Blogs

A Mole in Huckabee's Campaign?

| Wed Jan. 2, 2008 11:44 AM EST

Is there a mole in Huckabee HQ?

How else to explain two bizarre last-minute decisions of Mike Huckabee's campaign. First, the former Arkansas governor held a near-meltdown of a press conference on Monday, during which he decried negative campaigning but then played for the assembled camera crews the anti-Romney ad he had commissioned and had decided not to use. Then on Wednesday, Huckabee was scheduled to leave frosty Iowa--the day before the caucuses--for sunny L.A. to appear on the Jay Leno show. So he was trading a day of campaigning in the Hawkeye State for several minutes of chuckles on a national television show that probably is not watched by many of his potential voters, older social conservatives (unless these Iowans have a secret lust for Paris Hilton jokes). Huckabee certainly could reach more caucus-goers by working the Iowa media. And Iowan voters, as you know, expect to be treated like royalty by the candidates. Spurning them for laughs with Leno is not a show of respect. It looked as if Huckabee was more concerned with me-time than kneeling before Iowans--a true sin in presidential politics.

It practically seems that someone calling the shots in the Huckabee command is trying to sabotage his almost-a-miracle campaign. Whom might that be? Well, longtime readers of mine know that I am usually quite skeptical of conspiracy theorizing. But in this case, let me suggest a culprit: Ed Rollins. The veteran Republican strategist and operative recently signed on as Huckabee's campaign chairman. Rollins, who ran Ronald Reagan's wildly successful reelection campaign in 1984, has had a bumpy relationship with the GOP establishment. He worked for Ross Perot (as opposed to President George H.W. Bush) in 1992. But he has usually been a loyal GOPer. In the 1990 election, he ran the National Republican Congressional Committee. In 1993, he was campaign manager for Republican Christine Todd Whitman's successful gubernatorial effort in New Jersey. The following year, he helped Republican George Nethercutt, a Republican, unseat Democratic House Speaker Tom Foley. And he has assisted several Republicans since then.

It's been pretty clear--even if you don't read the National Review and watch Fox News--that the GOP elite is not keen on Huckabee ending up as the Republican nominee. So could Rollins be a double-agent? A plant of the GOP high-and-mighty, which would be delighted to see Huckabee crash and burn? Rollins does have a rep as an underhanded operative. After the Whitman race, he disclosed that he had had secretly paid black ministers and Democratic campaign workers in New Jersey to suppress the black vote. (He then partially retracted the remark, saying the comment was "an exaggeration that turned out to be inaccurate.") And in a 1996 book, Rollins claimed that he had learned (after the fact) about an illegal $10 million contribution to Reagan's 1984 campaign from Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos, but Rollin has refused to disclose details about this supposed crime.

So is it possible that Rollins is the GOP's Man in Huckabee Land? That may be fanciful speculation on my part. (Few high-profile strategists would want to be seen losing a campaign.) But the only other explanation is that after years of skillful politicking, Rollins has lost his game and gone stupid. Can you believe that?

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Networks Face Candidate Rebellion in NH

| Wed Jan. 2, 2008 11:28 AM EST

Ron Paul supporters are up in arms over the expulsion of their candidate from a Fox Republican candidate forum two days before the New Hampshire vote.

"If we permit Fox News Channel executives the power 'to limit a Sunday forum the state GOP party is co-sponsoring to five presidential candidates' based on polls, then this country really is in trouble," said Michael Kelly in a comment to the Nashua Telegraph this morning.

Meanwhile, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are asking ABC and the local WMUR — sponsors of the last big debate this Saturday — to let in candidates who have been included in past debates.

Under criteria set by the sponsors, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, two sitting Democratic senators, and Dennis Kucinich, a sitting congressman, are likely to be excluded. Clinton said yesterday: "I believe in the true spirit of the New Hampshire process; the candidates who have participated in past debates should not be excluded from this one."

"The voters of New Hampshire deserve to hear all the Democratic candidates' views on who can best lead America in a fundamentally new direction, and that's why I urge these networks to allow full participation in this week's debate," Obama said.

John Edwards and John McCain said they didn't want to interfere with the network decision.

"Fox News is scared of Ron Paul," wrote Eric Martin in response to a Nashua Telegraph article. "I'm not sure why, but they are. There is an opportunity for the New World Order to be overturned and for sovereignty to be given back into the hands of the people. I think that much of what Ron Paul stands for is the truth. Fox News should be scared not to allow Ron Paul in the debates. For some reason, the truth always stands in the end. It may be a thousand years from now, but at the end the truth will be standing on top of all the lies that tried to usurp it. If Fox News tries to hide the truth, it will fall, especially as a news organization, and one whose slogan is 'fair and balanced.' Fox News should include Ron Paul in there debates."

His detractors could care less "Just face it, Ron Paul is a weenie spouting crack pot ideas," said Robert Chapman in another comment. "The reason people think he has more than 5 percent support is because every crack pot is drawn to him like a full moon."

South Carolina Politics - So Damn Dirty

| Tue Jan. 1, 2008 9:41 PM EST

A holiday card claiming to be from "the Romney family" ended up in the mailboxes of South Carolina Republicans recently, bearing this inscription:

"We have now clearly shown that God the father had a plurality of wives, one or more being eternity by whom he begat our spirits as well as the spirit of Jesus, his first born, and another being upon the earth by whom he begat the tabernacle of Jesus, as his only begotten in this world."

Minus 10 points for being dirty as hell. Plus 10 points for being pretty clever. The Romney campaign has condemned the card, saying, "It is sad and unfortunate that this kind of deception and trickery has been employed. There is absolutely no place for it in American politics."

Kucinich and Obama Secure Second-Choice Agreement

| Tue Jan. 1, 2008 8:10 PM EST

In 2004, Dennis Kucinich told his supporters to caucus for John Edwards if Kucinich was not viable in their precincts. (Here's an explanation of viability and the caucus system.) That recommendation helped propel Edwards to a second place finish in Iowa.

This year, Edwards won't receive the same boost. Barack Obama has secured Kucinich's second-place recommendation. Not every second- and third-tier candidate will identify a leading candidate for their supporters to caucus for should he or she fail to meet the 15 percent threshold for viability. But for some, it's not hard to see where there supporters will go.

According to Pollster.com, Obama, Edwards, and Clinton are the only candidates polling over 15 percent. Here are the numbers:

Clinton — 29.4 percent
Obama — 27.0 percent
Edwards — 25.1 percent

Richardson has 5.5 percent; he has not indicated who he wants his supporters to caucus for should he be unviable, which makes sense because Richardson has the strongest chance of being viable of the second-tier candidates. If a Richardson supporter were trying to make up his or her own mind, he or she might see Richardson's strong anti-war stance and look to Edwards or Obama. But he or she might look at Richardson's lengthy resume and decide to support Clinton. We'll call that a wash.

Biden is at 4.4 percent. His supporters like his experience and foreign policy credentials. If forced to choose one of the top three to support, they will likely support Clinton. (Though perhaps Edwards.)

Dodd and Kucinich poll at 2 percent or below in most polls. Gravel polls at zero. Their supporters will likely be spread across the top three, with a heavier proportion going to Obama and Edwards. The Kucinich-Obama agreement is obviously in play there.

There are a couple other factors to keep in mind. Edwards has been in Iowa forever, and he did well there in 2004. Iowans seem very comfortable with him. From some second-place polling I've seen online, he will likely benefit the most from second-choicers. Many voters are ABCs, anybody-but-Clintons. It is widely assumed Clinton will gain the least from second-choicers.

What does this mean? Clinton, Edwards, and Obama may all get just about 30 percent. Don't trust anyone who tells you they know who's going to win this thing.

ABC, Fox Limit NH Debate

| Tue Jan. 1, 2008 12:07 PM EST

ABC and Fox are limiting the New Hampshire primary vote by denying candidates they deem non-competitive the right to participate in the last big debate here after the Iowa caucuses.

The way things stand now, Democrats Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel won't be allowed to participate in the Saturday, January 5 debate sponsored by ABC News, Facebook and WMUR. On the Republican side, Duncan Hunter has been kicked out.

Republicans Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter are to be excluded from a Sunday, January 6 Fox News GOP forum as well.

But Fred Thompson, who is nowhere in the New Hampshire race, is to be included by Fox.

ABC and WMUR have set the following criteria for getting into their Saturday, January 5 debate to be held in Manchester, according to this morning's Manchester Union Leader:

- Place in the top four in the January 3 Iowa caucuses

- Poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four reputable random sample New Hampshire telephone surveys sponsored by an established news organization and conducted and released by 9 a.m. on Friday, January 4.

- Poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four reputable random sample national telephone surveys sponsored by an established news organization and conducted and released on or before 9 a.m. Friday, January 4.

WMUR News Director Andrew Vrees told the Union Leader, "Right now, Dodd has a half of a percent in our most recent poll. That's two in 512 telling us they'd vote for Chris Dodd. Gravel has zero and Dennis Kucinich has 2 percent, and we're rounding up."

"Historically," said Vrees, "candidates with these types of numbers a week before the primary don't fare much better on Election Day."

Republican state chairman Fergus Cullen said Fox News has invited John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee to the Sunday forum. "No one else was invited," Cullen said.

In a statement, Cullen was critical of all sponsors of the debates and the forum. "Limiting the number of candidates who are invited to participate in debates is not consistent with the tradition of the first-in-the-nation primary," he said. "The level playing field requires that all serious candidates be given an equal opportunity to participate — not just a selected few determined by the media prior to any votes being cast."

Paul spokesman Kate Rick said the Paul campaign "has called Fox a half-dozen times" and received no response. In the past Paul has said Fox is "scared of me," and that they were propagandists for the Iraq war, and not real conservatives. "We have been here in New Hampshire a fair amount. We have raised $19 million this quarter, and we're polling at 8 percent here, which is ahead of Mr. Thompson," Rick said. "We are at a loss as to what criteria we are not meeting."

Over the weekend, the Kucinich camp was scrambling, madly trying to get the candidate's polling figures up to 5 percent. Chris Collier, Kucinich spokesman, said an August poll had his candidate at 7 percent.

In Prison, No One Can Hear Your Heart Breaking: Incarcerated Mothers

| Mon Dec. 31, 2007 11:54 AM EST

Sick as I get of the treacle that passes for heartwarming holiday stories this time of year, stories like this one make me see them in a new light. While we trim trees and open presents, 53 toddlers are growing up in a Mexico City prison with their incarcerated moms.

From the New York Times:

MEXICO CITY — Beyond the high concrete walls and menacing guard towers of the Santa Martha Acatitla prison, past the barbed wire, past the iron gates, past the armed guards in black commando garb, sits a nursery school with brightly painted walls, piles of toys and a jungle gym.
Fifty-three children under the age of 6 live inside the prison with their mothers, who are serving sentences for crimes from drug dealing to kidnapping to homicide. Mothers dressed in prison blue, many with tattoos, carry babies on their hips around the exercise yard. Others lead toddlers and kindergartners by the hand, play with them in the dust or bounce them on their knees on prison benches.
Karina Rendón, a 23-year-old serving time for drug dealing, said her 2-year-old daughter thought of the 144-square-foot cell she shared with two other mothers and their children as home. "She doesn't know it is a prison," she said, smiling sadly. "She thinks it's her house."

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Edwards in New Hampshire

| Mon Dec. 31, 2007 11:30 AM EST

As John Edwards ends his Iowa campaign in a virtual tie with Obama and Clinton he is also showing some gains in New Hampshire. In an American Research Group poll conducted between December 27-29, Edwards inched up from 15 to 21 percent in mid December. Meanwhile, Clinton fell from 38 to 31 percent, and Obama rose from 24 to 27 percent.

The question remains whether Edwards, who has long concentrated on Iowa, can break through the entrenched Obama and Clinton operations here on election day.

That may depend on the reception here to his intensifying anti-corporate populist style campaign. In New Hampshire the overriding general issues always have been focused around taxes and fiscal responsibility. Government, especially Washington beltway politics, is viewed here with suspicion and in recent years has lost credibility. As in other parts of the nation, there is an anti-immigrant tide. These concerns could work against Edwards's message, with its emphasis on income redistribution and government involvement in daily life — which may mean new spending. And his health care plans call for more spending, not less. His promise to end disparity between poor and rich with implicit redistribution of income goes against New Hampshire's love of the free market. He has shied clear of immigration.

In addition, people remain unclear about whether to believe Edwards. Last week he dropped into Nashua, the populous area in the southern part of the state, for a door to door campaign, knocking on doors, dispensing coffee and doughnuts. He got a warm reception. Reporters asked him about lobbyists, and Edwards promised they would never get into his White House. "When I am President of the United States, no corporate lobbyist … will work in my White House," he said in a recent speech. He says he won't take money from them. But recently a private donation of $495,000 was made to the Alliance for a New America, a 527 — a political advocacy group that raises money and campaigns independently of the candidate — that supports Edwards. Edwards says he has "absolutely no control" over this contribution.

As for the influence of lobbyists, Edwards's supporters include Scott Tyre, who serves on candidate's national finance committee. Tyre is the president of the Association of Wisconsin Lobbyists and owner of Capital Navigators, a lobby firm. He has personally donated $6,600 to the campaign. Whether these sorts of contradictions will harm his campaign remains to be seen.

My, What Big, White Teeth You Have: The Trials, and Petty Triumphs of the Widows of Kosovo

| Mon Dec. 31, 2007 11:25 AM EST

Oh, the many ways in which women around the world suffer. And prevail.

Atop everything else, the women, and in particular the widows, of Kosovo have to deal with the horrific fall out from beauty ideals there even as they seek to resume something resembling a normal life. You'd have thought it was only dark women (black and Hispanic) who lighten their skin. You'd be wrong.

From Women's Enews (hat tip to Salon's Broadsheet for hipping me to the site):

Victoria Schultz returned to Kosovo after six years and was amazed at how life had improved for two war widows. Now they have a good pension, houses of their own and new teeth with which to smile. Remarriage, however, seems out of the question.
SKENDERAI, Kosovo (WOMENSENEWS)--The two women had new teeth!
I couldn't believe the white sparkle of their welcoming smiles when I returned to Kosovo last month for the first time since 2001 and went to see Shehrije and Fatime Kastrati at their farmstead in a resource-poor rural area.
Six years earlier, at the end of my two-and-a-half-year stay in Kosovo, I had despaired for these two women. Only in their 30s, all they had left of their teeth were a few darkened fangs. A local doctor familiar with Kosovo's folkways told me that many young girls whitened their skin with a zinc-based cream that made their teeth fall out at an early age.
Still, even with the efforts of humanitarian doctors and the relief groups that help these lone women, and their children survive with their menfolk gone, they have almost no chance of remarrying. A widow with children is about as marriageable there as one of their cows. But at least some are getting their smiles back. All they need now is a reason to 'cheese'.

Follow Up On Kristol - Man, Is He Wrong a Lot

| Sun Dec. 30, 2007 9:42 PM EST

To follow up on my post from yesterday re: Kristol's hiring at the NYT, here's a post from Glenn Greenwald's old site listing all the different times Kristol has been flat wrong about something. A sampling:

"There's been a certain amount of pop sociology in America ... that the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular." [April 4, 2003]
Just four weeks after the Iraqi election of January 30, 2005, it seems increasingly likely that that date will turn out to have been a genuine turning point. The fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, ended an era. September 11, 2001, ended an interregnum. In the new era in which we now live, 1/30/05 could be a key moment--perhaps the key moment so far--in vindicating the Bush Doctrine as the right response to 9/11. And now there is the prospect of further and accelerating progress. [March 7, 2005]
Last week the Bush Administration's second-term bear market bottomed out. [November 7, 2005]

If pundits were judged on how often the they are correct or incorrect, Bill Kristol would be the worst pundit in the country. He'd be out of a job. But he's not. Somehow, there are other criteria used in judging pundits—criteria clung too so strongly that no degree of wrongness can invalidate them.

"Mr. Ten Percent:" Bhutto's Party Picks Her Widower, Son as Successor

| Sun Dec. 30, 2007 6:51 PM EST

Here's the NY Times ten years ago, on January 8, 1998, on the alleged extraordinary corruption of Benazir Bhutto's husband, Asif Ali Zardari, named today as the caretaker co-chair of the Pakistan People's Party until their 19-year-old son Bilawal is old enough to take over.

A decade after she led this impoverished nation from military rule to democracy, Benazir Bhutto is at the heart of a widening corruption inquiry that Pakistani investigators say has traced more than $100 million to foreign bank accounts and properties controlled by Ms. Bhutto's family.
Starting from a cache of Bhutto family documents bought for $1 million from a shadowy intermediary, the investigators have detailed a pattern of secret payments by foreign companies that sought favors during Ms. Bhutto's two terms as Prime Minister.