By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer 

Posted May 30, 2008 – This could be it; after Saturday one of the Democratic candidates will be closer to nabbing the nomination.  And if the party’s leadership can prevail, they’re predicting the race between Senators Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) will not drag on to the party convention in August. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) predicted on Thursday it will be over on by next week’s end.  During a speech to the Commonwealth Club of California, Reid said, he has consulted Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, (D-Calif.), and they all agree.

Reid went on to say that if neither candidate has clinched the nomination after the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee decision about Michigan  and Florida; or after Puerto Rico’s primary; or following Montana’s and South Dakota’s primary, he’ll advise Senate Democrats to step-up and end the contest by taking sides as super-delegates.
But will President Bill Clinton and the former first lady bow out?  There is speculation she’s planning to take her fight to the floor of the convention.  Some of her supporters are already planning protests outside the DNC Rules Committee meeting.  

“I don’t lament this campaign taking as long as it has, but it’s time it ended,” Reid said.
A fight on the convention floor could be the death of the Democratic Party chance to take back the White House for a couple of reasons. First, new young voters attracted to the party might bolt and a prolonged battle could allow the two camps to fester, dig in and create an even bigger divide.

While the Clintons may be more popular with older voters, older voters can’t deliver party strength in the future.  The young folks Obama and Clinton have brought to the dance can’t become disillusioned or loose faith in process.  If they do, the Dems may never see the opportunity to draw them back into the fold.   

The leadership of the Democratic Party is stepping in (they hope) before it’s too late, but “too late” might already be here.  Democrats want to see if they can “unite” and “win” in November; and the only way that will happen is if they can end this primary sooner rather than later. 
Tune in later today as we talk politics on a new on-line web-cast “Today’s Voice.”   The political talk show will look at the week in politics and provide analysis.  I’ll be one of their featured guests today, so check it out at 2 p.m. EST, at www.myvoicedc.com.

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer

Posted May 29, 2008 – It looks like this weekend when the Democratic National Committee meets they’ll have to deliver a compromise that will satisfy both the Clinton and Obama campaigns and end the long-running dispute over Michigan and Florida.

The DNC Rules and Bylaws committee will meet on May 31, and it will be a tough call  to allow two states that violated party rules, by holding early primaries in January, to be given a pass and enjoy the same privileges of those states who played by the rules.

Changing the rules is one way to keep Sen. Hillary Clinton’s hopes of capturing the nomination alive.  And nobody knows; the party might fold and give her what she wants. 

What if one of the most popular American sports leagues, let’s say the NBA, decided to allow trailing teams to change the rules during the game. In basketball, under the official rules, each team gets five players; each player’s baskets earn the same number of points; and the basketball hoop is 10 feet high. 

I’ve never seen the rules change before, during or after a game.  The team, who scores the most points by shooting the ball through the basket wins.

The DNC could decide to change the rules and increase the number of delegates Obama will need from 2,026, and they appear to be preparing for that.  “Our magic number could increase kind of at the 11th hour here,” Obama campaign manager David Plouffe told reporters Wednesday.

“If it’s raised a little bit based on the Rules Committee, we’ll have to go get some more super-delegates,” he added. But at some point we’re the nominee.”

There are a couple of other options for the DNC. They could seat half the delegates at the convention or seat all the delegates with half a vote.  But it still isn’t clear how those votes would be split between the two candidates.

What’s confusing is why Clinton is pushing for the Democratic National Committee to seat all 368 delegates from Florida and Michigan. It’s true she won both states, but all of the other candidates agreed not to campaign in either state and Obama wasn’t even on the ballot in Michigan. 

Harold Ickes, an advisor to President Clinton, is now working for the former first lady, he’s also one of the 30 members of the DNC committee.  Ickes said, he’ll be pushing the panel to base their decisions on the January primaries. “We are urging 100 percent of the delegations be seated and that each delegate have a full vote,” Ickes said.

