Would the Clinton campaign put drug use on the table?

Yesterday, the Huffington Post’s Tom Edsall reported that Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign may be subtly, quietly targeting Barack Obama over his teenaged drug use. Edsall’s article, though, felt a little thin — it said the Clinton campaign had sent out a “cryptic” email alluding to “shortcomings” in “Obama’s past. The message from the campaign headquarters did not go into any detail.

The Clinton campaign email did not spell out Obama’s “shortcomings, inconsistencies or misstatements,” but other Democratic activists have quietly received messages from Clinton allies pointing in the likely direction. Those messages provided a link to an Iowa Independent story by Douglas Burns headlined “The Politics Of Obama’s Past Cocaine Use.”

Of course, this isn’t exactly rock-solid. Unnamed activists have received ambiguous messages from “Clinton allies” about Obama’s drug use? I need a little more. If the Clinton campaign is seriously going to pursue this, it would be a pretty dramatic escalation, but I need something tangible.

This qualifies. (via Greg Sargent)

Billy Shaheen, the co-chairman of Hillary Clinton’s campaign in New Hampshire, raised the issue of Sen. Barack Obama’s past admissions of drug use in discussing the relative electability of the Democrats seeking the presidential nomination today. […]

“The Republicans are not going to give up without a fight … and one of the things they’re certainly going to jump on is his drug use,” said Shaheen, the husband of former N.H. governor Jeanne Shaheen, who is planning to run for the Senate next year. Billy Shaheen contrasted Obama’s openness about his past drug use — which Obama mentioned again at a recent campaign appearance in New Hampshire — with the approach taken by George W. Bush in 1999 and 2000, when he ruled out questions about his behavior when he was “young and irresponsible.”

Shaheen said Obama’s candor on the subject would “open the door” to further questions.

The Clinton campaign really ought to be careful with this; they’re playing with fire.

Shaheen isn’t just some county volunteer spreading around the stupid Obama/Muslim emails; he’s the chairman of the Clinton campaign in the first primary state, and a major player in the state’s Democratic Party.

Of course, you’ll notice that the attack here is indirect — Shaheen didn’t go after Obama for drug experimentation as a teenager, he went after Obama because, he said, Republicans would use drug experimentation as a teenager against him.

But this, I suspect, a big mistake for the Clinton campaign. For one thing, it reeks of desperation — perhaps even more so than using Obama’s kindergarten essays as evidence of excessive ambition. For another, it feels like an awfully cheap shot.

Indeed, Shaheen implicitly told the Washington Post that George W. Bush handled the drug issue well by fudging the truth, while Obama has handled it poorly by acknowledging the truth. As a rule, praising Bush — and urging a Dem rival to follow his example — is a bad idea in a Democratic presidential primary.

This issue has been pretty thoroughly vetted. Obama has written about it, spoken about it, and answered questions about it. Voters don’t care, reporters don’t care, even Rudy Giuliani — hardly sympathetic to Dems — has said he believes the issue should be off the table.

For the Clinton campaign to push this, at this late hour, could backfire.

As a rule, praising Bush — and urging a Dem rival to follow his example — is a bad idea in a Democratic presidential primary.

Hey Democrats! Your purpose is to bury Bush. Not to praise him.

Jees! Where is Marc Antony when you need him.

  • personally, i admire obama’s candid response. it is so refreshing after listening to all the others deny/obfuscate/change the subject on so many issues. it shows the man’s integrity.

    but then i’m just a damn librul hippy anyway……

  • Bush destroyed most of his mental capacity to think with abuse of cocaine and alcohol years ago. Is that “on the table” or “off the table?”

    Hillary is tanking. Nixon used to worry about “peaking too early” in the polls… I think that her yes vote to allow Bush to invade Eye-rack will end up destroying her chances to ever become President; she looks much to cynical and calculating for the millions of Americans that are sickened by this seemingly endless slaughter and imperial occupation of Eye-rack.

  • Yes, Shaheen, there’s no there there. If anybody cared about Obama’s drug use, it surely would have showed by now. The earlier shots at Obama – his kindergarten ambitions and his Indonesian foreign policy experiences – were not over the line for me, because he surely asked for it, and asked for it in real time, this year. But the drug thing is over the line. As a Hillary supporter, I ask you, DON’T DO IT.

  • Much better to throw candor under the bus and say that you tried drugs but that you “didn’t inhale”.

    Can the Clinton people look any more desperate?

  • personally, i admire obama’s candid response.

