Hillary’s Voice

I will be a guest tomorrow on Shelly and Anita Drobny’s radio show, The Cutting Edge, on Nova M radio.  Listen to Shelly and Anita every Sunday morning at 11:00 AM ET.  Click here for a list of upcoming guests.

Gary Varvel

Obama’s ‘Distractions’? (by Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post)
[Barack] Obama understands that the real threat to his candidacy is less Hillary Clinton and John McCain than his own character and cultural attitudes. He came out of nowhere with his autobiography already written, then saw it embellished daily by the hagiographic coverage and kid-gloves questioning of a supine press. (Which is why those “Saturday Night Live” parodies were so devastatingly effective.) Then came the three amigos: Tony Rezko, the indicted fixer; Jeremiah Wright, the racist reverend; William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist. And then Obama’s own anthropological observation that “bitter” working-class whites cling to guns and religion because they misapprehend their real class interests…

Obama needs to cast out [questions about these issues] as illegitimate distractions because they are seriously damaging his candidacy. As people begin to learn about this just-arrived pretender, the magic dissipates. He spent six weeks in Pennsylvania. Outspent Hillary more than 2 to 1. Ran close to 10,000 television ads — spending more than anyone in any race in the history of the state — and lost by 10 points. And not because he insufficiently demagogued NAFTA or the other “issues.” It was because of those “distractions” — i.e., the things that most reveal character and core beliefs.
Yes, Krauthammer is a conservative columnist and a neocon, but as I’ve said before, the conservatives are doing a much better job of covering this Democratic primary than either the so-called mainstream media or the so-called progressive media.

Clinton Earns Points for Pennsylvania Tactics (by Ira Teinowitz, Advertising Age)
WASHINGTON (AdAge.com) — Sen. Hillary Clinton may have been outspent, but she wasn’t outgunned, according to some Pennsylvania advertising executives. While many said that separating advertising impact from other factors (such as debate performance and the “bitter” controversy) is impossible, they gave credit to Ms. Clinton for doing a better job at targeting and using the resources she did have and ultimately rendering Sen. Barack Obama’s [$11 million worth of mostly misleading] ads largely ineffective.

Media Jump Ship From Obama To Clinton (by Thomas B. Edsall, writing at the Huffington Post)
In a blink of an eye, the media has jumped ship from the Obama campaign and become a crucial Clinton ally, pressing just the message — that Obama is a likely loser in the general election — that Hillary and her allies have been promoting for the past six weeks. The new tenor of media coverage is visible almost everywhere, from Politico, Time and The New Republic to The Washington Post and The New York Times… Until now, she, her husband, and her campaign aides have been trying, with little success, to make the case that Obama has potentially fatal flaws. For the first time, reporters working for magazines, newspapers and web sites have abruptly decided that she might well be right, and the results for Obama have been brutal.

Gallup Poll: Clinton Catches Obama Nationally
The Democratic presidential race is now effectively tied, with Sen. Barack Obama edging Sen. Hillary Clinton, 48% to 47%, according to the latest Gallup tracking poll.
And, of course, there’s the all-important Electoral College prediction.  See below.

Electoral-Vote.com, April 26, 2008
Clinton     284        McCain     244        Tie     10
Obama     243        McCain     269        Tie     26
Click through to see the maps.

Obama Attempts to Deceive the Superdelegates (by Bud White at No Quarter)
After Obama’s devastating defeat in Pennsylvania, the Obama campaign released a memo addressed to the superdelegates but published in the Wall Street Journal which argues that Obama would be the strongest candidate in the Fall against McCain. The memo is so deeply flawed that Jerome Armstrong ridicules it as “satire,” and “exhibit A” for “intellectual dishonesty”…Not only are the polls cited by Obama Inc. stale, but much has transpired since many of these polls were taken…. Hillary won 60 out of 67 counties in Pennsylvania and took every group except African Americans and those earning over $150,000 a year.

Superdelegates shouldn’t ignore the odds (by Gene Lyons)
Making himself the black candidate has definitely worked for Obama in the primaries. But the unfortunate fact is that most African American voters reside in states that Democrats either can’t win (the Deep South) or almost can’t lose (New York, Illinois, California). So what about the “Bradley effect”? Even granting Obama the 20 states that Sen. John Kerry won in 2004—a big maybe in a couple—I’ve taken to challenging his supporters to name two more that he has a realistic chance to capture. They normally change the subject. Democratic super delegates can’t afford to. That Clinton has obvious weaknesses, mainly high negatives after 16 years of GOP pounding, should be obvious. But she’d win Arkansas easily. There’s reason to believe she’d also take Florida. But then, Obama supporters don’t like to talk about Florida, do they?

Oh, no! He didn’t say that, did he? (by myiq2xu at Corrente)
Jake Tapper tells the tale: In an interview with National Journal’s Linda Douglass, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe downplays the impact Obama’s race will have on any November match-up, saying “the vast, vast majority of voters who would not vote for Barack Obama in November based on race are probably firmly in John McCain’s camp already. ”Did Obama run out of Democrats to offend? Is this strategy part of the “party building” meme?

Turning tide in Indiana (Boston Globe)
Long an afterthought in presidential politics, Indiana Democrats - who haven’t delivered their state in the general election since 1964, and haven’t had a meaningful say in picking their party’s nominee since 1968 - see the growing excitement over the contest between Clinton and Barack Obama as an opportunity to build up muscle in places where the party’s national reach had atrophied. The interest in the Clinton-Obama fight, they say, is helping to shift political identities. Thousands of people are signing up as new voters - 383,954 Hoosiers have registered since the 2006 election - while some people who have always voted Republican are deciding that they might just be comfortable casting a ballot for a Democrat. While national Democratic leaders worry that the protracted campaign could damage their eventual nominee, local Democrats say that the primary race may be the best thing to happen to the party in years.

Former Obama friend stumps for Clinton (by Christi Parsons at The Swamp, Tribune Washington Bureau)
One bonus for Barack Obama (D-IL) as he campaigns in Indiana is that so many friends from his home state can just drive across the state line to help him out. Then again, it’s also a short trip for the occasional hometown pol who has been crossed by Obama, such as one featured guest doing the Hoosier tour today. Joining Chelsea Clinton and other women leaders to campaign for Hillary Clinton today is Alice Palmer, the former state senator who picked Obama to be her successor back in the mid-90s. When she tried to reclaim her spot, though, Obama got her booted from the ballot.
We must never forget what Obama did to Alice Palmer, because it shows what kind of politician he is—he’ll do ANYTHING, screw ANYBODY to win.

Popular Vote Gives Clinton an Edge (by Michael Barone)
One thing many people haven’t noticed about Hillary Clinton’s 55 percent to 45 percent victory over Barack Obama in the Pennsylvania primary is that it put her ahead of Obama in the popular vote. Her 214,000-vote margin in the Keystone State means that she has won the votes, in primaries and caucuses, of 15,112,000 Americans, compared to 14,993,000 for Obama. If you add in the votes, as estimated by the folks at realclearpolitics.com, in the Iowa, Nevada, Washington and Maine caucuses, where state Democratic parties did not count the number of caucus-attenders, Clinton still has a lead of 12,000 votes. Moreover, she may be able to maintain that lead, despite an expected Obama victory in North Carolina on May 6, by rolling up big popular vote margins in West Virginia on May 13, Kentucky on May 20 and Puerto Rico on June 1. So it’s likely that Clinton will be able to argue that undecided super-delegates should heed the will of the people.
He’s another conservative columnist.  So take me into a room and beat me up.

Keith Olbermann Apologizes For Crack About Hillary (by Greg Sargent at TPM Election Central)
[Friday] Olbermann apologized in response to criticism of a crack he made the other night about Hillary. The barb in question came in a discussion with a guest about the fact that the super-delegates were going to have to resolve the Dem primary. Olbermann said: “Right. Somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out.” This line drew some very sharp criticism from The Huffington Post’s Rachel Sklar, who noted acidly that Olberman could “only mean one thing: Beating the crap out of Hillary Clinton, to the point where she is physically incapable of of getting up and walking out.” Which prompted Olbermann to send Sklar an apology: “It is a metaphor. I apologize: the generic ‘he’ gender could imply something untoward. It should’ve been “only the other comes out — from a political point of view.” You could’ve called for reaction first if your main motive had merely been criticism.” Not to quibble with the great KO, but does he really call people for reaction before pillorying them as “The Worst Person In The World”?
Not to quibble with the great KO OR the great Greg Sargent, but does Olbermann really think this kind of talk is valid commentary?  Is it the kind of talk that furthers understanding of what’s happening in the political process?  If he hated Obama as much as he hates Clinton, would he wish someone would take him out and lynch him?

Keith Olbermann apologizes for his Clinton remark (by Joan Walsh, Salon)
Consciousness-raising came before my time — I didn’t need it! But this campaign has truly been consciousness-raising for me. The sexism Hillary Clinton has faced has blown my mind… I really believe we will look back on this campaign as a milestone in getting us to a new understanding of the colorless, odorless toxicity of a lot of the sexism that persists in our society — the casual “I’m fine with a woman candidate but I just don’t like Hillary because” she’s a harridan, harpy, nutcracker, lesbian, bitch or she reminds me of my disapproving mother, ex-wife or high school math teacher.
Yes, remember it was “a woman, just not THIS woman”, giving progressives an out for any lurking sexist tendencies.  And Clinton would never have been elected senator if her husband hadn’t fooled around on her so that people felt sorry for her.  And they called her President Clinton’s wife, instead of by her name or title.  It started way early on, my friends, and it did not arise in a vacuum.

Clinton comment: Threat or prank?
Evansville police are investigating a possible threat against Hillary Clinton posted on the Facebook website. The person who wrote the comment allegedly has ties to the local Barack Obama office. He apparently was one of the few who met Senator Obama when he was in Evansville on Tuesday. Now the man has added his own negative twist to the campaign by making an alleged threat against Senator Hillary Clinton. The young man who posted the comment, reportedly a student at USI, is said to be actively involved in the local Obama campaign.
It’s an epidemic.  To those of you who say that Hillary Clinton has run a negative campaign, I say get real.  Clinton has pointed out Obama’s potential flaws in a general election, which (surprise!) is what you’re supposed to do in a primary election.  The Obama campaign has belittled both Clintons and turned them—people who have spent their whole lives fighting racial discrimination—into racists.  The Obamabots that the campaign has unleashed on the internet spew the same kind of hateful filth that we saw about Al Gore and John Kerry.  They use intimidation and hate speech as a matter of course.  I never thought I would see right-wing tactics used by so-called progressives against a Democrat, but now I have, and it is VERY ugly.

David Plouffe: “Do not trust Senator Clinton.” (by ronkseattle at The Confluence)
Of course the campaign manager’s full quote, winning mass media attention today, reads: “Fairly or not, the majority of voters don’t trust Senator Clinton.” But we all know the unrelenting message BO08 has been pushing since Day One: DO NOT TRUST Senator Clinton.

Fair Is Fair (by Geoff Garin, a strategist for Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign, writing)
[Throughout the Pennsylvania] debate, Clinton deliberately focused on the content of Obama’s comments without making sweeping statements about his character. It’s an important distinction. The Obama campaign has chosen from its inception not to treat Clinton with the same respect. In fact, the Obama campaign has made an unprecedented assault on her character — not her positions, but her character — saying one thing about raising the tone of political discourse but acting quite differently in its treatment of Clinton… The bottom line is that one campaign really has engaged in a mean-spirited, unfair character attack on the other candidate — but it has been Obama’s campaign, not ours. You would be hard-pressed to find significant analogues from our candidate, our senior campaign officials or our advertising to the direct personal statements that the Obama campaign has made about Clinton.
Click through for examples of how the Obama campaign has attacked Clinton personally.

Anatomy of a character assassination (by vastleft at Corrente)
WaPo harvests what Obama has sown: “The protracted and increasingly acrimonious fight for the Democratic presidential nomination is unnerving core constituencies — African Americans and wealthy liberals — who are becoming convinced that the party could suffer irreversible harm if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton maintains her sharp line of attack against Sen. Barack Obama.” Now, someone remind me, which of the Democrat candidates is constantly accused of being Rovian?

Double Standards Again (by Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft)
[Friday], Tweety (NBC’s Hardball host Chris Matthews) brings up Bill Clinton’s 1990 promise to not run for President in 1992. To Tweety this proves what untrustworthy people the Clintons are. Of course, Tweety is oblivious that, unlike Hillary Clinton who made no such statement, Obama also said he would not run for President… I do not write this to criticize Obama. Pols do this type of stuff all the time. I write this to criticize the brazen and shameless hypocrisy of Tweety and NBC. Their hatred of the Clintons deranges them.

Snobama is melting. (by John: south of Melrose at Liberal Rapture)
Snobama is melting. When Clinton lost Iowa gleeful posters at the Obamington Post announced that “inevitability” was all she had and now that was gone. Well, after winning every major contest since - including, always including, Florida and Michigan - she has a lot more than inevitability. I commend BHO for his smashing victories in Utah and Kansas and the like. When those states matter to the Democratic nominee he will matter again. Until then he’s the guy who won Democratic contests in Republican states. Axelrod glibly stated that working class whites haven’t voted for the Democratic nominee in a long time anyway. True enough. Then again, Democrats usually lose national elections, too - so David’s point was???

