He isnt totally gone hes basically just demoted.

David,
I think that Clinton and the rest of them personally wanted Mark out and they were looking for any good reason to let him go. Boy did he give them one!!

If he has been leading her so far he hasn’t done that great of a job her approval ratings and her lead over Obama in Pennsylvania have slipped considerably! It was about time she got rid of him. But I think it may be a little too late. She should have gotten rid of him when her campaign first started having major problems. I don’t think she can make up any points now!

Cynthia, Covington, Ga.

Penn is not the reason for Hillary’s downfall in this campaign. Us regular joe’s don’t even know who he is. Hillary is the reason for Hillary’s downfall. Negative breeds negative. You cannot cannot expect anything different.

I agree somewhat, if Clinton would have stayed more positive, then she would probably been closer if not ahead of obama right now. it is sad, but on the same token, she is in charge of her campaign and to quote all of her tv/radio adds “i’m Hillary Clinton and I approve this message” She always has the final say. she did not have to authorize any thing. So you can’t blame that on just Penn, she has to take some responsibility in that as well.

I believe that if Hillary had anything on Obama she would have used it by now. She has been in desperate mode for some time now. I think that it is sad that she feels she has to throw the kitchen sink at him. We are looking for somebody who can bring the country together, not someone who is successful at driving a wedge between people.

Mr. Gergen isn’t the fact that every other week there’s a new direction, and new coach for that direction part of what’s hurting Clinton in this campaign? I mean it’s hard to get behind a candidate when even the people who are suppose to be behind them are not. Does an unstable campaign lead one to think it will be an unstable White House too?

Marcy
Mobile, AL

I somewhat agree (save the interpretations that the Obama gaffee was worse… on that opinion I entirely disagree). However, I have often wondered why the Clinton campaign has not saw the power in going positive. It is during those moments when she is focusing on drawing voters to herself rather than away from Obama that she is most powerful. It is my observation that it is during these times that she truly shines and her in depth knowledge of the issues shines through.

Mr. Gergen - isn’t it true that the BHO NAFTA controversy was eventually disputed by the Canadians?
The Clinton campaign has been a disaster from day 1 - who was the Commander in Chief?
Who has shown true leadership in running a campaign and what does this say about the candidates?

Gergen not being crtical of Hillary ? Will wonders cease?

The reason I am not voting for Hillary has nothing to do with Mark Penn. It is the woman and the man she is married to. Neither of them have shown me one honest regard for the military men and women. I remember the distainful looks she would give the Marine guards in her first days in the White House. The fact that she now is able to pretend to care does not matter and never will. Hillary does not deserve to be my Commander in Chief no matter what she or her line up of retired “officers” may say.

Sometimes, the sword is mightier than the pen(n). Does this now mean the candidates will address more of voter’s real concerns like the war, economy, healthcare, etc… or continue to fling rumors and see what takes?

Mr Gergen, I love your stuff! I appreciate the honest and 360 degree view you give on every topic you bring to the table.
Kristy-
I agree. Hillbillary is responsible for what is being portrayed to voters in her campaign. It is not up to Penn to relay her views, that is her job. I have sat on the idea that if the two dem candidates (Hillary esp) would have stuck to their own business and showed their own thoughts instead of trying to demoralize each other, it would be a much tighter race. Now, the dem winner will have a STEEP hill to climb in November, and I don’t think either of them will make that climb. Hopefully, as David stated, the release of Penn will bring a more positive run to the forefront of the campaign from here.

I would imagine Hillary knows where she’s going from now on, with or without Penn, In spite of everything and particularly the media being 70% biased against her, she is still almost tied with Obama. People talk as though she’s miles behind. The more people know Obama the more they realize he’s not a leader, his “conflict” about the Olympic “opening” games boycott by Bush is an example of how he votes “present”. Missing the opening would not detract from the athletes but would send a message. Hillary gets it. Vote for her.

another chief political operative from Hillary’s campign bites the dust… Big Surprise… This is the worst-run campaign in the history of politics…

Mistatement, misremember, mismangement of campaign, misappropriations of campaign funds… what elese can you possibly mis? Wow sounds like a great leader and executive to me… Billary is a joke. Get out and go away.

Scoreboard Obama

Thank you Mr. Gergen. I find it funny, and the same time pathetic, that every time someone in the media says something decent about Hillary, Obama supporters explode about being bias. Well, I guess that’s the type of reaction I would expect from them considering 95% of the media has been fawning over Obama and forcing it down people’s throat that Obama is inevitable (NOT). When people hear this 24/7, it starts to stick in the back of their minds’ and it’s the only reason Obama has had any success at all.

David,

Although Penn might have been the mind behind the “kitchen sink” strategy, you have to admit that you cannot go totally negative on your oponent, yell “shame on you Barack O’bama” on TV, imply he hasn’t passed the commandor in chief test and mock the theme and style of his speech just on the advice of your campaign advisor, can you?

You also need a type of personality that sits well with that type of slimy and no-ethical-limit approach to fighting.

There is a BIG difference between this and the NAFTA case involving an Obama staffer. In the NAFTA case, the staffer involved was a low-level UNPAID staffer NOT the chief strategist of the campaign who has billed the campaign nearly $11 million. Plus, what had actually happened in the Canadian meeting is in dispute whereas here Penn admits to not only telling the Columbians “don’t worry” but telling them “don’t worry I’ll even help you get this trade deal passed!” HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!!!

Seems to be yet another opportunity for Clinton to recreate herself. I have now lost count of the number of strategy changes in her campaign. I tell you one thing, she may easily be the worst choice but the best politician in the race for president

Mark Penn is not gone. He is still a consultant to the clinton campaign. I think he knew he should not have done what he did but like many in positions of authority, he felt he could do what he wanted to do. Well as Senator Obama is calling for “CHANGE”, here is a sign that it is coming. Mark Penn thought he could get away with it and he did not but then to show the same old Washington thought process, she is still keeping him around as a consultant. I think here in the south we call it “HAVING YOUR CAKE AND EATING IT TOO”.

