So thinking a bit more reflectively about this Samantha Power business, I'm pretty pissed off. Sure, you can rail against the perfidy of the Clintons, but this sort of ritualized calls for resignations is all in the game. Having her resign, by contrast, is just playing the game poorly. Remember when fresh strategic thinking and common sense were going to break with the conventional wisdom? I do. The "monster" business was a dumb thing to say, and certainly the kind of thing you apologize for, but no kind of indication that she was a bad person to get foreign policy advice from.
« Military-Industrial Complex | Main | How Southern is the South? »
Power Outage
07 Mar 2008 12:52 pm
Comments (132)
It had to be done to make the issue go away and move on to the next news cycle. (And -- boy! -- does Obama need a good news cycle.) But, yeah, it sucks, especially since the press will use it as further evidence that the Clintons know how to play this game, while the Obamas do not.
Could not agree more. It is an indication of fear, something I had not tagged Obama's campaign with until now. You respond to critics but you do not let them dictate your actions. This was wrong, wrong, wrong.
It was dumb to say, but sad to see them give in so quickly and have her resign. Hope they know what they're doing.
Also, the guardian has her quoted as saying: "that is off the record":
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/07/barackobama.hillaryclinton
yeah, it's stupid, particularly since the comments were supposed to be off the record. A bit sloppy on Dr. Power's part, but it seems improper to let her go since she got burned by a unscrupulous journo.
the resignation makes Obama look weak.
i get that he wants to play it clean, but a simple apology would've been enough.
My god, can't we talk about their differing policies on Iraq, or on health insurance, or anything else in the entire world that isn't this stupid, peripheral crap?
And I agree with Matt, moe99, pjs, et al. Unnecessary for her to resign.
yeah, it's stupid, particularly since the comments were supposed to be off the record. A bit sloppy on Dr. Power's part, but it seems improper to let her go since she got burned by a unscrupulous journo.
Elvis: right on, brother.
Class acts that they are, the Clinton campaign are sending out a so-sad e-mail, asking for money to combat this vicious attack, not mentioning that Power fell on her sword within 11 hours.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Monster_money.html
This is the only reason I think Clinton has a shot at the White House: Gender politics are on her side. When a McCain supporter called her a "bitch," it was a one-day negative McCain story. When Tina Fey crowded that "bitches get things done," Clinton called to thank her.
Not that I think Power could have recovered by saying she meant to call Clinton a bitch...
Obama should hold a press conference, and when he gets asked about this say:
Senator Clinton is not a monster, as far as I know.
More seriously, I think she did have to resign. It was the only way for Obama to stay consistent with his message. In fact, he probably should've fired her.
Having her resign, by contrast, is just playing the game poorly.
But we're in the 'regression to the mean' stage of the campaign, where the rules of the game kick in much harder. It's Hack-A-Barack in the last minutes of the fourth quarter.
I think it's smart, on a Friday, to make sure the story dies from the news cycle. Because I'm quite certain that Samantha Power's not been deleted from the campaign speed-dial. (The only place she seemed to speak regularly as a surrogate was Tucker Faye Carlson's show.)
She's a policy adviser not a campaign adviser, it doest hurt Obama in the least and it gets it out of the news cycle. She'll be back for the general.
1) The Presidential campaign process, while certainly not perfect, does weed out the weak.
2) Obama is either willing to fight for the American People -- or he is not. He either has courage -- or he does not.
3) Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows how this country has been fucked in the past 7 years. They also know how Hillary Clinton has gone out of her way to ENABLE George Bush's actions. Because Hillary is concerned about Hillary -- just as Bill was largely concerned about Bill. Bill had no problem destroying the chance to help millions of America's poor simply for an irresponsible affair with Monica. Hillary has no regrets that 4000 men died in an unnecessary war in Iraq just so she could play footsy with Haim Saban, S Daniel Abraham ,and the other billionaire backers of the Israel Lobby.
4) Anyone who knows (2) and (3) KNOWS that Hillary should NOT be President -- and should be willing to explain that to Democratic voters. NOT for the sake of personal ambition --but for the good of the country.
If Obama lacks the courage to stand up for his people -- then maybe he is not suited to be President. Because if he can't stand up to an overprivileged, smug, incompetent like Hillary then he can't stand up to our foreign enemies and to the Republicans.
It's that fucking simple.
It wasn't just the "monster" comment, though. Go read the interview. She's cursing and speaking incoherently. The whole thing came off sounding incredibly bad, and the Obama campaign is right to cast her off. She proved herself to be quite a liability.
And WTF, she's a Pulitzer-prize winning journalist! On the record or off, you watch your mouth really carefully around journalists. She should know that. It was amateur hour all around.
Did Samantha die for Goolsbee's sins?
My guess is that Power wasn't pushed, she made the decision to resign on her own. She's always seemed amibvalent about her political role.
I agree. Samantha Power is way too significant a figure to just jettison. She's not just another campaign functionary.
I'm still for Obama, but he's showing some disturbing signs that he can be intimidated--ironically, the one thing I disliked the most about the early days of the Clinton administration.
I agree with Matt and everyone above that it was a stupid move, and makes Obama look week.
The one bright spot I can see from the events of the last couple weeks: Politics is much more fun when you hate one of the contenders. I actually liked Hillary until a couple of weeks ago. Now, instead of feeling kind of bad for her falling short in her quest for the nomination, I'm really going to relish the moment when she finally gives up.
resign or don't resignis besides the point.
the point is that Obama does not have a prayer unless he takes control of the debate again.
the Canadian/Clinton NAFTA scandal is the opening, but Obama is not taking it, and that will be his demise. On NAFTA and Clinton's kitchen sink attacks he could take the high ground, and do so very publicly by going back to Ohio to give a speech about....that would be new politic, that would be the 50 state strategy, that would be focused on electability in November . . .
but Obama seems to be doing nothing to put him back in the center of the national debate in a directing role.
Reading the story again, I'm pretty sure Power was drunk for that interview.
Thankfully, MattY has completely distanced himself from things like this in the past.
I distinctly remember MattY condemning - in the strongest words possible in the august webpages of The Atlantic - the DCCC's search for other Macaca moments.
I distinctly remember - as clear as day - MattY refusing to entertain smears and the like.
I distinctly remember MattY concentrating on an even-handed discussion of policy matters, not spouting DNC talking points like others, but really looking in to issues from all sides and considering all viewpoints.
Thankfully, MattY has remained above the fray.
I heard the most depressing thing on MSNBC last night. Obama apparently isn't going to pick up NAFTAGate 2.0 because he thinks he can beat her on the NAFTA issue alone.
To which I ask, WHY NOT BEAT HER ON THE ISSUES AND HER HYPOCRISY? Pointing out what she did is not negative. It's a statement of fact. This narrative can be easily established:
1990's through a couple years ago: Clinton loves NAFTA
Her campaign: Clinton doesn't like NAFTA anymore
But secretly: She loves NAFTA, and, as she apparently told Canada, she's pretending not to like it to get votes.
EASY!
*Assuming NAFTAGate 2.0 is true, of course.
Think southpaw may be right, the stuff about Ohio is pretty incoherent and rambling.
Read the whole interview, along with the on-record Telegraph piece where Power comes off like a starstruck teenybopper. It just all fits too well into the amateurish Obama cult thing. She had to go, at least for now.
Obama just surrendered to the terrorists.
"So thinking a bit more reflectively about this Samantha Power business..."
Hold on, you're going to think about this reflectively now? Is this the beginning of a new pattern for your blog -- first a knee-jerk post followed by a "reflective" one?
Let me make a meta-point here. This Powers incident shows the folly of assuming that your candidate's policy experts are so much smarter than the current president's experts. It's easy to look smart when your audience is a bunch of fawning U. of Chicago students and your highest responsibility is grading papers. It's not so easy when your audience is the political press corps and you assume a measure of real responsibility.
Couldn't disagree more that firing her makes him look weak.
Having a top adviser shoot off at the mouth all crazy-like made him look weak.
The only option was to fire her. She was off message and undisciplined. Of course it's understandable for her to be pissed, but she should have made sure she was off the record before she started ranting. Incredibly unproffesional, and proof positive she needs a time out.
Matt and most of the commenters above are too much in the wonkosphere bubble. She needed to resign, and pronto. The reality is that Obama's whole brand identity is that you disagree without being disagreeable, and that you do not "demonize" your opponents. His entire candidacy would look like a sham if he temporized here. If it's between two hardball politicians, Hillary wins, because his speech-making abilities are offset by her perceived experience. Those two respective attributes of him and her make it a tie. What gives Obama the edge is that, contrary to the Hillary frame, he's not just a good speaker, but someone with a fundamentally different vision for how politics ought to be conducted. That is the tiebreaker. If his people are calling opponents "monsters," Hillary has the advantage.
My bet is that Power, who is brilliant, recognized this, and quit so that Obama did not have to call her and fire it. But to win any state, including esp. Pennsylvania, you need voters, not intellectuals like Matt Yglesias.
Just one expample: There were indications that Obama was going to use against Hillary her statements to people like Bill Bradley that she would "demonize" any Dem. who opposed her health care plan back in 1994. Now he can still say that.
Lastly, her resignation does not preclude her from giving advice if Obama is elected. I also think that Obama already has learned much and gained much from his discussions with Power.
Of course she had to be canned when the entire premise of your candidacy is "change" and "hope' and turning away from old smear-tactic politics.
Yglesias' coverage of Obama will, ironically, never be nominated for a "Yglesias Award". Matt, your Obama blind spot grows every day.
Fred, read the comment from the earlier thread. Being a bad politician doesn't make you dumb. I would rather have Power advising me than the neoclowns in the admin right now, 8 days a week.
But we're in the 'regression to the mean' stage of the campaign, where the rules of the game kick in much harder. It's Hack-A-Barack in the last minutes of the fourth quarter.
This is a pretty good analogy. I particularly like "Hack-a-Barack."
It is not surprising that Israel bashers like Mr. Don Williams are displeased by the resignation of Ms. Powers. Back in 2002, Ms. Powers suggested that an invasion of Israel by US troops was in order to facilitate the formation of a Palestinian State. I'm sure that these Israel bashers would have been far more amenable to a US invasion of Israel, then an invasion of Iraq.
I think RaymondA is right on. She had to resign. Obama does not need to feign toughness. He need to be tough. That means sticking to his pledge to stay focussed on the issues. What does it prove that you can sling mud at a political opponent? Does it mean you'll be a good commander in chief? Was that true of George W. Bush?
1) The point is, HIllary IS a MONSTER. As is John McCain. Don't believe me? Go to the Brook Medical Center in San Antonio and look at the multiple amputees, at those with their face burned off,etc.
2) Wounds suffered in defense of the USA are one thing. Wounds suffered because smirking , corrupt Senators in DC wanted to suck the dicks of wealthy patrons are something else.
This Powers incident shows the folly of assuming that your candidate's policy experts are so much smarter than the current president's experts. It's easy to look smart when your audience is a bunch of fawning U. of Chicago students and your highest responsibility is grading papers.
First point: I know plenty of brilliant people I would not trust to make on-the-record statements to the press as my spokesman. Next: you're a blasted ignorant curr if you think that being a professor is only about grading papers and teaching undergraduates. What kind of idiot are you? To be a respected academic, you have to publish a lot to an audience of academics and professionals who want nothing more than to enhance their own reputations by telling you you're full of crap on a regular basis. Where the hell do you get off shooting off your mouth about the responsibilities of a university professor? You're just reinforcing the stereotype of right-wingers as a bunch of uneducated, disrepectful doofuses more apt to listen to creationist hucksters than actual subject matter experts.
It's easy to look smart when your audience is a bunch of fawning U. of Chicago students and your highest responsibility is grading papers. It's not so easy when your audience is the political press corps and you assume a measure of real responsibility.
The woman won a friggin Pulitzer Prize for her work. She's done a whole lot more than grade papers.
Seriously, Fred, de-ignorant-ify yourself.
Power was an unpaid foreign affairs advisor. She messed up, and removing her from the public eye is smart. Obama can continue to solicit advice from her in an unofficial capacity, and you can be sure she will find a spot at the State Department. That’ll be a fun confirmation hearing though…
Being a bad politician doesn't make you dumb.
This does give some insight into the Republican mind: apparently being a good politician means you're brilliant. Thus, Karl Rove is considered by them to be the most brilliant policymaker of all time.
I'm supremely pissed he let her resign. The Clintons have been calling Obama Ken Starr and Karl Rove, for God's sake.
This election is no longer fun. The Clintons are killing any joy in the process. And now Obama caves. Every day my hope for change dies a little death.
Why a fun confirmation hearing? Clinton isn't on the Foreign Affairs committee, unless she takes Obama's seat. Are you suggesting Sen. Vitter might defend her honor?
I guess Boxer and Menendez will still be around, but nobody's going to remember this in a year.
The situation demanded a weak move. Had this happened three weeks ago, Obama could've stood by her and the media would've likely given them a pass. But after the past two weeks, he can't afford to give the Clinton campaign any ammunition. This comes a day after the Ken Starr comment that the media is still repeating and only two days after a devastating loss. To fight for Power now would've guaranteed that all the media would focus on through the Wyoming caucus is this. Judging from Hillary's response, she doesn't want to let this go just yet. But maybe her lack of charity will work against her. Obama's people need to quietly remind the press how he reacts when smeared. He's gracious, she's vindictive. The way he handled this may appear weak, but any good general needs to be able to read the field and respond with a cool head. I give Obama props on this one. Maybe, if he's lucky, he'll have a couple good days tomorrow and Tuesday, which will allow him to climb out of this hole.
It's a Friday, she resigned, and we're America. No one's going to remember this on Monday.
Re RaymondA's comment "The reality is that Obama's whole brand identity is that you disagree without being disagreeable, and that you do not "demonize" your opponents. His entire candidacy would look like a sham if he temporized here "
----------------
BULLSHIT!
Either Obama thinks it is in the NATIONAL INTEREST for him to be President --instead of Hillary -- or he shouldn't be running. If Hillary is an acceptable substitute, he shouldn't be running.
Obama should visit the wounded troops at Brooks Medical Center -- the amputees,severely burned,etc -- and say: THIS is what you get when you make Hillary a Senator. What will you get when you make her a President?
The only reason Israeli billionaire Haim Saban is backing Hillary is because he thinks she will be "good for Israel".
That Hillary Will take on Israel's enemy Iran so Israel won't have to. That Hillary will spend the lives of US soldiers in a Iran War so that Israel won't have to spend the lives of Israeli soldiers.
While, at the same time, Hillary WON'T ask Israel to give up the Nukes that are driving the Iranians to develop nukes of their own in self-defense.
She had to go to save Obama a bad media cycle. But it was also important to pull both campaigns back from open warfare before it got any worse.
Some of the male blogospherites could do to chill the anti-Hillary rhetoric. some folk are starting to sound like left wing versions of the wingnuts.
David Brooks wrote about the problem for Obama in today's Times:
"In short, a candidate should never betray the core theory of his campaign, or head down a road that leads to that betrayal. Barack Obama doesn’t have an impressive record of experience or a unique policy profile. New politics is all he’s got. He loses that, and he loses everything. Every day that he looks conventional is a bad day for him."
Ummm... maybe Power had to resign because of stuff like this:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Power_on_Obamas_Iraq_plan_best_case_scenario.html
Apparently, Iraq policy is an issue where we shouldn't take Obama at his word. Key quote:
"You can’t make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009. He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator."
Now, I believe it is smarter to let the facts on the ground - as well as the best interests of the country - dictate withdrawal schedules. So I agree with what Power is saying. BUT THIS ISN'T WHAT OBAMA HAS BEEN SAYING FOR THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS. He's said he wants to pull out combat troops in 16 months and many people are taking him at his word. Which, maybe, they shouldn't.
In short, a candidate should never betray the core theory of his campaign, or head down a road that leads to that betrayal. Barack Obama doesn’t have an impressive record of experience or a unique policy profile. New politics is all he’s got. He loses that, and he loses everything. Every day that he looks conventional is a bad day for him.
There is a ring of truthiness to that, but as regards this debate, it imposes a false dichotomy: fire or accept. There are any number of ways to address this sort of thing.
Besides, isn't firing the offender the conventional response? Or have we live with GWB not firing his incompetent boobs (h/t generica) for so long that keeping people past any sane measure of worthiness (let alone fairly minor slips like this one) is now considered conventional?
And here is the real problem, which nobody seems the grasp. The Obama response to the last few days should have been (a) accept the Power resignation, but, (b) at the same time, go after Clinton viciously, but in a manner acceptable under the "rules of the game" (i.e, avoid name calling by the candidate or his campaign, but still hit her hard directly for the NAFTA flip flop, the hideous McCain loving comments, etc., etc., and use deniable surragates for the rough stuff).
The problem isn't that he accepted the Power resignation, the problem is that he isn't counterpunching.
But, that being said, a couple of points to keep in mind. One is that, despite some weaknesses from Obama in this regard there is a huge body of evidence that overall Obama would be far more electible in the general. Let's not let it obscure Clinton's many, many electoral vulnerabilities.
But the other is this. Even for people who don't loath Clinton to the extent thatI do, let's be honest. Even most Clinton supporters have to acknowledge that he would make a much better president than Clinton. So do you sell your souls for a (hypothetically, at best) a marginally greater chance in the general)? I don't think so.
This is much ado about nothing. Does anyone believe taht Barack is going to throw away Power's phone number and e-mail address. She was an unpaid volunteer. How do you fire someone who isn't getting paid? You beltway pundits are morons. Power resigns. Barack looks great to Jon Q. Donkey because her resignation is consistent with his message: We will not demonize our opponent. And then she continues to provide him assistance behind the scenes until he vanquishes the monster in June. Then Power is free to come back and help him beat McCain in the fall. This really is nothing.
Now can someone please ask Hillary about the Rezko co-defendants who donated to her campaign? And also please see if she could swing by the copy machine and pick up those 2001 through 2006 tax returns she said she was trying to get at the last debate.
This is much ado about nothing. Does anyone believe taht Barack is going to throw away Power's phone number and e-mail address. She was an unpaid volunteer. How do you fire someone who isn't getting paid? You beltway pundits are morons. Power resigns. Barack looks great to Jon Q. Donkey because her resignation is consistent with his message: We will not demonize our opponent. And then she continues to provide him assistance behind the scenes until he vanquishes the monster in June. Then Power is free to come back and help him beat McCain in the fall. This really is nothing.
Now can someone please ask Hillary about the Rezko co-defendants who donated to her campaign? And also please see if she could swing by the copy machine and pick up those 2001 through 2006 tax returns she said she was trying to get at the last debate.
Damir:
Who cares? No one cares that she swore. All that anyone cared about was that she called Hillary a monster. The problem for him, as has been stated in this thread, is that he needs to take control of the situation(meaning the primary). Right now, to any caual observer, it looks like a Clinton love fest. Where is the TradMed grilling her over her taxes and the Clinton library? He had to know that the TradMed would come after him now that he's the front runner. Axelrod better help Obama get back on his game, and quick.
Obama is never going to call her a "monster" in his campaign. But now the word's out there, being repeated on CNN and MSNBC as we speak. Yeah, the resignation makes him look a little weak, but ALSO there that word is now, bouncing around the echosphere, looking for someone to attach to. Who's run the more "monsterous" campaign? I'd say that's a net win for Obama.
She also said that both Barack and Clinton were equally unprepared for the 3am called, which is known as a Kinsley. I suspect she was fired as much for that.
And really. The woman writes about Rwanda and she calls Clinton a monster? She should have been more careful.
I don't care much one way or the other, but Obama would never have been able to complain about Hillary's negative campaigning again if he'd kept her.
New politics is all he’s got. He loses that, and he loses everything. Every day that he looks conventional is a bad day for him Lord help me, but Brooks is right.
Look, Don & MY, I too was initially pissed b/c I felt like Obama was caving to asinine demands. But he's getting ready to go on the attack, and he needs to launch his offensive from higher ground. Had he dithered and then had Powers resign after it got bounced around for 2 news cycles, it would have been bad. As it is, he acted immediately and pulled the rug right out from under the faux outrage. Clinton's going to look like a whiner if she keeps on about it. Now, Obama has all weekend to get his plan together, and let the news cycle reset. You see if Hillary doesn't wake up Monday with a bloody nose.
It's a close call. If she didn't resign, Clinton was going to use it for days on end. Though if dc is right about the ultimate goodness of having 'monster' in the vocabulary, maybe that wouldn't have been so bad.
But I incline to think that despite looking weak, he couldn't afford to have 'monster' sitting out there when he's trying to take the high road. Clinton is all about trying to take that away from him.
What we do need -- pronto -- is for Obama to find someway to reclaim the narrative here. Clinton's been calling the shot for a few weeks now and it's killing him.
By now, the Regnery Press must have commissioned an anti-HRC book with the working title "Monster" -- the only question is whether Kos gets his one into the bookstores first.
I'm OK with the resignation for these reasons-
- It helps put the story to bed sooner, rather than later
- It implies that there is accountability in the Obama camp. You don't get away with being a loose cannon
- Given that Obama is selling 'new politics' and a positive message based on optimism and hope, he doesn't want to be surrounded with people who fight down and dirty in the old political way
I'm OK with the resignation for these reasons-
- It helps put the story to bed sooner, rather than later
- It implies that there is accountability in the Obama camp. You don't get away with being a loose cannon
- Given that Obama is selling 'new politics' and a positive message based on optimism and hope, he doesn't want to be surrounded with people who fight down and dirty in the old political way
She also said that both Barack and Clinton were equally unprepared for the 3am called, which is known as a Kinsley. I suspect she was fired as much for that.
No, that was Susan Rice.
I think Matt has this wrong. She had to go. It's been too rough of a week for Obama and he has to get back on message. HRC and Co. would have beat Obama to death with the Monster.
