today. “Not only have I said it, I’m saying it now and I will keep saying it because I happen to believe it.”

The campaign also quickly linked to the official transcript of Perino’s comments on its campaign site, with the headline, “White House Attacks Hillary’s New Ad.”

This not only helps draw more publicity for the ad, but more importantly, it sets up the dynamic the campaign loves: the Bush White House vs. Hillary Clinton. (Right now, every other Democratic candidate is wondering, “How do we get the White House to attack one of our ads?”)

The exact same thing happened a month ago when Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman blasted Clinton, giving her yet another opportunity to humiliate the Bush gang.

As Ana Marie Cox put it, “The White House calling out Hillary’s new ad as ‘outrageous’ and ‘audacious’ plays so exactly in Clinton’s hands that if I didn’t know better, I’d assume the 08 campaign Karl’s working on is hers.”

Bushites and neo-cons love to hate on the Clintons. They feel that the Clintons are the one target they can focus on that will unite their base. The Clintons are Immoral, Liberal and Evil, in the eyes of the base.

I don’t know if they attack her because they hate so much, or if they attack her in an effort to keep their base together, but whatever it is, its as predictable as dawn following night.

  • I think they believe Hillary Clinton will be easiest for them to beat in 2008, and they are trying to help her get the nomination. And they are right that there are people who just detest them (especially in places like my state of TX), and who might vote Democratic if it were someone else. But it won’t matter in 08. She’ll win if she’s the nominee, but they won’t have to get a new play book. they already have all their Clinton attack tactics ready.

  • I think it’s no coincidence that Rupert Murdoch’s favorite Democrat is getting this sort of treatment. “Please don’ throw me in that briar patch over there!”

    Why? It’s a twofer – Clinton is the name that best riles the base, and is also the candidate likely to make the smallest waves for the richest elites for whom the GOP is run. They probably realize they can’t beat her in the general, but she is the Dem they will find easiest to live with. And, thanks to the fury she will raise in the lizardbrains, their loss to her will be by a less embarrassing margin.

  • “It’s good to have skills, it’s better to get lucky, but it’s the best when your enemies are hopelessly inept.”

    Does this mean that everyone will stop talking about how ‘skilled’ the White House is at politics and how ‘brilliant’ Karl Rove is? I think that part of the reason the D’s have gone on and on about such topics is they can’t bear to admit that they were completely hoodwinked on numerous occasions by a bunch of buffoons.

  • Back in 2000 there was a bit of video of Bush 41 congratulating his son on becoming president-elect (I don’t think the Supreme Court had ruled yet, but Senior knew the outcome anyway) and he hastened to also congratulate “Senator Clinton.” He could barely contain a sort of sniveling evil laughter as he said it. There was something very odd about his demeanor. He may have known then that she’d be the next president. That fuckin’ guy knows about a lot of things we don’t. I can’t get that sound-bite out of my mind. Does anyone else remember it?

  • I feel invisible to Hillary Clinton.

    I also feel like a serf living in the kingdom of King George XLIIV, complete with my Constitutional rights trampled on daily. I wouldn’t say that I’m invisible to King George, just riffraff that clutters the private landscapes owned by him and his Corporate Military Industrial Masters.

  • I can’t add much to the observations posted above.
    They are spot on.
    They go right to subtle soul of the matter…
    The time of insigths you won’t find on any oped page.

    I will however respond to this brave Hillary quote:

    Apparently, I’ve struck a nerve. The White House just attacked me a few minutes ago saying how dare I say that Americans weren’t visible to the president…

    She certainly is the daring firebrand isn’t she?
    Quite the boat-rocker.
    I mean… attacking the lowest rated president in American history with fluff.
    Wow.
    Gutsy stuff.

    And I guess that quote means she is going to attend soldier’s funerals as the war goes on under her command.
    Right Hill?
    That’s certainly going to endear you to an American public that loves you in droves.

    Our gal Hill…
    I just love her!

  • The obscenely paid Rethug consultants know that ’08 is not likely to be a good year for them, especially given that brood of colorless robots vying for the nomination. So they hedge their bets. Hillary is the hedge. If they can slime her enough one of their own slime will get in and become the next corporate stooge in the WH. If she wins she’ll govern Rethug lite, and the smarter Rethugs can live with that. The lunatic right base has no where to go except to one of their own, and Brownback can’t get elected dog catcher anywhere except in the bible bowels.

