He’s older than John McCain, more liberal than Hillary Rodham Clinton and offers way more change than Barack Obama.
Ralph Nader announced on Sunday that he will run again for president. The perennial candidate is as easy to dismiss as he is to fear – if you’re a Democrat. He won more than 2.8 million votes nationwide in the 2000 race, and many Democrats will never give up believing that he threw the election to George W. Bush.
Nader would not have done this had John Edwards stayed in the running for the Democratic nomination. The two share much in common, not the least of which is Nader’s longstanding alliance with trial lawyers who have politically sustained Edwards, a former trial lawyer.
We could be witnessing why Obama should have tried a little harder to court Edwards. And why the Democratic frontrunner should not have dissed Nader, as Al Gore did eight years ago.
The spoiler is back.
Craig on "Imus in the Morning" Monday
(2/25) RFD-TV/WABC-AM 6:29 AM EST

Comments
yar.......nader aint no fader......
Posted by: sturgeone | February 25, 2008 6:20 AM
I didn't realize that Obama had ever dissed Nader. If he did that's at least one point in his favor.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 6:29 AM
Nader will get even less than his 500,000 votes in 2004. He's irrelevant.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 25, 2008 6:44 AM
Craig, Giving it up for Tina Faye...nice. Thats right let the American people VOTE. Good job Craig.
Posted by: Tan | February 25, 2008 6:49 AM
Dont have RFD-TV........can you show us the painting? Love them cows.......
Posted by: sturgeone | February 25, 2008 6:53 AM
Nice appearance this morning, Craig. Tell your Dad nix on the cardinal thing--at least for a couple of years. Your Mom and Dad look like a great couple! Makes me think of the old Carnation tag line.
I wish he had given you another 30-seconds to develop the theme that you were just getting into.
I like Hillary's line to the effect that just because there's a new inspiration in town, the vested interests aren't going to fold their tents and leave.
And you're right about the pass Rich gave McCain because he couldn't resist the opportunity to pound on HC.
Posted by: Flatus
| February 25, 2008 7:20 AM
Who wants to carpool with me to the therapist?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxCiAXJpk_4
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 7:37 AM
The Ron Paulists now have a new old walking revelation to love, make believe he's V in V For Vendetta and raise millions for because everyday is Guy Fawkes Day.
Courtesy of the Washington Post... a world of suffering and failure becomes one of "cast members" and "guests"...
Should it now be called Walt Reed World or Walt Reed's Wonderful World Of Casualties?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022401993.html?hpid=topnews&sub=AR
And... with his triumphant George Polk Award, Josh Marshall gets a very good NYT write up... attasite TPM... with full acknowledgement of its founder, its staff and particularly its READERS!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/business/media/25marshall.html?ref=business
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 7:40 AM
I liked Geraldine Ferraro's oped in this morning's Times:
http://tinyurl.com/37cvd5
She's another strong woman--too bad they're out of favor this year.
Posted by: Flatus
| February 25, 2008 7:41 AM
I can't believe NY Mag and MOJo are even suggesting Chelsea Clinton run for public office. After this public stoning of a woman was condoned, and activily encouraged by the media then picked up by Obama fans, I wouldn't ask any female to run for office.
This cycle has been a real eye opener.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 7:51 AM
patsi - Oh, Barak was quite snarky about Nadar. He said something to the effect that Nadar had a pretty high opinion of himself. Just quite a nasty little remark.
If Nadar was going to get in, he should've done it as soon as Ewards got out.
I wonder if the primaries would have gone a bit differently if SNL had come back earlier? Yes, I do think it might wake people up to the media's failure to scrutinize Obama.
Tina Fey for sainthood.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 25, 2008 7:53 AM
Fox's Rosen on crowd cheering Obama blowing his nose
"Summary: Responding to a video clip of Sen. Barack Obama saying, "I'm going to blow my nose here for a second," followed by the audience cheering, Fox News Washington correspondent James Rosen then said, "That kind of spontaneous affection Chairman Mao only dreamed of." Rosen joined other media figures associating Democratic presidential candidates with communists."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802220009?f=h_latest
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 7:58 AM
Here's Mr. Obama's appearance before the Toledo Blade Editorial Board:
http://tinyurl.com/2ftkkh
Posted by: Flatus
| February 25, 2008 7:59 AM
Obama's comment on Nadar; once again, just feeling, no substance.
“My sense is that Mr. Nader is somebody who, if you don’t listen and adopt all of these policies, then you’re not substantive," Obama said. "He seems to have a pretty high opinion of his own work. ... I don’t mean to diminish him, but I do think there’s a sense now that you know if somebody’s not hewing to the Ralph Nader agenda then you must be lacking in some way.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/02/obama-responds.html
Nadar's comment about Obama; hmmm, subtance.
"He was pro-Palestine when he was in Illinois, before he ran for the state senate, during his state Senate, now he’s supporting the Israeli destruction of the tiny destruction called Gaza," said Nader. "He doesn’t have any sympathy for a civil death ratio of about 300 to 1, 300 Palestinians to 1 Israeli."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/02/nadar-launches.html
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 25, 2008 8:00 AM
Congresswoman Ferraro is truly strong.
When her multiple myeloma first turned out of control in the nineties, she became a willing participant in a number of the breakthrough trials created by Dr. Ralph Steinmann and his open source Direct Effect research group at The Rockefeller University.
She was among a handful of patients who tried the understandibly demonized drug thalidomide... which was successful at slowing and stopping the flow of blood to areas which produced her bloodbased cancer cells.
This led to the remarkable development of other, more refined anti-angiogenesis meds. (Thalidomide is now the one truly effective treatment for leprosy every developed.)
Then she became a participant in the project's great innovation: the anti-viral cancer dendritic DNA "vaccine". (This treatment has a very positive effect on most auto-immune conditions from AIDS to lupus to MS and beyond as most of these are caused by herpes zoster viruses.)
In a feature article in the WSJ she was reported to have gone from a terminal state with three months to live to a cancer-free status.
Rep. Ferraro has been in a heavy chemo cycle (21 day) for the last several years. She will not discuss it but I know a number of people who were in the dendritic DNA pilot program who stopped their treatment so that it would not violate the FDA clinical trials (for melanoma only). They all wanted it to benefit more than the handful of test patients they were.
That's strength indeed.
By the way, her once maligned husband is with her everyday.... takes her to treatment, keeps her company and takes care of her at home.
That sort of love is as true a source of strength as any.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 8:00 AM
good morning gang....
I have always respected Ralph Nader..... yes he's an egotist.... but I saw a stage full of them last night.... giving out awards to each other for the "godly" act of making millions for making movies..... big deal.....
I saw his appearance on MTP...... first time I've watched it in almost a year.....
everything he says I agree with.... this country is in desperate need of something different than this 2 party system......
but a third run as an independent for the presidency by Ralph Nader is at this point arguably a laugher..... he got squat for votes in 2004 and will get even less this time around.....
so Ralph..... if you really want to make a difference..... try working for a true third party run by a real candidate..... such as Bloomberg...... it's the only way to regain your reputation.... otherwise, it's a goner..... and that's a shame for someone who's worked so hard his whole life for the public good...
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 25, 2008 8:03 AM
McLaughlin echoes smear of Michelle Obama: "You don't think she's a black militant?"
"Summary: On The McLaughlin Group, host John McLaughlin asked Clarence Page: "Do you think Michelle [Obama] -- do you think she leaves the impression -- not mine, but I've heard this -- that she has a chip on her shoulder?" McLaughlin later asked Page: "You don't think she's a black militant?" Several media figures have recently suggested that Obama has a "chip on her shoulder," including VDARE.com contributor Steve Sailer."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802240002?f=i_latest
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 8:07 AM
Correction -- Geraldine Ferraro is on a 14 day cycle.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 8:12 AM
mornin' all.
Good god, It's deja vu all over again. Renee, Nader may well be right about us needing a 3rd party, and it may need to be an anti-corporate party - I figure Fry might have an opinion on that - but he is absolutely the wrong messenger.
Gotta go see what the scoop is on the dustup between Hill and Bar over the campaign flier. I spent all weekend shffling Li'l Pogo to basketball games and didn't get a chance to spend any time following it.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 8:24 AM
"McLaughlin echoes smear of Michelle Obama: "You don't think she's a black militant?"
Oh, good God. It was an ill-thought out statement, that's all. There's plenty to question....that's not one.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 8:33 AM
Nadar just may make it interesting................that is if the media actually gives any coverage to what he has to say.
Posted by: Mair
| February 25, 2008 8:44 AM
From last night's Oscar contests.
And The Winner Is
BEAR with 12 Correct
Runners Up
"Entry" whoever that was: 10
Jamie, Julia, and Harborwoman: 9
Dexter says:
here's the best link I have found, after watching all but one hour of The Oscars. It's a great wrap-up for the night...
http://theenvelope.latimes.com/awards/oscars/
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 8:48 AM
" I think you are going to see lots of formidable women candidates in the future, and sooner than you think. "
I can't think why. "Formidable" translates to Bitch in today's climate.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 8:51 AM
I, for one, still believe that HRC will win the DEM nomination.
For those who believe that BHO will get the nod, here is an excerpt from GORDO's Media Matters post(8:07am):
"Face it...once the primary is over, the microscope is gonna be turned on Barry Hussein and his wife Omarosa
..it ain't gonna be pretty.."
--Clevenative / Sunday February 24, 2008 9:48:33 PM EST
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| February 25, 2008 8:54 AM
I wish I had your confidence Linda....but a friend of mine...one of the smartest women I know, and a member of a very upscale NY family, said she had a big family dinner this weekend and was afraid to even admit she voted for Hillary. She said her family members were almost militantly worshipful talking about Obama and how the world was going to change now.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 9:00 AM
Congratulations to all the Oscar winners!!
Having seen both 'No Country for Old Men" and "There will be Blood", I really think TWBB was a better movie...I didn't want it to end.
I am thrilled, however for the Coen brothers!! I have seen all their movies...
Blood Simple (1984)
Raising Arizona (1987)
Miller's Crossing (1990)
Barton Fink (1991)
The Hudsucker Proxy (1994)
Fargo (1996)
The Big Lebowski (1998)
O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000)
The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)
Intolerable Cruelty (2003)
The Ladykillers (2004)
No Country for Old Men (2007)
From what I have read...this is the first time they have received Best Director(as brothers).