The irony is, of course, that Hillary's surrogates have said far worse about Obama over the course of this campaign but nothing happened in terms of resignations or even public rebukes. I'm thinking of one surrogate who, literally, insinuated that Obama wasn't organizing on the streets but instead doing/selling drugs.
But God, does Obama need to get back on message.
** What's pissing me off, as an Obama supporter, is that he is not getting out in front of his new campaign strategy. If he wants to (finally!!) question her claims to experience, excellent. that is fair ground. But he's relying on his surrogates to throw mini-bombs about library records, tax returns, and such. ALL of which can be spun by Wolfson as "desperate."
** He needs to hold a press conference and grab this bull by the horns, otherwise, the media will bury him under his new "offensive."
** He needs to come out and explain, publicly for the world to hear, that questioning the experience of a candidate is not negative attacking. That he welcomes these questions of himself; and then he needs to explain 1) his vision for leadership, why it's different from Hillary's and 2) that this has been a rough couple of days, since those FALSE stories about Nafta came out, but like he always says, "Our message has been the same when we were up as when we were down...."
>> As long as he hides behind his surrogates for attacks -- without FIRST framing the attacks -- he is completely fucked. Because Wolfson will frame Obama's strategy, and we've seen no signs that Plouffe and Axelrod are better at controlling message/expectations than Penn/Wolfson.
Penn gets blasted, but all his (bogus) spin makes sense to people who don't follow the race closely. That is who he writes for, not the media types or political junkies.
Re Don Williams
Old Don Williams just can't get over his hard on for Hiam Saban. Based on his comments to the Haaretz newspaper which Mr. Williams kindly posted some time ago, Mr. Saban would appear to be closer to the Obama position on the Middle East, then he is to the Clinton position. Talk to Hamas, talk to Hizbollah, talk to Iran, Bush is too pro-Israel. Hopefully, if either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama is elected, they will ignore Mr. Sabans' appeasement advice.
The Clinton campaign is pure, distilled hypocrisy. Which is why Obama supporters are getting mad. I don't blame Power for saying that kind of thing. I think it's a small matter whether she stays or goes.
If I were the Obama campaign, I'd just keep repeating the fact that they won Texas, because they did in fact win Texas. At this point it's hard to see how Clinton wins.
At this point the Clinton supporters are just trolling, because their candidate has lost.
Power's new book looks really good and I can't wait to read it.
Sen. Clinton could of showed some Good Will and Magnanimousness of spirit by accepting Ms. Powers' apology and moving on, knowing that some pretty heated things get said in the thick of the battle. Unfortunately, Sen. Clinton and her cronies had to show how Petty they are and call on Ms. Powers' resignation and now she is out of a job when the economy is so bad, I hope Sen Clinton is happy. A true person of goodwill would have accepted her apologies and moved on instead of trying to get some kind of political gain. There is no goodness in that woman and Sen. Clinton shows how she really feels about a woman's plight -- she could care less. Sen. Clinton is not a pleasant spirit, and she is very ruthless and cunning. Sen Clinton, what goes around comes around and what you put out will come back. She has a blackened heart of stone and she made much more out of this than it was worth. When Obama wins contests, she comes out and does her stump speech and never congratulates Sen. Obama at all. And now we see that she did not even have compassion towards another women -- just cut her head off! Put her out in the cold, let her suffer. What a mean-spirited women. I like the way Ms. Powers had the class to resign so as not to derail Sen Obama's campaign efforts. She quickly defused the bomb Sen Clinton hoped to throw. People will begin to see through these monstrous tactics of Sen Clinton and her Team.
We are now finding out, through the new information channel, the internet that Naftagate was the work of an initial call from the Clinton camp and Bush’s Canadian allie, Stephen Harper in an attemp to sabotage Obama and the democrats, which they did! Where's the Press on this? Click on the word "round-up"
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/the-truth-about.html
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080305.wharpleak0305/BNStory/National/home
Those of us who care for our Democracy for the vetting of truth and for fair and accurate reporting must call the main stream media to task. We can exercise our rights and our united power by calling CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc. and ask them to begin to Vet Hillary Clinton and ask the important questions they should be asking her, like why she has not returned the money back to IPA, a company accused of sexually harrasing women? Why have they not further discussed Camp Clinton's initial call to Canada in the Naftagate controversy? Why do they continually bring up negative stories on Obama and soft question of her -- like the press is bought and paid for, yet again! It is an illusion that the press has been hard on her and soft on Obama. That is a traditional Camp Clinton spin and we all know they are the Masters of Spin (that means in essence they do not speak the truth).
As for Hillary’s superior foreign experience, Hillary did not think it important enough to read the National Intelligence Report and so she voted Yes on a War/Mistake that should have never been waged instead of having the intelligence and Judgment to say No, as other Senators did, and stated at the time, that we must not invade Iraq who did not bomb us on 911, but instead finish the job in Afghanistan. This makes her qualifyingly ineligible for the top job as commander-in-chief. Just because she surrounds herself with a bunch of generals does not make her qualified. A Photo-op does not eras her Iraq vote or exonerate it. Camp Clinton loves to stage phony events for the perception to make us think something that is not, is -- Masters of Spin & Hype and Delusion, often busing people in to their events to make the crowd look bigger than it is!
Then there is the current Camp Clinton Mantra, that may be the American public are having second thoughts about Barack Obama, beginning to doubt him because he did not win in Ohio. That is such spin. They won Ohio because they slandered him and made people doubt that he is a true Christian and some secret closet Muslim instead. They duped him on Naftagate, when they were the initial culprits, somehow Rezko's trial was pushed up to conincide with the primaries and the insinuation that Obama was a criminal too, just waitin to go down with Rezko. That is why people doubted him unfairly, because of old-time party politics, instituted by a "do anything and say anything mentality", no matter the cost to the person and the party.
Brotherhood (1937) - 552: Do you wish to be courageous? Then prove your courage in battling for Brotherhood. Assurances alone will not create courage, nor will praises affirm achievement. No preparations can be a guarantee of success. Courage is tested by unexpected obstacles. I have already spoken about courage; if I repeat it, it means that this quality is especially needed on the path to Brotherhood
Let the Vetting Begin!
People here defending the firing/resignation are missing many points:
1) This story is far from "put to bed." The Clintons will only milk it more now that Obama caved.
2) Obama has said over and over that he's not perfect and the process is not perfect. He is trying to improve things, but Washington is not going to change overnight. By allowing her to "resign," he is saying perfection is expected, which no one, least of all himself, can adhere to.
3) Obama completely gives in to the hypocrisy of the situation -- they can say whatever they want about him, but his team must always be on the straight and narrow (which, of course, is defined by the Clintons themselves).
4) PTSD flashbacks to the first weeks of the Clinton presidency when he threw gays in the military under the bus at the fist sign of trouble, and then threw his nominees under the bus as soon as his opponents cried foul. Samantha Power is a stellar intellect with a stellar background. Nothing she said in the interview reflected on her foreign policy advise. He should have defended her right to make a mistake and move on.
We may still win in November because the situation with the Republicans is dire, but we'll be damn lucky at this point. The Clintons are determined to either win the nomination using gutter politics or else to take Obama down with them.
Sen. Clinton could of showed some Good Will and Magnanimousness of spirit by accepting Ms. Powers' apology and moving on, knowing that some pretty heated things get said in the thick of the battle. Unfortunately, Sen. Clinton and her cronies had to show how Petty they are and call on Ms. Powers' resignation and now she is out of a job when the economy is so bad, I hope Sen Clinton is happy. A true person of goodwill would have accepted her apologies and moved on instead of trying to get some kind of political gain. There is no goodness in that woman and Sen. Clinton shows how she really feels about a woman's plight -- she could care less. Sen. Clinton is not a pleasant spirit, and she is very ruthless and cunning. Sen Clinton, what goes around comes around and what you put out will come back. She has a blackened heart of stone and she made much more out of this than it was worth. When Obama wins contests, she comes out and does her stump speech and never congratulates Sen. Obama at all. And now we see that she did not even have compassion towards another women -- just cut her head off! Put her out in the cold, let her suffer. What a mean-spirited women. I like the way Ms. Powers had the class to resign so as not to derail Sen Obama's campaign efforts. She quickly defused the bomb Sen Clinton hoped to throw. People will begin to see through these monstrous tactics of Sen Clinton and her Team.
We are now finding out, through the new information channel, the internet that Naftagate was the work of an initial call from the Clinton camp and Bush’s Canadian allie, Stephen Harper in an attemp to sabotage Obama and the democrats, which they did! Where's the Press on this? Click on the word "round-up"
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/the-truth-about.html
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080305.wharpleak0305/BNStory/National/home
Those of us who care for our Democracy for the vetting of truth and for fair and accurate reporting must call the main stream media to task. We can exercise our rights and our united power by calling CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc. and ask them to begin to Vet Hillary Clinton and ask the important questions they should be asking her, like why she has not returned the money back to IPA, a company accused of sexually harrasing women? Why have they not further discussed Camp Clinton's initial call to Canada in the Naftagate controversy? Why do they continually bring up negative stories on Obama and soft question of her -- like the press is bought and paid for, yet again! It is an illusion that the press has been hard on her and soft on Obama. That is a traditional Camp Clinton spin and we all know they are the Masters of Spin (that means in essence they do not speak the truth).
As for Hillary’s superior foreign experience, Hillary did not think it important enough to read the National Intelligence Report and so she voted Yes on a War/Mistake that should have never been waged instead of having the intelligence and Judgment to say No, as other Senators did, and stated at the time, that we must not invade Iraq who did not bomb us on 911, but instead finish the job in Afghanistan. This makes her qualifyingly ineligible for the top job as commander-in-chief. Just because she surrounds herself with a bunch of generals does not make her qualified. A Photo-op does not eras her Iraq vote or exonerate it. Camp Clinton loves to stage phony events for the perception to make us think something that is not, is -- Masters of Spin & Hype and Delusion, often busing people in to their events to make the crowd look bigger than it is!
Then there is the current Camp Clinton Mantra, that may be the American public are having second thoughts about Barack Obama, beginning to doubt him because he did not win in Ohio. That is such spin. They won Ohio because they slandered him and made people doubt that he is a true Christian and some secret closet Muslim instead. They duped him on Naftagate, when they were the initial culprits, somehow Rezko's trial was pushed up to conincide with the primaries and the insinuation that Obama was a criminal too, just waitin to go down with Rezko. That is why people doubted him unfairly, because of old-time party politics, instituted by a "do anything and say anything mentality", no matter the cost to the person and the party.
Brotherhood (1937) - 552: Do you wish to be courageous? Then prove your courage in battling for Brotherhood. Assurances alone will not create courage, nor will praises affirm achievement. No preparations can be a guarantee of success. Courage is tested by unexpected obstacles. I have already spoken about courage; if I repeat it, it means that this quality is especially needed on the path to Brotherhood
Let the Vetting Begin!
Sen. Clinton could of showed some Good Will and Magnanimousness of spirit by accepting Ms. Powers' apology and moving on, knowing that some pretty heated things get said in the thick of the battle. Unfortunately, Sen. Clinton and her cronies had to show how Petty they are and call on Ms. Powers' resignation and now she is out of a job when the economy is so bad, I hope Sen Clinton is happy. A true person of goodwill would have accepted her apologies and moved on instead of trying to get some kind of political gain. There is no goodness in that woman and Sen. Clinton shows how she really feels about a woman's plight -- she could care less. Sen. Clinton is not a pleasant spirit, and she is very ruthless and cunning. Sen Clinton, what goes around comes around and what you put out will come back. She has a blackened heart of stone and she made much more out of this than it was worth. When Obama wins contests, she comes out and does her stump speech and never congratulates Sen. Obama at all. And now we see that she did not even have compassion towards another women -- just cut her head off! Put her out in the cold, let her suffer. What a mean-spirited women. I like the way Ms. Powers had the class to resign so as not to derail Sen Obama's campaign efforts. She quickly defused the bomb Sen Clinton hoped to throw. People will begin to see through these monstrous tactics of Sen Clinton and her Team.
We are now finding out, through the new information channel, the internet that Naftagate was the work of an initial call from the Clinton camp and Bush’s Canadian allie, Stephen Harper in an attemp to sabotage Obama and the democrats, which they did! Where's the Press on this? Click on the word "round-up"
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/the-truth-about.html
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080305.wharpleak0305/BNStory/National/home
Those of us who care for our Democracy for the vetting of truth and for fair and accurate reporting must call the main stream media to task. We can exercise our rights and our united power by calling CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc. and ask them to begin to Vet Hillary Clinton and ask the important questions they should be asking her, like why she has not returned the money back to IPA, a company accused of sexually harrasing women? Why have they not further discussed Camp Clinton's initial call to Canada in the Naftagate controversy? Why do they continually bring up negative stories on Obama and soft question of her -- like the press is bought and paid for, yet again! It is an illusion that the press has been hard on her and soft on Obama. That is a traditional Camp Clinton spin and we all know they are the Masters of Spin (that means in essence they do not speak the truth).
As for Hillary’s superior foreign experience, Hillary did not think it important enough to read the National Intelligence Report and so she voted Yes on a War/Mistake that should have never been waged instead of having the intelligence and Judgment to say No, as other Senators did, and stated at the time, that we must not invade Iraq who did not bomb us on 911, but instead finish the job in Afghanistan. This makes her qualifyingly ineligible for the top job as commander-in-chief. Just because she surrounds herself with a bunch of generals does not make her qualified. A Photo-op does not eras her Iraq vote or exonerate it. Camp Clinton loves to stage phony events for the perception to make us think something that is not, is -- Masters of Spin & Hype and Delusion, often busing people in to their events to make the crowd look bigger than it is!
Then there is the current Camp Clinton Mantra, that may be the American public are having second thoughts about Barack Obama, beginning to doubt him because he did not win in Ohio. That is such spin. They won Ohio because they slandered him and made people doubt that he is a true Christian and some secret closet Muslim instead. They duped him on Naftagate, when they were the initial culprits, somehow Rezko's trial was pushed up to conincide with the primaries and the insinuation that Obama was a criminal too, just waitin to go down with Rezko. That is why people doubted him unfairly, because of old-time party politics, instituted by a "do anything and say anything mentality", no matter the cost to the person and the party.
Brotherhood (1937) - 552: Do you wish to be courageous? Then prove your courage in battling for Brotherhood. Assurances alone will not create courage, nor will praises affirm achievement. No preparations can be a guarantee of success. Courage is tested by unexpected obstacles. I have already spoken about courage; if I repeat it, it means that this quality is especially needed on the path to Brotherhood
Let the Vetting Begin!
Boy, the Clintons really know how to play the game don't they?
Really?...Really?....
If the situation were reversed (Obama down in PDs, and all the rest), and Obama had just won Texas by four points, but lost the caucus and consequently in TOTAL LOST Texas by two delegates, people would be calling for Obama to quit now because his campaign doesn't know what hell they're doing...
What campaign would you rather have: one that at this point can't figure out how to win delegates (even though she's got 35 years of experience and has spent over 12 months now in campagin mode) or one that makes a few tactical mistakes for a few days, six weeks out from the next primary that he could (possibly) lose....
Obama wins Wyoming over the weekend then Mississippi on Tuesday --- his speech that night will get him back on track...What is the panic?...
Peter K.,
I couldn't disagree with you more. Obama ABSOLUTELY does not need to say he won Texas. Delegate math, as someone rightly said, is a "bloodless" argument.
Obama's supporters are frustrated yes, because Hillary is being hypocritical. But they (we) are also frustrated because Obama has not been able to respond to any of this crap effectively.
Trying to convince voters that he won (because of the caucus votes, which btw, Hillary has already convinced the MSM are bogus and "undemocratic") would be the dumbest thing he could do. the world understands that HRC won the popular vote, that is easy to understand: more people voted for Hillary than Obama. Even most of the press doesn't understand the complex prima-caucus in Texas, so for Obama to proclaim victory would look small and bitter.
He needs, as I said earlier, to get out in front of his decision to question Hillary's experience. He needs to say, rightly, that NO ONE has questioned her claims to experience thus far, and that when you combine that with the fact that she and Bill are willfully keeping voters in the dark about their finances, Bills' business transactions, and her functions in the White House, her claims to have been vetted are seriously challenged.
He needs to fight back, in a way that isn't "attacking" but rather, giving voters the more transparency than Hillary has been willing to do thus far.
