If ever a state's voters – or at least their principal industry – were inclined to vote for self-interest in a presidential campaign, then Mitt Romney would win today’s Republican primary in Michigan. He even promises faster Mustangs.
Claiming that federal regulations disadvantage Michigan's auto makers in overseas sales, Romney vows that as president he would weaken fuel economy standards and tackle other obstacles. "You take off those burdens and let's show them how fast a Mustang will actually go," Romney told the Detroit Economic Club on Monday.
The Michigan native and former Massachusetts governor, whose father ran a Detroit car company and later served three terms as the state’s governor, came across in the final days as though he were running to succeed George Romney as Michigan's chief executive.
Romney says he will probably not last beyond the Feb. 5 heap of 21 GOP primaries if he does not win today’s Michigan vote. Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee are his chief rivals, according to the latest Michigan polls.




Comments
me first???
Posted by: colleen | January 15, 2008 6:42 AM
weaken fuel economy standards - there's a clever idea, no matter that oil is $100 a barrel and rising. Silly little Ken Doll Romney needs to ride his Mustang into the sunset.
Posted by: colleen | January 15, 2008 6:54 AM
Well,
He is talking about things that are already happening...But desparation breeds votes and by golly the demise of the Big three has effected every family in the state.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:01 AM
Joe Scarborough should be required to watch his show.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:08 AM
I think its a great debate. The more Joe argues, the more we learn and can make an informed decision
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:12 AM
In Addition.
Think of how many more people actually know about Michigan's troubles this morning because of it.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:14 AM
faster mustangs: (reprise)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGPDlTvx0PQ
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:20 AM
Lousy weather here for the big day. Snow and very slippery out. Craig pointed out a lot of what I've noticed the candidates saying here in Michigan. Romney and others pointing out that his Father was a great Governor here from '63-69'. McCain asking people if we knew we had a Pro-American leader in France now. I got a call from Romney people last night mentioning how McCain has given up on Michigan's economy , which I'm sure was attributed to his remark "Those jobs aren't coming back." If Romney cares about Michigan as much as he says he does , why didn't he move back here and run for Governor here instead of Massachusetts? Lastly , has Fred Thompson asked for his old job back on Law & Order yet?
Posted by: Corey
| January 15, 2008 7:21 AM
Even though its cold buddy, I wish I was there. I would be campaigning like a bunker buster!
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:24 AM
Think how much better people would be informed if they didn't have an idiot like Scabby leading the discussion. He is the same guy who told us the evanagelicals in his neighborhood told him they were voting for Giuliani (clearly a lie.) And now he is trying to say Giuliani is surging in Fla.???????????
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:25 AM
BTW Kathy,
I still have Draft Gore on my fender. I will never wash it off. ;0)
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:25 AM
Faster Mustangs! Woo-hoo! And 'Vettes too! And bring back the T-Bird! Dodge has brought back the Super-Bee; will the Road-Runner be next?
It's difficult to imagine how Gov. Romney ever made a nickel as a businessman. Colleen is right. With oil prices going nowhere but up, Romney should propose tax incentives for cars that get 70mpg.
And memo to Mitt: it ain't the cars they design that's the problem. It's labor costs, particularly health care costs. You want to fix the US auto industry in Detroit? Fix health care.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 7:26 AM
Katie,
Mika and Shuster always tear him a knew !@#$%^ and make a pretty good picture of the other side. I think its great.
Life is never one way and Joe is the only show out there where you can here spirited debates for both sides. This is a good solid show and we could not have it better on other shows.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:28 AM
My Goodness,
The Double teaming aspect for Edwards and Obama has finally been mentioned.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:29 AM
If you want to fix Detroit..make cars that have better fuel efficiency
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:29 AM
Change The Constitution? OK, Rev. Mike, you're starting to Hucka-scare-me. Fortunately, it's harder to change The Constitution than it is to become prez.
I was, actually, more disturbed by Obama's "princes and principalities" remark, because he was in a church and he was clearly pandering. At least the Huckster wasn't in church and they aren't just empty words. Scary words, yes, but not without meaning for him.
The thing I don't understand about "liberals" voting for Romney: Why would they give someone who could, given his money, connections and looks, win the general any assistance? Why not undermine all of the front-runners and turn out for Ron Paul?
corey - Is the weather bad enough to be a spoiler or is it just par for the course up there?
Posted by: blueINdallas | January 15, 2008 7:30 AM
Its worse than that. They will have to make cars that don't break down once a year....and have better quality interiours.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:30 AM
I tried to find Jim Ignatowski's Eulogy for a Dead Race Horse on youtube but it's not there......very apropos, though, if anyone knows where it might be......
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:31 AM
Mr and Mrs Scarborough and their holy luv for Hucksterbee, used religion salesman have made their show unwatchable...and they are not fact based
Scabby boy--says Giuliani is surging...surging to the bottom
http://www.pollster.com/08-FL-Rep-Pres-Primary.php
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:31 AM
Chef Stone,
"Life is never one way and Joe is the only show out there where you can here spirited debates for both sides. "
But I grow weary of listening to Mika and Joe squabble. I want to listen to what the candidates or insiders have to say, which is why I prefer Imus. Just one more cow...
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 7:33 AM
Well they can do it. I drive a 1993 Saturn Station Wagon....except for regular maintence (knock on wood) it has never needed a major repair.
It gets around 30 miles to the gallon.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:34 AM
were I a cook, my jacket would say: Chef Stoned
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:34 AM
......Mika has consently laughed at Huck in Disbelief.....you aren't watching.
Mika is polite though. She is logical not in-your-face.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:34 AM
Sturg! Naughty Boy.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:35 AM
were I a cook, my jacket would say: Chef Stoned
Posted by: sturgeone |
darn you sturg..;last night a cocktail..thismorning my coffee
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:35 AM
the germans do it........my 81 mercedes easily gets 35mpg diesel......not enough, but pretty good......
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:36 AM
you are right...I don't watch msgop at all anymore
(with the KO and CC exceptions) I find them to be
purveyors of claptrap and factless and fectless drivel
they never make corrections and often spread rumor as fact.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:38 AM
I bought a Toyota Starlet in 1981. It was a small car and got 58 miles to a gal on the highways.
Toyota got rid of it a couple of years later because Americans didn't want it. The model went back to Japan.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:38 AM
Katie,
I respect your preferences. I watch because they are more rounded than FOX......anddddd I see friends on there too. ;0)
But more importantly, I weed through the crap and garb the important bits.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:40 AM
mornin' all.
I'm not sure, but I think the Mustangs Tom T. were talking about won't help Michigan's woes - they prefer grass to snow in the winter. :-)
I have a question - I've been reading LV and Reno newspapers, and they are framing the suit filed by the teachers' union straight up, not saying it was instituted by anyone in the Clinton camp. Sure, the teachers' union has endorsed Clinton, but according to those papers, the other plaintiffs had backed a candidate for governor in 2006 who has endorsed Clinton - a bit of an attenuated relationship IMHO. Has anyone seen anything anywhere that didn't come out of the Obama campaign or some source with an ax to grind against Clinton? Flip side of the issue - if we're saying the lawsuit favors Clinton if it is successful, doesn't creating "at large caucus sites" also suggest that the Nevada Dem Party was trying to favor Obama if it is so apparent that not allowing them will favor Clinton's chances? I'm just saying.
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 7:41 AM
Democracy Now
you can live stream it ..and then you do not have to weed through fundamentalist lies
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:42 AM
Fifty-eight miles per gallon. OMG! That is awesome. And I use the word "awesome" because I think using less fuel is a good thing. For some reason, some people think otherwise.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080115/ap_on_go_ot/transportation_safety
"Besides Peters, the two commissioners opposing a tax increase are Maria Cino, Peters' former deputy who is organizing the 2008 Republican National Convention, and Rick Geddes, a Cornell University professor who has served as a senior staff economist in the Bush administration on the President's Council of Economic Advisers."
Posted by: blueINdallas | January 15, 2008 7:44 AM
about walnuts mccain.......wasnt another part of his drubbing at the hands of bushroveco in SC 2000, besides the black child thing, wasn't it that his pow internment had made him crazy? If I remember that correctly, then they will soon be back to that again, I imagine......
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:46 AM
Pogo
I think the media is hyping the fight and missing the point of the law suit. The rule made by the state party has the unintended consequence of preventing people from voting while working to make it easier for others. In all likihood it will be resolved by opening up the causcuses off the strip to participation.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:46 AM
sturg
and his wife is a drug addict and thief...
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:47 AM
Seriously, why wouldn't Ron Paul be the perfect choice for non-Reps to get behind? He's the lesser of all evils on the Rep ticket and a win for him would undermine the top tier.
Posted by: blueINdallas | January 15, 2008 7:48 AM
Is?
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:48 AM
"is"
lies from 2000
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 7:49 AM
dnd, you make a good point about healthcare - assuming that it costs $5000 to insure each worker - that adds $2.50 per man hour to the cost of cars produced here - of course that applies to the Honda, Toyota M-B and other brands built here if they provide healthcare for their workers, too.
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 7:50 AM
whew......I almost choked on my cornpone......
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:50 AM
Blue,
Here is the Starlet on Wiki. They say it was a boring car. it doesn't mention the gas milage and the pickup speeds were phenominal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Starlet
Its too small for Americans.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:51 AM
May I suggest that you take a moment to read David Corn's blog about the Nevada caucus.
Posted by: blueINdallas | January 15, 2008 7:51 AM
yup..... our Craig was on fire last night.....
Sheila..... I am so not into being PC.... if Hillary has signs behind her in every rally I see on tv saying "Hillary"..... than Hillary it is for me...... besides..... it's easier and faster to type.... ;0}
faster Mustangs?.... I say free the Mustangs..... let them roam free on the range....
hey.... maybe we could let McCain do that too....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 15, 2008 7:52 AM
Blue,
Did you catch the whole of the Obama appearance? It was a full out Sermon and within it, he mentioned a "sermon" he had given a few months before.
If you want the black vote, you have to go to the churches, but you don't need to do the pastor's job for him.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 7:52 AM
No Problem Renee,
just making the arguement. If she likes it, there you go. More ability to play both sides.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:54 AM
Blue....
seriously.....
because Ron Paul is probably so far behind in the polls he doesn't have a prayers chance in hell even with Dems voting for him.....
Romney is in a dogfight for the lead..... the Dem votes could make a difference to him....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 15, 2008 7:54 AM
I had one of those followups to the Starlet......a small corolla......about 35 to 40 mpg......it was like a perfect knock-off to an Alfa-Romeo 4 door sedan......indestructable, except for me.....i destructed it......drove it into the ground........
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:55 AM
Ah, it's adorable...and it's missing a hubcap. It's also the same color blue as my '79 AMC Hornet that I bought in the mid/late 80s. Unlike your Starlet, Sheila, it got poor gas mileage and burned almost as much oil as it did gas.
Posted by: blueINdallas | January 15, 2008 7:57 AM
I like the way Obama speaks. I like his optimism and I think you guys are picking apart moot points.
Discussions on his pronoucniations. Whether black enough or a put on, just give me the feeling that you are really displaying prejudice and of course, I KNOW you are not.
Don't you think it looks like the Clintons yelling sexism and we KNOW they are not? just point out what your constant disection looks like.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 7:57 AM
oh.......paid 300 bucks for the corolla in ' 98 and drove it 5 years.....
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 7:58 AM
The weather here is the "Drive 30-40 MPH , instead of 55 on the highway." It was snowing hard when I left work , which is about 12 minutes south of here. It's not snowing here right now. Somebody left a Newsweek magazine from Dec. 17th in the lunchroom at work. I got to read a lot about Huckabee and Romney in it. I don't know if I could trust either one of them.
Posted by: Corey
| January 15, 2008 8:00 AM
jamie - No, I didn't see it all, but that makes Obama's behavior even more disturbing, as it does anyone else making those kinds of appearances in places of worship.
I (choke) agree with Tucker, those churches should lose their tax-exempt status.
Posted by: blueINdallas | January 15, 2008 8:00 AM
Blue, I was laughed at until I beat an Audi on a deserted highway in a race.....lol Awe Youth!
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:01 AM
KO is blogging at KOS
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/14/12636/5764/715/436605
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:01 AM
Sturgeone,
The Eulogy for the race horse is copywrited material. As close as I can find, the only source is on the DVD's of Taxi. It's described several places, but I can't find either a transcript or a recording.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 8:02 AM
for me....
this whole fight has gotten totally tedious.....
I voted for Clinton.....
I now let it go...... and whatever happens happens....
life is too short and I'm having too much fun to get into petty bickering......
I do a lot of weaving in the winter..... and I'm having a mucho fun playing around with different color combos....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 15, 2008 8:02 AM
Yeah, Tucker's all over it now......where was he when Falwell, Robertson, et al. were in the thick of the fray......not to mention faith based initiatives coming out of the white house......
Tucky was without a word when it was republicans politicizing from the pulpit.......he's such a little tool.....
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:03 AM
Good for renee!
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:04 AM
pogo,
There are factions that function autonomously (wink, wink) doing the dirty work in support of their candidate. That's what's going on with the teacher's union. Another example would be BET's Johnson.
They just showed a clip of the pocket protector "Democrats for Romney" set. This bunch, prompted by Kos' Markos Moulitsas all met on Facebook and want dems to cross over and vote for Romney in MI, to screw with the primary and the Republican field. Bet they'd feel pretty stupid if we wound up with President Romney.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 8:06 AM
pogo,
Now that I think about it, I'm surprised someone hasn't started a whisper campaign about Sen. Clinton's drug use when she was an undergraduate.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 8:08 AM
roger stone talked last night about the republicans in Michigan who crossed over and voted for George Wallace and later for Jesse Jackson...it's why most states do not permit open primaries
and the KOS idea was to keep the republican fight going longer to waste money and keep the disarray going...which is normally a gooper trick
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:09 AM
dnd.......if it were there, they'd have used it before now, eh?
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:09 AM
more comments from the evidence free zone
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:11 AM
The Intrepid Fallen Heroes hospital in San Antonio Texas is already maxed out with soldiers with catastrophic wounds.......they will need to build another one........
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:12 AM
Sheila,
I wasn't picking at him. It was a GREAT sermon. I was just commenting that he is in a political campaign.
If I objected to anything, it was the content about the Joshua generation standing on the shoulders of the Moses generation. He may not have intended it that way, but it came across as one of his slaps at Senator Clinton in the context of the race argument that was going on at the time.
It was a bit like his put down during the debate with "You're likable enough" and the not having a "bitch" problem music. He's brilliant and capable. He also has a somewhat snide and snarky streak that I find a little bit offputting.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 8:17 AM
found another question mark blog:
http://thesportshernia.typepad.com/
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:20 AM
Newtie just said...there will never be another Ronnie Raygun...
I guess he is supporting the Ed Rollins theory the Raygun coalition is doa
Can we conclude Newtie is supporting the Huckster in the hopes a dispirited gooper convention will turn to him?
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:21 AM
You see jamie,
I just didn't hear that. I heard Obama connecting with a new generation to take over. All of his talks have been about look to the future and moving forward.
I think it a serious slip to just rely on a popular song by YOUNG people to help with the influx of young people. Unfortunately, you have to vet the songs and a LOT of the songs can't be played.
The YOUNG Obama campaign just learned a valuable lesson. But the lesson is Vet the songs for bad words....and that is all.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:22 AM
katie.....
NEWTIE always supports just himself.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:23 AM
Nolan Ryan will be the Grand Marshall in today's National Western Stock Show parade. Just one more cow...
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 8:24 AM
did obama tell how Joshua proceeded to come down out of the mountains with his army and annihilate all the Canaanites and steal their cities and their land?
Joshua fit the battle of Jericho.......ahhhh, the promised land........
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:24 AM
The Reagan message was incredibly flawed, however during "Peace Time" you can forgive and go on. because another day, is just another day.
This is an incredibly sensitive time and We don't need another Reagan Administration who paved the way for all of this caos in our country!
HELL. the Reagan Administration was directly resoncible for the increased homelessness that has never slowed since his first four years.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:26 AM
I bet he skipped the annihilation part in his sermon......
another case of "God tolt me to do it....."
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:27 AM
kc, I think that would be a good result - either all are "at large" or none are.
dnd, re: Hill's college drug use - I think you just did.
Well, I gotta go. Later.
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 8:27 AM
Newtie is arguing the recession in Michigan is caused by .....Michigan Democrats. Could explain by Newtie couldn't get anyone to support him for president
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:27 AM
I am voting for whomever stands up and says they are still using drugs
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:28 AM
But I dont WANT to be president!
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:29 AM
......Kate,
None of them want's to tell you about their High Blood Preasure Meds
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:30 AM
I'm working on my Draft Strug signs as we chat
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:30 AM
It would be kind of interesting to know who takes what and how much they pay. It would be an interesting side bar to the health care discussion.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 8:31 AM
I think anyone using Joshua for a role model should be compelled to also go into his absolute annihilation of a whole people and theft of their land......it adds a little balance........read the book of Joshua to see all the things God told him to do.........
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:32 AM
If we listed all the bad things done unto others in the Bible we could be here all day. I rather like the bears tearing the children to pieces for being smart alecks.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 8:35 AM
Sturg....Paleeeese.
Anyone's use of the bible always parse to teach the subject they are trying to teach. I have never heard a pastor that taught all the negatives when he is trying to eencourage. ;0)
Maybe you should listen to some of Obama's Speeches.
And to all the rest. The Clintons used the same language in Black Churches when President Clinton was running. Obama's apearances now are the same thing.
This historically has never swayed the vote and was accepted as a part of stumping.
Rove's use of Pastors to sway their congregations is in direct violation of Federal Law.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:38 AM
pogo,
"dnd, re: Hill's college drug use - I think you just did."
Sen. Clinton graduated in '69. I think it would be weird had she not experimented with something! My theory is this is the real subtext of why she changed from a Republican to a Democrat during that time.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 8:38 AM
...... all that marching around the Jericho blowing the horns....covered up the fact that they were tunneling under the walls and then shored up the tunnel so that when they pulled the plug.....voila......the walls come a-tumbling down.........hurrah, we win......kill 'em all.....god told us it was our'n.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pih1hVdflnQ&feature=related
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:41 AM
So ok,
Sturg buddy,
what's your point and don't cut corners.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:42 AM
Sheila...........Im not overly fond of the bible being used to teach morality....it seems to always lead to oppression or annihilation of somebody.........
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:45 AM
"This historically has never swayed the vote and was accepted as a part of stumping. "
This is what I meant by the candidates have to go where they can find the voters. For the black community that is the churches. Usually that is the largest venue and speeches are done outside of the services.
All the candidates given time to speak in a church is a lot different than the evangelical pastor handing out a card in the pews telling the congregants how to vote.
Despite my qualms about Obama, it was a barn burner of a sermon and the Amens were rather resounding.
