Sevugan Joins Obama Campaign, Hits Hillary's Ties To Mark Penn
Many of you who have been following this race with Talmudic intensity will recognize the name Hari Sevugan -- he was Chris Dodd's spokesperson back in the last Ice Age when Dodd was still in the race.
Now Sevugan has joined the Obama campaign as part of the latter's efforts to beef up its communications team, which is taking more incoming fire than ever between Hillary and GOP nominee John McCain. On his first day, Sevugan is already out with an Obama campaign statement hitting Hillary for not cutting loose Mark Penn...
"Even though Senator Clinton said she'd distance herself from her chief strategist for meeting with the Colombian government, we later found out that he's still very much part of her strategy team. The comparison Senator Clinton tried to make today is laughable, but also typical of a candidate who has said one thing but done another this entire campaign."
Penn indeed will remain an "important" part of the Hillary campaign, as Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson confirmed today.
Late Late Update: I've revised the post to delete my error -- contrary to what I wrote earlier, Hillary herself did make the comparison between the Penn and Goolsbee situations.
I didn't watch it, but I thought that Clinton actually made the comparison herself on the morning TV rounds (see, e.g., Halparin's summary here: http://thepage.time.com/full-coverage-of-the-tuesday-morning-shows-2/ )
April 8, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, she did make the comparison on CNN this morning.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/08/ltm.02.html
ROBERTS: Optics and relationships though are also very important in a political campaign, and the fact that he still remains on the payroll, though, in a diminished role and with free trade being such a sensitive topic in the state of Pennsylvania, could the fact that he is still attached to the campaign hurt you there on the 22nd?
CLINTON: Oh, I don't think so, because I think people want to know where I stand. And I find it kind of curious, you know, we took action, and I think it was appropriate. Contrast that to Senator Obama's campaign, where as far as I know, nothing was ever done when one of his top economic advisers representing the campaign, unlike Mr. Penn who is not representing the campaign. But Mr. Obama's representative told the Canadian government basically not to pay any attention to what Senator Obama was saying about NAFTA, and I haven't seen any action taken in that campaign.
April 8, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Pwned", as they say.
April 8, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you miss Hillary's appearances on CNN where she refused to denounce Mark Penn and hit Obama on Goolsbee?
You're wrong on this, Greg.
link here:
http://thepage.time.com/full-coverage-of-the-tuesday-morning-shows-2/
April 8, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't Hillary make the same connection on one of the various morning shows she was on today?
Anyway, since when did we start parsing who said what? A campaign spokesman is the person who speaks for the campaign. So, if Wolfson or SInger made the analogy, isn't it the same thing?
April 8, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to CNN's THe Ticker, Hillary certainly did make the comparison between how her campaign "handled" Penn (how they completely bamboozled the media is more like it) and how Obama's campaign handled the Nafta thing.
So perhaps you may wish to correct the hazing part? The new guy is right on more than the Mark Penn issue.
Please correct your post.
April 8, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. It was two morning shows, CNN and ABCNEWS, that the candidate herself, Hillary Clinton, made the comparison between Mark Penn and Goolsbee.
There's even a nifty video clip to go with it here:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/04/08/intv.hillary.clinton.cnn?iref=videosearch
April 8, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Hillary Clinton, the candidate herself, reiterated the same statement on Mark Penn and Goolsbee on ABC NEWS's "Good Morning" below:
Looks like we're the ones hazing you, Greg.
April 8, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it was her advisors who made the comparison, but so what? It is her call (at least in theory it is, if it isn't what kind of a President will she be?)
And if it is okay for Monster Inc to keep Penn, a man/worm/golem who is directly working against his employers interest (at least one of his employers) why did Monster Inc insist on Obama firing Samantha Power?
Ms Power made an unfortuneate remark when he called Monster Inc monsters, but Penn was/is actively working against Hillary's stated positions. If anything Penn's transgressions are far, far worse than Ms Power's.
Ultimately the person who should be fired from Monster Inc is Hillary herself. She is supposed to be in charge, is she not?
April 8, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correct Immediately!
Clinton said this morning on the ABC Morning show she doesn't recall members of Senator Obama's campaign being required to step down after having similar contact with foreign governments. I am positive on this as I was watching and shouted "That's a Lie!" at my television.
April 8, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
link to hillary making the comparison added
April 8, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for updating your post, but I'd suggest a revision of the post otherwise people might continue to think that Hillary didn't make the comparison herself. Not that many people would read the late update beyond the entirety of the post.
April 8, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
added an editor's note. we're just kidding around here, people -- sevugan doesn't mind
April 8, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, you're just lukcy you didn't go with a Catholic joke, or you'd be doing penance on this one. As it is, looks like you'll have to stay late at yeshiva for this.
April 8, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the editor's note, Greg. Did you notice that Ben Smith picked up an article from Colombia quoting Bill Clinton's full-throated support of the Colombian free trade deal?
The link to the Ben Smith article outlining the Spanish translation of the article is below:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/Bill_Clinton_backed_Colombia_trade_deal_Estoy_a_favor.html
April 8, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank's very much.
April 8, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sloppy. What's happening to you Greg? Are you tired? Frustrated and angry with us Obama supporters scrutinizing every word you write? It just seems like your coverage has taken a decidely different slant these last few days/weeks that it didn't have before. Not accusing you of bias, just curious if there is something happening behind the scenes that we need to be aware of so that we cut you some slack.
Hope all is well. Oh and next time, I'd double check your facts before you try to pull a one-man gotcha operation against a campaign. It opens you up to claims of bias....
April 8, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
All three candidates have lobbyists.
Obama fires his, then he has a point.
Politics as usual.
April 8, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
One mindset seems to prevail among Clinton cling-ons: "wishful thinking"
And most often, it's "we think Obama is worse than Hillary". They stick to that belief as hard as they can.
Just saying stuff like "Obama has lobbyists on his staff" doesn't make it true.
And the claims that the campaigns should be held to different standards is ridiculous: "you play by your rules and I'll play by mine".
What a crock.
April 8, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are saying Obama does not have lobbyists on his campaign?
Please get informed before you spew.
April 8, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Name one active lobbyists on Obama's campaign.
It should be easy to prove a positive, if you're so knowledgeable.
April 8, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
He has lobbyists and they are always active.
Get real.
Also, found the dirt on Obama.
The RW blogs are posting it.
Hint, it is about his radical pastor.
April 8, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you know about it, let me know. I might change my vote if you prove to me that Obama is lying.
And guess what, I found the dirt on Clinton. It's in the same blogs.
What are you saying, exactly?
April 8, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't waste your time with the Clinton Troll. It is obvious this person has no specific info, just wants to prove your candidate is no better than Hillary. When one argues with a fool, it becomes hard to tell the difference!
I do appreciate willingness to listen to different viewpoints.
April 8, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless it has Obama spouting something his radical minister said, I'd say you found nothing new. Of course, I traffic in reality and you in fantasy....
April 8, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are too funny.
Because nothing says "accuracy" quite like rightwing blogs...
And nice smokescreen, btw. The post was about Clinton, Penn, etc, but you managed to drag the retired Jeremiah WRight into it. Excellent rightwing trollery.
April 8, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice backup.
I ALWAYS trust Right-wing blogs for my sources!
With friends like you, who needs enemies?
April 8, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
SOURCES is overstating it, I think. That would imply actually reading and processing information.
This guy could just paint the words Wright and Rezko on his TV, and he'd quote "TV Coverage that proves Obama is not fit to be president"
April 8, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gotalife does not cite sources. Just makes assertations. Check out his blog for more examples.
April 8, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
And to be clear, Obama's plan would prevent "anyone who is a former lobbyist from working on those issues during his first two years in the White House. And no one who is a political appointee could ever lobby the White House."
You can't compare Obama's stance on lobbyists with anything coming from McCain or even Clinton.
Penn is still the CEO of a company, an active lobbyists, and is STILL running her campaign despite the smokescreen.
April 8, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huh. Seems like I wasn't the only one who caught the fact that Hillary is flacking the Nafta thing while claiming her campaign did more to respond to the Penn situation than Obama did with Goolsbee...Hilarious!
Tell me again about how unfairly the media treats Clinton?
April 8, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
All I can say is I love Chris Dodd so his endorsement means a lot to me and I like the fact that someone who worked for him is going to work for Obama.
Chris Dodd - a dream candidate as far as his politics go - but then, so is Russ Feingold.
*sigh*
At least I know Chris Dodd is on my guy's side and that makes me all the happier.
April 8, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
Looks like Sargent's attempt at hazing was too clever by half.
April 8, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg,
Leave the hazing to Niedermeyer & Marmalarde.
April 8, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for updating the post.
April 8, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man, I love blogging. It means never having to say you were wrong. You can just "update." Seriously, Greg, don't you moonlight in media criticism? Don't you understand the difference between an "update" and a "correction"? And whether the subject of your error cares or not, YOU should care about whether your reporting is accurate. And frankly, so should your editor.
April 8, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
HAHAHA....wow, you really showed your true colors on that one Greg!
And it really shouldn't be an update, it should be a "I'm too busy carrying water for Hillary that I can't admit I'm wrong" addendum.
April 8, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not a fan of accusing anyone of bias and sometimes I think we Obama fans are a little harsh on Greg but this is kind of bad. FredApp is right. This requires more than an update. This requires a correction. The difference is the mea culpa aspect. You start by deleting the incorrect material. Not just updating on the bottom. Then you put in a correction on top of it and say you are sorry.
April 8, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
In response to Late Late Update. Good work Greg. That is how it is suppose to be done.
April 8, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"hazing" -
Is that what they call lying nowadays?
I'm so behind the times.
So, really, everything Hari Sevugan said was true.
Man, TPM really can't stand honest politicians, can they?
April 8, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks for updating Greg.
Now my post looks silly! ;)
April 8, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ben Smith has been doing some decent reporting over the last couple of days. Check out this latest post:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/Bill_Clinton_backed_Colombia_trade_deal_Estoy_a_favor.html
April 8, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It turns out the Big Dog wants CAFTA to go through as well- or at least, he did.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/Bill_Clinton_backed_Colombia_trade_deal_Estoy_a_favor.html
April 8, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely hilarious that we posted the same link basically at the same time.
April 8, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
A good addition.
I appreciate Dodd more these days than ever. He's taken the fight to his own party, and the other, on Telecom Immunity.
That's a positive check in his column, no doubt. If this advisor had anything to do with Dodd's stands in the Senate, good on him!
April 8, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the correction Greg.
April 8, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hang in there Obama trolls.
This thing is over after Puerto Rico and she will.
Then we will unite to crush McCain in the general.
Listen to your President of your party. He is telling you what will happen.
April 8, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still waiting on that name of a lobbyist in the Obama campaign. Either that or some other proof for any of the other baseless accusations you have made against him today.
;)
April 8, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would challenge you on just how she's supposed to win, but then I remember you are allergic to logic, rational thinking and facts.
April 8, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ooops.
win.
April 8, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
getaloofah - Please link to the rightwing site you refered to earlier so we can all see what "dirt" you say they have on Obama. If you don't tell us where then the only thing we can see is what color your balls are.
April 8, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, you ask and you shall receive:
http://infidelsarecool.com/2008/04/07/jeremiah-wright-former-muslim/
And:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=29543_Obama_Campaign_Hosts_Anti-Israel_Blog&only
See a trend?
April 8, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pathetic.
You linked Freeper sites with absolutely NO credible evidence, only scurilous charges.
And again, rather than pointing to anything Obama's done, you're playing the guilt by association card again.
Just when you've hit rock bottom, you break out the shovel and start to dig anew...
April 8, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This you call dirt? The purported anti-Israel blog is hosted by Rabbi Michael Lerner (liberal yes, anti-Semite no) and posts pieces from the Israeli paper Ha'aretz and noted commie rag The Economist. You disappoint.
April 9, 2008 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh oh. Looks like you've been pegged. The problem with being such a well known liar is that eventually you get a rep for it. At this point you could get your tongue notarized and no one would believe you. Time for a new screename and avatar.
April 8, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I already provided him with one - gotaloofah. Just like his pal Bill O'Reilly.
April 8, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, Obama trolls.
Don't throw stones.......
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501468_pf.html
April 8, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
What it's an OpEd by Tom Daschle about the Free Trade agreement with Colombia, so what? It doesn't mention Obama in any way, is he guilty of something because Daschle might support him?
Please tell us what this has to do with anything!
April 8, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tom works on the Obama campaign.
I bet he made money on this deal as a lobbyist.
April 8, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
And yet, his firm isn't registered to lobby Colomubia. So what's the point of all of this?
Penn met with the Colombian government. Penn is still working for Clinton.
Daschle is in favor of the agreement, but his firm doesn't lobby. Daschle is an informal advisor to Obama, and isn't paid by the Obama campaign. Tell me again the similarity between them?
Oh, don't bother.
April 8, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except for one small problem. Tom is not a lobbyist. This again is an example of that little problem you have with the truth. Still Waiting.
April 8, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loofah - where's the dirt?
April 8, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man you are really getting desperate! It's kind of fun to watch you fall, but kind of sad too. Oh well, I think I'll live and just enjoy the train wreck.
April 8, 2008 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm curious also gotalife:
are you criticizing Hillary for not supporting free trade?
Are you implying that she's saying one thing, while Penn does another?
Not sure how your linked article says anything positive about Clinton.
April 8, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, she is leading on changing trade policy before any new trade deals.
April 8, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh, and Obama isn't?
Your desperate attempt to somehow portray Obama at odds with core Democratic issues is ludicrous.
If anything, the fact that Mark "kill Colombian workers" Penn is STILL working for Clinton makes your argument a farce.
April 8, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the dirt you mentioned on Obama? And you think the Washington Post is a rightwing site? C'mon, where's the dirt you promised us?
April 8, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gotaloofah -
You are citing Littlegreenfootballs? Littlegreenfootballs? Are you insane?
Because everyone on that site is.
April 8, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I knew that would stir you trolls up.
They are very pro Israel.
It is a taste of the gop smear machine.
Welcome to the real world.
Don't blow up again okay?
April 8, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
gotalife -
any dirt you find on Obama on these repugnant sites, imagine it times 100 if Hillary is nominated.
I still don't understand voting out of FEAR, instead of voting out of HOPE.
April 8, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aww Gotalife. Don't you get it? The point is that those blogs are as easily debunked as you are. In 04 it was a different ball game. No Olbermann, No youtube. Limited blogosphere. It's the modern world now. The 06 elections showed how what we are doing right here has destroyed the effectiveness of their disinformation techniques. That is why everyone is laughing at you. This is the real world.
April 8, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loofah - where's the dirt you promised?
April 8, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loofah - where's the dirt?
April 8, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your a damn coward.
THE GOP IS COMING, THE GOP IS COMING!
I hope your laptop battery dies before you get the guts to come out of your spider-hole.
April 8, 2008 11:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loofah is a REpug. I don't know one damn Democrat who would cite LittleGreenfootballs for any reason other than to point at the crazy people and laugh.
You are citing Squeaky. Good effing god.
What a reveal.
April 8, 2008 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's interesting that Reverend Wright, unlike Bill Clinton and George W Bush, served in the military. Honorably.
Although Hillary Clinton has (apparently) often flirted with the idea of serving in the military, she opted...not to.
Yet, the Clintons insinuate Wright is unpatriotic.
It's remarkably reminiscent of the treatment of John Kerry, in 2004.
Makes you wonder...are the Bushs and the Clintons all on the same team?
Or, do they just share strategy?
April 8, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mister Bill Rakes in Big Bucks from Columbia Trade Groups
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/08/bill-clintons-ties-to-col_n_95651.html
April 8, 2008 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
on a side note:
"Talmudic intensity"?
I'm really not sure what that phrase means, but man does it ever sound cool.
April 8, 2008 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Talmudic intensity"
Like the phrase.
Also, I'm glad that Hari Sevugan has joined team Obama.
April 9, 2008 12:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with howard25. Quite a few of the Clinton supporters are using the same fear-mongering and fascist arguments that the Republicans such as Karl Rove use. Has the Democratic party become what we bitterly oppose? I thought we were the party that stands up for individual freedoms, such as free speech. I think some Democrats need to recognize that they have been led by the soul-less Penn (Rove's mental twin) down the path to fascism.
Fascism according to dictionary.com:
appeals to strident nationalism (patriotism); and promotes suspicion or hatred of both foreigners and “impure” people within his own nation.
April 9, 2008 1:29 AM | Reply | Permalink