Byron York turns one smear into another:
Despite a few positive touches, no one will be surprised to learn that “Game Change,” the movie, will present an overwhelmingly negative portrait of Palin. Roach — he also directed the one-sided, pro-Gore “Recount” about the 2000 election — even goes beyond the book to throw in some new material from his own research. Roach also compressed some events and turned descriptions of conversations into dialogue that may or may not have actually happened.
But put that aside. Why did Hollywood focus on only one-half of “Game Change”? The other half would have made a great movie.
It was certainly the most compelling part of the book, with no end of dramatic moments. The Clinton-Obama version of “Game Change” could have focused on the racially charged effort among white Democrats to stop the first black man with a serious chance of winning their party’s presidential nomination.
The alternate “Game Change” could have featured the spectacle of Bill Clinton, the nation’s “first black president,” doing everything he could, risking his own reputation and place in history, to stop an actual black man from winning the office.
The alternate “Game Change” could have featured white Democratic party elders torn over the Clinton-Obama contest, loyal to Mrs. Clinton yet impressed by Obama’s ability to speak “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one” (in the infamous words of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid).
And then there was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. What a great role the fiery preacher from Chicago would have made! “Game Change” — the book — reported that Obama and his top aides knew all along that Wright would be a problem, and yet did nothing about it until Wright’s “Goddamn America” sermon burst into the news.
The alternate “Game Change” could have featured top Clinton aide Harold Ickes’ suggestion that the campaign hire a private investigator to probe Obama’s connections to Wright. “This guy has been sitting in the church for twenty f–king years,” Ickes is quoted in the book as saying. “If you really want to take him down, let’s take him f–king down.” Screenwriter Danny Strong — he also worked on “Recount” — couldn’t have written it better himself.
The movie also could have focused on Hillary Clinton’s anger at Obama’s ability to escape the Wright mess unscathed. “Just imagine, just for fun, if my pastor from Arkansas said the kind of things his pastor said,” Clinton told aides, according to the book. “I’m just saying. Just imagine. This race would be over.”
Neither Sarah Palin nor Hillary Clinton is currently running for elective office. Either or both of them may or may not run again in the future. Sarah Palin is a private citizen. Hillary Clinton is our Secretary of State.
I was aware that “Game Change” was a hit-job on Sarah. I didn’t know until now (although considering the authors it’s really no surprise) that it was also a hit job on Hillary.
The only thing “racially charged” about the 2008 Democratic primary were the charges of racism emanating from the Obama campaign. You could just as easily argue that supporting Obama was an effort to stop the first woman with a serious chance of winning the presidency. Bill Clinton was supporting his wife, not opposing Obama. Those “white party elders” York mentions were not loyal to Hillary, they secretly supported Obama from the beginning.
As for the Wright controversy, regardless of what may have been discussed in private the Hillary campaign avoided the issue and took no part. The alleged statement by Hillary is entirely accurate. Any other Democrat would have been sunk by such a close association with Wright (or Rezko or Ayers.)
The worst part about the race card strategy pursued by the Obama campaign is that it has given the Republicans a new issue to use against Democrats. Long after Obama is gone they will keep talking about it.