Yes, I'm still celebrating!

Clintons Campaigning in PA This Week

Monday, March 10

Scranton, PA
Doors Open: 4:30 p.m. EST
Event Begins: 6:00 p.m. EST
Hillary Clinton Attends “Solutions for America” Rally
Scranton High School
63 Munchak Way
Scranton, PA

Tuesday, March 11

Harrisburg, PA
Doors Open: 10:00 a.m. EST
Event Begins: 12:00 p.m. EST
Hillary Clinton Attends “Solutions for America” Rally
The Forum
Corner of 5th and Walnut
Harrisburg, PA

Philadelphia, PA
Doors Open: 4:00 p.m. EST
Event Begins: 6:00 p.m. EST
Hillary Clinton Attends “Solutions for America” Rally
Temple University
McGonigle Arena1
800 Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA

Washington, PA
12:30 p.m. EST
President Clinton Attends “Solutions for America” Event
Washington and Jefferson College, Henry Gymnasium
60 South Lincoln Street (on the corner of Chestnut)
Washington, PA

Canonsburg, PA
2:00 p.m. EST
President Clinton Meets with Voters
Canonsburg Area Senior Center
30 East Pike Street
Canonsburg, PA

Center Township, PA
4:45 p.m. EST
President Clinton Attends “Solutions for America” Event
Center High School
160 Baker Road Ext
Center Township, PA

Scranton, PA JUST ADDED!
5:30 p.m. EDT
Chelsea Clinton Attends Scranton Office Opening
Clinton Campaign Scranton Office
222 Wyoming Avenue
Scranton, PA

Wednesday, March 12

Erie, PA
Additional details TBA.

UPDATE:

Wednesday, March 12

Erie, PA
11:30 a.m. EST
President Clinton Attends “Solutions for America” Event
East High School
1001 Atkins Street
Erie, PA

Johnstown, PA
3:00 p.m. EST
President Clinton Attends “Solutions for America” Event
Greater Johnstown Senior High School
222 Central Avenue
Johnstown, PA



.

Obama Foreign Policy Adviser Resigns Over Monstrous Remark

MONSTER BASH

Samantha Power, a foreign policy adviser to Obama's presidential campaign resigned today after it came out that she had called Clinton a "monster" to the foreign press. If you missed the news this morning, Powers said the following to The Scotsman newspaper: "We f*** up in Ohio. In Ohio, they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows Ohio's the only place they can win. She is a monster, too -- that is off the record -- she is stooping to anything."

Power said, "you just look at her and think: ergh. But if you are poor and she is telling you some story about how Obama is going to take your job away, maybe it will be more effective. The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive."

It probably didn't help that during a telephone press conference held by the Hillary Clinton for President campaign this morning that three House members, Congressman Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY), and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) called for Samantha Power to be dismissed.


Lowey said, she was, "Calling on Obama to make it very clear that Samantha Power should not be a part of this campaign."

Wasserman Schultz said that Obama had "set a tone of hope" and that the campaign should not degenerate into personal attacks and name calling.

Meeks added that while it's understood that politics is a contact sport, that it should be about the issues and not personal attacks. He said that this was "the worst kind of politics" and that this was what was expected from the other side and that Obama should "stand up and take action."

Later in the phone call, Wasserman Schultz responding to a question from Slate about off-the-record remarks noted that from her own experience, if you've already agreed to an on-the-record interview and then say something you regret and try to make it "off record" the press generally always believes that the comment is fair play to air publically.

According to MSNBC, Barack Obama initially responded to the controversy with this:

[He's] said to have made it very clear that statments such as one from his foreign policy advisor Samantha Power have no place in American politics.

However, back in December Obama made the following statements in regard to personal attacks:

...Obama said he had "been very clear to my campaign. I do not want to see research that is involved in trying to tear people down personally. If I find out that somebody is doing that, they will be fired. And I have been absolutely crystal clear about this, and I have been clear about this for a very long time."

Of course it's not as if the Obama campaign hasn't gotten personal with Hillary Clinton before, though usually the comments are coming from Barack's own mouth in the form of sexist dogwhistles:

First there was the "tea parties" comment:

Obama merely declined to comment in this case, but he hasn't gotten to New Hampshire with clean hands, having recently reduced Hillary Clinton's experience as first lady to attending tea parties; then, responding to being called out by the Clinton campaign on the obvious sexism of that jab, he denied he was referring to her gender (really?—he'd describe a man's experience as having "tea" with people?) and resorted to a thinly-veiled update on the old "hysteria" chestnut: "Those folks must really be on edge."

