A year ago, The New York Times’, Jodi Kantor wrote this article on Reverend Wright that prompted this passionate response from the pastor.
This is an excerpt from the Wright letter:
“I talked about how rare it was to meet a man whose Christianity was not
just “in word only.” I talked about Barack being a person who lived his
faith and did not argue his faith. I talked about Barack as a person
who did not draw doctrinal lines in the sand nor consign other people to
hell if they did not believe what he believed.
Out of a two-hour conversation with you about Barack’s spiritual journey
and my protesting to you that I had not shaped him nor formed him, that I
had not mentored him or made him the man he was, even though I would
love to take that credit, you did not print any of that.”
Why is this news you say? Well, Time decided to post said letter on their blog forcing the New York Times to respond. The paper is still reeling from the McCain fiasco and is making an effort to ensure that their credibility is no longer questioned.
Wright’s letter does provide some additional insight to the man being bedeviled by the conservative media. All of this heightened sensitivity regarding this issue makes you wonder whether Sen. Obama’s challenge to America in his speech will ever be addressed.
We have not heard the last of this however and issues such as the economy, health care and taxes may not get addressed.
Monday, March 31, 2008
The Wright Times
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Clinton's Threat or Bluff?
Clinton vows to stay in the race, threatening to take the fight to the convention.
In a Washington Post article today, Sen., Hillary Clinton was quoted:
"I know there are some people who want to shut this down and I think they are wrong," Clinton said in an interview during a campaign stop here Saturday. "I have no intention of stopping until we finish what we started and until we see what happens in the next 10 contests and until we resolve Florida and Michigan. And if we don't resolve it, we'll resolve it at the convention -- that's what credentials committees are for.
"We cannot go forward until Florida and Michigan are taken care of, otherwise the eventual nominee will not have the legitimacy that I think will haunt us”
I seriously doubt that the Clintons intend to make good on this threat, this is a bluff to keep the pressure on the superdelegates and the Obama camp. As Sen. Clinton’s options have dwindled, she has been hoping for an Obama implosion that has not materialized. Her plan B which I believe is being carefully crafted in her statement above, is to force her way on the ticket by threatening a brokered convention.
The May primaries are key.
Will the Obama camp entertain this proposal? I think some backroom negotiating may already be taking place between the Clinton and Obama camps. This so called dream ticket will only occur if she wins PA by a large margin and sweeps the next ten primaries, regaining the lead in the popular vote. If Obama does better than expected in Pennsylvania, and sweeps the primaries (Indiana and North Carolina) on May 5, the race is essentially over.
The end game.
The Vanel Journal predicts: THE RACE WILL BE OVER IN MAY. Clinton will win Pennsylvania and Obama will sweep the May 6th primaries. This should prompt more superdelegates to declare for Obama and force Clinton out of the race by early June at the latest. The Michigan and Florida delegates will be seated once Sen. Obama secures the nomination, spliting them evenly.
As far as the possibility of a dream ticket? Unikely, only a surprise win in North Carolina bolters that argument and the Obama camp is in no mood for a Clinton union at this time.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Obama's Deft move
I have to give credit to Armstrong Williams who floated the idea of an Obama-Bloomberg ticket a few weeks ago. Back then, I disagreed with his assessment that Obama would run on an Independent ticket featuring the New York Governor.
Sen. Obama running as an Independent in 2008?
Not likely I opined:
“ While I do agree that the Clintons will make a strong push for the super-delegates, I don’t see a majority of them disregarding the electorate should Obama win the most pledged delegates. I view this as a warning from the Obama camp to the DNC establishment. After all, the majority of super delegates are elected officials and they would fear a serious backlash if some backroom deal was struck to illegally hand the nomination to Clinton. (Political self preservation will trump the Clinton loyalty factor)
My best guess? Obama completes the primary season with a slight delegate edge, Clintons will try unsuccessfully to woo the SDs and get Michigan/Florida delegates seated, but in the end, they will fail and the DNC will back Obama.”
Besides, most state registration deadlines would have passed by the DNC convention.
Echoes of 1824?
The only way I see Obama on a 2012 Independent ticket is if he were to lose the nomination in a similar fashion to John Quincy Adams’ “corrupt bargain” of 1824. In that year, Andrew Jackson won both the popular and the Electoral College vote but was denied the presidency when Adams struck a deal with fellow presidential candidate Henry Clay in what Jackson referred to as the corrupt bargain. Adams was elected president by Congress and Clay was rewarded by being named Secretary of State. A frustrated Jackson resigned from the Senate and founded what we now know as the Democratic Party. Throughout this bitter primary battle, there have been many subtle hints that this nightmare scenario for the DNC may come to fruition should Obama in fact lose the nomination.
Bloomberg introduced Sen. Obama when he gave an economic speech the other day in NYC. There was hardly any mention of the speech as the MSM was buzzing with the possibility of an Obama-Bloomberg union. The flirtation with Bloomberg, at least temporarily, silenced some of the Rev. Wright controversy. There is no doubt that Bloomberg’s tremendous appeal with independent voters would be a boon to Obama’s need for a change in platform but I am unsure whether it bolsters his candidacy in purple states like Ohio and VA. These two states are part of the battleground states (FLA and PA are some of the others) that a candidate must win to secure enough Electoral College votes for the presidency.
The New York Mayor could be playing us all for fools while basking in the attention, or perhaps he is keeping his name in the headlines for relevancy and a possible future run. There are many options: The governorship of New York, A senate run or even another White House run in 2012. In any case, his support, I suspect, is something that Obama is desperately seeking, and I would not rule out Bloomberg’s involvement in an Obama administration.
Nonetheless, Obama ended the week on a high note by securing the support of Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA). The Casey family is from Scranton, PA- a bastion of working class voters that Obama needs for a strong showing in the April 22nd primary. He successfully outflanked the Wright issue while getting positive coverage. The mere presence of Bloomberg and the buzz he created was a clear boost to Obama as he works to assuage the anxieties of potential Jewish voters.
National polls so far indicate that he has weathered the storm.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
New Polls on the Race
This is a bit late but this video is an excerpt of Tim Russert analyzing the negative effects of the Democratic primary battle.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
The Kilpatrick and Paterson scandals
One was a rising Democratic star and the other rose to prominence following the sex scandal of a now fallen political star (See Spitzer resigns). The incessant reports of the failings of these two promising politicians have been a political embarrassment to the African American community and seek to undermine other prominent lawmakers who are starting to shine in their own right.
