So long, Rudy and John. There are many reasons why Rudy Giuliani and John Edwards were forced to step aside today. But an overriding cause comes to mind in both cases: Each were out of sync with their own party.
Giuliani’s moderate-to-liberal social views doomed the former New York mayor from the start. Social conservatives seem willing to accept some compromise in a 2008 nominee but not as much as he represents.
Edwards, as a white man, was not destined to prevail in a year when Democrats are so excited about breaking new ground with a woman or an African-American. But if he wants it, the former North Carolina senator might again run as No. Two.
Craig on "Countdown with Keith Olbermann"
Wednesday (1/30) MSNBC 8:00 PM EST
Comments
Where are you guys?
Posted by: harborwoman | January 30, 2008 2:08 PM
any guesses whose face Edwards is picturing as he swings that Habitat hammer?
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 2:08 PM
he should be swinging it at the media, i think. they doomed his campaign almost from the start.
Posted by: nannymm
| January 30, 2008 2:09 PM
From previous post...
harborwoman,
Yes, I agree...I really never quite understood point of his candidacy!! I am glad he is out of the race :)
Every time he mentions that he is the son of a mill-worker(with that pitiful look on his face)...it makes me want to slap him. :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:10 PM
any guesses whose face Edwards is picturing as he swings that Habitat hammer?
one possibility is Tweety who this morning said several moronic things
Edwards
"his face didn't match his message"
"I hardly knew him" so tweety whose fault was that
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 2:10 PM
Caroline Kennedy in Denver today with Obama.
Big crowd:
http://cbs4denver.com/politics/obama.clinton.denver.2.641540.html
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 2:11 PM
I'm guessing John Kerry.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 2:11 PM
Is Edwards the new Carter?
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 2:11 PM
Linda...
I have no desire to get into a pissing contest with you, but I also have no desire to read your negative opinions of John Edwards...not today. Please don't respond to my posts today if that's all you have to say. It's not appreciated.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 30, 2008 2:11 PM
Craig...Paragrapp 2..20088....
Posted by: harborwoman | January 30, 2008 2:14 PM
ahem...make that paragraph 2
Posted by: harborwoman | January 30, 2008 2:14 PM
Well, Craig...At least we agree as to why Edwards couldn't get any traction. As Matthews said a couple of weeks ago, he was "standing in the shadow of history". And, as Edwards himself said today, he is "stepping aside to let history blaze its trail".
I'm pretty idealistic, but I don't think he's picturing anyone's face as he swings the hammer...unless it's the media, who ignored him, likely due in no small part to the desires of their corporate masters.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 30, 2008 2:17 PM
Harborwoman,
Pundits predict races as far ahead as 20088. ;-)
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 2:17 PM
harborwoman
Soooooooooo...(just so I understand the rules)...it is OK for you to comment on my posts. But, I am not permitted to respond to any of yours, right?
That is, unless, of course, I happen to agree with you?
Relax...get over yourself :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:20 PM
Not to sound like Keith Olbermann but I'm guessing
hammer to Bill O'Reilly.
Posted by: Gidget
| January 30, 2008 2:21 PM
I see magobama continues to race bailt with the fake Clinton-Jackson statement. They have not had Congressman Meeks and the idiot tried to bait Maya
Angelou
Clinton should boycott NBC and not allow any surrogates to appear
the whole place is a load
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 2:21 PM
Reposted from last thread
pogo...
Your posts are always well thought out and cogent. Thank you for that. I appreciate those who think rather than taking pot-shots at the candidates they don't support.
I heard Hillary last night when she described her first day in office, and was duly impressed. I think she's given a great deal of thought to what it would actually be like to BE POTUS...not the glamor, but the work. As I said earlier, I'm watching and listening, and will soon decide where my support will go.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 30, 2008 2:23 PM
Linda...
No rules, just a simple request.
Posted by: harborwoman | January 30, 2008 2:24 PM
ROTFLMAO!!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:24 PM
harborwoman
you do realize that it was you who first commented on my post, right?
practice what you preach, sweetie :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:26 PM
KGC, I didn't glean from any the news stories I've read thus far that Edwards was stepping aside for now and might re-enter at the convention asking his delegates to hold on to their pledges. Can you give me a citation?
Posted by: eprof2 | January 30, 2008 2:28 PM
Linda's post----ROTFLMAO!!!
What does that mean?
Posted by: chickadee | January 30, 2008 2:28 PM
ROTFLMAO
Rolling On The Floor Laughing My A$$ Off
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:30 PM
I personally think Edwards' speech suspending his campaign is a very good one. I do think it sets out why he was campaigning for the office. While he would be a good AG, I think HUD or whatever it's called now would be a better fit, or perhaps FEMA director.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/us/politics/30text-edwards.html
When I think about the dem candidates who have dropped out of the race making up the backbone of a presidential cabinet, I see what I think would be an competent, effective, progressive one. I can't say the same about the repugs.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 2:31 PM
why are bloggers being so caustic to other bloggers?
Posted by: chickadee | January 30, 2008 2:32 PM
chickadee
http://www.gaarde.org/acronyms/
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:33 PM
hw, thanks.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 2:34 PM
you're easily amused, Lush
Posted by: tylenol
| January 30, 2008 2:35 PM
It was Obama that doomed Edwards, he had a good chance against Hillary, If Obama hadn't jumped in it would have been Edwards & Hillary in the top tier. So Edwards may not admit it, but he is imagining Obama.
Posted by: Bowamnc | January 30, 2008 2:36 PM
Linda -- I think that being the son of a mill worker is very much a part of John Edwards' identification. When he says that I believe that he is reminding people both of his roots, and that much is possible.
Being a Kansas farmer's daughter is VERY much a part of me. I am proud of it, and growing up the child of a farmer drastically affected me. Farmers are basically gamblers, they love the land, they don't mind hard work -- it goes on and on.
