Hillary’s Voice

Permanent link to MTA daily media news

Mike Luckovich

Who Wants to Be the Next Millionaire? (by Larry Johnson at No Quarter)
Here’s the news short and sweet–if you have a copy of the Michelle Obama video, in which she is lambasting white people (four different sources say she uses “whitey” as an epithet) at Jeremiah Wright’s church, then there is an ultra conservative Republican billionaire who wants to pay your $1 million dollars for the tape. Why? He hates John McCain. Conservative Republicans refer to John McCain as a Marxist and a sell out (and those are the nice comments). The billionaire in question believes Barack is a very weak candidate and, if he gets the Democratic nod, then McCain will surely be President. Especially after the October “surprise” of Michelle Obama railing against whitey. The billionaire wants to preempt McCain and Rove and has put the word out thru conservative networks that there is a $1 million dollar bounty for the person or persons who produce the tape.
From Larry Johnson’s bio: Larry C. Johnson is CEO and co-founder of BERG Associates, LLC, an international business-consulting firm with expertise combating terrorism and investigating money laundering. Mr. Johnson works with US military commands in scripting terrorism exercises, briefs on terrorist trends, and conducts undercover investigations on counterfeiting, smuggling and money laundering. Mr. Johnson, who worked previously with the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism, is a recognized expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, crisis and risk management.

Clinton Election Juggernaut Accelerates (by bringiton at Corrente)
After Hillary Clinton’s historic 41-point victory in the West Virginia primary, two questions loom: How long will Barak Obama cling to his shattered dreams of the presidency, and how much damage will be done to the Democratic Party by his stubborn and divisive refusal to accept the obvious? What just weeks earlier had looked to the Obama camp like an easy path to victory has been derailed following his confidence-shattering defeat in Indiana, a state conventional wisdom and his own campaign had projected he would win, and his disastrous showing in Pennsylvania in spite of outspending Clinton 3:1… Withdrawing before any more bitterness develops would be in the best interests of the Party as well as the security of Obama’s political future - and the political futures of the Party Leadership.

The daily numbers: Obama’s edge over Clinton narrows; McCain moves in front (On Politics, USA Today)
Barack Obama’s lead over Hillary Rodham Clinton among Democrats and other voters who “lean” Democratic has narrowed from 6 percentage points yesterday to 4 percentage points today, Gallup just reported. He’s ahead of her 48%-44% in Gallup’s national tracking poll.

ARG Poll: Obama Holds Small Lead in Oregon (Political Wire)
A new American Research Group poll in Oregon shows Sen. Barack Obama edging Sen. Hillary Clinton, 50% to 45%.

Hillary: “It’s About What’s Right For Oregon” (by SusanUnPC at No Quarter)
Via TexasDarlin: Another poll that shows a TIE in votes already mailed (49-49) / This one shows overall BO 50 — HRC 45 / We can pull out an upset in Oregon. (ALL HANDS ON DECK! GO to HillaryClinton.com and sign up for phone calls!)

ARG Poll: Clinton Way Ahead in Kentucky (Political Wire)
A new American Research Group poll in Kentucky finds Sen. Hillary Clinton with a huge lead over Sen. Barack Obama, 65% to 29%.

Obama, facing likely defeat, will skip visiting Kentucky (McClatchy)
LEXINGTON, Ky. — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, facing a likely defeat in next Tuesday’s primary election, won’t travel to Kentucky before the voting, but said he hopes to have much more time to win over Kentucky voters before the November general election.
So will he demand half the pledged delegates, as he’s demanding for Michigan?

Public Says Press Should Not Declare Obama the Winner (Pew)
Barack Obama may be building an insurmountable lead in the Democratic primary race, but the public is sending a strong message to journalists and pundits: It is too early to declare, as some already have, that the race is over. Fully 72% of the public - including comparable percentages of Democrats, Republicans and independents - say that journalists should not be anointing Obama as the Democratic nominee at this stage in the race.

Bill tells Kentucky voters Hillary’s not out yet (McClatchy)
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Former President Bill Clinton on Thursday gave no sign his wife’s presidential campaign is ready to fold up its tent and return to New York.