Detroit Mayor Kilpatrick, who became the city’s youngest mayor when he was elected in 2001, was recently charged with several counts of perjury stemming from an extra-marital affair with an aide. He refuses to resign and has decided to fight the charges in the midst of a recent no confidence vote and numerous calls for his resignation.
Gov. David Paterson, the newly elected (promoted) governor of New York cannot seem to stop confessing about his past affairs, cocaine drug use, and possible campaign finance fraud. I am unsure as to what the strategy is here, but I guess he is trying to air out the dirty laundry before someone else does it for him. The New York State Democratic party is still dealing with the aftermath of the Spitzer scandal and now Gov. Paterson seems to be providing future campaign fodder to Republicans with his daily musings of past digressions.
So far, I don’t see this having a major effect on the national race but I wonder if it is undermining current rising stars who should be getting more of the spotlight?
Rising stars such as Gov. Deval Patrick, Newark Mayor Cory A. Booker, Washington D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, and Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin represent the new guard of the Democratic Party led by the emergence of Barack Obama.
It is a shame that these prominent politicians are not being featured in the MSM; instead we are being fed a constant barrage of scandals involving Mayor Kilpatrick and Gov. Paterson. The DNC needs to find a better way to feature at least one of these rising stars at the convention to deflect the negative press that a potential Kilpatrick trial will undoubtedly generate.
By the way, who knows what other confession the New York Governor has up his sleeve?
The Enemy of my Enemy?
The National Review published a picture yesterday of Clinton with Richard Mellon Scaiffe, the owner of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Clinton, reeling from her Bosnia tales, decided to resurrect the Jeremiah Wright issue during that interview.
She repeated the same comment again later in the day, stating that Wright would not have been her pastor. Interestingly enough, when the MSM was in a frenzy covering the Rev. Jeremiah Wright issue, Clinton decided to distance herself from the controversy.
Although there have been rumors floating around indicating that the Clinton camp is secretly negotiating a place on the Democratic ticket, one wonders whether Obama will ever accept such a deal. The New York Times', Maureen Dowd wrote an Op Ed today stating that Clinton, faced with a humiliating defeat, is either attempting to destroy Obama to run again in 2012 or weaken him to a point where he will have no choice but to accept a unity Obama-Clinton ticket.
Can you imagine Obama, Bill and Hillary in the same room? I think the former plan, destroy him and run again in 2012, is more likely.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
The Bosnia "misstatement"
On a day when she should have been getting positive coverage for her policy speech on the economy, Sen. Clinton found herself entangled in controversy due to the following misstatement
“I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base. But it was a moment of great pride for me to visit our troops, not only in our main base as Tuzla, but also at two outposts where they were serving in so many capacities to deactivate and remove landmines, to hunt and seek out those who had not complied with the Dayton Accords and put down their arms, and to build relationships with the people that might lead to a peace for them and their children.”
After a firestorm of negative media coverage and contradictory accounts from many individuals who were actually on that trip, Sen. Clinton was forced to acknowledge the embellishment of the facts:
Here is the account from Attytood, who provided the exclusive:
"Now let me tell you what I can remember, OK -- because what I was told was that we had to land a certain way and move quickly because of the threat of sniper fire. So I misspoke -- I didn't say that in my book or other times but if I said something that made it seem as though there was actual fire -- that's not what I was told. I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire. I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I greeted her, I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it."
Attytood: I followed-up, noting that the episode has raised questions about her credibility on foreign policy.
She responded:
"No, I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts, I wrote about a lot of this in my book. you know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement."
Source Sphere: Related Content
Monday, March 24, 2008
Hillary's new math
The Clinton camp is currently pushing the idea that Hillary should be declared the winner. How you say? After all, she is behind in pledged delegates, states won, and the popular vote.
Electoral College votes.
This ridiculous notion that Hillary should win because she has won the states with the largest Electoral College votes is incredulous. The Clinton latest hack du jour parading the airwaves was none other Sen. Evan Bayh, who incidentally, was advocating doing away with the Electoral College system in 2000.
This was his position back then:
“I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people and to me, that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.” And in 2006 he was quoted “I think our president should be chosen by the majority of the American people”
And this is from the New York Times article quoting Hillary Clinton in 2000:
"At the time, Mrs. Clinton, who had just been elected to the Senate, said, “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people and to me, that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.”
Latest Gallup poll shows that Obama has made up all the ground he lost last week due to the Rev. Wright issue.
There is no way that Hillary can win the Democratic nomination. The only question is: How far is she willing to take this fight? It is in her interest to keep the primary battle going as long as possible in the hopes that Obama stumbles. Lastly, there is talk of a Superdelegate mini-convention shortly following the primaries. Will the loser, Hillary in this case, simply accept the results and support the nominee?
Stay tuned.
Olive Branch to Obama?
Below is a clip showing Chris Wallace chastising his colleagues for Obama bashing. Are we supposed to believe that Wallace is genuine in this plea or is it more of a charade to hopefully get the Democratic candidate to consider appearing on the network?
Sunday, March 23, 2008
The Richardson Effect
Bill Clinton spent Super Bowl Sunday wooing Bill Richardson. Pictures of a bored former President Clinton sitting in Gov. Richardson’s living room looking annoyed circulated the internet, so you can imagine the feelings of betrayal when the governor endorsed Sen. Obama this week. It was a blow that the Clinton camp did not take lightly.
Here is a quote from James Carville:
“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,”
How significant is the Richardson endorsement?
Well, for one thing it breaks the seemingly endless Rev. Wright coverage and more importantly, provides Obama with a vote of confidence amidst the current racial turmoil. Richardson allows former Clinton colleagues who are on the fence and genuinely torn, some political cover should they decide to jump off the Clinton train.
Will his endorsement bring in votes or was it more self serving?
