ArchPundit

The Youtube of the audio from John Gibson’s show below that has Ferraro talking about how Obama wouldn’t be where he is unless he was black.  That’s not the quote everyone is talking about. They are talking about this article in the Daily Breeze

She said it entirely independently on John Gibson’s radio talk show on February 26th.  And John Gibson called her on playing the race card:
Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

John Gibson calls her on racism.  John Gibson!

So she seems to have been saying it relatively freely around that time.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaa

Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

At this point her defense appears to be that she said it at a paid speech and so it was okay.  But she repeated it on John Gibson’s show.

Oh, and she’s a paid political analysist for Fox!  That makes it all better.

I think Obama can do without her fundraising prowess.

Hysterical–via Americablog

Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

On John Gibson’s show.  John Gibson!

Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

He even called her on it–John Gibson called her on it!

Really, go read it from him

It’s perhaps one of the weirdest arguments ever made about a nominating process, having more delegates matters less than winning the right states.  The apparent claim is that when one wins a state in the primary, that makes you more likely to win it in the general election.

It’s a dumb argument because, well, the general election is a different electorate and so winning a state in a primary doesn’t mean you can carry it in the general election.

Case in point, look at the Survey USA poll of McCain-Obama, McCain-Clinton matchups.

The maps are only a snapshot in time and I’m sure they would change over an election, but Democrats take Ohio in both cases and Obama, who hasn’t even campaigned in Michigan, wins Michigan, Clinton doesn’t.   That Obama makes inroads in some deeply red states is what is most interesting to me, while Clinton survives only by taking the safe Democratic states and a few swings.

He also loses New Jersey according to the survey which will only happen in bizarro world after an actual general election campaign just as Clinton isn’t going to lose Oregon and Washington.

Obama, according to the poll loses Pennsylvania and Florida–two places he hasn’t yet spent time in so this is likely to change if he does campaign in both places–or at least Pennsylvania will likely change.

The thing that makes all of this interesting is that Clinton’s only way to win the nomination is to have superdelegates vote against the plurality of the elected delegates.  In one case that is reasonable if she creates popular vote margin in the contests, but if Obama wins the most popular votes and the most elected delegates, it’s hard to imagine how superdelegates would justify voting against the Democratic electorate.  The only argument to even make that plausible is that Obama cannot win states like Ohio that are swing states–but the polling tells another story.

Howard Wolfson reminds us all that Mark Penn isn’t the only asshole in the Clinton campaign:

“When Senator Obama was confronted with questions over whether he was ready to be Commander-in-Chief and steward of the economy, he chose not to address those questions, but to attack Senator Clinton,” Wolfson said. “I for one do not believe that imitating Ken Starr is the way to win a Democratic primary election for president.”

Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

I had the obvious response of that’s great, she’ll answer the phone, but she might respond to the wrong country since she voted to invade Iraq after terrorists from Afghanistan attacked us. However, the Obama campaign was ahead of that:

“We don’t think the ad is going to be effective at all. Senator Clinton already had her red phone moment — to decide whether to allow George Bush to invade Iraq. She answered affirmatively. She did not read the National Intelligence Estimate. She still, curiously, tries to suggest that it wasn’t a vote for war, but it most assuredly was…”This is about what you say when you answer that phone. What judgment you show…She, John McCain and George Bush gave the wrong answer.”

Bus meet ditch.

Dan Curry appears confused about Willard Romney’s faith:

I don’t recall AP jumping this quickly to the defense of Mitt Romney and the many smears of his religion.

Willard isn’t a Mormon?  Because for the comparison to make any sense, Obama would have to actually be a Muslim.

BTW, most of the attacks on Willard came from other religious conservatives.

For those who were around when this blog started, the blogosphere was a very different place where liberal and conservative blogs tended to talk amongst each other and link accordingly.  That changed as the wingnutosphere went batshit insane.

One of those early bloggers who I remember having relatively interesting exchanges with is Bill Hobbs. Now the press guy for the Tennessee Republican Party who just attacked Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

He tries to defend himself on two points:

One of Obama’s foreign policy advisers, Robert Malley, is anti-Israel and pro-Hamas. Hamas is an Iranian-funded Islamist terror organization dedicated to the eradication of Israel. Malley thinks we should do support Hamas. Malley is advising Obama on Middle East policy.

Did the media cover that? Ask about that? No. They fixated on Obama’s middle name. Apparently, a story post at NashvillePost.com sparked the calls. The story is headlinedMcCain apology raises questions about state GOP, but NashvillePost.com didn’t bother to actually pose those questions to the Tennessee Republican Party. No, they went and interviewed Democrats.

What makes one pro-Hamas?  Thinking that there might have to be some sort of diplomacy with them.  Yeah.  Friggen genius.

Then he tries to defend the use of the Obama’s middle name by saying:

 Silly, of course. Run a Lexis-Nexis search for the number of times the media has used Hillary Rodham Clinton’s middle name, often to underscore her feminist leanings and independence from her husband. Do a search for how many times during the 1988 and 1992 campaigns the media called the first George Bush “George Herbert Walker Bush,” to underscore the media’s protrayal of Bush as a preppie elitist. Ditto the media’s reference to Dan Quayle as “J. Danforth Quayle.”

Actually dumbass, her middle name is Diane.  Rodham is her maiden name.

Not satisfied with being sort of a dumbass, he approvingly links to Josh Marshall’s satirical piece on Obama and Libya as if Josh were serious.

I would normally say that it was that he got several facts wrong, but instead of asking questions that illuminate a position, he tried to ask gotcha question after gotcha question after gotcha question.

Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

It wasn’t good questioning because it didn’t allow for clarification or nuance instead insisting on yes or no answers that had little to do with substance.

Michael Berube (I can’t do the accents in any reasonable amount of time) answers the important questions from the important people:

Mister Answer Man, Greg Sargent seems awfully flip about this. He seems to think that Obama is now completely off the hook, and that the question itself was “inane.” I’m not so sure. Aren’t the American people entitled to know whether Barack Obama, as a Muslim, approves of another Muslim who thinks Judaism is a “gutter religion,” and shouldn’t Obama reject him even more strongly by rejecting and denouncing him and then repudiating and disdaining him as well? – D. Schlussel, Michigan

Read the whole thing….

Or why understanding transitive relationships should be taught in Journalism 101.

Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Flash video.

What the fuck was that? What do you do to assure…blah, blah, blah.

Timmeh took his cue from Richard Cohen in the Washington Post column:

Barack Obama is a member of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama’s spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright’s daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said “truly epitomized greatness.” That man is Louis Farrakhan.

Except, Timmeh, got the facts wrong on top of it. Wright didn’t say Farrakhan epitomized greatness, that was a part of the Trumpet Magazine award to Farrakhan. Wright is the CEO of the magazine, but his daughter Jeri is the publisher. While those ties might be relevant, it’s very different from Jeremiah Wright saying that. And, in fact, the magazine split off from the congregation in September of 2005.

The thing is, everyone is missing the point about how fucking stupid this line of questioning was. When was the last time Timmeh took on some right wing fundamentalists for being anti-semitic? So why isn’t George Bush asked about every anti-semitic rant by LaHaye or Wildmon since by the transitive property Timmeh is invoking, Bush has close spiritual adivisors who work closely with them?

The Council on National Policy alone contains a whole host of anti-semitic right wing Christians who hobnob with the Tony Perkins and the Richard Lands and the Dobsons of the world, but that transitive connection would never be brought up would it? This isn’t just a connection of someone who goes on a trip with or says something nice, it’s a working group of conservative fundamentalists who welcome anti-semitism into their efforts to bring about a Christian government. Of course, the Bush administration has routinely played footsy with Wildmon, not just had a friend of his be nice to him on occasion.

This would never be an issue for a white candidate and shame on Timmeh for trying to do it to Obama. If Timmeh wants to be concerned about anti-semitism he should start asking the Mike Huckabee’s of the world about their supporters who they actually work with to get elected.

From Talking Points Memo:

I think that breaking down Russert’s Wright/Farrakhan questioning helps illuminate how truly bizarre it is:

1. The title of Obama’s book, “The Audacity of Hope,” came from a sermon delivered by Jeremiah Wright. Wright is Obama’s pastor.

2. Wright is the “head” of United Trinity Church.

3. Wright said that Louis Farrakhan “epitomizes greatness.”

4. Wright went with Farrakhan in 1984 to visit Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.

5. Farrakhan has said that Judaism is a “gutter religion.”

6. Wright said that when Obama’s political opponents found out about the Libya visit, Obama’s Jewish support would dry up “faster than a snowball in Hell.”

Russert’s question is then “What do you do to assure Jewish Americans… you are consistent with issues regarding Israel and not in any way suggesting that Farrakhan epitomizes greatness.”

The first question about Farrakhan—and Russert’s insistence on mentioning Farrakhan’s views regarding Judaism after Obama had already denounced Farrakhan’s bigotry—was all foreplay leading up to this masterstroke in which Russert synthesizes the six discrete facts into a knockout punch of innuendo and guilt by association: perhaps Obama thinks that Louis Farrakhan, the man Obama explicitly denounced not one minute before, is the very epitome of greatness.

All of the stuff about going to Libya, Farrakhan’s “gutter religion” comment, and Jewish supporting drying up like a snowball in hell—that was all totally unnecessary to reach the ultimate question, but wasn’t it fun?

Can’t make it up–shortly after Iowa:

Last night Big Media was finally able to publish the story they wrote a year ago. The victor last night was Big Media. The victors last night were Chris Matthews and Tim Russert.

But let’s not excuse what happened last night by blaming others. Let’s not make excuses by cheering about the delegate count or the delegate distribution in Iowa (Obama gets 16 delegates, Hillary 15, Edwards 14). Let’s not cheer about Hank Aaron nor the continuing endorsements coming in for Hillary. Let’s not cheer about Hillary strength in nationwide polls.

We need to take responsibility for what happened in Iowa. Let’s survey the damage and the opportunity.

* * *

Dodd, Biden and the rest are now out of the race. Richardson gets to participate in Saturday’s debate but goes nowhere. Edwards gets to participate in Saturday’s debate but goes nowhere (conventional wisdom before Iowa was that for Edwards Iowa was a “must” win – Edwards lost. Conventional wisdom was right and Edwards will have a tough time raising money, organization, and support.)

Iowa was a problem for Hillary for several reasons. Obama was from a neighboring state and spent a lot of money there and Edwards practically lived there for years. A bigger problem was the unified field of opposition against Hillary (Big Media, Republicans, and the Democratic candidates). This unified field of opposition meant that “going negative” against an individual in Iowa could easily backfire and there were too many opponents (include Big Media, Big Blogs, and Republicans) to take everybody on in a fight. Another complication was the ability of independents to vote in Iowa; a complication which exists in New Hampshire as well.

The race is between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and Big Media. Barack Obama is the Chris Matthews candidate and we need to treat him as such.

* * *

Our biggest failure in Iowa and beyond: we let down young people. Young people wanted change and excitement and truth and we gave them words and policy, and logic.

We effectively abandoned young people to a flim flam artist. We did not provide the truth to young voters. We were afraid they would get angry and disillusioned. We abandoned them. Young people thought the change and therefore the excitement was with the other side. We were excited by Hillary because we know she represents change worth having but we did not engage young voters by arming them with all the facts.

Flim flam artists target the young with excitement and hoopla, and hope. That is the way it always is. Hillary campaign strategists viewed Obama as a political adversary to be counteracted within normal political discourse involving policy. But Obama is a flim flam artist. You defeat flim flammery and flim flam artists by exposing them for what they are.

Again, you do not defeat a circus parade. You cannot persuade a bystander, using logic, not to be excited about the circus parade. You cannot cite statistics about how the parade is financed, how ugly the clowns are beneath the makeup, the amount of cheap glitter and paint employed to create the excitement.

Reading and viewing assignments for the Hillary media team this week: Elmer Gantry (book and movie), The Music Man (movie). Understand the opposition.

How do you defeat the Chicago circus of the ridiculous? Tell the truth fearlessly.

Young people and gay people did not know about Obama’s cynical gay bashing tour in South Carolina. Why not? Why did the gay newspaper The Washington Blade endorse Hillary but not mention the gay bashing tour of South Carolina? The campaign did not get the message out. Advertise in gay periodicals – tell the truth – fearlessly. We did, but as our commenting student in Iowa informed us, the campaign did not get the message out in Iowa. This is what we wrote:

What’s great about this is after all of the claims about the Obama cult, I have to say this and a few select bloggers out there have an uncanny ability to channel Wolfson and the whining that everyone is out to get them

Or from a cult checklist:

The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.

Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.

The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar-or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).

The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.

? The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members’ participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).

Most Hillary supporters are good people and many are friends. The people running Hillaryis44 might get some deprogramming…

I’m waiting for the site to explode in a blast of spontaneous

They have been entertaining me for a while now and I thought I’d share some of the better bits:

Winter Solstice:

For nonbelievers the Winter solstice brings the scientific fact of spaceship earth returning to the Sun’s ascent and the promise of longer hours of lifegiving light. The alignment of bright stars in Orion’s belt with the massive dogstar Sirius in northern skies brings the promise of rebirth with the eventual Spring embrace.

For believers, various celebrations are observed and encapsulated in the circular wreaths of evergreen.

Let me suggest that a site putting this out there, ought to be careful about calling people incense burners and birkenstock wearers….

On Obama and Clinton 

Obama:
Obama, like any flim-flam confidence man, is running against the clock. Flim-flam artists have to keep moving and changing stories and charming and spinning and talking that sweet talk – all the while keeping an eye out for the law. The trick is to pocket the money you got from the rubes who believe that snake-oil you sell but get out just in time to avoid the pokey.

Obama’s problem: The clock is ticking faster than Obama is dancing.
After getting away with complete acceptance of his totally manufactured story Obama began to face scrutiny from the more discerning members of the Democratic left. The more intelligent members of the Democratic left began to dismantle Obama’s bull and take notice of why Republicans were acting as Obama cheerleaders. Their judgment was “No there there – an empty Republican suit.

Hillary:
Hillary’s numbers began to soften when the Big Media Party, especially Tim Russert, decided to throw everything they had at her. Immediately the Republican candidates started to run ads against Hillary in places like New Hampshire. The Democratic candidates too continued the attack on Hillary. It was Hillary against them all. Her poll numbers softened. Now the opposite dynamic is in effect.

With the death of Benazir Bhutto candidates like John McCain, respected and loved by Big Media, began echoing the Hillary message. Experience matters. McCain and Big Media started to talk about the value of experience at the same time Obama started to get some little examination. John Edwards too finally realized his problem was Obama the concilliator, not Hillary the fighter. Edwards also realized that he needs to replace Obama as the non-Hillary. As we noted above Edwards adopted a hypocritical but intelligent stance regarding the financing of his campaign. Obama, whose numbers had earlier risen with the collapse of Edwards’ soft supporters is now losing those soft supporters to Edwards.

The Hillary campaign had already adjusted to the all out assault on Hillary initiated by Tim Russert. The endorsement of Hillary by the Des Moines Register and the rollout of that endorsement and the Hillary surrogates and the Hill-o-copter, the return of reality to the campaign trail because of the killing of Bhutto, and the last minute realizations of John Edwards all have contributed to the Hillary rise. But the big factor helping Hillary is that Iowans know they are being tested. Iowans are the ones who have to help select the next president – not a drinking buddy, not a popular college professor, – the president.
As Iowans get closer to decision day this Thursday, Iowans get serious. Pick a president Iowa – and Hillary will do just fine in the caucuses

That was three days before teh Iowa Caucus.

Mark Penn’s and Howard Wolfson’s stupidity is catching

One quote: “Let’s stay positive and not get away from the long-term game plan.”

Two quotes later: “of course we’ll fight… Make no mistake it’s now a fight between a true competent woman leader and a puppet propped up by Karl Rove.”

Night is day, white is black, that state matters, that same state doesn’t matter….