The Political Chase

Clinton Campaign Attacks Obama Drug Use

(Update I and Update II below)

Hillary Clinton is obviously getting desperate.

William H. Shaheen

Bill Shaheen, co-chairman of Clinton’s campaign in New Hampshire and a partner in the law firm Shaheen & Gordon, attacked Barack Obama today saying Obama’s prior drug use would keep him from being a viable presidential candidate.

“The Republicans are not going to give up without a fight … and one of the things they’re certainly going to jump on is his drug use,” said Shaheen, the husband of former N.H. governor Jeanne Shaheen, who is planning to run for the Senate next year. Billy Shaheen contrasted Obama’s openness about his past drug use — which Obama mentioned again at a recent campaign appearance in New Hampshire — with the approach taken by George W. Bush in 1999 and 2000, when he ruled out questions about his behavior when he was “young and irresponsible.”

Shaheen said Obama’s candor on the subject would “open the door” to further questions. “It’ll be, ‘When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?’” Shaheen said. “There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It’s hard to overcome.”

“Openings for…dirty tricks.” How ironic.

Shaheen’s law firm proudly display this slogan on its Web site: “The best legal minds belong in your corner.” I question the use of “best,” but one of their legal minds certainly deserves to be standing in the corner.

Some may say Hillary Clinton and her campaign did not learn anything from the kindergarten debacle, but I don’t believe lessons-learned negligence has anything to do with the recent slam.

Shaheen has to have a reasonable level of intelligence and common sense for Clinton to make him co-chair of a very important state, NH. The man knew what he was saying, and he could not have possibly forgotten the campaign’s last ludicrous slam against Obama. In fact, if the man has any savvy whatsoever, given the kindergarten thing, he would be very selective about any Obama comments at this point.

Furthermore, if Clinton was concerned about the last swift-boating, imbecilic incident, she would have made it abundantly clear to people at Shaheen’s level. Obviously she did not or was not effective in making it clear. So, my point is, I’m not buying into Clinton’s or her campaign’s disavowal, which was not made until after Obama’s campaign intellectually eviscerated Clinton.

Consider what Shaheen said and how he said it. He was making statements on a topic, regardless of whom the subject may be, that stick. Retract, disavow, and apologize –whatever. It remains, and Shaheen knew that. How could any capable lawyer not?

Response from the Obama campaign.

“Hillary Clinton said attacking other Democrats is the ‘fun part’ of this campaign, and now she’s moved from Barack Obama’s kindergarten years to his teenage years in an increasingly desperate effort to slow her slide in the polls. Senator Clinton’s campaign is recycling old news that Barack Obama has been candid about in a book he wrote years ago, and he’s talked about the lessons he’s learned from these mistakes with young people all across the country. He plans on winning this campaign by focusing on the issues that actually matter to the American people.”

Now look at Clinton’s response to her campaign’s mudslinging. They simply distance themselves from Shaheen’s remark.

Senator Clinton is out every day talking about the issues that matter to the American people. These comments were not authorized or condoned by the campaign in any way.

Not authorized, my ass. By what they did not say in their response, they might as well have endorsed it, bought a 10-second slot for every hour during prime time on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, MSNBC, and CNN, and run it for the next three days.

Barack was spot on when he said Hillary is “Bush-Cheney lite.”

Update:  The Jed Report does not interpret Bill Shaheen’s comments on Barack Obama’s viability as contained to Shaheen or benign. Instead, the Report says it was a calculated escalation with more to come.

For a few days after Hillary’s disastrous “Kindergate” moment, she dialed down her attacks on Barack Obama to a slow simmer. She’d crossed an obvious line, and her campaign risked becoming a parody of itself and imploding if she kept at it.

As anyone who has observed her political career should have expected, however, Hillary regrouped and returned to the attack trail, this time with more vigor and with renewed intensity. Most importantly, her campaign is attacking Obama with more savvy — using surrogates to launch attacks on his character, giving her “plausible deniability” in the media’s twisted version of reality.

It’s absolutely clear that her latest attacks are part of a coordinated strategy, and they are more savage then ever, but the difference between this week and last is that while Clinton has changed her tactics, Obama hasn’t. Just as he did ten days ago, Obama is now saying that Clinton’s attacks are desperate, and that they are the sign of a campaign that is fading fast and panicking.

…snip…

I’d suggest that he use the other meaning of the phrase “Hillary attacks” — that she attacks countries, like Iraq and Iran. The path to war with Iran is her Achilles’ heel. Her campaign momentum suffered its first serious setback after she voted for Kyl-Lieberman. At the height of her inevitability, she exhibited a pattern that progressive Democrats have feared most: her willingness to embrace right-wing policies when she thinks they are politically advantageous.

Update II:   Andrew Sullivan opines that Hillary is practicing the politics of fear. He’s right.

The hints were there already, but now a Clinton surrogate is flaying Obama for his refreshing candor about past drug-use. Again: this is the politics of fear. Check out the classic Clinton defensive crouch with respect to the GOP…So a Clintonite is urging that Obama follow W’s example. Somehow, I don’t think this is going to help. But it’s a sign of how worried they are that their coronation has turned into something a little more complicated.