Senator Clinton did a church appearance as well, but it was a straight forward political speech.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 8:47 AM
well the walls part was just a bit of history of the sapping of the walls......how they did it......"war stories"
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 8:47 AM
Well guys,
Its time to go for a walk. Been fun this morning.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 8:50 AM
the jeebus part is not so bad, but I dont see many christians who actually practise what christ preached......therein lies the rub, with me......lip service to the lord and savior with the message of love and for the rest of it "let's burn people we dont like." Just glad they cant get away with it anymore.......the founding of our country without religion being a part of government was a giant step in genuine morality.
Posted by: sturgeone | January 15, 2008 9:00 AM
Doris Kearns Goodwin was just great on Imus this morning. With all the drivel debating if HRC is racist because of the MLK/LBJ comment, Goodwin defended the statement by providing the historical context in detail.
Too bad you don't get that kind of information from the tabloid MSM.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 9:02 AM
Edwards campaign claiming Clinton is a racist. The Obama and Clinton campaign are trying to dial this back and now the Communications director for the Edwards campaign is saying Clinton is racially insenstive
He conflated two statements --the fairy tale and MLK statements to promote that position.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 9:14 AM
I really think all three campaigns have to use the first 10 minutes of the debate tonight to state unequivocally (like that?? *S*) that they morally support one another's campaigns, that they admire and respect one another, etc. etc. The MSM, probably a little ticked at being ridiculed about NH result, has moved, en masse, to race. Jaysus, MoJoe called it a 'race war' this morning. Will someone please SMACK him??
Posted by: tylenol
| January 15, 2008 9:19 AM
" Bet they'd feel pretty stupid if we wound up with President Romney."
I thought the same thing, dnd.....
Posted by: Patsi | January 15, 2008 9:22 AM
I thought the article was garbage, until I read the comments of a bunch of idiots.
Posted by: Ginger Saunders | January 15, 2008 9:27 AM
The media is craptastic..if they were honest they would be covering the Rover remarks which are blatently racist....not parsing Clinton's campaign
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 9:27 AM
"the founding of our country without religion being a part of government was a giant step in genuine morality."
sturg..... CLAP! CLAP!
I heard an entire hour of the Diane Rehm Show yesterday where her guests still claimed that NH was basically racist..... I wanted to call in and ream them a new one..... I didn't.... didn't want to be banned from calling the show for life...
Ginger..... we love you too!
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 15, 2008 9:34 AM
John Edwards, a third candidate in the Democratic primary, waded into the dispute Sunday.
"I must say I was troubled recently to see a suggestion that real change came not through the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King but through a Washington politician. I fundamentally disagree with that," Edwards told more than 200 people gathered at a predominantly black Baptist church in Sumter, S.C.
I'm guessing John Edwards was not a history major
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 9:35 AM
This could end up being a major "WOW" in medical science.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/dn13182-scientists-regrow-heart--and-it-beats.html?feedId=online-news_rss20
Ginger needs a ride on the S. S. Minnow
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 9:38 AM
Just to interject about Jericho, etc. The Old Testament is chock full of genocide. The books of Judges and Lamentations contain some of the earliest stories of genocide...they are very hard books to get through. And very depressing as it leaves the reader thinking "we haven't gotten very far in 5 thousand years, have we?" When one looks at world events it is indeed hard to see where the kingdom of God comes into it.
Posted by: tylenol
| January 15, 2008 9:51 AM
ok this is off-topic I guess, but I don't give a rat's *ss about Mitty or any other pug. So, I'll post this little piece with my thoughts at the end.
Is it Harder for a woman to become President than a black man?
Current mood: thoughtful
Category: News and Politics
Interesting discussion from the Canadian Press, which is excerpted here:
Excerpted from Canadian Press
Is it harder for a woman to make it to the White House than a black man like Obama in a country that outwardly lays claim to new levels of cultural maturity?
"I don't think you can quantify and say one is tougher than another," said Maren Hesla of EMILY'S List, a pro-choice fundraising group backing Clinton by mobilizing women voters.
"Not for a second do I suggest that he doesn't have an extraordinary set of burdens. But they're different. And they both bring certain advantages."
"It's about how each of them take advantage of the opportunities."
Initially, said Hesla, Clinton's campaign options were limited. She had to prove she had the background and experience to become a strong commander-in-chief.
"She had to be strong enough and tough enough. She passed with flying colours. You don't hear anyone questioning that now."
But Hesla points out it's something the men don't have to do, including the former Tennessee senator and longtime character actor who entered the Republican race last fall.
"No one questions whether Fred Thompson is qualified."
On some level as a society, said Hesla, "we are more tolerant of sexism than racism, which has been a great national shame."
American feminist Gloria Steinem made the same point this week in a New York Times editorial looking at why the sex barrier isn't taken as seriously.
She noted that black men got the vote a half-century before women in the United States.
"The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects 'only' the female half of the human race," she wrote.
"There is still no 'right' way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what."
***********************************************************************
My take on this is that people accept sexism far more than they do racism, at least on the surface. Did the press or the public in general express collective outrage at the two hecklers who attended a Hillary Clinton rally with signs saying "iron my shirts"? No, male reporters seemed amused and the right-wing nuts loved it. If someone came to a Barak Obama rally with a bucket of chicken, corn-on-the-cob and watermelon, it would have been a national UPROAR! Do not get me wrong... both are disgusting, but when it comes to politics women have been the down-trodden much longer than "the MAN" be he white, black or other ethnicity. As as supporter of women's rights at age 18 when I joined National Organization of Women, to today, I remain convinced that the time has come for a woman as President. Looking at England, Israel, Ireland, Pakistan etal, we could easily say that it's LONG OVERDUE !!!
Hillary Clinton is very qualified for this responsibility. The only way to break the glass ceiling is to have the courage to demand it as voters and citizens.
Off my soapbox
Posted by: Thomas Freeman
| January 15, 2008 9:55 AM
OMG.. i'm laughing so hard I'm crying... call 911..i cant breathe.. this is NOT suitable for your work computer
http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/i_got_what_america_needs_right
Posted by: tylenol
| January 15, 2008 9:57 AM
"The MSM, probably a little ticked at being ridiculed about NH result, has moved, en masse, to race. Jaysus, MoJoe called it a 'race war' this morning. "
Juan Williams on Fox called it a "civil war."
Also, what article is Ginger talking about? I missed something....
Posted by: Patsi | January 15, 2008 9:58 AM
kgc...
I hope Edwards was telling us that WA politicians responded to the desires of the people and needs of the country. Had MLK and his followers not marched through the streets and struggled to register voters, etc., LBJ would likely not have felt the time was so ripe for action. MLK et al were catalysts.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 10:04 AM
Thomas
Quite awhile back I made the point of black men "technically" having the vote long before women of any color. In fact there were areas of the country where "freedmen" property owners had the vote right along with their white counterparts. Of course there was horrible cases of prejudice that prevented men and women of color voting until the late 60s.
There has been a great deal of progress and some of the most powerful people in Congress are now women, but the old attitudes of male superiority are still very prevalent both in private and business life.
I think the only way to change perceptions at present is for the candidates themselves to take the fight to the higher plane of skills and competence. Whether they can do that remains to be seen.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 10:04 AM
Joe just won't let go of the "race" story line. I wish Mika would reach over and slap him silly.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 10:05 AM
Harborwoman
I don't think Edwards is on that high road. His communications director called Clinton racially insensitive and then conflated the fairy tale and MLK remarks.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 10:08 AM
kgc...
I didn't hear the Edwards' campaign remarks...I'll listen for them. However, it's hard to fault him for trying to find a way to be mentioned in this race. Both Clinton and Obama have consistently followed his lead in coming up with policy statements and even in what they find important enough to add to their talking points, and yet you'd think they're the only two in contention.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 10:13 AM
msgop is making race their story of the day so they can claim it is news when they make the debate all about race.
Russert to Clinton: Do you think you are a racist?
Russert to Obama: Do you think Clinton is a racist?
Russert to Edwards: Why did you say Clinton is a racist
Russert to Skinny Dennis: Were there racists on the UFO you saw?
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 10:14 AM
KGC
That was a bad move on Edward's part. It was like his jumping in on Obama's side during the last debate. He doesn't help himself by waving his hands in the air, jumping up and down and saying "me too me too".
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 10:14 AM
Jamie and Thomas...
I think you're both right. Prejudices against women's rights are much more insidious than those against men. They're more ingrained, more accepted as the natural order of things.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 10:15 AM
I got them sitting in a deposition waiting for someone to call in to ask some questions blues.
I believe that it is harder for a woman than a black to become president - Steinem, despite her obvious stake in the sexist angle, may very well be correct. And no, Fred Thompson's qualifications to be president shouldn't be questioned any more than John Edwards' or Barack Obama's, which is to say of course they should, as should Hillary's and Rudi' s and everyone who is running, but questioning whether Hillary is ready to be president or Obama is ready to be president is legitimate ONLY if gender and race are not a component of the questionning.
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 10:17 AM
Ty,
Do you want to come over here and clean up all the coffee I spit on my keyboard?
You'd think I'd learn...
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 10:18 AM
Well, Gov. Romney comes off as too perfect for my taste. I like those bags under the eyes, slightly mischievous types with a long history of guts and more than many mistakes.
I watch Morning Joe now because it has a pretty good balance I htink between the hosts. I can't watch Fox, CNN or ABC, CBS or NBC except for my local news affiliate on ABC, for vey long because they are so left. I also watch C-span quite a bit but they have so many people calling in now who are not serious that the show is not as pristine as it once was.
Posted by: Clemmieo
| January 15, 2008 10:18 AM
HW
Edwards would have served himself more if he hadn't taken sides, but came in instead to play the adult separating the kids on the school yard and started talking about the issues common to all the people
He missed the opportunity which is too bad.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 10:20 AM
The Onion just might have a problem with that one funny as it is. I have my doubts that Jimmy Carter actually wrote that piece, but they do have his name on the by line as well as his picture. I didn't see a disclaimer.
There is quite a line between satire and reality in a court of law. Even given that he is a public figure, he might have a court case. One of our legal beagles needs to take a look at it.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 10:29 AM
Jamie,
"Edwards would have served himself more if he hadn't taken sides, but came in instead to play the adult separating the kids on the school yard and started talking about the issues common to all the people"
Yeah. And let's see, which candidate did that? BILL FREAKIN' RICHARDSON!
{climbing off soapbox now...}
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 10:29 AM
kgc and Jamie...
From where I'm sitting, it seems as though no matter what Clinton says, you find a way to spin it into the right thing to say. No matter what Obama or Edwards say, you twist until it's the wrong thing to say. If something is said by someone associated with the Clinton campaign, you're very careful to point out that the words didn't come from Senator Clinton. But if it's from either of the other campaigns, the words might as well have been spoken by the candidate, regardless of who actually spoke the words. Now maybe I'm doing the same thing, but I don't think so...unless it's being guilty of trying to make Edwards' positions the right thing to say.
Perhaps this is all nothing more than sound and fury, signifying only that we've each gone to our own corners, having chosen the candidates we support...and not much is going to budge us off our positions. Whatever it is, it's exhausting....
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 10:31 AM
I couldn't read very far into the faux Carter piece. Frankly, it's simply too vulgar for words.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 10:33 AM
harbor
I have to disagree here. Edwards made the remarks, His communications director made the remarks.
Kofinis called Clinton racially insensitive.
And he combined two comments to make the point
so who is spinning.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 10:37 AM
you're very careful to point out that the words didn't come from Senator Clinton
I don't think I have done that but the Clinton campaigned as fired or asked people to step down when inappropriate remarks made by official reps of their campaign have done that.
Neither Obama or Edwards have done that even though they have acknowledged inappropriate behvior
for example the obama campaign calling Clinton the Sentor from Punjab. Apologiy but no firing.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 10:43 AM
HW
The only thing I meant by the criticism of Edwards was that he had the opportunity to really help himself and I felt he made the wrong choice by siding with Obama. It had the effect of making him a nonentity to the two main contenders.
Let's see if he can keep everything on the high road tonight and make himself look like the peacemaker.
dnd That was what Richardson did. The only problem with him was his presentation. Unfortunately, we live in a media age and brilliance and wisdom requires the ability of the sound bite. Richardson never did that which makes him a perfect Cabinet appointment if he wants it.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 10:48 AM
Thomas,
Thats all well and good about a woman for President. but those of us who just prefer Obama's message are not sexist either.
I don't think Clinton has what it takes. As simple as that. I don't want anymore Dynasty. Very simple. I want fresh air and I think its time to give this country to the next generation and let them inject change. Because WE haven't done a great job of it since WE took over.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 10:52 AM
kgc...
I haven't heard the Edwards campaign remarks yet, so can't give an opinion until I do. However, I don't consider either of the Clintons in any way racially insensitive, and that seems - on the surface - a silly remark. I just want us - and by that I mean the media - to talk about issues, rather than all this bickering about race and gender. Once again, our attention is being cleverly diverted. I'm more of the Craig Crawford school of thought...these people aren't so stupid that they willfully set out to destroy their campaigns...whether it's the Clintons, the Obamas, or the Edwardses.
If I ran a political campaign, the last thing I would be is politically correct. Which is one of the reasons politics would NOT be a good line of work for me. I probably wouldn't fire people for poorly considered statements...for lies and obvious wrong-doing, yes; for mistakes, no. I've heard that it's common practice to 'fire' or 'remove from sight' an offending staffer, only to have them pop up somewhere else when the storm has blown over. We should watch for that.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 10:58 AM
hw
you make many good points.
My current favorite Craig Crawford phrase of the moment is "evidence free zones."
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 11:09 AM
Sheila,
That puts us both on the high road with our votes. You favor Obama as presenting hope for the future. I see Senator Clinton as a woman with the capacity to be a great President without any consideration of a "dynasty". I don't think you are sexist and you don't think i'm racist. Now if the campaigns would just figure that out, we would all be ahead of the game.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 11:17 AM
Jamie
well "said" :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 11:20 AM
lol Jamie,
Amen....or should I say Awoman. ;0)
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:21 AM
Jamie...
I understand your criticism, but I don't think it's Edwards that makes himself a nonentity. The media does that by pretending, for the most part, that he's not even there. IMO, they shouldn't be allowed to get away with that. When they do, they are allowed to frame everything important about this election. The corporate structure wins again.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 11:22 AM
she, that is a legitimate, non-sexist criticism - wrong IMHO, but still legitimate and non sexist. I would say the same thing about Obama - I really don't want a kid as my president. (Acknowledged ageist remark. :))
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 11:23 AM
I am neither sexist or racist.
I am casting my vote for the Clinton/Obama ticket in '08...woohoo!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 11:23 AM
pogo.....how dare you for the Agist remark. lol
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:28 AM
I'm eating Pork Cracklings....otherwise know down here as Chicharrones....what does that make me?
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:31 AM
MSNBC is pushing Obama because he will be easy to defeat in Nov. This is a setup by corporate media. Imagine what the Repubs will do with Obama's good friend -Reverend Jeremiah Wright (who is a supporter of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan). See Newsmax.com
Posted by: GORDO | January 15, 2008 11:32 AM
Gordo
We already know he is related to Cheney
What could be worse than that.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 11:33 AM
Chef Stone,
"I'm eating Pork Cracklings....otherwise know down here as Chicharrones....what does that make me?"
Happy!
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 11:34 AM
GORDO,
Sounds All Inclusive to me. There are many points to ponder about all the Dem Candidates because they are all so electible.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:34 AM
Dnd! Your so Right! What a Treat.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:34 AM
Chef Stone,
"I'm eating Pork Cracklings....otherwise know down here as Chicharrones....what does that make me?"
Let me add: a gourmand with exquisite taste.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 11:35 AM
Katie,
Listen to this Irony.
Obama is the White Light compared to Cheney's Darkness..... :0)
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:36 AM
Are there Chicharrones in Colorado? I'm pondering moving there in the next year or so.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:37 AM
I'm eating Pork Cracklings....otherwise know down here as Chicharrones....what does that make me?
Posted by: Sheila
a fan of the George HW Bush diet
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 11:38 AM
lol I didn't get it from him. I just shared the pleasure!
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:39 AM
I know I am always a "day late and a dollar short"...but has this been discussed?
I think this is interesting...
From Page Six:
January 14, 2008 -- PRESIDENTIAL hopeful Barack Obama claims to run a clean campaign, but someone in his camp took a swipe at Hillary Clinton through the candidate's theme song.
As Obama and his wife, Michelle, strolled triumphantly into his victory party in Des Moines, Iowa, on Jan. 3, Jay-Z's "99 Problems" was blaring. In it, Jay raps, "I got 99 problems, but a bitch ain't one."
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 11:44 AM
heh, heh, heh
Romney caught manufacturing a photo op.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7895.html
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 11:45 AM
Yes Linda we have.
Thems that is on Clintons were outraged. Thems that is on Obama knew it was a case of trying to sound young and not vetting the songs.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:46 AM
Shelia,
"Are there Chicharrones in Colorado? I'm pondering moving there in the next year or so."
You betcha! Recall that prior 1821 Colorado was part of Spain's New Mexico territory. Mexican cuisine is the dominant ethnic food here.
BTW, I don't think President Richardson will approve of his head chef moving to Colorado...
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 11:47 AM
Thanks Sheila :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 11:48 AM
I am seriuously thinking about getting nearer to my boss. ;0)
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:48 AM
"Gordo
We already know he is related to Cheney
What could be worse than that."
ROFL.
Posted by: Patsi | January 15, 2008 11:49 AM
She, that makes me one grudgingly acknowledging my old fartness and intolerance of whippersnapers running my world.
Love cracklin's in cornbread, never ate them alone. I'd try them if I thought they wouldn't spike my cholesterol level as much as bacon, althought I think it would make Mrs. P puke if I did.
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 11:50 AM
I just read an article speculating on whether people will be willing to vote for Obama or not (not because he's black, but because his middle name is Hussein). I don't quite follow that logic, but it's out there. The question is... is the name Barak Hussein Obama a hindrance for the Senator's Presidential aspirations or is the MSM simply asking the question about whether middle America will vote for someone with a middle name of Hussein in order to create new controversy?
Posted by: Thomas Freeman
| January 15, 2008 11:51 AM
" Thems that is on Obama knew it was a case of trying to sound young and not vetting the songs. "
Come on, Sheila....you have NO idea if that statement is true.....oh, well....listen....I'm outta this. Obama and his followers can call Hillary a ho for all I care. 'Cause it'll just be a little mistake.
Posted by: Patsi | January 15, 2008 11:52 AM
Chicharrones are preferable if I'm going to spike my Cholesterol. They taste so much better than the stuff up north.....all the fried fat and salt.....YEE DOGGIES!
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:53 AM
gribbenes = kosher cracklins
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 11:55 AM
Patsi,
The facts are, Obama rolls into a campaign stop where the Press Advance "!@#$UP". YOu bet that Press advance and campaign stop manager got creamed for that.
That is the truth! Patsi don't read into it. Its a young campaign. ALL OF THE ESTABLISHED DEMS are on Clintons campaign.
The rest are spread out and Obama has the youngest ones. Now you can sling mud at them for a stupid song, but you are being just plain silly if you really believe OBAMA CONDONED that song with his WIFE in the room.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:57 AM
AND Patsi BTW,
I don't brag about it. But I am still connected to DNC and know a lot of campaign people. Some of them are on Clintons and some of them are on Obamas and some are with Edwards. I'm still capable of finding out what the truth is.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 11:58 AM
pogo,
Here's whatcha do: get a bottle of your favorite hot sauce, a bottle of your favorite beer and a bunch of chicharrones. When you combine the three it actually improves your cholesterol! Really!
Ok, I'm making that up. But it's one of life's guilty pleasures.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 12:00 PM
My Vauxhall Corsa gets over 40mpg in normal operations - not a hybrid, not an eco-freak, in Europe anything below about 35mpg is considered hideously wasteful and damaging. You want to make us want to buy American cars, therefore reinvigorating Michigan's economy? (With the slowdown you're going through, there's no way America can pull it out by itself). Massively ratchet *up* fuel standards, and make them good cars. At the moment, they're simply inferior technology - I love America and all things about it, but there is no point in buying a car that is so expensive to run when European models are just as fast and responsive, and more than twice as efficient.
Posted by: John Smith | January 15, 2008 12:01 PM
dnd.....way to go. That makes sense to me. Burn that cholesterol baby!
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:01 PM
Draft Sturg
The NORML Candidate
Posted by: spike
| January 15, 2008 12:03 PM
I tried to scroll back to find the "99 Problems" discussion, but I have had no luck.
____
Thomas...I think BHO's name is a hindrance. I also think the MSM is creating controversy.
IMHO...anyone without a "white, male" name is facing an uphill battle, to be elected...but it's OK!!
Clinton/Obama '08!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 12:04 PM
Draft Sturg
The NORML Candidate
Posted by: spike
It should be the norm
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 12:07 PM
if cracklins are what I think they are there is zero carbs in them. They are a staple snack in the Atkins Diet Plan.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | January 15, 2008 12:10 PM
It's snowing!!!!
<<<singing.."Ohhhhhhhh, the weather outside is frightful, but the fire is so delightful...da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da..let it snow...la-la-la...la-la-la" :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 12:11 PM
Cool for you Dog! Snow in Northern Va is a nice thing. It comes and then goes. ;0)
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:11 PM
And MSNBC just keeps stirring the pot with every guest ... but but but don't you think wink wink
Abrams sounded great last night on his own show, now he needs to come in and bang heads together.
It is so obviously non stop crud today and because they are having the debates, I want to see the guests, but I'm about ready to reach through the screen and stragle the hosts.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 12:11 PM
...there are zero carbs...
sorry
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | January 15, 2008 12:11 PM
yes, dog...it just started!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 12:12 PM
Bingo Horsey. I am doing that lifestyle plan. I have used Atkins for 26 years. I go off and I get lost. I am soooo sensitive to sugar, I just can't even eat fruit. Except as a treat.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:13 PM
<<<singing.."Ohhhhhhhh the weather outside is frightful, but the fire is so delightful...da-da-da-da-da-da-da-daaaa...let it snow..la-la-la..la-la-la..."
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 12:15 PM
Jamie,
Andrea is one that is making me mad. AND personally I like Andrea. Great Tea pal.
There are some that I can tolerate and some I just want to Bitch Slap....quarter in the jar.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:15 PM
Morning Posse....
Here's the Intrade Presidential Futures Market data from last night...
http://www.central.edu/publicdocs/01%2D14%2D08FuturesMarketGraphs.pdf
Republicans: McCain starts to pull away from Romney (and continues to do so today). This could be the start of a three state run for him (MI, SC, FL). Huckabee doesn't appear to be a factor. McCain is also gaining ground over Romney and Huckabee in the National Markets...Looking ahead, McCain still lead is SC, but Huckabee is a close second, and is slowing gaining ground.
Democrats: Obama holds the lead over Clinton in Nevada. Interestingly, Edwards is starting to get some play there as well.Looking ahead, Obama still holds a large lead in SC.
Posted by: spike
| January 15, 2008 12:15 PM
I keep trying to "sing" Let it snow...but the lyrics won't print... :((
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 12:16 PM
seriously, dog...it was flurries for 5 minutes and now, it is a mini-blizzard!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 12:18 PM
Depends on what kind of temperature follows Dog. Are you guys heading for higher temps or a freeze?
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:19 PM
Yes, Jamie. Andrea Mitchell is disgracing herself. I don't understand how they can get in front of a camera and say the things they say. I'd be way too embarrassed! And, on top of saying stupid and disgusting things, she seems so distracted that it appears she's not really listening to her guest's responses.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 12:21 PM
Yup, zero carbs in pork skin/fat.
http://www.deltablues.net/cracklin.html
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 12:21 PM
Watch for a Russert & Williams orchestrated attack on Hillary tonight - just like last time. If she gives them the slighest opening, MSM will run with it for days, if not weeks.
Posted by: GORDO | January 15, 2008 12:29 PM
Andrea keeps changing her story. Yesterday she was saying that as a member of the press she could say that it was Obama's campaign racheting up race. (No, Andrea --- YOU are doing the racheting.) I used to like her as well, but Jeez...she seems to be just making it up as she goes.
Posted by: Patsi | January 15, 2008 12:33 PM
pogo no need to go to all that trouble of making your own when you can buy bags of cracklins at the grocery store for cheap.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | January 15, 2008 12:34 PM
Gotta' sign off for a bit...taking my feet in for an overhaul. Later....
Posted by: harborwoman | January 15, 2008 12:35 PM
Gonna run now.
Posted by: pogo
| January 15, 2008 12:36 PM
for all you Huckleberry fans out there in the blogger land. Think on this and is this something you would want to do? Count me as an Army of One against this idea.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Huckabee_Amend_Constitution_to_meet_Gods_0115.html
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | January 15, 2008 12:41 PM
How do we get someone in the studio to strangle Andrea Mitchell. It now borders on disgusting. She is doing everything possible to ratchet the fight back up.
Does anybody know someone in MSNBC management to let them know we can recognize garbage when we see it.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 12:43 PM
Huck is pandering to the Christian Right.....to bad. He'd never be able to get it passed because then there are the rest of us.....me the Christian included.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:43 PM
MSNBC by limiting the "debates" to the candidates they select exposes their bias. As Jamie said earlier. It's all about the ratings. Too bad for MSNBC that Fox's American Idol is having it's season premier tonight.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 12:44 PM
Jamie,
Clog Dan's email. He's the one you need to talk to. The buck stops there.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:44 PM
Jamie,
Put down the remote and slowly back away. Take the pledge: no more MSNBC. You'll be glad you did.
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 12:46 PM
But Dnd,,,,,,its Super Duper Tuesday.....{twitch}
Seriously, I haven't seen one in a couple of months. Its fresh for me.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 12:48 PM
well... we got a foot of snow up here in NHland.....
now everything is clean, white, and pretty again....
I watched some of MSNBC's coverage this morning while working..... it's mucho stupidio.....
Joe and Mika did claim that Michiganers (hope that's correct.... if not.... so what)...
are upset about new fuel CAFE standards...... if that's true all I can say is that the American car industry still doesn't get it and deserves the problems they are experiencing...... with gasoline over $3 a gallon.... I see a lot more smaller cars on the roads around here..... a lot less SUVs....
hey WAKE UP Ford, Chrysler, and Chevrolet..... your nightmare is just beginning....
tylenol... if I ever happen to be in Montreal on a Sunday..... I wanna hear your sermon...... I'v never seen a preacher with a sense of humor like yours...... :0)
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 15, 2008 12:52 PM
dnd
If it were any other day, I would turn it off, but I genuinely want to see the guests. Richardson just now was excellent and he didn't let the witch lead him into a fight.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 12:52 PM
OT: has anyone seen "Charlie Wilson's War yet? I read a good review from a guy that was in the CIA at the time this all took place and he liked it and seem to think it was pretty accurate.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | January 15, 2008 12:53 PM
"Count me as an Army of One against this idea."
Count me in as well....I wonder if this is going to the the cornerstone of his campaign now.....
Posted by: Patsi | January 15, 2008 12:54 PM
The NY Times regrets its error we hope
NY Times falsely suggested that Hagel and Clinton took different votes on Iraq war resolution
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801150001
In a January 14 New York Times article, reporter Eric Lipton suggested that Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) took different positions on the 2002 resolution that authorized the use of force against Iraq. But, like Clinton, Hagel voted for the resolution (H.J. Res. 114), a fact nowhere to be found in Lipton's article.
Lipton reported that Sen. Clinton and former President Bill Clinton "appear[ed] to misconstrue the facts" in pointing to Hagel's assertion that his support for the resolution was, in Hillary Clinton's words, "not a vote for war" but rather "a vote to use the threat of force against Saddam Hussein, who never did anything without being made to do so." As purported evidence for the claim that the Clintons misconstrued the facts, the Times article suggested that the Clintons' assertion that Hagel "helped to draft the resolution" was contradicted by the fact that the version of the bill that Hagel helped write -- which "authorized only to secure the destruction of Iraq's unconventional weapons, not to enforce 'all relevant' United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" -- was not the version that ultimately passed and that Hillary Clinton voted for. Instead, a "slightly less restrictive" authorization bill passed, according to the Times. Yet at no point in the article did the Times note that, like Clinton, Hagel voted for the final version of the resolution, or that he praised the sponsors of the Senate version of the bill (which is "substantially similar" to the House version that passed) for reaching "a far more responsible and accountable document than" the version of the bill the White House was pushing.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 12:56 PM
a Democratic debate, a primary in Michigan, and American Idol.....
drat!..... I've got a library trustee meeting tonight.....
maybe I should play sick......
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 15, 2008 12:56 PM
Horsedooty/Patsi
Today they are trying to twist what he said as "He's always been in favor of a pro-life amendment", but that isn't what he said.
Any time someone wants another amendment, it makes me cringe and look for motives.
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 12:57 PM
Is Dan Abrams still GM of MSNBC?
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 1:00 PM
Yes Linda, He is still is.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 1:08 PM
"Today they are trying to twist what he said as "He's always been in favor of a pro-life amendment", but that isn't what he said."
I have a weird feeling that he's going to start running on a "let's REALLY dump choice" platform....
Posted by: Patsi | January 15, 2008 1:09 PM
LiL
Just found an article that indicates he isn't
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i4c6cbfc544ec16da13bae04d408ca5f6
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 1:11 PM
The Chicago Tribune published an op-ed today by some LA writer, Meghan Daum. "Clinton's style clashes with 'The Rules' of dating."
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 15, 2008 1:11 PM
Well,
I stand corrected and I'm glad. I like Abrams on the air.
Thanks Jamie.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 1:13 PM
I have a weird feeling that he's going to start running on a "let's REALLY dump choice" platform....
Patsi,
that is what the Rethugs have always tried to do.
They want fat white guys to control womens bodies.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | January 15, 2008 1:15 PM
I was thinking, that when he(Dan Abrams) came on, with a show at 9pm, that he couldn't possibly be doing both jobs. I love his show!! I wish he had the MSNBC 6-9am slot. :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 1:15 PM
KGC
It's a pretty silly op ed, but then I didn't like "The Rules" either. :-)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0115daumjan15,0,6389300.story
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 1:16 PM
Linda,
6-7pm would be better. I think 6-9am is just fine. ;0)
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 1:20 PM
LOL @ "...programmed her neural interface to register emotion at approximately 0900 hours Jan. 7)...."
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 15, 2008 1:20 PM
Hagel on revised Iraq resolution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIoa7WU2Dfc
Posted by: dnd | January 15, 2008 1:22 PM
Well,
the writers strike is not looking good. A lot of blood letting going on since Friday.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117979041.html?categoryid=2821&cs=1
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 1:28 PM
Interesting Political Cortex op ed about "The Greatest Country In the World"
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2008/1/14/144532/709
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 1:32 PM
Dog, They are talking about Huckabee.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 1:35 PM
I suspect that Patsi was referring to Huckleberry Hound but I might be wrong.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | January 15, 2008 1:36 PM
Jamie Good read.
I haven't thought of us as the greatest country since 1980's.
Sad to admit that.
Posted by: Sheila
| January 15, 2008 1:38 PM
NEW THREAD
Posted by: jamie | January 15, 2008 2:19 PM
Post A Comment