Parsing the Drudge Report on the "Smear Photo" Without the Use of "Clinton Rules"

by: Mike Caulfield

Thu Feb 28, 2008 at 03:00:41 AM EST

So maybe I've missed an update on this news story or something. But after having heard and read the coverage on the evil Hillary campaign circulating the photo of "dressed Obama" I finally went and read the actual Drudge Report that started it all.

And what's interesting about it is what it doesn't say:

CLINTON STAFFERS CIRCULATE 'DRESSED' OBAMA
Mon Feb 25 2008 06:51:00 ET

With a week to go until the Texas and Ohio primaries, stressed Clinton staffers circulated a photo over the weekend of a "dressed" Barack Obama.

The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat frontrunner fitted as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya.

The senator was on a five-country tour of Africa.

"Wouldn't we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?" questioned one campaign staffer, in an email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.

The question here is what exactly occurred. I know what we were told occurred -- the Clinton people were shopping this around to press, right?

Well, no -- if you look at it, it doesn't say that at all:

With a week to go until the Texas and Ohio primaries, stressed Clinton staffers circulated a photo over the weekend of a "dressed" Barack Obama.

Not circulated to press, or even voters. Simply circulated.

And staffers -- plural. Which is interesting, because Drudge seems to have gotten his hands on a single email.

If I got my hands on a single email from a Microsoft and noted "Microsoft employees were circulating" a memo over the weekend what would be the implication? How would we normally read a sentence like that, if "Clinton" was not the noun in it?

I think the answer is obvious. Staff circulating a photo would normally be read as staff mailing a photo around to themselves.

And the rest of the article seems to bear that out:

"Wouldn't we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?" questioned one campaign staffer, in an email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.

Look at the tone: does that sound like a press pitch to you? Or does it sound like Drudge is reading down a series of coversational internal reply-to-alls? Do media pitches or voter communications refer to Hillary as "HRC"? Do they normally include multiple staffers talking in an email?

The Obama campaign called this episode an example of "shameful, offensive fear-mongering."

But was it? Or was it what it appears to be to any reasonable reader -- stressed (and somewhat ignorant) staffers complaining internally about what they percieved was a double standard in the press?

Once again, unless I missed some later update, everything in the initial report here bears out the second analysis. The use of "HRC". The conversational style. Mentioning multiple "staffers", but only one obtained email. And the only direct quote being not about a Manchurian Obama scenario, but a perceived press unfairness -- the number one subject when Hillary staffers congregate.

And given that that seems the likely scenario -- who actually provided these internal emails to Drudge? Since that is how the world actually came into contact with this picture, isn't that the question we should be asking?

I have a guess or two, but it would require discussing the Obama campaign as a tactical entity instead of a revival meeting.

And it might require that we understand that the Obama campaign's greatest resource in this election has been a press that has happily adopted "Clinton Rules", and has been more than comfortable quoting stories on them from right-wing smear merchants with no additional sourcing for more than a decade now.

That's a great thing for the Obama campaign, where a temporary unity of purpose with the Drudge Report can provide the latest example of those desperate "will-do-anything-to-win" Clintons misfiring yet again.

But it should give the rest of us pause. It's time to stop celebrating the Republican Hate Machine and start dismantling it. Tossing this crap around doesn't get us there.

Another Misleading Mailer: This Time from Obama?

by: Dean Barker

Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 20:54:45 PM EST

"Hillary's health care plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can't afford it."

Harbage said he wasn't speaking for Edwards and that he hasn't joined up with a new campaign, but that he was so angered by the mail piece that he decided to speak out about it.

Any policy that would achieve universal coverage, he said, has to include some kind of mandate.
"It's about making sure everyone participates in the health care system," said Harbage, "and pays in what they can afford."

That ensures not only that everyone has access to health care but also that costs will be lower, he said. Other payers in the system bear the cost when uninsured people end up in the emergency room.

So, is this mailer misleading, or just harsh?

