Mike Schroeder = Hillary Clinton? Please Don’t Say That About Hillary.
Posted on March 26th, 2008 by Andrew Davey
WOW! Where do I start? I was looking yesterday at Orange Punch, only to find Steven Greenhut trying to compare OC GOP power broker Mike Schroeder to none other than Hillary Clinton. Yes, you heard me right… Schroeder = Clinton. Wait… HUH??!!Greenhut tried to make this case by saying Schroder’s legal maneuvering against Debbie Cook and politicking against Republicans he doesn’t like is similar to Hillary’s “destructive” behavior… HUH?! When did this become “destructive”? How is this “destructive”? Why should this be labeled “destructive”? And where here can one find anything “destructive”?
Now don’t get me wrong, I like reading Greenhut over at Orange Punch. And occasionally, I may even agree with him. (Scary, isn’t it?) But when he tries to compare the rough & tumble tactics of Mike Schroeder with Hillary’s inspiring campaign that’s putting people first, I just don’t see it working.
Sorry, Mr. Greenhut.
Filed under: National-US, Orange County - Local
Andrew, you’re the only person left who thinks Hillary’s campaign is “inspiring.” Was it inspiring when she said McCain would make a better CinC than Obama? She’s a jerk, Andrew. A total jerk.
rebecca-
Sorry, but I must respectfully disagree here. Last I checked, a majority of CA Democrats agreed with me last month. And earlier this month, a whole lot of Dems in Texas, Ohio, & Rhode Island also seemed to agree with me. And hold on, when did Hillary ever say that? I don’t remember that, just as I don’t remember Bill Clinton ever “questioning Obama’s patriotism”. I think there are far too many of these fabricated “scandals” out that are distracting us from real issues that working people care about.
She said she and McCain had passed the “CinC threshold,” and that Obama had not.
Andrew,
As your friend, I just have to ask. Do you agree with her statement? Do you believe John “Next 100 Years” McCain has passed the C in C threshold like Hillary has said and Obama had not? Those are her words, what do you think?
Would you, like Hillary, want a President who will keep us in Iraq for 100 years? I know you would never want that to happen.
Gee Rebecca you attack me for my ties to Ted Moreno but have no problem with Obama’s ties to Reverend Wright. Why is that?
Also why is it okay for you to attack Hillary but if anyone dares ask a question about Obama they get labeled a racist?
Rebecca & Claudio-
Again, I don’t think that’s what she meant. Hillary has NEVER endorsed McCain’s position on Iraq in the course of this campaign and she has NEVER said that he’s more qualified to be President than Barack Obama. If you had seen the WHOLE statement in context, she was making a case as to why she can beat McCain on security issues.
And btw, when has anyone in the Obama Campaign apologized for any of the hurtful personal attacks on Hillary?
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/24/22535/3559
I’m waiting for an answer…
Andrew,
These folks know very well that Hillary never endorsed McCain’s Iraq strategy. They prefer to muddy the waters in an effort to get people to take their eyes off the big picture. They are mesmorized and enamored by the “Obama Mystique”.
I guess they aren’t much different from those mesmorized by Reverend Wright’s mystique.
Sean-
I know, I know, but it still frustrates me. It frustrates me when I get emails from DFA & MoveOn asking me to “condemn all the negative attacks” as they blame it all on Hillary… Yet they don’t say a peep about all the personal attacks on Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton coming from the Obama Campaign.
And jeez, I write something here about a libertarian trashing Hillary… And I still see DEMOCRATS come here to bash her some more. Why the double-standard? Why is it OK for Obama’s Iowa Campaign Co-chair to bring up “the blue dress”, for one of his key national security advisers to mock Hillary’s “crying” and call Bill Clinton “Joseph McCarthy, & for his campaign’s senior strategist to
personally attack Hillary on a national press conference call last week? And why is it not OK for Hillary to talk about why she’s strong enough to beat McCain?
Again, this whole double-standard is killing me.
I had a feeling that this might not go well. I don’t think Democrats should ever be comparing Republicans to any Democrats, I don’t care who the Democrat might be, but Clinton has put forth that McCain is a better alternative to Obama and a new poll shows that 30% of her supporters would vote McCain before voting Obama.
“I think you’ll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say,†she said. “He’s never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002.â€
Obama has done more than just put forth a speech. And to what President Clinton said?
“I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country,†he said in Charlotte, N.C. “And people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics.â€
We all make choices when we chose to support a candidate and it’s frustrating that we refuse to acknowledge when our candidate has been out of line. There are occassions that Obama has said things that troubled me but I still think he would be the best nominee.
And as I’ve said so many times, I would vote for Clinton and Obama over McCain in a New York Minute.
Heather-
I appreciate that last part of what you just said. But still, where in Bill Clinton’s statement did he “question Obama’s patriotism”? I don’t see it… So why is Obama surrogate Merrill McPeak allowed to compare Bill Clinton to Joseph McCarthy? And in the statement of Hillary’s on McCain, she never said there that he’d make a better President than Barack Obama… She was talking about why she’d be a stronger candidate to beat McCain. And really, was that reason for Obama consultant David Axelrod to smear Hillary as “desperate” and “willing to do or say anything to win”, and make other personal attacks on Hillary during that national press conference call last week?
But hey, thanks for including the full statements here. They just prove the point I’ve been trying to make all along here.
Andrew - I just don’t see what Clinton said in that light and respectfully disagree. McPeak was wrong and so was Carville, who even though he doesn’t work for Clinton, he still shouldn’t have called Richardson “Judas” (and he refuses to apologize for it). It’s all ugly and all wrong. I won’t defend such comments from any candidate’s supporters.
But at a time when we should be criticizing McCain rather than praising him, I don’t think any statements on how ready he is to lead or patriotic coming from Democrats should be tolerated no matter the intention.
Gila,
I never got that memo. Is there someone I need to check with before I post a story?
Gila-
I’m sorry about the bickering. However, I never intended for this to be “Clinton v. Obama bickering”. If you look at the content of my story, you’ll see that my intent was to challenge Steven Greenhut’s construct of Hillary as a “destructive” figure comparable to Mike Schroeder. That’s all. I’m sorry that a couple commenters came in to join Greenhut in labeling Hillary Clinton as “destructive”, but I can’t stand by and do nothing when a good Democrat is attacked.
Sean, Chris made the request in email to the blog team on March 8.
Gila,
Again I never got that memo. However, Andrew’s post as he points out was in response to Steven Greenhuts attack on Hillary. Are we not supposed to defend Hillary anymore?
Rebecca decided to come in here and attack Hillary and call her names. I am not gonna let that slide.
The Obama crowd wants us to shut up so I guess we are just supposed to shut up. You comment about Andrew being handed a “pass” was out of line if you ask me.
Do we need a “pass” before we write something on this blog? Who do we contact? You?
My intention in commenting was to point out that we should never compare a Democrat to a Republican and that it was out of line.
Sean, all this has been discussed at length among the blog team. And my remark to Andrew about a “pass” was a joke.
You make some mighty cutting remarks to others but recently in email you said you were just yanking someone’s chain or something along those lines. Lots of us yank the chains of others, and I am no exception.
Gila,
I guess the entire discussion took place without me. Am I not part of said “blog team”?
I personally think that by us selectively deciding what should be discussed, i.e. Hillary and Obama, is not a good thing.
How can we criticize Jubal or Fleischman for not posting about an incident involving a Republican, i.e. Neilsen or Carona, if we are going to shy away from posting any criticisms of Hillary and God forbid Obama?
Gila & Sean-
It’s OK, really. I get why Gila said what she said. I appreciate Sean sticking up for me. But just because we’re discussing Presidential politics doesn’t mean we have to bite each other’s heads off… Now does it?
Heather-
I understand where you’re coming from. But since the cat’s already out of the bag, I might as well just say this again: I don’t like the double standard.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/03/26/drive_by_defamation?mode=PF
Why is it OK for Obama’s campaign to hit hard and go negative, but not OK for the Clinton Campaign to fight back? After all, aren’t we looking for a nominee who will fight the Republicans hard? I don’t think either Hillary or Bill attacked Barack Obama in any way, but I digress. I just want a nominee who can withstand right-wing attacks and fight like hell (meaning putting up a real fight, not throwing out character smears) to win.
Andrew-
Where did I say it was not okay for either campaign to defend?
And you really have no ground to stand on when it comes to “character” attacks by Obama. Clinton has done plenty from “Shame on you Barack Obama” to questioning whether he wanted to run for President since Kindergarten. She’s said he’s all talk and no substance, it doesn’t get much more personal than that. What about when she called him ‘Irresponsible and Naive’?
I don’t believe either campaign benefits from these kinds of attacks and condone neither. I don’t see how I feel about it as a double standard at all.
Heather-
I actually wasn’t talking specifically about you when I mentioned the “double standard”. It’s really throughout the media. But since you mentioned it, here goes:
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=2ae1b82c-0420-4e47-adba-4af115719d47
Is Hillary perfect? No. But still, the Kindergarten thing was a joke… And a humorous response to an Obama attack using right-wing flack Jeff Gerth (one of the “reporters” peddling Whitewater crap in the ’90s) and his assertion of a secret “20 Year Plan” Bill & Hillary have to retain power. “Shame on you, Barack Obama” was a response to the disgusting Obama mailers using right-wing talking points to smear Hillary’s health care plan as “big government forcing people to buy insurance”. He & his staffers have called Hillary “untruthful” constantly, smeared her as “desperate” (remember Barack’s comment about “the claws coming out”), smeared her supporters as “obsessed” over such silly things as losing jobs… Basically, the list goes on when it comes to the character attacks from the Obama Campaign. And while I hate to bring all this up, I don’t know what else to do when the media & all these so-called “progressive” pundits on radio & teevee want to blaim it all on Hillary.
Telling your blog staff not to write about party politics?
Sounds kinda red countyish….
Andrew, this is a case where we have to agree to disagree. I think saying it was a joke in hindsight is a means to try to cover up the fact that it was not in fact a joke. It was not portrayed that way at the time. Obama’s mailer was wrong but it does not excuse any “right wing” attacks that Clinton has undertaken (3am phone call? please).
I will not make excuses for Obama when he blows it because he has just as I believe Clinton has.
I still believe that either of these candidates would be much better than McCain and that’s the point I hope all Democrats can agree on.
I know Gila’s intent on being traffic cop is good(lets not hurt our eventual nominee and help McCain) but unless you put a blackout on any post related to the Democratic presidential candidates then here is what is happening: Andrew or Sean or Dan put up a post that is positive for Hillary and then in the comments someone trashes or otherwise takes issue with Hillary and then the barn door is opened and its a free fire zone. Your own bloggers do this–Heather responds to every positive HIllary post with some negative comment about Hillary and Sean commented negatively about Barack on a post about the Reverend Wright speech. Sean said he never got the memo–maybe Heather didn’t also.
It’s hard not to respond so I’m sympathetic to Sean and Heather and, Andrew in the above case. And I think you need to let this play through with occasional reminders(such as the one Gila did above) to keep cool.
Here is the reality: this is American politics people–it sometimes gets tough, even ugly. Both candidates have attacked each other, have attacked character, have attacked ability to govern effectively. And the attacks by surrogates have been worse.
But remember, this is what elections are about. You think that the the GOP Machine is going to be discussing policy differences over tea? No, they are going to go for the juglar, character, competence, experience, tempermant, spouses, Rev. Wright, Slick Willie, you name it. Primaries are the time to see who can take a punch and who has a glass jaw. There is always the risk that the losing candidates followers pick up their marbles and go home. I’ve read Obama people threaten that if the superdelegates throw the election to Clinton they’re done and I’ve heard some Clinton people threaten that if the Convention ignores the vote of the people of Florida they’re done also.. But consider this:
Did you ever see such a nasty primary as the GOP one this year? The absolute disdain that just about all the other GOP presidential candidates had for Romney was pretty obvious. There were some real damaging attacks on mcCain by Romney. Better then what we’re seeing in Dem primaries. And they’ve turned it around. Once McCain reached the mathematical number to clinch the nomination, the sniping stopped with the exception of the right wing fringe. The Dems are not at that point yet because no one has reached the number needed to clinch the nomination and we still have some significant elections ahead of us. Once a winner is picked I anticipate the sniping will stop(except teh left wing fringe) and people will support the winner. While the polls show that about 20% of the Obama and Clinton supporters say they will not support the other if their candidate does not get the nomination, thats a figure taken in the heat of the campaign. Once the reality of four more years of GOP Administration is upon them, most of them will come home.
NCS-
Heather responds to every positive HIllary post with some negative comment about Hillary
Every post? Really? Yikes. I think this is an exaggeration. Two out of the last three I made a comment but never called her names merely pointed out what I thought was contradictory to the criticism of Obama and that the Clinton campaign had done the same thing.
http://www.theliberaloc.com/2008/03/03/hillary-leads-in-ohio-shows-gains-in-texas/ - No comment from me here.
have not posted about either of our candidates for a reason.
I was defending things said against Obama that I think are unfair and I also think that both sides are not being very honest about what their candidates are doing. Ultimately, it is more important for us to put this criticism towards McCain. I think I’m pretty damn fair when it comes to Clinton, I don’t resort to name calling and I am very clear that I would vote for her in the GE.
NCS-
Thank you. I’m glad at least someone sees what I tried to do this morning. I also understand where Gila is coming from. It’s just that I never intended for this to be “Clinton v. Obama bickering”. I was calling out a right-wing pundit for comparing Hillary to Mike Schroeder. That’s all.
But if someone attacks Hillary, whether it be from “the left” or the right, I can’t just stay silent. I try my best not to “go nuclear”, but I think the Obama folks visiting here need to recognize that they can’t expect a double standard of promoting Barack while ignoring or denegrating Hillary. Yes, everyone here will support the Democratic nominee once we have one… But until then, we can’t just talk up one candidate while ignoring the other.
Heather- You write now:
” I think I’m pretty damm fair when it comes to Clinton.”
Here’s what you wrote last week :
“I don’t know how anyone can still support Clinton and still call themselves a Democrat.”
Fair? Time to go back and read Gila and Chris’ kumbaya memo.
NCS - yes, I agree, hot head statement indeed and I have my moments. I really get perturbed when Democrats insinuate that a Republican is a better alternative to a fellow Democrat and I do find myself sucked into the silly pie fights that happen when peopel care very much about the outcome of the Primary. No excuse for that though.
Heather–Fair enough.
Hi, sorry, I’ve been busy. Sean, I didn’t attack you for your “ties to Ted Moreno.” I attacked you for calling people “queers.” And I didn’t call anyone a racist, so don’t try to implicate me in that. You move really smoothly between what I said (”Hillary is a jerk”) and what OTHERS may have said (”they get labeled a racist”); it’s almost the exact same way Bush would talk about terrorism and 9/11 and then talk about Saddam. He never said Saddam did 9/11, but he’d always talk about him in the very next sentence.
Here, this is you: “Also why is it okay for you to attack Hillary but if anyone dares ask a question about Obama they get labeled a racist?”
Uh . . . .
Andrew, I’m sorry I’m always so mean to you on here, honey. You don’t deserve the sharp side of my tongue. You are a sweetlet, adn I am going to be nicer–to YOU, not to Hillary, who is a scumsucking pig.
Love,
Beccalou
I called Hillary a jerk; I think she’s acting like one.
becca — if it comes down to Hillary vs McCain, what will you do?
Hey, I learned my lesson from my last Nader vote. Doesn’t mean I have to like it.
“Hillary, who is a scumsucking pig”
Very classy Rebecca. I see you haven’t changed one bit.
“I didn’t call anyone a racist, so don’t try to implicate me in that”
Never said you did Rebecca.
I am shocked with your quick wit and foul mouth I haven’t read your column in a major newspaper. I figured they would all want a foul mouth ill tempered know it all like you.
Maybe you can go try and dig up another ten year old phone message that you can’t prove to attack me with.
That’s right, Sean. Ten years after the fact, I no longer have the phone message. The time to question its validity would really have been within, say, a year of publication. I’m sure I kept it that long! You can weasel all you want; I think it’s awesome!
And as far as not saying I called people racist, let’s recap my post, which was all of two posts up.
“You move really smoothly between what I said (â€Hillary is a jerkâ€) and what OTHERS may have said (â€they get labeled a racistâ€); it’s almost the exact same way Bush would talk about terrorism and 9/11 and then talk about Saddam. He never said Saddam did 9/11, but he’d always talk about him in the very next sentence.
Here, this is you: “Also why is it okay for you to attack Hillary but if anyone dares ask a question about Obama they get labeled a racist?†“
And actually, I got a job! I start Monday at LA CityBeat as its art editor and columnist. Thanks for your concern.
“The time to question its validity would really have been within, say, a year of publication.”
Unfortunately I did not know that you published it. I tried to avoid reading the Weekly or at least anything you wrote in the Weekly because I found it biased and nasty. I was relieved when I heard you were no longer with the Weekly because I really enjoy all the other writers.
Glad to hear you finally got a job. I am even happier to hear it is in LA and the folks in Orange County won’t have to be exposed to your nastiness and bias.
Yawn.
Rebecca,
(hurry up Cinco de Mayo)
I just preordered your new book “Commie Girl in the OC” on Amazon!” (couple of extra copies as gifts too
Regards,
A fellow member of the Sandwich Generation
Is Rebecca = SMS
They both seem to rant and use profanity when they can’t make a salient point. Think about it, have you ever seen them together at the same time?
just…asking?