A victim of perception

Quick: What's the quickest way to create the perception that you are dishonest?

Need any more time? How about lying your ass off to everyone?



And the biggest lie would be to lie to everyone about how you are not lying to them.

This article on the subject is hilarious. And encouraging.

Poll Shows Erosion of Trust in Clinton

"Advisers argue that her positive ratings have dipped as she has been defined by her opponents -- a normal campaign occurrence -- and that her honesty problem reflects the pounding she took from Republicans in the 1990s. But the Bosnia incident and the way the campaign handled it have left advisers divided over what a candidate can do after such a steep drop in trust.

Some of her aides believe that after Clinton told the Bosnia story -- of having run from her military aircraft into a hangar to avoid sniper fire -- when television images of the event showed otherwise, the campaign had no choice but to say she "misspoke." Communications director Howard Wolfson first did so on a conference call with reporters, and Clinton repeated the explanation over the course of several days.

Other Clinton advisers thought that response did not come quickly enough -- and that when it did, without further explanation or talking points for surrogates to use, it only worsened the perception that she had lied. Making the situation more difficult was a split within the campaign over whether Clinton had exaggerated, or simply confused the landing with another trip. One Clinton insider announced in a strategy meeting it was ridiculous to have imagined the first lady ever having been in danger, or for Clinton to have thought she was -- a slap at the senator from New York that other advisers described as disrespectful.

At the same time, die-hard Clinton loyalists thought her communications operation did not defend her heartily enough, which press aides said they thought was impossible. "Continuing to say it did happen when it didn't happen is not a strategy," one adviser said.

The problem was exacerbated when Bill Clinton, in defending her confused memory of the Bosnia event, got key details of the incident wrong, before later saying his wife had told him to stay out of it.

Two staffers from the Clinton White House years, Lissa Muscatine and Melanne Verveer, wrote a New York Times op-ed article recalling the perils of the trip, trying to justify why Clinton had gotten the story wrong. "As has been reported, Mrs. Clinton's trip to Bosnia included a U.S.O. component with the comedian Sinbad and the singer Sheryl Crow. The helicopters that carried them to performances at American base camps zigzagged just above the trees to avoid potential ground fire, according to Carey Cavanaugh, who was then a State Department official traveling with Sinbad, and helicopters flew alongside to deal with the threat of anti-aircraft fire or snipers. These facts explain why many of us, including the first lady, believed that the conditions on the ground were precarious. We were worried about sniper fire and were prepared to rush off the tarmac when we landed," they wrote.

Senior Clinton advisers argued that the Bosnia story would not have developed the way it did if it were not for a story line about Clinton that goes back to the 1990s, when scandals involving the first lady, including the firings in the White House travel office and her financial dealings, resulted in widespread doubts about her trustworthiness. That framework, they argue, made it easier for Clinton to be perceived as dishonest, a problem that first arose in her presidential campaign in a debate last fall when she gave conflicting answers on whether she supports allowing illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses."

I think the Clinton campaign has a problem with perception/reality correspondence.

Hillary Clinton does not have a problem with being perceived as being dishonest.

Hillary Clinton has a problem with being dishonest.

I suppose when people get lost in the perception/manufacturing reality business, for too long, they get a little lost in the bullshit.

Hillary Clinton is way lost in the bullshit.

That's not my perception.

That is cold, hard fact.

And, encouragingly, most Americans seem to be recognizing that fact too.

The arrogance of power and the Clinton campaign

Douglas Schoen writes this brazenly arrogant piece of political consultant tripe for the Washington Post, today, that gets to the heart of why Hillary Clinton should not have power.

New Strategy for Clinton

Money quote, as Andrew Sullivan would say:

"As the underdog, Clinton's positive message will not work unless she is able to undermine Obama's candidacy. The Illinois senator's success has been largely built upon his claims that he is a unifier who can work above partisan politics, that he will bring change to our government and that he will bring a new style of leadership to Washington. Without bringing a strong amount of skepticism to these claims, Clinton will not be able to make significant inroads in Obama's lead and cannot persuade the superdelegates to go against the will of the American people."

The layers of bullshit in this piece are quite breathtaking, I must say. But that last line really takes the cake.

In order for Hillary Clinton to win a democratic nomination, she must overturn the will of the American people.

I want to say that, again, slowly, to make sure you caught that.

In order for Hillary Clinton to win a democratic nomination, she must overturn the will of the American people.

For most of us, that would be illiberal and contrary to democracy. It would smack of the likes of Robert Mugabe or Fidel Castro, both likely role models for leadership for Mr. Schoen, undoubtedly.

For Douglas Schoen, this is what liberalism and democracy is all about. For Douglas Schoen, this is "progress."

Have you picked up on the theme, yet?

Progress for this Clinton campaign is Hillary Clinton getting power. And democracy be damned. You could dismiss such a strategy as the ravings of a mad and desperate political consultant likely to lose his number one client and most certainly to lose her access to the most powerful position in the world.

Except this is the Clinton strategy, at this point. And Mr. Schoen is right. She is likely making a turn for negative.

Which is all good with me, because it makes it clear as fuckin' day what this bunch is up to.

And, contrary to Mr. Schoen's concept of power, I have full confidence that the American people will see through it. And if Democrats were to somehow be weasled - which I see very little room for such a scenario to transpire; neither does Douglas Schoen, which is why he wrote this piece of kitty litter lining - the general electorate most assuredly would.

As will I. I'm already planning on voting for John McCain, at this point. Though I must that this most recent spate of bullshit from him and the Clinton campaign has me rethinking that.

Power doesn't just corrupt, as it turns out, as Lord Acton wisely observed. It makes one blind to the underlying reality.

If you doubt that, ask Robert Mugabe. Or better yet, ask Hillary Clinton.