Clinton Will "Make Sure" Florida's Delegates Get Seated

by: Dean Barker

Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:24:53 PM EST

"I thank you for this vote of confidence. I will make sure not only that Florida's delegates are seated but also that Florida is in the winning column for the Democrats in 2008!"

And Josh Marshall added this earlier:

Already some chatter that the Florida and Michigan delegate issue may go to court.

I don't have a crystal ball.  But I do know that if Obama has enough votes to win the nomination without FL and MI, and Hillary has enough votes with FL and MI, the press will have a field day watching the Democratic party splinter into tiny little pieces on the floor of the convention in Denver this summer.

Update:Democratic Party builder/reformer Simon Rosenberg, not exactly known for hyperbole:

Having worked on the New Hampshire primary and in the War Room in 1992 for the Clintons, I was present at the creation of the famous "rapid response" campaign style and fierce fighting spirit of the Clinton era. In the very first meeting of the famous War Room James Carville warned us "that if you don't like to eat sh-- everyday you shouldn't be in politics."  So I understand as well as anyone that this is a tough game, not for the faint of heart.

But there is a line in politics where tough and determined becomes craven and narcissistic, where advocacy becomes spin, and where integrity and principle is lost. I am concerned that this Florida gambit by the Clinton campaign is once again putting two of my political heroes too close - or perhaps over - that line. So that even if they win this incredible battle with Barack Obama they will end up doing so in a way that will make it hard for them to bring the Party back together, and to lead the nation to a new and better day.

Wolf Blitzer asks her whether she's willing to go to court to fight to get these Florida delegates seated at the convention.

"Oh, Wolf, this is pretty premature," Mrs. Clinton said, adding "We don't even know who the nominee is going to be yet."

Terrifying Numbers

by: Dean Barker

Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 06:24:45 AM EST

I'm talking about the undeniable narrative of the presidential race so far - turnout.  In every stage, but most dramatically in the Palmetto State, as red a place as can be, we are looking at turnout numbers that should have every Republican operative in this country terrified. I'll quote georgia10, since she beat me to the punch. Stunning:

Total 2008 South Carolina Primary Turnout

Democratic: about 530,322
Republican: about 446,000

I've been following this emerging narrative for a while - but now I'm just dumbstruck, adding to the chart I made earlier:

Voter Turnout by Party (rough numbers):
Iowa:     220,000(D)     115,000(R)
New Hampshire:     288,000(D)     239,000(R)
Nevada:     115,800(D)     44,300(R)
South Carolina:     530,322 (D)     446,000 (R)

Total Democratic Voter Turnout:     1,154,122
Total Republican Voter Turnout:     844,300

What Will Hillary's NH Delegates Do?

by: Dean Barker

Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 22:13:27 PM EST

This puts her New Hampshire delegates in an interesting bind, since our state party, with Ray Buckley at its helm, has worked overtime at the DNC meeting in December to keep all of our delegates.  Their status was in question because of our moved up primary, which in turn was necessitated by Florida's and Michigan's attempt to bully themselves into a pre-Feb 5th primary.  As Kathy Sullivan noted in the diary about this:

One of the key reasons I believe the waiver was granted was that Chairman Buckley worked with Iowa, Nevada and South Carolina on the no campaign pledge in Florida and Michigan. The other three early states, and the states that are scheduled for Feb. 5, were not pleased with the way Michigan and Florida tried to muscle their way into the front of the calendar. Raynmond recieved some criticism for this,which I think was unwarranted, as is evident by today's action.

So what will Hillary's New Hampshire delegates do? In my opinion, it's a terrible position to be put in by their candidate.   Florida and Michigan are directly responsible for why we had to have such an absurdly early primary this year.

I'll only add that I stayed away from writing about Bill Clinton's recent activities more out of depression than anything else, because like many I think it's hurting the party (and has potential long-term ramifications about political families and the executive branch).  But this latest move by Hillary to me is much more damaging to Democrats than anything Bill has said recently, because it undermines the party itself for the sake of personal political advantage.  That's Joe Lieberman not accepting his party primary defeat territory. And before I go on for two more pages I'll instead direct you to Josh Marshall, with whom I agree completely.

McCain, Sununu in "Intimate Setting" with Shady Billionaire and Putin Ally

by: Dean Barker

Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 19:34:37 PM EST

John E.'s role in the mix:

The senator said he didn't play politics with the rich and famous. He talked with billionaire and Democratic Party financier George Soros about the nuclear threat posed by Iran, and discussed trade and economic issues with billionaire and Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

Soros and Gates.  Yeah, I'm guessing that if our Senator were a bit more honest about what other billionaires he was cavorting with, that this front page story in the Washington Post would have been printed a lot sooner than today, two years later.  Sununu and BFF John McCain met with Oleg Deripaska, a "Russian billionaire whose suspected links to anti-democratic and organized-crime figures are so controversial that the U.S. government revoked his visa."

Whatever transpired, Deripaska was so pleased with the access to our public servants that he wrote a nice love note thank you in return: ""Thank you so much for setting up everything in Klosters so spectacularly," he wrote. "It was very interesting to meet Senators McCain, Chambliss and Sununu in such an intimate setting."

P'shaw, you say.  Doesn't mean anything.  It's not like they met a second time.  Well, actually, the WaPo article says that McCain met with Deripaska again in August of that year in Montenegro:

Seven months later, in August 2006, Davis was present again at a social gathering that was also attended by McCain and Deripaska, this time in Montenegro, another Eastern European country in which Davis's firm was working. The three were among a few dozen people dining at a restaurant during an official Senate trip.

...Afterward, a group from the dinner took boats out to a nearby yacht moored in the Adriatic Sea, where champagne and pastries were served, partly in honor of McCain's 70th birthday.

Surely John E. wasn't there too?  Well, despite saying at Davos that he had "no more overseas trips planned in the near future," this article mentions that John E. would be joining Johnny in Montenegro as part of a delegation right at that time.

At Davos, Sununu said that "there's real value -- for him and his constituents -- to attending such an event."

OK, then, Senator. What exactly was the value to me, your constituent, in a private meeting with a guy so crooked and so close to Putin that his VISA was revoked, and then meeting with him again in August.  

What did the people of New Hampshire get for McCain's Mediterranean birthday bash, and Sununu's and Deripaska's role in it?

Blowback from Clinton's NH-Primary Choice Mailer

by: Dean Barker

Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 22:11:13 PM EST

Well, it looks like it has caused some blowback. Lorna Brett Howard, former president of Chicago-area NOW, switched from Clinton to Obama over it:

Florida Poised to Avert World War III

by: Dean Barker

Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 21:32:39 PM EST

This is a good thing.  A very good thing.

Because while the world wavers, key Rudy! foreign policy advisor, old school neocon, and verifiable lunatic Norman Podhoretz is shouting from the top of the WSJ editorial pages to bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran (NIEs be damned):

as between bombing Iran to prevent it from getting the bomb and letting Iran get the bomb, there is simply no contest.

...The upshot is that if Iran is to be prevented from becoming a nuclear power, it is the United States that will have to do the preventing, to do it by means of a bombing campaign, and (because "if we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long") to do it soon.

...In 1938, as Winston Churchill later said, Hitler could still have been stopped at a relatively low price and many millions of lives could have been saved if England and France had not deceived themselves about the realities of their situation. Mutatis mutandis, it is the same in 2008, when Iran can still be stopped from getting the bomb and even more millions of lives can be saved--but only provided that we summon up the courage to see what is staring us in the face and then act on what we see.

McCain's Economic Brain

by: Mike Caulfield

Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 21:16:41 PM EST

At a recent meeting with the Wall Street Journal editorial board, Republican presidential candidate John McCain admitted he "doesn't really understand economics" and then pointed to his adviser and former Senate colleague, Phil Gramm - whom he had brought with him to the meeting - as the expert he turns to on the subject, The Huffington Post has learned.

