The Waning of Penn
In July 2007, the Clinton campaign’s then-chief-strategist Mark Penn sat in his gleaming white and aquarium-walled chief executive’s office at the global public relations firm Burson-Marsteller talking about a mistake he thought Howard Wolfson had made in responding to comments from a prominent Obama supporter.
“It’s very important in politics not to make the same mistake too many times,” Penn said at the time.
As if proving those words, Penn was removed by the Clinton campaign as chief strategist, after it was revealed that he had met with officials from Colombia to push a bilateral trade treaty with the United States, a policy Hillary Clinton opposes. It wasn’t the first time Penn’s corporate work posed an apparent conflict of interest for the campaign, but this time it cost him his title, if not his association with the campaign. (He will continue to poll and advise, according to an official campaign statement.)
Now, it will be none other than Wolfson, the communications director he gently criticized in public and butted heads with in private, who will take over his primary responsibilities as the campaign’s chief message crafter.
Until now Penn had successfully dodged a barrage of bullets from Clinton campaign advisers disgruntled with his choice of tactics, his unwavering belief in the power of poll-tested messages and his chilly personality. Dating back to at least Clinton’s loss in Iowa, staffers have been privately wishing him the worst.
And yet Penn’s closeness to Bill Clinton (his Burson-Marsteller office is decorated with several framed notes of “To Mark Penn, Thanks,” from President Clinton, including one across a Washington Post with the headline reading “Clinton Acquitted”) and the confidence the candidate ultimately had in him allowed him to hold onto the title of chief strategist, one he cherished and was proud of, even as his few allies argued that his influence in the struggling campaign had waned.
It took Penn’s own doing finally to knock him out of his position at the strategic helm. It was a seemingly unthinkable blunder, putting Clinton’s main message-maker at clear odds with one of her key economic messages as she appeals to working class voters in Pennsylvania. Worse still, it came after the Clinton campaign had tirelessly attacked the Obama campaign in the run-up to the Ohio primary after a lower-level adviser apparently suggested to Canadian officials that Obama’s position on Nafta was different from what he said on the campaign trail.
And it wasn’t the first time Penn found himself facing criticism for apparent conflicts of interest between his role as a high-paid public relations man and the (high-paid) brains of Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid.
Burson-Marsteller’s work for companies seeking to thwart union organizing campaigns enraged the union activists whose support the Clinton campaign was seeking. The firm’s contract with Countrywide Financial, the nation’s largest mortgage lender, led to some uncomfortable press for a candidate who constantly rails against foreclosures and the housing crisis. And its indirect representation of the military contractor Blackwater Worldwide, whose alleged above-the-law style of operation in Iraq have made it a prime example for war critics of the Bush administration’s mishandling of the occupation, raised yet more questions about Penn’s judgment. Next Page >
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
POLL REPORT
------------------------------------------
American Research Group, Inc
http://americanresearchgroup.com/
April 6, 2008 -
Pennsylvania Democratic Primary Preference
CLINTON 45%
OBAMA 45%
-------------------------------------------
And therein lies the fundamental problem with Hillary Clinton: It isn't that Penn led her down the road to defeat, but that she allowed herself to be dragged down that road. She relied on someone else to make core decisions, and in doing so subverted her own opinions and intuitions. This is what so many of us find so egregious about George Bush- his inability to use his own reason and common sense (if he in fact has any) to make decisions. He listened to everyone around him, used no judgment of his own, and was thus lead into disastrous decision after disastrous decision. None of us want that same attribute in the next President. Sure she was loyal to Penn, but that loyalty was blinding. If she listens that intently to others without employing her own sense of judgment, who would she listen to if in the White House? We need someone courageous enough to make their own decisions, and, as Penn has showed, Hillary clearly isn't that that person.
