Bill Clinton | TaylorMarsh.com

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | Bill Clinton

It’s Not News that Romney Can Win

By Taylor Marsh on 23 May 2012

MITT ROMNEY’S LUCKY the Republican primaries unmasked his warts long before anyone started paying attention. Sure America saw the clown show, but the circus has passed and now it’s down to business and economics, Romney’s strong suit.

I started following Mitt Romney during the 2007-2008 primary season, writing back then that he was dangerous for Democrats. Progressives scoffed at my analysis, though they did as well when I warned them about candidate Obama back in 2007.

But that was long before Pres. Obama decided to compromise with himself and take the economic argument so far right that it benefits Republicans across the board. Obama’s bipartisanship anti-ideological politics is why he and his campaign are fighting to keep their Bain Capital strategy against Mitt Romney alive. That his own car czar, followed by two well known African American Democrats, have followed his apolitical lead where Wall Street economics is concerned has now become the biggest threat to Pres. Obama’s reelection.

From Politico’s Jonathan Martin:

Margin-of-error polling, fundraising parity last month, conservative consolidation around Romney and a still-sluggish economy has senior GOP officials increasingly bullish about a nominee many winced over during a difficult primary process.
Interviews with about two dozen Republican elected officials, aides, strategists and lobbyists reveal a newfound optimism that with a competent, on-message campaign, Romney will be at least competitive with a weakened incumbent. That’s a dramatic shift from the fatalistic view many party stalwarts shared mere weeks ago.

The other reason Romney could win is the tepid nature of Pres. Obama’s reviews as leader of the economy among nonpartisans. If Mitt Romney is inoculated on Bain Capital he will emerge as the competent business leader who voters might decide is worth giving a shot. There’s no evidence incumbency is the plus it once was in fact it’s just the opposite.

That Obama hasn’t made solid relationships inside the Democratic Party and in the progressive community, beyond his die hard fans and supporters, makes it rougher for him. I don’t know anyone who thinks Obama runs the Democratic Party, with more evidence today that he doesn’t. He’s the un-Lyndon Johnson, a man who gets by on his own steam, not through relationships inside Democratic or progressive circles. The attitude of Robert Gibbs is brought to mind and just what a bad beginning the Administration made toward their base. Obama is another in a long line of presidents who don’t feel compelled to build the political party that made his rise possible. The feeling is Pres. Obama’s a one man ego band.

Meanwhile, team Obama has dispatched Steve Rattner, the first in the line of Bain boosters, long before Cory Booker and Harold Ford hit, who’s written a defensive op-ed for the New York Times. Laugh track not included.

I am among those who have been drawn into the argument — there was even a snippet of me defending private equity in a Romney campaign ad.
As a former Obama administration official, I was uncomfortable about being used in a Romney ad in support of his position.
However, I was also concerned that the Obama ads, while narrowly accurate, might be seen to portray Bain Capital (and implicitly, private equity) in an ugly light because a few of the companies the firm invested in went bankrupt while Bain Capital still made money…

And that’s just the first three paragraphs. All defense and whispering that “the Obama ads” are “narrowly accurate,” while vamping in order to scrape a way forward to help the boss.

This is a very serious moment for team Obama, an inflection point in the 2012 race.

But like the Romney campaign’s Etch A Sketch event, some things in politics simply define what is already known, solidifying a politician’s image. It’s not like anyone today actually thinks Pres. Obama represents the “hope and change” his team marketed, many never did.

What makes the Bain Capital gaffe, which in Washington speak is really the truth, potentially lethal for Pres. Obama is that it has the potential of equaling the playing field between Obama and Romney by taking Bain off the board in many nonpartisan eyes, with the only thing that could tilt it back to Obama being a foreign policy crisis, a field of expertise of Pres. Obama’s where Romney simply cannot compete.

Read full story · Comments { 74 }

Cory Booker, Day 3

By Taylor Marsh on 22 May 2012

The MSNBC host attacked Cory Booker for breaking with the Democratic Party line. As a journalist, he ought to celebrate truth-telling. – The Misplaced Loyalties and Dubious Code of Chris Matthews, by Conor Friedersdorf

JUST HOW DENSE is the new media elite?

The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf proves how thick today when reviewing Chris Matthews’ harangue against Cory Booker last evening. This is what Friedersdorf actually wrote today:

If Matthews were a political operative, perhaps the code he’s defending would make sense.
But he is a journalist.

Stop the servers!

Chris Matthews lost his journalist credentials in 2007-2008, during the “thrill going up my leg” primary season where he vilified Hillary Clinton at every turn and reveled in his serial political porn on the Clinton marriage, while parading every misogynist in his DC Rolodex across his Clinton hating guest roster.

What makes matters worse is that Politico’s Dylan Byers picked it up without any analysis that computes the history of Chris Matthews, and Byer’s covers media.

Chris Matthews has been a die hard Barack Obama supporter for over four years now, which is his choice. Fox News Channel is a ratings juggernaut doing partisan coverage. Are Friedersdorf and Byers really the only ones who don’t know MSNBC is now the bookend to Fox News Channel?

Of course, the game in elite new media circles is you never tell the truth about your colleagues, because that wouldn’t be cool. But writing about the shock associated with the reality that Matthews would attack someone who just took a rhetorical I.E.D. to team Obama’s entire strategy to take Mitt Romney down is analytical malpractice.

If you’re an Obama supporter, which I assure you Matthews is, why wouldn’t he be outraged?

Of course, all of this is just a side show, but for once Chris Matthews was actually arguing his own personal conscience transparently, so both Friedersdorf and Byers had it exactly backward.

Booker remains the villain in this PR disaster.

What does actually matter is the day after Think Progress reported that Mayor Cory Booker had accepted $565,000 from private equity firms and “at least $36,000″ from Bain, neither Friedersdorf of The Atlantic, nor Byers of Politico, even bothered to mention this fact, showed any interest or even knowledge that Mayor Cory Booker’s idea of “truth-telling” was to take the side of his own private equity backers against a fellow Democrat who also happens to be the President.

Now you know the dubious code of the elite media and what “truth-telling” means to them.

Hey, but maybe this will all blow over now that James Clyburn has once again skimmed the bottom of the barrel, this time by accusing Mitt Romney of “raping companies.”

The next verbal gaffe festival begins in 3…2…

Read full story · Comments { 34 }

Race Center Stage on Right

By Taylor Marsh on 21 May 2012

via Buzzfeed

“In Obama’s America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering,” says Limbaugh.

AFTER STEPPING IN over the weekend, because in the conversation over Trayvon Martin things turned ugly, coupled with Zimmerman apologists ignoring his own behavior in escalating the situation that led to Martin’s killing, the article on Buzzfeed today is particularly timely.

It goes well beyond the Trayvon Martin case, but remains pinned to it, because of the reaction to the killing of the youth by Pres. Obama, which was understandable to anyone who is a step away from reactionary Obama derangement syndrome, but also what’s developed in other communities since.

If you’ve spent much time consuming conservative media lately, you’ve probably learned about a slow-burning “race war” going on in America today. Sewing together disparate data points and compelling anecdotes like the attack in Norfolk, conservative bloggers and opinion-makers are driving the narrative with increasing frequency. Their message: Black-on-white violence is spiking — and the mainstream media is trying to cover it up. – In Conservative Media, A “Race War” Rages, by McKay Coppins

Defense attorneys are making the case for Zimmerman’s defense across the web and new media, while amateur Zimmerman defenders are doing something else entirely, represented by Daily Caller boss Tucker Carlson.

“I wouldn’t call it political correctness, I would call it lying,” said Tucker Carlson, editor-in-chief of The Daily Caller, describing what he considers to be the media’s racial double-standard. “To the press, the only hate crimes are straight white men somehow committing acts of violence against people who are not straight white men. When in fact, the real world is a lot more complicated than that.”

Ah yes, it’s all “a lot more complicated than that.”

If you’re talking about whether George Zimmerman will be found guilty or not, yes, it is, because it will be up to a jury of human beings who come with their own emotions, judgments and prejudices, which live beyond a judge’s instructions to them or their duty to be impartial.

However, if you’re talking about people looking at the case of an individual who got out of his car carrying a concealed weapon to engage a youth who was doing nothing wrong and ended up dead, it’s not complicated at all.

An individual’s civil rights is one of the cornerstones of our democratic republic.

Anyone, regardless of race, who abridges another’s civil rights when that person is doing nothing wrong and going about his or her business, is creating an event out of nowhere. But when that person helps cause an altercation that leads to the death of an innocent unarmed citizen, who wasn’t doing anything wrong in the first place, something has not only gone terribly wrong in our society, but with the foundational tenet of freedom in this country.

Conservatives feel aggrieved because no one is standing up for a white person who’s been beaten? The latest was an incident that went down in Norfolk, VA., when two reporters in a car were attacked.

Outraged that the national media didn’t give this story the same extensive coverage as the Martin shooting, O’Reilly launched into a campaign that has stretched over several nights of Fox’s top-rated show. Along the way, his team has uncovered an early police report that described the assault as a hate crime (authorities said it was a clerical error), and found neighborhood kids who speculated on camera that the assailants were exacting racial revenge for the death of Trayvon. O’Reilly has also publicly shamed the local newspaper for ignoring the story, and even called on Va. Gov. Bob McDonnell and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to intervene in the investigation.
But while Norfolk may be the most high-profile chapter yet in the “race war,” it’s hardly the only one conservatives have highlighted. Over the past four years, the Drudge Report has run dozens of headlines chronicling acts of violence against white victims — often by black youths.

