Kucinich’s “Eyes And Ears Project”…Questions Remain…

On March 28, we wrote about the launch of the Kucinich campaign’s “Eyes and Ears Project”…

“… it is important that we track, monitor, and gather information about the other candidates…we want other campaigns to know we are monitoring them…this process serves the dual function of keeping other campaigns honest. If they know we are monitoring them, they will be more likely to be transparent and honest…” [Go here for complete email]

Needless to say, this was a rather peculiar undertaking for a presidential campaign. The following day, Dennis Kucinich sent out an email admonishing the project…

“…I believe such tactics are spiritually and politically counterproductive, therefore I am asking you to disregard the request…’Monitoring’ projects are inherently pretentious, divisive and mean-spirited and have no place in a campaign which desires to change the world for the better… It is not the job of our campaign to keep other candidates honest. Each candidate must accept responsibility for his or her own integrity…” [Go here for complete email]

I’d like to first commend Congressman Kucinich for shutting down this project and for admonishing it the way that he did. Unfortunately, far too many questions remain:

1. Did Rep. Kucinich know about this project prior to its announcement by his National Outreach Coordinator?
2. If he was not aware of this project, why did he not immediately stop it after the campaign email went out? Why did it take him 24 hours and criticism from bloggers?
3. If he was not aware of this project, what does that say about his ability to be President of the United States? A campaign is in many ways a microcosm for a candidate’s potential administration. If he was unable to control someone as significant as his National Outreach Coordinator, it’s very telling about his ability to control those in his administration should he elected president.
4. If he was not aware of this project, and given that he has called this project immoral, why has his National Outreach Coordinator not been held accountable? In his email, Rep. Kucinich did not say that he would hold Evan Moody responsible (and no, I am not calling for him to be fired).
5. If Congressman Kucinich was aware of the “Eyes and Ears Project” prior to its launch, why did he not stop it until after there was criticism of it?
6. Why did Rep. Kucinich fail to accept responsibility for this project and/or apologize for the launch of what he has described as an “immoral” and “divisive” enterprise?

As a member of the United States House of Representatives, Dennis Kucnich has been fierce in his demands for accountability and transparency in the Bush Administration. He has consistently fought for what he believes to be essential components in government. If we at 2008 Central, other bloggers, members of the press, Kucinich supporters and voters fail to demand that Rep. Kucnich answer the aforementioned questions about the launch of the “Eyes and Ears Project” we will not only be doing a disservice to ourselves and the system, but we would also be failing to honor what the Congressman has championed for so long - honesty, transparency and accountability in politics.

The Congressman can’t call something immoral and divisive while at the same time failing to accept responsibility for something that took place under the auspices of his campaign. As the leader of the campaign, his staff takes action on behalf of him. If this was Evan Moody’s idea, then the Congressman must apologize for Evan’s immoral and divisive actions and insist that Evan also apologize. If this was not Evan’s idea, then those who created this program must be named. If the Congressman wants to be consistent, he must accept the responsibility that he demands of others and explain more about this project. Otherwise, voters should assume that these kinds of things will occur in his administration (except on a much larger and much more significant scale).

I have sent an email to the campaign asking them to disclose more information about the launch of this program. I will be placing a follow-up call to the campaign shortly and will also be contacting members of the press. I will update all as information becomes available.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday Talk Shows: Tommy Thompson, Joe Biden

ABC’s This Week: Sen. Dick Durbin, presidential counselor Dan Bartlett; ex-Gov. Tommy Thompson; Cal Ripken Jr.

CBS’ Face the Nation: Sens. Charles Schumer and Arlen Specter; Dan Bartlett.

NBC’s Meet the Press: Sens. Patrick Leahy and Orrin Hatch; Rep. Charles Rangel.

Fox News Sunday - Sens. Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden; Kevin Martin, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.

CNN’s Late Edition: Sens. Kit Bond, and Dianne Feinstein; Rev. Al Sharpton; Richard Haass, Council on Foreign Relations president.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday Night Democratic Roundup

I will not be including any fundraisers in the next 24 hours in this roundup, nor articles about fundraising: the first quarter deadline is tomorrow, and rest assured any serious campaign is furiously trying to raise money and will be jetting around the country to do it, while lowering expectations simultaneously. It’s just the way it is. Skip those articles tomorrow and save yourself a big headache.

