As we all know by now, HBO’s Palin-obsessed hit piece was the result of two main McCain campaign advisers who will probably never work again in Washington D.C. campaign politics due to their severe mishandlings of both McCain and Palin.
It goes without saying when one in particular winds up sitting on MSNBC’s distinguished panel four years later analyzing the current Republican National Convention, it usually indicates how seriously they are taken by the same kind of insiders they once were.
Palin made such an impact on a dudding campaign that it provided economic stablility for those campaign staffers but ultimately scared the pants off of the left as well. It was through that opportunisic drive of Nicolle Wallace and Steve Schmidt which made for a perfect marriage with a terrified left which resulted in the book and the accompanying HBO commerical flop, Game Change.
Nevertheless, it’s this and other Palin smear pieces which flop commercially that liberals love to reference when they’re forced to debate the true bullet points of Governor Palin’s amazing record as a public servant. This explains its mysterious release in a primary year, an effort to scare voters away from the one prospective candidate who threatened their game of politics as usual.
But, the darlings on the left had to at least try to be clever. In presenting their warped version of events on Sarah Palin, they also sold out Bill Clinton. I understand the tactic. Why would we question their version of events with regard to Sarah Palin if they were willing to expose the truth about Bill Clinton being racist and condescending to Barack Obama?
If Palin had indeed spoke at the RNC convention, I wonder just how many of the journlists among the mainstream media would have referenced one (or all) of the lies from Game Change?
How many of them can we expect to talk about Bill Clinton tomorrow night after his big speech on Wednesday? How many will remark about the racist and degrading comments made by not only Clinton himself, but others like Harry Reid (who is also speaking at the convention this year)?
Since we can all guesstimate the number of times being approximately -0- for either, let’s first revisit Game Change in the case of Bill Clinton. As highlighted by Warner Todd Huston a couple days ago over at Brietbart:
In 2008, during that contentious Democrat primary that pitted Hillary Clinton against Barack Obama, the former president was in full sales mode to get his wife the nomination of the Democrat Party. In an effort to enlist Ted Kennedy to his cause he uttered what any journalist would immediately brand as a racist remark.
According to Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker, Clinton said, “A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.”
You might recall, as does Lizza, that Bill Clinton was already being accused of acting in a racist manner by discounting Obama’s primary wins that year. But the former president was even more vehement in private.
This “carrying our bags” line could easily be read as harkening back to the days when African Americans were commonly seen as porters, baggage handlers, housekeepers, and other domestic employees.
And this wasn’t a rare misstep for Clinton. Former President Clinton also said, according to the famed bestseller Game Change, “A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee … the only reason you are endorsing him is because he’s black. Let’s just be clear.”
This is the guy headlining the Democratic National Convention! What will be the basis of his discussion? How in America, big government has the ability of skipping over qualifications and a decent record of public service to appoint someone who’s qualified to be a coffee-fetcher? Not only is such a move pioneering for the Democrats, it’s also incredibly feckless, as proven by our economy and the unemployment numbers right now.
Harry Reid got the ball rolling saying a couple years back that Barack Obama was appealing because he had the right skin tone and didn’t speak with a “negro dialect.”
Along with Clinton, Reid will be speaking at the convention as well. Incidentally, Reid’s racial comments about Obama were revealed by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann as well (Game Change authors).
Now that Game Change has rode off into the sunset of most B-listed forgotten pieces of entertainment, the facts play out as they are. In the end, Palin has kept her influence, her dignity, and her supporters. But what did Obama get out of it? Not much. And it’s our duty as Americans to not allow Hollywood or the MSM to forget these details.
By Palin taking the brunt of the hits from the film, the liberals in Hollywood obsessed with peeing on her fire let their complusion get the best of them. The facts are, the most delicious details are the disgusting remarks made about America’s first black president by two of the Democrat party’s pioneers needed by Obama more than ever before to save his failing campaign.
That double-edged sword cuts both ways…and looks poised to cut Obama even deeper.