    Agreed. Much better than the famed “….I didn’t inhale”

  • Um…besides being a Right-wing smear tactic, this is out and out racist. Did anyone ask Bill Clinton if he dealt drugs? How about George W.? No, but we should certainly ask the black dude.

    The last thing Democrats want and need is a Rove-inspired campaign and presidency.

  • Depends on how you look at this. Do you think Shaheen was out to smear Obama? Do you think he was passing out a “hit”? I don’t think so. Shaheen knows so well what the Right Wing Slime Machine is likely to do with kind of talk. We ought to be agreeing and realize that the repubs are desperate and , as history as recorded, will do anything and everything to maintain power. If you can accept this fact then he speaks the truth. If you can’t then you are drinking too much kool aid.

  • I’m pretty sure Bush did more coke in his day than Obama ever did.

    Look. As far as this “he did drugs” issue goes and the people who look down disparagingly on those who have done it, I ask this: He stopped doing drugs. A long time ago too. Those of you who condemn it, ask yourselves if you could start doing blow and just stop. Obama didn’t go through rehab and relapse, he stopped. A whole lot of people can’t just stop. I know about this through my experiences and of those around me. You HAVE to have a STRONG mind to stop of your own volition. So for those of you looking down on us with contempt from your high horse, you can just go powder your nose and see if you feel the same disgust for those that may have experimented or flat out just used.

    This whole thing is a non-issue. Its more suprising that he admitted it instead of denying or dissembling. But no. And its a shame really, that because of his experiences that he has not spoken out more strongly against the drug war but I understand his need to not rile the voting base. Many people still think the war on drugs is working and to say otherwise is political suicide.

    Hopefully this whole thing gets shut down cause it is very stressing. It mucks up the debate and doesn’t have any bearing on today’s problems. We might as well be discussing hillary’s pant suits.

  • Clintonism simplified: Let’s pee our pants in fear of what the Republicans might do.

    This is as disgusting as it is tactically stupid. janice @ 7 has it right–the way I imagined this came about was the Clintonistas sitting around, brainstorming about how to surface latent racism in the electorate, and this was what they hit upon. Then they sent out a surrogate high-profile enough to get attention for the charge but far enough away from Our Lady of Perpetual Triangulation that if the trial balloon was shot down, she’d less likely take collateral damage.

    Don’t they make you all proud to be Democrats?

  • It is pretty easy to over analyze this.

    I think the Clinton team is frustrated with her inability to get past the electability issue, and to try and neutralize it Shaheen is trying to say “look, it isn’t like Obama is going to get a pass, either” and the example he came up with, for better or worse, seems pretty fair game because Obama put it out there himself. It is a little hard to say it is a cheap shot or a dirty trick when Obama has openly discussed it. What Shaheen really appears to be going after was the political ramifications of Obama putting it out there (and sure, if that reminds some people Obama did it, icing on the cake).

    You can argue that Shaheen is wasting his breath because no one cares or Obama did a good job of innoculating against the issue by raising it early, or that Shaheen made a mistake because it just reanimates the jokes about Bill’s “I didn’t inhale” dodge, but those are different discussions than whether Team Clinton is “Rovian” for Shaheen to say this.

  • “On December 12th, 2007 at 5:12 pm, DB said:
    I’m pretty sure Bush did more coke in his day than Obama ever did.” – Comment #10

    I think that the correct way to phrase that is “Bush did more coke in his day and night and the following day until his source stopped answering his calls, than Obama ever did.”

  • I really like this site, but I think you’ve left out some key context. First, Shaheen was apparently talking about the Democratic field more broadly (in the WaPo writeup, he also ciriticized Edwards while praising Dodd and Biden.) Further, here’s a more complete version of what Shaheen said:

    Shaheen said Obama’s candor on the subject would “open the door” to further questions. “It’ll be, ‘When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?'” Shaheen said. “There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It’s hard to overcome.”

    He’s making it clear that asking questions like this constitutes “dirty tricks.” That doesn’t seem to be a good strategy for a campaign that plans to follow up on it.

  • Zeitgeist: …I think the Clinton team is frustrated with her inability to get past the electability issue…

    Yeah, I’ll go with that. And your point is well taken, this could be a fairly innocent statement about Republicans. But her electability is a problem, and not because of slimy shit the Republicans might toss out there. Her electability would be a lot higher if she hadn’t taken up positions on Iraq and Iran that Joe Lieberman would be proud of, and if she had apologized for her vote on Iraq. And maybe it would be a lot higher if she wasn’t riding Bill’s coat tails. (IMO if she wasn’t married to Bill Clinton we wouldn’t even be having this conversation because she never would have become a senator in New York).

    Her campaign has been gliding along on her “inevitability”, and that train has almost jumped the tracks. I can see how they might go for the low road, whether they actually are going there or not is open to debate but there certainly is a lot of motive to do so.

  • Racerx, you give me too much credit. I don’t suggest it was an innocent statement about Republicans – it was clearly anti-Obama, but trying to say “hey, it isn’t just Hillary that has electability issues, Oabama does, too.”

    My guess is that the Clinton camp believes if they can make the electability issue a draw, it lets them get back to the experience issue: if all candidates are equally electable (or not) who has the experience to get things done once elected – and issue they think she wins. (And the Obama responsive theme presumably is even if electability were a draw, the question should be who will do the right things once elected, and issue his camp thinks he wins.)

  • Zeitgeist: You are the only one who seems rational. When we get past the Clinton haters and all the rest of the trolls we find that there was much more said and much more discussed. All lot of the comments are as if this was said on nat’l TV and Obama was dissed. Boy! Talk about selective reading.

  • from my typing in #16, one might reasonably ask if I am doing drugs. . . sorry for all of the numerous typos.

  • I think the Clinton campaign needs to drop this IMMEDIATELY. All Obama has to say is “Well, I didn’t claim I didn’t inhale.” A sideswipe through her husband, but what would she say? There’s not a damn thing she can say.

    Let the Republicans go after Obama if they choose to do that. GW’s drug and alcohol abuse continued long into his adulthood, and I’m sure Obama can come up with a snappy reply to Republicans.

    Hillary doesn’t want to go there.

  • Are the Clinton people that stupid? As a 62 year old who did his share of drugs as a college student and outgrew it, this is the height of stupidity. Who would we rather have, a candidate to admits to what people over the age of 17 admit to doing or having done or an ex-president who gave the implausible expanation that he “didn’t inhale” This just reminds people of the worst of Bill Clinton instead of the best, of which there was a lot more.

  • I’m simple amazed at all these comments. We all know that if Obama is nominated
    Mr. Shaheen will be celebrated as a masterful political anaylist.Instead of acknowledging this, all we can do is cut ourselves in pieces. I’m appauled at the “inward” crtitique most have offered about Demos but don’t seem to remember what the repubs have done to this Country over the last 7+ years. Don’t you remember who and what they are? A lot of the comments than have been offered need to be looked upon with suspect.

  • I’ll guess the Clinton campaign will say Shaheen was freelancing on that one. Of course it’s out there now and that’s obviously convenient for them.

    On the other hand, it was also out there before. Obama’s statements regarding his youthful drug and alcohol abuse did not originate with the Clinton campaign. They originated with Obama. The incident was reported on by the MSM and a bit of a stir in NH at the time, both because it struck people as an impolitic thing for a presidential candidate to say and because at least one high-school student’s take-away on it apparently was something along the lines of, “Gee, Barack Obama partied it up fiercely in high school too, and look how well he turned out.”

    It would also be pretty damned naive to think that the Republicans would shy away from using that or anything they can lay dig up or make up against whoever Democrats nominate. Unless you just woke up yesterday morning and decided to start following politics for the first time, you know exactly what to expect of them. For that matter, it’s not like the Democrats would not have used Bush’s DWIs against him in 2000 if that had come to light sooner, or his draft-dodging ways in 2004 if, well, you know. So the answer is obviously yes. I think we could confidently predict that if Senator Obama became the Democratic nominee, we would certainly be hearing about that one again.

  • Goodby Hillary.

    This BS is just proving everyone’s worst fears about her.

    The polls won’t show the intense SURGE of true anti-Hilliary feelings resuliting from these high handed, below the belt tactics. She might just get wiped out by Feb.

  • I’m sick and tired of hearing things
    From uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocritics
    All I want is the truth
    Just gimme some truth
    Ive had enough of reading things
    By neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians
    All I want is the truth
    Just gimme some truth
    –John Lennon, Gimme Some Truth (1971)

  • CalD,
    It’s not that we won’t hear it again…I think it’s pretty safe to assume that Obama and his people would expect that to come out in the general election as some smear from the Republicans; the problem is that these are self-serving remarks hiding under the guise of trying to protect young Obama from the big bad conservative message machine.However, they functioned to bring the issue back onto the table during the primary. Nothing more than an attack that was supposed to look like something else..

  • Given that ex-President Bubba did indeed “inhale”, this is not something the only real Republican in the presidential race should be bringing up.

    But thanks for another good reason not to vote for the worst Democratic presidential candidate ever (after hubby).

  • Comments are closed.