But who could blame him. Gramm is a classic seeker of economic justice, comparing those who would exploit the poor to Nazis.

No wait, it wasn't those that exploit the poor that were the Nazis -- Who was it again?

It was the Democrats in 2002, for contemplating placing restrictions on government contractors who use offshore tax havens:

Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas) argued that corporations are forced offshore by a burdensome U.S. tax code that puts them at a disadvantage with foreign competitors. The paper relocations, known in tax parlance as a "corporate inversions," are legal ways to reduce U.S. taxes on foreign income.

"The world must think we have gone mad," Gramm said. "If I've ever seen logic in history turned on its head for political reasons, this is it."

At one point, Gramm said the effort was "right out of Nazi Germany" because of its restrictions on private business. Those comments led to a sharp rebuke from a Republican colleague, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, whose measure to end the practice altogether has cleared the Finance Committee.

Yes, banning government contracts to tax dodgers is just like Nazi Germany. I mean, it's like I'm seeing double.

Just one of the many pearls of wisdom I must suppose that McCain is getting from his esteemed colleague and possible Cabinet member.

Would love to see McCain defend Gramm's statement on the stump -- any takers in Florida?

Amid Unclear Nominees, Party Turnout Becomes Story of the Race

by: Dean Barker

Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 10:54:11 AM EST

Hurtling toward February 5th, we have a fractured GOP field, with two candidates (McCain, Huckabee) largely unacceptable to the biggest voices in the GOP stacking up wins and close seconds, while the one the establishment settled on early (Romney) finds that his vast fortune can't hide his mile-wide and inch-deep platform and support. And another big name (Rudy!) has utterly collapsed.

Among Democrats, while it is undeniable that we now have a two-person race, the choice for nominee is even murkier than the elephants.  With huge name endorsements, constituencies, and demographics between them, one with more wins and the other with more (non-super) delegates, and each of them representing a historic change in the person who will occupy the Oval Office, I now doubt that this will be decided soon, even as we hurtle past February 5th.

As crazy as it sounds in 2008, the idea of a brokered convention, on both sides, may not just be for political junkies anymore.

Yet out of such cloudy skies has emerged as clear a ray of light as we can see, and it is undeniably the biggest story of the race so far: turnout.

In Iowa, in New Hampshire, and in Nevada, Democrats are turning out to vote over Republicans in huge numbers.  In Michigan (where the Democratic race didn't matter), despite the Levin-induced mania for an early primary, and with the accompanying millions spent to make it happen, there was depressingly low turnout for Republicans.

But let's leave aside Michigan and look at the three other states, each with great regional and demographic differences among them:

Voter Turnout by Party (rough numbers):

Iowa:     220,000(D)     115,000(R)
New Hampshire:     288,000(D)     239,000(R)
Nevada:     115,800(D)     44,300(R)

Total Democratic Voter Turnout:     623,800
Total Republican Voter Turnout:     398,300

But the emerging narrative is as clear as day: eight years of Bush and Cheney have given the Democratic party an enormous structural advantage this time around.  Let's not blow it.

GOP 2008: A Slow Motion Car Crash

by: Dean Barker

Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 06:37:58 AM EST

Here's a former exterminator, and erstwhile "Hammer", on John "A Hundred Years or More in Baghdad" McCain:

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) lambasted Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) Thursday for "betraying" the conservative movement.

..."If McCain gets the nomination, I don't know what I'll do," DeLay said at the Capitol Hill Club, according to a source in the room. "I might have to sit this one out."

..."There's nothing redeeming about John McCain," DeLay told Fox News. "He appealed once again to independents...He's not going to go much further than New Hampshire."

