Ok - After watching Dem STRATEGISTS today, here's what I heard.

[blm]

Their target is Kerry.

Carville and Begala said Dr. Clinton gave the Dems a spinal transplant. "Finally" the Dems have a voice.

Laura Schwartz - a Clintonite - said Bill Clinton was so disappointed Kerry never hit back at the swiftboat vets.

Clinton and these strategists know damn well the media wouldn't cover the counterattacks. They read Boehlert's book and Pete Daou knew every aspect of what was done and how the media thwarted the counter deliberately.

THE DUMBASSES don't realize that the lies about Clinton FESTERED FOR FIVE YEARS without Clinton addressing them - at least EIGHT BOOKS attacked Clinton and blamed him for 9-11. They don't know that not fighting back for five years sounds alot worse?

Clinton held his tongue for FIVE YEARS and they are trying to hold that up as an example of how Kerry should have acted?

Clinton KNOWS BushInc stole the election and that Kerry won and won with the most votes in history. It is IMPERATIVE for a Hillary run that the Dem party refers to Kerry as a loser.

Kerry needs to say something.... like...... I applaud that President Clinton has decided to fight back all the lies that the Rightwing machine has been spreading nonstop for the last 5 years. Blaming Bill Clinton for 9-11 the last 5years has been a terrible distraction for the country and it's shameful that the Bush WH allowed it to go on.

[MBS]

1. no surprise

. . but at least it brings it out in the open. But Kerry will prevail. They don't realize that their strategy is based on assumptions that are several years out of date. Kerry is the one who's totally tuned in.

[blm]

2. And it will be Hillary facing Kerry in the debates.

And let's say Bill does get involved and tries to hit at Kerry - how does he explain to the Dem primary voters and to Kerry why he closed the books on IranContra, BCCI and covered up CIA drugrunning in his own administration?

How did that work out for the Dem party, Bill? The country? The world? Hell - why don't you explain why you closed the books on Bush's decades of dealings with terrorist banking networks to the 9-11 families, Bill.

[MBS]

3. Yes

Funny-- I was just thinking that today, that it was going to come down to Hillary vs. JK.

[karynnj]

12. If it comes down to Hillary and Kerry, Kerry has some real advantages

1) More and more the mood of the country in terms of the trust they feel towards their government seems like 1976. People then were digusted with the dirt of Watergate and the Vietnam war. They wanted morality, uncompromizing intergrity, incorruptibility, and a healing reaching out to everyone on the other side.

The Clintons can not exude morality or integrity, it's not in them. I don't know about any of you, but I wouldn't let a small child see the angry Clinton tape. I understand the anger, but he looked scary to me. Tay mentioned that the Pepperdine and some other speeches have all had a theme of common ground. Kerry has the first 3 almost by definition. What has been utterly amazing has been seeing the grace and dignity that Kerry has shown through everything.

2) How do their personalities really project.
Hillary can be very good, but she often sounds very very shrill. She also seems to not be always speaking what she really believes.

Kerry was seen as Presidential in 2004. His speeches have been incredibly moving - where policy speeches, eulogies or the Dissent speech which has to be it's own category. Also the Iowa tape and the show with the interactive questions today show a very relaxed Kerry, at peace with himself, speaking from his heart (with help from his brilliant brain.) I like that he laughed as often as he did.

3) Debates - Neither of the Clintons were as completly good on the debates as Kerry. They are both brilliant. I suspect the difference is that Kerry genuinely listens - which has to be hard to do if you speak second. (Consider that McCain is there toughest candidate - who do you want against him in a debate?)


4) Baggage
I'm already in trouble on DU-P because in speaking of the "war room" , the pro-Hillary poster trying to prove Bill had lots to deal with listed all his "issues". Eventually, I mentioned the words "cattle Futures" and "Rose Law files". I didn't mention Indonesia. The Republicans will mention all this and more.

Kerry has embraced his antiwar protests and people are totally aware that he was a genuine war hero (he likely will mention it far less - the whole country knows it). There is genuinely nothing much left to hit him with.

[TayTay]

4. I think 2008 will be one of those elections that is actually about

something and that people will be paying close attention to at least some of the issues. Sen. Kerry has been composing lists of just what he will do to change the direction of this country. I haven't seen this from Sen. Clinton. I am seeing meta stuff from them. (Our process is better than yours. We have won the smoke and mirrors thing for this past weekend and so forth.)

2008 is also going to be about National Security and Iraq. You can do all the Faux interviews you want, but someone is going to have to take the podium at a debate and explain exactly what the hell is going on in Iraq and what they intend to do about it. People want to hear that flat out. Ahm, I think Sen. Kerry has built a foundation for doing just that.

Meta only gets you so far, then you have to talk to people about what you believe and what you think should happen in the country. Those blue smoke and mirrors moments that do hold in some campaigns might not in this one. Some people might be preparing for a race that won't happen on those terms.

[sandnsea]

5. Yeah, okay, we ALL see it

So you can bet others in the party see it too. It's actually embarrassingly obvious - Bill has a little tirade and then hands the reins over to Hil. She gets a couple "tough Dem" sound bites, and then out trots her entourage, including McAuliffe!! It reeks. People will come to their senses when they realize she never follows through with anything of substance. I agree with Tay, people are going to want real solutions and Hillary's still running around talking about video games and flag burning like it's 1995. These little stunts won't work in the long run.

[wisteria]

6. I intend to bring this bullsh*t to the attention of every person I come

in contact with. I can now say, I loath the Clintons and all their little hanger-ons. The last thing this country needs is another Clinton presidency.

[ProSense]

7. Unbelievable

Clinton Defends Husband’s Tact, Adding That All Democrats Should Take a Hint

By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: September 27, 2006

WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 — The war of words between the Bush administration and the Clintons intensified on Tuesday as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested that her husband would have reacted differently as president if he had heard the same warnings about Osama bin Laden’s plans that President Bush had access to before 9/11.

Snip...

In her remarks, Senator Clinton also suggested that Bill Clinton’s animated defense of his own national security record as president, delivered only a few days earlier, provided a powerful example for Democrats, whom Republicans have sought to portray in recent national elections as too weak to lead the country in such perilous times.

“I think my husband did a great job in demonstrating that Democrats are not going to take these attacks,” she said.

Snip...

For Senator Clinton, who is considered a possible contender for the presidency in 2008, her comments on Tuesday were unusually personal in tone. But Howard Wolfson, one of her chief advisers, made it clear that Senator Clinton would be taking an increasingly aggressive posture to thwart any Republican attempts to cast Democrats as timid on national defense this election season.

“She is not going to allow her party, her husband or herself to get Swift-boated,” he said, referring to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that attacked the Vietnam War record of Senator John Kerry when he was the Democrats’ presidential nominee in 2004. “Democrats have to stand up and go toe to toe with Republicans on national security.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/27/nyregion/27hillary.html

[whometense]

8. Saw her prissy little act on the news tonight.

As a l-o-n-g time feminist (thought she probably would disown that label now, wouldn't she??) I think this hiding behind my big bad husband act is perfectly nauseating.

I wanted to shout at the tv. She wants to get elected on her husband's coattails from 6 years ago?

And the drummed-up outrage about Bush?? Please. Clinton's been playing along with the Bushes for years now.

In case anyone missed it, Crooks and Liars has the video here: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/09/26/hillary-comes-out-in-defense-of-her-husbands-actions-against-bin-laden/

[beachmom]

9. OMG!! That was the EXACT meme in that diary

Unbelieveable is right. Guess they have their operatives working the blogs already. But, you know, like NOBODY recommended that particular diary. And there was a combination of irate Gore and Kerry supporters who really gave it to them.

[karynnj]

14. How obvious!

Also, would anyone use the word "TACT" to describe Bill's performance.

Can't we please get that nice guy laughing with the students, answering queastions with honesty and respect to demonstrate the meaning of "tact"? Please! He seems to do it very well - I mean, he didn't even trash the useless Senators Sessions and Gregg.

[wisteria]

10. Well, the media is taking up that "Kerry didn't fight back" at the SBV.

I just heard it repeated by John Roberts on Anderson Cooper's show. It was in a segment about the elections and mentioned Clinton. I and e-mailing her office at telling her I don't like her attacks against Kerry. You know, maybe Imus was right this morning. Kerry better get real tough with these sleazy group.

[politicasista]

11. I agree

I think the media is gaining on Kerry with some help from the Clitonistas. I also think he needs to get even tougher cause they will stop at nothing.


It's really sad because I still had some respect for the Clintons. I know a lot of people do, but I don't know if I will after this deal.

[karynnj]

15. I disagree - Kerry needs to stay visible and stay Kerry

The fact of the matter is that I seriously don't think Clinton can win the middle if the worst side of him shows. One of the commentators on MSNBC yesterday spoke about how reporters covering him saw this side - the raging purple face - but it was never shown in public.

This is saying 2 things:
1) This highly unattractive behavior was not a one time occurance because of extreme provocation. (It in fact had no extraordinary trigger)
2) He is not the same in public as in private. (likely true for everyone-but not to this extreme.

Meanwhile, this week - some papers are covering Kerry's speech. I wonder if the religious press will cover it. Many denominations have magazines that come out monthly. Wouldn't it be odd if Kerry's resurgence comes from the religious presss that likely was leery of him in 2004? This is a press that is not controled by corporate entities.

Kerry in all appearances seems self assured, happy and at peace with himself. Think of the contrast: Clinton looking like he was going to kill the reporter or Kerry laughing with college students, speaking seriously and emotionally of Iraq and Afghanistan -where our soldiers are dying,and showing more of the person he is at a conservative college and finding that people like him. (Gee, Could Bill Clinton speak about his beliefs at Pepperdine? Would he convince them that he is a moral man?)

[wisteria]

16. I didn't mean to imply that he should fight them like Clinton fought the

press, what I am suggesting is that the Clinton's and the media are starting to portray Kerry as weak referring to the SBV to make their point. He needs to take care of this reference right now and re frame it now, not let it fester and grow. Clinton and others will us it over and over to discredit him.

[karynnj]

18. I agree with that

though I think he needs to do it in a Kerry way. Something like big a softball show of his choice. He show do this at the point that he has all the research done - as he discussed.

In Pepperdine, Kerry explained why he needed to speak about religion, explaining he had to to prevent others from painting a carricature. What if he spoke to a large group of VVA, the group he was a founder of with Bobby Mueller. The problem here is somewhat the same. He could address: - - his service
- his protesting
- the SBVT
- his work in support of veterans which started back in 1969.

If you think about it, if Kerry addresses these issues (or possibly even if he doesn't) Kerry is far more likely to win the veteran vote than Hillary. Kerry work for veterans is something that was lost in the noise in 2004. In some ways, just as on religion Kerry needs to take back who he really is.

[ProSense]

20. Agree!

The media didn't cover the message, they covered the fight:

Media largely ignored substance of Clinton's criticism of Bush anti-terror efforts

Summary: In their coverage of the Clinton-Wallace interview, the media largely ignored the substance of former President Clinton's criticism of the Bush administration's efforts to combat terrorism, instead focusing on Clinton's behavior during the interview or the possibility that his reaction was motivated by politics.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200609270001

[politicasista]

13. Another thing

Kerry better keep reaching out to people cause the Clintons are going to use the AA vote to their advantage.

[wisteria]

17. Well, Kerry has been great on many AA issues. They need to

be made aware of this. Also, Bill Clinton isn't running, Hillary is. This needs to be emphasized.

[blm]

19. Hey, Kerry ACTS substantively and always has. Hillary Clinton TALKS and

does little of substance.

Some people want to be fooled and coddled and others want action.