Being "Vetted"
Posted by Little Ms Purple at 1/17/2008 2:35 PM 
Categories: 2008 Election, Political strategies, All Posts
Categories: 2008 Election, Political strategies, All Posts
During the lull between primaries (albeit a very brief lull), I've been listening to Senator Clinton's political tactic of saying that she is the most vetted candidate and that such vetting hasn't taken place with Senator Obama. I'm not going to get in to whether that is right or not but what I would be worried about if I was running Clinton's campaign is "the other shoe".
What I mean by "the other shoe" are all of the documents, records and correspondences by or about Senator Clinton tucked away in President Clinton's library. There was a brief moment earlier in this contest when the subject of those documents and correspondences came up but it has since dropped off the radar. Should Clinton get the nomination, you can bet your bottom dollar that the Republican in the race is going to go after those records in that library. And should they gain access to any of it, that could be one big "other shoe" to drop.
What I mean by "the other shoe" are all of the documents, records and correspondences by or about Senator Clinton tucked away in President Clinton's library. There was a brief moment earlier in this contest when the subject of those documents and correspondences came up but it has since dropped off the radar. Should Clinton get the nomination, you can bet your bottom dollar that the Republican in the race is going to go after those records in that library. And should they gain access to any of it, that could be one big "other shoe" to drop.
Caught your blog from a link at ThinkProgress.org Interesting. A couple of points:
1) I'm going to assume you're not the obvious guess, the guy who just wrote the book about the NH phone-jamming voter suppression effort.
2) OK. I think it's great that you've seen the light, I think it is commendable that you saw the light before 2004 and spoke up. I can forgive people for being bamboozled the first time around in 2000, but I find it hard to forgive those who voted again for him in 2004, knowing full well Bush's flaws. I particularly have a difficult time with people who voted for him in 2004 and criticize him now or say crap like, "But... Kerry would have been worse!" Talk about wanting to eat your cake and have it too.
My question: what do you think of Bruce Bartlett? My beef with him is this: he had grave misgivings about Bush in 2004, but kept his mouth shut and worked to elect him anyway, then turned right around and wrote a book about it all. Hello, we could have used you on our side in 2004, Mr. Bartlett, but you cynically chose to... eat your cake and have it too!
Your serve, Mr. Purple.
Reply to this
Thanks for the comment... in terms of Bruce Bartlett, yeah, I agree with you 100%. The hypocrisy in Washington is rampant and that example couldn't be any clearer.
I "saw" the light over the course of many years and for an explanation to my transformation from red to purple, you can read this post:
http://mrpurple2008.com/2002/11/13/how-i-evolved-from-a-red-republican-to-a-purple-independent.aspx
In short, it was a combination of how the religious right and the neocons took over the party in addition to the sleazy, cheap and dirty political tactics used against McCain in 2000 that turned me PURPLE.
Lastly, you're right, I'm not the NH phone jamming guy with a book to promote.
Mr. Purple
Reply to this