I worked for a record executive who was the son of a coal miner, and to this day, that is how he sees himself. Not all, but certain kinds of jobs/work/employment simply become a part of you.
Posted by: Patsi | January 30, 2008 2:36 PM
eprof2
Edwards suspends campaign
January 30, 2008 - 3:01pm
No endorsement yet of Clinton or Obama
John Edwads )AFP)
By NEDRA PICKLER and BECKY BOHRER
Democrat John Edwards bowed out of the race for the White House on Wednesday, saying it was time to step aside "so that history can blaze its path" in a campaign now left to Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/4402
I don't think he is coming back but he is going to hold to his delegates and any that may be chosen in the future. It also keeps him eligible for matching funds.
So if you early voted for him and he gets delegates he will go to the convention with them
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 2:36 PM
patsi, I imagine he's also reminding himself of his roots - the wealthy often forget them, and I truly don't think John has.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 2:40 PM
eprof2
the ap is saying something else
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hoAvkYTooNMqpzn8fF_3B76ko8eAD8UGC6NO0
but I listened to the whole Edwards speech and he specifically addressed the delegate issue and I think this is incorrect.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 2:41 PM
"Clinton should boycott NBC and not allow any surrogates to appear: -- Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
Another friendly reminder of the site for MSNBC's comment board:
http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=541402
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 2:43 PM
I just don't understand why so many posters here, have become so sensitive lately. My goodness...
and, yes, tylenol, it is amusing to me. :)
Listen, people have different opinions about the candidates...that's just the way it is. I rarely even post anything about anyone who is seeking the nomination.
I will, however, respond, when someone sends a post specifically to me. I don't consider it a pi$$ing contest, but rather an exchange of thoughts and opinions. I also never take anything personally. :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:43 PM
bowman, not a bad guess. What with all the talk about an endorsement for Obama in exchange for AG status - then no endorsement - you may be right, and he may even admit it when the press aren't listening.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 2:43 PM
oy
By suspending his campaign he can retain control of his delegates, according to top advisers. If he “ends” his campaign, his delegates can go to any candidate they chose. Observers had already speculated that Edwards could play the role of power-broker by accumulating delegates and shifting them to the candidate of his choice. Edwards has 56 delegates to his name.
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/30/edwards-to-drop-out-of-white-house-race/
I report you decide oy vey
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 2:44 PM
kgc, I just read his speech at the NYT and he definitely said, "suspend." So, we'll just have to wait and see what they means in practical terms. Edwards has 62 delegates pledged to him. He may even pick up some more from Super Tuesday and the 22 state elections and caucuses. So, I'm going to hang in there with him and see what develops. To answer someone's question from the earlier post by Craig, I won't be supporting either Hillary or Obama until after the convention in August. Thanks, Pogo, for the encouragement; hope you saw my response on the last posting.
Posted by: eprof2 | January 30, 2008 2:47 PM
eprof2
I have a lot of friends who are Edwards supporters here and I have been trying to get them to go ahead and vote for him here (Cal)because he can get delegates because it is not winner take all.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 2:51 PM
hey look, guys, our own John R has surfaced on MSNBC Board at http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=543577
and his usual lovable self :
"thanks Joe [Scarborough], for being unbias in ur reporting about the clintons, their tactics are disgusting. as for crawford please, please dont waste air time having that blockhead on ur program. he is bias and a paid surrogate of the clinton campaign that tries to come across as an unbias commentator. he is a whiner and is attempting to diminsh the impact of the obama run for the white house. he is desperately trying to set himself up for a position in a potential clinton adminstartion which will never happen! i told him if he come to his senses and change sides i will get him a job with obama, but he chooses to go down with the clinton titanic lol."
http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=543577
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 2:51 PM
Linda...
I think Patsi is right on the question of why Edwards states he is the son of a mill worker..... not to seek pity..... but to show to the down trodden that if one works hard and gets an education..... even the son of a mill worker can become successful at his/her chosen profession and run for the highest office of this country.....
Despite the salary that Rick now earns in the high tech world..... neither of us forgets that we are both a son and a daughter from immigrant mill workers..... both our parents are French Canadians who came to this country to work in textile mills..... Rick and I were the first in our families to get a college education..... and despite the fact that a lot of his co-workers vote Republican and we personally benefit from that party's tax cuts.... we've both always voted for a Democrat for president.....
it also shows the difference between himself and Bush...... Edwards has had to earn where he is today..... and Bush had it handed to him on a silver platter.....
or in the words of Robin Williams during the 2000 presidential campaign......
"some people have to earn the presidency..... and some get it for a graduation present".....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 30, 2008 2:52 PM
Our celebrity obsessed culture now has it's two celebrity candidates, that the media has been yearning for since the campaign began. John Edwards had the best ideas and received minimal media attention. Haircuts? THAT they were interested in. Poverty? That's so wonk-y! Leave it to a neutral Edwards supporter to break it to you partisans; the remaining two candidates are fatally flawed. Prepare for President McCain ("bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran")
Posted by: davehyzy
| January 30, 2008 2:53 PM
Craig -- "any guesses whose face Edwards is picturing as he swings that Habitat hammer?"
Terry Mcauliffe?
Posted by: spike
| January 30, 2008 2:53 PM
Craig
I started to post a comment but that would have meant I would have to allow a cookie for there site , Too much trouble besides I've voted the most effective way. I don't turn them on. Saves on the heartburn medicine.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | January 30, 2008 2:53 PM
Patsi
My Dad is a retired mill worker. He did back-breaking work, for 35 years to provide his family with a good life. I am proud of my Dad and my life with him!!
II just hate that pitiful look that JE gets on his face, when he talks about being the "son of a mill worker"(like it was a horrible thing). It stings me like a slap in the face!!
And I did laugh out loud, when JE said it again, in his speech today...
"and yes, this son of a mill worker will be OK..."(or something like that).
That is my opinion, and if it upsets other posters, well, I can't change that.
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 2:53 PM
eprof, I did see your post - now get your ass out there and vote for the dem candidate in Nov. ;-)
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 2:54 PM
"Edwards, as a white man, was not destined to be seriously considered in year when Democrats are so excited about breaking new ground"
That's pretty much the dumbest thing ever written about anything ever in the history of written language.
Edwards was written out of the story by the media, even after finishing second in Iowa. Check the numbers-- he got way, way less coverage than the other two.
Plus, it's damn insulting to Obama and Clinton to suggest that they are where they are only because Democratic voters crave chicks and blacks to vote for. It didn't work that way for Pat Schroeder and Jesse Jackson, did it?
Your comment was appallingly flip and reductionist. You got any thoughts on the Rutgers basketball team you'd like to share?
Posted by: Elvis Elvisberg | January 30, 2008 2:54 PM
Other than the few he picked up in NH, SC & FL, what other BOUND delegates does Edwards have?
Remember, none of the caucus state delegates have been allocated until April through June. There can't be enough to make any difference.
Posted by: spike
| January 30, 2008 2:58 PM
Aye, Aye, Sir! See Lushis, even military training from more than fifty years ago remains a part of who you are and comes to you in odd times and good times. "Request permission to leave the ship, sir" as he salutes the officer of the day on the gangplank and goes back to lurking. Chime in here anytime you want Nash.
Posted by: eprof2 | January 30, 2008 3:02 PM
My goodness...has everyone here gone mad today??????
I think it is time for everyone to take a nap!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 3:02 PM
ya know craig - I think there are much more important posts for someone like Edwards than VP. Dumya and Cheney make us forget that the VP is not that great a gig in most administrations.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 3:03 PM
Elvis Elvisberg (love the name) -- it's like that moment in SC debate when Barack initially forgets to mention Edwards when touting himself and hillary, then pauses -- crowd laughs, he laughs, hillary laughs before he says, "and John" -- the look on Edwards' face says it all -- just wasnt the Dem year for a white man
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 3:03 PM
The Officer of the Day is, of course, Craig Crawford, as he's got the duty every day!
Posted by: eprof2 | January 30, 2008 3:05 PM
"Hey Elvis"
Jack waves
Edwards tied for a distant 2nd in Iowa. With the amount of time he invested there he needed to do better. That is what Iowa is for , to bypass the media hype and get up close and personal. Edwards spent so much time in Iowa that he is on half the family reunion mailing lists. Everybody is sure he is somebodys boy but they can't remember who.
He needed at least a close finish it didn't happen. Everything after that was down hill. Once the Kennedy liberals and the netroots abandoned him he was toast.
IMNSHO.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | January 30, 2008 3:07 PM
yeah eprof2, but dexter runs the Night Desk -- i'm about ready for relief duty tho, gettin tired
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 3:08 PM
eprof..... I'm glad to see you posting on this blog more often....
Linda..... I've already taken my nap.... now I want my apple juice .... :0}
Elvis.... I think the media ignored Edwards because he did come in second in Iowa..... after campaigning there for years, he was beaten by someone who campaigned there for only a few months..... that fact didn't bode well for his being able to win any other contests.... not excusing the media's shoddy behavior..... just trying to 'splain it....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | January 30, 2008 3:11 PM
Thanks for the reply, Craig.
I suppose it wasn't the year for a white man, given that we've got a white chick and a black guy left as the Dem candidates.
But I think it's way off base to suggest that Edwards's _whiteness_ was itself the cause of his lack of success.
*waves to Jack*
I don't think your comment is at all unreasonable, Jack-- I reacted negatively to the suggestion that Edwards was doomed by his whiteness. There were a number of factors contributing to his ultimate failure. My earlier comment, if it attributed his failure 100% to media blackout, was just as wrong as Craig's claim that his whiteness was the predominant, or only, reason.
I mean, the guy didn't win in 2004, either. You can look it up. There might be some issues beyond skin color at work here.
Posted by: Elvis Elvisberg | January 30, 2008 3:12 PM
LushIsLinda
Yes, I agree...I really never quite understood point of his candidacy!! I am glad he is out of the race :)
Every time he mentions that he is the son of a mill-worker(with that pitiful look on his face)...it makes me want to slap him. :)
Oh kindred spirit I couldn't agree more with that statement. What I found so frustrating about Edwards was everything he was against, he actually prospered from to become the rich, very sucessful person he is today. He did grow-up poor, his parents and grandparents did work in the mills, they must have instilled in him good morals, he graduated from HS, not all that common among mill workers children in the South, he went onto college, went onto law school became a fairly successful lawyer, was elected to the US Senate, ran as the VP on the 2004 D ticket, worked for a hedge fund, made a ton of money, benefited by all of Bush's tax breaks, then ran again for POTUS. That is the story he should have been using, and not this class warfare fable he kept on spinning, while he is living in his 20,000 sq. ft. home and getting $400 haircuts. If Edwards would have kept his message simple and to the point; that hard work pays off, big corporations employed people like my parents which provided us food, shelter and clothing and help send me to school, it was hard for a mill workers son but I made it and so can you if you apply yourselves. I always interpreted Edwards' message as he was talking down to his supporters, 'I made it coming from a poor family, but you can't. For you to make it, you'll need my help. Big corporations are evil'. Had he not been so self indulging, so condescending, he might have stood a better chance.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 3:15 PM
I was surprised that Edwards did not want to be king maker at the convention...and I do not think he is going for VP. He would make a good Attorney General and scare the piss out of the Republicans. Sort of a la Bobby Kennedy as he surely has the hair just like Bobby's.
As I emailed Craig last night, I have fired MSNBC for health reasons...'they' raise my blood pressure and make me sick to my stomach.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 3:16 PM
I think John, if he endorses at all, will endorse Hillary...He won't compromise health care etc for Obama....never happen......(I hope)...