Having lived through the tumultuous times of the O.J. Simpson trial, as well as the Rodney King verdict, it’s not hard to see the beginning’s of something serious developing in the American atmosphere.

The professional defense case may end in a not guilty verdict on second degree murder charges, but George Zimmerman is not innocent. No one is, regardless of race, who abridges an individual’s civil rights. This is what makes it complicated.

Conservatives are utilizing the Trayvon Martin killing as a springboard to attack the media on separate cases that often don’t get reported. Not all domestic battery and abuse cases get reported either, but conservatives aren’t ranting about that injustice. Black children go missing, yet they don’t get the attention white children do in the media either. This is a conservative identity crisis, because of what began a long time ago as a bedrock of Republican politics. It’s called the southern strategy that was created to mine and appeal to racists to beat Democrats.

That it’s being utilized in a presidential election year to rev up people against Pres. Obama, while conservatives in new media and their Republican allies hype all sorts of swiftboating angles surrounding the first African American president, is obvious to any fair minded analyst watching the spectacle.

They’re coming for Pres. Obama and people against him will use any means necessary, going well beyond issues and policy debate, including race baiting, to do it.

Unfortunately, team Obama utilized race baiting themselves in the ’07-’08 primary season, with the formerly distinguished Rep. James Clyburn willing to even call former Pres. Clinton out on race to help candidate Obama in South Carolina, as did Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. when he questioned whether Hillary cried during Katrina, which exploded into a horrendous spectacle between Democrats. It’s covered in my book in the chapter “Eating Your Own,” proving yet again how relevant this history remains today.

In a country built through slavery and just now seeing the first African American president, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that at a time of great economic angst deeply woven grievances are rising to the surface after an unarmed black teen is killed, not by a police officer, but by an American citizen.

That an African American president can see Trayvon Martin as a possible son and relate to the tragedy shouldn’t shock anyone. So why does Pres. Obama relating to Trayvon Martin upset conservatives and other anti-Obama zealots so much?

Where are people on Trayvon Martin’s civil rights? For too many, it’s the same place we were prior to 1964.

Read full story · Comments { 44 }

Oh Donna, How We Danced

By Taylor Marsh on 18 May 2012

DONNA SUMMER was writing “Love to Love You Baby”; I was Miss Missouri. “Last Dance” came out in 1978, the year after the BeeGees and John Travolta blasted on the scene and shook American culture. I was Broadway bound and once I got there one thing I’ll never forget is a couple of years later walking up 8th Avenue to pass the small intersection where Studio 54 was ensconced. It was the very last gasp of the lines, costumes and revelry that was well beyond my coolness, but I gawked at the glorious spectacle, even if it was a dying belch. The club was sold in 1981, when everything changed everywhere and forever.

Ronald Reagan was in, but the partying had just started, as it turned westward, and so did I a few years later.

Donna Summer and club dancing, joyous, raucous and wild partying on the floor like you’re on stage in your own “Saturday Night Fever” contest, went together like 8 balls, hot women and fast cars in Los Angeles.

As a professional dancer, once I walked happily away from the decades of grind, I began enjoying the right of passage for the unattached and permanently single.

Partying. Hard.

It was a time of L.A. rope lines, flashy dressing, and late nights that ended at sunrise.

Everyone thought they could live forever, while an entire generation of gay men were dying in dozens as the band played on. Somewhere around 1983, culture answered the Reagan devolution with Madonna and the bustier as outer wear. We didn’t wake up until Iran-Contra crashed around us, followed by the Keating Five, then Michael Milken and the financial catastrophe that was Ronald Reagan. The union busting, deficit imploding nightmare, and deregulating hatch of Rush Limbaugh hate radio, you know, the years Barack Obama remembers fondly. Henry Hyde’s war against women revved up through Reagan’s embrace of Jerry Falwell’s Immoral Minority, which segued into an awkward introduction of America to the new face of Alzheimer’s and the question of whether The Gipper had been sick during his presidency.

It explained so much.

The Cold War was over and the decade of the last gasp of America’s youthful exuberance would be a great economic boon, while conservatives worked to get even for Watergate, and the press dreamed of Pulitzers, after the Reaganites were turned out by the hicks from the sticks, Bill and Hillary Clinton. A couple who turned the Republican party into knots that took their eye off the biggest ball of all.

It all ended the first year of the 21st century, when frittering away the time during Clinton over sex exploded in the Twin Towers, because a man’s penis became more important than following terrorists and heeding William Jefferson Clinton’s warnings. Republicans don’t listen to Democrats even if it costs a nation its soul.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney’s “Gulf of Tonkin” WMD fiction was followed by torture.

All that was left was memories and dreaming.

…about the years of Donna Summer and the lighthearted effervescence her singing and that music unleashed in those of us who could hear it and dance to it, or just wish they could.

Donna Summer is dead. We look back on her music wistfully today, because it reminds those of us who listened to it or moved with it that the teenager country that once believed everything is possible and dreams come true, because we can do anything in this country, the place where that America actually existed, is dead, too.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

Romney’s Bill Clinton Swipe Followed by Whopper Rove Ad

By Taylor Marsh on 16 May 2012

MITT ROMNEY IS betting that tweaking Pres. Obama on Bill Clinton in Iowa will land, while just making stuff up. That he’s using a plot line that is also one of Edward Klein’s favorites illustrates the value of Regnery publishing to the right. Romney’s cracks got the attention of Politico, CNN, USA Today, Huffington Post, Washington Post, and, of course, Buzzfeed, though not for the same reasons.

“President Obama tucked away the Clinton doctrine in his large drawer of discarded ideas, along with transparency and bipartisanship. It’s enough to make you wonder if maybe it was a personal beef with the Clintons … but really it runs much deeper.” – Mitt Romney, presumptive Republican nominee

The notion that Pres. Obama “discarded” bipartisanship could only come from someone who plays fast and loose with political facts. Pres. Obama’s entire first term has been one reaction after another to Republican refusals to make deals, even when Obama served up the grand bargain to Speaker Boehner on the last debt ceiling fight.

“President Obama is an old school liberal whose first instinct is to see free enterprise as the villain and government as the hero.” – Mitt Romney

That’s just funny.

What’s more interesting is that neither Obama or Romney will take William Jefferson Clinton’s advice on what I’ve been writing is critical to solving our financial woes, which is that all the Bush tax cuts, including for the middle class, need to be rolled back. Of course, I’m also for a top 2% tax hike and expanding the cap on Social Security taxed income, while shrinking our military outposts in favor of economic models and special forces. However, if everyone could get on the same page by agreeing that Clinton’s proposal for middle class families to also give up tax cuts that we cannot afford, though without Bill Clinton’s grand bargain baloney, we’d have a start on bipartisanship that actually means something.

“Our party’s problem is, we are always reluctant to give up the gains of the past to create the future,” Bill Clinton told the audience at the Pete Peterson’s fiscal summit. “Democrats are reluctant to commit to longer-term health-care savings; they don’t want to touch Social Security.” [WashPost]

Unfortunately, our politicians are products being marketed, not leaders.

As for Romney’s claim about a “prairie fire” of debt that’s all Pres. Obama’s fault, this fallacy is part of the Democratic legacy of letting the Bush-Cheney era crowd off the mat.

George W. Bush outspent Barack Obama $5.07 TRILLION to $1.44 TRILLION.

However, I don’t feel sorry for Pres. Obama for having to fight this deficit image battle, because he’s the one who hoisted austerity up as the model and in the process moved the political conversation to the right. It’s just too bad it’s the middle class who’ll once again pay the price for his kumbaya

Read full story · Comments { 34 }

The Political Elite Fête Pete Peterson, the Man on a Mission to Gut Social Security

By Taylor Marsh on 16 May 2012

IT’S NICE TO be Pete Peterson.

But who is this guy? Besides the man who can get all the cool millionaires into a room to bargain away the U.S. social safety net?

Read Ryan Grimm and Paul Blumenthal, consider it your assignment today.

But if you haven’t figured it out by now why Pres. Obama thinks he can get away with a grand bargain, which will likely come in his second term, all you need is three of the most potent words in American politics: William Jefferson Clinton. The grand bargainer himself.

From E.L. Eskow on HuffPost:

The Rich Get the Elevator. The Middle Class Gets the Shaft.
“Simpson-Bowles makes the Social Security system more progressive,” said Bill Clinton. Actually, it would gut Social Security benefits while lowering the top tax rate for billionaires like Peterson and millionaires like Clinton. That’s the opposite of “progressive.” But it would give the illusion of ‘progressivity’ by offering a slight benefit bump to the extremely poor, funded by benefit cuts for the middle class.
It would also give a tiny bump to seniors who live an especially long time after retirement. That would also be funded by middle-class benefit cuts. And since minority and low-income life expectancy is still far below that of white people in general — and white women in particular — this would also be economically regressive.
The fact that this false ‘progressively’ would transform a social insurance program into a welfare program seemed to disturb the former President not one bit. And he seemed entirely unaware of the what it means to the political discourse when a former Democratic president argues for a plan that would cut taxes even more for the wealthiest Americans, while cutting the few hundred dollars per month received by many elderly and disabled Americans in order to provide benefits for the poor. Bill Clinton calls that “progressive.”
And that was the leftmost wing of the Fiscal Summit’s leadership.

