There must be an election coming up. The Dark Side is playing particularly nasty again. Earlier this year, Robert Novak accused Senator Hillary Clinton of leaking information about Obama's past cocaine use. There was no evidence and there was no leak; Obama admitted the cocaine use in his memoir.
Now Novak claims that Senator Clinton has some dirt on Obama. Karl Rove's good buddy, Bob Novak knows this because he is so cool that he has sources inside the Democratic Party:
Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, but has decided not to use it. The nature of the alleged scandal was not disclosed.
This word-of-mouth among Democrats makes Obama look vulnerable and Clinton look prudent. It comes during a dip for the front-running Clinton after she refused to take a stand on New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's now discarded plan to give driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
If I was foolish enough to believe a word from Novak's lying keyboard, "prudent" and "vulnerable" are not exactly the first words that would come to my mind.
Obama responds:
During our debate in Las Vegas on Thursday, we heard Senator Clinton rail against the politics of 'throwing mud.'
At the very same time, in Washington, Robert Novak was publishing a column in which he reported the following: 'Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama...'
The item did not identify these 'agents,' nor did it reveal the nature of the charge. It was devoid of facts, but heavy on innuendo and insinuation of the sort to which we've become all too accustomed in our politics these past two decades. If the purpose of this shameless item was to daunt or discourage me or supporters of our campaign from challenging and changing the politics of Washington, it will fail. In fact, it will only serve to steel our resolve.
But in the interest of our party, and her own reputation, Senator Clinton should either make public any and all information referred to in the item, or concede the truth: that there is none.
She of all people, having complained so often about 'the politics of personal destruction,' should move quickly to either stand by or renounce these tactics. . The cause of change in this country will not be deterred or sidetracked by the old 'Swift boat' politics.
Okay, someone is foolish here, and it's Obama. This is not the first time that Obama has failed to consider the source.
Over at Politico, Mike Allen and Ben Smith are running the drama as: "Obama: Don't 'swift boat' me . . . Obama accused Clinton of “Swift boat’ politics” and vowed he will not be intimidated." They note that the Obama campaign made the highly unusual move of releasing the statement, not from the campaign, but from Obama himself.
Clinton’s campaign communications director, Howard Wolfson responds:
Once again Sen. Obama is echoing Republican talking points, this time from Bob Novak. This is how Republicans work. A Republican-leaning journalist runs a blind item designed to set Democrats against one another. Experienced Democrats see this for what it is. Others get distracted and thrown off their games. Voters should be concerned about the readiness of any Democrat inexperienced enough to fall for this.
We have no idea what Mr. Novak’s item is about and reject it totally. Instead of pointing fingers at us, Sen. Obama should get back to the issues and focus on what this election is really about.
Back in July, our friend Novak said that a "woman or an African-American" Democratic nominee would give the GOP "hope." How much more hopeful for the GOP if that woman and that African American can be persuaded to lunge at each other's throats! Until there is something called evidence, it is just plain stupid to believe that this is anything other than another little nasty divide and conquer trick from the Dark Side.
Still, I am compelled to mention to you this really nasty scenario:
Who would benefit most right now in the Democratic contest from Obama and Clinton going at each other so badly they hurt each other? Some may recall the 2004 Iowa caucus contest when Howard Dean and Richard Gephardt assaulted each other so furiously in the closing weeks that Iowans turned to someone else. John Kerry came sneaking right up the middle to win with someone named John Edwards right on his tail.
Michael van der Galiën: Obama vs Clinton: Inexperience vs Experience
Hillary Fact Hub
Obama HQ
Bob Novak Hillary Clinton Barack Obama Politics John Edwards Democratic Rove Republican News Rightwing Smear Machine
