The "18,000,000" PUMAs Meet Up!

Rumproast has observations and links from the big event of a couple of weeks ago. Be sure to follow all links. You'll be glad you did.

Hear me them snore roar!

Wouldn't You Know

As soon as I published my last (admittedly mean) post, I came across some whispers. [Added: and more.]

Let's just say that I'll believe it when I see it, so I'm not going to delete the last post just yet.

Meanwhile, please enjoy some eye candy.

Never Mind the Green Backdrop ...

... how's this for an unfortunate image?

How fitting that, on the night Barack Obama finally claimed the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton delivered her non-concession speech from a concrete bunker. To reach the Baruch College gymnasium where Hillary spoke with such surprising defiance her supporters had to descend two flights below street level. The thick subterranean walls blocked out cell phone and BlackBerry signals, and no televisions were provided in the main event hall, thereby insulating Hillary’s cheering supporters (intentionally, some theorized) from the dispiriting events unfolding at the Xcel Center in Minneapolis.

Does it get worse? Uh ... let me just give you the first sentence of the second paragraph.

In the bunker there exists a different reality.

What? You want more? Read here.

What? You have no idea what the post title refers to? Well, then, time for a little Veracifier. (Thanks for the tip, twin!)

(alt. video link)

(h/t for the bunker link: Kevin K./rumproast. And, via Instaputz, see also Kevin's next post.)

Forgetting the First Rule of Holes

As I noted earlier, I don't buy the idea that Hillary Clinton raised the specter of the RFK assassination inadvertently. She's just way too good at staying on message, and there's no way she says anything unplanned when meeting with the press.

The thing that compounds this, though, is that in addition to employing distasteful tactics, she doesn't even have the sense to recognize when they backfire. Here, once again, she's just making matters worse. She could have just admitted her mistake and delivered a proper apology. Instead, she's turning it into yet another whine-fest that's all about her and how she's being treated unfairly.

Check out Veracifier's summary of her spin bots making the rounds of the Sunday talk shows yesterday:

(alt. video link)

KO on HRC

Oliver Willis has a video of Keith Olberman speaking about Hillary's assassination thing. As usual, KO's a little over the top for my taste, but he does make a number of good points if you can get past the bombast. In particular, he documents several other times when she has dropped this hint, that she needs to stay in the race, just in case: You know, what if Obama gets tagged?

It's absolutely disgraceful and it's not excusable as a slip of the tongue.

The way I see it, Hillary Clinton doesn't make verbal slips. She calculates every word that comes out of her mouth, particularly when she knows that she's speaking on the record. And when you learn that she's said it several times before? No. I'm convinced it's all part of her pattern of dropping hints, designed to create FUD in the minds of the voters and the minds of the superdelegates.

There's a word for people like her.

Hilzoy on Hillary

Making sense, as usual.

(h/t: Andrew Sullivan)

---

I tried to pick an excerpt, but it would have been 90% of the post at minimum. So just go read it, and be sure to follow his links to Josh Marshall and Ezra Klein's pieces, too.

Matthew Yglesias made a canny observation yesterday that all this talk about Clinton pushing for the VP slot could very likely be explained as coming from Clinton campaign staffers, all of whom will soon be looking for jobs. This makes sense to me.

In any case, the more I think about it, the more I don't want Hillary to be the VP. I think she would be a good campaigner (though not great), I don't think she adds much to the ticket where other choices might not bring more, and I don't believe most of her supporters will carry their grudges through November when they really think about what a McSame presidency would mean. Much more importantly, I think she (and Bill, and all of her staffers) would be absolutely dreadful in the Obama Administration. I can't see her being a good second-in-command, given her behavior over the past two or three months of this campaign. I think there would be endless bickering, leaks to the press, Bill pontificating, "Well, back when I was president …"

No. Much better for Obama just to win, fair and square. He could be magnanimous and throw his support behind her for Senate Majority Leader, or even offer her a seat on the Supreme Court. But I think it's best not to have her in his White House.

Classy as Ever

The latest reason for staying in:

My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.
-- Hillary Clinton

And Bobby Kennedy was a hard-working white American. I mean, as far as I know.

(h/t: Matthew Yglesias)

---

[added] Andrew Sullivan notes that this isn't the first time Hillary has used this line.

[added] Andrew has video from today.

Palate Cleanser

After the last post, this works for me:

Hillary: Truth and Consequences

See also.

---

Image copyright: Derek Chatwood, all rights reserved. Used with permission.

Blog Post Title of the Week

Obama picks up eight superdelegates; Clinton unveils PowerPoint presentation
-- Steve Benen

Debunking the "I Win the Important States" Argument

Among the small remaining stock of talking points that don't immediately produce howls of derision, Hillary Clinton likes to talk about her winning states that Democrats must win come November. Most of these are eye-rolling in and of themselves; e.g., California and New York would vote for an actual donkey over a Republican. But she does like to harp on her wins in some of the less deep blue states, as part of a last gasp effort to sway undecided superdelegates over to her side.

To that end, I can only hope these people read Mark Nickolas. His key point:

... of the 33 states that Bill Clinton won in 1992, Obama has won 18 of them, versus just 13 for Clinton. The other two were Michigan and Nevada (where Obama won the delegates and Clinton the popular vote). But Clinton conveniently omits any reference to these important facts.

If only the media would scratch a little before simply printing whatever argument a candidate makes...

New Record Set for Teh Stupid

This has got to be the most painful thing I've read this whole campaign.

[added] Which calls for my first ever post of a LOLcat, I think.

(pic. source)

Channeling the Iraqi Information Minister

Geoff Garin, lead strategist for the Clinton campaign, on a conference call with reporters this morning:

We think the results last night strengthen the case that she will be the strongest candidate for the Democratic Party in November.

(cf.)

Forget About Economists. Hillary No Longer Believes in Arithmetic.

Swiped this Olbergem, a cross between Monty Python and Jon Stewart, both at their best, from Oliver:

(alt. video link)

Oh, Shoot

Looks like Hillary's pro-gun mailer is a flop among gun enthusiasts, seeing as how the gun pictured doesn't actually exist.

Musta been the one used by the non-existent snipers, don't you think?

John Cole has details and further commentary.

Shameless Doesn't Begin to Describe this Pandering

“I’m not going to put in my lot with economists,” she said. A few moments later, she added, “Elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantages the vast majority of Americans.”

-- a prominent politician

Only the pronoun lets you know that this statement was not said by George W. Bush or John McCain.

Never mind the hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton pretending not to be part of the elite. It's the appeal to the worst part of the American psyche -- anti-intellectualism -- and the bull-headed refusal to listen to the unanimous view of people who know better that really annoys me.

[added] One of those people not being listened to, Robert Reich, has more on this.

Non-Line of the Day: 2008-05-03

From the HuffPo:

Aides to Sen. Hillary Clinton defended on Thursday her support for a gas-tax holiday - a proposal that has been roundly criticized by economic and energy experts and derided among pundits as political pandering.

[...]

Aides to Clinton could not, when asked, point to a single non-political expert who supported such a proposal …

... via MattY, who adds:

What happened to the idea that Clinton is the candidate of policy substance, competence, and experience?

Line of the Day: 2008-05-03

... I've never before in my life seen the press as willing to go easy on a candidate's claims to still be a viable contender.

Okay, so his life has not yet been so long. Still, Matthew makes sense.

I am sick beyond belief at the wide-eyed eagerness of the MSM to lap up the daily spin from the Clinton campaign about how they're "actually ahead, if you only consider …" and report it as gospel, just so they can keep this nomination "battle" alive and not have to think about finding some real stories to cover.

She. Can't. Win. All she can do is destroy the Democrats' chances in what should have been the easiest election ever.

(h/t: Scott Lemieux)

[added] Bonus Matthew:

One of my new lines when print journalism types start fretting about the blogosphere is to remind people that the emerging media landscape can't possibly be worse than 24 hour cable news, which often seems to be going out of its way to be uninformative.

[added] Via Oliver Willis: Timothy Noah issues a challenge:

Here's a rule I would like every political reporter, campaign official, TV talking head, and politician in the United States to follow. Go ahead and say, if you like, that Hillary Clinton retains a serious chance of winning the Democratic nomination. If you say this, however, you must describe a set of circumstances whereby this could happen. Try not to make it sound like a fairy tale.

Noah follows this with a brutal hacking apart of every fairy tale imaginable, which, if only some of the dispensers of hot air would read, might mean that we could get onto the real business of electing a president.

"... with us or against us?”"

Which politician used that phrase?

If you said George W. Bush, you're right.

If you said Hillary R. Clinton, you're right.

Caught On Tape: Clinton Campaign Push Polling

Ben Smith has some audio posted of a Clinton campaign push poll, recorded by the man who received the call and emailed it in to Politico. The sound is a little crappy at the beginning, but it clears up soon.

Shades of W in 2000, and other desperate, despicable, and dishonest politicians, I say.

(h/t: Mark Nickolas)

Good for you, Barack

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.

[...]

At a meeting with voters in North Carolina on Monday, Mr. Obama said lifting the gas tax for three months would save the average consumer no more than $30, a figure confirmed by Congressional analysts. Mr. Obama has previously dismissed Mr. McCain’s proposal as a “scheme.”

“Half a tank of gas,” Mr. Obama told his audience. “That’s his big solution.”

[...]

Mr. McCain and Mrs. Clinton propose to suspend the tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day, the peak driving season, which would lower tax receipts by roughly $9 billion and potentially cost 300,000 highway construction jobs, according to state highway officials.

(source)

Once again, the correct and responsible call by Obama, while Clinton joins McCain in trumpeting a feel-good measure that offers little real benefit and extracts real costs.