Note to everyone, there is no “leftmost wing” in politics. It does not exist, otherwise there would have been a primary challenger for Barack Obama.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

Ben Bradlee Questions Deep Throat and Red Flag in Flower Pot

By Taylor Marsh on 04 May 2012

Did that potted [plant] incident ever happen? … and meeting in some garage. One meeting in the garage? Fifty meetings in the garage? I don’t know how many meetings in the garage … There’s a residual fear in my soul that that isn’t quite straight. – from “Yours in Truth: A Personal Portrait of Ben Bradlee,” by Jim Himmelman

Via New York magazine - Photo: Treatments by Gluekit

BOB WOODWARD PLEADED to Himmelman, “Don’t give fodder to the fuckers.” He’s talking about people like me.

But it’s not “fodder.” It’s historical context from none other than Ben Bradlee. The story Woodward Carl Bernstein broke, along with Barry Sussman and Howard Simons, changed history by breaking the Nixon administration wide open. The Washington Post won a Pulitzer for their coverage and the story ended up as one of the most incredible political thrillers in motion picture history.

This new Watergate mystery revolves around Jim Himmelman, a former research assistant to Bob Woodward. In uncovering long buried Ben Bradlee memos to which he was given access for a new book he’s writing, excerpted from New York magazine last Sunday, it’s revealed that Ben Bradlee was a skeptic about certain details in “All the President’s Men.”

Joel Achenbach is covering this bombshell for the Post. Max Holland of the Daily Beast has been critical of the Deep Throat legacy for some time and also did a write up this week, as did Politico, as well as Slate’s Jack Shafer.

As an aside, Ben Bradlee makes an appearance in my book The Hillary Effect, as does his wife Sally Quinn and for good reason. Bradlee admitted that Ken Starr, as a judge back in the ’80s, gave the Washington Post a judgment on a libel suit that saved the paper millions of dollars and endeared Starr to him forever. This little nugget was reported by Salon.com in an article titled “The Not So Mighty Quinn,” which is no longer available online, though it’s partially cached on Google. It’s one reason it was critical to get the history written down.

During Watergate, I watched every televised portion of the hearings and hung on every word, which is why this story got my attention. I became enamored with Republican Howard Baker because of his performance during the hearings, as did many, thinking Sam Ervin, chair of the Senate Watergate Committee, a god for the way he handled his difficult job, which you’d never see from anyone today. It was back in the days where my political opinion was moored to my big brother’s tutelage.

Himmelman’s Bradlee find freaked Woodward out, but Bradlee was nonplussed. He also refused to do what Woodward asked, revealing a lot about both men.

Bob went into his pitch, which he proceeded to repeat over the course of the meeting. He would read the “residual fear” line out loud, and then say he couldn’t ﬁgure out how Ben could still have had doubts about his reporting so many years after Nixon resigned. This was the unresolvable crux of the problem, and one they circled for the duration of the meeting: How could Ben have doubted the ﬂowerpots and the garage meetings, when the rest of the reporting had turned out to be true? Bob thought this was inconsistent and hurtful. Ben didn’t. Bob tried everything he could to get Ben to disavow what he had said, or at least tell me I couldn’t use it. Ben wouldn’t do either of those things. “Bob, you’ve made your point,” Ben said after Bob had made his pitch four or five times. “Quit while you’re ahead.”
[...] He closed by making a direct, personal appeal to Ben. “You’re this legend,” he said. “You’re the editor.” Ben’s doubts were going to mean something to people. Ben did his aw-shucks routine, but he had clearly made the calculation that Nixon’s resignation, and the reporting that had contributed to it, weren’t contingent on whether Deep Throat had watched Bob’s balcony for ﬂowerpot updates. That was on Bob and Carl, not on Ben or on the Post.
[...] At the end of the meeting, when Bob asked for his ﬁnal opinion, Ben said, “I’m okay with it, and I think I’m going to come out of it ﬁne. So you two work it out.”

Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward gave Joel Achenbach their response to Himmelman, which is offered below in its entirety, because to do otherwise wouldn’t be right.

“If Jeff Himmelman thinks his discovery of a December 4, 1972 memo on Watergate is a significant revelation, he is wrong. The memo he has is authentic. To the best of our recollection, someone contacted Carl and said there was a person, a neighbor, who had important information on Watergate. Carl went and interviewed the woman as described in the Dec. 4, 1972 memo. As the memo plainly shows, Carl did not know she was a member of the Watergate grand jury when he arrived at her home.
“She gave Carl her phone number — and he later noted ‘this checked w. grand jury list number’ that we had. If he knew initially that he was interviewing a member of the grand jury, that would have been stated at the top of the memo, as was our style in all Watergate memos of interviews. He also quotes her in the memo as volunteering, ‘of course I was on the grand jury’ because that was news to him.
“Though the woman threw out lots of names of those she suspected of furthering the criminal conspiracy (she had some right and some wrong), she provided no specific information of suspect or illegal actions. What she said led to no story. As Carl wrote in the memo, ‘she advises us to read our articles from Sept. 15 to Oct. 30. ‘You will have many clues — there is more truth there than you must have realized.’ We wrote those stories and did realize they were true. Those stories essentially outlined the Watergate conspiracy and alleged that crimes had been committed by Haldeman, Mitchell, Stans, Kalmbach, Magruder, Porter, Chapin and Segretti.
“We referred to this woman’s interview in less than two pages (p. 211-213) in our book about covering Watergate, All the President’s Men. In that book we did not, of course, reveal that she was a member of the grand jury — in order to protect her as a source.
“When asked on April 26 2012 by Himmelman, neither of us — until after reading the original memo after 39 years — remembered she had been a member of the Watergate grand jury. The interview with her had been of little consequence because she was not telling us much more than we already believed — and published. And the lack of specifics in her account meant we had little to follow up on. Frankly we were not sure what to make of her comments at the time, and in our book Carl noted that she ‘sounded like some kind of mystic.’ But it was one of those interviews that gave us and our editors comfort that we were on the right track as later demonstrated by the subsequent investigations and history. The memo does, however, show that a member of the grand jury thought the prosecutors, who supervised and ran the grand jury, had missed the real story and the high-level conspiracy.
“You ought to publish the whole memo so your readers can see it and understand its clear context.
— Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward”

From the New York Times, part of what Woodward had to say:

In an interview Monday, a day after New York magazine published an excerpt from the book, Mr. Woodward described Mr. Bradlee’s comments as outdated, long before the identity of Deep Throat, Mr. Woodward’s anonymous source, was revealed.
“I can understand in 1990, when Ben doesn’t know all the details, he’s kind of musing and saying, ‘Gee, I’m not sure this is all straight because it seems so incredible,’” he said. “But all of Watergate was incredible.”
He added, “This is a classic case of manufactured controversy, as best I can tell.”
Mr. Himmelman, through his publisher, declined to be interviewed.

It’s not clear at all it’s a “manufactured controversy.” It would change the way many watch “All the President’s Men,” as well as study the subject. If Deep Throat and the flag in the flower pot were manufactured in part, it changes the dramatics, though not the outcome.

The Washington Post still brought down Richard M. Nixon.

It remains very unfortunate Gerald Ford pardoned him.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Arrogant Amnesia: Obama Gets OBL, Republicans Stuck with ‘Mission Accomplished’ Cod Piece Photo Op

By Taylor Marsh on 28 April 2012

AN INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA in the Situation Room with Brian Williams on the bin Laden raid has exploded.

Sen. John McCain is having a hissy fit.

Breitbart’s Ben Shapiro is either the dumbest political writer on planet earth or is ignorant of presidential commander in chief powers. I’m guessing it’s both. He’s squealing like a little girl that Admiral McRaven was in charge of SEAL Team Six during the dangerous bin Laden raid, which in his mind means Pres. Obama is gutless, though how he comes to that conclusion takes a Olympic fete of intellectual fraudulence only someone from Breitbart could complete.

McRaven’s charge has been known since May 2011, written up by no less than Military.com, which also pointed to the thoroughness of the plan:

About 10 days before the raid, Obama was briefed on the plan. It included keeping two backup helicopters just outside Pakistani airspace in case something went wrong. But Obama felt that was risky. If the SEALs needed help, they couldn’t afford to wait for backup.
He said the operation needed a plan in case the SEALs had to fight their way out. So two Chinooks were sent into Pakistani airspace, loaded with backup teams, just in case. One of those Chinooks landed in the compound after the Black Hawk became inoperable.

Politically motivated and manufactured right wing reaction to the ad above revolves around a CIA memo obtained by TIME magazine, which proves absolutely nothing and raises no questions whatsoever, unless you’re a partisan hack.

Republicans actually believe the military is in charge of foreign policy and military actions. They have never understood our American republic is founded on the guiding principal of civilian leadership.

That Pres. Obama made the call and got the bastard of 9/11 galls them and they will do anything to discredit a gallant act of pure presidential leadership that was heroic, risky and revealed Barack Obama’s complete and total respect and faith in our elite military forces to get the dangerous, from military aspects to international and political hazards, job done.

I, for one, am loving it and can only say…

Finally.

At long last.

The ad I’ve been waiting to hit.

Having it narrated by former Pres. Bill Clinton is a stroke of political genius.

Unlike George W. Bush, who paraded himself around on an aircraft carrier, then took his place on a podium in front of a banner screaming “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED,” when it actually wasn’t and still isn’t in Iraq, Pres. Obama got the job done of getting Osama bin Laden.

Republicans are squealing bloody murder about an ad they would have tricked up and trotted out long before today. We would have been hearing about this every day since it happened, little doubt the Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes, who fictionalized Dick Cheney’s nuclear fantasies ad nauseam, given access to whatever Republican hero who’d gotten the madman of 9/11.

This U.S. military success, under the commander in chief Barack Obama, forever obliterates any question that he doesn’t have the right stuff to lead this nation. Republicans campaign to deny him his moment of leadership is everything that’s wrong with our politics.

Anyone can disagree with Pres. Obama’s politics, I do often and strongly, but Pres. Obama earned and deserves credit for making the decision and okaying the risky SEAL Team Six op to get OBL. It’s long past time he received it and nothing Republicans say should rob him of it.

As for using Mitt Romney’s words against him on national security, don’t make me laugh. Republicans have defamed military veterans who are Democrats, tarnishing their military service, even lying about vaunted combat awards.

That team Obama is hitting Mitt Romney on national security and foreign policy is not only fair game, it would be dereliction of political duty not to. Because unlike on the economy and business, there is absolutely no case to be made for Mitt Romney as commander in chief.

Read full story · Comments { 31 }

Blue Dog Dems Go Down

By Taylor Marsh on 25 April 2012

Let there be dancing.

From the Washington Post:

Two conservative Democrats lost their seats in Pennsylvania tonight thanks to the state’s new congressional map.
Rep. Mark Critz beat Rep. Jason Altmire in a highly competitive member-vs-member Democratic primary for the 12th district, while Rep. Tim Holden (D) was defeated in a primary by lawyer Matt Cartwright in Pennsylvania’s new 17th district.

Critz beat K Street man Tim Holden, who voted against Obama’s health care bill. It’s one thing to be against it, as Critz is, though he has said he won’t vote to repeal it. He wasn’t in office when the vote on ACA was held.

Blue America, part of the hero pack of progressives who targeted the Blue Dog Democrats who lossed, released a statement (h/t Crooks & Liars):

Blue America Treasurer Howie Klein said, “Blue America congratulates Matt Cartwright on his hard fought win and we pledge to continue that fight across the country wherever progressive candidates are working hard to free our political system from the entrenched interests on behalf of ordinary Americans. Our next stop is Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district where progressive businessman Rob Zerban is battling to defeat Republican poster boy Paul Ryan in a swing district. The establishment doesn’t think that’s possible, either. We think Rob can prove them all wrong once again.”

Cartwright evidently does a legal segment on the evening news, proving the Fox News model can pay if you want to jump from expert talking head to political candidate.

I’d like to see Sen. Bob Casey taken out, too, but he’s up against one-percenter, self-funded coal-mining rich man Tom Smith, so you have to ask what’s to be gained? You could say the same thing about Sen. Claire McCaskill’s brutal battle in Missouri. Republicans out of that crowd are nothing short of depressing, which often applies to Casey and McCaskill, too.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

Barbra Streisand Turns 70

By Taylor Marsh on 24 April 2012

I cannot begin to write what Barbra Streisand meant to me growing up as an artist, performer, dancer, singer and entertainer, but especially as a young woman dreaming of a life beyond where I was born. There was film and Barbra Streisand.

When boys in my high school heard me screeching in the shower outside my window, they laughed and made fun of me for weeks. I was a bit embarrassed, because my shower singing was always ghastly, as I stretched beyond my talents as the water relaxed me and took me beyond the boundaries of my life.

What Ms. Steisand has done in her life is not only remarkable, but has made entertainment history. Some of us understood what it meant when it was Ms. Streisand who presented the Academy Award to the first female director to receive it, Kathryn Bigelow for “The Hurt Locker.”

Like many liberal women, she’s been a target of the right, while being a staunch supporter of Democrats her entire life, particularly of former Pres. Bill Clinton, though he’s certainly not the only one. She came to Pres. Obama’s aid recently, while slamming the Fourth Estate for negligence, with a slap at Susan G. Komen for playing politics with women’s health. From a piece she did on Huffington Post from February of this year:

…Journalists need to stand strong and do their job, which is to challenge candidates immediately when they are purposefully misleading the public. They should not be polite or fearful of offending someone when the truth is in question. As we continue through the primary and head toward the general election, this is crucial. Without the mainstream media’s commitment to holding candidates accountable, we have little chance of having a well-informed electorate on Election Day. And let’s look at the facts. The truth is, President Obama’s leadership on the stimulus, bringing the auto industry back from the brink of collapse, adding nearly 3.7 million private sector jobs in 23 consecutive months of job growth proves that our country is moving in the right direction. Because of the President’s policies, our economy is on the road to recovery and it’s time we start celebrating the truth.
P.S. Hooray to everyone who supported Planned Parenthood and spoke out against Susan G. Komen for the Cure, who wrongfully politicized the issue of women’s health. This week we saw how the power of grass roots activism can lead to positive change. Bravo!

I’ve chosen some lesser heard vocals, though I start with the most important; others include Streisand in French, which I love, via “Je m’appelle Barbra” (1966) that you can hear after the jump. I never had the means or opportunity to see and hear Ms. Streisand in person, my money always needed to live, but I’ve heard most everything she’s ever recorded, which was good enough for great joy. “One Night Only” is spectacular, if you haven’t heard it yet. There are so many from which to choose. Oh, and if you haven’t had the pleasure of perusing her book on living and design, it’s marvelous.

Happy Birthday 70th to Barbra Streisand.

Your life has meant so much to so many. I’m just one of them.

Biography
Actress/singer/director/writer/composer/producer/designer/author/photographer/activist Barbra Streisand is the only artist ever to receive Oscar, Tony, Emmy, Grammy, Directors Guild of America, Golden Globe, National Medal of Arts and Peabody Awards and France’s Legion d’Honneur as well as the American Film Institute’s Lifetime Achievement Award. She is also the first female film director to receive the Kennedy Center Honors.
She won Oscars for both Best Actress (“Funny Girl”) and Best Original Song (for her composition of “Evergreen” which has since become a standard.) She also was nominated for Best Actress for “The Way We Were.” The three films she directed received 14 Oscar nominations. A leading film star in dramas, comedies and musicals, her latest film, “Meet The Fockers,” became the first live-action comedy to earn over half a billion dollars and remains the highest-grossing comedy..
An eight-time Grammy Award winner who is the only performer to have number one albums in five consecutive decades, her 51 gold albums, 30 platinum and 18 multi-platinum, each of which, according to the Recording Industry Association of America, exceeds all other female singers. Only Elvis Presley has achieved more Gold albums than she. The RIAA also notes that her 71 million albums sales tops the RIAA list of album sales by a female singer. With the recent debut at #1 of her “Love Is The Answer” album, her 9th record to reach that top spot, the time-span between her first and most recent Number One albums, exceeding that of any other performer or act, is now 46 years. Her most recent album, “What Matters Most,” debuting at Number 4, was her 31st to reach the Top Ten in the ratings charts, with which she passed The Beatles to become the third highest achiever in that significant statistic, exceeded only by the Rolling Stones and Frank Sinatra.
Her civil rights activism and philanthropic pursuits are just as impressive. The Streisand Foundation has given millions of dollars in 2100 grants to non-profit organizations and she has raised many millions more through her performances.
The career of Barbra Streisand has been paved with bold, creative achievements and highlighted by a series of firsts.
For her first motion picture, “Funny Girl,” she won the 1968 Academy Award for Best Actress, the first of two Oscars.
With “Yentl” (1983,”) her first film as a director, she became the first woman ever to produce, direct, write and star in a major motion picture. “Yentl,” earned five Oscar nominations and also brought her Golden Globes for both Best Director and Best Picture.
“The Prince of Tides,” her next directorial feature, was the first motion picture directed by its female star ever to receive a Best Director nomination from the Directors Guild of America as well as seven Academy Award nominations. Barbra Streisand produced the heralded drama in addition to directing and starring in it.
She won the DGA award (Best Director Music/Variety Television Program) in 1994 for her television special, “Barbra Streisand: The Concert,” which she co-directed with Dwight Hemion.
For her very first Broadway appearance in “I Can Get It For You Wholesale,” she won the New York Drama Critics Award and received a Tony nomination.
For her very first solo recording, “The Barbra Streisand Album,” she won two 1963 Grammy Awards. One of these was for Best Female Vocal Performance. The other, Album of the Year; made her the youngest artist to have received that award.
She is the first female composer ever to win an Academy Award, this for her song, “Evergreen,” the love theme from her 1976 hit film, “A Star Is Born.” She was nominated again in 1997 as co-composer of “I Finally Found Someone,” based on her love theme for her 1996 film as director/producer/star, “The Mirror Has Two Faces.” The film achieved two Oscar nominations and the Best Supporting Actress Golden Globe for Lauren Bacall.
She is the recipient of five personal Emmy awards. Her first television special, “My Name Is Barbra” (1965,) received five Emmy Awards, including one for her for best performance, as well as the distinguished Peabody Award, the first of two. This achievement was repeated 30 years later by “Barbra Streisand: The Concert” which won two additional Emmy awards for Ms. Streisand among the five for the production. That show also was accorded the Peabody Award, the Directors Guild of America award and three CableACE awards and it became the highest-rated musical event in HBO’s history. Her 2001 television concert special, “Barbra Streisand: Timeless. Live in Concert,” also co-directed by its star, won four more Emmys, including one for Ms. Streisand’s performance. She is also an Emmy recipient in 2001 for her Barwood Films’ documentary on pioneering women directors in the early decades of motion pictures, “Reel Models: The First Women of Film.” … and much more…

Continue Reading →

Read full story · Comments { 17 }

Bill Clinton’s New Role as Pres. Obama’s ‘Campaign Whisperer’

By Taylor Marsh on 23 April 2012

by Pete Souza

Politico nails the headline in the most important political article of the day, penned by Glenn Thrush and Jonathan Martin.

Team Obama has finally realized that talking about Mitt Romney as not having a “core” is a loser.

Anyone who has looked at his life, which I have, knows this is well off the mark. Romney has a deep, foundational core, which can be seen in his family life, his devout commitment to Mormonism, as well as the outreach he’s done through his church, which includes helping people.

However, there is nothing in the Mormon fundamentalist faith that is liberal or even centrist. It is a staunchly conservative doctrine with defined roles for men and women that are vastly outside of how the majority of Americans live. It’s also what allows Mitt Romney to embrace the Republican far right.

This reality is masked by whatever moves meant to get him where he wants to be, with Mitt Romney’s necessity to cater to the fringe right his most vulnerable point of weakness, because the American people are not moored on the right.

Of course former Pres. Bill Clinton would know the extremes are where Romney’s vulnerable, while also offering an opportunity to hit fringe right policies trumpeted by today’s Republican Party.

From Politico’s piece today:

Barack Obama’s top advisers are making a mid-“core” correction in their attacks on Mitt Romney — with a little nudge from Bill Clinton, who is finding a niche as an Obama campaign whisperer and fundraiser.
Romney, senior advisers David Plouffe and David Axelrod intoned time and again, was a political shape-shifter who lacked any real moral or political “core.”
The slogan was the Obama talking point for months. But Clinton, echoing survey data presented by Obama’s own pollster Joel Benenson, quietly argued that the empty-core approach failed to capitalize on what they see as Romney’s greatest vulnerability: An embrace of a brand of tea party conservatism that turns off Hispanics, women and moderate independents.

Helene Cooper did a story in the New York Times on team Obama’s new strategy last week titled “In Strategy Shift, Obama Team Attacks Romney From the Left.” This is how it began:

So long, flip-flopper. Hello, right-wing extremist.

Followed by the fill-in”:

After months of depicting Mr. Romney as the ultimate squishy, double-talking, no-core soul, Team Obama is shifting gears. Senior administration officials, along with Democratic and campaign officials, all say their strategy now will be to tell the world that Mr. Romney has a core after all — and it’s deep red.

However, the Times missed former Pres. Clinton’s “campaign whisperer” role, which is the best characterization I’ve read to date on what’s been circling.

Bill Clinton’s role is critical, because there’s been no sense that Axelrod and Plouffe have gotten a clue how to run against Mitt Romney with a candidate that’s no longer about “change” and “hope” in anyone’s eyes. It begins with the lack of a campaign slogan. That there has been no mention of what Pres. Obama wants to do in his second term isn’t surprising, because if Pres. Obama came out and admitted he’s in on some form of entitlement grand bargain, his activist base would bail. It’s about defining his opponent as a choice people can’t afford to make, which is best made through Romney’s austerity penchant for the 99%, but not the 1%, with emphasis on his far right policy approach, not populism.

America’s had many wealthy presidents, but none wanted to balance the federal budget on the backs of people, which Mitt Romney telegraphs he would by embracing the Paul Ryan economic model.

“You can’t just keep changing these things around, they have to have more of consistent message or nobody will buy it,” Politico quotes veteran GOP consultant and the man who ran Jon Huntsman’s doomed campaign, John Weaver.

Considering that’s exactly what happened to Huntsman and Weaver, he learned the lesson the hard way.

Romney’s already Etch A Sketching his immigration stance, so Democrats need to get busy with their message. Mitt Romney wants to allow the government to force women to have unwanted medical procedures; he wants to tear Hispanic families apart; and double down on austerity, expecting the private sector to take over on multiple fronts, while drowning the government safety net in the oval office bathroom if he gets the chance.

Bill Clinton knows a deeply religious man like Mitt Romney, with a beautiful family, no scandal in sight, except the sin of being rich and not caring much how he did it, except to serve at the pleasure of shareholders, can’t be carved out as having no “core.” It also alienates the financial industry and big donors that the Big Dawg is now being tapped to reach, because Obama needs them to wake up.

Personal attacks also let a politician slip through the cracks on their policy extremism.

Pres. Obama wants a second term and former Pres. Bill Clinton beat Newt Gingrich at his own game, then beat back the right who tried to make a private consensual affair about something it wasn’t, utilizing what many have deemed unethical means through Kenneth Starr to do it, which was set up before Bill Clinton was in office by Chief Justice Rehnquist, something I talk about in the chapter of my book “Blaming Bill.” Yet, Bill Clinton survived to thrive.

The partnering of Barack Obama with Bill Clinton is long overdue and it could be something that will make a difference in the 8-12% of the electorate that will decide the presidency in November.

The rest will be about world events over which neither campaign or either big two parties have any control.

Read full story · Comments { 25 }

Mitt Romney Targets HUD in Hot Mic Moment

By Taylor Marsh on 16 April 2012

“I’m going to take a lot of departments in Washington, and agencies, and combine them. Some eliminate, but I’m probably not going to lay out just exactly which ones are going to go,” Romney said. “Things like Housing and Urban Development, which my dad was head of, that might not be around later. But I’m not going to actually go through these one by one. What I can tell you is, we’ve got far too many bureaucrats. I will send a lot of what happens in Washington back to the states.” – Wall Street Journal

Oh, how perfect. April is Fair Housing Month.

Obviously, team Romney couldn’t care less.

They don’t care that every year HUD gets 10,000 complaints about housing discrimination.

Soldiers without a roof over their heads, it’s not our problem it’s theirs.

Team Romney doesn’t take enforcing anti-discrimination in high poverty neighborhoods seriously.

As for housing discrimination against LGBT individuals and families, it’s a reality Mitt Romney evidently ignores.

For a man who once considered an elevator for his cars, affordable housing doesn’t mean much. Unlike his dad, who worked his way up, Mitt Romney simply can’t relate to the concept of The Fair Housing Act, passed in 1968.

Unlike Bill Clinton, as well as Republican administrations going back to 1965, increasing home ownership of minorities is not his priority.

Unlike Barack Obama, community development doesn’t seem to grab the Mittster either.

Presidents of both political parties have supported HUD and the work the agency does going back decades into the 20th century. Supporting HUD has been a bipartisan event, because it’s about helping people who need it.

The campaign was quick to say these weren’t specific details, because he’s running for President for Pete’s sake!

“Gov. Romney is discussing some of the ideas he has to tackle the big issues facing America. Gov. Romney has also laid out a bold set of policy proposals that will grow our economy, cut spending and get our massive debt under control,” spokesperson Amanda Henneberg said, emphasizing that the proposals were just discussions. – Los Angeles Times

What would closing HUD mean? Maybe a better way to understand this is to focus on the over 24 million people who became homeowners because of HUD and the Federal Housing Administration.

Here are a few links on what HUD does for people, with much of the focus on those who are the most vulnerable in our society. You know, part of the 99% that are rarely counted and many of whom don’t vote, with those above poverty certainly not the wheel house of team Romney.

Avoiding Foreclosure
Buying a Home
Economic Development
Energy
Environment
Fair Lending
Grants
Home Improvements
Homelessness
Homes for Sale
Housing Discrimination
Housing Research and Data Sets
HUD Homes
Information for Disabled Persons
Information for Senior Citizens
Limited Denials of Participation
Veteran Information

Read full story · Comments { 8 }

Team Obama Mines Mitt ‘Secrecy,’ Gets Clinton Treatment on Mormon ‘Dog Whistle’

By Taylor Marsh on 16 April 2012

David Axelrod starts mining Mitt Romney’s penchant for “secrecy. From Mike Allen’s Playbook today:

David Axelrod tells us the Obama campaign will make a major umbrella issue of what he calls “Romney’s penchant for secrecy”… “Harkening back to my youth, which extends far beyond yours, there was a show called, ‘I’ve Got A Secret.’ Increasingly, I think that would be the appropriate title for the Romney campaign. There are central issues, but this is a disturbing one and it goes to that question of, like, ‘Who is this guy? What does he stand for? What does he believe? What do we know about him?’”

This has got to be infuriating for Axe.

Never mind that candidate Barack Obama couldn’t answer these very same questions in 2007-08. It’s ironic that David Axelrod is having trouble getting his hands around the Romney strategy, which has used the Obama template from the start to secure the nomination.

A big part that answers the question has to do with Mitt Romney’s Mormonism. The GOP tells him what I did: embrace his Mormonism.

Fat chance with the media waiting in the wings for Obama reelect to play the Mormon card, which Politico has gone out of their way to mention.

Today, Mike Allen and Jon Meacham went further on “Morning Joe.” Is Axelrod’s “secrecy” a dog whistle for Mormonism?

Panelist Jon Meacham asked whether any of the focus on Romney’s “secrecy” may have something to do with his faith, Mormonism, a religion shrouded in mystery for many non-Mormons. “Is this code for the secrecy of the Mormon Church?” he asked Allen. …
“As the Obama campaign makes the case that Romney is somehow weird, different,” Allen replied, “some supporters of Romney will say that that is a dog whistle, that is a way to come near the religion issue. The Obama campaign will tell you they’re not going to touch it, they don’t poll on it, they don’t talk about it in focus groups because they know that it would blow up if they did and that got public.”

Wonder how team Obama feels about getting the Clinton treatment? It can’t be too comfortable with the media hitting you on innuendo and gossip from insiders, whether you’re actually doing what’s being openly speculated about or not.

Perhaps it’s about depressing the vote among conservative evangelicals.

“You can’t go into the temple, right? [...] Not even on the West Side? You go to Salt Lake, and I’m like, ‘Oh, that’s pretty, I want to go in.’ And they are like, ‘No, you’re Southern Baptist.’” – Joe Scarborough

Question is, when Axelrod says “secrecy,” do religious conservatives think Mormonism and if they do will they stay home?

Read full story · Comments { 10 }

Mitt Romney Fundraiser Whispers, Floats ‘Republican DREAM Act’

By Taylor Marsh on 16 April 2012

“It was my early birthday present for someone to be critical of me as a mother, and that was really a defining moment, and I loved it.” – Ann Romney

Today is Ann Romney’s birthday and she’s been celebrating since the mama gaffe heard ’round the world.

The quote above came at Mitt Romney’s closed-door fundraiser, which offered an opportunity to tease what his plans are if he can beat Obama in November.

Romney also went into greater detail than he has on the campaign trail in describing how he would maintain the progressive structure in the tax code after implementing his 20 percent across-the-board tax cut.
Democrats have argued that Romney’s tax proposals would disproportionately help the wealthy, but on Sunday, Romney identified specific loopholes and deductions for the wealthy that he would eliminate in order to both finance his tax cut, and ensure that the nation’s top earners face the same tax burden they do today.
“I’m going to probably eliminate for high income people the second home mortgage deduction,” Romney said, adding that he would also likely eliminate deductions for state income and property taxes as well.
“By virtue of doing that, we’ll get the same tax revenue, but we’ll have lower rates,” Romney explained. …

Democrats are complaining specifics were in short supply. It’s silly, because as people found out with Barack Obama, what people say in the campaign season often recedes when the politician is faced with real job realities.

Romney has managed to get his campaign down to two priorities, “jobs and kids.”

“I’m asked — how do you boil it down, how do you encapsulate this into a campaign message: Two things, jobs and kids,” Romney said, explaining that restarting job growth and preserving a better future for the next generation were the campaign’s guiding principles.

Can Pres. Obama boil his campaign down to two specifics?

Romney also praised Fox News Channel, calling them the network of “true believers,” while anchors in the wider TV universe “tend to be liberal.” But the campaign clearly understands that online he has an even playing field: “Where we are ahead or even is on twitter and on the Internet.”

The big news, as I read what occurred, came on immigration. Considering Romney’s primary message, his statements offer his first stab at rebranding on a critical issue for Republicans.

Romney said the GOP must offer its own policies to woo Hispanics, including a “Republican DREAM Act,” referring to the legislative proposal favored by Democrats that would offer illegal immigrants a limited path to citizenship, to give Hispanic voters a real choice between parties.

Etch a Sketch moment or not, it’s a pivot Republicans have to make, so it’s no surprise. It’s not like conservatives are going to vote for Barack Obama, but the fever swamp base of the GOP won’t like it.

But right now, both campaigns are very busy in the battle of the broads, each side making his case who is better for women. On civil liberties issues, Democrats win easily, but that’s not Romney specific. Republicans simply don’t respect women’s individual freedoms, though as we saw with Michele Bachmann they have no problem pandering on them. Romney’s campaign said he wouldn’t touch the Ledbetter Act, but would he have signed it if he was president? We’ll never know. Democrats want to paint Mitt Romney as anti-women on economics, but they’ll need some actual evidence before anyone will believe that one.

Chris Hayes tried to begin that work, finding a comment from Romney about welfare and working.

“I wanted to increase the work requirement,” Romney said. “I said, for instance, that even if you have a child two years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, ‘Well that’s heartless,’ and I said ‘No, no, I’m willing to spend more giving daycare to allow those parents to go back to work. It’ll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.’”

Bill Clinton can feel candidate Romney’s pain.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Rick Santorum Crashes, Adult Industry Celebrates

By Taylor Marsh on 11 April 2012

“America is suffering a pandemic of harm from pornography. It contributes to misogyny and violence against women. It is a contributing factor to prostitution and sex trafficking.” – Santorum Declares War on Porn Industry

Rick Santorum is an ignorant putz and like all politicians loves pontificating on subjects he knows absolutely nothing about.

As if ridding the world of the adult industry would stop sex trafficking? As if people would be better off without the outlet of video fantasies? Who actually believes this nonsense?

The National Organization for Marriage likely does, but they also believe homosexuality is, well, whatever they say it is, starting with a whole group of people deserving to be cut out off from marriage.

Republicans aren’t hip to equality, as John McCain proved by voting against the Ledbetter Act for equal pay; as Scott Walker proved recently when he signed a bill repealing the 2009 Equal Pay Enforcement Act.

Under the new law, there will be no remedy for justice under state employment law for women who are sexually harassed in the workplace, or for minorities who are subjected to racial epithets and other signs of discrimination. – Scott Walker Quietly Signs Anti-Abortion Measures, Repeals Equal Pay Act, Ahead of Easter Weekend

No one ever cares if women in the adult industry are making their own choices and raking it in as long as their looks and popularity lasts. It’s a gamble, but it’s theirs to make.

Stephen Hirsh of Vivid Entertainment nailed the Republican problem, via Politico:

Hirsh said he “doesn’t seem to have his finger on the pulse of what’s really going on out there. Again, this is 2012. People are more comfortable with sexually explicit material than ever before. I think this country has some bigger problems that they have to deal with than whether or not someone’s watching an adult film on their computer.”
Hirsch said that Republicans “say ‘less government, less government,’ until it comes to moral issues when it’s like, ‘Ah! Government should be involved because the government knows what you should think and what you should watch’ and I think ultimately that is dangerous.”

What Hirsh has to say about Democrats is something I read almost wistfully. It reminded me of 2000, when I shared the Los Angeles Times Southern California Living page with Hugh Hefner, Pres. Bill Clinton, and a shot of “Boogie Nights,” in a column close to the Democratic convention titled “L.A.’s Long Strange Tryst With the Democrats.”

Ah, those were the days.

The Internet set strippers, adult actresses and other female adult entrepreneurs free. I was actually there when it started, one of the only female managing editors talking about sex and politics when the web economy took off. I saw women start fan clubs on the web, walk away from being employee to start million-dollar businesses, including in film.

Let’s also remember all the blue chip companies and hotel chains who profit from porn, because their guests enjoy renting it.

There’s an underground smut world that’s damaging to everyone and nobody is going to say otherwise. But these companies operate on the margins and the legit operators want no part of them, while fighting against child pornographers, something that deserves the guillotine or something equally barbaric.

The right’s war against women is an offshoot of the Republican moralizing that brought Pres. Bill Clinton to heel in the 1990s, focusing on Monica Lewinski while Al Qaeda was plotting across the globe.

Republicans today have become more interested in what people do in their personal lives and bedrooms, which is why conservatism is bankrupt. It’s the antithesis of conservatism.

As for Democrats, your average citizen believes they’re all that is standing between them and austerity U.S.A., which includes a dry, passionless existence where caring for our brothers and sisters is seen as extravagance. People are too busy to realize that the Republican Party’s rightward march has brought Democrats to the right, too.

Preview of coming attractions, a grand bargain on entitlements, compliments of whoever is elected, Obama or Romney.

So, I don’t see Democrats as the savior some do.

But then I know there are plenty of them who belong in the war on women category, too. Remember that the Stupak Amendment is named after a Democrat, whose actions helped set off the war on women in the first place, with anti-women’s freedom Democrats being applauded as part of a “big tent” philosophy.

Not for me.

You’ll also have to forgive me if I don’t believe Mitt Romney’s going to come after people’s porn. He’s a businessman and his friends in the hospitality industry will tell him sex is profitable.

As far as I’m concerned, none of these guys can be trusted.

Read full story · Comments { 22 }

Putting the Bimbo in Blonde and Birtherism

By Taylor Marsh on 04 April 2012

Heather Childers, a “straight news” anchor for the Fox News weekend program America’s News Headquarters and co-host of Fox & Friends First, tweeted this afternoon: “Thoughts? Did Obama Campaign Threaten Chelsea Clinton’s Life 2 Keep Parents Silent?” and linked to a blog post pushing a conspiracy involving the Obama campaign murdering, or threatening to murder, individuals to keep quiet questions about Obama’s eligibility. – Media Matters

It’s all the Clintons’ fault, according to Fox News anchor Heather Childers and her now infamous birther tweets.

via Media Matters

Well, she didn’t exactly say that, but what Heather Childers did was link to a notorious birther site article that pushed the boundaries of birtherism, accusing the ’08 Obama campaign of threatening murder, after committing one to keep everything on the hush-hush.

Godfatherpolitics.com has declared that President Obama’s birth certificate is a “fraud.” Recent posts on the subject include: “World Media Picking Up Obama Birth Certificate Fraud While America’s Media Remains Silent”; “Mr. President – Put Up or Shut Up!”; and “Alabama Supreme Court Justice Says Barack Obama Birth Certificate Would Not Stand Up in Court.” – Media Matters (links for posts available at the link)

And guess who was next on the list? Former Pres. Bill Clinton, with Democratic insiders all knowing the dirty details of the origins of birtherism.

The headline to the post Childers linked to: “Did Barack Obama Campaign Threaten Life of Chelsea Clinton to Keep Parents Silent on Obama’s Ineligibility?”

This broad would make a perfect co-host for Sean Hannity.

Mediaite reached out for a statement from FNC and got one:

“The tweets have been addressed with Heather and she understands this was a mistake.” – Michael Clemente, Fox News senior vice president for news

The news division of Fox News has lower standards than Donald Trump’s Miss Universe Pageant.

Read full story · Comments { 8 }

Hillary Mania on High

By Taylor Marsh on 03 April 2012

Rep. Nancy Pelosi has caught Hillary mania, which is sweeping the media and political class during the Republican circus lull, while everyone nods off until Mitt Romney can squeeze 1144 out of wingnut primary voters.

I’d heard about this exchange, with Buzzfeed posting the video late yesterday.

“I would love to see Secretary Clinton become the nominee for President in 2016,” Pelosi said during an appearance in the 92nd Street Y in New York City Sunday night.
“I do think the Secretary should entertain the thought of running in 2016,” said the former Speaker of the House, who was formally neutral in 2008 but was widely viewed as tacitly supporting Senator Barack Obama, then Clinton’s bitter rival. “Hasn’t she been a magnificent Secretary of State?”

The speculation continues where my book leaves off. The question won’t be answered until we get a lot close to the next election, after Hillary Clinton has some much deserved rest.

What you won’t see is Secy. Clinton on the campaign trail. Never thought otherwise, but Sam Stein reported confirmation from Administration officials yesterday.

Pres. Bill Clinton talked about Hillary running in 2016 with Jake Tapper, as well as others. He’d be happy with whatever she decides, foundation or another presidential run, which will be an odds-maker in Vegas soon enough.

Beyond the buzz, one thing that was very interesting is Secy. Clinton’s recent handling of Rush Limbaugh. Having written the book on Hillary’s 20-year rise in politics and her interaction with traditional and new media, the confidence and diplomacy showed through honest assessment of the wingnut radio blowhard is worth noting.

Clinton talking to the grande dame of NBC, Andrea Mitchell, via Politico:

“I thought the response [to Limbaugh] was very encouraging. The response from the public, the response, in particular, from women cutting across all kinds of categories, the response from advertisers.”
“I think we need to call people out when they go over the line. They’re entitled to their opinion but no one is entitled to engage in that kind of verbal assault. Let’s keep it to the issues,” she said.
“We, as a nation, have every right — and in fact I welcome it — to engage in the kind of debate and dialogue that is at the root of who we are as Americans,” Clinton said. “But lets not turn it into personal attacks and insults. We’re beyond that. We’re better than that and people in the public eye have a particular responsibility to avoid it.”

The maturity, calm and confidence Clinton illustrates in this comment is a long way from the ’90s trademark “right wing conspiracy.” It’s expected from someone in the national political arena now for 20 years, but also coming from a secretary of state who has seen what she’s seen across the world. A woman who has nothing more to prove.

It makes gnats like Rush Limbaugh much easier to flick away at this point.

Secy. Clinton has never been stronger, more secure or sure of her power than she is today. With some rest and reflection and some holiday time, too, considering she’s tired but healthy, there’s no reason to think she won’t reconsider her Shermanesque statements on running a second time for the presidency.

However, no one should be surprised if living her life exactly as she chooses, without the constraints of the political arena, won’t satisfy her fully. I’m just not sure people will let her. There’s a real hunger for Hillary to run in 2016 and it’s only 2012. It’s only going to get louder from here.

Everyone knows the U.S. is poised to elect a female president as soon as a competent, charismatic woman, who also can be seen as commander in chief, shows up. The thought that it could be an anti-women’s rights conservative is unthinkable to most.

Read full story · Comments { 10 }

Pres. Obama Takes on Supreme Court Hubris

By Taylor Marsh on 03 April 2012

President Barack Obama walks with Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada, left, and President Felipe Calderon of Mexico following their joint press conference in the Rose Garden of the White House, April 2, 2012. The three leaders are reflected in the base of flag polls situated on the Colonnade. (Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy)

Power is a beautiful thing if you learn how to wield it.

The Fox headline: Obama warns ‘unelected’ Supreme Court against striking down health law.

Obama knows his health care bill is the signature first term accomplishment of his Administration and the Democratic Party. A historic piece of legislation he is not going to leave in the hands of conservative judges who have a history of wielding their ideology recklessly.

So, a shot across the bow of the Roberts court, considering what they did on Citizens United, but especially what Chief Justice Rehnquist orchestrated in 2000, appointing Bush to the presidency, was a worthwhile effort to make.

It draws a line in the sand on an issue that is absolutely vital to Pres. Obama’s first term being seen as strong, rather than weak.

From Pres. Obama’s remarks on Monday…

Joint Press Conference by President Obama, President Calderon of Mexico, and Prime Minister Harper of Canada

PRESIDENT OBAMA: [...] With respect to health care, I’m actually — continue to be confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the law. And the reason is because, in accordance with precedent out there, it’s constitutional. That’s not just my opinion, by the way; that’s the opinion of legal experts across the ideological spectrum, including two very conservative appellate court justices that said this wasn’t even a close case.

I think it’s important — because I watched some of the commentary last week — to remind people that this is not an abstract argument. People’s lives are affected by the lack of availability of health care, the inaffordability of health care, their inability to get health care because of preexisting conditions.

The law that’s already in place has already given 2.5 million young people health care that wouldn’t otherwise have it. There are tens of thousands of adults with preexisting conditions who have health care right now because of this law. Parents don’t have to worry about their children not being able to get health care because they can’t be prevented from getting health care as a consequence of a preexisting condition. That’s part of this law.

Millions of seniors are paying less for prescription drugs because of this law. Americans all across the country have greater rights and protections with respect to their insurance companies and are getting preventive care because of this law.

So that’s just the part that’s already been implemented. That doesn’t even speak to the 30 million people who stand to gain coverage once it’s fully implemented in 2014.

And I think it’s important, and I think the American people understand, and the I think the justices should understand, that in the absence of an individual mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to ensure that people with preexisting conditions can actually get health care. So there’s not only a economic element to this, and a legal element to this, but there’s a human element to this. And I hope that’s not forgotten in this political debate.

Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress. And I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this Court will recognize that and not take that step.

Read full story · Comments { 15 }

Conservative ‘New Right’ Sees Method to Unscientific Madness

By Taylor Marsh on 30 March 2012

Attacking the messenger is nothing new in politics.

Conservatives are applying this across the board, utilizing what William F. Buckley once told Charlie Rose was conservatism’s main goal: attacking and fighting against issues.

So, if scientific facts don’t promote your political agenda, attack it.

A study highlighted by Mother Jones is quite illuminating and proves the “New Right’s” plot perfectly. Kevin Drum focuses on “conservatives don’t trust science,” but that’s not the message that’s most important.

At the core of what Gordon Gauchat calls the “New Right” objective against science points to something far more challenging for the left. Oh, if only there was a “New Left” to match the conservative “New Right.” (Is there even a “left” anymore?)

The critical point in the study is that not only is the conservative distrust of science found in the study coming from educated conservatives, which Drum highlights, but more importantly, it’s calculated and politically purposeful in intent, which can be seen through corporations joining in, as well as religious conservatives, to push their ideology over science to win the ideological argument.

In other words, educated conservatives are purposefully manifesting changes through their anti-science intent for ideological gains alone.

The facts and truth of science don’t matter as long as conservatism wins. It’s not that they’re ignorant. It’s that they don’t care. It you elongate this thesis to include our economy, health care, even entitlements, but especially the war drums on Iran, you’ll see once again why bipartisanship for Democrats is a loser. Conservatism at its core thrives off of scorched earth, because it has no other choice, because facts don’t support it.

Bill Clinton saved the economy after 12 years of Reagan ruin; Barack Obama had an economic catastrophe dumped in his lap after 4 years of Bush, who was handed a whopping surplus from Clinton, with Obama barely able to save the country from financial ruin. Imagine if Obama would have done tax hikes like Clinton, then you get what might have been, but even with his modest approach, Obama dug us out from what yet another “conservative” president wrought.

A snippet of the study is below:

In addition, a comparison of predicted probabilities indicates that conservatives with college degrees decline more quickly than those with only a high school degree (p < .05). These results are quite profound, because they imply that conservative discontent with science was not attributable to the uneducated but to rising distrust among educated conservatives. Put another way, educated conservatives appear to be more culturally engaged with the ideology and, in Martin and Desmond’s (2010) terms, more politically sophisticated.
[...] The NR’s [New Right's] ideology conflicts with the scientific community on a number of crucial aspects. First, Mooney (2005:5) identifies an inherent tension between conservatism as a political philosophy that emphasizes traditionalism and the “dynamism of scientific inquiry—its constant onslaught on old orthodoxies, its rapid generation of new technological possibilities.” Mooney also stresses two key constituencies of the NR, the religious right and transnational corporations, that each have vested interests in scientific outcomes. Corporations subject to government regulation often challenge science to undermine federal controls and protect their profit margins (McCright and Dunlap 2000, 2003). Religious groups clash with science over moral, epistemological, and ontological issues, such as Darwinian evolution, stem cell research, and AIDs research (Ansell 1997; Burack 2008; Smith 2001). Studies of the conservative movement in the United States have also focused on its cultural dimensions and, particularly, the NR’s media empire. Beginning with radio and book publishing houses and then extending into cable television, think tanks, and Internet social networking sites, the NR [New Right] has created an intellectual apparatus that promotes the conservative agenda and articulates a conservative cultural identity. This intellectual base represents an alternative to academic locations and the scientific community and is often socially distinguished and reinforced through its criticism of “liberal” bias in these cultural spheres…

No wonder Al Gore became the Republican Party’s number one nemesis.

The calculated conservative head-in-the-sand-on-science-so-you-can win-politically-plan has a potentially devastating outcome, especially for climate change advocates, but also our energy policy, which is a national security issue.

It also proves another reason why religious conservatives, led by Rick Santorum, and Michelle Bachmann, are such hard core homeschooling advocates.

The nefarious aspect of the study reveals that even educated conservatives walk away from science upon discovering that it holds too many inconvenient truths.

There’s no reason to believe that this won’t hold true for every other issues where facts fail to fall their way.

I’d say it’s one reason why the number of independents is growing, with Republicans losing the most on party identification. Unfortunately, independents don’t trust Democrats or Republicans anymore and it’s not hard to understand why they don’t.

Read full story · Comments { 26 }

Obama Playing Defense Over Gas Prices & GOP Attacks

By Taylor Marsh on 01 March 2012

How did it come to this?

How badly has the Obama administration handled promoting what’s actually been happening on energy production on their watch?

It couldn’t have been worse.

The graph here is from the Wall Street Journal, from back in August 2011. Here’s an excerpt from the report:

1,069: The number of rigs drilling for oil in the U.S. this week.
The figure reflects a huge surge in U.S. oil drilling, up nearly 60% in the past year and the highest total since at least 1987, when oil services company Baker Hughes Inc. began keeping track.

But I bet you if you conducted random interviews across the country with average Americans you wouldn’t get many who are aware that Pres. Obama has presided over a surge in energy production and the decline in U.S. dependency on foreign oil.

With Newt Gingrich squealing about $2/gallon gas, which is a fantasy, while Republicans blame Pres. Obama for the price of gas, it’s clear nobody on the right cares about the facts.

Once a political narrative gets started it’s hard to unlock it in people’s minds.

With Keystone XL as a backdrop, with Pres. Bill Clinton coming out in support of it, as Canada begins the southern section of the pipeline, Pres. Obama denying Keystone in the short-term plays into a false narrative that he’s undermining U.S. energy interests.

It’s false, but it’s a building theme that the Obama administration must have polling is setting in.

The Iran issue isn’t helping oil prices either, which for Republicans simply offers a way to hit Obama on two fronts, even if there is no basis in fact for the attacks.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

1 2 … 14 Next »

TAYLOR MUST READS

Lanny Davis Joins Booker and other Democrats Slamming Obama Bain Ads Against Romney
The attacks on Newark, N.J., Mayor Cory Booker (D) by the more vitriolic liberal commentators for what he said about [...]
It’s Not News that Romney Can Win
MITT ROMNEY’S LUCKY the Republican primaries unmasked his warts long before anyone started paying attention. Sure America saw the clown [...]
The Choice for Romney is Liz Cheney
Why not the best for President Obama and the Democratic party? And how much more will victory be worth having [...]
Oh Donna, How We Danced
DONNA SUMMER was writing “Love to Love You Baby”; I was Miss Missouri. “Last Dance” came out in 1978, the [...]
Edward Klein’s Jeremiah Wright Interview Goes Wide with Swift-boating Proposal, and Sean Hannity’s Help
“The world is about to see Jeremiah Wright and understand his influence on Barack Obama for the first time in [...]
Trayvon Martin Knuckle Injury: Small Abrasion, 1/4 Inch in Size
DEFENSE HACKS led by “Just One Minute” made a lot of noise on Wednesday, writing Trayvon Martin “showed bloody knuckles,” [...]
Romney’s Bill Clinton Swipe Followed by Whopper Rove Ad
MITT ROMNEY IS betting that tweaking Pres. Obama on Bill Clinton in Iowa will land, while just making stuff up. [...]
Hillary’s Vogue
“I feel so relieved to be at the stage I’m at in my life right now. Because you know if [...]
Republicans Already Lost Hispanics, Now Shoot for Losing Next Generation
“While President Obama has played politics on this issue, the Republican Party and our presumptive nominee Mitt Romney have been [...]
Obama’s Composite Girlfriend Creates Rip van Winkle Awakening
The success of “Dreams” has given Obama nearly complete control of his own life narrative, an appealing tale that has [...]
Ann Romney’s Style
IT’S FABULOUS and she can afford it. When I saw it on CBS “This Morning,” I knew it would catch [...]
Arrogant Amnesia: Obama Gets OBL, Republicans Stuck with ‘Mission Accomplished’ Cod Piece Photo Op
AN INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA in the Situation Room with Brian Williams on the bin Laden raid has exploded. Sen. [...]
Gritty GIRLS Takes Over
“You could not pay me enough to be 24 again.” – female doctor giving Hannah a pelvic exam Inspired genius. [...]
Beyond Timothy Leary and Valley of the Dolls: Psychedelic Drugs and Healing in the 21st Century
“Rick Doblin has done a lot for the field, but he is more of a populist,” Grob says. “We need [...]
Shrill for the Women’s Vote: Ann Romney and Hilary Rosen Go to War
My Twitter feed was on fire after an appearance last night on CNN’s AC360, where I said that I thought [...]
For Zocalo Public Square: When My Butt Kicked Me, by Taylor Marsh
A Former Dancer Learns to Work Out Again After a Puzzling Injury Beyond politics. A very different type of piece [...]
Erick Erickson Gets the ‘Joe Scarborough Award’
As an added bonus, it was more than a bit ironic to hear Barack Obama call Paul Ryan a social [...]
Mad Men Megan Draper’s Black Pantie Moment
“You’re too old. I don’t need an old person.” – Megan Draper, “Mad Men” Megan Draper’s cutting “old person” line [...]
The Hill: Women are the Real Game Changers, by Taylor Marsh
I wrote a piece for The Hill yesterday. Here’s a snippet: HBO’s “Game Change,” adapted from the blockbuster book by [...]
America is a Woman
**updated** The bishops’ opposition to contraception is not an argument for a “conscience exemption.” It is a way of imposing [...]
Joe Scarborough’s Weird DM Rant Invades My Weekend
*updated below* So much for keep calm and carry on, what Joe Scarborough proclaims to be his motto. It was [...]
The Weekend Pres. Obama Gave Women Their Own Social Security
But the reality of life here is that Mr. Gulbranson and many of his neighbors continue to take as much [...]
Joe Scarborough Compares Obama Contraceptive Mandate to Federal Govt. Mandating Southern Baptist Female Deacons
“… I think women should be deacons as well as men. …But if the federal government, if the Justice Department [...]
Susan G. Komen Puts Romney’s ‘Not Concerned About the Poor’ In Perfect Context
The decision, made in December, caused an uproar inside Komen. Three sources told me that the organization’s top public health [...]
U.S. News & World Report: Time for a Tea Party of the Left, by Taylor Marsh
President Obama takes his base for granted on issues like the Bush tax cuts, Plan B, and the economy - US [...]
Ryan Lizza and The Hillary Effect, Case Proved Beyond Any Doubt
The reason I wrote my book was to tell a piece of history. It was to set the record of [...]
Capitalism Out of the Closet
**UPDATED** Would we be any worse off with Stephen Colbert as president? I doubt it. Politifact has watched the video [...]
UK Guardian Interview for The Hillary Effect
Last week was busy for me. One interview I did was for the UK Guardian, which is up today: Does [...]
The Party’s Over
There’s a reason Obama reelect doesn’t have a slogan. All they’ve got is a question: Are you in? Symbolic of [...]
A Word from Amb. Joseph Wilson about The Hillary Effect
“During the primary elections that pitted Hillary Clinton against Barack Obama, Taylor was the leading analyst of, and most articulate [...]
Not Disappointed in Pres. Obama
**Postscript added** President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics [...]
Fan Politics
Despite rising public concern about the federal budget deficit, Americans favor keeping Social Security and Medicare benefits as they are [...]
Money Quote that Would Make Reagan Laugh
“Cantor and Kyl just threw Boehner and McConnell under the bus. This move is an admission that there will be [...]

TM Connect

It’s Not News that Romney Can Win

Cory Booker, Day 3

Race Center Stage on Right

Oh Donna, How We Danced

Ben Bradlee Questions Deep Throat and Red Flag in Flower Pot

Arrogant Amnesia: Obama Gets OBL, Republicans Stuck with ‘Mission Accomplished’ Cod Piece Photo Op

Blue Dog Dems Go Down

Barbra Streisand Turns 70

Mitt Romney Targets HUD in Hot Mic Moment

Team Obama Mines Mitt ‘Secrecy,’ Gets Clinton Treatment on Mormon ‘Dog Whistle’

Mitt Romney Fundraiser Whispers, Floats ‘Republican DREAM Act’

Rick Santorum Crashes, Adult Industry Celebrates

Putting the Bimbo in Blonde and Birtherism

Hillary Mania on High

Pres. Obama Takes on Supreme Court Hubris

Conservative ‘New Right’ Sees Method to Unscientific Madness

Obama Playing Defense Over Gas Prices & GOP Attacks

Follow Taylor on Twitter

TAYLOR MUST READS

New Media