He seems too aloof at times, now is the time to stand the fuck up and make voters believe he wants this as badly as she does.
Re SLC's comment "Hopefully, if either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama is elected, they will ignore Mr. Sabans' appeasement advice."
---------------
Hopefully, when Obama is elected he will act as President of the USA , not of Israel. I'm not optimistic enough to even expect Hillary to do so.
Power really f'ed up, plain and simple. Unless you're a republican talking to Timmy Russert, everything you say to a reporter is on record, unless spelt out otherwise beforehand. You do not get to say something dumb and make it vanish by saying right after, "oh, that's off the record." Not how it works, and she should know that.
That said, I agree with others here that Obama firing her is kind an Edwards-sacking-Amanda-Marcotte thing all over again.
And while I've heard about this Clinton ad that supposedly portrays Obama as darker, I've not seen much detail about it. Where did that run?...
This is way, way worse than the Amanda Marcotte debacle. Power is a Pulitzer Prize winning author with a Doctorate who is advising Obama on his foreign policy and has a progressive way of approaching the world. If that's not a person to stand behind during a faux uproar, who is?
1) I think Obama needs to step outside of the campaign for a moment -- and talk with the American People as if he is President. There is no campaign. There is not Hillary.
2) Everyone's expecting him in Pennsylvania -- so he should catch the interest of Pennsylvania by going to Texas. To the Brook Medical Center -- to visit the crippled soldiers. Not as a political event -- but to gather information on their plight. A Day later, he can give a speech in Pennsylvania , point out their plight, point out Hillary's responsibility for it, and ask why Hillary accepts alls the privileges of power --but NONE of the responsibility.
3) He needs to visit all the people in this country who are being fucked over, talk with them , and point out that Senators McCain and Hillary have done nothing to help those Americans.
3) Pennsylvania has no shortage of poor. Of people losing their homes. of crooked bankers.
But Obama can visit elsewhere in the country -- and then talk about those problems here in Pennysylvania. To point out that we are all in the same boat --well, most of us.
Hillary and McCain spend most of their time on the upper deck sipping champagne.
4) Pennsylvania has a large number of the elderly. Obama needs to note that $3 Trillion has been stolen out of Social Security/Medicare in the past few years -- and ask SENATOR Hillary why she allowed that to happen.
Obama needs to note that the dollar has lost 40% of its values in the past few years, that that really hurts people on fixed income. Then he should ask Senator Hillary why she allowed that to happen.
5) Hillary has been make false claims to EXPERIENCE. Well, Obama should challenge her now to show where she has shown RESPONSIBILITY. Where she has shown ACHIEVEMENT.
6) Finally, Obama should not the problem with the common citizen suffering because of deep corruption in our politics. Because politicians are constantly tempted to whore for rich men. Then he should again ask Hillary to release her income tax returns.
7) Obama should set a STANDARD for what a US PResident SHOULD BE -- and show that Hillary has consistently FAILED to meet that standard in years past.
Interesting. When I heard about this resignation (and JMM's theory that it represents Obama getting "bitch-slapped"), my reaction was Matt Yglesias-inspired: Maybe, like Clinton thinking Mark Penn is a genius, Obama truly believes that an adviser who called Clinton a monster is not someone he wants in his campaign and fired her because of that. It's obviously tempting to go for the "her only crime was getting caught" interpretation but from where I sit it's not obvious that it's true.
Can someone fill me in on why Samantha Power's exit would be such a loss? As I understand it, her contribution to foreign policy thinking is something along these lines:
1) Genocide is bad.
2) It's also bad when the U.S. deposes a genocidal dictator as it did in Iraq.
3) It's better to work through the UN and focus on genocidal wars where no U.S. national interests are at stake.
The real reason Powers got fired was that she also shot her mouth off to the BBC regarding Obama and the troop pullout:
“He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator…. You can’t make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009…” http://thepage.time.com/
Stupid, stupid, stupid esp. coming on top of the NAFTA flap.
Ms. Power, a brilliant, prodigal, Pulitzer-Prize winning author, was not asked to leave, campaign sources said.
Maybe it's true.
neil,
I hope your wrong. Because if Obama really does not see Clinton as a monster, it would raise some pretty serious questions about his judgment.
Any of you see that bit where one of HC's people explained how since BO is part black he's probably a cannibal, and hence the real monster in the race?
People don't give a shit about "he said-she said" political bickering.
But let a politican come along who listens to THEIR grivances -- who speaks up on THEIR Behalf -- someone who is willing to kick the shit out of the power elite because of THEIR mistreatment -- and you'll get interest. THAT's a leader.
Hillary doesn't have a clue of the concept. Because she's NEVER been a Leader. At ,what? ,age 60 she's going to start?
Her "35 years of Experience is 35 years experience in FAILURE" Of prominance without results. Of position without accountability.
Re Don Williams
Is it not Mr. Williams position that the US should be talking to Hamas, Hizbollah, Syria, and Iran? Or am I missing something here. That also appears to be Senator Obamas' position and Hiam Sabans' position, based on the Haaretz interview which Mr. Williams himself posted. I guess Mr. Williams wants to go further then that and take Ms. Powers' advice and invade Israel to force the Government of that State to acquiesce to every Palestinian demand, under the naive assumption that this will improve our standing in the Arab world. The only thing this would do is demonstrate to the Arab world that the US can be pushed around.
I don't think anyone really believes Power won't be involved in the Obama adminstration when we win the election. That's when her advice will really matter, not now.
Posted by Mike | March 7, 2008 1:01 PM