Air America’s Rachel Maddow has a hilarious web video series called Campaign Asylum and this week’s episode takes on Mike Huckabee.

Maddow reads Marie Claire so we don’t have to and reveals that in a recent interview with the magazine, Huckabee came out strongly against one of the more pressing problems of the day: mini-skirts.

In America, if a person dresses provocatively, they’re calling attention, maybe not the most desirable kind, to private parts of their body.

I gotta agree with Maddow when she wonders if a women’s magazine is really the best place to take women to task for the way they dress. Presumably he’d like women to vote FOR him, right?

Mike Huckabee | 1 Comment »

The L.A. Times has a frontpage article today on the potential problem Romney’s Mormon faith could pose for him among evangelical Christians. It includes quotes such as:

“I don’t believe he would be guided by God.”

and

“When it comes right down to it, a Mormon’s strength is human. A Christian person’s strength is superhuman. I want [a president] who has that extra on his side.”

But the guy seems to have pretty strong faith, certainly from their perspective he’s right on the issues (this week at least) and his no-vice and novel faithful-to-one-wife lifestyle certainly must impress. So what is it exactly that makes Christians so nervous about voting for a Mormon?

The Times breaks it down:

• [Mormons] consider the Book of Mormon a holy text, a revelation from God, on par with the Bible.
• Mormons hold that God is made of flesh and bone…and he’s even married to a Heavenly Mother.
• man can become God-like after death, a concept called ultimate deification.
• Mormons fully accept the New Testament account of Christ’s life and resurrection…[b]ut they don’t accept the doctrine of the Trinity — Father, Son and Holy Ghost as one entity.
• the [Mormon] church permits abortion in cases of rape or incest, if the mother’s health is at risk, or if the fetus has severe deformities.

The article stresses, however, that these theological differences are not insurmountable; there’s a pragmatic streak in the evangelical community that preaches one overriding principle: ABD: Anybody But a Democrat. But in the primary, when the choice is among a field of candidates who share the same positions, well, as Jason Thurman, asst. manager of the Shepherd’s Fold bookstore puts it:

“If one’s a Christian and one’s Mitt Romney? I have a feeling I’d vote for the Christian.”

But which Christian? If the feelings of several members of a South Carolina Bible study are any indication, Romney may well have something to worry about come, oh, July 4 or so.

[they] favor former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister. They’re also eager to hear more from former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson.

Mitt Romney | 5 Comments »

Is this an endorsement not even Duncan Hunter wants?

Nahhh.

(h/t Lucas at calitics)

Duncan Hunter | 4 Comments »

According to The New York Times Caucus blog, John McCain’s oppo research team has circulated this YouTube video of Mitt Romney appearing to voice support for abortion rights as late as May of 2005 to the press.

In the video, Romney says:

I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice and so far I’ve been able to successfully do that. And my personal philosophical views about this issue are not something that would do anything other than distract from what I think is a more critical agenda.

Watch it here:

The reason this is significant is that the statement comes a full six months after Romney’s much-ballyhooed conversion from pro-choice to anti-choice in Nov. 2004. But the Romney campaign says there is more context here and so first, they released one smackdown of a statement:

It is very troubling that the McCain campaign would attack the governor s pro-life stance by trying to alter the context of a statement made at a news conference where he made a passionate case for his veto of stem cell legislation that showed a level of disregard for the sanctity of human life. The McCain campaign s motives are obviously borne of desperation. Their actions are both sad and unfortunate.

But they didn’t stop there. They also distributed a YouTube video of their own, a longer piece from that same press conference where Romney speaks in more depth about the stem cell bill he vetoed, which was the purpose of the press conference.

I gotta say I think this round goes to Romney for giving as good as he got but still appearing to take the high road. While it’s good to see the McCain camp getting down with the tubes, the move does smack a bit of desperation. Of course, if I was running John McCain’s campaign right now, I’d be desperate too.

John McCain, Mitt Romney | 2 Comments »

Speaking of Rudy’s 12 commitments, he apparently flubbed the speech in which he unveiled them today by totally omitting one. Transcript (taken from video shown on Hardball) below:

GIULIANI: Apparently I skipped over one of my 12 commitments. And the one that I skipped over was…how could I skip that one, oh my goodness. [beat…uncomfortable pause…takes off glasses…wipes brow…wipes brow again…glasses back on…] Yes, I will cut taxes and reform the tax code.

He forgets to promise to cut taxes in New Hampshire? Good one. But in the end, even after all 12 were listed, there was one glaring hole in his 12 commitments: Iraq.

When asked about the omission of the most important issue to voters this campaign season, he said:

“What I was trying to do was to look at the things, as best as you can predict it now, that are going to be there a year and half from now,” he said. “Iraq may get better. Iraq may get worse. We may be successful in Iraq. We may not be. I don’t know the answer to that. That’s in the hands of other people. But what we do know for sure is the terrorists are going to be at war with us a year, a year and half from now.”

In other words…

Iraq: sooooo not my problem. La la la, I can’t hear you…

That’s what you call a real leader there, folks.

Rudy Giuliani | No Comments »

Greg Sargent at TPM Cafe has a great analysis of a CNN story on Rudy Giuliani’s anti-terrorism cred. On one hand, Sargent is pleased that the MSM is finally starting to investigate the holes in Giuliani’s so-called heroism on 9/11 (what Sargent calls “successful municipal crisis management” at best.)

The CNN report cites Dominic Carter, Sr. Producer for NY1 who criticizes Rudy on three main points:

- terrorism wasn’t even on Giuliani’s radar for most of his tenure as mayor

- Giuliani made the decision to house the emergency command center 1 block away from the World Trade Center. As CNN puts it: “Too close to a previous terrorist target without any backup site, according to the 9/11 Commission report. During the 9/11 attack, the command center was destroyed.”

- There was no compatability between police and fire department radios. CNN again cites 9/11 commission report: “the response operations lacked the kind of integrated communications and unified command contemplated in the directive.”

But Sargent notes that the ultimate message the piece sends is that Giuliani is the best man to keep us safe from terrorism. CNN totally buys into the entire premise of Giuliani’s candidacy by referring to him as “tough-talking” and casting Giuliani as the savior not only of the 9/11 attacks but of the 1993 attack as well:

he’s been through it twice. During the 1993 and 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City.

Giuliani wasn’t yet mayor in 1993.

And then there’s the words CNN flashes on the screen during the report:

Giuliani’s War On Terror

So much for subtlety.

This is what passes for “balance” these days — if the truth is critical of a Republican, throw in some made up shit to balance it out. There’s no context here, it’s merely myth-building. As Sargent says,

It has nothing to do with having actual national security experience, which Rudy is trying to create the illusion of having in arguing that he’s the candidate who can best be trusted to fight global terrorism.

Until the media begins making this fundamental point…it’s basically ceding the key rhetorical turf to Rudy at the outset. Merely flashing the words “Giuliani’s war on terror” on the screen is handing Rudy a victory. That’s all there is to it.

Rudy Giuliani | 2 Comments »

Considering what a punchline Lieberman’s 2004 tagline “Joe-mentum” has become, it’s puzzling why the Romney campaign would use a similar mash up of “Mitt” and “momentum” in this fundraising ask on the Romney blog Five Brothers:

While my Dad and our entire family are thrilled that momentum is on our side, we know that change happens fast in campaigns and you can never rest on your laurels. At this critical time, we need all the support we can get to ride the “Mitt-mentum” all the way to the White House.

The fact is, while Lieberman used the line to try to artificially generate momentum where there was none, the Romney camp can legitimately claim some big Mo. There’s an internal poll that shows Romney 17 points ahead in Iowa and a new Mason Dixon Poll that shows him 11 points up in New Hampshire. So you gotta wonder why they’d encourage the association with Lieberman’s dud of a campaign.

Mitt Romney | 2 Comments »

On yesterday’s Hardball, Chris Matthews went OFF on the new conservatism and on Rudy in particular for empowering terrorists by cowing to them. I’d first read about it over at dday (where I’m subbing this weekend) but you really got to see it to appreciate it (h/t to TPM.)

The must-read Fareed Zakaria piece Matthews references is HERE.

Rudy Giuliani | 9 Comments »

A brand new FoxNews poll shows some interesting movement among the Republican field since Fred Thompson’s non-announcement announcement last week (the poll was taken the evenings of 6/5 & 6/6.) Since they surveyed respondents both with and without Thompson in the race, it provides a pretty good picture of who is hurt most by his entrance into the race. (There seems to be a debate factor at play here as well since the polling took place the evenings of and after Tuesday’s debate.)

First WITH Thompson:

As in other recent polls, Thompson goes from single digit support pre-announcement to double digit support post. He surges 5 points to 13%, essentially tying McCain for second place (MOE = +/-3%.) The poll also finds Rudy and McCain slipping 2 points each from May, Romney ticking up 1 and the “I don’t know”s dropping from 24% to 19%.

Now WITHOUT Thompson:

Here Rudy stays static with 26%, McCain drops 3 points and Romney climbs 2 from May. The “I don’t know”s go from 25% to 20%.

A few conclusions (from someone who is admittedly no poll expert, if you are one, please weigh in):

- Interesting that the “I don’t know” crowd is identical whether Thompson is included in the poll or not. This would seem to indicate that undecideds are not breaking for Thompson but rather other candidates are bleeding support to him.

- He takes equally (4%) from both Rudy and Romney while only 1% each from McCain and Gingrich

- Since McCain dropped from May to June in both instances, his fall is likely due more to his pro-immigration solliloquey during the debate than to Thompson’s entrance into the race.

What do you all think?

Fred Thompson, Polling | No Comments »

CNN’s Ticker wonders if the recent groundswell of support Ron Paul is enjoying online rises to the level of a “phenomenon.” So far, Paul’s catalog of feats includes:

“Ron Paul” is among the top-searched terms on Technorati, the popular site that tracks blog posts. According to the community Web site, Eventful, there are more than 16,000 outstanding “demands” for Paul to appear in cities across the country – that’s up 11,000 from just one week ago, leapfrogging him over Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York. Ron Paul video clips get plenty of play on YouTube and there is no shortage of blogs devoted to his support.

The question is, will this enthusiasm translate into real world metrics. Certainly the polling doesn’t show much movement (although the new FoxNews poll — taken the evening of and after Tuesday’s debate — has him rising from 1% to 2%.) But over on the fundraising side of things, if this story is true, we could indeed have a phenomenon on our hands.

Congressman Ron Paul’s donations have moved up - not by hundreds of thousands - but by millions as a result of his debate performances and groundswell of support on the Internet and in New Hampshire, observers close to the campaign say.

[snip]

[they] are revealing – with some astonishment – that donations to the campaign in recent weeks have pushed the total up to perhaps $4 or $5 million.

Of course, the source of the story is something called Free-Market News Network, Corp., whose very name would seem to betray a bias toward Paul, but look for mainstream media to start to report this leading up to the June 30 end of quarter fundraising deadline for a sense of whether there’s any truth to it. But as of now, his fans in the tubes sure are eating it up.

UPDATE: Speak o’ the devil, Ron Paul is running second in the Facebook/Newsvine election poll with 10% of the entire vote (behind Obama with 21% and ahead of Giuliani who has 8%.)

Ron Paul | 3 Comments »