Buck Naked Politics

Four Misleading Statements About Hillary Clinton?

by Damozel | In a speech  in Denver, Barack Obama made four statements about Hillary, all of which she attempts to refute at her campaign's website.  Jeralyn at Talk Left says:. 

This is a dangerous road for Obama. Check out his past support for Rumsfeld and Bush, expressed during the confirmation process of John Ashcroft. He even calls Rumsfeld "not out of the mainstream....Hillary has been the most vocal critic of President Bush and his policies among all the Democratic candidates. From the early debates, while the others criticized her because they perceived her to be the frontrunner, she kept her eye on the real enemy: President Bush, his Administration and its failed and misguided policies.

The New York Post "Endorses" Obama, Disses Hillary

by Damozel | The endorsement, so-called, which you can read here, can be summed up as follows:   If you must vote for a Democrat, vote for Obama!  He's not "Team Clinton!"  I imagine this "endorsement" will be quite welcome to Hillary.  Their approval wouldn't have done her any favors. It's really not fair on Obama, though.

Dismayingly, some of what The New York Post says about Bill Clinton's detrimental effect on Hillary's campaign, though naturally very nastily framed, isn't so different from what I've been saying myself.  Fond as I am of Bill Clinton, his "antics" (their word) certainly tarnished my excitement over the prospect of a woman in charge.  Though I'm relieved that he is now going to back off, he's done plenty of damage.

Kennedy Family Divided over Hillary and Barack (update)

by D. Cupples |  Over the last couple days, we've heard a lot about the three Kennedys who've endorsed Barack Obama: Sen. Ted Kennedy; Rep. Patrick Kennedy, Ted's son; and Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg, John F. Kennedy's daughter.  Reportedly, Robert Kennedy's widow, Ethel, also supports Obama.

What we're not hearing much about in the media is the divide in the Kennedy family, as three of the political clan's members have endorsed Hillary Clinton: former Maryland Lt. Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Robert Kennedy's eldest child; Kathleen's sister Kerry; and their brother Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (MSNBC)

Watching Hillary and Obama Watch the State of the Union Address

posted by Damozel | As far as I'm concerned, the two Democratic candidates really did steal the President's show, even though neither said a word.

Truly, it was a treat to see both of them react to the President's speech, especially during his comments on health care.  Hillary responded with averted eyes and some truly excellent slow-clapping, while Obama just scratched his chin thoughtfully.  Neither exactly rolled his or her eyes, but the sidewise averted gaze of each was the nearest thing to.  Bless them both. I wish they'd mend their fences.

Will the Polls Turn out Right re: Florida?

Posted by D. Cupples | My home state of Florida will tally its presidential primary votes today, though early voting started about two weeks ago.  At this point, it looks like Democratic voters' votes won't really count because of troubles with the national party, but mine is a big state, so people still want to see how the candidates do in Florida.

The pollsters' and pundits' failure to even hit the dartboard regarding the New Hampshire primary a few weeks ago has stoked my curiosity about how their predictions will pan out regarding Florida.  I thought I'd collect some pre-vote-count poll numbers, so that tomorrow night I can compare them to the actual results.

A One-Minute Primary Primer for Dummies

by Damozel | Face it, most of us slept through our civics class and are uninterested in process except as presented in our favorite reality shows and videogames. Fortunately, the BBC has stepped in with a one minute and ten second film that will bring you up to speed, even though the conventional wisdom it presents concerning the importance of Iowa and New Hampshire seems to have been rebutted by recent events.  The video is designed for Brits who don't understand our system.  After all, in their system, the Prime Minister is selected in under a month and you don't have to be a rich oligarch with powerful connections to run.

Anyway, if you're feeling out of the loop, check out .What is a primary? at the BBC website.  (Thanks to Cockney Robin for sending me this...)

South Carolina Dem Primary

By D. Cupples |  With 98% of the votes in, Barack Obama won the South Carolina Democratic primary with 55%,  followed by Hillary Clinton with 27%, and John Edwards with 17%. (CSPAN/AP)  More than 2,000 South Carolinians voted for candidates who had already dropped out (e.g., Biden, Dodd, Richardson).

Even some pre-primary polls (sort of) got it right this time -- at least that Obama would win by a solid margin -- which turned out to be larger than pollsters had anticipated.   Results from Zogby (released the day before the primary) put Obama at 38%, Clinton at 25%, Edwards at 21%, Other at 5%, and Undecided at 7%.

