ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



First thoughts: Iraq is back

Posted: Monday, March 17, 2008 9:17 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under:

From Chuck Todd and Mark Murray
*** Iraq is back: Overshadowed in the last few weeks by the economy, the horserace, and even the recent back-and-forths over Geraldine Ferraro and Rev. Wright, the issue of Iraq returns to the campaign trail today. Just before the war’s five-year anniversary, John McCain is in the country, as is Vice President Cheney. Meanwhile, at George Washington University in DC, Clinton gives a speech this morning on Iraq. Per the New York Times, Clinton will discuss “her plan to begin withdrawing American troops within 60 days of coming into office… She was also expected to attack Mr. Obama over a recent statement by a former foreign policy adviser, Samantha Power, in which she said the Iraq withdrawal plan Mr. Obama had outlined while campaigning was a ‘best-case scenario’ that he would revisit once in office.” But is that the pot calling the kettle black? Earlier this month, the New York Sun reported that retired Gen. Jack Keane, who had briefed Clinton on Iraq and who had been asked to be a campaign adviser on military issues, said he had “no doubts whatsoever that if [Clinton] were president in January '09 she would not act irresponsibly and issue orders to conduct an immediate withdrawal from Iraq.” This should be a week the Obama campaign was looking forward to but it's not obvious he's going to get the advantage on Iraq that, perhaps, his campaign expected a few months ago.

VIDEO: NBC Political Director Chuck Todd offers his first read on the presidential candidates' focus on the Iraq anniversary and not the economy situation.

*** Obama’s Iowa sweep: So the trashing of the caucus process was not good for Clinton's campaign, which got killed at the Iowa county convention re-caucus. Obama picked up an additional nine delegates, mostly from Edwards’ January 3 haul. The overall delegate take for each candidate: 25 for Obama (that's up from 16 ); 14 for Clinton (that's down one from her 15); and six hung with Edwards (down from 14). That takes Obama’s pledged lead over Clinton to 1,409 to 1,250. With the superdelegates thrown in (253 for Clinton, 217 for Obama), the delegate count stands at Obama 1,626, Clinton 1,503. This is more evidence that the outsider candidate (Obama) continues to beat the insider candidate (Clinton) at the ultimate insider game: the battle for delegates in odd county convention processes.

*** Full disclosure: After releasing all of Obama’s Rezko records and sitting with Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times reporters on Friday, the Obama campaign has upped the ante for Team Clinton. Yesterday, the Obama camp asked Clinton to release all of her tax records, disclose all of her earmarks, and make the donations to the Clinton presidential library and foundation public. The Clinton camp, in response, says Obama should release his tax returns for every year he's been in public office and every earmark he requested as a state senator. The pushback is obvious: try to cloud the lack of disclosure in the Clinton campaign with questions of lack of disclosure on the Obama front. This is the road the Obama campaign clearly wants to go down. The question is whether bareknuckles politics ultimately hurts Obama's image or whether a fight for disclosure brings back the bad news of the Clinton years Democratic voters -- and superdelegates -- might be tired of.

*** Clinton’s super problem: By our count, the Clinton campaign hasn’t publicly announced the support of a new superdelegate since just after February 5. Indeed, since Super Tuesday, Obama has gained 47 new superdelegates, while Clinton has lost seven (including Eliot Spitzer). Does Clinton have a bigger problem on the superdelegate front than folks realize? Why do we think party leaders -- who saw the Democrats lose governorships, state legislatures, and the control of Congress during the Clinton years -- suddenly jump on board the Clinton campaign? Isn't this the reason the Clinton campaign has only been able to keep uncommitted supers from climbing board Obama's bandwagon but they haven't been able to woo a new super to their side in a month? ? Isn't this also an explanation for why the Clinton campaign has done so poorly in the caucuses? The caucuses are made up of the activists who follow this stuff closer and think about things like electability and who can help the party keep Congress, etc. If Clinton's not winning over caucus activists, why should we believe she'll win over a large enough chunk of superdelegates to overcome Obama's pledged delegate lead? Ultimately, her best chance is to convince supers that Obama is completely unelectable on par with McGovern, an argument that might have been helped a tad by Rev. Wright.

*** Just askin’: Just how lucky is McCain that the political media world’s focus is on Clinton vs. Obama? Otherwise, wouldn’t his Iraq trip -- with Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- be getting a lot more scrutiny, as would the fact that he’s using taxpayer dollars to pay for a campaign trip? If there were two nominees right now, would McCain have even tried this? Probably not, since everything he was doing would be under more scrutiny.

