Buck Naked Politics

Kathleen Sebelius, the Veepstakes, and the glass ceiling

by Adam |  There's loads of speculation about the VP.  The most commonly floated choices are Kathleen Sebelius, Tim Kaine, Joe Biden, and Evan Bayh.  Of those four, I'd be happy with the first two, and worried about the other two (Biden because of his mouth, age, and the skeletons in his closet, and Bayh because he would cost the Democrats a spot in the Senate, barring a miracle turnaround in the Indiana governor's race).  I'd also be quite happy with Bill Richardson or Brian Schweitzer, but the former seems to have dropped out of the running (presumaby, like Jim Webb, he was a bit too controversial and knew he would fail the vetting process) and the latter, unfortunately, has never really picked up steam.  (Don't be shocked if Schweitzer gets the pick, though - the Obama campaign is not very leaky and has their cards close to their chest on this one.

Hillary: Bush Adm'n to Undermine Women on Contraception Issues

by Damozel | I am supporting Obama for president now, so don't start on me if you're one of his supporters, but I'm nevertheless filled with pride that Hillary---my choice for the nomination---is justifying my faith in her. She has (in her words) 'sound[ed] the alarm' regarding the Department of Health and Human Service's pending regulations that will redefine common forms of contraception as 'abortion.'  What's in a name?:

These proposed regulations set to be released next week will allow healthcare providers to refuse to provide contraception to women who need it. (HuffPost)

That's bad.  That's very, very bad.  The ramifications are serious, both for those who think it’s not the government’s business to impose its current ideology on health care issues such as availability of contraception to the poor or who are already grumbling about all the women on welfare who expect taxpayers to pay for their children’s basic necessities. 

Hillary & Obama, Fund-Raising (and The Amazing Interactive Map), John McCain, & More About Jesse Jackson

by Damozel | This is an AP article saying that Bill Clinton is ready and willing to do whatever Obama asks of him, including (maybe) speaking on his behalf at the convention.   I won't quote from it, but I'm thinking it's bad news for PUMAs who want to believe that Hillary wants them to keep passing around their slam books and making plans to disrupt the convention.  Bill sounds...conciliatory.  Obama should probably consider it.  (If you are thinking 'Doubtful,' read on.)

Meanwhile, Mayor Bloomberg is planning a fete for Hillary to welcome her back.

Want to see who is donating to the candidates?  Check out this interactive map.  Seriously, it's cool -- Deb's going to love it.

Obama & the Miffening* of Dem Insiders...

By Damozel | According to The Politico (via Alegre). relations between Obama and Capitol Hill are a leetle strained.  Apparently, some Dems aren't feeling so much Obamamania anymore.

The article describes them as 'miffed.'   

*Please don't email me.  I know it really isn't a word.  I just think it should be.

FISA: How They Voted and What it Means

by Damozel | This piece of legislation --- and what Congress has done to the fourth amendment---which protects the privacy of ordinary citizens from unreasonable invasion by the government ---  matters. 

Those who defended the telecoms for breaking federal law at the request of the Bush administration kept talking about the telecoms' subjection to  'the heavy hand of government.'  This was always spurious argument in the case of the telecoms, who had no more obligation than you or I to comply with an unlawful demand to break the law (none) and the same obligation as you or I would have to refuse to comply. And in fact, not all telecoms chose to go along with the demand.    

FISA, on the other hand, unleashes 'the heavy hand of government' on ordinary citizens.

Melissa McEwen & Maureen McCluskey: The Left's Campaign Against Hillary Clinton

by Damozel | The Guardian has an excellent two-part piece by Melissa McEwen and Maureen McCluskey, in which they track the ways in which Clinton's opponents recycled all the old anti-Hillary slurs formerly flung at her by the right.  Led by certain members of the Church of Lord Kos, supporters of Obama dug up out of the back garden the whole slop jar of gratuitous and frequently sexist insults. 

In a complete 180-degree turn, the same members of the left who had once defended Clinton against the attacks of the right wing - the trumped-up scandals and dug-up dirt that led to endless hours and millions upon millions of dollars wasted in fruitless investigations of the Clintons, their business dealings, their friends, not to mention the peculiar features of Bill's twig and berries - adopted the frames of those attacks as their own. Everything old was new again. Call it political retro chic..... By April, the blogfather Kos himself was agreeing that Clinton wasn't even to be considered a Democrat anymore. (The Guardian, part 1)

WSJ Compares Obama to Bush; Hillary Supporters Are Still Holding Out; What John McCain Didn't Learn from Vietnam

by Damozel | Is it really Obama who is running for Bush's third term? the Wall Street Journal sternly inquires. First Republicans called him the most liberal Senator ever --- which was never true --- and now they are trying to have it the other way.   It turns out that Obama is deviously taking all McCain's positions before he can get round to it --- or something.    Check out The Wall Street Journal if you want to laugh. Via Steve Benen at Crooks and Liars.

