Dirty Tricks

When it was Kathleen Willey reporting stuff like this, it was the other side that made a big deal out of it.

Comments

[ctc]

Lightweight. I’ve been a drunken fuckup to the present day.

[linden]

The best part of the article is the description of all the magazines he received. Unless I was actually being charged for the mags, I wouldn’t mind receiving them.

[SteveInClearwater]

That’s the point of the magazine scrips. He didn’t order them, but was being charged for them, which he of course didn’t pay. Thus a series of credit rating battles while he defended the fraudulent use of his name.

[PapayaSF]

Yes, I thought Shannon’s post was funny as well, but I’m afraid I reject the Jesse’s comparison as forced and unfair.

1) Rape is a rather more serious crime than DUI.

2) Willey was personally victimized by Clinton. Connolly was not personally victimized by Bush.

3) Willey did not, IIRC, plot to drop a public bombshell days before an election. Connolly did.

4) Willey was publicly attacked by people employed by Clinton. Connolly, AFAIK, was not.

So I’m not shedding any tears for Connolly and his self-inflicted plight.

[Jesse Walker]

My reference was to Willey’s allegations of harassment after she made her charges against Clinton (threats from strangers, slashed tires, etc.), not to her initial charge of sexual assault. Similarly, I was comparing that to the harassment of Connolly after his initial story was aired, not to his original revelation of Bush’s DUI.

Assuming Connolly’s and Willey’s claims are true, I agree that the chances that Willey’s tormentors were connected to Clinton are greater than the chances that Connolly’s tormentors are connected to Bush (as opposed to being freelance Freeper thugs). The point was that there isn’t much overlap between the people who leaped to repeat Willey’s charges and the people now leaping to repeat Connolly’s, even though both figures might be victims of substantial abuses of power.

Finally: it’s silly, if not offensive, to describe Connolly’s plight as “self-inflicted.”

[Andrew]

Shannon Love gets my vote for single best comment I have ever seen on H&R.

That aside, are there any public policy implications in this thread?

One place we can defend free speech is on campus. Politically motivated hooliganism is pervasive and broadly tolerated throughout the American university system. Not exactly a model for the rest of the citizenry.

[Friend of Terry Gross]

It takes a special breed of sheep to be a Republican. A bellicose one.

[joe]

The DUI release was pointless, anyway. Were there any voters who didn’t realize Bush was a fuckup in the 70s?

[thoreau]

Joe-

Why must you go around smearing the Great Leader? Haven’t you seen how dashing and bold and honorable he is? He even flies fighter jets!

[Ezra Pound]

I can see the idiocy thread is this one.

[Shannon Love]

Those damn (Democrats/Republicans/Other)! Is there no level to which those (Democrats/Republicans/Other) will not stoop? It seems every election brings out new stories of sleazy unethical behavior from those creeping (Democrats/Republicans/Other).

When, oh when will we learn that the all the moral intelligent people are (Democrats/Republicans/Other) while all the jerks and idiots are always (Democrats/Republicans/Other)?

It’s almost as if politics is not the most nobel and uplifting calling of humanity but is instead an ugly struggle for power by any means short of outright mass violence.

Death to the (Democrats/Republicans/Other) scum!

[Douglas Fletcher]

I don’t see any point to this except to glean that if you don’t want to trouble from strangers, keep your name out of the papers.

[mak_nas]

lol @ shannon — well said. they’d all fornicate with animals if it meant some minor pox would befall the other guy’s house.

[Kevin Carson]

joe,

According to Al Hunt and Judy Woodruff, Bush was a drunken fuckup at least as late as the late ’80s.

[PapayaSF]

Thanks, KJ, for the defense. Let me say a bit more.

If Connolly had simply dug up Bush’s ancient DUI and publicized it, I would have more sympathy for him. However, he held onto it until the point of maximum political damage: just before the election, when Bush had little time to respond.

Is this legal? Yes. Is it just “politicking”? Perhaps, but it was widely perceived as a dirty trick and a low blow.

In an ideal world, if you did such a thing to a presidential candidate with tens of millions of supporters, the most that would happen to you is that you’d get snubbed and people would write letters to the editor criticizing you. However, we don’t live in an ideal world (a reminder some libertarians need at times). If you tick off tens of millions of people, the odds are some will go too far and dump trash on your lawn, etc.

Let’s say I exercised my First Amendment rights and printed up a pamphlet decrying the irresponsibility of teens having children out of wedlock, the evils of gang life, and the awfulness of rap music. I then stand outside the worst high school in San Francisco and pass this out. Chances are, someone might be offended. I might even be screamed at or assaulted. True, anyone who assaulted me would be committing a crime and violating my rights, but my plight would still be self-inflicted.

[KJ]

Dear Jesse,

it’s neither silly nor offensive to describe Connolly’s plight as “self-inflicted”. It’s just an observation, and a pretty accurate one to boot. As the saying goes, “what goes around comes around,” doesn’t it?

[joe]

Unwelcome politicking=invitation to threaten, assault, steal from, and vandalize.

Got it, KJ. God bless America.

[Levy Robert J.]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 82.146.43.155
URL: http://www.penis-enlarge-pills.com
DATE: 02/27/2004 05:18:26
In his errors a man is true to type. Observe the errors and you will know the man.