Failing my Clinton Rorschach Test.

“I looked at the Rorschach blot. I tried to pretend it looked like a spreading tree, shadows pooled beneath it, but it didn’t. It looked more like a dead cat I once found, the fat, glistening grubs writhing blindly, squirming over each other, frantically tunneling away from the light. But even that is avoiding the real horror. The horror is this: In the end, it is simply a picture of empty meaningless blackness. We are alone. There is nothing else.” Ok, I’m not that ’round the bend. But I have to admit, when I saw this picture of Sen. Clinton on Drudge today, this immediately came to mind:

Oddly enough, the same exact thing happened a few weeks ago when this oft-used pic instantly reminded me of this.

Or is it just me?

As a disclaimer, unlike Republicans and denizens of Halloweenland — I’ll stand by that one — I’m not comparing Sen. Clinton to Linda Blair’s secret admirer or a psychotic, snazzily-dressed mass-murderer here. In fact, I think Drudge’s tendency to post unflattering pics of Hillary and Chelsea Clinton is often cruel, juvenile, and bordering on sexist (if not plunging right past that border.) So, this is not meant as a comment on Clinton per se, only on the implicit associations made by my impressionable fanboy subconscious, which would seem to trump slightly the findings of my Implicit Association Test. (And, in my defense, at least I wasn’t so irredeemably geeky as to come up with Tasha Yar.)

Stepping Back for the Big Picture.

With a six-week lull between now and the next contest, during which I hope to spend more time focusing on Harold Ickes than on Harold Ickes (sorry, dissertation humor), now’s a good chance to buck Mark Penn and refocus on the macrotrends in the primary race right now:

For one, superdelegates are clearly trending towards Obama. “Among the 313 of 796 superdelegates who are members of Congress or governors, Clinton has commitments from 103 and Obama is backed by 96, according to lists supplied by the campaigns. Fifty-three of Obama’s endorsements have come since he won the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, compared with 12 who have aligned with Clinton since then…[Since Ohio/Texas] the Illinois senator has won backing from nine superdelegates and Clinton one, according to the campaigns and interviews.” (Speaking of which, he picked up another one today in Wisconsin’s Melissa Schroeder. As you probably know, you can keep track of the supers over at DemConWatch.)

For another, whatever sound and fury Mark Penn tries to kick up about Pennsylvania and electability, it’s a tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing. In the most recent general election poll of the state, Obama still does better than Clinton against McCain there (although, thanks to all the recent negative press, McCain has moved ahead of both since this poll.) To his credit, Clinton supporter and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, off-message once again, today conceded Obama can take PA over McCain. (And in any case, as Michael Dukakis can tell you, past primary performance is often not a valid predictor of future outcomes.)

Otherwise, Obama is up in the daily trackers, although those tend to be volatile. Most importantly, obviously, Sen. Obama enjoys a sizable, if not insurmountable, lead in pledged delegates, votes, and states, so we’re in very good shape, despite what ever sad butchering of reality emanates from Camp Clinton these days. So keep your chin up, y’all. If you got money, donate. If you got time, phonebank, write your supers, and/or get the message out. Let’s press this thing home.

By the way, while looking for a good Penn-Microtrends link above, I found this NYT book review that begins with an anecdote about the TV show Numb3rs: “‘There’s no way the bad guys can win,’ my son assures me each time we watch the show together. ‘They can’t do the math, Dad.’” Truer words have never been spoken.

Preach it, Keith.

“You are campaigning as if Barack Obama were the Democrat and you were the Republican…Voluntarily or inadvertently, you are still awash in this filth.” One part Edward Murrow, one part Howard Beale, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann speaks his mind on the Clinton campaign, Geraldine Ferraro, and the kitchen sink.

And, while I’m embedding video, these merry pranksters made a similar point today, albeit with more snark and less dudgeon. Vinegar or honey, they’re all speaking the truth.

Fair is Foul, and Foul Fair.

“The results of those primaries were fair and should be honored.” Speaking of rogue states, the Clinton campaign continues its gamesmanship in regard to the beauty contests held in Michigan and Florida. (As reported yesterday, Florida’s House Dems — four of nine of whom are Clinton supers (two are Obama voters) — already stepped on the idea of a do-over.)

As for those “fair” primaries being seated as they are, that’s obviously ridiculous if the contest is still in doubt, particularly given that Sen. Obama wasn’t even on the ballot in Michigan. But, don’t take my word for it — Here’s Sen. Hillary Clinton on the question back in 2007: “It’s clear: This election they’re having is not going to count for anything. I personally did not think it made any difference whether or not my name was on the ballot.“

A New Sheriff in Town.

“‘If you have a single ounce of self-preservation, you’ll vote no,’ implored Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) last night.” The House creates a new independent ethics panel, 229-182. As the WP notes: “Even with two House members under indictment, two others sent to prison, and several others under federal investigation, nearly half the House did not want to submit the body to the scrutiny of a panel not under its control.” Nevertheless, ethics watchdog groups seem pleased with the bill. Said Common Cause‘s Sarah Dufendach: “For the first time in history, you have nonmembers able to initiate investigations. They’re doing oversight. They’re the new police.” (And to tie everything back to the current theme, Sen. Obama advocated an similarly independent Office of Public Integrity for the Senate in his ethics reform package. Sen. Clinton, someone with considerably more than “a single ounce of self-preservation,” voted against it.)

Spitzer’s Out…Hubris or Death Wish?

“I am deeply sorry that I did not live up to what was expected of me. To every New Yorker, and to all those who believed in what I tried to stand for, I sincerely apologize. Over the course of my public life, I have insisted — I believe correctly — that people regardless of their position or power take responsibility for their conduct. I can and will ask no less of myself. For this reason, I am resigning from the office of governor.” Spitzergate comes to its inevitable close as the Governor resigned this morning, paving the way for Lt. Governor David Paterson to take office in Albany. (Yes that means Clinton -1.)

I know that some Dems have argued that Spitzer shouldn’t resign, citing David Vitter in particular, and that something is fishy about the Dubya Justice Department’s handling of this case. To be sure, I haven’t been relishing the unsightly upsurge in schadenfreude among the GOP, Wall Street, and exactly the type of corporate ne’er-do-wells Spitzer spent a lifetime fighting.

But, let’s get real here: Spitzer’s actions weren’t only brazenly and colossally dumb, they were patently illegal. Now, one can question the purported immorality of the world’s oldest profession, and I would be among those who think it’s a relatively victimless crime, situations like human trafficking excepted. But given that Spitzer is a guy who’s personally put people in jail for prostitution and then condemned them in the press, this would seem to be a no-brainer. He had to go down for this, or he would have put himself above the law. So whether or not Spitzer had well-connected political enemies — and, of course, he does — is somewhat beside the point here. The real problem here is that Gov. Spitzer was so unfathomably stupid as to engage in illegal acts that he — better than virtually anyone else alive — knew would result in his downfall. And the tragedy is that, given what Spitzer might’ve accomplished in office otherwise, everyone now pays the price for his apparent inability to restrain his appetites.

Beware Pennsylvania Tunnel Vision.

“Simply put: If Obama (and supporters) set expectations for a knockout punch in Pennsylvania, they will be giving oxygen to a gasping Clinton machine on its last breaths. But if they keep Pennsylvania in perspective (no single state has determined the nomination, although New Hampshire, Nevada, and Ohio were all frantically seen and spun as such in their moments), they’ll emerge from the coming Pennsylvania Clinton victory – a kind of Last Hurrah for the politics of the last century – to cross into the 21st century beginning in early May.” I added this link to the post below, but in case you missed it: Al Giordano crunches the numbers and argues that focusing on the Keystone State is not the way to go.

Along related lines, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe downplayed the importance of PA today: “Pennsylvania is only one of 10 remaining contests, each important in terms of allocating delegates and ultimately deciding who are nominee will be.” (And before anyone argues that this broader focus means Obama can’t win Pennsylvania in the general, take a look at the polling there. As in many other states, Obama does significantly better against McCain in Pennsylvania than does Clinton.)

The Magnolia Blooms. | The Slog Ahead.

“What we’ve tried to do is steadily make sure that in each state we are making the case about the need for change in this country. Obviously the people in Mississippi responded.” Sen. Obama takes Mississippi handily, winning 60%-38% (with 99% reporting.) This means a probable pick-up for Obama of five more delegates (19-14).

And now, mainly because pundits seemingly can’t do math and the Clinton campaign has proven itself utterly shameless in defeat, we’re in for six misbegotten weeks of ruthless campaigning until the next test in Pennsylvania. Sen. Obama is up by approximately 160 pledged delegates on Clinton, meaning Clinton has to win every state ahead — including states she’ll be lucky to even come close in, like Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota — by 67-70% — margins she has yet to accomplish anywhere but Arkansas. If, for some reason, we want to play by the Clinton metrics, Obama’s popular vote lead is at least 680,000 votes in the official tally, but that doesn’t include several of the caucus states. Add them and Obama’s lead becomes 830,000 votes. And, of course, Obama has won twice as many states.

Now, I for one think there’s a good bet Sen. Clinton will win Pennsylvania by an Ohioesque margin. Guess what? It won’t matter. It’s over. But because the Clinton campaign refuses to face the reality of their situation, and because neither the supers nor the media seem to be inclined to inform them of thus, expect six more grueling weeks of needless intraparty bloodletting.

Sigh…between this and Spitzer’s meltdown, it’s Christmas in Spring for the GOP right now. Update: In a bit of good news for Sen. Clinton, she gets her own version of the CA recertification bounce, picking up four delegate in Colorado and one in New York as those results become official. Of course, she’s still down 155 or so, but I’m sure the Clinton campaign will take solace where they can find it.

Don’t Mess with Sinbad…or Greg Craig.

“I think the only ‘red-phone’ moment was: ‘Do we eat here or at the next place.‘” As you may recall, Sen. Clinton’s recent touting of her commanding foreign policy bona fides hit a snag when it turned out not only that she was lying about the particulars on several trips, but that her big Kosovo excursion was taken with those wily diplomatic veterans, Sheryl Crow and Sinbad. (If you frequent Talking Points Memo, one wag (no, not idiotic, although he’s funny too) has been having a good deal of fun with this over the past week or so.)

Well, now the real Sinbad has gotten involved, and his critique of Clinton’s account of that trip is pretty devastating. ““I never felt that I was in a dangerous position. I never felt being in a sense of peril…In her Iowa stump speech, Clinton also said, ‘We used to say in the White House that if a place is too dangerous, too small or too poor, send the First Lady.’ Say what? As Sinbad put it: ‘What kind of president would say, ‘Hey, man, I can’t go ’cause I might get shot so I’m going to send my wife…oh, and take a guitar player and a comedian with you.“‘”

Update: If you don’t want to take Sinbad’s word for it, how about Greg Craig, the director of Policy Planning for the State Dept. during the Clinton years? He completely eviscerates Clinton’s claims to foreign policy experience in a memo this morning: “There is no reason to believe…that [Sen. Clinton] was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue – not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.” (He then goes on to refute her claims country by country. Pretty damning stuff.)

Pelosi: No Effin Way.

“I think that the Clinton administration (sic) has fairly ruled that out by proclaiming that Senator McCain would be a better Commander in Chief than Obama. I think that either way is impossible.’” Sinbad aside, you really don’t want to tick off Speaker Pelosi. Calling a joint Obama-Clinton ticket “impossible” in an interview with New England Cable News today, Speaker Pelosi makes her displeasure obvious with the Clinton campaign for hyping McCain over the Senator from Illinois. “I wanted to be sure I didn’t leave any ambiguity.” Play with matches, Sen. Clinton, you were due to get burned. Update: Lest anyone missed the import, Pelosi says it again: “I do think we will have a dream team, it just won’t be those two names…Take it from me, that won’t be the ticket.”