The “Hillary Responders” is an organization that proclaims it is “not affiliated with or authorized by Hillary Clinton for President.” But someone — I do not know who — shared my e-mail address with them. The group created its website just six days ago and is hiding the identity of its organizers with a domain privacy blocker and has no identifying information on its website or information. No information for the Hillary Responders group exists in the IRS database for 527s and other non-affiliated political committees.
“Hillary Responders” is featuring this sort of critique of Barack Obama on its web page, actively encouraging people to spread these as “talking points” on blogs, in letters to the editors of newspapers, and in phone calls to voters:
Barack Obama responded yesterday to the spread of such “talking points” by these nebulous pro-Clinton forces:
Well look, there’s always some nonsense going on in general elections, if it wasn’t this it would be something else. I mean as you will recall, first it was my name, right? That was a problem.
And then there was the Muslim email thing and that stuff hasn’t worked out so well. And now it’s the patriotism thing.
And the way I will respond to it is with the truth. That I owe everything I am to this country…
As far as the American flag pin, I mean when we start getting into those definitions of patriotism that’s a debate I’m happy to have, because I will come right after them. This is a party that presided over a war in which our troops did not get the body armor that they needed, or sending troops over who were untrained because of poor planning, or are not fulfilling the veterans benefits that these troops need when they come home, or undermining our constitution with warrantless wiretaps that are unnecessary.
That is a debate that I am very happy to have. We’ll see what the American people think is the true definition of patriotism is.
“Hillary Responders,” I don’t know who you really are, and you evidently don’t want me to know. But allow me to share my reaction to your efforts. When I place side-by-side:
1) The words of a group that uses flagmongering to reinforce the small-mindedness of lapel pin loyalty tests;
2) The words of a man who tells me that a patriot is someone who acts in the best interest of the nation and to defend the constitution;
I reject the former, and I endorse the latter.
I refuse to be moved toward or away from Hillary Clinton the candidate by the superficialities of this nebulous group unless it becomes clear that the Clinton campaign itself is connected to the effort. But I also refuse to let this kind of authoritarian, conformity-hugging, groupthink version of campaigning pass by without remark. The Hillary Responders exhibit an affinity for Republican McCarthyism that does not amuse or fit or flatter any responsible Democratic Party candidate. Hillary Responders, whoever you may be, you may think to score political points with your shallow demonstration of the staged maneuvers of patriotism, but you do your favored candidate no credit by acting to undermine the constitutionally-informed sense of patriotism upon which the presidency is based.
“…affinity for Republican McCarthyism…” I thought so too. Maybe “Hillary Responders” is a group of Republicans who want Hillary on the Democratic ticket.
Last time I checked, McGovern was down in Texas helping out at those Hillary BBQ campaign events–when he wasn’t busy writing op-eds in favor of impeachment.
This is an extraordinary amount of spin, Jim, even for you. Maybe you didn’t look at the site very closely or maybe you didn’t have your coffee yet.
The piece you are all up in arms about was an Associated Press piece that has been out for several days:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j7h3tqXBVMkt-Ig_c0Dz025_-jJQD8V0M9VG0
This particular piece has been reprinted everywhere from Yahoo News to MSNBC to Huffington Post. Yes, this Hillary Rapid Responders website has it too.
If you look at the top of the hillaryresponders.com website, there are tabs for categories like Speeches, Letters to the Editor, McCain, and Obama on the far right (probably an intentional racist thing, that.). If you look under the Obama tab, you will see the AP piece about four articles down, right under the one where Farrakhan gives speech endorsing Obama.
What I DON’T see next to this piece is the thing Jim describes as “actively encouraging people to spread these as “talking points†on blogs.” The whole website is basically a bunch of videos and stuff written by other people collected in one place.
And yes, Obama has a group like this too–the “Truth Squad”. I’m sure Jim has already written them a challenging letter to produce their tax exempt status.
If you are going to print that much of the article, you should credit the author. hillaryresponders.com did.
The title of the piece is “Conservatives Say Obama Lacks Patriotism” The author is NEDRA PICKLER.
You can read the entire piece here:
http://hillaryresponders.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=57:obama-may-face-grilling-on-patriotism&catid=13:obama&Itemid=45
or here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23315711
or here:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/5564470.html
or here:
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/politics/story/284797.html
or here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20080224/obama-attack-fodder/
or here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080224/ap_on_el_pr/obama_attack_fodder
or here:
http://www.maysville-online.com/articles/2008/02/25/ap/politics/d8v0m9vg0.txt
or here:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080223/D8V053E00.html
The nerve.
Damn, but you’re going to be busy writing articles about all these outfits and how they all “play flag games”.
Oh yeah? You disagree with me? Well, flag flag flag flag flag!
You seem awfully defensive, Iroquois.
Tell you what.
First, find me a link to this “Obama Truth Squad.” The only thing I can find when I type that in to Google is a series of Republican hit pieces.
Second, show me the place in which the Obama people criticize Hillary Clinton for not holding her hand in a particular position when the national anthem’s playing, or for not wearing a lapel pin.
Do all those things, and present it all to me in one place to look at. Then look into and if appropriate critique that group.
Go to it. I look forward to your progress report.
E-mail from Hillary Responder:
“What do you get as a RAPID RESPONDER:
Daily talking points about our candidate’s positions.
Daily talking points about how the opposition is misleading voters with false statements.
The satisfaction that you ARE MAKING A DIFFERENCE on the campaign.”
From the website:
“Join a blog: #
What is a Hillary Rapid Responder?:
#
Someone who speaks the truth to the media about our candidate’s message and positions.”
“Key Message Points”
“Call voters”
“Travel to a State”
“Core Message Guidance”
“Letters to the Editor”
If these anonymous people — whoever they are — think that having a president who holds his or her hand in the proper position and who wears the right lapel pin is more important than having a president who preserves, protects and defends the constitution of the United States, then I will oppose them, because they stand for a great deal of what is wrong with this country.
You don’t seem to have the same problem with such people. And that’s your right, just as it’s my right to call out the people who think that enforcing sheeplike conformity is really what matters.
In response to your #4: The Huffington Post is a piece of corporate dreck that I have no respect for and choose to ignore.
The rest are news organizations reporting the controversy. I expect nothing from them.
Hillary Responder is a website advocating for Hillary Clinton and against Barack Obama because he didn’t hold his hand in the Approved Position one day and because he doesn’t wear the Approved Piece of Jewelry. That’s Republican thinking of which George W. Bush would be proud.
Furthermore, it’s superficial. These people are asking us to choose a candidate based on superficial demonstrations of patriotic fervor, rather than the substance of the candidate’s policies. Rather ironic, given that Hillary Clinton claims to be the candidate of substance.
I don’t see hillaryresponder.com advocating anything. There’s no blog, no comments, no opinion. They just repost stuff that has been published elsewhere–letters to the editor, news pieces, videos. Oh, and you can give them your contact info if you want to volunteer.
So you’re saying it’s okay for the Associated Press, which is supposed to be an unbiased news source to write the piece in the first place. But it’s not okay for an apparent political website to reprint it without comment. And the reason for that is….? Why aren’t you blasting this Nedra Pckler person for writing it in the first place?
I saw Obama’s “Truth Squad” mentioned here:
http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-gets-rapid-responders-respond-misleading-attacks
I’d love to see their website. I suspect it’s private, as I’ve seen a request for this on the Obama blog. I sure don’t understand all that stuff Obama considers to be “racist” and I wish there was a website that would explain it instead of having to get it from leaked insider campaign documents. Like for instance why were they upset when Hilary made that remark about copying someone else’s speech and said instead of “change you could believe in” it was “change that you could xerox”? If you want to decide for yourself you can see both clips here:
http://hillaryresponders.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=13&Itemid=45
I’m starting to think Jim might be working for Hillary, wouldn’t that be interesting?
I don’t think it’s accurate for Jim to say the website “is featuring this sort of critique of Barack Obama on its web page” either. It’s not on the front page above the fold. It’s not even on the front page. You have to click one of the tabs to search for it–or better yet, do an advanced google search. And even then, you won’t find it above that fold on that page. It’s way under the article about Obama catching flack for not attending that black thingy event of Tavis Smiley’s. That’s not a “feature”, it’s an afterthought tucked away on the back pages. I don’t think it’s a “critique of Barack Obama” either, it’s more of a critique of the conservatives they quote in the article. Shheesh, can we have some accuracy or has EVERYONE been into the Koolaid.