Bill's Disappearing Act

Wild Bill tries to take the spotlight on primary night, until someone gives him the hook:

Clinton's Columbia Cackle

The girl just can't help herself-- Hillary Clinton used her famous cackle on Thursday to deflect a question about the $800,000 her husband earned in 2005 giving speeches for a Bogota-based group that supports the Colombia free trade agreement — the same trade deal she currently opposes.

Once Upon A Time...

...there was a mythical black president who held court with his white wife. They lorded over the land, until he was impeached and she bolted for the world's greatest deliberative body.

Today, the mythical first black president is trying to help his white wife beat a man who could be the actual first black president.

The white wife launched the first racial salvo, when she suggested that all Martin Luther King, Jr. did for civil rights was to "make speeches."  To reinforce the point, she said, "It took a president (Lyndon Johnson) to get it done."  Meaning: it was swell that King made some speeches and stuff, but it took the white guy in power to make it happen.

The mythical first black president then disrupted his welcome in Black Presidentville with a cranky tantrum:  the campaign of the actual black man in the race was "the biggest fairy tale" he'd ever seen.  And he's seen a lot of them, so there.

Blacks around the country took offense that their mythical leader would dismiss the actual black candidate as a fantasy, so the mythical black president took to the airwaves to try to clarify: he meant that the black candidate's position on Iraq was a "fairy tale," not his candidacy.  Black audiences weren't buying what the mythical black president was selling this time.

Meanwhile, the white wife claimed that while the black candidate was an "inspirational speaker" (shorthand for a great preacher), he hadn't "put in the spade work to be president."

The Rev. Al Sharpton must be too busy admiring his "Destroying Don Imus Award" to notice.

On Sunday's "Meet the Press," the white wife claimed that this campaign shouldn't be "about race."  Which is why she didn't mention race, right?

New polls show that black voters support the actual black candidate by a 50 point margin over the white wife of the mythical black president.  Among white voters, the white wife has a much more vulnerable 14 point lead. 

Black voters in South Carolina and beyond might say to the New Hampshire women who carried her over the finish line, "We're glad you're proud to have a woman in the race.  But we've got a black man in the race, and we're proud of him, too."  The pendulum, in other words, is about to shift again.

Race was irrelevant before the mythical black president and his white wife injected it into this campaign.  Nobody much cared about the color of the black candidate's skin.  They just cared that he was smart and dynamic and talented and they worried that he may not have had enough experience.  But the white wife's campaign was seeing these polls before any of us did.  She knew that she'd have to make it about race to scare up racial fears and get her base---white voters---to the polls.  It's the dirtiest of dirty tricks.

Here's another rich but sad irony: the mythical first black president and his white wife claim to embrace minorities, to work for their advancement, to help them achieve equality, and to work toward racial unity.  And yet here they are, stoking the flames of racism, dismissing a black man of undeniable ability as a "fairy tale," and dividing by race.

For two people who claim to admire Dr. King, the mythical black president and his white wife have turned his most powerful adage upside down:  they are asking us to judge the black candidate by the color of his skin, NOT by the content of his character.

Then again, would you expect anything different from two people whose own characters are empty and malignant?

Desperado

Either the Clinton War Machine is more inept than anyone thought, or Senator Barack Obama's background really is that clean.

The New York Times's political blog CLICK HERE is reporting today that Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign is still---at this late hour---trying to dredge up dirt on her chief opponent.  Why haven't they done this already?  And if they have, they clearly came up with nothing, because as of yesterday, they were still trying.

The Times got a hold of an email sent yesterday from Clinton's Deputy Campaign Manager, Bob Nash (who, by the way, served as White House personnel director during the first Clinton co-presidency, so he knows about dirt-excavation).  Here he is, trying to unearth something damaging on Obama:

From: Bob Nash
To:
Sent: Sun Dec 09
Subject: BARACK

HOW ARE YOU ?? I AM FIGHTING HARD >

SECOND  ARE YOU PEERSONALLYAWARE OF  TH EWORK  BARACK DID ON THE SOUTH SIDE WITH COMMUNITY  ORGANIZATION S , ETC ./.

BOB WHAT DI DHE DO AFORE HOW LONG AND WITH WHO ??

PLS TELL BOB HELLO

BOB

Bob J Nash
Deputy Campaign Manager
Hillary Clinton for President Exploratory Committee
4420 N. Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203

If they don't have the dirt by now, it doesn't exist.  They've got nothing on Obama, and they're losing ground to him faster than than you can say "Oprah."

By the way, did you notice that Hillary's campaign is still referring to itself as an "Exploratory" Committee?

I guess that's so if she loses to Obama, she can always say, "I wasn't really running for president.  I was just exploring it."

Fun With Bill And Hill

At a campaign stop in Iowa yesterday, New York's Junior Senator simultaneously gave off the whiff of desperation AND played the old victim card.

Referring to what she has called her Democratic opponents' "piling on," Hillary Clinton lowered the boom:  "I have said for months that I would much rather be attacking Republicans and attacking the problems of our country, because ultimately that's what I want to do as president, but I have been for months on the receiving end of consistent attacks."

Dramatic pause, and then:  "Now the fun part starts."

The "fun" part is, of course the specialty of the Clinton Strike Force: against opponents, fire away with overwhelming criticism, fear and intimidation tactics, opposition research offloaded bit by bit, whispering campaigns, and denials, obfuscation, and stonewalling.  She can't wait!

Queen Bee expected a coronation; ergo, her comments that she would have much rather spent her time attacking Republicans.  But, woe is her.  Girlfriend has some Democratic opponents who failed to yield to the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team, and now she's got to spend her time and resources trying to kneecap them.  She is exasperated.  She may as well have said, "I hope you're happy!"

So now she's out with the "victim" routine again.  But look out!  While she plays the damsel tied to the railroad tracks, her team is out there with machetes.  Slashing and burning.  After all, to them, it's "fun."

The Gay General and the Junior Senator

Last night, as I watched the Republican presidential debate on CNN, I made notes in between rolling my eyes at how stultifyingly boring it all was.  But then, toward the end, something caught my ear.

A man stood up and asked a question about gays in the military.  Fair enough.  Until he went on the say that he had served in the Army, rose to the rank of Brigadier General, and had stayed closeted as a gay man until he retired from the military.

I made the following note at that very moment (I swear this is the verbatim thing I wrote):  "Close to the end, we had the gay General, who said he came out as a gay man after he left the Army, and he said he thought gays should be able to serve openly. 

"Guess who's position THAT is?!  HRC.

"The gay General a Hillary plant?  Up to you!"

Even as the General was still speaking, I knew he must have been placed there either on the orders of Hillary Clinton's campaign or on his own accord, but certainly with the idea of helping her in mind.  Turns out, he was named co-chairman of Hillary's National Military Veteran's group THIS MONTH.

She, of course, says she doesn't know anything about it.  (For the "smartest woman in America," she doesn't seem to know much of anything.)  Her campaign denies putting him in the audience(!).  And CNN denies knowing he was part of her campaign.  (How a major international newsgathering operation running a debate with prescreened questions doesn't know that a questioner who also happens to be a Brigadier General is working on behalf of a candidate is beyond me.)

All of the criticism this morning seems to be leveled at CNN, and that criticism is justified.  They ran the previous Democratic debate like discount night at a brothel.  Last night's spectacle was almost as bad.

But the real criticism should be directed to the Junior Senator from New York, whose campaign is getting away with murder out there.  Peppering the audiences with her supporters (who last night booed everyone EXCEPT the only guy she can beat: Huckabee), planting questions, denying knowledge, stonewalling to the death.  These are classic Clintonian tactics.  She should be called out on them rather than have CNN take all of the slings and arrows.  CNN was at fault, but the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team also played CNN----and us----like a Stradivarius.

Norma Rae

Workers at CBS News have voted to authorize a strike, which means that the CBS News-sponsored Democratic debate, scheduled for December 10, may be postponed or cancelled altogether.

I know.  A sad day in America.

New York's Junior Senator came out swinging with a message of solidarity for her peeps:  "The workers at CBS News have been without a contract for close to two and a half years. It is my hope that both sides will reach an agreement that results in a secure contract for the workers at CBS News but let me be clear:

"I will honor the picket line if the workers at CBS News decide to strike.

"America's unions are the backbone of America's middle class and I will always stand with America's working men and women in the fight to ensure that they are able to earn a fair wage."

Girlfriend's fist is firmly in the air.

Now let US be clear:

Hillary Clinton would walk over her grandmother if she thought that would help her get re-elected to the presidency.  She would cross picket lines and trample striking workers if that would advance Hillary somehow.

The fact that she says she won't cross the picket lines to attend the debate means only one thing:  SHE KNOWS THESE DEBATES ARE HURTING HER.  SHE KNOWS THAT EVERY TIME SHE APPEARS IN ONE, HER POLL NUMBERS DROP.  ERGO, SHE WILL AVOID ALL FUTURE DEBATES.

The CBS strike comes at a fortuitous time for the Junior Senator.  Who knew that in addition to bringing home the bacon and frying it up in a pan, she could also channel Lech Walesa?

American Gangster, Part 2

In a column published today (November 17), Robert Novak reported this gem:

“Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, but has decided not to use it. The nature of the alleged scandal was not disclosed.”

Further:  "“This word-of-mouth among Democrats makes Obama look vulnerable and Clinton look prudent. … Experienced Democratic political operatives believe Clinton wants to avoid a repetition of 2004, when attacks on each other by presidential candidates Howard Dean and Richard Gephardt were mutually destructive and facilitated John Kerry's nomination.”

Sure she does.

