The Geffen Thing

I don't really have anything to say on the Clinton-Geffen-Obama spat from yesterday, except to observe that I was becoming so overtaken with Obama-mania (he's dreamy) that I was finding myself kinda sorta hoping he would decide that the time had come to position himself as the candidate of intellectual property law reform. Well, with David Geffen as his finance chair, probably not.

UPDATE: As you'll see in comments, Geffen hosted a big Obama fundraiser but isn't actually the finance chair. His real finance chair is Penny Pritzger, a Chicago billionaire who also happens to be the 89th most powerful woman in the world. Or at least she was in 2006. Hillary Clinton, by contrast, is 18th, just above Ann Livermore of Hewlett Packard and just below Chilean president Michelle Bachelet.

2/22/07 8:51AM del.icio.us this incoming links

Comments

Geffen isn't Obama's finance chair; he doesn't have any role in the campaign, he just co-hosted one fundraiser. Obama's finance chair is Penny Pritzker. The whole tempest was an effort by the Clinton campaign to show that they can lie and smear as furiously as any Swift Boater, which must be so very thrilling to Democratic primary voters.

Posted by: David Weigel on February 22, 2007 08:59 AM

Nixon opens to China!

Perhaps Geffen could do this just to spite Eisner (actually I have no idea of the relationships, but one can hope).

Posted by: theCoach on February 22, 2007 09:01 AM

Assume Petey has a point (and, yes, that hurts) when he says that the best way for any other Dem candidate to beat HRC is to first become known as the only practical Democratic alternative to HRC. Maybe that's the race Obama feels he has to win first--he's setting up HRC, but he's competing (at the moment) with Edwards. It would be lovely if alt.Dem.candidates spent the next several months hammering the bejeebus out of HRC as a means of competing with the other alt.candidates (rather than going after them directly), but only if HRC couldn't win the nomination.

Posted by: SomeCallMeTim on February 22, 2007 09:06 AM

Reforming copyrights is the sort of thing you don't run on, but do anyway. (See my comment yesterday as ot the magic of electoral dishonesty). Why face the opposition your campaign when you can take their money and fuck them over later? It's a hell of a lot easier to win re-election than election anyway.
As for Hillary, I can only assume she's running a campaign that's calculated to prove that bloggers and the base of the party don't matter. She really better hope she's right.

Posted by: soullite on February 22, 2007 09:11 AM

"Assume Petey has a point (and, yes, that hurts) when he says that the best way for any other Dem candidate to beat HRC is to first become known as the only practical Democratic alternative to HRC."

Thanks for the shout-out, but I don't think I've ever said any such thing. The race is stuck in amber until mid-summer at least as an HRC/Obama race, with Edwards hanging out in the shadows. And that's actually a race Edwards can win.

And as someone who thinks Edwards is the answer to many, many questions, I'm quite happy to see HRC and Obama trading punches right now. It won't change the two person race dynamics for the near future, but that's perfectly OK. Watch the horse running off the pace on the outside of the track...

------

And finally, I think the accurate interpretation of Geffen-mania is that it shows weakness on the part of Team Hillary to have to go negative so early. They're scared of Obama, which again, is very good strategic news for Edwards.

Posted by: Petey on February 22, 2007 09:17 AM

While referring to one of your opponent's major donors as the "finance chair" is surely a despicable smear that should render its author unfit for any political office, I'm afraid it still falls quite a bit short of claiming John Kerry shot himself to get a medal.

Dickerson at Slate was correct to call this round for Hillary, simply because Obama's campaign got lured into getting down into the gutter with them. Take a look back at Obama's brilliant response to the South Carolina politicos, or the madrassa smear; he's shown a Reaganesque ability to defang attacks without looking like a nasty politician himself. In this case, his campaign released a stock rebuttal complete with references to the Lincoln Bedroom and such, which made them sound exactly like any other campaign. Obama needs to get back to his standard tone and he'll win these spats in a breeze.

The blogs are so reflexively anti-Hillary that they're willing to deem her the loser of any and all exchanges, which just ain't so. People are in for a rude awakening if and when Hillary claims the nomination and they're like, "But everyone I know hates Hillary!"

Posted by: Steve on February 22, 2007 09:22 AM

People are in for a rude awakening if and when Hillary claims the nomination and they're like, "But everyone I know hates Hillary!"

Let's wait and see that "if" turn into a "when." She's still the massive favorite, and it's her race to lose. But I now am starting to believe she's going to lose it.

Posted by: SomeCallMeTim on February 22, 2007 09:29 AM

People are in for a rude awakening if and when Hillary claims the nomination and they're like, "But everyone I know hates Hillary!"

But I know all these people who like Hillary!

Posted by: Matthew Yglesias on February 22, 2007 09:45 AM

The problem with the "Hillary won this one" argument is that she didn't. Her complaint is void of merit and widely seen as such. She came across as a bit over the edge and prickly and willing to twist the truth to make her false assertions. Rather than pass on Geffen who said he didn't like her she attacked ObamaRama which is just plain dumb.
ObamaRama in his reply points out that HRC is faithless to past friends (who now prefer him), reminds people of the "selling WH sleepovers" dustup, and is the aggrieved party, not HRC.
Not bad really.
Then for the real point: ObamaRama cannot always take the high road in his replies. Just as Dems learned they had to fight back against the Right's smears so ObamaRama has delivered a preemptive bitchslap to HRC. He has shown that she can't trash talk him and get away with it.
She's the Charm Impaired Clinton Twin, not him, with all that implies.

Posted by: tiptap on February 22, 2007 10:44 AM

It's just amazing that people hate Hillary so much that they'll even cheer on right-wing smears against her. Never mind that the whole Lincoln Bedroom flap was an overdramatized production of the right-wing noise machine from way back - as long as it's aimed at Hillary, all's fair!

If Obama's next "preemptive bitchslap" is a Vince Foster reference, will you cheer that on too?

Posted by: Steve on February 22, 2007 10:52 AM

While I'm sure Hillary's supporters have perfectly good reasons why they would vote for simply because she's not a Republican, some of us don't have any such reasons. You might care most about abortion, but if you don't what's left? They'll do the same things on trade, they'll do the same things on executive power, they're both just as likely to start a war with Iran. They both hate free speech, free expression, and youth culture. They are both willing to make fun of the few for the approval of the many (or the powerful).

She's not going to stop the war. I'll tell you all that right now. You don't have to believe me. I know she's said she will. But I believe that come January of 2009, she'll say that the situation isn't right to begin withdrawal. Every few months she'll point to some act of violence for proof we'll have to stay. It's Nixon's "Peace with honor" all over again. I'm not going to vote for that.

I know that she won't vetoe all sorts of wonderful things from congress that a Republican won't. That's not enough for me, though I admit everyone should wiegh that choice for themselves. What option do we really have but to throw it to the Republicans. We've tried working within the party, they just ignore us anyway. I'm well aware that this is the argument that Nader used. He was wrong, because Al Gore was obviously not George W Bush. But there is very little difference between Hillary Clinton and Rudy Guiliani unless the Supreme Court (code for Abortion) is the most important issue to you.

Posted by: soullite on February 22, 2007 11:03 AM

I am aware that there is no second E in Veto. sorry bout that.
Also that it's Weigh and not Wiegh.

Posted by: soullite on February 22, 2007 11:04 AM

Steve... there's more truth in the WH sleepover stories than that Geffen is ObamaRama's Finance Chairman. Do you so love HRC that you don't mind her fucking lies? Her opportunism? Her supreme confidence in her own wrong headedness?
And you HRCophiles are getting more tiresome than the Bushites with your "Hillary hater" bs. I don't hate HRC, I hold her in utter and complete contempt, largely for her self-righteous smugness. Add to that her vote to authorize the war and that she thinks she deserves to be president because she was married to one of the great 20th century American politicians.
I despise her sense of entitlement. And the last thing the US needs right now is more dynastic politics featuring the less talented of the clans.
The thought of HRC speaking to the country from the Oval Office is a nightmare. And I don't believe for one moment that the nation is so delusional as to elect her and her dismissive and divisive style of politics. Fuck her!

Posted by: tiptap on February 22, 2007 11:10 AM

But you don't hate Hillary. Okay.

Posted by: Steve on February 22, 2007 11:12 AM

What option do we really have but to throw it to the Republicans. We've tried working within the party, they just ignore us anyway

It shocks me that anyone who's been paying attention for the past 8 years could say something like that with any degree of seriousness. Since the party "ignores" "us" (I'm not sure who you're lumping in there), you're willing to accept 2 or 3 more Republican Supreme Court Justices (thank God the only cases before the Court will be about abortion, though!), continued appointment of political officials throughout the bureaucracy, and an almost guarenteed continuation of most of the terrible policies of this administration.

All because you "know" that Hillary will start a war with Iran, and the mainstream Democrats won't found a Department of Peace. Shouldn't you be off volunteering for Kuchinich somewhere?

Posted by: Ben on February 22, 2007 11:33 AM

That list is dated, if you ask me. Hillary has probably dropped at least one rank, since on that list, which came out in August '06, Pelosi was ranked 48th. She was Minority Leader then. Now she's Speaker of the House, which places her probably in second, ahead of Condi Rice but behind Merkel.

