Stinky Politics

Want to know how ‘stinky’ the 2008 presidential race is going to get?

In the week of December 17, 2003 a very dirty advertisment appeared on Iowa television. The spokesman and (one of three) leader for the group that ran the ad was Robert Gibbs. Robert Gibbs is also the current communications director for Barack Obama.

The 2003 advertisment, just before the Iowa caucuses, morphed the face of Osama Bin Laden with the face of then frontrunner presidential candidate Howard Dean.

Everytime right-wing outlets ‘accidentally’ spell Barack Obama’s name as ‘Barack Osama’ Robert Gibbs must realize that Karma is a bitch.

As to Obama’s Gibbs having claimed that “Howard Dean just cannot compete with George Bush on foreign policy,” and that “It’s time for Democrats to think about that, and think about it now.” all we can say is Karma is a bitch. Gibbs believes that a Presidential candidate with ‘no military or foreign policy experience’ is ‘unqualified’.

As the Chicago Tribune pointed out

Despite often lofty rhetoric that he plans to bring the nation a “new kind of politics,” Sen. Barack Obama has surrounded himself with operatives skilled in the old-school art of the political backstab. [snip]

When Obama assembled his crew early this year, he brought together a team with a long track record of the sort of caustic rhetoric he has pledged to avoid, just as other presidential candidates have done by hiring people similarly talented in the art of opposition research and attack. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) even hired some of the very people who trashed his 2000 presidential bid.

From his campaign headquarters in a high-rise on Michigan Avenue, Obama’s political warriors range from a research director with extensive experience in throwing darts from Democratic National Committee’s offices to a communications director who once worked for a group that ran a controversial ad that used an image of Osama bin Laden to attack Howard Dean.

Obama’s latest campaign hiccup started with documents that sarcastically questioned Clinton’s ties to India that were pitched to reporters on a not-for-attribution basis. The documents later became public, angering many Indian-American supporters.

The documents questioned links that Clinton (D-N.Y.) and her husband, the former president, had with various companies that outsource American jobs. One included a headline that referred to Clinton as the Democratic senator from Punjab, a reference to a joke Clinton had made last year at a fundraiser. [snip]

Obama’s communications director and one of his closest advisers was once employed by a group that ran a television ad shortly before the 2004 Iowa caucuses that used a picture of bin Laden to criticize Dean’s foreign policy credentials at a point when Dean was the Democratic front-runner.

For the record here is Howard Dean’s biography which shows how much more experience in public service Dean had in 2000 than Obama has in 2007. Dean did not have much foreign policy experience but he had served as chairman of the Governors Association and therefore was a player in national policy making for several years.

Dean was elected to the Vermont House of Representatives as a Democrat in 1982 and was elected lieutenant governor in 1986. Both were part-time positions that enabled him to continue practicing medicine. In 1991, Dean became Governor of Vermont when Richard A. Snelling died in office. Dean was subsequently elected to five two-year terms, serving as governor from 1991 to 2003, making him the second longest-serving Governor in Vermont history, after Thomas Chittenden (1778–1789 and 1790–1797). Dean served as chairman of the National Governors Association from 1994 to 1995; during his term, Vermont paid off much of its public debt and had a balanced budget 11 times, lowering income taxes twice. Dean also oversaw the expansion of the “Dr. Dynasaur” program, which ensures universal health care for children and pregnant women in the state.

Here is the video again. Watch it again. The smell of Chicago stinky politics is wafting through the fall air.

Share

92 thoughts on “Stinky Politics

  1. Oprah and Obama: Its No Secret
    ——————————————————————————–

    By Rev Bresciani
    Sep 8, 2007

    Oprah Winfrey endorsed Obama’s campaign in May of 2007 and now has announced plans to step up the Barackian coalition to bolster his bid for the presidency. The Obama endorsement may be good news for Oprah who always seems to need a cause and good news for Obama who needs all the help he can get. It is bad news for the rest of us including some liberals and Democrats.

    Oprah psyches up her gushing adherents to the tune of 8.4 million viewers a day. Her website boasts 2.3 million unique visitors a month. Her magazine, newsletter and the Oprah Alert e-mails reach another 4 million Americans although they are obviously redundancies from the aforementioned groups.

    She plans to yield her sprawling 42 acre property presumptuously called “The Promised Land” to the fund raising efforts of the Obama campaign. By some estimates she may be able to raise somewhere between 3 and 5 million dollars for Barack’s race for the White House. She indicated that it may not end there and that she may sponsor and produce ads for Obama.

    Oprah’s endorsement for the Obama campaign slips out from under the “equal time” rules of the FCC because the rules do not apply to news programs, documentaries or interview shows in which a single candidate is the only focus point of the show. Republican lawyers will want to take a closer look at these laws now since Matthew Mosk of the Washington Post reported in Houston’s Chronicle’s online site September 6 2007 that in an audio forum aired recently Oprah said “the Obama’s will be her only political guests.”

    That Oprah could sway a huge contingent of folks is not in dispute. Phil Rosenthal said in the Chicago Tribune Web Edition September 7, 2007 “The Oprah brand is undeniably a powerful thing. Most TV shows have an audience. She has a congregation.”

    That her influence can beat the heretofore 0/0 record of celebrity influence to pull a presidential race over the finish line is in question. Two remaining questions will plague her effort and have begun already.

    The first is the Ross Perot kind of vote sucking that pulled George H. W. Bush from office and gave Bill Clinton the necessary margin to step in. The heat will be felt first in Hillary’s camp and the whole Democratic machine will suffer from the schism. Votes gleaned from Hillary can only translate into votes garnered for the GOP candidates. The only question is how many?

    The second question has to do with evangelical Christians from either party. To many believers Oprah is less gilded and more Hollywood chrome plated. The snafu with James Frey’s “A Million Little Pieces,” giving away cars on prime time and helping kids in Africa while ignoring our own youth do not get her any points with Christian conservatives.

    To the more discerning and biblically well read among the evangelicals the nature and message of Oprah’s much touted “The Secret” authored by Rhonda Byrne falls under the category of more prosperity gospel hype. This book is a clarion call to all who want to feel good, self affirm and get rich. Nothing new here, appealing to what everybody already wants is no secret.

    Neither The Secret nor the rest of the prosperity gospel hype Christianity is now plagued with comes with a disclaimer but if the fine print were included it would read like this. In case of a stock market crash and or an entire economic crash the shelf life of these claims is limited to one week. Maybe.

    It is also no secret that Obama stands in full opposition to the repeal of Roe V Wade and is openly endorsing gay marriage. By association this is Oprah’s stand as well and it will take more than her fifteen minutes of fame to sway over two hundred years of American faith in the sanctity of life and a reasonable national morality. America doesn’t need a doctrine that sways in every new wind that blows across the fruited plains.

    In the mean time Obama’s got Oprah, Edwards has got labor, Thompson’s just got started and Keyes has almost got drafted. Keyes? Yes if you’re truly conservative then you might want to take a look at Dr. Alan Keyes who is seeing a growing number of Americans interested in getting him petitioned into the race. Dr. Keyes is the founder of the grassroots Renew America movement that appeals to both young and old across both red and blue states.

    Those who are concerned about our headlong rush into everything pop culture oriented are not as likely to be swayed by TV’s currently reigning female deity. Conservatives may not be able to get the entire nation to return to higher values in Toto but they are not going to give up hard won ground without a serious fight.

    The days when pioneers and plainsmen struggled just to survive may have long since passed but those roots will not be pulled up willingly or easily by mainstream Americans.

    Conservatives will have to choose carefully, stump ferociously and stand up and be counted to pull this one off. It does well to remember that holding the line may not seem very illustrious in a world of marvelous new changes but no orderly change is possible in a world that has fallen into confusion.

    Ariel Durant who was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom and authored “The Story of Civilization” put it this way “The conservative who resists change is as valuable as the radical who proposes it.”

    Conservative minded Christians always take their cue from their Rock. “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.” Hebrews 13:8

    Rev Bresciani is a Christian author and a columnist for several online sites and magazines.

  2. Oprah is an idiot. Someone must ask Obama – why he takes money from Oprah who was pro-war and still is!! I have several clips of Oprah’s show where she argued passionately for war. I am telling you she is a republican and is a terrible airhead. I just hope that Hillary wins and that humiliation will kill that mad oprah. Like when she made Beloved remember and butchered poor Tony Morrison’s novel? That super-flopped at the box-office. Like when she lied for the book “Million Little pieces” and said herself that truth did not matter!! I just cannot watch news anymore – all about this silly woman’s magic. Let’s wait and see her fail and loose her popularity!

  3. Today Oprah B*t*h has come out and said on TV that she is for Obama and will only have Obama on her show and she will do everything possible to get women for Obama and make him win. She says she is posstive that she will make him win. She says she will sponsor ad, star in ad for him – go herself t o Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina and will do “Women for Obama” she says she is determined to derail the Clinton candidacy. What a scum she is! Bitch! Cannot stand her anymore.

  4. I think Oprah’s idea is to get Obama to win the primary so he can loose the general election and Republicans can win. That is her idea. She is a republican you all! She said herself she loves Goerge Bush in 2001 on her show. She argued for War and still supports war!

  5. Not that what you’re saying, Secret isn’t entirely within the realm of possibility…BUT..

    The reverse effect will happen. Obama will destroy Oprah. Oprah was the perpetually, invincible, consummate
    TV Talk Show hostess. Her supporting Obama exclusively has demonstrably shown, she can no longer be objective. Fairness and objectivity are no longer the Hallmarks of her persona. She is blindly supporting race, not what is best for America. Her ratings will drop like a rock. Obama will not only lose the nomination he will destroy Oprah’s appeal, the appeal that gave her fame and fortune with women across the racial divide.

    Mrs. S.

    aside:

    re the posted video:

    At first glance, with the “stinky” comments put there by MO still lingering in my head.. Just looking at the close up of the eyes…I thought the content was about Obama…apparently it’s about Osama.. There’s something there that doesn’t quite compute.

  6. Mrs. Smith,
    I just needed to vent after seeing Oprah herself speak about what she will do for Obama. I hope that Obama destroys Oprah like you say. That will be a dream come true! Thanks for making my day!

  7. Hey secret where did she say this?
    Did she say anything regarding Clinton or the other candidates?

    I’m sorry people, I like many have had certain restraints about talking about this as just her supporting Obama because he is black, as I don’t want to be perceived (since I’m most certainly NOT) as a racist.
    BUT, how can this not come across as her just supporting Obama because he is black?

    And I ask, if Obama was white, would she endorse him?

    Would he ignite the same amount of interest if he was white?

    I think the answers goes without saying.
    If some white guy had made the same foreign blunders as Obama so far has made, he’d be out of the race by now.

  8. Hello everybody & admin,

    I’m trying to upload the news coverage of Clinton’s appearance at AARP to youtube. It’s great that the local TV cast noticed all other candidates except Clinton & Huckabee showed up at such a great opportunity to address seniors.

    admin, maybe you can get the youtube link running under the comment section once i finish loading.

  9. I don’t think Oprah is a Bushie… She has just been playing it cool because she doesn’t want any repurcussions resulting from her dissing the War.

    Obama is another case altogether. Oprah is demostrating her inner racism because she is supporting the first black man with a shot at the presidency. Obama is no Sydney Poitier, Harry Belafonte or Denzel Washington, whom I adore. They would know better and have the guts to disuade her from taking this disasterous one sided path to personal distruction. But not Obama. He’s going to fail and take Oprah down with him. Can she survive this huge fall from grace? That I don’t know. I can say this, though. She will never be thought of with the same admiration as she had been pre-Obama.

    Mrs. S.

  10. During the roll out of Fred Thompson’s announcement of his candidacy for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, in a remark aimed at all Republicans, he said – I CAN STOP HILLARY.

    According to John Harwood (now the Washington Correspondent for CNBC), Thompson made his first official campaign appearance the next day at the convention center in Des Moines, Iowa. During his appearance on Friday’s broadcast of ‘Washington Week in Review’, Harwood went on to recount that:

    “Maybe two hundred people were there, maybe a few more, but the room was not packed. It was not electric. It looked to a lot of us in the room as an underwhelming start for somebody who was really going to be a top-tier contender.”

    HEH HEH

    Way to light a fire there, Freddie !

  11. hillfans, looking at mydd, im proud that we have many more hillfans there than a few short months ago. more pro-hillary diaries getting on the recommended list and more defenders to refute the anti-hillary garbage by the naderites and haters. georgep, areyouready, lori, and bookgrl are great bloggers on mydd. it’s a pleasure to be on there now. daily kos and huffington post needs more work. more pro hillary sites are propping up all over the net. this site is still the best. a sense of community and the truth. lots of time and work to go. GO HILLARY GO!!!!

  12. Hey guys, Forget about Oprah. It’s a free country. She can support whoever she wants. Let’s just concentrate on our girl getting elected.

