Team Clinton: Down, and Out of Touch

Spencer Collins · #1 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:14 PM

Team Clinton: Down, and Out of Touch

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A02

They are in the last throes, if you will.

As Vice President Cheney knows, such predictions can be perilous. Still, there was no mistaking a certain flailing, a lashing-out, as two Clinton advisers sat down for a bacon-and-eggs session yesterday at the St. Regis Hotel.

The Christian Science Monitor had assembled the éminences grises of the Washington press corps -- among them David Broder of The Post, Maureen Dowd of the New York Times and columnist Mark Shields -- for what turned out to be a fascinating tour of an alternate universe.

First came Harold Ickes, who gave a presentation about Hillary Rodham Clinton's prospects that severed all ties with reality. "We're on the way to locking this nomination down," he said of a candidate who appears, if anything, headed in the other direction.

But before the breakfast crowd had a chance to digest that, they were served another, stranger course by Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer. Asked about an accusation on the Drudge Report that Clinton staffers had circulated a photo of Barack Obama wearing Somali tribal dress, Singer let 'er rip.

"I find it interesting that in a room of such esteemed journalists that Mr. Drudge has become your respected assignment editor," he lectured. "I find it to be a reflection of one of the problems that's gone on with the overall coverage of this campaign." He went on to chide the journalists for their "woefully inadequate" coverage of Obama, "a point that has been certainly backed up by the 'Saturday Night Live' skit that opened the show this past Saturday evening, which I would refer you all to."

The brief moment explained everything about the bitter relations between Clinton's campaign and the media: Singer taunting the likes of Broder, who began covering presidential politics two decades before Singer was born, with a comedy sketch that showed debate moderators fawning over Obama.

"That's your assignment editor?" responded Post columnist Ruth Marcus.

"That's my assignment editor," Singer affirmed.

That Clinton's spokesman is taking his cues from late-night comedy is as good an indication as any of where things stand in the onetime front-runner's campaign. To keep the press from declaring the race over before the voters of Ohio and Texas have their say next week, Clinton aides have resorted to a mixture of surreal happy talk and angry accusation.

Yesterday, Ickes played the good cop. "We think we are on the verge of our next up cycle," he reported, even suggesting the apparent impossibility that Clinton "may be running even" with Obama when all the contests are over. "This race is very close," he judged. "This is tight as a tick."

The reporters were dubious. The Monitor's Dave Cook mused about the consequences of Clinton "battling after there's not much chance."

"For the love of God, we can't say there's not much chance here," Ickes maintained.

David Chalian of ABC News reminded Ickes that Obama's lead in delegates is now of the size Ickes had said would be "significant."

"As we all know in this city, I have a very short memory," Ickes answered.

At one point, he warned of "a bitter and potentially very divisive credentials fight" at the Democratic convention. At another point, he compared the race to 1972, when a strong front-runner, Ed Muskie (now played by Clinton), was upended by an antiwar candidate, George McGovern (now played by Obama), who lost to the Republicans. "The fact is, he could not carry his weight in the general election," Ickes argued.

More ?
Team Clinton: Down, and Out of Touch

I believe that if Hillary loses either Ohio or Texas,she will back out within 10 days. I don't see a credentials fight at the Democratic convention.Why?..it could further harm the Clinton's legacy and Hillary's future in the senate. I say the so called "experts" are wrong..time will tell.

Mikeyy · #2 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:24 PM

Why is it "Team Clinton" all of the time. Or "the Clinton machine". Why isn't it "Team Obama" or "Team McCain". This stuff drives me bonkers. The Clintons are not running. Hillary Clinton is running. Thats all. No machine. Their campaign staff is just like everyone else's staffs.
I'm telling you the media is pro Obama. And anti Hillary. I see it over and over. Chris Matthews asked the other day. "Is the only way Hillary can win to drag Obama in to the mud with her and Bill?"Who said they were in the mud?. I know Karl Rove had a reputation for playing dirty during campaigns. But when did the Clintons get a rep for that? I don't think they did until this election.

Spencer Collins · #3 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:33 PM

I agree..the media is pro Obama but I can also understand the perception of "Team Clinton". Sure,all of the candidates deploy their spouses on the campaighn trail but many believe Bill's roll went beyond the usual spousal stump speech. I still think he hurts her more than he helps her.Example,Bill stated that if Hillary does not win in Ohio or Texas,it's all over.That remark did little to upset Obama's momentum and may have actually helped Obama!

Mikeyy · #4 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:39 PM

He told the people there that if she doesn't win its on them. LOL. I guess he's right but it was sure blunt. But I still think that Hillary is just held to an entirely different standard.
I just don't ever remember there being this big Clinton Machine they all keep talking about. Bill barely won the first time. And he won the second time because he did well the first time. Where is the evidence for this "Clinton Machine". I know its not your fault it just ticks me off when people just make crap up and it becomes the new reality.

cnredd · #5 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

I know Karl Rove had a reputation for playing dirty during campaigns. But when did the Clintons get a rep for that? I don't think they did until this election.

What?!?!?!...

This is from 1996...Long before Lewinsky...

Quote:

Nearly every outrage in policy or practice to emerge from the Clinton White House has a precedent or parallel in Arkansas. Take the latest scandal, dubbed "Filegate" by the media. It becomes more understandable if one recalls that, as James Stewart reported in Blood Sport, Clinton, in his 1990 reelection campaign for governor, used the Arkansas state troopers to investigate rumors that his Republican opponent, Sheffield Nelson, had fathered an illegitimate child.

Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign likewise used a private detective to dig up dirt on the names that made up what was known inside the campaign as a "doomsday list" of Clinton's extra-marital sex partners. And Betsey Wright, the governor's former chief of staff, was in charge of what she called "bimbo patrol," putting out to reporters discrediting information on women who claimed to have gotten it on with the gov. ("Where's the info on Gennifer?" Hillary asked the Little Rock campaign headquarters from a pay phone when the Flowers story broke, according to Roger Morris.)

Democrats were justifiably outraged in 1992 when it became known that Bush's campaign had people go through Bill Clinton's passport files in the State Department in a vain attempt to come up with damaging information. But after Clinton's election, in July 1993, two Clinton appointees went rifling through the State Department's confidential personnel files of 160 Bush-appointed department employees, leaking information about two of them--Elizabeth Tamposi and Jennifer Fitzgerald--to the Washington Post. Fitzgerald had been so frequently and widely rumored to have been Bush's mistress that a CNN reporter asked Bush about it during a campaign press conference. (The two Clinton appointees identified as responsible for unauthorized use of the files were later fired when the incident became public.)

The State Department incident happened at roughly the same time the White House began illegally obtaining FBI files on a host of private citizens who had left government service, from prominent Republicans such as James A. Baker, Marlon Fitzwater, and Ken Duberstein down to nonpolitical career employees. Immediately, the White House began dissembling: It was all a "bureaucratic snafu" which Clintonoids blamed on a career-Army employee on loan to the Clinton staff. Then it turned out that the man in question, Anthony "Big Tony" Marceca, was a veteran operative of many Democratic presidential campaigns. The snafu was next blamed on Craig Livingstone, director of the White House office of personnel security.

But it turned out that Livingstone had gone to great lengths to secure the services of Marceca, and that the two men were buddies who, when they worked together on Gary Hart's presidential primary campaign in 1984, had proposed blackmailing trade unionists and others supporting Walter Mondale into switching to Hart. Livingstone, a sometime bar bouncer, and Marceca, a former furniture repo man, were a fairly gamy pair to be given responsibility for handling the most sensitive information the U.S. government possesses on its citizens.

The number of files obtained by this duo of campaign junkies grew. First 300, then 400, then 600. Finally it was learned that Marceca had copied files on some 100 National Security Council personnel onto a computer disk, and had taken them home on his laptop. That brought the number of files obtained to 700.

Is all of this new to you?...

Mikeyy · #6 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

What?!?!?!...

This is from 1996...Long before Lewinsky...

Is all of this new to you?...

I guess you posted the wrong story. Because I see no evidence that Hillary Clinton was operating some big political machine. Do you? And who would you rather go up against while campaigning. The Clinton Machine or the Bush Machine?

Mikeyy · #7 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:59 PM

And BTW what a hit job piece that story was. And dated.

Spencer Collins · #8 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

He told the people there that if she doesn't win its on them. LOL. I guess he's right but it was sure blunt. But I still think that Hillary is just held to an entirely different standard.
I just don't ever remember there being this big Clinton Machine they all keep talking about. Bill barely won the first time. And he won the second time because he did well the first time. Where is the evidence for this "Clinton Machine". I know its not your fault it just ticks me off when people just make crap up and it becomes the new reality.

The term "Clinton Machine" is just a metaphor for effective campaighning.With Bush,it was "Rovian Tactics".Anyway..some believe that Obama would be more effective against McCain and polls support that claim.I live in one of the most conservative counties in the entire nation. HILLARY IS HATED HERE! The "few" Democrats in my county are moving towards Obama.

Obama does not fair much better but at least they say he is intelligent and even a credit to his race. There are very few areas in this nation where Hillary shows High Favor - Ability Ratings.She knew it would be an uphill battle.Hillary still has a small "chance" of success but she may have to risk splitting the party over those super-delegates. I believe she will not do that,it would harm her seat in the Senate and she is painfully aware of that fact.

cnredd · #9 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

I guess you posted the wrong story. Because I see no evidence that Hillary Clinton was operating some big political machine. Do you?

The "machine" does not only refer to her public campaihning, but the shenanigans behind the scenes...Private investigators...CIA files...etc...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

And who would you rather go up against while campaigning. The Clinton Machine or the Bush Machine?

Bush easily...

At least with a Bush campaign, they come out and tell you they think you're a bad person instead of the Clintons, which had a history of getting it out secretly to the press while shaking your hand and smiling...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

And BTW what a hit job piece that story was. And dated.

Quote:

The two Clinton appointees identified as responsible for unauthorized use of the files were later fired when the incident became public.

Should they have made it a puff piece with facts like this?...

Mikeyy · #10 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 05:18 PM

I remember the fact that Bill Clinton was considered a plus for Hillary early on because of his charm and skill with the audience. And because he left the country in better shape then when he was elected. Not because of dirty tricks. But I won't keep beating a dead horse

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/elections/2320-team-clinton-down-out-touch.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
Untitled document	This thread	Refback	02-29-2008 03:36 PM