Then, the "claws" comment:

Obama saved most of his criticisms for Bush, but he seemed to have Clinton in his sights when he said, "You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out."

And this period piece:

“[OBAMA] I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal,” he told reporters.

’Cause you know how women are….

Driven by feelings…. Worried about their [sex] appeal… Prone to tears… The whole phases of the moon thing…

And did you catch the dogwhistle in “periodically”?

NOTE: Apparently, Andrea Mitchell and Nora O’Donnell noticed as well. Even if the boys on the bus didn’t — or approved.

PA PLAY

In Pennsylvania news at the same morning press conference there were hints that there may be at least one PA Presidential debate.

Also, when a WTAE reporter (Aaron Saykin maybe?) asked if Clinton had to win PA, Howard Wolfson said that the campaign would not make any blanket statements but said that PA was "absolutely critical to the campaign." Well, yes!
.

Clinton Conference Call

I got the chance to participate in a Clinton campaign media conference call this morning with Ann Lewis, Senior Advisor for Hillary Clinton for President, and Howard Wolfson, Hillary Clinton's Communications Director.

This was not a special call for bloggers, it was for the media (AP, Gannett, Pacifica, Andrea Mitchell, etc.) including some bloggers. So, yes, kudos to them for blogger outreach.

Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake gives her account of the call here which includes the following:

I will say, however, that the Clinton campaign has been much more open when it comes to letting people ask tough questions of them. Something like what happened the other night -- when Obama general counsel Bob Bauer got on a Clinton conference call and hammered Wolfson -- could never happen in reverse. I've asked to be on the Obama calls and they've never allowed it, because I certainly would've liked to ask similar questions of them about the Harry & Louise ads, so points to Clinton for transparency.

Many of the questions asked by the media were about how should Florida and Michigan be handled by the party. While, not surprisingly, maintaining that the delegates should be seated from those states, they did seem open to do-overs or, at least, stated a preference for primaries versus caucuses if it comes to that. They also said that the pledge not to campaign in FL and MI ended on February 5th.

Ann Lewis credited some of their win in Ohio to campaigning in "urban, suburban, exurban and rural areas" as Clinton had for her NY Senate run and said that that strategy would also do them well in states like Pennsylvania.

A couple of questions were asked about the release of Clinton's tax returns and they did say that they will be released before April 22nd (PA primary date).

They also said that the campaign had taken in 3 million dollars in the 24 hours following Clinton's wins this week.
.

2 Political Junkies At War!

Yes, 2 Political Junkies are at war -- with each other!
OK, not really. First of all, neither of us wants to see a [gulp] President McCain.

But, while Dayvoe sees Barack "They Even Applaud When He Sneezes" Obama as the best chance for salvation from the forces of evil in November, Maria believes that Hillary "Comeback Kid Part II" Clinton and her Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants [Suits] can redeem mankind and womynkind.

[/snark]

Seriously folks, we have a split here and we're going with it. However, that does not mean that we want to turn 2pj into a battleground. One of these two will end up being the Democratic nominee and both of us will support the eventual winner, so no scorched earth blogging or comments, please (right, like that's going to happen).

We just thought that our readers had a right to know where we stand (apart for now).

Signed:

David DeAngelo
Maria Lupinacci

.

Phonebanking Today

Phonebanking for Hillary

WHEN:
Today, 2:00 PM - 9:00 PM

WHERE:
AFSCME
116 Blvd of Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 15222

CONTACT:
For more info, contact Stephanie Rex @ srex@hillaryclinton.com

Clinton wins Texas, Ohio & and RI

Clinton wins Texas, Ohio (& and RI)..

Phonebanking for Hillary

WHEN:
Saturdays - Tuesdays, 9:00 AM - 9:00 PM

WHERE:
AFSCME
116 Blvd of Allies
Pittsburgh, PA 15222

CONTACT:
For more info, contact Stephanie Rex @ srex@hillaryclinton.com

The Campaigns Hit Pittsburgh!

Saturday, March 1, 2008

Pittsburgh Official Obama Kick Off Canvass!! (Official Event)
This is the first **official** Obama canvass in the city of Pittsburgh!! So come join Obama supporters from Allegheny County and beyond as we go door to door in our neighborhoods registering voters and spreading Barack Obama's message of hope, action and change!!

