David Corn

It is like the other side of the looking glass for this WH and all their ilk.

It is just amazing to hear them these days.

I guess it would be silly to expect any of them to admit they screwed up big-time but history will be very unkind to them.

In their delusions they really think a pin-point strike against Iran will prove they were right all along about Iraq.

Thanks

Olmert woes, dwindling time cloud Rice Mideast trip

WASHINGTON, June 10 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visits the Middle East this weekend facing the reality . . . .

{snip}

"Politically speaking, fortunately or not, fairly or not, Olmert is a dead man walking."

http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSN09473273

*****

Coincidence?

Condiliestya'...

Talk about somebody we need to testify, in the open, under oath...

Can't wait until she's relegated to "coming out" for some more shoe-shopping! Gotta be getting pretty crowded in that little closet!

-T

Obama Hoisted Upon His Own Petard

By California Yankee Posted in 2008 | Housing Hypocrisy |

On the campaign trail Obama has railed against Countrywide Financial Corp. and its executives -- blaming the firm for "infecting the economy and helping to create a home foreclosure crisis":

That was then. Today, ABC News' Sunlen Miller caught Obama away from his remote controller teleprompter, and asked him how he could "rail against Countrywide Financial Corp. as an example of insiders and today's economy while your VP search is headed by someone who got questionable loans from Countrywide?"

Obama didn't know how to respond:

"Well, look," Obama said, "the, the, I mean - first of all I am not vetting my VP search committee for their mortgages, so you’re gong to have to direct -- "

"But shouldn’t you?" asked Miller.

"Well, no," Obama said. "It becomes sort of a, um, I mean, this is a game that can be played - everybody, you know, who is tangentially related to our campaign, I think, is going to have a whole host of relationships -- I would have to hire the vetter to vet the vetters. I mean, at some point, you know, we just asked people to do their assignments.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Obummer sounds like Bush without the old teleprompter!

Democrats' New Political Threat to U.S. Security
Maybe You Can Make This Stuff Up.

By California Yankee

We have been through this time and time again.

The left and its media allies cannot accept that the country's leaders, especially those leaders with a Democrat "D" near their name, found it necessary to authorize the use force in the war the Islamic extremists continue to wage against us.

The left's solution has been to fabricate a myth that we were "mislead" into war. Despite the fact that no less than three exhaustive reviews have completely discredited this mythical lie, last week the Democrat controlled Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by West Virginia Democrat John D. Rockefeller IV, tried to try and rewrite history and thereby breath new life into this despicable myth.

As a few Democrats realize, success in Iraq will be a problem for the Democrats. Now that the success of the surge is being recognized by the press, if not the Democrat's standard bearer, those that once supported the war but switched positions with the prevailing political winds are growing desperate. The only way those Democrats who once supported the war, and thereby offended the Democrats' agenda-setting antiwar left-wingers, can see to hold onto power is to blame their support for the war on being mislead.

Fred Hiatt takes a look at Rockefeller's new report revised history and finds Rockefeller has not yet accomplished the left's mission. Hiatt explains that if you bother to read Rockefeller's new report revised history you will find that it fails to support Rockefeller's assertion that the "administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when it was unsubstantiated, contradicted or even nonexistent:"

On Iraq's nuclear weapons program? The president's statements "were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates."

On biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories? The president's statements "were substantiated by intelligence information."

On chemical weapons, then? "Substantiated by intelligence information."

On weapons of mass destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information." Delivery vehicles such as ballistic missiles? "Generally substantiated by available intelligence." Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information."

As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you've mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment. So, you think, the smoking gun must appear in the section on Bush's claims about Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to terrorism.

