I have to admit it: I'm not smart enough to follow Hillary Clinton's line of reasoning. In an interview on Saturday, she declared she was in the race until the convention. And in making this vow, she cited Florida and Michigan:
"We cannot go forward until Florida and Michigan are taken care of, otherwise the eventual nominee will not have the legitimacy that I think will haunt us," said the senator from New York. "I can imagine the ads the Republican Party and John McCain will run if we don't figure out how we can count the votes in Michigan and Florida."
Clinton and her spinners keep saying that Florida and Michigan could be lost to the Democrats in November if the Democratic National Committee does not accept the delegates elected in those states (in early primaries not approved by the national party) or if there is no do-over in those states (as now appears unlikely). But do they have any basis for saying this? Presumably, the Republicans and independents in Florida and Michigan won't give a damn that the Democrats (with help from Republicans in the legislatures) screwed up the primary elections in these two states. The Rs and Is who can be won over by either Barack Obama or Clinton (whoever is the nominee) are not likely to be swayed against the Democrat because Democratic delegates from their states were not recognized by the national party. What sort of ads can change that? ("Republicans, the Democratic Party doesn't care about Democratic voters in your state.")
As for the Democrats, HRC appears to be suggesting that if she is the nominee she will not be able to excite the Ds in Michigan and Florida--where she did well in the unapproved primaries. (Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan; and neither he nor Clinton campaigned in Florida.) Does she truly believe that Democrats eager to punish George W. Bush's Republican Party will vengefully vote for John McCain or stay home because of a procedural matter? Will they really respond to a GOP ad that says, "The Democratic Party did not want to count your vote, so you should vote for the Republicans"? Would that play with Democrats in, of all places, Florida, where GOPers shut down the 2000 recount? And if Clinton was not the nominee but campaigning hard for Obama, could she and Obama not rally the Democratic faithful in Michigan and Florida in the general election?
It seems that Clinton's argument is predicated on the assumption that Democratic voters are peevish, resentful grudge-holders willing to cut off their noses to spite the national party--and hand the White House back to the Republicans. Are they really sooooo sensitive and beyond the reach of the persuasive powers of Obama and/or Clinton? If Clinton believes she cannot win over the Democrats in Michigan and Florida in November, maybe she shouldn't be in the race.
Comments
Divide and conquer.
BHO is up by double digits via Gallup and the number is not just sustained but rising.
As if BHO would not be a legitimate candidate by her measure? She belittles herself by such crazy talk.
Phony is a nice way of putting it.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 11:45 AM
As a Florida voter and a Hillary supporter who is pissed at the way my vote has not counted in this primary season...I can assure you that I am completely willing to sit out this election and I am among the MANY, not the FEW. (And just for the record, I am an adult WHITE and WELL EDUCATED male).
Posted by: David H
| March 31, 2008 12:00 PM
The candidates had an agreement.
The national party and state party have rules.
The rules might suck and need to be changed but not in the middle of a contest. That is called cheating.
I know of MANY in FLA that claim they will sit it out if HRC is the eventual nominee so I guess both extremes cancel each other out.
Not voting is a vote for McSame either way.
Worse, it just sounds like voter extortion, "do it my way or I won't vote" - maybe that will work. Maybe the DNC should quake in their collective boots and change the rules any time someone threatens them with not voting. I guess it could catch on.
No educated thinking person of any color could possibly convince me that makes sense.
Maybe that's just me.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 12:27 PM
As a Florida voter and a Hillary supporter who is pissed at the way my vote has not counted in this primary season...I can assure you that I am completely willing to sit out this election and I am among the MANY, not the FEW. (And just for the record, I am an adult WHITE and WELL EDUCATED male).
Posted by: David H | March 31, 2008 12:00 PM
Absent your states decision to move your primary up in order to have a bigger influence on choosing the nominee despite knowledge that the DNC would penalize Florida voters for so doing, (in other words, if the primary clusterf*ck didn't happen) and Obama won the nomination, would you still have chosen to stay home because if that's the case, then your anger is peevish and misplaced. Bus since it did happen, why do you blame Obama for it?
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 1:34 PM
The Hillary supporters (at least in part) missplace blame on Obama instead of their own state leaders because of the memo by Robert Bauer, Obama's general campaign council, pointing out the potential problems with a re-vote.
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/03/19/obama.memo.pdf
Posted by: eyes_open
| March 31, 2008 1:48 PM
Now I know you Cornnuts were getting all excited about Sadr staring a new blood bath so you could proclaim the Surge has failed but dang it that surge just keeps on working~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sadr fighters raise white flag
The Times
AFP Published:Mar 31, 2008
BAGHDAD - Fighters of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have melted away from the streets of the Iraqi capital and Basra where they fought fierce battles with security forces, AFP reporters said today.
Yesterday, Sadr ordered his fighters to withdraw from the streets in a move signaling the end of clashes which erupted in the southern port city of Basra and quickly spread to Shiite areas across Iraq.
AFP correspondents in Baghdad and Basra said that militants were off the streets in the two key cities where they fought Iraqi security forces backed by US-led coalition air power.
The Sadr group in Baghdad confirmed that fighters from the cleric’s feared Mahdi Army militia were no longer deployed in the capital.
"Sadr movement and Jaish al-Mahdi (Mahdi Army) are committed to the order of Sadr," said Hamdallah al-Rikabi, spokesman of the cleric’s movement in western Baghdad. "We are implementing what Sadr has ordered."
Witnesses said pedestrians and vehicles were now on the streets of the two cities after curfews were eased.
"Life is back to normal in Sadr City," said Ahmed Suhail, a resident of the eastern Baghdad district and bastion of Sadr where intense fighting killed dozens of people.