    It will certainly be fun to watch all the macho Rethug types take her on. She’ll cut their balls off. But there has to be an election for her to get that chance. Martial law. Don’t forget it. It can come after the election if they haven’t been able to lie, cheat and steal their way to a ‘victory’ at the polls. Cheney wants to duke it out with Iran, and one of these mornings we will wake up to find out we bombed ’em. The script is being played out day-by-day. One baby step at a time.

    Here comes the dreaded Draft.

    If a never ending war in Iraq, and a much bigger one with Iran becomes the hand-off to the next president, we will indeed live in interesting times. Would the country stand for Bush staying on past Jan. 20, 2009? Or would Cheney just declare himself ‘President-For-Life’.

    Inquiring minds want to know.

  • It is a good ad, and it’s good for Hillary to get attacked by the White House. But the White House isn’t completely stupid — this is direct mail by other means. The White House attacked this ad in order to open Republican wallets. Perino’s statement was a fund-raising pitch.

  • I’d like to be invisible to the NSA. Instead, these days I operate under the assumption that any and all phone calls, email, IM’s and comment posts are being recorded somewhere. BTW, to any NSA reading this, go Cheney yourself.

  • I only wish Clinton would not limit her ad criticism to Bush. The add should say: “If you’re a family that is struggling and you don’t have health care, you are invisible to this president and his Republican party” or something like that. Hang that anchor around all their necks.

  • JKAP- The Roman Numeral 43 is XLIII, but you’re right about being invisible. I can’t see you. With the exceptions of Ed Stephan, Steve Benen, me and a perhaps a couple other folks everyone here uses pseudonyms precisely for the sake of invisibility. The government can still find you if it wants to, though.

  • Clinton will see Rove’s The Math and raise him The Art of War.

    Those idiots can’t help themselves. They’re bullies so they have to rush out and start shouting. But because they’re confused and tired they just spout gibberish. Which is great. The more Clinton gets the White House to talk, the more she reminds voters that a Republican got us into this mess.

    Medicare Part D, is helping millions of people, and working better than anyone would have expected.

    Yes and the premiums for Medicare Part D will shoot up next year much to the benefit of … the pharmaceutical industry. Care to comment Ms. Perino?

  • Clinton is the name that best riles the base, and is also the candidate likely to make the smallest waves for the richest elites for whom the GOP is run. They probably realize they can’t beat her in the general, but she is the Dem they will find easiest to live with. And, thanks to the fury she will raise in the lizardbrains, their loss to her will be by a less embarrassing margin.

    Sharp, concise, and, far as I can tell, 100 percent correct.

    The Upstairs/Downstairs dynamic at Fux News is what’s going on amongst the Republicans writ small. Sean Hannity detests her with a frightening intensity; Rupert Himself likes her just fine. The money side of the Republican Party is perfectly willing to tolerate four or even eight years (probably depending on whether or not they deem JEB! electable in 2012) of the Empress. They know she’ll treat ’em right, while keeping the base angried up.

  • The White House and its dead-ender supporters (the hard-core 29%) suffer from an incurable malady – “Clinton Derangement Syndrome.” They hate the Clintons passionately but, despite all their verbiage, they can’t articulate just WHY they hate the Clintons. Their derangement often causes them to act against their own interests.

    Those of us who are alleged to suffer from “Bush Derangement Syndrome” have an advantage over those with CDS. We’re reality-based, and our derangement is due to reasonable cause.

  • I think tAiO at 13 hit it perfectly. It gives the hapless BushCo too much credit to think they are attacking HRC to help her win. The reality is that the Clintons really do strike a nerve with Team 43 (and probably even more so everytime 41 accepts Bill warmly – in contrast to troubled 41-43 relationship).

    Which is why I think HRC, despite stirring up their base, would be quite electable: they don’t think straight when dealing with HRC. She easily baits them to do irrational things. It might be fun to watch.

  • Let me make it clear, I’ve always liked Hillary Clinton, but she’s not my first choice in the primary and casting my vote for “not Hillary” (or anybody-but-Hillary, if you prefer), in the primary.

    That said, I fully expect her to win the nomination, I will gladly support her if she does (she’s been a true Democrat all her life), and I expect she will crush the Republican nominee and win the presidency.

    Of course, if we’re lucky enough, Obama, Edwards, Dodd, or Biden will win and, unlike Hillary (per her critics here), they will end corporate capitalism as we know it.

  • Perhaps the Clinton campaign should say “you’re welcome” instead of “your welcome.”

    Pet peeve.

  • Listen, I’m glad the White House is inept.

    But last I checked, Bush isn’t running again!