But statements regarding Iraq's support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." Statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda "were substantiated by the intelligence assessments," and statements regarding Iraq's contacts with al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." The report is left to complain about "implications" and statements that "left the impression" that those contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Damn those facts~~~

He he he

Here’s a quick geopolitical quiz: What country is three times the size of Texas and has more than 300 days of blazing sun a year? What country has the world’s largest oil reserves resting below miles upon miles of sand? And what country is being given nuclear power, not solar, by President George W. Bush, even when the mere assumption of nuclear possession in its region has been known to provoke pre-emptive air strikes, even wars?
If you answered Saudi Arabia to all of these questions, you’re right.
Last month, while the American people were becoming the personal ATMs of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was in Saudi Arabia signing away an even more valuable gift: nuclear technology. In a ceremony little-noticed in this country, Ms. Rice volunteered the U.S. to assist Saudi Arabia in developing nuclear reactors, training nuclear engineers, and constructing nuclear infrastructure. While oil breaks records at $130 per barrel or more, the American consumer is footing the bill for Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121305642257659301.html

******

Well if it is for the Saudis and Condi is volunteering - then it is okay.

McCain Calls Arizona a Swing State

[...]

In a “strategy briefing” video posted Saturday on the McCain campaign website, Rick Davis, the campaign manager, did not include Arizona as one of the 17 “historically Republican states” -- though Arizona has voted Republican in every presidential election but one since 1952. In that one election, of 1996, Bill Clinton carried Arizona by a 2.2 percent margin over Sen. Robert Dole.

In the briefing, Davis avoided mentioning Arizona in his breakdown of McCain’s electoral strategy. But he did include Arizona among swing states. "In the Southwest," Davis says in the video, "McCain’s history in the region with over 25 years representing the state in Washington combined with his strength with Latinos and his record on immigration, makes him a natural Western state candidate.”

A call to McCain campaign headquarters seeking comment on Arizona being placed as a contested state was not returned.

http://www.washingtonindependent.com/view/mccain-campaign

******

Maybe he can pickup a VP from AZ to win his own state?

I don't think this bodes well for gramps.

Maybe AZ doesn't mean anything to him?

"The cost of this war, in lives and treasure, for Americans and Iraqis, has been greater than we ever imagine."
--Condi Rice

From Salon: http://tinyurl.com/4l2eoj
No one could have predicted it

When terrorists hijacked airplanes and crashed airplanes into buildings, Condoleezza Rice said that no one could have predicted it. When levees broke and floodwaters poured into New Orleans, George W. Bush said no one could have anticipated it.

The Bush administration was wrong both times, of course. Long before 9/11, the Federal Aviation Administration was warning that terrorists might try to hijack planes and crash them into buildings. And long before Hurricane Katrina, Louisiana officials were warning that New Orleans wouldn't stand a chance if a massive hurricane ever hit.

The "who knew?" defense seems to be a favorite of this White House. So while we're not so big on preemptive strikes, maybe it makes sense to make one here. Before conditions get any worse in Iraq -- at least 30 more people were killed in sectarian fighting today -- let's get one thing straight: Someone could have predicted this, and somebody did.

As former senior intelligence officials tell Knight Ridder, U.S. intelligence agencies "repeatedly warned the White House beginning more than two years ago that the insurgency in Iraq had deep local roots, was likely to worsen and could lead to civil war." What became of those warnings? Nothing, apparently. Robert Hutchings, who chaired the National Intelligence Council from 2003 to 2005, says that Bush and his top aides ignored a "steady stream" of warnings about civil war in Iraq. "Frankly, senior officials simply weren't ready to pay attention to analysis that didn't conform to their own optimistic scenarios," Hutchings says.

Hutchings isn't the only critical voice in the Knight Ridder report, and Knight Ridder isn't the only one unearthing damaging new revelations on the path to what may yet turn out to be all-out civil war. Earlier this week, the Associated Press brought news of a report from the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction -- a report that blames the lack of progress in Iraq on a lack of prewar planning in the Washington. "Pre-war reconstruction planning assumed that Iraq's bureaucracy would go back to work when the fighting stopped," the report says. When that didn't happen -- when Iraqis didn't get right back to work after all those "greeted as liberators" parades -- the Coalition Provisional Authority didn't have the manpower on hand to do what needed to be done. As the Washington Times puts it, whatever plans the Bush administration had simply "crumbled" when coalition forces encountered "an unexpected foreign and domestic insurgency that looted the country, sabotaged electric and water service, and killed hundreds of Americans and Iraqis."

Only the insurgency wasn't exactly "unexpected," either, at least not to anyone who was paying attention. As former CIA official Paul Pillar said last month, the "judgment of the intelligence community" before the war began was that there wouldn't be an insurgency, but only if the United States succeeded in quickly "restoring and establishing" safety, security and a growing economy for the Iraqi people. "Of course," Pillar said, "we did not succeed in doing that."
==+==
There's more; but you get the gist. Why are approval ratings and generic congressional matchups give Democrats such a huge advantage?
Dems 47% DMW 34% biggest difference since Dems held a 50/32 advantage.
rAssmussenreports: http://tinyurl.com/34c5fz

Republicans don't know how to govern. The current crew in the WH has mismanaged so many crises that Americans are ready for a change. As DMW leaders have noted, this administration has killed the Republican brand. They're sooooo DMW.

Okla. Dem calls Obama liberal, declines to endorse

Jun 10, 2:58 PM (ET)

By TIM TALLEY

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - Democratic Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma said Tuesday Barack Obama is "the most liberal senator" in Congress and he has no intention of endorsing him for the White House.

However, Boren will vote for Obama at the Democratic National Convention in Denver in August and will vote Democratic on Nov. 4.

"I think this is an important time for our country," Boren said in a telephone interview. "We're facing a terrible economic downturn. We have high gasoline prices. We have problems in our foreign policy. That's why I think it's important."

Boren, the lone Democrat in Oklahoma's congressional delegate, said that while Obama has talked about working with Republicans, "unfortunately, his record does not reflect working in a bipartisan fashion."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OUCH!!!!

Obama’s hypocrisy on Johnson continues

Apparently, what’s good for the goose has no relation to the gander in the Barack Obama campaign. After David Axelrod shrieked about Mark Penn’s connection to Countrywide during the primaries, the Obama campaign seems rather undisturbed about their own connections to the subprime lender. Despite a Wall Street Journal article detailing millions of dollars received by Jim Johnson in sweetheart loans from Countrywide, Obama has publicly declared he will stand by Johnson:

The headline at the Huffpost says it all. Republicans vote to protect oil companies from taxes:

HuffPost: http://tinyurl.com/6rnjct

"The Democrats failed, 51-43, to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a GOP filibuster and bring the energy package up for consideration. Separately, Democrats also failed to get Republican support for a proposal to extend tax breaks for wind, solar and other alternative energy development, and for the promotion of energy efficiency and conservation. The tax breaks have either expired or are scheduled to end this year. The tax provisions were included in a broader $50 billion tax measure blocked by a GOP filibuster threat. A vote to take up the measure was 50-44, short of the 60 votes needed."

Another filibuster and Roadblock Republicans think that they're improving their chances in November by backing Big Oil? They block the energy bill, farm bill, Bush vetoes schip, Gramps votes against the GI bill. These votes are piling up as ammunition for the Dems in November. Dems who are flush with cash will decimate the ranks of the DMW. It's like Republicans don't even care if they're in the minority any more. Karl Rove=Political genius. LOL.

Looking for a connection to this thread and Condi Rice. Thinking. Thinking. Thinking. Hey, didn't one of the Big Oil Cos have a supertanker named after Ms. Rice? Those crazy Big Oil Co.s just love them some DMW icons.

New Obama Economic Policy Director Is Taking Heavy Heat For Defending Wal-Mart

NationalEconomist.com ^

While it appears Jason Furman is clueless about inflation and the business cycle ...it does appear he understands Wal-Mart, which is causing trouble for him with the wacko left...