I’ve always maintained that Gov. Richardson was auditioning for a VP slot, but I assumed that it would be on a Clinton ticket. The shrewdness of Richardson’s move was in the timing. He was able to do it when Sen. Obama needed a respite from the negative onslaught caused by the Rev. Wright issue, and later, he will be able to call in some favors. Whether that translates into an Obama-Richardson ticket remains to be seen. It is also much too early to tell if Richardson’s announcement will deliver the Latino vote. Texas and California have long voted and Florida will not hold another primary.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Passport breach, a big endorsement and more Wright stuff
The blogosphere and the news wires are reporting that the passport of Sen. Obama was breached at least three times since January, you can read all about it here. The State Department is denying any political motivation but when you hear reports that Obama was prevented from traveling to Indonesia for at least seven months, it makes you wonder whether these “breaches” were in fact innocent. Also, Barack Obama picked up a big endorsement today from Latino New Mexico Governor, Bill Richardson.
I grappled with the idea of simply publishing the picture of Rev. Wright at the white house on a photo dated 9/11/98 (eerie huh?) It smacks of pure editorial sensationalism, something The Vanel Journal will try to limit going forward, but the point is that there is more to this man than is being reported. So I decided to do a little digging and found this anonymous blog and the following info from a good friend.
Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright is the son of Rev. Jeremiah and Dr. Mary Wright. His mentor was Rev. Dr. Samuel D. Proctor, pastor emeritus of the Abyssinian Baptist Church, New York. He was ordained 41 years ago and faithfully served the Trinity United Church of Christ (UCC)/(TUCC) for thirty-six years.
Rev. Wright has earned four degrees from Howard University, the University of Chicago Divinity School, and the United Theological Seminary. A respected theologian and ethnomusicologist, he has been bestowed nine honorary degrees.
He is a former marine, and served on the medical team as a cardiopulmonary technician that performed the surgeries on President Lyndon B. Johnson at the National Naval Medical Center. He has been bestowed three U.S. Presidential commendations
Pastor
Rev. Wright is the fourth pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ. When he came, there were 87 members. He grew the membership to over 8,000. Thirty-six years later, as he retires, his legacy includes more than seventy active ministries and eight corporations, including a credit union, a community development corporation, a health and hospice corporation, a higher education corporation, a day care center, two senior housing complexes, a federally chartered credit union, and an elementary school which has received a charter from the Chicago Public Schools Board of Education.
Scholar/Educator
He has published four books and numerous articles. He has mentored hundreds of clergy and for thirty-six years has taught a ministers-in-training program. Forty-two persons have finished seminary and been ordained during his pastorate. During his tenure, the Trinity UCC has given in excess of $1 million dollars in scholarships to high school graduates entering college. The church is now renowned for its benevolence and commitment to education.
The numerous gifts and donations include:
$1.5 million dollars to assist members pursuing seminary education.
$500,000 to the United Negro College Fund and over $500,000 to the Fund for Theological Education and several fully accredited (by the A.T.S.) seminaries including Chicago Theological Seminary, United Theological Seminary, The Lutheran Theological Seminary in Philadelphia and the Samuel DeWitt Proctor School of Theology at Virginia Union University.
Support for ministry and educational opportunities provided to poor blacks in Bahia (Brazil), the Caribbean and throughout Africa, with special ministries in Ghana and South Africa. Trinity UCC has been one of the largest contributors to the Our Church’s Wider Mission (OCWM) of the UCC for over 10 years.
Student of Islam and regarding his visit to Libya
Rev. Dr. JAW is a student of the history of religions. His master’s degree from the University of Chicago is in that discipline and his area of concentration as an historian of religions was Islam in West Africa. While a student at the University of Chicago (U of C) he studied with the esteemed Islamic professor, Dr. Fazlur Rahman.
You can get the full bio here.
Rev. Wright has been active in Chicago politics for more than four decades and I am sure that he has met and crossed paths with many more politians than Sen. Obama, including the Clintons, as evidenced by the picture in the previous post. I surely hope that we can now move on and discuss the real issues affecting our nation rather than rely on soundbites and the next "gotcha" moment.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
An Obama-Hagel ticket?
Of course I do assume that he does win the nomination.
Obama will need to make a bold move in naming his VP, and Chuck Hagel, the moderate Republican from Nebraska and frequent bush critic would do just that.
Hagel was quoted:
"In the current impasse, an independent candidate for the presidency, or a bipartisan unity ticket ... could be appealing to Americans,"
Sen. Hagel, a war veteran, brings his vast experience and balance to a Democratic ticket. He would be a welcome change from the partisan politics that we have grown accustomed to in the past administrations. Obama should go a step further and name potential members of his cabinet that includes both Republicans and Democrats. These moves could put jittery independent voters at ease in November.
Obama does have other excellent choices for VP: former Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA), Gov. Tim Kaine (D-VA) or perhaps Gov. Sebelius (D-KS). Hagel, given his history in the senate, would be a better fit to promote a bipartisan unity ticket. The Nebraska senator was also quoted as saying that the US may need another party. This is yet another warning to the Democratic Party. We may see a third party headed by Obama if he is somehow denied the nomination.
THE SPEECH and its historic significance
Unless a last minute deal is struck, Michigan and Florida will not hold another primary. This is bad news for the Hillary camp who was counting on the inclusion of both states to help narrow Sen. Obama's lead. She can only hope for a major blunder by Obama or somehow put together a string of impressive victories that gives her the lead in the popular vote.
While she is expected to do very well in Pennsylvania, Obama could win most of the May contests to seal the nomination. He is favored in NC, and Indiana, due its proximity to Illinois, will be very competitive. Sen. Clinton will make a last ditch effort to appeal to the superdelates but I don't think they will be in the mood to overturn the will of the voters, especially following THE SPEECH.
Polls do show that Clinton has gained some ground, but in one speech, Obama was able to seize the moment and raise the national discourse regarding race to a level no one had ever achieved. It was a turning point in a primary battle that showcased the dueling isms represented by the civil rights and the feminist movements. Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama represent the legacy of the two movements. We are watching history in the making and it is a shame that their parallel but divergent paths crossed at the same moment in time.
In his a recent New York Times article, Mark Leibovich wrote:
“It brings to mind that the civil rights movement and the women’s movement have a long, complicated history dating back to abolitionism and the origins of modern feminism. While they have been philosophical allies, sharing goals and ideals, there have also been periodic collisions that could bespeak an inevitable friction”
It is a friction that has manifested in the democratic primary race. The fact is Clinton should have run in 2004, it would have been bold and her confrontational approach would have repelled the swiftboat attacks that killed John Kerry’s candidacy. Instead, she chose to play it safe and used her brief senate career to bolster her eventual run at the white house. She never figured that a freshman senator would have the audacity to run against her.
