Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Clinton: Whining in Texas, Too

UPDATE: This is turning into possibly the biggest story of the primary so far. First there was the Ohio press release; then the Texas press release you're reading about now; then, later tonight right just in time to make the newspaper deadlines, a telephonic press conference that accused the Obama campaign of widespread fraud in the caucus process (without any evidence, like witnesses, made available at the conference) and held open the possibility of Clinton bringing lawsuits challenging the election results and artificially stringing out the primary until the Democratic National Convention in August. So please read all three posts to get the full story, and I'll work on something more comprehensive pulling it all together. Thanks.

REQUEST: If you participated in a caucus -- in Texas or anywhere else -- would you please email me at vichy at safe-mail.net? Please do so whoever you supported, and whether your experience was good or bad; I just want to learn more about what's been happening on the ground. Thanks! TDS.
****************************

So a couple of hours ago, the Clinton campaign was whining about supposed Obama campaign violations in Ohio, when actually the only people trying to game the system were the Clinton folks themselves.

I write a post about it. Then I go out. A nice judge dismisses a ticket I got for expired registration on our van, because we'd moved and didn't get the DMV paperwork. I pick up my daughter from school. I get back home. I see another press release from Clinton in my email. I think, "I'll bet this is them whining about something in Texas now."

I thought that for two reasons:

(1) Clinton's just been whining a lot lately, so I'm coming to expect it. As the scorpion said to the frog, it's simply her nature.

(2) The Clinton camp seems intent on building a "record" of supposed campaign violations in Texas, which is critical to them and which they're very afraid they'll lose, so that they can file a lawsuit challenging the results and then use that as an excuse to stay in the race even though it hurts the party ("we can't drop out now, we don't even know how the courts will rule in Texas").

Why do I think they're intentionally manufacturing a lawsuit? Easy: they've pretty much said so. They had their surrogate -- a teacher's union strongly backing Clinton -- file a frivolous lawsuit, quickly dismissed, in Nevada. They've threatened to file suit to seat the Florida delegation that Hillary herself previously said shouldn't be seated. (The Wall Street Journal foresees that one going to the Supreme Court -- an even more conservative Supreme Court than the one that selected Bush President in 2000.) And they "lawyered up" long ago in Texas, though they tried to deny it once word got out.

Was I right about my inbox containing a fine Texas white whine? Let's read it together, shall we?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 4, 2008
Contact: Press Office, ###-###-####
email@website.com

Statement from Clinton Campaign Texas State Director Ace Smith

Across Texas today, we are seeing record voter turnout. We are pleased to see that voting in today’s primary is running smoothly and that Texas Democrats are energized and participating in the process.

In preparation for tonight’s precinct conventions, the Clinton campaign has worked with the Obama campaign and the Texas Democratic Party over the past few weeks to ensure that there was clarity of the rules and that every voter has a chance to participate in the process on an even playing field.

Unfortunately, we have received numerous reports that the Obama campaign is violating Texas Democratic Party rules by circulating precinct convention sign in sheets in advance and are having them filled in now. These underhanded tactics undermine the process that all parties agreed to.

The Texas Democratic Party has issued a memo this afternoon once again clarifying that these sign-in sheets are invalid and that this tactic is a violation of the rules.

We want every Texas voter to know that sign in sheets distributed before the primary polls close, will not count. We encourage them to participate in their precinct convention by showing up at their polling location at 6:30pm.

We call on the Obama campaign to join us in repudiating these tactics, and to work with us and the state party to ensure that the integrity of the process is maintained.

We look forward to a tremendous turnout in both the primary and tonight’s precinct conventions.
###


See? So, next, if Hillary doesn't do well in the primaries and caucuses today, keep your eyes peeled for lawyers.

Hillary Clinton: W.A.T.B. This is not a person with the cojones and character to stand up to John McCain.

P.S.: Overview of how Texas primacaucus works here. I'll be blogging on that later, too.
BACK TO VICHYDEMS HOME

28 comments:

One World, One Planet said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

That doesn't surprise me - or probably anyone. She did say she'd do 'whatever it takes'. I say it's time for Obama to fight back by bringing up the Monica incident, the strange disappearances of documents and people tied into her former lawfirm and various other questionable dealing. It's time to force her to release her tax information.

Of course, the fact that she is winning in Ohio and now tied in Texas doesn't say much about the voters either if the scare tactics and lies and dirty tricks on her part worked to get them to vote for her.

Anonymous said...