...the New York Sun wants full-fledged anti-Wal-Mart people around Obama, and thus headlines Obama’s choice of Furman this way:

Wal-Mart Defender To Direct Obama’s Economic Policy: Appointment of Jason Furman Immediately Meets With Skepticism

The Sun then brought out the “experts”:

“It’s surprising because this guy seems to feel that Wal-Mart’s low-wage, low-benefit business model is good for America. That’s just flat-out wrong,” the executive director of Wal-Mart Watch, David Nassar, said…

A New York-based labor organizer and writer, Jonathan Tasini, said he was puzzled by the selection of Mr. Furman. “It’s legitimate to give you pause,”…

During the primary campaign, Obama was sharply critical of the company. He has said he will not shop there and that Wal-Mart should pay “a living wage.”...

Which means it is going to be interesting to see how he deals with this situation, since Furman also wrote in 2005 a 16-page paper titled, Wal-Mart: A Progressive Success Story...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It just keeps getting better~

LBH,

Why no comment on what David Corn wrote? This thread is suppose to be slightly topical and about Condi or am I missing something?

Do you think David Corn has a blog as a place for you to just post Reich-wingnuttia talking points and for bashing Obama?

This is David's personal blog and the comments section is for people to comment on his work.

It would be nice if you pretended to care about where you are and why we are here by posting something good or bad that is ACTUALLY ABOUT his work?

Just a thought

(Maybe you can return to the juvenile name-calling and get banned? Please?)

Limbaugh shows Obama stumbles without his notes
'You take away the prompter, written speeches and you have nothing'

© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Rush Limbaugh

Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh says Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is riding on "a wing and a prayer" and cannot sustain his "image" until the general election in the fall.

"Ted Kennedy could do a better job," Limbaugh said yesterday.

"I've constantly noted, ladies and gentlemen, you take the prompter and the written speeches away from Barak Obama, and you have nothing. You have nothing like the guy with the soaring rhetoric and the inspiring and sermon-like quality," he said.

Obama's campaign has been plagued with issues over statements by his wife who said her husband's campaign finally made her proud of America, his former pastor who said "God d--- America," and by friends who expressed regret they did not do more as violent activists in the 1960s and 1970s.

Now Obama's own words are attracting attention, too.

Limbaugh said a speech by the candidate illustrates his point.

In the YouTube video, Obama says: "Everybody knows that it makes no sense that you send a kid to the emergency room for a treatable illness like asthma, they end up taking up a hospital bed, it costs, when, if you, they just gave, you gave them treatment early and they got some treatment, and a, a breathalyzer, or inhalator, not a breathalyzer. (crowd laughing) I haven't had much sleep in the last 48 hours."

Limbaugh commented: "He hasn't had much sleep in the last 48 hours. It's inhaler. There's no such a thing as an inhalator. And a breathalyzer? A breathalyzer is what they give you if you've been overserved adult beverages and you're driving around and the cops catch you."

Limbaugh said Obama's speech in Bristol, Va., just last week was interrupted by the candidate's apparent inability to keep his thoughts in order.

In the speech, Obama says: "What they'll say is, 'Well it costs too much money,' but you know what? It would cost, about... It -- it -- it would cost about the same as what we would spend... It... Over the course of 10 years it would cost what it would costs us... (nervous laugh) All right. Okay. We're going to... It... It would cost us about the same as it would cost for about -- hold on one second. I can't hear myself. But I'm glad you're fired up, though. I'm glad."

That is why, Limbaugh said, he doesn't believe Obama "will do as many of these town hall meetings with McCain as his camp is saying. … If this were George Bush that you were listening to, this would have been commented on since it happened. You would have had people all over the country saying, 'Gosh, can't we get a guy that can talk? Can't we get a guy who can put two thoughts together?"

"This is the worst example of it, but I have noticed this and I have seen this throughout these town hall debate situations," Limbaugh said.

Limbaugh noted Obama's explanation that he couldn't hear himself.

"By the way, when he makes his remark about the audience being loud and distracting, we didn't edit any of the audience out. The audience was not making a sound because the audience is as perplexed as you will be," Limbaugh said.