*** I am liberal, hear me roar: While Clinton will be talking withdrawal from Iraq at George Washington University, across town in DC, the liberal Take Back America conference -- which famously booed Clinton over her Iraq views in 2006 and 2007 -- begins today. The confab, sponsored by the Campaign for America’s Future, today features a speech by Donna Edwards, who beat incumbent Rep. Al Wynn (D) in a primary last month and hears from Sen. Jim Webb later tonight. The theme of the conference, organizers told First Read last week, is that 2008 has an opportunity to be a sea-change election for the Democrats.

*** It’s the economy… : Today should be a major Iraq day, and instead it appears Washington (and New York) and the media will be consumed with the economy. The campaigns are all prepared for an Iraq week, but don't seem to be prepared for a week dominated by the economy. None of the three candidates has been aggressive about reacting to what's actually going on with the economy. All have plans about housing and taxes, etc. But none seem to be tempted into talking about why there's a credit crunch or what's going to pull the country out of this economic funk. And surprisingly, the media isn't demanding answers from the candidate on their prescriptions for the economy.

*** On the trail: Elsewhere today, Clinton heads to Albany after her Iraq speech to attend David Paterson’s swearing-in ceremony; McCain remains overseas; and Obama is in Pennsylvania, where he stumps in Monaca and Scranton.

Countdown to Pennsylvania: 36 days
Countdown to North Carolina, Indiana: 50 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 232 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 309 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639 to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.  

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

What's the big deal with tax returns?  Would everyone be surprised if turned out that the Clintons are rich?  Is that what you want to know? What can be gained from seeing these returns?  As a US Senator, she has to file a financial disclosure form, that will list all her financial dealings that may have an impact on her ability to govern.  So, again, what is the importance with seeing her tax returns? Oh, I get it.. it's just another divisive tactic of the Obamabots.
Are you kidding me?  Clinton is asking Obama to release his old tax returns (which he has already said he will) when she hasn't even released her 2006 returns yet (which Obama did already)?????  What BS.  
How many American soldiers are you willing to sacrifice if we leave and Iran invades Iraq. I know, that couldn't happen, it's not like they've never been at war with Iraq before. When the Sunni's are being slaughtered, how many are you willing to send in to stop it. Or perhaps you will just say, "look away."

The Bush adminstration once beleived that Saddem was contained. They then came to believe that he was willing to send terrorist to attack us and deny any involvement. I guess he should have went to Iraq and checked for himself instead of listening to those who told him he had WMD's. The UN, Russia, Britian, the CIA, etc.. He should have looked into his crystal ball and known that they were wrong. Instead, he acted. Only God and you know what would have happened if he had not. Try to remember, Israel bombed Iraq's nuke plant years before. But, perhaps they forgot how to build one.

Jaycee, I too echo your sentiments. During elections, the pastor at the church I attended (Baptist), would go so far as to firmly suggest who the congregation should vote for.  Fortunately, most of us knew what the deal was (Pastor ___ was being paid under the table to endorse that particular candidate). So, we  as independent/knowledgeable thinkers made the decisions as to who was the best candidate for "US" and our community and voted accordingly. Unfortunately, there are still pastors/evangelists who "operate" this way, but as you've said, the pastors of these churches come and go and members of these congregations know that a most of them cannot be taken seriously.

I think Sen. Obama's record in the legislature,  his actions as a community leader, and his devotedness to family and friends speaks volumes as to the character of this man. Again, he is still the best man to become President of the United States of America.

Obama, 2008!
When Iowa held county conventions on Saturday, our county had 100% delegate turnout for Barack Obama but Hillary had only 45% of hers show up - even her alternates bolted.  One cannot move on into the oval office by consistently saying that only "big" states count.  We smaller states not only have delegates, but we have votes in the electoral college as well.  We also have senators and representatives in congress that are important to a president's leadership and ability to get laws passed.  For any superdelegates to cast their ballots for Hillary while Obama leads in delegate numbers, popular vote, and number of states won, would be a gigantic slap in the face of more than half the United States!  When trying to get congress filled with democrats, you need the support of voters in all 50 states, not just the big ones!
Anti Reagness, Columbus Georgia. (Sent Monday, March 17, 2008 10:19 AM)

---------------------------------------------------
You have it ALL RIGHT!  Ditto! I agree Francis.
Don't forget to take a ride down the "Avenue of Welcomed Liberators" in an open car, Chicken Dick.
I see Obama is starting to tank in the polls.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/
Hillary beats McCain, BUT McCain beats Obama!
....and the spread between Hillary and Obama is only .08%
tsk, tsk, tsk............shoe's on the other foot now, eh?

