Monday’s Mini-Report

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* Mark Penn has been forced out of his role in the Clinton campaign, but he’s not really gone: “…Penn may no longer have the coveted title of chief strategist, but he remains a key member of the campaign’s senior staff. Mr. Penn took part on the campaign’s morning message call this morning, as usual. This afternoon, he is also scheduled to be on a call with Clinton and other aides to begin to prepare for Saturday’s presidential debate in Philadelphia. Mr. Penn ‘is still going to be very much involved,’ a senior campaign official said. Indeed, it is not clear precisely what Mr. Penn’s title-change entails, other than a public rebuke, although the official said that ‘there is a difference between being in charge and being one of many voices.'”

* Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman (D), now out from behind bars, has quite a few interesting things to say — about the details of his case and about the need for Karl Rove to testify about his role in the controversy.

* Great chart comparing job growth during Clinton’s two terms against job growth during Bush’s two terms.

* John McCain gave another big speech in Iraq today. Right around the time the GOP candidate was insisting that we’ve “turn[ed] things around,” MSNBC had to break away to report on mortars being fired into the Green Zone, which came just a day after five Americans troops were killed in Iraq.

* Interesting statement from the Clinton campaign: “The violent clashes in Tibet and the failure of the Chinese government to use its full leverage with Sudan to stop the genocide in Darfur are opportunities for Presidential leadership. These events underscore why I believe the Bush administration has been wrong to downplay human rights in its policy towards China. At this time, and in light of recent events, I believe President Bush should not plan on attending the opening ceremonies in Beijing, absent major changes by the Chinese government.”

* Good move on the part of New Jersey officials on six weeks of paid leave for workers to to “care for sick family members and newborn or adopted children.”

* “The percentage of recruits requiring a waiver to join the Army because of a criminal record or other past misconduct has more than doubled since 2004.” Still no law-abiding gays, though.

* The Mortgage Bankers Association is now finding it “harder than it imagined to pay its own mortgage.”

* Historian Sean Wilentz makes the case today that the if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead, and Obama’s lead is “reliant on certain eccentricities in the current Democratic nominating process,” most notably a proportional system of dividing delegates in the states. Perhaps. But why is a winner-take-all system superior? Wilentz doesn’t say. (And aren’t those “eccentricities” the party rules that all the candidates agreed to play by before the process even began?)

* The Pulitzer Prizes were announced today. The WaPo did especially well.

* I’m sure everyone will want to pick up the new book from my friend Cliff Schecter, “The Real McCain: Why Conservatives Don’t Trust Him and Why Independents Shouldn’t.”

* Some of Cliff’s revelations are already raising eyebrows.

* The NYT characterized professional blogging as dangerous to one’s health.

* After seeing his lead dissipate last week, the new Gallup Daily Tracking poll shows Obama back up by nine.

* Cokie Roberts helps capture everything that’s wrong with the media establishment’s take on Iraq. It’s painful but important.

* And finally, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.), one of Congress’ most unhinged members, insisted last week that because of immigration, “We’re losing our country. People are not assimilating themselves to America. They’re not speaking English, and you must speak it if you want to succeed here in this country,” she said. Bachmann also compared the situation on the border to the Israel/Palestine conflict, saying “the argument that fences don’t work doesn’t hold water. Look at Israel and Palestine. Fences work.” Oh my.

Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

Mark Penn has been forced out of his role in the Clinton campaign, but he’s not really gone: “…

hillary’s chickens are coming home to roost…

  • Historian Sean Wilentz makes the case today that the if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead, and Obama’s lead is “reliant on certain eccentricities in the current Democratic nominating process,” most notably a proportional system of dividing delegates in the states. Perhaps. But why is a winner-take-all system superior? Wilentz doesn’t say. (And aren’t those “eccentricities” the party rules that all the candidates agreed to play by before the process even began?)

    Since academics always use 50 words where one will do, here’s Seanny-poo edited down to the essentials:

    “If wishes were horses, we’d all be riding.”

    Poor widdle Seanny-poo, as deluded as failed professor Mary (is there something about academics not being able to understand what they’re looking at?) is all upset that the rules didn’t let The Empress win. Hurrah for the rules! A majority of the country now knows the Clintons for the traitors they are.

    If you want to see someone taken down, eviscerated, and the body left to rot in the gutter, go read the letters to Seanny-poo’s little rant. Makes what happens here to Mary Mary Quite Contrary look gentle.

  • …it is not clear precisely what Mr. Penn’s title-change entails, other than a public rebuke…

    What Mr. Penn’s title-change entails? Not a damn thing.

    Hillary keeps him on the payroll to her (and our) demise.

    Of course, the decision to keep him on (and hire him in the first place) speaks to her judgement (or lack thereof).

  • The NYT characterized professional blogging as dangerous to one’s health.

    Thus we owe a big debt of gratitude to Steve, who’s putting his health in jeopardy to contribute to the enlightenment of the masses. I’d go so far as to call him a true patriot if not for the fact that he doesn’t wear a lapel flag pin.

  • Assignment for Hillary Haters. Read Digby’s post Storylines. Maybe the over-the-top HIllary haters got fooled by the media again into jumping to conclusions about her.

  • Wilentz has been offering a number of odd arguments for Hillary’s candidacy, but this is the most bizarre yet. If the rules were different, the candidates would have campaigned rather differently.

    Using the results from a contest predicated on one set of rules and determining an outcome based on another is ridiculous. That’d be like taking the results of the Final Four games and saying, hey, sure, Memphis may have scored more points, but UCLA had more assists, and that’s what really matters, so UCLA should win.

    Wilentz has apparently been a friend of the Clintons since he and Bill were at Oxford together. You can’t blame him for trying to help out an old friend, but this is just sad.

  • Historian Sean Wilentz makes the case today that the if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead, and Obama’s lead is “reliant on certain eccentricities in the current Democratic nominating process,…

    There’s nothing “eccentric” about proportional distribution of delegates. If a primary system is eccentric and needs modification, then look to the winner-take-all approach (which, incidentally, is why we need to find a way to do away with the electoral college).

  • …if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead

    It’s just amazing how Hillary is winning using everything except the actual rules of the Democratic Party.

    If Hillary sees her shadow on the first Thursday following the new moon after the Ides of March…

  • Mark Penn has been forced out of his role in the Clinton campaign, but he’s not really gone: “…

    Isn’t that pretty much true of Clinton in the primary? She’s out, but not really gone.

    And what an arrogant move. Her media buddies played it up well. I’ve seen reports of his ‘ousting’ all over. But it’s just a shift. More smoke and mirrors from the empress of lies. Do. Not. Want.

    Historian Sean Wilentz makes the case today that the if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead,…

    Oh please. Proportional is far more democratic. Wilentz is a foo deserving of our pity.

    “If wishes were horses, we’d all be riding.” -Tom Cleaver

    Tom successfully pitied him. Well done, maestro.

  • Peter Funt (candid camera) has a few more ways Hillary might win.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/06/AR2008040601661.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

    I believe President Bush should not plan on attending the opening ceremonies in Beijing,”

    I hate mindless symbolism.

    entheo (1)Mark Penn has been forced out of his role in the Clinton campaign, but he’s not really gone: “…hillary’s chickens are coming home to roost…

    Damn it, entheo, you made me shoot milk out my nose.

  • And another thing – winner takes all really sux. If you live in a red/purple state, twice your vote was ‘given’ to Bush.

  • Gallup polls are only relevant when they show Obama ahead, but let’s not mention any other polls which show him still statistically even with Clinton.

    Thank God Penn’s role has been diminished, I’ll dance on Ellen’s show if he is fired for good!

    And, why shouldn’t it be relevant that Clinton would be way ahead in a winner-take-all system? Many people here argue that Michigan and Florida’s votes aren’t relevant, but if they had been counted then she’d be pretty much even with him in popular vote and delegates.. but hey, let’s only accept the tally that shows BO ahead, that’s fair and balanced!

  • I hope we don’t have to pry the keyboard from CB’s cold dead hand.

    * “The percentage of recruits requiring a waiver to join the Army because of a criminal record or other past misconduct has more than doubled since 2004.” Still no law-abiding gays, though.

    A lot of gays break the law just by living their lives.

    Obama is going to kick McCain’s ass when the general election caucuses start.

    Once again blogs have been passed over by the Pulitzers. Why do they hate us.

  • Obama is going to kick McCain’s ass when the general election caucuses start. – Dale,

    That’s about the funniest thing I’ve read all day.

  • Historian Sean Wilentz makes the case today that the if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead…

    Jebus. Are we really down to asking why Democrats don’t use Republican voting methods???

    And how come we never hear a Clinton supporter saying something like “if Hillary hadn’t voted for the biggest clusterfuck in American history she would be way ahead”?

  • …if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead…

    If “ifs and buts” were candy and nuts, we’d all have a wonderful Christmas.

  • Uhm, CB, a one liner on this? * Some of Cliff’s revelations are already raising eyebrows.

    Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain’s intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain’s hair and said, “You’re getting a little thin up there.” McCain’s face reddened, and he responded, “At least I don’t plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt.” McCain’s excuse was that it had been a long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long days.

    McPottymouth spews a line like this – in public – about his WIFE? And this is the man whose finger is on The Button?

    This deserves much more than a one-liner, IMHO.

  • Historian Sean Wilentz makes the case today that the if the Dems used a winner-take-all system in the primaries and caucuses, Clinton would be way ahead,…

    So?

  • So shillary is lying again….

    Penn is “out”, but is actually still a key senior staff member….

    Typical clinton bs – “depends what ‘is’ is…

    America does not need a bush-clinton-bush-clinton dynasty.

  • So, as is usually the case, Mr. Penn becomes another hanger on with a different title. Sort of reminds you of a ‘hanging’ chad doesn’t it? Nothing ever goes away in the Democratic party …… from those chads to the Hillary & Bill (which has to remind you of a bait and switch routine the more you listen), the Democrats just hate to lose honestly …… er, I mean, honestly the Democrats hate to lose don’t they? Now if we can just figure out how to make them count the people’s votes and respect the people’s choices we would truly have a Democratic election.

  • ” But why is a winner-take-all system superior? Wilentz doesn’t say. ”

    Winner- take-all is not an intrinsically superior system. It is the system that will be in place in November. And there will be no caucuses.

  • Regarding winner take all vs current democratic party primary rules:

    The winner-take-all system like the Republicans use is better if you want to select someone from the current establishment or a mainstream party member. I personally find the Democratic system an advantage in that it allows stellar candidates to rise to the top, even if they are not pre-selected by the establishment.

  • Let me note that the fact that someone won by using the rules to their advantage (Obama’s 50-state strategy) and the grass-roots power involved is very applicable to November. Toppling the establishment (Clinton) is a big feat and bodes very well against McCain!

  • Dale (5): I read the Digby Storyline story. My conclusion is this is a circle of poor journalism (let’s pretend Hillary is also a form of journalist, for practical purposes).

    Here’s what we know:
    Hillary tells the detailed story of a woman who dies. It mirrors a story she was told by a policeman. The policeman heard the story from a relative of the woman. He knows the name, age, employment, and how she reportedly dies. The relative(s) refuse to talk to the media. A hospital denies the veracity of the story. The woman’s name, age, employment are public. The name of the denying hospital is public.

    Journalists:
    1) Hillary doesn’t know or at least say the name of the woman or hospital. Nor does she confirm where she heard the story.
    2) Kornblut (WaPo) and Mitchell (MSNBC) don’t know whether the story is true, or even whether the woman died at the hospital that’s denying the story. Same is true with many other journalists. They only know what Hillary said, what the policeman said, and what the hospital said.
    3) Digby insists the hospital was “never accused” of the mistreatment. She further suggests the hospital had no way of knowing whether they were the right hospital. Conclusion: this wouldn’t happen were Hillary a Republican, and there are probably Republican shinaigans going on here.

    My conclusion: Knowing the name of the woman who died, it probably wasn’t too hard to find out what hospital she was in (obit, co-worker, relative’s neighbor). Someone probably would have run the story, and may well have asked the hospital to comment first. Just because Kornblut doesn’t know the linkage, doesn’t mean the hospital wasn’t threatened with bad exposure. Even though Hillary didn’t name the woman or the hospital, they would have had to respond. Do we know it was the same woman? Maybe not, but what a lot of coincidences. Would this have happened had Hillary been a Republican? Maybe not, but it should have. Did Hillary have an obligation to vet the story before telling it so publicly. Yes, if only because someone might vet it.

  • (is there something about academics not being able to understand what they’re looking at?)

    Not all academics have the pedagogically pre-Jurassic intellect of a putrid brine-pool on a toxic-waste-infected beach “Instructor” Wilentz, Mr. Cleaver (my disdain for the post-secondary teacher wanna-be who “shortcuts” his way to a PhD by pulling a double BA instead of doing his Master’s work ranks right down there with the likes of Karl Rove and Dubya). Besides—Wilentz is a Clinton tool from the “impeachment” days of B-J, and has made several unsupportable attacks on Obama in the past

  • “Winner take all?” How about Diebold count all? Hey, the GOP used the “winner take all” system in their 2008 primaries and got the corporate war-monger war-criminal, old John McInsane… Sounds like a great system..

    Corporate war-monger imperialist Hillary couldn’t run on her own reactionary record, so she started lying, smearing and sliming Obama. Then she claimed that little states didn’t really count, that caucus votes didn’t really count and that alleged “red” states didn’t really count. And oh, yes, Michigan, with only Dennis Kucinich and her name on the ballot, oh, yes, that vote should be counted… What a load of crap, Hill.

  • An article titled “Canada, U.S. Agree To Use Each Other’s Troops In Civil Emergencies” appeared on CanwestNews Service on February 22, 2008. According to the report, Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries of either nation to send troops across their borders during emergencies. This agreement was signed in Texas on February 14th, but neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced it.

    According to the Canwest article, this agreement has been greeted with suspicion by Canada’s politically left wing, and America’s politically right wing. The liberal leaning Council of Canadians is campaigning against what it refers to as the increasing integration of the U.S. and Canadian militaries.

    The left-leaning Council of Canadians, which is campaigning against what it calls the increasing integration of the U.S. and Canadian militaries, is raising concerns about the deal.

    “It’s kind of a trend when it comes to issues of Canada-U.S. relations and contentious issues like military integration. We see that this government is reluctant to disclose information to Canadians that is readily available on American and Mexican websites,” said Stuart Trew, a researcher with the Council of Canadians.

    “Co-operative militaries on Home Soil!” notes one website. “The next time your town has a ‘national emergency,’ don’t be surprised if Canadian soldiers respond. And remember – Canadian military aren’t bound by posse comitatus.”

    Posse comitatus is a U.S. law that prohibits the use of federal troops from conducting law enforcement duties on domestic soil unless approved by Congress.

    Can you imagine the military walking your streets during a civil emergency? The Canadian left greeted it with suspicion but what about our left? Where are or left leaning elected officials and what do they think about this? Do they even know? Do they care?

    I wonder what the definition of a civil emergency is? Martial Law anyone?

    HELLO JOURNALISTS?!?!

    http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=403d90d6-7a61-41ac-8cef-902a1d14879d

    http://www.naturalnews.com/022952.html

  • Danp (25) good analysis. You’d think that Hillary would have learned to triple fact check any anecdote she told after all her years of being smeared by Clinton-Haters (like Tasmanian Cleaver). But the immediate reaction among many was that she was lying plain and simple. The Clinton Rules are still in effect as a prejudicial frame that exaggerates her transgressions. She’s done things I really don’t like, but the Clinton-hating wipes out any subtlety in both judging unfavorably what she does and in judging favorably what Obama does. She should have simply said that this was a story she was told and that it illustrates many, many other stories of our broken healthcare stories.

    Sean Walentz is obviously biased, but what he says does indicate some problems in the general election. And Dems do have a history of getting excited about unelectable candidates.

  • Dale, I am assuming you were responding to me in #31. Was it Canadian troops on our soil after MLK was assassinated? Did the president get Congressional approval?

    That’s rather moot anyway because Bush signed one of his famous documents allowing the use of military on US soil long ago. Now, we get to have another country’s forces, too.

    That wouldn’t concern you?

  • Mr. Penn ‘is still going to be very much involved,’ a senior campaign official said.

    The lesson of recent history, being, I guess, that an ugly-as-crap unaccountable (ob-)noxious know-it-all behind the scenes is always one of the keys to victory.

  • after all her years of being smeared by Clinton-Haters (like Tasmanian Cleaver).

    All I do is merely note the 35 years of lies she has behind her and ghe 40 years of lies her spouse has behind him. One doesn’t need to be a “Tasmanian” to not want a pair of assholes like the Clintons back in power. If you can’t stand the heat caused by merely citing the facts, perhaps you should get the hell out of the kitchen, as Harry Truman would have told you.

    Bthe way, Good Democrat Dale, I keep asking you Clintonistas to point out one thing the Clintons have done that is actually something a real Democratic President would do, and you and the rest have still failed to note any one thing. Is it because there isn’t anything to note?

    The Clintons are Republicans who couldn’t make it in their own party. Once a Goldwater Girl….

  • Cleaver, you mistake your opinions for facts. For all their faults, the Clintons have done more for Democrats and the country than you can imagine doing. Denying what they’ve done for the sake of your own self-poisoning bile is just self-indulgent. You let the wingnuts get into your brain, son. You really should be more polite to your betters.

    Personally I’ll be glad when the Clintons get off the national political scene, but I’ll be even more glad to be rid of the rabid Clinton-haters with their “Poor widdle Seanny-poo” level of discourse.

  • MsJoanne, I was just noting an instance of troops on the streets. I believe the Army was called in after the Watts Uprising too. Come to think of it, I’d rather have Canadian troops than US ones. “Get off the street there, eh.”

    I guess I have outrage fatigue. Fascism seems to have changed from the creeping type to the galloping type.

  • How bad a year is it for republicans? I just saw an ad on TV for this guy:
    http://www.voteforcraig2008.com/
    This is in southern Alabama, in a heavily Republican district, and yet nowhere in the ad or on the front page of his website does it mention that the guy is running as a Republican. Being an (R) this year is like a death wish politically, clearly the professional campaign advisers are saying to stay as far away from the word as possible.

  • “John McCain… was insisting that we’ve ‘turn[ed] things around,’ MSNBC had to break away to report on mortars being fired into the Green Zone”

    That clip gave me a Baghdad Bob flashback.

    It’s times like these I wish I knew how to edit video because a Baghdad Bob/McCain morph would hit the net like dynamite.

    ***
    Note to Lawmakers in states that border Canada. You views on Mexican immigration are taken as seriously as a Texan’s view on snow. Seriously.

  • The McCain-called-Cindy-a-cunt story is interesting HOWEVER it won’t get any play in the MSM– they won’t go near that word. Although the notion that he called her a trollop is sort of hilarious.

    Just an observation, but has anyone ever seen Cindy McCain speak? She’s always there, stage right, but never seems to speak. She seems to be more invisible than Laura Bush. It especially stands out because the Dems are running two campaigns where the spouses are sort of a two-fer, as both Bill and Michelle travel and speak publicly on behalf of their respective spouses.

  • Re 39,

    Actually, the MidWest is seeing massive changes in demographics from Mexican immigration.

    I read a quote from a MidWestern politician on his Democratic dream ticket. He wants Gore/Obama. The writer found it strange, since the town the man hails from was a “sundowner” town not that long ago. The politician replied that that was then and this was now; that is, brown is the new black. All over the Mid(upper Mid)West, towns that would be dead are not, but only because of Mexican immigration. It’s strange and difficult for rural people from lily white places. (Of course, scale is everything…an inch of snow in Texas is a big deal, whereas here, we only start talking about it if it’s at least 18 inches overnight.)

  • Cleaver, you mistake your opinions for facts. For all their faults, the Clintons have done more for Democrats and the country than you can imagine doing. Denying what they’ve done for the sake of your own self-poisoning bile is just self-indulgent. You let the wingnuts get into your brain, son. You really should be more polite to your betters.

    Once again, my little mini-putz, you fail to list one thing they did. Because you can’t.

    Since you’re probably too stupid to know Yiddish, “Putz” means “a penis that thinks it’s a person.” A more perfect description for you, Dale, I can’t imagine.

  • Once again, my little mini-putz, you fail to list one thing they did. Because you can’t.
    Since you’re probably too stupid to know Yiddish, “Putz” means “a penis that thinks it’s a person.” A more perfect description for you, Dale, I can’t imagine.

    Perhaps in your circle of airplane glue sniffers, you can dictate the terms of the conversation at least to anyone within spittle range, but not with me. Feel free to Google Clinton if your memory fails you when you try to recall what they’ve accomplished.

    By “stupid” I assume you mean “ignorant” which has a different meaning. And you admit your limits in imagining. Not good with words or imagination? That’s not a good combo for a “writer.”

    Oh and thanks for those private emails where you really let the phlegm fly.

  • Hey, since it’s tax time again…

    …Has anyone wondered why:
    Persons earning over $54K are required to use a pay-for-play third party?They lowered the minimum required to file to $3K income?

  • Argh, it looked right in preview…

    Persons earning over $54K are required to use a pay-for-play third party?
    They lowered the minimum required to file to $3K income?

  • Does the single word “interesting” with respect to Clinton’s statement on the China Olympics mean that you agree with her but are reluctant to give any comfort to her campaign? Please specify exactly what you consider to be interesting. If she said something good, give her credit for it.

  • I agree with Danp in comment 25, 100%. It is a very controversial discussion and I believe that it is being made into a bigger issue than it should. There are way more important issues in the world that need to be addressed such as an alternative to gasoline with the price of oil as high as it is.

  • Comments are closed.