Obama’s Present To RIPublicans

Barack Cheney Obama, fresh from his Slime Hillary Clinton gig on the Tonight Show, today proudly continues his Slime Hillary Clinton tour – with Ripublicans joining him as an added attraction in Obama’s Chicago Circus of the Ridiculous.

Buried in Josh Marshall’s increasingly biased against Hillary Clinton blog is an interesting lump of information posted by someone other than Josh ‘Obama is Marvelous’ Marshall.


“Interestingly, the Republican National Committee is now circulating Obama’s memo among reporters via email as a way to make the case against Hillary as a general election candidate.”

Hillary Clinton strategist Mark Penn has responded to the Obama/Ripublican Von Ribbentrop Pact:

This morning I explained in a breakfast briefing that Hillary has the potential if she is our nominee to win almost a quarter of Republican women in the general election, and that this could well be a last-minute surprise that happens in all of the regions of the country.

I was looking recently at Republican women voters (core Republicans and Republican leaners), and their support for Hillary has doubled in the last few months to 13 percent, from less than 6 percent. Also quite interestingly, “Don’t Knows” surged to 11 percent, so a total of 24 percent would either vote for her or consider voting for her. The same thing happened to her favorables with this group — they also went up. While 75 percent viewed her unfavorably, this was down from 87 percent just a few months ago.

So there is now about a quarter of Republican women open to voting for Hillary, about double from June. Looking at those trends, I believe in the end, if she is our nominee, she will continue to expand her share of Republican women votes, and that there is a growing vote in that group for her. In the overall national polling, she is beating Rudy Giuliani among women by 18 points, so women are strongly coming over to Hillary so far in this campaign.

Has Mark Penn lost his mind with his analysis of Republican women voting for Hillary? No, Mark Penn is right on target. The Dallas Morning News:

Independent evidence indicates that her sex is a strong asset in seeking the Democratic nomination. And while it would be premature to say for sure that it will help in the general election, initial signs are that it will be a plus, something a prominent Texas Republican pollster says his party has failed to recognize.

“Republicans underestimate the very powerful symbolism and feel-good emotions that would accompany electing the first woman president,” said Dr. David Hill of Houston, director of Hill Research Consultants. “It’s a big deal.”

Amazing. Mark Penn, a smart WINNING guy just might have a point. Read this amazing sentence from pollster Hill:

Before this is over, Hillary’s candidacy will have more in common with Amelia Earhart’s first trans-Atlantic flight or Sally K. Ride’s first trip into space than Helmsley’s heartlessness,” he wrote.

Obama’s “Don’t Blame Bush” campaign [see the Washington Post quotes at the link] publishes memoranda lovingly circulated by Ripublicans. Another NOT MARK PENN pollster, the respected Andrew Kohut, addresses the “woman” issue and appears to agree with the Penn thesis:

Andrew Kohut of the independent Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, said a study of 40 statewide elections showed that female Democrats did better against male Republicans, largely because they did better among women and no worse among men.

Though conceding that some find Mrs. Clinton “more polarizing” than some other female candidates, Mr. Kohut suggested she would enjoy a similar advantage. He said the Pew study showed that “the gender differences in support for Clinton at this early stage in the campaign are, on average, typical for Democratic women who run for statewide office.”

Her advantage is most obvious in polls of prospective Democratic primary and caucus voters. The latest USA Today/Gallup poll shows that she attracts 55 percent of women, compared with 44 percent of men. By contrast, Sen. Barack Obama gets 23 percent of women and 20 percent of men.

A similar pattern is evident in individual state polls.

Iowa Woman-Power; National Woman-Power:

In Iowa, which holds the first caucuses, the latest Des Moines Register poll showed Mrs. Clinton with a 13-point lead among women, easily offsetting a small lead for Sen. John Edwards and Mr. Obama among men.

Some 54 percent of the Democratic turnout in 2004 was female. [snip]

But a similar advantage appears in general-election surveys. A recent ABC News-Washington Post poll showed her leading Rudy Giuliani by 8 points overall but by 18 points among women.

GOP candidates and the Republican National Committee already are attacking many Clinton statements and proposals. But Mr. Kohut agreed that if women perceive that she is being attacked as a woman, “there could be a rallying to her.”

Faced with facts the Obama campaign slings mud and slime for Ripublicans to use against a Democrat in the general election.

Dick Cheney loves attacking Democrats. Obama and Cheney are two of a kind.


79 thoughts on “Obama’s Present To RIPublicans

  1. why is Edwards so stupid and incompetent? His campaign is still harping on the stupid attack line of ‘Washington lobbyists’. It has gained him no traction. I’m worried about him. If he slips away in Iowa, where will his supporters go? More on Edwards’ stupid attack…

    Former North Carolina senator John Edwards could not have dreamed up a better chance to draw a contrast with rival Hillary Clinton, a New York senator.

    Yesterday morning, ABC News reported on its website that Clinton had scheduled a “Rural Americans for Hillary” lunch for later this month. But the location for the lunch, which features a briefing from members of Congress and senior campaign staff, is anything but rural: the Washington office of Troutman Sanders Public Affairs, a lobbying firm representing Monsanto, the agribusiness and biotechnology giant.

    Edwards had spent the past two days on the ground in Iowa promoting his rural agenda and looking for caucus votes. His hometown newspaper, the News & Observer in Raleigh, rewarded him with this headline: “Edwards gets boots dirty as he woos rural voters.”

    “While John Edwards has introduced policies to ensure family farmers can compete against big agribusiness, protect the food we eat and preserve farming communities, Hillary Clinton, beholden to Washington lobbyists, is tailoring her rural policy to reflect the needs of big agribusiness,” Edwards’s communications director, Chris Kofinis, said in a statement yesterday. “While corporate America and lobbyists may want someone like Clinton in the White House, regular Americans are ready for someone who will stand up for them and fight for real change.”

    But a rival campaign said Edwards, too, has had ties to Monsanto, including investments in a private-equity firm that invested in the company.

    In May, Fortress Investment Group, a publicly held private-equity fund for which Edwards worked part time last year, held 9,700 shares in Monsanto worth a relatively insignificant $533,000, US Securities and Exchange Commission documents show. The Fortress fund had shed those shares as of August, records show. The Wall Street Journal reported in August that Edwards had roughly $16 million invested in Fortress funds.

    When Edwards ran for president in 2004, one of his top aides, Peter Scher, was a registered Monsanto lobbyist at the firm Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw.

    Clinton spokesman Phil Singer accused Edwards of ignoring his links to Monsanto and attacking the senator out of desperation.

    “In 2004, John Edwards said, ‘If you are looking for the candidate that will do the best job of attacking the other Democrats, I am not your guy,’ ” Singer said. “But he’s become that guy now that his 2008 campaign has stalled.”

    Kofinis responded that it was “disappointing that the Clinton campaign seems determined to make weak and baseless attacks, instead of facing the truth that selling out family farmers is wrong for Iowa and wrong for America.”

    Unlike Edwards and Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, Clinton has taken tens of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and political action committees. Her two rivals have sought to make that distinction central to their efforts to overtake her campaign

  2. Obama’s campaign is the dirtiest since Bush 2000. He is easily outdoing all candidates from both parties in dirty tricks and character attacks. He represents the worst of the dirty tactics we have seen from the Bush people and the republicans in the past years. Obama has no shame – he will misrepresent and distort anything to make an attack. Bush the Uniter! Obama the “new” politician.

    Good thing the Obama people are pretty incompetent, so we wont have to see another self-proclaimed “uniter” in the white house again.

    Btw, anyone else laughing at Obama’s story of how he lost his flag pin – thats the reason he stopped wearing it? First he says he doesn’t wear it for principle, then that backfires, so he creates a “dog ate my homework” excuse and says he lost the pin! I guess something that lame is the only move left for him, having played out his blaming the staff excuse.

  3. Why Am not surprise that Obama is making all these rookie mistakes….because he IS a rookie and that’s why Hillary’s charge of inexperience and lack substance stick to him like “white on rice.”

    I’ve been a Hillary Clinton supporter from the beginning and I’m so glad I found your site. It’s so nice to talk to like minded people who believe in logic and facts.

    I’ve convince my husband and son that Hillary is the future and Obama is a selfish dream because yes it would be wonderful to see a person of color as the President of the United States but he has to have the full package and to tell you the truth, the man ticked me off for running
    right now.

    Although, I can’t really fault him but what I didn’t like was his inability to think for himself and stand on his principles, control his supporters and his staff or correct them. I knew he was week when he let David Greffen called the Clintons liars in his name. Big mistake even if he didn’t know about first hand, he should had stood up and corrected his backer and distance himself from those comments….but he didn’t, he was silent and by his silent in my opinion he is complicit in the negative behaviors of those supporting him.

  4. Kostner, wonder who that “rival campaign” was? Good opposition research and rapid response on the Monsanto links. Edwards repeatedly launches attacks without vetting his own liabilities and the attacks bring up issues Edwards should have tried to avoid from the first.

    ANewNewDeal, where did you hear the “lost” pin version of Obama’s flag pin excuse? We heard that Kucinich was on Jon Stewart (Colbert?) and was asked to show what was in his pockets. Kucinich pulled out a flag pin from his pocket and said it was Obama’s flag pin. Hillarity ensued.

    Carbynew, welcome to the pink oasis. The Geffen nastiness clued a lot of people into the real intent of the Obama campaign. That was another situation where Obama could have put nastiness to rest by doing as you suggest and distancing himself from Geffen’s remarks. But of course a nasty campaign is what Obama intended all along. That is why Obama hired Axelrod and Gibbs.

    BTW, we are still waiting for an apology from Obama on the anonymous memos attacks. Bill Clinton must be apologized to by Obama, Hillary must be apologized to by Obama and the Southeast Asian community must be apologized to by Obama.

  5. Obama supporter Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post has more today on Hillary and the women’s vote:

    “A friend of mine in New York — a high-powered professional woman — told me the other day that she thought the country had moved beyond the point where women should want to vote for Hillary Clinton just because she would be the first woman president. “Just vote for the best person,” she said, with what sounds like impeccable logic.

    But Clinton, according to all the polls, is winning overwhelming support from female voters. And the reason, I think, is that there’s a flaw in my friend’s logic: Except in some sort of arcane higher-dimensional geometry comprehensible only to mathematicians, you can’t get beyond a point that you’ve never actually reached.

    The fact is that we’ve never had a female president. And for many women across the country — especially those of the boomer generation who have seen the role of women in American society change so dramatically — Clinton’s election would be a historic milestone and a source of great pride.

    That’s certainly not the only reason Clinton leads the national polls for the Democratic nomination. She started with universal name recognition and has proceeded to run a smart, largely mistake-free campaign. She is surrounded by the aura of her husband’s eight-year administration, and while that may be a mixed blessing if she gets to the general election, it’s a huge asset among the Democratic faithful.

    But her lead among women over Barack Obama and her other rivals is so huge — and so much greater than her lead among men — that it has to have something to do with gender. Which is perfectly understandable.

    But some of the numbers are stunning. A national CNN poll released Wednesday showed that among registered Democrats, 68 percent of African American women said Clinton was their likely choice for the nomination while only 25 percent backed Obama. By contrast, Obama led Clinton — 46 percent to 42 percent — among African American men.

    As the old proverb goes, “women hold up half the sky” — actually, a bit more than half. If Clinton can sustain her advantage among women — especially among the working-class and middle-class women who could be said to constitute the spine of the Democratic Party — it’s hard to see how Obama, John Edwards or any of the other challengers can gain much ground on her.

    Not that they aren’t trying. Clinton’s rivals are full of promises and proposals that are meant to appeal to female voters — initiatives on issues such as family leave and health insurance. All the Democratic contenders have records of support for gender equality. All of them, especially Obama and Edwards, are more than capable of projecting themselves as strong-yet-sensitive, modern, caring guys.

    But they can’t hide the fact that they’re guys. And she’s not.


  6. With apologies to men who treat a women as an equal and who believe they are capable and smart or, in the case of my husband, smarter than men, I must point out that the present bewilderment and resentment about Hillary’s popularity is, for many, richly deserved.

    “As ye sow, so shall ye reap.” What has been sown for years is that women cannot think like a man, be as strong, or lead. Now we are reaping the notion that the change we are desperately looking for is for someone who does not think exactly like a man — not this president and his minions, anyway.

    This is why Obama’s strategy of lowering Hillary’s high ratings by comparing her to Bush is not only extremely offensive and utterly false but self-defeating as he should have learned last time..

    For his 8 years and about 4 thereafter, everything bad that happened was Bill Clinton’s fault. Now it is
    all Hillary’s. Obama’s judgment is bad. Let’s move on.

  7. The obvious is the most effective defense/offense.. Cheney has chosen Obama as his next of kin for the White House; I’d barrage the airwaves with more of Bush/Cheney policies continuing with an Obama presidency. A passing of the torch to Obama.

    Make Obama synonomous with Bush/Cheney in animated fashion… More War, no S-Chip, no Tax Cuts for the Middle Class… It’s a natural, especially where Obama is so proud of his relationship w/Cheney.

    Jamit and cramit down the throats of the Obama Democrats…you can throw in Obama’s abandonment of the Baby Boomers for good measure, just in case we missed a demographic along the way!


    Mrs. S.

  8. Look the main article on hillaryhub about Hillary Surprise. I agree with that 100%. It also helps to explain the disconnect between the prioroties of elite media (way upper middle class to rich) and elite blogs vs. that of an average middle class voter. The average middle class voter cares much more about how to get by day to day, how to put their children through college, how to cover their medical costs etc. while the upper middle class (elite, namely most of MSM and elite blogs) care about stuff like “whom to have a beer with”, “who can give a good speech”, “lobbyists” etc.. that matter little to people who are struggling to get by day to day. Hillary’s message resonates with them while Obama’s message resonates with the elites.

  9. Obama’s messages revolve around the hallmarked messages Republicans are famous for..”NUANCE”.. I believe it was Lindsey Graham that pointed this out to his own party.. (paraphrased) While we focus on (nuanced issues) abortion, gays and religion; our country is going to hell in a hand basket…(in so many words)

    Mrs. S.

  10. freckles, Welcome to Big Pink! 🙂

    Also, ra1029, I agree with you about Obama’s message resonating with the elites. Frankly, that whole “politics of hope” thing has a very limited appeal, if that’s all you’ve got. It’s intellectual more than pragmatic.

    BTW, I’m not at all surprised the RNC is circulating that Obama memo. The RNC is as desperate as he is.

  11. admin, From the story I’m assuming the rival campaign was Hillary’s, especially since she was the target of Edwards’ lame attack.

    BTW, here’s another excuse to laugh at Edwards. A new poll has Hillary leading him by 13 in NC!

    Clinton 31%
    Edwards 18%


  12. I like this ‘Hill’ article…

    The 2008 Howard Dean Fantasy
    By Byron York
    October 19, 2007
    I remember traveling around Iowa a couple of weeks before the 2004 caucuses.

    Howard Dean was flying high, probably at his highest point. He could make mistakes, gaffes, funny noises, whatever, and it didn’t seem to hurt his commanding position in the polls.

    It got so bad that the other Democratic candidates were constantly irritated because the only thing reporters wanted to ask about was Howard Dean.

    “We haven’t gotten to the first vote,” Richard Gephardt told a small group of reporters at a café in Creston, Iowa.

    “We haven’t had one vote cast in this country. Now, you all do a great job, but the real deciders of this are not the media but the people. You’ve got to be a little patient, and you’ve got to let the people decide this.”

    Gephardt turned out to be right (although the real deciders didn’t decide on him).

    Dean melted down, let out a scream, and his campaign fell apart.

    Everyone moved on. But now the episode has given rise to something new: the 2008 Howard Dean Fantasy.

    This time, the fantasy goes, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is Dean.

    On Wednesday night, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), playing the role of Richard Gephardt, said on “The Tonight Show,” “We’ve got a long way to go before the first vote is cast.”

    “Four years ago, you know, President Howard Dean was coronated, and that didn’t work out. And so really until those folks start going into the polling place, these races end up being very fluid.”

    OK, sure, the race is theoretically fluid. But can a candidate who runs on the hope that the Clinton campaign will implode end up in the winner’s circle?

    Well — anything’s possible. But he better have a Plan B.

    “She’s the robot candidate,” one Democratic strategist said recently of Clinton. “She doesn’t make mistakes. She’s getting better. She is regarded as warmer than I thought possible.

    “Barack is still just as good, but she’s just picked up her game.”

    The problem is the “still just as good” part. Ten months after declaring his candidacy on a freezing Illinois day, Obama is still pretty much in the same place he’s been all along.

    He established himself as Mr. Hope and Change, and now, stuck in distant second place, he’s trying to take the offensive against Clinton.

    But that’s hard for Mr. Hope and Change to do. And the truly scary thing, for him, is that he might be this year’s Howard Dean.

    “In some ways, his problem is like the problem Dean had,” the Democratic strategist continued. “To most people, Barack Obama represents an idea. He’s an aspirational candidate — like, ‘Wouldn’t it be great if what Barack Obama says was possible?’ There’s no rationale for the candidacy other than hope and change, and what the hell does that mean?”

    Back in late 2003, a number of Republicans were hoping and praying that Democrats would choose Dean.

    My magazine, National Review, published a cover with a picture of a wigged-out looking Dean and the message “PLEASE Nominate This Man.”

    Alas, it wasn’t to be, and looking back it seems that in the back of our minds we all knew that.
    Now it doesn’t feel that way at all.

    The Robot Candidate seems too strong, and, just as important, her rivals seem too weak for a massive shakeup to occur.
    But that’s no fun. So enjoy this moment — at least we’ve still got a few more weeks to indulge in the Howard Dean Fantasy.

  13. Poor Edwards…

    Edwards’ cash on hand

    A reader unaffiliated with a campaign spots a little trick campaigns (and companies) routinely use to bump up their cash on hand, and that seems to have been used to greatest effect by Edwards last quarter. The idea is to push your expenses into the next quarter, by delaying things like payroll.

    Anyway, Edwards, whose campaign typically pays its staff on the 15th and the 30th, shows only one salary line last month, on Sept. 15, for a total of more than $850,000. There wasn’t a payment on Sept. 30 (which, incidentally, was a Sunday, another possible reason; the other campaigns happen to pay on a different cycle).

    The effect, in any case, was to bump up the cash on hand.

  14. Obama told Leno his excuse of how he lost the flag pin. Thanks HllaryLandRocks. This guy always tries to find his way out of something by splitting hairs and then telling everyone else they are mistaken, pointing to his “split hair” rationale to show that they just got the issue a little bit wrong, they don’t “really” understand, and now wise Obama will clarify it for them. Problem is is that he is mostly lying when be tries to backtrack himself out of a problem. The most recent example is the flag pin. A few weeks ago he was telling us how he didn’t really mean it when he said he didn’t know how he would have voted on the Iraq war resolution had he been in the senate, because he only “said it once to prop up democrats” were. Of course that’s not true, but Obama has been BSing people his entire life, and it’s driving him crazy not getting away with it this time

  15. Don’t people like Eugen Robinson get it. Women are voting for the best candidate. He’s got it exactly backwards.

  16. Obama Campaign Spending Report Incomplete

    “The report filed late Monday shows dozens of payments to credit card companies that were not accompanied by a specific explanation of what the money was spent on. As much as $1.2 million in credit card charges in July, August and September did not contain detailed information of hotels, airfare and campaign expenditures.”


    While no one else seems to be following up on this, it looks like the Obama camp played, “fast and loose”, with the finances. I think that he spent a good deal more than was initially reported and that’s the real reason for the Obama email fundraising push. That, ‘gap” was more than the 2 million stated.
    Anyone want to guess how far he trails in the money primary NOW?

    Also cheek out the latest from Rasmussen;
    Friday, October 19, 2007

    The fall of 2007 is a good time to be Senator Hillary Clinton. Her lead has been growing in national polls for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, her negatives have held steady while those for her challengers have been growing, she leads now in Iowa and New Hampshire, and the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that Clinton is seen as the most electable candidate in either party.

    Eighty-one percent (81%) of Democrats say that Clinton is at least somewhat likely to win the White House if nominated by her party. That’s up from 75% a month ago and the current total includes an astounding 50% of Democrats who believe she is Very Likely to win it all if nominated. No other candidate—Republican or Democrat—comes close to that figure. A month ago, 41% of Democrats thought Clinton was Very Likely to win.

    About the only concern for Clinton in the numbers is that the election will be held in the fall of 2008, not this year. Not only that, of course, but the first actual votes to be cast in Election 2008 are still a few months away.

    Sixty-five percent (65%) of Democrats think Senator Barack Obama is at least somewhat likely to win the general election if nominated. However, just 23% believe he is Very Likely to do so. A month ago, 69% said that Obama was Somewhat (43%) or Very (26%) Likely to win if nominated. A recent Rasmussen Reports survey found that Democratic voters are beginning to see Obama as more politically liberal than Clinton.

    Perceptions of electability for former Senator John Edwards have slipped over the past month. Just 60% now say he is at least somewhat likely to win, down from 73% a month ago. Only 17% say he is Very Likely to win, down from 24%.

    Just 30% of Democrats think New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson would have a chance of winning if nominated. Only 6% believe he would be Very Likely to win.


  17. I just did an interview with politico and they asked me what I thought about the Iowa Caucuses, January 14th or the 3rd? I said the third. I said that I hope New Hampshire moves theirs up to December because it will help Hillary and that Iowa should be as close to NH as possible to shorten the gap of time between (create a shock effect ya know, carry her to victory in Iowa). What do y’all think. I am nervous I am going to start a controversy. I also told him that there is a rule that people from out of state can caucus here if they live here for 3 days or longer and register. I confused the hell out of this guy. But what do you think? TMI or did I say the right things. Help me (:

    O, btw, see her new ad? Wow.

  18. Kostner, thanks for posting that article, a great read indeed.

    Right on the money, Obama seems more like Dean than Hillary does.

  19. celiff, thanks for the tip, just saw the ad now.

    Wow!!! A great one, her voice is really soothing and calm in this ad.
    And let me tell you, I have always loved her voice, deep and husky, haha. But no silly critic can attack her now.

    It seemed shorter than the previous ones, maybe because there was very few clips and editing done, but it looked visually nice. And the music was good too. She was attacking Bush, but in a strange way it came across as ‘unitingly'(not a word, I know, hehe) to me. 🙂
    Maybe because of, again, the soothing voice and music, I liked it.

  20. celiff, why did politico interview you? was it random or?
    I thought you did good, why did they want to know when you wanted the caucus to be?

    Just hope no body spills the beans, and decide to have the caucus later to aid Obama…..
    3rd sounds good.

    How about this rumor that NH will move their into December huh?
    Anything new on this?
    For no other reason, maybe Iowans need to have some competition, and realize this is important, and not just take it for granted. It is easy to fall in that trap, and almost forget to do your job as a voter, and get informd.

  21. ps, her new ad, Trapdoor, anyone see/recognize where she is in this clip?
    Seems like a good ‘performance’ by her.

    It is SOOO important with a good mic, when doing these things.

  22. Gorto,

    Her ad was cut from her stump speech, so no staged ‘performance’. She did great.

    On mydd, Edwards and his ‘white’ supporters are pushing a story on how Clinton raised money among those ‘poor Chinese’.

    Edwards and his supporters disgust me a lot. They are simply a bunch of white racists. This whole ‘white southern’ electability crap is just delusional. Taylor Marsh is absolutely right to call him out on his ‘racist’, ‘sexist’ tendancy.

  23. kostner I didn’t mean to imply she had a staged performance, I know it’s not. I was just wondering from where this could be. Iowa? NH? CA?….
    And with ‘performance’ I mean she delivered good, not acting wise, just….giving a good stump speech. Politicians are in many ways performers, they have to perform or people won’t bother to listen to you, like Richardson in debates = Bad debater(performer).

    Edwards has lost it again, if she has raised money, it is because people have wanted to give money, even poor people in this country give to politicians. Unbelievable.

  24. I’ve been reading a bit about the polling memo battle between Mark Penn and Obama’s Joel Benenson. The AP story has this quote:

    “Penn’s assertion is entirely baseless and refuted by a number of public polls. Moreover, these polls also indicate sizable defection among Democratic women should Sen. Clinton be the nominee,” Benenson said.

    WTF is he talking about? I’m not aware of a single poll that shows “sizable defection among Democratic women should Sen. Clinton be the nominee.” Her negatives among Dems are lower than Obama’s. No wonder the RNC is circulating his memo. What an idiot.

  25. BTW, that “Hillary Surprise” article linked on HillaryHub.com is great. Someone here recommended it (I forget who, but thanks!). It makes a lot of excellent points.

  26. What the hell is this FISA bill? Netkooks are buzzed with Chris Dodd’s hold.

    Geez, do any ordinary voter understand this damn FISA bill? The netkooks are so out of touch. They are pushing these stupid stuff nobody cares. People are dying in Iraq, oil prices rise to a new high, healthcare costs are skyrocketing, and middle class is getting squeezed.

    All those stupid netkooks care is FISA… Give me a fucking break.

  27. TheRealist says:

    ==”While no one else seems to be following up on this, it looks like the Obama camp played, “fast and loose”, with the finances. I think that he spent a good deal more than was initially reported and that’s the real reason for the Obama email fundraising push. That, ‘gap” was more than the 2 million stated.
    Anyone want to guess how far he trails in the money primary NOW?”==

    Yes, I agree. A close eye regarding bottom lines needs to be on Obama’s expenses because it ultimately affects his COH and the amounts eligibe for the Primary and the GE.

    As it is, a great deal of time has elapsed for filing an amended return when the deadline was 4 days ago on Monday @ midnight. That sweet fragrant smell of coverup is wafting through the air… hmm…delicioso!


  28. Celiff, you did fine in the interview. You probably confused them because what they were looking for was some Iowan who would insist on having Iowa 100% first and who would threaten NH for threatening to vote in December.

    Big Media is upset at having Christmas vacation disturbed by Iowa or NH voting early.

    You wrote that a person from out of state can caucus if they register 3 days earlier. Are you sure about that rule? Do you have a cite for that rule? You wrote in a post a few days earlier that the Obama campaign wants to bring in busloads of Illinois people 3 days before the caucuses. If they think it is possible to register for the caucuses 3 days earlier then the attempt would be to have Illinois voters vote in Iowa.

    We’ll check the Iowa rules, but if you have any information on this 3 day registration rule, let us know. This could be very dangerous and would need to be exposed.

  29. Thanks admin. I am not 100% positive on that rule, but if politico is a good news source they’ll check it out. I told him I thought it was true, but didn’t say for sure it was.

    Did you hear that Michigan’s governor and Lt. governor endorsed Hillary? Good news.

    That 3 day rule could be dangerous for sure.

  30. hi guys, i just saw the new ad from hillary and it was great a usual. i believe she has mandy grunwald from the 1992 caimpaign.

  31. Terrondt, yes, Mandy Grunwald is involved again! 🙂 And IIRC, she was the driving force behind the “Sopranos” spoof, too.

  32. Celiff, our understanding is that you must be a registered Iowa voter and reside in Iowa for at least 6 months before you can LEGALLY register to vote in the caucuses.

    However, big HOWEVER, those who register to vote in the caucus are not vetted thoroughly. It is possible to register illegally to vote in Iowa a few days ahead.

    You might be on to something rather big. It is possible that the Obama campaign is planning on bringing outsiders to vote in Iowa 3 days before the caucuses.

  33. I’m a big Mandy Grunwald fan myself. I remember her from the ’92 campaign.

    BTW, on fundraising, didn’t Obama fail to provide some spending details, too, in his quarterly report? Hmmm … That “gap” probably IS bigger than $2 million.

    And, kostner, Obama’s come out against the FISA bill, FWIW.

  34. I also thought this quote from Byron York’s piece was pretty funny:

    “In some ways, his problem is like the problem Dean had,” the Democratic strategist continued. “To most people, Barack Obama represents an idea. He’s an aspirational candidate — like, ‘Wouldn’t it be great if what Barack Obama says was possible?’ There’s no rationale for the candidacy other than hope and change, and what the hell does that mean?”

  35. Yeah, I liked that quote too Paula.

    I forgot to say that I thought she looked VERY Presidential in the ad.
    She didn’t look like a candidate on the campaign trail, she looked like the President! 😀 😀 😀 Alright!!!! I’m getting giddy just thinking about it!

  36. admin,

    PEGGY NOONAN continues her obsession with you. The following is from an article she penned in WSJ.

    ‘Mrs. Clinton is the tea bag that brings the boiling water with her. It’s always high drama with her, always a cauldron–secret Web sites put up by unnamed operatives smearing Barack Obama in the tones of Tokyo Rose, Chinese businessmen having breakdowns on trains after the campaign cash is traced back, secret deals. It’s always flying monkeys. One always wants to ask: Why? What is this?

    It’s funny that Peggy Noonan brought my attention to this site in the first place!

  37. Kostner: Noonan is so funny. The Hillary supporters on Daily Kos call themselves the Flying Monkey Squadron. Noonan is reading our contributions? I am so amused.

  38. I’m can’t believe how bias the media is with this Obama love fest going on. It’s been a sad fact this election season that about only 10% or the news articles have been fair to Hillary. The others are suspect to me because of the high level of Obama supporters in the media.

    Some of the best article in fact has come from the conservative and independent writers. Unforturnately, some of the worst and one sided has come from those in the media who support Obama.

    Case in point is the bias Los Angeles Time article on the chinese immigrant donors…very one sided and doesn’t take in account to this happening to most of the top tier canidates. I can’t believe Obama has gotten away with his crappy reporting submission, yet Hillary Clinton is being raked over the coals over slight reporting irregalarities from 3rd party organization.

    And this so called false concern about immigrants giving money to Hillary, when has a mean test been approved to give to your canidate of choice. I know that some immigrant feel honor to give to canidate and Cubans have been doing this for decades. I was even told by my friend that that giving money to polititans is a way to invest in America and it’s an honor to do it and also let the polititan know my concerns…the same as giving money to the church.

    It was kind of disrespect for to poor people and the continuing treating them as 2nd class citizens.

  39. The LA TIMES was obviously straight from another candidate’s oppo research team. Probably either the Republicans or Obama.

  40. DCDemocrat, soon Barack Obama himself will echo Louis XIV and say “L’etat, c’est moi.”

    The post is the definition of cult.

  41. File these under “D” for dumb (from the Hotline):

    “Chris Dodd was joined by members of the NH firefighters’ union and a group of young students as he became the first major Dem candidate to file for the NH primary. As he sat down to speak with reporters after filing, Dodd asked Sec/State Bill Gardner how ex-Sen. Gary Hart (D-CO) was doing in NH when he came to file before the ’84 race. Gardner told him that Hart was in single digits at the time. Dodd: “There you go, I rest my case.”


    “Edwards, in an interview with the Las Vegas Review-Journal on 10/18: “My experience is that in states that are sometimes red, sometimes blue, the places where the results (of national elections) are determined … the determination is made based on how a Democrat does in smaller towns and smaller communities. … I’m the candidate who can do well in those places. Nevada’s a state I believe I could do well in in the general election for the same reasons. … I’m the Democratic candidate who’s actually won in a red state. I beat an incumbent Republican to get elected to the U.S. Senate. … I grew up in a rural, small-town community, so I have a natural connection to people in those parts of America that are crucial to winning in battleground states.”


    “In case you were wondering, Obama “can shake his booty.” During a taping of “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” 10/18, Obama “offered voters a quick glimpse of his bust-a-move skills” by “dancing to the tune” of Beyonce’s “Crazy in Love.” Degeneres, to Obama: “You got some moves. You’re the best dancer so far of the presidential candidates.” Obama: “It’s a low mark, but I’m pretty sure I’ve got better moves than [Rudy] Giuliani.” The episode is slated to air 10/29.”

    Someone please tell Dodd that Gary Hart lost the primary and the election, tell Edwards he lost his home state of North Carolina in 2004 and tell Obama that his dancing skills feed stereotypes and don’t help his search for credibility.

  42. admin: I was struck by the diarist saying Obama is the message when Christian theology says Jesus is the Word. The parallelism was over the top.

    There is a subtle shift happening at dkos, and I think it might be significant. Dodd is beginning to get the vocal backing of people there. They are in quite a stew about the FISA bill, and Dodd placed a hold on the bill, so he is receiving a fair amount of adulation from the madding crowds. I think with Gore so close to being the impossible dream (filing deadlines) and the ongoing Obamwards meltdown, they’re searching for the newest un-Hillary. Don’t be surprised if Dodd becomes the latest craze at a blog near you.

  43. In the beginning was the Word, DCDemocrat. Obama’s shrinking base is increasingly a cult.

    Dodd is the latest Hillary parking lot. Gore was always a Hillary parking lot. Richardson, Biden are also Hillary parking lots. Those parked in the lots will soon drive to HillaryLand.

    Dodd is the latest craze. Think Pokeman, pet rocks, beanie babies.

    Whatevery happened to the Gore supporters? Are they still deluded that Gore will get in the race or have they looked at the polls and the calendar and realized it is too late, at best. Have Gore’s “I won’t run” statements penetrated yet?

    The Head Kook wrote a long time ago (12/5/06) called “2008: If Obama runs, he wins”. So much for that delusion. Head Kook has for all intents and purposes endorsed Obama but still wants Obama to dance to the Kooks music. Two rams facing each other and butting heads, going nowhere. They will both wake up with headaches when Hillary gets the nomination and the general election.

  44. You know, admin, I don’t think Noonan was very fair to you. I assume it was your site she referred to as slandering Obama, but you post mostly positive stuff about Hillary, and often your Obama postings are video or quotes from Obama himself.

  45. Here are some of the laugh lines (why do people listen to this kook?) from the Head Kook’s Obama will win post:

    it’s hard to see how Barack Obama loses the nomination barring scandal or the mother-of-all gaffes.

    it would be Obama’s race to lose.

    Nevada will be a battle between Edwards and his union allies, and Richardson and his southwestern and Latino base.

    Iowa is right next door to Obama’s Illinois, and while Vilsack will win it (getting no boost out of it), the race for second-place will determine the “true” winner

    Hillary, for now, appears to be bypassing Iowa

    So the early battle would appear to be between Edwards and Obama

    But given the state’s [South Carolina] large African American population, along with Obama’s popularity with female voters (yeah, they love him),

    There’s one thing that could put a skid on Obama’s fast rise — an Al Gore entrance into the race. Other than that, I don’t see a way anyone stops him.

    But an entrance into the race would make Obama the prohibitive favorite. If politics is about seizing opportunities, it would seem a no-brainer for him to enter the race now.

  46. O, btw, John Edwards, the whiny wimp from NC (which as we know Hillary has the lead in) will be on Real Time With Bill Maher. I can’t wait to see how he whines. Ugh.

  47. admin,

    That’s hilarious. do you still have the link to that head kooks’ ‘Obama’s race to lose’ essay? I’ll sure keep it on file. LOL.

  48. Kost I wouldn’t post that anywhere too early. I’m superstious. Fine here, but I’d hate to see that everywhere.

  49. Here’s one I came across on the Progressive Review website…

    “Barack Oblahblah”

    I would add one more blah, just because it fits more with the colloquialism…

    Barack Oblahblahblah”

  50. I know Hillary will not vote for a fisa bill with retroactive immunity for the telephone companies-but I really hope she will join dodd and biden and fillibuster this sellout bill. Hillary is frontrunner for the presidency and if she joins the effort to stop this outrage it will make huge headlines and force a better bill. and Im not a “netkook”-Im a worried american tired ofwatching the civil liberties my ancestors fought for go down the tubes. hillary-block that bill.

  51. texan4hillary,

    i disagree. These bills are for netroots and liberal elitists. Nobody outside blogsphere gives a damn on these sorts of bills. Why do demos waste energy fighting these things? The economy is sliding into recession. Ordinary voters care more about bread-and-butter issues instead of elitist bloggers’ pet projects.

    Democrats will lose election next year if they keep on doing these silly things dictated by dailykooks.

  52. I cant even read the DAILY KOS…..Its these people who are trying to take over the DEMOCRATIC PARTY. It would be funny if next year, after Hillary gets the DEM nomination, she snubs the KOS convention and ATTENDS the DLC convention. That would drive them all BIZERK!

Comments are closed.