Time: Saturday, March 1 at 11:00 AM
Duration: 3 hours
Host: Lauren Watts
Contact Phone: 603 759 8027
Location: Canvass Staging Area (Pittsburgh, PA) 208 N. Highland Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15206
RSVP @:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/officialevent/4r8wq


Sunday, March 2, 2008

Hillary Campaign Event (this Sunday)
Are you a Democrat? Are you still undecided who to vote for in the upcoming Pennsylvania primary? Would you like a chance to talk to someone who has worked closely with Hillary Clinton to learn more about her as a person and as a Presidential candidate?

If you answered yes please join Sally Katzen, former deputy assistant to the President for Economic Policy in the Clinton Administration, for a discussion about Senator Clinton. In Sally's own words: "I want to talk about the choices the people of Pennsylvania have -- the first time in many years where they have a real voice in the selection of the Democratic nominee for President. I can talk about [Senator Clinton's] position on the issues, her real solutions to the problems facing the country, her character and values, her electability and anything else anyone wants to talk about."

RSVP: Please let us know if you plan to attend by emailing: hhnorman@verizon.net
What: A conversation about Hillary Clinton with Sally Katzen
Where: The Juring Home at 2223 Beechwood Blvd, Pittsburgh PA 15217
When: Sunday March 2 at 11am


Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Obama for America
Western Pennsylvania Young Professionals Kick-off Event

Take this opportunity to get in on the ground floor of an historic campaign.

WHEN:
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
7:00 PM until Midnight

WHERE:
Rolands Seafood Grill
1904 Penn Avenue in the Strip - upstairs

CONTACT:
Danny Cerrone, dcerrone@thorpreed.com
Douglas Miner, dbmpitt@yahoo.com
John McClelland, jmac@goodapples.com
.

Academy Picks Its Top Fave Last Night

Jack Kelly Sunday

Jack Kelly attacks Senator Obama this week.

He begins with something having little to do with Obama himself:

Texas state Sen. Kirk Watson had an embarrassing moment the night the candidate he is supporting for president won the Wisconsin primary. MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked him to name a legislative accomplishment of Sen. Barack Obama.

"I'm not going to be able to do that tonight," Mr. Watson replied.

And then uses that embarrassing episode (see it here) to imply that because state Senator Watson couldn't do it that night, no one would be able to do it. Check out what State Senator Watson himself had to say about the evening:

So . . . That really happened.

On Tuesday night, after an important and historic victory in the Wisconsin Presidential Primary by Senator Barack Obama, I appeared on the MSNBC post-election program. “Hardball” host Chris Matthews (who is, it turns out, as ferocious as they say), began grilling me on Senator Obama’s legislative record.

And my mind went blank. I expected to be asked about the primary that night, or the big one coming up in Texas on March 4, or just about anything else in the news. When the subject changed so emphatically, I reached for information that millions of my fellow Obama supporters could recite by heart, and I couldn’t summon it.

My most unfortunate gaffe is not, in any way, a comment on Senator Obama, his substantial record, or the great opportunity we all share to elect him President of the United States.

Had I not lost my mind, here are the accomplishments I would have mentioned:

• Senator Obama’s fight for universal children’s health care in Illinois.
• His success bringing Republicans and Democrats together (a huge selling point for me in general) on bills such as the one in Illinois requiring police interrogations and confessions to be videotaped.
• His leadership on ethics reform in Washington (the bill that lobbyists and special interests are complaining about right now has his name on it).
• His bill to make the federal budget far more transparent and accessible to Americans via the Internet – we could use that openness in Texas.
• And his vital work with Republicans to lock down nuclear weapons around the world.

So it's not as if there's nothing there, only that Watson's brain burped and couldn't bring any of it to the surface.

Nice spin, Jack. You almost got away with it. Almost.

My guess is that Watson won't be speaking out for Senator Obama anytime soon.

Kelly then goes on to reference a few reliable voices to (of course) objectively assess Senator Obama. First, David From of the National Review. Here's what Kelly says:

Or any other night. Barack Obama, noted National Review's David Frum, has the thinnest resume of any candidate for president since William Jennings Bryan in 1896. Then 36 (the youngest man ever nominated for president), Bryan had been a congressman for only six undistinguished years when he electrified the Democratic convention with his "Cross of Gold" speech.

Bryan got creamed in the general election, which suggests there is a limit to how high a populist with little on his resume besides a charismatic personality and a silver tongue can rise.