Authorities lifted the curfew across Baghdad but still retained it in the Baghdad districts of Sadr City, Kadhimiyah and Shuala amid continuing tensions. "Most shops are open and there are no militiamen in the streets," Suhail said.
The curfew in Basra was also eased today after authorities kept it in place during the night.
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 2:33 PM
Projection: Clinton Wins Popular Vote, Obama Wins Delegate Count
March 28, 2008 02:31 PM ET | Michael Barone |
The Clinton campaign has taken to boasting that its candidate has won states with more electoral votes than has Barack Obama. True. By my count, Clinton has won 14 states with 219 electoral votes (16 states with 263 electoral votes if you include Florida and Michigan) while Obama has won 27 states (I'm counting the District of Columbia as a state, but not the territories) with 202 electoral votes. Eight states with 73 electoral votes have still to vote. In percentage terms, Clinton has won states with 41 percent of the electoral votes (49 percent if you include Florida and Michigan), while Obama has won states with 38 percent of electoral votes. States with 14 percent of the electoral votes have yet to vote.
The Clinton campaign would do even better to use population rather than electoral votes, since smaller states are overrepresented in the Electoral College. By my count, based on the 2007 Census estimates, Clinton's states have 132,214,460 people (160,537,525 if you include Florida and Michigan), and Obama's states have 101,689,480 people. States with 39,394,152 people have yet to vote. In percentage terms this means Clinton's states have 44 percent of the nation's population (53 percent if you include Florida and Michigan) and Obama's states have 34 percent of the nation's population. The yet-to-vote states have 13 percent of the nation's population.
Thus the Clinton campaign could argue that Obama cannot win states with most of the nation's people even if he wins all the remaining eight primaries. Could argue—but I don't think that's going to persuade any superdelegates that Clinton is the real winner.
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 2:42 PM
Just another typical politician caught in a lie~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Obama had greater role on liberal survey
The Politico
By KENNETH P. VOGEL | 3/31/08 4:35 AM EST
But the questionnaires provide fodder to question BarackObama’s ideological consistency and electability.
During his first run for elected office, Barack Obama played a greater role than his aides now acknowledge in crafting liberal stands on gun control, the death penalty and abortion — positions that appear at odds with the more moderate image he has projected during his presidential campaign.
The evidence comes from an amended version of an Illinois voter group’s detailed questionnaire, filed under his name during his 1996 bid for a state Senate seat.
Late last year, in response to a Politico story about Obama’s answers to the original questionnaire, his aides said he “never saw or approved” the questionnaire.
They asserted the responses were filled out by a campaign aide who “unintentionally mischaracterize[d] his position.”
But a Politico examination determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago nonprofit group that issued it. And it found that Obama — the day after sitting for the interview — filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama’s own handwritten notes added to one answer.
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 2:48 PM
"Yesterday, Sadr ordered his fighters to withdraw from the streets in a move signaling the end of clashes which erupted in the southern port city of Basra and quickly spread to Shiite areas across Iraq."
Doesn't that pretty much confirm that the level of violence is directly related to what Moqtada al-Sadr orders? Analysts are already speculating Sadr's strategy now is to lay low until the surge is over. Waving a "white flag" with one hand means little if the other is still free to reload.
Posted by: eyes_open
| March 31, 2008 3:06 PM
For those of you uneducated hacks out there who drank the Obama koolaid...it was a REPUBLICAN-controlled supermajority that decided to move up Florida's primary. Just for once, try reading analysis and commentary that doesn't completely support your one-sided opinion. If you Obamaniacs are so certain that he has what it takes, let Florida's election stand (neither candidate campaigned, both names were on the ballot--a LEGITIMATE election by any standards) and let Michigan re-vote! Oh that's right, Obama prefers the undemocratic caucus rules as opposed to a state-wide primary. If this were a job application, Obama wouldn't even be considered qualified enough to be granted an interview, let alone given the job!
Posted by: David H
| March 31, 2008 3:27 PM
David H, although neither HRC or BHO officially campaigned in Florida, Hillary has the party establishment to push for her. Obama's support is more grass roots oriented. It is not a perfect predictor but the trend this primary season has been when Obama visits a state to campaign, Hillary's lead erodes. To let the Florida vote stand as-is would not be representative of the result had things proceded as normal. In theory, I support a re-vote after time allowed to campaign but how this can be pulled off in the time left seems to be beyond even the experts. Instead of focusing on BHO, Florida voters should be rallying against the Republicans responsible for this mess.
Posted by: eyes_open
| March 31, 2008 3:51 PM
"it was a REPUBLICAN-controlled supermajority that decided to move up Florida's primary"
Um, we know all about that, it makes your "sitting it out" even less plausible.
Why punish all Americans by promoting the GOP for doing such a thing?
Can't you see such a position is bass-ackward?
No reason for the personal attacks. We have uneducated and a few doctors that post here so broad brush insults only reflect poorly on your communications skills (FWIW)
Ninth grade debate club would teach you that to drift into the Ad Hominem is a surrender or any point you wanted to make.
If you want to be taken seriously you have to try to sound a little serious.
Just a thought.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 3:59 PM
Why would the good people of FLA allow a republican supermajority to be elected?
I guess Mencken was right:
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. "
~ H. L. Mencken
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 4:06 PM
If I remember correctly the D's could have voted down the date change but the R's leadership[sic] attached the primary date change a bill that made for paper trails to stop the vote fixing. The combined bill passed unanimously - so all the D's voted for the date change.
Now some (erstwhile smart) peopole want to blame one candidate or the other? Like they (either or)manufactured this mess?
Makes no sense to me.
Knowing all that how can a person justify sitting it out?
I guess there is plent oif blame to go around but really, staying hoime is the same as voting for McSame.
Might as well just go vote GOP and punish yourself with four more years of the same BS? The problem is because some people have their collective panties in a wad over the primary they would give the election to the GOP and punish the whole planet?
Call me crazy but that is insane.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 4:14 PM
Where's that spell-check? HA!
(uneducated hack would have include me and my spelling!)
Thanks!
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 4:16 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2008-03-30-iraqnews_N.htm
Looks like Sadr AND the Iranians?
These are the enemy, the insurgents, nationalists, or Mullahs?
How much can we be "in charge" and "winning" if these two are the primary force for peace?
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 4:20 PM
Doesn't that pretty much confirm that the level of violence is directly related to what Moqtada al-Sadr orders? Analysts are already speculating Sadr's strategy now is to lay low until the surge is over. Waving a "white flag" with one hand means little if the other is still free to reload.
Eyes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sadr is waving the white flag because the Iraqi army is kicking some ass nad he doesn't have all the power you cornnuts had hoped for.
Even if your theory were correct that would only make the case to stay and win instead of surrendering and leave.
Nice try though!
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 4:30 PM
Obama's support is more grass roots oriented. It is not a perfect predictor but the trend this primary season has been when Obama visits a state to campaign, Hillary's lead erodes.
Eyes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pando'nial tried making this same argument to no avail.
Obama lost in all big states- CA -NY-NJ-OH-FL and soon PA so his grass roots effort is a bogus argument.
It has only helped him in Red states that McCain will carry in the general.
Why is Obama afraid to give FL voters a say in a democratic process?
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 4:37 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/31/dems.roundup/
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar -- a superdelegate holdout from a traditional swing state -- backed fellow freshman Sen. Barack Obama Monday morning.
*****
I think Bill Richardson's endorsement is why some of these others are coming forward.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 4:44 PM
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/06/florida.michigan/
[...]
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said the states can either come up with a new plan to choose a slate of delegates or appeal to the party's credentials committee when the convention opens in August.
"The rules were set a year and a half ago. Florida and Michigan voted for them and then decided that they didn't need to abide by the rules. When you're in a contest you do need to abide by the rules," he said Thursday on CNN's "American Morning."
The national Democratic Party stripped Florida -- epicenter of the 2000 election debacle -- of its 210 national convention delegates as punishment for the state's decision to move its party primaries to January 29.
Michigan received the same treatment after moving its primary date to January as well, losing its 156 convention delegates.
*****
The time to change the rules was almost two years ago.
Not in the middle of a contest.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 4:50 PM
And now a word from Chairman Dean:
"We're glad to hear that the Governors of Michigan and Florida are willing to lend their weight to help resolve this issue. As we've said all along, we strongly encourage the Michigan and Florida state parties to follow the rules, so today's public overtures are good news. The rules, which were agreed to by the full DNC including representatives from Florida and Michigan over 18 months ago, allow for two options. First, either state can choose to resubmit a plan and run a party process to select delegates to the convention; second, they can wait until this summer and appeal to the Convention Credentials Committee, which determines and resolves any outstanding questions about the seating of delegates. We look forward to receiving their proposals should they decide to submit new delegate selection plans and will review those plans at that time. The Democratic Nominee will be determined in accordance with party rules, and out of respect for the presidential campaigns and the states that did not violate party rules, we are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game.
"Through all the speculation, we should also remember the overwhelming enthusiasm and turnout that we have already seen, and respect the voters of the ten states who have yet to have their say.
"As we head towards November, our nominee must have the united support of a strong Democratic Party that's ready to fight and ready to beat John McCain. After seven years of Republican rule, I am confident that we will elect a Democratic president who will fight for America's families in the White House. Now we must hear from the voters in twelve states and territories who have yet to make their voices heard."
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 4:55 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkS9y5t0tR0
Hillary Clinton Iraq War Vote Speech
*****
See, she was ALWAYS against the war just like she was ALWAYS against NAFTA!
lol
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 5:07 PM
"it was a REPUBLICAN-controlled supermajority that decided to move up Florida's primary"
Um, we know all about that, it makes your "sitting it out" even less plausible.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Republicans worked it out with the state and counted the votes.
The dems could have done the same.
It's not the voters fault but the national dem party.
The dem party is run by a few elitist instead of the american people-good reason to stay home!
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 5:11 PM
LBH, read again. I didn't say BHO would win in a re-vote. He would however probably close the gap some affecting the delegate distribution.
You are also missing the point about Sadr. He is a major power player. Killing him would likely make him a martyr, and a trial would probably be seen as an American led farce like the Saddam trial. Our only option now may be diplomacy. You can thank the Bush admin for passing up the chance to take him out when he was still a small fry.
Posted by: eyes_open
| March 31, 2008 5:20 PM
Florida moves primary right behind N.H. vote
By Michael Peltier, Reuters | May 4, 2007
TALLAHASSEE -- Florida lawmakers, hoping to give their state more influence in US politics, yesterday moved up the state's presidential primary to the last Tuesday in January.
Governor Charlie Crist, a Republican who has been building a reputation as a moderate in the mold of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, said he would sign the measure, which also orders most touch-screen voting machines to be replaced with equipment that will produce a paper trail.
The Jan. 29 primary date aims to give a larger role on the national stage to the state, which decided the 2000 US presidential election and put George W. Bush in the White House following a five-week legal battle over vote recounts that was ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court.
Moving the primary would put Florida ahead of about a dozen states that have presidential primaries scheduled for Feb. 5.
The rescheduling to earlier dates could wrap up the nominating races early and would favor well-known, well-financed candidates.
