Monica Crowley

The McLaughlin Group

I will be a panelist on The McLaughlin Group THIS weekend.  Please check your local listings for time and channel, or visit McLaughlin.com for more information.

Eggs, Potatoes and a Signal

This morning, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg invited Senator Barack Obama for breakfast. They went to a diner in Midtown Manhattan, sat in the window, and chatted up education and homeland security. The press stood on the sidewalk, cameras whirring away.

If Bloomberg and Obama had really wanted to have a private talk, they would have gone behind closed doors at Gracie Mansion or at the apartment of a third party. Instead, they chose a joint in the center of New York and sat so the press could get a clear shot. 

They didn't dine together for their health. This was a signal. It was a signal from Bloomberg to Obama's supporters that if Obama is the Democratic nominee, Bloomberg will not run for president. He will not stand in the way of this young, talented guy. He will defer.

But, if the morning after Super Tuesday, it looks like Hillary Clinton and Bloomberg's other nemesis, Rudy Giuliani, are their party's nominees, Bloomberg will run. That was the other signal.

That's what the Bloomberg-Obama breakfast was about. Eggs, scrambled, not over easy.

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.

Iowa vs. Saville Row

At a campaign stop at a YMCA in Iowa yesterday, former president Bill Clinton pulled a Stalin and erased years of history.

"“Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning, I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers,” he said.

Huh?

In May 2003, the Party Animal said this:  "I supported the president when he asked for authority tos tand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

As president, in 1998, he also signed into law the Iraq Liberation Act, which made regime change in Iraq official U.S. policy.

In addition to revising his past to make him look like Barack Obama---who actually did oppose the war from the beginning---Bill spent the rest of his time talking about his favorite subject:  Bill.

In 10 short minutes, he managed to work in the word "I" 94 times.  He made only 7 passing references to his wife.  She, of course, is a mere afterthought, because it is he who is running for a third term.  The co-presidency lives!  But remember, there are two of them in the co-presidency.

Even funnier:  Bill showed up in Iowa wearing a $6000 bespoke suit and a $200 silk tie.  I wonder how that's going over with the old farmers in Iowa.  Even fellow multimillionaire John Edwards knows enough to campaign in the corn fields in jeans, with his sleeves rolled up.

Gone is the folksy guy from Hope.  He's now Fifth Avenue Bill.  He's rolling in the dough and his global superstardom.  If he's got to schlep around Iowa to get his third term, he'll do it, but you'd better believe he's going to look good.

He's proving the old adage that you can't go home again.  But his flash and dash and cash may be a little much for Iowans---and voters in New Hampshire, too---who are looking for someone a little more relatable.

Like Oprah.

The more things change, the more they stay the same

"Things are different now."

       This is what the individual players assembled at Annapolis for the latest Middle East "peace conference" keep saying, indicating a wishful hope for "progress."  President Bush has said "things have changed," as have the Israelis, the Syrians, and the Palestinians.

Maybe they are right.  Maybe things HAVE changed.  Let's see.  What's different now?

Well, Yassir Arafat is gone, but he's been replaced by Mahmoud Abbas, who's as much of a terrorist as Arafat ever was.  Abbas was, after all, Arafat's top lieutenant.  His Fatah party routinely murders Israelis.

What else has changed?

Iran now speaks openly of annihilating Israel and is tirelessly and relentlessly working on the nuclear weapons to do it.  Iran has armed and trained Hezbollah and stationed them on Israel's northern border.  They have already instigated one proxy war against Israel, and are strengthening themselves for another.  Today, they've got ever-longer range missiles that can reach Israel and beyond. 

Another change?  The terrorist group Hamas is now firmly in power in Gaza, using their good offices to launch strikes against Israel.  It is now also getting support from Tehran.

What else is different?  Once democratic Lebanon is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Syria and Iran, controlled by their terrorist colleagues of Hezbollah.  Syria is also now the beneficiary of North Korean nuclear know-how.

So yes, the president and the Annapolis attendees are correct: things ARE different now.  Just not in ways conducive to a "peace process."

One thing that hasn't changed?  The Saudi delegation (surprise!---they showed up) still refuse to shake the hands of the Israeli delegation.  Obvious question:  if you can't even shake hands, how are you going to settle an epic millennial conflict?

It wouldn't be the tail end of an American presidency without one final, dramatic stab at trying to settle the Arab-Israeli problem.  But alas, this conference will end up the way all of the previous ones have for one simple reason:  as long as one party will not accept the right of the other party to exist, there is no "process" as there is no "peace."

The Obama Offensive

In an interview tonight on ABC's Nightline, Senator Barack Obama strikes at the heart of Senator Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy:

"I think the fact of the matter is that Sen. Clinton is claiming basically the entire eight years of the Clinton presidency as her own, except for the stuff that didn't work out, in which case she says she has nothing to do with it," Obama said.

Courageously, he went on.

Referring to his relationship with his wife, Michelle, he said: "There is no doubt that Bill Clinton had faith in her and consulted with her on issues, in the same way that I would consult with Michelle, if there were issues," Obama said. "On the other had, I don't think Michelle would claim that she is the best qualified person to be a United States Senator by virtue of me talking to her on occasion about the work I've done."