Poor Poor Hillary? (by Jeralyn at TalkLeft)
Washington Post columnist Libby Copeland exmaines the “Poor Hillary” meme by those who don’t care for Hillary Clinton. It’s only worth reading for the end: “You see the real Clinton on TV this week after her West Virginia win. Brian Williams tries to lead her into an autopsy of her campaign, and she keeps coming back with that smile. She looks rested. She looks like she knows exactly what she’s doing. ‘Made of steel,’ is how John Edwards describes her Wednesday, just before he endorses Barack Obama. ‘We’ll know a lot more on June 4th,’ the candidate herself says, placid as a lap cat. ‘I don’t believe in quitting. I don’t believe in being pushed out.’”

Why The FL Delegation Must Be Seated (by Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft)
At some point, one hopes, Barack Obama and his supporters will start thinking about winning in November. It needs to start with seating the Florida and Michigan delegations. There are many arguments that those worried about the future Democratic primary schedule can raise about this and that and the integrity of the RULZ. I think they do not have much merit, but I am not writing here to rehash that. Why? Because a normal functioning Democratic Party would not be wasting time thinking about the 2012 primary schedule and instead would be thinking about making the 2012 primaries moot - by winning the Presidency in 2008. No one will remember or care about Donna Brazile and her silly RULZ fixations in 2016, if we win the White House in 2008.

Action Words (by riverdaughter at The Confluence)
Here are some other things you can do to get your point across to the DNC: You can send an email to the DNC expressing your thoughts on the FL and MI problem. Ask them to seat the delegations from both states as is as the solution has been obstructed for too long. Be polite but assertive in your email. Here is the link to the form on Hillary’s site. You might want to leave a little something in her tip jar while you’re at it.

Let’s Keep Our Heads, Conflucians (by riverdaughter at The Confluence)
Before we get too moblike, let’s think about this. First, I want to lay out what I want to see happen with the party and this primary season:
• I want the process to proceed fairly.
• I want all voters to be counted and respected.
• I want Florida and Michigan delegations counted so they make an impact on the nomination.
• I want Obama and his enablers to back off.
• I want Donna Brazile and anyone else at the DNC to stop putting their thumb on the scales for Obama and against Clinton.

I want the Rules and Bylaws Committee to waive the rules for FL and MI and seat all delegates as voted on by their voters on the dates of the primaries of those states without any “gifts” to Obama to make the process seem fair to him. The votes are votes. [Obama] lost Florida. He took his name off Michigan’s ballot in order to game the system. He obstructed revotes in both states… The time to act was back in February-March when counting the votes in both states would have had minimal impact. Obama squandered that opportunity. Tough for him.

Barry needs to cancel his “in-your-face’” celebration next Tuesday. I’ll give the Rules and Bylaws committee until May 31 to settle MI and FL and save face.

LATINO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WANT FL AND MI COUNTED (by Mario Solis-Marich at Nuestra Voice)
Washington, DC - Fourteen Hispanic Members of Congress sent the following letter today to the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee urging them to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations at the Convention in Denver. The members stress that disregarding the votes cast by hundreds of thousands of Hispanics in Florida and Michigan, particularly in Florida, which is home to 1.1 million Hispanic voters, could be detrimental to the Democratic presidential nominee’s success in November.
Click through to read the letter.

The Logic Of Clinton’s Argument To the Superdelegates (by Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft)
The normally sharp James Joyner plays dumb in order to take a swipe at Hillary Clinton: “The ‘Electoral College’ argument, though, is interesting. On its face, it’s silly. The Democratic Party has a set of rules in place for how it selects its nominee. Those rules don’t at all resemble winner-take-all model mirrored on the Electoral College. Consequently, her opponents didn’t run their campaigns as if that were the case. To now claim that this is how the race should be decided is brazen.”… Clinton is arguing to the superdelegates who can vote for whomever they like. Clinton is arguing she has a better chance to win in November… She may be wrong. You can argue against her points. But to call the argument silly is, well, silly.

Vox Populi, Obama Edition (by eriposte at the Left Coaster)
[T]he Presidential election in November is not decided by superdelegates and the Democratic nomination will be decided by superdelegates this year because neither candidate has enough pledged delegates of their own to cross the threshold of 2209.1415926536 (or whatever the number is today). Since neither candidate has enough pledged delegates to win on their own, superdelegates have to exercise independent judgment to figure out which candidate has the best chance of winning in November… In that situation, the superdelegates are entirely entitled to use the popular vote (eek!) - among registered Democrats (if you want to avoid the um, “mischief” factor) or among all voters or both - to decide who would be the better candidate to beat Sen. McCain in November, just as they are entitled to use the pledged delegate count - which in turn is ultimately based on popular votes.

A Surprise About Obama, Clinton, and Turnout (American Research Group)
Conventional wisdom has it that Barack Obama’s primary victories are based on his ability to increase turnout. A look at what happens when voter turnout increases in the primaries proves that this notion is wrong. In fact, Obama has had his greatest primary (and caucus) victories when turnouts have been low… There are exceptions (such as Arkansas, Tennessee, and Rhode Island), but Clinton, and not Obama, tends to win in the states where turnouts are higher. The relationship is strong enough that Democratic primary turnout can be predicted using Clinton’s share of the vote.
He has a lot of people fooled, though.  See below.

Ponies, Cows and K Street (by Anglachel)
That the clothes have no emperor is a realization that people are coming to as they understand the claim to be recruiting new kinds of voters is not holding up when tested through actual elections. The Unity Pony is not quite the fine steed we’ve been told to Hope™ for.

But the other animal in this contest is the Cash Cow… [Obama has] done some time-honored practices like giving … large sums of money to other politicians’ campaign chests, and handing over donor lists in exchange for endorsements. The new twist (and I have to admit a certain admiration for the sheer chutzpah of it all) is to demand that his donors not provide money to any other outlet than himself so that he can be the Godfather of campaign funds, dispensing it to reward loyalty and punish defections and opposition. You do business with us and only us or else (sound of knuckles cracking). Got it? It does fit well with the bully-boy tactics we’ve seen in everything else this guy has done.

The demand that other modes of political communication and action be denied operating funds is savvy in several ways. It makes Obama the arbiter of political viability. It boosts the power of his message by reducing the number and efficacy of competing voices and alternate views. It enforces loyalty to his agenda, preventing an internal opposition from forming. In its structure, it is the same as the Republican’s K-Street project, a shake-down racket…  The more aggressively Hillary is demonized, the fewer independent sources of funding and the more dependent the party is upon The One.

1968 or 1976? (by Anglachel)
What I am seeing over the course of the campaign is that a disdained and mocked politician backed by a somewhat patchwork coalition has consolidated message and support to become the insurgent opponent to the establishment, business-as-usual candidate. Yes, you heard me right. Hillary is to the current Democratic Party as Reagan was to the Republicans in 1976. Which puts Obama in the position of Gerry Ford, the person who was supposed to present a change for the Republicans, but who ended up being the muddled choice of unsatisfied party regulars who had nothing new to offer and who could see the danger presented by the Movement Conservatives… Wherever these two candidates [Clinton and Obama] began their campaigns, they have ended up in very different places. The Conventional Wisdom was that HRC was the Establishment candidate, the ultimate insider, but those who have been watching the cracks in the party since Big Dog battled the Village in the 90s knew this wasn’t so. Obama is completely the choice of the party power elite.

Women in Politics: The Same As It Ever Was (by Erica Barnette)
I thought I’d dig up a few examples of Supposedly Liberal™ bloggers and columnists who have similarly ill, anti-woman things to say about the first serious female candidate for President…

Hillary is “petulant, arrogant, whiny… a spoiled brat.” She’s “childish. A desperate, spurned lover. And, as ever, shrill… shrill… shrill… shrill. And, oh yeah, cold. (Brrrrr!) She doesn’t have a heart, and she’s jealous and vindictive (over, uh, boys?) Any woman who votes for her is voting with her vagina, not her brain. When she “periodically… is feeling down” she goes on the attack! She’s ruthless.She has claws! But dude, there’s nothing sexist about saying that! Especially according to the guys. And, you know, she really ought to just be beaten… to death. I mean, c’mon–don’t you just want to punch her in the face? After all, she’s ambitious, dominant, and controlling. She’s carping, and a liar, and frigid, and when she smiles it’s fake. She’s controlling and humorless. Watch out–she’ll bite you! And watch out for her supporters, too–those ladies, when they don’t get what they want, they tend to go a little crazy! They may even cut your balls off. Ooh, but she has balls of her own–three of them! Arianna Huffington agrees with Maureen Dowd: Hillary’s just a little wittle girl.

There are more–including many I posted in my original post–but I’ll stop there. Suffice it to say that plenty of folks, including supposedly liberal (even “feminist”) writers, are slinging misogynistic shit at Clinton. I wish I could say it was all coming from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Chris Matthews, but I can’t.

For the misogyny doubters, minimizers, rationalizers, and enablers (by lambert at Corrente)
For those unpersuaded by or dismissive of the 90 examples in Shakes’s Hillary Sexism Watch, or our own less systematic efforts, try this from Marie Cocco in WaPo: “I will not miss seeing advertisements for T-shirts that bear the slogan ‘Bros before Hos.’ The shirts depict Barack Obama (the Bro) and Hillary Clinton (the Ho) and are widely sold on the Internet.”

Obama’s Math (by koshembos at CVorrente)
Why is Obama optimistic and why are the super delegates boarding the bus on its way to the bottom of the ravine? Is it possible that Obama relies on “everyone but McCain” to get all Democrats home? Is he convinced that his superior convincing powers will attract the lost souls? Does he believe that the closer non-Obama Democrats will get to November the more stressed they will be by a potential Bush 3rd term, while will also forget that earlier he treated them like shit? Or may his arrogance, elitism, media and blogger support, tons of money and a mountain of hubris make him and his advisors delusional?

Later! Not coming back this fall! (by John: south of Melrose at Liberal Rapture)
The wide assumption in the DNC and Obama cabal of elites and scoundrels is that those of us who refuse to vote for Obama under any circumstances (and we are legion) will come to our senses by November and vote for the chosen one. Since they have no principles beyond money and faddishness they cannot see that our refusal to vote for this woefully unqualified man is fundamentally based in core principles - not anger, disappointment or passing frustration… I will not vote for Obama because he represents values I am fundamentally opposed to: racism, sexism, condesension to the working class, lack of judgement about associates, political expediency, graft, and entitlement. How can I say this? I’ve examined not what he has said but what he as done, and where he has spent his adult life. I encourage you to do the same.

Why I’m Turning Down Obama (by Steve Corbett, WILK Radio)
“Operation Turndown” has deep roots in my own personal radical politics. If Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee for president, I will not vote for him. I will turn him down. Judging from callers to “Corbett” yesterday, so will many other Democrats. Democrats must follow their hearts and their heads… Hillary is the strongest, best candidate. Hillary can beat John McCain. Hillary is my Democrat. Even if party bosses tell me that we must get behind the nominee and that the nominee will be Obama, I have a choice. Even if family, friends and colleagues tell me I’m wrong, I have a choice. Even if you hate my decision, I have a choice. And I will use it. To do otherwise would violate the principles I work hard to uphold. I’ve made a decision – a well-thought out, reasoned and rational decision.

An Open Call to Women & Others Revolting Against Obama & the Democratic Party (by Linda Starr)
There are many of us who are totally disgusted with the DNC leaders attempting to force Obama on us as our nominee. We’re revolting. We are organizing a massive walkout at the Democratic convention. We are working to defeat any superdelgate who endorses or votes for Barack Obama, or works for him in any way. We intend to go through the entire donations list and work to defeat any Democratic Representatives who contributed to Obama’s campaign.

We are joining forces with millions of other women across the country to start a new [N]ational Women’s Party with the purpose of electing women, anti-war activists, supporters of equal rights for ALL Americans, including Gays and Lesbians. We invite all disgruntled Americans who are sick of politics as usual, fixed elections, fixed primaries, skewed media commentaries by hosts and their guests who are not held accountable for their insulting personal attacks, and manipulative media coverage in favor of any candidate over any other candidate, e.g., COUNTDOWN and HARDBALL and others, or general political profiteering at our expense. JOIN US.
Contact newwomensparty-at-aol.com

advice from a pro (infotainment rules)
Exurban Jon at Exurban League: “If Bush gave a speech about drug dealers, would you release a statement saying, ‘how DARE you insult me!’? Of course not; you’re aren’t a drug dealer. So if you really aren’t an appeaser, you shouldn’t have willingly identified yourself with that group. I’ve done plenty of PR work in my time, senator. Although you shouldn’t have released a statement at all, here’s how you should have handled a press question about Bush’s comments: ‘One thing all Americans agree on is that appeasement doesn’t work. As president, I will engage in tough, principled, and direct diplomacy just like Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan before me. And of course, no American president will engage with terrorists, least of all those who seek to destroy our stalwart ally, Israel. I look forward to celebrating the 65th anniversary of Israel’s independence.’” Another amateur-hour play from Barack and his first responders. Ho hum.

