Friday, July 25, 2008

Obama's GOP backers

Two major new articles are up today. Taken together, they offer the most compelling Theory of Obama I've yet encountered.

The first is Greg Sherman's piece in The New Republic: "The End of the Affair." Pressfolk previously "in the tank" for Mr. O may now be de-tanking themselves.

A couple of weeks ago, the NYT published an article by Adam Nagourney titled "Poll Finds Obama Isn't Closing Divide on Race." It was hardly a hit piece. Nevertheless, the Obama camp pummeled him hard.
"I've never had an experience like this, with this campaign or others," Nagourney tells me. "I thought they crossed the line. If you have a problem with a story I write, call me first. I'm a big boy. I can handle it. But they never called. They attacked me like I'm a political opponent."
More:
Reporters are grumbling more and more that the campaign is acting like the Prom Queen. They gripe that it is "arrogant" and "control[ling]," and the campaign's own belief that Obama is poised to make history isn't endearing, either.
Here's the most telling -- and troubling -- part:
Reporters who have covered Obama's biography or his problems with certain voter blocs have been challenged the most aggressively. "They're terrified of people poking around Obama's life," one reporter says. "The whole Obama narrative is built around this narrative that Obama and David Axelrod built, and, like all stories, it's not entirely true. So they have to be protective of the crown jewels." Another reporter notes that, during the last year, Obama's old friends and Harvard classmates were requested not to talk to the press without permission.
Just what sort of "crown jewels" are they protecting? The answers may reside in what may be the most eye-opening investigation of Campaign 2008 yet published...

Donna and Karl, sittin' in a tree. Did you know that Donna Brazile has long been chummy with Karl Rove? Take special note of the way Donna praised Rove and Bush in the wake of Katrina.

Turns out Donna's GOP pals have long taken an interest in Barack Obama. Please forgive a lengthy quote (emphases added by me):
Obama did score a landslide victory that year, but it had little to do with his age, energy level or the obsolete nature of the Democratic Party establishment. His campaign manager David Axelrod ran the classic Rovian smear campaign, first accusing Obama’s top primary contender of sexual impropriety. After disgracing Blair Hull out of contention, Axelrod used the same device against the G.O.P. primary winner, Jack Ryan.

Of course, this is where things get interesting. House Speaker Dennis Hastert decided he must stick his oar into the battle, calling on Ryan to end his senate bid. The candidate dutifully bowed out, and in his stead, the Illinois Republican Party fielded an unknown, African American bible-thumper from Maryland named Alan Keyes. Clearly, the G.O.P. wanted Obama to win that election. No other explanation can account for the party sacrificing a senate seat to a (supposedly) liberal Democrat who'd (supposedly) spoken out against the Iraq War in 2002.

A Hollywood script writer couldn't have come up with this storyline. Within a year of arriving in Washington, Brazile’s rising star – the product of a globe-trotting Kansas woman and a philandering tribal leader in Kenya - had launched his presidential exploratory committee. The Internet fundraising team of Howard Dean signed on for the ride. So, too, did some of Wall Street’s biggest investment banks, corporate law firms, and energy giants. By the end of 2007, Obama would post a record-breaking haul of $100 million in campaign contributions. And all while he was still "introducing himself", as Brazile and other analysts put it, to the American public.

Who exactly brought the banks and oil companies to the table still remains to be ferreted out, but it wasn't Dean or Brazile, or even the man who placed Obama on the speaker's list at the 2004 Democratic Convention, John Kerry. It's more likely that Karl Rove huddled with top Bush fundraisers to set that gravy train in motion. Among the candidate's money bundlers were George Kaiser and Robert Cavnar, both oil industry executives. Other Bush campaign pioneers joined the bandwagon soon afterward.
Allow me to add a further note about the Ryan business. He was running behind in most polls, and may have lost to Obama in any case. But no-one can deny that he would have been a tougher foe than Alan Keyes was. The strange (and possibly illegal) leaking of Ryan's sealed divorced records -- against the wishes of both himself and his famed ex -- could have created sympathy for Ryan.

Now let's fast-forward to the 2008 primaries.

Remember the prog-blog Big Lie about how Hillary owed her votes to a cross-over campaign masterminded by Rush Limbaugh? This propaganda meme spun the truth 180 degrees.

The Republicans had targeted Hillary for removal from the beginning:
As she would mention in the Washington Times article two years later, her “old friend” Rove had hit the ground running with the start of the 2008 election cycle, appearing on talk shows to bash frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Behind the scenes, G.O.P. rank and file activists were organizing crossover voting drives to knock Clinton out of the race before November.
That's not all. As you know, many have questioned the antics of the Obama team in the caucus states. Obama did much better in those elections.) Were the Obama supporters actual Democrats -- or were they Rovian changelings?
In the red states, they could easily outnumber Democrats at the caucuses, enriching Obama’s delegate count and allowing him to boast later “I’ve won more states.”

To recruit additional foot troops for this effort, New Hampshire G.O.P. leader Stephen DaMaura started the Facebook website “Stop Hillary Clinton (One Million Strong AGAINST Hillary).”
Although the Clinton camp didn’t realize it at the time, a caucus in Nevada (like a caucus anywhere) would naturally benefit Obama, since her base of blue-collar, older and non-English-speaking supporters would not be driving across town to attend some meeting run by disorganized volunteers. On the other hand, motivated Republicans could be counted on to show up, especially if the G.O.P. candidates could be persuaded not to campaign in the state. (They didn’t.)
And now we get into serious electoral fraud territory:
According to Cronin’s study, nearly all of Obama’s 138-delegate lead over Clinton could be traced to 12 red state caucuses. In most of these contests he routinely won by 2-1 margins, even though polls in those states showed the candidates much closer. In Idaho, for instance, with its scant African American population, few colleges and relatively few Starbucks outlets, he captured 15 of the state's 18 delegates.

Something fishy was going on here. Was Dean's so-called 50-state strategy for a DNC managed campaign to stack caucus locations with Obama supporters? Did the number of G.O.P. crossover voters wildly exceed expectations? Or was there just downright lying in the computation of the vote tallies?
Too bad "Thor" Friedman won't talk about this stuff. Fortunately, we have Rosemary Regello, author of the above. She also wrote this list of potential "October Surprises" awaiting the Lightbringer.

If Regello's analysis is correct, then Rove followed a clear one-two-three strategy.

1. Pick the Dem with the most skeletonized closet.
2. Set 'im up.
3. Knock 'im down.

Even if step three does not come off as planned, those skeletons will keep a President Obama in line.

7 comments:

DarkGravity said...

Yeah, I'm not buying it. While I do think that the Obama campaign has done some very shady things, I don't think it's a GOP trick. Obama is out for himself and it's that simple.

Anonymous said...

Not buying it hahaha. The stakes are in the multiple trillions of $$ - all (as in ALL) the resources in the world, from Entertainment Revenues to New Third-World wood shavings, to Nuclear Secrets, plus WiFi and Broadband. Who's stupider than us who pay $100's every month for airy electrons?

Without Hillary in the bargain it's all dull. I want her like Patton wanted war.

Dimitri

CognitiveDissonance said...

I've often thought there was something very Rovian about this election. Particularly with the courting of Republicans and red state caucus victories added to the mix. So I wasn't really surprised by this story, it basically vindicated my feelings.

I've always had the feeling that the dislike Rove and republicans was much deeper than the excuses they give when asked. I think Rove in particular is worried about payback. Quite frankly, he and Bush and Cheney and many more should be behind bars right now. I doubt that Obama or McCain will do anything about that if they win the presidency. But after all they put the Clintons through in the '90's, I do think that scares them. I think part of what Rove has done is to protect his own corrupt, worthless back side.

Unknown said...

My fears are that this is NOT a Rovian dirty trick. Too much "international corporation" money put bHo into the running in the beginning. And the Bush Admin needs someone who will pardon their a$$es; they can only be certain about bHo because of the corruption dripping out of every pore. If it is all a Rovian trick for the Repubs to win -- then for the first time in my life, I have to say more power to them.

The big problem is that I could see something like this almost from the first simply by following the money and bHo "corporate" votes in IL Senate. Who contributed to bHos HopeFund, unless the donors were hidden until the time I began my research? But could they have been hidden from Hillary's researchers? Where was Hillary's team? Asleep in Inevitability Land?

Perry Logan said...

Beyond his backers, you can make a strong case that Obama is himself a neocon.

Obama voted for the Bush-Cheney Energy Bill--as neocon as you can get--called by some the worst piece of legislation ever passed.

Obama kissed the ass of the Ronald "Death Squad" Reagan admnistration, while dissing the Clinton admnistration. For this alone, he should be run out of the party.

Obama voted for FISA and big media immunity. All but the stupid Obamites have noticed the problem with this.

Obama voted for the U.S.-Mexico border wall.

Obama seems to be...ah... for NAFTA. Or willing to lie about NAFTA.

Obama talks the talk of the right-wing pro-Israeli lobby.

Obama used neocon (i.e., dirty) tactics in his primary campaign.

And this is only what we KNOW about.

So--inasmuch as Obama is any earthly thing--he's a neocon. Or he is under powerful mind control by neocons, which would explain the aura of creepiness...

I ask you, Joe--how can progressives be so dumb? Has their misogyny blinded them?

Anonymous said...

At this point, nothing surprises me about what this man does or what capacity he has for knocking people out of the race.

Honestly, most of the Republicans I know who voted for Hillary did so because they felt she was better suited to CIC and the presidency than McCain. These weren't people with money to just throw away but yet they gave to her. Now that Obama's running, they are either going to stay home or vote McCain to keep Obama out of the White House.

Was there a GOP conspiracy? Possibly. Who knows.

Anonymous said...

There's a lot more to this that will take this a level or two lower in near term. I really don't want to ruin the surprise and am sure everyone will understand when it surfaces.

I was in a family for more than 26 years who joined a huge Crime System. They knew Obama in the 90's and that among a few other things will start to explain other things many are suspecting.

Marty Didier
Northbrook, IL