“We don’t think it’s fair to seat them fully because we both lived by these rules and pledged to abide by them,” Plouffe said.

It looks like it will be close to impossible to resolve this issue if they decide to forgo the rules, or change the rules.  That would never happen in basketball. 
 

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer

Photograph by Otis P. Motley

Posted May 27, 2008 – This long holiday weekend has kept Sen. Hillary Clinton on the

defensive, explaining away her reference to the June 1968 assignation of Sen. Robert Kennedy as her reason for remaining in the race.   

In other words, something could happen that would force or eliminate her rival Sen. Barack Obama from the race, and if she were to quit, who would the Dems have to carry on?  [But she says this was not her rationale … She says the only reason for her reference was that Kennedy was in the race in June – not that she would be around in the event that something happened to Barack.]

Is she serious? 

But putting all that aside, why is her campaign blaming Obama for the reactions to her comments?  It’s not as if this is the first time she’s alluded to a tragedy befalling Obama. It’s just that this time, when she was speaking to the editorial board of The Argus Leader of Sioux Falls, S.D., that it created media frenzy.

I recall her campaign dropping similar hints to columnist Robert Novak back in December, 2007, and he reported that the Clinton campaign had “scandalous information” that would be harmful to the junior senator and force him from the race.   

Clinton has also made it a practice of using code words, like “working-class” for “poor White folks,” whom she maintains won’t vote for Obama. Even one of her staunch supporters, Rep. Charles Rangel  (D-N.Y.), urged her to stop with the “poor White people” comments. 

And now, even after having eliminated all the other men who sought the Democratic nomination, she and her husband are charging sexism and unfair media coverage as the reason she trails her rival.

But this latest “spin” on the assassination gaffe tops them all: blaming Obama for something she said.

This is what she said: “You know, my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.”

So some folks thought she was back to her coded messages again, and this message sounded like she was implying that her competitor might be harmed. 

If she wasn’t suggesting that, why not come clean and say so?  In a letter she sent to The New York Daily News, she wrote: “I pointed out, as I have before, that both my husband’s primary campaign, and Senator Robert Kennedy’s, had continued into June. Almost immediately, some took my comments entirely out of context and interpreted them to mean something completely different — and completely unthinkable.”

On Sunday, her campaign continued to pounce on the Obama camp rather than offer up an apology.  Howard Wolfson, a Clinton spokesman said on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” that “it was unfortunate and unnecessary, and in my opinion, inflammatory, for the Obama campaign to attack Senator Clinton on Friday for these remarks, without obviously knowing the full facts or context.”

But it looks like the Kennedy family isn’t buying it either.  The New York Post reports that the Kennedys are infuriated by Clinton’s remarks.  They quote a family member as saying, “That comment may be the last nail in her campaign’s coffin.”

 Admitting the family’s priority is the health of the ailing senator, the Post reports an insider saying, “I think people really felt that a line was crossed.”

“She no longer has only her husband to blame for the ill-chosen comments coming from her camp,” another family member told the Post. 

Her widely perceived insensitivity couldn’t have come at a worse time, close to the 40th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s death. 

This isn’t the first time Clinton has created ill will with the Kennedy family. It’s believed the endorsements by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) and daughter of President John Kennedy, Caroline Kennedy of Obama were prompted by Clinton’s earlier comments that the Civil Rights Act was President Lyndon Johnson’s doing.  In essence, it diminished John F. Kennedy’s role as well as that of Dr. Martin Luther King.

Over the weekend, Obama gave the commencement address at Wesleyan University, filling in for the patriarch of the Kennedy family, Ted Kennedy, who was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor earlier in the week.

Obama spoke to the graduates on the lawn of the campus and called for the young graduates to commit to public service, a similar call made by the late John F. Kennedy in his 1961 inaugural address. 

Obama continues to stay above the fray, letting his campaign manger, David Axelrod, respond to Clinton’s chargers.  Axelrod told reporters that the incident is over and that Obama’s campaign in ready to move on. 

On to the primary races in Puerto Rico this coming weekend, then to South Dakota and Montana which, on Tuesday, June 3, will be the last states to vote.

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer

Posted March 26, 2008 – It looks like Sen. Barack Obama isn’t the only one with problem preachers in his camp.  McCain has joined the chorus, “renouncing” two lofty ministers who have “dissed” the Catholic Church and implied the Holocaust was God’s will. 

McCain, had accepted the endorsements of the Rev. John Hagee and the Rev. Rod Parsley, both conservative evangelical pastors, but was forced to distance himself from both of them following the release of inflammatory excerpts from their sermons.  

Hagee, a televangelist and pastor of an evangelical mega-church in San Antonio, remarked in a 1990 sermon that God had sent Hitler to deliver Jews to the Promise Land.

“Obviously, I find these remarks and others deeply offensive and indefensible, and I repudiate them,” McCain told reporters Thursday. “I feel I must reject his endorsement.”

McCain’s decision was a tough one.  Because denouncing the popular evangelist pastor could hurt the Republican candidate with the Christian right who’ll be an important constituency, needed in wooing voters in swing states like Ohio and Florida.

But this isn’t a first for Hagee. He’s also made disparaging remarks about the Roman Catholic Church, implying it supported Adolf Hitler.  So, McCain made a calculated decision. It was time to cut the pastor loose and disavow his endorsement. 

Smart move.

But as soon as McCain shook off the Hagee flap, comments from Ohio preacher Rod Parsley were discovered.  On a DVD version of one of Parsley’s sermons, the pastor says, “Islam is an anti-Christ religion that intends, through violence, to conquer the world.”

Parsley, pastor of the World Harvest Church in Columbus, Ohio, like Hagee endorsed McCain in February when he was battling former Gov. Mike Huckabee for the support of religious conservatives.  At the time of Parsley’s endorsement, the Arizona senator praised him as a “truly great leader in America.”

But on Thursday, McCain withdrew the platitudes. “I believe there is no place for that kind of dialogue in America, and I believe that even though he endorsed me, and I didn’t endorse him, the fact is that I repudiate such talk, and I reject his endorsement,” McCain told the AP.

McCain is now faced with a situation, not unlike the one Obama has endured regarding the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.  McCain, however, contends a difference in their cases, saying he can’t be responsible for everything a supporter might say.

Both Obama and McCain had one perception of who these men were and what they stood for and found out later a different side of them.

From here on out, politicians and pastors might want to keep some distance.

These philosophical and religious differences could be why the founding fathers thought the separation of church and state would be a good idea. 

 By Pamela Gentry, Senior Poltical Producer

Posted May 23, 2008 — Sen. Hillary Clinton makes an assassination gaffe while defending why she’s still in the race.  The New York senator said the following;

Clinton: … You know, I have been willing to do all of that during the entire process, and people have been trying to push me out of this ever since –

Q: Why?

Clinton:  I don’t know, I don’t know.  I find it curious, because it is unheard of in history.  I don’t understand it.  And you know, between my opponent and his camp and some in the media, there has been this urgency to end this.  And, you know, historically that makes no sense.  So, I find it a bit of a mystery.

Q: You don’t buy the party unity argument?

Clinton:  I don’t.  Because, again, I’ve been around long enough - you know, my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June.  Right?  We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.  You know, I just - I don’t understand it, and, you know, there’s a lot of speculation about why it is.  But –

Q: What’s your speculation?

Clinton:  You know, I don’t know.  I find it curious.  And I don’t want to attribute motives or strategies to people who I don’t really know …

After press reports of her comments she told reporters;

“Earlier today, I was discussing the Democratic Primary history and in the course of that discussion mentioned the campaigns that both my husband and Senator Kennedy waged in California in June in 1992 and 1968. And I was referencing those to make the  point that we have had nominating primary contests that go into June.  That’s an historic fact. The Kennedys have been much on my mind in the last days, because of Sen.  [Ted]Kennedy; and I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation and particularly for the Kennedy family was in any way offensive. I certainly had no intention of that whatsoever.

My view is that we have to look to the past and to our leaders who have inspired us and give us a lot to live up to. And I’m honored to hold Sen. [Robert] Kennedy’s seat in the United States Senate from the state of New York, and have the highest regard for the entire Kennedy family.   Thanks”

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer

(Posted May 22, 2008) - There’s some good news from state of California for Sen. Barack Obama. A new poll released today finds more folks shifting dramatically towards his candidacy and away from both Sen. Hillary Clinton’s and John McCain’s.

This trend could put the damper on Clinton’s argument that she is the only one who can win the states she’s won in the primary come the general election.  Clinton beat Obama in California’s  primary February.

The survey was conducted over the past 10 days by the Public Policy Institute of California and found 59 percent of likely voters have a “favorable impression” of Obama compared  to 51 percent of voters who say they have an “unfavorable” impression of Clinton.

The presumptive Republican nominee John McCain didn’t fair much better than Clinton; 53 percent of the voters said they have an unfavorable opinion of the Arizona senator.

With only a few primary contests remaining, Obama is spending some campaign time working to woo voters he’ll need in November should he be the nominee. Today, he gave a speech  to the B’nai Torah Congregation  in Boca Raton, F la., and laid out his views on issues impacting Israel. 

But there will be one diversion from the campaign trail this holiday weekend.  The freshman senator will be filling in for his colleague and friend Sen. Edward Kennedy on Sunday when he delivers the commencement address at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut.

Kennedy who was diagnosed earlier this week with a malignant brain tumor asked Obama if he could be his backup.  “Considering what he’s done for me and for our country, there’s nothing I wouldn’t do for him. So I’m looking forward to standing in his place on Sunday even though I know I won’t be able to fill his shoes,” Obama said.
 

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer

Posted May 21, 2008 – Sen. Hillary Clinton’s has won her second primary in as many weeks,  but her lopsided victory in the Kentucky primary still left the New York senator trailing Obama in pledged delegates, and no chance of catching up.

Clinton captured 65 percent of the vote in Kentucky to Obama’s 30 percent.  But even with Clinton’s  landslide, Obama gained at least 14 delegates in the state.  According to The Associated Press Obama now has 1,931 out of the 2,026, Clinton has 1,755.  Now Obama needs fewer than 100 super-delegates to seal the deal for the nomination.    

In an apparent attempt to convince the super-delegates that she is still the Democratic Party’s best hope of defeating Sen. John McCain in November, Clinton told a crowd gathered at Marriott Hotel ballroom, “Tonight we’ve achieved an important victory. It is not just Kentucky bluegrass that is music to my ears. It is the sound of your overwhelming vote of confidence even in the face of some pretty tough odds.”

Sticking to her guns to stay in the race, Clinton told the cheering crowd, “Some have said your votes didn’t matter, that this campaign was over, that allowing everyone to vote and every vote to count would somehow be a mistake. But that didn’t stop you. You’ve never given up on me because you know I’ll never give up on you.”

But, once again overshadowing a hefty Clinton win with a well-timed media blitz of his own, Obama, who was expecting a decent-sized win in Oregon, headed to Iowa.  He made sure the cameras were rolling in Iowa, which delivered him his first primary victory, as he stood before an ocean of supporters in Des Moines (with the imagery of the Capitol glowing in the background) to thank Iowans for putting him over the top in elected delegates. 

“You know, 15 months ago, in the depths of winter, it was in this great state where we took the first steps of an unlikely journey to change America. The skeptics predicted we wouldn’t get very far,” he told the crowd. “The cynics dismissed us as a lot of hype and a little too much hope. And by the fall, the pundits in Washington had all but counted us out.  But the people of Iowa had a different idea.”

Obama is the projected winner in Oregon, a state that’s even Whiter than Kentucky, but the final results won’t be tallied until all the mailed ballots are counted. Both Clinton and Obama took time Tuesday night to salute their colleague and friend, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), who was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor.

Clinton told those gathered in Louisville, “Senator Ted Kennedy is one of the greatest progressive leaders in our party’s history, and one of the most effective senators in our country’s history. He’s my friend, and he’s my inspiration.”

Obama called Kennedy “a spirit of change, and hope, and possibility,” adding, “as he takes on this fight, let us lift his spirits tonight by letting Ted Kennedy know that we are thinking of him, that we are praying for him, that we are standing with him and Vicky, and that we will be fighting with him every step of the way.”

Kennedy, 76, is a longtime friend of the former first lady and President Clinton; he has endorsed the junior senator from Illinois. 

With both candidates moving on to the remaining contest in Montana, South Dakota and Puerto Rico, neither will be in those states today; both will be campaigning in Florida instead.    
 

By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer

Posted May 20, 2008 – Sen. Barack Obama has a new name, a new super-delegate endorsement, and he’s been picking up new donors in the last 24 hours, before primaries in Oregon and Kentucky.

On Monday, while visiting a Native American reservation in Montana, Obama was adopted as an honorary member of the Crow tribe. In a ceremony his campaign says is reserved for special dignitaries, Obama entered the rally at the Crow reservation with his honorary parents, Sunny and Mary Black Eagle.

He was given a new name, honorary new parents; he was given gifts for his “wives” and children. But the married Illinois senator corrected the plural reference of “wives.”

 “I like my new name Barack Black Eagle,” he said. “I mean that’s a good name.”

But “I don’t want to get in trouble when I get home I can have new parents but no new wives.”

And speaking of Michelle, his wife of 15 years, Obama made it clear during an interview with ABC that the Tennessee Republican television ad targeting his wife was unacceptable.  “Lay off my wife,” he told Good Morning America.  The ad targets his wife’s comments – when she spoke of being proud of her country for the first time – as being “un-American.”  

“Should I be the nominee, [Republican’s] can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record,” he said.

But Republicans aren’t the only ones talking.  On Monday, West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd, the oldest member of the U.S. Senate, threw his support behind Obama, a week after the state’s primary.  Wonder what took him so long? Byrd, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan who once opposed Civil Rights legislation, released a statement saying, “I believe that Barack Obama is a shining young statesman, who possesses the personal temperament and courage necessary to extricate our country from this costly misadventure in Iraq, and to lead our nation at this challenging time in history. Barack Obama is a noble-hearted patriot and humble Christian, and he has my full faith and support.”

While tonight’s primaries in Oregon and Kentucky will not be game-changers, there are signs the Democratic Party is starting to rally around Obama’s candidacy.  The New York Daily News is reporting that top Clinton donors are started to contribute to his campaign.

All of these recent developments could be the reason Geraldine Ferraro, a staunch Clinton supporter, is now attempting to carry the bad political water by calling Obama “terribly sexist.”  Ferraro is so upset that Clinton is trailing the Illinois senator that she’s now resorted to name-calling and working to rally women against Obama as the nominee.
 
Ferraro should be given a slap on the wrist for whining.

 By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Producer

Posted May 19, 2008 – On Sunday Sen. Barack Obama appeared at a campaign rally in Portland, Oregon and was greeted by a sea of folks estimated at topping 75,000.  “Wow!  Wow! Wow!” Were the first words from the senator’s mouth when he witnessed the sea of folks gathered to greet him.

This has to be one of the largest crowds any presidential candidate has mustered in one spot for one rally.  And it literally took “by land and by sea”  to make it possible.  Those folks wanting a glimpse of the 46 year-old candidate, his wife Michelle and their two daughters, filled the Waterfront Park as well as the nearby Willamette River that boarded the park.  From their small boats and water crafts they waited and watched to hear his speech.  

Obama is no stranger to big crowds, he’s been setting records throughout the campaign.  But this one far exceeds the 20,000 folks who filled a stadium in South Carolina when he and his wife appeared with Oprah Winfrey; and surpasses what was his largest crowd to date, 35,000 people who gathered in downtown Philadelphia on the Independence Mall. 

On Tuesday the next primary contests will take place in Oregon and Kentucky. While Obama has traveled to campaign in both states this past weekend, his rival for the nomination, Sen. Hillary Clinton focused more of her time in Kentucky. Playing to much smaller crowds in intimate setting, her campaign is confident she’ll do well in the Bluegrass State.

Clinton encouraged voters she spoke to in Bowling Green, Kentucky, to turn out and send the message that this campaign isn’t over.  Reminding those gathered she’ll be ready for the job on day one, but also acknowledging she’s “running for the toughest job in the world.”

  But her prospects of landing the job are also tough.  During her four day campaign swing through Kentucky Clinton touted leading her rival in the popular vote, but her figures include the votes from Michigan and Florida. Those two states are not included in the Democratic National Committee’s official count, and delegate count, not popular vote determines who secures the nomination,

So Tuesday’s primaries like all the remaining contest will only have one result; bring the contest closer to its end on June 3.  

Obama has decided to wait for Tuesday night’s results from Oregon and Kentucky in Iowa, where he got his first primary win.   “We thought it was a terrific way to kind of bring things full circle. We still have some contests left, but if Kentucky and Oregon go as we hope, then we think we will have a majority of pledged delegates at that point, and that’s a pretty significant mark.”

It sounds like he’s moved on to the general election. 

By Pamela  Gentry, Senior Political Producer

Posted May 16, 2008 – This week will be a memorable one for Sen. Barack Obama.  It started with him  getting blown out by Sen. Hillary Clinton in the West Virginia primary and ended with him landing the most coveted endorsement on the Democratic political scene, former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) 

So, has he secured the Democratic nomination? At least folks are acting like he has.

It’s a sure sign a candidate is getting close when the opposing party leadership starts targeting him.  And Obama appears to have caught the attention of President Bush.

 On Thursday, while speaking to the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, the president said that anyone who would negotiate with “terrorists and radicals” are no better than the Nazis of World War II Germany.  The remark was obviously a veiled slap at Obama, who has said he would consider greater engagement with countries like Iran and Syria.

But – and  President Bush knows this as well as anybody – Obama has never said he would negotiated with terrorists. “George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the President’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel,” Obama said. “It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack. It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel.”

This is just the beginning from the Republicans. But the Bush quip – which was later co-signed by presumptive Republican nominee John McCain (R-Ariz.) – wasn’t enough to stem Obama’s surging popularity.

 Following the Edwards endorsement earlier this week, Obama continued to add clout to his frontrunner status.  On the heels of Clinton’s landslide victory in West Virginia, Obama picked up more heavyweight support and delivered a serious blow to Clinton’s prospects for overtaking his lead.

On Thursday, Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Howard Berman (D-Calif.) announced their super-support for Obama’s nomination.   

Waxman chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform; Congressman Berman chairs the House Committee on Foreign Affairs; and both are respected leaders in the American Jewish community and major voices in Democratic policymaking.

Their endorsements were timely and could help neutralize Bush’s assault on the Illinois senator.

This week also delivered an endorsement from NARAL-Pro Choice American and the United Steel Workers Union, in addition to a half-dozen other super-delegates who decided to come on board.

All of this will get Obama even closer to the number of delegates needed to win the nomination.  Obama now has an estimated 1,896 of the 2,026 needed for the nomination, Clinton has 1,718.

The two Democratic candidates will face primaries May 20, in Kentucky and Oregon. Stay tuned.