No matter who wins the Democratic presidential nomination, back-room deals seem likely to make the difference and hand Republicans a rhetorical opportunity to portray Democrats as undemocratic.
Right now, neither side in this race sees a clear path to a nominating majority without relying on so-called superdelegates -- and some of those 796 party insiders are determined to wait as long as possible to make a fateful choice between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama. Worried party elders are already meeting behind closed doors to work something out.
Both contenders have long known it might come to this. That’s why they gave a combined total of nearly $1 million in campaign contributions to elected officials who are superdelegates, according to a study done by the Center for Responsive Politics. Obama led the way with $698, 200 doled out to unpledged convention delegates who could decide the outcome. Clinton trails at $205,500 in superdelegate giving.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Friday that superdelegates should not “overturn the verdict, the decision of the American people.” But a razor-thin margin of difference in delegate totals would mean no overwhelmingly clear verdict from Democratic primary voters.
If Clinton and Obama end up with a photo finish in delegates that yields no winning majority for either side, unelected and unpledged superdelegates will basically have to break a tie. And supporters for the losing candidate will surely argue that democracy failed in the Democratic Party.

Comments
I agree that a razor-thin margin will lead to hurt feelings for whoever loses. (Expect a battle as to what "razor-thin" means).
One thing I'd like to hear more about-- how long have the campaigns been giving to superdelegates? What percentage of giving to politicians are the superdelegate donations?
If it's been going on for a long time, then it might not be part of a strategy to woo their votes at the convention, rather a more general effort for support from politicians. After all, no one expected the SDs to wind up deciding things.
Posted by: Elvis Elvisberg | February 16, 2008 6:15 AM
Craig you hit it right on the head. I admire your analyses. I am frustrated to the point that I don't even think I am a Democrat anymore and believe me this is a first. I don't know what to do, and I see the media just jumping on the Obama bandwagon and if Hillary fights for the nomination she is painted as a power-hungry bitch instead of graciously closing up shop. This whole thing is disgusting.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 16, 2008 6:17 AM
Don't give up, Tom. I remember feeling so hopeless after the country went blind over Ronald Reagan, that I folded up my tent for a while. My God, what damage that man and his party did to America.
The real Democrats are still out there. We're called the base. And we can feel proud that we were not the ones who participated in the Raygun travesty, a dumbing down of the population which, I might add, led us to Bush.
Stick with the party.
Posted by: Patsi | February 16, 2008 6:51 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZEYCP4zzQc
Don't give up!
Posted by: Corey
| February 16, 2008 7:06 AM
Tom-I am absolutely understand your frustration, but the thought of a Repug in the WH next year makes me crazy and to be honest, it frightens me. So here is my plan-Send Hillary some money, make sure I have time to help here in PA when the primary season kicks in. Then when the nominee is selected, I will get behind her or him. Oh, and I will stay away from cable news.
Posted by: max | February 16, 2008 7:24 AM
If ever there was a way the snatch defeat from the jaws of victory we dems sure can find it.If we look realistically it is a no brainer to unie behind Clinton with Barak as the VP .This would ensure a possible 4 terms of a democrat in the White House and restore America back to the middle class .More important than that restore our image in the rest of the world at a time when the globe is getting smaller.But do we do this -heck no!
Instead we rip each other apart and in the end will be choking on the words President McCain.We refuse to belive that much of America will not vote for any black man yet.It is not what we vision for our future but it is reality now.If we unite behind Clinton /Obama we have a shot at defeating McCain and unting our party.This gives Barak the experience he needs to lead in the world as her predessor.
Instead we do a Lamont /Lieberman split which is leaving the rethuglicans inwardly squealing with glee.
I am all for a backroom deal if we can parlay it into a win/win for America;s future for the next 16 years.Sadly I do not think we will do it.
Posted by: Linda M | February 16, 2008 7:39 AM
stick with the party.....slim hope is better than the gop's no hope.
Posted by: sturgeone | February 16, 2008 7:52 AM
Good Morning Craig,
Maybe I am naive but isn't this the way it has always been done in our country? I am not politically wise but seems this "stuff" has been going over for eons.
Hillay will win Ohio, Pa and Tx so that should take care of things, I hope. haha
Go Hillary
Posted by: Carol
| February 16, 2008 8:21 AM
PS I agree with Linda
Posted by: Carol
| February 16, 2008 8:23 AM
Totally agree with Linda M. A Clinton/Obama ticket would be unbeatable and give the country exactly what we need. Why not?
Posted by: crawford rocks | February 16, 2008 8:30 AM
Agree with all you said, Jamie.
Posted by: Patsi | February 16, 2008 8:39 AM
I think Obama needs more experience before he really becomes president. I think the crossover Repubs who voted for him are doing it to insure that McCain runs against Obama. You just wait, if Obama is the nominee the s*** on him will hit the fan. The Reps have beaten Hillary up for 16 years.I think the dirt that can be thrown has been thrown over the years and the surprise factor will be missing.
Posted by: steve | February 16, 2008 8:55 AM
A theme song for the Democrats this fall.
Ray Charles and the Raeletts, "Hit the Road Jack"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Tiz6INF7I
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 9:01 AM
Clyburn, Superdelegates and Robo-Call Threats
" .. Cleaver notes that some members of Congress who support Clinton are experiencing threats — not from fellow members but when they return home.
They have been told that they would face opposition in their next election if they do not support Obama, and Cleaver says some — such as John Lewis — have become the victims of "robo-calls." In Lewis' case, the calls said "very, very derogatory things about him."
http://www.taylormarsh.com/
Posted by: GORDO | February 16, 2008 9:07 AM
A song for Reverend Mike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT8y2EvUK9M
Arkansas traveler
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 9:20 AM
jamie,
Obamaniacs? lol
I see you like using my tagline. Well feel free to use anytime you want.
One thing I totally agree with you on is this: Of course, this is colored by the feeling that the Obama screaming, crying, and fainting teenyboppers have hijacked the caucus states, many of which are likely to be lost as red states in the general.
Rose color glass wearing, non-working, no life experience googley eyed teenagers, voting for someone based on a list of promises wrapped up in empty endless speeches delivered by a good looking articulate 40's something male, who BTW also lacks experience. Is Obama the Pied Piper of Hamelin, or the Wizard of Oz?
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 9:24 AM
steve,
"I think the crossover Repubs who voted for him are doing it to insure that McCain runs against Obama"
In Texas that is exactly what many of the Rs are doing. Voting for Obama in the primary. But not sure that strategy will work in Big T as to many Ds are fully committed to HRC. But there is always hope. Hope lol
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 9:29 AM
Elvis wrote:
"One thing I'd like to hear more about-- how long have the campaigns been giving to superdelegates? What percentage of giving to politicians are the superdelegate donations?"
Me too.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 9:30 AM
FD
I started calling them that ages ago. You must have missed my slightly more strident "panties on the stage" post. :-)
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 9:31 AM
New York Post, NY - 5 hours ago
By MAGGIE HABERMAN February 16, 2008 -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the Democratic "superdelegates" should follow the will of the people in their states ...
So that would make Speaker Pelosi a Clinton superdelegate.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 16, 2008 9:32 AM
Tom, you almost had it right. You said, "...and if Hillary fights for the nomination she is painted as a power-hungry bitch..."
Actually, here in South Carolina, they portrayed her as a 'power-hungry racist bitch.'
Posted by: Flatus
| February 16, 2008 9:34 AM
Campaigning for dummies
http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-wh-campaign,0,2078891.flash
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 9:35 AM
State GOP split as convention nears
Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Saturday, February 16, 2008
The cash-strapped California Republican Party is facing deeply divisive political and financial problems in this critical election year - beginning with a $3 million loan from a furious contributor who was supposed to have been repaid on Friday.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/16/MNS1V32BU.DTL&tsp=1
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 16, 2008 9:36 AM
jamie,
"panties on the stage"
LOL. Glad you said that and not I.
Jamie answer me this question if you will. When does challenging someone's record become an attack, if the facts support your challenge?
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 9:37 AM
Linda wrote:
"it is a no brainer to unie behind Clinton with Barak as the VP "
I know this is the deal they should strike. Obama can get some real experience rather than just deciding after a few years at the state level he'll take a national senate seat just to make it look as if he's attempting to get some Washington experience before running for president (all a show really). We keep the youth involved. 16 years of dem rule.
It does seem a no brainer. Obviously it's not.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 9:38 AM
For years ppl have wanted a real horse race instead of a coronation in the Dem party..now we get one and it just pisses ppl off... I dont understand how the party can have this great dialogue about what the country needs and wants but still end up with such venom on both sides.. it's not like they're all that much different.. does anyone honestly think that an Obama cabinet would look all that much different from a Hillary cabinet? Either nominee would, I trust, get a list and fill those jobs. This is about a fundamental change (oops..sorry..there's that word again) in the way things are done, particularly after the past 8 years.
I hesitate to use a religious word here, but it seems to me that the Dems could learn a little pastoral care. Get ppl out in the trenches to talk about what happens AFTER a nominee is decided.. how are you going to bring both camps together for the sake of Democratic ideals? To focus on the obvious differences between the two parties, and judging from the polls for the past ..ohhh 6 years, the Dems are far closer to how the electorate feels than the Reps are.
Posted by: tylenol
| February 16, 2008 9:42 AM
Wendy,
it is a no brainer to unie behind Clinton with Barak as the VP
Sounds good on paper, but do you think HRC is going to want to share the spotlight with Barry Obama. Who do you think would receive more press coverage? The MSM fav, Barry O, that is who. HRC is not into sharing.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 9:43 AM
I have the solution.
" Biden-- Obama"
HRC as Majority leader
That is still my dream ticket.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 9:45 AM
Gordo - on the superdelegates threat issue - see a post I did yesterday regarding this - there is a link to an interesting article about this:
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/02/mccain-games-the-democrats.html#comment-35280
This article is also very good - NYC reps sticking with Hillary under great pressure:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/15/borough-superdelegates-stick-by-clinton/
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 9:46 AM
John McCain will be running with a blowup doll as his vp. No one is going to want to be near that disaster.
Posted by: Super Delicate | February 16, 2008 9:46 AM
Fry
She is not into losing either
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 9:46 AM
I agree Jamie and the others wholeheartedly regarding the caucus system. As I new resident to Iowa I witnessed the system firsthand as well and I found out that you cannot even bring up the issue of disenfranchisement with native Iowans without lots of hooting and hollering: "it's tradition!" "It's always been done this way!"
As far as I am concerned there are a lot of traditions in this country that have gone by the wayside and the caucus should be one of them. The people in the system who need our government when it works at its best should not be alienated from the political process.
When my husband and I got home from caucus night we looked at each other and said, "Did that remind you of a pep rally or what?" It certainly didn't strike me as a sacred tradition to be treasured for perpetuity. But listen, I'm a new Iowa resident. Maybe I'm missing something.
Posted by: Ally
| February 16, 2008 9:48 AM
Somebody needs to interview Ted Kennedy and find out if he will follow the people in his state.
Posted by: Ally
| February 16, 2008 9:49 AM
Well Jack then she need to make her VP a Latino. They out number Afro Americans and are more likely to vote.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 9:52 AM
"When does challenging someone's record become an attack, if the facts support your challenge?"
When you portray it as something substantially different than your own position, actions, money sources et.
When you ascribe nefarious motives to the position i.e. racist that you definitely know weren't intended.
When you take the position out of the context of a conversation that twists the meaning of what someone has actually said.
Those are a few ways. Honest people can have honest differences of opinion. For instance, I think our current President is a war criminal. He probably disagrees even though the other day he said, "Some people might call me a war monger"...... Well Yeah! Duh
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 9:53 AM
speaking of backroom deals
This is what MSNBC is. It is the cable channel of Ann Coulter and Michael Savage and Don Imus. It is the home to Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson and their deeply disturbed attitudes toward women.
The longer MSNBC responds to legitimate concerns about the conduct of its hosts and guests by lashing out at critics and booking Ann Coulter again, the more clear it becomes that the problems at MSNBC go much higher than Chris Matthews.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802150016
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 16, 2008 9:55 AM
After the 2000 debacle in Florida, I became disenchanted with the political system. I was very upset with both Nader and Gore, Nader for running at all, and gore for not utilizing Clinton enough. I then became a registered Independent.
I am once again seeing the party hijacked by Republicans who do not want HRC to win, and dreamy eyed folks who do not value experience. if folks vote for BHO because they like his stance on issues, fine, But, I am hearing some folks, including some of my friends, saying that he looks good and sounds good. They believe he doesn't have to know much because he will have advisers. That scares me.
Oh, I am a Floridian.
Posted by: Pauline | February 16, 2008 9:55 AM
Democrats Look to Avoid Convention Rift
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/us/politics/16delegates.html?th=&adxnnl=1&emc=th&adxnnlx=1203173796-2qso0HNdd/mZRxXbRPhqrw
Posted by: NY Times | February 16, 2008 9:58 AM
Craig, I found a list of who gave what to whom? But I can't find one with dates. Do you know how recent this money was given?
http://www.capitaleye.org/superdelegates.asp
Posted by: Linda~in~Wisconsin | February 16, 2008 10:00 AM
The Obama campaign's repeated rationalization that he has enough experience to be an effective president is based on Clinton's similar lack of qualifications when he was elected.
What they choose to ignore is the uncontested fact that Bill Clinton's first two years were an unmitigated disaster. He thought that because he was the de jure commander-in-chief, that he had the wisdom to effectively deploy troops to Somalia. How wrong he was.
And his handling of the healthcare issue resulted in a hemorrhage of political capital.
Those, and other fiascoes, were a direct result of his inexperience.
The only way that Obama could avoid equivalent failures would be by populating his administration with experienced hands--something I believe he would be reluctant to do.
And, I sense that while many of his constituents will have voted for because they believe he's the best man for the job. others will have cast their ballots expecting massive infusions of capital into urban areas.
I think Obama recognizes that Southwest Asia is where he must apply his most immediate attention. But who is he to trust without embracing that which he has promised to change?
Posted by: Flatus
| February 16, 2008 10:01 AM
Pauline: One of my girlfriend's husbands told me the exact same thing, "Don't worry...he will have really smart and experienced advisers." He caucused for Obama in Washington state while my friend went with Hillary. After the caucus she asked him why he went with Obama as he said he was "undecided" on the way in. He said, "I got caught up in the emotion of the moment. It felt good."
This is a smart guy. An executive for a large banking institution in Seattle. He works 60-80 hours a week so he didn't have time to research the issues—he went with a feeling.
People have the right to vote for whatever reason they wish so please, no attacks. This is just a story I relate based on personal observation.
And by the way, I don't believe in the whole concept of undecided voters. I believe that at a certain point, deep down in a person's gut, in places nobody talks about, everyone knows who they are going to vote for.
Posted by: Ally
| February 16, 2008 10:02 AM
Fry - Jamie
I'm with you guys. I'm a little nervous about all that is happening here. The notion that Obama callers are trained not to talk about policy but rather talk about their "conversion" experience and how they "came to Obama"
Yikes
As I noted - my dog is signed up to make calls on his behalf - she hasn't made any yet because she doesn't have thumbs, is deaf, and can't speak real words - although her snorting (she's a French Bulldog) would be as meaningful as some of Obama's speeches.
Here is the first thing you say to callers:
"I'm supporting Barack Obama because he is the one candidate who can unify our nation and bring an end to the divisive politics in Washington. "
If undecided:
* During his more than two decades of public service, Barack Obama has been bringing people together to solve important problems. As a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, Obama brought faith, political, labor and business leaders together to restore hope and economic opportunity to a community that had been devastated by steel mill closings.
• Barack Obama is challenging the conventional thinking in Washington by leveling with the American people about his plan to strengthen Social Security. Politicians in Washington routinely dodge and duck any discussion of Social Security – because it’s the so-called third rail of American politics. We can trust Obama to tell us the truth even on the tough issues – and even when it’s not politically convenient. That’s how we’ll strengthen Social Security, and it’s how, as President, he’ll changed the divisive, partisan politics in Washington that have blocked so many needed reforms.
• Barack Obama is the only major candidate for President – in either party – who both opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning and opposed the Bush administration’s march to war in Iran. That’s the kind of judgment that we need in our next Commander in Chief.
• Time and time again, Barack Obama has proven himself as a leader who can bring together people of all different backgrounds and beliefs to help change this country for the better. He will be open and honest with the American people and provide the judgment our country needs.
I'm not sure how telling American's the truth about Social Security strengthens it (gee thanks - that's a good start) perhaps you have another plan in mind that will strengthen Social Security besides telling American's the truth.
I don't need to go over the war in Iraq garbage - up or down vote on the record or it doesn't count. See the Joe Williams HuffPo - he says it better than I:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-wilson/battletested_b_86355.html
Well if the Presidency was just about leading prayer circles - I guess he'd have my vote.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 10:02 AM
dog's eye
"I see no reason Obama should take VP to someone he is slightly ahead of, fair and square, at this point in the primary and caucus season."
This is actually an outgrowth of my attitude toward the caucus system. It just disenfranchises too many voters and is too subject to pressures outside of the voting booth (i.e. Limited Locations, Union membership).
If you subtract those caucus delegate totals from both sides just to have an honest look at the totals from the states that maximize participation, it looks completely different than the totals the Obama folks claim now.
No I'm not advocating massive changes in the system until after the General, but if we are going to resolve this split in the party to ensure a win in the general and put salve on the hard feelings, then the Clinton/Obama ticket makes the most sense if only for it's likely length of tenure for Democrats in the Presidency.
There is no way Obama would not be an activist VP simply because Clinton would be crazy not to use his talents and she isn't crazy. This would set him up for the Presidency in 2012 or 2016.
Keep Bill out of trouble by letting him sing with the Supremes. :-)
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 10:08 AM
KGC,
I know we've already beat up on MSNBC more than enough, but your post this morning reminds me that I haven't thrown my three cents in on them lately.
I think the use of clips from Chris Matthews apology on his Hillary comments in promotional ads is as repugnant as anything that network has done. Like all their attempts at atonement, the apology didn't go far enough, and then when they use it to promote his show, I question whether that wasn't the true intent of the so called apologia.
Posted by: EdVB
| February 16, 2008 10:09 AM
hey dog,
I responded your your question late yesterday. I was out doing things and wanted to be sure I answered your question.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 10:10 AM
Dog...lat time I checked there were a bunch of states - a bunch of BIG BLUE states still left to vote.
Talk about wanting to coronate someone...quite a few Obama supporters and Obama himself have been trying to coronate him w/o letting everyone actually vote.
What happened to the will of the people
David Wilhelm was very clear - superdelegates should go with the will of the people unless the will of the people is Hillary - then they should vote their conscience
ummm...ahhh...ohh...well...I've pledged my support to Barack....ummm...uuhhh.
I myself am just thinking about a bigger picture. 16 years of democratic rule and the kid can get some real experience rather than just thinking because he got a little national attention for a-I'll admit it-damn good speech in 2004 that suddenly he's qualified to be president.
To quote Bill Clinton: "Give me a Break!"
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 10:13 AM
EdVB
Apparently they have not been beaten up enough because they go on about their merry way.
But I do post all my complaints on their website just in case someone might see it. You have to register to post there but if it could make a difference it's worth it.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 16, 2008 10:16 AM
Wendy: That interview is going down as one of my all-time favs. I have forwarded it to about a million of my closest friends. Fine fun for the whole family.
Posted by: Ally
| February 16, 2008 10:16 AM
What if the Washington State Primary vote is different from the caucus results?
What really is the will of the people?
Posted by: Super Delicate | February 16, 2008 10:19 AM
"Give me liberty or give me death."
-- Patrick Henry
"I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat."
-- Winston Churchill
"We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
-- FDR
"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
-- JFK
"I have a dream."
-- MLK
"Yes we can!"
-- Barack Obama
"Words are cheap."
-- Hillary Rodham Clinton
Posted by: dnd | February 16, 2008 10:20 AM
Do you think they are even going to release the Democratic Presidential Primary Results in Washington since the votes don't count? Anybody in Washington know the answer to that one?
Posted by: Ally
| February 16, 2008 10:20 AM
Oops, forgot:
"Just one more cow."
-- Craig Crawford
Posted by: dnd | February 16, 2008 10:21 AM
dog, oh dog. Old age my dear. It was on waterboarding.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 10:22 AM
dog,
Look here on yesterday's blog.
February 15, 2008 7:57 PM
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 10:24 AM
dnd - I'll give you that one - that was a little funny.
Patrick Henry did actually go out and fight in the war though.
And LBJ signed the legislation to make MLKs dream a reality - oops - that's racist to bring that up - sorry.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 10:26 AM
Gun violence. Certainly this is one aspect that needs investigating or will it just be chalked up to ironic coincidence.
" ...NIU Shooter Bought Gun Accessories At Same Shop As VaTech Killer ... www.nbc5.com/news/15315385/detail.html?rss=chi&psp=news
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 16, 2008 10:27 AM
WOO HOO Robin Thicke. Well considering his mother is Gloria Loring from Days of Our Lives and his father is Alan Thicke, it's no wonder he is such a talent. Thanks for the post Corey.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 16, 2008 10:29 AM
I'll chime in with everyone else: get rid of caucus'. Get rid of super delegates.
Instant runoff voting is the way to go in a democracy.
Posted by: dnd | February 16, 2008 10:32 AM
dnd
""Yes we can!"
-- Barack Obama
"Words are cheap."
-- Hillary Rodham Clinton
You will note that everything above "Yes We Can!" is from men who demanded that people actually DO something difficult. Obama isn't real long on what ACTIONS he or anyone else should take, which is why HRC thinks that life is more than just Words.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 10:32 AM
MSNBC is slowly running out of steam, and will sooner or later come to a halt. What they need is a total shake-up from the bottom up. I was stupefied the other day watching the poor weather-girl, Jackie the Canadian, giving her weather report and had to use the screen on her laptop computer to show the weather images. 'We have this cold front coming across the Midwest". And she is pointing to her computer screen and the camera man had to zoom in on it , and all you could see was this fuzzy little green blob. Just simply pathetic, felt sorry for Jackie, trying to do her professioan best with with insufficient prompts.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 10:32 AM
Something Obama supporters can read their children before bedtime
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-lewis/barack-and-the-wolf-a-ca_b_86971.html
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 10:33 AM
dnd - I think we should have a national primary in June - all parties pick their candidate all 50 states - let everyone vote - no caucus'. Popular vote wins.
Then in November we vote for President from the various parties primary winners - popular vote wins.
Sounds less complicated to me. That said...what would we all argue about?
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 10:39 AM
Where do I send my application for superdelagate status? I need to get some that money HRC and BHO are sending to them. Bills you know need to be paid.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 10:50 AM
"Jack was out kissing babies while I was out passing bills. Someone had to tend the store. "
Lyndon B. Johnson
Just to show there is nothing new , from the 1960 campaigne.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 10:53 AM
Wendy
We need some sort of vetting and weeding screen that allows people to get acquainted with the possibilities before narrowing down to one or two candidates prior to a convention, but I'm not quite sure of what system would work best. Possibly a series of debates followed by Primaries in Geographic areas.
Money and name recognition play such a huge part in our elections which is probably why I like the Parliamentary system of government, but that is another argument.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 10:54 AM
You're welcome , Tom. That video goes back to a chat I had with a friend about faith. She had no belief in God or angels. "No proof." was her reason why. I posted that video on my blog after that chat. I think believing , could be for anything. Belief in God , angels , someone or yourself. Last night I was watching CNN and someone wrote in and said that it didn't matter who the next president was because it would just be 4 more years of broken promises. I'm sure everyone here who has a candidate of choice has picked them because they believe in their candidate.
Posted by: Corey
| February 16, 2008 10:54 AM
From Fry Daddy @ 9:24: “One thing I totally agree with you on is this: Of course, this is colored by the feeling that the Obama screaming, crying, and fainting teenyboppers have hijacked the caucus states, many of which are likely to be lost as red states in the general.”
Really now! I am white, turned 65 on February 3, and in Central Ohio. There are many of us old, white folks involved for Obama, so don’t talk about the demographics for Obama being some screaming, crying, and fainting teenyboppers. Yes, there are Strickland and Glenn here supporting her, but many of the other legislators and people in public office here are behind Obama. I know them! They are neither all black nor young.
I see some of you want to “give” it to Hilliary Rodham Clinton (I’ll be using that entire name henceforth because she, just as when Bill ran, wants it out of the public until after the election; guess it turns some men off!!) saying why not a Clinton/Obama ticket. That is because you know the Clintons will never accept the Obama/Clinton ticket.
BTW, one of my beefs with her is that I don’t believe healthcare should be forced on everyone. There are other beefs as well. If you don’t want it you will have to pay for it anyway. Healthcare should be a choice as Obama wants it.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g8-DEMtAE9q4i4ySQ0eV_qZefmRQD8UIVGG00
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 10:55 AM
Some thoughts carried over from last night.
1. a response to UT's comment on Pelosi's declaration
2. a follow up on the subject of torture
Eurotom,
I understand your feelings. Several friends of mine had the same comment this morning. They have never voted Republican in their lives and now the moment of truth is approaching. McCain seems in better shape today with some help from Pelosi and Zbig.
For those wishing to state specifically where in the US Constitution torture is prohibited see link below. This is not an endorsement of torture, simply a look at whether the Constitution itself prohibits torture. Also a quick look at the GC which protects legal combatants but not illegal conbatants.
http://stubbornfacts.us/politics/pop_quiz#comment-13077
Posted by: Maxtrue | February 16, 2008 10:56 AM
More wisdom of Lyndon Johnson
"Presidents quickly realize that while a single act might destroy the world they live in, no one single decision can make life suddenly better or can turn history around for the good."
Lyndon B. Johnson
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 10:56 AM
dog's eye
The LBJ quote wasn't racist in any way. You could have just as easily said that MLK had a dream, but until he led the sit ins, marches and strikes nothing happened.
There is always an idealist/realist, dream/action component to every movement.. They each have their place in any achievement.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 10:59 AM
You are paying about 40% more for your own health insurance, and about 40% more for each doctor visit to cover the cost of uninsured people who use the ER and then skip out on the bill because they are broke. So i guess the choice is up to you. Health costs rising 15% per year to cover the cost of the uninsured, or tax credits to those same uninsured so they can afford insurance, and then you do not have to pay for it. Or it sounds like Bushworld -"you can get good care in the emergency room." That is the kind of thinking that got us into trouble, All the recent studies indicate without the mandatory requirement it is just more of the same.
Posted by: Try facts for breakfast | February 16, 2008 11:03 AM
"BTW, one of my beefs with her is that I don’t believe healthcare should be forced on everyone. There are other beefs as well. If you don’t want it you will have to pay for it anyway. Healthcare should be a choice as Obama wants it"
Let see your 65, I guess your not using medicare
LOL
we all pay in just so you can have better healthcare.
I wish my health Insurance was as good as medicare.
That is what manditory health insurance looks like.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 11:04 AM
LBJ also claimed to know the difference between "chicken salad and chicken sh**."
Posted by: sturgeone | February 16, 2008 11:07 AM
Speak Karolenna, speak. They don't mind Obama in a symbolic role, but have their precious Clinton in that role, and they stomp their feet like petulant children.
Well Clintonites, you better get used to the reality. What Craig says about black reps getting pressure is true. One of the truly underreported stories is the blowback black establishment Democrats are getting from the black community for their support of Clinton. Don't think they're nervous, they've petrified. Because a new generation (a Barack generation) are determined to vote them out (Albert Wynn last week) if they don't vote for Barack. Hardball politics. And there goes a big block of superdelegates.
Obama is going to win the nom. The only way Clinton can win is through some sort of dirty trick, but I'm confident that Obama's campaign is smart enough to not fall for any of them.
Obama-Richardson Ticket in 08!
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 16, 2008 11:07 AM
If a person doesn't want health insurance, they should have to pay their medical bills (at retail rates) before they receive any medical services.
Posted by: unlikely_burrito | February 16, 2008 11:07 AM
"US Constitution torture is prohibited see link below. This is not an endorsement of torture, simply a look at whether the Constitution itself prohibits torture."
Maxtrue,
Cruel and unusual pretty well covers the whole idea of torture. It was certainly meant to counteract grevious punishments that had been practiced against colonists by British authorities at the time and to make a break European conditions of the period. There was very much an "Enlightenment" movement in progress throughout Europe and her possessions.
On top of that, there has always been a general consensus as to what constitutes torture even in countries where it is practiced.
Then you add International compacts and treaties, various trials and verdicts following wars, just plain good ol' common sense that it doesn't work, and the rather exalted humanitarian ideal that America is better than that and you come to the conclusion that Torture is just plain stupid.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 11:08 AM
Jamie wrote:
"We need some sort of vetting and weeding screen that allows people to get acquainted with the possibilities before narrowing down to one or two candidates"
You're probably right. I think a series of debates between all party candidates running is best - but i still think there should be a national primary. Obama et. al. started running for Pres a year ago. They could debate...do rallys and appearances for 12 - 16 months before anyone has to vote. That's more than enough time to figure it out.
Dog - Well that hurts my feelings...that you think my charm is running thin...but I'll try to go on.
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 11:08 AM
The Al Wynn defeat was helped by turnout but is not the result of Obama. It is the result of hard work by Donna Edwards. There is some feeling she was cheated out of a win last time. And Obama wasn't on the ballot then.
Posted by: Try facts for breakfast | February 16, 2008 11:10 AM
you can log comments about MSNBC programming at http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=541402
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| February 16, 2008 11:11 AM
"Let see your 65, I guess your (sorry it’s you’re) not using medicare
LOL
we all pay in just so you can have better healthcare.
I wish my health Insurance was as good as medicare.
That is what manditory (again, sorry, but it’s mandatory) health insurance looks like."
No, as I understand it I cannot get medicare yet. There is one form that does not pay much. I am considered one of the first "babyboomers" (that's funny). I am paying COBRA at $400/month. I cannot retire for another year and will not even be able to retire then due to three downsizings/restructures so I will be working indefinitely.
If someone knows something I don't I'd appreciate any advice, but I have been so busy working as a contractor for the past few months and becoming a first-time grandmother that I frankly have not had time to check into any kind of medicare. So, no, you are not paying anything for me.
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 11:14 AM
Burrito wrote:
"If a person doesn't want health insurance, they should have to pay their medical bills (at retail rates) before they receive any medical services."
I agree. If you don't want to buy in then I don't want to pay for you.
As I said before. I'm all for helping the poor among us and I believe Clinton's plan between tax credits, the percentage of sallery, medicare and medicaid and a plan to reduce prices will make sure everyone is covered with out overburddening the poor among us.
One study showed that people who actually make enough money to have insurance choose not to buy it. It's not a priority for them.
I believe Jamie brought up the Social Security argument long ago - we've all been paying into Social Security for decades now - none of us are headed into the poor house because we pay into social security.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 11:15 AM
The difference between John Edwards and Barry Obama, is Edwards actually had a plan, had experience, knew what he was talking about. The reason I disliked Edwards so, had nothing to do with his ideology as much as it had to do with him being such a hypocrite and talking down to people in such a condescending way, which only a true Southern can pull off.
Obama on the other hand has 100's of bullet points presented in his well articulate, well delivered speeches, but they lack any substance. His follower when asked why they are voting for him all have the same pat answered, "Because he represents hope and change." It is a very slick piece of political campaigning, and I guess if no one dares ask the next question on specifics how he would obtain all this hope and change, a number of you will be left with your mouths open when the promises are found to be undoable. Fans of Barry should Google him and read about what friends, classmates and others have said about him, about his true ideology, who he was in prep-school who he was in college. What were his thought then as compared to now, how does he see the US, and what should be the US's role in worldwide affairs. You might be very surprised. If you want America to be turned into a true Nanny State, then Obama is your man. One thyme which is recurring is that everyone comments on his ability to deliver well articulate speeches. But as history has so clearly demonstrated the ability to deliver well articulate speeches is no assurance that person will become a great leader.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 11:15 AM
http://www.ssa.gov/r&m2.htm
When you are 65 you are eligible for medicare.
If you are a true babyboomer you are not 65 but turning 62 this year,.
Posted by: Try facts for breakfast | February 16, 2008 11:17 AM
Fry - any thing you can recommend from your Googling?
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 11:20 AM
For those who feel that the coverage of Hillary Clinton has been extremely biased, there is a petition that is sent to all of the networks with the comments of each individual signing it. I've received robo responses from all of the networks since signing it, so they are getting them one at a time, not some mass one time event.
http://stage.citizenspeak.org/node/1224
Just fill in the form, add your personal message if you wish, and click Send. The letter will be sent to 25 influential journalists and news outlets,
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 11:20 AM
No matter what, I am so appalled by the amount of money poured into this nominating process. What does that say about all of us? Wasted dollars on a nominating process and wait until general election when the big dollars are spent.
I don't know, maybe that is "why" John Edwards isn't choosing...all that money to fancy rather than food and shelter for our poorest.
Wealth increased for the top echelon of our country -- those very rich who pay thousands of dollars to keep away from the rest of us 'poor folk.' I hate to sound like Lou Dobbs, but it really is starting to turn my stomach like MSNBC has. And on another note, I am dismayed that Craig has not been on MSNBC for some time. He could use some $$$, too. : ( And the American public used to own the "airways" that most of the money is going to (networks, cable) and we are paying a lot of money every month to buy that network and cable feed.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 11:21 AM
"http://www.ssa.gov/r&m2.htm
When you are 65 you are eligible for medicare.
If you are a true babyboomer you are not 65 but turning 62 this year,."
I cannot take full Social Security until next year. I know. I've checked into it.
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 11:24 AM
Karolena
It is 66, not 65 for most boomers.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 11:26 AM
"Karolena
It is 66, not 65 for most boomers."
Yes, that's what I said and then "Try facts for breakfast" said I am not. But if you go here
http://www.ssa.gov/retirement/1943.html
you will see that I am a boomer. God, I never wished I would be older until now!!! I hate talking about my age because most think I'm in my 50's. Had an aunt who told me once that "a woman who tells her age will tell anything".
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 11:30 AM
Wendy, You can try these for starters. Just enter them in Google just as presented.
obama's past friends interviewed
or
global poverty act obama
Now my favorite link is to his link. I call it the endless list. see for yourself.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm
Some of the things i like, but there are certain things which I have no idea under our constitution how he would pull them off.
Need to run, everyone have a good day.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 11:33 AM
Karolenna and anyone else with a huge premium Cobra policy.
For the duration look into a Health Savings Account. Contact someone like Blue Cross. The way they work is relatively simple. The insurance company provides a "major medical" policy with a large deductible.
If you have no previous conditions and are in reasonably good health, this should be a lot cheaper than the $400 a month you are paying.
You set up the HSA (there are guidelines on the amounts you can deposit). These accounts are tax deductible against your gross income. You pay your insurance premium and all uncovered medical costs out of this account. That way you are paying with untaxed funds.
For a small business or self employed person, this can be a major insurance savings.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 11:35 AM
I want to go back to debates...I heard Contessa on MSNBC state to some pundit "why" do we need another debate before the Wisconsin election when BHO is ahead?
One thing about the debates, they sure even the playing field and cost. Personally, I think BHO's charisma doesn't translate at the debates as in a rally. Even Mrs. M. Obama knows that...perhaps that is "why" BHO hesitated on more debates. Plus, the debates do not require extra money on behalf of the candidates and I sure enjoy the debates a lot more than most of the talking heads and pollsters.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 11:35 AM
full Social Security
and you are confusing years for different things.
full is the operative word. You may collect a lesser amount when you turn 62
Babyboomers people born between 1946 and 1964
cannot collect their full soc sec benefit until they are 67
but can qualify for lesser amounts at 62. The first boomer has applied..
Medicare is a different issue and you get it when you turn 65 regardless.
Posted by: Try facts for breakfast | February 16, 2008 11:36 AM
Karolenna,
Forgot to address this. Your comments on my comments were really jamie's comments which i cut and pasted, but they are ones I totally agreed with.
Now I am off. Bye
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 16, 2008 11:37 AM
FD
"One thyme which is recurring is that everyone comments on his ability to deliver well articulate speeches."
Can't help myself. Is this a one time event, a theme you are espousing, or are you just feeling unusually spicy today?
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 11:39 AM
SOCIAL SECURITY
News Release
Nation’s First Baby Boomer Files for
Social Security Retirement Benefits -- Online!
At an event hosted by Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, the nation's first Baby Boomer, Kathleen Casey-Kirschling, today filed for her Social Security retirement benefits online at www.socialsecurity.gov. Ms. Casey-Kirschling, who was born one second after midnight on January 1, 1946, will be eligible for benefits beginning January 2008.
http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/pr/babyboomerfiles-pr.htm
Posted by: Try facts for breakfast | February 16, 2008 11:41 AM
Oh...and the way women are treated in most Muslim countries makes me really upset to see us buying into paying-off an abusive society to support that way of life -- all because of a failed foreign policy.
We so need a woman President.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 11:43 AM
Karolena
Two things,
1-- A sure sign that someones argument is bankrupt is when they spend more time pointing out spelling and grammatical errors they they do disputing the point being made.
2 When you did try to dispute the point you were, idiotic wrong. It is always better to get your facts straight before you post. The Medicare web site is easy to find. Just google "medicare".
From the medicare FAQs
http://questions.medicare.gov/cgi-bin/medicare.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=121
"Be sure to sign up for Medicare about three months before you reach age 65. And remember, you do not have to be retired to enroll in Medicare."
So that leaves one major question, just who are you anyway. Because we all know you aren't a 65 year old white woman. Because if you were you would have already checked this one out.
I think your the pimply faced 16yr old boy.
Because we all know I'm the 13 yr old girl with perky tits
Just a little use net humor there folks.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 11:45 AM
WJ
: ) Thanks for making me laugh....I agree more humor, than serious. Becuase if I can't laugh, I would be crying at all of this horror.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 11:47 AM
Here is some basic HSA information, but do talk to your insurance carrier and bank for specifics in your area.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_savings_account
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 11:53 AM
Craig comments about back room deals--today's NY Times mentions that all eyes are watching what Al Gore may or may not do in an effort to resolve the potential rift.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/us/politics/16delegates.html?hp
Query: Would it satisfy & unify the Clinton/Obama camps IF (A VERY BIG IF) Al Gore became the nominee?
Posted by: Coreen | February 16, 2008 11:55 AM
Purgatory extends season
February 15, 2008
By Ted Holteen | Herald Staff Writer
Headline from Colorado newspaper.
I think that's how we all feel about the primaries.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker. | February 16, 2008 12:02 PM
KGC - Unintentional humor in headlines is fun.
Now if there are any well to do snow bunnies amongst us, the story that goes with the headline sounds like a reason to rejoice.
http://www.durangoherald.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=news&article_path=/news/08/news080215_2.htm
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 12:07 PM
I am back from defending Corporate America, which in this case - actually consisted of some good and decent people.
Anyways, I do not think the Democrats will have to destroy themselves to pick a nominee.
Pelosi said: ``It's not just following the returns; it's also having a respect for what has been said by the people.'' She also said it would be ``a problem for the party if the verdict would be something different than the public has decided."
I think that after 20 debates, and caucuses and primaries all over the country, Barack will emerge as the Democratic nominee.
I think that Obama has the best message this year and the substance to back it up. He has shown impressive political skills battling the Clinton Machine and provides the best chance in the general. (for more on this - http://www.dailykos.com/user/Warrentowers13 - I like to think that my posts have become more understanding of Clinton supporters due to this board - but I am sure I still piss them off.)
On MI and FL, Pelosi said: ``I don't think that any states that operated outside the rules of the party can be dispositive of who the nominee is.''
If Clinton can mount a big comeback and emerge as the clear winner - than so be it. But it is going to take more than political maneuvering to get there.
And no Clintons on the Supreme Court. They are much better at being politicians and they would turn that place into a circus (nothing personal - just a factor of being the most famous couple in the free world for more than a decade).
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 12:07 PM
Texas delegate apportionment rules.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5528612.html
Posted by: Bear
| February 16, 2008 12:10 PM
speaking of endorsements - I know you weren't, but I am, for a sec. Did y'all see Kwiesi Mfume the other evening on MSNBC when asked if he was endorsing either dem candidate and he said he was not? However, he called Obama "Oback Borama" 2 times. Bet I know who his preferred candidate is, and I'll bet it's not Borama.
Posted by: colleen | February 16, 2008 12:14 PM
Warren...you know as much as the rest of us about the outcome of all this...and BHO should be winning if he has spent that much money on super delegates. To me this is a dead heat, thus, Craig's post.
My mantra remains the same...who is going to heal the dem party in August?
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 12:16 PM
"Dead heat" - that is the State of Denial that the Clintons have been selling.
I think Clinton herself will heal the dem party in August. I realize anything can still happen, but if she loses either OH, TX or PA - she will throw her support behind Obama and we can train our sights on the Republicans.
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 12:25 PM
If some of the things coming out from the Obama campaign are true I think another question is who is going to heal the Black caucus. If my Congressman Emanuel Cleaver is saying he has been pressure then that is going to create some friction between him and the Obama factions. Nobody, is going to mount a credible challenge to him and anybody trying to threaten him are being very foolish.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 12:25 PM
Is Horse Doody on post?
I just was thinking about you and your store...made a wonderful lentil soup last night with green chile. And I was wondering where you get your pinon nuts? I was PO'ed at Albertsons since their pinon nuts come from China? North of here, there are a gabillion pine nuts and we have to get them from China. Just wondering if you are seeing the same problem with food supplies.
(sorry for the personal post here)
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 12:25 PM
Another Lyndon Johnson quote
There are plenty of recommendations on how to get out of trouble cheaply and fast. Most of them come down to this: Deny your responsibility.
Lyndon B. Johnson
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 16, 2008 12:31 PM
Blonde Wino
Please send me the recipe to the lentil soup to
webthings at comcast dot net
Anyone else with a recipe, particularly vegetarian or diabetic, please send them along.
Thanks.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 12:36 PM
Here is a great quote from author and eating locally activist Barbara Kingsolver. She says, “The very least you can do in your life is to figure out what you hope for. And the most you can do is live inside that hope. Not admire it from a distance but live right in it, under its roof.”
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker. | February 16, 2008 12:37 PM
jamie
Will do...I do not use any meat...but will tell you my secret ingredients and I do not measure...but, it is yummy.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 12:38 PM
I may be jumping in late on this topic, but this has been nagging at me for awhile...
Several of you keep making comments about the WA state primary vs. caucus vote totals. I see a great likelihood that the primary vote will NOT reflect reality or the will of the people. Anyone who is paying attention understands that the caucus was the process by which delegates were chosen, and is unlikely to waste the time/effort/stamp to vote in the primary, which will skew the results. My ballot is sitting on the dining room table, but I see no reason to use it. I've already caucused and made my choice known.
Please explain why I'm wrong, if you think I am....
Posted by: harborwoman | February 16, 2008 1:01 PM
I know how to spell my name.
I did as you suggested. And it appears you are wrong.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/1/28/191444/715
Is the former president's tone taking away from what he's trying to do for his wife?
KENDRICK MEEK, (D) FLORIDA: You know, it's interesting. The first time we've actually had a leading female candidate, leading African-American candidate and the first time, a former commander-in- chief is now a spouse to one of those candidates.
I also think it's important, even on the last clip talking about the response to Barack Obama's win. I was actually with the president in South Carolina. I've been traveling with him over several days. He was asked a question about historic voting in the state of South Carolina and that was at 10:00 a.m. in the morning. We just left breakfast. We didn't even have any exit polls at that time. So some of it is the reporting of how events actually took place .
Posted by: Super Delicate | February 16, 2008 1:01 PM
And one more point, we still should let the other states hold their primaries/causces before the outcome for the dem nomination. And we should also face MI and FL. Just because the repugs are in such a shameless state with their nominating process, we should (as Craig's post states) let the democratic process unfold.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 1:02 PM
Blonde wino,
we get pretty much everything at Central Market in Ft Worth that places like Albertsons would never stock..
Central Market is a store that competes with Whole Foods pretty well. Certainly not the cheapest but the produce is better than Albertsons and if you stay out of the "packaged" foods it is comparable in price.
http://www.centralmarket.com/cm/index.jsp
I am not aware of any problems with where the pinion nuts come from thou. Is it not possible to go up north a little and buy the nuts locally as it were? Its not Hatch chile season yet is it?
You have mentioned the boot heal of NM in several of your posts. Is that your local? Are you aware of Cormac Maccarthy's book the Crossing? Mccarthy use to live in El Paso and I think teach at UTEP but I could be wrong about that. Anyway, The Crossing is set in post WWII New Mexico in the Boot Heal. It is the second in a trilogy of westerns the first being All The Pretty Horses. In the Crossing the two brothers capture a wolf and decide to return the wolf to its native home in the mountains of Mexico. An adventure ensues.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 1:03 PM
" Did y'all see Kwiesi Mfume the other evening on MSNBC when asked if he was endorsing either dem candidate and he said he was not? However, he called Obama "Oback Borama" 2 times. "
Yes....I saw that. Stunning!
Posted by: Patsi | February 16, 2008 1:04 PM
I love these Mona Lisa moments.
Sound like he may actually be endorsing Lillary Hinton without coming out and saying it if he is intentionally mispronouncing Obama's name. Akin to the Reps saying Barak Hussein Obama, but more subtle.
Was it an accident or was it intentional?
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 1:12 PM
Thanks HD...my hubby used to gather his own pinon nuts when he lived up north...we just get a lot prickly pear cactus here and the locals have taught us how to harvest the pear without getting all of those little CACTUS needles on you hand! Sort of like handling artichokes. If I ever get to Ft. Worth, I would love to visit the store! We have a farmer's market here on Wed. and Sat....plus a good truck farm. But, I am lazy when I am working and jump into Albertsons. We only have a Toucan market here (no Trader Joes). El Paso has some good markets.
DON'T PANIC, I'M ORGANIC!
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 1:14 PM
Histrionics get attention but not necessarily good attention.
However, like George W. Bush, Borak Obama (as well as Oback Borama) seems detached and above it all. I don't see W breaking a sweat about the war in Iraq. (Well, OK, so he got pi$$y with a couple of reporters in the rose garden; Borak has gotten snarky at times, too.)
The only time he seems passionate is when it is orchestrated into a speech. He seems disingenuous.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 1:19 PM
Brain...and comedians being political pundits...my favorite! : )
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 1:21 PM
HW
On Tuesday, I will be going to vote in the Primary. I don't think that enough publicity noise has been made about it this time around to really change things for future elections, but if we don't make the effort, the party regulars will stay with a system than ensures their power.
I'm hoping that there will be enough of a difference in that raw vote count to make some people think twice when the next stage of the caucus occurs.
At stage two if delegates or elected replacements don't show up, the power to cast that vote reverts to each precincts leader. IOW, there is no guarantee that the vote as originally cast will stay that way. Then there is the third tier where everything could change again.
It really is a rotten system totally open to fraud and destruction of the one man one vote concept.
Go vote.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 1:22 PM
None of the creative excuses can make up for the fact that Hillary is running an out-dated campaign.
She is targeting demographics instead of trying to appeal to the entire country. In other words - dividing us into camps (not because of racism - just political strategy).
Hillary and McCain (and the entire establishment) is trying to rise up and put Obama back in his so-called place.
Hillary and McCain would rather run the traditional campaign - where they lay out mutually exclusive positions and then focus on tearing down the other's ideas. Neither one is prepared to deal with Obama.
If you want to talk demographics...Obama appeals to a big one - the anti-war crowd - and an even bigger one - the people who are sick of Washington politics (check out the approval ratings of Bush AND Congress).
And Barack is getting positive coverage because he is saying things that make a lot of sense to a lot of Americans - across all demographics. And inspiring them to follow and participate in politics (oh - I mean just "talking."). I think inspiration by itself is a "sollution." And no - that is not all Obama brings to the table.
I gotta take Lucy for a walk.
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 1:25 PM
HD
If I go to Mesilla (our "old town"), I can find New Mexico pine nuts...again more of my laziness. Thanks for the western lore...it is really wondeful. I had asked if anyone heard of mennonite cheese? Just like the Mormons, the Mennonites have settled in Chihuahua. Their cheese is the best on green enchiladas (I always buy them locally as I cannot reproduce the wonderful flavor of the enchiladas)...no recipes here.
http://www.epcc.edu/nwlibrary/borderlands/19_mennonites.htm
The Mennonites (I was born and raised in Pennslyvania) are what I consider the "working Amish." They are quite industrious and several years ago the colony in Chihuahua got busted growing marijuana. I am sure it was as good a quality as their cheese.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 1:28 PM
Blonde wino,
Central Market has stores in Houston San Antonio FTW and Dallas and Plano (north Dallas) so take your pick. they also do internet ordering I think.
Do you know the best way to remove the evil prickly pear thorns from your hand if they are too little to use the tweezers on?
Rubber cement. Spread it on over the thorns and let dry then just rub the cement off and the thorns come out with the glue. It is a perfect solution.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 1:29 PM
Apparently it has been deemed that a man's behavior is the societal norm (cool and detached) and therefore the characteristic of a good president. Women's behaviors are therefore counter to what is valued for presidential politics and so when Hillary shows any kind of female trait, it is deemed an "emotional outburst." However, much of the criticism of Hillary is that she is too man-like—driven, unemotional, power hungry (not to mention those darn pantsuits.)
Seems like she finds herself between a rock and a hard place.
And, for the record, I think we could use a little MORE emotion in this country. There happen to be a few things going on that we could all stand to get emotional about.
Posted by: Ally
| February 16, 2008 1:30 PM
Jamie: Is there a movement in Washington to go ahead and send in those Primary ballots? Or, as harborwoman says, are many people just pitching them in the trash (recycle!) knowing that they won't count in the Democratic Presidential Primary?
Posted by: Ally
| February 16, 2008 1:32 PM
As soon as I got wind of 'super delegates' I knew it'd be trouble. As if politics aren't political enough, there's all this sub rosa stuff forever going on.
I don't like it.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 16, 2008 1:32 PM
Craig... great article. Please do your part to participate more on the cable news shows to share your balanced and meaningful perspective. The media bias has made it very difficult to gain any perspective on the race. I agree with you and I believe this is heading down a very dangerous path for our party. If you want some bias the other way folks tune into www.taylormarsh.com. It gives me the stomach to watch cable news because I can at least balance it with other sources of perspective. I agree that Dan Abrams truly tries to be a balanced journalist.
Posted by: Indy Man
| February 16, 2008 1:34 PM
No need for medical marijuana in Mexico, but
http://www.cannabisculture.com/backissues/cc10/Amazing.html
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 1:35 PM
The original men in black! *L*
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 16, 2008 1:39 PM
tt and d-e-v
: )
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 1:43 PM
d-e-v ????
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 16, 2008 1:45 PM
Doots & Blonde,
"Do you know the best way to remove the evil prickly pear thorns from your hand if they are too little to use the tweezers on?"
Buy canned nopales in the store ;)
Posted by: dnd | February 16, 2008 1:51 PM
Warren... stay away from the Kool-Aid, okay!!! We may have Obama as our nominee, but if the Obamabots continue to burn the bridge between the Obama and Clinton camps by doing many of the anti-Clinton practices, we will not have a united party and we will lose in November.
I'm trying really hard to stay positive toward Obama because if he is our nominee, i want to be able to support him... but the fervor, the unhinged zealotry, and the focus on the political conversions to the Obama Kingdom is really scaring me and putting me off. My questions and doubts are really increasing with Obama and I know that many more are starting to feel this way because of the divisive actions that are coming from Obama's camp. He is not being a uniter at all!!!
Posted by: Indy Man
| February 16, 2008 1:54 PM
dnd
Now you know what this lazy blonde shops are Albertsons, sometimes.
I am really getting the munchies now and I have not had anything Mennonite today.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 1:55 PM
Warren et al
I don't expect you to put any faith in the following, but it seems to me rather than pursuing from demographics that Senator Clinton made the decision to principally speak to the groups and issues she has championed throughout her whole life: Women, Children, Health care etc and expected the traditional party power folks to come along and back up what they supposedly believe in with action. It was how she won New York and has continued serving that state garnering a great deal of popularity while doing so.
Instead she got slapped around by the media, dissed by Charlie Hustle, and deserted by the people who preferred money and power to actually making something good happen.
You may get Obama and the Kennedy leftovers, but I'm pretty sure you won't want it once you get it.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 2:01 PM
"Every poll shows Barack narrowing the gap in the upcoming contests. Surprisingly to me Texas more so than the other states. "
Well, duh! The FW paper states clearly that he started putting teams on the ground in Texas OVER a year ago. Who is behind this candidacy?
Posted by: Patsi | February 16, 2008 2:03 PM
Jamie
Amen. I think your post says it all.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 16, 2008 2:03 PM
Well, didn't we just "vote the bums out" in the last mid-term? What happened to all of the shiny, happy people who replaced a portion of the "do nothing" Congress? Obama is making his case to those who can completely sublimate reality. There is a difference between being optimistic and being delusional.
With the exception of those poor, souls who have had their spirits completely crushed, we all have an ember of idealism that still smolders after the age of 30. I think that it is far more likely for positive changes can be made by someone who has actually worked with opposing forces to hammer out solutions than someone who uses pretty words to claim that he can go to Washington & make it all better.
George HW Bush used something like that: "Read my lips. No new taxes." People often go for the biggest, prettiest package.
The ads have started playing down here and Sen. Clinton's features Hil'ry as helping hand/nursemaid. I can only assume that's because some people don't like strong women, because it's not a very good ad.
Obak's (jeez, that really is catchy) is about the need for healthcare; it's a very depressing ad which, for me, means that it out-sucks Hil'ry's ad.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:08 PM
Thanks Blonde.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 16, 2008 2:10 PM
For goodness sake, people. Stop whining!
The USA is NOT a "democratic" system.
The (upper class) founding fathers FEARED placing election results in the hands of the masses. Thus we have the idiocy that is the electoral college system.
U.S. Senators were originally elected by state legislatures.
So what if the superdelegate decide this one?
Posted by: nash
| February 16, 2008 2:12 PM
coreen:
it is no secret that I am a hard core Hillary supporter - so this may shock a lot of people.
I could easily cast my vote for Gore @ the top of a ticket. and I could do it with Obama as the VP.
Yes - there is a ticket sans Hillary I could happily vote for. Gives us the experience and leadership we need now, give BO time to grow up, sets the dems up for a 16 year run.
Although there is still a part of me that feels it's time for a woman's touch - that ticket works for me.
I hope nobody hurt themselves falling out of their chairs.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 2:13 PM
"If there are multiple small thorns in a fairly small area, try removing them with glue. Spread a generous coating of patch glue over the entire area. Wait until it dries, then peel it off. It will usually pull the thorns (and your body hairs) out as it comes away from the skin."
http://www.utahmountainbiking.com/firstaid/plants.htm
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:14 PM
may have to log off as we are having a monster thunderstorm this afternoon with big thunderboomers. Just had one scared the hell out of the dogs. Getting hard to type with two dogs in my lap. One weighs about 50 lbs and the the other is about 12 lbs.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 2:14 PM
nash - I'm proud to live in a country where I can whine freely. Whine free or die!
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:16 PM
Reminds me of one of my faves from "The Electric Company." My stars, is everything on YouTube?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_hQxKNdZcE
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:18 PM
doots - Just raining on this side of town. I was sleeping through the thunderstorm early this morning just fine, but couldn't sleep through the cat yowling in the living room.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:21 PM
Charlie Hustle was Pete Rose at one time.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 16, 2008 2:22 PM
Who is Charlie Hustle?
dog in baseball, Charlie Hustle is the name given Pete Rose for the way he played the game. Before the gambling issues.
Politically no idea.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 2:25 PM
Dog's eye
Charlie Hustle was my bad. Afraid that I see Senator Obama as more Elmer Gantry than St. Francis. I apologize for that one.
STill I think what is the money source is a legitimate question. He runs an expensive Senatorial campaign. His wife gets a high paying job. His first year he is very active. His second year he misses 1/4 of the votes.
Presidential campaign activists are on the ground more than a year ago. His wife takes a one year leave from that new high paying job (paid or unpaid?).
That must have been one whale of a tab they were running up before any campaign contributions were coming in (when was the presidential campaign account set up?)
I haven't heard anyone asking questions about any of the above, but they can rail on over and over about Senator Clinton releasing her tax returns despite having all of her Senatorial filings up to date and where did she get that five million she loaned the campaign?
A little balance in the questioning from the so called reporters would be good to have.
And yes, I could live with Gore/Obama, but absolutely not with Obama on top. He just doesn't impress me at all.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 2:26 PM
Blue,
thanks the weather people have us in a storm box I am near Arlington near I 30 and I 820 on the east side of FTW. not raining a lot but a lot of thunder. Dogs welded to my hips.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 2:27 PM
Need something for a rainy afternoon. Too bad you can't get bread pudding with whiskey sauce delivered. Now why am I thinking about that Jamie? (ps - I am Marianne Dashwood.)
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:31 PM
"Barack is going to be on top for the next 8 years."
Screwed Again?
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 2:35 PM
I'm on the other side of the airport from you; northeast. I hear little rumbles in the distance now; pouring down rain. Keep the puppies safe daddy.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:37 PM
"bread pudding with whiskey sauce "
Because it cures everything that's wrong with the world for at least 15 minutes. ;-)
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 2:39 PM
jamie - Ha. Yep, but I think B-rye is wrong. He doesn't have the Dem nom yet & McCain would kick his backside in the general. If he managed to get elected, I think he would be such a complete and utter failure that a second term is an impossibility. Don't worry, it'll be four years at the most.
Pouring rain and just got weirdly bright outside. Maybe a little green. Hail mustbe on the way.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:42 PM
Jamie:
I commend the causes Hillary champions - but I have a problem with the way she does it. She is willing to throw anyone under the bus who stands in their way. Everyone on here always says Hillary is a "fighter." I believe that the Clintons do it because they believe it is in the country's best interests - but that doesn't make it right.
Yes - there are examples of Obama playing politics in this election. The media hounded him for not going after the Clintons sooner.
I think Obama has run a positive campaign compared to the bitter attacks Hillary would face in the general. Also, it seems the GOP is making the same charges against Obama that Clinton did - and those arguments have not worked out so well.
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 2:44 PM
"At stage two if delegates or elected replacements don't show up, the power to cast that vote reverts to each precincts leader."
Jamie -
We had to vote to winnow our delegates. 7 people for 5 BO slots e.g. lots of interest. i don't think there will be no shows.
It was the Repug WA congress that voted to try and force use of the primary system, but the State Demo party reverted by choice to the use of caucus. Be upset with them not the BO supporters.
My hunch is an equal number of both HRC and BO supporters will disregard the mail votes . Look to the number of ballots not winning margin. I tossed mine, but DW mailed hers.
Posted by: Rezdog
| February 16, 2008 2:49 PM
dog - Well, I don't have a recipe for that. I was just wishing that my fave, little restaurant over in Grapevine delivered.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/215/gallery/27356-a27776-t3.html
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:49 PM
Bread and Butter Pudding
Twelve ½ inch-thick slices French or Italian bread, crusts removed and buttered generously on one side
5 large eggs
4 egg yolks
1 cup sugar
¼ tsp. salt
1 quart whole milk
1 cup heavy cream
1 tsp. vanilla extract
½ cup confectioner’s sugar
1 cup heavy cream for serving
Preheat oven to 375 degrees. Butter a shallow two-quart baking dish.
Gently beat the eggs, egg yolks, granulated sugar and salt until thoroughly blended.
Scald the milk and cream in a saucepan over high heat. Don’t boil. When you tip the pan and it spits or makes a sizzling noise, remove from heat and stir in vanilla extract. STIR GENTLY, don’t beat, into the egg mixture until blended.
Overlap the bread, butter side up, in the prepared baking dish and pour the egg mixture over the bread. Set in a larger pan with enough hot water to come halfway up the side of the dish. Bake until bread is golden-brown, about 45 minutes until a sharp knife can be inserted and comes out clean. The bread should be golden. This can be done early in the day. Do not chill.
Before serving, sprinkle with confectioners sugar and place under the broiler. Don’t walk away, this takes only a minute or so. Or you can use one of those crème brulee gadgets to brown the sugar.
Serve with a pitcher of heavy cream.
Sauce
175ml (6fl oz) Milk
80ml (3fl oz) Brandy
2 egg Yolks
1 level tsp Arrowroot or Cornflour
1 tsp Light Brown Sugar
Blend arrowroot with a little cold milk.
Heat the remaining milk and when boiling stir it into the blended arrowroot.
Return mixture to pan and bring back to boiling point.
Mix together egg yolks, brandy and sugar.
Allow the arrowroot sauce cool a little, whisk into the egg mixture.
Cook without boiling, whilst whisking until the sauce thickens, if too thick add a little milk or cream to slacken.
Serve hot
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 2:50 PM
"As I said language is very telling. "
Just curious. Would you care to quote any language that I have used that wouldn't be equally applicable to anyone of any race?
You make all these accusations without knowing a damn thing about me, my life, or my history with others. Without going in to all of that which is none of your business, lets just leave it with it is so incredibly wrong that you are a complete fool.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 2:54 PM
Blue:
Obama "doesn't have the Dem nom yet & McCain would kick his backside in the general. If he managed to get elected, I think he would be such a complete and utter failure that a second term is an impossibility. Don't worry, it'll be four years at the most."
This is the politics of fear that is not supported by the facts.
Why would McCain kick his backside in the general? The experience argument - don't think so. Obama's ability to bring people together is exactly what this country needs when it comes to foreign policy. Obama can win much of the Dem base, the anti-war Indys and Republicans, and new voters. Hillary would have trouble with Independents and men against McCain.
Why would he be a complete failure? Because he is not the candidate you are adovcating for...
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 2:54 PM
How Ron Paul
"Tavis Smiley, the bestselling author of the "Covenant With Black America," is in a world turned upside down. He said he's being "hammered," "barbecued," and is "catching hell" from black Americans for suggesting that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) made a major mistake by declining to speak at the State of the Black Union event that Smiley plans to host next week in New Orleans.
"There's all this talk of hater, sellout and traitor," Smiley said to me in a telephone interview. Smiley even mentioned getting death threats, but wouldn't elaborate. He said his office has been flooded with angry e-mails. "I have family in Indianapolis. They are harassing my momma, harassing my brother. It's getting to be crazy," Smiley said."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/t...ml? hpid=topnews
Posted by: Looks like a duck | February 16, 2008 2:58 PM
warren - Bringing people together under a tent and on a foundation of what exactly? That's what I have yet to figure out. I've been a lifelong Dem, but I can not see myself voting for him because I wouldn't know for what, exaclty, I was voting.
jamie - Big Fish actually has a whiskey sauce on there pudding, but brandy sounds good, too.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 2:59 PM
And I am not trying to win any converts. I think everyone who supports Hillary should keep fighting. After two debates and TX and OH - we will know if she still has a real shot. But of course we will probably disagree.
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 3:01 PM
SuperD - as to your 1:01 post - I saw the same person who was traveling with Clinton in SC say the same thing at the time.
I also saw Craig on many shows asking other pundits to please explain to him what exactly was racist. MoJo and others would just say...he was he was...and never break down what was actually said. That is why I started reading Craigs blog - he was the only one I could see thinking clearly.
I'm sure I can easily start analyzing all the sexist code words in obama's speeches...now does anyone want me to start doing that?
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 3:04 PM
Oh, brother. Trying to bait Jamie with a sexist, ageist reference. "...woman of your generation..." Can we please get beyond personal attacks?
If you've made the move from Edwards to Obama, then let us know what you think he stands for and why you think that's a good thing.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 3:05 PM
Blue:
What people want is simple.
-End the Bush Doctrine and evolve American foreign policy
-Make health care more affordable and accessible immediately and get us on the road towards universal health care
-Pass a comprehensive immigration bill and ensure that our boarders are safe
-Unite and lead the world on fighting terrorism, speading human rights and protecting our environment.
-Decrease the concentration of wealth at the very top of our economy.
The ideas and policies are out there - what we need is the government to stop fighting with each other and playing politics and start getting things done.
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 3:07 PM
Doots, Tiptoe, Blue, Bear,
Just saw the weather report for your area. Hope you can all stay dry and nothing gets flooded.
Looks like Colorado Bob won't get hit so hard. Not sure about Mad.
Posted by: dnd | February 16, 2008 3:10 PM
Some people get "off" on throwing terse backhanded insults inside every single post. It is not enough for these people to actually disagree respectfully.
It could be a habit, it could be a style, or whatever....it is really just old-fashioned rudeness.
imo
Posted by: unlikely_burrito | February 16, 2008 3:12 PM
This goes with my 2:13 post - I was commenting from my Treo and couldn't post this.
Colleen...sorry about the name
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swYl_rFe7Qk
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 3:13 PM
blue
What is the place in Grapevine? I was down there on business a few years ago and ate at a cafe on Main Street. Good pie, they wouldn't let me leave without trying some pie.
Just down the street was a great little Western wear store "Circle R Ranchwear" & I picked up a excellent pair of Tony Lama boots there.
Posted by: bowmanc | February 16, 2008 3:13 PM
d,
thanks
has let up for the time being.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 3:16 PM
Thanks dnd. We do have weather here today.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 16, 2008 3:17 PM
"I think Obama has run a positive campaign"
This is a "fairy tale"
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 3:17 PM
Wendy:
I don't think Bill was being a racist - SC was just dumb politics. He should have stayed away from such charged words but of course the media overreacted - that's their job.
Bill was only trying to discount Obama's momentum like the Clintons have been doing this entire campaign. Arguing Hillary is still the best candidate - it is just Obama does better with blacks, wine drinkers, cacauses, people in little states or red states or whatever. The argument is starting to lose its effect if Hillary doesn't start actually winning.
Posted by: warren | February 16, 2008 3:21 PM
"As I said language is very telling."
And what exactly did Jamie's comment tell you? What exactly are the voices in your head telling you about what Jamie meant?
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 3:23 PM
burrito,
"Some people get "off" on throwing terse backhanded insults inside every single post. It is not enough for these people to actually disagree respectfully."
I couldn't agree more. All of these posts calling Obama supporters cultists, simple minded, delusional teeny boppers add nothing to the conversation.
Posted by: dnd | February 16, 2008 3:23 PM
If the balloting becomes hopelessly deadlocked, is there any chance a compromise candidate can emerge? It's happened before, right?
Would Al Gore accept?
Posted by: Dexter
| February 16, 2008 3:24 PM
"Oh Patsi try those cheap tricks with someone else. As usual, boring! Considering just how many times you've been around the block I would think you could come up with a better response, one again you dissapoint. "
Typical of your non-answer answers.
Posted by: Patsi | February 16, 2008 3:24 PM
"Jamie you've used every word except "uppity" to describe Obama, and now you've swung into a sexual reference about him. I find that very telling, I here a lot of woman of your generation using similar terms and I think it displays a mild form of racism."
ROFLMAO
Pure garbage.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 3:26 PM
OT Wendy, a couple of weeks ago I picked-up a Blue Tooth keyboard and mouse for my Treo. The keyboard folds up neatly, and the mouse is really compact. Makes the Treo really seem like the PC that it is.
Posted by: Flatus
| February 16, 2008 3:28 PM
bowman - It's called Big Fish, but there are lots of good places in Grapevine. It's a cool, little town, huh?
warren - Thank you for telling me "what people want." I'm a people, too. I just don't think that Obama has the goods to deliver anything, and at this point, he hasn't made it clear to me what he is trying to deliver. (It's not bread pudding with whiskey sauce, at any rate.) I do know that he's asking us all to not only believe in him, but to believe in ourselves. Jeez, I like to feel all warm & fuzzy as much as the next fella, but I really insist on having someone there who can handle the job. He's given no indication that he is anything other than a Toastmaster-extraordinaire.
I was not on team Hil'ry when this started, but since Obama is the alternative... In my view, he's done nothing to deserve the presidency.
"A "present" vote is generally used to provide political cover for legislators who don't want to be on the record against a bill that they oppose... While these votes occurred while Obama and the Democrats were in the minority in the Illinois Senate, in the Audacity of Hope (page 130), Obama explained that even as a legislator in the minority, "You must vote yes or no on whatever bill comes up, with the knowledge that it's unlikely to be a compromise that either you or your supporters consider fair and or just."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/02/the_everpresent_obama.html
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 3:29 PM
Summary: CNN's Carol Costello said that audience response at a Barack Obama rally is "a scene some increasingly find not inspirational, but 'creepy,' " quoting columnists who have likened Obama supporters to members of a cult or described their enthusiasm as "creepy." On-screen text during Costello's report read: "OBAMA-MANIA BACKLASH" and "PASSION 'CULT-LIKE' TO SOME." Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer similarly cited other writers to make the same assertion: "ABC's Jake Tapper notes the 'Helter-Skelter cult-ish qualities' of 'Obama worshipers,' what Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times calls 'the Cult of Obama.' "
In a February 8 New York Times column headlined "Questions for Dr. Retail," David Brooks referred to Obama as the "Hopemeister" and compared his supporters to Hare Krishna members: "Obama's people are so taken with their messiah that soon they'll be selling flowers at airports and arranging mass weddings." He also wrote: "Have you noticed that he's actually carried into his rallies by a flock of cherubs while the heavens open up with the Hallelujah Chorus? I wonder how he does that."
In a February 7 column, Time columnist Joe Klein wrote of Obama's speech following the February 5 Super Tuesday primaries: "And yet there was something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism -- 'We are the ones we've been waiting for' -- of the Super Tuesday speech and the recent turn of the Obama campaign."
In a February 7 post on his ABCNews.com blog, Political Punch, senior national correspondent Jake Tapper wrote of Obama's supporters: "Inspiration is nice. But some folks seem to be getting out of hand." Tapper continued: "It's as if [former Senate Majority Leader] Tom Daschle [D-SD] descended from on high saying, "Be not afraid; for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all the people: for there is born to you this day in the city of Chicago a Savior, who is Barack the Democrat." Concluding the post, Tapper compared Obama supporters to followers of Charles Manson. Tapper wrote: "The Holy Season of Lent is upon us. Can Obama worshippers try to give up their Helter-Skelter cult-ish qualities for a few weeks? At least until Easter, or the Pennsylvania primary, whichever comes first..."
These are the same people quoted about the horrible things Senator Clinton has done. They remain just as quotable.
Posted by: Looks like a duck | February 16, 2008 3:31 PM
dnd
"All of these posts calling Obama supporters cultists, "
Did you see the posting above about Tavis Smiley?
As far as I know, none of those supporting Clinton have made death threats against those who mildly criticize her.
It doesn't apply to all of the Obama supporters, but there is a climate within that campaign and some of the people I have seen in person that is more akin to rock star adoration and stalking than it is to reasoned thought about a political candidate.
Posted by: Jamie | February 16, 2008 3:33 PM
Warren wrote:
"He should have stayed away from such charged words"
that's my point - what charged words?
Can someone post the Bill Clinton words here for me...NOT OUT OF CONTEXT and NOT WORDS SOMEONE ELSE SAID THAT ARE NOW BEING ATTRIBUTED TO HIM. HIS WORDS.
Thanks - I can't find them.
Throwing out comments like - stay away from charged words or Jamie's a racist or whatever doesn't point to what exactly you find to be "charged words"
I just need a little help here - perhaps I paid too much for my college education because I don't see it.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 3:34 PM
Flatus - thanks - I've considered it but too much to carry around
:-/
Need to be portable.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 16, 2008 3:37 PM
Hi Jamie,
Have you made any calls for Hillary? My daughter and I just gotten done making some. Her more than me since I work. She has completed over 100 today.
BTW, she is only 11, but she just reads the script:)
Even my 11 year old rolls her eyes when people talk about Obama's change on TV. She asks, "But does he know how to change thing?"
Posted by: Jan | February 16, 2008 3:39 PM
I don't know whether to attribute it to a cult of personality or people just not wanting to deal with the reality of how things are accomplished in this world/form over function.
He's definitely appealing to something, but I seem I still seem to be immune to Obama fever.
As always, the devil is in the details.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 3:47 PM
Something some of you Hilliary Rodham Clinton supporters have not considered and it has come up on more than MSNBC. He has run a better organized campaign than any other person running either R or D. He has run it like a business and some say organized, well thought out, good judgment and planning as someone we would need in the WH. We all know that he is intelligent. Hilliary Rodham Clinton is intelligent. I could go on and on about how I disagree with her, but I’ve already mentioned these things.
The planning and execution that Obama and his team have accomplished has been fantastic for someone who was not even heard of until four years ago. Hope and perseverance were how he was able to be so successful in the streets of Chicago, something that is pretty much unheard of there. Even his Republican foes in Illinois have made comments about his tenacity and ability to get things done. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if someone could bring that to the WH and to DC to really bring about change and make politics better than it is where we could actually accomplish something? Who do you think brought out over twice the number of voters this time around? It certainly wasn’t Hilliary Rodham Clinton.
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 3:49 PM
ok you largely argumentative people, Nap time.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 16, 2008 3:49 PM
yeah Bri.. I'd like to know too.. what's wrong with 'smoke and mirrors?"
Posted by: tylenol
| February 16, 2008 3:51 PM
Jan - Glad you have an 11-year old who knows enough to ask questions. Good parenting!
That goes for all sides and all candidates.
My pinky finger is starting to tingle. Don't think I've been on this much in six months. Gotta take a break.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 16, 2008 3:51 PM
"bowman - It's called Big Fish, but there are lots of good places in Grapevine. It's a cool, little town, huh? "
Great venue. I've planned events at the Gaylord Texan and the DFW Lakes Hilton. Great location for conferences and meetings.
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 3:52 PM
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 3:49 PM
Also not Obama. People are voting because they hate George Bush and they hate the Iraq War.
Posted by: Looks like a duck | February 16, 2008 3:52 PM
NEW THREAD
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| February 16, 2008 3:53 PM
I have two must read weekly magazines--the New Yorker and the Economist. Of the two, the Economist is the best informed, best edited, and most often right about political things. It's published in London.
Below is a 'fair use' excerpt out of this week's cover story about Obama. It reflects my key concerns about his candidacy:
"Of magnets and magic dust
That question is partly answered by Obama the phenomenon. His immediate effect on international relations could be dramatic: a black president, partly brought up in a Muslim country, would transform America's image. And his youthful optimism could work at home too. After the bitterness of the Bush years, America needs a dose of unity: Mr Obama has a rare ability to deliver it. And the power of charisma should not be underrated, especially in the context of the American presidency which is, constitutionally, quite a weak office. The best presidents are like magnets below a piece of paper, invisibly aligning iron filings into a new pattern of their making. Anyone can get experts to produce policy papers. The trick is to forge consensus to get those policies enacted.
But what policies exactly? Mr Obama's voting record in the Senate is one of the most left-wing of any Democrat. Even if he never voted for the Iraq war, his policy for dealing with that country now seems to amount to little more than pulling out quickly, convening a peace conference, inviting the Iranians and the Syrians along and hoping for the best. On the economy, his plans are more thought out, but he often tells people only that they deserve more money and more opportunities. If one lesson from the wasted Bush years is that needless division is bad, another is that incompetence is perhaps even worse. A man who has never run any public body of any note is a risk, even if his campaign has been a model of discipline.
And the Obama phenomenon would not always be helpful, because it would raise expectations to undue heights. Budgets do not magically cut themselves, even if both parties are in awe of the president; the Middle East will not heal, just because a president's second name is Hussein. Choices will have to be made—and foes created even when there is no intention to do so. Indeed, something like that has already happened in his campaign. The post-racial candidate has ended up relying heavily on black votes (and in some places even highlighting the divide between Latinos and blacks).
None of this is to take away from Mr Obama's achievement—or to imply that he could not rise to the challenges of the job in hand. But there is a sense in which he has hitherto had to jump over a lower bar than his main rivals have. For America's sake (and the world's), that bar should now be raised—or all kinds of brutal disappointment could follow."
Posted by: Flatus
| February 16, 2008 3:54 PM
Release Type: Grantee Press Release
Grantee Contact: David Roscow, 703.276.2772
Washington, DC - 01/30/2008 - 13 percent of eligible Florida citizens under the age of 30 participated in last night’s Florida primary, according to preliminary estimates by CIRCLE (The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement). More than 150,000 young people participated in the Florida Democratic primary, despite the fact that the Democratic primary was not fully contested. (See Table 2.)
Can't be Obama. He didn't campaign there.
Posted by: Looks like a duck | February 16, 2008 3:58 PM
From Jan: "Let me guess... you are one of these people who have no dependents, so you have the luxury of voting on idealism."
I don't believe Hilliary Rodham Clinton can get her healthcare passed. It forces people to pay for her plan when some people like teachers and others already have plans that work for them. She wasn't able to get it passed in the early 90s when the Clinton’s were more popular. Do you think, even if the Democrats are in majority, that it will be any different now? I like the idea of giving people a choice and giving them some assistance if they need it when it comes to healthcare. It should not be forced on them. What you are doing is saying that some people are so dumb they won't take advantage of a good deal when they are given the opportunity.
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 3:59 PM
Karolenna, you're in TX too?
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 16, 2008 4:02 PM
tiptoe, No, I'm in Ohio but much of what I do is plan events all over the Americas. I planned two different conferences in Grapevine at the venues I mentioned.
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 4:10 PM
Looks like a duck said:
“Washington, DC - 01/30/2008 - 13 percent of eligible Florida citizens under the age of 30 participated in last night’s Florida primary, according to preliminary estimates by CIRCLE (The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement). More than 150,000 young people participated in the Florida Democratic primary, despite the fact that the Democratic primary was not fully contested. (See Table 2.)
Can't be Obama. He didn't campaign there.”
Early voters made up 59% of the vote in Florida at least a month before the actual primary. Obama did not campaign there and it was before the Iowa and SC wins. Trends showed that Obama was picking up momentum going into the election, but he did not have time to make it up because many had already voted. If you watch where he campaigns, he has been able to make a big difference in the results after he goes to the states. That's what I am looking forward to in Ohio.
Posted by: Karolenna | February 16, 2008 4:12 PM
Wendy - Good to know that Hillary supporters(at least some of us-in truth I was an Edwards supporter,but did
vote for Hillary in CT) are open to possibilities that may not include their chosen candidate & will give serious consideration to the ultimate dem. nominee .
The NYT discussion about Al Gore's concerns that a brokered convention could damage the party's prospects, his decision to remain neutral so far, that he may be needed as a mediator if neither Clinton or Obama winds up with enough delegate votes to be the nominee, leads me to wonder if those who have been hoping for him are planting a seed with the party "elders/elites" who are concerned with the growing rift between the Clinton/Obama supporters (as evidenced within these posts) to draft Gore as the only choice to unite the party. The one who all sides could accept & work to elect. Now wouldn't that be an amazing outcome! Extremely unlikely but with the way this is proceeding nothing seems impossible. Who would have thought just a year ago that it would come down to a choice between the first woman or the first black man to become the dem. nominee.
And after all, wasn't this the election that the dems could not possibly lose?
Posted by: Coreen | February 16, 2008 4:18 PM
RELOAD NEW THREAD....;0)
Posted by: Sheila Stone
| February 16, 2008 4:23 PM
How about Hillary Clinton/Harold Ford Jr 2008?
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 16, 2008 5:35 PM
Post A Comment