Hillary Warns Kerry: Hands Off McAuliffe

NewsMax ^ | 3/5/04 | Limbacher

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Uber Democrat Sen. Hillary Clinton is warning all-but-certain presidential nominee John Kerry to back off if he's thinking about replacing party chairman Terry McAuliffe before the election.

Asked about rumblings that the Kerry camp wanted to toss McAuliffe over the side, Clinton told the New York Times on Friday, "Terry has helped the Democratic Party move into the 21st century to compete against the incredible interlocking institutional powers of the other side."

"A lot of plans have been laid, a lot of infrastructure put in place, and I want to see us follow through," she insisted.

The disagreement over McAuliffe's future could be just the tip of the iceberg of a growing rift between the Clintons, who, through McAuliffe, still control the party's machinery - and Sen. Kerry's political team, which now sees itself in the driver's seat.

Sen. Clinton, for instance, reminded the Times that her husband did not replace the party chairman when he became the nominee in 1992 - a none too subtle hint that she expects Kerry to follow suit.

Still, the Kerry camp is reportedly bristling over McAuliffe's antics, such as his decision to publicly allege that President Bush went AWOL from the National Guard. That stunt put the spotlight on parts of Kerry's past that he preferred not to discuss - such as his decision to team up Jane Fonda for anti-war protests in the 1970s.

Another sign of the growing rift between the Kerry and Clinton teams came late Tuesday, when Sen. Clinton offered an unenthusiastic endorsement to Kerry as the party's inevitable nominee, and did so on Japanese TV - a venue where few Americans were likely to notice.

Strategists for the Massachusetts Democrat are said considering different ways to curb McAuliffe's independence - a move that would certainly limit the influence wielded by Sen. Clinton and her husband in upcoming campaign decisions.

Still, Kerry strategists, aware that alienating the Clintons could cost their candidate in more ways than one, have to be careful not to ignite an internal civil war.

Even without McAuliffe, for example, Sen. Clinton controls the Democratic Party's presidential media fund through her right hand man Harold Ickes, who has the backing of Bush-bashing billionaire George Soros.

And other Democratic groups that will play critical roles in the 2004 election include Americans Coming Together, founded by Hillary ally Ellen Malcom, and the Center for American Progress, run by former Clinton White House chief of staff John Podesta.

[Interesting Times]

Sounds more like her allies on the dark side of the force.

Hey, projection is one of our most valuable tools in the battle against the leftists. If you want to know what they're up to, just see what accusations are spewing from their lackeys.

At the moment, for example, we're informed that the Republicans are planning to run a really, really dirty campaign. See? Piece of cake.

[freedomson]

Mrs. Clinton is angry.

And when Mrs. Clinton gets angry......

PEOPLE DIE !!!

[betty boop]

Kerry strategists, aware that alienating the Clintons could cost their candidate in more ways than one, have to be careful not to ignite an internal civil war.

Verrrry interesting post, T_C. Actually, I suspect there's a good chance an internal civil war may well ignite in the DNC, and possibly soon. This would be a battle royale between the Clinton and the Kennedy factions.

Hitlery desperately wanted the DNC Convention for New York City; Teddy beat her on that question, and so the convention comes to Boston. (She is not used to being "beaten" like this....) McAuliffe, of course, is a Clinton factotem, and as such is deeply resented in certain quarters of the party.

It gets really dicey when Hitlery makes not-so-veiled threats against Kerry -- especially since I sincerely believe she would like the Veep slot this year -- from which to undermine Kerry's presidential bid, and position herself for a "coronation" at the Convention this summer.

Hitlery wants the White House and means to have it by hook or by crook; she just will not compete for it: She wants to be drafted, swept into the nomination on a wave of mass party adulation. After Ickes works Kerry over good from behind the scenes, Kerry would be toast. (It has been suggested that the leak about Kerry's "intern problem" came out of the Clinton camp.) He's really quite a weak candidate anyway, all things considered....

Of course, Teddy Kennedy stands firmly with his man, Kerry. One senses there is little love lost between Kennedy and the Clintoons. This could be a very interesting year!

[Enterprise]

I just assume that the RATS will run their usual campaign. And a RAT campaign automatically contains dirt, slime, lies, innuendo, slander, and any number of other tactics to help them win "no matter what the cost."

[Interesting Times]

Sure, but you have to admit it's courteous of them to warn us in advance...

[LiteKeeper]

BLEACHER BUMP - "Bring it on!"

[fella]

"the incredible interlocking institutional powers of the other side." = "Vast right-wing conspiracy".

[onedoug]

"...the incredible interlocking institutional powers of the other side."

Monica again?

[Political Junkie Too]

McAuliffe is the Clinton's "Renfield."

He is necessary to feed the beast.

-PJ

[SanDiegoBushMan]

I really will not be surprised at all if Kerry doesn't make it to the election. I think the intern thing could return or it could be something totally different and he will be forced, by the dems and the media (same thing), to step aside in favor of Hillary.

[Dems_R_Losers]

I agree with this, but why would Kerry pick this fight right now, when he's trying to get ready to take on George Bush, unless he's a bigger idiot than I think he is? Wouldn't it be better (from Kerry's perspective) to keep up the illusion of one big happy socialist family until after he's elected and consolidates his power, and then start the bloodbath?

Kerry HAS to pick this fight now, and he has to win it, or he is a political eunuch headed for a total wipeout in November. Aside from McAuliffe's obvious loyalty to the Clintons, which is enough reason to sack him, McAuliffe is simply a horrible DNC Chairman. He was a freaking disaster for Al Gore during the 2000 campaign and especially during the recount. He has already hurt Kerry immensely with the AWOL stuff. He has no clue about how to beat George Bush, and no intention of coordinating message with the Kerry campaign. Bush has an absolute loyalist and sharp political operative at the RNC in Ed Gillespie, along with Karl Rove at the White House. To go up against these guys with only Terry McAuliffe is truly like bringing a knife to a gunfight. I think it could also be Kerry's "Sister Souljah" moment if he can get McAuliffe sacked.

Go back and read Zell Miller's book if you really want to understand what a disaster Terry McAuliffe has been for the Democrat party.

[goldstategop]

The Clintons are warning Kerry if he messes with THEIR control of the Democratic Party, he's finished.

[Mo1]

.

[bray]

I just love the smell of Civil War in the morning!

Pray for W and The Election

[TomHarkinIsNotFromIowa]

Separated at birth.

[CFC__VRWC]

Oh, I know how bad McAuliffe has been for the democrat party, and every night I get down on my knees and thank God for giving him to the Republican Party. :)

However, most of the democrats seem to think just the opposite - that McAuliffe has been the greatest thing to ever happen to their party, and I just don't see a big groundswell of support for his ouster. That just weakens Kerry's position that much more, and his position is already very weak. Right now he's flat broke, his primary momentum has almost completely evaporated, and the big guns of the Bush campaign are just getting warmed up. The Rat convention and its accompanying "bump" is a long way off.


Of course, you could argue that Kerry's position will only get weaker as time goes on (probably true) so he may as well attack now before any strength he has is completely sapped. But if he starts this battle now he completely cuts himself off from the big-time Rat donors, who McAuliffe still has in his back pocket.

If Kerry lets things lie and works behind the scenes for a few weeks to increase his clout, he could take on this fight and have a much better chance of winning. But by picking it in public, he forces McAuliffe and Clinton to deal very harshly with him and put down the rebellion.

[BigTime]

Re. Post #46.

I think you're right that this whole deal is bogus. But I think the plant is from the Clinton camp. I think they planted both stories: 1) Kerry is thinking of dumping McAuliffe before the election then 2) Hillary will rebuff this attempt.

So what does it mean now that these two stories are out there in print? The Clintons have created a referendum for Kerry: Will he dump McAuliffe? If he doesn't, then this will go down in the Clinton PR machine as a show of their continued dominance over the party.

I think all along the Clintons knew Kerry had no intention to dump McAuliffe and wouldn't attempt to do so anyway. So now a non-story (McAuliffe keeping his job) has become a story which never was.

Total fabrication. Total manipulation of the media who willingly play the suckers again.

All to portray the Clintons as power brokers. But it's all smoke and mirrors. If the Democrats will break out of their funk, they need to wash that man/she-beast right out of their hair. Until they do, they (along with the willing media) remain the Clinton's cat toys.

[betty boop]

I really will not be surprised at all if Kerry doesn't make it to the election.

He really does appear to be a very weak candidate. My suspicion is that is not an accident.

Don't forget, McAuliffe knocked himself out "front-loading" the primaries schedule to get a Dem candidate as early in the year as possible. Kerry is the result.

So, what's he supposed to do between now and November? Argue with President Bush? Of course, this does leave him hanging out there as a target for a longer period than ever before in presidential election history. Plenty of time for the Clintoon Cabal to give him a good working over...leaning on people and leaking behind the scenes, of course.

What with that braying, whiny voice of his, plus his arrogance, the disgrace of the Winter Soldier interlude, his whiplash-inducing policy reversals, tendency to speak out of both sides of his mouth at once, and disgraceful voting record in the Senate, my prediction is that most folks will be sick of him in no time.

And then, when Clintoon factotems like Chris Lehane and Harold Ickes get done with him, he'll be a twitching corpse bleeding on the floor -- and Hitlery will step over the body in her haste to get to her "coronation"....

Kerry would have to be certifiably nutz to put her on the ticket with him: She would upstage and undermine him at every turn. But then, I really do believe she wants the Veep slot, and right now! (Which means she's probably going to get it, by hook or by crook.)

"People just love me, and I can raise a ton of money," saith the Goddess: In the end, it may all come down to money. The size of Bush's campaign war chest is giving the Dims fits. Bush will have the luxury of leaving the vilification of his opponent to folks inside the Dim party and spend his ample cash running a clean, idea-driven and policy focused campaign.

Well, that's my speculation, for whatever it's worth. Who knows if it's true at this point? We'll just have to wait and see how this charming little intramural struggle plays out....

[Paul C. Jesup]

I will give Kerry this much credit, he does know who to target first.

[TheGeezer]

I think Hildabeast believes Kerry to be unelectable, ultimately. She won't be able to predict a positive win in the summer, anyway, though she could run on the ticket and return to her senate seat if defeated. If Kerry wins and lives through two full terms, she'd likely be facing an uphill reelection battle in 2012. Though Bush41 succeeded President Reagan, I tend to think (however possibly erroneously) that Americans tend not to vote for vice-presidents of two-term (and lame-duck) presidents. I think perhaps Bush41 succeeded because of Americans' fondness for President Reagan, rather than Bush41's own appeal.

I still think she'll wait until 2008 to face off against whomever, when she will have greater distance between her candidacy and the Republican-core-energizing x42 legacy, AND be able to face a "lame-duck successor". It won't be VP Cheney, however, but some younger surrogate.

I think DM pursues some other agenda when he opines about a Hildabeast run, though I don't know what it may be. He may simply be needling her. I know there's no love lost there...

Regards.