Although I was wrong about the Tuzla dealio and sincerely thought it was not going to turn into a big issue - I honestly think this 'Mucking Out The Barn' is just an absurd level of piling on.  MSNBC is so ridiculous.

From The Hotline:
Manure Matter

"Hillary Clinton told a story yesterday on the campaign trail -- without attribution -- that turned out to be a Ronald Reagan original. Sigh. NBC/NJ's Athena Jones reports that her tale went like this:

"He (Rendell) reminds me of the story about that little boy -- you ever hear this story where, you know, a man walks by the barn. He sees this little boy in this room filled with manure and he's standing there and he's diggin' and he's diggin' and he's diggin' and the man says 'Son, what are you doing? You're up to your hips in manure with that little shovel' And the boy said 'Well, with this much manure around, there's gotta be a pony, and I'm gonna find him!'"

MSNBC, perhaps not surprisingly, has been running the clip this a.m. of Reagan telling the same story. We're looking for the clip.

In the meantime, readers, big deal? No deal? This latest hullaballoo turns on a parable -- unlike the botched Bosnia story, which Clinton exaggerated unnecessarily to inflate her foreign policy credentials. Or so it seemed. She said she misspoke and that she was tired.

I'm not as moved by the manure flap. Sure, some would say it's further proof of Clinton's lack of authenticity, her willingness to poach ideas or stories and claim them as her own. Thoughts?"

From Jennifer Skalka at The Hotline

Is anyone else having a problem today with the TPMElection Central page not loading fully?

It hasn't loaded properly for me since they added the audio file as a late update to one of the articles today.  The recommended reader posts etc. are not loading at all and neither is the audio file or any of the posts before it. 

Just wanted to see if it was just me...

Really?  And not lawyers with any specialty in say, constitutional law or anything.

Here is the email via Politico:

Dear Fellow Lawyer for Hillary,

As many of you know, this Saturday, March 29th, close to three hundred County and State Senate conventions will take place across the State of Texas. These conventions are very important because they are the next major event, after the March 4th Presidential Primary and Precinct Conventions, that will determine how many delegates Hillary will receive from Texas leading in the DNC Convention this August.

The campaign's goal is to have an attorney present at each of the convention sites this Saturday. Many of you have graciously volunteered your time in so many ways and some have already committed to assisting us on Saturday. We still need a few more lawyers, however, so if you can help Saturday that would be GREATLY appreciated. For those of you who will be travelling from out-of-state, if would be fantastic if you could arrive by Friday morning because many of the County and Senate District CREDENTIALS Committees will meet at least once, probably more often, before Saturday. Indeed, some committees have already begun meeting and we expect many Committees will meet on Friday. Whenever you can show up before Saturday morning, however, you?ll be welcomed with open arms and a big thanks!

If you can help on Saturday, please contact Martha Smiley immediately at Marthasmil@aol.com or at 512-413-3866. Martha has been extraordinary in heading up our TX lawyers/advocates effort. Our Texas political team and Martha will be working on where best to deploy lawyers, but if you are able to fly/drive into Dallas, Austin, Houston, San Antonio, or Midland, you will be effectively deployed to a convention site within that general geographic area. If you have friends who live in any of the bordering states who can help, please let Martha know as we?ll need coverage in some areas that are not as accessible by air. I have copied Martha on this email.

Many, many thanks again for everything you have done, and will continue to do, to elect Hillary the next President of the United States.

Leecia

Leecia Eve
Senior Policy Advisor
Hillary Clinton for President

Advance note:  this isn't a burning platform on campaign issues - just a thought on perspective and the importance of staying balanced.

Today, as I hung up the phone after talking my mother off the "Obama is doomed" ledge for the umpteenth time, I wanted to take a moment to see what you all think about these pundits, polls and and all the campaign spin.

I'm not typically rattled by much particularly when I am firm in my understanding and convictions.  However, the incessant spin around this campaign season seems to be taking a toll (at least on the people around me). 

Today's memo from the Clinton campaign on polls reminded me of the email Penn sent out after Iowa with the regrettable "Where's the bounce?" gloating (about an hour before the bounce showed up). 

This tete-a-tete with the respective campaigns' spinning something new every 15 minutes is just not important - a few of them are true undercurrents and wind up breaking through but most of them aren't and don't.  Which is also why these polls need to be taken with a grain of salt (or a handful). 

I'm a consumer in the age of instant gratification and absolutely admit to my political internet news addiction.  I love politics and I love having access to all of this information.  Which means reading Penn and Plouffe, reading poll data and reading all the punditry pretty much 24/7 for me. 

In the end though, I keep my perspective  by going back to my understanding and my convictions.  That doesn't mean my preferred candidate will win the nomination or the election.  But it keeps me grounded in the facts (such as they are) and enables me to be informed without being worried.

Which brings me to my question - how do you keep your perspective during "silly season?"

Seriously?  Is this from the school of "I brought you into this world and I can take you out?"

I honestly do not understand why she is continuing to push the CiC argument via her unprotected Iraq humvee.  She certainly has other achievements to highlight IMHO.  Even if they aren't 100% airtight, wouldn't it be better than dredging up the Iraq vote again?

Please help me to understand the logic on this one - I'm truly stumped.

Just in case anyone thought she didn't really mean it, Pelosi reiterates her earlier position on the Clinton-Obama, Obama-Clinton ticket possibility. 

..."Take it from me, that won't be the ticket." 

As I listen to yet another "talking head" try to figure out the psyche of Obama voters and supporters, I am ironically reminded of a line from the movie Independence Day:  "Hey, old guys!"

I am a 37 year old white female and I voted (and caucused) for Barack Obama in San Antonio, TX.  One of the most talked about issues in the democratic primary thus far has been the new (big) D demographic supporting Obama.  Breaking News for Howard Dean:  My generation (and the next one) is a big part of the new (big) D and we are POST-RACIAL.  Stop trying to define us with the old tools and trappings that defined the party.

If you ask the right questions you will find that your newest party members aren't voting for Obama because he is black.  I have accepted and embraced the world as it is - bi-racial relationships, sexual individuality, successful women, single mothers, stay-at-home dads and other non-traditional families (to name a very few).  I don't identify with identity politics.  This is the reason that the pundits, talking heads, Ferraro's, etc. continue to be stupified - they still don't "get it."

One of my proudest and most memorable parenting moments was about 12 years ago.  Our regular sitter was a 70-ish year old lady named Fran who we called "Granny Franny."  When I got home from work my four-year-old daughter Megan was asleep and Fran recounted to me a conversation they had.  Megan was telling Fran about her day at pre-school and was talking about her best friend Ebony.  Fran asked Megan if her "friend Ebony was black?"  Megan was stumped and finally replied "No, she's BROWN." 

Today, my daughter is an amazing young woman and she is also a supporter of Barack Obama (though she can't vote yet).  And head's up Hillary - she was completely stymied by the "Change you can Xerox" mention - that went over like sending a TELEX would.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SDHxaYhqAo

(h/t) to Megan McArdle for this very funny video.

The television interview is here:  http://www.necn.com/category/32/4893

When asked about the possibility of Senator's Clinton and Obama sharing the national democratic ticket, Pelosi responded "I think that the Clinton administration has fairly ruled that out by proclaiming that Senator McCain would be a better commander in chief than Obama.  I think that any, that ticket - either way - is impossible."

Then after the end of the interview, Pelosi turned and said "I didn't want to leave you with any ambiguity."

On Friday (02/29/08) the Clinton campaign aired new television ads including one that is now commonly referenced as the ‘3 a.m.’ ad.  This 30 second spot shows a few shots of sleeping children and then a picture of the White House.  The narrator comments in an ominous tone to the background of a phone ringing.

Narrator:  It's "3:00 a.m. and your children are safe and sleep, but there's a phone in the White House and its ringing.  Something's happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call. Whether it's someone who already knows the world's leaders, knows the military, someone tested and ready to lead in a dangerous world. It's 3:00 a.m. and your children are safe and asleep. Who do you want answering the phone?"

Last Wednesday afternoon (02/27/08), less than two days before the 3 a.m. ad hit the airwaves in TX, Hillary Clinton held the "Solutions for America - Economic Summit" in Zanesville, OH.  The Summit was attended by various esteemed panelists including the CEO of Weight Watchers, Florine Mark.  While describing her support for Clinton, Mark makes a comment very similar to the narrator's script in the 3 a.m. ad.  From the transcript: "I will only feel safe if this woman becomes president of the United States of America.  I feel that if God forbid, that red phone in the White House rings, I want her there to answer it."  Florine Mark channels Roy Spence?  Or alternatively, Mark Penn?

In a somewhat clairvoyant moment from Salon's Walter Shapiro:  "The speaker was not Clinton, but a panelist, Florine Mark, the CEO of Weight Watchers. "When I think of Senator Clinton, I think of the word 'safe,'" Mark said in a line that, had it been uttered by an ordinary voter during a focus group, might have prompted a pollster to write a "listen to the people" memo."

Also before the 3 a.m. ad went public, the AP's Mike Glover (02/27/08) quoted Hillary Clinton saying "What I feel is happening is people are starting toward the big questions they should have to answer, who can be the best commander in chief, who do you want in the White House answering the phone at 3 a.m."

So was that quote planted with Florine Mark or lifted by Penn as fodder for Clinton's 3 a.m. campaign ad?  Clinton later remarked that she was "there [at the Economic Summit] to listen."  Is that because her panel members were told what to say?  NRO's blog, The Corner, sees it differently.

On Friday (02/29/08) the Clinton campaign aired new television ads including one that is now commonly referenced as the ‘3 a.m.’ ad.  This 30 second spot shows a few shots of sleeping children and then a picture of the White House.  The narrator comments in an ominous tone to the background of a phone ringing.