Archive for April 29th, 2008
Apr 29, 2008 at 8:01 PM by David Pleasant
The chattering heads on David Gregory’s show on MSNBC this evening said "something is up" in the Hillary campaign for mid-June. I know that can’t possibly be any more vague, so here’s the gist of what they said.
David Shuster, substituting for Gregory tonight, reported Hillary campaign manager Terry McAuliffe has set June 15 as the end date for the campaign. According to Shuster, the following exchange took place in an interview McAuliffe had with CQ’s David Corn:
MCAULIFFE: The primaries finish on June 3, and after that there will be pressure on the uncommitted superdelegates to commit.
CORN: So all done by June 15? You won’t contend the nomination contest beyond then?
MCAULIFFE: (Smiling) Oh, I’m confident we’ll be the nominee.
Rachel Maddow then said:
"The real surprise is that we don’t hear [from] undecided superdelegates that they’re getting pressure from either the Democratic superpowers that be like Howard Dean or from Barack Obama. We’re only hearing about direct pressure on undecided superdelegates from Hillary Clinton."
Rachel’s point being that committed superdelegates aren’t being challenged to jump ship.
Joe Scarborough added:
"There’s something going on in the Clinton campaign because McAuliffe said that today. Last night, somebody very close to the Clinton campaign — very high up in the Clinton campaign — also told me something was going to happen in June. That this was not going to go to Denver. I’ve got no more details than that, but I find it very instructive that Terry McAuliffe said the same thing today."
Jay Carney (TIME) said he "was hearing the same thing" and that "it must arise out of some concern for the state of the party."
Carney went on to posit, summarizing, Clinton would continue if she won decisively in any of the upcoming primaries, but if she "lost" Indiana next week, she would "fold her tent up next week."
Eugene Robinson (WaPo) acknowledged he was hearing the same thing.
Scarborough then strongly reemphasized, "Something’s up."
They ended the segment collectively nodding and agreeing on "something’s up."
No one knows, or at least I don’t, what that "something" may be, but there was a different air in the conversation than the typical punditry and speculation — more conviction. And, it leaned toward Clinton acquiescing if she doesn’t hit a grand slam next week.
It could all be a Clinton tactic to indirectly interject a premature or false expectation of victory in the Obama camp, hoping they relax rather than push the next few days. I don’t believe the Obama camp would be that stupid, but they’ve had several tough weeks.
So. . .
Apr 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM by Political Chase
(Updated below)
Barack Obama repudiated Jeremiah Wright this afternoon in a press conference in Winston-Salem, NC.
This video was just released. More to follow soon.
Update: This is the transcript.
I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That’s in my DNA. Trying to promote mutual understanding; to insist that we all share common hopes; and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That’s who I am. That’s what I believe. And that’s what this campaign has been about.
Yesterday we saw a very different vision of America. I am outraged by the comments that were made, and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday.
I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992, and I’ve known Rev. Wright for almost 20 years. The person I saw yesterday was not the person I met 20 years ago.
His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church. They certainly don’t portray accurately my values and beliefs. And if Rev. Wright thinks that’s political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn’t know me very well. Based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought either.
Continue reading ‘Obama repudiates Wright’
Apr 29, 2008 at 2:26 PM by David Pleasant
George Bush held a press conference this morning that was staged as focusing on the economy, but it was a lame ploy to pound Democrats during the election season. The most unpopular president in history fired off criticism after criticism at Congress (viz. Democrats), and displayed anger several times.
When asked about how successful the war in Afghanistan was, Bush pounded the podium and vehemently declared, “We’re making progress.” No one asked the scornful president to define “progress.”
Without exception, according to Bush, all problems the country faces are directly attributable to Democrats Congress. And of course, everything Bush has demanded is and has always been perfect in every way, as evidenced by his 28 percent approval rating.
The presser was a veiled attempt at election season politics (viz. campaigning) but mitigating the risks of Bush associating himself with a specific GOP incumbent or candidate, although he hesitantly put a plug in for John McSame.
Bush accused Congress of blocking his proposals to deal with everything from high gas prices to tuition bills.
“It’s a tough time for our economy,” Bush said at a Rose Garden news conference. “Across our country, many Americans are understandably anxious about issues affecting their pocketbook, from gas and food prices to mortgage and tuition bills. They’re looking to their elected leaders in Congress for action.”
“Unfortunately, on many of these issues, all they’re getting is delay,” he said.
He repeatedly called for drilling in ANWR (Arctic national wildlife refuge), and to begin construction of oil refineries to help meet the global demand for oil, which would, according to Bush, reduce the overall price of oil and other energy related costs.
Bush also called on Congress to drop emission restrictions on coal plants, which at its current level, is, I believe, the single greatest source of carbon emissions in the country. If I recall correctly, emissions from coal plants are responsible for approximately 50 percent of our carbon-based pollution.
Bush slammed Congress so hard, the less informed viewer would have easily believed the only thing Democrats did was develop ways to purposefully ruin the economy, ran the major oil companies, force homes into foreclosure, thwart higher education pursuits, and logarithmically raise food prices.
President Bush then pinned the problem of rising food prices largely on Congress, saying it was considering a “massive, bloated” farm bill that would fail to eliminate subsidy payments to “multimillionaire” farmers. With the nation’s farm economy thriving, the president argued, it is time for Congress to reduce lavish farm subsidies that translate to higher taxes for average Americans.
Mr. Bush said he had also urged Congress to pass legislation that would help address problems in the housing market by modernizing the Federal Housing Administration, reforming the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan agencies, and allowing state housing agencies to issue tax free bonds to refinance subprime loans.
“Yet they failed to send a single one of these proposals to my desk,” he said. “Americans should not have to wait any longer for their elected officials to help more families stay in their homes.”
Read the transcript.
Apr 29, 2008 at 9:52 AM by David Pleasant
Speaks for itself.
Hillary, too, was asked about Wright today by reporters. While she took the opportunity to remind all of us of her earlier declaration that she would not have kept Wright as her pastor, she called on John McCain to get the North Carolina GOP not to run the ad hitting Obama over this:
"I have said that that that was a personal decision of his. I answered one question about it that made it clear I would not have stayed in that church under those circumstances," Clinton told reporters in Graham, NC.
"But, I regret the efforts by the Republicans to politicize this matter and I believe that if Senator McCain were serious he would do more than just send a letter he is the putative nominee I think he could very clearly tell the North Carolina party tell the Mississippi party that he would not tolerate those kinds of advertisements and I’m waiting to see if he does that."
Apr 29, 2008 at 8:48 AM by David Pleasant
John McCain is scheduled to deliver a speech on health care today. Following are excerpts from his prepared remarks. As you can see, McCain makes no provision for the 47 million Americans that currently do not have health insurance. Instead, he says he will “work tirelessly to address the problem.” Has he already started? Does Quick Draw McGraw already have a bill pending?
Well, I suppose I overstated that a bit. If any of the 47 million uninsured have sufficient income to yield a $5,000 tax liability, they can get a $5,000 tax credit. Assuming they are fully employed, That will only put them about 18 months behind in the payment cycle, assuming they have the means to get started and an insurer that will accept them. And, if their premiums will be as expensive as mine are ($900+ per month w/high deductible for just me and that’s with only one family-physician visit in seven years), the $5,000 might be as useful as $0.05. The point is, $5,000 tax credits are realistically only applicable to middle- or higher-income brackets.
Moreover, he intends to have the A-Team (”insurers, businesses, state legislators”) and “patients” to hammer out a plan to “reach out” to “at risk people” and will ultimately be managed by the states, that is, if the “states consent.” That smells, at best, like No Child Left Behind, but with an option to say no and consequently block benefits from whatever special-interest-centric plan the A-Team and “patients” will develop.
I would also like to know how “patients” working on the A-Team will be determined. Will Ronald A. Williams of Aetna be an A-Team patient? Will any of the homeless veterans sleeping under bridges be included in the “patient” group? Will Donnie Ingram, who lost his job in January when his Lancaster County, SC textile mill employer outsourced its operations to Brazil, be an A-Team patient? And, of course, there is always the option of yanking that myocardial infarction patient out of Trauma Room No. 1 for a four-hour video conference.
Maybe Mr. Bush Mr. McCain will address it in his speech, but there is nothing in the advance excerpts about S-CHIP, which George Bush refused to sign. (If he has signed it over the past few months, I’m not aware of it.)
The key to real reform is to restore control over our health-care system to the patients themselves. Right now, even those with access to health care often have no assurance that it is appropriate care. Too much of the system is built on getting paid just for providing services, regardless of whether those services are necessary or produce quality care and outcomes. American families should only pay for getting the right care: care that is intended to improve and safeguard their health.
When families are informed about medical choices, they are more capable of making their own decisions, less likely to choose the most expensive and often unnecessary options, and are more satisfied with their choices. We took an important step in this direction with the creation of Health Savings Accounts, tax-preferred accounts that are used to pay insurance premiums and other health costs. These accounts put the family in charge of what they pay for. And, as president, I would seek to encourage and expand the benefits of these accounts to more American families.
Even so, those without prior group coverage and those with pre-existing conditions do have the most difficulty on the individual market, and we need to make sure they get the high-quality coverage they need. I will work tirelessly to address the problem. But I won’t create another entitlement program that Washington will let get out of control. Nor will I saddle states with another unfunded mandate. The states have been very active in experimenting with ways to cover the “uninsurables.” The State of North Carolina, for example, has an agreement with Blue Cross to act as insurer of “last resort.” Over thirty states have some form of “high-risk” pool, and over twenty states have plans that limit premiums charged to people suffering an illness and who have been denied insurance.
As President, I will meet with the governors to solicit their ideas about a best practice model that states can follow – a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP that would reflect the best experience of the states. I will work with Congress, the governors, and industry to make sure that it is funded adequately and has the right incentives to reduce costs such as disease management, individual case management, and health and wellness programs. These programs reach out to people who are at risk for different diseases and chronic conditions and provide them with nurse care managers to make sure they receive the proper care and avoid unnecessary treatments and emergency room visits. The details of a Guaranteed Access Plan will be worked out with the collaboration and consent of the states. But, conceptually, federal assistance could be provided to a nonprofit GAP that operated under the direction of a board that included all stakeholders groups – legislators, insurers, business and medical community representatives, and, most importantly, patients. The board would contract with insurers to cover patients who have been denied insurance and could join with other state plans to enlarge pools and lower overhead costs. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level.
Apr 29, 2008 at 6:44 AM by David Pleasant
I repeatedly find instances of Hillary Clinton pandering some voter-catching two-bit policy, which is contradictory to policies Clinton has proposed in the past or runs afoul with her legislative record.
For example, Clinton has joined the McCain Pandering Express in a proposal to eliminate the federal highway tax during the summer months, and as usual, rapidly slams Obama for being against it.
Clinton Monday on highway taxes:
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton lined up with Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, in endorsing a plan to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for the summer travel season. But Senator Barack Obama, Mrs. Clinton’s Democratic rival, spoke out firmly against the proposal, saying it would save consumers little and do nothing to curtail oil consumption and imports. . . .
Mrs. Clinton said at a rally on Monday morning in Graham, N.C., that she would introduce legislation to impose a windfall-profits tax on oil companies and use the revenue to suspend the gasoline tax temporarily.
Mr. Obama derided the McCain-Clinton idea of a federal tax holiday as a “short-term, quick-fix” proposal that would do more harm than good, and said the money, which is earmarked for the federal highway trust fund, is badly needed to maintain the nation’s roads and bridges.”
Rewind. Clinton in 2000 on highway taxes: (h/t kos).
Campaigning in the Hudson Valley, Lazio continued a two-day assault on Clinton’s support of maintaining the 18-cent federal gas tax and then used tough rhetoric to declare that "trust" and "character" were campaign issues during an evening fundraiser in Manhattan that raised more that $1 million.
Clinton, meanwhile, lashed out at Lazio’s plan to repeal 4.3 cents of the gas tax, calling it "a bad deal for New York and a potential bonanza for the oil companies."
During a visit to a shopping mall in the Buffalo suburbs, Clinton said that "the gas tax is one of the few exceptions where we actually get more money back than we send to Washington."
Moreover, consider how Paul Krugman characterized McCain’s tax policies, which Clinton also seeks to implement.
[A] look at what Mr. McCain says about taxes shows the same combination of irresponsibility and double-talk that, back in 2000, foreshadowed the character of the Bush administration.
Krugman continues:
If truth be told, the McCain tax plan doesn’t seem to embody any coherent policy agenda. Instead, it looks like a giant exercise in pandering — an attempt to mollify the G.O.P.’s right wing, and never mind if it makes any sense.
The impression that Mr. McCain’s tax talk is all about pandering is reinforced by his proposal for a summer gas tax holiday — a measure that would, in fact, do little to help consumers, although it would boost oil industry profits.
More and more, Mr. McCain sounds like a man who will say anything to become president.
There you have it. Straight from one of Hillary’s most ardent supporters.
