Hillary: I Want to Command the Economy

"We need a president who is ready on Day 1 to be commander in chief of our economy."

—Hillary Clinton.

[continue reading...]

Hillary: Earmarks Got Me Elected

"Part of the reason that I won New York by 67 percent are my earmarks."

—Hillary Clinton.

[continue reading...]

Hillary Mocks Obama, Lauds McCain

"Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign, I will bring a lifetime of experience, and Senator Obama will bring a speech he gave in 2002."

—Hillary Clinton, March 7, 2008.

[continue reading...]

Hillary As First Lady. Ergo, Hillary As President?

All politicians embellish their own importance and exaggerate their accomplishments, both of which the campaign trail exacerbates.

Hillary is no exception—let alone as she's running for president—but her claim that her eight years as first lady equips her to become president cries out for explication. Here's the verdict of Patrick Healy, the New York Times reporter on the Hillary beat:

[D]uring [her] two terms in the White House, Mrs. Clinton did not hold a security clearance. She did not attend National Security Council meetings. She was not given a copy of the president’s daily intelligence briefing. She did not assert herself on the crises in Somalia, Haiti and Rwanda.

And during one of President Bill Clinton’s major tests on terrorism, whether to bomb Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, Mrs. Clinton was barely speaking to her husband, let alone advising him, as the Lewinsky scandal sizzled.

An interview with Mrs. Clinton, conversations with 35 Clinton administration officials and a review of books about her White House years suggest that she was more of a sounding board than a policy maker, who learned through osmosis rather than decision-making. . . .

[In short, her] conversations [with her husband, then-President Bill Clinton,] and her 79 trips [abroad as first lady, do not] add up to unique experience that voters should reward. She was not independently judging intelligence, for the most part, or mediating the data, egos and agendas of a national security team. And, in the end, she did not feel or process the weight of responsibility.

[continue reading...]

Why Can't Ron Paul Come Up With Something This Good?

David All alerts us to another anonymous, online political ad. Following the example set by Patrick Ruffini, since the ad wasn't on YouTube, I uploaded it there:



The ad's argument: As many others have pointed out, electing Hillary Clinton president would be strikingly similar to giving George W. Bush a third term. Ergo, vote for a real change candidate: Mike Bloomberg.

Headline explanation here.

[continue reading...]

Quote of the Day

"[A] lot of the Republicans who have condemned them and talk about their platform of family values, interestingly, didn't keep their own families together. Give Bill and Hillary Clinton credit for doing something we say they should have done and that is hold their marriage together in spite of enormous trials."

—Mike Huckabee.

(Hat tip: AmSpec Blog.)

Update: "I'm appalled when people are so personal in their attacks on her," Huckabee recently told the Weekly Standard, in reference to Hillary. "Nothing will engender more support for her than being perceived as a bully of a guy attacking this woman."

Related factoid: Huckabee and Bill both served as governor of Arkansas (the 54th and 50th), where they were also both born, in a town named Hope.

[continue reading...]

Why Can't Democrats Explain Their Opposition to Gay Marriage?

The Politico's Ben Smith reports from the latest Democratic debate:

Obama, like Clinton and Edwards, was unable to explain his opposition to same-sex marriage in principled terms, referring to it as a matter of "semantics." Obama cast his opposition as a matter of strategy and priority—he would not have advised the civil rights movement to make the repeal of anti-miscegenation laws a top priority in 1961, he said.

Clinton called her opposition "personal," but didn't explain it. And Edwards took back an earlier comment that his "faith" had led him to oppose same-sex marriage—but didn't elaborate on the source of his current opposition.

"Their reasons for opposing equality in civil marriage tonight became even less clear," Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese said in a statement after the debate.

It's times like this when you gotta admire the forthrightness of Ted Kennedy, who, in reference to the Marriage Protection Amendment, thundered, "A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry, pure and simple."

Rob Bluey goes into more detail here.

[continue reading...]

The Daily Digest

In Washington, white shirts and dark suites are de rigueur, but rarely do you see the three-piece ensemble—especially in mid-August. The exception is Bob Novak, who a few days ago revealed his reasoning: "It looked better on television to see a vest than a big old belly."

Bruce Bartlett welcomes William Kristol and Kathryn Lopez to the conservatives-in-praise-of-Hillary club.

Meet the First Ladies Club: Jeri Thompson (courtesy of the Post), Judith Giuliani (Vanity Fair), Elizabeth Edwards (the Post), and Michelle Obama (the Times).

"A unique chapter in White House history came to a conclusion last week," writes Fred Barnes. "Call it the Wehner era, as in Peter Wehner, the director of the office of strategic initiatives. The title is misleading. Wehner ran a one-man think tank inside the White House (with a few young research assistants) that brought scholars and thinkers to talk to President Bush and that e-mailed ideas and information to several hundred journalists and writers and intellectuals and policy entrepreneurs. His missives became known as Wehnergrams [link added], but there will be no more of them. Friday, August 3, was his last day at the White House."

But Wehner is no shrinking violet. Now using the byline of senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center (like Rick Santorum), he has already penned a defense of his former boss, chief White House speechwriter Michael Gerson, whom Gerson's colleague, Matthew Scully, pillories in this month's Atlantic.

[continue reading...]

The Daily Digest: Republicans vs. YouTube

A YouTuber implores the Republican candidates to remain in the YouTube debate

Cato president Ed Crane recently asked if Hillary is a neocon? His libertarian colleague Steve Chapman, of the Chicago Tribune, answers in the affirmative: "A Hillary Clinton presidency promises to unite Madeleine Albright's zeal for using bombs in pursuit of liberal ideals with Dick Cheney's vision of the president as emperor."

Reviewing Milton Friedman: A Biography, by Lanny Ebenstein, Doug Bandow relates a lesson in market-based parenting: "'Once, when the family was traveling across country by train, Milton gave [daughter] Jan and [son] David the choice of a room with berths or the difference in cash between the price of the room and the price of riding in coach. The children chose to sit up in coach for two days.'"

Before there was Freakonomics (2005), the best-selling book that popularized the "dismal science," there was Tyler Cowen, the modern-day cult hero of libertarian economists.

A tipster leaks to Jim Geraghty a selection of Fred Thompson's vocal support for McCain-Feingold, "legislation that tends to a level of support among NRO readers roughly comparable to the Ebola virus."

[continue reading...]

The Daily Digest

"The decision to adopt Hillary and drop Clinton has nothing whatsoever casual to it," observes Tod Lindberg.

David Frum notes three elementary mistakes in Bob Novak's memoirs: (1) Novak and Frum lunched, only once, at the Oval Room on November 21, 2001, not at the Hay Adams on September 19, 2001. (2) Frum began work as a White House speechwriter in January, not March, 2001. (3) Frum does not live in Georgetown, which Novak should know because he's been to Frum's house for dinner.

Check out the best of Reagan's TV ads from his 1984 campaign.

Does Daily Kos violate McCain-Feingold? According to a complaint filed with the FEC, "It surely spends at least $1,000 per year in hosting and based on what they charge (and get) for advertising, their support of candidates is certainly worth over $1,000 per year. Lastly, their self-identified purpose is to influence elections in the Democrats favor." David Freddoso draws the appropriate conclusion: "None of this is an argument for regulating Kos, but rather an argument for abolishing the silly campaign finance regime that that the Kos-krazies and their ilk have pushed on us for a generation now."

[continue reading...]

The Daily Digest

The invariably funny Dave Weigel live-blogged last night's Democratic debate. (Google, the debate's co-host, lavished some cool perks on the press pool.)

Obama is chummier and softer, but, as Jennifer Rubin observes, he simply cannot compete with Hillary's "experience, judgment and preparation. . .. All but the most rabid of the Democratic base I think will come to see that. So I would suggest that the GOP primary voters think long and hard about electability. Otherwise, we'll be debating whether First Gentleman or First Guy sounds better for Bill."

David Hogberg captures the state of Newt: "Newt is a great idea man. He provides the GOP and the conservative movement a wonderful service in that role. Why mess that up with a run for the Oval Office that would prove disastrous?"

Speaking of Newt, his new grassroots group, American Solutions for Winning the Future, which has seven staffers on payroll, is spending like John McCain, hauling in almost $115K last month but shelling out almost $415K.

[continue reading...]

Elephants Chase Donkeys

[continue reading...]

Tech President Standouts

Earlier this week, USA Today ran through the highlights:

• Obama used the Web to organize a national "walk for change" day. His campaign says 10,000 people canvassed neighborhoods across the country Saturday to build local support networks.
  

• Hillary is asking online voters to pick her campaign song. Her latest video shows comical clips of what she ironically calls "truly wonderful" suggestions (singers wailing "metal girl" and "bring sexy back"). "I'm so gratified that all of you thought this was such a wonderful idea," she says, followed by clips of men calling it "ridiculous" and "insulting."
  

• Romney's adult sons write a "Five Brothers" blog that reinforces the former Massachusetts governor's "family values" theme.
  

• McCain posted his college basketball picks during the NCAA tournament's March Madness, urged supporters to submit theirs and offered a free campaign fleece to the best prognosticator.
  

• Biden uses video clips at www.headtohead08.com to compare himself with rivals on issues.
  

• Edwards and Dodd offer RSS feeds of their campaign-event calendars.

Then there's Ron Paul and Fred Thompson.

Update (6/18): The Boston Globe adds its take (and introduces an interesting word, velocious, the adjectival form of "velocity").

[continue reading...]

The Daily Digest

More evidence of McCain's Obey-esque temper.

Jonathan Martin pinpoints what's wrong with the GOP's seven dwarfs: Huckabee; Brownback; Hunter; Gilmore; Thompson; Tancredo and Paul.

All politicians airbrush their resumes, but Hillary's airbrush is particularly amusing. In 2005, she returned a $5,000 campaign donation from Wal-Mart, citing "serious differences" with its practices. Yet she remained "largely silent," according to former directors and executives, when she sat on the company's board, from 1986 to 1992.

A few months ago I bet a colleague that Al Gore will not run for president. In short, the reputational risks and overwhelming stress of a campaign far outweigh uprooting his comfortable, lucrative and joyous post-political life. Although old Time hand Eric Pooley pines for a Gore resurgence, his cover story this week bears me out.

Dave Weigel tries to calm down Michelle Malkin, who is forced to retract a claim that Ron Paul "allied himself" with groups who believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

[continue reading...]

The Daily Digest

White House staff and presidential aides disembarking from Air Force One in New York City

Bill Richardson describes himself a "market-oriented Democrat." Certainly, he's the most conservative D running for president. By contrast, his party's front-runner, Hillary Clinton, in 1996, said she agreed that "[t]he unfettered free market has been the most radically disruptive force in American life in the last generation."

Before he decided run for president, Tommy Thompson boasted an impressive resume and reputation. But each time he appears in a debate, he diminishes himself.

Approximately one-third of Americans describe themselves as evangelicals. But I often wonder to what extent these people share the views of their alleged political leaders in the religious right? In short, is the influence of the Robertson-Dobson-Falwell axis overstated? Fortunately, Right Wing Watch, a blog from People for the American Way, dug up the evidence for me. Its conclusion: at least with respect to Robertson, these guys are still very much a force to be reckoned with.

Interesting footnote: Falwell disapproved of Martin Luther King Jr.’s civil-rights activism because “preachers are not called to be politicians, but soul-winners.” The “secular” excesses of the 1960s, however, were much too much for him, prompting him to found Moral Majority Inc.

Update (6/4): The Post reports that "[i]n the view of many social conservatives, their organizational structures—from megachurches to Christian colleges, broadcasting networks and public interest law firms—have never been stronger."

[continue reading...]

Clinton-Richardson

"Hillary Clinton is the most conservative" Democrat running for president. So says columnist Bruce Bartlett, who argues that Hillary’s policies would resemble Bill’s: “Outstanding” on trade, “far better than George W. Bush” on the budget, and “no worse than” W on regulatory policy.

We should add, as Michael Crowley did recently in a cover story for the New Republic, that Hillary "has always been more comfortable with the military than many of her liberal boomer peers." She comes from the Truman-Kennedy foreign-policy wing of her party, and despite enormous pressure from her base, she refuses to recant her vote authorizing the Iraq war. She is also cosponsoring a bill to sanction U.S. companies that do business with Iran.

Equally to the ire of primary and caucus voters, Hillary deplores violent and sexual content in video games—though because she's not a knee-jerk leftist, she has proposed a voluntary ratings system rather than a mandatory one. Indeed, she talks more about our national morale and faith, which are far common from the mouths of Republicans than Democrats, than she does about gay marriage and abortion. A few months ago, she even declared that the latter is a "sad, even tragic choice."

In short, Hillary has left behind her HillaryCare days and embraced the political center. She focuses more on consensus than partisanship. And if you think I'm exaggerating, well, just ask such adversaries-turned-allies as Rick Santorum (on restricting graphic media for children); Sam Brownback (protecting refugees fleeing sexual abuse); Lindsay Graham (expanding health care services for the National Guard); and Newt Gingrich (reforming health care).

And yet, pace Bartlett, Hillary is not the most conservative Dem. That honor belongs to Bill Richardson, about whom Reason magazine sums up the case nicely (not yet online):

[As governor] Richardson cut New Mexico's income tax from 8.2 percent to 4.9 percent, halved the capital gains tax, and eliminated the gross receipts tax. He frequently and explicitly drew a link between lower taxes and economic growth. . . . [He] not only supports the right to carry a concealed weapons but holds a concealed-carry permit himself. He . . . endors[es] charter schools (but not vouchers) and medical marijuana (but not decriminalization).

And in case you think a presidential run has caused Richardson to revisit his views, as it has done to others, two things he said last week should quell your fears. First, on taxes: "Democrats, whenever we have a solution, we want to tax. I'm different. I'm a tax cutter." Second, on guns: "I'm a Westerner. . . . The Second Amendment is precious in the West." In fact, Richardson has the highest rating from the National Rifle Association of any candidate for president, Democrat or Republican.

Finally, Richardson’s resume stands heads and shoulders above those of all his Democratic challengers: Governor, U.N. ambassador, congressman, cabinet secretary. As Karen Tumulty of Time puts it, “He has rescued hostages and negotiated with some of the toughest characters on the planet."

Others have noted that Congress is now in the hands of Democrats largely because Democrats ran blue-dog candidates in November. A Clinton-Richardson ticket would entrench this conservative trend.

Update (5/4/07): Citing various quotes from Hillary, but no specific policies, the Club for Growth calls Bartlett "crazy." Comments Club President Pat Toomey:

Her distrust of individual freedom, her distaste for the capitalist system, and her faith in government control places her at the far left end of the political spectrum. A President Hillary Clinton would do everything in her power to make America look more like our neighbors across the Atlantic and less like the capitalistic free-market enterprise that has made this country great.

And in case Karen's quote about Richardson's diplomatic successes left you curious, the Las Vegas Review-Journal elaborates: He's pried free a journalist from Sudan, concessions out of Kim Jong Ill, prisoners from Castro and Americans from Saddam.

Update (11/10/07): Rich Lowry joins the conservatives-for-Hillary club:

It's a paradox of this election season that the most conservative candidate in the Democratic presidential field is the one most hated by conservatives. Hillary Clinton will not make extravagant promises about pulling American troops from Iraq, defends declaring elements of Iran's Revolutionary Guards a terrorist organization and won't endorse massive new payroll taxes to fund Social Security.

[continue reading...]

The Daily Dose

China

The Post's Anne Kornblut profiles Hillary's pollster, Mark Penn.

Please welcome Senator Jim Demint (R-SC) to the blogosphere. (Well done, Tim.)

Chuck Muth, a former executive director of the American Conservative Union, and Steven Greenhut, a columnist for the Orange County Register, are turning in their GOP-membership cards.

Kudos to the Hill for running a series "exploring the recommendations of the Sunlight Foundation’s Open House Project, which advocates online transparency in Congress." Rob Bluey writes the inaugural op-ed, in which he advocates credentialing bloggers.

Fred Thompson's advisers give the Politico's Mike Allen another leak. In addition to "talking to potential campaign managers," for an announcement to be made in June or July, the Thompson team is "researching ways to use technology—including the Web, videoconferences and teleconferences—to harness the enthusiasm for his candidacy among grass-roots bloggers and activists."

[continue reading...]

Those Poor Romney Staffers

John Edwards's $400 haircuts are by now yesterday's news, thanks to the Times's David Kirkpatrick, who brings such scrutiny, for the first quarter, to the full field (Slate's John Dickerson provides a cheat sheet):

Romney, who is by far the richest candidate, was stingiest with his staff members’ salaries, often having them fly discount airlines and stay in accommodations as humble as a Super 8 Motel in Parsippany, NJ. “We put a premium on efficiency,” said spokesman Kevin Madden. Recalling a trip for the campaign's official announcement in Michigan, he said, “We tripled up in a hotel suite—one of those cheaper ones.”

McCain’s campaign, which is burning through money, of which it has the least among the GOP frontrunners, had the highest-paid staff of any campaign in either party. Nine earned more than $25,000, including strategists Michael Dennehy, whose $51,925 made him the highest-paid staffer on any campaign, and Terry Nelson, who raked in $36,173.

Giuliani, the capitalist candidate, boasts the best-paid top staffers: seven exceeded the $25K threshold, and campaign manager, Mike DuHaime, garnered more than any of his counterparts ($44,375).

Hillary remunerated only three employees more than $25,000 (the real prize being working in Hillaryworld), but reported $154,000 in unpaid bills to her media adviser, Mandy Grunwald, and $277,000 to her main political adviser, Mark Penn.

Obama’s only aide to net more than $25K was his grossly undercompensated finance director, Julianna Smoot. She made $26,099 and oversaw $24.8 million in primary fund-raising.

[continue reading...]

Obama vs. Hillary in the Money Primary

I’ve always found John Heilemann’s articles to be sharp and interesting, somewhat like the old David Brooks. He files his reports for New York magazine on national politics, and has a knack for showing rather than telling. Here’s an except from his latest story, on the money chase between Obama and Hillary:

"The most gratifying thing about our fund-raising success isn’t the bottom line,” [Obama’s chief campaign strategist, David] Axelrod says, “but the number of people who have contributed and the number who are small contributors. The people we’re targeting are new to this; they’re not constrained by old loyalties. There’s a lot of energy in that world, and it gives us enormous potential to grow.” When I ask if he’s implying a contrast to Clintonworld, Axelrod offers up a pointed aperçu: “There’s a difference between grabbing low-hanging fruit and planting trees.”

Obama’s finance people know that historically the second and third quarters have seen a falloff in contributions. But whatever happens next on the money front, the political implications of Obama’s first quarter are already set in stone. The central question about Obama is whether, for all his charisma and star power, he may simply be a flash in the pan. And that question remains largely unanswered. He has yet to demonstrate anything approaching depth on any area of policy. He has yet to articulate a compelling vision of America’s place in the world at a time of clear and present peril. For many people, even those inclined to favor him, he remains something of a cipher. And he has yet to be tested under fire or to prove that he has the fortitude required to withstand the rigors of a presidential campaign—which Clinton has been and does in spades. But Obama’s performance in the money primary does demonstrate that he can build an organization, in a breathtakingly short time, that can go toe-to-toe with hers. And that is no small thing. “As someone new to the presidential process, there was a question of, ‘Can he hack it?’” says Axelrod. “That question has been answered.”

Update: The NYT plays copycat: "Donors Linked to the Clintons Shift to Obama."

[continue reading...]

The Daily Dose

The interior of the dome of the Michigan Capitol building

The IBD editorial board calls on Paul Wolfowitz to resign, "to right as much as he can of the mess he's made." (For a background, not just a briefing, check out this long profile of Wolfowitz's reign at the World Bank by the New Yorker's John Cassidy.)

New Jersey Governor John Corzine's recent broken-leg, ribs, collarbone and sternum car crash underscores the importance of buckling up—though the reason for doing so is not because "it's the law," but because it can save your life (or at least prevent catastrophic injuries). (Related: Radley highlights the growing chorus of college executives who advocate moving the drinking age back to18, and argues that Congress should "abandon[] the federal minimum altogether or at least the federal funding blackmail that gives it teeth.")

Chuck Todd, NBC's new political director, puts his finger on why Imus's remark will forever be footnoted to his resume: "[I]t was as much sexist as it was racist. . . . It didn’t touch merely one third rail of American societal discourse (race) but two third rails (race and gender)."

It's economics, stupid (courtesy of Phil Klein): "Whatever liberals may say about Fox News, its financial success, from an objective microeconomic standpoint, is a textbook case of a market response to consumer demand. There were a lot of conservatives out there who were[] [dis]satisfied with the available news sources. My hunch, and this is reinforced by the bankruptcy filing of Air America, is that liberal positions are adequately represented in the media and therefore there isn't enough pent-up demand to make a liberal cable news channel a success."

Her aides allowed him only a fleeting hallway encounter with their boss, so TNR's Michael Crowley set out himself "to unravel the mystery" behind Hillary Clinton's views on the Iraq war. Dozens of calls later to former Clinton officials and Democratic aides, and after sifting through her past, from her college career through eight years in the White House and six in the Senate, Crowley concludes that the former First Lady—who once tried to enlist in the marines—"has always been more comfortable with the military than many of her liberal boomer peers."

[continue reading...]