Posted by: athyrio
| January 30, 2008 3:16 PM
Oh Sweet Jesus!!
FryDaddy actually agrees with me?
Am I taking my nap already...I must be dreaming!!!
LOL!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 3:19 PM
Elvis, think a little harder? The fact that Edwards didn't get the coverage that a second place finish in a race with a chick (I'm sure Hillary would be flattered) and black may just reflect the dems' excitement about breaking new ground with a woman or an African-American on top, which the media has reflected in its coverage. No, it didn't work out for Schroeder and Jackson - but htis isn't the 80s. Considering the lack of light between the positions of Edwards,Clinton and Obama on many issues, what, other than race and gender, do you see as having swung better than 65% of each primary to Obama and Clinton and not to Edwards? Craig did not suggest that C & O are where they are only because they are a chick and a black, but he does not dismiss those factors as part of the reason they have done so well, either. Maybe Craig's words aren't so dumb after all.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 3:20 PM
Good vibes to Brian NYC -- he's not our only Edwards champion, but possibly the most passionate
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 3:22 PM
BTW...I think JE home is closer to 28,200sqft ;)
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3848
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 3:22 PM
Blonde wino -- what does it say that there is no obvious cabinet department for someone who fights poverty?
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 3:25 PM
I thought Brian was for Obama...
I am so confused :(
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 3:27 PM
Linda,
I can't speak for harborwoman, but I can tell you that she's seriously bummed that her candidate dropped out. So today is probably not the best day to be critical of what he said. That's all...
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 3:28 PM
Ah! Top o' th' day, mateys!
So Edwards is out, eh? I agree with CC, he maybe could put out a feeler about how he would consider veep again, but I really think he wants to get back in the courtroom and crank out some cash.
After the bad-blood with JFKerry that went on for a LONG time, and continues even now, I think Edwards really needs to get away from this scene, go back to his mega-mansion, and fade out .
Lieberman just laughed off the "McCain veep?" question...he was honest as always...at least the man has that going for him...but Edwards hasn't closed the door yet...
I saw last night where Jon Stewart was as impressed with KS guv Sebelius as I was...he had her pegged as a zombie in "Night of the Living Dead"scenario, where I simply called her an automaton. I laffed MAO when Stewart called her a cougar! She shore-do LOOK like a cougar! Ohhhh..Corey? Here's your chance!
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 3:29 PM
he is now, LushIsLinda, but don't think anyone in these parts fought harder for Edwards, until recently
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 3:29 PM
Actually Linda "but don't anyone in these parts fought harder for Edwards until" today. Brian's been trying Obama on for about a week now - I think he could see the writing on the wall. He officially changed horses this morning.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 3:32 PM
Craig,
"what does it say that there is no obvious cabinet department for someone who fights poverty?"
It says that our priorities are seriously screwed up.
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 3:32 PM
yes, dnd, good vibes to harborwoman and all of our Edwards supporters.
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 3:32 PM
This whole thing about Edwards being "king maker" ---I never bought that...I always thought it was 1600 Penna Ave. or nothing this time around...Edwards doesn't strike me as the type to lurk in shadows and emerge with a big plan to control his party's destiny...I think he's had enough, and I don't think we'll ever see him run again for Prez.
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 3:34 PM
Nader wants another run at WH. That will boost the Reps for sure. Where are you Ross Perrott now that the Dems need you?
Posted by: eprof2 | January 30, 2008 3:34 PM
i missed the official announcement: http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/01/only-mccain-left-standing.html#comment-22974
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| January 30, 2008 3:37 PM
Rudy surely got the worst advice in presidential politics history...eggs in one basket, kill in FL and sweep Tsunami Tuesday (now called Super-Duper Tuesday).
He's gotta be absolutely dying inside.
I actually feel sorry for him...it's gotta be embarrassing.
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 3:37 PM
HW
I won't rush you, but
" I think she's given a great deal of thought to what it would actually be like to BE POTUS"
is exactly the reason I support her, not just for her current positions on issues, but because people seldom change their basic personality and habits of a life time. From High School on, she as been a "worker". Whatever it took to produce a solution, a finish project, a plan of action, that is what she did.
Not everything she has done in 60 years has been successful, but you know that she won't stop and will keep going until she gets results and the situation whatever it is is improved for the better.
Posted by: jamie | January 30, 2008 3:37 PM
LushIsLinda...there is a Department of Poverty...Homeland Security! Look what they did for New Orleans!
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 3:38 PM
Craig,
"what does it say that there is no obvious cabinet department for someone who fights poverty?"
Then won't HUD (with the finicial backing it needs) be perfect for JE?
Posted by: Gidget
| January 30, 2008 3:39 PM
lament for Rudy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWK6I1cR34k
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 3:40 PM
-- Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times his "best estimate" was that Rezko had raised more than $60,000 for him during his political career.
The Sun-Times over the summer, however, linked $168,000 in donations to Rezko.
Obama's chief presidential rival, Democrat Hillary Clinton, had accused Obama of not being straight about the money he's received through Rezko and Rezko's fund-raising efforts
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/766605,CST-NWS-obama30.article
Posted by: GORDO | January 30, 2008 3:42 PM
craig
are you the only one who has the balls to stand up to those creeps at MSNBC......although pat buchanan sometimes makes them look silly too
Posted by: tz | January 30, 2008 3:45 PM
Dex, you'll pardon me if I don't feel sorry for Rudi. Bwahahahahahahah
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 3:46 PM
dnd
I appreciate you telling me that...thank you :)
Having said that...
I was just giving my honest impression of JE, during his speech(like everyone here does, on a daily basis).
It was never my intention to upset harborwoman.
You know, there are dozens of C-Listers here. If everyone was worried about upsetting another person, with their remarks, I do not think this blog would last too long. I didn't say anything nasty or vulgar about JE...it was just my opinion.
I really think JE made the decision that was best for him and his family. I don't think citizens should take it so personally.
I am for Hillary. if she dropped out of the race, it would be OK with me. If she loses to Obama, that's OK with me, too.
With all due respect to harborwoman...if she is really upset, then she probably shouldn't be on this political blog today...no?
If someone will just explain the new rules to me, I promise I will "play nice"...but, honestly, if you read my original post, that harborwoman commented on, I think you will agree, it was pretty "run-of-the-mill"(no pun intended. ;)
dnd...harborwoman is lucky to have a good friend like you :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 3:47 PM
Dexter...if someone wants to be President, they want power. Edwards wanted the power. He may have used his power for "white" magic instead of "black magic." (yikes...that sounds racist) Edwards would make a great AG...fighting poverty by busting those corporations...it is all in his stump speech.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 3:48 PM
Linda and Fry: thanks to both for explaining your anti-Edwards sentiments; can see where he would be considered grating if you thought he was talking down to those from humble roots. Myself, I never perceived any "talking down" or assuming mill workers and others could only make it through govt handouts.
But it was good of you to share your opinions, and very enlightening.
Posted by: dog's eye view | January 30, 2008 3:49 PM
obama returned 70,000 more last night while HRC was speaking in florida.......pretty cagey as he knew it wouldnt get much press
Posted by: tz | January 30, 2008 3:49 PM
"Mr. Crawford, are you listening to me? Mr. Crawford? MR. CRAWFORD!"
Eternal vigilance, Craig, eternal vigilance. :-)
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 3:53 PM
Craig, this is a repost question for you...
Craig,
I have a question for you about McCain.
Last night on MSNBC, Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough were openly discussing how McCain sucker punched Romney just before the Florida primary with an outright lie about his position in Iraq.
As this gets more widely reported, do you think it will have a negative impact on McCain? Is there an effective ad to be run during the general election?
Posted by: Bear
| January 30, 2008 4:00 PM
This is a long article with a lot of background on Obama. It is not mean, just straight forward facts. For those who talk about him being the new JFK, including JFK's daughter, this will tell them why Obama is no JFK.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0801w.widmer.html
Posted by: jamie | January 30, 2008 4:05 PM
dog
**"assuming mill workers and others could only make it through govt handouts. "**
you make my point better than I do!!
The constant over-use of the phrase, "son of a mill-worker", especially, with that sad, pathetic look on his face, makes it seem that all mill-workers were lower class people who needed handouts.
I am only saying that, as the daughter of a mill-worker, that is not true. Yes, my Dad worked long hours doing hard work, but he made a good living. I had a wonderful childhood. We had a nice home, with all the trappings. My siblings and I all continued our educations, after high school. Three of us actually graduated...LOL...guess who didn't...LOL!!
My Dad worked lots of overtime, to make ends meet, but he never took "government handouts".
If you listen to JE, however, the life in a mill-worker family was one to be pitied.
Not true...
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 4:13 PM
Craig got called a blockhead? I thought that only happened to Charlie Brown! So JohnR must be Lucy Van Pelt in disguise. Edwards left and Rudy is leaving soon? Who's next? *Looks at Mitt Romney*
Posted by: Corey
| January 30, 2008 4:13 PM
dog,
You did read the nice things I said about him, didn't you? As i said he had/has a great story to tell, a story most of us would like to point to and say I've been there, but I was able to over come those obstacles. Edwards problem, as I see it, was he only told half the story and only gave out half the credit.
I in NC so i do have a fairly good understanding about mill workers and the problem they faced. They don't face them any longer as all the mills, except for a very few, all went over seas. And like McCain told the people in Michigan about the automobile manufactures, the mill jobs are never coming back.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 4:14 PM
I don't get why that moron John R. is even allowed in this forum. He is simply a flame-throwing troll.
Posted by: EuroTom
| January 30, 2008 4:24 PM
Only the Mittster
would be able to link an opponent to Ted Kennedy and ignore his contections.
LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGTJDAAHCnQ
Good ad btw
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | January 30, 2008 4:30 PM
Fry: did indeed see all the good things you said about John Edwards.
Brownie points all around, a la mode if you wish.
Posted by: dog's eye view | January 30, 2008 4:31 PM
LushIsLinda,
Your dad's story is the kind of story JE should have been touting, and one he could have, instead of the poor pitiful me I was once poor like you, and then go home to mansion on the hill. BTW no one I know bemoans him having achieved enough wealth to purchase such a home.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 4:31 PM
Take all kinds tom
Why don't you bake a plate of troll house cookies?
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | January 30, 2008 4:32 PM
I have a question. Which one of you has read Obama's book, Dreams from My Father? If so do you recall him menting anything about working after school or on weekends to help out the family's financial situation while residing in Hawaii?
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 4:38 PM
Just reported on MSNBC- New York Post endorses Barak Obama. Of course David Schuster spins it as a slap in the face of HRC. Why can't it be that they just endorsed him. Seems like that they are so obsessed and fixated that it has become nauseating. I am getting dangerously close to not listening to them anymore. Somehow I thing they are going to have a backlash again.
Seems like Chris Matthews' apology wasn't enough.
Posted by: Pauline | January 30, 2008 4:39 PM
Sorry that was suppose to be "mentioning", not menting. lol
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 4:40 PM
So it turns out a lot of my friends are supporting Obama. While I am disappointed, I am glad they are passionate about him and excited about the election. People might wonder why I like Hillary. Besides the historical context of her candidacy, a strong woman, and a former first lady, I was impressed when I read her biography. She has an interesting life to share, and you can feel her passion and her desire to help people when you read her book. She seemed to me to be extremely genuine.