To Obama Supporters Accusing the Clintons of Blasphemy: A Counterblast

by Teh Nutroots | The LA Times snipes:  Is the Right Right On the Clintons?  I doubt it.  They've never been right about anything else.

Predictably, the piece continues the media's reality show-level coverage of the campaign. Boo hoo hoo:  the Clintons are campaigning aggressively.  They've attacked Obama's record, his public statements, and diverse other factors underlying the phenomenon that he is because they would like to win the nomination.  But apparently Obama is a sacred icon whom the grubby fingers of the rival campaign must never besmirch. 

Swift Kicks

Heh. At Jon Swift:

Michelle Malkin...wants a real man to run for President. She wants someone who will not be afraid to deport all the illegal immigrants and kiss away the Latino vote for generations or to tell people who have lost their homes to "suck it up" and get used to living in the street, and has turned her blog into a personal ad for the man of her dreams. "I need a man," she writes. "A man who can say 'No.' .....A man who won’t panic in the face of economic pain. A man who won’t succumb to media-driven sob stories. A man who can look voters, the media, and the Chicken Littles in Congress in the eye and say the three words no one wants to hear in Washington: Suck. It. Up." But so far it looks like Malkin's desire for a real man has gone unquenched and she will have to make do with her husband.

The New York Times Endorses....(Can We Have the Envelope Please?)

by Damozel | For Democrats, they pick HILLARY CLINTON.  I wish I could hear the anguished screams of Hillary-hater Maureen Dowd.  Otherwise:  nope, not surprised. 

For Republicans, they pick JOHN MCCAIN.  I wasn't expecting that, but I can't say who I expected instead.  Romney?  I don't know.  As they say, "We have strong disagreements with all the Republicans running for president. The leading candidates have no plan for getting American troops out of Iraq. They are too wedded to discredited economic theories and unwilling even now to break with the legacy of President Bush. We disagree with them strongly on what makes a good Supreme Court justice."  But they found McCain "an easy choice." I doubt this particular endorsement helps him much with the "base." Rather the reverse, I imagine.  But he's my favorite too, naturally.

Mitt Romney: Odd Republican Out?

But whyyyyyy?  He's so pretty.  He has such Reaganesque hair and such nice, gleaming teeth! But evidently the other Republicans don't like him.  John McCain seems to have compared him to a pig.  And apparently, Mike Huckabee's campaign manager has to restrain himself from knocking out Romney's nice, gleaming teeth.  Look:

With so much attention recently on the sniping between Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama on the Democratic side, the almost visceral scorn directed at Mr. Romney by his rivals has been overshadowed.

"Never get into a wrestling match with a pig,"€ Senator John McCain said in New Hampshire this month after reporters asked him about Mr. Romney. "You both get dirty, and the pig likes it."

Mike Duncan: A Man with a Plan to Beat Top Dems

posted by Damozel | Previously The Hill gave us Karl Rove's ace strategy for beating the top Dems in the campaign.  Now RNC Chairman Mike Duncan has a plan.  The Hill says that he has provided "numbers, strategy to beat top Dems." 

This should hearten the many prematurely defeated Republicans (Defeatocans?) who believe that the disastrous seven year reign of George W Bush, and the divisions among their own party, have made a Democratic upset an exercise in wishful thinking.  "Pointing to internal poll numbers, the RNC chairman repeatedly insisted that no matter who Republicans nominate, the Democratic candidate can be defeated in November."  (The Hill)   

The Vast Wingnut Jabber-palooza Celebrates Its Birthday

by Teh Nutroots | Even repeatedly wrong right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin gets things right once in awhile.

Yes, it’s been a full decade of bitter Clintonian sniping, acute paranoia, and psychological projection against conservative talk radio, conservative authors, and conservative activists. (Malkin)

Feel free to dismiss the remainder of the piece with the horse laugh it deserves.  Pretty funny when all the neocons have left is jeering at the Clintons' attempts to undermine a rival Democratic candidate (because, in contrast to the Republican primaries, people actually care).  Clearly, despite all that Malkin and her ilk have done and go on trying to do to the Clintons, they just won't go away.....If they had any brains, or anything but bile, spite, and ire---which of course they do not---seems as if they'd be encouraging Dems to vote for Hillary as the easier candidate to beat.