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| February 25, 2008 9:03 AM
Here's one cat who turned down the Kool Aid:
Soul Man’ Sam Moore tells Obama to stop using his song “Hold On, I’m Coming” at campaign rallies
Moore says he’s not endorsing Obama or anybody else at this time for president.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 9:10 AM
"Serious question: why wasn't Elizabeth Hanford Dole's candidacy taken more seriously? "
Uh, because she's an idiot?
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 9:11 AM
dog, you could be right about Nader, but he does the college campus and sunday talk show tour, gets lots of exposure, and his anti corporate message rings pretty true with a segment of the population whose fortunes have been diminished by what they see as corporate greed. The only place he has ever really, demonstrably f*cked things up is FL, although any state that has lost jobs or seemingly lost jobs due to NAFTA is a prime target for his campaign (read, Cal, OH, TX). There are enough folks there who will vote for him on that message, and in a state with a razor thin margin, it can swing enough voters from the less corporate major party candidate to make a difference. I hope not this time.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 9:13 AM
Patsi...I feel bad that your friend was afraid to admit that she voted for HRC. 8(
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| February 25, 2008 9:13 AM
For those who believe that BHO will get the nod, here is an excerpt from GORDO's Media Matters post(8:07am):
"Face it...once the primary is over, the microscope is gonna be turned on Barry Hussein and his wife Omarosa
..it ain't gonna be pretty.."
I went to look for this quote and I had to find it in the comments section and the only way it is related to the Media Matters article is because some demented ass placed it there. To say it is part of the article is disingenuous in my opinion.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 9:15 AM
dog...I have read that book, by Ethan Coen. I bought it years ago and then donated it to the library. 8)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| February 25, 2008 9:19 AM
Well if Hillary isn't on the ticket, I might just toss my vote toward Nader. It won't make a difference anyway and it will be my little way of expressing my disdain of these "revival meetings" he's been holding, and the women fainting at his feet. C'mon, this is getting waaaaaaay out of hand.
Hillary 2008 or bust.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 9:21 AM
Pogo....
that's what I basically said..... Nader is not the right messenger for a third party run..... I think Bloomberg might be....
Patsi.... wasn't there a "movement" a while ago that said all women should wear the "bitch" label and wear it proudly.....
Lush..... I love the Coen brothers too...... my favorite is Raising Arizona...
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 25, 2008 9:27 AM
Nader is only a problem for Obama. IMO
With Nader in the race it draws a sharp light on the fact that Obama needs to make a hard turn to the center.
At some point Obama is going to have to do a "sistah soljah"(sp?) moment with the wing nuts in the party. He needs to prove to the world that he is not owned by the left wing of the party.
When he does, they are going to threaten him with Nader. If he is seen as caving to the wingnuts then he loses the general election.
As I've said before, he placed himself in a pretty box, I'm interested in seeing how he can get himself out of it.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 25, 2008 9:28 AM
Horsedooty
I didn't say it was part of the actual article...I said it was from his post. I did put the name of the poster, in the comments section and the time of the comment.
I was not intending to be disingenuous. At any rate, I am glad you read it. 8)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| February 25, 2008 9:28 AM
I would say that in a year when more candidates campaigned on the trope of change on the left, on the right and in the muddle of the middle (your pick who was where), the fella who brought the absolute most change to America of anyone since FDR (at least) is the one and lonely George W. Bush.
Not a lot of elected Dems -- even since the 2006 trickle of a watershed election -- have been successful in changing his change.
People remember than he ran on a vague premise of compassionate conservatism. My big laugh ain't that: it's the memory of his bleating sweetly over having a modest, even humble foreign policy.
Here was a guy who served as governor in a state where the governor has the LEAST power (ridiculously so) of any of the fifty states.
And yet he totally overwhelmed both houses of Congress -- and to an alarming extent when he should be toothless still does.
To my mind the only thing that both houses of Congress have done to really thwart him are stay in session to deny him recess appointments, etc.
Change, guys. Change in executive power on grotesque levels.... change in the diminishment of the legislative branch... change in a near complete absence of oversight... change in levels of "privatization" without regulation of government bureaucracies (every department has its Blackwaters, not just Defense).... change in the Constitution from the basis of government and American life to a sort of sorry theme park...
So you gotta ask... why is everyone so hungry for change?
The last seven years have had the unspoken slogan "Change That Can Kill Ya".
Isn't that all we have had rammed down our gullets for seven years?
Why are we all screaming for it all over again?
Where is a call for restoration of the Constitution? Why do I feel that every candidate won't be too willing to give up the excessive executive powers Bush created?
How else would such sweeping change as promised be executed in a country and a Congress that might be as polarized as this blog?
How much change would that be? Even if a person would like the direction policies were taking....
Does anyone really believe any of these candidates would willingly surrender -- aside from rhetoric -- any of the real changes Bush has made with his tiny brain and giant mallet?
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 9:28 AM
RRenee
I am such a fan...I would be hard put to pick a favorite!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| February 25, 2008 9:30 AM
9-11
Well said !!
AMEN!!
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 25, 2008 9:34 AM
9/11, good point about expecting those who will ascend to the newly powerful executive branch to willingly reverse the direction that Bushco took when adding that power and to roll those changes back. I've only heard Hillary talk about rolling back the Bushco constitution shredding, although Obama may have said similar things.
Drop me a line at larry dot chafin at steptoe hyphen johnson dot com if you are of a mind to do so.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 9:37 AM
The Attack on Obama
"Indeed, that process has begun, and is accelerating along with Mr. Obama’s drive toward the nomination. Conservatives will briefly applaud him for defeating Hillary Clinton, the immediate object of their hatred, which they will then turn on him as the next target. Denigrating material about the front-runner—whose popularity and skill they clearly fear—will be ready for deployment very shortly, but will not be aired until his nomination is a certainty.
Meanwhile, certain themes are being tested on the Web sites of the extreme right. The basic concept is to suggest that Mr. Obama is not as wholesome as he appears to be. On these sites and in e-mail barrages, he is portrayed as the son and stepson of Muslims from Africa and Asia, who worshipped in mosques and madrasas as a young boy. That is a proven falsehood surrounding a tiny grain of fact, but no matter. Repetition will make the poison.
Next will come questions about the Chicago church he attends, whose eccentric pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is a close friend and spiritual adviser to the Obama family. In an article published on the Newsmax Web site just days ago, Mr. Wright is depicted as a raving black nationalist and a proud associate of Louis Farrakhan. He is prone to polarizing remarks about a wide range of topics, from Jews and Israel to the disappearance of Natalee Holloway."
http://www.observer.com/2008/how-attack-obama
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 9:43 AM
9/11....
I am so glad you're back and adding to our respective IQs once again....
no.... I don't think any of them would have surrendered the "change".....
except for Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, Richardson, and Paul.....
they are gone..... thanks to the media and the fool hardiness of the American voting public (myself included).....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 25, 2008 9:44 AM
"Patsi.... wasn't there a "movement" a while ago that said all women should wear the "bitch" label and wear it proudly..... "
Might be a good idea. Here in Twangtown, "hillbilly" used to be an ugly word. But about ten years ago Marty Stuart started using it with pride...."hillbilly music" -- I decided I liked it a lot.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 9:46 AM
9/11 -- You made many great points, and the executive power one is crucial. I believe Hillary has said she would start to reverse some of these....but like you, I question if any POTUS will let go of them easily.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 9:48 AM
Bullshit on saying Hillary is not electable sorry.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 9:48 AM
pogo,
You bet.
rr,
My brother -- who has a genuine sense of American and global history and, having worked for thirty years as for the NYS AG's office, a real sense of governance, good and bad, found satisfaction in voting for Kucinich.
Why?
Because Kucinich's history as a mayor in a disastrous city told him the man could actually work within law and bureaucracy to govern effectively -- and legally.
By the way... I mentioned this before... but this last season of the Wire has a dual theme... one is about the Baltimore Sun (and what all papers face in losing relevance) AND a mayor who is based openly on Kucinich.
It's very good. (And I get a solid Clark Johnson in Baltimore fix.)
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 9:49 AM
Dooty,
Links provided by GORDO tend to be just about that useful.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 9:58 AM
"Bullshit on saying Hillary is not electable "
Absolutely. That's Obamatalk. He's been racheting that up all along, and I consider it seriously slimy politics. Fits right with him calling her White House experience as being about tea parties. Can't get a majority from her own party? If the BASE were the only voters, Hillary would already be the candidate. Indies and Republicans have taken over this primary.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 10:00 AM
dog, ok, but i don't see Obama winning. I only see a winning scenario if they go into the final election together. apart from that, there will be a lot of lingering bad feelings. I just know it!
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 10:00 AM
dog's eye,
I have both read and heard directly about Obama's virtues as a Constitutional law professor. All of it was consistent and good. And (as my favorite game show remains "Consider The Source") one of the voices is Bruce Green's whose tenure at Fordham Law has created some of the best legal thinkers and actors of the post-boomer world.
Last night I was watching on the McCain Channel -- oh, I meant Paxson TV (or what's left of it) -- Patrick Stewart's Captain Ahab. I have grown over ten years to embrace his version.
I bring it up because the position Ahab cannot evade -- even when he has his moment of lucidity as Starbuck stands next to him with a knife -- is the best emulation of what Shakespeare could show about kings.
The attraction of using unbalanced executive power to achieve good to great political goals is more than a conundrum: it is well on its way to becoming an American version of the crossroad Oedipus met.
It has always existed. And great leaders like Lincoln and FDR were rebuffed in their pursuit of it... even by their allies... even in times of war.
Bush has transformed this from a path to be faced into a vortex which may have the strength of a black hole.
God help whoever is elected to any federal office... from the H.R. to the Presidency. And may the American people stay awake to what is right and not to who's their their personal star in office.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 10:01 AM
I love this video... me thinks Michelle doesn't.
I wanna be under Barack Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Xb3bDwE9jQ
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 10:06 AM
jamie,
are you saying what I think you are saying? Dooty = caca?
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 10:12 AM
Stand Strong Tavis
Expert guest post by Michael Fauntroy
"One of the really unfortunate aspects of the current battle for the Democratic presidential nomination is the apologetic position that appears to be taking root in the Black community regarding Barack Obama’s candidacy. It goes something like this: “We shouldn’t press him too much to talk about Black issues because that might mess it up for the brother.” This color-before-accountability group-think has led to some sad examples of Blacks turning on each other for having the audacity to ask Obama to discuss his agenda for Black America. Tavis Smiley has recently been caught up in a silly battle because he had the temerity to not accept the company line regarding Obama’s campaign."
http://www.taylormarsh.com/
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 10:13 AM
9/11....
I read in a recent Christian Science Monitor that the reason Kucinich ended his bid for the presidency so abruptly is because he is facing stiff competition by other Democrats for his congressional seat.....
apparently there are many in his district who are upset about this past run for the presidency..... they are making the claim that he wasn't doing the job of representing his district because of the distraction of running for that office....
the CSM said that the possibility of him losing his seat to another Democrat is very real....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 25, 2008 10:13 AM
dogs eye view
actually if you break down the primary vote its repugs and independents that have beaten her and example would be wisconsin when the vote was broken down the dem vote was obama 50 and clinton 49......republican and independents gave him the other 16 points...............thats why im against the open primary...........its a democratic primary and only dems should be allowed to note not every tom dick and harry.......off the street who want to try to sway the elections...........its a known fact the GOP wants to run against obama as they are encouraging their voters to cross over and vote for him...........these same people will vote for mac in the general
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 10:18 AM
Republicans could have done something about partisan gridlock during the last eight years but choose not too...now they want to be part of the party
a little late
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:22 AM
Kucinich also had the sad news of his brother's death...
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 10:26 AM
"Republicans made up 6% of voters in Missouri's Democratic primary"
Dog
In Missouri
HRC dominated Obama in the suburbs and exurbs of the state. No obvious independent surge, IMO.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 25, 2008 10:26 AM
Please dog, why then are texas republicans urging voters to vote for Obama
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 10:27 AM
I am going to join a group of "Democrats for Ralph Nader"... that is, should Hillary not be on the ticket. There is no motivation to support someone who is so arrogant as to say all Hillary's supporters will vote for me, but I can't say the same in reverse... GRRRRRR... Nader 2008
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 10:28 AM
the DNC are idiots...............with their stupid proportional delagate splitting ............having open primaries and super delagates they have screwed up the whole system...........i believe the democrats should choose their nominee and not people outside the party..........a;lso to have 2 states like iowa and NH having the power to pick their candidate is really outrageous when they have 1 percent of the voting public ..............the whole system should be changed .....but dems like to shoot themselves in the foot ......fact is they have had only 2 presidents in 40 years......(carter and clinton)....thats because they [put up far left candidates when the country is centrist,,,
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 10:30 AM
How is that partisan gridlock going to end on immigration?
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:30 AM
rr,
That's always a concern for HR members who run for any greater office... and there had been dissatisfaction with how DK was perceived as turning into a fulltime candidate for president, even out of the cycle.
Eurotom,
Kucinich has one of the few truly open faces in national politics.
When I saw him appear on TV after his brother's death... even I could feel the depth of his loss and pain.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 10:33 AM
Rush Limbaugh is suggesting that Republicans VOTE FOR OBAMA in the ...Dick Morris urges Republicans in Texas to vote for Obama on H&C: ... Recent comments. well, no actually, they didn't "urge her to concede" ...
securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14734 - 117k - Cached - Similar pages
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:33 AM
Patsi: You are correct on the electability issue being the backbone of the Obama strategy. It all started here in Iowa. Most of my neighbors caucused for Obama and several told me that the theme of the ground game was that Hillary was too "polarizing" and could not win the general. My neighbor across the street said that was the main reason she was voting for Obama (meanwhile when I spoke of some of my concerns surrounding his thin resumé and not mandating health care I discovered that she knew NOTHING of his experience, record or policy positions. She told me he went to Michigan as an undergrad and that he voted against the war. Oy.)
I have said repeatedly on this blog that people can vote for whomever they wish and for whatever reason. I simply point out that there are many who jumped on the Hope Float based on the electability issue and I question whether February (or November 07/December 07/January 08) is too early to determine electability or use it for the sole basis of support.
Of course the press bought the electability argument hook, line and sinker. Frankly, you have to give Obama credit for a winnable strategy.
Posted by: Ally
| February 25, 2008 10:34 AM
Eurotom,
What will Nader enable McCain to accomplish?
Well, why don't undertake a group project?
List everything that Bush and Cheney have done, undone and destroyed.
Then you can make a list of how a view that letting McCain be president and all he can ruin in office will be justified by the speculation that a one term McCain presidency will create a) a brilliant opportunity for any Dem candidate of your choice and b) that a McCain victory will totally cripple if not annihilate the Dem nominee who is not of your choice.
Pencils ready?
Begin!
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 10:36 AM
dog
you like open primaries because it favors obama and i can respect that ,,,,,,,,,,but for republicans and independents to have such a large say in dem party politics ,,,,makes primaries useless....why have a party primary when members of that party arent really making their own choice .......
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 10:36 AM
I don't thinkI'm missing the point at all.
Moderate Republicans who could have done something but were to cowardly are trying to save their moderate position.
Why should Democrats give anything now when they went along with all this crap.
What reacharound and on what issues are people going to come together now.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:37 AM
I realize this is very old news but doesn't it bother anyone else that for last 20 years someone named Bush or Clinton has been the president of the US? Bush 41 Clinton 42 Clinton 42 Bush 43 and Bush 43...Do we really want and is it healthy for the longevity of the country to have yet another Clinton to follow in their footsteps? I don't think it is.
And don't forget Jeb, he could be getting his ducks in a row as I write this for his run for the Whitehouse. There are people that have been born and graduated from High School that have not known another presidential name besides these two.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 10:38 AM
Nadir..ego driven maniac and without a Green party he needs some neocon group to fund him.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:39 AM
dog,
"Tom: she cannot even get a majority of her own party voters to support her, and she is the candidate most likely to coalesce Republicans behind John McCain."
You are wrong on the latter point. With HRC we know who and what she is, with a HRC in the WH we also know she wouldn't be on the next plane to Iran to meet with Ahmadinejad. It is Ahmadinejad who is calling for the annihilation of Israel, it is Ahmadinejad who keeps expanding Iran's nuclear advancement to obtain nuclear power(?), and Obama will meet with Ahmadinejad without any qualifiers.
As I asked you the other day, which BTW you never answered, what is the one thing that makes you want to vote for Obama? What are his accomplishments as a Illinois legislator or as a US Senator?
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 10:43 AM
lets face it .....on the electability factor .....if obama was white and was only a senator for 2 years ,,,he would have never gotten a second look ........we have to realists here ......pretty speeches and hope and change are not resons to qualify some one for president ..........now before any of you start the racial defense ...this is not meant to be racial.....its meant to show common sense
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 10:44 AM
9/11 I'm tired of feeling held "captive" to the dems because there is never another alternative. I have plugged my nose in 1988 and 2004, and I just don't want to do it again. Confidence is fine and good, but Obama irks me.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 10:44 AM
I don't see it as payback at all. But I do see the Republicans trying to worm their way back in by pretending to want the "post partisan era" when they could have started it at any time but don't.
I don't see any compromise on any issue that works to the advantage of the programs Democrats have wanted.
Why haven't the moderate Republicans who supposedly now support Obama demanded an end to the war. IT is a Republican Congress that is keeping it going.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:47 AM
frydaddy
dog dosnt answer that question......he just loves obama even though he hasnt done anything to qualify him for potus
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 10:47 AM
I am bored... I am going to go watch old episodes of THAT GIRL.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 10:48 AM
dog
then why have dem and GOP primaries at all>>>>>just have primaries with everyone running on the ballots and the top 2 are prez and VP.....open for everyone ...that makes no sense and the i read what your positions are you dont make much sense either
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 10:51 AM
"dog dosnt answer that question......he just loves obama..."
--zumper
------------
uhhh...dog is a she...not a he ;)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| February 25, 2008 10:52 AM
"a lot to how strongly you identify with the Democratic party, and its traditional wing at that."
I identify strongly with it. A lot of Obama people do not. He and his following have done their best to marginalize many of the people in the base, especially the baby boomers his youth voters believe are "so yesterday." In reading many messages from this bunch of new voters, I ask myself two questions: 1. Are they voting for a serious political candidate or American Idol; and 2. Given the sexual-based and sexist comments they often make, who the hell raised them? Certainly not feminists.
The threat made by both Obama and his supporters has always been, unless we get our way we'll stay home or vote for the Republican. What does that say about this crowd? So, if he is not the candidate, bye-bye. OR if he is the candidate and loses, bye-bye. OR if he wins and fails miserably to deliver this brave new world he's promised, bye-bye.
Given any of these scenarios, they'll need those despised baby boomers -- who made it possible for a woman or a black to run in the first place -- to rebuild the party.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 10:53 AM
dog
There needs to be a big sea change in the way politics are conducted to have a "post partisan" era.
To some degree look at what happened to Schwarzenegger in Cal. When he moved to more moderate positions, the Republicans basically abandoned him.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:54 AM
In California only the Democrats have an open primary and Clinton won here.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 10:57 AM
people ..........the GOP is not going to win in november ...........unless something drastic happens i dont think the dems can screw this up .....but for all you younger people this is your future ......im old enough that its not going to affect me too much,,,,,,,but i have 15 grandchildren and 2 great grandchildren ,,,,,,its them i worry about .....i realize that you young people are driving this election...and i hope to God you make the right decision because GW has set this country back 10 years and if the annointed one dosnt deliver we could be set back another 10 years
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 11:01 AM
dog -----------------------
GOP Games a November Victory
Attention All Texas Republicans and Independents!!
"March 4th, Texas Republicans and Independents will have an opportunity to end Hillary Clinton's (and Bill's) presidential ambitions once and for all!
Since Texas has on open primary, Republicans and Independents should sign in at their polling place and request a Democratic ballot. They should then vote for Barack Obama. Even James Carville admits that if Hillary loses Texas, "she's done!" Republicans can help make this a reality!!! Just think, no more Clintons in the White House!
Voting Democratic this one time will have NO effect on your ability to vote in the next Republican primary or obviously on your vote in November. Since John McCain has the Republican nomination locked up, voting for McCain or Huckabee at this point will have no effect on the outcome on the Republican side.
I urge you to vote against Hillary Clinton by voting for Barack Obama. Please forward this e-mail to all your Texas Republican and Independent friends so that we can help ensure the Clinton's defeat on March 4th!!!"
http://republicansforobama.org/?q=node/359
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 11:04 AM
Patsi, your statement is absolutely not true. Most Obama supporters including myself will vote for Hillary if Obama is not nominated. On the other hand, it will be the younger voters that might not be as enthusiastic about Hillary. I only hope the rest of America is ready for change and McCain does not denote change. Therefore, although I really hope Obama wins, I will take Hillary over McCain.
Posted by: Cheryl S. | February 25, 2008 11:05 AM
"Some Americans have pegged Obama as an intelligent, unifying, transformative figure. That is what the young and crossover GOP are responding to."
assuming facts not in evidence
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:05 AM
Kerry was not "totally unelectable" He almost won.
A lot of people feel if the election in Ohio had been conducted properly he would have won...even with the damage of the swiftboat
and what about the Republican attack of Willie Horton that did the greatest damages to Dukakis, do you think
Jim Pinkerton has gone away.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:08 AM
Eurotom,
Kerry irked me.
Gore irked me.
Clinton irked me.
Mondale irked me. (Though I respected him.)
Carter irked me. (I wanted less teeth and Mo Udall.)
McGovern didn't. I knew what he was up against and he was the first case I knew of TV networks bowing to power by their refusing to air his solid "Come Home, America" acceptance speech the next day... forcing him to give it at around two AM with no one watching. (Anyone here read St. George and the Godfather by Mailer... not his best but a good refresher of the zeitgeist. For his best non-fiction... well, there's Armies of the Night.)
Bobby Kennedy irked me at 13 because he jumped on Gene McCarthy's momentum. Then Gene McCarthy irked me because he preened and withheld his support from Humphrey... thus helping Nixon be the one.
I don't think irking is working ever as a justification from going what any of us may feel is a candidate who is bad to a President who is worse... even worst.
It doesn't even work in relationships in life or at work.
Please... reconsider what wars McCain will bring... what wanton violation of whatever blood-brain barrier is left between business and politics...
And that electing yet another untreated dry drunk will destroy far more than your most irksome, volatile or reasonable negative expectations of Obama can even being to evoke.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 11:11 AM
dog
where is his record of unity ...........3 years in the senate and he hasnt crossed the aisle once.....those lifetime member of congress in their late 60's and 70' s and even in their 80's arent going to work with anyone unless it is in their interests not the country's.......clinton has worked accross the aisle many times ....but gop isnt going to work with ant dem as is proven with the situation in congress right now..........the dems have had only 2 presidents in forty years and even though carter was a nice guy we had to wait 12 years for a dem to win and he(clinton) did it going against the far left wing ......if obama fails with the far left it will be 20 years before another dem will get in ......
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 11:11 AM
Senor Horsedooty,
Sadly that is why I could not support George Clinton for President in 2008.
I mean... any man who could do what the funkdelic he did for Parliament could do even more for Congress... sexual or otherwise.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 11:14 AM
Patsi: I am 38. This statement may sound controversial but it is just my opinion, OK?: Feminism is dead amongst women my age. The sisterhood my mother and aunt experienced in the 70s has been replaced with pettiness, competition and Keeping Up With the Joneses.
However, Feminism will experience a resurgence and I am going to tell you why I think so: I am the only one of my female friends from high school or college who continued to work for wages after having kids (granted...I can work from home so it is great for me and my kids.)
Anyway...most of my friends have not kept up any career skills. They haven't even returned to work now that there kids are in school. Instead they are financially able to stay at home (lots of Obama supporters in this category—"Soccer Moms"). Meanwhile, slowly but surely, divorce is starting to pop up amongst this group, mainly due to infidelity on the part of their husbands. Sound familiar? Kind of like the 50s and 60s?
I was raised by a single Feminist mother who told me that I could never rely on a man. Don't get me wrong...I love men and I have a wonderful husband. I just don't want to suffer financially if, God forbid, he gets hit by a bus or even worse, has an affair. So I chose to remember history and stay current.
I know that the Feminist movement was about choice. Women have the choice to stay at home or work and I think it's great. But let's not pretend that these choices haven't made a difference in the current Feminist movement. I believe this is why you see "Waitress Moms" leaning to Hillary and the "Soccer Moms" leaning to Obama.
Of course there are exceptions to all of this so please don't attack. These are just my observations.
Posted by: Ally
| February 25, 2008 11:17 AM
Rush Limbaugh is suggesting that Republicans VOTE FOR OBAMA in the ...Dick Morris urges Republicans in Texas to vote for Obama on H&C
That is a fact. The R party want to take on Obama and his Socialist pollyanna ideology. In my opinion and other R's, the better candidate to run against would be HRC. At least HRC isn't about to give away the keys to the kingdom. If you read any of his books, even snippets, his interviews of years gone bye, what his friends and colleagues have said about his out-look on how the world should look, that same ideology still holds true today, America the world's caregiver. All his talk about hope and change may not look so good once it has been fully exposed. HRC can't challenge him on anything because as soon as she does the Obama people with the help of the MSM classify her comments as dirty/negative politics. So I hope this Tuesday night she has as much fire in her as she demonstrated this weekend and goes after Obama. She may lose, but I rather see her go down swinging that sit back and let someone who is far less qualified establish the governing rules and run the tables with them. Hopefully this will be HRC's, scorched earth debate. It can not hurt!
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 11:20 AM
I'm just sayin' you can believe that but there is no proof that Obama is a transformative figure. His record does not prove that.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:25 AM
all these GOP crossovers will vote for GOP in the general ............one thing about republicans they are loyal to their party ....case in point GW...........democrats are not loyal as shown by their threats of not voting for the other guy if their guy loses the primary
Posted by: zumper | February 25, 2008 11:25 AM
Putting all this on pause...
One of my favorite human beings is Sherman Yellen. I'm a fan of his playwrighting and tv/film work and I actually got to meet him at a Dramatist's Guild event. I was stunned that in a big room filled with writers and lyricists whose work I loved, it was Yellen who I wanted to meet.
He's been posting a lot up at HuffPo. A lot of that has been excerpts from a wondrous memoir he's writing.
This one is an absolute glory. If you love schnauzers, Maine Coon cats (who are dogs dressed up Halloween as cats), Norman Rockwell, his wonderful writer son Tom, the ASPCA and Eric Erickson, you'll have the best February day so far this year.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sherman-yellen/gus-and-us-part-three_b_88284.html
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 11:27 AM
Dog: I am no expert. These are just my personal observations. I have three girlfriends who are separated right now due to infidelity. They will suffer immeasurably if divorces follow. They have been out of the workplace for 6-10 years AND we are headed for some tough economic times.
My mother told me two things that have always stuck with me: Never date a man who wears white shoes and never rely on a man from a financial or happiness perspective. I don't know what the deal was with the white shoes but I always understood the latter.
Posted by: Ally
| February 25, 2008 11:29 AM
ET - your 10:44 post - I second everything you said. Why I'm switching to Independent finally and as I said the other day urge more to do the same.
Frankly, I'd like to see Bloomberg get in the race too - hell bring back Ross Perot (my partner's mother grew up down the street from him in TX) - HELL Lieberman is independent now - he can run TOO! Maybe even Ron Paul can say goodbye to the Republicans and run as an independent.
Even though I don't like many of them (although I'd give Bloomberg a SERIOUS look) at least we'd have a wide range of ideas to choose from and not be stuck choosing between the amateur and the war monger. Let them all run - NOW THAT would be change we can believe in.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 11:30 AM
dog's eye,
Go look for how their Public Editor pantsed the Times (yet again) for a lousy, self-subverting piece... either underreported or overedited.
What matters is that WaPo has picked up the only ball which matters... McCain and lobbyists, McCain and scandal, McCain and overt hypocrisy.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 11:31 AM
dog
the Times ombudsman said the story should not have been published.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/23/155510/776
and Obama had lobbyists on his campaign payroll
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/lobbyists-on-obamas-08-payroll-2007-12-20.html
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:31 AM
9/11, thank you for your 10:36 post. Has anyone gotten above a D+ yet?
dog, the reason I don't like open primaries is that in our 2 party system they only operate to the advanatage of the other party -usually the Republican party because of the tendency of the Democratic party to make hash of the nominating process (as it has this time) - only after one party has a presumptive nominee. I really don't have a huge problem with independents voting in either party's primary because that's what they do in the general election. But hey, states make their own decisions about these things, and we end up living with the outcome. I know, anyone who likes to keep their options open to either support their chosen candidate or mess with the other party's process can register as an independent and vote in either paty's primary if the rules allow in closed primary states, but the potential for mischief strikes me as more remote in that circumstance than in open primary systems.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 11:34 AM
Wendy!
Mike has been a good mayor for the city, particularly in areas other mayors from Lindsay on ignored -- the four outer boroughs have experienced not just a resurgence of good governmental service but have been restored as havens for light manufacturing.
He has put up a good fight for education. (And I was not thrilled with Joel Klein and his first two years of running the Board of Ed at all.) And he has created a first rate public health system. (With really cool psa's for NYC logo condoms -- get some today!)
But there are issues with him (as there are with everyone else).
Yet I will say one thing about him excels all the others.
A year or so ago was a good example. He fell into his familiar privilege mode and backed his friend and wealth peer Woody Johnson's dumbass plan for a Jets stadium on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.
When a city -- when ANYONE -- winds up depending on Cablevision and the Dolans to save their city's behind -- we know have have fallen down a rabbithole and a sewer all at once.
BUT --
When it was over you didn't have to take a terribly close look at Bloomberg to see a refreshing absence of a chip on either of his shoulders.
When something he wants fails... he moves on without getting punitive, petty or just plain weird.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 11:37 AM
Obama has the same relationship with lobbyists as John McCain
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/obamas_lobbyist_line.php
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:37 AM
pogo,
We all get A's for silent meditation on the subject.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 11:39 AM
In a fundraising e-mail distributed yesterday, Obama emphasized his stance against taking money from lobbyists and PACs.
Two lobbyists who are supporting another candidate and spoke to The Hill on condition of anonymity said that Obama’s campaign contacted them asking to be put in touch with their networks of business clients and acquaintances.
One of the lobbyists, who supports Clinton, said that Shomik Dutta, a fundraiser for Obama’s campaign, called to ask if the lobbyist’s wife would be interested in making a political contribution.
“I was quite taken aback,” he said. “He was very direct in saying that you’re a lobbyist and we don’t want contributions from lobbyists. But your wife can contribute and we like your network.”
Dutta declined to discuss his work.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obamas-k-street-project-2007-03-28.html
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:40 AM
Senor Horsedooty,
Sadly that is why I could not support George Clinton for President in 2008.
I mean... any man who could do what the funkdelic he did for Parliament could do even more for Congress... sexual or otherwise.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of) Author Profile Page | February 25, 2008 11:14 AM
9\11,
how could have I forgotten George. That is a scream.
thanks,
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 11:40 AM
Okay...
Just for a little historical context.
While no one has brought up plagiarism by either Democratic candidate today...
I am sure all of you read at one time or another about the actual creation of John Kennedy's Pulitzer winning Profiles In Courage... which served (along with Robert Donovan's superbly objective PT-109) as JFK's equivalent to Senator Obama's memoirs....
Kennedy served as the creative director and editor of the book (which I treasured as a kid)... but a credible analysis by Herbert Parmet in his Kennedy bio makes the case that Ted Sorenson did indeed write most of the text. (Which Drew Pearson had claimed prior after Kennedy's VP nom attempt and before his 1960 run.)
Am I bothered by this? Well... I don't think either JFK or Ted Sorenson ever expected to win something like a Pulitzer. But Sorenson's loyalty to Kennedy was deep and genuine...
And I've had the experience of having something I've written a good part of get awards on national TV.
My loyalty was to my contract with the producers... and that their checks cleared.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 11:47 AM
Patsi wrote:
"Are they voting for a serious political candidate or American Idol"
Patsi - you bring something up that is very interesting here. As I've said before, my area of interest as a scholar is Digital Theory, Digital Rhetoric and Hypertext Theory. One of the interesting aspects of this new media age is the question of authority and how we deem someone authoritative. I believe we are seeing a spill over now in how we elect someone to office - especially President. I'm just going to link to this article for those who want to read it
http://chronicle.com/free/v53/i41/41b00601.htm
If you don't want to read the article and want a bulleted version - this is a quick overview page I did for a presentation:
http://ctwebspace.com/671/presentation/authority20.html
This view of authority is definitely generational. The Net Gens definitely take a different approach to how they deem something important or relevant and clearly from this election we can see they are taking that same approach in deciding who should be President. I do not make any judgments on this but simply find it an interesting phenomenon.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 11:49 AM
slightly off topic but Jane Hamsher on the plagerism discussion
I'm not Jane Hamsher's biggest fan, but this is very very nice:
"Doris Kearns Goodwin was on MTP talking about whether Obama copped lines from Duval Patrick for his speech or not. She went into a long discourse about how politicians are always "borrowing and absorbing patterns and evolving," and dismissed it as no big deal. Which may in fact be true. But is she the best person to be weighing in on this? Considering that the biggest scandal of her career was about plagiarism, it was kinda like asking Roger Clemens to speculate about the problem of steroids in the WWF and making no reference to, you know, the elephant in the room."
Maybe they should have had Joe Biden and Mike Barnicle too.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:52 AM
The I;m not Jane Hamsher's biggest should be included in quotes...
I am one of her biggest fans
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 11:53 AM
Zumper, you badly underestimate the capacity of the Democratic party to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. You had better hope the indies believe that Obama (yes, I have come to believe despite my hopes to the contrary that he will be the dem nominee) is the transformative figure he and his supporters say he is. I'm not so sure they do or will.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 11:54 AM
Senor Horsedooty
Dooty = caca?
That referred to links provided by GORDO as they tended to be either single source, way on the fringe of human thought, or a fly by commentary that added nothing to the conversation.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 11:55 AM
The Clinton campaign denies they are the source of the photo
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 12:00 PM
If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely. This is nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry. We will not be distracted.”
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 12:02 PM
Soooo, I'm just guessing here, but tomorrow's debate could deviate from the conciliatory tone on which the last one ended?
And now .... lunch.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 12:05 PM
kgc,
One of the hardest things any writer has is wondering who the hell they just paraphrased or copied.
Whenever my all time favorite composer/collaborator and I were were locked in a small aerie-like room during workshops or rehearsals, he would write something breathtakingly rich and complete in a couple of hours...
Then look up and say with a wild grin... "So who did I steal from this time?"
I'd fall on the floor everytime.
Reading and writing (sadly not arithmetic) get deeply, intimately fungible when anyone is engrossed in writing a project.
A script of mine that is very active just now made me remember a book (now over a century old) that I read dozens of times between seven and thirteen.
I had to return to it to make sure my work had its love for it but was both essentially and particularly distinct from it and original.
But... as I said after I realized during one final preview that I had really truly just written (not copied) a lyric that cleaved to the style of Sheldon Harnick...
"Is it possible to channel the living?"
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 12:06 PM
In the interest of joyous harmony and universal peace, I would like to propose that we create the Trailmixers branch of the Official Monster Raving Loony Party
http://www.omrlp.com/
There was a Florida branch so maybe our fearless leader could check to see if they are still in existence and we could be the netroots outpost of same.
dibsies on the full body length sunrise headdress.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 12:11 PM
9/11 thanks for the run down - I like him fiscally and think he's a terrific philanthropist as well as hearing good things about him from New Yorkers regarding his tenure as Mayor but admit I have a lot more homework to do.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 12:11 PM
dog,
"I respond to Obama's personal characteristics: the ability to listen well, being closer to those living everyday life -- he's not that far removed from being a community organizer or state representative; not being wedded to the one right way to do things -- realizing there are several, the ability to inspire others to do their best and look more seriously at their communities at large. Sheer intelligence."
So you are voting for the image, the charisma factor, of what you think you see and hear, and not on his past performance, or how he plans to implement his endless list of promises? I am not totally surprised by that, as most Obama supporters are following down the same path. That is why I refer to Obama as the modern day Pied Piper. They are voting for the rhetoric, the charisma of Obama without giving any thought to the 5 W's which much has remained unanswered. That is a very dangerous concoction.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 12:12 PM
9/11
Isn't what got Kearns Goodwins and Biden in trouble (not to mention Barnicle) the use of exact wording?
Personally I think the attacks on Obama for plagerism are stupid. The themes and wording they are talking about are so common that pretty much every pol has used them at one time or another (I think someone else said that first.)
I mean if just the idea or theme were the measure wouldn't Shakespeare's family be in court all the time.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 12:12 PM
He looks cute in Muslim dress
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 12:14 PM
This is the final death rattle of the Clinton campaign. Mismanaged. No consistent message. Fundraisers nervous. Super delegates leaving my the minute. In fighting among over paid expert consultants. Disheartened and bitter supporters. Now comes the 'throw as much mud and see what sticks" strategy. It'll all be over on March 4, thank God.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 25, 2008 12:18 PM
""Is it possible to channel the living?""
9/11
The patterns with which people operate can bring on the weirdest sensations almost to the point of wondering if we are all some sort of experiment that won't end until we note that exactly the same events and conversations just keep happening at regular intervals.
A few days ago the TV gave me that de ja vu all over again feeling until I realized that the sounds were coming from a political panel.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 12:18 PM
Hey Horsedooty!
I don't know what dooty means, but can you explain this?
yo soy ????
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 12:20 PM
"My mother told me two things that have always stuck with me: Never date a man who wears white shoes and never rely on a man from a financial or happiness perspective. I don't know what the deal was with the white shoes but I always understood the latter."
Ha! I love that, Ally. My daughter, about to turn 39, is a proud feminist, but not particularly outspoken on the subject. My son, 34, is probably more outspoken because he is more political.
The daughter worked as a mid-level music exec for ten years, then married ad moved from Nashville. She's staying home for a couple of years with the new daughter. But she is very aware of the need to get back in the work force. Many of the mothers in her Ohio "mom's group" are professionals (doctors and lawyers) who took a couple of years off to have children. So they are probably in a slightly different category than the women you spoke of. It will be very hard on them, and that makes me sad.
My earlier post regarding sexism hasd to do with my disgust that it is obvious that we've seen, through the media, that sexism is still alive and well....healthier than I ever dreamed.
Part of that had to do with a well-orchestrated campaign against the concept of feminism, to the point that women started saying, "I'm no feminist...BUT."
The same campaign was run against Hillary Clinton, and will no doubt be run against Michelle Obama.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 12:20 PM
And I begin supporting Ralph Nader on 5 March
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 12:20 PM
fry said
"his endless list of promises"
Fry how is Obama's list any more endless than any other candidate in the race, say McCain?
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 25, 2008 12:21 PM
Actually KGC the Clinton campaign did not deny they were the source of the photo - do you have a link that says they did because I'd like to see it.
I'd like everyone to know that I sent the Clinton campaign an e-mail this morning over the Obama photo letting them know that while I don't want them to necessarily "win pretty" - thought her piss and vinegar towards Obama over the weekend was RIGHT ON, that it was clear what the intent of this was to pray of people's fear and mistrust of Muslims and then associate Obama with them. I know politics and winning campaigns is tough and can be ugly but I told them that this was not what I had in mind when I wanted them to fight and it was even too low for me.
I think the Clinton campaign should fire whomever sent out the photo and apologize for the staffer's lack of judgment.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 12:22 PM
a previous example of Republican bipartisanship
(and why Democrats think it is a Trojan horse)
"It's About Screwing Liberals
Those of us in the know understand that the "gang of 14" thing was not a victory for Democrats, or bipartisanship, but a blessing bestowed on the Republican right to cheat by promising that Democrats wouldn't do anything to make them want to cheat.
But it pissed off conservatives because while they want conservative judges to be appointed, what they want even more is to extend a middle finger to Democrats as often as possible. In other words, they wanted the Republicans to cheat so they could laugh at the impotent Democrats.
Their politics is mostly driven by a desire to say "f--k you!!!!!!!!" to their perceived political enemies. There isn't much more there."
http://www.atrios.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 12:24 PM
"One of the hardest things any writer has is wondering who the hell they just paraphrased or copied."
9/11 -- With my current book, I am partly relying on writings I did over the past decade. I called an editor friend and asked, "Is it okay for me to steal from myself?"
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 12:25 PM
The Drudge Photo
25 Feb 2008 09:50 am
It's unclear who is circulating the photo, what the photo means, why only Matt Drudge would receive it, why anything would assume that eve "stressed" Clinton staffers would do such a thing, and why, absent any proof that such a photo was circulating, Obama's campaign would formally react.
(Clinton campaign aides denied circulating the photo, although they worry that, if someone on the campaign -- 700 people now -- did so without authorization, they will be in a pickle.)
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/the_drudge_photo.php
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 12:29 PM
ET
yo soy = I am
in spanish
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 12:32 PM
Wendy -- a very interesting article. Especially liked the Wikipedia portion re: how many times "edited" coming to mean how "authoritative." (When the real question might be, "how many idiots dicked with this entry?")
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 12:32 PM
Thanks KGC for the link
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 12:33 PM
kgc,
With Biden it was a pre-internet young and stupid cut and paste.
With Kearns Goodwin... it is something I have seen historians of all eras do... they can come to think of something which is clearly TAKEN as a given... forgetting that while it may have become a truism or even a cliche, it remains an original thought and expression.
She paid for that one in lots of ways. It was plagiarism, conscious or not. But I don't believe it was anything beyond a pronounced, public version of what I wrote above.
With Barnicle... his problem was not what he took but what he made up out of bits and pieces and pure air.
That has been an addiction of his... but it hasn't stopped him from being a well-paid minor Paul Harvey.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 12:34 PM
On a personal note...
I sure would be apprciate if Typekey change the text that runs next to their check box from asking if you'd like to be signed in for the next weeks...
To asking if you'd like to signed in for the next two minutes.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 12:36 PM
Didn't Barnilce steal from George Carlin
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 12:36 PM
LOL Patsi
The one thing you can say about Wikipedia is that they do have a lot of really good editors that do fact check and will remove things or change things if they think they are wrong.
That said, one of the original Wikipedia guys left over these content wars they were always having. One person changes something, then another changes it back, then someone changes it back and it goes on and on.
Wikipedia is helpful but it should only be a first stop to help get your research going and not be the definitive answer on anything.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 12:37 PM
This is from my 9:43 post: "On these sites and in e-mail barrages, he is portrayed as the son and stepson of Muslims from Africa and Asia, who worshipped in mosques and madrasas as a young boy. That is a proven falsehood surrounding a tiny grain of fact, but no matter. Repetition will make the poison."
Wonder if this photo is part of the Repub attack on Obama?
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 12:43 PM
kgc,
Yeah, that he did. And the fabulist stuff as well.
Zuckerman who owns the Daily News and U.S. World & News Report didn't care much about that and hired him fast... at least that is what my neurotoxic brain remembers.
More importantly, Carlin was THE best Mr. Conductor on Shining Time Station... better even than Ringo.
And Kevin Smith would never cast Barnicle in anything.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 12:44 PM
I dunno, Gordo.
But those pictures of Will Farrell from the Semi-Pro premiere sure looked like it.
He went, like, totally Muslim, dude.
Or was he just dressing like Shaq?
I get all of this so confused.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 12:46 PM
Patsi,
I only can hope your agent sent you the written permission note.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 12:50 PM
In the end - it probably is the Republicans - they're probably setting the 2 dems off one another by saying hillary did it - which of course Obama people are happy to believe and point out.
Who knows
Anyway - Obama should embrace his connections to the Muslim community, use his position to dispel ignorance towards the vast majority of Muslims who are not terrorists, and help us bridge that gap. If he's so into making change and bringing people together...his knowledge of the Muslim community could be a great place to start instead of hiding from it...but wait that might actually hurt his chances to be President and actually winning the Presidency is more important than actually doing what he says - bring people together. Nevermind.
another none story - move on Obama people.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 12:50 PM
read the story
it references the story ...the photo published on the Drudge web site...
important to read the links to you post to make sure they prove your statement.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 12:51 PM
also, ET,
there are some that insist that Yo is redundant as Soy can be translated to "I am" in the conjugation of the verb Estar soy relates to I so some say I am saying "I I am Horsedooty" I tell everyone that I am aware of that but that I stutter.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 12:51 PM
OT a little,
does anyone think it is Odd that the Iman loves Kearns Goodwin and Barnicle and Biden. All of which are known plagiarists? I take that to mean nothing just find it interesting.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 1:00 PM
"Zuckerman who owns the Daily News and U.S. World & News Report didn't care much about that and hired him fast... at least that is what my neurotoxic brain remembers"
I don't understand Zuckerman at all,
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 1:01 PM
can anyone say PHOTO SHOP? They don't allow photographs in court anymore for this very reason.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Horsedooty! | February 25, 2008 1:03 PM
9/11
Click on comment anonymously fill out the info and then put a check in the remember info box. From then on when you click on anonymous, it should fill it in for you.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 1:04 PM
Senor Horsedooty --
Some people say... his very funny bestseller God's Other Son was principally written by Charles McCord ... who wrote quite a bit of the sketches and material, live and pre-recorded, for the show in its funny prime on WNBC.
McCord definitely wrote just about all -- libretto, lyrics and music -- of the spec musical version of God's Other's Son which was pitched to Jerry Zaks and other B'way people unsuccessfully last decade.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 1:08 PM
"Why is the Obama Campaign Freaked About a Photo?
We are such children in this country. It's why I did the story on William Ayers and Obama, which is exactly what the wingnuts will unload on Mr. Obama, which was greeted with shock and dismay. Obama and his unhinged fans better get a grip, because killing the messenger won't kill the story come general election time. But even postulating the likely occurrence had Obamabot heads exploding, due to their fascistic fetish for warning people to shut up, or attacking someone talking about a real issue that will bite Obama when the time is ripe. When you have reactions like we're seeing today over the shot of Obama in Somali garb, it only proves my point. Dems are in trouble looking towards the general election if this is the best Obama can offer in way of a response."
http://www.taylormarsh.com/
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 1:16 PM
Good to hear from Marty - know him via USC affiliations - I think Nader is only a spoiler as long as he's the only 3rd party candidate in the race - I say fill the field with candidates and then it's a real conversation with some choices.
Marty is a hard core dem though. A friend of mine that worked for him believes that the Dukakis in the tank idea was his. LOL.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 1:17 PM
Wendy -- When I first saw "Spaceballs," and Rick Moranis walked out as "Dark Helmet" the Dukakis in a tank shot came to mind.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 1:29 PM
If I was Obama I would have handled the clothing issue thusly"
If true:
--While on a visit to Somalia in 1996 I was honored by an invitation to dress as a Somali Elder. I accepted. It was a singular experience that helped me appreciate their distinctive and rich culture.
If untrue:
--I would have been deeply honored had I been invited to dress as a Somali Elder during my 1996 visit to Somalia. It would have been a singular experience adding to my deep appreciation for their rich and distinctive culture. Unfortunately, the story of my having been granted that honor is a complete and total fabrication.
Posted by: Flatus
| February 25, 2008 1:29 PM
I tried posting a picture of Bush wearing a communist Zen Buddhist Vietnamese outfit...
That was also a dress.
The link was too long.
I remember when Shirley Temple when Ambassador to Ghana she was FREQUENTLY photographed in Ghanian clothing.
As are many politicians when they travel or even attend ethnic events.
By the way... my favorite story of an American ambassador ever was how Shirley Temple acted when she arrived in Prague on the day the Soviet tanks swung their asses onto the streets.
Even though she had yet to present her credentials and officially start her tenure...
She WALKED through the streets to the Soviet Embassy....
She STRODE into the chief consul's office uninvited...
And she PROTESTED in a way that scared the crap out of everyone who could hear her.
This was reported by Czech workers at the embassy.
I always add in my mind her stamping her foot and swinging her arms.
I love Shirley Temple.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 1:30 PM
Patsi,
Poor Mel Brooks cut the scene where Dark Helmut was telling reporters how his Spaceballs Empire Miracle had changed the universe by getting planets to grow arugula and other fancy greens...
(Testing all your Dukakis memory banks...)
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of)
| February 25, 2008 1:34 PM
UhOh, 9/11 -- I confess to a: not liking arugula and b: not knowing the Dukakis connection. I'm always late on movies...I don't think I saw Spaceballs until my son was in grad school and rented it!
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 1:41 PM
Flatus - nicely said - and it's clearly true as the picture is of Obama - I believe the way the Obama campaign is reacting is making Obama look bad. Just as it would be bad for the Clinton campaign if they were indeed the one's pushing the photo (because I believe if they were their intent is clear).
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 1:43 PM
Wonder if Marty wrote the arugula speech too...hmmmm...I'll ask my friend.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 1:47 PM
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashoa.htm
Drudge doesn't accuse the Clinton Campaign the Obama campaign does
worth going to the site to see the picture of Shrub in a native dress and Senator Clinton and Chelsea with their heads covered.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 1:55 PM
KGC - Drudge doesn't really make that clear and the Maggie Williams comment does nothing to dispel it...that said...I'll believe Hillary before I'll believe a hack like Drudge.
And Flatus' response above is right on. Obama should just embrace it and use it to his advantage...not act like he's running from something - bad for his...'image'.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 2:01 PM
personally given the type of campaign Obama has run
they probably are the ones sending out the email
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 2:06 PM
As those of you who read stuff here very often know, in addition to politics I try and read and post links related to the economy, usually from the NYTimes (I'm too cheap to subscribbe to the WSJ), and lately, it has largely been bad news - the only silver lining to which is the opportunity to point out how incompetently Bushco has managed the economy, notwithstanding Sean Hannity's protestations to the contrary. The bad news continues.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/business/25cnd-econ.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Look down to the last couple of paragraphs if you want to see spin.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 2:08 PM
Wendy!, how dare you call that hack Drudge a hack? Why I read an interview once a couple of years ago with somone - the name is long gone from my memory at this point - who claims Drudge told him that he was right on about 80% of the things he published. Think about that - a "newsman" admitting that he is wrong on 20% of his stories.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 2:13 PM
I was thinking more the campaign that would do anyting to win including using lies and smears
Remember Craig Crawford said the campaign that will do anything to win is the one that does,.
The only way Obama could win was to destroy the most popular Democratic politician and that is what they did.
Before Bill Clinton ever uttered the words Jesse Jackson people were posting they thought that's the excuse the Clinton's would use in SC if they lost.
And accusing the Clinton campaign of not competiing and SC. The Obama campaign circulated the "racist" memo to build up steam.
Yes they are the campaign that will do anything to do win. And not in a pretty way.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 2:14 PM
""personally given the type of campaign Obama has run"
yes a winning campaign."
An interesting opine on the relative merits of each campaign and their fiscal management:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24rich.html
Posted by: dnd | February 25, 2008 2:15 PM
ET
yo soy = I am
in spanish
yo soy Horsedooty!
THANK YOU... I kept wondering. I could have asked my partner coz he is Italian, and understands spanish, but it didn't cross my mind...
hahahah I just MSN'd him:
[20:18:42] EuroTom - 3 more days til Mauro arrives says:
what does this mean?
[20:18:46] EuroTom - 3 more days til Mauro arrives says:
yo soy?
[20:19:06] EuroTom - 3 more days til Mauro arrives says:
you know it?
[20:19:13] Lonesomechaser71 says:
spanish
[20:19:19] Lonesomechaser71 says:
I am?
[20:19:22] EuroTom - 3 more days til Mauro arrives says:
YES
[20:19:24] EuroTom - 3 more days til Mauro arrives says:
very good
[20:19:30] Lonesomechaser71 says:
:D
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 2:20 PM
Drudge accuracy rate is 37%
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 2:20 PM
Pogo
LOL
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 2:21 PM
Today's Asian Times. Article on Obama.
"When you want to uncover an unspecified secret, look for the woman."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JB26Aa01.html
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 2:22 PM
9-11
I know the connection,
basically sealed Dukkakis' fate in the farm states. Belgium endive, the great cure to the farm crises of the 80's.
The Dukkakis campaign, lol, there was an effort in cluelessness.
it was a bit like the housing crises now. Land prices went down along with low crop prices.
The federal reserve told banks to reduce their farm loan portfolio.
In 1986 I couldn't get a farm loan with collateral. But I moved to Kansas City got a contract with the Corp of Engineers. The bank backed me for $5000 with basically a signature loan.
Why?
it was for business not farm, they needed business loans to balance out their loan portfolio per fed. regulations.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | February 25, 2008 2:24 PM
Jack,
fry said
"his endless list of promises"
Fry how is Obama's list any more endless than any other candidate in the race, say McCain?
Obviously you haven't been to his web site.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 2:25 PM
Oh ET and KGC
It's only dirty if Hillary does it
It's running a really good campaign if Obama does it.
Don't you see the difference?
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 2:26 PM
What's a vagina?
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 2:26 PM
Belgian Endive is really good. Here it is called Witloaf which means WHITE LOAF... it is often cooked and then baked with slices of ham, cream sauce and cheese and then served over fresh mash potatoes. My ex is soooo good at making this.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 2:28 PM
Corey your question reminds me of an embarrassing moment in the life of a friend of mine. His mother had some sort of Tupperware party and she apologized to the guests that she had no napkins to offer with the hor' derves being served. Her son said "oh yes you do mommy" and he grabbed this purple box out of the linen closet: KOTEX... He could read enough to know that it said "napkins". Poor kid was teased about it FOREVER!
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 2:31 PM
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_02/013094.php
Frank Rich not so much. And he had a perfect target in McCain but passed it up to obsess once again about Senator Clinton.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/11/203012/520
Rich on the race card.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 2:32 PM
Oh ET and KGC
It's only dirty if Hillary does it
It's running a really good campaign if Obama does it.
Don't you see the difference?
Posted by: Wendy! | February 25, 2008 2:26 PM
My point exactly Wendy, though you put it ever so more succienctly ... WTF? did I spell succienctly wrong? My spell checker DOES NOT LIKE IT!
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 2:34 PM
KC, then Drudge gives himself over twice the credit he's due. LOL
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 2:36 PM
Boy, look at you Clintonites. What happened to you? What happened to all of the "Hillblazers"? Where's this "Clinton Country"? You constantly bitch and moan about how Obama did this to your favorite candidate or the mean old MSM did that to Billary. "...She was so good, and he's so bad! Why can't they see that???"
My question: If Clinton can't beat a so called lightweight, first term, junior Senator, what makes you think she could beat John McCain? Face it, Clinton would have been a nightmare as a Democratic candidate. No enthusiasm within her own party and a galvanizing force for the Republicans.
It's over y'all. Face it. She's not going to be the next president.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 25, 2008 2:37 PM
Look at the increase in Obama's unfavorables
Friday, February 15, 2008
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday
viewed favorably by 54% and unfavorably by 44%
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 2:39 PM
Bill Kristol Previews GOP Attack On Obama: He Thinks He's Better Than You
"Kristol manages the neat trick of wrapping up not one, but two highly dubious anti-Obama smears into his first few grafs -- the bogus flag-pin patriotism story and Michelle Obama's claim that she's really proud of her country for the first time.
That's to be expected, of course. But what interests me is the overarching theme he uses to tie them together: They both show, he suggests, that haughty and elitist Obama thinks he's better than you and the average Joe. We saw these exact same attacks lobbed relentlessly at Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004, of course. "
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/
Posted by: GORDO | February 25, 2008 2:42 PM
9/11, I think I'll take the pledge as well, and add another to the list.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 2:45 PM
I guess the Clinton campaign now controls all the media
CNN online poll echoes smears by asking if Obama "show[s] the proper patriotism"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802250002
As Politico senior political writer Ben Smith noted, on February 24, an online poll at CNN.com asked: "Does [Sen.] Barack Obama show the proper patriotism for someone who wants to be president of the United States?" Smith wrote: "I've got to say, I've never seen a reader poll like this on a mainstream media website (or, to be honest, a right-wing blog). ... [
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 2:45 PM
the obamabots are going ballistic posting over at politico on the somali garb picture - guess they think someone's pickin' on jesus again.
Posted by: econsmed
| February 25, 2008 2:46 PM
All you need to know about Ralph Nader is that he graduated at the very bottom of his Harvard Law Class and he turned out to be the most famous. I think the reason why he threw the election to W is because they are birds of a feather...ineffectual narcissists who will do anything, in the name of helping the people, to stay relevant.
Posted by: Bear
| February 25, 2008 2:47 PM
lol@ecomsmed
That is pretty funny.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 2:57 PM
no alpha, the way this thing is going McBush is going to be the next President
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 3:08 PM
ET
"napkins". Of course that is why so many people from other countries are shocked that Americans don't say "serviettes" or some other name to distinguish them from that particular article.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 3:12 PM
FD
I would need to know more about the Asia Times to make a complete judgement, but a lot of that seemed a bit of pop psychology in relation to Obama. What I find even more disturbing is the view of the United States and the English language as some sort of marauders in relation to the rest of the world, its cultures, and languages.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 3:15 PM
Corey Mitchell...
While I was mopping the floor, I thought of your question "What is a Vagina?" Why? Because I asked my Gram the exact same question. I had taken my mom's copy of "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex But We're Afraid to Ask"... and I was sitting in the parked car reading.... I was in 6th or 7th grade, young naive.. and so I get to the word VAGINA... so I go in and say "Gram what is a vagina" and she told me. Later I came in and asked "What is 'intercourse" and she answered and I went back to the car... finally I went in and said "Gram what is a homosexual?" and she looked at me and said "WHAT BOOK IS THAT YOU ARE READING?". LOL, I still think of this. My Gram was a saint on earth I think. I think I miss her everyday.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 3:19 PM
I think the Obama campaign released the picture and made up the email to distract from their false mailers in Ohio,
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 3:19 PM
I think the Obama campaign released the picture and made up the email to distract from their false mailers in Ohio,
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | February 25, 2008 3:19 PM
Well his indignation would certainly heighten his reputation as a saint. I wonder if the Pope is willing to canonize him?
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 3:21 PM
Who watched the Oscars? Not many.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/oscars_tv_ratings
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 3:23 PM
The University of Florida Obama timeline, should you need to check where Barry has been these 47 years.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.africanamericans.com/images2/BarackObama.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ufsfbo.blogspot.com/&h=669&w=500&sz=29&hl=en&start=59&um=1&tbnid=VUXMRAolDAKeJM:&tbnh=138&tbnw=103&prev=/images%3Fq%3D%2B%2522Barack%2BObama%2B%2522%26start%3D54%26as_st%3Dy%26ndsp%3D18%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 3:24 PM
I want to know when Nader becomes nadir? Yes, 2.8 million votes in 2000. Last outing a miniscule couple hundred thousand.
When does "perennial" devolve into "perennial joke"? He is a caricature of himself, but Dorian Gray-like, an ever-darkening, ever saddening one. Gone the Corvair Crusader, replaced by Irrelevant At Any Speed.
To me, it's like watching reruns of "Groundhog Day". Ralph woke up, it's February in a Leap Year, hears Sunny and Cher on the cheap radio alarm clock and declares for President. Why he missed the opportunity to do this on February 2nd eludes me, unless he thought that Punxsutawney Phil would get more ink than he did.
Sadly, there's a whiff of Britney Spears to Ralph...so self-delusional that he can't recognize he's being laughed at, not with.
Posted by: WACPAC | February 25, 2008 3:24 PM
Fry Daddy, why do you call him Barry? He doesn't like the name anymore
WACPAC as for Nader, I hate the guy, but I am making a pledge that i will vote for him if Hillary and Barack are not on the ticket together. Wait, I rephrase that... If the winner doesn't invite the runner-up to be on the team.
Might piss off my democratic friends, but if I am going to toss my vote, better for a left winger than McBush or some right wing nutcase.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 3:26 PM
ok, no matter what anyone says, Barack Obama was VERY GOOD LOOKING in college... serious! http://www.africanamericans.com/images2/BarackObama.jpg
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 3:32 PM
jamie,
Could be wrong on this, but isn't the Asian Times one of the 15 newspapers of the NYT?
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 3:33 PM
"Fry Daddy, why do you call him Barry? He doesn't like the name anymore"
ETom..... fry daddy is our resident conservative....
he tolerates you and others calling McCain "McBush"..... so if he wants to call Barack "Barry"..... well, it's only fair, IMO....
econsmed..... I know I shouldn't say this........ but.... thanks for the laugh....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 25, 2008 3:34 PM
Tom,
Just a carry over from HS days.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 3:35 PM
thanks Renee, thanks Fry... Econs, I didn't quite understand the comment.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 3:36 PM
There was only one barry and that was BARRY WHITE.
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 3:37 PM
Corey I am ashamed... You said Barry White and I was thinking Barry Manilow...
When I first visited NYC in 1983, I saw CATS on Broadway. I thought it was stupid, but I loved seeing Betty Buckley on state singing MEMORY... But to be honest, I think Mr. Manilow's version is the best of ANY I have heard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQMYALVdqK8
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 3:40 PM
ET wrote: "I think Mr. Manilow's version is the best of ANY I have heard."
OK - ET - this is where you and I are finally going to part...
Barbra Streisand's was the best version of MEMORY ever - IMHO.
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 3:57 PM
Corey, the Oscars show was great; I watched all but the hour "The Wire" was on HBO, and Jon Stewart was wonderful. I am no Stewart sycophant, either...I am tired of his schtick on The Daily Show, but he was good as well as funny and at times hilarious last night.
Posted by: Dexter
| February 25, 2008 3:58 PM
would have expected a little more from you BNYC
oh well...
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 3:59 PM
FD
Asia Times could very well be one the major world papers. I was somewhat suprised at the strength of the anti-American feeling in the article. There are sections of the world where that is more the norm which is why I said I wanted to know more about the paper itself, particularly since this seemed to be an "opinion" article that was being presented and seemed to have "news" content.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 4:00 PM
BNYC
you made me chuckle...you've never done that before.
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 4:08 PM
Wendy, Barbra sang MEMORIES
Memory is from Cats, did she do that too?
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:10 PM
Please stop with the Barry Manilow talk...
I am having a crisis of identity because I don't mind Big and Rich. I absolutely love Neil Diamond. Barry Manilow is a guilty pleasure. After I declare that I used to watch Lawrence Welk as a kid and still watch the occasional reruns on public television,
I fear the Carlton jokes will start anew and I can't afford the therapy...lol!!!
Posted by: Bear
| February 25, 2008 4:11 PM
Is this the same Asia Times you are speaking of?
Asia Times Online http://www.atimes.com and http://www.atchinese.com, is a quality Internet-only publication that reports and examines geopolitical, political, economic and business issues. We look at these issues from an Asian perspective; this distinguishes us from the mainstream English-language media, whose reporting on Asian matters is generally by Westerners, for Westerners. Our Chinese-language edition presents our articles to Chinese readers around the world.
We are served by more than 50 correspondents and contributors in 17 Asian countries, the US, and Europe. Additional content is provided by news services and renowned think tank and investment analysts and academics.
Asia Times Online was founded in the beginning of 1999 and is incorporated and duly registered in Hong Kong. It derives its revenues from advertising and
the resale of original content to other publications and news services.
Historically, in our publication policy and editorial outlook, we are the successor of Asia Times, the Hong Kong/ Bangkok-based daily print newspaper founded in 1995 and associated with the Manager Media Group, which had to cease publication in the summer of 1997 as a result of the Asian financial crisis. Like its predecessor, Asia Times Online gives its readers worldwide an overview of Asian news events, looking behind the headlines that are the staple of the news agencies and networks.
Asia Times Online is reaching a rapidly increasing global readership. Our readers are people of influence - investors, executives, diplomats, academics, journalists - who need to know about Asian political, economic and business affairs. We have become a "must read" for Westerners and Asians who do business with each other.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:11 PM
Extra, Extra, read all about it another Obama supporter faints at rally in Cincinatti. What is it up to now? Eight? I lose count.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 4:11 PM
Bear, I still have Bobby Sherman's Greatest Hits and every recording of The Partridge Family.. heheheheheh
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:12 PM
The people who have this tremendous fear of gender equality make me laugh. Makes me want to send each of them a picture of the A-10 pilot pointing out the battle damage to her airplane received in combat in Iraq. Since I don't have the photos lying around, this series of shots will have to do:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=928
If half the men around here had her balls, we could meet any challenge.
Posted by: Flatus
| February 25, 2008 4:13 PM
Yep, he IS a spoiler, and I'm beginning to really NOT like him!
He should Bill and STFU & write a book or something.
GRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 25, 2008 4:13 PM
Yeah Corey, we've heard that one before. But calling the feminists here the "estrogen mafia" sort of belies that claim... Sorry, but that's how I feel.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:15 PM
Do*
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 4:16 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmMDIedRnkY&feature=related
Enjoy ET
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 4:16 PM
I'll admit that he probably doesn't like women as much as I do , but that's just how I roll!
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 4:17 PM
another one faints? hopefully jesus was there at the ready with his water bottle again....I wonder if it's considered to be holy water since Barry held it....
Posted by: econsmed
| February 25, 2008 4:17 PM
Bear, *G/S* Little Pogo generally goes to sleep watching George Lopez, and Fresh Prince is on when I go in to turn his TV off, and I typically watch for a few minutes for a chuckle. Carlton was always and is still my favorite character on the show. btw, and-a-one-and-a-two.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 4:18 PM
ET, you like that? Then you'll love this.
http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/02/15/water-bottlewoman-faintingand-barack-obama-what-do-these-three-things-have-in-common/
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 4:19 PM
See Pogo, I thought Bear was talking about Carlton the Doorman on Rhoda... Lorenzo Music. But yeah Carlton on Fresh Prince.. he was awesome. I even started listening to Tom Jones again because of that goofy character. heheheh, how old is "little pogo"? LOL
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:20 PM
ET,
http://www.atimes.com
I would think that would be the one.
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 4:21 PM
What happened at the rally? Was Obama talking in specifics?
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 4:21 PM
If Obama was talking specifics then she didn't faint...she fell asleep
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 25, 2008 4:21 PM
ET, nice version of Memories!
Whenever I listen to it, I can relate to "..memories of my days in the sun...."
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 25, 2008 4:22 PM
Ha!
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 4:25 PM
Pogo, that page freaked me out... It was so freaky.. every time.. "uh, do we have the medics? Is somebody down. I think someone's fainted".
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:27 PM
"What happened at the rally? Was Obama talking in specifics?"
no, Corey...... he was speaking in tongues.....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 25, 2008 4:27 PM
Hillary Clinton for President
ORGANIZATION
http://www.nndb.com/org/570/000167069/
Obama for America
ORGANIZATION
http://www.nndb.com/org/684/000167183/
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 25, 2008 4:28 PM
ET
That was a quick save. I am a One CD Fanilow and that is 2:00 A.M. Paradise Cafe. It was so unlike the majority of his work that it went out of production for awhile even though "When October Goes" became a jazz standard and one of my favorite songs. The lovers of his piano and jazz work brought it back.
The other great songs are the title cut "Paradise Cafe and the duet with Mel Torme On Big City Blues. I couldn't fine any of the songs on You Tube, but Y! Music has samples for anyone who has heard the songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/release/25749
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 4:29 PM
alpha, don't worry we "Clintonites" knew the other day we can't win. That was when the Obama campaign announced that His face had suddenly appeared on a chimichanga in Houston, and has already cured two blind Mexicans and given three more their green cards. The Hispanic vote is His.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 4:31 PM
RENEE.. LOL LOL LOL LOL
I remember a crazy cousin of mine doing that to me to cast out a demon that was causing my ear pain... Her mother got me in the crazy church and they said my ear hurt because a demon was sticking his long pointy fingernail in my ear... So I had to pray, blah blah blah.. later in church, the eardrum blew because I was so totally infected.
As for the cousin... she left her husband and daughter, got hooked on drugs, moved to South Minneapolis became a total nutcase, was in a psychiatric ward several times and became a lesbian. Last I heard, she's still nuts.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:33 PM
I consider myself a feminist and I am not insulted by references to estrogen, I'm simply amused. Life is too short not to be amused.
Posted by: colleen | February 25, 2008 4:33 PM
OMG Patsi... LOL... I have tears in my eyes...
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:34 PM
ET, he's eleven. And as to the fainting thing, I think that's referred to sa schtick.
Patsi, RFLMAO
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 4:34 PM
well ok colleen, but it wasn't what was said but HOW... imho. :-)
It is past bedtime for me. Goodnight all...
Now I am craving a chimichanga! LOLLOL LOL
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:36 PM
I think if I were advising HRC and/or BO on how to better sell their universal health care package to the American people, I would tell them they may want to include in their talking points the 2 things anyone who has ever bought insurance will always ask. What is the cost and what does it cover. Or is it that the American people believe this health care will be free, and will cover everything from a hangnail to a lung transplant, therefore no one needs to question their plan?
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 4:37 PM
Sen. Obama's comments Sat. regarding the mailers was hilarious! He said he has been under attack. When? Have I missed something? He is waltzing all the way to the nom., the general will be another story. I can't wait.
Posted by: Gayle | February 25, 2008 4:38 PM
Obama rallies should come with a warning or something. Something like: May Cause Fainting.
Funny stuff all!
Posted by: Corey
| February 25, 2008 4:39 PM
Wendy,
"If Obama was talking specifics then she didn't faint...she fell asleep"
ROFL. Very good!
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 4:40 PM
Oh my god. LMAO. Kinsley is hilarious.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022501089.html
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 4:43 PM
ok good christian soldiers....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNs3ur52mcM
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:48 PM
Interesting article by Peter Morici, Professor, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland.
http://www.finfacts.com/irishfinancenews/article_1012688.shtml
Posted by: FryDaddy
| February 25, 2008 4:51 PM
Caution: Attending a Barack Obama Rally may cause light-headedness, confusion, headaches, fainting and immeasurable prophecies. Make sure the water you bring is HOLY.
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 4:52 PM
Pogo...
after reading that Kinsley article it's become clear to me what the real problem is with the NYT.....
look at the last sentence in paragraph 7...... it reads" He would accept no oral communications.".....
they're just pissed off that McCain isn't a Bill Clinton....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 25, 2008 4:53 PM
Things are heating up sports fans. A Hispanic supporter of Hillary's campaign has stabbed his brother-in-law during a heated argument over Hillary and Obama.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 4:55 PM
Thanks, pogo, that's hysterical and so truish.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 25, 2008 4:56 PM
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0225081ortiz1.html
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 4:57 PM
Patsi that was priceless! you just made me your bitch for life - thanks!
Posted by: econsmed
| February 25, 2008 4:57 PM
Renee -LOL!!
Bye, y'all, gotta go get the prince.
Posted by: pogo
| February 25, 2008 4:58 PM
Patsi
Just saw the story. It's awful, but I immediately thought of two completely inappropriate jokes.
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 4:58 PM
Things are heating up sports fans. A Hispanic supporter of Hillary's campaign has stabbed his brother-in-law during a heated argument over Hillary and Obama.
Posted by: Patsi | February 25, 2008 4:55 PM
But the Obama supporter began by choking the Hillary supporter... weird...
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/25/democratic-house-divided-pa-man-stabs-brother-in-law-over-election/
Posted by: EuroTom
| February 25, 2008 5:00 PM
NEW THREAD
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| February 25, 2008 5:04 PM
Infighting.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| February 25, 2008 5:06 PM
NEW THREAD
Posted by: jamie | February 25, 2008 5:09 PM
Post A Comment