Hillary for President 2008!
Wow, just think how much more race relations could have improved if you didn't have Pastors like Mr. Wright out right declaring, and Mrs. Obama inferring, that the White Man keeps you down.  No wonder 1 17 year old Black man didn't have a problem with putting a gun to the head of that girl at UNC.  But no, we have to make excusses as to why it's OK for minorities to be racists.
I find it quite comical that even most democrats are unable to see why Obama is so appealing. Its not his experience or his karisma. Its his ideas of working with all people regardless of their views.Its his lack of name-calling. Its his lack of republican hating. I am sad to learn that its just a false facade. Appearently his true views are the ones expressed by his pastor, otherwise why would he choose to sit there week after week and listen to them? It has now become clear that the Democrats will be unable to win the election in November so I have decided to vote for McCain. I think that he is an honest, straight forward man and I am willing to give him a chance. Its too bad the Democrats(the Party of Hate) can't look at people that way. Its a sad commentary on our society.  
Let's see. Can't forget to change the page numbers, to cover the ones we shredded. And the dates and times on the files about my schedule. Oh, and Bill, don't forget to make up some new names for the contibutions you got. There, that should cover it. Now we can kick his butt. huh?
With the economy in the shape its in and getting worse everyday, McBush wants to keep the war going .
It's amazing how many people MSNBC brought on it's network this weekend to provide excuses why the company Mr. Obama keeps shouldn't reflect on his ability to judge charactor; however, even MSNBC's attempt to shore up it's choice for President didn't do too much good - at least to those who are capable of thinking for themselves.

PS

Mr. Obama don't waste your or our time he in Northeast PA as we won't buy your BS.
Many voting for Clinton to boost GOP-Boston Globe
A sudden change of heart? Hardly.
Since Senator John McCain effectively sewed up the GOP nomination last month, Republicans have begun participating in Democratic primaries specifically to vote for Clinton, a tactic that some voters and local Republican activists think will help their party in November. With every delegate important in the tight Democratic race, this trend could help shape the outcome if it continues in the remaining Democratic primaries open to all voters.
Spurred by conservative talk radio, GOP voters who say they would never back Clinton in a general election are voting for her now for strategic reasons: Some want to prolong her bitter nomination battle with Barack Obama, others believe she would be easier to beat than Obama in the fall, or they simply want to register objections to Obama.
"It's as simple as, I don't think McCain can beat Obama if Obama is the Democratic choice," said Kyle Britt, 49, a Republican-leaning independent from Huntsville, Texas, who voted for Clinton in the March 4 primary. "I do believe Hillary can mobilize enough [anti-Clinton] people to keep her out of office."
Britt, who works in financial services, said he is certain he will vote for McCain in November.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/17/many_voting_for_clinton_to_boost_gop/


Probably also explains a lot of the demographic shift after McCain sowed up the Rep. contest.  i know this is not the narrative the MSM wants you would rather push a racial divide...Obama can't win in White America, blah, blah.
This site is hilarious.  Just a bunch of idiot dummycrats yelling back and forth at each other, naively thinking you can change the other side's opinion.

It's like two children arguing to their mother on who started the fight.   "He did it!"  "She did it!"  "No he did" "She lies"  on and on...

Almost no one that comes here will change their vote because of anything posted here by you dummycrats.  All you end up doing is solidifying the hatred for your own candidate by the other side, making your chances to win the general election even worse.  But by all means you dummycrats, keep it up.  We thank you.

President John McCain will thank you as well on Nov 5th.
By the way, the other thing to note on the "electibility" issue is "coattails".  Again, should the superdelegates decide to overturn the larger vote-getter, perhaps they should think about who will allow the Dems to attain larger numbers of representatives in CONGRESS.  Surely, that is a factor too.

Obama 08
When Hillary was running for the Senate, she attacked
her opponent in every speech with the line "When are you going to release your tax returns" Now when the Obama campaign asked her the same question, Mark Penn likens Senator Obama to Ken Starr. Is that the best the Clinton campaign can come up with? Pretty lame as far as I am concerned. I am still supporting Senator Obama because I do not want to go back to the Clinton years.
From First Read:

'...The Politico adds, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) reiterated her position Sunday that superdelegates should reflect the will of voters in the Democratic nominating process — a nod to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), whose campaign is making the same case.”...'

Thank you, Nancy !!
This is EXACTLY RIGHT !!
The Super Delegates MUST ENDORSE the candidate with the most primary and caucus delegates

That candidate is BARACK OBAMA

Barack Obama IS INEVITABLE !!

Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee

Barack Obama will be you President

Obama/Edwards '08
Character counts
Integrity counts

Obama '08, for a Democratic VICTORY IN 2008

Well First Read, when McCain and either Obama or Hillary are paired together and the nominating process is over, the real battle begins. Each nominee will be tearing down at one another. Now, the problem is that if Hillary challenges McCain on Iraq, he'll remind her that she also voted for the war; if she goes after him on national security, he'll have an easier time on this and will get her to be specific, and if he finds untruths in what she says, he'll portray her as a liar; and if she attacks his background, he will unleash all of her scandals and lies and hugely scare up votes, particularly from conservatives and independent. Hillary may be able to beat him on the economy and possibly health care, but McCain's dig into her past will come to haunt her and delvier her an embarrassing defeat.
On the other hand, there is little McCain can dig up to attack Obama. He can talk about Rekzo, but Obama will bring up the issue of his relationship with lobbyists, demonstrating McCain's hypocrisy on ethics. If McCain goes against Obama on national security, Obama will remind him of the mess he and Hillary helped create in Iraq (and remind him of how the war helped spawn a new terrorist group, al-Qaida in Iraq that never appeared before the war started, and the facts that WMD inspectors found no evidence of any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq). And if McCain tries to attack Obama on the economy, Obama will remind him of what he said (that the economics is something he is not very familiar with).
So, you can see it is easier for McCain to handle and defeat Hillary. In fact, he even mentioned that he desires to have Hillary as his opponent. The Republicans are better prepared to attack Hillary and motivate GOP voters into turning out in large numbers to reject another Clinton presidency, recalling the Bill presidency.
It never ceases to amaze the attention paid to less substantial issues. I don't blame the usual suspects, I blame us. Voters,bloggers, and passerby.

To let anyone dictate the discourse on the country's direction, and base it on...

1.) A washed up, FAILED VP candidate (most folks didn't know who Ferraro was till now)

2.) A preacher who has no political authority whatsoever.

3.) SNL SKITS!!!!!

If we allow the narrative to take such a frivolous turn, don't we deserve 4 more years of whatever is dished out?

G.I.G.O

garbage in, garbage out
Here is what bothers me about Obama's pastor.  The family has been attending that church for 20 years, and if the man preaches his hatred once, you can bet he's done it time and again.  Obama and his wife have exposed his children to that.  Even if not the one ranting sermon that has been shown again and again, it's been reported that all his sermons tend to be laced with expletives, and that would be enough for me to take my children out of that church.  I cannot reconcile the racist rantings of this man with being the mentor of a man we want as president.  I never had any reason to wonder about Obamas minister before this all became public, and being far far from Chicago, I would have no reason to know of his racist preachings.  I am now very unhappy that I voted for Senator Obama in our primary.  I will not vote for him in a general election.  I will not vote for McCain, so if presented with a choice between Obama and McCain, I will stay home. If Senator Clinton gets the nomination I will vote for her.  At least I can say for her that what you see is what you get, not like Obama who presented himself one way, and more and more we are seeing he is politics as usual.
SIERRA I DO NOT THINK HE WILL BE BRINGING IN  AS MANY AS YOU HOPE FOR. PEOPLE AROUND THE BLOGS HAVE GREAT CONCERN WITH A MAN WHO HAS DEVOTED HIS WHOLE CAMPAIGN AROUND JUDGEMENT AND WORDS MATTER.
YOU CAN NOT FIX THIS ONE, IT WILL NOT GO AWAY .
I DO NOT BELIEVE HE IS DONE WITH THE REZKO THING EITHER. HE HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP WAY TO MANY TIMES ALREADY IN THAT TRAIL.
OBAMA HAS SHOWN EVERYONE HIS POOR JUDGEMENT, IF YOUR REALLY THINK THAT A REPUBLICAN, INDEPENDENT OR A CLINTON SUPPORTER WOULD VOTE FOR HIM IN THE GENERAL  THEN YOU ARE REALLY WRONG.
WORDS DO MATTER ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU USE POOR JUDGEMENT.
THIS AND REZKO ARE NOT GOING AWAY.
FACE IT IT COULD BE COMING TO A END THE SUPER THAT ENDORSED HIM TODAY WAS ALREADY WITH HIM, SHES FROM CHICAGO.
CLINTONS WE KNOW WHAT WE GOT. WE NEED NO REMINDERS WE JUST DO NOT CARE ANYMORE. WE HAVE GROWN AND MOVED ON AND KNOW SHE WOULD MAKE THE BEST PRESIDENT FOR US.
TELL YOU BOSS A SPEECH ABOUT RACISM IS NOT GOING TO WORK, HIS SPEECHES WON'T MATTER MUCH ANYMORE.
TO C A, Tuscaloosa,Al.(March 17 08)I agree with  you
Many of Rev. Wright's comments were contemptible. But regarding some comments there is some truth to them.This county has been controled by rich white males(there is no doubt about that)Racism does still exist in the US(there is no doubt about that)Some of our actions across the world have creaated enemies for us who now means us harm(there is no doubt about that)These facts to some, mightE be to some,divisive and horrble ,they are true facts.Sometimes people take offense because the truth hurts.We as a nation for the peace of all mankind we have to move forward.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=774959

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google