faboo mama

WaPo is reporting that the Clinton’s campaign is $20M in debt.

$20M.

And they want back in to the WH?

There’s nothing in the article that says anything beyond Wolfson’s confirmation of the number. We have no idea if that includes the $12M the Clinton’s loaned themselves. Terry McAuliffe was on Meet the Press this morning and said:

A top Clinton adviser this morning said that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is open to the possibility of loaning her campaign more money to continue in the race.

Terry McAuliffe, the Clinton campaign chairman, told Tim Russert on “Meet the Press” that he spoke to Clinton about the possibility of contributing more money and “she said that she would be willing to do it.” However, McAuliffe insists, “We haven’t needed it.”

Russert pressed the issue, asking McAuliffe if the Clintons will be able to repay all debts after the campaign is over. “We plan on it,” he replied.

Must be nice to have that kind of change. Let’s put this in perspective: With their first loan, the Clinton’s could have paid off my house, bills and bought me a new car and it would still have been well under 10% of what they loaned themselves.

What a working class family.

This is where Clinton’s dog foghorn to racist whites in Ky and W. Va. is headed. It’s a shame that the Clinton’s campaign is more than willing to revisit their race baiting-tactics of December and January with this. Especially since they are flat out lying about her white support. It’s sad to think that a Democrat feels it’s okay to implement a Southern strategy to win votes in a race she’s already lost.

What makes this all even more laughable are the blogging Clinton supporters who contort their logic to justify anything. Remember that for the past few months, we’ve been told by these people that Obama’s big wins in Idaho, Utah, Mississippi and Kansas don’t mean anything. Despite the hundreds of thousands of people who came out to vote for the Democrats vs. the few thousand that voted for the GOP candidates, we were told that “there was no way those states are voting for a Democrat in November.” Why? Oh, the reasons change and facts are fudged, but they say, “Those states haven’t voted for a Democratic president in ### years.” Needless to say, I was shocked to see that Jerome Armstrong, among other Clinton-supporting bloggers pushing that W. Va is in play because they gave Kennedy the nod in 1960.

THUD.

1960.

You read that right. W. Va. hasn’t voted for a Democratic president in 48 years and that means it’s great for Clinton’s chances in Nov., but the states that Obama has won, but haven’t voted for a Democratic president in 20, 30, or 40 years are not in play.

The stupid is strong in this one.

h/t to TPM:

Hillary Clinton now has an ad running in PA with imagery of Osama bin Laden.

THUD

I…er…I thought that that was GOP territory. I mean, how many SOTU addresses have we played drinking games where we chug when Bush mentioned 9/11? How many times did we laugh at the inanity of Dick Cheney tying bin Laden with Iraq? Now, Sen. Clinton has concern trolled her way into the gutter.

The Obama campaign has a response:

Wonder how that’ll play with the Clinton’s?

This morning, I woke up still pissed at the farce that happened in Philadelphia last night. As I mentioned in my previous post, there was nothing of substance touched on in the two hour commercial laden gang up on Sen. Obama last night. I see Clinton supporters who whined when Obama and Edwards “ganged” up on Clinton in New Hampshire, actually say that last night’s debates were fair and refreshing. Yeah…for the GOP. The comments on ABCNews website has reached over 14000 and most of them were negative. The blogosphere is abuzz with the Disaster in Philadelphia and even the MSM is collectively shaking its head.

Over at Booman Tribune, StevenD did the hard work I was just starting; going through the transcripts to summarize last night’s quesions:

1. Will you offer loser the VP - Gibson (G)
2. Obama’s “bitter” comment - G
3. Can Obama beat McCain (to Clinton) – Stephanopoulus (S)
4. Can Clinton win (to Obama) – S
5. Wright question (to Obama) – G
6. Wright question (to Clinton) – G
7. Several Wright questions (to Obama) – S
8. Why don’t people trust you/ Tuzla question (to Clinton) – S
9. Has Clinton been truthful (to Obama) – S
10. Flag question/patriotism (to Obama) – G
11. Flag question/patriotism/Ayers (to Obama) – S
12. Questions on Plan to get out of Iraq (to both) – G
13. Iran questions re attack on Israel (to both) – S
14. Economy questions (Will you raise taxes?) (to both) - S
15. Raise Capital Gains Tax questions (to both) – G
16. Soc. Sec. Taxes (to Obama) – G
17. Guns/2nd Amend. Questions (to both) – G
18. Affirmative Action question (to both) –S
19. Gas Prices/Energy policy questions (to both) – G
20. How would you use Dubya as advisor/other role (to both) – G
21. Undecided Superdelegate question (to both) – G

Do you see anything of any importance to the average American there? It wasn’t until about maybe 90 minutes into the 2 hour debate that George Stephanopolous said:

Let me turn to the economy. That is the No. 1 issue on Americans’ minds right now.

Then it was about taxes and we got to learn that Charles Gibson who proved his cluelessness on income levels of professors back in January, told us that people making $200K a year were middle class. We were also subjected to Gibson’s elitism that the average American cares or will be affected by captial gains tax. Gibson acts as if these debates were his personal interview with the candidates and screw the rest of us, he spent an inordinate amount of time debated Obama, while letting Clinton’s answers slide. He failed, once again, as a moderator.
Charles Gibson, also decided that editorializing was fair game. In a question regarding guns directed toward Sen. Clinton he said:

GIBSON: Well, with all due respect, I’m not sure I got an answer from Senator Obama, but do you still favor licensing and registration of handguns?

This was minutes after Obama had, in fact, answered the question and Clinton and Stephanopolous had a back and forth. It could be that Gibson’s inherent and obvious dislike of Obama denied him the ability to hear anything the Senator said. Maybe it’s the simple fact that when you keep interrupting a person when they’re trying to answer you, it proves that you’re not really listening.

I mentioned in my previous post that this debate was such a joke that it had me agreeing with Jonah Goldberg. No one makes me agree with Goldberg without reprecussions. Last night, Tom Shales posted on Washington Post an article titled: In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC. I recommend you read the entire article, but let me share you some snippets:

For the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with.

snip

Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to “take one statement and beat it to death,” he said.

No sooner was that said than Gibson brought up, yet again, the controversial ravings of the pastor at a church attended by Obama. “Charlie, I’ve discussed this,” he said, and indeed he has, ad infinitum. If he tried to avoid repeating himself when clarifying his position, the networks would accuse him of changing his story, or changing his tune, or some other baloney.

snip

To this observer, ABC’s coverage seemed slanted against Obama. The director cut several times to reaction shots of such Clinton supporters as her daughter, Chelsea, who sat in the audience at the Kimmel Theater in Philly’s National Constitution Center. Obama supporters did not get equal screen time, giving the impression that there weren’t any in the hall. The director also clumsily chose to pan the audience at the very start of the debate, when the candidates made their opening statements, so Obama and Clinton were barely seen before the first commercial break.

Newsday writes:

The morning after the latest Democratic debate, the talk doesn’t seem to be about which candidate — New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton or Illinois Sen. Barack Obama — would make a more-formidable foe to run against Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.

The talk seems to be about which of the two ABC News moderators — Charles Gibson or George Stephanopoulos — did the worst job, which one was sillier in Philadelphia.

Will Bunch wrote an open letter to the two hosts of last night’s debacle:

With your performance tonight — your focus on issues that were at best trivial wastes of valuable airtime and at worst restatements of right-wing falsehoods, punctuated by inane “issue” questions that in no way resembled the real world concerns of American voters — you disgraced my profession of journalism, and, by association, me and a lot of hard-working colleagues who do still try to ferret out the truth, rather than worry about who can give us the best deal on our capital gains taxes. But it’s even worse than that. By so badly botching arguably the most critical debate of such an important election, in a time of both war and economic misery, you disgraced the American voters, and in fact even disgraced democracy itself. Indeed, if I were a citizen of one of those nations where America is seeking to “export democracy,” and I had watched the debate, I probably would have said, “no thank you.” Because that was no way to promote democracy.

And that’s just a small sampling. You know it’s bad when USAToday, the tabloid that seems to focus of the news of 8 months ago, has a current roundup of criticisms on their pages.

You’ll note the recurrent themes. The candidates themselves were mere props on the stage. To ask who won or lost last night’s “debates” is to ask the wrong question. Neither candidate shined, though the focus group said that Clinton one. Odd one that, since the only time they responded really postively toward her was when she told a joke that didn’t sound scripted. Naturally, the Clinton’s are using that clip as a promo piece. Otherwise, a simple scanning of the transcripts show that Obama’s answers to the most inane questions were intelligent and clear. The focus group responded overwhelming positive to his answers, so it was curious that only 5 of the 22 people thought he won the debate.

It has been estimated that over 10M watched last night’s debates, making it the most watched debate this season. 10 million Americans who care what the next President of the United States has to say and as StevenD mentioned, they didn’t touch on any of the important questions:

Global Warming, New Orleans Reconstruction, Health Care, Veterans Benefits (New GI Bill or Health Benefits), Defense Spending, National Debt, Trade Issues, Environmental issues (not about global warming), Regulatory Agency scandals and problems, Financial markets, Worldwide Food Crisis, Darfur, Pakistan, Somalia, North Korea, NATO, Russia, China, Nigeria, Venezuela, Drugs, Unemployment, Mortgage crisis, Bush administration Crimes and Scandals, Torture, Guantanamo Bay and other detention facilities, Loss of Civil Rights (Electronic surveillance, FISA, Habeas Corpus), Infrastructure issues, Gay Rights, Race (except as it came up re: Reverend Wright), Immigration

Last night’s debate forces us the understand how vested the powers that be are in keeping us uninformed. They say that Americans are turned off of politics, it was the disgusting behaviors of the two “moderators” that turn us off, not necessarily the candidates themselves. ABC, once again, put on a show for the corporate masters and the rest of us could only watch from the cheap seats.

There’s no recap. It sucked balls.

ABCNews needs to know how much they fucked up on this one. You can call (212) 456-7777 or email them.

It was, hands down, probably the worst excuse of a debate in all of debating history. It was through no fault of the candidates. It was purely Assclown Hijinks with Chuck Gibson and Georgie-boy. Absolutely NOTHING of substance was asked of the candidates. I came in late and was still subjected to 45 minutes of non-issue questions on Rev. Wright, bitterness and flag pins. Can you guess the bias? There was one guess on Clinton’s lying habits. She actually said something like, “People are just going to have get over my habitual lying.” Oh…that part may be an tiny exaggeration.

Okay…wanna know how bad it is? Jonah “Iraq is Going Great!” Goldberg thought it was bad. When you have me agreeing with something Goldberg writes you know it’s bad. (h/t to idredit)

I’m no leftwing blogger, but I can only imagine how furious they must be with the debate so far. Nothing on any issues. Just a lot of box-checking on how the candidates will respond to various Republican talking points come the fall. Now I think a lot of those Republican talking points are valid and legitimate. But if I were a “fighting Dem” who thinks all of these topics are despicable distractions from the “real issues,” I would find this debate to be nothing but Republican water-carrying.

The responses from viewers on ABCNews gives you a better idea of how bad it was:

Jesus Christ - are you kidding! This is the worst sham for an unbiased debate I have ever seen - FIRE STEPHANOPOLOUS and GIBSON… and by-the-way, NO multi-miliion dollar severance package - make them pay a fine for torturing americans with their insane questions

Posted by:
j50george 9:42 PM

Pathetic job, ABC. Very sad. You had a chance to cut through the crap, but you chose to wallow in it. Lapel pins? Wright? Bosnia? All that crap’s been hashed and rehashed. And millionaire Gibson whining about capital gains taxes. What a travesty.