And if that weren't enough to get him outfitted for cement shoes, check out his other body slam into New York's Junior Senator:

"You know, we must be doing pretty well in Iowa. She wasn't paying much attention to what I said before then."

So, in the course of a 15 minute interview, Obama said point-blank that Hillary's "pillow" talk with her spouse wasn't enough to qualify her for the presidency, slashed her for not taking responsibility for her own policy failures, and reminded everyone that he's the frontrunner now.

Not bad for a night's work.  To Hillary's shock, chagrin, and horror, Obama's attacks on her are unencumbered by the Clinton-imposed "rules of engagement."  And for the first time in its long political life, the Clinton Strike Force doesn't have the first clue how to handle it.  Except for playground taunting akin to "I know you are, but what am I?"

Obama has the momentum.  She's lost it.  He knows it. She knows it. 

For the two scorpions in the bottle, the question is:  Who will deliver the fatal sting first?

What About Our Hearts and Minds?

There is an article in today's New York Times magazine by James Traub called, "Persuading Them: Want the World to Like Us Again?  Think Diplomacy."

Traub argues, as do all of the Democratic presidential candidates, that America needs to work hard to "repair" our "image" in the world. That the policies of President Bush have alienated many countries. And that we need now to go out of our way to talk to them, accommodate them, appeal to them, give them goodies, and promise we won't be mean to them anymore.

Ridiculous. This is no way for a superpower to behave.

America is the most powerful nation in the history of the world, but you'd never know it from the way Traub and the Democrats are suggesting we act. They want the United States of America to grovel, beg their forgiveness, and promise it won't happen again.

They are into humiliation, I guess.  Because we are the most powerful nation on earth, people are inevitably going to hate us, resent us, fear us, envy us. And because we have chosen to defend ourselves after being attacked, the people on the receiving end of our retaliation aren't going to like us much.

Diplomacy has its place. It can be useful when dealing with rational actors. But it can also be extremely destructive when it is used with an enemy that uses it against you: to deceive, buy time, regroup.

One last point:  why is it always OUR responsibility to reach out to the rest of the world and fix our relations?  It seems to me that we have plenty of enemies who should be bending over backwards to appeal to US and promise US that attacks like 9-11 won't happen again.

While we wring our hands over how to "repair our image" and make it up to the world, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of reciprocating going on. Something tells me that unlike the New York Times and Senators Clinton, Obama, et al, there aren't a lot of leaders in Tehran, Damascus, and Riyadh wondering how they can "repair their image" in America.

 

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?

Preemptive Strike?

While on a campaign swing today through New Hampshire, Senator Barack Obama spoke to a group of high school students.  When asked about his time as a student, Obama admitted to having been a "goof off" who experimented with drugs and alcohol.  He told them he later realized what a mistake it had been and how he had wasted so much valuable time.

None of this is new information, of course.  Several years ago, Obama published a memoir, "Dreams from my Father," in which he laid out his past.  When he announced his candidacy for the presidency, the media raked over every admission and splashed it everywhere.  In other words, by now, Obama has been vetted publicly.

Some have suggested that Obama reminded folks of his drug background today as a way to preempt the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team from using it against him.  That perhaps THIS is the so-called "scandalous information" they threatened to have on him.

This isn't it. 

Maybe the Clinton don't have anything against him at all.  Maybe they are just bluffing to keep him off-balance.  Or maybe the Clintons do have something with which to blackmail him.  If they do, this drug stuff isn't it.

Classified, for about 5 minutes

Splashed on the front page of today's New York Times is a story headlined, "U.S. Hopes to Use Pakistani Tribes Against al Qaeda."  Here is the first paragraph: "WASHINGTON, Nov. 18 — A new and classified American military proposal outlines an intensified effort to enlist tribal leaders in the frontier areas of Pakistan in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, as part of a broader effort to bolster Pakistani forces against an expanding militancy, American military officials said."

The fourth word of the story is "classified."  Did it strike anybody at the Times that perhaps "classified" information should not be published on the front page, or frankly anywhere else in the paper?

The piece goes on:  "The tribal proposal, a strategy paper prepared by staff members of the United States Special Operations Command, has been circulated to counterterrorism experts but has not yet been formally approved by the command’s headquarters in Tampa, Fla."

I guess the military commanders don't have to wait to get a copy BECAUSE THEY CAN NOW READ IT ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE NEW YORK TIMES.

A cynic might suggest that perhaps the military itself leaked this to make sure they got funding for the project.  But that flies in the face of the delicate nature of our dealings with Pakistan.  President Musharraf is hanging by a thread and the Islamists are waiting in the wings to seize control of the regime and the nuclear weapons.  If the United States looks like it's injecting itself too much into Pakistan, Musharraf falls and the country slips into chaos.

Whomever leaked this must have known the damage it would do to our efforts to help Pakistan fight al Qaeda.  Those plans are intricate, sensitive, and now, no longer classified.