Clinton Advisor Sidney Blumenthal on Republican Dirty Tricks
(broadcast stream
) (.mp3 download Right-click,”Save Target as”,”Save”)
[Although the show can certainly be heard and understood, this particular archive is not of the best sound quality. A better archive will replace this one as soon as it is available.]
Mark interviews Clinton advisor and confidante Sidney Blumenthal on the hazards of the Clinton Years. Mark asks Blumenthal what advice Blumenthal will give to the probable future Presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton on how she should respond to the Republican lies, dirty tricks, and vicious personal negative attacks against her like the ones that have surfaced in the tabloids just this week.
Should Democrats play as dirty as Republicans?
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Skip June 24, 2005 12:49 pm
Mark,
I agree with your view on how to battle the GOP and disagree with Blumenthal’s. There is no other way to fight this insanity from the far right wing of the GOP other than going nose to nose with them. Unfortunately, the Democrats have a disadvantage at the start with all the Fox News imitators out there. But the old approach is obviously failing miserably. No more mister nice guy. The wimpish far right usually cry their little eyes out when confronted, portraying themselves as victims if they are not already wrapped in the flag. GO Howard Dean GO !!!!!!
Skip June 24, 2005 4:18 am
Mark,
Sidney Blumenthal’s comments about Dominionists made me think of a future Inside Scoop interview of Joan Bokaer from Cornell University.
http://www.theocracywatch.org/
Mark Levine June 24, 2005 12:51 am
James,
I think you give good political advice.
james June 23, 2005 11:56 pm
Hello Mark. I really enjoy this show and your interview with blumenthal. I read the clinton wars and thought it was an awesome book; however, I cannot disagree more with blumenthal.
There is no doubt in my mind that hillary (assuming she is the nominee in 2008) needs to go negative. But I think she should engage in a certain type of negative campaigning. The Republicans simply fabricate lies and wildly exaggerate people’s comments (ie. Gore and the Love Story incident). I think Hillary should instead engage in a different type of negative camaigning.
For example, if the Republicans nominate a conservative like Bill Frist or George Allen, Hillary must NOT attack them as being too conservative. That will merely energize the conservative base. She should rather cleverly portray them as men who want to take America to the past, enemies of progress, and hypocrites more beholden to special interests than to the country’s interests. I think such attacks will establish a clear contrast between the two candidates without necessarily compromising Democratic integrity. I also personally think that Hillary should aggressively campaign in Western states like Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, where people are more socially moderate and predisposed towards a Goldwater/Reaganesque libertarian streak. Moreover, much to the dismay of my liberal friends, Hillary should use illegal immigration as a wedge issue, much like how the Republicans used Vietnam to divide the Democrats in the late 60’s. By being tough on this issue, she could win the votes of more conservative blue collar workers, who voted for her husband, but defected to Bush in the last two elections.