Clinton Presidential Campaign: Dirty Politics as Usual

Author: Norman Kjono
Article Published: 10 December 2007

From MSNBC News, December 10, 2007, Clinton Campaign Asks Volunteer to Resign, by the Associated Press:


DES MOINES, Iowa - Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign on Sunday requested the resignation of a second Iowa volunteer coordinator who forwarded a hoax e-mail saying Barack Obama is a Muslim possibly intent on destroying the United States. Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ and says he has never been a Muslim, but false rumors attempting to tie him to Islamic jihadists are circulating on the Internet. ‘Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential Candidacy,’ read the e-mail. ‘Please forward to everyone you know. The Muslims have said they Plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at The highest level.’ The Clinton campaign has decried the rumors as offensive and outrageous, and last week forced volunteer Jones County coordinator Judy Rose to resign after learning that she forwarded a such an e-mail on Nov. 21. But it turns out Rose wasn't the only one. . . . ‘We've made our position on this crystal clear,’ said Clinton spokesman Mo Elleithee. ‘Our campaign does not tolerate this kind of activity or campaigning. As soon as it came to our attention, we asked this individual to step down.’ . . . Rose has said she did not agree with the e-mail but was sending it to other area Democrats to show them how dirty politics was getting. Olson did not respond to an e-mail requesting comment.”


Hillary Clinton has made her position known about spreading patently false statements to achieve a political objective long before this most recent filthy incident. Her aggressive support of anti-tobacco and anti-obesity pharmaceutical tax, ban and mandate agendas since the early 1990s (see Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton Quotations) make it abundantly clear that spreading Junk Science epidemiological studies that are lower in quality than mean-spirited gossip speculation is her political stock in trade. 


A case in point is an August 2007 bill to raise awareness about the alleged dangers of secondhand smoke sponsored by Senator Clinton and Senator Patty Murray (D-WA). See Clinton Announces Introduction of Bill to Raise Awareness About the Dangers of Secondhand Smoke. Reported provisions in that bill are:


“The Secondhand Smoke Education and Outreach Act would establish grants and demonstration projects, awarded by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, for educating the public about the health consequences of secondhand smoke in multi-unit dwellings and in public spaces, such as public parks, playgrounds, and national parks.”

It appears that neither Senator Clinton nor Senator Murray are aware of the salient facts that in July 1998 U.S. District Court judge William Osteen eviscerated tobacco control junk science about Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) in his 90 page-plus Memorandum Opinion that accompanied his order to vacate chapters 1 to 6 and all appendices to of the December 1992 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report on secondhand smoke. Nor do those senators acknowledge the fact that the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) conducted an exhaustive seven-year review of Environmental Tobacco Smoke from 1994 to 2001. OSHA concluded that ETS exposures were not as represented by tobacco control advocates and in December 2001 withdrew its proposed nationwide workplace smoking ban. See Summary of 16 Important Points About Environmental Tobacco Smoke for important facts about Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS). It is also clear that senators Murray and Clinton chose to ignore the facts that highly credible researchers Enstrom and Kabat, (see “Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Tobacco Related Mortality in a Prospective Study of Californians, 1960-98,” by Enstrom and Kabat, as published in 2003 (BMJ  2003;326:1057), concluded in a seminal study several years ago that the alleged risks of ETS are overstated. Both senators also choose to ignore the fact that an International Agency for Research on Cancer study failed to find credible causation between ETS and cancer. It is equally clear that both senators who sponsored the above bill to raise awareness of the dangers of secondhand smoke refuse to acknowledge the views of tobacco control advocates such as Elizabeth Whelan and Dr. Michael Siegel who bluntly state the extremist positions about secondhand smoke promoted by many of their anti-tobacco peers damage the credibility of both credible science and the tobacco control movement. And it is clear that Senators Clinton and Murray also blithely ignore the March 2005 study published by the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. From Science Daily, March 21, 2005,"Study Examines Role of EGFR Gene Mutations In Lung Cancer Development," about a study published by the Journal of the National Cancer Institute  (NCI):  

“A new study has found that mutations in either of two genes are involved in the development of lung cancer. One of them is the first known mutation to occur specifically in never smokers, according to a new study in the March 2 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. . . . These results also "suggest that exposure to carcinogens in environmental tobacco smoke may not be the major pathogenic factor involved in the origin of lung cancers in never smokers but that an as-yet-unidentified carcinogen(s) plays an important role." (Underline, italic added.)  


Studiously ignoring any facts or evidence that reveals the Social Marketing sound-bite-of-the-day to be false is usually “justified” by the assumption that the patent remedy espoused for the “Target” of choice is of such compelling importance that any means to the end of mandating the remedy is acceptable. The process is firmly imbedded in Anti-Mentality thinking. The process is based on a choice to be intolerant of anyone or anything that gets in the way of achieving the political objective. We must be mindful of the written tobacco control policy, now firmly imbedded in the War on Fat as well, that drives current news about important public health subjects. That policy was clearly stated by tobacco control April 1993, in booklets published for Project ASSIST participating states. Page 22 from “Planning for a Tobacco Free Washington:” 


Strategy: . . . the most effective way to reduce smoking rates is to decrease public tolerance of tobacco use. 


