Two articles you might find interesting - I did.

[babylonsister]

James Moore -- Texas Expert on Rove -- Discusses Political Surrogates, Rovian Tactics, and Win at All Cost Campaigns in 2008
Submitted by BuzzFlash on Mon, 03/24/2008 - 5:16pm. Interviews

A BUZZFLASH INTERVIEW

I think it's fair to say that they are not just playing the "race card," but they're trying to combine race and fear. This is the thing that probably pushed me over the edge with the Clintons. ... They see race as an effective button to push to move people in their direction, to create doubt. And that was the whole Rove thing, to create enough doubt that people go back to their default positions and their belief systems. ... They're using fear to put them where they want to be.

-- James Moore, Emmy-winning reporter and coauthor of Bush's Brain

Interview w/Mr. Moore here:
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/interviews/101

******************************

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/03/24/does-clinton-want-obama-to-lose.aspx


Does Clinton Want Obama to Lose?


Last week, the Atlantic's Matthew Yglesias suggested that Hillary Clinton may want Barack Obama to lose the general election. The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum, an Obama supporter who often defends Clinton, replies, "she's not rooting for John McCain and she's not secretly plotting Barack Obama's downfall."

Who's right?

Obviously, it's impossible to know for sure either way, since it's a question of motive. I think Clinton's political interests clearly militate toward a harsh campaign against Obama. Her only chance of winning is to disqualify him as a general election candidate, giving the superdelegates no chance but to contravene the elected delegates, which they are otherwise reluctant to do. This also serves her interests because if Obama loses, she would be the front-runner in 2012. (Drum asserts, "It's either 2008 or nothing for Hillary," but he doesn't say why, and the assertion seems wrong on it's face -- she won't be too old in 2012, her Democratic fanbase wil remain intact, and her interest in the presidency will presumably be undiminished.)

Now, is Clinton actively thinking along these lines? Like I said, you can't know. Even if she's thinking in selfless terms, I'm not certain she would regard a John McCain victory over Obama as a total disaster. Senators tend to be very clubby and place enormous weight on paying dues. Clinton is said to consider Obama unworthy of the presidency, and indeed has said that McCain is ready to be commander-in-chief and he is not. She may not think a McCain presidency would be much worse for the country than an Obama presidency. I definitely suspect her chief strategist, Mark Penn, would prefer a McCain presidency. Penn is right-of-center on foreign policy and economics. His loyalty to liberalism is extremely tenuous.

But this is speculation. An easier question to answer is, How much does Clinton value her own interests versus those of the Democratic Party? And here the answer is very clear: Clinton is acting as if she doesn't care about the Democratic Party's interests at all, except insofar as they coincide with her own. Her continued campaign is significantly damaging Obama's general election prospects, and this would perhaps be defensible if she had a strong chance at the nomination, but she doesn't. As Politico recently reported, "One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives."

To inflict serious damage on the likely nominee in order to pursue a one-in-ten chance of securing the nomination is, ipso facto, an act of extreme selfishness. Whether she sees the damage to Obama's prospects as a feature or a bug is interesting but beside the point.

--Jonathan Chait

[babylonsister]

1. Not playing the race card? Hillary: Wright "Would Not Have Been My Pastor"

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/hillary_wright_would_not_have.php

Hillary: Wright "Would Not Have Been My Pastor"
By Greg Sargent - March 25, 2008, 1:21PM


Okay, here we go. In an interview today with reporters and editors of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Hillary made what I think are her first extensive critical remarks about the Jeremiah Wright controversy, suggesting that Obama should have moved to another church in response to Wright's comments...

"He would not have been my pastor," Clinton said. "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend."...

The Clinton campaign has refrained from getting involved in the controversy, but Clinton herself, responding to a question, denounced what she said was "hate speech."

"You know, I spoke out against Don Imus (who was fired from his radio and television shows after making racially insensitive remarks), saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that," Clinton said. "I just think you have to speak out against that. You certainly have to do that, if not explicitly, then implicitly by getting up and moving."

That is an implicit criticism of Obama for not "speaking out" or "moving" churches in response to revelations about Wright's views. Obama, however, has spoken out against Wright, denouncing his more controversial views in multiple interviews and in his big speech on race relations, though he has not disavowed the church.

Hillary made the comments in a newspaper in blue-collar-voter-rich Pennsylvania, where she needs a big win on April 22nd to keep her electoral hopes alive. The Tribune-Review says that some of what Hillary said was in response to a question. We'll bring you video or a transcript as soon as we can.

[TwilightGardener]

2. She's awful. Everyone can now see that when she talked up McCain and bashed

Obama by comparison (and then Bill did it too), she really meant it. That's the ONE area where she's being truthful in this campaign--for whatever reasons, she'd rather see McCain win. And if the SD's haven't figured it out by now, they're idiots--and if they've figured it out but refuse to stop her, then there is a true cancer within the party.

[Me.]

3. That's What Pushed Me Over The Edge Too

That and their continual endorsing of McCain. I find it loathsome and cannot imagine how those two will behave if they re-enter the WH. I have no faith they will be on our side.

[babylonsister]

8. I guess that high road she took regarding Wright didn't lead her

where she needs to go. Oye. Pitiful.

[Celebration]

5. The ONLY explanation

Is that if she can't have the nomination, she wants Obama to lose the general election. These tactics will not be forgotten by Obama supporters. She has crossed the line. Many Democrats won't be bothered to go to the polls if she is our nominee.

[babylonsister]

6. See the second piece in the OP: I've heard lots of people

speculating, including a panel on Hard Ball yesterday, that that's what she's doing. She's trying to smear Obama even though she has no chance of winning, so McCain is elected and she can run again in 4 years. There's something about unbridled ambition that's really creepy to me. I cannot see us going through this shit again in 4 years. :grr:

[Celebration]

7. she's unbalanced

Unbalanced people tend to make huge mistakes under stress, as in when they are "sleep deprived." It is sad because overall she is extremely talented. We do not need another unbalanced person in the White House--whether this year, or four years from now.

Campaigns are stressful, as is the Presidency. We have seen how Obama acts under stress, and now we see how Clinton acts under stress.

When people are under stress, they act under instinct...........it is clear whose instincts we should trust. It is just SO CLEAR whose instincts we should trust.

Please, super delegates, end this now.

[grantcart]

9. The desperation is now seeping out

[TheDoorbellRang]

10. Actually, she DID choose her family when she kept ol' Bill

There ARE options in this day and age for denouncing and repudiating a philanderin' hubby. Just sayin'

She would have done well to keep herself and her comments out of this media spinfest. Everytime she tries to traverse the moral high ground she sinks in up to her knees.

[DevonRex]

4. IWR pushed me over the edge but

all the race baiting definitely validated my decision. I've been horrified, mostly because I was such a strong Clinton supporter and defender before.

[Bread and Circus]

11. James Moore article is fascinating, bookmarking for later.

[babylonsister]

12. It was good, though I'm sure the Clintons wouldn't be too thrilled by

the Rove comparison. If the shoe fits...

[babylonsister]

13. And then there's this-the Clinton campaign is doing their best...

She's gone way too far with this one. :grr:

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/hillary_finance_committee_memb.php

Hillary Finance Committee Member Compares Wright And David Duke, Says Obama "Used Race When It Suited Him"
By Greg Sargent - March 25, 2008, 2:37PM


The Wright Stuff is coming fast and furious from Hillary and her supporters.

First Hillary criticized Obama today for not sufficiently distancing himself from the controversial pastor.

I've now learned that a member of Hillary's finance committee and a longtime ally of the Clintons has made some very explicit statements about Barack Obama's ties to his controversial minister, Jeremiah Wright, saying that it's "legitimate" to raise questions about those ties, comparing Wright to David Duke, and claiming that Obama has "used race where it suited him."

The finance committee member, Niall O'Dowd, made the comments on Saturday in an unnoticed interview with RTE Radio in Ireland. The Wright issue has been raised by Hillary surrogates Lanny Davis and Joe Wilson, making O'Dowd the third Hillaryite (or fourth, if you include Hillary herself) to hit Obama over Wright.

The interview is worth a listen, because it's another example of supporters of the candidates (see Power, Samantha) getting themselves in potential trouble by saying things abroad in settings where more candor is possible, and indeed expected, than here in America...

The comments from O'Dowd -- who's long been close to both Clintons, having served as a key adviser on Irish affairs to Bill Clinton and hosting a big fundraiser for Hillary last year -- go farther on Wright than Hillary and her supporters have thus far.

O'Dowd said that the Wright comments raised "a legitimate question" and observed that "it's interesting that Barack Obama sat in the pews while all this was going on, and never once in any of his books or anything else" did he denounce Wright, adding: "He worshipped this man."

O'Dowd also compared Wright to Duke and inadvertently said that the Hillary campaign is actively making an issue of the Wright controversy, something the campaign (Hillary's comments today notwithstanding) has been careful to avoid doing. O'Dowd said:

"I think the issue that the Clinton campaign has seized on is that Barack Obama, you know, never once raised his voice to his pastor and said, `I think your language is quite extreme here, and I think you language is probably wrong.' Because let's turn this around. If this was David Duke and he was preaching on behalf of, and Hillary Clinton was in the pew, there would be outrage about this. And there can't be this double standard. Barack Obama has used race where it suited him, but when it doesn't suit him he backs away from it."