Nita Lowey: Worst Clinton Surrogate Ever?

One of the big problems with the fact that the Democratic primary process continues to grind on and on and on and on with nothing new on the horizon until Pennsylvania -- unless some other governors would do us all a solid and get caught screwing some whores again -- is that the media is running out of campaign surrogates with whom to talk. The A-Listers have long passed, and the B-Listers all said crazy things about how lucky black people are and how God hates America for Hiroshima. That's why we were saddled with the jowly drone of Bill Bradley today, his voice as dynamic as a bowl of week-old wheat crackers, boring us to tears today on Meet The Press. And yet, this is a net win for the Obama campaign because of the gaffe-filled performance of Nita Lowey for the Clinton campaign.

Highlights? Yeah, we've got them. First up, here's Lowey making the case for Clinton based upon their oft-hyped "some states are more important than other states" strategy. Except she confuses "Ohio" -- which Clinton won -- with Iowa, a state that Obama won back in January and then apparently re-won this week when some Edwards delegates shifted to his side.

LOWEY: Now, you and I both know that no one since 1960 has won the presidency without winning Iowa. We know you have to win Iowa, we have to win Pennsylvania, have to win Florida, they are key states that are critical to getting the number of votes in the electoral college, and I think right now, frankly, it's a tie.

Even better is the answer Lowey attempts to give Russert on the matter of Clinton releasing her tax records, which ends up being long, convoluted, comically inept, evasive, shallow, and then finally bad for the campaign, as she more or less commits them to a firm date of April 15 for the release of these records, after weeks of the campaign using "on or around tax time" as the deadline, which would have bought them the entire month of May.

RUSSERT: Congresswoman Lowey, should Bill and Hillary Clinton release the list of $500 million of donors to the library, the tax returns since they left the White House, and her schedules and records from the National Archives relating to her activities as First Lady so people can make a true judgment about her experience as she's portraying it.

LOWEY: Several points. First of all, it's my understanding that there are 20 years of tax returns in the public view from both Bill and Hillary Clinton. Secondly, in terms of earmarks and transparency, the Democrats have cut earmarks in half and now there has to be a certification next to each earmark that the person who's submitting them will not have any financial interests in that earmark. In terms of the Clinton and the work he's done in the fund raising, I've been to several countries in Africa. I've seen the work of the Clinton Foundation and the positive work he's done for HIV/AIDS. I do believe that the Clintons have a long record of releasing their tax returns and as I understand, that on April 15th, they will release their other records and with regard to the National Archives, that is going -- it's been gone over line by line and it will be released. Was there anything else? I don't remember.

Tune in next week, when Tony Rezko and Geraldine Ferraro perform a pantomime adapted from the Eliot Spitzer wiretaps!

Comments

[Brian76239]

Watching the talking heads on sunday isn't supposed to be funny,
but this last episode of "Meet the Depressed" was over the top.
Who is this woman trying to convince? Me or Herself?

I don't care how you SPIN this BS. The numbers for the Clinton
campaign don't add up. I guess that this was supposed to be
aimed at the superdelegates.

[MichaelC]

So Jason Linkins questions the fact that "some states are more important than other states"? The last time I checked it's called the Electoral College. For example, Utah has 5 votes, California has 55. That's why it's important to consider which states the candidates have won so far. With a single exception, Obama's home state of Illinois, Clinton has carried all of the big "Blue" states Democrats must have to win the election in the Electoral College. Obama has won quite a few small "Red" states that are likely to go Republican. He is, in that sense, almost a mirror image of McCain. These are facts, not wishful thinking.

[ampay]

But the thing you're overlooking is the blue states will go blue no matter who the democratic candidate is. The swing states, which Obama does well in, will help secure the nomination.

[drbala]

Obama didn't do well in the swing state of OH. If Al Gore had won Ohio, or if Kerry had won Ohio, we wouldn't be having this conversation--we may not even have this blog, Arianna might still be a republican if not for Bush.

Without the swing state of Ohio, the dems will lose in November. Obama and his follower can wish that UT, KS, AL, MS, LA, GA, VA, and SC et. al. will fall into Obama's column in November. They must be drinking something to even wish like that.

Bottom line is without winning Ohio and Pennsylvania, you cannot win the general. And Obama has trouble with these states.

[billreef]

This reply shows how Clinton has "dumbed down" the electorate. The staes won in the primary have nothing to do with who wins in the general election. I mean Hillary has won TN and OK does anyone believe she will carry those states in the general. It is a proven fact, exit polls in every primary to date, that BO carries a higher percentage of "swing" voters who will be critical to carrying "swing" states. This carp about who won big states and who won caucuses is HC spin for why she is losing thre nomination.

[clbrune]

Only on Obama's Huffpost does this signify anything.

How about when Obama surrogates are asked on national television if they can name the most significant legislation Obama has passed.

No? What about significant legislation he has sponsored?

No? What about anything...anything at all...that he has done?

No? Can't name a single thing?

Isn't that just a wee bit more astonishing than a single switch of Iowa and Ohio?

This is a pathetic double standard (not surprising, of course)

[AntonioMaceo]

The big difference is that not releasing tax returns, earmarks, and library contributors is a serious issue. We need to know who has bought political traction with someone who plans to be president.

[Bettysdad]

The Texas legislator that couldn't answer Matthew's question was NOT an Obama surrogate.

He was simply a supporter who cannot be expected to know much about Obama's record.

Go ask the people of New York State the same question about Mrs. Bill Clinton. You'll get the same answer, which is really a damning indictment.

[drbala]

If you as an elected official--state senator--who supports Hillary, I'm sure they'll easily remind you of SCHIP, veterans benefits, or anything that they can remember at that time.

Of course, it's not just the texas Senator that has problems...a whole bunch of self proclaimed Obama supporters couldn't name a thing (as we say in a Fox Obama group interview).

Drink up.

[ddog323]

I watched Meet the Press yesterday, and I had to fast-forward through this irritating shill's lies because I couldn't stomach them.

The Clinton campaign just doesn't get it. One of the reasons people love Obama, is because he and his people answer the questions instead of avoiding them completely and telling lies.

[hazmaq]

The only point I'd make is that Lowey was one of the cleaner Clinton shills I've seen. But on Bradley -

MSNBC/NBC/GE took Donahue off the air for a reason. They have never and will never allow a strong voiced Lefty on the air -Ed Schultz is doing pretty good -but both CNN and the MSNBC cut him off quickly.

The media always play the hard offense themselves and always bring on weak Left'ys to respond.
That's the new fair and balanced way by our Congressionally approved media conglomerates..

--for all of who just you just got your usual Spring Dish or Direct TV skyrocketing price increases, did you notice your dollars paid for a shiny new SHELL OIL channel ?

F***your TIVO -they now own TIVO too!

[Tumult]

This is a win for Clinton not Obama. The groups she is winning with do not keep up with relevent information anyway, so would have no idea that this information isn't true. It doesn't have to be true it just needs to be believed by the people voting. The people supporting Clinton will take from this, see released her tax returns ect. Obama people are just being sexist and acting like Ken Starr. The people putting this woman down will look like mysoginistic thugs. Which is a Clinton strategy, having people correct her and go negative on her, strenthens her with her base. Clinton is the anti-feminist, vote for her because women are victims! Obama supporters have the strength to go beyond that, they already know women rule the world, just ask Michelle.

[Dee321]

Jason,
You Obamanists are shameful spinners.
You are not a reporter. You are an Obama supporter.
Why do you take random clips to attempt to prove your point.

You should be happy Lowery took the high road when asked about Rev. Wright.
Rev Wright SOLD the tapes to Fox to promote himself and to continue this argument he has been having with Hannity.

If you want to comment about something, find out why he taped himself using abusive language in January of this year, then sold the tape to Fox now. Talk about that!

[RhondaSTL]

Dee321 - You're right that she handled the Rev. Wright issue very graciously. But I cringed several times at her comments/responses to other issues. In my opinion, she wasn't a help to Sen. Clinton, and possibly a hindrance in the case of those voters who haven't had their state primaries. Bill Bradley wasn't much of a help to Sen. Obama, but he didn't make me cringe. The point of the post was the caliber of the two guests (one milk toast supporter, one ill-prepared supporter), certainly not about the caliber of the candidates. If you had to chose a "winner" of the discussions, would you really have chosen Ms. Lowey?

By way of disclosure, yes, my candidate of choice is Sen. Obama. However, if Sen. Clinton is the candidate in November, given a choice between the two, I would rather see Mr. Bradley and not Ms. Lowey discussing the candidate's view.

[fignozzle]

high road??
she was the first to bring it up when she was running out of clinton "truths" to spin!!!!

[Zyzzygowski]

The tapes of Rev Wright are for sale to anyone. You could even buy them. The tapes are a fund raising tool used by his church.

"Why do you take random clips to attempt to prove your point."

Ummm, isn't that what is being done with the Rev Wright tapes? Twenty years of giving sermons and we have only heard ten minutes of Rev Wright speaking. I am thinking he has said a great deal more, and I suspect some of it was positive, good and not always angry.

As for Rep Lowery she was a bit shaky. Ask a simple question. Get a speach.

[hazmaq]

Because HE KNEW FOX AND FOX VIEWERS ARE DUMBASSES!

[NickOhio]

With people like this being spokespeople for Dem candidates, how can we not be afraid of the November election?

The only thing which can save any Dem (hopefully and most likely Obama since the Clinton campaign is doing all it can to die of self-inflicted wounds as evidenced by Rep Lowey, Ms. Ferraro, the political demise of Gov. Spitzer and Sen. Clinton's own false sense of security) is for McCain to continue to focus on his only asset... his pro-war posturing. McCain has nothing else to campaign as a point of interest that will lead us into a bright future. He is clueless on economics (almost his exact words), cannot figure out where he stands on immigration, has a health care idea that will only serve to aggravate the masses since most of us pay way too much for health care where the actual care is less acceptable than many other countries and is clueless on technology, data security and privacy, and the loss of our liberties.

[drjay79]

This is an example of the caliber of people she will be hiring for the administration?

[tstamp]

Oh man. That's good stuff. I'm sure it's horrible karma, but this post really made me happy.

[realpolitic]

Waiting for Hillary to take the high road is like waiting for Godot.

[joja]

Good for you, Nita!

Paybacks are hell, aren't they, Hillary?

You fucked over Nita in 2002 when it was her "turn" to run for the Senate seat in NY, and now she's fucking you over!!

I love it!!!!

[Horst]

The woman is clueless.....another one of these New York politicians plucked from obscurity because of their feminist credentials (think Geraldine Ferraro). This was embarassing.

[Mort]

She was every bit the question dodger that Hillary is.

[SEQUOIABISON]

TAX RETURNS, TAX RETURNS WE WANT TO SEE YOUR TAX RETURNS, We want to see the skeletons in your closet and how much Bill has been spending on Monica since he left the white house.

[letuckerchicago]

Tony Rezko is probably a contributor to the Clintons, don't you think? Slick guys try to hang around stars, be they senators from Illinois or New York - or Repubs, for that matter. I say, let the contributor shoe drop so we can get on with it.

[Bettysdad]

The day after Mrs. Bill Clinton brought up the Rezko issue the Obama campaign released a photo taken at a Clinton fundraiser of Bill and Mrs. Bill with their arms around Rezko.

In typical Clinton fashion, Hillary said her picture is often taken with people she doesn't know.

I don't understand why the Obama campaighn trot out this photo every single day.

[GeorgeKaplan]

Nice piece of trash. Is this the UNITY we are speaking of?

[TotobiAyokoh23]

There is no surprise here, of course she is a Clinton supporter; half-baked intellectuals willing to sell their conscience for a mess of Hillary's pottage.

[clbrune]

How about the Obama surrogate (a Texas congressman) who couldn't name a single thing Obama had done as a Senator.

Couldn't name a single thing Obama had done.

That's a brainy surrogate.

[Bettysdad]

Check your facts.

Just because Matthews chooses to ask someone a question doesn't make them a surrogate.

The guy was just a supporter.

[ampay]

I know, all the dumb-asses support Hillary.