  13. Secret, Oprah is supporting Obama as part of her cult of personality idealism. Not race. We know better than that.

    I also agree that Obama will destroy the Oprah brand. It was inevitable. They both thrive on the adoration of sycophants. This mutual admiration society they have so publicly established will go down in flames.

    And for the most part I think we should leave the Oprah endorsement alone. Let the media overhype it. The more coverage the better. There will be backlash. A presidential candidate (especially at times like these) is not the same as jersey sheets or lavender lotion. Folks resent being told who to vote for by people who are given a platform by the sole virtue of their celebrity. Folks here are already bitching about it. She’s raising 3 million for a politician, not a worthwhile cause. Middle class folks resent that. (Oh, and men especially hate her and see men who associate with her as pansies- not a great move by someone wanting to look commander in chief-ish)

  14. Kostner, let us know when your uploads are ready.

    Terrondt, the change beginning to take place on some blogs is due to an old adage the Dems have forgotten for decades – let’s paraphrase it as “Don’t Whine – Organize”. Many Democrats for years have prefered to whine about unfairness, complain about those mean Ripublicans, cry about those Freepers, etc. etc.

    Democrats have appeared weak because frankly they were. If someone keeps repeatedly punching you in the face and calling you names and all you do in return is complain and whine about unfairness you appear weak because you are weak.

    A lot of the anti-Hillary posters on the blogs you mentioned and on Democratic Underground quite simply are Naderites who will never support Hillary. They do not listen to reason. The owners of the Big Blogs too are not happy with the rise of Hillary. They stand to lose all the fake prestige and attention they thought they had when Hillary wins. These owners too will always want to be the top dog and tell Hillary how to run her life and campaign. In other words, the Big Blog owners and Naderite interests will be negatively impacted by a Hillary win and they will not go quietly.

    Our job is not to whine but to organize and fight back. When Hillary gets the nomination these Naderites and Big Blog owners will not go away. They will keep up their demands on Hillary to do things that will hurt her election chances. We will make sure they do not derail Hillary.

  15. Well, if Oprah can single-handedly give the nomination to Obama, then I guess Hillary’s support wasn’t that deep after all. This is just another in a very long line of challenges Hillary has faced and will face.

    I still think Oprah’s taking an enormous risk, by potentially alienating millions of her viewers. She’s also have some serious egg on her face if Obama loses.

  16. admin., i agree with your take. and on weak dems that complain and whine instead of fighting, think back a few weeks ago from that relic from the past telling dems on why we will lose(dukakis). he needs to stay away from giving political advice. like hillary says all the time”she’s been fighting the rightwing for years”. she’s no kerry and dukakis that’s for sure.

  17. OkieAtty & Paula,

    Let’s stop worrying about Oprah… I really don’t believe it’s a big deal. It will back fire on these two if they overhype this thing. It’s a president race, not a beauty contest…

    Admin,

    I tried several times, but am still unable to get the video work. It’s weird. Hillaryhub has the video link from the website of a local TV station. I copied the video from ‘internet temporary’ folder to my local drive, the file is in ‘flv’ format. Youtube generally accepts such format. I uploaded to youtube, but it kept on remind me of ‘unable to convert the file’… I was able to upload other ‘flv’ files to youtube with no problem … Frustrated here.

  18. Terrondt, you are right. Our girl is no Kerry or Dukakis. She is a great fighter. She knocked Chertoff out of the race for AG with one well-timed, well-placed comment about Katrina. That kind of thrust and parry only happens when you’ve been in many battles.

    Anyone notice Chuck Hagel is retiring from the Senate and has announced he will not run for POTUS? Any idea why when he is well-placed to raise money and has solid support? I think he may be jumping out to protect himself for a 2012 run.

    Admin, I think you are right about the Big Blogs losing face. They will fight to keep their sandcastles. They want Edwards at all costs even if it means slashing their own throats. We must protect the party from those gomers. They forget the GOP is the enemy. GD egotistical wanna-be powerbrokers. They have hollow support except on the local level. When will they stop overstepping their boundaries?

  19. That’s right terrondt, and weakness is not very attractive. Like Bill Clinton says about politics and perception ‘It is better to be strong and wrong, than weak and right” – smart man that Bill.

    By the way terrondt, thanks for talking up this site on other blogs.

    In case anyone missed it, the Washington Post finally has a big story on Hsu and Obama called “Hsu Steered Major Fundraiser To Obama”.

    “Before becoming a major bundler for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign, disgraced Democratic donor Norman Hsu helped host a 2005 California event for Barack Obama’s political action committee and introduced the senator from Illinois to one of the biggest fundraisers for his presidential bid.

    Federal Election Commission records show that Hsu gave $5,000 to Obama’s Hopefund PAC in connection with the fundraiser and that people publicly identified with Hsu and his companies gave an additional $19,500 to the PAC in 2005 and 2006.”

  20. OkieAtty, gomers and sandcastles is exactly right.

    These are self-interested gomers who value their “influence” over actual wins by Democrats. The key is that they rather have Hillary lose as president than have Hillary win because if Hillary wins they lose their false claim to importance. Big Blog owners know once Hillary is president the media will stop paying attention to them because the media will go to where power is being exercised – the White House. Big Blog owners will lose money because less people will visit their sites. They don’t want Hillary and will try to sabotage her even after she has the nomination – because it is in their SELF-interest.

  21. admin, i saw a piece on foxnews(yeah i know,a gop mouthcase) talk about the hillary/hsu connection but failed to mention obama’s 7,000 bucks he took. they showed the pic with hillary and hsu together.

  22. Hey y’all, Can’t add any wisdom to what’s been said about Stinky Bomber. I kept sayin’ there was somethin’ that smelled worse that a septic backup. Now we know what it is. So, keep on movin forward. Leave him in the swill. I am so glad Hillary went to the AARP convention–the only democrat who did–and I am proud of her for her great speech there. We just gotta keep lookin foward with our candidate, our smart girl, who’s got the best team in the business. –mollyj

  23. yeah, what was that all about? only dem showing up at the aarp convention. what are they doing, pissing off a cruical voting block. oh well, hillary having the convention all to herself is good too. hukabee did himself good showing up.

  24. I want to give a huge shout out to Admin and you guys for making this place a safe place to discuss our candidate and the issues. I have gleaned lots of info I use in my discussions with others about Hillary, Edwards and Obama. Thanks!

    (Can you tell I drank a lot last night? 🙂 )

  25. Is Hillary the only Democrat running for president?

    27,000 AARP members and Hillary is the only Democrat to speak?