Policy: Changing public acceptance of tobacco use will require policy change, a critical ingredient of societal change.  

Increasing the price of tobacco products

Increasing the number of smoke-free environments  


Social change requires that people receive persistent and consistent messages from sources they trust. To this end ASSIST resources will be used to generate a variety of media messages that will foster and strengthen public support for proposed policy changes. (Underline added.)  

If a U.S. Senator has chosen to exploit systematic decreasing of public tolerance for persons who smoke to achieve a political objective why would that person not also choose to exploit orchestrated intolerance of Muslims to be elected to the highest office in the nation? We need look no further than Senator Clinton being the only Democrat candidate for President of the United States to vote in favor of the resolution to negatively label Iran as a terrorist state to understand that orchestrated intolerance of Muslims is also deeply imbedded in her thinking. That fact that the most recent update of the National Intelligence Estimate plainly states that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003 merely confirms the predilection to spout negative labels first and ignore the facts that conflict with such pronouncements later.
Such behavior by members of the U.S. Senate and a presidential candidate speak loudly to the fact that spreading rumors, innuendo, unsubstantiated Social Marketing sound bites, and deliberate falsehoods about others is an established practice that has become business as usual for those who find them to be an attractive means to achieve political ends. Given Senator Clinton’s decade-plus support for such programs and the deceptive Social Marketing schemes that accompany them why would a reasonable person expect any different behavior in her campaign for President of the United States?

We’re sorry, Senator Clinton, but your decade-plus history of exploiting orchestrated intolerance of persons who smoke and those who are obese speaks far more clearly to we the people than denial of your presidential campaign’s complicity in spreading false and hurtful rumors about Senator Obama’s faith. We also understand far more clearly than you apparently grasp that when the CEO of a company or political leaders engage in hurtful behavior such as sexual harassment it creates a hostile work environment where subordinates accept that the institution also condones racist or healthist conduct as well. It is the hostile environment about your “Targets” of choice that you create, senator, that confirms we the people cannot permit that cancer to metastasize into the White House. 


Finally, the latest toxic emissions about a competitor for the Democrat presidential nomination from the Clinton campaign are completely in character with long-standing associates of the senator from New York. See Class Action Racketeers II: Campaign Dollars Flow:


“As reported in the September 20, 2007 BusinessWeek article “Co-Founder of Milberg Weiss Indicted,” by Robert Jablon of the Associated Press, Mr. Weiss denies the charges, vowing to fight until he is exonerated. The following results of the indictments are also of interest:


1. Mr. Schulman: Agreed in September 2007 Mr. Schulman to plead guilty to a racketeering conspiracy charge and in a plea deal agreed to forfeit $1.85 million and pay a $250,000 fine. The plea deal recommends a prison sentence of no more than 33 months, well under the up to 20 years in prison sentence he would face if convicted.


2. Mr. Lerach: In September 2007 Mr. Lerach agreed to plead guilty to conspiring to obstruct justice and making false statements under oath. He reportedly will forfeit $7.75 million pay a $250,000 fine, and accept a prison sentence of one to two years in prison.


3. Mr. Bershad: In July 2007 Mr. Bershad pleaded guilty to conspiracy. Sentencing is scheduled for early next year.”


If senior partners of a law firm who have donated more than $1.1 million to the Democrat party and Senator Clinton’s campaign combined will plead guilty to making false statements under oath, obstructing justice and racketeering, why should anyone be surprised that the campaign for a recipient of that tainted money would lie about a political competitor in pursuit of the party’s nomination for president?


We’ll just go by what we know about Senator Clinton’s “experience” during the primaries. It appears to me that Senator Obama’s campaign theme that it’s time for change is precisely on point.

Norman E. Kjono

FORCES is supported solely by the efforts of the readers. Please become a member or donate what you can.

Contact Info
Forces Contacts
Media Contacts
Ian DunbarIan Dunbar, United Kingdom

Latest Article »»  

Bill Brown, USA

Latest Article »»  

Michael J. McFadden, USA

Latest Article »»  

Joe Jackson, United Kingdom

Latest Article »»  

Virginia Day, USA

Latest Article »»  

Robert Prasker, USA

Latest Article »»
Contact Robert Prasker »»

John Dunn, MD, United States

Latest Article »»
Contact John Dunn, MD »»

Andrew Phillips, Canada

Latest Article »»
Contact Andrew Phillips »»

Pat Nurse, United Kingdom

Latest Article »»
Contact Pat Nurse »»

Elio F. Gagliano, MD, Italy

Latest Article »»  

Edmund Contoski, USA

Latest Article »»
Contact Edmund Contoski »»

John Luik, Canada

Latest Article »»  

Norman Kjono, USA

Latest Article »»
Contact Norman Kjono »»

Gian Turci, Italy

Latest Article »»  

Søren Højbjerg, Denmark

Latest Article »»
Contact Søren Højbjerg »»