« And now something entirely different | Main | Things that make you go "hmmmm..." »

March 24, 2008

Truth to power? Nope. Just power.

I have a friend who says that she absolutely can't vote for Hillary Clinton. She says it's because she believes that Clinton would do or say anything to be in power.

Oddly, Steve Novick's U.S. Senate campaign has eroded in a way that mirrors a lot of my friend's concerns about Clinton.

My first-hand account of Novick's attempt to game an endorsement for himself was apparently just the beginning. The untoward Wiki edits by a Novick staffer and Novick's ugly attacks on Clinton and Obama are more evidence that this is a person whose campaign runs very much like Hillary Clinton.

The latest "say anything to win" from Novick happens to be a part of their latest email and website push: Jeff Merkley is a liar. Steve uses video from the latest debate to push his claim.

The "lie" is more of the divisive garbage that Novick has patterned for himself. Based on an interview that Merkley gave to KPOJ, Novick uses the "pants on fire" phrase to demean Merkley.

Consistent with the pattern Novick's campaign has established, the accusation falls apart under examination.

Novick and his online mob have gone after Merkley for saying that Novick "recently supported Nader". The transcript from the interview (hear the complete audio here)isn't what they're saying. Here's Merkley's statement:

What he’s referring to is that there is a difference of opinion we had come up recently in which Steve was saying how much he liked Nader and how disappointed he was in Barack Obama and in Clinton. And I just have exactly the opposite point of view.

When Nader put himself forward saying Democrats and Republicans are exactly the same, that Gore is exactly the same as Bush, that Clinton was exactly the same as Dole. To me that was just completely erroneous. Completely about Nader. Not about the truth, not about the facts. Because there are vast differences are trade issues, on health care issues, on education issues. Huge differences. And so I have the reverse. I was very disappointed in Nader and I’m very excited about our Presidential candidates.

Merkley clearly says that their difference of opinion is "recent", not that Novick "recently supported Nader". There's not even an inference to such an idea. Mixing up "like" and "support" as synonymous in an effort to brand Merkley a liar is ridiculous.

Nevermind that Novick has been vocal about liking Nader.

A person would have to be deliberately trying to make something sinister out of it to reach that conclusion.

Oh wait...

Posted by Kevin at March 24, 2008 08:17 AM