Hillary’s Voice

I will be a guest on Mario Solis-Marich’s KTLK Los Angeles radio show Sunday at 10:30 AM ET.  Click here to listen.
Listen to Mario live
     Weekdays
          From 3:00 to 6:00 PM ET on KHRO in El Paso, TX
               (listen via Mario’s website)
          From 6:00 to 9:00 PM ET on AM-760 Denver, CO
     Sundays  from 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM ET on KTLK Los Angeles.

Wrapped in the Flag

58% Say Obama Denounced Wright for Political Convenience, not Outrage
You can’t fool most of the people most of the time.

On Sunday TV, One Hot Rivalry Fuels Another
Tim Russert and George Stephanopoulos plan competing interviews of the Democratic candidates on Sunday.
I guess Barack won’t be in church.

1 man, 0.89967 vote (by Jeff Jarvis)
CJR’s Clint Hendler[:] “The Democratic party’s nominating process is a kaleidoscope of caucuses, conventions, and primaries, sometimes all in the same state. And there’s no obvious best way to estimate a popular vote from it all.” And this: The news organizations and the campaigns, of course, all count the alleged popular vote differently. This is shameful: undemocratic and unDemocratic. We must reform the primary system in a unified way. This idea that each state can and should do its own idiosyncratic thing is a leftover of a disorganized and unconnected past and it is hurting now. The principle for reorganization is simple: Every citizen has a right and an opportunity to vote in a meaningful way in the primary process. One person, one vote, damnit.

Electoral-Vote.com, May 2, 2008 (270 needed to win)
Clinton     291        McCain     236        Tie     11
Obama    264        McCain     263        Tie     11
Click through to see the maps.

Gallup: McCain opens national lead over Obama (On Politics, USA Today)
The headline on latest national Gallup tracking poll is that Republican John McCain leads Democrat Barack Obama in a hypothetical matchup by six percentage points (48%-42%) and leads Hillary Rodham Clinton by only one (46%-45%).

Former DNC chairs: Hillary would beat McCain today — Obama wouldn’t
(CNN) – Seven former Democratic National Committee chairs who support Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid, and the family of one who is deceased, released a letter Friday arguing that she is the candidate best-equipped to beat John McCain in November. The letter was signed by former party leaders Kenneth Curtis, Charles Manatt, Debra DeLee, Don Fowler, Steve Grossman, Pennsylvania Governor Edward Rendell, and Clinton adviser Terry McAuliffe. It was also signed by the family of the late Ron Brown, who served in the Clinton administration. They write that “if the election were held today, Hillary would beat Senator McCain, but Senator Obama would lose to the presumptive GOP nominee.”

CNN poll: Obama losing support
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A new national poll suggests the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination between Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is a tie… “Obama has lost his edge,” said Bill Schneider, CNN senior political analyst. “Is it because of the controversy over his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright? While most Democrats have an unfavorable opinion of Wright, only 19 percent say Wright’s statements have made them less favorable to Obama. More than two thirds say they’ve had no effect at all. The bigger problem appears to be Obama’s string of losses to Clinton in big states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. Those losses have not driven up Clinton’s support. But they may have created doubts about Obama’s ability to win,” Schneider said. But the poll suggests Wright certainly doesn’t help the Illinois senator.

Obama says Wright might cost him Indiana (McClatchy)
MUNSTER, Ind. — Barack Obama is trying his best to put the controversy over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright behind him, but he’s girding for the chance that his best won’t be enough when Indiana Democrats vote on Tuesday.
Always an excuse.  Never his fault.  Do we know anyone else who’s always blaming others for his failures?  Hint:  He’s the current occupier of the White House.