Walt Handelsman

Settling Scores (by Eleanor Clift, Newsweek)
I’m beginning to think Hillary Clinton might pull this off… If she does, a lot of folks—including a huge chunk of the media—will join Bill Richardson (a.k.a. Judas) in the Deep Freeze. If the Clintons get back into the White House, it will be retribution time, like the Corleone family consolidating power in “The Godfather,” where the watchword is, “It’s business, not personal.”… If Clinton can win Indiana, hold Obama to single digits in North Carolina, and then run up a big margin in Kentucky on May 20, where she’s leading in the polls, she could overtake Obama in the popular vote. “We have to win big and lose small,” says an aide. Obama may yet discover his inner Rocky and recast himself now that the media is turning on him. It’s hard to be the next new thing for 15 months, which is how long he’s been running. And it’s time enough for Hillary to win ugly, if that’s what winning takes.
Settling scores, are we, Eleanor?  And bear in mind that if you count Florida and Michigan, Clinton is already ahead in the popular vote.

Is It Just Stupid Or Something Else? (by myiq2xu at Corrente)
Recall, if you will, the nineties, when the Democrats last controlled the White House. When Bill was elected, one of his top priorities was health care reform. Hillary chaired his HCR task force, but the reform effort failed miserably. There is much misinformation regarding that failure, almost all of it wrongly placing blame on Hillary. Among the actual reasons for the defeat of “HillaryCare” was the failure of Congressional Democrats to support it. The same is true of other Clinton initiatives, such as ending the ban on gays in the military. Throughout the nineties, the Congressional Democrats failed to actively support Bill Clinton, and sometimes actively opposed him.
And are they already starting to do it again?  See below.

Dems hedge on healthcare (The Hill)
Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult. It is still seven months before Election Day, but already senior Democrats are maneuvering to lower public expectations on the key policy issue.

Obama just can’t help himself, can he? (by lambert at Corrente)
Yet another Republican talking point from Mr. Waffle: “Democrat Barack Obama argued that voters are yearning for ‘straight talk and honesty’ on the economy as he sought distinctions with rival Hillary Rodham Clinton just nine days before the next round of primaries in the hotly contested race for the presidential nomination. “Straight talk, straight talk…” I just know I’ve heard some candidate use that before… Now, who could it be? Surely a Democrat… Nothing about that little paragraph is good.
Not only was it a Republican talking point, it was a way to undermine Clinton in the honesty department.

Bill Moyers’ Jeremiah Wright interview

2 N. C. stations won’t air anti-Obama ad (McClatchy)
Two North Carolina television stations, one in Charlotte, the other in Raleigh, have said they won’t air an advertisement from the North Carolina Republican Party that uses a sound bite from Barack Obama’s retiring minister.

Hillary Challenges Obama to Non-Moderated Debate (by Jeralyn at TalkLeft)
Hillary Clinton today asked Barack Obama to participate in a Lincoln-Douglas style debate without moderators. They would each ask the other questions. Obama tells Fox News in a segment that will air tomorrow there will be no more debates before May 6, when Indiana and North Carolina vote.

Obama-DNC Fundraising Deal (The Page, Time Magazine)
After a series of discussions, the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee have decided to file papers with the Federal Election Commission establishing a “joint fundraising agreement.” Under the law, such a committee can accept up to $28,500 from individuals, most of which would go to the DNC. Presumptive Republican nominee John McCain has already formed such an alliance with the Republican National Committee. Their group — called Victory — was created in March after McCain clinched the GOP nomination and is headed by McCain adviser Carly Fiorina. Sources say the DNC has also held talks with Hillary Clinton’s campaign about forming a separate vehicle with her, but that no deal has been struck.

This is so not right (by riverdaughter at The Confluence)
Obama’s campaign and the DNC have made a deal to do joint fundraising?!… The fundraising entity would enable big money donors to contribute up to $28,500 with the majority of that money going to the DNC. In other words, Oprah and her friends can get over that pesky $2300 rule and donate 10 times that amount to the DNC. But they’re going to want something for that money. There is no quid without a pro quo. The DNC is going to have to dance to their tune. This stinks big time.

Dean Says Nominee Will Be Chosen in Last Races (Political Wire)
Superdelegates “have every right to overturn the popular vote and choose the candidate they believe would be best equipped to defeat John McCain in a general election,” DNC Chairman Howard Dean told the Financial Times. Said Dean: “If it’s very very close, they will do what they want anyway… I think the race is going to come down to the perception in the last six or eight races of who the best opponent for McCain will be. I do not think in the long run it will come down to the popular vote or anything else.”

Delegate challenges to be heard (by Nedra Pickler, Associated Press)
WASHINGTON (AP) — A plan to award half-delegates for the disputed Michigan and Florida Democratic presidential primaries will get a hearing before party leaders. The co-chairs of the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws committee sent members a memo Friday announcing a meeting May 31 to consider the idea… Under the challenges, all superdelegates from both states would get to vote. The pledged delegates would only count for half votes. Hillary Rodham Clinton won both contests and has been pushing for the delegates to be seated.

Lots more really good stuff at MakeThemAccountable.com.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com