And here's what Frum had to say:

Like Obama , Bryan was a charismatic young political (just 36 at the time of his first presidential run!) with a thin political record. Yet on the strength of one legendary speech at a Democratic national convention, he was clutched to heart by the party's left wing and made the repository of its grandest hopes on a whole range of so-called progressive causes.

Bryan stands - or should stand - in American political history as an object lesson in the dangers of choosing politicians without records of accomplishment on the basis of fine phrases alone. If Obama loses in 2008 - or (at least as possible) wins, and then goes on to fail as president - I wonder if many Democrats will not be haunted by the warning that Hillary Clinton gave earlier in this cycle: There is a big difference between making speeches and making change. Deval Patrick and Barack Obama jointly deny it. Bryan's career suggests that the former first lady will likely be proved right.

I'm just surprised to see anyone on the right writing that Senator Hillary Clinton "will likely to be proved right." Small matter.

The next reference to objectively asses Senator Obama is Tom Buffenbarger, the president of a union endorsing Senator Clinton.

He then quotes Senator McCain and implies that Obama's current edge has more to do with his opponent's missteps than with his own campaign:

"Don't be deceived by an eloquent but empty call for change that promises no more than a holiday from history," said Sen. John McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee.

Eloquent but empty calls for change seem to be working well enough for Mr. Obama in the battle for the Democratic nomination. But that may be due more to the weaknesses of Hillary Clinton than to his strengths.

Talk about objective assessments!

The curious thing about the column is the ending:

If Mr. Obama is ultimately to be the Democratic nominee, it could be just as well for Republicans to have the race settled early. As long as Barack and Hillary battle, journalists can focus on horse race trivia. But if Mrs. Clinton folds her tent and slinks away, journalists will have little to write about except Mr. Obama's thin resume and left-wing voting record.

"I've got news for all the latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing trust fund babies crowding in to hear (Mr. Obama) speak," Mr. Buffenbarger said. "This guy won't last a round against the Republican attack machine."

It's nice to see Jack Kelly admitting the Republican attack machine exists. Think about it: Jack's inclusion of the line in the column only makes sense if Jack himself believes that it's true.

THANKS, JACK!

Mean Girls

Maureen Dowd who sank her fangs into Al Gore at every opportunity in 2000 (and how did that work out for the country?) is at it again -- this time with Hillary Clinton.

Here, she smugly quotes Leon Wieseltier:

"Others do not underestimate her relentlessness. As Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor of The New Republic, once told me: “She's never going to get out of our faces. ... She's like some hellish housewife who has seen something that she really, really wants and won't stop nagging you about it until finally you say, fine, take it, be the damn president, just leave me alone."

Yes, Mo, you're still the cool High School Queen Bee who will never let anything stand in her way -- not even a little misogyny -- to get in a cutting remark.

Fred Honsberger Still Spins

Good to know the ole Honzman can still spin the quasi-factoids like the best of them.

I took a listen yesterday to his show and heard him berate the Clintons for owning stock in companies they'd denounced: Fox News, Walmart and so on. He said they were dissolving the trust in order to avoid any election year embarrassments. There was wailing and gnashing of teeth over the millions made by the hypocritical Clintons.

Too bad only part of the story got out on the KDKA airwaves. Take a look.

CNN/AP:

Bill and Hillary Clinton liquidated the contents of their blind trust upon learning it contained investments of $5 million to $25 million that could pose conflicts of interest or prove to be embarrassing to her presidential campaign.

Notice what my friend Fred left out? The five letter word "blind." It turns a "trust" into a "blind trust." A couple of paragraphs later:

The Clintons looked at the contents of the blind trust in April under instructions from the Office of Government Ethics and sold the assets in May, according to a disclosure form filed Friday. The Clintons had the blind trust since former President Clinton was governor of Arkansas in 1983 and had no control over its transactions.

Fred must've missed those last few words: "had no control over its transactions."

So you'd think blaming them for what was in the blind trust would be, well, absurd. Wouldn't it?

Once this point was raised by a caller (not me, by the way), Fred moved the goal posts. He said he was using the same criteria that anti-war critics use when talking about the Iraq war: They say Bush invaded Iraq to get more profits for his oil company buddies, but HIS money's also in a blind trust!

So...yea you got me. I don't understand the Fred-logic either.

Sticking in My Craw

This has been sticking in my craw for some time. From kos himself.

He contrasts two completely different answers to the question: Senator do you think that homosexuality is immoral? One answer is from a Democrat and one is from a Republican. This is in light of the position taken by General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who said that he believed that homosexuality is immoral.

The first answer:

"Well I'm going to leave that to others to conclude," [the Senator] said. "I'm very proud of the gays and lesbians I know who perform work that is essential to our country, who want to serve their country and I want make sure they can."

And the second:

I respectfully but strongly disagree with the chairman's view that homosexuality is immoral.

Which was the Democrat and which the Republican?

Of course it turns out that the first answer is Senator Hillary Clinton's and second is Senator John Warner's (R-Va).

On a side note, it never ceases to amaze me that whenever the GOP is ranting about Hollywood's threat to the sanctity of marriage, no one seems to recall that John Warner was once married to Elizabeth Taylor. She was his 2nd marriage (out of 3) and he was her 7th marriage (out of 9). Or that Ronald Reagan was married twice. Sonny Bono 4 times. But I digress.

Anyway, this morning kos pointed out that Senator Obama did scarcely better than Senator Clinton:

On Wednesday, Newsday repeatedly asked Obama if same-sex relationships were immoral.

"I think traditionally the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman has restricted his public comments to military matters," said Obama, leaving Capitol Hill. "That's probably a good tradition to follow."

He turned the conversation to opposition to the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy: "I think the question here is whether somebody is willing to sacrifice for their country."

Later, an Obama spokesman said the senator, in fact, disagrees with Pace.

The article kos linked to for the Obama "sequence" does point this out:

That sequence was remarkably similar to Clinton's responses Tuesday. When an ABC reporter asked her about the issue, she replied, "Well, I am going to leave that to others to conclude."

Later, a Clinton spokesman said the senator, in fact, also disagrees with Pace.

Let me go on record, this is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

Same-sex relationships are not immoral.

Do you know what is immoral? Cheating on your spouse, that's immoral. Stealing food from starving people, that's immoral. Invading a sovereign country under false pretenses and starting a war that's killed thousands of Americans then humiliating the wounded from that war when they return home for medical attention, that's immoral. (Yea, I went there - what of it?)

But Jill Sobule kissing a girl? C'mon.

Clinton Update: Senator Clinton clarified things with this statement today.

I have heard from many of my friends in the gay community that my response yesterday to a question about homosexuality being immoral sounded evasive. My intention was to focus the conversation on the failed don’t ask, don’t tell policy. I should have echoed my colleague Senator John Warner’s statement forcefully stating that homosexuality is not immoral because that is what I believe.

Obama Update: Senator Obama clarified things today as well.

As the New York Times reported today, I do not agree with General Pace that homosexuality is immoral. Attempts to divide people like this have consumed too much of our politics over the past six years.

Memo to P-G Columnists: The Hillary "Southern Drawl" Story's Already Been Debunked

That rowdy pair of conservative columnists (Jack Kelly, Ruth Ann Dailey) over at the P-G have a bad habit of late. They've begun to traffic in already debunked stories.

With Ruth Ann, it was the bogus Pelosi/Plane story. Does she still believe what no one else in the country believes?

With Commando Kelly, well, the most recent incident involved the phrase "slow bleed."

I haven't see the story of Senator Clinton's supposedly faked "southern drawl" yet on the pages of the P-G, so let me take the opportunity to let everyone know it's already been debunked.

It begain, like a lot of fake news, with the drudgereport. Drudge posted this audio a few days ago to show the world the depth of Hillary's pandering: While she's speaking she's adopting a southern drawl in a southern church! She's faking the accent and the southern grammar!

Ah, but if the Devil can be found in the details, Drudge (and large chunks of the right side of the blogosphere) leave out a huge detail. According to Greg Sargent, Clinton was quoting a hymn by James Cleveland:

I don't feel no ways tired,
I've come too far from where I started from.
Nobody told me that the road would be easy,
I don't believe He brought me this far to leave me.

See? The words (and therefore the grammar) aren't hers. It changes the story a scosh, huh?

And when was she ever in the south? I mean, she was born in Chicago, right? Educated at Wellesley and then at Yale, right? Spent 8 years in DC, right? When would she ever have picked up even the hint of a southern accent?

Oh that's right. The 17 years she spent in Arkansas.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no big fan of Clinton's, I'm just trying to save the conservative columnists at the P-G some more embarrassment (as if that's possible). I'll let Sargent have the last word:

Look, Hillary's real sins here were being corny as hell and painfully tone deaf. But phony this wasn't. You'd think that after having so many of their silly tales blow up in their faces these wingers would start checking the facts once in awhile -- if only to stop making themselves look so damn foolish all the time.

Morning, Pittsburgh.