Posted by: EuroTom
| January 30, 2008 4:42 PM
Afternoon peeps,
Thanks for the good vibes Craig. Now lets all go forward and do everything in our power to insure the next president is Barak Obama.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| January 30, 2008 4:42 PM
Hillary was once the president of the Fabian Fan Club. Right there that is enough for me to like her. I can see Hillary now singing along to "Turn Me Loose".
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 4:46 PM
Barack Hussein Obama - Talks about a lot of change but does not go into details. His group and his message is a fairy tale like Bill Clinton said. Barack Hussein Obama also supports credit card companies and saying that the borrower should be held more accountable and higher interest rates. Also Barack Hussein Obama said he is agent of change like Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. Reagan GOP party only changed two things Tax breaks for the upper class and screwing the Air Traffic controllers and that is why we have delays at the airport today because of Mr. Change Ronald Reagan. Barack Hussein Obama is more like an undercover GOP candidate in the democrat party. I was an Edwards supporter and I am going to have to side with Hillary Clinton now after January 30. On the GOP side I was always a John McCain supporter. John Edwards would be stupid if he supports Barack Hussein Obama and I would never work on his campaign again.
Posted by: Brian A. Mac Ineirghe | January 30, 2008 4:47 PM
No matter what, I'm sticking with Hillary. If she loses the nomination, I will re-evaluate which candidate I will want to support.
Posted by: EuroTom
| January 30, 2008 4:47 PM
new york post endorses obama!!! i think i might start reading the post hehehehe
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/01302008/postopinion/editorials/post_endorses_barack_obama_813218.htm
Posted by: John R, | January 30, 2008 4:47 PM
Yes, FryDaddy
I agree...
He has every right to have such a spectacular home...he has earned it, by getting an education and endless hours of hard work!! :)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 4:49 PM
John R, I am sure Rupert Murdoch was waiting with baited breath for your statement. Thank god, he can breathe again!
Posted by: EuroTom
| January 30, 2008 4:49 PM
Sally forth, Brian. As for me, I'll be going forward on a different path - at least for now. How about a friendly bet - I bet that I vote on the primary candidate that wins the state I'm in and you don't. Your vote is Tuesday, Mine is May 13 (but I'm betting that I have the bet half won by Tuesday night). You can even name the stakes.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 4:50 PM
euro, heheheheheh
Posted by: John R, | January 30, 2008 4:51 PM
Maybe John R. is really Joe Scarborough...hmmmmm.
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 4:51 PM
Why is MSNBC and Keith Olbermann such Barack Hussein Obama Supporters?
Posted by: Brian A. Mac Ineirghe | January 30, 2008 4:51 PM
I wouldn't exactly call the NYPost endorsement a progressive's dream.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 4:52 PM
Pogo you don't really believe this is going to be decided on Tuesday do you?
JohnR nothing is worth the NY Post for.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| January 30, 2008 4:52 PM
I believe the endorsements are just so much bullshit. If anything they cement my position even more. In many ways I feel BO is being forced down our throats and I am gagging on BO. And if BO is such a uniter (that scared me when I first heard it from GWB). how come he is trashing HRC in his mailouts which I receiving daily? Again, so much BS and it makes me feel like they really think we are so stupid and gullible. Again, I do not feel the magic of BO and I have tried, believe me. Of course, I do not believe in Hannah Montana, either.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 4:53 PM
Euro Tom
"He is simply a flame-throwing troll." He is a recent arrival courtesy of the intense campaign activity. Despite a few of the flareups that you have had, most of the time we all settle back and quietly talk about differences. This bores the bejeesus out of trolls who get ignored and go away on their own. You didn't come with when we were at our best, but even our ol' buddy Fry Daddy that once we get comfortable with someone's style we can even manage to be really nice to intelligent conservatives. :-)
FD Now you just go on being pleasant, you don't want to make a liar of me in front of the new folks.
Posted by: jamie | January 30, 2008 4:54 PM
Well, gotta fly - later.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 4:56 PM
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/2008/1/30/a-redo-for-florida-democrats.html
Dean to try to seat delegations before the convention.
others are suggesting a redo.
I guess they really are whistling past Florida this year and I think there are going to be a lot of annoyed Floridians.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 4:56 PM
Brian, I believe the bet I proposed will be - half of it, anyway.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 4:57 PM
lush, up until now i would change the station when Joe came on, but now i cant wait to hear his thoughts i even tape his shows along with keith and chris, enemy of my enemy is my friend :)
Posted by: John R, | January 30, 2008 4:58 PM
Brian A.
While I'm glad to hear you favor Senator Clinton, please be aware that we all know Senator Obama's full name and there is no need to say it several times in the same post.
Posted by: jamie | January 30, 2008 4:59 PM
Well if I was being overly rude, I apologise. I'm off to bed now... exhausted here.
Bye all.
Posted by: EuroTom
| January 30, 2008 4:59 PM
now jamie, ive been acting pretty good lately, u miss me when im rough huh...u like that kinda stuff dont u, come on and admit it to us all ;)
Posted by: John R, | January 30, 2008 4:59 PM
BTW, there is a lawsuit filed against Dean about the Florida delegates. Bye, now.
Posted by: pogo
| January 30, 2008 5:00 PM
pogo
unless it was filed today
all the prior ones have been dismissed
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 5:06 PM
John R
I don't care if you even exist.
Now FD is a different matter. He can be fun even when I want to strangle him as most of the time he remains a complete gentleman.
Posted by: jamie | January 30, 2008 5:10 PM
Is NOTHING sacred anymore? Cantina, hangout of Fidel y Che, closing in M.C., Mexico.
http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSN3019348720080130?feedType=nl&feedName=usoddlyenough
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 5:14 PM
Senator Clinton,
"I do not feel the magic of BO and I have tried, believe me."
Do you really think it is wise to post under the name "Blond wino?"
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 5:16 PM
Euro Tom
I wasn't scotding you. I was explaining why in quieter less excitable times, we just don't pay any real attention to trolls and they usually go away.
Those who genuinely love politics and stick around for sane discussions get well known and accepted as they are.
Posted by: jamie | January 30, 2008 5:16 PM
A different look on Republican Florida race
It seems that McCain and Romney were the favs of the old farts. Where as Huckabee, Guliani and Paul picked up more youngsters.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/104047/McCain-Romney-Support-Higher-Among-Older-GOP-Voters.aspx
Jack
working on old fartdom
Posted by: whskyjack | January 30, 2008 5:17 PM
E-Tom,
I also read Hillary's book and gained tons of respect for her. I have to admit, I read it years ago, to see what she said about Bill, and his "favorite hobby"
Her story has stuck with me and the book was really a decent informative read.
Posted by: h20storm
| January 30, 2008 5:22 PM
The name is BlondE wino, thank you. And are any of these posts really wise?
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 5:22 PM
Googling without success,
Anyone,
Was it ever determined if JE suspended or quit the race? Or does it matter? Are his delegates still held to their pledge or what? TIA
Posted by: Rezdog
| January 30, 2008 5:25 PM
I'd forgotten about how much of 1972 was payback for 1968 a very nasty intraparty fight
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 5:27 PM
"Must be a classy dinner"
LOL
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| January 30, 2008 5:29 PM
dnd
Why do you assume I am female because of the use of Blonde in my user name? You shouldn't judge on color...it could get you in trouble.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 5:31 PM
Jack,
You don't have to work on old fartdom. Old fartdom works on you...
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 5:31 PM
Brian A. MacIn's . 4:47 post is full of truths.
Think of "revolution" and you may think of 1776 or you may think Cuba, 1959, or any number of political revolutions in Africa and the Caribbean.
So , Ronald Reagan commandeered the word and we had the "Reagan Revolution".
Remember "trickle-down economics"?
Reagan basically declared war on poor and working people and called it a "revolution".
And this current crop wants us to return to that type of cruelty.
Sheila said that any of us who don't "get" Barack Obama's "change" are "dolts"...but I challenge anyone to ask the guy beside you on the train, your teacher, your high school student...hell...your university political science major...ask anybody what this "change" is all about...you'll likely get a bs answer or a blank stare...don't ask me, either, because I haven't heard anything from him except almost exactly the stump speeches of Charles Paladin, the fictional senatorial character in "Taxi Driver". (1975)
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 5:34 PM
dnd
lol
Tell me about it.
as I told my sister the other day
I may have been a hell raiser when I was young but now a days my drug of choice is advil.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | January 30, 2008 5:36 PM
Senator Clinton,
"The name is BlondE wino, thank you. "
My apologies.
"And are any of these posts really wise?"
Wisdom? Wisdom? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE WISDOM!.
Oh, sorry, got carried away. You want wisdom? Read Dexter's posts.
"Why do you assume I am female because of the use of Blonde in my user name? "
Why do you assume I think you are female?
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 5:36 PM
why thank you dnd...I am blushing...tee hee hee
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 5:38 PM
Jamie,
For an R type of Conservative like me I don't really dare step in-between inter-political street fighting when it doesn't concern my party. I will come out after the fighting has died down to carry off the wounded.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 5:42 PM
Hey all.
Following on Dexter's post from above, has anyone asked the question if the job of a president really is to "bring people together" or be a "uniter, not a divider" or whatever? Even if there were specifics attached, what the heck does that even mean?
With the possible exception of George Washington, our greatest/most admired presidents seemed to have been politicians who were hated in their day by large chunks of the country: Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Reagan...
So I'm not sure the ability to "unite" people is even relevant to doing the job of United States President. Or is it?
Thoughts anyone?
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 5:42 PM
LaL,
"Thoughts anyone?"
You think Reagan was a great president?
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 5:46 PM
Lardass Liberal:
What was it Doris Kearns Goodwin said last night on Stewart's show...Truman left office at like 17 % approval and wasn't resurrected by book-writers until a quarter century later.
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 5:46 PM
DND...notice I said "greatest/most admired"
I think it would be hard to argue with the latter, even if you're not one of the admirers.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 5:47 PM
LaL,
I dunno if Reagan was really all that admired until long after he left office. c.f., Dex the Wise's post about Truman.
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 5:50 PM
also, that list starts with Bill Clinton. Only things I was really PO'd about...when he bombed Baghdad ...
and NAFTA...I remember how guys in our local UAW office were ready to disown him over that one.
But Bill Clinton left us in darn good shape.
And then...and then...and then....we got 2000, Supreme Court , and a moron monkey-man.
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 5:51 PM
dnd
I assumed you thought i was female because you called me Hillary Clinton (disguised as the Blonde Wino) secretly dissing BO on this blog.
Can we all agree the HRC is a female?
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 5:52 PM
dnd...as a matter of personal opinion, I'm with you on the Reagan thing brother.
But as far as his reputation at large, a huge chunk of the country would list him among the greats of all time. Just as we would list FDR there, and lots of global-market capitalists would argue that he was a socialist nincompoop. And just as lots of folks south of the M-D line would still say the only good place for a portrait of Abe Lincoln is on a dart board.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 5:54 PM
"I will come out after the fighting has died down to carry off the wounded."
FD
Now that was funny. Either that or Chris Matthews makes you look like Will Rogers.
Posted by: jamie | January 30, 2008 5:54 PM
"I don't really dare step in-between inter-political street fighting when it doesn't concern my party"
and those endliess posts about John Edwards were just concern. In fact fry you post more about Democrats then you do about your own party
not surprising all things considered
15% of the house republicans are not running again
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 5:54 PM
dnd...Mets-Tigers in WS this year? Mets got Johann Santana 2day for 4 no-names.
Tigers have Miguel Cabrera at 3rd, Edgar Renteria at ss, and Dontrelle Willis on the hill every 5th start. Day-um!