I think Forbes should have a list of Most Powerful Women in the State of Nature. (shrugs) Candace Parker can dunk.

Posted by: Matthew Struhar on February 22, 2007 12:08 PM

Ben, You like to lie, don't you. I never said that I "knew" Hillary would start a war with Iran. I said I knew she wouldn't leave Iraq. Either you're too stupid to know the difference, or you lied about what I said. Pretty fucking retarded given that my comment is not very far above yours.

Seriously, when did I argue for a Department of Peace? So you accuse me of reading minds in one line, and pretend you can read mine the next? We're all dirty hippies and peacenik liars to you, eh? You are so obviously a Hillary supporter. You can tell by the Republican style attacks and the disregard you so obviously hold for the vast majority if the Democratic base.

Well, since you're clearly not smart enough to think up any other reasons why attacking Iran would be a monumentally bad decision, do you want me to enlighten you? You know that IRaq, Iran, and Afghanistan form a continuous swathe of land right? You really think it's a bood idea to make the Iranians, the Taliban, and both sides of the Iraq civil war into natural allies? you think we have the soldiers to occupy, let alone pacify, an area nearly the size of continental europe? You think China won't fund and arm those rebels when we put such a massive army on their border? Will Pakistan be able to stay out of it, and for how long?

Ben, you're one step below George Bush in my eyes. You're as dishonest and cowardly, you rely on the same mischaracterizations of your enemies as he does. And so does Hillary, as we've increasingly seen this week. Thats how I know she won't pull out of Iraq. It's the ultimate act of triangulation to her. The ultimate proof that she's not a dirty hippy.

Posted by: soullite on February 22, 2007 01:40 PM

Ben, you're one step below George Bush in my eyes. You're as dishonest and cowardly, you rely on the same mischaracterizations of your enemies as he does.

Dude, you make arguments like "Hillary hates free speech." Get off your high horse.

Posted by: Steve on February 22, 2007 01:41 PM

Charming, to be sure.

Sorry for misplacing quotation marks around words you never typed. That was an error on my part. I leave it to you as to whether I am a liar or retarded.

I'm not a Hillary supporter, but your argument, such as it was (at least the parts you wrote down, it is true that I can not read minds) was so absurd, I felt compelled to respond. Anyone who is trotting out the old "the two parties are exactly the same because they ignore us (who's that "us again?), and let's just vote for Nader" needs to be corrected.

The past eight years have shown that there was indeed quite a bit of difference between the two parties, and your stance that Hillary and Rudy are nearly the same (for reasons you don't quite articulate), and that there's no need to worry about "throwing it to the Republicans" defies what we've been seeing in the Bush years. Excuse me for saying that you want a Department of Peace, but the quality of your argument ("No, really, this time there isn't any difference between the parties") seems to put you in the ranks of those who are unaware of some fundamental truths about American politics.

Thank you for telling someone not as smart as you about the value of not attacking Iran. How about now you explain why the Supreme Court is "code" for abortion, and thus it need not bother those who are smart enough to throw the election to Rudy. We lying idiots await your response.

Posted by: Ben on February 22, 2007 01:52 PM

Re Supreme Court

The issue of the Supreme Court is very simple. Clinton - Breyer and Ginsburg; Bush - Roberts and Alito. Anybody who says that there is no difference between the parties is full of s***. End of story.

Posted by: SLC on February 22, 2007 04:37 PM

I think it is important to separate the questions of copyright (a la Hollywood) and the wider sphere of "intellectual property." Copyright is a relatively minor aspect of the overall problem, and if we insist on connecting authors' rights with the ridiculous gene/software/business process patents we are legitimizing the latter by proxy, even if copyright holders are abusive and petty.

The basic distinction is something like, DRM = stupid, annoying; bad patents = life-threatening, industry choking, etc. There is no reason Hollywood couldn't help with the real IP problem, especially as they are likely to become participants in a digital market where patent bombs go off at random. The market will correct their misjudgements about

Posted by: Timon on February 22, 2007 10:21 PM

...how much abuse their customers will put up with.

Posted by: Timon on February 22, 2007 10:24 PM

What shocked me is that Geffen tried to get Pelletier pardoned. Good for him- Pelletier is a great man and if Hillary said she'd pardon him- I'd forgive her a host of sins. But the Rich pardon says everything about her hubby- it sums up his Presidency- what a contemptible act of cowardice. Hillary has been way too clever by half. She's like the heavyweight who's never been hit. Obama just landed a jab, and she practically buckled.

Posted by: Trevor on February 22, 2007 10:54 PM

mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar