The extremely long pre-primary season is going to leave an awful lot of time & media attention for these little dustups and there will be zillions of them before the voting begins in 11 months.  It's the price we pay for the permanent campaign.  

Howie put out the same Gerstein-like release aimed at Edwards when Edwards quoted MLK about silence is betrayal.

Why does Maureen "Obambi" Dowd continue to get such prime real estate in the NY Times?  Why?  She's not particularly funny, or insightful.  Why?  She stopped being funny about 11 years ago.  What am I missing??

As a fairly newly-minted Richardson partisan, I have to say ... I think "underdog" is not a bad place to be. Hillary and Obama will be tearing into each other for the next 10 months. If I was working for Edwards, I'd suggest working as quietly as possible for the next 6-9 months. He'll have enough money and name ID, but he needs to keep his head down.

The whole thing (endless campaign before any voting happens, then all the voting nearly right away) seems almost intentionally designed to create a pundit-driven primary, completely dominated by personality and process stories.

If we had a long primary season and a shorter campaign before the voting, the voters would have more power and the pundits less.

Hmmmm, is this just a coincidence?

When Hillary apologizes for her mistaken war vote on Iraq, Mr. Geffen may think about apologizing over harmless words.

Why does Hillary listen to MoDo?  That woman has picked apart every Democratic candidate since I remember.

First of all, she's putting faith in the accuracy of Modo's  "quotes", which have been shown to be about as believable as her hair color.

Secondly, this type of attack confirms all of Hillary's negatives. She's over-reacting and she's preemptively attacking against the wrong party. Haven't we had enough of that?

Senator Clinton's campaign is as bad as Michael Mann's Miami Vice. Lots of money going into it, some great production values, but there no substance.

This column, in the spirit of talk like a pirate day, is written in the style of America's cattiest pundit, Maureen Dowd.

Yeah, Hillary chose to tie one of her primary opponents to the insults of his fundraiser.  What an idiot she is.

I'm not sure which is the stronger argument:

1) The idea that Hillary would be doing more about the war if her campaign weren't so busy issuing this one throwaway press release about David Geffen; or

2) "Waaaaahhh."

I swear, I'm not a Hillary supporter, but you guys are going to make me into one at this rate.  Sometimes you manage to make Maureen Dowd look like a serious political commentator by comparison.

I don't subscribe to NY Select so unfortunately I can't read Dowd's full article.  Maybe someone can tell me in what context Geffen was talking about the "smoked filled rooms"

"...In Maureen Dowd's latest column, Hollywood mogul David Geffen unloads on Hillary Clinton, saying Republicans "believe she's the easiest to defeat."

"It's not a very big thing to say, 'I made a mistake' on the war, and typical of Hillary Clinton that she can't," Dowd quotes Geffen as saying. "She's so advised by so many smart advisers who are covering every base. I think that America was better served when the candidates were chosen in smoke-filled rooms."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/02/20 /dreamworks-geffen-slams-_n_41732.html

BECAUSE, that particular statement sounds an awful lot like madville CARVILLE rather than Geffen?

Remember when WE progressives 'first' wanted Dean in the DNC...  this is what Hillary's middle fingered man apparently said:

"...To many Washington Democrats watching the circus-like contest from afar, it has been an embarrassment. "I think it's pathetic," says James Carville. "It's so indicative of the Democratic Party. Now we're just playing into every stereotype: We're weak, disorganized, flopping around. ... Somebody should have fixed this damn thing in November. I wish someone would have taken charge and three or four people would have gotten together in a smoke-filled room... They're not running for president! They are running for party chair. This is supposed to be a rigged deal. You think the Republicans would do it this way?"

THE DEMOCRATIC DIVIDE
The Outsiders - by Ryan Lizza - Post date 02.04.05 | Issue date 02.14.05
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050214& amp;s=lizza021405

Hmmm....

http://hornetsnest.typepad.com/hornet/20 07/02/maureen_dowd_ob.html

Geffen wanted a pardon for one of his buddies.

Obama communications director Robert Gibbs just released this statement regarding the Clinton campaign's demand that Obama denounce the comments that supporter David Geffen made to Maureen Dowd of the New York Times:

"We aren't going to get in the middle of a disagreement between the Clintons and someone who was once one of their biggest supporters," Gibbs said. "It is ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen when was raising them $18 million and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln bedroom. It is also ironic that Senator Clinton lavished praise on Monday and is fully willing to accept today the support of South Carolina State Sen. Robert Ford, who said if Barack Obama were to win the nomination, he would drag down the rest of the Democratic Party because 'he's black.'"

Edwards's universal health care plan?

Couldn't be worse then what Hillary's guys said about how Obama shouldn't be the nominee since he's black.

Personally I would have preferred a more hands off response by the Obama crew without the line about race at the end.

Such arguments tend to only make both people look worse.

I must say, I have been having some trouble spotting Obama's new clothes.

Sure the guy is young and smart and fairly charismatic, but I haven't really seen what makes him Presidential timber. I have only seen a couple of his campaign speeches and a few interviews, so I want to stress that I am still drawing an opinion that is yet incomplete, but so far my impression has been that he speaks in mild platitudes weighed carefully to offend no one. I don't really know where he's coming from or what his intentions are.

So it certainly tilts the odds against his getting my vote when I see harsh attacks against another Democrat so early on. That's the LAST thing, and I do mean the last, that I am looking for in a Presidential candidate. At least until the day that Bush is sent packing and there is a fully functioning Democratic government in Washington, party cooperation is among the highest principles I seek in my candidates, if not the highest.

What Geffen said was well over the line--well over. And although it's not the same responsibility as a candidate has for his own words, Obama does have some responsibility for what an important staffer says. Add to that the fact that, in his campaign's official response, he could treat a fellow Democrat no better--and not only no better, but no more imaginatively--than to recycle a hoary Republican talking point. . . . That bodes ill.

Would Clinton have been better off ignoring the Dowd column? I incline toward saying yes, she should've ignored it. But there's no cut-and-dried answer to that question, and I do commend her for aiming her sharpest words at a staffer, not at the candidate, which is as it should be.

Speaking as an undecided Democrat, Obama does not come off well from this exchange, not in my eyes. I still haven't ruled him out, but the odds are starting to turn against his getting my support.

make a minor bit of jostling into something major.

i can't believe after all the hand-wringing we did about Kerry 'staying above the fray' and not responding swiftly and forcefully to attack, some of us actually think Obama should just sit there and take it

I like a comment made by Kos, saying essentially that somewhere in America, John Edwards is smiling.

Hillary and Obama will do enormous damage to each other in this primary season.

A few more of these exchanges and look out -- Al Gore will be able to conceive of a reason to enter the race later this year.

Take it?  Geffen launched a cheap "under the belt" attack at the opposing candidate.  He is one of Obama's staffer.   They used Maureen Dowd for these comments to boot.  

Instead of lashing back and talking about Obama in a deragotory way the statement issued by the HRC campaign asks for them to keep a civil tone.  Rapid response of the Clinton team without going nuclear.  

The response back?    

Slams about "Lincoln bedroom" and "because he is black" attacks.  

IMO Obama comes off much worse than HRC, although perhaps HRC should have let the cheesy attack with Maureen Dowd used as the surrogate go unnoticed and unresponded, even though Geffen is Obama's finance chair.  

Of course, as always, in the end the voter decides what to make of this, who "won," who "lost," if anyone.  

is this snark?

F no!  This nide anti Clinto BS is driving my BP up to the highest ranges!  The idea that Hillary is pro war is idiotic and that seems to the favorite script on this and many other sites.  I suggest you go to www.dailyhowler.com and read the truth about Hillary's statements about the war...she has been saying for almost three years that if she could re-do....there would never have been a vote at all - jeeze but everyone is demanding an apology...What the F for?  Does that help one person anywhere...well, I guess it does, her opponents...but everyone is wrapping it in holy gauze .  Bull.

I hope that you guys have listened to Bill Richardson just now in NV and he has asked for a pledge from all the campaigns not to attack each other...and came out against Geffen's statement. (which NO ONE in the comments above seems to understand how dangerous  that kind of meme will be if and when Hilla and Bill have to fight off the rightwing plus media juggernaut)Biden just said to sign him up on that pledge. Its smart, wise and right and I fully do not believe there is any chance that it will slow down the idiot attackers on this site one bit.

Stoller is your press?!  Well, lordy....and if I dont AGREE with you....I should leave...GOD!  You truly dont understand politics at all...do you?  (though Im sure you think you do - everyone is an expert these days)...its a team sport bucko!  We only set up the other side to club us if we act the way that so many are acting on this site and others.  I was in NH the night of the NH debate in 2000 and I was driving when I heard B radley call Gore a liar and I knew right then that the Republicans would use that over and over and over and they did.  I suggest you visit some right wing blogs and see the joy that they are getting from you guys who like to call Hillary silly names and attack and abuse and snidely reject.  (Hey!  You dont have to vote for her - just does the rhetoric have to so vitrolic?)You are simple if you dont understand that she is the odds on favorite to be our nominee and a compleat fool if you dont think these fun attacks will be a joy to the press and help them in their mission to elect their pal McCain.

"we'd love to speculate as to why the Clinton folks chose pick this battle? It's not as if they are used to getting good Dowd columns. And considering that this may be the first serious back-n-forth between Clinton and Obama of the campaign, it could end up stepping on the NV Dem-AFSCME cattle call. Do the Clinton folks want to see how quickly Obama backs down (if he does)? Do they simply want to highlight Obama's Hollywood ties? Or are some Clinton folks simply mad at Geffen? Has he said harsher things that we don't know about?"

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/

Aiko,

Look I luv the Hotline...I worked with them for years (thats what I was doing in NH in 2000) but hey - the 21 yr old who wrote that didnt get it...In the paper of record, at a political event for Obama - the head of the event said that the Clinton were special kinda liars (like a Hollywood mogul can say that without being hit by lightning)andddddd....that Bill has been F-ing around!  Completely irresponsible!  Obamas people are responsible for this, believe you me....I have put together a bunch of events like this, a press strategy is part of the prep....jeeze especially a LA kickoff like that....   WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM ....Lordy, Im the leftiest son of a bitch there is - but I dont try to derstroy members of my party who happen to be capatalists just because Im a little wobblie... its about beating the real baddd guyssss.

It was real mature to use Rush Limbaugh and Fox News tactics when all Obama had to do was issue a one sentence press release. Down with Obama!!

Shaun....are you joshing me?  Do you think that winning the WH in 08 is going to be easy?? My goodness...pleazeee dont be so silly...My God....they are gonna come out with BIG GUNS for whoever the Dems put up...and theylll have allll the money in the world and of course theyll have the cables shows and the NY Times and the Post scripting the negative storyline.....you know the stuff that Geffen (and the Daily Kos) said today.  Perceptions are reality in politics.  Always!

Please everyone read the Daily Howler!

I'll be surprised with this long primary season, we don't sink our own boat with this infighting.  We are certainly handing out the talking point for the Republicans.

Remember when Hillary made a comment alluding to unknown candidates possibly denying terrorism being a problem?

Will she condemn herself for negative campaigning and baseless speculation?

Will she condemn any volunteer who takes part in a blog who criticizes another candidate?

Hillary Clinton voted for President Bush's stupid, wrongheaded, destructive, and expensive War on Iraq. Unlike, say Senator Edwards, she has yet to admit she was wrong to do so.

Voters like myself rightfully hold that against her. She can say she was misled by the Bush Administration's lying, cherry-picking intelligence about WMDs et al, but unless she now admits she was wrong to support this misguided and preemptive War against a country even she had to know had no connection to 9/11, Hillary is a stubborn, elitist, corporate establishment, power-seeking political suck-up who is running for President as a true, upright, and honest Democrat. And it just ain't so. She voted for Bush's War and she refuses to recant.

If she wants to run as an "Independent" Democrat like her "moderate" DLC comrade, friend, and fellow war supporter, Joe Lieberman, let her do so. Otherwise, she's only opposing Bush on his "competency" in running the War and not on his illegitimacy and his ultimate political and moral ignorance.

Sincerely,
radlib1

P.S. I knew before the war, just from reading between-the-lines from the papers at my cottage on the canals in Venice, California, that this was a fucked-up war-in-the-making. My roommate from college (Yale) was Joe Lieberman and I was warning him then that they should let the UN inspectors do their job. Nobody, including Joe and Hillary, listened.

Instead, they went along with the prevailing political winds and backed Bush and his neocon minions. They should all be held accountable for their actions and their votes, Hillary included.

An unnecessary and bloody war is more important than a blowjob. And Hillary, of all people, should have known that.