History is once again repeating itself. During the abolitionist movement, Frederick Douglas and Elizabeth Cady Stanton had an eerily similar bitter battle over the right to vote. Douglas won that battle with the passage of the 15th amendment.
Clinton as she fights for the nomination appears to be at the wrong end of the historical tide and after THE SPEECH, Obama may have sealed her fate.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Obama's speech on race
Sen. Obama just gave a much anticipated speech today addressing issues of race and comments made by his former pastor, Rev. Wright.
The speech was historic, delivered at the National Constitution Center with a backdrop of several American flags, it provided an atmosphere of a presidential State of the Union address rather than a political stump speech. It was also brilliant and inspiring, yet very subdued. There was a sense that the senator tried to contain his usual lofty rhetoric. Sen. Obama hit a home run today by addressing one of the most divisive topics plaguing our nation. He provided some insight into the complexities of the man who aspires to become the fist black president of the United States.
Obama could have easily taken the easy road by denouncing and rejecting as most politicians do tend to shy away from the subject of race and religion. Unlike Romney who refered to his Mormon faith only once, he invoked the name of his pastor many times throughout the speech tackling the issue head on, embracing his racial identity while forcing his audience to face the issue of race relations.
“I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton’s Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I’ve gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world’s poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.”
Sen. Obama did not shy away from the Rev. Wright controversy and truthfully acknowledged his presence at some of the sermons:
“Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely.”
He refused to denounce his former pastor by announcing that he can “no more disown him than I can disown the black community” or my white grandmother who “has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe”. He also challenged America to look at the race issue while noting the anger that belies Rev. Wright’s controversial statements is real, powerful and cannot be wished away.
The speech worked but one only can wait and wonder whether it will ease the anxieties of white working class voters who are crucial to his success.
The full text of the speech can be found here.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Michigan redo in trouble?
The proposed revote in Michigan appears to be in trouble as lawmakers are unable to agree, in principle, on the language of a law needed to allow the primary.
Here is an excerpt:
"She is in a hunt for delegates. Why this sudden pull out all the stops to give Hillary Clinton every opportunity to try to catch up? Guess what? It's not going to happen. This legislator is not going to facilitate it."
Meanwhile, Florida's dealine will pass soon and it is unlikely that a last minute deal will be struck.
UPDATE: Florida Democratic Party says it will not hold second primary
Obama and the Wright stuff
Over the weekend, Sen. Obama was dogged by reports of his relationship with Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., the controversial pastor of the United Church of Christ. The media and the conservative blogosphere worked themselves into a frenzy these past few days trying to connect Obama to statements made by Rev. Wright. The Obama campaign attempted to temper the growing firestorm by publishing this statement in The Huffington post.
The question is: Can we really hold a candidate responsible for disparaging remarks made by one of his supporters especially after he has denounced them? McCain faced a similar situation with pastor John Hagee not too long ago.
More importantly, there is a clear disparity in the reporting of Obama’s African American pastor and other white evangelicals such as Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and their ilk.
Glenn Greenwald opines:
"(1) Given their close and long-standing personal relationship, does Wright merit more scrutiny vis-a-vis Obama than white, radical evangelical ministers merit vis-a-vis Republican politicians? and,
(2) Are the statements of white evangelical ministers subjected to the same standards of judgment as those being applied to Wright's statements?
Even if the answer to (1) is "yes," that doesn't change the fact that the answer to (2) is a resounding "no."
Although some of the reports have been discredited (see here), Greenwald is correct, there is something else happening here, we are witnessing the ghettoizing of Obama’s base in order to erode his support amongst mainstream white voters. The Obama camp can ill afford a mild response; the Wright controversy if handled properly, can provide him with an opportunity to talk about and faith and patriotism.
In the end, none of the candidates have control over who supports their respective campaigns, but the record does suggest that reporting on this topic has not been consistent.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Michigan redo possible
It appears that we are closing in on a deal for a possible Michigan re-vote. If it occurs, a primary would take place June 3. There are some logistics that need to be finalized and both campaigns would have to agree on the proposed plan.
This should compel both camps to negotiate a settlement for Florida, say a 50-50 split on the pledged delegates?
The Vanel Journal has always maintained that a split of the delegates is the best way to resolve the impasse and according to reports on MSNBC, it appears that we are heading that way.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Obama Campaign Responds to Clinton E-mail
This is from the NPR website..
Wednesday morning, the Clinton campaign sent reporters and bloggers covering the campaign a statement that consisted of questions and comments under the title of "Keystone Test: Obama Losing Ground."
The Obama campaign's communications department decided to annotate those questions and comments with some comments of their own... and boy, they held nothing back.
Below you'll find the annotated e-mail that has been making the rounds of the media. The Obama campaign's comments are in bold.
To: Interested Parties
From: Clinton Campaign
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Re: Keystone Test: Obama Losing Ground [Get ready for a good one.]
The path to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue goes through Pennsylvania so if Barack Obama can't win there, how will he win the general election?
[Answer: I suppose by holding obviously Democratic states like California and New York, and beating McCain in swing states like Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Virginia and Wisconsin where Clinton lost to Obama by mostly crushing margins. But good question.]
After setbacks in Ohio and Texas, Barack Obama needs to demonstrate that he can win the state of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is the last state with more than 15 electoral votes on the primary calendar and Barack Obama has lost six of the seven other largest states so far -- every state except his home state of Illinois.
[If you define "setback" as netting enough delegates out of our 20-plus-point wins in Mississippi and Wyoming to completely erase any delegate advantage the Clinton campaign earned out of March 4th, then yeah, we feel pretty setback.]
Pennsylvania is of particular importance, along with Ohio, Florida and Michigan, because it is dominated by the swing voters who are critical to a Democratic victory in November. No Democrat has won the presidency without winning Pennsylvania since 1948. And no candidate has won the Democratic nomination without winning Pennsylvania since 1972.
