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

[standforpeace]

I think you have got it all wrong blaming it on the surrogate. Even Rhodes Scholar Bill Clinton hasn't been able to produce a coherent explanation of why the Clintons continue to reject and denounce the very idea of releasing the tax returns. Hell, you don't have to be smarter than a 5th grader to know the only conceivable reason that a politician would refuse to routinely release tax returns that the Democratic voters need to do their job of vetting the potential nominee is because there is something there that they don't want us to know until after we've cast our votes. So this woman is just the latest Clinton surrogate asked to explain away the unexplainable. I expect that most viewers looked right past Lowey's lack of spin ability to the underlying issue -we want those tax returns that were filed last year and in the years since the Clintons left the White House.

[Bibbo]

First of all let me clearly state I'm a republican but there's something about the Clintons that crosses party lines and that is "character". Its hard to define what defines character but basically its about trust.Do you trust the person to do whats "right" or do you have doubts. Its not effectiveness or smarts or intelligence but rather its a judgement of the persons deepest motivations. Does the person but the welfare of others above his own or not. We learn this as children in Sunday school about love of neighbor as ourselves. The soldier who dies saving his buddies, the cop or fireman who risks all to save a civilian or the volunteer who quietly spends a lifetime working with the poor. Its what we would make you proud to be able to say "thats my son or daughter". I believe "character" is the critical attribute that allows one to leave the world a better place than it was after you're gone. The Clintons fail this "character test". How much would you trust the Clintons to behave honorably if an "innocent person" was in the way of thier political future? They would come up with some convoluted rational about needing to trash the innocent because the good they intend to do compensates for the "little" injustice of harming the innocent. Remember the "sluts and nuts" campaign? Lets be done with them once and for all.Send them both back to Arkansaw.

[kingcityguru]

I saw the interview "live" this morning and came to two conclusions before reading this post:

Bil Bradley was very unpolitcal in that he did not sieze on opportunities to slam or slander Clinton which made me think, first, that he was very bad at his job then, after some thought, that he views his job differently in Obama's new-politics kind of way.

Nita Lowey's answer about the tax returns was just so evasive and "old politics", i.e., do not provide a direct answer but suck up so much time doing it that the person moves on (which Russert did). Pathetic.

Vote McCain.

[AreYouFibbing]

Those in Obama's corner will grasp on to anything won't they?

[ScandalousCandice]

She isn't as maddening as that beast of a woman Kiki McLean. Kiki works for the Clinton campaign and is a master at not answering one single question. She just talks shit and talks in big long stupid circles. But then when you say you didn't answer my question, she would freak out on you. I know a lot of people are not Tucker Carlson fans, but Tucker seemed to be the one guy who would not let Kiki get away with her stupid tactics about dodging the answers.

[flatus]

Have your fun but keep in mind that the goal here to kick the snot out of Mackyboy regardless of winner.

[ladygreenslippers]

Even if i were a Clinton fan, i would still find this amusing.

Frankly, as soon as she started talking, i took off the t.v, because between her and Bradely - well . . .

too bad i missed a good laugh - i watch it religiously every Sunday!

dam!

What's her excuse? is she tired? she sounded like that beauty contestant who was asked about geography. lol

[anghiari]

Would any of you Clinton supporters step up and tell me why Cokie Roberts was whining on George's show several Sundays ago about poor hillary having worked hard and done all the right things and now she has just been swept aside by a cute man. Old George Will, this Sunday trying to bury Obama because of WRights's statements, while trying to push Hillary to the forefront. Rush Limbaugh got Texas Republicans to go to the Democratic primary and vote for Hillary. Ann (bad taste-bad attitude) coulter has sworn to vote for her (her subliminal message to Republicans to vote for her so that they get to meet her in the general) This whole thing about Hillary surviving --what problem has she had to survive except her husband. What other tough problems? All the Repugs have to do if she is the nominee is show up with the zillion plus bimbo eruptions that Bill has had since leaving the White House. Anybody heard the one about right after 9/11 Bill who was on one of his speaking tours in Australia was found inflagrante with a girlie girl and had to be pulled out by the secret service so they could get him back to the US as soon as possible. This was during the Bush administration --if true anybody think Karl Rove didn't get that info from the secret service asap? These guys follow Bill around and I am sure they have shared with the Repugs. Even Hillary's wayward female supporters would be hard pressed to elect a woman who should probably be divorcing her husband rather than moving into the white house? Why do you think prominent republicans have been pushing Hillary? They don't give a good damn about her claims of experience. They know she is beatable and they know they have a whole program of intel on her and bill.

[argosfalcon]

Well this whole thing has just turned me off, this grasping for power for powers sake shows the character of the candidate clearly. I am not going to join either camps cult of personality, they now only inspire feelings of despair for the future as they blindly beat each other up, with no regard for party or the fate of the nation. As a party of one I can now say both support nothing but winning at all costs. A pox on both they houses and those that support this style of politics.

[fatherof5women]

yes, she was awful--and i'm a clinton supporter...the good news is that only obama fans watch russert or nbc news or msnbc anymore....so her horrible performance was only seen by obama fans anyway.....and after governor rendell ate russsert's lunch last week (or the week before?), russert won't be having any more strong clinton surrogates on, that's for sure....thank god we don't have to put up with his drooling, anti-clinton diatribes on any more debates..

[hyjanks]

The idiotic presumption by Ms. Lowey is that since Hillary won the big states with the most electoral votes, that automatically assumes that Obama couldn't win them in November--that we need Hillary to keep those votes on the Democratic side.
Yeah. Mc"Cane" winning New York, California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, et al is a real threat!
Ms. Lowey's presentation should have followed directly Bush's recent comments about the state of the economy. We then could have had a double-barreled laugh fest--or cry fest as the case may be.

[MikeL1]

She's a fabulous surrogate. Her remarks are just as confusing as Clinton's campaign. Hillary's screaming this "experience" junk on us. But they will NOT release those papers 2 prove her so-called experience. These supporters are easily fooled. All she have 2 do is say it with NO proof or evidence & they believe it. The truth will come out in a few years that Clinton may have more experience than Obama by...mmmm.....a few months!

[mix2007]

Clinton is trying to destroy Obama, who will win and be the party's nominee.

If Obama does lose the general due to attacks created by the Clintons (experience, etc) , the blame with squarely be on Clinton.

Hillray is planning to destroy Obama in 2008 so she can run against McCain in 2012. We should not let her!!!

The good news: Everyone will HATE Clinton forever, and they will be persona non grata in the party after this "scorched earth" fiasco.

ABC = Anyone But Clinton!!

[LeftLeaner]

It's funny how HuffPost is great with videos, EXCEPT I can't seem to find those showing Jeremiah Wright. You know, the ones where he blasts America, blames the American people for 9/11. etc.

Did I miss something?

I'm sure the HuffPost viewers would be interested in those as well.

[Farmerette]

Nita Lowey has always been a pretty slippery talker, but today she sunk to a new level. Russert lobbed softballs to both of them, but in every single instance, Lowey avoided answering the question. It was the same old/same old "Never mind what the question is...just keep reciting the talking points."

I don't understand why Linkins chose to attack Bradley for his personal appearance, but the fact is that Bill made some excellent points in Obama's favor. He was far more forthright than Lowey, who should be embarassed by her tap-dancing routine. Russert should have called her on it. It was a terrible interview.