"I served 12 years with him, six years...as one of the leaders of the Senate," former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) told radio host Mark Levin on Jan. 10. "John McCain was not only against us, but leading the charge on the other side."

p.s. How's that indictment going, Tom?

Update: Tom DeLay says he "might have to sit this one out." But if convicted, does he become a felon and lose his right to vote anyway? And how many votes will the GOP lose this year in this manner?

Covering New Hampshire

by: Mike Caulfield

Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 22:24:29 PM EST

And thank God for Harry Shearer's magic feed from the CBS sattelite:

My favorite part? Where Couric asks if someone predicted Obama would win by 20 points. "10 points." says someone off-camera. "Double-digits" somebody spins. "Double digits," Couric nods.

It's like a found-art David Mamet play.

If we still have the primary in four years, would it be possible to keep these people out of here? Please?

The Giant Sucking Sound is Back

by: Dean Barker

Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 22:15:08 PM EST

When I asked about Barack Obama, Perot said he admired his eloquence but thought it "a little odd that we would be less concerned about his background than being a Mormon." Perot was pleasantly surprised when I told him that Obama was a Christian, not a Muslim, and relieved when I informed him that the e-mail Perot (and untold others) received about Obama not respecting the Pledge of Allegiance was a fraud.

McCained in Mittchigan

by: Dean Barker

Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 05:54:14 AM EST

In an open primary.

I agree with many that McCain may be the hardest to beat in the general. But I'm not sure the GOoPers are going to let him get there in the first place.

Or to put it another way, New Hampshire 'aint a whole lot like the rest of America, even on the Republican side.

Chris Doddism for President 2008

by: Dean Barker

Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 08:49:01 AM EST

Senator Chris Dodd, with far less money and press, somehow ran for president and scored a huge victory in preserving our constitutional rights, according to the WSJ (from Bowers).  Amazing what a little leadership and strength will do:

Senator Chris Dodd's Presidential campaign died with a whimper in Iowa. But he still seems to be dictating national security policy to fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill, and unless the Bush Administration is willing to fight, perhaps to the next President too.

We're told that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is saying privately he now won't attempt to update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) on the wiretapping of al Qaeda suspects. Instead, he'll merely support another 18-month extension of the six-month-old Protect America Act. Among other problems, the temporary bill includes no retroactive immunity for the telecom companies that cooperated with the feds after 9/11.

High Stakes GOTV Battles on Primary Day

by: Dean Barker

Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 22:30:46 PM EST

Which is a long way of saying that I got depressed reading this:

But the Clinton intervention at Ward 9 in Nashua nonetheless persuaded the moderator to ban the Obama observers. And the disputes, which dragged on for hours and grew quite heated, generally scrambled the Obama efforts to keep track of who was and wasn't voting, said Obama supporter Andrew Edwards, a rookie state representative assigned to observe the polls in Nashua, where Clinton ran up a big margin in her favor. Edwards was confronted by Lasky and by another veteran Democrat, state representative and Nashua Democratic chairwoman Jane Clemons, who he said issued a veiled threat during the dispute that he would face a stiff primary challenge in Nashua if he ran for reelection.

"The effect of it was that it basically disrupted our get out the vote operation," said Edwards. "My effectiveness that day [in checking off names] was less than 50 percent as a result of the people who kept coming in" to protest the observers.

Clemons, whose son Nick Clemons managed Clinton's campaign in the state, said she objected to the Obama observers because she said she had been told by the Nashua City Clerk the day before that such observers would not be allowed and that letting the Obama use them conferred an "unfair advantage." In an interview Friday, the city clerk, Paul Bergeron, said this was not the case, that the discussion before the election had regarded volunteers challenging voters, not those checking names off lists.

Sutton Town Clerk Threatened Over Thirty-One Votes

by: Dean Barker

Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 21:30:37 PM EST

The assault picked up after lunch. Paul supporters phoning Call claimed to be from the media. Others just yelled, saying she had committed treason, fraud. One person said she should be shot. She received as many as 40 calls that day.