Posted by:
Yucca333 10:15 PM

Whatever they paid them to gang up on obama i’ll double it.they should leave the debates to the REAL news networks!!!!!

Posted by:
walchrs 9:43 PM

What a terrible debate by ABC’s moderators. I guess this is why I never watch ABC News. About 30 minutes was spent on Rev. Wright, the bitter comment, and Hillary mis-speak(which was only about 5 of those 30 mins). We then had to sit through 30 minutes of commercials in a two hour program. That was pathetic ABC. PATHETIC.

Posted by:
mr_sj 10:12 PM

LOL…One of my great laughs of the day has been watching Clinton’s new dead horse ad. If you haven’t seen it, you simply must see just how not bitter her “supporters” are:

See? Don’t just look like they shit rainbows and break into song at any moment?

“I find my faith uplifting.” GRRRRRRRRR

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Luckily, there are people in Pennsylvania with a firm grasp on reality. They aren’t buying into Clinton’s distortion of Obama’s words. Twenty-one party leaders and elected officials in Pennsylvania sent out a letter today:

Dear Fellow Pennsylvanian,

We live in small towns and rural areas throughout Pennsylvania and we support Barack Obama for President.

A few days ago, Sen. Obama made some comments that his opponents are now using to make him appear as if he is something he is not. Instead of speaking to us honestly about how they intend to solve the problems we are facing, they are playing the same old Washington games that accomplish nothing.

What Sen. Obama said is that over the last 25-30 years, working class people in places like Pennsylvania have been falling behind, and that politicians in Washington haven’t been looking out for them. He also said that, as a result, many people have become frustrated, angry and even bitter about all the broken promises.

He was right.

The politicians who are now saying that we shouldn’t be frustrated are the ones who are out of touch.

People in the towns and communities we live in have seen their jobs shipped overseas. We’ve seen our pensions disappear. We’ve seen our health care costs skyrocket. We’ve seen everything from the cost of gasoline to a gallon of milk go through the roof.

As our families have struggled to make ends meet and our communities fought to stay intact, how has Washington responded? By giving tax breaks to the wealthy, rewarding corporations who ship jobs overseas, and turning the levers of power over to the lobbyists and special interests.

It’s easy to feel a little frustrated when you see these Washington politicians continue to ignore you. But it’s not the only emotion we feel. When someone comes along who is untainted by the system in Washington, who doesn’t take money from federal lobbyists or special interests and who promises that things can be different, we feel something else—hope.

That’s why we’re supporting Barack Obama. Others have come along and promised change, but failed to deliver. Sen. Obama is different than the rest. He doesn’t take money from the special interests, and he speaks honestly about the issues we are facing.

In addition to supporting his plans for jobs, health care and education, we believe that he can deliver on his promises to ensure economic opportunity for family farmers, to provide support for rural economic development, to promote renewable energy in rural America, to protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting, and to preserve open land for hunting and fishing.

Unlike his opponents who have been part of the Washington establishment for decades, Barack Obama understands the struggles we are going through. We welcomed him with open arms as he made his way through small towns and rural areas on his recent bus tour across the state. And we will work day and night from now until the primary on his behalf not only because he has heard our frustrations, but because he speaks to our hope that Washington can actually work for people like us.

Sincerely,

Ted Alter, State College

Westmoreland County Commissioner Tom Bayla, Greensburg

Mayor John Brenner, York

Lloyd Casey, West Chester – President, Pennsylvania Forestry Association

Mayor John Fetterman, Braddock

Mayor Rick Gray, Lancaster

Scott Harrison, Warriors Mark

State Representative Bryan Lentz, Swarthmore

State Senator Sean Logan, Monroeville

Carl Majji, Claysville – Corporal, U.S. Army

Mayor Thomas McMahon, Reading

State Senator Bob Mellow – Pennsylvania Senate Democratic Leader

U.S. Representative Patrick Murphy, Doylestown – U.S. Congressman (PA-08)

Perry County Commissioner Steve Naylor, New Bloomfield

Lackawanna County Commissioner Corey O’Brien, Dunmore

Fran Rodriquez, Lancaster

State Representative Josh Shapiro, Abington – Deputy Speaker, Pennsylvania House of Representatives

Major General Walter Stewart, Berks County – Former Commander, 28th Infantry Division, Pennsylvania Army National Guard

State Representative Dan Surra, St. Marys

State Representative Thomas Tangretti, Greensburg

Lackawanna County Commissioner Michael Washo, Scranton

You can sign your name to this letter too on Barack Obama’s website (warning there’s a video that starts playing automatically)

Wealthy Clinton supporters are at it again; using their money to buy the presidency. 12 Clinton supporters have decided to try to extort Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a letter:

We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August. We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the Party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters.

That’s just a chunk. The entire letter is in the link above to TPM. Here’s the list of people who’ve decided that because they give more money to the DCCC that they have more influence than you or me.:

• Marc Aronchick
• Clarence Avant
• Susie Tompkins Buell
• Sim Farar
• Robert L. Johnson
• Chris Korge
• Marc and Cathy Lasry
• Hassan Nemazee
• Alan and Susan Patricof
• JB Pritzker
• Amy Rao Lynn de Rothschild
• Haim Saban
• Bernard Schwartz
• Stanley S. Shuman
• Jay Snyder
• Maureen White
• Steven Rattner

Now, I’m not rich and never have been. I probably won’t ever be able to give $25,000 to the DCCC, let alone $250. Still, I’m unclear as to why their voices count more than my voice. I was under the assumption that this was the Democratic Party, that we were all equal. I get that they may get more access and if they’re helping the Democratic Party, I have no problem with that. What’s bothersome is that they’re more than willing to punish the entire Party for the sake of one candidate.

This isn’t an anomaly. This is the 3rd time this past two weeks that Clinton’s heavy donors have put pressure on the Democratic Party officials to rollover for Sen. Clinton. The first was on March 15th, when Clinton donors threatened the DNC with loss of cashflow (See LAT link above). This isn’t an anomaly. This is the 3rd time this past a week that Clinton’s heavy donors have put pressure on the Democratic Party officials to rollover for Sen. Clinton. The first was on March 15th, when Clinton donors threatened the DNC with loss of cashflow:

Mrs. Clinton won the primaries in both states, but the contests were not sanctioned by the party, neither candidate campaigned in the states and Mr. Obama did not even put his name on the ballot in Michigan.Pushing to seat the Florida delegates, at least one top Clinton fund-raiser, Paul Cejas, a Miami businessman who has given the Democratic National Committee $63,500 since 2003, has demanded Democratic officials return his 2007 contribution of $28,500, which they have agreed to do.

“If you’re not going to count my vote, I’m not going to give you my money,” said Mr. Cejas, who was the United States ambassador to Belgium from 1998 to 2001.

Christopher Korge, a Florida real estate developer who is another top fund-raiser for Mrs. Clinton, held an event last year in his home that brought in about $140,000 for the national party, which was set aside in a special account for the general election battle in Florida. But he told committee officials this week that if Florida’s delegate conundrum was not settled satisfactorily he would be asking for the money back.

“If we do not resolve this issue,” Mr. Korge said, “I think it’s safe to say there will be a request for a return of $140,000.”

The 2nd was the announcement that 10 Clinton donors had raised $12M to bankroll a revote in Michigan. Do you understand that? These people are so desperate to cash in on Clinton’s promises that they were willing to buy her votes.

Ten donors to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign offered Wednesday to give Michigan $12 million to hold a rerun of its Democratic primary as she and rival Barack Obama traded sharp words over the proposed June 3 contest.With state lawmakers facing a deadline today for approval of the plan, Clinton made a quick stop Wednesday in Detroit, where she called on Obama to endorse the do-over election.

It’s bad enough that the Clinton’s have decided destroying the party was a better option than trying to act like humans for a few months, but this shows you their character. The fact that they are willing to get people to toss millions of dollars to buy an election says a lot about them.