Karl Rove is driving the Obama – Clinton wars

He certainly had the examples of what to do by the Nixon administration he adored from puberty.

History is being repeated with almost identical methods, and unfortunately so are falling for them that if we don’t expose them it may cost us the General election!

In a 1996 The Washington Post article By George Lardner

Buchanan Outlined Plan to Harass Democrats in ’72, Memo Shows

Rove stated that he IS an adviser to the McCain campaign, he also works for FOX news.

Republican presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan strongly favored a plan of “covert operations” to harass and embarrass Democratic contenders in the heady days at the Nixon White House before the Watergate scandal.

Buchanan laid out his ideas in an April 10, 1972, memo looking ahead to that summer’s Democratic National Convention

On the memo’s last page — one never turned over to Watergate congressional investigators — Buchanan and his top aide recommended staging counterfeit attacks by one Democrat on another, fouling up scheduled events, arranging demonstrations and spreading rumors to plague the rival party, all the while being careful not to run afoul of the Secret Service.

In addition to his speechwriting work, Buchanan was in charge of “opposition research” for the Nixon White House and was, as he put it in one memo, a “regular and enthusiastic member of the campaign ‘Attack Group’ ” that met regularly to discuss 1972 political strategy.

Terry Lenzner, former assistant chief counsel for the Senate Watergate committee, said on learning of the memo last week that it was more reminiscent of the separate program of “dirty tricks” directed against Democratic presidential candidates in the 1972 primaries by individuals such as White House-hired political saboteur Donald H. Segretti.

With funds supplied by Nixon’s personal lawyer, Segretti crisscrossed the country under assumed names, planting spies, disrupting rallies and creating divisiveness among the Democrats with false press releases, bogus letters and fake ads. After plea bargaining, he drew a six-month prison term for fabricating literature in the Florida primary. One was a letter on the campaign stationery of Sen. Edmund S. Muskie (D-Maine) accusing Sens. Henry M. Jackson (D-Wash.) and Hubert H. Humphrey (D-Minn.) of sexual misconduct.

“Operation Gemstone,” at a Jan. 17, 1972, Justice Department meeting with Attorney General and Nixon campaign director Mitchell, White House counsel John Dean and deputy campaign director Jeb S. Magruder.

His proposals included CRYSTAL, an electronic surveillance to be directed at the Democratic convention from an opulent houseboat, SAPPHIRE, a spying caper relying on prostitutes working out of a lush houseboat bedroom, wired for sound (the ceiling was too low for an overhead camera), and TURQUOISE, a disruption scheme relying on what Liddy called “a commando team of Cubans” to sabotage all of the convention hall’s air-conditioning units.

At the January meeting, Mitchell rejected the scheme as too expensive. But on April 1, Liddy has said, Magruder finally conveyed approval of a $250,000 “Gemstone” budget, including two prostitutes, four spies in the Democratic camps and a series of surreptitious break-ins.

His (Buchanan) White House papers include a Dec. 15, 1971, memo to Haldeman and Mitchell outlining “an anti-McCloskey campaign in New Hampshire.” One idea, Buchanan said, would be to find a way of getting a gay rights group or the Black Panthers or the radical Students for a Democratic Society at Dartmouth “to contribute a grand or so to the McCloskey campaign” and then alert the highly conservative Manchester Union Leader about the donation.

OK If you have come this far, you will be enraged, pissed, screaming your head off when you read the next part!

Hillary and the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy

The strange case of conservative pundits and their love for Barack Obama

by Wayne Barrett

March 11th, 2008 12:00 AM


Rush Limbaugh predicted on January 28-shortly after the South Carolina primary and before Super Tuesday-that Clinton ads would make Obama “appear darker than he is,” alluding to Time magazine’s infamous O.J. Simpson cover. He even repeatedly likened Bill Clinton to the notorious public-safety commissioner and Klansman Bull Connor, branding the ex-president “Bull Clinton.”

Declaring that he knows the Clintons “like every square inch of my glorious naked body,” Limbaugh predicted that they were “going to pit” Hispanics and blacks against each other. “The message is going to be: ‘Hispanics, don’t let them take me out, and don’t let them-those black people-marginalize you.

contending that the Clintons were alienating blacks who see “Obama as a nice guy, a soaring visionary.” Careful to put this praise for Obama in the mouths of others, Limbaugh nonetheless portrayed him as “above the fray” and “not taking the bait” and deserving of “all this Kennedy appellation.”

“We don’t want this Democrat campaign to end now. We need Hillary. We need the soap opera. We need somebody roughing up Obama before it’s our turn to get there. We need chaos in this party. President Clinton is on our side in this. It’s about winning, folks. It is about the Democrats being defeated. It’s like, when the enemy is eating themselves alive, you pass the salt.”

Limbaugh had started the campaign way back in early 2007, singing “Barack the Magic Negro,” a “Puff the Magic Dragon” parody about Obama’s supposedly inauthentic blackness, even calling him the “Magic Negro” 27 times in a single show. Then he went silent about Obama during the heat of the January primaries. Now he’s mocking the new frontrunner again, asserting that his rhetoric is as empty “as Hillary Clinton helplessly protests,” and declaring that “his career bears no trace of his own character.”


has used his widely read syndicated column to hammer the Clintons and praise Obama as “eloquent and inspirational.” Though he once opposed making Martin Luther King’s birthday a holiday and championed white rule in the former Rhodesia, he, too, has accused the Clintons of racial politics. “The Clinton campaign may be drifting into encouragement of brown-versus-black racial conflict by condoning Latino racial hostility to the first African-American with a chance to become president,” he wrote on the same day in late January that Limbaugh made the identical argument, if less delicately. He warned that blacks might not forget “the slurs of January,” especially Hillary’s reference to Obama’s legal representation of the indicted Chicago slumlord Tony Rezko.

Novak tried to poison the well by suggesting that the Clintons were dumping negative innuendos about Obama on donors and journalists like himself. “I have not talked to a single Republican in my reporting of attacks on Obama,” he wrote, effectively outing his anonymous Clinton sources.

He called Hillary’s comments about the complementary roles of Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson a “race debate.”

But by March 1 and 3, his columns were decrying Obama’s “horrible gaffe” on Louis Farrakhan and even discussing questions of merit regarding the Rezko relationship, citing suggestions that a controversial Iraqi billionaire had helped Obama buy his Chicago mansion, funneling the cash through friend and donor Rezko.


Here’s how Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard and Fox News’ prized analyst, opened his first New York Times op-ed column in January: “Thank you, Senator Obama. You’ve defeated Senator Clinton in Iowa. It looks as if you’re about to beat her in New Hampshire. There will be no Clinton Restoration. A nation turns its grateful eyes to you.” Kristol went on in that column to cite Obama’s “ability and charm” and likened the Clinton slayer to Bobby Kennedy in another, calling him “charismatic” twice in the same paragraph, as well as “a skeptic of simple ideological stances, a gifted politician and an anti-politician.”

When Obama later won in South Carolina, Kristol contended that Bill Clinton played “the race card,” albeit “clumsily.” Kristol said that Clinton was trying “to turn Obama into Jesse Jackson” and blasted him as “unseemly.” A beacon of racial sensitivity, Kristol has acknowledged his longstanding speed-dial ties to Karl Rove, even after Rove appeared to orchestrate the push polls in the 2000 South Carolina primary that defeated Kristol’s then favorite, John McCain, by suggesting that he’d fathered a black child with a prostitute.

Of course, once Kristol concluded that Obama had the nomination in the bag, he delivered an extraordinary hit piece of his own in the Times. On February 25, Kristol clobbered Obama for removing his lapel flag pin, saying that Obama was “impugning the sincerity or intelligence of those vulgar sorts who still choose” to wear one. He also derided Michelle Obama’s statement that she was “really proud of my country” for the “first time” in her adult life. “It is fitting that the alternative to Obama will be John McCain,” he said, rushing into the general election as precipitately as he rushed into Baghdad. “But could the American people, by November, decide that for all his impressive qualities, Obama tends too much toward the preening self-regard of Bill Clinton, the patronizing elitism of Al Gore and the haughty liberalism of John Kerry?”


CNN commentator, maxed-out John McCain donor, and professional moralist Bill Bennett-whose brother Bob represented McCain in the flap over The New York Times’s recent attempt at exposing a McCain sex scandal-became an Obama booster as soon as the primaries started. “Obama never brings race into it,” Bennett said in early January. “He taught the black community you don’t have to act like Jesse Jackson; you don’t have to act like Al Sharpton. You can talk about the issues.”

Undeterred by the race flap over his own assertion on his syndicated talk-radio show in 2005 that “you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down,” Bennett deplored “the bitterness of the Clinton campaign” and the “unfair hits” they’d taken at Obama. He declared that “all the magic is with Obama” and saluted his “great dignity.”

During the TV coverage on the night of the New Hampshire primary, Bennett twice counted the Clintons out before the results came in, flatly contradicting his Democratic counterpart, Donna Brazile. He predicted that the Clintons would “come in like George McGovern and go out like Richard Nixon.” When Hillary won, Bennett described himself as “an almost lifelong critic of the Clintons,” adding that “there’s a lot of things you can say about them that are uncomplimentary and that are true.”

Bennett also blasted Bill Clinton a few days before his Jesse Jackson comments, calling him an “unguided missile” who was “driving Hillary out of the headlines with his own irrepressible zest for political combat,” though the only comment of the ex-president that had drawn ire at that point was his reference to Obama’s “fairy tale” version of his opposition to the Iraq War. Unlike many of his right-wing colleagues, Bennett has been too busy rallying conservative support for McCain to explicitly recast his early embrace of Obama, oscillating in recent post-debate commentary between saluting Obama as “well-spoken” and declaring Hillary a victor. But he did devote one column to the many ways that McCain is preferable to either Democrat.


Byron York, whose columns in The National Review and The Hill have made him a “voice-of-reason” conservative on Fox News and elsewhere, has traveled full circle on Obama. Last July, he analyzed Obama’s debate performances beginning in April of 2007 and concluded that “one major candidate is unquestionably unprepared to be president.” The author of a book called The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy, York then abruptly enlisted in the apparent pro-Obama right-wing conspiracy, hailing him as “electrifying” and praising him for “one of the best political performances anyone has seen this year” after attending a rally in South Carolina in January. Obama, York wrote, was “relentlessly mocking his rivals while making himself the only sane, honest and reasonable person in the race.” York concluded that Obama represented “a mortal threat” to the Clinton candidacy and said it would be hard for Bill Clinton “to cut his legs out from under him without appearing racist.” A couple of days after the article appeared, York praised the Obama campaign’s “high-mindedness”-on Fox News, no less-and said the Clintons “needed to knock Obama down from that plane.”

When Bill Clinton drew the Jackson parallel on the day of the primary, York appeared with Maureen Dowd on Meet the Press, and both of them lobbed one bomb after another at the Clintons. “I don’t think you can overstate the amount of anger created in Democrats by Bill Clinton’s tactics,” the scholarly-looking York deadpanned. “The whole point” of the Clinton strategy in South Carolina, he said, was “to suggest that all these white voters” who’d looked at Obama earlier and concluded that he “wants to be president for everybody” were wrong, and that he “really wants to be president for black America.” Extrapolating this from the reference to Jackson’s victory years earlier, York said the Clintons were trying “to drive white voters away from Obama” and that these tactics were “making the Democratic establishment so angry.” Prior to York’s South Carolina pronouncements, he’d devoted most of his campaign coverage to tireless cheerleading for a paragon of racial sensitivity named Rudy Giuliani.

This is soooo unbelievable, just this one article. Read the entire thing and you can watch how the Democratic race has been micro managed by the repugs!

I am not a very good writer, but the history from Nixon’s election and this one bodes ill for the country if we do not expose and condem these people NOW.

A few in the media controlling everything!

dkos is a hotbed of reaction of this manipulation.

We have to take our country back, we cannot give them a minute more than they are allowed.

Please someone, lots of you please make this into understandable articles and get it around to all you can so they can see the truth!

Thank You!


  1. This is about self-professed Progressive Democrats losing their collective minds in the heat of an extremely competitive primary.

    Possessed by a misguided faith in illusory virtues of identity politics, far too many (formerly) reasonable souls have devolved into nothing more than tribalist super-fans, perfectly willing to catapult any and all MSM-fed claptrap so long as it smears the other side’s champion.

    The sad thing is most of these folks know better, but instead  have chosen to remove their otherwise highly attuned news filters and pump out any and all anti-candidate sludge they can find – all with that finger pointing tone of faux emotive outrage that would be laughable if it weren’t so pathetic.

    And sure, there may be any number of political operatives responsible for initiating these ridiculous stories.  After all, Karl Rove isn’t the only campaign manager with a highly competent oppo research team.  

    Yet however this inflammatory, rancid red meat gets thrown to the partisan monkeys, it doesn’t automatically mean that they have to chew it up and vomit it back out on the rest of us.  

    From day one, the whole point of the blogosphere has been to free us from MSM-driven disinformation that once threatened to imprison political discourse in a cage of utter irrelevancy, and I’ll be damned if these idol-worshiping goof balls throw me back into that zoo.

    For the sake of us all, the candidate fans need to knock this crap off, and pronto.

Comments have been disabled.