"With an earlier presidential primary, Florida will now take its rightful place near the front of the line in determining the next leader of the free world," Crist said.
The measure was opposed by the mainstream national parties.
State lawmakers, however, said Florida, the fourth-most populous state, had been taking a back seat to others by holding its primary in March. The state's primary will now be preceded only by the New Hampshire primary and the caucuses in Iowa and Nevada.
"It is a huge benefit to Florida and the issues that are important to Florida voters," said state Representative David Rivera, a Republican from Miami and sponsor of the bill.
"Now candidates will not only come to Florida to raise money in secluded country clubs and mansions, they are going to have to come and campaign and talk about issues that are relevant."
The new voting machines, to be funded with $28 million in federal money, must be in place for the 2008 presidential elections.
Crist strongly supported the introduction of a paper trail at elections . His predecessor as governor, Jeb Bush, the president's younger brother, had opposed it.
Touch-screen electronic voting was introduced in some counties after the fiasco of the 2000 presidential election.
Crist said the use of optically scanned ballots would alleviate any doubt about an election's outcome.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/05/04/florida_moves_primary_right_behind_nh_vote?mode=PF
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 5:46 PM
For those of you uneducated hacks out there who drank the Obama koolaid...it was a REPUBLICAN-controlled supermajority that decided to move up Florida's primary.
Posted by: David H | March 31, 2008 3:27 PM
And who elected them? Certainly not this uneducated hack. Your state has f*cked up two elections. Get your own house in order.
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 5:49 PM
Iran brokered the ceasefire between Maliki and al-Sadr and it was people in Malaki's own party that encouraged Iran to do so. The big losers here are Maliki and the USA.
What the hell was Cheney doing over there a few weeks ago? Asking Malaki to take the lead by ordering Iraq troops to take on Sadr Mahdi army in the oil-rich south?
No need to worry. The surge is working because the is less/more violence, take your pick.
What does 100 years of McSame have to say about this?
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 5:58 PM
For those of you uneducated hacks out there who drank the Obama koolaid...it was a REPUBLICAN-controlled supermajority that decided to move up Florida's primary.
Posted by: David H | March 31, 2008 3:27 PM
And who elected them? Certainly not this uneducated hack. Your state has f*cked up two elections. Get your own house in order.
posted by Neil
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ya think this might be why Hillary supporters will stay home instead of voting for your guy? You hard left trolls are soooo angry and bitter~~
Then theres Pando'nial whining to Flan that he's been called this name and that~~~ Poooor Pando~~~~ He doesn't take critisism well does he? Cry me a friggin river Pando~~~
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 6:26 PM
You are also missing the point about Sadr. He is a major power player. Killing him would likely make him a martyr, and a trial would probably be seen as an American led farce like the Saddam trial. Our only option now may be diplomacy. You can thank the Bush admin for passing up the chance to take him out when he was still a small fry.
Eyes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sadr is less of a major power player now than he was 5 years ago, hence the cease fire. No one is talking about killing him or trying him, they want him at the table in the government.
The problem is he walked out of the government a while back. Diplomacy would only happen after the streets were cleaned up of al queda and militias which the surge has been successful in doing.
Taking him out as you suggest would have been a disaster and more american troops would have died.
Why is it so hard to see that the surge has done more good than bad?
I would love to bring all our troops, including my brother, home from Iraq as soon as possible. We cannot afford this war and should end it as soon as possible but let's give the surge a chance to work so we don't have to send our troops back under worse conditions. If the surge doesn't work then I would agree to end the war.
If the surge is successful it will be far more cost effective and cost less lives than the other alternative.
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 6:43 PM
"The surge is working because the is less/more violence, take your pick."
You're getting your terminology wrong. It isn't "violence," it's "a defining moment in the history of a free Iraq."
Posted by: Mary Kitt-Neel
| March 31, 2008 6:47 PM
And this one for the doctor in the house:
Always thinking about ya Dog B~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Earth Hour crashes to Earth
Andrew Bolt
Sunday, March 30, 2008 at 11:01am
Credit the public with sense. Earth Hour, hysterically promoted by The Age, the Sydney Morning Herald, the ABC, SBS, Sky News and the federal and state governments, resulted in no significant fall in power usage.
Check the graphs from our National Electricity Market Management Company, tracking power use between 8pm and 9pm (a period in which demand always plummets):
NSW may have had a tiny cut in demand just after 8pm, but in fact ended up the night using more power than the day before:
As with the graphs, so with the crowds:
More than 1000 people braved the chill and the rain to see Premier John Brumby and Lord Mayor John So lead the countdown to 8pm… At the top of the Rialto, a small crowd had a sense of anticlimax when there was no widespread blackout at 8pm. In fact, across the CBD rows of illuminated office windows, with little sign of beavering workers behind them, showed not everyone had read the memo.
The organisers will say never mind, this was about raising awareness (although not of raising awareness of the facts). But here’s the awareness it should raise: how difficult it is to get even a tiny cut in just electricity use for one lousy hour, in a country responsible for just 1.5 per cent of the world’s emissions.
And then think what the Rudd Government is promising: a 60 per cent cut in all emissions, all year. And it’s to be matched by every country around the world.
Meanwhile, the world has not warmed since 1998. Indeed, the oceans and atmosphere have cooled over the past couple.
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 6:51 PM
Dog B,
Did you turn off your florescents last night? I sure hope you weren't contributing to global warming when you could have made a difference in the world.
Posted by: LBH
| March 31, 2008 6:55 PM
Oh, so much disinformation (flat out lies) and so little time.
The Republican supermajority that voted to move Florida's Election up (in direct contravention of BOTH parties' rules) was approved by BOTH parties.
Source (via tinyurl, they have a flamboyant naming system, eh?):
http://tinyurl.com/38bfag
Florida Legislature:
Senate: 26 DMW party & 14 Dems
Senate voted 37 - 2 in favor of moving the date up. I don't know who those two geniuses were (As well as who the mook was that didn't vote). I'll look it up later.
Florida House of Reps: 77 DMW & 43 Dems
FL House voted 118 to 0
Both parties voted to break the rules. Only the National Democratic Party has enough principle to stand by the laws that they all agreed to.
Republicans voted to disenfranchise half of their voters and cut their delegation down to a fraction of what it would have been if they had only followed the rules. First the Florida DMWs screw their constituents, then the RNC doesn't count half of the votes. Typical.
That in itself tells you all you need to know about the party that has encouraged its executive and legislative branches to break the law and let the DOJ look the other way. Remember IOKIYADMW. It's OK if you're a Dead Man Walking.
When Floridians were warned that their delegates would not be seated, they voted to move their election up anyway. Stooooopid.
Who is the stooooopidest person in this whole mess? Clinton or Ickes:
"Harold Ickes, a top adviser to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign who voted for Democratic Party rules that stripped Michigan and Florida of their delegates, is arguing against the very penalty he helped pass"
Source:
http://tinyurl.com/2xuuna
Talk about a CIC threshold.... she has her advisers voting for rules that work against her. Texas redux.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 7:02 PM
Clinton says Obama wants to stop votes
[...]
Obama has been picking up superdelegates at a rapid clip while Clinton's success with that group has slowed considerably.
"I don't even keep track of it, I can't even tell you that figure," Clinton said when asked by Pittsburgh CBS affiliate KDKA how many superdelegates had endorsed her in recent weeks.
As she spoke, her husband, former President Clinton, was in Oregon, lobbying uncommitted superdelegates.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080331/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_primaries;_ylt=Aqa3XhzVz_.2Vricx3oGHCGs0NUE
*****
"I don't even keep track of it, I can't even tell you that figure,"
So THAT's why she is staying in the race? Because she doesn't know she has already lost. One question though, if hubby is lobbying superdelegates and if they don't count them how does he know who is and is not on the list?
Seems a wee bit insincere, eh?
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 7:04 PM
More lawlessness from the DMW party:
HUD secretary resigns:
"Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson resigned today amid a criminal investigation into favoritism in awarding HUD contracts that critics said was blunting the agency's effectiveness in dealing with the subprime mortgage mess."
Source:
http://tinyurl.com/2qa889
Mr. 20% sure knows how to pick the criminals to run his administration. That makes about 800 resignations amid criminal investigations for Mr. 20%'s administration, and a dozen or so convictions. I guess that's why 76% aren't interested in 4 more years of the (Mc)Same ol' crap.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 7:09 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHUAsTrl4JI&feature=related
Bush booed at 2008 Nationals home opener
*****
Nothing more American than apple pie and baseball.
Poor guy gets booed non-stop.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 7:15 PM
For all you "educated" folks out there:
Dean wants a Revote but Must get Approval from DNC Rules Committee:
"The former head of the Democratic National Committee doubted Thursday whether chairman Howard Dean would be able to get approval for do-over presidential nomination contests in Florida and Michigan."
"It'll be a hellacious battle," said Don Fowler, a former DNC chairman who sits on the party's rule-making committee.
Source:
http://tinyurl.com/33s25m
Don't blame the DNC or Barry. Fowler and Ickes knew what they were getting into when they voted to penalize Michigan, Florida and their own campaign.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 7:15 PM
Florida Legislature:
Senate: 26 DMW party & 14 Dems
Senate voted 37 - 2 in favor of moving the date up..
Florida House of Reps: 77 DMW & 43 Dems
FL House voted 118 to 0
Both parties voted to break the rules.
Posted by: Pandemoniac | March 31, 2008 7:02 PM
You can stay home, stomp your feet, take no responsibility for the situation of you own making and blame Obama supporters.... or your can write your state senator, state rep, state DNC party and tell them what you want fixed and when.
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 7:16 PM
Sadr's fighters laugh in the face of Al-Maliki and Mr. 20%
IRANIAN GENERAL played key role in Iraq cease-fire
"Iraqi lawmakers traveled to the Iranian holy city of Qom over the weekend to win the support of the commander of Iran's Qods brigades in persuading Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr to order his followers to stop military operations, members of the Iraqi parliament said."
"Sadr ordered the halt on Sunday, and his Mahdi Army militia heeded the order in Baghdad, where the Iraqi government announced it would lift a 24-hour curfew starting early Monday in most parts of the capital."
"But fighting continued in the oil hub of Basra, where a six-day-old government offensive against Shiite militias has had only limited gains."
"So far, 488 people have been killed and more than 900 wounded in the offensive, Iraqi Interior Ministry officials said."
"The backdrop to Sadr's dramatic statement was a secret trip Friday by Iraqi lawmakers to Qom, Iran's holy city and headquarters for the Iranian clergy who run the country."
"There the Iraqi lawmakers held talks with Brig. Gen. Qassem Suleimani, commander of the Qods (Jerusalem) brigades of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps and signed an agreement with Sadr, which formed the basis of his statement Sunday, members of parliament said."
"Ali al Adeeb, a member of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's Dawa party, and Hadi al Ameri, the head of the Badr Organization, the military wing of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, had two aims, lawmakers said: to ask Sadr to stand down his militia and to ask Iranian officials to stop supplying weapons to Shiite militants in Iraq."
"The statement issued today by (Muqtada al Sadr) is a result of the meetings," said Jalal al-Din al Saghir, a leading member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. "The government didn't have any disagreement with the Sadrists when it went to the city of Basra. The Sadrist movement is the one that chose to face the government."
"We asked Iranian officials to help us persuade him that we were not cracking down on the Sadr group," said an Iraqi official, who asked for anonymity due to the sensitivity of the subject.
===+===
And what's really stoopid about this is that Al-Maliki asks for JAM to turn in weapons and get none. Zip. Nada. Al-Sadr's militias got weapons from IA troops who surrendered in the face of the onslaught of the militias. Sadr's killers are said to be driving around in American issues humvees, to make matters worse.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 7:24 PM
Oops. forgot the linkie:
http://tinyurl.com/2pjggh
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 7:24 PM
I think Hillary should keep running until the clock runs out. If she's wins. I'll vote for her.
On the calendar, the clock runs out ten days after the Puerto Rican Primary.
In meantime, it'd be nice if Hillary spent more time trashing the ripe old DMW John McSame instead of her democratic competition but even that i don't mind. It's good practice for the slime coming Obama's way from the far right DMW party.
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 7:26 PM
It's Deja Vu all over again. DMW predict victory in '06.
Democrats Are Winning... Except at the Polls
By Michael Barone | June 12, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/pd7wh
Projection: Republicans will win in 2006
Steele and Santorum win in a rout as the economy shoots upward
September, 2006 | LBH
===+===
And we all know how THAT turned out, eh? It was a brutal asskicking that still has LBH seeing stars.
Now fast-forward to 2008....
"Projection: Clinton Wins Popular Vote, Obama Wins Delegate Count"
March 28, 2008 02:31 PM ET | Michael Barone
Projection: Gramps McBush wins in a Landslide
March 27, 2008 | LBH
The rest of us roll around on the ground laughing our asses off. That's almost as good as the TNF's.
Almost.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 7:34 PM
McClatchy cover the Iraq Civil War better than anyone.
In our own history, did France stick around after the revolutionary war to help the north or the south in the US civil war? I didn't think so.
Blood and guts McSame, whose father and grandfather gave their lives for this country, and for whose approval John McSame has worked for all his adultlife, wants to give it a 100 years.
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 7:34 PM
"That's almost as good as the TNF's."
lolololol
Maybe "almost" but TNF's effin RAWK!
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 7:42 PM
"Sadr is waving the white flag because the Iraqi army is kicking some ass nad ...."
Posted by: LBH March 31, 2008 4:30 PM
The Iranians are controlling the whole thing. Al-Maliki is just a toy poodle in a room full of pitbulls. The IA isn't kicking anything but its own ass. Only the biggest and the baddest (American Troops) are kicking Sadr's ass. The IA is just soiling their pants and handing over American-provided weapons to Al-Sadr's militias. IA suuuuucks.
Heh. nad.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 7:45 PM
Who knows for sure, after two terms of Bunnypants I truly fear the American public is both crazy and uninformed.
Maybe "more of the same McSame" can repackage the current failures in vainglorious homage to their alternate reality and enough lemmings snap to and follow in step.
Bush being booed at the ball game is a good sign. People are getting informed and I hope the numbers favor the thinking public this time. I still think the youth vote is critical - if they don't show up we all could lose.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 7:51 PM
Iran Brokers Call for Ceasefire;
Bush reduced to Irrelevancy in Iraq; Fighting Continues
By Juan Cole
31/03/.08 "ICH " -- - McClatchy provides a lot of important detail about Sunday's surprising developments regarding the fight between the Iraqi government and the Mahdi Army. A parliamentary delegation from Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's own coalition (mainly now the Da`wa Party and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq) defied him by going off to the holy seminary city of Qom in Iran and negotiating directly with Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr and with the leader of the Quds Brigades of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Brig. Gen. Qasim Sulaymani.
As a result of those parleys, Muqtada al-Sadr called on his followers to stand down, though I read his statement as permitting continued armed self-defense, as at Basra where the Iraqi Army is attacking them and the US is bombing them. Significantly, he calls on the Mahdi Army to stop attacking the HQs of rival political parties. That language suggests that the parties are suffering from such attacks and are worried that party infrasture is being degraded ahead of the October 1 provincial elections. The southern parties have essentially defied al-Maliki and Bush to make a separate peace.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19650.htm
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 7:55 PM
[...]
There's just one problem: John McCain doesn't always behave according to his own statesmanlike script. In fact, while attending that same Munich conference in 2006, the Arizona senator had another one of what have come to be known as McCain Moments. In a small meeting at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof, McCain was conferring with Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the foreign minister of Germany—one of America's most important allies—when the others heard McCain erupt. He thought the German was being insufficiently tough on the brutal regime in Belarus. Raising his voice at Steinmeier—who's known for speaking in unclear diplomatese—McCain "started shaking and rising out of his chair," said one participant, a former senior diplomatic official who related the anecdote on condition of anonymity. "He said something like: 'I haven't come to Munich to hear this kind of crap'." McCain's old pal Joe Lieberman jumped in. "Lieberman, who reads him very well, put his hand on McCain's arm and said gently, 'John, I think there's been a problem in the translation.' Of course Lieberman doesn't speak German and there hadn't been any problem in the translation … It was just John's explosive temper."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/129660
*****
Grandpa is not stable. We don't need a hot head in the WH.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 8:06 PM
Obama lost in all big states- CA -NY-NJ-OH-FL and soon PA so his grass roots effort is a bogus argument.
Posted by: LBH March 31, 2008 4:37 PM
grass roots
–noun (used with a singular or plural verb)
1. the common or ordinary people, esp. as contrasted with the leadership or elite of a political party, social organization, etc.; the rank and file.
In those states with established Dem party machines, HRC can squeeze out a win. In all other states, including smaller dem states like WI, MN, MD, OR and WA Barry doesn't have to fight the wave of the state Dem Machine. For Obama to win the bigger states (as he will in the general) he needs to have the backing of the state machines. This will happen in CA (55 EV), NY (31 EV), NJ (15 EV), IL (21 EV), as well as middle-sized states like MA, MD, OR, MN and WI. The fact that he consistently comes from 20 points down to win or come within a hair of winning, shows the strength of his organizing skillz.
"Why is Obama afraid to give FL voters a say in a democratic process?"
Posted by: LBH March 31, 2008 4:37 PM
When he puts the HRC campaign out of its misery in June, he will graciously allow Florida and Michigan to seat their delegates to pad her delegate count and to win over the goodwill of state voters.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 8:13 PM
Like CA - NY and others that are always blue will suddenly turn red?
That never impressed me as a substantial risk.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 8:16 PM
"The Republicans worked it out with the state and counted the votes."
Posted by: LBH March 31, 2008 5:11 PM
As I mentioned before, if there's a party that will condone lawbreaking, it's the DMW party. It's just business as usual for them (while giving their voters half of the power they deserve).
"The dems could have done the same."
Posted by: LBH March 31, 2008 5:11 PM
Why condone the actions of those states who chose to break the rules?
"It's not the voters fault but the national dem party."
Posted by: LBH March 31, 2008 5:11 PM
It's not the voter's fault except that they elect the state reps who set the dates for their elections. If the voters don't like it, they should vote their reps out of office. The DNC could allow states to break the rules, but what for? As I mentioned Dean is for a revote. The DNC rules committee won't have it. Ickes, Clinton and Fowler were for the rules before they were against the rules.
"The dem party is run by a few elitist instead of the american people-good reason to stay home!"
Posted by: LBH March 31, 2008 5:11 PM
Dems aren't staying home. They are breaking records in every state where elections have been held. Republicans are breaking records for apathy.
Votes for ALL DMW COMBINED in all primaries this year: about 15 million
Votes for Barack Obama ALONE: About 14 million.
Add another 13 or 14 million for HRC and you can see that the DMW party is just that. Dead. Man. Walking. They don't vote. They don't care. The DMW party scrood this country up so bad that they can't do anything but walk away in shame.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 8:27 PM
edumacated: You can stay home, stomp your feet, take no responsibility for the situation of you own making and blame Obama supporters....
Educated: or your can write your state senator, state rep, state DNC party and tell them what you want fixed and when.
Posted by: Neil March 31, 2008 7:16 PM
I just looked up the vote in the Florida state legislature:
In the Senate, the two geniuses were DMW. In their dementia, they must've thought they were asked if they wanted to FOLLOW the rules, ergo the "no" vote.
http://tinyurl.com/3275oz
In the house, I missed the one vote to follow the rules (Seiler) a democrat. Silly wabbit.
http://tinyurl.com/2w24vo
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 8:50 PM
This is one of many examples of the dishonest nonsense (or is it sheer stupidity?) of the Dead Man Walking party that I can't let stand.
"No wonder you progressives, like Bagdad McDermont didn't want to go to war with Iraq, Saddam was there SUGER DADDY!"
~~~~~~~~~~
Indictment: Iraq paid for junket
By MIKE ALLEN | 3/26/08 7:02 PM EST
Posted by: LBH March 27, 2008 12:56 PM
Spies for Iraq pay for a junket and the DMW zombie chow kicks in. Blame Dems for the fact that Mr. 20%'s administration has allowed spies to work freely in America. Combined with the reliance on the Iraqi Curveball's intel and Chalabi's misinformation and you get the picture that Iraqis have the Bush Administration dancing in circles like drunk chickenhawks. Muy pathetic. Muy.
And speaking of pathetic.... It's "McDermott" not "McDermont;" and it's "their Sugar Daddy" not "there Suger Daddy." I'm getting the feeling more and more that LBH is a homeschooled 13 year old, not an actual adult. This would explain the political naivete and the atrocious writing skillz.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 9:09 PM
"Like CA - NY and others that are always blue will suddenly turn red?"
"That never impressed me as a substantial risk."
Posted by: capt March 31, 2008 8:16 PM
Remember: as long as Barry doesn't get his groove back, they can turn the FauxNews "Two Minutes Hate" straw men into electoral gold, Rumplestilskin-style.
In their minds (or "there" minds, as LBH likes to say), losing Denny Hastert's seat (and every other special election this year) is not so much an omen as a hiccup in an otherwise smooth ride to victory. I just wish I could get them to contribute to Joe Lieberman's campaign again like I did in 2006. I laughed till I cried. TNF's are effin funny; but DMW logic puts Stephen Colbert to shame.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 9:19 PM
Listening to All Things Considered on the drive home one of the subjects was the ceasefire. What did experts on and reports from Iraq say?
*At best the ceasefire can be considered a stalemate which is BAD for the Iraqi government since this was supposed to be a defining moment.
*The only reason Malaki still has a job is because he is the only compromise candidate. It would take months to find a non extremist leaving chaos.
*Not only is the Mahdi Army not defeated, they've retreated to blend into the general public, maintaining control of the area.
Posted by: eyes_open
| March 31, 2008 9:32 PM
Day-of-Week Effect in Gallup Daily?
I received some interesting charts this afternoon from Harrison Hickman and Ben Margolis, both of the Democratic firm Global Strategy Group that polled for John Edwards until he withdrew from the race (full disclosure: Hickman was my employer longer ago than either of us wants to admit). When Hickman and Margolis plotted the Gallup Daily results for the Obama-Clinton race, they noticed an impressively consistent pattern by day of the week. In data released during February and March, Obama typically does best on three-day samples that end on Saturday (combining interviews from Thursday, Friday and Saturday), while Clinton typically does best on samples ending on Tuesday or Wednesday night (covering Sunday through Wednesday).
The chart below shows the pattern in the Clinton lead (Clinton minus Obama) for each of the last nine weeks:
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/day_of_week_effect_in_gallup_d.php
*****
Some interesting pollstrology stuff.
Posted by: capt
| March 31, 2008 9:33 PM
Poor Gramps McBush is a failure in his own tribe. Governor Arnold's environmental guru calls McBush's environmental plan a failure (gives his plan an F). DMW Senator from Florida (where "educated" democrats do everything they can to empower Republicans), Mel Martinez gives Gramps an "Incomplete" for his statements on government bailouts. And now Zombie Chow hater "Paul O’Neill – President Bush’s former Secretary of the Treasury – sarcastically commented on McCain’s lack of preparation to lead on economic issues:
NYT: McCain recently confessed in public that his grasp of economics is limited.
O’NEILL: Yeah. That’s a great place to start from, isn’t it?"
Source: http://tinyurl.com/2dwfr6
Who was it that called Mr. 20% "Dumbya?" Well, when we pair him up with Gramps we have "Dumb and Dumbya." Dead. Man. Walking.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 9:55 PM
Blood and guts McSame, whose father and grandfather gave their lives for this country, and for whose approval John McSame has worked for all his adultlife, wants to give it a 100 years.
Posted by: Neil March 31, 2008 7:34 PM
Did you read this: http://tinyurl.com/2azl66
Gramps' Ancestors Owned Slaves
The family's storied military history stretches back to Carroll County, Miss., where McCain's great-great grandfather William Alexander McCain owned a plantation, and later died during the Civil War as a soldier for the Mississippi cavalry.
But what McCain didn't know about his family until Tuesday was that William Alexander McCain had owned 52 slaves. The senator seemed surprised after Salon reporters showed him documents gathered from Carroll County Courthouse, the Carrollton Merrill Museum, the Mississippi State Archives and the Greenwood, Miss., Public Library.
==+==
Wouldn't that make the race all the more symmetrical? An African American vs the scion of a slave-owning plantation-running white family. Coming from a slave-owning family doesn't disqualify Gramps from being a good President (only his suckass policies would).
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| March 31, 2008 10:26 PM
DMW party illustrated:
"It's worth noting that even the godfather of vast right-wing conspiracy [Richard Mellon Scaife] cannot abide by the damage Republicans are doing to America's place in the world. Perhaps, in the face of the Iraq catastrophe and the abdication of America's moral authority, panty-sniffing no longer seems so important."
http://tinyurl.com/yrklce
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 11:40 PM
Should we consider McSame's great-great grandfather, slave owner William Alexander McCain, who fought and died for his plantation, a patriot or more accurately a man guilty of treason for trying to destroy the United States of America over property rights dispute... more to the point, a fight over the freedom of enslaved black human beings?
Not to worry, the black slaves stayed on for a few more generations and worked as sharecroppers. Now, there's a good financial arrangement that works out well enough for labor to feed their families but not well enough to clear their debt.
Posted by: Neil
| March 31, 2008 11:53 PM
I'm voting Republican this fall in the presidential election because I want more of mc same. But seriously, I'm voting Republican in the fall because there's no way in hell McCain can take this state. I'm voting Republican in the fall because today is 4/1.
Posted by: Neil
| April 1, 2008 12:02 AM
Did I mention HRC's campaign will be dead soon since she can't raise enough money to compete?
"Among the debts reported this month by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s struggling presidential campaign, the $292,000 in unpaid health insurance premiums for her campaign staff stands out."
Source: http://tinyurl.com/2ov4oa
She is for UNIVERSAL health coverage right? Don't her campaign workers count?
Time to make the donuts.
Posted by: Pandemoniac
| April 1, 2008 6:49 AM
Clinton's 'deadbeat' campaign stiffs vendors
April 1, 2008 - 7:29am
Angry vendors, stiffed by the financially-strapped Presidential campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton, warn others to avoid doing business with the New York Senator, calling her and her organization "deadbeats" and saying they may have to sue to get paid.
Health insurance premiums weren't paid for campaign staff members for at two three months. The campaign claims health insurance was covered. Staff members grumble quietly they were not.
For all practical purposes, Clinton's campaign is broke and debts continue to mount. The candidate who vows to carry her all-but-hopeless campaign to the convention in Denver in August faces having her phones cut silenced and her electricity shut off.
"This campaign is a mess," says one Democratic strategist. "Organizationally, financially, strategically -- it's a goddamned disaster."
Yet Clinton -- short on delegates, short on support and short on cash -- vows to fight on.
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/5706
Posted by: capt
| April 1, 2008 8:40 AM
This just in:
Clinton caught in a three way with Spitzer and an unnamed third person.
Film at eleven. (ew!)
Posted by: capt
| April 1, 2008 8:54 AM
Capt, I don't know what scares me more, the thought of a video or the fact you didn't specify which Clinton... 0.o
Posted by: eyes_open
| April 1, 2008 9:42 AM
"didn't specify which Clinton"
On purpose . . . . .
Posted by: capt
| April 1, 2008 9:47 AM
Funk sensation George Clinton?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clinton_%28funk_musician%29
Posted by: eyes_open
| April 1, 2008 10:11 AM
funkadellic (sp)
Posted by: capt
| April 1, 2008 10:12 AM
Well, I guess it could be either Clinton. I have heard both can come from behind!
(sorry I couldn't help it)
Posted by: capt
| April 1, 2008 10:36 AM
Come from behind, eh?
Posted by: corky
| April 1, 2008 9:19 PM
Post A Comment