Obama can’t bluff past Wright issue (by Roger Simon at Politico)
[In] Obama’s recent interview on “Today” [he] explained why he did not speak out sooner to denounce Wright… “When the first snippets came out, I thought it was important to give him the benefit of the doubt.”… Does this make sense? When Obama heard these “snippets,” why didn’t Obama call Wright immediately and demand an explanation and express his concerns? Obama has an explanation, but it simply makes no sense: “Because if I had wanted to be politically expedient, I would have distanced myself and denounced him right away, right? That would have been the easy thing to do.” So let me get this straight: Obama did the wrong thing, because he didn’t want to appear to be doing the politically expedient thing, which was the right thing… Does Obama really want us to believe this is how he makes important decisions? Or is this a politician bluffing his way through a tough moment and trying to get away with it?

Voters say Wright has hurt Obama — but question how much
SANFORD, N.C. - Black and white voters in next week’s primary states agreed on one thing Wednesday: Barack Obama’s preacher had hurt the Democratic presidential candidate at a crucial time. The question was how much.

Indiana shows why Obama might lose to McCain (McClatchy)
BROWNSBURG, Ind. — Exhibit A of Barack Obama’s problem with white folks: Indiana, home to a lot of disgruntled Democrats who could help put John McCain in the White House — particularly people backing Hillary Clinton in Tuesday’s primary.

Obama’s appeal to working-class whites faltering, polls show
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama’s problem winning votes from working-class whites is showing no sign of going away, and their impression of him is getting worse.

Suddenly, N. Carolina Is Facing Tighter Race (New York Times)
RALEIGH, N.C. — Just days before the North Carolina primary, the Democratic presidential contest in this state is suddenly alive with a fresh air of competition, as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton seeks to capitalize on a controversy that polls suggest has whittled away some of Senator Barack Obama’s support among white voters. Not long ago, Mr. Obama was perceived to hold such an advantage that some Democrats here wondered whether Mrs. Clinton would bother to compete vigorously. But the candidates intensified their efforts in the final weekend — both appeared here on Friday evening — and Mr. Obama was eyeing a return on the eve of the election.

Clinton promises ‘game-changer’
GREENSBORO, North Carolina (AFP) - Hillary Clinton on Friday promised a “game-changer” in next week’s nominating showdowns with Barack Obama despite his hefty mathematical advantage in their gripping White House race.

Clinton deserves some credit for her own rebound (by Tom Baxter, Southern Political Report)
April 30, 2008 —  Don’t attribute all of Hillary Clinton’s rebound in the latest InsiderAdvantage North Carolina poll to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. She deserves some of the credit herself… [D]on’t discount the significance of Clinton’s attack on Obama for opposing her plan to suspend the federal gas tax, just as he earlier opposed her proposal to freeze foreclosures… Empathy works, and while Clinton’s plan hasn’t won much favor from economists, it puts her on the offensive with respect to a tremendously potent issue.
Clinton’s gas tax plan makes the oil companies responsible for the taxes, at least temporarily.  She knows, and says, it’s not the long-term fix she proposes, which is an all-out effort to find alternative sources of energy.  But people are tired of huge oil company profits while they can barely afford to fill their gas tanks.

Obama attacks Clinton’s gas tax plan
INDIANAPOLIS, - Broadening his attack, Barack Obama said Saturday that Hillary Rodham Clinton’s support for a summertime break from the federal gasoline tax symbolizes a candidacy consisting of “phony ideas, calculated to win elections instead of actually solving problems.”
And HIS plan is?  Obama sounds more like Bush every day—don’t depend on the GOVERNMENT to help you out.

THE ‘COJONES’ PRIMARY (by Kirsten Powers, New York Post—which endorsed Obama and belongs to Rupert Murdoch)
May 2, 2008 — IT’s starting to look like a “toughness gap.” His chant: “Yes, we can.” Her chant: “Yes, we will.” Obama likes to say, “I may be skinny, but I’m tough.” Hillary throws back shots and threatens to obliterate Iran. He complains about tough questions from George Stephanopoulos and Charlie Gibson. She sits down with Bill O’Reilly. A Fox News poll released Wednesday found that 61 percent of Democrats describe Clinton as “tough,” but only 23 percent say that about Obama. The boys are swooning. The president of an Indiana steelworkers local union introduced Clinton as the “individual with [the] testicular fortitude” to deal with the nation’s problems. In his endorsement of Clinton, North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley enthused, “This lady right here makes Rocky Balboa look like a pansy.” In an ad, the governor gushes more: “She is so resilient, so determined. She knows how to deliver.” Or, as Clinton said in a World Wrestling Entertainment promo: “The last man standing may just be a woman.” Ouch.

Why won’t he debate Hillary?: Obama a chicken? (video)

Clinton takes time for girl talk
CARY, N.C. - Forget about policy speeches and wooing superdelegates. For Hillary Rodham Clinton, Saturday morning was devoted to chick chat — a panel discussion with a group of working moms on topics ranging from girl-on-girl violence to her daughter’s early dating years.

Elizabeth Taylor supports Hillary Rodham Clinton
LOS ANGELES (AP): Elizabeth Taylor said Friday she is supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign, calling the New York senator a smart, strong leader in a statement issued by her publicist.
Yeah, she announced it over a year ago, but Obama has been trotting out oldies but goodies.  Why can’t Clinton do the same thing?

Super stuck! (by Mike Madden and Walter Shapiro at Salon)
Democratic superdelegates who haven’t yet chosen sides tell Salon about phone calls from Bill Clinton and high-anxiety nightmares. It seems most are not enjoying political superstardom.
Remember that John Lewis was harassed into switching allegiance from Clinton to Obama.  No wonder these delegates are stuck.

What are desperate supporters to do?  Oh, I know, how about threatening the superdelegates!

Harmful, Divisive And Fallacious Petition From Color Of Change (by Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft)
Color of Change is circulating an outrageous, deplorable and fallacious petition: “Leaders of the Democratic Party are playing a dangerous game — risking the credibility of the party to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination against the will of voters. Heading down this path means disenfranchising millions of voters and legitimizing a campaign strategy that has displayed a clear pattern of race baiting and divisive politics.”… Color of Change falsely smears the Clinton campaign while engaging in race baiting and divisive politics itself. Color of Change smears not only Hillary Clinton, but the millions of Democrats who support her.

What’s a desperate campaign to do?  Oh, I know, pander to Republicans, even though you’ve vilified the opposition for being civil to the conservative media.

Obama Woos Republicans in Indiana (Political Wire)
Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign “is applying a grass-roots organizational zeal to courting Republicans” in Indiana, “much as it has done for younger voters in previous contests,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

What are desperate supporters to do?  Oh, I know, hand out a sample ballot that looks like a real ballot, and that already has the candidate’s bubble filled in…

Well, here’s something interesting… (by Frank Eaton at BlueNC)
I’m no lawyer, but here’s what I can find from the State Board of Elections Statute regarding sample ballots: “… No person other than a board of elections shall produce or disseminate a document substantially resembling an official ballot unless the document contains on its face a prominent statement that the document was not produced by a board of elections and is not an official ballot.” And here’s a piece of paid literature being distributed at early polling places around Winston-Salem by paid people for a brand new PAC called the Winston-Salem Black Political Action Committee:

 

People have actually been carrying them into the polling places and trying to turn them in as their ballots, which speaks, i believe, to their resemblance to actual ballots. Never mind that nowhere on this piece of paper does the word “sample” appear. The words “official ballot” sure do. Prominently, one might say. Like, right at the top. Where did this formerly blank ballot come from? Who is the Winston-Salem Black PAC? Why didn’t they file the organizational reports that were due this week?
Click through to see a larger image of the ballot.

… while pretending that the opposition is trying to suppress voting in that state.

Voter suppression in North Carolina? (The War Room, Salon)
Did a pro-Hillary Clinton nonprofit group make voter suppression robo-calls to keep Barack Obama’s voters from going to the polls in North Carolina on Tuesday? That’s the charge from part of the liberal blogosphere this week, but it’s a charge based on no solid evidence of wrongdoing… Those who’ve suggested there was voter suppression at work often started their coverage from the assumption that the calls were directed at the primary. In fact, the calls were part of a campaign aimed at 24 states in total, and they were intended to boost voter registration in general…

Josh Marshall in particular has been flogging this story without context, implying some sort of nefarious subplot here despite WVWV’s long track record of registering unmarried women and statements from both Obama and Clinton supporters validating their work…  I believe this is the lowest point I have ever seen the blogosphere sink. There is no reason whatsoever for this mob mentality to go after one of the most important voter registration efforts out there designed to empower women … If they are such an evil anti-progressive group, why would they award ‘female blogger of the year to Digby’ and run ads encouraging women to vote?
Click through for much more detail.

What are desperate supporters to do? Oh, I know, make up “shit” about the opposition!

Did Sidney Blumenthal cross the line? (by Joe Conason at Salon)
Some bloggers accuse Blumenthal, a Hillary advisor, of spreading right-wing lies about Obama. But I get his e-mail blasts and the charge isn’t fair.

Pennebaker: Clip Doctored (by Ben Smith at Politico)
I just spoke to D.A. Pennebaker, the director of “The War Room,” who said his film had been doctored to produce a widely-viewed YouTube clip. In a clip from his film on the 1992 Clinton campaign, posted to YouTube [Friday], Clinton advisor Mickey Kantor is — according to subtitles — seen referring to Indiana residents with an expletive and to his colleague George Stephanopolous with a racial slur. “He does not say that. He does not say that,” said Pennebaker, after viewing the clip… The … expletive, he said, appeared to have been entirely fabricated, with new audio dubbed onto the original movie.
UPDATE: I spoke to the editor of the video who said that he enhanced, but didn’t alter, the audio in the second portion of the video.
Lambert asks, why won’t Ben Smith tell us who that editor is?  See below.

Kudos (by lambert at Corrente)
Who was pushing a doctored anti-Hillary video? The same crowd that was pushing the fake WVWV anti-Hillary smear? The same crowd that pushed the Muslim garb anti-Hillary smear, that Kevin Drum retracted, but Obama repeated? Honestly, what’s next from these guys?… UPDATE How very, very odd. WKJM [Whoever Kidnapped Josh Marshall] isn’t covering this at all. I mean, you’d think that when a video that has Clinton operatives supposedly insulting IN says before the crucial IN primary goes viral, and all over the A list, and then the video turns out to be doctored, there’d be some coverage, any coverage. Say, can’t WKJM just call up his good friends at the Politico and ask them who the unnamed “editor” was? Just to put those nasty rumors that the Obama campaign was behind all this to rest? Nah. Move along people, move along. There’s no story here.

But if the racial slur fabrication doesn’t work, try misassociating Kantor’s use of the word “shit”.

Posted at BuzzFlash as of this morning: “ABC News: Yes, Clinton Advisor Did Call Hoosiers “Sh*t” in clip from ‘92 5/3”

If Tapper had put down his chicken sandwich and rented The War Room, he’d know that Mickey Kantor did not call Indiana voters “shit” (Media Matters)
Summary: Referring to the false allegation that in the 1993 movie The War Room, Clinton campaign adviser Mickey Kantor called Indiana voters “shit,” Jake Tapper wrote on his blog: “Were I not currently eating a chicken sandwich at Liberty East Restaurant in Charlotte, NC, while working on a World News piece about the economy and the candidates, I would go to Blockbuster, rent a copy of The War Room and settle this matter as much as possible.” Media Matters for America did obtain a copy of the film and does indeed “settle” the matter; Kantor did not call anyone “shit,” and he was not referring to Hoosiers when he said, “Those people are shitting.”

Smear #3: Hillary killed three Hoosiers in the Clinton Library with the Wrench! Then ate them! (by lambert at Corrente)
Well, so far we’ve had two smear campaigns against the Clinton this week, both extremely unconnected to the aboveground* Obama campaign and yet, almost incredibly, breaking just before another major primary: Smear #1, WVMV (for NC); and smear #2, the doctored “War Room” clip (for IN). Gee, it’s great to see a new kind of politics in action, isn’t it? Interestingly, the modus operandi was the same for both campaigns: Smear Hillary by smearing her associates**, then get the false claims “in the air” by propagating them on the A list. Both operations were also designed to delegitimize a (potential) Hillary win, through charges of voter suppression in NC (a tactic used by the OFB [Obama Fan Base], though quickly forgotten, after Obama losses in NH and NV), and through baseless charges of racism and hatred (a tactic used by the OFB in all times and all places for any or no reason). So, I’m guessing that smear #3 is already on the launching pad, and liftoff will be achieved just in time to ruin everybody’s Sunday.
NOTE * At this point, let us remember that Axelrod’s day job is corporate astroturfing.

Drudge Rules Their World: Kantor Video Doctored (by Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft)
Moral of the story? The Left blogs have lost their way.

James Clyburn Happy to Play His Familiar Part Once More (by Sean Wilentz, Princeton history professor writing at the Huffington Post)
Last week, Bill Clinton belatedly observed that the Obama campaign “played the race card on me” in South Carolina, and cited a conversation he had had with Jesse Jackson to prove his point. [Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, the highest-ranking black leader in Congress] jumped back in, getting the attention of The New York Times by charging that “black people are incensed” at Clinton and claiming that it is “an almost ‘unanimous’ view among African-Americans that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton are “committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win.” Clyburn may well be correct about perceptions of the Clintons among some black voters; but he simply hides how Obama, his campaign, and their supporters have willfully created that impression.
I hope you will click through to read this entire article.  It’s a recap of all the false racist charges of racism against the Clintons.

The poisonous campaign of Barack Obama (by John: south of Melrose at Liberal Rapture)
Reposted from March: By lying overtly and covertly about who he is Obama has poisoned this campaign and this country. He has used his considerable talents as an orator to fool the chattering classes and the media. He has used skillful oratory to blur his questionable past, rewrite our recent history, and open another gash in the wound of race in America. He has taken the difficult issue of race and turned it into a Benetton commercial and wonders why Pennsylvania isn’t buying it. He breathlessly compares his grandmother to the putrid Wright and wonders why his grand “speech” didn’t take.

He has taken the low road, while claiming the high one. He has lied about his intentions for the wars if elected. He has lied about his association with his church: Our Lady of Perpetual Resentment. He has plagiarized speeches, lied about both Clintons, lied about NAFTA, and run a dishonest, ruthless campaign. He has willfully associated with bigots, slumlords and terrorists to further his career. (Yes, William Ayres is a terrorist.) He has turned the idea of meritocracy on its head by elevating vagueness and self promotion to messianic heights. He has accomplished nothing of note in his public life and insults those who have.

Fatigue and racism threaten to knock Obama bandwagon off the road (The Guardian, U.K.)
Barack Obama was showing signs of campaign fatigue. Sitting on a picnic bench in a park on Pagoda Street, Indianapolis, in discussion with a group of 30 supporters, he told a story about the “modest” background of himself and his wife, Michelle. And 10 minutes later, seemingly having forgotten, he told them it all again. It is hardly surprising, given that he has been on the road almost non-stop since Christmas, battling Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. In recent weeks, he has often seemed absent-minded, forgetting the names of the towns he is in.
Conversely, Hillary seems to be enjoying herself.  She’s definitely better suited to the rigors of high office.

Change Oregon Can Believe In? (by bobbank at MyDD)
Speaking about the need to “Clean up our Water”, Barack made this solemn pledge to the people of Oregon: “[H]e will continue his leadership in protecting national treasures like the Great Lakes from threats such as industrial pollution, water diversion, and invasive species.” Oregon to Barack: the Great Lakes are not in Oregon!… So there you have it… Barack’s campaign presented a hastily constructed copy-and-paste job, with little or no thought given to the specific issues on the minds of Oregon voters.  Change they can believe in?  Hardly.