    How about attacking some of the people actually running for office? There’s, like, nearly a dozen of them. Just pick one. Any of them.

    I realize that Bush is an easy target, but to see all the Dem candidates continually attack a guy who will go off into a shady, black-cloud-covered sunset in 17 months seems like a gigantic waste of time.

    Call me crazy …

  • I couldn’t agree more with sagacity at #2; the White House and the RNC think Clinton will be the easiest of the front-runners to beat, because she has a long and often flip-floppy history while Obama basically came out of nowhere. If Clinton gets the nod, count on the White House switching overnight from puling unfocused crybabies to the expert dirtdigging team they are. I agree that she’d still probably prevail, although the Republican noise machine would tear her up some, but I think she’d make a crappy president. Not as bad as Bush, but that’s hardly setting the bar high.

  • Mark D.

    Not as crazy as it seems. The presidential election almost always boils down to “do you want more of the same?” vs. “do you want a change?”

    Even the Republican candidates are talking or hinting “change” while actually actively supporting “more of the same.”

    This is why Dems will win, Repugnicants will lose, and why the strategy of hitting at an unpopular regime is a good one.

  • It’s time, then, for Clinton to respond with specific examples of this Administation’s visibility toward each of the groups mentioned in the ad.

    But what I’m not seeing is what scares me – why is it that not one Democratic candidate has stated clearly, unequivocally, that if elected, he/she would roll back any and all ‘unitary executive’ power grabs that have taken place under this Administration? Such statements are needed, I think. It is of utmost importance that all facets of the unitary executive theory be roundly, soundly repudiated.

  • Hillary not “coming out of nowhere” means that she is pretty much fully vetted after Senate campaigns. I don’t expect much beyond the usual Hillary bashing.

    You all give Repugnicant 5th Columnists too much credit. None of them are “pushing Hillary with hope and a hidden agenda) anymore than we are picking who we think is the weakest Repug and are secretly pushing him and hoping we can fool the other side into electing him by mistake.

    And just like in New York, once people see her on her own, and discover she is actually quite intelligent, strong, and is not the monster Fox and Rush would have you believe, she will win in a walk.

  • terraformer said:

    It is of utmost importance that all facets of the unitary executive theory be roundly, soundly repudiated.

    Although I agree that it should be repudiated, and that it would be nice if Dem frontrunner(s) would do so and forego the temptation to have this legal weight handed to them upon election, I think the main reason is that this is not even a blip on the radar screen with the electorate and there are fears of head-scratching and even “tinfoil hattism” if one pounds on this issue right now.

  • definitely agree with terraformer. i want to hear the dems bash this unitary executive theory. i also want to hear them say they will restore the constitutional rights bushco stole from us the day they take office.

  • Is it so wrong to say that I want the new Dem president to undo the Unitary Executive. . . after they have already used the powers to send all who were part of BushCo to North Elbonia to be interrogated however the locals see fit, dismembered Halliburton by executive fiat, and created enough new seats filled with young liberals on the Supreme Court to outnumber the Papal Five?

  • Zeitgeist

    LOL

    But you forgot . . . and get rid of 84% of the congressional Republicans by indicting them for crimes committed during the last 6+ years when it was “anything goes – to the victors belong the spoils.”

  • Is it so wrong to say that I want the new Dem president to undo the Unitary Executive. . . after they have already used the powers to send all who were part of BushCo to North Elbonia to be interrogated however the locals see fit, dismembered Halliburton by executive fiat, and created enough new seats filled with young liberals on the Supreme Court to outnumber the Papal Five?

    Ahem … Shame on you Zeitgeist! Shocked. I am SHOCKED you would suggest doing anything like that to members of BushCo.

    It would be far more appropriate to dart them, fit them with radio transmitter collars and drop them off at various remote points in Iraq in groups of three. They’d awake to find they have just enough survival gear to keep them alive IF they all cooperate and work very hard but various groups of angry Iraqis are locked in on their signals so they need to keep moving. The entire thing could be broadcast by satellite and all proceeds would go to humanitarian relief efforts in Iraq.

    tAiO

    p.s. Executive fiat. Is that some sort of fancy sword or ax or something?

  • Not as crazy as it seems. The presidential election almost always boils down to “do you want more of the same?” vs. “do you want a change?”

    Even the Republican candidates are talking or hinting “change” while actually actively supporting “more of the same.”

    This is why Dems will win, Repugnicants will lose, and why the strategy of hitting at an unpopular regime is a good one.
    -colonpowwow

    Oh, I understand why they’re doing it. But I’m going to have to very respectfully disagree that it’s a good strategy.

    If the GOP candidates are running from Bush, but actually propose “more of the same” (a point upon which we agree), then why don’t Hillary, Obama, et al, show why those candidates are just like Bush?

    All they do is keep going after a guy who won’t be running for office any time soon, without actually making the Bush connection to those against whom they will actually be running.

    While it’s definitely the easy and popular thing to do, I just think it’s a waste of time.

    I dunno … there’s what seems like a decade between now and the actual election, so maybe they’re just keeping their powder dry until the time actually comes to open fire.

    (Note that I’m totally open to the idea that I have no clue what I’m typing about—there’s a reason I’m not employed by a campaign, nor blog about politics any more. 🙂 )

  • Yeah, I understand your point and it certainly is tempting (especially in the case of Bush) to just scream silently until that wonderful day he just goes (or is put) away.

    I think the other problem is that the Dem candidates are focusing mostly on positioning themselves vs. other Dems without having any idea (or wanting to lend an aura of respectability by default) which particular Repugnicant will prevail as their nominee.

    Thinking of what you said, it seems like the party Dem VIPs and party organizations (Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy etc) and others not running, respond quickly these days to any BS steaming from a GOP frontrunner. That seems to be their response to your point.

  • ***comment 5…Hey Haik…”He could barely contain a sort of sniveling evil laughter as he said it. There was something very odd about his demeanor….”

    That’s the way he always laughed and acted…remember he used to be CIA director.

    ***#6…JKap…you ‘are’ invisible to Hillary…she’s a NY senator…good to get those attacks out there in front though.
    Clinton was just doing the usual. Perrino’s the idiot. Plus more of the same is all the GOP candidates save one.

    What I find distressing is how so many of you just seem to shut your ears to Kucinich. He’s the only one saying and doing everything right. People just say , “hmm”, and then go back to talking about the other candidates.

    He’s voted right on every single issue the 1st time and is the only one to actually bring articles of impeachment against Cheney (HR 333), has introduced single payer not for profit health care, has the best plan for ending the Iraq occupation, would end NAFTA, I mean…I don’t get why he is so easily ignored when he is the only one who really speaks truth to power AND walks the walk. I don’t get it.

    I will support whoever wins the nomination but Kucinich is authentic and everything I could want in a candidate yet all I ever hear about is Clinton and Obama. Why is that?

  • Hey, I’m a longtime admirer and supporter of Kucinich and I’m voting for him in the primary. I think he’s the most progressive of the lot. But since he’s mired in marginal territory politically (low single digits, I believe), and I’m firmly in the reality-based carpetbag, I know that all the action here is in discussing one(s) who has a realistic shot of getting the Democratic nomination.

  • Maybe she’ll hit the lotto and get the cable news talking heads replaying the ad a few hundred times (for free) in the course of discussing the controversy. The only thing they love more than good controversy to flog is a nice piece of video to run whilst flogging.

  • There is one senario which has been missed. Yesterday Karl Rove said he would be advising a presidential candidate but he won’t say which one. Being that the Repubican brand is not selling these days. I think he will be working with Obama as an Independent if he loses in the primaries. The only way the Republicans can win the White House is to split the Democrats. As has been quoted Hillary is ok with the corporate types. But to the neo-cons who now have power she would be repugnant. Watch Obama to see if he echoes Karl Rove. Comments like — I am a uniter not a divider. The neo-cons have the power now and are not going to give it up easily. I hope and pray this doesn’t happen.

  • Hillary’s calm, clear message about the invisibility of Americans to this President shouldn’t have raised their hackles. The fact that they’re all ape sh_t over that ad tells me that Rove wants to change the subject. His history of coaching Bush has ruined any chance for progress on real issues for average Americans. He can’t duck behind a fusillage of blanks fired against Clinton. They will lose, and lose big.

  • The GOP does NOT think Hillary will be the easiest to beat – quite the contrary. Hillary is their biggest fear. Anyone who doesn’t see this needs a lesson in common sense.

    It’s an old tired mantra and I am amazed that there are “Democrats” who keep peddling it.

  • One of the smartest, toughest Repubs ever was Al D’Amato, Senate banking chair. Hillary went gunning for D’Amato in 1998, calling him among many other things a “Jesse Helms clone”. Result: one of the most powerful Repubs got his ass kicked right out of the Congress, losing to Chuck Schumer.

    No, the Repubs do not think HRC is easy to beat.

    I think the ad is beautiful. Right at the heart of the Republican base, leading them back to sanity.

  • Comments are closed.