Presidential Candidates Should Not Mix Religion and Politics (thanks to New Hampshire Insider)
WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 15, 2008) – Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama should stop distributing fliers expressing his religious qualifications to be president, says the Interfaith Alliance, a leading religious freedom advocacy organization. This week, Senator Obama’s campaign began distributing fliers in Kentucky describing Senator Obama as a “Committed Christian” and telling voters how Senator Obama’s religious upbringing will affect his decisions in the White House. Unfortunately, this is just the latest example of political candidates from both parties misusing religion to gain support in this year’s campaign. The flier is similar to other Obama campaign publications distributed earlier this year in South Carolina. The Interfaith Alliance is opposed to candidates exploiting their religious beliefs to gain electoral support.

Curtain Time for Barack Obama - Part IV (Evelyn Pringle, OpEd News)
The solution to the problems arising from the unsuccessful attempts to shut down Operation Board Games would be for Barack Obama to become president and issue a bipartisan pardon to all members of the “Combine” who funded his seat in the US Senate. The scam worked when Scooter Libby took the fall for the Bush administration.

Huckabee: ‘I apologize that my comments were offensive.’ (Think Progress)
[Friday], while speaking at the NRA convention in Louisville, KY, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee made an offhand joke after being interrupted by an offstage nice. In his joke, Huckabee claimed that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) “dove for the floor” when “somebody aimed a gun at him.” Huckabee has released a statement apologizing for the remark… Obama was placed under secret service protection last year — the earliest ever for a U.S. presidential candidate — because of racially motivated threats.

McCain: Obama not qualified for presidency (by Ben Smith at Politico)
McCain’s hardest shot at Obama this cycle, on a conference call with bloggers. Obama’s willingness to meet with the Iranian leadership, he said, “is an unacceptable position, and shows that Senator Obama does not have the knowledge, the experience, the background to make the kind of judgments that are necessary to preserve this nation’s security.”

McCain calls Obama ‘reckless’ for willingness to talk to Iran (McClatchy)
LOUISVILLE — Likely Republican nominee John McCain used his stage at the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting to bolster his conservative credentials and rip his potential Democratic opponent, Barack Obama.

Neoconservative McCain Adviser: ‘At Some Point,’ ‘You Might Want To’ Talk To Iran (Think Progress)
[Thursday], McCain reiterated his unwillingness to engage diplomatically with various Middle East countries, particularly Iran. But [that] night on PBS’s Charlie Rose, even [neoconservative McCain advisor Robert] Kagan moved away from McCain’s position. While he defended the Bush administration’s current refusal to sit down with Iran, Kagan admitted that this policy may not be as sustainable as McCain thinks: “…You know, I think, and this is where John McCain may not — doesn’t agree necessarily. I think at some point we may find ourselves in a position when you might want to do that.”
Click through to watch the video.

McCain Flip Flops on Hamas (Political Wire)
In a Washington Post op-ed, former Clinton State Department official Jamie Rubin says he spoke to  Sen. John McCain about Hamas on British television two years ago. Said McCain: “They’re the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them.” Last month, McCain criticized Sen. Barack Obama for refusing to criticize former President Carter’s meeting with Hamas, saying “it is a grave and dangerous mistake for an American leader to meet with a terrorist organization like Hamas.” He has since used Obama’s position on Hamas in fundraising solicitations. The op-ed subheader: “McCain Was for Talking Before He Was Against It.”

McCain tells NRA that Dems would put gun-owners’ rights at risk (On Politics, USA Today)
In a speech he’s giving this hour at the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting in Louisville, presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain touts his record of supporting most things the NRA wants — and says that his Democratic rivals would…

Flashback: McCain once sought to push the NRA out of the GOP. (Think Progress)
In Louisville, KY [Frida]y, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) [addressed] nearly 60,000 gun enthusiasts at the annual National Rifle Association convention. McCain requested the speaking spot, but, as Cliff Schecter points out, McCain once said the NRA shouldn’t be embraced by the Republican Party: “The NRA is entitled to their advocacy. I don’t think they help the Republican Party at all, but I don’t think they should in any way play a major role in the Republican Party’s policy making. [CNN, 5/12/00]”
Click through to watch the video.

Lots more really good stuff at MakeThemAccountable.com.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com