"The Tweety Effect" Effect (Updated!)

by Damozel | At Media Matters, Eric Boehlert discusses the calling out of Chris Matthews by the liberal blogosphere, giving credit where it is due to: Rachel Maddow of Air America, Josh Marshall of TPM, Jamison Foser of Media Matters; Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake; Jeralyn E. Merritt of Talk Left; Pam Spaulding; and Digby.  They---and everyone who wrote in to protest Matthews' shameless attempt to (I suppose) influence the vote by parading his atavistic fear of Hillary---deserve a big thank you from those who didn't participate.  This is an example of how public action can correct an abuse in the system or the media and there need to be more of it----for the media's own good. The result was an apology from Matthews.

That's good.  Matthews needed to be made to apologize and to back off.   If you haven't been paying attention, the reasons are summed up here:

Bill Clinton, Pit Bull: A Clinton Campaign Strategy

by Damozel | You could argue that perhaps that people's spouses shouldn't be allowed to speak for their campaigns under any circumstances on the same principle on which doctors refrain from operating on family members or lawyers refrain from defending them.   I don't think it's possible to be objective when someone attacks your spouse, even when what they say is true.  If it isn't, or if you believe it isn't, it's doubly hard.  Most people have said that it's about time Bill Clinton shuts up.  Indeed, I've thought so myself, much as I am fond of Bill Clinton.

But as Ben Smith (The Politico) points out, the Bill Clinton-as-campaign-pit-bull doesn't seem to be doing Hillary any harm.

Candidate Debate: Campaign Finance, NAFTA and Obama's Reagan Remarks

by D. Cupples |  Without solid campaign finance reform, our politicians will likely continue making public policy that doesn't serve the public.  That's why I was glad to hear Hillary Clinton say during last night's CNN debate that she favors public funding for elections -- though, she did not state the extent of funding. (Transcript)

Edwards and Obama rightly blamed NAFTA for some current troubles facing us ordinary Americans.  Clinton was silent on NAFTA.  Obama accused Clinton of saying that NAFTA had been a "boon" to the economy.  Politico said that paraphrasing journalists, not Clinton, had said that.

As expected, Obama's comment about the GOP came up.  Here's Obama's original comment:

Supreme Court Protects Perps from Lawsuits & Ignores Ordinary Investors

by D. Cupples |  Scandals like WorldCom, Enron and Adelphia forced thousands of ordinary investors to watch their retirement funds (or their children's legacies or college funds) shrivel by billions of dollars -- all so that a relative few Wall Streeters would never have to work again.  A few corporate perpetrators went to prison, but most ordinary investors were not fully compensated.

Last week, in the Stoneridge case, the U.S. Supreme court ruled in favor of protecting perps from securities fraud suits. Unfortunately for Baby Boomers and other ordinary investors, the stock-market waters will likely become even more shark infested. 

Securities law expert Pat Huddleston explains:

The Biggest News to Emerge from SC (IMHO)

Ok, South Carolina is over and McCain has won, and Huckabee has come in second. But two items from ABC News caught my eye:

Preliminary exit poll results indicate that nearly seven in 10 Republican voters in the state are identifying themselves as conservatives, which is more than in the 2000 primary there, as well as more than in either Michigan or New Hampshire this year. (italics mine).

And this:

Primary 2008: Mud Pies Sprout Wings in South Carolina

  Posted by D. Cupples |   The South Carolina primary is today, and mud is flying through the air like the wicked witch's airborne monkeys in the Wizard of Oz. (CNN via Memeorandum) 

Sean Mullen at Kiko's House tells us about the origins of such campaigning, describing the late Lee Atwater as:

"the daddy of the South Carolina Republican primary as we know it and prototype for Karl Rove and every dirty-trick political consultant to come down the mud shoot in the last 25 years."

It's an interesting piece, which you can read here.
 

Humanizing Hillary

by Damozel | Reactions to Hillary's recent appearance on Tyra Banks' Fox talk show showe just how far Hillary really is damned with some people whatever she does.  Accused by some of presenting herself as an emotionless, de-genderized android along the campaign trail and of refusing to discuss Bill's peccadilloes, any display of emotion by her is considered by others to be a "cynical ploy" (a phrase I'm almost as tired of as "campaign surrogates").   

Evidently, some people---including some people in the UK and elsewhere who read The Times of London---actually believe that she is an emotionless, de-genderized android.  "No, dears, that was Margaret Thatcher," said my co-blogger Cockney Robin during tea-time here in BN-Politics' underground grotto, causing co-blogger Nicholas (who reveres the evil Mrs. T) to draw himself up stiffly and depart the room in a marked manner.  Though of course what's really going on is that for people who just don't like her, Hillary can't do anything right.  Here's what the rather conservative (via Nicholas and Rob) Times of London has for those of us who weren't watching: