« Who Is John McCain? | Main | Pick Up Six »

The Daily Five: Just Super

28 Mar 2008 05:48 pm

1. Sen. Pat Leahy: "There is no way that Sen. Clinton is going to win enough delegates" and so should quit....he later walks back his comment....but says that "there is no good reason" for Clinton to stay in the race. Clinton team rebuts with angry comments from Rendell and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter. And Rep. Bruce Braley, an undecided frosh/superdelegate from Iowa, is happy to see the contest continue: "My preference is we let the system play out and we go to Denver. If it hasn't been resolved, then it gets taken care of there."

2. Clinton campaign talking point: In 1992, Bill Clinton didn't wrap up the nominee until June. Tapper truth: well, more like mid-March.


This notion that the 1992 presidential race was not over until June is literally true. But it was truly over about five or six weeks after the New Hampshire primary.

3. Newt Gingrich, on Obama:

Senator Obama gave us a very courageous speech. We owe it to him and to the topic to take it very seriously and respond to the level of eloquence and systematic explanation that he gave us. He asked historic questions, and that is appropriate. And I want to make quite clear, and this may well be a disappointment to the more partisan and the more ideological, my speech today is not an answer to Senator Obama. It is not a refutation. Hopefully, it is the beginning of a genuine dialogue in which people of all backgrounds can come together to have a serious conversation about America’s future.

Let me start by talking about the concept of anger, because I do think there’s an authenticity and legitimacy of anger by many groups in America. Senator Obama said in his speech:

That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white coworkers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician’s own failings. . . . That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition.

I think that that’s right, and I think that it’s important to recognize that anger can be a source of energy to create a better future—in which case it’s a very good thing. But if anger is a self-inflicted wound that limits us, it is a very bad and a very dangerous thing. And we have to be very careful about the role that anger plays in our culture. Tragically, what has happened is that cultural and political leaders have used anger as an excuse to avoid reality, as an excuse to avoid change, as an excuse to avoid accountability, because everything that is wrong is somehow somebody else’s fault.

Watch Gingrich's full speech here.

4. Chelsea Clinton, in Allentown PA:

‘Do I think my mother will be a better president than my father...Well, again, I don’t take anything for granted, but hopefully with Pennsylvania’s help, she will be our next president, and yes, I do think she’ll be a better president.”

Responds Hillary Clinton: "I have to talk to her before I answer that question."

5. Chuck Todd on language:

If someone says, "the process isn't hurting the party, let everyone have a say" you know that is code for "I'm still holding out hope for Clinton."

But if a supposed uncommitted superdelegate says, "we need to start thinking about what this is doing to our long term chances of defeating John McCain" that is code for, "I am leaning toward Obama but I hope Clinton will simply drop out so I can always claim to her and Bill that I was never against them."

Comments (29)

"I am leaning toward Obama but I hope Clinton will simply drop out so I can always claim to her and Bill that I was never against them."

...i can't believe i'm saying this, but i am starting to admire Tom Delay.

If the Dem leadership was more like Delay, as thoroughly evil as he was, none of this crap would be happening.

By this point, he would've had all the Supers' balls in a vice, making DAMN SURE they voted for the lead candidate to wrap this thing up to insure they could beat the other side.

All this hemming and hawing by the Top Dems seems to underscore every nasty accusation of weakness the Bush crowd has leveled at them the last seven years.

Everyone should watch the whole video of Speaker Gingrich's speach. That was an excellent and honest response to Senator Obama, and I share his hope that there can be a serious dialogue along those lines.

Gave me a great deal of respect for the man.

If this primary battle had come down to Obama vs Edwards, does anyone think it would be this nasty? Indeed, if this contest had come down to Obama vs anyone but Hillary the Democratic party would be in way better shape, and the tone much more civil.

Hillary divides everywhere she goes, with everything she does. It's her nature, just like lying is.

And I also have a theory as to why some in the Hillary camp do not want to quit: it allows them to rake in more money from gullible supporters and blow it. Look at Penn...we know he takes a huge consulting fee...why would he want the gravy train to end? Same with Woolfson, et al.

Even the Clintons continue to be able to travel all around and live the good life on someone else's money. Of course, they also get to feed their collosal egos as well.

The small donors who give to the Hillary campaign remind me of the widows who are bamboozled into giving to these multimillionaire television preachers. I feel sorry for them, because they could use the money far more than the Clintons and their cabal of leeches.

Hillary shows she has a nice sense of humor vis a vis her's daughter's stumping. Nice job HRC.

Re Obama supporters, see the most recent post on Ben Smith's blog. A robot has been inplanting pro Hillary comments in the body of the comments. Go there and give weight to the other side, that is, Obama's candidacy. Give it your all!

Fired up! Ready to go!

The first half of Gingrich's speech was unreal, he showed guts doing that. Then of course he bashed away at Left this, Left that...yawn. Dems and Repubs share blame for poverty… but Newt how exactly is the "left" to blame for not building levies, NCLB, school seg, racist Universities, misogynist Universities, underpaid teachers, folks that can quote folks that have never been near poverty in their life yet are experts on why it occurs...right! Ghana v S.Korea? Lmao Korea has been a nation for hundreds of years...Ghana?

Come on no comparison Ghana is a nation imperialism forced with arbitrary borders that above “experts” drew on charts thousands of miles away hardly the same dynamic and to suggest it is frankly ignorant at best. After WWII the US flooded capital into Korea, that had a smaller population and virtually no ethnic differences or problems whatsoever amongst its native folks. Ghana? Not so much. I notice he didn’t mention Vietnam... yeh that "leftist" government that isn’t doing to bad thank you very much.
I do realize the left has serious flaws and saw them growing up in Liverpool in an education system that was a humiliation due to the petty egos and blindness of a Labor city council (FU Mr. Hatton!). However, I also know class, race, religion and wealth don’t always come through Horatio Alger sentiments. They also come through exploitation in meat plants, coal mines, avarice in war and abuse of a capital system that rewards the few and gives the many the Heisman.
It was not LBJ that corrupted and bent Detroit to its current miasma no it was the greed, corruption and blind eye turned to the pigs in the automobile industry that hold that blame card. They went for profit over American livelihood, greed over a man or woman that devoted their life to them and tax cuts to deny those same people the aid they needed while their former employees sipped cocktails and smoked stogies in deals that took jobs and wealth to other shores. So I scoff when Newt talks of hard work and saving being the yellow brick road. These people devoted decades to see it snatched away in a millisecond so folks that tinker glasses at AEI dinners can get half a point on their stocks.
Yes the school system in that city resembles that of Liverpool (a craptacular mess) but if the capital wasted is to be put to better use then instead of petty finger pointing how about solutions? Throwing money away is not the answer on that I agree, however, nor is thinking NCLB or any other BS scheme imagined from the comfort of a red leather chair while quoting Faulkner is either.
In order for people to work, educate and succeed they need inspiration and that is what Obama promises. Can he deliver it? I honestly do not know but I'd rather roll the dice at a chance then tow the line of partisan finger pointing BS. So I challenge Newt set aside "its the left's fault...yadda yadda blah blah," and actually go to the 9th ward, Oakland, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, El Paso and talk to people. Find what makes them tick, what inspires then find leaders that can harness the will and ability of one to another and another until a few becomes many and collectively they can achieve greatness without bitter labeling. Then and only then can Newt comprehend it is not a label, or a stereotype of perception that will make our country great it is the simple act of recognizing there are many ways to sow the seeds of prosperity but the hardest thing to do is act on change without knowing who you want to change and how.

Here is another correction ambinder can add to his pile:

ambinder:
"Obama: A Mere "Lecturer?"
28 Mar 2008 10:18 am

So is Barack Obama exaggerating his resume when he says he was a "law professor" at the University of Chicago?

The schools says no."

The school:
"Obama did NOT "hold the title" of a University of Chicago law school professor.
WASHINGTON—The University of Chicago released a statement on Thursday saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “served as a professor” in the law school—but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed on Friday.

“He did not hold the title of professor of law,” said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the school, on East 60th St. in Chicago"
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_obama_did_hold_the_title.html

obama was not a University of Chicago law school professor. I await ambiners next corrections post.

tonya harding = hillary clinton

nancy kerrigan = barack obama

oksana baiul = john mccain

in case anyone forgot - BAIUL won the Gold Metal -

Leahy is right and poster ROB is right
Someone put an end to this so we can win in November

(FYI: The California primary was June 3 1992 - if there was a CA primary now instead of the name recognition primary of Feb 5th - Obama would win in a heartbeat - check out his huge lead in every CA poll)

HADENOUGH - you mauy want to change your name to
READENOUGH

This is the statement from the "University of Chicago" confirming Obama'a tenure teaching and was considered a "professor" -- you owe Marc the apology -- not the other way around
------------------------
"The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined."

"HADENOUGH - you mauy want to change your name to
READENOUGH

This is the statement from the "University of Chicago" confirming Obama'a tenure teaching and was considered a "professor" -- you owe Marc the apology -- not the other way around"

It doesn't matter what you consider obama. That's a big problem for obamatons. It's not about you. From the University of Chicago law school:

"“He did not hold the title of professor of law,” said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the school, on East 60th St. in Chicago"
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_obama_did_hold_the_title.html

What don't you understand about "He did not hold the title of professor of law"? Looks like not only is your keycaps sticking but you own me an apology.

When I was in college we all called faculty members professors regardless of their titles. In everyday usage, you use the word "professor" not not lecturer. This is a very stupid issue.

Poor old hadenough, from troll to self-parody in one sad moment of self-righteousness. How are the mighty fallen.

Actually the thing I found most intriguing about Speaker Gingrich's ideas was his statement about rewarding finishing school early.

If you can finish high school in three years, take the money the school would have spent on you the fourth year and apply it to a scholarship for you. If you finish in two years, apply the last two years to a scholarship. That is a big deal! Not only that but it gives a really strong reason to seriously apply yourself in high school, which then prepares you for college.

This idea may have been mentioned by someone before, but this is the first time I have heard it.

Regardless, I would love to see a bit of back and forth between Speaker Gingrich and Senator Clinton on this stuff. I think a lot of good could come from it.

Praise for Newt Gingrich? Will this party ever learn?
The list of Republicans run out of office because of the hypocrisy in their personal lives seems endless: Bob Livingston, Newt Gingrich, Mark Foley, David Vitter, Ted Haggard, Larry Craig...when are we going to learn?
Spokesmen like Limbaugh, Hannity, Gingrich, et al are going to help McCain?
Are we nuts?
James Dobson has it right: Forget Washington and Focus on the Family.

Camp Clinton, just because Hillary has a "truth" problem, which is finally catching up to her, does not make everyone a liar. She caught got telling that tall tale, "the Bosnian Sniper Fire" story and now everyone knows her true character and the depths she will go to embellish her own persona. Andrea Mithcell went on that trip with her, however, she never reported that there was no Sniper fire until it became public knowledge, though Hillary had told that story three (3) times. However, Andrea is compelled to dig up old sermons of Rev. Wright's and expose them to the public. However, we are not electing a Pastor but a President, and those are Rev. Wright's words NOT Barack's as in the Sniper Fire Story which are Hillary's and Hillary's alone. Then there is the statement Hillary likes to make "that she would never meet with her enimies", than why did she meet and sit down with her Arch Enemy, Richard Mellon Scaife, to re-introduce the Rev. Wright matter. This is the same Richard Scaife, who accused Hillary and Bill of Vince Foster's murder and another 60 more and was their personal persecutor and devil while they were in the White House and took them on a witch hunt for years, What's that about, what did she really tell him? In her desire to make Barack look unelectable it seems, instead, the Chickens are Coming Home to Roost.


Angellight,

Do Chelsea tell the truth of whether she is in fact on full pay and benefits with her "job" at a hedge fund while campaigning for her mom full time?

The inability to tell the truth runs in the family.

That is probably why she is being groomed to take over her mom's Senate seat after she becomes President....

Of course, if that flops like the Health Care plan, there is always the Governor of NY post....

That job is being held by someone who can't see the writing on the wall that he needs to step aside for a more qualified candidate who doesn't owe her standing to her race.

Besides, he has admitted to being Bill C like!

"Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined."

last sentence from Univ of Chicago formal statement - seems clear enough -- HADENOUGH

besides if you want to quote Lynn Sweet - you know it's twisted -- we posted the same correction on her blog -- but she edits what gets printed on her blog --

she would have to because her anti-slant is usually irrefutable -

HADENOUGH" why not just link Taylor Marsh?

Next time you want to make a point - link to something credible

ok THATSENOUGH

No problem with credibilty:

FACT CHECK: OBAMA AND OIL

In the ad, Obama says, "I'm Barack Obama, and I don't take money from oil companies or lobbyists, and I won't let them block change any more."

Obama has taken $213,884 from the oil and gas industry as of Feb. 29th, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Sen. Hillary Clinton has taken $306,813 in that same period.

Two of Obama's campaign bundlers are also CEOs for oil and gas companies, per a list released on his campaign Web site.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/28/834887.aspx

Here's the statement from Clinton campaign policy director Neera Tanden:

"Presidents have to do more than announce principles. They have to solve problems. At a time of crisis in our financial markets, Senator Obama announced a series of broad, vague principles, while offering no new concrete solutions to provide Americans with greater confidence in the market or keep them in their homes. The contrast could not be clearer - on Monday, Senator Clinton announced a detailed, specific plan to address the housing and credit crisis. On Tuesday, Senator McCain announced that he had no plan. And today, Senator Obama offered just words."
...
As it turns out, those were just words... Today, Senator Obama gives an economy speech followed by a fundraiser at - you guessed it - one of the top 10 issuers of subprime loans in America, Credit Suisse. In fact, Senator Obama has taken more money from the top 10 issuers of subprime loans than BOTH Senator Clinton and Senator McCain [cq.com].
http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-campaign-unimpressed-obamas-speech-economy

There is no question: obama has not credibility.

axelrod and obama:
Nuclear Leaks and Response Tested Obama in Senate

Mr. Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was “the only nuclear legislation that I’ve passed.”

“I just did that last year,” he said, to murmurs of approval.
...
But, contrary to Mr. Obama’s comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate.
...
In addition, Mr. Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axelrod, has worked as a consultant to Exelon. A spokeswoman for Exelon said Mr. Axelrod’s company had helped an Exelon subsidiary, Commonwealth Edison, with communications strategy periodically since 2002, but had no involvement in the leak controversy or other nuclear issues.

The Obama campaign said in written responses to questions that Mr. Obama “never discussed this issue or this bill” with Mr. Axelrod. The campaign acknowledged that Exelon executives had met with Mr. Obama’s staff about the bill, as had concerned residents, environmentalists and regulators.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html

Obama's campaign proudly announced today the endorsement of former South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges who will join his campaign as a national co-chair.

But the endorsement of Hodges may raise eyebrows among those who support Obama because he strongly decries lobbyists on the stump, frequently saying that he will not let them work in his White House or set the agenda in Washington.
...
NBC's Domenico Montanaro adds that Hodges is, in fact, a registered federal lobbyist, a search of the Senate Office of Public Records Lobbying Disclosure Act Database shows. He registered as such on June 1, 2007.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/02/544600.aspx

And on and on. obama has no credibility to question.

See what you guys did? You let hadenough troll you completely off topic again. You can't reason with a troll like that because when you refute one of their claims with facts, they'll just copy/paste 10 more.

I think that even more likely than the "I am leaning toward Obama but I hope Clinton will simply drop out" interpretation is the "The race is starting to show real signs that it's hurting us while helping McCain" interpretation, mixed with a little "good God, are Hillary and Bill overtly praising McCain AGAIN! Are they really trying to blow this thing?".

I think more and more Democrats are waking up to the fact that, yes, Hillary would be willing to plant the suggestion to her voters that come November, McCain is a better option than Obama. This would be bad for the Democratic party, bad for the country, and bad for everyone not directly connected to the Republican party and not named Clinton.

I have no problem with her continuing as it's a chance to highlight the principles that the party will be running on in November, but in light of the Clinton's current strategy, the Democratic leadership is right to take steps to put a stop to this, now.

Everyone should read Al's post from over at the Field...www.ruralvotes.com/thefield

This just in, from a Field correspondent in San Antonio, Texas (name of delegate deleted). Both the delegate and the source to whom she reported are known to me and are of the highest ethics: I trust them not to embellish. You can see that the report is even-handed and sticks to the known facts.

It includes an eye witness report from the caucus convention in Senate District 26, plus second-hand information on similar tactics in Senate District 19.

San Antonio favored Clinton, including in the caucuses, and is where the political machine of former mayor (and HUD secretary) Henry Cisneros operates. This report includes back-room deals prior to and during the event, the stacking the convention committee chairs ahead of time with Clinton operatives, the taking of Obama delegates off the voter rolls, holding a meeting before its scheduled time to lock out Obama delegates, and, get this… suspending the senate district caucus for the rest of the day - before voting - to, no doubt, reconvene the session at whatever hour they estimate they can gain maximum advantage.

Here’s the report:

(The Obama delegate) got there to discover a backroom deal had already been cut by Democratic Party leaders in the county, presumably, to set up the rules committees 50/50 Clinton/Obama people, but all the committee chairs are Clinton people.

Clinton’s campaign has sent a bunch of “at large” delegates to the Sen. 26 caucus to hang out in the event someone doesn’t show up at the right time, so they can step in as delegates. (The Obama delegate) is not certain if the Obama folks are doing the same thing, but she said she had not heard of this practice from the folks she’s dealing with on the Obama side.

Somehow, none of the Obama delegates from our precinct are listed on the rolls, so they have all been categorized as provisional for the caucus. She’s not certain if the Clinton delegates from our precinct suffered the same fate. She said this is strange because someone on the Obama side said they saw all the names entered onto the rolls.

In Senate District 19, she was told, the Clinton people called a meeting to set up rules for the caucus at an appointed time, but then showed up early. When the Obama people showed up at the appointed time, the Clinton people adjourned the meeting. (The Obama delegate) said it turned into somewhat of a racial thing since most of the Clinton people were Hispanic and most of the Obama people were black.

She said it’s truly smoke-filled backroom politics, with a lot of confusion for those who aren’t invited into the backroom. She got there early this morning and it’s expected to last until 8 pm or so tonight. If the delegates aren’t in place at the pricise moment to cast their votes, too bad. The Ceasar Chavez march is today, so the Clinton people managed to get an adjournment of the caucus until the march is over, so they can go to the march. Let’s hope that wasn’t a ploy.

Clinton manipulating Texas?

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=963

from "The Clinton Bet" at swimming freestyle:

" If Obama were to lose to McCain in November, some large number of Democrats will hold Clinton at least partially accountable for the reasons noted above: the damage to Obama caused by the long, nasty nomination campaign and the lack of time to effectively campaign against McCain. Democrats will be big time pissed at Hillary Clinton and she'll lack any reasonable amount of support from Democratic voters in the 2012 primaries.

She really is, at this point, betting the farm. If not successful, which seems increasingly likely, she may ruin whatever opportunities she has going forward."

http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com

it's dismaying how it seems to have been forgotten that the contest really should focus on Senator Mccain. Both the Clinton and Obama campaigns insult our intelligence when they hope to sway our opinions with this tit for tat, and we insult ourselves when we take the bait. Neither candidate is perfect, and neither is evil personified.

I agree with Daniel that everyone should watch all of Newt's speech. The words of a true conservative, to be sure, but a thoughtful and genuine response to Barack's call. There was a fair bit of left-bashing, but there were also some interesting points (e.g., rewarding kids for finishing school sooner, scrapping "adolescence" and replacing it with "young adulthood"). Pop some popcorn, crack open a cold one, and give it a listen.

I hope Barack decides to engage him on this. It sounds as if they (by-and-large) agree on what the problems are, but they (obviously) disagree on the solutions. But that's what we should be talking about. And it would be infinitely more interesting and worthwhile than any of the garbage being spewed by the likes of Hillary or McCain these days.

Yes we (all of us, together) can.

"And it would be infinitely more interesting and worthwhile than any of the garbage being spewed by the likes of Hillary or McCain these days.

Yes we (all of us, together) can.

Posted by Chris"

You're funny.

Will this blog report on the fact that the Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams was a director for a company knee deep in subprime scandal?

How can Hillary be objective in assessing the mortage crisis when her own campaign manager was guilty of practices that Hillary now criticizes?

Not only was Crack NOT A LAW PROFESSOR, he wasn't much of a lawyer, either. A MEDIOCRE PAPER SHUFFLER in a second rate law firm for a couple of uneventful years, (he was a student on the family's dime until he was 32) until he decided it was much easier to BECOME A "BLACK" MAN and ride the CHICAGO SOUTH SIDE MOB LIMO to political success.


Me thinks ethan is confusing Leroy Brown with OBammBamm.

Maybe he need to be ethanized?

Marc didn't really showcase the crux of Newt's speech. I think this passage cuts to the chase:

Now, because the Left cannot deal with the cost of bad culture and the cost of bad government, they are constantly trying to find a scapegoat for the failures of their own institutions and the failures of their own bureaucracies.

In the end it was an idealogue giving a speech on his idealogical philosophy to draw distincton between the Left and the Right, and to highlight the perils of black victimhood....Racism is not the problem/reason for poor (black) schools staying poor or poor (black) neighborhoods remaining poor:

As long as you focus on earning a living in America, and you focus on being prudent, you rise. [...] It’s astonishing in America how many groups rise. But they rise by learning the rules of rising. And the first rule is to make business and the development of wealth and the creation of economic opportunity more important than politics and to focus resources on encouraging people to go into business, not bureaucracy.

We get it Newt. Now go away...


*****************************************
*****************************************

Indeed, Clinton is like Rocky!

She keeps getting beat up by both Democratic back stabbers and the news media alike. We have realized that Clinton lied about her Bosnia trip, but we also know that Obama has lied about:

1) his relationship with the LUNETIC RACIST Rev. Wright
2) his involvment with the crook Tony Rezko
3) his association with the self-proclaimed Pentagon TERRORIST William C. Ayers
4) his note about his father's arrival in the US due to Kennedy
5) his taking hundreds of thousands of $$$$$$$$$$$ from lobyists

WHAT IS IT GONG TO TAKE FOR AMERICA TO FIGURE OUT OBAMA IS A RACIST, BIGGOT, AND ANTI-SEMITIC?

DO WE HAVE TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE WE DID WITIH GEORGE BUSH?

REMEMBER IF WE HAD SLECTED GORE, WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE IRAQ MESS?

Come on people, WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We need someone like Hillary to fight for us the same way she is fighing for the nomination.

*****************************************
*****************************************