Hillary has been criticized in a negative way about everything she says and does not say, about everything she does and doesn’t do! Obama, his wife and campaign, have said and done many dubious things and the media and people have not picked on them. They have attacked Hillary with false statements, accused her of being racist when she only said that MLK and President Johnson worked together to pass the Civil Rights Act, which is absolutely true and not racist at all. I heard Hillary’s speech on TV and later got astonished to see the turmoil that such statement by Hillary caused among the black population. I got even more astounded with Obama’s reaction on TV to such statement; I will never forget his words: “Yah, I am baffled by that statement by the senator… She made as ill-advised statement about Dr king, suggesting that Linden Johnson had more to do with the civil rights’ act…” Obama accusing Clinton of giving more credit to President Johnson regarding the Civil Right’s Act …. what was he thinking about? Did he hear her speech? Did we hear the same speech? His words were a punch to my face. I expected that low blow from his campaign and supporters, which can’t see beyond his dreamy speeches and/or the color of his face and would do everything to see that man become president, including making false statements about the other candidates. Can you imagine, trying to insinuate that the Clintons are racist?! The Clintons, out of all people! I’m speechless! I did not expect Obama to go on TV and reaffirm such a stupid insinuation. Obama and his supporters are the ones being racist! Obama has been playing the race card from day one, which is disgusting! Obama is a two-faced racist man, and I DO NOT trust him! Some people say that if one does not vote for Obama, one is racist! Are you for real? Look at who is voting for Obama in terms of race and gender! 85 – 95% of the black population is voting for Obama, while the white voters are split right down the middle! Who’s being racist here?
Obama is winning because black people are only voting for their own race, white males aren’t ready to elect a woman president, and because the unregistered republicans, which already have a party leader (McCain), go ahead and vote for Obama with sole intention of removing Hillary out of the way. These republican votes that he gets now at the primaries are not going to be there for him in the presidential election. I know a few republicans from different states that proudly assumed having done this. They voted in the democratic elections in favor of Obama to remove Clinton out of the way.
Hillary was so criticized for her complaint regarding the media being harsher on her and favoring Obama. She was called a whiner by Obama and his supporters, and now that the media finally started to ask Obama harsher questions, he came on and started to complain about the fact that the media is starting to be a bit harsher on him! Who’s whining now? It doesn’t feel good now, does it Barack? Well, get used to it…. It will get a lot tougher when running against McCain! Maybe that just proves what I already new – YOU ARE NOT READY TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT!

Bill said...

I think it's time for the political pundits and press to take a break from their delegate calculation exercise and analysis. Their work have been far too tilted to one side. Let's Super Delegate process takes place as it is intended to be.

thomas said...

Hillary stands in front of the voters and tries to make skeletons appear in Obama's closet knowing he is too ethical to bring out her skeletons. While his are figments of her imagination, hers are not. Unfortuantely, the media is giving her the kid glove reatment so we won't see her defend herself. Here is more information:

In May 1993, Hillary was accused of having a central hand in firing several long-time employees of the White House Travel Office, the better to give the pricey travel business to her Hollywood pals, Linda Bloodworth Thomason and Harry Thomason. In true scandal-mode form, Hillary denied everything and when Whitewater Independent Counsel Robert Ray investigated Travelgate, he concluded that there was substantial evidence that involved Hillary but not enough to warrant an indictment.

A couple of months later, in July 1993, White House Deputy Counsel Vince Foster was said to have committed suicide, although the case for his murder has been made persuasively by, among others, Christopher Ruddy, in his 1993 book, "The Strange Death of Vincent Foster: An Investigation."

But the case didn't end there. In 1996, Hillary was accused by the Senate Special Whitewater Committee of ordering the removal of potentially damaging files related to Whitewater from Foster's office on the night of his death. Hillary denied everything, once again proving her adeptness in the scandal briar patch.

In June 1996, White House security head Craig Livingstone, a political operative and former bouncer, illegally obtained over 700 FBI files of mostly White House personnel from former Republican administrations. Hillary was accused of requesting the files and, in fact, hiring Mr. Livingstone, but she denied everything to yet another Independent Counsel, and Filegate became one more notch in her briar patch scandal belt.

Ultimately, her co-presidency brought about the fall of more elected and appointed members of her regime, as well as "friends” who met untimely deaths, were indicted, pleaded the fifth, fled the country, and were imprisoned, than in any administration in American history.

Keeping in mind that Hillary – in her own "two for the price of one" pronouncement – told the nation that she would be sharing the presidency with her husband, it would beg the imaginations of even her most fervent acolytes that the tsunami of scandals that inundated the Clinton tenure somehow escaped either the notice or personal involvement of Hillary herself.

To see the shocking Scandal Index of the Clinton years, as compiled by the liberal Progressive Review (http://prorev.com) is to appreciate the Clinton's 24/7/365 belief that any progress in their leftist domestic and foreign affairs agenda could only be realized through the most nefarious activity – much of which fit neatly into the criminal category. Under the listing of "Records Set'" by the Clinton administration (read: co-presidency), Progressive Review cites the following, of which I will only list a sampling:

▪ Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates.

▪ Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation.

▪ Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify.

▪ Most number of witnesses to die suddenly.

▪ First president sued for sexual harassment.

▪ First president accused of rape.

▪ First president to be held in contempt of court.

▪ First president to be impeached for personal malfeasance.

▪ First first lady to come under criminal investigation.

▪ Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign-contribution case.

▪ Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions.

▪ Number of Starr-Ray investigation convictions or guilty pleas to date: one governor, one associate attorney general and two Clinton business partners: 14.

▪ Number of Cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 5.

▪ Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine that were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47.

▪ Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33.

▪ Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61.

▪ Number of congressional witnesses who pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122.

▪ Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15; acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6.

▪ Clinton machine crimes for which convictions were obtained: drug trafficking, 3; racketeering, extortion, bribery, 4; tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement, 2; fraud, 12; conspiracy, 5; fraudulent loans, illegal gifts, 1; illegal campaign contributions, 5; money laundering, 6; perjury, et al.

▪ Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn't remember, didn't know, or something similar: Bill Kennedy, 116; Harold Ickes, 148; Ricki Seidman, 160; Bruce Lindsey, 161; Bill Burton, 191; Mark Gearan, 221; Mack McLarty, 233; Neil Egglseston, 250; John Podesta, 264; Jennifer O'Connor, 343; Dwight Holton 348; Patsy Thomasson, 420; Jeff Eller, 697; and Hillary Clinton, 250.

Believe it or not, this exhaustive list omits even lengthier lists – on public record – of crimes investigated, public officials and reporters intimidated, threatened and muzzled, and the raft of dead people associated with the Clintons who died by guns, knives, alleged suicides, etc. See http://members.tripod.com/~rcjustice/pres.html and http://prorev.com/legacy.htm.

For more on the scandals involving Hillary, go to:

http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/swirsky/03132006.htm

jewcyney said...

Just a response to anonymous (the second one)...as a white woman who voted for Obama in the CA primary, I find your hysterics and generalizations to be ridiculous. First of all, have you missed all the conservatives and Republicans telling people to vote for Hillary because they think she will be easier to beat? Rush Limbaugh has huge influence over conservatives and he keeps urging people to vote for Hillary...what does that say? Second of all, the race card has been played by none other than Bill Clinton enough times that even his wife has come out and "apologized" for it. I am all for a woman being president...but she needs to earn my support, just like a man does. Isn't voting for someone just because she is a woman the same as voting against someone just because she is a woman?

Dr. John Scott said...

So Clinton wins the popular vote in Texas and Ohio, claiming momentum is not on her side. Check that. As I recall, just a few weeks ago, Obama was 26 points behind in Ohio and double digits behind in Texas. Losing the popular vote by only 8 in Ohio and 2 in Texas tells me Obama made a huge recovery in both states. Can you say momentum?

Anonymous said...

Clinton is outclassed even if she wins the nomination. Obama has run a very clean campaign while Hillary will do whatever it takes up to and including rupturing the dem base.

Anonymous said...

Sen. Obama makes me proud that there is a politician who does not sink to gutter level like the Clintons. We all knew what Hillary would do if she thought she might be losing the primary election. So, why does this surprise us? The telephone ad did not impress me. Fear is no way to make our country better, Sen. Obama will prevail.

Jane

Anonymous said...

Clinton didn't "win" Ohio & Texas, the media won it for her by giving tremendous coverage to her self admitted kitchen sink tactics, the majority of which had no foundation….and the only reason as to why the “tide turned” during the last week.

I have no problem with the media covering the negatives of all candidates...but when I hear the pundits analyzing the negative attacks by Clinton regarding Obama to death, without any mention of the pending fraud trial against the Clintons, or her acceptance of donations from a convicted felon/disbarred lawyer who is facing numerous sexual harassment charges, or her acceptance of the endorsement of Henry Cisneros, one of the subprime players, one can't help but believe that the media wants this campaign to go on because they would not have much else to discuss otherwise. Ratings are GOLD….and way too many voters allowed the media to think for them, as opposed to thinking on their own.

