Why is Obama in bed with Karl Rove?

Deals with Obama's embrace of Novak as a credible source plus his embrace of Gertz's ambition pact nonsense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-c-johnson/why-is-obama-in-bed-with-_b_73737.html

Why is Obama in bed with Karl Rove?
Larry C. Johnson
November 21, 2007

If Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Hillary Clinton's campaign told him that they had some dirt on Obama, would Obama's staff react as they did to the Robert Novak column of November 17? And yes, I am putting Novak in the same category as the crazy Iranian leader. Novak has damaged U.S. national security as much as Ahmadinejad with his exposure of Valerie Plame and the subsequent destruction of her clandestine intelligence network.

Why has Senator Barack Obama kept the Novak story alive through repeated statements for days? Is he just naïve or is he misinformed? Is he really so unfamiliar with the journalistic incest of Washington and Novak's status as a Republican hit man? Why would Obama focus his campaign on unfounded "smears" circulated by Novak? Why would Obama, the candidate of "hope," pump up the claims of Novak, "the prince of darkness"?

Let;s be clear. I am not saying Senator Obama should have ignored the rumors. Hell no. Confronting them head on is appropriate. But you go after the source, in this case Novak, rather than act as if there is substance to the charge that the Clintons are shopping trash to Novak.

The Republican smear masters had already tipped their hand for dealing with Hillary Clinton. Look at Karl Rove's debut column in Newsweek, where he lays out the strategy that Obama appears to be parroting:

"And so the question to John McCain from a woman at a town hall in South Carolina last Monday was tasteless, but key: 'How do we beat the ?' Right now, Republicans are focusing much of their fire on Senator Clinton. Criticizing her unites the party, stirs up the unsettled feelings many swing voters have toward her and allows each candidate to say why he is best able to beat her."

With Rove's instructions to Republicans in mind, take a new look at Obama's reaction to Novak. Is Obama wearing a wrist bracelet that says, "what would Karl Rove do"?

lots more...

Another 7 or 8 years, and he just might be ready for national office.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

And why did Bill embrace Bush so firmly on terrorism and Iraq war and advise other Dems to do the same?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

And why did Bill Clinton embrace Poppy Bush's need for secrecy and privilege throughout the 90s instead of embracing the citizens right to honest and open government?


http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

Hillary: “Now voters will judge whether living in a foreign country at the age of 10 prepares one to face the big, complex international challenges the next President will face. I think we need a President with more experience than that."

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/hillary_obamas_foreign_policy_experience_consists_of_him_living_abroad_at_age_of_10.php


The Republican National Committee: OBAMA'S TOP 5 FOREIGN POLICY CREDENTIALS

Foreign Policy Credential #1: "Life Of Living Overseas" For 4 Years...In Elementary School:

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=7101

The logic is totally whack. The title is worthy of National Enquirer. The writing even sucks.

not a surprise. The only consolation is that they'll all be gone by March.
Maybe

Or were you just offering your critical analysis of its value as readable prose.

:evilfrown:

god i wish they'd all just stop.

develop some integrity and stop repeating falsehoods and lies about Hillary with the intent of ruining her reputation, people might not write negative articles about him.

The media only cares about Obama to publically lash Clinton to keep women in their place. Do we not get what is going on here? They would broadcast live executions if they were allowed.

more than I can say about most people.

Hillary isn't playing the gender card but it IS being played by her detracters and not in a positive way.

either their candidate or because they realize they might get a job with all Hillary bashing all the time Arianna Hufferton. Maybe they are just doing their puke jobs to begin with. I think they have some sort of schedule. One of them posts 6 or 7 in a row and inserts a negative post wherever they can.

Who is wearing the pantsuit anyway?

even if it meant villifying himself to make an indirect connection between Obama and evil?

I don't think Hillary has anything on Obama. Perhaps she's manufactured something, but I doubt that as well. But questioning Novak's credibility just makes Obama looks like he has something to hide. Telling Hillary to "bring it on" is showing that he has nothing to hide.

Personally I'd tell Bob Novak that he has no credibility and that he should go fuck himself. But I'm not running for President. If I were in Obama's shoes I'd probably do the exact same thing.

Johnson and Plame were in CIA training together. He has vigorously defended her, which is understandable.

Novak insists that a well known Democrat gave him this information and this person said it come from inside the Clinton camp. With Chris Lehane working for Clinton, anything is possible.

Rumsfeld and to call her Bush-Cheney lite?

Feeling a bit *concerned* are you?

likes to repeat the same thing over and over, even it if has no merit. Novak's column should be regarded as having no merit because it's based on vague assertions not backed by hard evidence.

Novak should never be given any credence because he's shown himself to be untrustworthy and hypocrital. His direct involvement in the outing of Valerie Plame should be enough to show what kind of journalist he is.

I wish Obama wouldn't use innuendos and lies by a hostile Republican gossip-monger to make himself look like a victim who's being picked on by that big bad Hillary Clinton.

When Hillary said in the last debate about candidates mud-slinging by using talking-points right out of the Republican playbook---was right on.

Obama and Edwards are using words right out of that playbook and it's disgusting.

The spin I'm seeing from certain fronts of certain campaigns.
Kicking up every negative thread you can find in the middle of the night is sleazy and disingenuous.
I think doing so represents the worst kind of sleaze.