GREETINGS FROM BROAD RIPPLE VILLAGE: (by Bob Somerby at the Daily Howler)
[Friday’s New York Times had two articles on potential voters’ assessments of whether Rev. Wright would have an impact on the primaries in their states. The Times]sent a reporter to Tarheel towns to get the views of African-Americans. (Good!) And they sent a reporter to Broad Ripple to get the views of upscale whites. (Good again!) But what did the Gotham paper do to get the views of less affluent whites? Simple! Instead of interviewing such rubes, they simply asked the swells to speak for them! This produced a pleasing second-hand view: Low-income whites, with their racial bad faith, may well be swayed by this story! Let’s be clear: If the Times had actually interviewed those down-state voters, it may well have found racial attitudes mixed in the brew… But the pair of reports which are offered [Friday] represent a comical type of reporting. And they represent a perfect follow-up to [Gail] Collins’ sneering about those small towns.

Getler: Moyers could have been tougher with Rev. Wright
PBS ombud Michael Getler says Bill Moyers’ interview with Rev. Jeremiah Wright “came across to me more as a conversation among theologians than it did as a truly probing interview with a truly controversial person who had said some truly inflammatory things …I do feel that there were not enough questions asked and some that were asked came across as too reserved and too soft, considering the volatility of the charges.”

Someday never comes (by Jamison Foser at Media Matters)
The news media are so far in the tank for John McCain, many reporters don’t bother even trying to pretend that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee has faced the level of scrutiny they’ve given Democrats Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and, when he was in the race, John Edwards. Instead, like teenagers trying to put off homework so they can go to the mall, they insist they’ll get around to scrutinizing McCain … eventually… Just wait. Be patient. Eventually, the nation’s largest news organizations will get around to telling you whether the presumptive Republican presidential nominee is lying, or flip-flopping, or just flat doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Not today or tomorrow, mind you — but someday.

McCain is Not Bush, Says Adviser
Republican presidential contender John McCain will be able to sufficiently distance himself from the unpopular president of his own party in the upcoming general election, according to a top adviser to the Arizona senator.
Good luck with that, McCain adviser!

McCain’s staff and Bush’s staff talk ‘everyday.’ (Think Progress)
At a lunch hosted today by the Christian Science Monitor, former uber-lobbyist Charlie Black, who is a senior adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), said that McCain’s staff talks to the President Bush’s staff “everyday.” Black also said that before McCain offered harsh words last week about Bush’s response to Hurricane Katrina, the campaign gave the White House a “head’s up.”

McCain blames Minnesota bridge collapse on earmarks (by Steve Benen at Crooks and Liars)
Joe Klein recently predicted that John McCain would avoid a cheap and pathetic style of campaigning. McCain, Klein said, “sees the tawdry ceremonies of politics — the spin and hucksterism — as unworthy.”… At this point, if McCain is experiencing any kind of internal dilemma, I’m pretty sure hucksterism is winning. “Republican John McCain said Wednesday that the bridge collapse in Minnesota that killed 13 people last year would not have happened if Congress had not wasted so much money on pork-barrel spending. Federal investigators cite undersize steel plates as the “critical factor” in the collapse of the bridge.”

O’Reilly: ‘It’s Bull’ That Torture Doesn’t Work (Think Progress)
[Thursday] night, in an interview with Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly praised the Bush administration “for doing a good job protecting Americans after 9/11? and attributed its success to its “aggressive manner” of protection, including “Guantanamo, water boarding three times, and other things.”… O’Reilly then questioned Clinton’s opposition to torture, insisting that if the U.S. had “an al Qaeda big shot” in custody, he would “dunk him into water” — i.e., waterboard him. When told that torture does not produce “high quality” information, O’Reilly cried, “That’s bull!”.
We have to wonder how he can be so certain.

Lots more really good stuff at MakeThemAccountable.com.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com