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 5:55 PM
On the other hand, I can't be sure if there any Thomas Jefferson haters left. Mainly because the federalists pretty much won that fight, and there was no more reason to hate.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 5:56 PM
Blonde wino,
"Can we all agree the HRC is a female?"
Sorry. Not going there...
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 5:58 PM
Jamie,
Maybe John R is really Fritz, coming back to haunt you?
BlondE wino,
Why do you assume I am female because of the use of Blonde in my user name?
Interesting nik, but you are correct ,one shouldn't assume you are a female just because you use the nik BlondE. My late cousin, very much a male, was called Blondy by his Marine brothers. Also I don't think(?) a female would insert "wino" as part of her nik, but stranger things have happened around here. At any rate nice to meet you.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 5:58 PM
FryDaddy...can we assume you are a male, else you'd be FryMommy? Please say yes. My world is falling apart here.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 5:59 PM
Dex,
I'm not making any predictions until pitchers and catchers start in a couple of weeks. And I gotta tell ya brother, I can't wait..
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 6:00 PM
very unflattering Pat Oliphant cartoon of Hillary's ass:
http://www.gocomics.com/patoliphant/
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 6:01 PM
Jamie,
I often thought of myself as the Conservative Will Rogers. I thought Will Rogers was witty, with a very dry funny side.
The dinner bell has sounded it's calling.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 6:04 PM
LaL,
"But as far as his reputation at large, a huge chunk of the country would list him among the greats of all time. Just as we would list FDR there, and lots of global-market capitalists would argue that he was a socialist nincompoop."
You bring up a really good point. I would argue that Reagan's popularity was based on revisionist history, but that's neither here nor there. The way people feel is the way people feel.
Posted by: dnd | January 30, 2008 6:04 PM
LardassLiberal ,
Less there be any doubt. FryDaddy equals male. lol
Posted by: FryDaddy
| January 30, 2008 6:05 PM
gotta feed dogs, but check out this hilarous Rall cartoon...I wonder if Ted wasn't inspired by Crawfordslist here:
http://www.gocomics.com/tedrall/
Posted by: Dexter
| January 30, 2008 6:05 PM
The absolute scariest thing about Reagan was how he went from "no-way-can-that-joker-ever-be-president" to "great communicator" almost overnight in early 1981. And the national news media (with a bit of an assist from John Hinckley) had a lot to do with that shape-shift.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 6:06 PM
"Do you really think it is wise to post under the name "Blond wino?" "
dnd -- and there I was, just getting ready to compliment her on her screen name! :)
(Don't change it, wino! It has a certain flair...)
Posted by: Patsi | January 30, 2008 6:11 PM
I don't know why so many people love Reagan either he took jobs and health care for college students away from the American people. If they should love anyone it should be Bill Clinton who helped build a surplus and not lose one American life in Bosnia and Hillary who was fighting for health care back in the early 1990’s.
Second, I have talked to Obama supporters in Florida and I asked them “what does Obama want to change and how is he going to do it” They do not know how to answer that. Why, because Obama never tells anyone what his plan is. They just chant “YES WE CAN, YES WE CAN” a bunch of nothing.
Third this is to Craig Crawford, can you ask Keith Olbermann why is he and MSNBC such Obama Supporters tonight?
Posted by: Brian A. Mac Ineirghe | January 30, 2008 6:11 PM
FryDaddy
Thank you for the clarity...remember the original post by Craig that JE was not a woman and the dems have a more exciting choice than white bread. (Think of our choices as a croissant and pumpernickel this year. It really is interesting when only words are presented...no photos. Perhaps we should run our elections without actually seeing the candidates or hearing the candidates...just the words, thank you.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 6:11 PM
Oliphant needs to work on his Hillary caricature, rusty on Teddy too.
Bush and Cheney have made it too easy for cartoonist
They need to get back to working on their fundamentals.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | January 30, 2008 6:15 PM
CHOREPLAY...
When a woman is turned on by the sight of her husband/boyfriend/partner doing regular household chores, that she would normally be doing.
"Last night, it was all about choreplay. I was all 'OH YEAH, fold that laundry. Oh yes, just like that! In half and, then in half again. OHHH'"
LMAO!!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| January 30, 2008 6:16 PM
We all need to remember that one of Reagan's legacies was to bust the air traffic controllers union and to this day we have to live with an antiquated system. Just read the recent NASA report about our friendly skies. RR is not everyone's hero.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| January 30, 2008 6:17 PM
January 30, 2008
Nader takes steps towards another White House bid
Posted: 05:00 PM ET
Nader is taking steps toward another White House bid.
WASHINGTON (CNN) – Ralph Nader, the longtime consumer advocate who was blamed by many Democrats for Al Gore’s loss in the 2000 presidential election, launched an exploratory committee Wednesday for another White House bid, and told CNN he is likely to get in the race if he can put the resources in place.
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/01/edwards-and-giuliani-fold-2008.html#comments
I think people might stone him this time.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | January 30, 2008 6:17 PM
WJack...I agree about Oliphant. It probably also wouldn't hurt to take a bit of the racial edge off his depiction of Obama, who is basically characterized in the pose of an organ-grinder's monkey. It looks like something out of a white hate magazine.
I never did like Oliphant that much anyway. I think he's kind of a weirdo.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 6:18 PM
Finally, Obama's picked up the pace on the stump
http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-obama-clinton,0,963933.story
Posted by: Rezdog
| January 30, 2008 6:20 PM
LushisLinda...if mundane household chores turn you on, you MOST DEFINITELY need to watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN0oDnoc3-c
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| January 30, 2008 6:20 PM
Oops....I also assumed Blondewino was a woman....just figured only a woman woud come up with such a cool name. (kidding....)
Posted by: Patsi | January 30, 2008 6:20 PM
LAL
mundane household chores do not turn me on, but watching my husband perform them