There is so much one could say about Hillary right now, but the one thing that stands out the most to me is that she bringing a new brand of politics to this democracy. She and Bill's notorious record of scandal and legal manipulation of the English language as well as the American voter, laced with a teflon-like exterior that not even the highest courts in the land have been able to scratch, reminds me of one person: Al Capone. Their rap sheets are comparable (Blue collar crime vs. White collar crime). Fortunately we had Elliot Ness and the IRS in Capone's day. Today, the Clintons have no adversary brave enough stand up to the machine/war room. It's ironic that Hillary and Bill used a Sapranos theme to launch their campaign. I mean, she and Bill championed NAFTA. Now she claims to have always been against it, meanwhile her top man - Mark Penn - goes to Colombia to assuage some NAFTA benefactors. COLOMBIA! We should be concerned. Do we actually believe that he did this without her knowledge? What will it take to make the American people see that the integrity of our nation is at stake, and whether you support Hillary, Barack, or John, it is not hard to choose which one has the weakest moral compass. All you have to do is look at the history/pattern of behavior, lies, accusations, indictments, campaign fund raising violations, etc. One of the candidates tips the scale considerably. Hillary Clinton is the new American Gangster, and if we elect her, we can expect more of the same, and we will deserve it.
Very well put, Peter. I completely agree with your post. A word or two more about Penn. The mere fact that Hillary chose someone to be her chief campaign strategist who consults to and REPRESENTS THE INTERESTS OF a country which is the DRUG CAPITAL of the universe, should be enough to disqualify her from running for president. And I find it to be so very typically "Hillary-speak" to have Maggie Williams announce that Penn has "left the campaign", and yet he will stay on in a consulting and polling capacity. In other words, he didn't leave the campaign !!
It might be a very good time for Mark Penn to abandon the sinking ship - when Hillary's campaign crashes and burns Howard Wolfson will be tagged as being responsible. We all know that Hillary will appear on the Sunday talk shows and blame everyone but herself.
Why wont this country stand up to the Clintons? Bill didnt even want Penn to step down from the title Senior Advisor. The compromise was to demote him but still retain him. He was on 2 conference calls with the press and Hillary today. I am from PA..I sure hope the unions, lunch bucket white men, minimum wage earners, high wage earners, women and senior citizens and our youth of Pennsylvania see that she isnt the one to save your jobs. So many questions of where their wealth really came from. Mark Penn aligned with them for years should all tell you the answer.
Vote responsibly on April 22nd
DRUDGE FLASH
--------------------------------
HILLARY Colombia ties don't stop with Penn
By EAMON JAVERS | 4/7/08 6:56 PM EST
Clinton is using an anti-trade message to win over working class voters in Pennsylvania.
Mark Penn isn’t the only Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter on the wrong side of the Colombia trade agreement.
The Democratic-leaning advocacy firm the Glover Park Group, former home to Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson, signed a $40,000 per month contract with the government of Colombia in April of 2007 to promote the very agreement that Clinton now rails against on the presidential campaign trail.
That means Glover Park Group was arguing the same position on the free trade agreement as has Penn, the contentious Clinton strategist and Burson-Marsteller chief executive who lost his campaign job over the weekend after The Wall Street Journal revealed that he’d met with Colombian officials to plot strategy on the pact.
Several other Glover Park employees have deep connections with the Clintons, including founding partner Joe Lockhart, who served as the White House press secretary under President Bill Clinton, and Joel Johnson, who was a senior communications adviser in the Clinton White House.
Six employees of Glover Park Group contributed a total of nearly $20,000 to Clinton’s campaign in 2007, according to data kept by the Center for Responsive Politics.
==================================
Strategy? You want strategy (as opposed to authenticity)?!
Here's one that just might work, or at least might work as well as any other formulation or fabrication which the skunks at Hillaryland might concoct. And here it is in the imagined words of Herself spoken at a last-ditch rally a day or two before the Pennsylvania Primary:
"You know, it's true that half or more of the electorate not only dislikes me personally and disapproves of everything I stand for. The fact is they hate my bloody guts, wouldn't walk across the road to urinate on me if I was aflame after a horrendous car accident. I understand that. I accept that. And I know that if through some fluke I somehow still manage to win The White House it's almost a dead certainty that my presidency will in almost every respect be a catastrophic failure the likes of which this Republic has never seen, not even from Jimmy Carter. All these things I do well understand.
"But you know, you, the American public, must understand that I really, really want this. I've been aiming at and working towards this goal my entire adult life. And towards this goal I have sacrificed much. I've lied, I've cheated, and I've stole. I have abetted and covered-up criminality on the part of others. I've been subjected to personal humiliation and embarrassment on a scale which would rightly have sent normal people around the bend; and yet even then I persevered, looked the other way, lashed out at my detractors who said I was an amoral automaton. In pursuit of my goal I have knowingly and willingly cut every corner to gain every edge, even attempts to subvert the Constitution. In short, I have sacrificed whatever semblance of integrity I might once have had, or, if you prefer, I have sold my soul to the devil, all so that you might one day be honored by having me as your president.
"And you know, now, very late in this arduous campaign, I find myself rather speechless over the fact that most of you still have not grasped the simple, basic fact that, goddammit, I want this, I've worked hard for this, I feel as though I've earned it, and yes, that I'm entitled to it. And if you choose to deny me this then be assured I will spend the rest of my years in public life, or private life, trying my best to make your own lives as miserable as possible, if only by my continued existence on the planet (again, think Jimmy Carter). So even if defeat is my fate in this pursuit, I pray the Almighty will give me many more years in which to indulge my propensity to propose ridiculous programs and to say outrageous things. And if by Grace those years are granted to me then there can be little doubt that the acquiescence of a mainstream media will continue to accord me attention comparable to that normally reserved for the likes of Madonna and Britney Spears. I'm here, I'm in your face, and if any of you for one minute think that I have the class and the grace to go quietly into that good night, well then think again.
"So what will it be America? You can give me what I want, or not. Either way you get the worst I have to give. As your president, I will give you Socialism and a sickness of politics never before even imagined. If spurned, you have my pledge, God willing, simply to stay around for another 20 years, in one capacity or another, and continue to subject you to all the things you already have determined you can't stand about me.
"I don't want your love. And I couldn't care less about your respect. I want to be the first female president of the United States. What is it about that simple proposition that you don't understand?
"Thank you, and I look forward to your support on April 22 in Pennsylvania, and then again in November. Or else."
Good riddance to Penn. We need to return elections to what they're supposed to be about: leaders espousing ideas and having dialogue with voters to either promote or demote ideas.
Reagan is so fondly remembered because he had a philosophy that he believed in and he talked about it, trying to persuade people. The public agreed he was at least worth giving a chance to.
Penn is the worst of America: exploiting differences and doing whatever it takes to elect a candidate. NO MORE. Why does Hillary need someone to tell her what her strategy should be anyway? Isn't that what the head of the campaign is supposed to do?
After nearly eight years of governance by a president who prides himself upon being the decider without responsibility many have found that Hillary Clinton's campaign for president follows this same model.
Loyalty above all else.
Anyone else, or no one is responsible for anything, except victory.
That anything that does not contribute to the script is unworthy of consideration.
That there is no conflict between supporting labor and supporting those that employ death squads to silence labor.
That there is no reason to vet a story line that conforms to your storyline. Of the moment.
All that can be said after watching Hillary's campaign over these past months is that she is a stalwart supporter of the labor movement and prudent use of military force.
As far as we know.
It seems Hillary is doing a fine job of putting nails in the coffin of her own campaign. Obama needs to capitalize on her blunders and put her away in the next round of primaries so we can get on with the business of winning in November.
Hillary is relying on Pennsylvania and Indiana as her aces in the hole. However, events have a way of taking over, of which she will not be pleased, Penn or no Penn.