SHAME ON YOU HILLARY

The Clintons’ elastic relationship with the truth has been a consistent shared behavior between them since Bill entered politics. Whether these two are knowledgeable, compassionate or deserving (or not), what they say just always needs to be vetted. Couple this with their all-consuming sense of personal entitlement, and I think they’re pretty frightening. I don’t care if Obama or McCain wins; either would be better than the guaranteed-destructive and unerringly untruthful Billary.

Well. Ae You trying to tell, that she was manipulated?

Then how anyone can even think, that so easy-manipulated person should pretend to be a president?

Also : 2 major figures from the campaign were gone during 4 months.
She can NOT manage!
NO skills.
She can NOT manage this campaign, how can she pretend to rule the country?
What is this all about?
She is disqualified.
And no question about it.
With penn or without - she just can NOT make it - to manage.
(remember - she never did!)

Kitchen sink did not work.
Toilet bowl will not work.
It will only take Clintons down that way.

Now I am afraid, HRC will lose her senate seat next time.

Penn was not fired. This is a demotion - Look closer, he’s still there on the payroll. His title is the only that has changed. Now it’s just Senior Strategist instead of Chief Strategist.

The Clinton’s needed a smoke screen to change Monday morning headlines from the $109 million dollars in questionable revenues that the Clintons made reported on their taxes. They want the middle class to think that they understand their working poor pain. Couple that with some other questionable business deals/partners listed on their tax returns and the lies she told about her foriegn policy experience in Tuzla and add two parts diversion.

The Penn demotion has accomplished that - for now.

Oh, that’s right, you’re Clinton-biased and Penn brainwashed. You’re still for the “same ole’ same ole”, huh? more of the distortions, more of the hypocrisy, more of the behind-closed-doors-dealings. more of the cover-ups.

I’ll just file your article away with the heart-wrenching story of an uninsured pregnant woman getting hit by sniper fire in Ohio while trying to find someone to give her and her fetus health care but being turned away because she didn’t make $20 million in 2007. Oh, wait, maybe that’s not exactly what happened.

Mr. Gergen, I too really like when they have you on the show on CNN. I appreciate your honesty as it relates to each candidate. And, though you may favor one over the other, you do not let it show. We are given the facts and your insight from years of your presense in US politics.

Thank You
Kent, Illinois

What’s hurting Hillary in her campaign is not Mark Penn, no matter what foolish thing he did. It’s Bill, and she can’t fire him.

The best strategy that Mrs. Clinton can follow now – one that would preserve the chances of a Democratic victory in the fall and preserve her reputation, too – is to pursue a gracious, warm, emotionally appealing campaign that draws people to her instead of trying to drive them away from Obama. Indeed, if she had pursued that strategy more consistently from the beginning, she would almost certainly be closer to the nomination now.

Not only the above statement about strategy is too little, too late; it would have never been followed from the beginning. Clinton has shown her true colors by now: egotistical, selfish, racist and liar without any boundaries. Because she always considered herself the de-facto nominee, her dark, nasty, true self was always there to appear the moment anybody would dare competing with her. The last straw: stating that the conservative nominee is more prepared than her democratic rival in running the country. I have never seen any republican going that nasty, to say the least, againgst a fellow republican like this woman has against her fellow democratic rival. Rove et al are nothing compared to her.

Although I respect Mr.Gergin tremendously, I disagree with his take on Clinton’s negativity…I just don’t see it…What I do see is a media, including CNN , that is enthralled with Obama and fearful of taking on a very popular black man when he makes a gaffe…While making hay of his pastor’s words, very little was said of the “typical white person ” comment…Geraldine Ferraro got days of lambasting and Obama’s ownwords were dismissed…I don’t get it…I’m very offended by him and, somewhat more so by the press that swoons over his every word. …Clinton is not being negative, she is being defensive

Just to echo others here, it has nothing to do with Penn. Hillary was destined to fall. If it wasn’t Obama performing the coup de grace it would be someone else.

Always the rumors and innuendo about some “explosive” information about the opponent. In the technology world they call it FUD–fear, uncertainty, doubt–and it’s intended to keep buyers from committing to the purchase of a competing product, not with concrete reasons, but with vague, amorphous, hints that if you go with the other company’s product, you’ll regret it “soon enough.”

If it isn’t these vague references to “nasty stuff” that they’re sitting on, it’s making unfair attacks with the excuse that “the Republicans will do much worse in the Fall.” Either way, the actions of the Clinton campaign repeatedly call to mind the old saying, “With friends like these, who needs enemies?”

I have followed all the twists and turns of this presidential election. The general impression I get is that Obama will be the best candidate to both represent the people of the USA and represent the USA on the international arena.

Clinton come across as being hungry for power. She seems to be capable of anything, legal or not, to reach the ultimate power. Her lies and innuendos are so blatant that any sane voter cringes at them.

I hope the media will take hold of this nickname and use it: Mz. Spoke.

Jeepers Gergen! Are you STILL on the Clinton payroll?

Mr Gergen, offlate your personal affiliation , some call it biasedness, to a particular group is showing up on your political commentary these days. Your reporting should be unbiased.

What is it that you have started picking up on Clinton, and advising anybody’s election campaigns what to do and what to say, like you gave your billion dollar advise to Clinton what she should’ve spoken on MLK day.

Role of media is to report whats happening on ground without distorting the facts, public will make its own opinion.

I think that Mark Penn leaving was excellent for the Clinton Campaign.

If Hillary has nasty stuff on Obama, she will use it before teh PA vote. Just better hope that it doesn’t backfire on her though…she needs the win…not a tie! And so far everytime she throws stuff at Obama, it somehow gets on her…

Nice attempt at false equivalence between what Penn did and the nonsense over Obama’s adviser and NAFTA, which has been disputed by the Canadian government. For bonus points, you even managed to allege (falsely) that what Penn did wasn’t as bad, or as damaging.

Then again, this kind of garbage is par for the course with Gergen. It is unsurprising that a former adviser to Bill’s administration would manage to work in a reference to a Clinton hit job on Obama. The only surprising part is that the rest of this article, about what kind of campaign Hillary ought to be running, is pretty much spot on.

Not buying Mark Penn as the fall guy. Remember Bill and Hillary are seasoned veterans of the political games and they don’t do anything against their will. Mark Penn and the Clintons are clones of each other. Hillary is not “warm”, she’s a pitbull with rabies. She doesn’t know any other way.

Clinton/Penn were a step behind this entire campaign. After they won New Hampshire they should have foreseen a tight race on Feb 5th and organized a full campaign including caucus’, they should have realized that they needed to attract liberals to win, the real swing vote this campaign. I believe that Clinton had the best chance to win in the Fall, but Hillary shouldn’t claim the Nomination this way. She lost and its her own campaigns fault.

Penn was the reflection of the Clinton campaign, not the face. A singularly ungracious reflection of a singularly ungracious and utilitarian group of people who need to go away.

Bye, now.

Hillary should be running the show, not Penn or Bill. But unfortunately I see the handwriting on the wall…..we are getting much of the same as we did with Bill and who gave us NAFTA and who was on the Board at Wal-Mart…..which is the BIGGEST importer from China….so tell me who made $$$$ from that decision, oh 109 million of them to be exact. Has Hillary paid her back depts in Ohio, her employee’s health insurance, come on find out this info this is reporting. How is that lawsuit doing in California? Penn had nothing to do with all the above, but I do find it interesting that he kept his day job, while helping her and you tell me how that looks to Columbian benefactors?????

The dots are starting to connect.

David Gergen

I question your comparision to Obama’s aid meeting with Canadian officials, since that’s been debudnked some time ago. Penn wasn’t fired, it was a ruse by the Clinton campaign to make it appear he’s gone-but he isn’t.

All other news networks are reporting those facts, why is CNN so pro-Clinton?

Do you still get paid by the Clintons’ David?

This is just another example of Hillary’s poor judgement and management style. With all the potential support she could have drawn to her campaign, it continues to remain in shambles. There is no doubt that both she and Bill are seasoned politicians. Old time politics don’t work any longer. They just don’t get the message. I wouldn’t trust Hillary to run anything; let alone the country.

Obama is the best leader we have running for president. If you want to get this country moving in the right direction and are ready for change. He is the answe. If you want to be stuck in the way America has been for the last 15-20 years. Make sure you vote for Maccain or Hillary. I assure you they wil get and keep you there. And once your there you will see you still are not getting any positive results.

Change is good, embrace it. Go Obama!!!!

David…you are so right for the most part. With the exception of the mini-firestorm comment. Hillary should have focused on her campaign and how to solve the housing crisis, healthcare, Iraq war, etc., instead of her whole focus being on Obama. It got personal and she let her feelings get in the way…such a WOMAN thing.

I totally agree, Hillary is at her best when she is kind and gentle, and the Party is then served best. A pity she did not realize that early on.

It’s pretty obvious that you’re not from the U.S. or you would know that Hillary can’t win, and that actually the more time Obama has to campaign and meet the people the more support he gets.

Sorry for not addressing the above article, just wanted to address the above poster.

This was an excellent article. Penn did not see the value of a positive campaign because he had never seen “positive” campaigns work well. That he has been severely demoted to a place without authority in Hillary’s campaign gives all of us hope for the future.

Perhaps now we can find out: Is Hillary a person of good character?

Hillary has created all of the negativity going from her campaign. And that is how she will attempt to run the US. Penn and Bill C. have probably encouraged it, but I believe that they are all dishonest is every way.

I do believe that Hillary is holding back, that the TRUE Hillary has yet to be seen and that Hillary is even nastier, more self-centered, and lies even more than the Hillary we have seen in the last few weeks. I also believe that she knew what Penn was doing, she knew about the Canadian meeting, she knows that her bills aren’t being paid (at the expense of many families and small business owners), and I believe that knows her “mis-speaks” are fictional.

She will create more nastiness, at Obama’s expense, and McCain will in-fact win in November. BUT….. if we are all really lucky, we will go through this again in 4 years.

It is to some extent true!!!!!!!! But my question is that if she is ready as commander in chief from day 1, how Penn could have influenced her to shift towards a nasty politics? Does not it prove that she is a mask of the old vested group of Bill’s regime? If a would be president does not have that control or decency or can easily be blinded by greed for power, how can she be crowned with the most powerfull post of the world? Where is her judgemnt??? The nastiness she brought in the politics is the proof of her unworthiness not only for the president of America but also a good soul or a decent citizen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hillary Clinton has shown the worst possible side of what type of Commander-in-Chief she would be. #1 being her trustworthiness (meaning the flashback of her Bosnia trip & through no fault of her own but you must check your sources, the story of the woman in Ohio who died and did have medical insurance; #2 Penn and herself along with her campaign’s NEGATIVE campaigning and negativity does nothing but breeds negativity; and #3 to say nothing more but she is no more experienced than the rest of the candidates (she did a lot while in the White House but most of the time was probably spent denouncing or being mad with Bill over his affairs). I honestly believe that she may have already ruined her chances for this election based on lack of credibility for both Clintons.

I don’t get it, people keep talking about the negative campaign back and forth. I see the Hillary message as extremely negative and desperate. She says that people trusted with a vote by large numbers of people are free to break that trust and vote for her instead. She blames other people for all of her problems. She surrounds herself with angry people. Aren’t we ready to rebuke would be leaders who have anger issues and personal problems. What happened to ethics? Isn’t it obvious that she will be changing her policies left and right if she were to some how change the election. I just wonder who is going to take the blame for her next big failure.

Gergen,
You’re a long time Hillary supporter so everything you say needs to be taken with a bucket of salt. How in Gods green earth can you honestly say that what Penn did is less than the made up story of Obama’s surrogate going to Canada, especially when the follow up story (which you fail to mention) actually fingered the Clinton team for that trip and showed the initial story got it wrong?

Hillary chose her strategist, chose her lies, chose her negativity. That is who she is.

The more people know Hillbilly the more they also realize she’s a fake and can not control the people that is in her campaign.
Enough said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is just another example of how horribly Clinton’s campaign has been managed. This nomination was hers to lose and she has done so. Her campaign is a terminally ill organism and Penn is just one decaying appendage, falling off. American people need to look at how the candidates have managed their campaigns. John McCain had very nearly wrecked his campaign before he lucked out. Hillary has made every mistake, many of them several times over. How on Earth could she have squandered the riches of the opportunity she had when the primary season began? Simple, she lacks the executive leadership skills. Only Obama has run a campaign that suggests he has the leadership abilities to manage an effective government.

Why does the media keep insisting that it’s only the Clinton campaign throwing kitchen sinks? From what I’ve seen, the Clinton campaign has been the one under massive attack lately - blowing everything up from the Bosnia story (shouldn’t be THAT big a deal), to the tax returns being released - which only proved that she’s a better citizen than the Obama campaign bargained for ($10mil charities and the donations from her book).

The last ‘kitchen sink’ tactic for the Clinton campaign was the Wright scandal, and since then the Obama camp has released countless attacks - there’s even that picture of a bruised “rocky-like’ hillary going around.

In my opinion, the Obama campaign has been throwing the kitchen and bathroom sink at Clinton, not the other way around. I love how the Oprah-owned media twists things.

I doubt very much if Penn’s dismissal will improve things for Hillary. Hillary herself is the problem, and the disarray in her campaign just shows her poor management skills. If this campaign were about some real positive direction, everyone could rally around that and get something done, but it is all about her, not her aspirations for the country. She is falling into the same packaging problems that sank Gore. He should have been able to beat Bush with his hands tied behind his back, but he kept changing his image until nobody knew who he was any more. Her fakeness is showing through more and more.

You have to be kidding to believe that an academic advisor meeting with Canadians was more at fault that a chief strategist meeting with a client nation seeking NAFTA status without fair labor treatment!

I think David Gergen has been one of the more insightful commentators on the CNN roster during this Primary. However, he seems to have missed a mark with Mr. Penn.

The incident with the Colombian government is much more significant than a misinterpreted gaff on the part of one of Senator Obama’s advisors during a university tour.

If “judgement” is a byword of this primary, then one has to wonder about Hillary Clinton’s judgement in bringing an active lobbyist into her closest ranks. More important, the question of “what was he thinking?” spills over to Mrs. Clinton too. If NAFTA reform is truly a high priority item on her agenda - would she not make clear to all who work in her campaign the VALUES she expects them to support? Or is this just another case of Clinton double speak?

No I believe the exact opposite - Mark Penn’s playing both sides of the fense goes to the core of our doubts about the Clinton character - and this story deserves much more attention than it’s gotten.

This is a bit like firing the Captain while the Titanic is already sinking.

Blame might be in place, but it’s not going to make a bit of difference.

Only Hillary is responsible for Hillary. End of story. I am certain this is political and PA union related. They have been calling on her to fire him and PA is her last hope. So there you go….step down, but don’t leave just yet, still need ya in private.

By the way, If the Clinton Campaign is planning to go hard Negative, it will be just before the Pennsylvania Primary, with too little time for Obama to respond.

The underlying reality here is that Hillary’s staff have been arguing over “who” she should be; tough, soft, a fighter, a more feminine woman, etc. Unfortunately, she apparently allows this manipulation of herself in her desperation to win. I can’t image Barack being anyone but who he already is; warm, serious, relaxed, intelligent, willing to deal with whatever comes up in his own way without others telling him how he should appear.

How Mrs.Clintons managed her campaign shows her leadership. By all means it is not the leadership our country need. The only thing she can do just be mean and pray that something happen to OBAMA

For God’s sake … the phrase is “Eating your cake and having it too.”

Google Paul vs. Clinton. Why does NO-ONE talk about this?

Stop the excuses:

I lied about Bosnia (bah, it’s the media’s fault)
I don’t present my tax returns (bah, it’s Obama’s fault)
I tell a fake story (it’s the hospital’s fault for checking the facts)
my husband cheated (it’s the other woman’s fault (how anti-feminist can you get, btw).

multiple staffers on my campaign leave (it’s the media’s fault).

I can’t even run a campaign staff (but I’m experienced enough to run the country)

And you’re offended by Obama. Good grief, look to your own candidate.

That meeting is just one more reason why we need a change in Washington, How many other meetings like that take place never to be found? Hilary is a liar, plain and simple.

The fact that we are discussing Penn and not the $109M that the Clintons reported in their tax papers should answer your question as to why now. If this ain’t a masterfully timed work of spin, I don’t know what is.

Dear New Jersey,

What do you call Clinton saying”shame on you Barak Obama” She up there throwing the everything she can at him. Funny thing is, the whole time Clinton is lying to Ohio about nafta. She was for it in the Whitehouse as firstlady. The mailing were true. Clinton on Television said nafta was good..she said it. Now her top advisor is working for the Columbian goverment? Who is not fired by the way. He is still on the camapign. Clinton lied about Ireland, lied about nafta to ohio, lied about Bosnia. Then she makes a joke about it? Bad taste. My brother was almost killed by sniper fire.

Penn is still involved in Hillary’s campaign, so while he may have been “demoted,” that’s not exactly a resignation. With that much chaos and infighting going on, what can we expect if Hillary becomes President?

And, if the Clintons are planning to throw the kitchen sink - and, maybe the bathroom, too - at Sen. Obama, could they please just do that and get it over with?

I know this for myself. If Sen. Obama is not our candidate for whatever reason, I still will not vote for Hillary. The Former First Lady and Senator from New York has played too many games, told too many lies and distortions of the truth, stood up too many times for what is wrong, and is too well-connected to a lying former President for my comfort level.

I will not support Hillary in any capacity. Period.

Si se puede! Obama 2008!

He is still an adviser just no official title. I’m not sure anything is really different.

Joe and NJ, your comments are pathetic and sad. Any fair minded person can see who has negative. Any fair minded person can see who has been yelling bias. Look at NJ, he is doing it now. YOu can support Hilliary or McCain without distortions and distractions. This will force all Americans to focus on the issues. We will become a better country for it.

Hillary Clinton, with or without Mark Penn, is a manipulative liar. Carl Bernstein’s book , The Woman in Charge, points that out. Mark Penn did not tell that lie about sniper fire in Bosnia. Hillary did. Mark Penn did not tell that lie about the state of American health care from the perspective of the young pregnant woman. Hillary did! Hillary Clinton doesn’t love America, in my opinion. She craves power and influence and the opportunity to top Bill Clinton’s earning power.

It absolutely amazes me that Hillary got away with having Mark Penn as her top strategist for so long. She claims she is pro-union and anti-NAFTA, yet Penn’s PR firm runs a department devoted to union busting and now we see that he is working to get a free trade deal that she is supposedly against. This is the same slimeball that defended the tobacco companies against punishments for targeting children in advertising. The campaign had the audacity to court unions for their endorsement knowing full well what Penn represents. When cornered by labor, Penn replied that he has never worked for the union busting department. However, as CEO he allows it to operate! This is only further proof that nothing that comes out of Hillary’s mouth can’t be trusted, just like her imaginary snipers!!!

Tsk Tsk Tsk…smoke and mirrors 101. Just let Camp Clinton keep shooting themselves in the foot. The more she talks the more we see Bill holding her on his lap moving the stick up and down. Hasn’t anybody else had their fair share of 20 years of Bushes and Clintons?? And look where we all sit NOW!

Billary is about done…kitchen sink is NOT required…just stick a fork in em. From my volunteer work in PA, those folks know exactly what time it is….OBAMA-time.

joe i think the media owes it to obama to show the true face of hrc. they’ve for weeks showed the words of rev. wright not sen obama and that wasnt fair. but all the wrong doing of hrc isnt on the front burner she only demoted her pr rep not fired, can she not do it alone; make her tax returns available @ 4pm friday during the mlk celebration that she knew would have alot of coverage out of respect using his moment for her personal gain; lie about the mother and child issue, yes lie because she running for the highest office in the us. she should have had common sense to check it out before repeating it playing on sympathy. i dont trust her at 3am or 3pm. is she going to take the word of me and push the button, because i said i HEARD etc china is going to do something. she took that mans word that he HEARD. also, i guess you too made millions , and you and hrc had brunch together because believe me your a vote for her when she gets in office she will only get richer and us poorer, why do think penn did what he did and only got demoted. he stuck his fingers in the cookie jar too soon. dont count your chickens b4 they hatch is what his mother should have taught him and now her. wake up sir.

Why is this such a big deal? Because the media (esp CNN) just loves to go negative about Hillary. They let Obama do and say whatever he wants(like the white thing comment) but 90% of the politcal news is something negative about HIllary, when she talks about her economic plan, her health plan, her Iraq plan, her plan on China, Korea, etc, her plan on education, does the media cover any of that? No, does it cover Obamas plans no, because than they would have to look hard at his lack of them. Hillary is less than 4/10ths of 1% of the pop vote and less than 130 of the delegate vote and if the Democratic primary was a “winner take all” like the Republicans is, she would have already had the nomination even without Mi or FL. Obama cannot beat McCain, the states he won will vote Republican like the past 4 elections and McCain will be in, oh great another 4 years of failed policy. GO HILLARY

I think you’re in the forest David. I guess if I were win-at-any-cost Hillary, I would continue to infuse my public smokescreen with discussions blaming the campaign strategist; endless “new math” on the delegate count etc….ad nauseum…also. But there are some highly inconvenient issues that would be open game in a general election: Bill’s implied commitment to Burkle for staggering speaker’s fees and to those who funded his library; Their upcoming fraud case in Los Angeles County – for which their lawyers are now preparing for a November trial; The Clinton Chronicles DVD (now available on YouTube – which was not around during their previous reign)

I believe in forgiveness and letting go of the past – but we’re talking about the potential president and first spouse of the United States here – not head of some city council. Do we really want to watch endless replays of video footage - featuring CURRENT White House residents - saying “I never had sex with that woman?”

David Gergen!!! How can you possibly say, ” Still, it was a far cry from what one of Barack Obama’s top advisers did when he met with Canadian officials on NAFTA and his mistake properly set off a mini-firestorm”.

Are you kidding me? This was Clinton’s strategic adviser. This was not a misinterpretation of a conversation. This was about $$$$.

I have valued and respected your judgment and opinion through Democratic and Republican presidents. This has ended.

Now I question your credibility and fear if you peel away the mask James Carville will pop out. A very sad day.

He quit because he’s never going to see his multimillion compensation from the campaign.
She’s broke, remember?

If Pennsylvania had NY-style tabloids, the headlines would be “Clinton Hates Penn, State of Confusion” and “Clinton better off without Penn”

Even if I did not believe that Hillary (and Bill) are pathological dissemblers, dishonest and opportunistic to the core, I would still not vote for her given her absolutely atrocious management of her campaign.

It is simply not enough to know policy inside-out. The President has to be able to run the government effectively and efficiently from the top-down.

Barack showed good judgment not only concerning the decision to authorize W. to invade Iraq, but regarding the decisions made in his campaign. He has convinced me that he has the judgment, knowledge and temperment to be an effective President.

And the truth is that Hillary did not show poor judgment regarding the vote to Authorize the Use of Military Force in Iraq. What she revealed was that she is a dissembling political opportunist. Just as Bush thought we would storm into Iraq and be showered with roses, then declare victory on an aircraft carrier–all in time for use during the ‘04 campaign–so, too, did Hillary think that she was setting herself up on the right side of the Iraq issue in ‘02. . . politically!!!

No more do we need a President whose guiding principle in political expedience!

Vote Obama ‘08. . . Pleeeeaaaasseeee!

Why are we not asking Hillary Clinton what she was thinking by putting a lobbyist in charge of her campaign?

Are we to believe there’s nothing in it for Penn, his company, his company’s clients? He’s a lobbyist. He’s lobbying for a Clinton White House. The media, and Obama, has really let Clinton off the hook on this one.

Pointing a finger at Penn for lobbying, oops Public Relations, is ridiculous. He’s a lobbyist. Lobbying is what lobbyists do.

Tell me we’re not expected to believe there’s nothing in the Clinton presidency for Penn. Can you say Cheney and Haliburton.

I really don’t know what makes me more sick the people on this blog or the media hate for Hillary. When can Hillary ever be “gracious” or “emotionally appealing” or “warm” without people making fun of her and saying it is all a lie. Really she is a strong woman which will not come across on TV and reporters won’t like it. I really don’t think
Mrs. Thatcher was all warm and fuzzy. Do peopel really want a poodle for president I know I don’t so I can never get behind Obama.

When is the media going to look at the consultations of the Clinton campaign with Canada on NAFTA? Their reassurances to Canada was what initiated the NAFTA inquiries by reporters at the outset. The Canadian government then spun those inquiries to Obama, for their own purposes. After that the US media has given Clinton a free ride on the issue. Don’t you think Penn was active there?

Gergen still totally biased for the Clintons. This is exactly the same, if not worse, then Canada thing with Obama. Canada doesnt steal American jobs, Columbia could.

I feel that Mark Penn’s demotion will be a plus for the campaign. I feel that Hillary’s campaign needed some fresh ideas. I only wish that people would accept Senator Clinton for who she is. If she shows her sensitive side, they say she is to soft. If she shows her strength, they attack her for being to strong. I find it interesting how the male candidates can be both strong and soft, no one seems to question that. Time to get up to date people, a women should be allowed to be as strong as needed to get her point across, just as a man has the right to. What should be focused on are the issues that are dramatically affecting this country.

Penn is not truly out of the Ciinton campaign… It’s 2008. He’s just a phone call away.

Personally, I think Penn’s actions were sanctioned by the Clinton’s and it points straight to her lack of judgement and willingness to win at all costs. If this had been Karl Rove, there would have been a outrage! Instead, it will probably be news for today and forgotten tomorrow. Understand that for all of his faults, even Bush didn’t allow Karl Rove or Dick Cheeney to continue in their former jobs while working on his campaign or in the White House. Again, this smells of bad memories of the Clinton’s– their lack of honesty and transparency in governing is all to familar to most of us.

IAM A CANADIAN and the reports about Obama were totally FALSE!! It has been reported in our press and debated in our parliament.

Also Penn has NOT resigned!! Hillary probably can’t afford to pay him the money she owes him.

Shame on you Hillary. You will not be able to attack Obama on NAFTA-GATE, thanks to your Strategist Penn. What goes around comes around, and now it is your turn to answer to the Colombian affair. The working class of Ohio now sees you true colors. They must have gotten a shock when they saw your income.

Shame on you Hillary. You will not be able to attack Obama anymore on NAFTA-GATE, thanks to your Strategist Penn. What goes around comes around, and now it is your turn to answer to the Colombian affair. The working class of Ohio now sees your true colors. They must have gotten a shock when they saw your income.

Christine,
Hillary made her own bed; now she has to lie (sic) in it.

As a HRC supporter, i have always felt that Marc Penn was a leach on Hillary’s energy. She has always done well when appealing to the good nature of the voters through her ability to have a full grasp of the issue’s and show the “so called” human side of her personality. I find it disturbing that we are even enthralled by the issue of her showing a more feminine “maternal” side. It clearly illustrates that there is a deep bias not working in her favor or for any woman who wants to live in the world of politics. Do we ask such questions of her male counterparts? Do they need to “get in touch” with their feminine sides? How crazy would it be if we asked Barack Or John “how they feel” and if they could give us an inside look at their touch-feely side?

Whenever the Clintons release whatever they think they have on Obama how much credibility does it have coming from the filthy kitchen that they live in. It will be like Bosnia as far as some are concerned. I’m sure they will use any tactic that they can to make him look bad even inventing or buying some made up dirt. These people are sick and we as a society should do with people like this is put them away so they can’t hurt anyone else.

David,

I have a ton of respect for the level of discourse and the balanced perspective you bring to any political discussion. For that I thank you.

I do disagree with you on a couple of points in this article. First, on your point that what Penn did is “a far cry from what one of Obama’s top advisors did,” I agree Penn’s deed is a far cry from what Goolsbee did; but in the other direction - it’s much worse. I think that Jamil from Dearborn has it exactly right, so I won’t reinvent.

…………………………………There is a BIG difference between this and the NAFTA case involving an Obama staffer. In the NAFTA case, the staffer involved was a low-level UNPAID staffer NOT the chief strategist of the campaign who has billed the campaign nearly $11 million. Plus, what had actually happened in the Canadian meeting is in dispute whereas here Penn admits to not only telling the Columbians “don’t worry” but telling them “don’t worry I’ll even help you get this trade deal passed!” HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!!!……………………………………………..

Second, as to whether this stays in the news and whether Pennsylvanians come to know about Penn, that is up to the media and the Obama campaign. As an Obama supporter, I never want to see the campaign get into negative, personal attacks. But I do think it is fair to make a lot of noise about the relevant facts of this incident.

This is her CHIEF STRATEGIST! She is either lying about her position on the Colombian trade deal, or she has shown very poor judgment on those with whom she has surrounded herself. I supsect it’s the latter, (although I have no doubt she has been stretching the truth on her actual beliefs re trade for months now; but Obama has, too. Neither are isolationists.) But the abject failure of her chief strategist to do the right thing wrt the campaign indicates a major failure of leadership. That is the unfortunate fact, and I think that we should all know about that, whether we live in Pennsylvania or elsewhere.

The trouble with Hillary is she has sides. Her sensitive weepy side her strong and strident side, etc. etc. with each side taken to something of an extreme. She seems poorly integrated.

Like Penn the state of Penn will not hold for her. She has shown too many sides, told too many lies, hired too many smarmy advisors, made too many expensive errors…failed to win the hearts and minds enought to open pocketbooks. Like Penn, she is toast.

Her surrogates hinted early on they had something to use against Obama…with-holding it for effect or feigned decency. When asked point blank to reveal anything they might have, they admitted they had nothing. Or so they said. If they bring up something right before the primary it will be so bloody apparent that they were lying, anything they charge will pale. It will backfire like everything else.

If this is how she runs her campaign, how will she run her white house???

David,

Why do you think there has been so little play on the networks over Obama winning the delegate race in Texas Iwould think it was a major change from before..is it still really a victory for Clonton??

Just an observation as I have seen nothing on this in the news.

thanks

It is all about the candidate and who she surrounds herself with! She has proven herself to be a vicious divisive liar and will say and do anything to advance her personal ambitions. I thought that Bill’s presidency will leave a palatable legacy after all his personal problems, but now the both of them have left such a rotten taste for everyone that it is unthinkable that they could ever resurrect their “legacy” or her future ambitions ever again. She wants to wound Obama so badly that he would lose in November and then she can try again in 2012. The message should be very clear to her regarding any future ambitions: NEVER AGAIN, Clintons.

For those of you who do not believe the Clinton campaign has dirt on Obama: Do you seriously think she’s the only one?? Has it occurred to anyone that the Republicans WANT him to be the nominee? Has anyone wondered why??? Because they have some of the same dirt on him she does,if not more! It should be glaringly obvious when some one with as little experience has Obama has,is fawned over by everyone on the planet. Even Oprah jumped on that wagon. Is it not a little strange that he seems to be so squeeky clean and constantly compares himself to JFK? If he’s anything like JFK,he’s as much a womanizer as Bill Clinton! Mark my words,the dirt will start to show.If he does manage to get elected,I for one will be proud to say “I knew all along he was dishonest” when he screws up big time due to lack of experience. I trust Hillary to fix the mess we’re in. She’s a proven fighter.I don’t think she has any more dirt on her to be dug up.She’s been there and dealt with it all very gracefully. So go ahead,keep believing Obama is the second coming.No one is that good!!!!

If Mark Penn did anything for Hillary clinton, it was to allow this country to see what a deceiptful person she truly is. You state that it was one of Abama’s staff that started the NAFTA talks, when in fact it was Clinton. I believe the country has had enough of the Bush=Clinton dynasties, and are ready to change directions. This woman has proven time and again she cannot be trust with this most sacred office. If she were to somehow get (note that I did not say win), I will definitely vote for the Republican Party. At least with McCain we know what we are getting. She is beyond saving.

David ,

Hillary Clinton Has for years proven to this country what she stands for .Raising those in poverty out of poverty , Building up the middle class and making America strong . You were there while Bill Clinton was in office . You know Hillary didn’t just sit back and play first lady . She got up and fought for poeple like me . she does want a better America for all americans . I am proud , and blessed to have Hillary Clinton on my side . She will always have my support .

Thank You .
Kirk

Canada refuted Hillary’s claims that Barack did the wink wink. Colombia did not refute Mark Penn’s involvement. To think that Hillary does not know what her chief strategist is up to on a daily basis is totally absurd. Such hypocracy!

Several bloggers have referred to the Canadian flap. I wish the media would clarify for once and for all that it was the Hillary camp that was talking to the Canadians and that “somehow” the Hillary camp wound up charging it was Obama’s. The Canadian’s discovered the truth and tried to clarify, but for some unknown and still very interesting there was no big follow-up.

Considering it may well have lost Obama hundreds if not thousands of votes, it was a masterful and horribly creepy dirty trick. One could almost call it election fraud. It should be revisited in detail. I feel Penn was at the bottom of it.

As for obama not being adequately vetted. Some dogs don’t have fleas to pick.

David,
Do you think you could explain exactly what happened with “NAFTAgate”? My impression was that the initial news reports were all wrong, that some of Clinton’s people may have been involved, and that the Canadian govt even apologized, but now you’re suggesting it’s worse than what Penn did. There seems to be so much misinformation concerning this issue. Could you set the record straight? Thanks!

Hi, Anderson, it is obvious that no matter what Hillary does, for most CNN reporters and commentators, she is always doing the wrong thing!If she kept Mark, it would be bad, if she removes him as Chief Advisor, that’s not enough, If she is rich… well that’s a sin (as if politicians were all poor!!!) and if she sold more books than Obama that’s a minus for her! And the best of all… Jack Cafferty… he always reads 4 or 5 damaging comments about Hillary and only one good one, it is so obvious if you read his bloggs! Come on, CNN report facts, stop trying to lead us into voting for Obama!
Mecca from Puerto Rico (and Mecca is my REAL name!)

Mr. Gergen,

Sounds like Sen. needed and still does need you to be her top-dog advisor.

Margaret Thatcher would never have played the “Woman Card” as Hillary does so often. This is another documented fact, but of course Hillary and her supporters are clearly not impressed by facts, only hearsay and scurrilous innuendo.

Hillary needs to disclose as much as she can about this sham named Obama. I still cannot understand how one speech by him forgives his 20 years of intimacy with a rabid, misanthropic America basher. If any other candidate had this kind of baggage and tried to lie about the association, they would be out in a second. Instead, the media is making an equally big deal about some stupid Bosnia comments or a parable about a pregnant woman. Time to wake up to the reality of who Obama is and what his friends and family represent. Here’s to a ninth inning rally by Senator Clinton that disposes of this false prophet named Barack Obama.

No matter what, the campaign is still helping who think positive. All is good, always leave a space to correct the mistake. Its never late to say sorry. Action has always reaction. Make it better for all. Peace all.

Bravo, Christine! I am also sick with the the people on this blog and the media hate for Hillary!
Mecca

It sounds like he will still be around in a “demoted” capacity and frankly I think they should have totally cut ties with him, because I think Hillary cannot afford to keep the connection at this point. I agree with David’s comments but I think this may very well hurt Hillary in PA when you add it to a situation where the voters appear to be increasingly turned off by Hillary’s aggresive “I’m going to win this one way or another” attitude.

Thanks Christine, The polls show that Hillary has got most of the negative media coverage 87 % to 53 %. No, I don’t think the Media wants Hillary{a strong women} to be President. Most of the Media stations are owned by people with their own reasons for picking a President. The Media has high-jacked this election like no other. The really good coverage or lack of negative coverage for Obama, shows where they stand. They should have no say, Their suspose to be netural.I’ve stopped watching Olberman, Hardball, and the likes, because it gets pretty sicking. Hillary is far better to solve the problems we face. Obama has to go through the learning process. At least Hillary has learned a few lessons along the way. And yes, I lke her.

David: I don’t understand why you say the Canadian NAFTA memorandum “properly set off a mini-firestorm” with respect to Obama. That memorandum was de-bunked as false hearsay right after it cost Obama the Ohio primary. In fact, it turned out Hillary’s campaign — not Obama’s — was the one giving assurances to the Canadians. Why doesn’t this get more coverage? Alice

No Canada didn’t totally refute the claim . They just said it didn’t go down the way it was reported. Hummmmm. Mr Penn is a non- story. Mr Obama’s head advisor, Mr Axilrod, also works for a company that advises companys that want to do business with our goverment. Guess we should look a little deeper on that one. It’s all nonsence, all these people are not running for President ! It ’s all mudding up the waters, when it comes to the issues.

How true is are the reports from Canada that it was Hillary’s campaign that contacted the canadian government and stated they were only stumping. Many of my friends from canada that I talk to have stated that this information is well known up there and that it was all over the news media. Is this true?

Ordinarily, I think the world of David Gergen. However, comparing the media fabricated NAFTAgate with the very real two-faced personality of Penn and the Clinton campaign is unconscienable (sp?).

Gergen should know better. The premise of the comparison is a lie.

No matter how it is spun, no one can honestly say that the Clintons did not know of Mr Penns back ground. He has worked for them for 16 + years. Truth be known, they were just hoping she would get the democratic nomination before this came to light.

I hope Mr. Gergen is correct about the public tiring of the negativity - much of it couched in hyperbolic terms like the above “lunged for the jugular” (not to fault you, sir). But, honestly, I don’t see it.

Negativity, rudeness, and hyperbole are so contagious. Why, just look at some of the comments above.

Well, I would like to support whomever the Democratic Nominee is but I absolutely will NOT support a mud-slinging or a backdoor candidate. In that instance, I would rather just sit the election out and deal with McCain as president.

I am really disappointed in the Clintons. Not only is a negative primary contest disheartening, it is downright stupid — unless one wants to see a republican back in the White House.

David,
Thank you for being fair and balanced.
I am beginning to think those days are gone …when people
in the media are “fair and balanced”
Hopefully the will at least try and stay acurate

Hillary is her own problem. Can’t make a silk purse out of a sow. (Oops, I forgot the “ear” part.)

Senator Clinton is a prevaricator, we all know this . She prevaricated to us about landing under fire and running to vehicles . She thinks the American public has cannon fodder for brains. We all know Mr. Penn is not going to leave her campaign. She will do anything to get the nomination

I’m surprised that David Gergen would offer the Obama team with Canada, incorrect, story again. When the actual notes of that informal meeting were shown, it was established that nothing was said in private that was different then Obama’s public stance on NAFTA, i.e. need to renegotiate in specific areas. But we do now know that the Clinton team actually did contact the Canadians and tell them not to worry about NAFTA but to take the Clinton political rhetoric with a “grain of salt.”

The prime minister’s top aide said this in a room full of reporters for Pete sake.

I haven’t thought the campaign was that negative; I’ve seen worse where the candidates actually slung mud - this one has been more the supporters and the media than the candidates.

If the Clintons have some things that voters need to know about Obama there should be a way to release the information without it appearing negative - if the information is true voters need to know about it.

McCain has run a very respectful campaign so far and even though the Democratic candidates haven’t been that negative they still have a far piece to go to have the same classiness that McCain has shown so far.

Annie Kate
Birmingham AL

At this rate Hillary may need Bill to open the door for her in Denver. What a sorry state of affairs (only a slight pun intended) if it should actually come to that.

This is all one big trick — Hillary knew about the negotiations with the Columbians well in advance! The only mistake here is that Penn got caught! He will be the fall guy on this one. Also, Penn is not going anywhere, he is being used for covert operations and will still be dictating the campaign.

Camp Hillary did the same thing with the Canadians during the Ohio primary and Obama got blamed for it when it the Clintons!

Do the math — why would Penn jeopardize $10 million that he is earning from Hillary for a fee of $300,000 with the Colombians? It does not compute!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This campaign is about numbers (delegates, popular vote, money, etc) — always numbers — so don’t lose focus.

Personally, I have seen no evidence of Hillary’s ability to manage her campaign let alone the country. I think this presents much more serious issues than the Canadians did with Barack Obama, in that Hillary has continually made poor decisions and this is another example. Barack IMMEDIATELY corrected the error in his campaign. There is no way that he would be “Swift-Boated”. Hillary not only has been shown vunerable, she has been shown unable to respond effectively to these hiccups. She definitely hasn’t responded in any substantial way to any of these issues. How would she EVER last in a General Election?

I have to laugh when I read these comments lambasting Mr. Gergen’s overt preference for Senator Clinton. When did the media hang up their personal political biases and go neutral? And when did the public condone that act? Wouldn’t it be much more honest if political pundits, commentators, even reporters spoke honestly about their picks for the nominees? That way, we as viewers/readers/listeners wouldn’t have to jump down their throats everytime the slighest hint of preference surfaced in their dialogues. Just a thought.

“Be honest about what you see, get out of the way and let the story reveal itself.” Anderson Cooper. David, wise words and a standard I generally expect of you - you failed me today.