Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama, in the South Carolina Debate:

I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.

Apparently Obama isn’t the only one with ties to “slum landlord business” owner Tony Rezko. He’s the one in the middle, in case you can’t tell who the slimy one is.

TPM has the video of Hillary trying to explain herself on NBC.

This wouldn’t even be an issue if Clinton hadn’t attempted to smear Obama with a tie to Rezko that countless media investigations have shown involved no legal wrongdoing on Obama’s part. She chose to play dirty. Obama hasn’t brought up Norman Hsu, or Whitewater, or any number of guilt by association and assumption attacks he could have hypothetically leveled at the Clintons.

The Rezko thing is only one in a long list of if not outright dishonest, at least misleading attacks the Clintons have leveled at Obama, from fliers telling voters he would raise their taxes, questioning his commitment to choice through the non-issue of the present votes, the uncorroborated allegations of voter intimidation by a union most of whose members voted for the Clintons, the claim that Bob Johnson apologized before he actually did, and their distortion of his comments about Reagan. Included in this very abridged list of lies and distortions is the accusation that the Obama campaign played the race card against the Clintons, rather than the other way around.

I’m leaving out most of the attacks by Clinton surrogates with that contain obvious racial subtexts. This is only the primary, and the Clintons have already been caught in at least six major lies or distortions by the press. How many before it starts to matter?

Is it too late for Obama to bring back that ad talking about how the Clintons will say or do anything to win?

Related Posts with Thumbnails