Given John McCain’s record, and rhetoric, Republicans are clearly worried about how voters are going to react to the argument that McCain offers the nation “Bush’s third term.”

In fact, conservatives are so worried about it, the misguided ideologues at the Wall Street Journal editorial page have decided to make a novel argument: it’s Barack Obama, not McCain, who’s actually “running for … Bush’s third term.”

Barack Obama, Who is He?

by Damozel | On this July 4, Barack Obama is drawing a lot of criticism from some who were previously anxious to support him. 

A New York Times editorial calls out Obama for his numerous failures to support the hopes of liberals that they finally had a champion worthy of the glory of their cause.  They aren't pleased with his most recent incarnation of the swing voter's Democrat.  And it's not just the so-called 'far left' that is reeling with shock.  In fact, even very moderate Democrats --- i.e., those who support a liberal agenda without necessarily wishing to see it implemented without some concession to the feelings of the opposition --- are shocked; shocked, I tell you!--- to learn too late what Obama is really about.  Once again, I can only shrug and say, 'Weren't you listening?'

In fact,  I don't think I'm ever going to get tired of saying, 'We told you so'  to his champions on the far left.  Another time, maybe they'll read the fine print.

Why Bill ---and Certain Hillary Supporters --- Should Let Hillary Drive the Car

Posted by Damozel |  Don't get me wrong. In my opinion --- and as a Clinton supporter, I followed the exchanges extremely closely while they were happening--- Bill Clinton has every right to be angry about the way Hillary was treated by the Obama campaign.  I don't think his anger is productive, mind you; and I think he is undermining Hillary's chances.  But if Hillary values her political career, she needs to give Bill a time out. 

Hillary, as a mature woman, knows the best way to prove someone wrong is just to prove them wrong. You don't get there by sulking in your tent or complaining; you get there by rising above the slurs and gossip, as Clinton-supporter and lifelong civil rights activist Maya Angelou advised Hillary to do in this poem.  Bill used to know how to rise above the fray. Why isn't he doing it now?

To accuse someone of being a racist -- a vile thing for a person to be --- is, by definition, to accuse them of vileness.  It is a grave insult.  It seems to be these allegations that are fueling Bill Clinton's outrage and wounded feelings. Most of us would feel just the same.

U-N-I-T-Y! A Bloggerama

By Damozel | At The Moderate Voice, Joe Gandelman speculates that the wounds might be too profound to heal.  I personally doubt it.  A month in political time is equal to a year in real time.  And as the subsequent post shows, many Democrats were moved by the event and the speeches.  I can't see the sour feeling of some of the insiders having much of an effect on the average voter. 

Marc Ambinder likewise wonders whether unhappy Clinton donors can be brought into the circle and made to join in the unity boogie.  See above.

At The Reaction, Michael Stickings is optimistic that at last we're on our way:

The Long-Awaited Unity Event: 'We Are One Party'

By Damozel | Hillary pulled out all the stops for Obama at their first 'Unity' rally.  Obama said, 'She rocks.'  Well, for once in quite awhile, he's actually right.  Anyway, I'm glad they're going to pull together.  I'm not so sure they'll be able to pull the divided party together, but here's hoping they can:

Obama Weighs in Again on Telecom Amnesty...

by Damozel | And what he says isn’t going to cheer you up if you oppose it. 

It had crossed my mind that perhaps Dodd’s and Feingold’s repudiation of the bill was at least partly motivated by a wish to mitigate the disappointment many Democrats feel in Obama’s stance on FISA. I don’t really know how these things work. But after all, Obama did suggest, didn’t he, that he wasn’t happy with this part of the bill and would fight to see it removed?  Yep, that’s what he said, in the midst of explaining all the things about it he did like.

It does….grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses.

Dodd was pretty specific in the statement he made on the Senate floor concerning his reasons for opposing FISA (discussed here). He and the many Dems House Dems who opposed the ‘compromise’ bill, so-called, don’t really seem to see a crucial connection between legalizing the past actions of the telecoms and national security.

So, anyway, now that some Senators have pubicly opposed this provision, what’s Obama got to say?

Bullet-Proof Faith in Barack: Conversations I was part of Last Week

by D. Cupples | During separate conversations with three friends last week, I witnessed live in the flesh what I've seen in the media for months: unquestioning faith in Barack Obama that remains intact despite evidence that should have a shattering effect -- or at least cause a few hairline fractures.

I have not witnessed such bullet-proof faith since those few years after 9/11, during which millions of Americans (led by Limbaugh and Fox) believed that President Bush could do no wrong: a time when True Believers would point and bellow and maybe key the car of anyone who mentioned facts that might test their faith in Their President.

While lunching at a restaurant last week, a friend asked me this:

"So, Deb, have you gotten over Hillary yet?"

Obama Does a 360 on NAFTA

by Damozel | My colleague addressed Obama's professed love for 'the free market' yesterday. (BN-Politics)  Indeed, economist Paul Krugman pointed out back in January that Obama was less  progressive than either Clinton or Edwards on certain issues affecting domestic policy.  With respect to today's article in Fortune --- certain to cause alarm and despondency among progressive supporters who were carried away by his Message of Hope --- color us unsurprised.  Forewarned by Krugman and others, we checked the fine print. 

His campaign was quick to point out that this isn't really a reversal as such. He's just worked back round to his original position.

Muslim Women Barred by Obama Campaign from Photograph

by Damozel | While it's true that a certain segment of the population is hysterical about Muslims, that segment of the population isn't likely to vote for the Democrat in the next campaign and probably ought to be ignored. Anyway,  this is not the right way to handle it.  At least the campaign immediately apologized.

[B]oth [women were] Obama supporters who said they felt betrayed by their treatment at the rally. 

“This is of course not the policy of the campaign. It is offensive and counter to Obama’s commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. “We sincerely apologize for the behavior of these volunteers.” (The Politico)

Recipe-gate Part 2: A Teapot in a Tempest

by Damozel | But of course:  it's always the mid-Twentieth Century for a certain segment of the American public. Family Circle is sponsoring a bake-off between potential First Spouses.  Which one is the best role model for the homemakers of America?  As The New York Daily News says, '[T]he stakes are not small. The wives of the winners of the last four presidential elections have also won this competition.'   

So...by failing to win this competition, Michelle or Cindy may cause their husbands to lose the election.  Furthermore, they'll reveal themselves to be unfit to be a presidential spouse.  A presidential spouse needs to be a good role model, even if the spouse is Bill Clinton.  Bill submitted a recipe for oatmeal cookies.

It's worth noting that none of the spouses claims that the recipe was her --- or his --- own invention.  It's not Top Chef.   So the whole thing is kind of a farce. 

Doyle Hire: Was It A Big F*** You to Clinton & Her Supporters?

by Damozel | Hillary's being gracious about it, but her supporters are construing the Doyle hire as a slap in the face.  According to The New York Observer, a Clinton loyalist said that Clinton loyalists are 'livid.'   

Clinton loyalists view her with deep suspicion and believe that she is shopping around a book deal and acted as a background source for an extremely harsh Vanity Fair piece about Bill Clinton...."Either one of two things happen," said the bundler. "Hillary is selected as vice president and they fire Patti, or Hillary is not going to be the vice president."

Kevin Drum writes:  '[T]he developing conventional wisdom is that Team Obama is sending the same kind of message to Team Clinton that the Tattaglia family sent to the Corleones in The Godfather:...If this is true, it's beyond bizarre. Obama has every incentive in the world to make nice with Hillary...'   

Gore Endorses Obama; Patti Solis Doyle Joins Obama Campaign (and What that Means for Clinton)

by Damozel | Now that the dust has had time to settle (well, some of it), Al Gore is making a debut campaign appearance with Obama and --- in a break with precendent --- has asked supporters of AlGore.com to contribute to the Obama campaign.  Ya'll know I love Al, and I can't say no to anything he asks of me, so I guess the time has come.  It was bound to come sooner or later. After all:  I want the Dem to win, simple as that.  From The Caucus:

“Over the next four years, we are going to face many difficult challenges — including bringing our troops home from Iraq, fixing our economy, and solving the climate crisis,” Mr. Gore said. “Barack Obama is clearly the candidate best able to solve these problems and bring change to America.”

Obama thus receives the Environmentalist-in-Chief's endorsement.  Let's hope he is prepared to deserve it.   

Olbermann vs. His Demographic; Network Boss Thinks Hillary Viewers Will Come Back for More

by Damozel | I am a sufficiently committed Democrat to vote for Obama in the general election.  I think --- I say I think --- that he'll try to represent the Democratic party if elected.  I don't have to like or believe in him.  I believe in what he stands for. 

But there are some things that have happened during the primary --- and some people who helped to orchestrate them --- that I shall never, never forget or forgive. 

But it's not just me. Despite what Frank Rich, who doesn't know a thing about it, would have you believe, the anger of many of  Hillary's supporters still burns with the fury of a million white-hot suns.  There are some media figures who seem to think they can put out the blaze by pissing on us.  They're wrong. 

A Note to Hillary Supporters: Obama vs. Nobama --- How Punishing Him May Punish Hillary

by Damozel | First, let me emphasize that I am speaking only for myself and not for any of my cobloggers.

I'll say it again (and again and again):  I wanted Hillary to be the Democratic nominee and I certainly haven't cared for the way Obama's campaign and supporters have comported themselves during the primaries, but I am not going to cut off the nation's nose to spite David Axelrod's face.  Obama's political goals are more or less consistent with mine and that matters more to me at the end of the day than whether or not he's my ideal candidate.

So I am astonished that some Hillary supporters think it's more important to punish Obama than it is to repudiate the Bush administration and the GOP. Eight years, people!  Look at what eight years of GOP dominance has done to our standing in the world and our sense of ourselves as a people.  A few months of intraparty squabbling and Obama's very special brand of 'new politics' doesn't begin to compare.