Troubling demagoguery

Don't get me wrong. I'm not an Obama supporter, not really. My preferred candidate dropped out a while ago, and I harbor some serious questions about Barack Obama.

However, I am deeply troubled by Hillary Clinton, on a number of accounts. The latest is her hired gun's demagogic comparison of Obama's legitimate call upon Clinton to release her income tax returns with the odious witch hunt conducted by Ken Starr and the neocons of the Gingrich era.

As the New York Times lamented in an editorial back in November, the tradition of financial disclosure, and especially the release full income tax returns, is eroding. Although Senators Obama and Dodd had already released theirs, Hillary Clinton had not; the editorial noted that "primary voters should have this information while they ponder who should get their party's nomination."

The paper made a similar point in an editorial on February 15: of the leading candidates, Barack Obama is the only one who has released his full federal income tax return, "a level of disclosure," said the Times, which was "once routine for candidates."

And mind you: the Times endorsed Senator Clinton, so their criticism can hardly be viewed as unfair or partisan.

But when Senator Obama called for Senator Clinton to release her tax returns yesterday, the Clinton campaign accused Obama of "imitating Ken Starr."

Absurd attempts to deflect legitimate criticisms with baseless ad hominem attacks is the sort of scurrilous tactic we have come to expect of Dick Cheney, Carl Rove and George W. Bush. No leading Democrat should stoop to their level. That the Clinton campaign has done so is appalling, and certainly does not auger well for the kind of President she would be.

Note: this was originally posted in ketches, yaks & hawks 7 March 2008