Obama: I Would Have Gotten Rid Of Mark Penn
Obama, today in Indiana:
“I think it was surprising to me that a high ranking, if not the highest ranking, member of Senator Clinton’s team would be engaged in business activities and lobbying that was directly contrary to the position Senator Clinton had taken,” he said.But if one of his advisors had done the same thing?
“Let me put it this way: I’m not surprised that Senator Clinton found herself in an uncomfortable position as a consequence. And I know that if staff of mine were putting me in that kind of position, I would get rid of them.”
Hillary spokesperson Jay Carson's response:
“When Sen Obama’s top economic advisor told the Canadian government not to take his anti-NAFTA rhetoric seriously, he and his staff misleadingly denied that the meeting ever occurred, and then took absolutely no action,” Carson said in a statement. “It’s good to know he has a higher standard for our campaign than his own.”
That last barb was a pretty good line, Jay, though I'm sure lots of folks will be objecting to the Goolsbee-Penn comparison, since they're hardly of comparable stature within the campaigns and were engaged in different types of activities.
Late Update: Oh, and Penn was getting paid; Goolsbee wasn't.
Late Late Update: It's also worth noting, however, that Goolsbee was reported (though it's been disputed) to have been characterizing Obama's position, while Penn wasn't characterizing Hillary's position. Meanwhile, here's video of Obama:















Is Goolsbee a paid employee of Obama's?
April 11, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
He wasn't a paid employee of Obama and he wasn't a paid lobbyist by the Canadian Government.
While Penn was paid several hundred thousand and Clinton's husband was paid close a million to give speeches in support of the deal.
April 11, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
He wasn't a paid employee of Obama and he wasn't a paid lobbyist by the Canadian Government.
While Penn was paid several hundred thousand and Clinton's husband was paid close a million to give speeches in support of the deal.
April 11, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Judging by Hillary's mounting debt, Penn wasn't paid, either...
April 11, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds like this is Obama's response to
Hillary's: Wright would not have been my pastor.
Hello Elton!
April 11, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Umm...yeah, except the Goolsbee thing was debunked and the Canadians said they misrepresented his position. The Canadians also said that Hillary's campaign was implicated in saying the same things.
Also, Goolsbee is in no way comparable to Penn, because last time I checked Goolsbee wasn't being bankrolled by the Canadians to support NAFTA (which still wouldn't be as bad, because Canada isn't an anti-union paramilitary hell hole like Colombia is)
How pathetic that that is all they can come back with. So typical though.
April 11, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary should continue pushing a debunked story. It will only add to her already impeccable credibility.
April 11, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Oilbama, do not waste your time giving opinions on Hillary's campaign. I sure sure there are plenty of women your supporters have not called F*cking Wh*res today. Keep up your uplifting campaign and get them out there. You can give them extra points if they slime elderly women.
April 11, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Once again, don't try to conflate Randi Rhodes with Obama, because she had nothing to do with him. But I don't expect anything more than that trash from you desperate Hillary supporters. You can't defend Penn or Bill or Hillary on the facts, so you bring up Randi Rhodes to attack Obama? So pathetic..
April 11, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
LuxVeritas, It was a Obama campaign event fundraiser listed on Obama's website for Obama supporters. Clear enough for you?
It sounds like you want to throw your hero Randi Rhoades under the bus.
April 11, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, go to MyDD. Todd Beaton (Hillary supporter)wrote an entire post on this. It was not his fundraiser. It was a dinner thrown by people voting for him to raise money. Completely different. You cannot hold him accountable for everything that his supporters say. It would be like holding Hillary Clinton responsible for all the idiocy you spew here...
and if it was Obama who sponsored the event, do you honestly believe the Clinton campaign wouldn't be milking it for all its worth...?
April 11, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't bother to respond to dembillc. H/She has been posting the same crap in every thread today.
April 11, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah...I don't know why I bother with these idiots.
April 11, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm often tempted to respond to dembillc because he used to have an intelligent argument for supporting Clinton. But lately, he seems to have devolved into a troll. I wonder if there's a list of Known Trolls so that we can make better use of our time. Has anybody been keeping count?
