Mark Penn Takes a Seat on the Curb

While I realize two posts in one evening for The Dombrowski Factor may be more than most can handle, the breaking news of Mark Penn’s being reduced to curbside prophet by the Clinton campaign makes it virtually impossible for me to remain silent.

The New York Times had the honor of sending me the first alert, featuring the headline: “Chief Strategist of Clinton Campaign Steps Down.”

Of course, as the campaigns always so graciously announce, everyone who is sent packing is said to have “resigned” or “stepped down.” But, given the controversy from both within the campaign and from observers on the outside, the “resignation” is long overdue.

The NYT article states, “Mark Penn, the architect of much of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign, has been replaced as the campaign’s chief strategist in the wake of revelations that he lobbied on behalf of a trade treaty with Colombia that Mrs. Clinton opposes.”

The official statement from the campaign offers a new lesson in brevity. From Campaign Manager Maggie Williams:

After the events of the last few days, Mark Penn has asked to give up his role as Chief Strategist of the Clinton Campaign; Mark, and Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates, Inc. will continue to provide polling and advice to the campaign.

Geoff Garin and Howard Wolfson will coordinate the campaign’s strategic message team going forward.

I see. Just the events of the last few days? Right.

The “events” they refer to simply provided them the final push needed to send Penn over the cliff. As reported by the Wall Street Journal: “But Clinton campaign advisers made clear that he was all but forced out for what Mr. Penn on Friday conceded was ‘an error in judgment.’”

Here’s the short version of what happened (at least according to the news that’s fit to print): Penn’s public relations and lobbying outfit, Burson-Marstellar, was hired last year by the Columbian government to help secure passage of a bilateral trade agreement with the United States. The trade agreement is one that Senator Clinton strongly opposes.

In fact, it seems Mark Penn cannot make anyone happy these days. The Columbians fired him, too, with claims of disrespect.

But isn’t the most appropriate question at this point: How was it that Penn was permitted to maintain his role with Burson-Marstellar while serving as chief strategist?

Isn’t it an enormous violation of professional ethics to be stroking Countrywide Financial Corp. with one hand while your candidate is passionately criticizing the mortgage industry in her stump speech?

Or to be doodling “I heart Blackwater” in your notebook while your candidate is calling for the United States to cease all business with them in Iraq and Afghanistan?

[Please note: there are more credible critics regarding this issue than Jim Hoffa.]

As the Clinton campaign is far from over, you might ask what good it will do to use Penn as a scapegoat at this point. It’s not for the overall strategy for which they need one right now so much as the fact that Clinton now has to serve up someone’s head to Pennsylvania voters.

As it was in Ohio, free trade is a big issue to many Pennsylvania voters. Clinton has been running ahead in the polls, but this direct swipe at her credibility could cause a negative backlash, especially among labor support.

Hillary needs a win on April 22 to keep her campaign alive. But, with Penn being just the latest in a line-up of Clinton campaign curbside prophets, continued struggles with funding, an overall failure to communicate and focus on a clear message, and ongoing negative press, it seems a long-shot at best that we will see Sen. Clinton become the Democratic nominee.

~ by Jenny on April 7, 2008.