PEW RESEARCH POLL GIVING OBAMA 10 POINT LEAD SUSPECT—VERY SUSPECT

Rasmussen Daily Gives Clinton 2 point National Lead Today.
The Associated Press today, along with other MS media outlets, are reporting the results of a Pew Research Center poll that (purportedly) shows "Obama has weathered the controversy over provocative sermons by his longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright", by (purportedly) showing that "Barack Obama leads Hillary Rodham Clinton, 49 percent to 39 percent nationally." Obama with a 10 point national lead? We don't think so..These results are HIGHLY suspect for three reasons:.
First, according the Associated press article, the Pew Center results "have changed little from late February"—in dramatic contrast with virtually every other national poll that has bounced between Obama and Clinton in the last 30 days, and which now has Obama and Clinton tied, or very close. .
Second, how could this poll show that Obama has, so to speak, "recovered" from the Wright affair, when it never showed his popularity suffering from it in the first instance? (Note also the Pew poll concluded on March 22, 2007.).
Third, this poll contradicts every other national poll, as expressed by the Real Clear Politics National Average of 2.9% in Obama's favor (factoring in the anomalous Pew Research Poll results, and amounting to a virtual tie), and a Rasmussen Daily (March 27) daily tracking result finding Clinton leads Obama today, 46% to 44%. (See here and here.).
NOTE: In addition to the Rasmussen Daily (showing Clinton +2), the Fox News poll shows Clinton +2, and the NBC/WSJ poll shows a "tie"..
Our take: The best reason to assume a Clinton victory is the Main Stream Media's serial, incorrect, predictions of Hillary Clinton's demise, and its backward arching efforts to consistently portray the Democratic Primary contest in Obama's favor, while casting Hillary as the heavy. This, even though Team Obama has run a far more personal, dirtier campaign than any in recent memory.

NEW PENNSYLVANIA POLL KEY TO CLINTON STRATEGY IN KEYSTONE STATE

[Wall Street Journal]

About 70% of likely voters in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary have concerns about their ability to afford health care, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released last week, the Wall Street Journal reports..According to the poll, voters ranked health care as their third most important issue in the election after the economy and the war in Iraq. Among voters who cited health care as their most important issue in the election, 56% said that they supported Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), and 38% said that they favored Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.)..According to the Journal, Clinton is "adopting a battle plan reminiscent of the one James Carville and Paul Begala used to boost underdog Democrat Harris Wofford into the Senate in 1991 and adapted a year later to help propel Bill Clinton to the presidency" with a focus on health care and the economy. Wofford "stunned the political world when he defeated former Gov. Dick Thornburg, a well-known moderate Republican who had resigned as U.S. attorney general to seek the seat," the Journal reports. .The Journal also notes that Obama intends to give a speech on the economy Thursday followed by a six-day bus tour in The Keystone State.

Nepal: 90 Tibetans are jailed, Beijing warns of suicide bombers

Kathmandu warns Tibetan exiles; stop the protests or face deportation. Beijing accuses Tibet of preparing suicide attacks against China, while New Delhi asks the Dalai Lama not to compromise Indo-Chinese relations.


Kathmandu (AsiaNews) – Nepalese police have confirmed the arrest of 90 Tibetan exiles yesterday in Kathmandu, while the government has underlined that they "will not allow further pro Tibet protests – in order to maintain good relations with China". At the same time Beijing is continuing its campaign against the Dalai Lama, accusing him, once again of being the "real brain behind the protests" and has launched the alarm: "There are suicide bombers ready and waiting to totally destroy Chinese harmony".
Basanta Rajouria, a Nepalese police officer explains: "The arrests took place outside the Chinese embassy during a pro Tibet protest.  The government has been very clear on this point: Tibetan exiles in Nepal risk deportation, if they fail to respect our laws and undermine our relations with other nations".
 Those arrested were carried away in police trucks shouting "respect the rights of Tibet" and "stop the bloody repression".  Overnight a group of about 50 protesters gathered around the police station where the others are being held asking for their release.
In the interim, China continues its campaign to discredit the Buddhist leader.  Yu Heping, spokesperson for the Chinese office of public security says: "In Tibet and surrounding regions, armed groups are preparing themselves to battle for independence.  These, at the instigation of the Dalai Lama, intend to use suicide bombers to carry out their attacks and destroy our nation's social harmony". 
From the seat of the exiled Tibetan go9vernment in Dharamsala, the head of Tibetan Buddhism has consistently denied all accusations of sedition, and has put forward the hypothesis that the violence in Lhasa was provoked by Chinese police dressed up as Buddhist monks, in order to justify the repression that followed.  The Tibetan people, says the Dalai Lama, "are not violent people.  My mind turns to what happened in 1959.   A photograph that shows a Buddhist monk holding a sword, but it isn't a traditional Tibetan sword.  We know that hundreds of Chinese soldiers dressed up as monks".
India, it seems has chosen to believe Beijing and has asked the Dalai Lama to "refrain from indulging in political activities that can upset China". Pranab Mukherjee, Indian foreign minister underlines: "The Buddhist leader is our respected guest, and we will continue to offer him hospitality.  However, during his stay here, he must not under take political activities or any other actions that can undermine relations between Beijing and New Delhi".
 

Captain's Table injury suit set for mandatory arbitration

Terri Moore filed a personal injury suit against Penn National Gaming in Madison County Circuit Court March 28, alleging she sustained serious injuries after tripping in the Captain's Table Buffet in the Alton Argosy Casino.

Moore claims she was walking in the dining area on April 6, 2006, when she slipped and fell with great force and violence causing injuries to her back, left wrist and neck.

She claims that Penn was negligent by:

Failing to properly maintain the walkway for customers;

Failing to routinely inspect the walkways for the safety of its customers;

Failing to have routine and proper inspections of the walkways;

Allowing a slippery and foreign substance to remain in the walkway; and

Failing to warn customers of the dangerous condition on the walkway.

Moore claims her injuries have caused and will continue to cause her to sustain great physical pain and mental anguish, medical expenses, disfigurement and loss of a normal life.

Represented by Mike Glisson of Alton, Moore is seeking damages less than $50,000, plus costs.

The case is scheduled for mandatory arbitration.

08 AR 162

OBAMA LIED ABOUT HIS ILLINOIS STATE POLITICAL RECORDS-- FALSELY STATING THAT NOT ONLY DO THEY EXIST, THEY HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY SCRUTINIZED

[Marketwire]

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that forced the release of Hillary Clinton's daily White House schedule on March 20, announced today that Barack Obama's November 11, 2007 claim to cable TV news reporter Tim Russert—that "every single piece of information, every document related to state government" relating to Obama's tenure in the state legislature "was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is… available right now", appears to be false.

According to a February 25th letter from the Illinois Office of the Secretary of State in response to Judicial Watch's open records request, "The ISA does not maintain Senator Obama's personal records or papers. [Nor] does the ISA maintain records generated by his office. In addition, the ISA has received no requests from Senator Obama to archive any records formerly in his possession." .
Said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

"Our investigation suggests Senator Obama could have had his records archived so that they are available to the public, but, to this day, has chosen not to do so. Apparently, he does not want a complete paper trail of his time in the Illinois State Senate. Where are his office records?"

Judicial Watch recently forced the release of Hillary Clinton's White House daily schedule through a lawsuit, and is pursuing her phone logs.

20 DEM ACTIVISTS WHO LEANED ON PELOSI HAVE GIVEN $24M TO DEM CAUSES

Susie Tompkins Buell and her husband Mark

March 27, 2008

The twenty Democratic mega-donors who warned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to back off her position on the super-delegates automatically voting for the candidate with the most pledged delegates (i.e. Obama) have contributed almost $24 million to Democratic candidates and committees over the last 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics and as reported by ABC News.
.
The list of major donors who signed the letter includes Susie Tompkins Buell of San Francisco, an entrepreneur who made her initial fortune with the Esprit clothing line, also runs a charity she founded, and who is often described as Hillary Clinton's best friend.
.
Under the circumstances, we disagree with the ABC News take on all of this that "threatening the DCCC is equal to threatening the superdelegates" and that it "also reinforces the narrative that [Clinton] will destroy the party to win." (See here.)
.
That is nonsense. First, no one threatned Pelosi, let alone the "DCCC".

Moreover, if Nancy Pelosi can lean on the candidates about the tone of their campaigns and try to push super-delegates into, in effect, voting for Obama, it is about time Nancy Pelosi heard from a primary source of her own power: The ability to raise money for Democratic causes and the party activists who have made that possible.
.
It is absurd that these twenty or so Democrats, who have given generously of both their time and money—and when Nancy Pelosi asked them to jump, they asked how high—cannot make their views known to her.
.
And it is completely naïve for ABC news to be "shocked" that they would do so (or that Pelosi would listen) or imply that this feeds into the Mainstream Media's preconceived story line of Hillary Clinton not playing by the rules. Next ABC will be telling us that they are "shocked" that Nancy Pelosi welds more power that any other congressmen.

PELOSI: SUPER-DELEGATES SHOULDN’T LIMIT CHOICE TO LEADER IN DELEGATE COUNT

[The Politico]

Politico is reporting that Brendan Daly, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), responded late Wednesday night to a letter by twenty supporters of New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, including San Francisco Democratic activist Susie Tompkins Buell , urging his boss to stop making comments about the super-delegates automatically selecting the Democratic presidential nominee based on the pledged delegate count alone:

"Speaker Pelosi is confident that superdelegates will choose between Sens. Clinton or Obama — our two strong candidates — before the convention in August," Daly said. "That choice will be based on many considerations, including respecting the decisions of millions of americans who have voted in primaries and participated in caucuses. The speaker believes it would do great harm to the Democratic Party if superdelegates are perceived to overturn the will of the voters. This has been her position throughout this primary season, regardless of who was ahead at any particular point in delegates or votes."

We interpret Speaker Pelosi's response differently that Politico, however.

Rather than "standing up to" to letter's signatories, Speaker Pelosi explicitly states that the super-delegate vote should be based on a number of considerations, with the accumulated pledged delegate vote count being only one of them. In our view, Speaker Pelosi has gotten the message.

Second, we respectfully disagree with Daly's assertion that this has been Speaker Pelosi's position throughout this primary season, regardless of who was ahead at any particular point in delegates or votes."

It was not until the pledged delegate count reached a mathematical impasse—albeit with Barack Obama holding a slight but insurmountable lead in the delegate count—that this even became an issue, or that Ms. Pelosi spoke out publicly in this issue.

In addition, Speaker Pelosi's dislike of the Clinton's is well known, and the implication of her previous statements—as favoring the Obama camp—undeniable.

Five ways to help your church remain united

 

Nothing breaks a shepherd's heart like seeing the sheep squabble.
by Rick Warren, Guest Columnist
Posted: Tuesday, April 1, 2008, 9:45 (BST)
Font Scale:A A A

Enlarge this picture
Rick Warren
We've all faced conflict as pastors. It isn't easy. Nothing breaks a shepherd's heart like seeing the sheep squabble. It's your responsibility as a pastor to lead the church in a united effort. According to Jesus, the witness of your church is at stake. God can work through a lot of deficiencies in your church, but he won't work through disunity.
So as you try to keep the sheep together, here are five principles to keep in mind.
1. Maintain an attitude of acceptance. Don't major in minors. Don't insist that everybody agree on every minor detail. Some topics are disputable. Paul tells us this in Romans 14:1-23. He gives an example of food and tells readers not to let food preferences get between them and other believers. He tells believers to maintain an attitude of acceptance.
Aren't you glad we're not all alike? God loves variety. When conflict breaks out at your church, your first task is to figure out if it's over a disputable issue or an essential. If it's essential, deal with it. If it's not, then you need to lead the people involved to accept one another's differences.
We tell all of our new members in Class 101 that we strive for unity in the essentials and freedom in the non-essentials. It helps people see from the beginning that we value acceptance at our church.
2. Focus on your common purpose. What unites a church more than anything else is a common purpose. That's why we insist that everyone who joins Saddleback go through our membership class. That's where we lay out the purpose of our church. We want people to know where we are going before they get on board. Your church isn't the only game in town. More than likely there are other good, Bible-believing churches that employ different styles in your community. Tell people what your church is about so they can decide from the beginning if it's something they want to join in on. It'll save you a lot of potential disunity later.
3. Control your tongue. As a pastor, whenever anyone comes to us with gossip, we need to stop it before it starts. We also need to make sure the other leaders of the church do the same thing. The Bible makes it clear that gossip is a sin. When you listen to it, you become a partner in that sin. Ephesians 4:29 says, “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.”
What is gossip? Gossip is when you're sharing a problem or criticism with someone who is neither part of the problem or part of the solution. If they're part of the problem or solution, then it's legitimate to share it with them. Otherwise, leave it alone. We need to preach on this from the pulpit and continually remind our leadership about it. It's that important.
4. Teach your church to support the leadership. Hebrews 13:17 says, “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.”

I don't know about you, but this verse scares me to death. The Bible says that one day I will stand before God and give an account for how I watched over the souls in my congregation. Pastor, that should scare all of us. That means I must live life on my knees praying for wisdom. God will hold me accountable. And he will hold you accountable as well.
With accountability comes authority. If you don't have the authority, you can't be held accountable for it. God gives pastors authority to make decisions, to lead the direction of the church. We need to teach our churches the biblical basis of our authority. We don't do this to prop ourselves up. We do it because the unity of the church is at stake. And that matters dearly to God.
5. Practice God's method of conflict resolution. Matthew 18 gives us the procedure we're to use when someone is blowing it. In the passage, Jesus says: “If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector” (Matthew 18:15-17 NIV).
People often come to me as the pastor when they have a problem with another person at the church. I always ask them if they've talked to the person with whom they have a problem first. The first step of conflict resolution is to go to the other person. Don't let people go behind their back – even if they're coming to you.
Then, the Bible says, if the other person won't listen, take someone else along and confront them. If they still don't repent, you bring them before the whole church. If there's still been no repentance, you treat them like a pagan – like an unchurched person. The church still needs to love them. They can even attend the church. But you've got to make it clear that for them to be a member of the church, certain behavior is expected. Following what God's Word says can flat out change lives. I've seen it happen over and over again.
Jesus tells us that a church that sticks together is a tremendous witness to the watching world. You see, it isn't normal for people from different backgrounds and social statuses to come together as a family. But it happens every day when local churches work together to do God's work in the world. People who aren't believers see that unity. And it's attractive.
I pray that your church will have the kind of unity that honors God and draws others to the cross.

About Rick Warren:
Rick Warren is the founding pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., one of America’s largest and best-known churches. In addition, Rick is author of the New York Times bestseller The Purpose-Driven Life and The Purpose-Driven Church, which was named one of the 100 Christian books that changed the 20th Century. He is also founder of Pastors.com, a global Internet community for ministers. Copyright 2005 Pastors.com, Inc. Used with permission. All rights reserved.

Zyprexa And Diabetes: Is This A Tale Of Company Greed Coupled With FDA Failure?

Alaska v. Eli Lilly Trial: Focus Is On What Was Known About This Alleged Side Effect, And When They Knew It

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

News reports about the case Alaska v. Eli Lilly & Co., 3AN-06-05630 CI, Alaska Superior Court (Anchorage), have been limited but interesting thus far.