April 11, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
This topic has been broached a few times. Here are two I like:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/surveying-the-troll-landscape.php
and my favorite:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/dembillc-wins-the-troll-youd-m.php
April 11, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, these are good reading. But I'm looking for a flat out list like this:
KNOWN TPM TROLLS
dembillc
goatlife
milo
You get the picture. Maybe I'll spend a weekend doing this myself if it doesn't yet exist.
April 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mathew weaver
Raek
I did write a post about these trolls to ignore about a week or 10 days back. I can't find it now at TPMEC.
April 11, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
At this point, anyone who still supports Clinton in her effort to foment civil war in the Democratic party is a troll. And a fucking elderly whore.
April 11, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your hypocrisy is amazing.
You can't point to Obama saying anything derogatory to women, so as always you have to try the guilt-by-association meme. It points to an overall weakness in your argument if you can't say anything about the candidate and have to attack those around him. If that's the best you've got, you've got NOTHIN'. HE didn't say it, HE didn't endorse it, HE wasn't there, HE didn't promote the fundraiser (not so fast Dembillc, you're going to say it was on his website. Look up Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly and Ronald Reagan on his supporters too. ANYONE can blog on the site. Just because someone blogged the event, doesn't mean it's OFFICIAL, just as someone reading TPM would (hopefully) not regard your opinion as Official, either).
Let's get this straight, I'm not excusing what Randi Rhodes said, but you're CONSTANTLY over-inflating her role in the Obama campaign. What do I mean? You're suggesting she HAS a role in the Obama campaign.
SHE DOESN'T!!!!
Got it?
McCain actually DID insult women on SEVERAL occasions, yet you don't say a damn thing. Why is that? Are you a sexist because you condone HIM calling his wife what he called her? What he said about Chelsea? What he allowed to be said about Hillary standing right next to the woman that said it? Why no outrage there?
Simple. You don't give a shit about sexism. You don't give a shit about inclusion and taking back this country. You care about tearing down a political opponent and don't give a shit about the consequences if neither Clinton nor Obama gets elected, so long as you tear down Obama.
Sheesh, leave some straws for the rest of the Trolls to grab...
April 11, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I'd certainly be happy to call you a fucking whore. Would I get extra points for calling you an elderly fucking whore?
April 11, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a huge difference between actively lobbying against policies and simply telling people not to worry about them.
I mean, even if you support a policy, it still makes sense to tell people who are afraid they would be negatively affected that it won't be that big of a deal. Doing that isn't a betrayal of the policy, it's actually good for it.
April 11, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wright, Goolsbee, Rezko. Rinse. Repeat. Rinse. Repeat.
This is where Obama loses out to Clinton. The man just seems to have no taste for drama. All of his "scandals" are so watered down and infrequent, they need to be stretched over months if not weeks. In contrast, the Clintons give us a fresh dose of conflict-of-interest and utter hypocrisy on an almost daily basis.
Vote Clinton - because how else are we going to entertain ourselves?
April 11, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
billysunday 11:08 am:
I hope I'm correct in saying that there is sarcasm in your comment. Regardless, I found it dryly funny.
Every once in a while, I find it helpful to take a step back and reflect on some of the craziness of this campaign. I reached a flipping point last night when I read a NYT Caucus article about the fight for delegates in Guam.
Go to the URL below, read the article, and read my response (4/10, 6:33 pm). I hope you find humor in it.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/the-late-word-spotlight-on-guam/
April 11, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Oilbama, instead of giving Hillary advice, thank god she did not listen to you when you voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill. Why don't you answer why you compare your campaign to acts of War Crime?
At a recent fundraiser, Senator Obama is quoted to say, "For those of you who are just weary of the primary, and feeling kind of ground down or that it's like a Bataan death march, I just want everybody to know that the future is bright." Senator Obama compared his campaign tour of the U.S.A. to the War Crime of the Bataan Death March.
Just stick to your calling women F*cking Wh*res routine, it has more class.
April 11, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
At this point, after saying the same thing over and over and over for days on end, one must safely assume that you're paid by the line.
It would be a wonderful addition to this board if there was an ignore feature where your posts wouldn't show to those of us that tire of your propoganda.
November 2008 can't come soon enough, if only to be rid of your ranting.
April 11, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do you mean that he'll continue ranting if Clinton concedes and throws her support to Obama? Man, that's just crazy.
April 11, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
My fear is that s/he will continue ranting for the entire 8 years of an Obama administration.
April 11, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's beyond crazy. I hope it's unlikely, for his sake.
April 11, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ah,
fresh air. Thanks for pointing that out, Greg.
There is no comparison really and that was a total straw man answer.
April 11, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let me just say this, dude - I've had all the fucking drama these last 8 years that I need in this lifetime. I ain't looking for drama from a president. I'm looking for cool and the ability to think under pressure which Obama exhibits in great huge amounts.
April 11, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're right, there is no comparison between the Goolsbee and Penn actions.
Goolsbee was meeting on behalf of the Obama campaign to communicate that the campaign's public statements did not match its private intentions.
Penn, on the other hand, was meeting on behalf of his own corporation separate from the Clinton campaign.
Once again, Obama proves not only that that he's all words and no action, but that those words don't count for much.
April 11, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
This qualifies as gold medal spin.
So it's perfectly acceptable to have the "chief campaign strategist" lobbying for a foreign country while directing Clinton's campaign, because he's doing it on his own time?
Too freaking hilarious.
April 11, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll be sure to remember that whenever Hillary's lobbyists do something she supposedly opposes.
"It's OK if Penn supports Blackwater! I don't."
April 11, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, Goolsbee wasn't meeting on behalf of the Obama campaign. He was meeting in the capacity of a professor for the University of Chicago and for 30 seconds of that meeting he made a comment that misinterpreted and later misrepresented in a memo.
There is no comparison whatsoever to Goolsbee making an offhand comment that the Canadian Gvt has admitted to misrepresenting and Penn who has received 10% of the Clinton campaign's donations (while her campaign employees' insurance premiums, small business owners across the country get stiffed, UC Davis has to take her campaign to collections) to LOBBY for on behalf of a foreign government for a trade deal.
It would've been more appropriate for Greg to also add that Hillary Clinton's campaign is notorious for holding Obama's campaign to a higher standard than her own (i.e. He takes donations from Oil company employees so he won't fight oil companies even though I have received more donations from Oil company employees and PACs and lobbyists)
April 11, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
The difference was that Goolsbee never gave the Canadians any assurances or otherwise took a position on Nafta contrary to Obama's. Or don't you recall that fact?
April 11, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is so disingenuous. I don't care what he says about anything after the fact.
April 11, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary is so disingenuous. I don't care what she says about anything.
Fixed it for you.
April 11, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama may exaggerate, but he's not an inveterate liar nor is he married to one.
April 11, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Redrum. Redrum.
April 11, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the update, Greg. I wasn't able to find out myself whether he was a paid employee or not....
April 11, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
I support Obama, but I wish he hadn't said anything about this. It feels like he's twisting the knife.
April 11, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
It sounds like he was asked about it.
What is he supposed to say? No comment?
This isn't Hillary bringing up Rev Wright in a right-wing newspaper interview.
April 11, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's campaign has never even so much as apologized for campaign co-chair Jesse Jackson Jr's shameful comments on the morning after Clinton won the NH primary. The Clinton campaign has fired people for much less than that more than once.
April 11, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Shorter: look! Over there! A shiny new pony that is completely unrelated to the topic of the post!
April 11, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
But... but...
Bill says Politics is like football. You're supposed to get hurt. or something.
April 11, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who have they fired?
Bob Johnson (of drug accusation fame)? Nope.
Geraldine Ferraro (of Affirmitive Action fame)? Nope (she voluntarily stepped down but continues to fund raise).
Bill Clinton (of Jesse Jackson comment fame)? Nope.
Howard Wolfson (of comparing Obama to Kenneth Starr fame)? Nope.
Mark Penn (of being a total parasite fame)? Nope (changed his job title, nothing more).
So again I ask you who, EXACTLY, have they FIRED again?
April 11, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Late, as usual.
That story has played out.
Who burned down Clinton's office in Indiana?
April 11, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
A Clinton surrogate to get the insurance money to pay overdue bills in California??
Seriously though, are you trying to imply that the Obama campaign is responsible for this too???
You do know that some random crackpot was recently arrested for vandalizing Obama's IN campaign office too, right?
Random crackpots happen, deal with it.
April 11, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL! Too funny.
Even gotalife has to admit that, right, gotalife?
April 11, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
God did. Do you think Clinton will take the hint?
April 11, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
To borrow an Onion headline:
God Answers Prayers Of Hillary Clinton
'No' Says God
April 11, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pyrrhus.
April 11, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Late, Late, Late Update: The Colombian Government said they weren't sure whether Penn was there on behalf of the campaign or his company...
April 11, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton is really trying to make this analogous to Golsbee. But there was not and COULD HARDLY HAVE BEEN any conflict of interest.
Goolsbee was not "lobbying" for anything.
Obama's stance on NAFTA has always been the same, and his adviser was very likely saying something to reassure the Canadians, but nothing as extreme as what he was quoted as saying.
Remember, the discussion was about inserting labor and environmental standards into NAFTA. Don't you guys think Canadians might want that as well? Now if he'd gone to the Mexican embassy, that would have been quite a different story. But Canada and the US should be pretty much on the same page regarding labor and environmental standards in NAFTA.
April 11, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Some enterprising Obama supporter ought to make a YouTube video that goes like this:
1. Headline re: Goolsbee talking w/ Canadian embassy
2. Headline re: Penn talking w/ Colombian embassy
3. Footage of Clinton criticizing Obama about Goolsbee
4. Footage of this Obama comment
5. Footage of Clinton from last week equating the two, basically the same thing Carson says here
6. Footage of maple syrup and drugs being imported from Canada
7. Footage of violence against laborers in Colombia
8. A giant not-equal-to sign
April 11, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOLOLOLOL!!!!!
I love it.
April 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
When I read the response on another site (which coupled his words with a picture of a finger pointing Obama) I began flipping out of my pro-Obama mind. "How could he do this? It shows no empathy or understanding of Senator Clinton's circumstance? Don't do to her what she has done to you!"
After listening to the response, I felt much better. He was calm, and thoughtful, not a wagging finger in sight. His response conveys more empathy when you see and hear it (versus merely reading his spoken words).
I'm calmer now...
April 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see...her chief strategist took hundreds of thousands from Columbia. So did her husband
Money talks
Bullshit walks
And the both are still there
April 11, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Late Late Update: It's also worth noting, however, that Goolsbee was reported (though it's been disputed) to have been characterizing Obama's position, while Penn wasn't characterizing Hillary's position."
Greg, why did Mark Penn personally tell you that ?
What a load of crap.
And, what a pathetic two-bit troll you are.
April 11, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
This latest flap will of course be seen as another Clinton attack on Obama. The fact that Obama started it will be seen as Obama responding to the negative Clinton campaign. It's getting comical. What this story needed was another photo of Obama with his long-suffering look.
April 11, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would've been more appropriate for Greg to also add that Hillary Clinton's campaign is notorious for holding Obama's campaign to a higher standard than her own
Good point and just another reminder that Hillary uses Karl Rove–style tactics, like accusing her opponent of committing sins that she herself is guilty of.
April 11, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
For a man who is known for his ability to deliver an inspiring sermon-like speech when it is prepared in advance, Obama is surprisingly poor at speaking off the cuff. I've noticed this before. He needs to stop the pauses. We don't want another President that constantly pauses to think as he tries to speak. It might raise speculation that he, like Bush, is being fed his lines through an earpiece.
April 11, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll agree with you on that. It's something he needs to improve upon.
April 11, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reach for straws much?
April 11, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hear hear! What we Americans need is a President who never pauses to think before he speaks!
100 years in Iraq McCain comes to mind...
April 11, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh please!
April 11, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
They've got a rather comical photo of Obama over at Fox News that accompanies their story about Obama saying he would have fired Mark Penn. They are also covering the story of the so-called "suspected traitor delegates" that Obama purged from his convention list before the outcry caused him to reinstate them. I don't think that story was covered on this blog. But AP picked it up.
And it turns out that Randi Rhodes will be coming back to Air America. I'm sure her departure was all a ruse. This has happened before. They made a big deal about her refusing to apologize about foul language she used to describe Hillary, and subsequently being canned. But she's coming back. And then there's that hick homophobe Ed Schultz. Too bad. Progressives deserve a better radio venue. One that doesn't try so hard to split them apart.
April 11, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto loves Fox News. That is all you need to know about him.
April 11, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Try a little harder on research, and a little less on spin.
Randi Rhodes was terminated from Air America.
Her new gig is on NovaM.
Air America's owner is a big Hillary supporter who took offense to something (admittedly awful) that Randi said off-air.
While her words were deplorable, they weren't on the job. She was terminated for something she said at a private function.
Again, I am not justifying the words. But that fact that she was fired (or forced to resign, that much isn't certain) for that, yet Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter and Savage can continue to spew their venom unabated OR EVEN CHALLENGED by the Hillary supporters here points to their hypocrisy.
A progressive radio person gets chastised for poor word choice said off-air and everyone gets up in arsm.
Conservative radio people do worse, say worse every day and you give them a free pass.
More importantly, where's the respect for Freedom of Speech?
I don't agree with Hannity constantly positioning Obama as a closet Al Qaeda sleeper-agent, but I don't watch Hannity, I don't support his sponsors. He has a right to speak, and though I think he's a despicable person, I no more want him to be outlawed from speaking than Rhodes.
If you disagree with Rhodes, Schultz, Miller, Maddow or any of the other radio folks that have come out to say they prefer Obama to Clinton, then by all means don't listen. But THEY have as much a right to speak as the Conservatives.
If there's a market for All-Hillary all of the time, then go start your radio show and God bless you in your endeavors. Just let me know where you are on the dial so I can be sure to avoid that one too...
April 11, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama would have gotten rid of Mark Penn. Ok. But he still sat in that church for 20 years. Where's Obama's forgiveness? Where is his sense of understanding? Did he disassociate himself from Pastor Wright? Could not Hillary disagree with Penn on this issue, but still not totally disassociate herself from him? I'm being sarcastic, of course. But it is another example of how Obama wants to have things both ways.
April 11, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Could not Hillary disagree with Penn on this issue, but still not totally disassociate herself from him?"
Not while she's paying him as chief campaign strategist, and two other members of her campaign are also connected to Columbia.
Was Wright ever Obama's chief campaign anything?
We're talking about the difference between statements of opinion and financial transactions. A major distinction. This is a bit more than a disagreement.
April 11, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto makes the same mistake I've seen made constantly since Air America came on the air. He is presuming to say that our entire existence as liberals hangs on whether or not Air America makes it.
LOL!
April 11, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lol...Thats funny HusseinTenaX!
Also funny is the Rev Wright thing. I think the people have pretty much spoken about that, doesn't matter how much they try to keep it in the fold. McCain has pastor problems as well, so dont give me that it will hurt him in the General, not as long as McCain has a So-called hate speaker himself.......This stuff is so silly!
April 11, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we need to go back to what Goolsbee actually said, rather than relying on the Clinton campaign's characterization of it. The whole thing was a load of nonsense--start to finish. And the fact is, no one actually knows who talked to who, or who said what. The bullshit and the accusations were flying, but the facts were, and are, unclear.
Penn, on the other hand, clearly met with the Columbians. And what's most interesting to me is that no one in the press seems even vaguely curious about whether Clinton's campaign was aware of Penn's moonlighting or not. I'd think it would be an important question ask: "What did you know and when did you know it?"
April 11, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm very disappointed that you've chosen to change your avatar.
April 11, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are we Democrats still fighting this internal battle. We're all caught up in this obsession with the Clintons. Turn the page. Focus your energy on GE.
June 12, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink