The hypocrisy of this campaign has hit a new low with a top Clinton aid comparing Obama to Ken Starr. A couple of weeks ago, it was the “Cult of Obama” and comparing him to Jim Jones. Does this campaign do anything but call people names?
The way I see it, the Obama/Starr comparison isn’t even GOOD mud-slinging. Obama is pushing for the Clintons to release their tax statements not prosecuting perjury. If Obama had brought up Monica Lewinsky, then a retort of this kind “might” be logical. As things stands, it just looks a little loony.

Below are the top five differences between Obama and Starr:

1) Starr released a huge report detailing in sordid detail an inappropriate relationship between a sitting President and an intern. Obama pushed for Clinton to release her tax returns.

2) Starr sought to pursue perjury charges against a sitting President who also said to a national audience, “I did not have sex with that woman.” Obama had the nerve to make a strong showing and threaten Hillary Clinton’s entitlement to the Democratic nomination.

3) Starr had to endure cheesy excuses form a sitting President who made such statements as, “It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.” Obama made such cheesy statements like, “Yes, we can.” In Spanish.

4) Starr spent a lot of American tax-payer money on his failed impeachment attempt. Obama made a lot of money in February.

5) Obama holds up hope for the future. Ken Starr held up a blue dress covered in a sitting President’s protein.

The only similarity between Ken Starr and Obama is they were both victims of the vast Clinton spin-machine. The “Vast Right-wing Conspiracy” meets the “Cult of Obama”. I wonder what’s going to come out of that campaign next? Maybe that Obama has a black baby….?

[[Op-Ed post by MNP correspondent Jill the Shill]]