Mark Penn a Thorn in Democrats’ Side
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Democrats, HillaryThe Barack Obama / Hillary Clinton tensions do not seem to be lessoning. Amongst the just released memos is a particularly harsh anti-Obama memo written by Clinton’s chief strategist Mark Penn in March of 2007. Penn’s memo outlines why Obama shouldn’t be considered a potential contender for the American presidency:
“All of these articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared toward showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting that in a new light. Save it for 2050 … It also exposes a very strong weakness for him — his roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited. I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values.”
Ouch.
From a strategic standpoint, Penn’s line of attack may have been understandable, if rather cynical, when the letter was written well over a year ago. But the nastiness of the missive and its release so close to the convention is not going to make Obama supporters warm any faster to Clinton supporters.
Now Penn is at it again. Today, he has an editorial on Politico justifying John McCain’s attack ads. Penn’s point, that attack ads work, is accurate (and rather obvious) but whose side is this guy on? Aren’t Clinton’s people supposed to be going after McCain, not praising the Republican nominee’s strategy?
I’m not actively rooting for or against Obama at this point. So, to me, Penn’s antics are just good political theater and a reminder that the Democrats still have a sloppy, feckless quality about them, despite their recent organizational and messaging improvements.
But I know McCain must be loving this. A contentious Democratic convention would make what’s sure to be a deathly boring Republican convention seem welcome.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 12th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Democrats, Hillary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:01 am
“…Penn’s antics are just good political theater…”
Well sure they are, but so what? Why is everyone so surprised that politics is political? Republicans do the exact same thing: demonize one another for the nomination, followed by back-slaping once they’re done spilling blood.
Tired of partisan politics? Then it’s time to get out of politics. People don’t run for office because they agree with everyone else. They run because they disagree.
Truman was right: if you want a friend, get a dog.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:11 am
People do not run for office because they disagree. Hillary and Barack disagree on very little. They run because they believe they can make a difference (for good or for bad) to some segment of the people, and because they seek the power to do so.
Peter Pettigrew is and has always been a Death Eater. Oh, sorry. He is using the name Mark Penn right now. Slightly better shape than Scabbers the rat.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:33 am
I’m skeptical that the words of Mark Penn will actually influence voters that much in the end.
it is certainly true that Obama’s bio is not a paint-by-the-numbers portrayal of Joe Bag-of-Donuts. But pointing this out can only have power in the absence of folks taking their own measure of the guy. That means that Obama can still fill in the blanks by telling his own story and giving off a vibe that makes him feel like someone who has shared the IMPORTANT common American experiences and thus understands what people want from their next President.
The Clinton campaign was a train wreck. They should have won easy. Penn is one guy who is being cast as deserving of much of the blame for that. So everything he is doing now should be understood in the context of someone who wants to distract attention from his own failures until interest in the primary campaign has blown over. Thus, any attention given to Obama’s perceived inadequacies is time not spent dissecting how Hillary Clinton’s team pissed away a nomination that was theirs for the taking.
The irony here is that if Obama is so unattractive a candidate, this begs ever more the question of how Penn and the rest of the Clinton team dropped the ball. The obvious answer is that perhaps Penn doesn’t understand America nearly as well as he thinks.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Penn calling Obama “not a real American” is more than slightly humorous.
Penn is a dual-citizenship, AIPAC, Zionist flunky like the Clintons and the Bushes. “Real” Americans have had enough of a foreign nation controlling our foreign policy. We WANT a “real” American!!!
August 12th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I have been hearing this all over the news, the internet, I think the media is wanting to stir things up in the Democratic party so their corporate candidate, McCain will win. Trouble is if that happens there will be perpetual wars, more tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, (only 2/3 of them pay taxes anyway) and the already middle class will become extinct. But so be it; maybe we have to really hit bottom before we can have a new beginning. But it won’t be fun for those in the lower tier income brackets, which is most of us these days.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
SO WHAT!! Here we go again and Fraudbama will definitely use it as any type of excuse that he can. Clinton DID NOT use this offered scenario and that states a great deal in itself. Be pissed at Penn, sure. BUT Clinton turned it down so why all this ONCE AGAIN “stir up the pot”, I do not comprehend.
The DEMS will lose for certain in November. As a DEM voter for 40 years I will one of the MANY who do not vote at all or will cast a vote for McCain.
August 13th, 2008 at 8:10 am
Mark Penn is so totally irrelevant it is amazing any one still pays attention to him. He is a low rent bigot (how many people of color work for his firms, Burson-Marsteller and PSB?) and a dyed in the wool hawk.