[What the Clinton campaign secretly means: PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT WE'VE LOST 14 OF THE LAST 17 CONTESTS AND SAID THAT MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA WOULDN'T COUNT FOR ANYTHING. Also, we're still trying to wrap our minds around the amazing coincidence that the only "important" states in the nominating process are the ones that Clinton won.]
But the Obama campaign has just announced that it is turning its attention away from Pennsylvania.
[Huh?]
This is not a strategy that can beat John McCain in November.
[I don't think Clinton's strategy of losing in state after state after promising more of the same politics is working all that well either.]
In the last two weeks, Barack Obama has lost ground among men, women, Democrats, independents and Republicans -- all of which point to a candidacy past its prime.
["A candidacy past its prime." These guys kill me.]
For example, just a few weeks ago, Barack Obama won 68% of men in Virginia, 67% in Wisconsin and 62% in Maryland. He won 60% of Virginia women and 55% of Maryland women. He won 62% of independents in Maryland, 64% in Wisconsin and 69% in Virginia. Obama won 59% of Democrats in Maryland, 53% in Wisconsin and 62% in Virginia. And among Republicans, Obama won 72% in both Virginia and Wisconsin.
But now Obama's support has dropped among all these groups.
[That's true, if you don't count all the winning we've been up to. As it turns out, it's difficult to maintain 40-point demographic advantages, even over Clinton]
In Mississippi, he won only 25% of Republicans and barely half of independents. In Ohio, he won only 48% of men, 41% of women and 42% of Democrats. In Texas, he won only 49% of independents and 46% of Democrats. And in Rhode Island, Obama won just 33% of women and 37% of Democrats.
[I'm sympathetic to their attempt to parse crushing defeats. And I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's full-throated endorsement of Clinton didn't make any difference. Right]
Why are so many voters turning away from Barack Obama in state after state?
[You mean besides the fact that we're ahead in votes, states won and delegates?]
In the last few weeks, questions have arisen about Obama's readiness to be president. In Virginia, 56% of Democratic primary voters said Obama was most qualified to be commander-in-chief. That number fell to 37% in Ohio, 35% in Rhode Island and 39% in Texas.
[Only the Clinton campaign could cherry pick states like this. But in contrast to their logic, in the most recent contest of Mississippi, voters said that Obama was more qualified to be commander in chief than Clinton by a margin of 55-42.]
So the late deciders -- those making up their minds in the last days before the election -- have been shifting to Hillary Clinton. Among those who made their decision in the last three days, Obama won 55% in Virginia and 53% in Wisconsin, but only 43% in Mississippi, 40% in Ohio, 39% in Texas and 37% in Rhode Island.
[If only there were enough late deciders for the Clinton campaign to actually be ahead, they would really be on to something.]
If Barack Obama cannot reverse his downward spiral with a big win in Pennsylvania, he cannot possibly be competitive against John McCain in November.
[If they are defining downward spiral as a series of events in which the Clinton campaign has lost more votes, lost more contests and lost more delegates to us ... I guess we will have to suffer this horribly painful slide all the way to the nomination and then on to the White House.]
[Thanks for the laughs guys. This was great.]
Redo for Michigan and FLA?--Unlikely
There is considerable momentum for a redo in Michigan and Florida. The Washington post has obtained a memo that outlines a plan for a Florida revote on June 3. The plan, a primary vote by mail, is already being challenged by the nine Florida Democratic congressmen.
This is a bad idea that encourages states to do the same and I doubt that all of the parties will come to a mutually acceptable agreement. Apart from the many objections and legalities of the vote by mail process, there is the issue of money and timing. The primary calendar is running out and the states refuse to pay for it. Clinton, who won both primaries virtually uncontested, is hoping that the delegates are seated as is.
When she was questioned on the issue of fairness, she said:
"That was his choice, remember," she said. "There was no rule or requirement that he take his name off the ballot, and his supporters ran a very aggressive campaign to try to get people to vote uncommitted. So it wasn't that he didn't participate at all. In fact there was a real effort to get people to vote uncommitted, and I still won 55 percent of the vote."
I wonder if she would have had the same sentiment if she was leading in the delegate count?
The only way to solve this debacle is to seat the delegates, splitting them evenly, while allowing the candidates to hammer it out in the remaining states. Both states were warned of the consequences of their actions yet proceed to hold the earlier primaries. Gov. Granholm and Gov. Crist are not honest brokers--Granholm is a Clinton superdelegate and Crist is a potential McCain VP nominee who would love to see the Democrats in a protracted primary battle.
Update: As stated above, the new plan is to split the delegates evenly.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
The marginalization of Barack Obama.
Barack Obama scored a decisive victory in the Mississippi primary yesterday by trouncing Clinton 61-37, adding to his delegate lead. However, the democratic battle for the nomination is taking a troubling turn towards race baiting and marginalization, a tactic being championed by Clinton hack du jour, Geraldine Ferraro.
What is clearly being lost in the media is that she has done this before- to Jesse Jackson in 1988. “Former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."
One cannot help but wonder if the campaign’s sudden shift toward racial polarization wasn’t suggested and pushed by Ferraro herself.
In this scathing editorial in the NYT, Orlando Patterson writes that the 3 a.m. ad:
“mimics a similar ad made for Walter Mondale in his 1984 campaign for the Democratic nomination. What bothers me is the difference between this and the Mondale ad. The Mondale ad directly and unequivocally played on the issue of experience. The danger was that the red telephone might be answered by someone who was “unsure, unsteady, untested.” Why do I believe this? Because the phone and Mr. Mondale are the only images in the ad. Fair game in the normal politics of fear.”
Oh the irony does not stop there. Here is another blog excerpt.
"In early May 1984, when talk of a Mondale-Hart ticket began to circulate, O'Neill made a preemptive strike. "I have a candidate. Her name is Geraldine Ferraro. She's from New York. She's a Catholic. She's been an effective member and she's very smart," he announced. ...
"Tip very clearly saw the need for a little bit of pizzazz. He also recognized it was time," said Ferraro."
Ferraro's recent diatribes in the media is a clear attempt to marginalize Sen. Barack Obama and his accomplishments. Clinton has given up on the black vote and is on a mission to scare rural white voters into supporting her. The campaign's tepid response to Ferraro's comments indicates that she has secretly endorsed this move as a last ditch effort to steer voters away from Sen. Obama. The brilliance of this move is that she is using an African-American woman, Maggie Williams, and a purported democratic trailblazer, Ms. Ferraro to do her bidding, shielding herself from criticism while she stays on message.
The Clintons recent suggestion that Obama could be offered a VP slot is both outrageous and condescending. Howard Wolfson, a Clinton campaign spokeman, in a recent conference call stated that Obama had not passed a yet undeclared national security threshold but could do so by the Democratic convention in August.
Unbelievable. Is there a national security boot camp that Sen. Obama should attend to bolster his credentials by summer?
The sad thing is that these incredulous moves may actually work if the Obama camp fails to properly address them by using their own surrogates. Sen. Obama will need to prove his mettle against the Clinton machine in order to claim the nomination. In the end, he will be a much better candidate ready to face whatever comes his way this November.
UPDATE: Ferraro quits
Gov. Spitzer resigns.
Well it's official, Gov. Eliot Spitzer has resigned. A tragic end to what was once a promising career. Spitzer, a brilliant state AG, was never the politician he aimed to be. His short tenure in the New York governor's mansion was littered with multiple missteps (trooper gate and the driver license issue) that gave even his most fervent supporters reason to question his political acumen.
This was no doubt a political witch hunt, but one he brought upon himself by making numerous enemies during his rise to governor and casting himself as a moral crusader. A banner no one can realistically uphold without it crashing down.
Spitzer's meteoric rise and fall is a tragedy that will be debated and studied for years to come.
Here is the video:
Source
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Republicans to impeach Spitzer unless he quits
New York Republicans will seek to impeach Gov. Eliot Spitzer if the does not quit in 48 hours.
Stay tuned...
UPDATE:
A top legislative staffer says N.Y. Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who is linked to a prostitution ring, is holding transition meetings.
Obama is winning because he is Black
Geraldine Ferraro made some incendiary statements recently regarding Senator Barack Obama’s candidacy. Ms Ferraro, if you can remember was part of the Mondale-Ferraro team that benefited from a superdelegate vote when they chose Mondale over Gary Hart at the 1984 convention. Reagan won by a landslide.
She was quoted as saying:
“I think what America feels about a woman becoming president takes a very secondary place to Obama's campaign - to a kind of campaign that it would be hard for anyone to run against," she said. "For one thing, you have the press, which has been uniquely hard on her. It's been a very sexist media. Some just don't like her. The others have gotten caught up in the Obama campaign.” After the Spitzer scandal yesterday, we now have yet another Clinton superdelegate taking attention away from her campaign
The Obama camp issued a statement demanding that Clinton denounce this statement and Susan Rice, one of Obama's foreign policy advisors, was on MSNBC this morning demanding that Clinton "repudiate" the statement.
It also appears that they’ve taken a more aggressive approach in addressing Clinton's repeated attacks. Greg Craig, senior advisor for Obama, released the following statement today:
“When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of experience, it is important that you have evidence to support that claim. Hillary Clinton’s argument that she has passed “the Commander- in-Chief test” is simply not supported by her record.
There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton played an important domestic policy role when she was First Lady. It is well known, for example, that she led the failed effort to pass universal health insurance. There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue – not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.
When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims – i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign – would conclude that Senator Clinton’s claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.” You can read the entire memo from the TPM website.
Mississippi votes today and Obama should easily carry the state, then it is on to the next battleground state of Pennsylvania, where Clinton is heavily favored.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Spitzer admits involvement in prostitution ring.
The Vanel Journal normally deals with national politics but this is too good to pass up!
As someone who grew up in New York City, I am very disappointed. Eliot Spitzer admitted to taking part of a prostitution ring today in a startling revelation that could sink his political career. Spitzer, known for his crackdowns during his tenure as New York’s Attorney General, had reached near legendary status by successfully prosecuting many corporations and individuals. He was dubbed the "Elliot Ness of NY" after the big screen character in The Untouchables.
Republicans already smell blood and are calling for the governor’s resignation. Should he resign, he would be succeeded by Lt. Governor David Patterson, the legally blind African-American lawmaker who was the first to hold that position.
This scandal could not have come at a worse moment when Democrats are locked in a tough primary battle; it may affect the November elections.
He will be forced to resign..stay tuned
Source
UPDATE: Sources indicate that Eliot Spitzer will resign
Source-Fox news
Will the Democratic Party leader please stand?
It is hard to fathom that democrats could manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. In a year where we have an unpopular war, a slowing economy (no R word here!), and an incumbent president with very low approval ratings, democrats are working hard towards a devastating loss in November. This is a failure of leadership.
The current Michigan-Florida (yes Florida again)debacle and a nasty primary battle threaten to split the party in two. Howard Dean, the Dem party chair, has all but deferred the problem to others who may have self serving agendas in seeing a revote take place.
Senators Clinton and Obama are locked in a primary fight that resembles a republican swiftboat onslaught. If you didn’t know any better, you would think Obama was already running against the republican candidate.
Then there is the issue of the superdelegates, will they respect the will of the voters or will they align themselves with a candidate based on future favors and promises? In the next few weeks, a deal must be struck to unite the two warring factions within the party and sort out this revote mess. Mr. Dean, your leadership is sorely needed.
Meanwhile, Sen. McCain is busy uniting the republicans and taking notes. The current primary battle is providing much ammunition to the GOP.
Sen. Obama to attend the Clinton "How to be a Veep seminar"
Obama not ready for VP, but could be by this summer?
The Clinton camp under fire for their apparent doublespeak, is trying to clarify their position that Obama could be offered the number two spot on the ticket.
The topic came up on a recent conference call where Clinton chief spokesman, Howard Wolfson was asked to comment on the Clinton offer and he replied " It is possible Obama could meet that threshold by this summer's Democratic convention."
Huh? Isn't he leading in delegates, races won and the popular vote? Just a thought.
Here is Sen. Obama answering the Veep question..
Sources:TheHill.com, MSNBC.COM
Should primaries be closed?
Amid persistent rumors of the “Rush Limbaugh effect” in Texas, and the potential mischief that republicans may cause in the remaining democratic primaries, it is a topic that needs to be explored, especially now that John McCain has secured the nomination.