"Nobody was saying a word. There was no cheering; there was no fainting. There was just disbelief. I have warned you people several times, you get this guy away from the teleprompter and the David Axelrod-written speeches. This guy doesn't even write his own speeches. Mario Cuomo and Malcolm X write these, but the bottom line is, you get this guy away from them, and I don't care, he blames it on lack of sleep. Hey, get used to it, man, you want to be president. Remember that phone call that's going to ring at 3:00 in the morning? It's going to be Hillary saying, 'Have you seen Bill?' And he'll say, 'Yeah, the last time I saw him was in the Oval Office and I couldn't get rid of him so I came up to bed.' This is the guy who wants to run your healthcare," Limbaugh said.

"If the American people had learned 30 years ago that a presidential candidate of any party can number as one of his best friends a terrorist who blew up the Pentagon, he would be finished. Today he's the nominee of the Democrat Party for president of the United States, and this is a man of change and this is a man of hope and dreams. This is a man who is finally going to bring about the federal government fixing everything that's wrong in healthcare," Limbaugh said.

~~~~~

And you Cornnuts make fun of McCain~

Ha ha ha ha!

Money will be a HUGE factor in November as it ever has been in politics. Hillary is so far in debt that it'll take her quite a while to mitigate the mess she made.

NYTimes: http://tinyurl.com/3qpt5s
"With her campaign now officially suspended, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is confronting still another challenge: whittling down what is believed to be the largest presidential campaign debt in history."

Obama is flush with cash and will be having no problem from here on out getting all the cash he needs. An article from The Hill argues that Obama will easily be history's first 100 Million Dollar Man.
The Hill: http://tinyurl.com/5gng8g

If Mrs. Clinton joins Obama on the Dem ticket, how much of that debt will be erased? You know who would be a great VP choice? Condi Rice. I can just see her now standing behind Gramps helping him to get the whole Shia/Sunni/Kurd distinction straight, barking his shins every time he starts to hum the "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb... Bomb Iran" song.

Hey Capt,

I agree with Corn ~ Condi hasn't been effective in anyway.

Happy? Now, mind your own business like Corn said!

LBH,

Are you trying to dominate the thread, change what is the topic or just making your own blog on David's dime?

Is Obama bashing the only theme you are capable of posting about?

Just wonderin'

Sorry Mr Corn

I find Obama more fascinating than Condi ~

However, since you brought it up:

Dems 'Distort' Iraqi Intel, Leading GOP Senator Says

By Fred Lucas
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
June 10, 2008

(CNSNews.com) - Though sold as new evidence that the Bush administration misled the public about pre-Iraq war intelligence, the "Phase II" report released late last week by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is a partisan election year ploy, said the top Republican on the committee.

"The Democratic staff who authored the report twisted policy-maker statements, and cherry-picked intelligence in order to reach their misleading conclusions," said Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond (R-Mo.) in a conference call with reporters Monday. "It was drafted by partisan Democratic staff to distort intelligence for the obvious political purpose for use in the 2008 elections."

The "Phase II" report on prewar intelligence pointed to several speeches between October 2002 and March 2003 by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, then juxtaposed those speeches with intelligence reports. The report in general paints a picture of misrepresented or hyped intelligence in the lead-up to the Iraq war.

The Democratic majority on the committee says administration officials were wrong in telling the public the following: that former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was linked to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and al-Qaeda; that Iraq would give terrorist groups chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons; and that Iraq was developing drone aircraft to spread chemical or biological agents over the United States. None of those claims was proven by intelligence, the report states.

The previous Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report from 2004, approved unanimously by committee members, determined that flawed intelligence rather than intentional deception led to policy decisions regarding Iraq.

The latest report, Bond said, excluded the input of minority Republicans.

"I find it ironic that Democrats would knowingly distort and misrepresent the committee's findings in the intelligence in an effort to prove that the administration distorted or mischaracterized intelligence," said Bond. "It's the political gamesmanship that should be beneath the Senate intelligence committee."

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.), in a statement, said the Bush administration was "fixated" on Iraq.

"Top administration officials made repeated statements that falsely linked Iraq and al Qaeda as a single threat and insinuated that Iraq played a role in 9/11," Rockefeller said. "Sadly, the Bush administration led the nation into war under false pretenses. There is no question we all relied on flawed intelligence. But there is a difference between relying on incorrect intelligence and deliberately painting a picture to the American people that you know is not fully accurate."

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino was quoted by the Associated Press last week as saying, "We had the intelligence that we had, fully vetted, but it was wrong. And we certainly regret that."

Bond accused Committee Chairman Rockefeller of using the "old discredited view" that the administration pressured intelligence analysts, while charging that committee Democrats ignored the comments of congressional Democrats who supported the war.

"It's telling that the Democrats chose to exclude any of their own statements based on the same intelligence available to administration officials in the final report," Bond said.

Who could've predicted that levees would break? Who could've predicted that civil war would break out in Iraq? Who could've predicted that deregulating and setting banks loose unencumbered on homebuyers would lead to record home foreclosures? Who could have predicted that gas prices would reach $100 a barrel (and more)?

The current administration's disregard for clues leading to impending problems is phenomenal if not unprecedented. In general, it would seem that Republicans have a blind spot where it comes to disregarding inconvenient facts, indeed, ignoring reality. A prediction, a long series of clues that the DMW ignore at their own peril:

via HuffPost: http://tinyurl.com/58vc4o
"Most Americans don't even start thinking about the election until after Labor Day. So, this is not a prediction. It's not even prediction adjacent. At best, it's a very reticent observation of the early landscape. And those can change."

"But -- right now -- I get the sense that Barack Obama will clean the table with John McCain."

"John McCain is a remarkable man, with a substantial life. But inexplicably he looks petulant, stiff, whiney and -- shocking to note during his "Green Banner" speech -- awkward. With a nervous laugh. But it goes far beyond those superficialities. His economic plan continues the one driving America into a recession, with an economic advisor (Phil Graham) who's a lobbyist for the banking industry at the heart of the housing crisis. More importantly, Sen. McCain himself admits knowing little about the economy -- an issue that may be the biggest this year, even over Iraq. And as for Iraq, he's largely supportive of the president, who has a 28% approval rating. Indeed, he's voted with the 28% president a full 95% of the time."

"John McCain can be charming when he quips one-on-one with Jon Stewart, but when he's out making speeches, he appears lost. Making gaffe-after-repetitive gaffe. (Incorrectly claiming al Qaeda is in Iran. That we should be in Iraq for 100 years. Singing "Bomb-bomb-bomb Iran.")
==+==
A year from now, they'll be wondering who could have predicted that Americans would be so ready for change that they'd vote for a young, inspirational African-American senator over a 70-something, tired, bumbling, off-message grump?

LBH,

What you might find fascinating is not fascinating to others.

David Corn is a best selling author writer and reporter, you can trust his topic is of more interest to tohers than your personal likes or dislikes.

Show some respect. It will reflect better on you.

I know you can't find anything about Condi bashing Obama so try to follow along.

The days of abusing DC's blog for your personal likes are numbered. Trust me, I am being honest.

John McSame,

The gaffe that keeps on giving!

lol

What does this remind you of?
Condi Rice:
"But it is more than that -- what I have called our uniquely American realism. This makes us an incredibly impatient nation."

Then a few seconds later, Ms. Condi notes:
"At the same time, ironically, our uniquely American realism also makes us deeply patient"

Kinda reminds me of this rumbling, stumbling, fumbling:
"Because the -- all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be -- or closer delivered to what has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the -- like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate -- the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those -- if that growth is affected, it will help on the red."
--George W. Bush, explaining his plan to save Social Security, Tampa, Fla., Feb. 4, 2005

Somebody asked about Mr. Obama's first 100 days yesterday or the day before:
here: http://tinyurl.com/4vbasg

save Social Security?

Thank all that is good that Bush didn't save it, his plan was to invest all that booty in Bears-Stearns - that is a scary thought, eh?

The days of abusing DC's blog for your personal likes are numbered. Trust me, I am being honest.

Posted by Capt

Jeesh, if only you abided by the same rules:

June 9th blog: Capt 20 of 60 posts (less than half on topic)

June 6th blog: Capt 71 out of 131 ( again less than half on topic and more than half of entire posts)

June 5th blog: Capt 10 of 18 posts

June 4th blog: 19 of 39 posts

I could go on but you get the picture I hope.

I'm just sayin!

Deflection will not work.

Clean up your act or not, it is all up to you.

Maybe you could just get this out of the way and call someone - anyone another one of your pet fascinating names?

Something nice about Pande maybe?

Please, just one I am sure DC is reading along.

What was that name for Pande?

Come on, nothing to fear if you are not wrong, eh?

Please - please - please

I for one, will not miss ya so how 'bout it?

Is Obama bashing the only theme you are capable of posting about?

Just wonderin'

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No, I have no problem bashing liberals in general~

You asked!

*brushes shoulder*

lol

Capt is right; they've got themselves quite a stable of kickass writers here at CQ. There's a story on the CQ front page about Gramps' fundraising problems. They traced a pile of Bush donors and found them on the lists of both Democratic candidates. The main reason that they've switched horses? The War. A bunch of 'em are libertarians that know that the quickest way to kill an economy is to borrow and spend on a war (especially in a country with one of the world's largest largest sources of oil). There's a subset that don't like Gramps' politics and his personality. Either way, they aren't opening the pocketbook to fund Gramps' excellent adventure in presidential politics.
CQ story: http://tinyurl.com/4ld6nh
Former Bush Donors Still Hesitant About Backing McCain

Obama on the other hand has managed to bring in money in huge chunks, all the while having to battle HRC for money from Big Money Dem Donors. A startling fact from Jane Hamsher writing at the HuffPost: http://tinyurl.com/46r8lz
"in February, the month that Obama raised $55 million, he did not host one single fundraiser."

If Obama reaches the 100 Million dollar mark in a single month as Dem Fundraisers (including some HRC backers) are predicting, Gramps is in a world of trouble.

"I have no problem bashing liberals in general"

Why and why does that belong on David Corn's blog? What does that have to do with anything?

What do you really want to communicate? Do you even read what David writes, if so why do I have to pry a comment about his work from you?

Is there a purpose beyond bashing or is that the message - that you can bash?

That is not why this blog exists. Have you ever heard of blogger.com? You can make a blog where you can bash on liberals all day.

Liberal bashing for the sake of liberal bashing or because it entertains you does not belong here.

I say again - clean up you act. Your time here bashing for the sake of bashing is waning. Trust me.

Hey Capt,

You can continue with the personal insults to try and rile me, but it's not working. I' m ignoring you~~

Just sayin~~

I know I will give BHO more (I already gave a little)

I don't care if he is flush with cash - it is as much a message to McSame and the GOPhers that their grasp on power and money is slipping as it is support.

Now there is a substantial difference, I would vote for HRC (if she was the nominee) but I would not have sent her any money.

It makes a difference to me whether I actually like the candidate. I like BHO a lot.

Just trying to help, a heads up as it were.

Go about your bashing on your own, I'll help no more. You simply don't appreciate honesty.

Fairly predictable. When faced with care and honesty you react as if I am insulting you?

I offer respectful advice and you get insulted? No reason to be so small minded and petty but that too is up to you.

Back to the JITA method.

Have a gas!

june 10th blog

16 comments out of 31

4 on topic 12 NOT!

just sayin!

Condi Rice Freaks out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIqeeK6sntk

This one is too funny!

Rice presses need for Palestinian state

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- Condoleezza Rice at an AIPAC conference stressed the urgency of establishing a Palestinian state. “The expansion of violence in the Middle East makes the establishment of a peaceful Palestinian state more urgent, not less,” the U.S. secretary of state said Tuesday at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy conference in Washington. “The present opportunity is not perfect by any means, but it is better than any other in recent years and we need to seize it. Israelis have waited too long for the security they desire and deserve, and Palestinians have waited too long amidst daily humiliations for the dignity of a Palestinian state.” Rice’s remarks were greeted with silence. AIPAC has been among the leading skeptics of the current Palestinian leadership’s abilities to control terrorism should a state be established. Rice, who was warmly received at the conference, also said the Palestinian track should take pre-eminence over recently renewed Israel-Syria talks.

“We do appreciate the effort that our ally Turkey is making toward a peace between Israel and Syria,” she said. “The key is to pursuing all paths to peace while maintaining focus on the Palestinian track because it is the most advanced.”

http://www.jewishledger.com/articles/2008/06/10/news/news20.prt

Fox News' E.D. Hill Apologizes for "Terrorist Fist Jab"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InahUzwRSH8

****

Since the Reich-wingnuts have nothing to run on they will add "terrorist" to anything.

Next thing you know if Obama has some cereal it will be called "Terrorist Cheerios"

lol

Perhaps feeling the ratings heat, Fox News is making changes to its afternoon lineup.

TVNewser reports that E.D. Hill, who hosts "America's Pulse" — and who raised many eyebrows this week after calling Barack and Michelle Obama's fist-pound a "terrorist fist jab" — has lost her show:

(huffpo)

Not sure yet what label to use for BHO, but 'liberal' doesn't fit very well.

C. Rice hasn't done well, but neither have any of her predecessors as SecState for a long, long time.

Liberal and conservative are meaningless these days.

Labels are just a way for some folks to rationalize their prejudices.

Democrats have been more conservative than republicans for many years now.

Bush and Cheney and the rest of the neocons are radicals. Nothing conservative about being radical.

The neocons are true eastern european communists that want a big daddy dick-tater. Anybody that doesn't agree is a liberal.

That is why "conservatism" is dead - the old ways have been exposed.

*brushes shoulder*

"Not sure yet what label to use for BHO"

Try "Mr. President?"

Seriously, BHO is WAY too centrist for me. He has a very long way to go before his ideology could be considered liberal by any stretch.

Still better than HRC in too many ways to list.

Bush has set the bar so low anybody with a pulse will make a better president. Barack has the potential to do some very good things, if he lives up to half of his potential I will be happy.

And Who's Vetting McCain's Veeps? A Former Lobbyist, Natch

And amidst all this back-and-forth, parsing and equivocating about Jim Johnson, the man who is vetting Sen. Barack Obama's vice presidential hopefuls, we now ask: who is vetting Sen. John McCain's would-be heirs to the throne?

The only reason any of us even know that former Reagan White House counsel Arthur Culvahouse is helping McCain vet his Veep possibilities is because Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., told The Hill last month.

“It’s Arthur B. Culvahouse, that’s who’s heading the search,” Alexander said, spilling the beans.

Culvahouse is a partner at O’Melveny & Myers and despite McCain's past anti-lobbyist posture, A.B. Culvahouse has been in the past a quite successful lobbyist -- though he is not one currently.

http://tinyurl.com/5m43g2

*****

People living in glass houses . . . .

It is fascinating how all the Republicans submit "swiftboat" type comments about Obama's vp vettor, ignoring the topic of Condi and her and the Bush flight from reality. Republicans ignoring the reality of their crimes and responsibility by running away from reality, just as Condi and Bush. What a concept. What parallelism. I am so glad that after an eight year nightmare, Americans are waking up. Your tactics are so 2000 and 2004. They don't work anymore.

"It is like the other side of the looking glass for this WH and all their ilk."

The Captain.........................................................................

"Can't wait until she's relegated to "coming out" for some more shoe-shopping! Gotta be getting pretty crowded in that little closet!"

Hajji........................................................................................

"Obama Hoisted Upon His Own Petard, Obummer sounds like Bush without the old teleprompter"

LBH....................................................................................

As Uncledad and if I was forced to shoot one of you mother fuckers without a doubt it would be LBH. I read what you say (LBH) and it means nothing, really it means nothing, you are a small retard without the short bus, your just fucking dumb with no excuse.

Howdy Capt.

Hajji, I'm still reading, thanks.

Howdy Uncledad.

I hope all is well.

Thanks Pandemoniac for the Christian Science Monitor article on Jerusaem and the "First 100 days" link.