    At the video report, the reporters are also scratching their heads wondering where the other candidates are.
    http://www.boston.com/partners/worldnow/necn.html?catID=80780&clipid=1732647&autoStart=true&mute=false&continuous=true

    These big conventions are scheduled years ahead of time so it is not as if the other candidates did not know about it when making their schedules. Does Obama really think that money from Oprah is more important than speaking to a high voting demographic such as AARP represents? Where was John Edwards? Dodd, Biden, Richardson? What are they busy doing?

    Have they all given up?

    Should we file a Missing Persons report with the police for the other Dem candidates?

  26. terrondt,

    ‘world dictator’ puts out a diary on the link between Hsu and Obama. Just in case they use ‘Hsu’ to smear Hillary, we have more materials now to set the record straight…

    Washingtonpost article, ‘Hsu Steered Major Fundraiser to Obama ‘…

    Before becoming a major bundler for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign, disgraced Democratic donor Norman Hsu helped host a 2005 California event for Barack Obama’s political action committee and introduced the senator from Illinois to one of the biggest fundraisers for his presidential bid.

    Mark Gorenberg, who now sits on Obama’s national finance committee and is one of his biggest fundraisers, said Hsu organized an early 2005 event for the Hopefund and invited him to help raise money.

    “He introduced me to Barack Obama,” Gorenberg said of Hsu. “He was working on an event for Barack’s PAC, and he asked me to help, and I did. Barack came up to San Francisco, and [Hsu] introduced him to a bunch of people.”

    Apparently Gorenberg is still close to Hsu

    Gorenberg said he is worried about Hsu. “Despite it all, I still love the guy,” he said. “Despite everything you read, every experience I ever had with him was nothing but delightful, and I just scratch my head.”

    ….

    Admin,

    Your ‘Osama’ ad is now on myDD to remind everybody of the dirty work Robert Gibbs did to Howard Dean in 2004.

  27. Admin,

    The ‘Bin Laden’ youtube link you provided seems to strick a nerve. LOL. Even Jerome chimes in with the following:

    ‘Gibbs will say anything for a buck. But wasn’t it Gibbs that was sent out on the road right at the beginning of July to “tighten Obama’s message” or something? That month ensuing didn’t work out to well as Obama slipped out a number of statements that were shaped as inexperienced.

    I expect the intra-Dem negative 527 action to be less of an occurrence this time around– maybe I’m just being a hopemonger?’

    —Jerome Armstrong

  28. No smell on the breath OkieAtty.

    We wanted to build a Pink Oasis of Love for Hillary supporters to refresh themselves in the soothing waters of rationality. Refreshed after intelligent exchanges of knowledge in cool Pink breezes we are then ready to face and educate the irrational and stinky.
    🙂

  29. Yes, Admin, Thanks for the safe space to talk about Hillary, strategize and get some reassurance about this race. Maybe we can all meet someday. LOL –mollyj

  30. i saw on mydd admin. it’s good this gets out and fully on the record about this hsu guy AND THE OBAMA-STINKY CONNECTION TO HIM ALSO. it really has shut up the nutkooks. not a peep. let’s make sure it stays that way. as for the general that’s another story. we will cross that bridge when we get there.

  31. at my local walgreens i keep running into this gop clerk who last time touted obama, then yesturday asked me about thompson. she say’s “thompson is the next ronald reagan”. i nearly laughed in her face. more like freddie krugger. can somebody put a pic of thompson and krugger side by side. seperated by birth for sure.lol

  32. Hey how about Freddy Thompson next to the Geico caveman? I’ll go take a look at those diaries right now! mollyj

  33. Admin, the stars are in alignment when Hillary and Huckabee show up at the AARP and the rest of the candidates are non-shows. From what I have read she hit a home run with that audience. That is impotant because AARP members have time on their hands and vote. Aprops of your past comments about the weaknesses of other campaigns. Again, never interrupt an adversary in the middle of a mistake.

  34. wbboei,

    Does AARP still send out their magazines? Postal workers used to hate the day AARP would send out their millions of magazines, which were either quarterlys or some other interval.

    If AARP still sends out those millions, of postal worker back breaking, magazines then we can look foward to the next mailing. It is sure to feature their convention and a smiling Hillary either on the cover or centerfold speaking to AARP.

  35. I am from Davenport, and the AARP debate coming up later this month will be there. Obama is in fact skipping this debate, which reaches the most powerful caucus block in Iowa. So, more room for Hillary (: Go Hillary and go Hawks today!

  36. Note to All:

    Today is BO’s Big Fundraiser w/Oprah!

    Terrondt:

    hillary hotline.com blog …Do you have the official web adress for the hillary hotline? I played with this one changing it around to work, but..nada.

    Thanks in advance,

    Mrs. S.

  37. i don’t know what knuclehead is advising obama but skipping these aarp debates and forums is close to political suicide. lucky he is making em. a reliable voting block is a religion.

  38. kostner, You’re right about Oprah. And, mj, you hit the nail on the head about keeping our eyes on the ball.

    I also forgot, as OkieAtty says, that her campaign torpedoed Chertoff’s chances to be AG with one perfectly timed leak They are damn good, lol.

  39. i changed my username on the hillary’s bloggers from terry to terrondt so u guys know where to find me there. im also terrondt on the hillary hotline. good sites.

  40. I’m now watching Hillarys speech at the AARP, and I must say there is something about her at this event, kinda different.
    She’s good, not paying attention to the speech itself and the words, her delivery is GOOD. Shes smiling a lot, feeling comfortable, sounds like she has adopted a slight accent here, I can’t quite place what it is, but I like it. She’s getting better all the time. 🙂

  41. By Roland S. Martin
    CNN Contributor

    (CNN) — It’s big news that the goddess of talk, Oprah Winfrey, is throwing a huge shindig for U.S. Sen. Barack Obama at her California estate that is expected to bring in $3 million.

    That is more than what Hollywood honchos Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and others raised in separate fundraisers for Obama and his chief rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton.

    No one knows for sure what the effect will be with Oprah backing Obama because she has never thrown her full support behind a political candidate.

    The Washington Post made it plain as to her influence on the general public, courtesy of her massive media platform: “the television program that reaches 8.4 million viewers each weekday afternoon, according to the most recent Nielsen numbers. Her Web site reaches 2.3 unique viewers each month, ‘O, the Oprah Magazine,’ has a circulation of 2 million, she circulates a weekly newsletter to 420,000 fans and 360,000 people have subscribed to her Web site for daily ‘Oprah Alerts’ by e-mail.”

    Although Oprah is a billionaire, by law, all she can contribute to the Obama campaign is $4,600 — $2,300 for the primary, and if he wins the nomination, he can use the other $2,300 for the general election campaign. Watch analysts talk about Winfrey’s influence »

    On CNN’s “Larry King Live,” she said that her support is bigger than any check she could write.

    Not quite.

    Although The Post reported that Oprah is in talks with the Obama campaign about taking an active role — appearing at rallies or cutting campaign commercials — she could instead choose to launch her own 527 political group that wouldn’t have any spending restrictions.

    Imagine this scenario: Oprah chooses to create the “O for Obama” 527 group. She then seeds it with $5 million, and plans a series of radio and TV ads touting Obama in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Arizona.

    In Iowa, she might shoot a commercial in a cornfield. In New Hampshire, the setting might be outside the state capitol. How about the Geechee islands in South Carolina? And for Arizona, the infamous — only because of its sheriff — jail in Maricopa County.

    She could tailor each ad for residents of that state, and flood the airwaves as Obama is doing the same.

    Now, the laws says the 527s can’t coordinate their messages with the campaign, and there are other restrictions. But it could be a huge boost to a campaign lagging Clinton in national polls.

    You don’t think they matter? Ask Sen. John Kerry. The Swift Boat Veterans launched a 527 group that developed devastating ads that helped derail his message, and the campaign.

    Oprah may get some heat for trying to buy the election, but many rich benefactors have used their money for partisan purposes.

    The talk show diva has been on record that Obama is the first, and likely last, candidate she publicly backs. If that’s the case, why not simply go all out?

    Roland S. Martin is a nationally award-winning, multifaceted journalist and CNN contributor. He is the author of “Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives on Faith.” You can read more of his columns at

  42. looks like some blogs are already tired of this Obama-Oprah hype. Let them keep on digging.

    From Huffington….

    Oprah, Obama and Osama

    Football is back. The Indiana Colts v. The New Orleans Saints. Decent
    game. There’s been a sports lull on TV. I guess if I was sitting in a
    cave in Afghanistan somewhere I’d probably be watching European
    Football (soccer). Do you think he’s watching TV or are they bringing
    him various international news papers? I don’t usually think of him
    except when I’m at the airport. You know, taking the shoes off and all
    that.

    So today I’m hanging out catching up on some sleep and occasionally
    flipping through the stations and all of a sudden I’m getting the three
    O’s. Oprah has decided to get in bed with Mr. and Mrs. Obama, and Osama
    has decided that he wants to be a blogger. I guess if talk show hosts
    can choose presidents then perhaps terrorists should be blogging. And
    imagine the nerve of telling the Democrats how they should use their
    congressional majority. Pisses me off. Makes me want to go out and bomb
    something. If Osama wanted the troops out of Saudi Arabia then perhaps
    he didn’t have to kill 3000 people. He could have just hired himself a
    lobbyist. He could have done things the way the rest of his family
    does.

    The Osama Blog. I mean, as Wolf Blitzer of CNN so astutely pointed out,
    the dude has even DARKENED HIS BEARD!! Mr. Religious Jihad is concerned
    about his looks. I wonder if he used Grecian Formula. “Gets the grey
    out.” I’ll bet you his hair has actually gone white and he’s probably
    looking a lot like Moses but without the magic staff. If he had that
    staff, he’d be kicking ass right now.

    Perhaps instead of the magic staff he’s got a short wave radio and he’s
    plugged into the BBC so as to keep up on the news. If that’s the case,
    my advice is to check out Andy Kershaw’s World Music Program, the BBC’s
    best non-news show..

    Obama, “The Candidate of Change”; and, to make sure of that, he’s hired
    every one who’s ever worked for the Clintons. What’s the Change you
    ask? We’re moving from Yale (Bush) to Harvard/Princeton (Mr. and Mrs.
    Obama). That’s quite a change I guess. Did Oprah go to college or did
    she become a billionaire right out of high school? If I remember
    correctly, she had gotten a call from GOD and was told to spend the
    rest of her life catching sexual predators. Maybe she’ll work through
    legislation. You know, if Oprah can choose a president then she can do
    just about anything…3 O’s, its been quite a day.

  43. I bet Hillary is busy preparing for tomorrow’s debate. She always works hard and takes nothing for granted.

    Tomorrow’s spanish debate will be webstreamed live!! Hope she’ll hit another home run. Hillary is extremely popular among hispanics.

  44. Gorto, thanks for the link. I agree. The speech was quite good. She has a way of personalizing issues that make you feel like your talking to a friend rather than simply listening to a politician. It’s quite effective.

  45. OkieAtty,

    Couldn’t agree with you more about your Obama / Oprah sycophant worshipers remark.

    But please stop with the homophobic “pansy” remarks. That’s just not cool. Thanks!

  46. A good indicator of whether the Oprah factor is working is to follow the number of unique hits on Bwak’s and Hillary’s websites. This article made me think of it. http://www.planetc1.com/cgi-bin/n/v.cgi?c=1&id=1189277945

    Anyone else make the connection that Stinky’s top fundraising state is CA? That should be publicized. The whole Hollywood, elitist freak thing plays none too well in the midwest, etc. (No offense LADem)

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/09/08/state/n102853D65.DTL

  47. Anyone got a link to the debate tomorrow?

    Will be interesting to see how it’s played out, are they all on stage at the same time or one after the other?

  48. Just as there are a lot of sexist men out there still, there are a lot of homophobic men(and women) out there still. And these people might see it as slightly ‘pansy’, there is already that picture(drawing) or Edwards in a dress out there as we know.

    Don’t think this was OkieAttys opinion, just pointing out a negative view that unfortunately some people still subscribe by.

  49. Sorry LADem, just reporting what I hear. And that’s verbatim. It’s not a gay thing, it’s a perceived weakness. Men as a general rule do not like Oprah because of that whole “let’s talk about our feelings” thing she does. It’s a reality just like Bwak has to overcome his skin color. Acting like the biases out there don’t exist is insane. Hillary has to worry about being a woman. There’s a huge bias against her as we have seen in stuff posted at dKos, etc.. The polls indicate there are a number of people who would never vote for a woman president. They perceive women as weak on defense, scatterbrained, emotional, more focused on the decorations in the Oval Office than our foreign policy positions. Get a female candidate who is too strong on those issues then she is termed a dyke or bitch. It’s all a balancing act. For BO and for Hillary. Look at Edwards- he has to overcome his good looks with men because he’s seen as being all fluff, no substance, a bigtime, slick attorney who will say anything to get elected. Why do you think he plays the war on poverty thing? He’s just too stupid not to make the haircut and hedge fund gaffs.

    Also, I posted my comment about the website hits and the CA perception before this post but bc it has links, this one will probably be first. Much of the country (especially the independents, moderates, conservative leaning voters) think of CA in terms of Hollywood, the OC and the Hills. Sorry. True story. That bias can be exploited. Californians give the most money to BO. That means there is the implication that BO doess not represent “mainstream” views. Right or wrong, it exists.

    We’re at war for the future of this Nation. I don’t think political correctness necessarily applies. Why do you think many voters lean towards the GOP when there is a terrorist attack, a Bin Laden tape release or terror warning? Because Dems play the PC line and look weak. Fred Thompson plays well to the masses in spite of being a Neanderthal (sorry Neanderthals out there 🙂 ) because he looks and sounds tough. Cardigans, baby blue shirts, and soft hands and voices won’t work in middle America especially when there is an ongoing threat from radical religious sects. Act strong, be strong, be seen as strong.

    BTW- Hillary’s broaching the topic about the GOP/terrorism swing was made just in time in light of the Bin Laden tape release, huh? Maybe her statement has inoculated the Dems against the GOP swing some???? Let’s look at next week’s polls and see what pans out after 9-11-07.

  50. Hey, anyone else realize Edwards made a serious tactical mistake re: missing the AARP Convention?

    “Clinton also promised to renew the country’s commitment to Social Security, keeping her message in line with the group’s Divided We Fail campaign, introduced this summer to put healthcare and retirement on the agenda of the presidential candidates.

    AARP launched the campaign in conjunction with the Business Roundtable and the Service Employees International Union. Together, the groups are spending more than $60 million, focusing on 10 states.”

    He needs SEIU doesn’t he????

  51. “Hillary’s broaching the topic about the GOP/terrorism swing was made just in time in light of the Bin Laden tape release, huh? Maybe her statement has inoculated the Dems against the GOP swing some???? Let’s look at next week’s polls and see what pans out after 9-11-07.” Hmmm. ..great obervation.

  52. OkieAtty,

    You just wrote, “Acting like the biases out there don’t exist is insane,”
    but then you just do the very same thing, acting like the bias doesn’t exist when you declare “pansy” is not a gay thing. In most ANY place you go, the word “pansy” is most definitely an offensive gay thing. Just as we wouldn’t want people using disparaging names for female genitalia to characterize Hillary Clinton, we shouldn’t be using these sorts of descriptors for other candidates – no matter how much we dislike them. Please raise the bar. Thanks.

  53. Speaking of “Stinky” and “Obama”, last nite Jimmy Kimmel picked up on his wife’s comment that he is “Stinky” “in the morning”. Kimmel aired a spoofed campaign ad that Obama purportedly ran as an answer to his wife. It wasn’t exactly couth, but it was hard not to BUST OUT LAUGHING. It was aired during the opening monologue, so it’s right at the beginning. They have the episodes up on Kimmel’s website: ABC > Late Night > Jimmy Kimmel.

  54. LADem, I reported verbatim the words of guys I have spoken to about men who like Oprah. Sorry, but get over it. My reasons were well stated. And for the record, I don’t think of pansy meaning gay. Just weak. Gay is non synonymous for weak. I understand why you propose your definition, but a pansie is a flower which wilts in the heat. It is too weak to stand the heat, be under fire, etc…. The word may be considered by some to be a derogatory term about gays, but at its most potent definition, it’s about weakness.

    BTW- Edwards, Dodd and Clinton will appear at the Divided We Fail forum in IA 9-20-07. Edwards is trying to get at least some part of the action. Oh, and the National Cancer Society is doing a buttload of advertising on the issue too in early primary states.

    http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=103338
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/31/us/31cancer.html?ex=1189396800&en=b40cb0aa92713030&ei=5070

  55. Newsweek has come up with one long article speculating how President Hillary will govern. The article is full of rehashing of 1990s, however it’s still worth reading.

    They also have an exclusive interview with Hillary….

    DARMAN: As someone who’s watched a president up close, what do you understand that the rest of us can’t know?

    CLINTON: I can only tell you both my perspective and my experience. It is very important for a president to seek out information from a wide variety of sources. I seek out people who are not only able to come with some expertise or relevant experience, but are willing to debate and discuss differences of opinion. Sometimes it surprises people to see how seriously I seek out that kind of debate. Obviously, I can’t know every nook and cranny of what a decision might mean. I want people to try to reach a consensus, but if a consensus is not easily available, I want to know all sides of the issue. And finally, at the end of the day, I have to make decisions. I feel very comfortable, once I have decided, taking responsibility for that decision. It’s not anybody else’s decision once I’ve made it. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong.

    You say that to effect change, you have to work within the system. Did you and President Clinton fully grasp that when you first came to Washington, or was it something you learned over time?
    It certainly is something I had to learn. I have a much fuller understanding of the dynamic between the White House and the Congress, no matter who’s the president or who’s the leadership. I would be the first to tell you I was not as aware of that and as understanding 15 years ago. I think, also, there is a learning process that goes on with respect to both substance and presentation of difficult decisions that I feel much more familiar with and, you know, in command of than I was before.

    Everyone says how they’re going to do a better job than Bush of reaching out to the opposition and the Congress. Who are some of the Republicans you can pick up the phone and talk to?

    It would depend on the issue. If I were concerned about defense or foreign policy, I would talk to Republicans [such as] John Warner and John McCain and Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins. I don’t always agree with their perspective, but I find it very important to hear and try to factor in my thinking. On health and human-services kinds of issues, Mike Enzi’s been a partner. Again, we don’t always agree, but I believe he’s trying to do what he thinks is right. If it’s on environmental issues, it could be as unusual [a] pairing as Jim Inhofe [or] George Voinovich, whom I’ve worked with trying to cut diesel emissions. Obviously, I have a great deal of respect for Dick Lugar and Gordon Smith. I am more than willing [to work with them].

    Is it easier for you to trust Republicans and empathize with them since you’ve been a senator than it was beforehand?

    I think that goes both ways. Trent Lott famously said that after I was elected, lightning would strike. [But] he and I worked together. I backed him for what he was trying to do after Katrina because I thought it was the right thing to do, and it was reminiscent painfully of what we have gone through trying to help New York after 9/11. If you had said to me eight or nine years ago that I’d be working with Trent or Lindsey or a lot of these folks, I would think you’re probably a little cross-eyed.

    What goes through your head right before you have to fire someone?

    I’m sorry it didn’t work out. I wish the person well because I think I can say 99.9 percent of the people I’ve had to deal with that unfortunate action are good people, hard-working people. It just wasn’t a good fit.

    Do you feel bad afterward?

    I feel bad. We obviously try to find a better opportunity for anyone we have to let go.

    For the past 15 years, your critics have accused you of being ambitious and power-hungry. Do you think people would have an easier time with you once you’re president and your power is indisputable?

    I don’t take that seriously. I don’t know anyone in the U.S. Senate who hasn’t been motivated. You’re not sitting around eating bonbons and you get a call saying, “You’re starting on January 3rd.”

    What mistakes have you made as a senator?

    I think there’s always room for improvement. It’s hard to get used to what has become the pattern of the administration, which is that they basically mislead people. When I negotiated with the White House over an expert panel to figure out what we needed to do to protect the health of residents and workers downtown after 9/11, I held up the nomination of Mike Leavitt, because, in the minority, we had very few levers to pull. And they said, “Look, we’ll put together this panel and we’ll work on it.” So we did, and it met and it made recommendations–all of which were ignored. I want to deal with people in an upfront, forthright way. If I tell you I’m going to set up an expert panel that is going to look at serious health and environmental-health issues, we may not agree on what comes out of it. But once I say I’m going to do it, I will do it. In-your-face contempt on both sides of the aisle for the process has been very destructive for our government. I believe in checks and balances and separation of powers. We are stronger when we’re looking for ways to make progress together. I believe in evidence-based decision making, not ideological bases.

    Do you think, like President Bush, that operating in a post-9/11 world enhances the president’s authority?

    I think that a president does have enhanced authority at such a time. We have one president and one commander in chief at a time. But it’s almost as though [President Bush], particularly pushed by the vice president, had this model in mind of unaccountable power. And I don’t think that’s within the framework envisioned by the Founders.

    So you can’t imagine any scenario in which a Hillary Clinton presidency says the global terror threat is justification for denying congressional oversight?

    This is something you can’t answer in a hypothetical. You can operate to protect the security of our country within a constitutional framework with appropriate oversight. It may not, for security reasons, always be open and public. But it should certainly be organized and regularized.

    What’s the biggest difference between your thinking on the use of American force now and 15 years ago?

    I have always believed that American force was there as the strongest tool in our toolbox for leading the world and pursuing American national interest. I supported the first gulf war, not that anybody really cared about my opinion. I supported my husband going into Bosnia and Kosovo. But I think that the combination of the threat of military force backing up coercive diplomacy is a very strong position for the United States to be in, and it has been unfortunately undermined by the president’s actions in Iraq. There are a lot of lessons of what not to do, following this president. [There are] more lessons to be learned looking at his father and the coalition he put together in the first gulf war, and looking at what my husband did putting together the NATO coalition to deal with [Slobodan] Milosevic and Europe.

    What about the biggest difference between Hillary Clinton, the decision maker of today, and Hillary Clinton, the decision maker of 15 years ago?

    I have a much deeper understanding of what American leadership at home and abroad has to mean for the 21st century. I am much more experienced in dealing with my own government and understanding both its potential and its limitations. I believe that my commitment to issues that I care deeply about is just as strong as it was not only 15 years ago, but 35 years ago. My commitment and understanding of the process that has to be pursued in order to make change in America is just much greater than it would have been in the past.

    Newsweek also comes up with another long article basically speculating how president Hillary will govern…
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20649206/sit e/newsweek/

    How She Would Govern

    I’d like to quote one paragraph…

    Over the course of the summer, she watched her rivals for the Democratic nomination try again and again to define themselves as change and Clinton as the status quo. (“We’re more interested in looking forward, not backward,” Barack Obama told reporters. “And the American people feel the same way.”) But she would not cede the change mantle, no matter how large her lead in national polls, not in an election where the voters were fed up and angry, not when Obama was saying “change” was what he was all about and John Edwards was running a tough populist bid. “The campaign was watching Obama and Edwards peddling this false choice of change versus experience,” says someone close to the campaign who did not want to be identified discussing internal matters. “They realized, wow, this is a great opportunity to emphasize one of her strengths”–or, more precisely, it was an opportunity to argue that her years in the capital gave her the experience to make change happen.

  56. Latest CBS Poll:

    WILL OPRAH’S ENDORSEMENT OF BARACK OBAMA MAKE MOST PEOPLE YOU KNOW…?

    31% – More likely to vote for him

    63% – Won’t make any difference

    (Note that this isn’t what people said THEY would do, but what they THINK other people might do. I’d say that the number who will actually be swayed by Oprah will be even smaller.)

  57. Oprah’s contribution

    A reader suggests:

    • Free cars for all Iowa undecideds.
    • The Van Natta or Wiley books in the Oprah Book Club.
    • Today’s guest: Linda Tripp.

  58. someone wrote on politico:

    I think any strong reservations HRC may have had about this endorsement are being quickly placated by a persistent media narrative and the expectations being placed on Oprah’s involvement that will undoubtedly lead to process stories of the absence of an “Oprah bump”, etc. Hell, Bruce Springsteen went on tour with John Kerry for at least a few days in ’04 and didn’t garner nearly as much attention. But to be fair, he isn’t raising 3 million in one night. But that’s not the gist of the media’s focus right now. It’s all impact-centric prognosticating about action on the stump. The bar is being raised to where a couple early polls showing anything less than a massive movement in women and the media narrative is cemented.

  59. I agree with that politico comment. Expectations are so high, and that’s always a big danger.

    BTW, kostner, those reader suggestions had me LMAO.

  60. “Note that this isn’t what people said THEY would do, but what they THINK other people might do. I’d say that the number who will actually be swayed by Oprah will be even smaller.”

    I’m with you, Joe Friday.

  61. kostner, I’d also add the Ed Klein book to that list, lol. That’s that really trashy one from a year or two ago that claimed HRC was a lesbian and that Chelsea was conceived via rape.

  62. Oprah’s Favorite Things: 1200 thread count sheets, and Obama! I think he’s her new boy toy. She’ s an idiot!!!! I don’t think she cares about the effect this campaigning will have on her show, she said she’ almost done and all of her success and money are for her mission and purpose in life. I think her new missions are Schools in Africa and a Black President. She IS totally devoted to the cause of Black upward mobility. Not a bad cause – but it really is her mission.

  63. Well, when Obama starts jumping UP and DOWN on Oprah’s studio couch, we already know he’ll blame her.

    You know that doncha? 🙂

    I don’t think Obama’s Fundraiser went as planned. The A-List stars have smartened up. The attendes seemed to be Oprah’s loyal, personal friends rather than Stars going all out supporting Obama.

    Mrs.S.

  64. Hi folks,

    I found it’s extremely amusing. Why are you guys so worked up by this Oraph thing? I predict it won’t cause a ripple in the water. On the contrary, I believe it will backfire on him in the end if media continues the hype. Do you believe IA farmers will like Oraph to tell them whom to vote for?

    I usually just pick up the mockery piece on this Obama-Oprah insanity. Let’s stop this Oraph madness and keep our eyes on the ball, okay?

    Have fun!

  65. Kostner,
    I get your point that Oprah will not have an effect with Iowa farmer and it may turn off people – but like the group that formed during kerry’s campaign to attack him – Oprah can do that. I suppose people are just outraged by her audacity to think she can appoint a president of the free world!!

  66. Secret,

    Roland Martin who wrote the article suggesting Oprah could start a 527 for Obama mostly writes about faith and such. He does not know what he is talking about in this case.

    Obama, the new politics reformer, allowing Oprah to start a 527 to help save his sinking campaign would set the political world into a death spiral of laughing. He would kill us all we woud be laughing at him so hard.

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/07/martin/index.html

  67. Kostner..no worries.

    We’re playing chess while the BO’s are playing Checkers.. We’re in between moves and reading and reporting whats going on around us in real time. Thats all.

    Mrs. S.

  68. Admin, I am informed that AARP still publishes their magazine, the current issue is September-October, and it was received a few days ago. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the next issue will be November-December and will be received in early November by their millions of subscribers. It is also reasonable to assume that it will give good coverage to Hillary on the verge of the holiday season when families get togther and the discussions turn to politics. Wouldn’t it be grand if it also included that wonderful quote by Obama to the effect that people over 50 forget things, etc. Take that Oprah!

  69. Thanks for the information Wbboei.

    Your assumptions seem reasonable. Also, by the next issue they will have held the AARP debate in Iowa which Obama is too busy to attend.

    Hopefully the magazine will point out that Obama missed both their debate in Iowa as well as the convention in Boston AND the dumb old idiot voters remark.

    Truly, this has to be one of the worse managed campaigns in history. Hooray for Axelrod.

  70. The highly respected political analyst Charlie Cook has the following the say about Hillary’s chance….

    One of the nation’s leading authorities on political trends and U.S. elections likes what he sees in the early days of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign for president.

    Charlie Cook, publisher of the Cook Political Report, said Clinton has the “best organized” presidential campaign he has seen since Richard Nixon won re-election in a landslide in 1972.

    “On the Democratic side, I think it’s going to be a real challenge for any other candidate to knock out Hillary Clinton,” Cook told a small group of journalists Monday at the National Press Foundation in Washington.

    He called New York’s junior senator a “disciplined campaigner” who has worked with “Prussian-like efficiency” in her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination.

    Cook said he traveled to New Hampshire and was impressed after watching Clinton interact with voters and deliver her stump speech. He said the senator has every detail covered and leaves nothing to chance, which is why some people criticize her for coming across as calculating and impersonal.

    “Does she give up spontaneity? Yes. But my guess is she’ll come up with a plan to deal with spontaneity,” Cook said.

    In polls, Clinton on average now runs ahead of each of the major Republican candidates, he said.

    “What we’re seeing is President Bush and Iraq as sort of a wet blanket all over his party,” Cook said, but he stopped short of saying that a Democrat will win the White House from Republicans in 2008.

    “Each of the Democrats has their own weaknesses and as a result will probably keep the election pretty close,” Cook said.

  71. Thank you Admin–for the excellent work you do on this site, along with the bloggers you have honored. The cumulative effect is to give far deeper insights into the campaign process than can be found anywhere else, and to provide Hillary supporters like us with the information we need to argue effectively with opponents and to pursuade those who remain neutral, in a much changed political landscape where over 40% of the electorate are independents.

  72. Clinton’s ‘discipline’ has her close to locking up the nomination
    Sunday, September 09, 2007MARK WEINER WASHINGTON NOTEBOOK
    One of the nation’s leading authorities on political trends and U.S. elections likes what he sees in the early days of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign for president.

    Charlie Cook, publisher of the Cook Political Report, said Clinton has the “best organized” presidential campaign he has seen since Richard Nixon won re-election in a landslide in 1972.

    “On the Democratic side, I think it’s going to be a real challenge for any other candidate to knock out Hillary Clinton,” Cook told a small group of journalists Monday at the National Press Foundation in Washington.

    He called New York’s junior senator a “disciplined campaigner” who has worked with “Prussian-like efficiency” in her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination.

    Cook said he traveled to New Hampshire and was impressed after watching Clinton interact with voters and deliver her stump speech. He said the senator has every detail covered and leaves nothing to chance, which is why some people criticize her for coming across as calculating and impersonal.

    “Does she give up spontaneity? Yes. But my guess is she’ll come up with a plan to deal with spontaneity,” Cook said.

    In polls, Clinton on average now runs ahead of each of the major Republican candidates, he said.

    “What we’re seeing is President Bush and Iraq as sort of a wet blanket all over his party,” Cook said, but he stopped short of saying that a Democrat will win the White House from Republicans in 2008.

    “Each of the Democrats has their own weaknesses and as a result will probably keep the election pretty close,” Cook said.

  73. Amin,
    Yes I get your point and thanks for saying that. You are right – I almost forgot obama’s claim to fame is his being the new breed in politics!! Let’s watch for the day for Oprah to have egg on her face!!!

  74. Hi Admin,

    I have finally been able to upload one video to youtube as a test. The video is about tomorrow’s Spanish debate in Florida. It mentioned Hillary would have 5 events scheduled on Monday following the debate.
    Feel free to insert the video into commentary section…
    Don’t forget tomorrow’s debate!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u9WQRHztkg

  75. Well, Oprah knows as much about foreign policy as Osama Obama. Frankly, she’s more qualified to be President than Obama. I’m no fan of Dave Brooks but I love the Daily Osama thing–he’s got a point.

  76. “Each of the Democrats has their own weaknesses and as a result will probably keep the election pretty close,” Cook said.

    Um, and the Repubs don’t have weaknesses? No one’s paying attention to their because all the focus is on the Dems. His point about HRC’s disciplined campaign is on the money, however. And that’s a reflection on her, definitely.

Comments are closed.