An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Obama Aide Resigns After Calling Hillary Clinton “A Monster”

The increasingly bitter and vitriolic tone of the Democratic Presidential nomination campaign featuring Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama has taken its latest foot-in-mouth victim:

A Barack Obama adviser resigned Friday after calling rival Hillary Rodham Clinton “a monster.”

Samantha Power, an unpaid foreign policy adviser and Harvard professor, announced her resignation in a statement provided by the Obama campaign in which she expressed “deep regret.”

“Last Monday, I made inexcusable remarks that are at marked variance from my oft-stated admiration for Senator Clinton and from the spirit, tenor, and purpose of the Obama campaign,” she said. “And I extend my deepest apologies to Senator Clinton, Senator Obama and the remarkable team I have worked with over these long 14 months.”

The Obama campaign accepted the resignation immediately.

That means the Obama campaign wants to defuse the controversy immediately but it may have some other implications (see below). Clinton backers had been demanding Power’s resignation.

Power told The Scotsman that Clinton is a “monster” who will stoop to anything to win. She tried to make the remark off the record, but the Scottish newspaper printed it anyway. She apologized in a statement and the campaign decried the remark.

Actually, by the rules of journalism practiced by most journalists it doesn’t qualify as “off the record.” Off-the-record is usually agreed to before hand by the reporter. Saying something and regretting it and then saying “off the record” won’t cut it with some editors since there was no previous agreement.

Power is a foreign policy adviser to Obama and a Pulitzer Prize winner, was quoted in The Scotsman as saying Clinton was stooping to low tactics to recover ground in the race to win the party’s presidential nomination. The Harvard professor is also quoted as telling the newspaper Obama’s team had been disappointed with Clinton’s campaign win in Ohio on Tuesday.

“In Ohio, they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows Ohio’s the only place they can win,” Power is quoted as saying. “She is a monster, too — that is off the record — she is stooping to anything.”

….Obama’s spokesman Bill Burton said in an e-mail: “Senator Obama decries such characterizations which have no place in this campaign.”

Obama’s campaign had to act swiftly. For one thing, Power’s comments if she remained would have sparked a controversy that would dominate the news cycle and create great sympathy for Clinton. And, as David Brooks notes in his column, Obama’s campaign has been based on the premise that he’s offering a different kind of politics that focuses on issues and not vitriol.

The phrase most often used now is “knife fight” — the theory that the Clinton campaign benefits when they can draw Obama into reacting like just any politician using the usual tools of demonization or verbal overreach.

This time his aide used both.

One of Obama’s several dilemmas is how to run and maintain an issue-oriented campaign when brickbats are being hurled at you. Do you throw back or get bloodied and hope people consider you noble and principled?

Power’s comments underscore the fact again: it is getting very very ugly, divisive and emotional out there for supporters of Clinton and Obama. Power now joins the list of people — some from the Clinton camp — who made outrageous statements about the other side and had to quit. And the list of factors that suggest that party unity may not be easy for the Democrats this year, no matter who ends up on top.

  • domajot
    This is just too, too bad.
    Powers is an extremely intelligent person who understands the Middle East at its deepest levels.

    My hope is that she abd Obama will keep in touch.
  • PaulSilver
    We all have feelings about perceived injustice, but try to contain our wrath in order to avoid escalation. It seems to me that it is to Clinton's advantage to push Obama off balance and off his higher road. Unfortunately a momentary lapse by Ms Powers is just the kind of advantage Clinton hopes for.
    Yet since animosity is inevitable the real display of maturity and integrity is how fast one can disavow such offenses and regain the trust of supporters.
    Likewise I think Obama should accept the agreement to use public funding for his campaign and completely open all files related to the Rezko mess.
  • Macan
    I gather Power was no ordinary advisor, but very close to Obama...Condi Rice to Obama's Bush. This was a major hit...and, significantly, a self-inflicted one.

    An important point here is that this will contribute to the view...among the party establishment...that the Obama movement is "not ready for prime time".

    It was a freshman mistake.

    Can you imagine the body blow to the Democrats in October...say Obama were the nominee...and one of his key advisors from academia (where smug sneers at the GOP and "war heroes" are, after all, de rigueur)... made a mocking crack about McCain being a "hero" and tortured in the Hanoi Hilton.

    The GOP is holding sessions for its officials on Message Discipline, on issues of race and gender.

    Will the Obama team get the message?
  • mwp
    As Shaun says elsewhere, the Clinton camp has compared Obama to Ken Starr. They've also -- twice now -- compared Obama unfavorably to John McCain (and that's the sin against the Holy Spirit -- unforgivable).The Obama camp is taking the very high road by removing Power so quickly for a spur of the moment comment made in the heat of a very tough fight. The danger is that the way Clinton is playing is going to make just about anybody who's an Obama supporter agree with Power's characterization

    I'm not a particularly big Obama fan, and I've never been anti-Hillary. I was undecided for a long time. But if she doesn't quit saying the Republican candidate is more qualified than the front-running Democratic candidate, I'm going to refuse to vote for her if she's the candidate in November. It confirms everything her detractors have been saying about her -- that the only thing that motivates her is her own ambition, and she'll take her party down with her in a heartbeat. I've voted D in every presidential election since McGovern, but Hillary's only getting one more chance from me -- one more "McCain and I have passed the Commander-in-chief threshold, but I don't know about Obama." If she does it again and she'd the nominee, I'll skip the presidential vote altogether in November.
  • casualobserver
    "I've voted D in every presidential election since McGovern",

    Wow, mwp, what are the odds of finding someone who actually inked a ballot for both Fritz and Mike! I hoped you made copies of those....those are worth some serious dough to collectors!

    Seriously, if you made the trip to the polls under those fruitless situations, you owe it to yourself to keep that track record unblemished. Write in Dodd, Biden or Richardson, but do not not vote.
  • pacatrue
    For the record, I'm in academe and never heard anyone making fun of war heroes. Maybe I hang with the wrong crowd. And that's sort of the whole point; it's a small crowd who might do such a thing. For better or for worse, academia is one of the few places of prestige that a person can rail tirelessly against something without getting fired, and so it occurs. Some barrista at Starbucks may think the same way, but no one cares, because that's not a prestigous position. Now, I'm not denying that American academia isn't liberal compared to the general public, but most of us liberals can respect McCain for his military service and what he endured without thinking he's the right Commander-in-Chief right now. Even if we do work in academia.
  • Paul and domajot - I've like your comments before and I don't dislike what you've written here, but as a freelance jouralist who has been interviewed herself and has had politicians ask her to take something off record long after it had been in the public domain, you don't think you're being a little easy on her? Her pedigree as a writer and professor, and someone on a book tour for goodness sakes, would seem to indicate that this is not about pushing Obama off-balance, as Paul writes, but rather is more akin to what Macan says about this hit being self-inflicted.

    No? Yes? What do you think?
  • Macan
    Pacatrue...your point about "academia is one of the few places of prestige that a person can rail tirelessly against something without getting fired" is a central point here, I think.

    I was not making a point about academic liberalism so much as academia in general (having spent years in it myself). It is a sheltered environment. Clinton's folks are streetwise, in a way Power clearly wasn't.

    For example, Power has made bizarro comments before...as at Berkeley where she suggested US military action in Palestine to create a Palestinian state against Israel.

    As you note...people can do and say all kinds of things in academe -- unless it is not politically incorrect, of course, which consigns one to damnation -- and as long as you have tenure you are protected.

    As Jillmz notes, as someone with journalistic experience, a figure in the political sphere/public eye should know better. Obama does not need "own goals".
  • pacatrue
    Macan, I agree with your point that this was a screw-up by someone who forgot she couldn't just say whatever she thought in a conversation, but instead must represent the Campaign. Everyone agrees on this, which is why the Obama campaign "resigned" her. (Yes, I know I'm turning an intransitive into a transitive.) My reaction was entirely against the hint that academics all sit around bashing war heroes all day long, except when searching for great deals on Che Guevara t-shirts (www.subvertamerica.com/academe has great deals by the way). There seem to be many people who think this is indeed the case, and I may have lumped you into that group reflexively.
  • pacatrue
    Ooh, subvertamerica.com doesn't seem to exist. I see a great parody web site in the making.
  • Rudi
    I gather Power was no ordinary advisor, but very close to Obama...Condi Rice to Obama's Bush. This was a major hit...and, significantly, a self-inflicted one.

    Obama does have a chief foreign policy wonk - and her name is Rice, but not Condi. Powers was a second tier adviser. What about the likes of Wolfson, Penn and Shaheen in the Clinton campaign?
  • casualobserver
    First Austan, then Powers. If he's got an advisor named Felicity Shagwell, I predict she is the next to go.
  • elrod
    Casual,
    LOL!

    I think Obama showed he IS ready for primetime by how he handled this. Obviously he cannot control what Samantha Powers - a brilliant woman by any estimation - is going to say on her book tour. She's not a messaging person like Burton or Axelrod. And she definitely is not Obama himself. But Barack Obama did something he did not have to do and that's to remove her from the campaign. It proves that Barack Obama really is engaging in politics in a new way.

    On the other hand, Howard Wolfson and Mark Penn issue insults on a daily basis - comparing Obama to Ken Starr, dismissing 40 states as significant, etc. And they're still trusted advisers.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice/Joe Gandelman | Designed by Elegant Themes | Customized by Tyrone Steels II/Enxit Group, LLC