Did the republicans cross over in Texas and Ohio to save Hillary’s campaign?
The exit polls from both states prove inconclusive, nonetheless, there were republicans voting in both primaries.
This brings us to Mississippi.
Last year, the Democratic Party of Mississippi sued the state alleging that republicans were crossing over to vote for the weaker candidate in the democratic primary. On June 8, 2007, US District Judge Allen Peppers ruled in favor of the Democratic Party of Mississppi and ordered the state to provide a mechanism to close the primaries in future elections. The case was quickly appealed thus the upcoming primary on March 11 will remain open.
The solution is to have a modified primary system where registered republicans and democrats are restricted to their respective primaries and independents are free to vote for either party.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Obama for VP?
The Clinton camp has been dropping not so subtle hints that they would accept a Clinton-Obama ticket. Bill Clinton was quoted the other day in Mississippi stating that a "joint ticket would be unstoppable". Obama quickly rejected that idea and for good reason. This is a brilliant tactic from the Clintons, a devious attempt to get voters to choose Hillary in the hopes of a two for one deal: Vote Hillary and you also get Obama!
After winning Wyoming and Mississippi, Obama will have an insurmountable lead in pledged delegates. If he can carry both PA (long shot) and NC, he will be in a strong position to claim the nomination barring any mishaps. The Clintons realize that they need Obama and his supporters but I am not sure that the opposite is true. He has much better choices without the Clinton baggage.
Here is my VP shortlist:
Sam Nunn -Well respected former Georgia Senator, brings foreign policy experience and could put Georgia in play.
Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA)- War hero, puts VA in play.
Gov. Tim Kaine (D-VA)-Even better choice, will help carry VA.
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius-One of his national campaign chairs, she would help with the midwestern states and the women vote.
Gov. Janet Napolitano (D-NV)- Same as above but Sebelius is a much better choice.
Chuck Hagel –Would show him as a unifier but could be chosen for a cabinet position.
Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IND) –Long shot.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Superdelegates Snub Their Noses at their Constituents
How can any elected official look their constituents voters in the face and say, "I know you voted for Obama (or Clinton, or whatever other candidate), but I know what's best, you don't, so my vote is pledged for Clinton (or Obama, or whatever other candidate the majority of constituents voted for)."
Crap. He's voting for her because of his own personal interests and loyalties, instead of listening to the voice of the people who put him in office in the first place.
Personally, I think this is an out-and-out, disrespectful snub of his constituents. They were "intelligent" enough to respond to his campaign pleas by voting him into office, but they are not intelligent enough to vote for anyone else. How DARE he? The next time he is up for re-election, this should be rock-solid grounds for every single one of his constituents to vote him out of office.
(These Superdelegates are shedding light on a bigger problem in Black communities that are represented by "old guard", establishment-loyal politicos. This is concrete evidence that when it comes down to being loyal to the constituents who elected them in the first place, or to the "establishment" that pulls the puppet strings, gives them their paycheck, and makes them feel like part of the club, well....
And speaking of local politicos disrespecting the voice of their constituents...check out THESE facts up in Harlem:
Barack Obama defeated Hillary Clinton in Inez Dickens’ Council District 9.
He beat Hillary Clinton by 1,970 votes in the 9th Council District on Feb. 5, 2008.
He was elected by a majority of the Voters in the 9th Council District.
He has received $0 from Inez Dickens.
He was chosen by the People of Harlem.
Inez Dickens is the Councilwoman for the 9th Council District in Harlem.
She is a delegate who will vote for the Presidential Nominee on behalf of Harlemites in her district.
She says she will vote for Hillary Clinton at the Democratic Convention.
She donated $1,250 to Hillary Clinton.
She has ignored the People of Harlem
Click HERE to read the article, with photos, on the New York Times website.
OBAMA-HILLARY OR HILLARY-OBAMA?
Using Rovean tactics with NAFTA-Gate and the red phone ad, Hillary Clinton was able to rescue her campaign from the brink of disaster. In Ohio, She effectively knocked Obama off message when he failed to properly respond to the scurrilous accusation that his campaign contacted the Canadian embassy to deny statements he made during the Ohio debate. The infamous red phone ad coupled with support from Latino voters (she won that demographic 67-31) helped her carry Texas.
The Obama camp must retool their message and get tougher. Attacks from the Clinton camp should not go unanswered and more effective counterpunching is needed. Mr. Obama needs to realize that he is in a street fight, he must put down the microphone and get some boxing gloves. The Clintons are much better in a brawl and some democrats do want that quality. In the next few weeks, expect sharper attacks from Obama and howls of protests from the Clinton camp that the inspirational agent of change is a typical politician. Yes the race will get nasty, just how much?--remains to be seen.
Sen. Obama is favored tomorrow in Wyoming and will win Mississippi on Tuesday. Clinton is hoping for another big victory in Pennsylvania to bolster her argument that she has been winning the “states that matter” since it is mathematically impossible for her to catch Obama in pledged delegates. Clinton may in fact be secretly planning to force her way on the ticket should she lose the nomination. This could be the only way the Democrats avoid the potential disaster of a divided electorate. A neutral party statesman (Al Gore where are you?) may step in to broker a deal pairing these two dynamic personalities.
Can they work together and who will be number two? These next few weeks will provide more insight.
Updated link--Clinton wants united ticket
Why a MI and FLA redo is a bad idea
The biggest proponents of a Florida revote, Gov. Charlie Crist (R-FLA), Sen. Nelson (D-FLA) and Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D-MI) have ulterior motives. Crist in particular, the wildly popular Governor from FLA, is on the short list for McCain’s VP. He would love to see the Democrats slug it out for a few more weeks. Senator Nelson and Gov. Granholm are staunch Hillary supporters, both are hoping for a Clinton rebound that will help her seal the nomination.
How did we get here in the first place?
Both state parties were warned by the DNC that they would be penalized if they chose to skirt the rules and move up their primaries. They ignored these warnings and proceeded to hold early primaries, thus creating the current debacle. New primary elections in Florida and Michigan are a terrible idea that will encourage more states to follow suit. The DNC has set rules governing the primary electoral process and all of the candidates agreed to abide by those rules. Sen. Clinton not surprisingly has had a change of heart. She desperately needs the delegates if she has any hopes of winning the nomination.
The charges of voter disenfranchisement being leveled by Gov. Crist are disingenuous when it was his state legislature who voted to ignore the rules. There is also the cost issue, who will pay for it? Michigan and Florida want the DNC to pay for their folly, so far the DNC is balking and rightfully so.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Is Obama the Antichrist?
Mediamatters.org recently ran a story on Glen Beck's recent interview with evangelist John Hagee, the controversial pastor from Texas.
Superdelegates should not decide the nominee
Geraldine Ferraro, a Clinton supporter, recently wrote a New York Times article arguing for the independence of the superdelegates.
Before addressing her arguments, some added history to her piece:
-1984 Super-delegates chose Mondale-Ferraro over Gary Hart ( remember his sex scandal?)
-In 1988, Dukkakis led in pledged delegates and Rev. Jesse Jackson had accumulated roughly one thousand delegates from the primaries. Prior to ceding the nomination, he brokered a deal called Rule 13B that allowed delegates to be proportionately awarded whenever a candidate obtained at least 15% of the vote, going forward.
Ms. Ferraro is correct when she states that the caucuses are not fully representative of the democratic electorate. The caucuses do tend to cater to the most fervent party activists. The superdelegates coupled with rule 13B, act as safeguards to prevent extreme left activists from nominating undesirable candidates doomed to fail in the general election, while providing them with a platform. Superdelegates are supposed to be a buffer to irrational political activism, not become King and Queen makers. However, no one expected two dynamic and highly qualified candidates in the same year, thus the conundrum.
Ms. Ferraro neglects to mention that prior to Tuesday, Sen. Obama had won 11 straight victories encompassing both caucuses and primaries. His campaign recently eclipsed the 1 million donor milestone and attracted countless of young voters who have never participated in an election. The sinister vote that she alludes to in her article may in fact be Obama converts who are tired of the partisanship. She must make the case for the independence of the superdelegates since it is mathematically impossible for Clinton to garner enough pledged delegates to secure the nomination, regardless of the outcome in the remaining states. She will try to make the case that by winning larger blue states, she deserves the nomination. That is an empty argument, the candidate with the most pledged delegates and a lead in the popular vote should be the nominee.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Clinton wins and McCain clinches..
Hillary Clinton (D-NY) scored some much needed wins last night vowing to keep fighting, political dynasties do tend to die hard. Clinton was able to rally her core constituencies, the working class, older voters (women in particular) and the Latino vote in Texas.
Barack Obama (D-IL) still leads in the delegate count, however he needs to respond better to attacks and retool his message to better connect with older voters and the working class.
John McCain (R-AZ) as expected, clinched the Republican nomination, forcing out Mike Huckabee, who conceded last night.
Stay tuned for full analysis of last night's results and much more.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Voters go to the polls today..
The Republican primary contest should be wrapped up by this evening. Every major poll shows that McCain enjoys a comfortable lead. Huckabee has vowed to stay in the race but I imagine that his run will end tonight after McCain reaches 1025 delegates and is awarded the nomination. Unlike the Democratic civil war, the republican primary has been remarkably civil.
Still, a few questions linger for McCain..
Does McCain still have issues with conservatives?
Can Huckabee pull an upset and fight another day?
Will the NAFTA fiasco affect the OHIO primary?
Fireworks in the Canadian Parliament...
Monday, March 3, 2008
The Clinton Experience....
Please click this link to hear the vast Clinton experience.
On a recent conference call, Slate's John Dickerson asked:
"What foreign policy moment would you point to in Hillary's career where she's been tested by crisis?"
source
Will Billary destroy the Democratic Party or are they up to something else?
The Clintons seem to be employing a scorched earth policy in their primary battle with Barack Obama. How else do you explain the recent attacks ads?
Is it their intent to damage Obama in the primaries, where even if he wins, McCain can move in for the kill in the fall? Sen. Clinton would then attempt to reemerge as the Democratic Party savior in 2012, political dynasties do die hard.
There might be a more sinister plot at hand. The Clinton camp may have realized that the 2008 nomination battle is lost so they are positioning themselves to force a deal to allow HRC on the ticket as VP to avoid a humiliating defeat. Since it is mathematically impossible for her to garner enough delegates to overtake Sen. Obama’s lead, she may threaten a protracted primary battle and a brokered convention to compel Obama to select her as his running mate. She can then save face joining the Dem ticket under the guise of party unity. The Obama camp may reluctantly agree to such a deal, much to the chagrin of his supporters, to avoid a nasty battle. All of this hinges on whether she is able to carry OH and RI Tuesday night. If she does not win, he may decide to appeal directly to the superdelegates and force her out of the race.
The New Electorate: The transformational change of the Republican and Democratic parties.
We are currently witnessing a paradigm shift in both the Republican and Democratic parties if current trends continue. In the next few months, we may see the end of Reagan style politics coupled with the demise of the Clintonian era.
The George W. Bush presidency may have signaled the end of the Reagan era for the Republicans. The trifecta of a candidate with an aggressive unilateral foreign policy, fiscal responsibility and social conservatism may be at an end if the republicans lose this November. A McCain loss in the general election will trigger a civil war between the fiscal and social conservative factions of the GOP. After the dust settles, the Republicans will need to consider electing a candidate with a much broader appeal to the electorate. Think Gov. Charlie Crist (R-FLA) or a Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA) type.
A potential McCain-Obama match up conjures a metaphoric image that couldn’t be more drastic: Senator John McCain (R-AZ), the 71 year old war hero running against Barack Obama, the 46 year old senator from Illinois. The stark contrast of experience versus change, young versus old, and establishment versus young upstart, immediately comes to mind. The Democrats have been energized by this relative newcomer who has mobilized millions of young voters to the democratic process with a Hope/Change mantra, whereas Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has attempted to run as an establishment candidate with the most experience. One of the problems plaguing Senator Clinton is that she is simply not connecting with this message and the democratic electorate is clamoring for change. Furthermore, she has allowed Obama to capture the message of hope and inspiration, a platform her husband Bill Clinton who ironically is from Hope, AR successfully used in 1992 against George H.W. Bush. She has run one of the most bizarre and dysfunctional campaigns in recent history and as a result, we may see the end of the Clintonian era of presidential politics tomorrow night.