Later in the day, Obama called her bluff.  He took the unusual step of issuing a direct, signed statement:  “During our debate in Las Vegas on Thursday, we heard Sen. Clinton rail against the politics of ‘throwing mud.’ At the very same time, in Washington, Robert Novak was publishing a column in which he reported the following: ‘Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama...’ ”

He went on: “The item did not identify these ‘agents,’ nor did it reveal the nature of the charge. It was devoid of facts, but heavy on innuendo and insinuation of the sort to which we've become all too accustomed in our politics these past two decades. If the purpose of this shameless item was to daunt or discourage me or supporters of our campaign from challenging and changing the politics of Washington, it will fail. In fact, it will only serve to steel our resolve. But in the interest of our party, and her own reputation, Sen. Clinton should either make public any and all information referred to in the item, or concede the truth: that there is none.”

Howard Wolfson, Clinton's campaign communications director, said she has "no idea" what the item is about. (Of course not!)  In a totally transparent example of pure projection, Wolfson added:  "This is how Republicans work."

Actually, this is how the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team works.  Just ask the Governor of New York.

Do you know what it costs to dryclean an asbestos pantsuit?!

At an early point during last night's Democratic presidential debate, former Senator John Edwards dared to challenge Senator Hillary Clinton on a range of issues.  She waited for a beat or two, and then----with a steely look----admonished him for "mud-throwing."

Poor Edwards cowered in the corner for the rest of the night.

Because you are not allowed to challenge New York's Junior Senator, her rivals and the press back off, let her have her zone of delicate flower womanhood, while she rolls over all of them.  If anybody raises questions about her positions or the fact that she's flip-flopped or that she's incapable of standing for anything beyond her own ambitions, they are accused of throwing mud, victimizing a woman, and "swiftboating."

Last night, she went back to the tried and true:  the "yes/no" "answers" and the rote lines about being "comfortable in the kitchen."  Senators Joe Biden and Chris Dodd---the most seasoned guys on the stage----just shake their heads in disbelief that they're losing to this hack.

Nobody throws mud more pointedly and more efficiently than the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team.  But they attack others for doing it (even when the others aren't) because it lets her get away with never having to answer anything.

That's her scam.  It's pathetic to see that she's still working it, and it's still working for her.

How Houdini Does It

Yesterday I posed a question about New York's Junior Senator.  Now that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer---who had wanted to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants despite overwhelming public opposition to it----withdrew his plan, Senator Clinton was left twisting in the wind.  She fumbled the issue badly over the past two weeks, unable to give a clear position.  When Spitzer backed away from it, what was the girl to do?

Turns out the girl created a particular set of fortuitous circumstances.  The Clinton Ladies Intervention Team got her out of this particular box by leaning---Tony Soprano-like---on Spitzer.  They twisted his arm until he cried "uncle."  They told him he had exactly 24 hours to disavow his OWN policy, or....well, he wouldn't want to know what was going to happen to him.

Conveniently, today---the day before the Democratic debate----suddenly Spitzer has a change of heart about driver's licenses, paving the way for the Junior Senator to proclaim that now she herself is against the licenses.  What a lucky break for the Gal from Chappaqua!

Spitzer did as he was told.  All of this would have been very convincing except for the bruises on Spitzer's forehead, which appear to have been applied by a hammer.

The Clinton Ladies War Machine steamrolls anyone who gets in their way.  It doesn't matter if you are a junior editor at GQ magazine or the Governor of New York.  Out of Girlfriend's way, or sleep with the fishes.

This Is Not Happening!

The most damaging attacks coming at Senator Hillary Clinton aren't coming from conservatives.  They are coming from liberals.  This is something the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team did not anticipate.

First, Senator Barack Obama and former Senator John Edwards saw her falter during the last Democrtaic presidential debate and went for the jugular.  While she was trying to beat back their attacks, she's had to fight a rearguard attack by the elite liberal media.

In last week's New York Times, Maureen Dowd launched a scathing attack on her.  LINK HERE

Garry Trudeau has been just as relentlessly scathing in Doonesbury, the most liberal of liberal political cartoons (www.doonesbury.com).  And an endless parade of liberal columnists across the country have taken her apart.

This is the pantheon of left-wing press.

This is something Girlfriend did not expect. The Clinton Strike Force hadn't developed a scenario to deal with this.  Polls slipping, Bill blowing it as her primary attack dog, negative coverage from liberals she had just assumed would always put a halo above her in every piece....This is a recipe for implosion. 

Girlfriend must turn the tide, which is beginning to grow to tsunami-like proportions.  When you lose the momentum---when you lose the PERCEPTION of momentum----you lose the race.

Can the Clinton War Machine do it?  If the candidate were Bill, I would recommend not counting them out.  But because the candidate is her, she just might have to watch it all slip away.

Lamps Flying All Over The Place

If you are in a certain household in Chappaqua, New York at this hour, you may want to duck.

The poll numbers for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign are down---and falling.  Though the Junior Senator still has a dominant lead, the momentum is going the wrong way for her.  In Iowa, it's a three way death vise between Clinton, Senator Obama, and former Senator John Edwards.  She's up by 2 to 10 points, but that lead is evaporating.  Same situation in New Hampshire, where her lead is about 10 points, but the movement is downward.

Since the Estrogen Card didn't work as well as she had hoped, the Junior Senator wound Bill up and sent him out to test-drive the "Swiftboating" Card.  Somehow, we were supposed to buy that criticizing Rodham for being preternaturally unable to take a position was akin to the 2004 swiftboating attacks on Senator John Kerry. (Of course, it needs to be noted that the swiftboat attacks were true, as is the charge that Rodham doesn't have a single opinion beyond "Bush is bad.")

When the "swiftboat" attack (conceived by the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team but executed by her loved one) bombed, she had a mysterious "senior adviser" proclaim Bill's comment "counterproductive."  (Funny, the unnamed adviser was a woman with a Midwestern twang.)

The comments were only deemed "counterproductive" because they didn't work.

So, while Bill takes refuge in the arms of the first available woman not his wife, Queen Bee is running roughshod over her Team.  Trying to whip them into shape.  Back in line.  "Focus, people!  FOCUS!"

Shattered glass everywhere.

The Mondale Card

When I was in college, former Vice President Walter Mondale came to campus to speak.  It had been several years since he had lost the presidential election to Ronald Reagan, and he was particularly unguarded in his comments and refreshingly introspective.

During the Questions and Answers period, I asked Mondale if he thought--in retrospect--he had made a mistake when he accused Reagan of not owning up to having to raise taxes.  During his acceptance speech at the 1984 Democratic Convention, Mondale had said, "Mr. Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I.  He won't tell you.  I just did."

At the time, this comment was cheering by the tax-n'-spenders in the audience and by the elite media, who all crowed about Mondale's "honesty" and "realistic approach."  The rest of the country, however, heard this and had a different reaction.

Without missing a beat, Mondale told me, "Yes, it was a mistake to admit I'd raise taxes.  I shouldn't have done it."

Mind you, he still would have raised taxes; he just regretted blurting it out loud.

This weekend, New York's Junior Senator, Hillary Clinton, got Mondale's endorsement.  Score!

Hillary implies she's the smartest woman in America.  No doubt, then, that she has learned the lesson that cost Mondale (among other things) the election:  she won't admit to intending to raise your taxes, but once she's president, she will.  The girl---and the Democratic party---can't help it.

Let Me Make This Perfectly Clear

Late today, New York's Junior Senator tried to contain the damage from last night's unmitigated disaster of a debate performance.  Her campaign posted a statement to clarify---I guess---her muddled position on New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's proposal to grant illegals driver's licenses.

Here is her stab at being decisive:

"Senator Clinton supports governors like Governor Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by [you still with her here??] the Bush administration's failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform." Her campaign said on her behalf.

She can't even say these murky words herself.  She's got to have her "campaign" do it, because it comes sort of close to actually having a position.

The New York Times blog LINK  unwittingly (I think) said it all with the following statement:  "Mrs. Clinton's advisers said that she had not studied either plan, and was not specifically endorsing either one of them."

Senator Obama's chief strategist, David Alexrod, summarized:  "She is a habitual evader."

Calls to mind the incisive comments of several months ago of former Clinton BFF, David Geffen.

Somewhere in Chappaqua, a lamp flies.

Happy Halloween, Hillary

I always thought that New York's Junior Senator was beyond having a bad performance.  Sure, she was hyper-scripted, super-controlled, and focus-grouped to within an inch of her life.

But I never thought she'd stumble, lose focus, and trip the way she did during last night's Democratic debate.

It was like watching the Great Oz get exposed as the small little person he was.

Hillary Clinton blew it.  She relied on her usual non-answers, but this time her opponents weren't having it.  Senator Barack Obama challenged her to actually define her current (and past) positions on Iraq.  Former Senator John Edwards accused her multiple times of "double speak."

At one point, she was asked about New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's insane proposal to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.  She gave a long, twisted defense of the policy.

Then Senator Chris Dodd came out with guns blazing against it (Dodd '08!!  Just kidding!).  This got Clinton being for it before she was against it:  "I did not say it should be done."

Say what, girlfriend?!  That's EXACTLY what you said. 

"You know, Tim," she said to Russert.  "This is where everyone plays gotcha."

No, Senator.  This is where your own pampered arrogance has finally caught up with you.  You NEVER answer questions---never mind tough ones----so you are surprised when you can't duck them.  Especially on camera.  And you have ALWAYS gotten away with dodging and bobbing and weaving and hemming and hawing, because everyone---from your opponents to the press---has allowed you to get away with it.  Defer to Queen Bee.  And they all did.

Until last night.

Remember that old deodorant commercial that said, "Never let them see you sweat?"  Last night, Hillary Clinton showed a lot of sweat.  She cut herself, and now there's blood in the water for the sharp-toothed and opportunistic piranhas.  Her opponents will be far more aggressive now that they've seen her falter.  That vulnerability will be opened further by adventurous members of the press.

Because she stumbled so badly, she's begun to whine that this was no way to treat a lady.  The DrudgeReport is reporting that the Clinton Ladies' Intervention Team is complaining that Russert was "unfair," "belligerent," and "broke debate rules."

This crybaby routine worked when she ran for the Senate.  No more.  Not in the Big Leagues, Senator.  If you can't handle the guy from "Meet the Press," can we really expect you to handle the guy in Tehran building nukes?

Don't try to pull this "I'm just a delicate flower" act again.  Either you're a fragile woman who needs special courtesies, or you're tough-as-nails and ready to be commander in chief.  Can't be both. 

       Your old mask has fallen off, Senator.  Which new one will it be?

Don't Cry For Me

About 60 years ago, the pampas of Argentina were ruled by a hyper-ambitious, political ladder-climbing First Lady, who ran the country, even though her charismatic husband ostensibly was president.

His name?  Juan Peron.  Hers?  Well, she was immortalized in pop culture by Andrew Lloyd Webber as Evita.

Today, Argentina has elected a new president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.  Obviously a woman.  Who is a lawyer.  Who met her husband while in college.  Who is also an Argentine Senator.  Who is succeeding her husband as president.

Here come the congratulatory statements from New York's Junior Senator!  "I just want to congratulate President-elect Fernandez on her history-making victory," she will say, or some such thing, in order to hit everyone over the head with the inevitable and cliched comparisons.

But hold your horses.  Here's what Fernandez said just three months ago about our own female candidate:

"Hillary was able to position herself nationally because her husband was president.  She didn't have a political life beforehand, and that isn't my case."

So before Mrs. Clinton trips over herself to use President-elect Fernandez as an example of what can happen if voters are just "enlightened" enough, she should keep in mind that Fernandez herself rejects the comparison.  "I'm a real feminist," she suggested.  "I was in elected politics on my own.  I'm not a derivative of my husband.  I'm no Hillary Clinton."

And Hillary Clinton is no Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.  But she may be an Eva Peron.

Hillary's Listening Tour

A few months ago, I interviewed Jeff Gerth, formerly a reporter with the New York Times.  He and a Times colleague, Donald Van Natta, had just published a book about the Junior Senator from New York called Her Way.  I asked him about an episode they wrote about which, at the time, got very little attention.

During the 1992 presidential campaign, they wrote, "Hillary's defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the microscopic to the down and dirty.  She received memos about the status of vaious press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack."  (Italics added).

Gerth and Van Natta continued, "The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill.  Bill's supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions."  (Italics added).

I asked Gerth about this when the book was published, and he said it was remarkable that the Clintons were engaged in this kind of illegal surveillance of political opponents.  Other than my interview, however, very few others picked it up.  Until now.

As Gerth points out, nothing in their book has been challenged---by the Clintons or anyone else.  The telling comment from Team Clinton came yesterday, when they released a statement saying, "We don't comment on books that are utter and complete failures."

A classic deflection move.  The Clintons KNOW the charges are true, so they can't deny them flatly (although the Clintons are good at that too).  So they try to smear the authors as "failures."  Never mind that the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team did everything in their power to bury the book and ensure it would be a "failure." (It actually did fairly well.)

But here's the bigger point:  Rodham wants to deny our intelligence agencies the ability to listen in on foreign terrorists.  In August, she voted against an emergency law that would have temporarily expanded the government's power to conduct surveillance on incoming calls to America from terrorist suspects without a warrant. 

She also made privacy an issue in her campaign, arguing for protected phone records, etc. ("Privacy!"  That's a good one, eh?)

After watching the Clinton rip across our national landscape for about 20 years, I'm still amazed by their chutzpah.  She has railed against Richard Nixon and George W. Bush for corruption, illegal use of wiretaps, using government agencies for personal and political gain, and so on.  And she does it all with a straight face, while she's behind the scenes, doing exactly what she's accused them of---and more.

As Gerth and Van Natta put it, "down and dirty."  Exactly that.

Ball and Chain

You can just imagine the sound and the fury that engulfed Chez Clinton late last night.

During the Democratic debate in New Hampshire, New York's Junior Senator was asked if a president should have the ability to order the torture of a terrorist to extract information in the event of an imminent attack.

"It cannot be American policy, period," Mrs. Clinton replied, then sat back to take in the inevitable applause from the liberal, mostly college-age crowd. 

Used to softballs, she was unprepared for what happened next:  getting whipsawed by a follow-up from moderator Tim Russert, who reminded her that her lovemuffin, Bill, had SUPPORTED the torture exemption recently on "Meet the Press."

Behold the icy stare.

The Junior Senator clasped the podium, and through gritted teeth and phony smile, said, "Well, I'll talk to him later."

The Ice Queen cometh.

The New York Daily News reports today that Bill wasn't the only one who has supported a presidential exception for emergency torture.  In fact, the Missus told the Daily News last October that she did too:  "If we're going to be preparing for the kind of improbable but possible eventuality, then it has to be done within the rule of law."

She went on to say that "the ticking time bomb" scenario represented an exception to her opposition to torture:  "...then," she said, "the decision to depart from standard international practices must be made by the president..."

Did she just contradict herself last night?  Yeah, she did!  This so rarely happens it's like seeing the Biblical red heifer.

You can just imagine her "conversation" with Bill as soon as the lights at Dartmouth went down:

Her: "I'm sick and tired of answering for you, fool!  From now on, zip it!"

Him:  "But honey, I was just echoing what you said last October."

Her:  "You're not helping, Bill."

Him:  "Sweet pea, you've got to pay attention to your own positions.  I can't do that for you."

Her:  "Shouldn't you be having a nightcap with Brad and Angie or something?  Huma!  Get me Eleanor Roosevelt on the line."

Back To The Future

OJ Simpson under arrest.  Hillary Clinton talking about her universal health care plan.

We're partying like it's 1994.

It's amazing how far arrogance can take you.  Since her first health care debacle, Hillary Clinton says she's learned her lesson, learned how to compromise and build consensus, and learned that nationalizing America's health system was not the way to go.

Behold Hillary's NEW health plan, unveiled by the Junior Senator today.  Although it's a bit less ambitious than the first one, it's chock-full of government-run initiatives and expanded programs.  And of course, it wouldn't be a Hillary program if it didn't have a big tax hike.  She claims it will cost $110 billion a year.  That's a low-ball estimate if I ever heard one, given what this plan tries to do.  And hey, Senator: was there any Republican input?  Any of that "consensus" and "compromise" you seemed to have discovered the way celebrities in trouble find Jesus?

Didn't think so.

OJ Simpson back in the Big House, this time for alleged armed robbery.  No lessons learned here, either.

I hope you liked the mid-1990s, because you're about to relive them.

We Had It First

Last weekend on the program, we reported Michelle Obama's comment while campaigning in Iowa with her husband:  "Our view is that if you can't run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House."

We unearthed the quote, buried deep in The New York Times, and told you what it really meant:  that she was taking a direct shot at Hillary Clinton.  The Obama campaign has apparently decided to make some frontal attacks on the frontrunner, and Michelle, having watched the pitbull roles of Bill Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards emerge, is starting to take that role on herself.

Today, Jennifer Hunter of the Chicago Sun-Times (one of Obama's hometown newspapers) is reporting this analysis, and the DrudgeReport has picked it up:  "Michelle said she travels with her husband in part "to model what it means to have family values," adding "if you can't run your own house, you can't run the White House." She didn't elaborate, but it could be interpreted as a swipe at the Clintons."

Of course it was, but listeners to the Monica Crowley Show already knew that.

What's even more interesting was the SECOND quote we reported from Mrs. Obama:  "This election is about truth and authenticity.  There is nothing more important than your word.  Truth does matter."

Another direct swipe at Hillary---and Bill.

You know who ELSE this sounds like?  It sounds like Obama supporter and former Clinton dear friend, David Geffen---the Hollywood mogul---who a few months ago told the New York Times that the Clintons lie "with such ease, it's troubling."

Hillary retaliated against Geffen by demanding that Obama return his campaign contributions (he did not).  But it was easy for Hillary to go after Geffen:  he's a white man.  It's harder for her to go after Obama.  And Michelle?  That's like going after Oprah.

Barack and Michelle Obama are lowering the boom and putting Hillary in an unfamiliar position: on the defensive with no way out.

But dear listeners:  you knew that days ago.

A Sudden Change of Tune

On the troop surge currently ongoing in Iraq: "It's working."

Those aren't the words of President Bush. Or Vice President Cheney. Or the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Or Rush Limbaugh or Monica Crowley.

The phrase, "It's working," was uttered yesterday by Senator Hillary Clinton, the current frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for president. Of course, she buried that acknowledgement in a heap of caveats: the Iraqi government needs to do more, we may be too late, we need to start bringing troops home. But for a Senator who has spent much of this year downplaying any hope for the surge, voting with her party to end all U.S. involvement in Iraq, and berating the president for a losing strategy, her comment---"it's working"---is quite remarkable.

It's also really smart.

Hillary is always three steps ahead, so she must have an inkling that come September, General David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, will report better-than-expected progress.

So her comment accomplished three things: 1. She is preempting Petraeus's report, so by the time it comes out, she can position it as "old news." 2. She will look like a pragmatist, willing to see the realities on the ground in Iraq. And most importantly, 3. She will be able to claim her initial vote for the war as ultimately correct.

A Democratic congressman who voted against the war but just came back from Iraq also now says the surge is working. Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) is now arguing that we need to stay longer in Iraq because "we're making real progress" and "the consequences of pulling back precipitously would be catastrophic..."

All of a sudden, a few Democrats are sounding an awful lot like the president they have slimed for six years.

Hillary is a bellwether. Her comment yesterday will make it safe for other Democrats to "change their minds" on Iraq---or at least on the need for a rapid withdrawal. She isn't running a primary campaign; she's running a general election campaign. And she knows if she's going to have any chance of winning in November 2008, she's going to have to reposition herself as the kind of "moderate" who voted for the war in the first place.

The liberals are still running the party. But Hillary knows that general elections aren't won coasting on liberals, and that even this war may not stay entirely unpopular forever.

With two words---"It's working"---she's getting in front of the game. Let's see who follows her shrewd move.

Drag Update

Well this is as predictable as the sun rising every morning: Hillary Clinton is backing away from any suggestion that she wants a "legislative fix" for talk radio. (See my blog yesterday for details). Her press secretary, Phillipe Reines, said, "Jim Inhofe is wrong. This supposed conversation never happened. " Barbara Boxer's spokespeople used almost the exact same language: the conversation, they said, "never happened." Which means that when the uproar over this began last night, Clinton and Boxer got on the same page fast. Inhofe, meanwhile, stands by his account.

So whom are you going to believe?

Of course Hillary's denying it. That's what the Clintons do. Deny, deny, deny. Then go try to do it anyway. Usually in a clandestine, subversive, sneaky way. The Clinton Ladies Intervention Team has perfected this to a high art. She may deny wanting to destroy conservative talk radio, but that's her way of throwing us off the scent of what she's really doing--or at least wants to do. If we've learned anything since 1991, it's this: watch what the Clintons DO, not what they say.

Hillary Clinton: Vladimir Putin in Drag

The former head of the KGB and current president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, recently made it illegal to engage in so-called "extremist" talk and activity.  In Russia today, you can get arrested and silenced---and often, killed---for publicly criticizing the government.  Over 1000 Russian journalists have been murdered since last year---all for speaking out against the corruption, cronyism, and tyrannical oppression of the Putin regime.

If Hillary Clinton gets her way, you may not be killed for speaking out, but you may otherwise be silenced.

Tonight on John Ziegler's radio show on KFI in Los Angeles, Senator James Inhofe said that he overheard Senators Clinton and Barbara Boxer saying they want a "legislative fix" for talk radio. (Hear it here:  http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2042.html). They want to apply the Fairness Doctrine (which requires equal air time for all sides in political campaigns) to the radio airwaves.  This is their attempt to muzzle me and all of my conservative talk radio colleagues----and you.

The Clinton machine has tried---and in many cases, succeeded---in kneecapping its competition.  Now Madame Defarge wants to kneecap an entire industry protected by the First Amendment----because it is dominated by those who oppose and criticize her and just about everything for which she stands.  Something tells me she would find a way to exempt Air America.

Be careful what you wish for, Senator.  If you want to apply this to talk radio, then we will demand equal time in the REST of the media:  ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, every local newspaper, Time, Newsweek, the list is endless.  MSNBC.com reported TODAY that over 90% of all journalists who gave campaign cash gave to Democrats.  Polls of White House and Washington correspondents show that over 90% of them vote Democrat---and that's been true for decades.  Let's see the Fairness Doctrine applied to THEM---and the outlets for which they work.  Can you imagine The New York Times having to devote 50% of its pages to the fair presentation of conservative points of view?!  Armageddon!

It'll never happen, because liberals will stand up and fight for their rights of free speech.  Conservatives had better be ready to do the same, because Hillary is bringing the fight.

Hillary's French Connection

As soon as the exit polling started rolling in from this weekend's French presidential election, Hillary Clinton realized she had a problem. Across the pond, the French made a revolutionary decision to choose a conservative, Nicolas Sarkozy, over the Socialist, Segolene Royal. The French had chosen Socialist leadership for decades, but with double-digit unemployment, a stagnant, going-nowhere economy, and out of control immigration, including an exploding Muslim population that is destroying French culture, the French have decided that perhaps they should try a new approach.

The problem for Hillary is that the "new approach" was embodied by a man. The French rejected Royal by a significant margin. From the supposedly "enlightened," "progressive," "liberal," "gender-neutral" French, this was a most shocking result. The surrender-loving anti-Americans over there actually selected a MAN to lead them, a man who also happens to be an unalloyed pro-American guy.

During Royal's concession speech, you could hear a pin drop at the Chappaqua Headquarters of Team Clinton. "WHAT?! The French are supposed to be more hip than we are! How could they have rejected her? How? BILL! I'm asking you a QUESTION!!"

So, out trots Hillary spokesman and pit bull, Howard Wolfson, to tell us, "Other than the fact that they are both women, they don't have much in common."

Pardon, Monsieur? Has it escaped him that both Segolene and Hillary are both SOCIALISTS? Hillary would never come right out and say that, of course, nor would she actually run on the Socialist line. But over the decades, she has talked repeatedly about the need for income redistribution, for taking profits from major companies and redirecting that money to what she deems are more worthy causes than capitalism, and for nationalizing at least one major part of the economy. In fact, Hillary may be a more articulate Socialist than the Socialist herself, Ms. Royal.

I should also point out to Mr. Wolfson that there is another similarity: both women have significant others who are, shall we say, "interesting." Royal never married her main squeeze, with whom she has children; he's also the leader of her political party, and they had a couple of wild public fights over policy and her campaign. And Hillary's better half? Well, there he goes, Mr. America....

The point is that there was no reason for Wolfson to dismiss any comparisons between Hillary and Segolene, UNLESS the Clinton Team ITSELF believes there ARE comparisons! And warning signs. Women fled from Segolene. And although Hillary still commands significant support from American women, she can't be happy that in the end, French women flocked to the guy.

Sure, Germany has a female chancellor, Angela Merkel, and Chile's president is also a woman, Michelle Bachelet. And yes, the United States is a different animal. BUT. If the oh-so-progressive French aren't willing to vote for a woman as president, will the American voters go for one?

Maybe the bigger issue is this: perhaps the French WERE willing to vote for a woman, but Royal was just the WRONG woman. If that holds true here, then that's the REAL issue that must be keeping Hillary up at night, counting sheep in Chappaqua.

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary's Imus Lie

"Hillary 1984"

It could be the most creative campaign attack ad in a long time, and it isn't costing any of the candidates a dime.   Hillary Clinton is the target of the latest sensation on YouTube.

Someone has remixed the classic "1984" commercial by Apple Computer, replacing Big Brother with Big Hillary.

For those of you who don't remember, the original "1984" ad first aired during the Super Bowl, to introduce Apple computers more than 20 years ago.

To see the new video, go to: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo

Barack Obama's campaign says it had absolutely nothing to do with the new video.

As of Monday morning, YouTube reported the video had been viewed 206,439 times.

Check out the The San Francisco Chronicle's report on the new spot, CLICK HERE.

Obama on Hillary's Heels

According to the results of a new Washington Post-ABC News poll released today, Hillary Clinton may want to put her shrink on speed-dial.  She's still leading the Democratic pack, of course.  But the trends for her are not good, especially among a base she sorely needs and the votes of which she has largely taken for granted: African-Americans.

In December and January Post-ABC polls, Clinton led Illinois Senator Barack Obama among blacks by a huge margin: she pulled 60 percent, while he came in with 20 percent.  Now, however, Obama leads among blacks, with 44 percent to her 33 percent.  How the mighty have fallen.

And there's more bad news for Queen Bee:  when she announced her candidacy in January, she led Obama by 24 points.  Her lead has now fallen to 12 points. 

The numbers also show that despite the Iraq war being THE major mobilizing issue for Democrats, Hillary's refusal to apologize for voting to authorize the war does NOT appear to be hurting her among Democrats. 

Which means that there is something ELSE going on among Democrats, some other reason they may be starting to turn away from Hillary.  Could it be something beyond the issues, something less tangible, something she cannot change?  Could it be that Democrats may be turning away from Hillary....because she's Hillary?

Hillary slams the door on an Iraq apology

Hillary continues to run from the question of whether she’ll apologize for her vote authorizing war in Iraq.

When pressed on the question yet again, the junior senator told WGRZ-TV’s Lynne Dixon she would be happy to speak to the media after the event. Reporters were able to shout two more questions to Clinton before her staff ushered her out of the room, and closed the doors on them. WGRZ-TV has video of the incident posted on their website.

See for yourself how some men in suits helped Clinton avoid the questions.

Hillary Buys South Carolina Endorsement

The Clintons are up to no good once again, this time buying a big endorsement in a state key to winning the White House.

On Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton scored a coup in the presidential race by winning the endorsement of a key black political leader in South Carolina, state Sen. Darrell Jackson.  Now it has come to light that Clinton’s campaign reached a deal to pay Jackson’s consulting firm $10,000 a month through the 2008 elections – a deal worth more than $200,000.

Jackson is also the minister of a large church in Columbia and he has acknowledged that he should have revealed his financial dealings with the Clinton campaign before making the endorsement.

CLICK HERE to read more on the latest Clinton scandal!

Hill Stands By Her Man

Senator Hillary Clinton is speaking up in support of her husband Bill’s defense of his anti-terror efforts.   The junior Senator from New York says she’s tired of Democrats being pushed around on national security issues.  "I just think that my husband did a great job in demonstrating that Democrats are not going to take this.”   Dick Morris is weighing in as well, writing that what happened on Fox is showing the REAL Bill Clinton.

The Hillary Watch

The junior Senator from New York kicked off her reelection campaign this week, but we all know what Hillary really has her sights set on.  This weekend I'll be joined by the man trying to stop Hillary Clinton in her tracks-- He's John Spencer, the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in New York.  I'll also be joined by John Podhoretz, the author of Can She Be Stopped? a great book on Hillary's political ambitions.  Click here to purchase John Podhoretz's book from Amazon.com.

n

Hillary's iPod

Here's Hillary Clinton's latest attempt to make us think she's human-- tell us what's on her iPod.  The Senator from New York tells the New York Post she enjoys Motown tunes, classical music and the Rolling Stones.  Aretha Franklin's "Respect" is also on there-- maybe in protest to her husband?   I wonder if "Maneater" by Hall and Oates is on there?   Or maybe "Witchy Woman" by the Eagles?   Feel free to share some of your song suggestions, by clicking the "COMMENTS" link!