"One person said he was on a nationally syndicated radio station," Call said, "and he has given out my phone number and they need to call the town of Sutton to find out why there's voter fraud."

The voices came from everywhere. California. Ohio. Florida. Michigan. Very few were from New Hampshire.

A man from Texas e-mailed that he was "contacting, by certified mail, the Attorney General of New Hampshire . . . and requesting a complete investigation and prosecution of any and all parties involved."

<...snip...>

She went home and locked her doors. She called her mother in North Carolina. She cried. The calls kept coming. She unhooked her answering machine and requested an unlisted number.

Kucinich Goes Nader, Calls for Recount

by: Dean Barker

Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:04:35 AM EST

But this says it far more persuasively than I can.

Fergus! Hillary Clinton is "Like a Roto-Tiller"

by: Dean Barker

Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 18:30:57 PM EST

This morning at a briefing for foreign reporters covering the New Hampshire primary, state GOP chairman Fergus Cullen made this analogy about Clinton.

"She is like a roto-tiller - a machine of cold steel with claws that grind up the earth," Cullen said, as jaws dropped among many reporters.

"Actually, the roto-tiller may be warmer than Clinton."

"The roto-tiller is used to mix in the fertilizer, otherwise known as cow manure," Buckley said. "I see a lot of cow manure in the Republican party. They are all standing out in the field up to their knees in the cow manure."

*To understand why Nanny Cullen gets the Rudy!esque exclamation point, click on the link.  What a preposterous name tag.

National Punditocracy Covers Their Shame by Calling Us Racists

by: Dean Barker

Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 19:11:37 PM EST

But in Tweety-land, apparently the only way to save face on this is to call us racists.  The charge is so absurd I'm not even going to dignify it with a response other than to say that the monstrosity of the slur is equaled only by the illogic of it, if one actually cared to counter-punch.

I actually started preparing a long, drawn out survey of what went on, but it looks like DHinMI has already done so, and better than I could have.  Please read it. But to sum up a little of what he said and add a few crude additions of my own:

* Connecticut Valley Dems are in the main for Obama, while Boston-area southern NH Dems are in the main for Clinton.  We saw the same breakdown in 2004 as well between Dean and Kerry.  But guess what? There's a whole lot more votes in Manchester and Nashua than in Hanover and Keene, and in small towns, college or not, all over the state that went Obama. And in a year where indies broke for Obama, and registered Dems for Clinton, advantage Clinton.

* Edwards' message of economic populism did not resonate with lower-income/working class town towns, and those voters broke for Clinton.  I find this kind of troubling for Team Edwards, actually. But in a way it makes sense, given that people who are working more have to rely on tradmed more for candidate info, and Edwards did not get nearly as much oxygen as the other two.

* Here's a wild thought: maybe Clinton won because she had a fantastic set of qualified people running her show with tremendous experience in state politics, an unbelievable field operation, and worked her tail off in the final weeks here. And then there's that business of her being a very credible, experienced, qualified candidate for POTUS.  Maybe she won, because, um, she won.

* Women held strongly for Clinton.  A very interesting fact moving forward.

* A rising tide lifts all boats: massive voter turnout helped all candidates, not just ones who capture the youth vote, and the pre-Iowa neck and neck status of Obama and Clinton held tight. In the end, this was Clinton's firewall, and a firewall doesn't need to look pretty, it just needs to stop the spread of the flames.  And with months and months beforehand of large margin frontrunner status here, she held on.  While the number of delegates is the same, and the margin of victory is small enough to call it a tie, the psychological, media, and momentum victory is huge.  Well done, Senator.

But none of this matters, because the bobbleheads are talking about tears and how we're a bunch of not only racists but liars, publicly supporting Obama but in the privacy of our viting booth showing our Yankee bigotry.

Update: The one big mystery for me still, though, is why all the post-Iowa polls were so wrong, even the reputable ones.  For more on that, check our Pollster's analysis.