The most prolific news coverage to date has come from Lisa Demer, reporting for the Anchorage Daily News.  Her March 22, 2008 article, "Defense opens in Zyprexa trial", informed us about some interesting comments made by the trial judge during a court session that involved only the lawyers for the parties -- such that jurors did not get this earful:

Without lawsuits like the one the State of Alaska brought against Lilly, claims that drugs cause health problems "might well go unaddressed," Anchorage Superior Court Judge Mark Rindner said from the bench this week....

Rindner was reacting to an assertion by Lilly lawyer George Lehner that drug regulation is a matter for the federal Food and Drug Administration, not any state. Alaska's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act shouldn't apply to drugs, Lehner told the judge.

Rindner disagreed. Evidence presented by the state over the past two weeks established that the FDA "isn't capable of policing this matter," he said.

As background, Zyprexa is Lilly's top-selling prescription drug, with worldwide sales of $4.8 billion in 2007.  Zyprexa was approved in September 1996 for the treatment of schizophrenia. Starting soon thereafter, doctors began to report to the FDA and to Lilly that some patients using Zyprexa seemed to experience severe weight gain and high blood sugar which seemed to lead to diabetes in some instances.

The State of Alaska has sued Lilly to recover medical costs paid by the State when treating Medicaid patients who have developed diabetes after taking Zyprexa. The jury trial of that lawsuit, which started earlier this month, is being heard in an Alaska state court located in Anchorage.

A March 8 article, "Lilly Waited Too Long to Warn About Schizophrenia Drug, Doctor Testifies", by Alex Berenson, of The New York Times, provided this account of some early expert testimony in support the state's contention that this Lilly downplayed the serious side effect risks associated with Zyprexa in order to make more money:

Eli Lilly, the drug maker, could and should have warned physicians as early as 1998 about the link between Zyprexa, its best-selling schizophrenia medicine, and diabetes, an expert witness told jurors Friday in a lawsuit that claims that Zyprexa has caused many mentally ill people to develop diabetes.

Instead, Lilly hid Zyprexa's risks from doctors to protect the drug's sales, according to the witness, Dr. John Gueriguian. Lilly waited until 2007 to add strong warnings to Zyprexa's label to reflect the drug's tendency to cause severe weight gain and blood sugar changes.

Lilly put "profit over concern of the consumer," Dr. Gueriguian said Friday near the end of four hours of testimony....

By the fall of 1998, the combination of adverse-event reports, clinical trial data that showed hyperglycemia and weight gain, and problems in animal studies should have been enough for Lilly to warn doctors about Zyprexa's links to diabetes, Dr. Gueriguian said. Instead, the company did nothing.

Documents from 1999 and 2000 also showed that Lilly was accumulating evidence of Zyprexa's risks but not sharing it with doctors, he testified.

With this and other similar testimony being heard by Judge Rindner, it is understandable why he is doubtful about the proposition that the FDA is on-the-job and, therefore, federal preemption is warranted.

In closing, if you are interested in learning more about this Alaska v. Eli Lilly trial, you need to visit the Anchorage Daily News online pages with Zyprexa articles by Lisa Demer, such as her March 14, 2008 report, "Japan made Zyprexa labels reflect risk to diabetics".  On these pages there are links to resources that will give you insight to past and present developments, both, that are significant to this ongoing Zyprexa trial in Alaska.

Yes, we need more scientists in office, and they need to know how to run [A Blog Around The Clock]

SEA will train scientists to run for office:

SEA is holding a workshop to train scientists to run for office on May 10th at Georgetown University. If you are a scientist or engineer and have been considering running for office or working on an election campaign, then join us for a crash course on how it's done. Below is a video for the workshop featuring Congressman and former physicist Vern Ehlers.

Hat-tip.

Read the comments on this post...

Airplanes make me cranky [Pharyngula]

I'm home. It's been a very long day with horrible flight delays, and I'm grouchy. I must frog blast the vent core.

I was stuck on an airplane for far too many hours, and I wanted to get some work done — on my laptop. Have you noticed how tightly packed the seats are in coach? It was tight, but I could at least get started on some work, when the guy in front of me decided to recline his seat back and sleep. Suddenly there was a head rest aimed at my throat and the back of the guy's head in my nose. I could smell his shampoo! (I think it was scented with sweat vinaigrette, with extra animal fats added for body). I tried to work some more, but the only way to do it was to partially open my laptop, rest the hinges on my thighs, and reach into the gap to type; it was like squatting by the tank at Seaworld, trying to do dentistry on a dolphin while squinting at the phosphorescent herring stuck to the roof of his mouth.

Airlines, please. If you're going to squeeze the seats together that closely, could you please lock them all in one position? It just doesn't work otherwise. And how about screening passengers for basic hygiene? By the end of the trip I was beginning to think that it would be a mercy if the hairball in front of me detonated.

OK, I feel a little better now.

Read the comments on this post...

New Article With 25 Big Pharma Facts, And Free Online Tool To Search MedWatch Report Data

A Couple Of Recent Offerings From Our Readers, For Your Consideration

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

As you will see, we have two readers who emailed me recently to thank for today's post.

First, Sally Thompson sent an email to let me know that "25 Shocking Facts About the Pharmaceutical Industry" had been published on the Nursing Online Education Database web site.  This interesting article by Laura Milligan starts out as follows:

Researching and snagging an adequate, wallet-friendly health care plan is tough these days, despite its high-profile presence in political debates. A large part of the controversy over expensive health costs stems from criticism of high-priced medications marketed by powerful pharmaceutical companies. From Medicare fraud to CEOs worth billions of dollars, big drug companies are accused of putting profits above patients, spinning false PR campaigns and more. We've uncovered 25 of the most shocking facts about the pharmaceutical industry in this list.

The 25 facts presented are wide-ranging and even-balanced; here's the last one, for example:

Pharmaceutical Companies donated millions to Hurricane Katrina relief programs:  Americans are used to bashing pharmaceutical companies, just as they criticize health insurance companies, rising gas prices and monopolies. It may come as a shock, then, to discover the philanthropic efforts undertaken by big drug companies. Medical News Today writes that companies like Abbott, Eli Lilly, Merck, Pfizer and others have donated millions of dollars in cash and supplies to the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts.

Each of the 25 facts is linked to the source material used by the author so if you want to learn more about any of the items all you need to do is click-thru for more information.

This article by Laura Milligan on the Nursing Online Education Database site is worth a read by people interested in the doings -- good, bad, and ugly -- of Big Pharma.

Moving back in time, last week Paul N. Danese, Ph.D., the co-founder of FDAble LLC, contacted me after seeing a comment I had left on another site  regarding Consumer Union's proposal for a consumer-based adverse-events reporting system.

Dr. Danese wanted to bring to my attention his company's adverse drug events search engine at FDAble.com, which allows one to access and search the vast compilation of data which the FDA obtains from MedWatch reports that the agency receives. 

Here's how Dr. Danese described this search tool to me:

FDAble allows users to search all modern U.S. FDA-related adverse events (Q4 1997 to Q3 2007).

Users may search for adverse-events by drug name, outcome, patient age, weight and other metrics.

All searches are free.  We also offer a yearly subscription service, which allows users to generate an unlimited number of custom adverse event reports.

The FDAble.com search page interface is clean and conspicuously shows this disclaimer:

FDAble is not associated with the Food and Drug Administration.

The search results from the FDA adverse drug events database are, due to their nature, probably of more use to researchers than consumers and patients. 

What is remarkable, based on my experience doing drug injury litigation over the years, is that this information is now so readily available.  It use to be the case that one had to submit a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the FDA for this type of data -- and, believe me, that was a very, very slow process.

Anyone with a need to review the FDA's MedWatch database for reports of side effects concerning a particular prescription drug will greatly appreciate this new search tool at FDAble.com.  We thank Dr. Danese and his company for their efforts in getting this much needed service online and, moreover, letting us use it for free.

If you have any information or news relevant to the topics covered here on Drug Injury Watch, please feel free to contact me using the link in the sidebar.

SAMANTHA POWER OBAMA’S NEXT SECRETARY OF STATE? (SHE SERIOUSLY NEEDS TO TONE DOWN HER USE OF THE F-WORD.)

[HuffingtonPost.com]


The "monster" remark was a curious slip of the tongue for an incredibly accomplished journalist who has conducted thousands of interviews and knows precisely when and how comments are considered on or off the record. But whatever, being an Obama supporter and hence a pussy, Power had to go and apologize. But, no matter, Power wants back into the game—apparently to realize her ambition of becoming Secretary of State, notwithstanding her penchant for the F-word.

Reports the Huffington Post:

Speaking at the Columbia University School of Law on Tuesday night, Power labeled herself "amazed" that Clinton had tried to get so much "political mileage" from comments Power made, in which she suggested that the next commander-in-chief would consider conditions on the ground when implementing his or her Iraq withdrawal plan..
"What I was saying is that you have to take into account what the generals on the ground are telling you," Power told the room of several hundred undergraduate and graduate students. "Take for example that 3 am phone call [from Clinton's campaign commercial]... She is not going to answer the phone and play a voicemail she recorded in 2007. That is crazy. She is going to judge the situation in 2009. Of course she is going to take into account what the generals have to say about the Iraq situation and what they are saying on the ground.".
While Power ultimately left the Obama campaign for what she deemed "monster-gate," the brunt of the Clinton campaign's criticism was leveled at a policy interview she conducted with BBC Television shortly before her departure. Downplaying the firmness with which Obama would approach his current plan to withdraw troops, Power said, "[the senator] will, of course, not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator... What he's actually said, after meeting with the generals and meeting with intelligence professionals, is that you -- at best case scenario -- will be able to withdraw one to two combat brigades each month."
In the days that followed -- even after Power severed her ties to the Obama -- the Clinton campaign cited the remarks as evidence that the Illinois Democrat could not be trusted to deliver on his Iraq pledges. Obama's camp, in return, stressed that the he would operate off a plan to remove one to two combat brigades per month over the course of 16 months. They also pointed to remarks by Clinton adviser Lee Feinstein, acknowledging that there are "contingencies" that one must take into consideration when looking at Iraq..
On Tuesday night, Power was not as reserved. She fired back against the Clinton campaign's attack, saying it was disingenuous and shortsighted of the New York Democrat to not (should she become president) listen to the advise of her military advisers..
"I now am in my first ever political attack ad," said Power. "And it does no justice to what I was saying and does no justice to a responsible position, which I am sure will entail looking out for U.S. security and that, with the passage of time, things are going to look different then they did in 2007.".
The two-plus hour discussion at Columbia was held to promote Power's new book "Chasing the Flame." And while a good portion of the talk centered on the book's content (as well as several apologies for the "monster" remark) much was devoted to a detailed and surprisingly honest look at Obama, his position on the issues, and even the type of White House cabinet he would appoint..
Power called Obama's willingness to meet, without preconditions, world leaders with whom America did not always see eye-to-eye, one of the turning points of the Democratic primary: "I can tell you about the conference call the day [after Obama made the proclamation]," she recalled. "People were like, 'Did you need to say that?' And he was like 'yeah, definitely.'"
She emphasized that, unlike President Bush, Obama would put greater focus on the general welfare of the Iraqi people (looking at population displacements, health conditions, economic insecurities), when considering U.S. policy in that country. She also drew a picture of an Obama administration that was filled with different viewpoints and congenial debate..
And, to the delight of many in the crowd, she even hinted that she could be part of that hypothetical cabinet. "Because of the kind of campaign that Senator Obama has run," Power said, "it seemed appropriate for someone of my Irish temper to step aside, at least for a while. We will see what happens there."