Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

yar.......nader aint no fader......

I didn't realize that Obama had ever dissed Nader. If he did that's at least one point in his favor.

Nader will get even less than his 500,000 votes in 2004. He's irrelevant.

Craig, Giving it up for Tina Faye...nice. Thats right let the American people VOTE. Good job Craig.

Dont have RFD-TV........can you show us the painting? Love them cows.......

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.

Who wants to carpool with me to the therapist?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxCiAXJpk_4

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

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.

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.

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.

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

Here's Mr. Obama's appearance before the Toledo Blade Editorial Board:
http://tinyurl.com/2ftkkh

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

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.

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...

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

Correction -- Geraldine Ferraro is on a 14 day cycle.

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.

"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.

Good morning all.

Patsi (and burrito): I think you are going to see lots of formidable women candidates in the future, and sooner than you think.

9/11: good to hear about Mrs. Ferraro. She has got to be a proponent of the Warren Zevon "enjoy every sandwich" rule, which more of us should live by.

Nadar just may make it interesting................that is if the media actually gives any coverage to what he has to say.

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/

" 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.

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

I do not think many Americans will fall for the "vote for Nader for a third party schtick" again. Those that do probably would not have voted for the Dem or GOP nominee anyway -- maybe he will pick up Ron Paul's supporters who don't go for a Paul write-in? Voters have very recent history to guide them. Nader in 2000 opened the White House door to George W Bush, and Theresa LePore and the butterfly ballot moved him in.

Whereas it had been 20 years since an earlier viable third party run -- John Anderson in 1980, vs. Reagan and Carter. Anderson siphoned off moderate GOP and ate into Carter's support more.

Tidbits from wiki profile on Anderson: Jackie Kennedy apparently voted for him, per Arthur Schlesinger's journals, and Anderson has "indicated strong support" for Barack Obama's candidacy (they are both from Illinois).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Anderson

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.

Hi Patsi. I think formidable is formidable. One can be formidable without being strident.

And loved the Tina Fey line "bitch is the new black."

The trick is bitching without seeming like one. (Speaking macro here, not of any person, living or dead.)
========
Serious question: why wasn't Elizabeth Hanford Dole's candidacy taken more seriously?

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).

Lush: you should read "Gates of Eden", a short story collection by the Coen brothers. Amazing. You can buy it very inexpensively used through amazon.com.

Totally worth a read. Some of the stories are very funny; one or two is poignant; one I did not understand at all, so time to read collection again.

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.

"Serious question: why wasn't Elizabeth Hanford Dole's candidacy taken more seriously? "

Uh, because she's an idiot?

Patsi...I feel bad that your friend was afraid to admit that she voted for HRC. 8(

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.

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!

dog...I have read that book, by Ethan Coen. I bought it years ago and then donated it to the library. 8)

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.

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...

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

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)

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?

RRenee

I am such a fan...I would be hard put to pick a favorite!!

9-11

Well said !!

AMEN!!

Jack

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.

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

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).....

Barack Obama taught constitutional law for many years at UChicago, a very good school. He has great respect for the Constitution and for its checks and balances.

I do not have any doubt he would roll back the Bush-Cheney power grabs.

Hillary Clinton is not electable, so what she would do about the damage to our Constitution is likely to be handled from the Senate.

"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.

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.

Bullshit on saying Hillary is not electable sorry.

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.)

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. She is just not electable. If she pulls the nomination, I do not expect to see her elected president.

You are loyal, but you have blinders on.

Dooty,

Links provided by GORDO tend to be just about that useful.

"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.

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!

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.

I love this video... me thinks Michelle doesn't.

I wanna be under Barack Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Xb3bDwE9jQ

jamie,

are you saying what I think you are saying? Dooty = caca?

yo soy Horsedooty!

Bingo! Patsi just said it outright: "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."
=========

Hillary cannot be elected with Democrats alone, and she has virtually no crossover appeal. Obama is peeling off her support among women, even the non-latte drinking variety.

Patsi: you are leaving out too many people who do not identify with either party but love their country dearly and intend to vote.

I have been saying this throughout: whether you support Clinton or Obama comes down a lot to how strongly you identify with the Democratic party, and its traditional wing at that. I suspect we are seeing that on this blog.

LATimes story today on "Obamacans" -- GOP-leaning volunteers now working tirelessly for Obama, because they see him as candidate most likely to get past partisan gridlock.

" ...Republicans made up 6% of voters in Missouri's Democratic primary, 7% in Virginia's and 9% in Wisconsin's. (Most states make it harder to vote in the other party's contest.) The overwhelming majority cast their ballots for Sen. Obama, according to exit polls.

Johanna Schneider was one of his Virginia supporters. She went door to door for Obama with her 14-year-old son, Chase, convinced that fellow Republicans have lost their way. "I just feel this is a tremendous opportunity to open politics up to a new generation," said Schneider, a former GOP staffer on Capitol Hill. "And I believe that Barack Obama is a genuine transformational candidate."

Patsi and KGC: these are not casual supporters, and they will vote for Obama in the fall. They will not ever vote for Clinton, and there are scads of them. Even among Democrats.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-gopobama25feb25,0,6377987,full.story

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/

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....

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

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

Kucinich also had the sad news of his brother's death...

Zumper, my friend from NY: I so strongly disagree. I think party primaries should be open to any registered voter, because it keeps the parties from putting up lunatic fringe candidates. (This is important in state and local elections, particularly, where gerrymandering can make a district safe for a party.) Vote in one party primary or another, but not both, of course.

Issue is: independents and thinking members of the opposition party have to live under the candidate elected, so get the best candidate up there. You will have some miscreants gaming the system, but vast majority of your "crossover" voters will be sincere.

Some Obama voters may vote for McCain if Hillary is the nominee. That's true. But they will not vote for McCain (or whomever the GOP nominee) if Obama is the candidate.

And the GOP would much rather run against Clinton than Obama. They have got to be watching his fundraising from small donors with great alarm.

Clinton is a paper tigress at this point.

I believe SO strongly in open primaries.

"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

Please dog, why then are texas republicans urging voters to vote for Obama

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

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,,,

EuroTom: re Texas GOP: are they urging a vote for Obama? Plz put up a link; have not followed that.

How is that partisan gridlock going to end on immigration?

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.

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

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.

KGC: you're missing the point. GOP was in lockstep because they were supporting GWBush, and I hope many of them pay dearly for it at the polls this year.

But seeing that is undoubtedly what pushed some GOP voters in Obama's direction: they know they've got an idiot president and a party that's gone off the rails. They do not see an end to partisanship with Hillary Clinton -- quite the reverse -- and they know our country has to move forward.

On immigration: a very complicated issue, and it's not just partisan either. You know that! (Or maybe you don't .)

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!

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 .......

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.

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!

Nadir..ego driven maniac and without a Green party he needs some neocon group to fund him.

No, Zumper, I do not like open primaries because it favors Obama. He happens to have benefitted, but I have ALWAYS been in favor of open primaries.

And your saying that independents should have no voice in the primaries is why I will never be a Democrat or a Republican.

BUT: is the purpose of presidential primaries party-building or selecting the candidate with the widest appeal?

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?

KGC: I love that you called him "Nadir." That word can mean "the lowest point."

And you are proving my point about partisanship. You are seeing this as Democratic payback time, when a great deal of the country wants to get past that and work on some real progress. Too much going wrong at present, domestically, economically and internationally.

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

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.

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.

frydaddy

dog dosnt answer that question......he just loves obama even though he hasnt done anything to qualify him for potus

I am bored... I am going to go watch old episodes of THAT GIRL.

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

"dog dosnt answer that question......he just loves obama..."
--zumper
------------

uhhh...dog is a she...not a he ;)

"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.

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.

In California only the Democrats have an open primary and Clinton won here.

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

Zumper: What people are responding to with Obama, in my opinion, is someone who gets that we have to get beyond partisanship and will listen to and incorporate good ideas from both sides. Because good ideas exist on both sides (although the GOP frequently takes theirs so far they become dangerous or punitive -- thinking education policy and welfare reform here).

The 1988 and 2004 candidates of which you despair, Dukakis and Kerry, had long resumes that Jamie would find acceptable, and were totally unelectable.

But you do pose an interesting question, about the 2 years of Senate experience (following about 8-9 as a state represenative?)

He's not running for Senate, though. He's attained that. He is running for President, which requires a slightly different set of skills. Judgment, executive ability and inspiring Americans to work together to develop solutions to problems are important.

Mrs. Clinton has not demonstrated those qualities this primary season. She will fight our battles for us, with all that experience. She is not challenging us to come together and help make our own solutions. I think Obama has learned, in less time, that the best solutions come from the ground up.

Writ large, that's watching what states do and what communities do, and building upon their successful experiments. Not imposing an expert-sanctioned, top down approach.

Some Americans have pegged Obama as an intelligent, unifying, transformative figure. That is what the young and crossover GOP are responding to.

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

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.

"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

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.

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.

Fry: re your question: "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? "

I have said my piece. Am not a policy wonk; more of a macro observer. 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.

He is more liberal than I am, but I trust him. I am one of those voters who goes with the person, not the platform.

I voted happily for Bill Clinton in 1992, and did not know rhyme and verse of his work in Arkansas. Still think he was an excellent president, although he should never have tried to lie his way out of the Lewinski matter. Don't you think most people would have said, "well he is a hound dog", and moved on? (And I say that as someone who "owns" and loves 2 hound dogs.)

Does that help? Wonkishness on his legislative record? Someone else could address that better.

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 ......

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.

KGC: "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
=============
I have been talking to voters and volunteers, not reading polls.

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.

GORDO: thanks for the republicansforobama link. Shall check it out.

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!

Ally, that's a fascinating observation on postfeminism. Suspect you are right about a lot of it.

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.

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

Another topic: do you guys think McCain will be the eventual GOP nominee?

The NYTimes story was absolutely baffling to me.

Do you think there is another shoe to drop?

Caught about 2 mins. of Jonah Goldberg on Morning Joe today saying the NYTimes story "innoculated" McCain against those charges coming up again.

Then switched the channel rapidly, as woke up further and realized I was watching MoJo and Goldberg.

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

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.

Ally: Your mom was wise.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

Obama has the same relationship with lobbyists as John McCain

http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/obamas_lobbyist_line.php

pogo,

We all get A's for silent meditation on the subject.

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

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!

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.

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.

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.

The I;m not Jane Hamsher's biggest should be included in quotes...

I am one of her biggest fans

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.

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.

Craig I think with this thread you've given Nader's run more attention than the entire MSM combined. You may be the only one who cares.

CLINTON STAFFERS CIRCULATE 'DRESSED' OBAMA
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashoa.htm

The Clinton campaign denies they are the source of the photo

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.”

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.

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?"

Sure looks that way pogo, but Hillary has been so schizophrenic who knows what tact she'll take. She seems to think the voters will fall for the "two Hillary strategy"

In the interest of joyous harmony and unive