Indeed. IMHO, she's opportunistic and politically ham-fisted. As for the Clinton brand, it seems to be all about triangulating in order to enhance their own political fortunes while at the same time externalizing the long-term political costs to their own Democratic base.

Her departure from this race can't come soon enough.

Posted at April 1, 2008 11:58 AM in response to Hillary Campaign Post-Mortem

I think the closest Obama himself has come to a "move on" argument against Clinton is his statements about how he doesn't have a frame of reference that derives from the '60s. There I detect a similar exasperation, a note of "Do we really have to go through _this_ for the rest of the year?"

I'm not quite sure this example really substantiates your "pox on both houses" argument, but there again we're back to inference and interpretation. Anyway, point(s) well taken.

Posted at March 24, 2008 4:23 PM in response to Obama Campaign Manager Hints Clinton Camp Has "Pattern" Of Questioning Obama's Patriotism

Three days before the primary, huh? I presume this means that they'll be releasing her tax returns on Saturday, the proverbial black hole of political news coverage. Either that or late Friday afternoon, the corresponding event horizon of said black hole.

Some transparency.

Posted at March 24, 2008 1:58 PM in response to Hillary Will Release Tax Returns At Least Three Days Before Pennsylvania Primary

"Nope. He was saying that the Republicans and their media abettors will pound Obama on patriotism, so we should take the opportunity to deprive them of that attack."

I don't disagree with your take on the underlying strategy of Clinton's rhetorical gambit, but it seems to me you're drawing a distinction without much of a difference. Even if you believe that Clinton was making the case that his wife's candidacy would somehow preempt patriotism attacks from the right, isn't he then by necessity legitimizing that very line of attack? Moreover, how could Bill's suggestion that that line of attack would be more damaging to Obama than to Hillary be interpreted as anything other than a ratification of the attack itself?

"But, you know, I've heard Obama supporters _saying_ versions of that: vote Obama so we can move on from The Clintons and the way the media loves to hate them."

This strikes me as a false equivalence. Granted, Obama's blogosphere supporters (at times, myself included) are certainly making that case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't have any recollection of any such "ad homonem comparative vulnerability" arguments coming from the Obama campaign.

Posted at March 24, 2008 1:28 PM in response to Obama Campaign Manager Hints Clinton Camp Has "Pattern" Of Questioning Obama's Patriotism

Ofercryinoutloud. When Bill Clinton said "two people who loved this country" he was not only obviously referring to his wife and McCain, he was also clearly impugning Obama's "love of country" (read: patriotism) by omission. That would be the same Obama who, in Bill's construction, apparently also bears responsibility for "all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics." (Interloping ingrate.)

Just because Bill is rhetorically skillful enough to couch his ad homonem attacks in a veneer of civility doesn't make them any less disparaging. IMHO, to suggest there has not been pattern of such attacks of Obama by Bill Clinton would seem to me to require either a. an intentional exercise of political diplomacy (Richardson) or, b. of certain degree of willful obtuseness (Sullivan, et al).

Posted at March 24, 2008 11:30 AM in response to Obama Campaign Manager Hints Clinton Camp Has "Pattern" Of Questioning Obama's Patriotism

Sorry for inadvertently parroting your "amateur" remarks with my downthread post. It was already a pretty long thread by the time I showed up and commented, which I did without first reading yours. My bad.

Posted at March 22, 2008 11:40 AM in response to Hillary Campaign "In The Red"

The Politico article cited in this post was loooonnng overdue, IMHO. As I've already said in previous posts, the corporate media was sustaining corporatist Hillary's campaign on a kind Schiavo-esque life support since at least the Potomac primary. It's nice to finally see some extra-blogosphere acknowledgment of that dynamic.

BTW, does anyone else find it perplexing and/or amusing that it seems to be shrill dead-ender night on the TPM front page? In all fairness, I have decided that if Hillary were to secure the nomination by superdelegate coup I'd be writing in Obama come the general. However, I don't imagine anyone here would give a shit, let alone post that on the front page.

Maybe I don't use enough exclamation points.

Posted at March 21, 2008 11:58 PM in response to Endgame Signals?

Apparently it's not just states that don't matter, but governors too! Congratulations to Bill Richardson on achieving the Hillaryworld status of the non-material. Is that like some disembodied state that enables him to levitate and see through walls and such? That'd be so cool.

Posted at March 21, 2008 1:44 PM in response to Mark Penn: Richardson Endorsement Of Obama "Not Significant" Anymore

Amateur hour?! That's a pretty funny indictment coming from that toxic, race-baiting, train wreck of a clusterf**k otherwise known as the Clinton campaign.

By the way, I've seen both blogosphere and media speculation of Clinton camp involvement, but has anyone in the Obama campaign actually leveled that charge? All I've heard, aside from their rightfully plaintiff call of "foul," is that they're (justifiably) calling for a full investigation.

If anyone can provide a link to a specific charge coming from Obama's campaign, I'll gladly stand corrected. Otherwise, as Shakespeare might have written once (I'm guessing -- I don't read much) methinks he doth protest too much.

Posted at March 21, 2008 11:57 AM in response to Hillary Spokesperson Describes Obama Campaign As "Amateur Hour"

To repeat what I’ve already said in previous comment threads, the MSM has successfully kept Hillary’s terminally moribund campaign on life support on behalf of the Republicans who would clearly prefer for her to become the nominee. Thank you, corporate media, for giving us Hillary Rodham Schiavo. Somebody needs to be sure to get some good video of her reaction to the convention balloon drop so we can send it off to Bill Frist for his diagnostic evaluation.

Posted at March 15, 2008 4:03 PM in response to "...but you can never count out the Clintons"