And as far as Ohio is concerned, it is a very sad indication of the voters in that state, who apparently value someone with no “experience” to speak of other than being “First Lady”, who spent more time as First Lady fighting personal legal battles than anything else, and who is in the pocket of the very entity that victimized them with predatory lending and is foreclosing on their homes, and who openly embraced NAFTA UNTIL it became politically incorrect for her to do so in her bid for the Presidency.
How bizarre.

It seems to me that Obama is trying to win by taking the high road and being the nice guy. Clearly, in certain states of the US, the nice guy does indeed finish last. Texas and Ohio may want to revisit how they view reality…as the majority of the voters are clearly using the same reasoning process that created their current problems….and, as the saying goes, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing time and time again, expecting a different result.

-d said...

If Clinton and Obama share a ticket for the Presidential race… my vote will go to someone else.

Seriously, we haven’t even got to the general election and I’m already tired of seeing Bill Clinton, reading his comments, and having listen to his voice.

Anonymous said...

I want to take issue with "whining." It is an emotionally charged word with negative connotations, depracatory, and sexist (and believe me I am not a radical feminist). Commentators use this word,"whining," too. It actually reflects back badly on the user.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the person above me and the 2nd comment, and I dont know about anyone else but I was one of several witnesses to an Obama supporter attempting to cheat the Texas Caucus system here in San Antonio. Basically he was inside the polling area signing only Obama supporters up for the caucus early and telling them they didn't need to comeback that night when the "caucus actually occurs. And to any person that says you can have the packet early...well you must be the precinct coordinator which obviously means you live in the precinct. The guy who was doing this (and got caught by texas state attorneys) was from Washington DC. I have no doubt that he wasn't the only one doing this. Other incidents in my city lead me to believe the accusations of the Obama Camp intimidating people away from caucus' in Nebraska. This same guy told spanish speaking people that they were not allowed to come to caucus, and we all know they primarily support Hillary. This is no way reflects on all Obama supporters, I met some really great people yesterday from both sides. I think it is worth saying that the polling places where this guy was "working" in went to Hillary....and on a side note, I was the youngest delegate of about 30 at 19 yrs old! :D

Anonymous said...

Dear Hillary,

Please note, you are still behind in pledged delegates and the popular vote;

Senator Obama has won more states.

The Democratic party does not want you as a nominee because you are too polarizing and divisive.

In the general election, you will loose to McCain.

Thersites D. Scott said...

To the last Anonymous (who was actually at a caucus): I'd love to talk with you about your experience, because I really want to learn more about what happened on the ground, what's true/untrue, etc. I know the Texas Secretary of State says no complaints of misconduct by either side have actually been filed, so I really want to speak with anyone who was there, either way. If you're still on here, would you please email me? vichy aT- safe-mail.net . Thanks!!
T.D. Scott

Anonymous said...

Just what has Hillary accomplished in her political career other than ignoring the affairs her husband had, and I don’t believe they weere foreign ones, BUT carried out under her nose as a so called first lady? Maybe Monica should take her place in this election as well! The leader of our country should have some morals to substanstiate their postition as a comptent person. Hillary has made the calls during the previous administration, and look what it brought forward for the American public.

Thersites D. Scott said...

Next, to the anonymous who dislikes the word "whining": you're right, and I'll be careful about using it in the future. In this case, I was making a reference to the "WATB" label, which is super common n the liberal political blogosphere to refer to Republicans (usually male) and therefore carries a strong tone of disapproval when applied to a Dem. But I'll be sparing if I use the word "whining" about HRC, if I do so at all. Thanks for the feedback!

Anonymous said...

Ithink Hillary needs Obama more than Obama needs Hillary.

And secondly the delegate count favors Obama more than Hillary, thus I would expect him to be on top of the ticket & chose wisely if he intends to have Hillary as a runningmate.

Secondly, only a selfish person can deny the fact that 27 out 41 states have favored Obama and she still thinks she should be on the top of the ticket.

Lastly, I would think Democrates should better think wisely over what voters have choosen here, otherwise I don’t Ssee any other reason why John McCain won’t win the general election if Hillary runs for the president this yr instead of Obama.

Anonymous said...

Honestly, HRC is certifiable.

She’s had the magnifying glass off her for awhile.

Let’s see what happens should the media decide to break open the Whitewater vault and other assorted Clinton escapades.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Anonymous that posted at 11.42

And also I think

Yes, they should run as a team. She should answer the phones and he should make the decisions

Anonymous said...

Sorry to brake the news but Democrats and Independents are needed to win the general election. Independents are overwhelming going for Obama.

Funny, Hillary had a double digit lead in Texas not that long ago, and in the end just falls over the line, likely with fewer delegates than Obama after the caucus votes are counted - and this is supposed to be a great victory? lol!

Anonymous said...

You guys are hopeless.
Do your research.
Think about who is the most qualified person for the job of presidency.
Bill Richardson.
He was and still is kinda kissy-kissy with the Clintons, but Obama would pick him for the VP monination.
Plus Bill Richardson is Mexican America.
Hispanic vote right there.
Boo Yah.

Anonymous said...

I live in Houston, Tx and I voted at the caucus last night. I had a very bad experience because I feel like the Clinton supporters were trying to prevent Obama voters from staying to caucus. I got to the location at 7pm and had to stand outside in the cold weather until 9:30pm because they said that two voting polls were broken causing a long line for people to vote. I took the time to early vote so that I could just go caucus but I still waited for hours. Then we were told by Clinton supporters, which were the precinct captains that we could sign in and leave. Needless to say several hundreds of prople left after signing in after a 2 and a half hour wait outside in the cold. They would not allow anyone inside although the late voters were in a totally different building at the school. Children were tired and needed to use the bathroom and they couldn't even let them do that. Then once we were finally inside and signed in, they told use that it didn't matter who you were going for we were just going to pick delegates. I stood up and corrected the team leader, which was a Clinton supporter, and told her that's not the way it was explained to me and that we had to separate by Obama or Clinton and then the delegates would be appointed according to who had the most supporters. This not only happened at my precint but at several and everyone I spoke to said that the Clinton group was trying to misinform the people to prevent the overwelming OBAMA support. I feel like the Clinton camp tried to steal delegate votes from Obama and they came very early to get the leader positions. It was very disorganized and very shady. SHAME ON YOU HILIARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

In answer to Jewcyney, Fox news just proved me right! 9% of all people that voted in the Democratic primary in Texas were republican, and, according to results shown, they voted for Obama!

Like I said before, Obama is winning because black people are only voting for their own race, white males aren’t ready to elect a woman president, and because the unregistered republicans, which already have a party leader, go ahead and vote for Obama with sole intention of removing Hillary out of the way.


Obama has been carried this far by the media and sneaky republicans!
He will lose big time against McCain!

Thersites D. Scott said...

Anon at 5:51: I disagree; Republican leaders want Hillary to win (Fox News' owner, Rupert Murdoch, even threw her a fundraiser!) because they know they can beat her, while some moderate Republican voters are actually willing to cross the line and support Obama - for real.

Here's my evidence:

1
2
3

Anonymous said...

thersites d. Scott, I'm afraid that that might be in theory what some republicans think they should do, but that isn't what the republican voters are actually doing! I personally know republicans who voted in the Democratic primaries for their states and voted for Obama to throw Hillary out of the way (their own words). They want Hillary out of the race! Hence the fact that he always does so well in republican states!

Anonymous said...

Answering to Anonymous at 11:48AM, the reason why Obama did so well in Texas is because 9% of all voters were republican and voted for him! Hence the fact that he does so much better in republican states! Republicans hate Hillary! Obama is benefiting from it! However, that will end with the presidential election! Republicans will vote republican in the presidential election and Obama will lose big time!

jewcyney said...

Anonymous, you are correct in that 9% of the Democratic primary voters in Texas were Republicans, and that 53% of them voted for Obama...but I hate to break it to you, but that's pretty legit. Republicans all over the country are supporting Obama. In each primary that allows it, Obama does very highly with Republican voters who are disillusioned with Bush and/or McCain.

Perhaps there were some people, such as your friends, who voted against Clinton by voting for Obama. But there are a lot more documented cases of what they were calling "Rush Limbaugh voters" coming in and voting for Hillary. That's why the numbers of Republicans were so high for her...normally, Obama has a much higher lead in Repubicans voting in the Democratic primary. A lot of Republicans do like Obama, believe it or not.

Now the troubling thing is if the Republicans voting for Obama are still willing to do it election night. Many will, but with the moderate McCain running, who knows.