Barack Obama

Obama is still getting the rock star treatment - literally (I HATE the phrase but it applies perfectly here). Crowds waited outside a Tallahassee meeting for him and he had to give a three minute address from a park bench. I don’t care what your politics is, that’s amazing. That’s straight out of old-school politics - like, 19th century and 18th century politics.

Jesse Jackson endorsed Obama. I’d write abou tthe endorsement vs. Sharpton’s reluctance, but I don’t think many people actually give a damn about these endorsements. It’s better looked at as symptoms of Obama convincing African-Americans rather than a possible remedy.

Obama is in Milwaukee in mid-April and will charge $25 for admission to a rally. It’ll be a nice easy way of taking the Obamania and converting it into campaign cash without offending anyone.

Bill Richardson

Bill Richardson is traveling to North Korea for talks in April, according to an AP report. The other candidates are trying to shore up weaknesses while barely being in the Senatae or not in government at all, and a sitting Gov. takes time to fly to North Korea for negotiations. Pretty unbelievable. He’ll reach more people in the news over this than he would trying to campaign locally. That said, he’ll have to buckle down in the early states all the more to make up time.

Richardson called for more focus on preventing a nuclear 9-11. He stated: “In the 20th century, nuclear deterrence worked. In the 21st century, it won’t. Nothing will stop suicidal Jihadists from using a nuclear bomb if they get their hands on one. … Defending ourselves from new dangers requires new thinking, new strategies and new tactics. We need to adapt our ideas about national security to an age in which the nuclear threat come not from a missile, but from a suitcase or a cargo hull. Not from a nation, which can be deterred by the threat of retaliation, but from a shadowy terrorist network with no return address.” Full text of his speech is here. Impressive making such a substantive speech so close to the fundraising deadline: most of the time, all free time is used for fundraising (note Obama scheduling his town hall meetings on health care for next week, not this week).

At a union rally, Richardson pledged that his labor secretary would be a union member. Also, the war wasn’t popular.

Christopher Dodd

Dodd talked about how he is runnign because voters will want someone with experience as President. How he is better than the experienced people ahead of him (Clinton, Richardson, and Biden) he doesn’t really say. The interview is mostly Dodd shaking his head at how much Bush is hated in South America.

Dennis Kucinich

Kucinich stopped his spying project; more on this soon.

He’s off to New Hampshire early this week.

Hillary Clinton

Is Clinton worried about Dodd? Probably not, unless he’s stalking her on the HIll or something. But still, she’s holding a roundtable in Orlando tomorrow on his signature issue, subprime mortgages and predatory lending. This is probably a hedge against someone accusing her of not caring about the issue.

Clinton is in Iowa on Tuesday, visiting Iowa City, Fort Madison, Burlington and Mount Pleasant.

One fundraising note: I’m venturing a guess that Clinton has significantly more than the 25-30 rumored. She’s trying to run on inevitability, and will need to crush expectations to do so. Add in former Pres. Clinton shadow fundraising while she campaigns, and the way too prevalent rumors of $25-30, and I think she has something like 35-40 million when the FEC releases: she’ll want Democrats to say ‘wow.’ And this is her first best chance (especially since no one is really -that- excited about her policies). The other candidates are far too risky to even venture a guess, although Edwards and Obama both have the potential to come in with surprisingly high marks.

Joe Biden

Biden will speak in front of the National Jewish Democratic Council in late April. Other Democratic candidates are expected to speak as well as Democratic Congressional leadership.

Biden found a state director for his Iowa campaign, Bill Romjue, whose resume goes all the way back to Carter-Mondale in 1976. He alo once worked for John Edwards.

John Edwards

The whole Edwards clan, Elizabeth and his kids, will be in Iowa on Sunday. Also noted, Dodd will be there too. That should be quite the competition for attention.

There’s probably no right answer on whether Edwards should keep campaigning or not. The editorials online are mostly positive, but not all (Alhough, that article is one of the most partisan and cynical I’ve seen; if you don’t believe Edwards should be president, say so, don’t try to use his mere running as evidence against him. It’s crappy editorial like that which are part of the reason we started this site. And there are just as many on the left as there are on the right.). Some cancer patients are lauding their decision. Hopefully these types of articles will fade over time. It’s a completely defensible decisions to keep running, given how strongly they believe in what they are doing, and that it’s not something that is physically affecting her yet.

Mike Gravel

Gravel debated a University of Virginai law professor over the similarities and differences of the Iraq and Vietnam wars.

Sphere: Related Content

Live Blogging Duncan Hunter on Lou Dobbs

Caught this one by chance, just flipping through the news stations.

Hunter joined Duncan Hunter in studio to talk about the NAFTA Trucking Act of 2007, which tries to address the scourge of Mexican trucks. Hunter immediately went into the specifics of Mexican trucks offloading, and how this act prevents it. The act calls for mandatory driving records exchange with Mexico. Dobbs went after NAFTA, and said September 11 nearly changed that.

Hunter talked about bringing back Reagan Democrats, by building up the middle class, especially manufacturing. Hunter also said Mexico and Canada ought stand with us in the next war America enters into - and commented that it was a shame they were not in Iraq, which even Dobbs was stunned at, considering Iraq was a war of choice. (no matter what you think of it, saying that Mexico and Canada must go to war with America because of NAFTA is a pretty extreme position.)

Dobbs segued into debate on Ramos and Compean, Hunter mentioned his legislation to get a pardon has 94 co-sponsors. Dobbs went into Atty. Gen. Gonzalez; Hunter said an investigation into Gonzalez’ behavior on the two would be OK. Hunter went immediately into saying that a fence ought be built. Hunter and Dobbs then talked about Chertoff and the difference between a virtual fence and a real fence on the border; both preferred a fence. Hunter wrapped up by saying that he put the language in bills that made the San Diego border fence be built.

Analysis: Hunter sounded like a Congressional expert on the topic, not especially Presidential.  Don’t get me wrong - he had a great command of details, but he did not tie them into themes; Dobbs did that for him. Carl Levin was on the show immediately before him, and if anything, Levin came off as more presidential. Hunter talked so quickly that I’m sure I missed a lot of what he said above, even in a five minute interview.

That being said, Hunter did a fine job selling his experience and expertise on NAFTA and immigration. For the type of people that watch Lou Dobbs, this appearance might be more of a helpful evaluation interview on an issue that they think is important. It will probably by appearing soon on Youtube and can be something Hunter can point to as his stance on a subject.

Grade: B. He didn’t sound presidential; he rushed through what he had to say to hit his talking points, sometimes wildly. But on the positive side, he got his points across.

Sphere: Related Content

Romney Already Dropping VP Names

Some might call it presumptuous for a man who in the last poll of Republican voters only registered 3% to be dropping any VP name save his own. But not Mitt Romney.

In a campaign stop in South Carolina, Romney mentioned Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, SC Gov. Mark Sanford, and Sen. Jim DeMint (SC) by name; later, he told reporters that he wouldn’t fail to mention local names whenever asked. It’s curious, since most politicians defer that question until later, unless a specific name is brought up, when they normally deferentially deny anything specific. Mentioning local names might have been a way to connect with a lot of voters state wide, since this is the sort of thing that might get briefly mentioned on the local evening news.

Regarding his poll numbers, Romney told reporters, “The time I expect to be doing better is in the fall and winter and I’ve got plenty of time to get my numbers up. … I’m going to have as familiar a name as anybody else in the race.”

Also, former US Rep. Bob Beauprez of Colorado endorsed Romney.

Sphere: Related Content

Endorsements For Everyone

Rudy Giuliani picked up the endorsement of Steve Forbes. This will add more credibility to Rudy’s recent moves to portray him as an economic conservative. It should be noted that Giuliani has previously come out against the flat tax, however. Giuliani said in a release, “Steve and I share an economic vision that embraces supply-side economics, tax relief, and spending restraint.” Giuliani also issued a press release detailing his conservative record on the economy in New York.

In what sounds to me more like post-divorce hostility than a true heartfelt endorsement, BET co-founder and President of the Washington Mystics of the WNBA Sheila Johnson is endorsing Barack Obama; her ex-husband, Robert Johnson, who also co-founded BET and is currently owner of the NBA’s Charlotte Bobcats, is backing Clinton.

According to a report in the Union Leader, Obama picked up endorsements from New Hampshire Representatives Sally Kelly of Chichester, Sid Lovett of Holderness, Nancy Warren and Deborah Billian of Rochester, Jim Powers of Portsmouth, Jim Kennedy of Exeter and C. Pennington “Penn” Brown of Epping. Also in the article, State Sen Robert Anders is supporting Romney.

Rep. David Obey, chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, endorsed Edwards. He had endorsed Gephardt last cycle.

Michigan State Sen. Jack Brandenburg is switching endorsements from Romney to Giuliani. This is a bad omen, and comes on the heels of Romney falling to 3% in a nationwide poll including Fred Thompson. Even more ominous, the article states that this may be the beginning of defections from Romney:

But Romney’s list of supporters may be circumspect. Brandenburg is the third of six prominent Macomb Republicans on the list to say that their backing for Romney was never more than tentative at best.

State Rep. Brian Palmer of Bruce Township said that he is backing Romney “at this point.” He said the candidates’ early jockeying and aggressive approach toward landing endorsements has been unprecedented.

“But it’s still early. There will still be some shifting around,” Palmer added. “I don’t care what anybody says. A lot of things can change.”

Macomb Republican Party Chairman Jim Carabelli appears on the list of county party chairs endorsing Romney. But in reality Carabelli, as the party leader, remains neutral while he works to lure more candidates to Macomb and enjoys being wooed by other campaigns.

Carabelli said he admires Romney and agreed to become a member of a Romney steering committee but never pledged his loyalty to the candidate.

“Let’s just say I’m dating a lot of people right now,” he said, “and I’m looking to go out on some second dates.”

Billie Jean King endorsed Clinton.

Edwards issued a press release of more than 50 South Carolina politicians who had endorsed him.

Former Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes and an Atlanta businessman endorsed Edwards as well.

The National Organization for Women’s political action committee endorsed Clinton. Some media are treating this as a major endorsement. I’m not sure why; the endorsement of the group for Carol Moseley Braun didn’t seem to change the race at all. Just because someone endorsed the front-runner doesn’t make the endorsement more significant than it is.

Lastly, the only person not to get an endorsement was John McCain. He visited Charlie Crist recently, and despite warm words from Crist, and the strong connection of Crist’s organization to McCains, Crist did not endorse McCain, rather calling him a “great friend of Florida.” It is curious whether the struggles of McCain in the polls are in any way related to Crist holding out.

EDITS:

The Lindner family of Cincinnati is endorsing Romney. This could be huge for Romney financially, as this article details, giving him the edge in getting millions of corporate donations.

Pat Buchanan’s sister Bay Buchanan has joined the Tancredo campaign and will be the campaign manager.

The East Haven Democratic Town Committee is endorsing Chris Dodd.

Sphere: Related Content

Live Blogging Bill Richardson on The Daily Show

Richardson is on the Daily Show tonight. Going into this, his poll numbers have started to creep up from nothing to generally towards the top of the second tier.

Richardson comes to a nice ovation. Richardson first jokes about the process of thinking about it, but says he’s in, he just hasn’t made it official with the FEC yet. Stewart goes over his impressive resume and wonders what will hold him back. Richardson points out that he is rising in the polls (and Stewart makes a Dodd joke). Richardson then point blank says he is the most qualified person to be president. Richardson takes advantage of a remark about Washington to talk about bringing the country together through negotiation.

Richardson talked about the sole of the shoe anecdote (which we have blogged about here). It was pretty much word for word from his account. He finished up by making a cheap plug of his book. Stewart made a joke about shoes and that was that.

Compared to Dodd, Vilsack, Biden, or any other Presidential candidate on the Daily Show, Richardson by far was the best master of the room. He was funny in an unpredictable way, but not in a way that overshadowed the powerful anecdote he told.

A+ on the appearance for Richardson. There’s zero chance anyone saw that (except die hard Republicans) and was turned off. Given the short amount of time, I can’t expect any detailed policy proposals (nor did we get any). He was selling himself as a potential candidate, and any Democrat primary voter will definitely take him more seriously after seeing that appearance.

Sphere: Related Content

Live Blogging Newt Gingrich on Charlie Rose

(Due to technical difficulties, blog taken last night could not be posted until now. Apologies. In the meantime, Charlie Rose has added video of the discussion online. Gingrich comes on at the 28 minute mark.)

Gingrich was on second, and Rose said the main focus will be on foreign policy. Rose starts the discussion on Iraq. Gingrich says that America will be the greatest country in the world (economically, militarily, culturally, etc.) win or lose in Iraq. Gingrich says that listening ought be the top priority in foreign policy, saying that throwing your weight around without a competitor just increases resentment. He calls for slowly building coalitions, or a large anti-American coalition will coalesce; he says its an American problem, not a liberal or conservative problem. Pointing to the new world, he references facebook and myspace.

He called for the State Department to be reorganized for leadership to fix that problem. He also criticized the self-absorbtion of America. He called for the next President to go around the world on a listening tour. Rose cited Bush campaigning in 2000 on being humble and listening. Rose also cited France and Iran immediately responding to 9/11 with words of solidarity. He talked about the nature of global power, saying that Americans don’t have to show anyone they are powerful to have power. Gingrich said that he wasn’t happy with the way the Kyoto treaty was rejected. He then talked about Clinton as a president, and mentione d the general timidity of the left to use power.

For the next president, Gingrich said that there needs to be more agreement. He said that Kyoto was a bad treaty, but that reducing greenhouse gasses is a great idea, calling for developing technology and reaching out to China and India with the technology. He called for rebonding with e EU over womens rights or childrens rights, saying agreement ought take precendent over disagreement, although in practice its harder. He said a president needs better tools in the State Dept. so it is sophisticated enough to work in the world.

Rose turned the topic to Bush. He said that is was ‘very painful’ to look at Bush and decide what went wrong. Comparing Vietnam and Korea to Iraq, Gingrich looked at it through the prism of Americans killed, and said the level of furor comparatively reflects the competition for power in Washington, and then looked at the history of southeast Asia a little more. He continued, comparing Iraq to Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, south Lebanon, and Palestinian territories, saying that other “vicious” opponents are out there. He called for a strategy against Iran that mirrors the Reagan strategy against the USSR. If they did not release the British soldiers, he called for barricading Iran and sabotaging their one refinery for gasoline, but not firing a shot.

Rose asked if America was perceived as week. Gingrich agreed, but only in the past few years, since June 2003, saying if Iraq was built on the Afghan model instead of the Bremer way, Iraq would be far better off. He also said the entire Bush Administration went ‘off a cliff’ in June 2003. Going back to projection of power, he again cited TR speaking softly but carrying a big stick. He said the North Koreans twice defied ultimatums. You ought want people to respect you, but everything can’t matter; compromise on non-essential issues.

On the role of America in this century, Gingrich stated that public education is a key to competing in the coming century.

And that was about it.

A strikingly non-partisan interview for the most part, Gingrich talked a lot about the role of America in foreign policy and what is effective in diplomacy. It’s this Gingrich, not the radically partisan one who battled Clinton on impeachment, who has a chance to make a run in the primaries. I think someone talking about the nuance s of diplomacy and foreign policy could be extremely well received: it seems to be a problem, and Gingrich has a systematic, non-partisan solution that is historically tested.

It’s well worth a watch, and he came off well. The only thing I’m not sure of is whether when he starts talking about domestic issues, if his answers will satisfy anyone.

Sphere: Related Content

Poll Vaulting: Edwards With Slight Lead in Iowa

The new Zogby telephone poll in Iowa was released, and Edwards has a slight lead.

Edwards	27%
Clinton	25%
Obama	23%
Biden	3%
Richardson	3%
Kucinich	1%
Dodd	Less than 1%

What does this mean?

With Vilsack out of the race, the big three are running neck and neck, and any of them can win Iowa. This type of competitiveness at the top could be competitive enough to prevent another dark horse from gaining any traction, bad news for Richardson and Biden (there doesn’t seem to be any additional support for Kucinich in Iowa; seeing as though he campaigned there in 2003, it’s somewhat safe to say that he doesn’t have nearly the breakout potential as Richardson or even Biden). I also have to wonder how long Dodd can even stay in the race. His poll numbers were low in the last survey (1%) and now they’ve gotten even lower. Yeah, margin of error and everything, but he didn’t pick up any of Vilsack’s numbers.

This poll was taken before Vilsack endorsed Clinton, though. It will be interesting to see if that endorsement helps her, and if so, will other candidates focus on other states.

Sphere: Related Content

McCain Calls Media “Jerks”?

“These jerks from the media…”

This morning Sen. McCain appeared on Fox & Friends to discuss current legislation regarding troop withdrawal from Iraq along with some election matters.  During the interview he managed to take a shot at the media [video]:

Brian Kilmeade: You will take a question from anybody about anything.
John McCain: And I also have these jerks come on the bus, too.
Brian Kilmeade: You have who come on the bus?
John McCain: These jerks from the media.
Brian Kilmeade: Okay. Of course that couldn’t be me, I hope. I haven’t been on a bus in a while without paying a fare.
John McCain: Come on.  You’re welcome on.

Was this just a joke or is he puting some latent hostility towards the media on display?  Probably a bit of both…

Sphere: Related Content

Kucinich Creates Network Of ‘Spies’ - Hillary Clinton Targets Women

Today, the Kucinich campaign receives the award for the creepiest campaign email.  In an email sent to supporters, the campaign announced the launch of the “Eyes and Ears Project.”

“… it is important that we track, monitor, and gather information about the other candidates…we want other campaigns to know we are monitoring them…this process serves the dual function of keeping other campaigns honest.  If they know we are monitoring them, they will be more likely to be transparent and honest…”

With the expected endorsement from the National Organization for Women today, the Clinton campaign aggressively targeted women with an email sent to supporters from Geraldine Ferraro.  Ferraro writes:

It’s been 23 years since I was the first woman on a major party presidential slate, and I remember what it was like breaking that barrier — including the barrage of attacks at the hands of the Republicans.

Now Hillary is poised to break the biggest glass ceiling of them all. This time, when we elect the best, most qualified candidate for president, for the first time we’ll be putting a woman in the White House.

Full text of both emails after the jump.

Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Follow Up (2): Sources: ‘Vilsack To Endorse Hillary’

Yesterday, former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack endorsed Sen. Clinton in her quest for the presidency.

The NYT Blog reportsthat Sen. Clinton will be helping Gov. Vilsack pay off the roughly $430,000 campaign debt he’s accumulated.  Looks like we have yet another instance of Sen. Clinton putting her money to use…

Sphere: Related Content

What’s McCain Going To Wear During The Summer?

 Here at 2008 Central we try and watch as many of the candidates’ speeches as possible.  While watching a McCain speech from his visit to Lebanon, New Hampshire on March 17, 2007, I finally noticed that he’s basically been wearing the same outfit, while on the stump, for the past few months.

The outfit: black/navy slacks, white button down dress shirt, gray/navy v-neck sweater, shined loafers and a bombers jacket.  This outfit is designed to make you (the audience) feel a certain way about the Senator.  Is it working?

The aforementioned outfit has made an appearance at campaign events in Lebanon, NH (3/17/07), Spartanburg, SC (2/26/07), Des Moines, IA (2/17/07) [the list isn't comprehensive].  Clearly, the McCain camp is somewhat aware of the repeating outfit, which might explain why they removed an article that explicitly mentioned the outfit from McCain’s Senate website.

Sphere: Related Content

Clinton (Inadvertantly?) Slights Biden

Attending the health care forum in Las Vegas this weekend were John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. The one Democrat not attending was Joseph Biden, who previously dropped out because of scheduling concerns, although there is speculation that is not the case.

 When Clinton took the stage, though, she began by saying ““I’m glad everyone on the Democratic side is here.”

That said, I do not think that it was meant as a slight. It’s probably more meaningful that no one noticed that Biden was even missing.

Sphere: Related Content

Giuliani Starts Mentioning ‘Supply Side’ More Than ‘9/11′

Rudy Giuliani has started fighting back against those who have claled him too moderate or even too liberal to be the nominee of the Republican Party. He taking this initiative not by clumsily backtracking like some other candidates would, but by isntead asserting his credentials as being impeccable on economic issues.

His campaign started running its first radio ads. As this CBS News article describes them:

Giuliani said, “We need supply side policies and reduced government spending—fiscal discipline—to keep the economy growing.” The rest of the ad is a very general kind of paean to old campaign saws like “leadership and optimism,” and a strong defense. The one specific in the message—and don’t kid yourself, every word of this thing was carefully chosen—is “supply side.”

He targeted these ads on two radio shows that you might consider well known among conservatives: Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.

Giuliani also did a long interview with Larry Kudlow, of Kudlow and Cramer. One of the first issues brought up was the sub-prime mortgage issue that Chris Dodd is heavily involved in. Giuliani skipped past the details - even admitting he did not know - and went right for a clear philosophy that could have been pulled from the Reagan playbook:

KUDLOW: Do you think Congress should get in and regulate this area [subprime mortgages]?

GIULIANI: Very reluctantly, I would think. I can’t say that I know enough about it to give you a detailed opinion of it, but my instinct would be that Congress should stay out of it. We’d be better off if Congress did stay out of it. If some mistakes were made, and they’d be too aggressive, and after all, the housing market was growing by leaps and bounds for a very, very long time, that sometimes creates over investment. Sometimes creates bad decisions. It’s kind of the natural thing in the market. So I’d rather have it correct itself than have Congress try to correct.

Later on, though prompted, Giuliani talks about being a ’supply sider.’

KUDLOW: In that–in your book, “Leadership,” you talk several times about the benefits of a free economy. You talk about capitalism. I want to ask you, do you regard yourself as a free market capitalist? Do you regard yourself as a supply sider?

GIULIANI: I regard myself as a supply sider for sure. I mean, watched Ronald Reagan do it and learned it, so it works. Taxes get reduced, more revenue come in. Practiced it as the mayor of New York. I’m the first mayor ever to do that. It’s almost harder to do in New York than it is in Washington. There was less of an acceptance for it and more resistance to it. But I have lowered taxes 22, 23 times. I started with a $2.3 billion deficit and by lowering taxes, we cleared that deficit and we started building a pretty big surplus. So not only do I believe in it, I’ve made it work. So I believe in it really strongly because it comes out of practical experience. Free market, more and more so. I’ve said over the last 10 to 15 years I’ve become more and more convinced that globalization, free market economics is the way to go for the United States. It really just challenges us to kind of predict the future and to try to think of the industries we have to create where we can take advantage of the large number of consumers that are emerging in China, the large number of consumers that are emerging in India. If we challenge ourselves, it really gives us the hope of real growth and that’s what we should be pointing toward, growth.

He goes on to mention more the benefits of being a supply sider and why he believes in it. For now, the value in the interview is how Giuliani is defining himself as a traditional Republican; should he win the nomination, this interview will be a textbook for examining his ideological beliefs on the economy.

Sphere: Related Content

More Questions Raised About Obama and Substance

This weekend, Obama and other Democratic candidates participated in a health care forum in Las Vegas sponsored by the Service Employees International Union. A Washington Post article today highlights Obama’s inability to speak with authority on issues of substance.

David Peter, a child support case worker and member of the SEIU in Las Vegas who was also in the audience, said Obama may have been better off not participating in the forum. Peter is a local organizer for anti-war candidate Dennis Kucinich, but said he was impressed with Clinton’s health care plan and disappointed in Obama.

“He wasn’t prepared for it,” Peter said. “I saw him speak here about a month ago and it was on his issues and just on sort of introducing himself to the people and I thought he was much better on that speech than he was in this forum.”

Obama was pressed by a union member in the audience who said she went to his Web site to learn more about his health care vision, but didn’t find much beyond his commitment to reduce HIV/AIDS and lead poisoning.

The difference between Clinton and Obama is not especially wide in terms of what both are talking about. Both Obama and Clinton are trying to focus on selling the country on actually doing a massive health care plan; the others, for the most part, are pushing their own plans as the answer.

However, the difference between Clinton and Obama is as wide as the Grand Canyon when it comes to talking about health care. First, Clinton has credibility on the issue from the 1993 attempt to reform. People know she has a history with this. But Clinton also knows the ins and outs of health care as well as anyone, and can talk convincingly about it. This manifests in Clinton knowing the issues better than Obama, which relates to the complaint above. She may not be specific about her plan, but pretty much everyone would know the parameters. She’s leaving herself room to negotiate down the line and not campaign herself into a box. At the same time, she’s trying to sell America on the idea in general by talking about the problems at length. That’s balanced, and at the same time a bit disarming to anyone who thinks she’s beyond convincing people.

Obama, on the other hand, is an unknown. His speeches on health care mention the problems, but focus on his theme of idealism and cleanign up Washington. The problem with this is that he never conveys any expertise on the matter. For all anyone knows, Obama may know more than any candidate on the trail about health care; but he may know less. He simply hasn’t augmented his successful idealism message with any meat so far.  His health care page includes more details about building sidewalks than about insurance.

The good news for Obama and people who like him is that he’s promising to start a deeper discussion next week, which is in no way too late for him to win. But he’s going to have to work to become authoritative on issues, which will complement his overall theme that much more, regardless of whether he has a specific policy like Edwards or not.

Sphere: Related Content

Program Alert: Live Blogging Newt Gingrich on Charlie Rose

Newt Gingrich will be on Charlie Rose Tuesday night.

Gingrich is sort of running a shadow campaign for president right now, possibly waiting until some of the conservatives fail in the Iowa Straw Poll in August to step into their place and pick up the pieces in September; should a strong conservative option emerge before then, Gingrich could back down without the indignity of losing an election to another conservative. It’s a strategy that is based on protecting and possibly enhancing his reputation and power within the conservative wing of the Republican Party. In fact, one could say that him holding his shadow over this campaign has prevented any of the conservative candidates getting any sort of legitimacy on the right. (Although Fred Thompson is quickly disproving that theory with his impressive poll numbers and low negative numbers.)

 I’ll be live blogging his appearance tomorrow - so look out for that.

Sphere: Related Content

John and Elizabeth Edwards on 60 Minutes; Also, We Called It

John Edwards and Elizabeth Edwards were interviewed by Katie Couric on 60 Minutes (who has since blogged about the interview, calling them ’sanguine’ about the cancer).  

On making the decision to keep campaigning:

John Edwards:Well, first the decision was made by the two of us, no one else… as it should be. And she said to me, “This is what we believe in. This is what we’re spending our lives doing. It’s where our heart and soul is. And we can not stop.” The doctor came in. And I said, “I need to know. We have a tough decision to make. We know what we want to do. But I need to know whether Elizabeth can physically do this and I don’t mean physically stay at home and watch me do it. I mean, can she physically do it, go out on the campaign trail, do all the work that needs to be done?”

The country’s going to want to hear from her, and I knew that. And the doctor said yes she absolutely could physically do it.

Elizabeth Edwards: You know, you really have two choices here. I mean, either you push forward with the things that you were doing yesterday or you start dying. That seems to be your only two choices. If I had given up everything that my life was about – first of all, I’d let cancer win before it needed to. You know, maybe eventually it will win. But I’d let it win before I needed to. And I’d just basically start dying. I don’t want to do that. I want to live. And I want to do the work that I want next year to look like last year and… and the year after that and the year after that. And the only way to do that is to say I’m going to keep on with my life.

Interestingly, Sen. Edwards directly stated that personal lives of presidential candidates ought be in bounds:

First of all, there’s not a single person in America that should vote for me because Elizabeth has cancer. Not a one. If you’re considering doing it, don’t do it. Do not vote for us because you feel some sympathy or compassion for us. That would be an enormous mistake. The vote for the presidency is far too important for any of those things to influence it. But, I think every single candidate for president, Republican and Democratic have lives, personal lives, that indicate something about what kind of human being they are. And I think it is a fair evaluation for America to engage in to look at what kind of human beings each of us are, and what kind of president we’d make.

On the whole, this interview is about and only about continuing the campaign with Elizabeth having incurable cancer. I think the naysayers on this are way off base; Elizabeth and John have the right to make this decision. That said, it’s far, far, far better for them to constantly confront this type of skepticism, since those most likely to question them are two types: political types (who are probably unconvincable) and middle America, family-values types who may wonder if Sen. Edwards is being selfish and ignoring his family. This type of aggressive questioning will more than likely help Edwards, since his doubters probably were adapting that sort of tone. Also, the ability of the two of them to stand up to such questioning - and not only that, but inviting more - will definitely help him.

Also, a week ago I asked that Edwards say this: “Look, it’s a big house, an ostentatious estate, I admit. Similar to Kennebunkport or the Kennedy Compound or maybe even the Bush ranch. And yes, it’s more than most people can hope for. And that’s the problem; I’m running this campaign so more people can have access to what I’ve had. Most people who grew up like I did can’t even hope for this much. That has to change, that can change, and I will work to make that change as President.”

In the interview, he said this: “I’ve come from nothing to now have everything. And I think everybody in this country, no matter who their family is, or what the color of their skin, ought to get that chance. ”

Once again, I called it.

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »