For the first time since before the Rev. Jeremiah Wright flap, Democratic presidential frontrunner Barack Obama enjoys a statistically significant lead over Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Gallup Daily tracking survey of party voters.
Many reasons could be imagined for this latest Obama boost, but my guess is that Clinton is suffering among Democratic voters for being portrayed as a party wrecker. Depicting Clinton as Tanya Harding bent on knee capping her opponent was probably as devastating as anything else for her.
To counter this developing narrative, Clinton needs to forcefully lay out a feasible path to the nomination that undercuts the notion that she is on a kamikaze course.
Rick Sloan, Communications Director for the International Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union, today emailed this scenario to the media:
- 1247 Delegates: Hold on to the 1247 pledged delegates HRC has amassed since January 3rd
- 1497: Maintain the support of the 250 super delegates who have endorsed her candidacy already
- 1648: Add 151 pledged delegates to her total with ten point wins in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky and Puerto Rico
- 1860: Add another 122 pledged delegates by winning or placing a close second in Guam, Indiana, North Carolina, Oregon, Montana and South Dakota
- 2046: Seat the Florida and Michigan delegations adding 186 pledged delegates to her total
- 2095: By seating the Florida and Michigan delegations, she gains 49 uncommitted delegates or super delegates
- 2215: Secure the votes of 120 of the 330 remaining super delegates to surpass the 2208 delegates to be nominated
-- Rick Sloan, International Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union [Note: If Florida and Michigan delegates are counted -- as Sloan does in the above scenario -- the winning number grows to 2,208]
Craig at the Virginia Festival of the Book
Saturday (3/29) 2:00 PM EST
Barnes & Noble, 1035A Emmet Street
Charlottesville, VA (434) 984-0461

Comments
Good morning!
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 12:06 PM
warren -------------------------
This is a set-up. For certain reasons, I cannot discuss Chris, Rachel, Chuck and Nora. This much I can say: They are following orders. You are being bamboozled.
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 12:16 PM
Maxtrue:
I find it funny that you are now mad because Obama is agreeing with you! Obama has a realist streak to his Foreign Policy which is crtical in turbulent times.
(Idealism is best saved for the "salad days" to quote Raising Arizona).
And let's talk about Reagan. The reasons why many Americans admire his Presidency is because of Foreign Policy.
(I was only a kid in the 80's so I had no clue about his economic policies.)
But I do know that part of Reagan's legacy was ending the cold war and making great strides in American diplomacy. Plus, the "old gipper" was pretty funny and damn smart.
Finally, being a realist is the only way a Democrat can win the general and defeat the GOP's politics of fear. Obama is setting himself up perfectly for the general.
Obama said:
"The truth is that my foreign policy is actually a return to the traditional bipartisan realistic policy of George Bush's father, of John F. Kennedy, of, in some ways, Ronald Reagan, and it is George Bush that's been naive and it's people like John McCain and, unfortunately, some Democrats that have facilitated him acting in these naive ways that have caused us so much damage in our reputation around the world."
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 12:22 PM
Gordo:
If you cannot discuss your reasons than shut up already.
I thought the whole point of this blog was a discussion.
(Anyways, go ahead - open up. How could you get in trouble? What am I going to say: "It's TRUE!! I heard it on a blog from this spy-bot named GORDO who was sent by Taylor Marsh." Hah! I would get laughed out of the room : )
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 12:26 PM
Posted by: warren | March 29, 2008 12:22 PM
It appears you studied history with Peggy Noonan and Chris Matthews
http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory12.html
It is not surprising you would find him appealing since it was his rhetoic which made him memorable. Too bad it did not reflect his policies.
Posted by: Delusional History | March 29, 2008 12:26 PM
warren ---------------------------
Please research JW's " Lost Boys" - all will become understandable. Would really like to be less cryptic, but it has to be this way.
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 12:36 PM
On Capitol Hill, Tutu became a public relations disaster for Reagan. Tutu started off the hearing by saying apartheid itself "is evil, is immoral, is un-Christian, without remainder." I was there, and all breathing stopped, without remainder. Tutu continued:
"In my view, the Reagan administration's support and collaboration with it is equally immoral, evil, and totally un-Christian. . . . You are either for or against apartheid and not by rhetoric. You are either in favor of evil or you are in favor of good. You are either on the side of the oppressed or on the side of the oppressor. You can't be neutral."
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/06/09/reagans_heart_of_darkness/
Posted by: Tootoo | March 29, 2008 12:36 PM
Max:
"If I get Powers right, we ought to make a new path to prevent genocide and understand we can not win victories anymore, but simple negotiate the best of bad outcomes with our enemies."
The point is to stop treating other sovereign nations as "enemies." How do you think a negotiation would go with countries you have labeled the "Axis of Evil." Give me a freaking break. That is not diplomacy - that is grade-school-bully tactics. (aka "wild wild west").
(And McCain has already cast aspersions at world leaders in Russia, China and Cuba - and the general election hasn't even really got going yet.)
The key to diplomacy is building coalitions and solving common problems. Not "defeating our enemies!!!" That is Bush-speak. More importantly - our real "enemies" consist of brutal dictators and ideologues - not entire countries.
(And just to be clear - it is Samantha Power - no "s" - if we are talking about the same person.)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 12:40 PM
In 25 years of interviews with his hometown paper that could only be released upon his death, former President Ford said Ronald Reagan received far too much credit for ending the Cold War.
Reagan was "probably the least well informed on the details of running the government of any president I knew," Ford said. In a separate interview he said, "He was just a poor manager, and you can't be president and do a good job unless you manage."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/12/politics/main2358453.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_2358453
Posted by: Ford's view | March 29, 2008 12:40 PM
"But Obama's message of judgment and ending the mindset that got us into Iraq - "
ROFL, Warren. The very same mindless/mindset that got us into Iraq had attracted the Obamatons to his campaign. Follow me....I am Change....I AM JOSHUA!
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 12:40 PM
Gordo:
I already saw "Lost Boys." That was a great movie. I like vampires.
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 12:41 PM
warren -------------------------
JW is the key to the puzzle.
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 12:46 PM
"The reasons why many Americans admire his Presidency is because of Foreign Policy. "
OH, yeah, Warren....another reason to vote for Obama....his Reagan-worship. Is the Holy One planning to sell drugs to arm Middle Eastern rebels and start covert wars in South America? How does he feel about Death Squads?
Obama is trying to change the Democratic party into Rebublican lite.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 12:51 PM
Patsi:
The whole reason the people elect a President is so that they can be mindless (at least with respect to politics).
Most Americans don't want to bother themselves with all this political nonsense. They just want to elect a leader they than can trust - so they can go back to focusing on their own lives.
And Obama meets this test with his intelligence, "experienced" supporters (such as Richardson, Kerry, etc.), judgment and the way he has run his campaign. For everyone other than the Clintonites - his organization has been so impressive it is scary (especially to the GOP).
But the big plus about Obama is inspiration. I don't want to get back into the debate about whether "words matter." But I predict the ability to inspire will be one of the greatest assets for Obama if he is elected President.
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 12:51 PM
The whole reason the people elect a President is so that they can be mindless (at least with respect to politics
You have demonstrated point for your side..
Posted by: Point | March 29, 2008 12:53 PM
Clinton's camp can show her path to victory
Obama's only way to victory is to have Clinton drop out.
Posted by: WTF | March 29, 2008 12:57 PM
In as much that race is now fore front
I beg to ask Mr Obama
Sir will you pardon Abu Jamal Mumia.
Will any one in the Philly area ask him this question?
what effect will an Obama pardon have
The web site Black commentator got me to thinking about what his answer might be.
As an advocate for the Black Panthers, the site claims he is innocent.
Can some ask Mr.Obama that question?
Posted by: rushopsII
| March 29, 2008 12:59 PM
To end the madness
go to AlGore2008.com
send an e-mail asking Al get in to the race
It serves no propose for the democratic party to destroy itself when there is no need to
AlGore2008.com
Posted by: rushopsII
| March 29, 2008 1:06 PM
Sorry good buddy. This is all I could find on the "Lost Boys"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Boys
(this does not scare me too much for the general.)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 1:06 PM
Dear Democratic Elite: Back Off
If you continue to try to push Hillary Clinton out of the primary race before a clear winner emerges, you're going to accomplish one of two things, neither of which have anything to do with your actual goal. Taking myself out of this equation entirely, if the Obama elite keep pushing their agenda here's what you'll get:
1. Clinton supporters will harden further against voting for Obama if he becomes the nominee. (Hillary fans are already close to this, so don't push them any further, because you can't win in November without them, ...
2. Clinton supporters will protest your overbearing and undemocratic interventionism by casting a protest vote for John McCain. (Lunch bucket and Reagan Dems don't trust McCain on the economy, but Clinton's their man in this race, because they believe she's the one who can get us out of this economic mess, but they hate elitist political snobs even more, so voting for a heroic veteran like McCain won't be that hard for them, especially if these same people took their vote away, too.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/dear-democratic-elite-ba_b_94004.html
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 1:08 PM
A friend sent me this fantastic rendition of The Star Spangled Banner. It's less than two minutes, and well worth the listen...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKCVS57j284
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 1:10 PM
Patsi:
"Obama is trying to change the Democratic party into Rebublican lite."
I thought Obama was the so-called most liberal man in the Senate.
Don't you see - we are going to pull reverse-reaganism on the GOP. Obamacans are going to outweigh any Reagan Democrats who are supposedly going to vote for 100-years of war and Bush's economic policies.
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 1:11 PM
WTF:
"Clinton's camp can show her path to victory."
So can Obama's. Keep doing what they have been doing all across the US, i.e., Winning!
(and - "path to victory" sounds like W talking about Iraq. And don't forget moving the goal posts - the Clinton camp has been doing a lot of that. In addition, to some isolated incidents of Senator Clinton "mis-speaking" when she is tired...)
Once again folks - time for the Obama campaign song:
"East Bound And Down"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Unvr3mC_QJU
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 1:17 PM
warren ------------------
Again, JW is the key. Who is JW? That along with Lost Boys will end in a successful Google search.
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 1:18 PM
Maybe later G-man. I need to take Lucy, aka "the goose", "googles", "Miss Lucy", for a walk.
It is a nice sunny day in NYC!!
For the Clintonites:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtkVGClqrT4
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 1:21 PM
(she also goes by "gookies" - but I need to watch using that nickname around Asians. Hah! It is rather tough to explain all of Lucy's nicknames...)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 1:23 PM
Warren: I think you have been doing a great job advocating for Obama and parrying a lot of the cheap shots slung here. A friend reviewed some recent C List posts; found them to be overwhelmingly pro-Clinton (like upwards of 70%, even without counting trolls and anonymous posts -- which are on the upswing here).
So you are a voice in the wilderness, but an articulate and principled one.
Many thanks from this longtime reader for that.
Best wishes,
dog the bully
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 29, 2008 1:28 PM
Am I my brother's keeper?
(didn't someone famous say that?)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 1:28 PM
"The whole reason the people elect a President is so that they can be mindless (at least with respect to politics)."
ROFL....you bettcha. Warren, I give you George W Bush.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 1:29 PM
(Although, Warren -- I take your point. Sadly.)
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 1:30 PM
"The whole reason the people elect a President is so that they can be mindless"
Patsi,
I'm not buying all the argument here, but in my experience most people are just standing around, waiting for someone to tell them what to do.
Posted by: Rezdog
| March 29, 2008 1:31 PM
Rick Sloan sounds as if he has a plausible winning formula.
Maybe Stinky and I will drive up to NC and hold signs for a while.
Posted by: Flatus
| March 29, 2008 1:33 PM
"Don't you see - we are going to pull reverse-reaganism on the GOP. "
Ah. So that's the secret plan. I wondered what the point of it all was. (Aside from the fact that Obama has something of a messianic personality -- like your pal "W" -- and is surrounded by men like Gary Hart and Tom Daschle who believe they can wield some power again.)
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 1:33 PM
"in my experience most people are just standing around, waiting for someone to tell them what to do. "
Thank God Obama came along and played his magic flute for them.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 1:36 PM
"you are a voice in the wilderness"
Is Guyana still a wilderness?
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 1:42 PM
Craig ,
Sloan's comments are intriguing and I don't know how he's calculating the delegate allocation in her wins and 2nds. First thing comes to mind is to remember that Obama's del count is not inactive. IMHO, he wins after IN counting the SDs plus the FL/MI dels as you suggested yesterday on CM.
Posted by: Rezdog
| March 29, 2008 1:44 PM
"Thank God Obama came along and played his magic flute for them"
Better than the sax.
Posted by: Rezdog
| March 29, 2008 1:48 PM
So what if there are more pro Clinton postings.
This is a open, comment board and anyone who wants to is free to comment. It is the content of the posts that should count.
No one chased anyone away or suggested they no longer post. You are free to make your case.
Posted by: Known by the company you keep | March 29, 2008 1:49 PM
Watching Leahy yesterday was a joke. Who the hell does he think he is? These guys think we are STUPID! Telling her to quit is just making us more determined. If the circumstances were reversed would it be OK to tell Obama to quit? I doubt it. Leahy looks OLD!
Posted by: Melanie | March 29, 2008 1:52 PM
P.S. Obama looked like a boob on the View, and going to a sports bar? What a poser. It is not gonna fly in PA.
Posted by: Melanie | March 29, 2008 1:54 PM
Dear brave "known by the company you keep"
You have made my point with your nick.
And then 2 posts down, a newbie chimes in, "Obama looked like a boob" and then calls him a poser.
You cannot make this up.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 29, 2008 1:58 PM
Not a newbie. Maybe you missed my posts during one of your promised "this is my last post" posts or is that the other Hussein?
Posted by: Melanie | March 29, 2008 2:01 PM
Another great trailmix , Craig!
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 2:01 PM
Melanie: I have not seen your previous posts, although I no longer read C List as carefully as I used to. Apologies there.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 29, 2008 2:03 PM
Dear Pearl Clutcher
You spend all your time here complaining about other people's comments.
You seem to want a special little kiddie pool where you can post and no one should be allowed to challenge your statements.
Posted by: Dkos is waiting for you | March 29, 2008 2:04 PM
Dog-apology accepted
Posted by: Melanie | March 29, 2008 2:06 PM
"You seem to want a special little kiddie pool where you can post and no one should be allowed to challenge your statements."
As do you, Dkos is waiting for you. Perhaps you have no fear of having your statements challenged because you've hidden your identity behind a list of ever-changing monikers.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 2:08 PM
Corey...this article should cheer you up big time. (I saw on your blog that you're a big fan of The Whopper)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120672457122272165.html?mod=mm_media_marketing_hs_left
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 2:11 PM
Perhaps you have no fear of having your statements challenged because you've hidden your identity behind a list of ever-changing monikers
Two wrongs don't make a right. My point is still true.
Posted by: So what feel free to ignore me | March 29, 2008 2:11 PM
For the umpteenth time, could someone please explain to me why it's necessary to make up new pseudonyms when you could simply continue to post under your existing pseudonym? To bury anonymity under another layer of anonymity? Most of the stuff I'm seeing posted under these fake handles is pretty harmless. What's the big deal? Who or what are you hiding from?
I give up. Gotta go wash the motorcycles now anyway. It's a beautiful day down here in sunny Florida.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 2:14 PM
Craig,
It's "Tonya", not "Tanya."
Posted by: Nancy | March 29, 2008 2:16 PM
"Two wrongs don't make a right."
You, and several others who consistently post here, might consider the truth of this statement....
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 2:17 PM
LL,
They just think it's cool taking a dump is someone's mess kit while they think no one can see them. Go figure.
Posted by: Flatus
| March 29, 2008 2:19 PM
Yeah, I know. The namechanging is odd behavior for someone presumably of voting age and thus past puberty.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 29, 2008 2:25 PM
EVERYONE IS FRIGGIN' TESTY AGAIN...
Pffft, whatever...
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 2:30 PM
Oh and in spite of SOME Obama supporters here being ultra insulting to Clinton supporters, I will vote for Obama if he is the nominee...
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 2:31 PM
ET-
As will I...though I'm starting to worry we're in the minority...but McCain scares the **** out of me!
~G
Posted by: Gidget
| March 29, 2008 2:34 PM
The continuation of the Republican practice of allowing big business to dictate our government's operating principles is what scares the **** out of me!
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 2:37 PM
See Gidget and harborwoman this is the bottom line. We gotta get the Dems back in power. I am frustrated how this nomination is playing out and the mess the DNC has made and all that, but we GOT to remember what the future holds if McBush becomes president. I still want Hillary, but if Obama carries the nomination, I will not only vote for him but enthusiastically encourage others to do so as well. I just have to ignore some voices on here that piss me off so much that makes me want to sit the whole damn thing out... and I don't have to spell out who I mean in particular.
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 2:42 PM
ET
You only think you have the Democrats in power if you choose the one with a radical agenda.
After two years the Congress will be gone, and after four, the White house as well.
Posted by: Flatus
| March 29, 2008 2:49 PM
Afternoon Flatus. What do you foresee, with the "radical agenda"?
PS: not saying this to bait you; am interested in what you think. FWIW, you are one of the newer posters I read with anticipation of being both amused and informed.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 29, 2008 2:54 PM
Dear Tom:
Just put me in the Clinton category :-))
P.S.
Got your link...thank you loved it put it in "my favorites"
commented on your blog.
brb its canine romper room here, seems like my "Babies" are restless too :-))
Sincerely,
Heather
Posted by: Heather
| March 29, 2008 2:54 PM
i will try harborwoman.. I truly dislike him with every fiber of my body. I think he is rude, insolent, hateful, mean, arrogant and a total putz. but I will TRY.. I know he has the right to post here, but he said he wouldn't come here anymore and then VOILA he's back. I don't really consider myself part of a clique, just someone who finds the drive-by shooter postings are childish and mean spirited.
So I will try to ignore him, hateful as he is. I realize that when I react, he gets what he wants and the best thing to do is ignore him. And I apologise for my antics in this situation. (But I'm not the anonymous ones posting his "last post"... just thought you'd like to know).
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 3:00 PM
Harbor: excellent post on plutocracy.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 29, 2008 3:09 PM
To JennBe, and Heather and Jamie, I wrote a reply to you guys from your comments you put on my blog.. Many thanks!!!
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 3:10 PM
Just a note:
I would just like to clarify where I stand on the Obama issue I am not out to condemn him or or anyone that supports Obama. I may disagree with those that support him, but at all times I will try to be respectful of their views in the same manner that I hope those that support Obama will be of me, and my support of Hillary
I will continue to give constructive criticism on Obama maybe in a tongue irreverent way, but never anything vituperative or insulting.
--Heather
Posted by: Heather
| March 29, 2008 3:10 PM
"Madrak: the rule of thumb is that if you read or hear something that makes you hate another Democrat, you need to dig down further because there's more to the story. The real enemy is the media, and they see themselves as the only superdelegates."
http://flprogressive.blogspot.com/
This weekend is a convocation of progressive bloggers. The link is for a transcript of some of the panels. The one on humor is very good, featuring Ted Rall.
There is a lot on how to keep McCain from getting a free ride.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 3:11 PM
Great post, kgc! The media as the only superdelegates? Absolutely! They're doing their dead level best to select our candidates for us. Have they already succeeded?
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 3:17 PM
Thanks, Tom. I enjoy your posts...and really appreciate getting the perspective of an ex-pat. Jason's posts have been interesting, too, in that regard. I envy both of you the freedom and courage to go live in another country....
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 3:22 PM
This week I did about 14 hours of Hillary sign holding in the Salem-Keizer area. It is pretty satisfying; a few jerks are obscene or yell insults, but the vast majority are friendly. Some stop to talk. I've found interesting people who support different candidates.
A couple of nights ago I went to Portland to see Gus Van Sant's new movie, Paranoid Park..very good..
I had an hour to kill so I picked a large island at 23rd and Burnside..Three crosswalks intersect.
In the hour I was there I experienced many times more insults than I had in the previous 14 hours.
One 30ish man in a Jaguar stopped his car and screamed obscenities at me. A group of 5 young people told me to get out of Obama's town.
A nice , young jogging couple, (Obama supporters) offered to stay with me until I would leave for my movie.
I declined their generous offer.
I've been working on campaigns since 1960 when my parents took me to see John Kennedy.
There have always been crackpots, the occasional nut.
This year is very different. It is very sad.
Back to Portland with my sign and raingear.
Posted by: Oregon Democrat | March 29, 2008 3:24 PM
Harborwoman
Have they already succeeded? They certainly have made their choice known. The panels on the link talk about on going efforts to work around the media as well as trying to impact the way politics is covered.
I can't figure out why some candidates or office holders are teflon coated and others are like velcro.
How did McCain escape any damage from the lobbyist story?
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 3:25 PM
Warren,
Reagan called who an evil empire? You have got to be kidding me. We should stop treating nations as enemies because they are nations? How is this in anyway a return to the policies of Reagan and Bush. I think you're losing it completely. NK blinked because they were isolated and not regarded as simply another nation. Ths disparaging view of both Western hegemony and the isolating of offenders runs counter to traditional thinking. Outside the box, Obama? Now it is a different message to get back in the old box...LOL
Powers, who will obviously will be back under an Obama administration pointed out that Clinton was one of the only President who acted to prevent genocide with the encouragment of that "monster" Hillary. Does Obama want to return to that? Do you care to debate this? And why should America not treat a regime like Iran that works towards a nuclear weapon, supports terrorist groups and frequently calls for the destruction of Israel and the defeat of Liberal Democratic hegemony as an enemy? Think that will sell come November?
I will love to see how the NYT and others compares Obama's policy positions and advisors representing anything close to a return to more traditional Reagan and Bush senior foreign policies. Is he refering to Contragate, supporting Saddam, or of Reagan's unilateralist approach that forced the Soviets out of power? Come on Warren, I expect more objectivity from you. The fact you defend this comeplete gaff reveals your faith-based support.
Yep, past Presdients didn't stand up to the behavior of Russia, China and Cuba. Will you show me where JFK and Reagan did not do this? You are so completely wrong it is actually quite funny coming from a smart guy like you. It reveals the extent you worship your leader despite the obvious bullshit he is spouting to reverse the concerns created by his papers, advisors, mentors and contributors. One thing is certain: he made his ideological bed and wrote two books about where he stood. Now, desperate reversals on the stump will not change things.
The essential difference between Obama and Clinton is below.
http://www.centristcoalition.com/blog/archives/004197.html (scroll down for my comment and please excuse the typos)
I explain how Vietnam ended the Liberal Consensus and how Reagan and Clinton kept the Left in exile for two decades until Rove baited them out and Democrats in angst let them into their Party to help beat Bush. Obama dervies both support and policy from this crew while not embracing there most radical or anti-American positions. His affinity for this crowd however, paints his foreign policy in a light he now whats to re-tool. I read your American Spector article and Obama's position is described by most as the most Liberal strategy since Jimmy Carter. Behind the purty words lies the likes of Zbig, Malley, McPeak and Rice as well as Lake and Powers. Come on Warren, get a clue.
The Carter Doctrine actually goes against much of the ranting from Obama and against the Jeffersonian idea of internationalism. Remeber we are one world after all? This wasn't going to be accomplished without the sacrifice and tough determination JFK outlined in his swearing in Speech. Even Powers cries out for intervention against genocide which Reagan and Bush 1 did not want to do. They were more the realists who often prefered enemies of ours to be assisted in attacking each other as Reagan promoted between Iran and Iraq. If I remeber, Democrats deplored this foreign policy though Carter armed OBL after Zbig baited the Soviets into Afghanistan. I'm sure Gordo will recommend you read some Huntington.
If you want to pretend and avoid looking deeper than pandering speeches buy Obama designed to deflect substantial and grounded objections to Obama's policies and inclinations, then what can I say?
Yes, the Democrats vaciliated Bush in invading Afghanistan and forcing Pakistan to side with us. Democrats facilitated removing Saddam and pushing sanctions against Iran. Yes, Democrats facilitated Bush's position in Lebanon and Darfur and support of the colored revolutions. Yes. Democrats did not want to lose Iraq and advocated a surge long before Bush did while demanding Rumsfeld resign. Just read the interview between Russert and Obama just before Obama delivered his 2004 convention speech. Obama professes to seek victory in Iraq. Yes? I am glad that in principle, Democrats supported the logic and condemned the competence in carrying out the "traditional" objectives by Republican Presidents..
Your biggest problem in the post above is that you fail to see what was wrong with Reagan foreign policy and how that contributed to taday's problems. On the other hand, you fail to understand what went right with Reagan's foreign policy in terms of the Cold War. He ignored the Far Left, crusaded against the Soviets, built up a big stick, promoted an economic renewal and gave whatever support he could to those trying to free themselves form another country's oppression. To suggest that Obama should follow the mistakes and ignore the reasons that Reagan was successful indicates both your failure to understand the hisotry and your faith v reason regarding Obama.
I will say it again. Reagan and Bush1, JK, RFK, Truman, Clinton and FDR supported the notion of a benign Western hegemony of Liberal Democracy built upon credible alliances, free markets and unshakable resolve. Obama's Dignified Foreign Policy introduces the view that such hegemony is a pretense for American domination. It clearly reflects a triangulation between Powers, Malley, Zbig, McPeak and Rice. Sorry, Warren, there ought to no place for cultural relativism in the defense of Liberty and national self-interest. Powers can't even get the UN to stop weapons into Darfur while Blacks are bombed into genocide.
Obama's associations with pro Hamas, anti-America and anti-Jewish thinkers presents a fatal problem. This is compounded by a long list of dubious advisors who have never advocated any return to Reagan or Bush 1. It is par for Obama to try and use words to mask his record, associations, former statements and the continued attack on all that is Bush. Let him get Powel's backing or Cohen. Let him get Baker and Scowcroft to stump for him. I am waiting for Fallon to sign up.
It was a bad move design to foll uniformed voters which is about the best thing Obama has going for him. If the Press can manage to filter out a full vetting, Obama has a chance. If hournalists take a go look at the outrageous contradictions and spins Obama has delivered since 2004 and his roots that back twenty years, he will never survive McCain. These stump speeches are jsut digging himself deeper into the garbage. He sure looks funny on the View.
If I were Obama, I would be worried about my own reputation. With each attempt to blow back woories, Obama creates new problems. BY the time he reaches the Oval Office (if he does) his credibility will be so burnt that his four years will likely make Carter look good. Again Warren, how can you call Obama's Liberal foreign policy article anything like a return to the past unless you're talking about Carter's great term? Obama has done what Reagan did not: actually reduce the confidence American's feel should he win the election. Perhaps that is why China, Russia, militants, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Cahvez, Cuba, are all hoping he wins.
Does that at least tell you what the world thinks about Obama's new messge to return America to traditional foreign policy?
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 29, 2008 3:28 PM
Just back from a walk with Lucy, and I had a few thoughts...
As you may have learned, Lucy is getting very good around people (not so much around otra perros), so I have two questions:
1. If Lucy barks because someone suddenly comes out of a door on the street - does she bark because she is afraid or because I am afraid?
2. If an un-supervised 5-year-old kid runs up into Lucy's face to pet her - and she bites him. Who do you blame?
Anyways, don't worry - #2 did not happen. Couple of funny stories from the walk:
-The NYC sidewalks are crowed today. So me and Lucy got pretty close to this guy and his 100-pound sheep dog. Lucy did her thing and we walked by. The guy screams out: "If you let your dog bite mine - I will sue!!" I shot back: "She didn't bite - and there are enough lawsuits in the world!" (And then laughed to myself that after I got done with him in court - all he would have left was his dog ; ).
-Finally, right after that incident - a nice lady walked by and Lucy gravitated to her. Another dog came close and Lucy barked - so I said don't mind the dog - "She like's to be in charge." And the woman replied - "Or wants all the human attention."
And I thought interesting - is there any difference to "being in charge" and "having all the human attention?"
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 3:35 PM
kgc...
I think their success predates the current slate of candidates. The constant media drumbeat about haircuts, or age, or been in the Senate too long, or whatever, has gone a long way toward reducing our options to Clinton, Obama and McCain. But now they're working with what they've got...or what they've wrought.
I do think those of us who are paying attention are in the minority. Most people are simply too busy working and trying to make ends meet, while trying to have some kind of life with their friends and/or families, to even want to pay this much attention to politics. Some of the brightest people I know simply ignore the whole thing until it's reduced to the final two, then begin to make up their minds which way to vote.
I also think the media plays an enormous role in whose teflon works at any given moment, or over any given 'scandal'.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 3:36 PM
Dog:
Don't worry about dealing with all the cheap shots and trumped-up charges. (That is what I do for a living and it just comes naturally.)
But I take your compliment about being a "voice in the wilderness..."
Thanks!
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 3:38 PM
Warren,
We have a point of agreement. Lost Boys is an entertaining movie and I really love the Santa Cruz boardwalk. It may be one of the last of the true seaside carnival areas complete with salt water taffy and a good wooden roller coaster. :-)
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 3:41 PM
Yes, I was just out on NYC streets too.
A guy from HRC, (Human Rights, not Hillary Clinton) asked me to contribute to their fund. When I told him what Obama just said about returning to Reagan and Bush 1 foreign policy, he was speechless. I asked him as a gay person (which he was), why he found it no problem to support Obama (which he did) when those associated closely to Obama are rather homophobic. He said he "hoped" Obama would reject these things. When I asked him why he didn't like Hillary he said she gets support from the health insurance corporations. He said he thought she was too hawkish and bipartisan. When I asked him what he thinks Obama should do abroad he said, pull our forces out, come home and spend our money on ourselves. Needless to say I did not contribute.
It is beautiful outside however.
Yes, some real differences between Hillary and Obama supporters that purty words will not gloss over.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 29, 2008 3:44 PM
Melanie:
"and going to a sports bar? What a poser. It is not gonna fly in PA."
Spoken like someone who does not know PA. I am going to make sure I hit some sports bars in PA and talk up Obama.
(And don't worry - I will be "nice enough" to Clinton ; )
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 3:45 PM
Jamie:
Have you ever ridden the Cyclone at Coney Island?
And I love seaside carnival areas - I spent a lot of time in Jersey!
(Time for me and the goose to have some Big Arc chicken - another good eatery in NYC!)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 3:48 PM
HW
We agree. The media really did a number of Al Gore in 2000. I am encouraged by the increased number of main stream media sites that allow comments.
If there is an error, it shows up very quickly in comments.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 3:50 PM
Max
Are you suggesting that GWB is a better President than Carter?
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 3:54 PM
kgc...
The ability to interact, as limited as it is, is certainly a plus. But my real hope is that the internet will enable real people to learn and link together to try to achieve real, positive changes. No matter how we go about it, it won't be easy. 'They' have a big head start on us!
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 3:54 PM
Harborwoman
"But my real hope is that the internet will enable real people to learn and link together to try to achieve real, positive changes."
If you have some time check out the link.
That pretty much sums of the goal of the convocation.
It ia a group probably 100-150 who have met through blogs such as Atrios and Firedoglake coming together in person to talk about a progressive agenda and how to deal with the rightwing media.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 3:59 PM
"Perhaps that is why China, Russia, militants, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Cahvez, Cuba, are all hoping he wins".
-----Max
Max
How has Bush in his 7 long years neutralized the "influence"of this group in the geo-political arena?
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 4:02 PM
Oh, shoot, kgc...Meant to say that I had followed your link and am thrilled with the conversation that is happening there. I bookmarked the site, but will this be an on-going conversation, even after they're no longer meeting face-to-face?
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 4:05 PM
One of the radio shows I listen to in Seattle recently had a full hour of calls from Obama supporters who were asked to explain why the are supporting him. Many of them indicated that Obama would stop the war and spend "that money" in our own country. Not once did the host mention that we are not "paying" for the war...it's going on the card.
While I'm not suggesting that the war isn't a drain of blood and treasure, I believe its been pretty well covered in the media that this war is not part of the normal budget but adding to the national debt. To think that the minute we pull troops out we are going to be wallowing in cash a la Demi Moore on that bed with all that money in Indecent Proposal not gonna happen (you know I like to tie everything to a movie).
Posted by: Ally
| March 29, 2008 4:05 PM
DHD: "...What do you foresee, with the "radical agenda"?"
In my mind I see radicalism as something that is one standard deviations, or more, to the left or right of the center of the public opinion distribution.
The subject of the policy is immaterial; what counts is how it's perceived by the public.
If it's under that part of the population distribution embraced by two-thirds of sentient beings, then the policy can be safely enacted by lawmakers without fear of draconian retribution (ouster). That still allows for officials in particular localities voting against a proposal without disrupting it nationwide.
And, it allows for politicians of opposing parties to form coalitions supporting a legislative position.
Trying to force a consensus when the subject is outside parameters will result in what happened with Mrs Clinton's healthcare initiative during her husband's first year. It was only Irish luck that allowed him to recover.
I sense that Mr Obama's core supporters are within that area of the curve to the left of the one standard deviation mark. And, most assuredly this core has shown themselves to be vocal and demanding supporters. If he is to satisfy them, his policies will be to the left of where he needs to be to create working coalitions.
People such as Sen Leahy can afford allying themselves with the core as that position represents Vermont. The same can't be said for Gov Richardson.
I don't know which issue will be the one that sinks Mr Obama. But surely, as the Sun rises in the East, it's out there and will be introduced.
Posted by: Flatus
| March 29, 2008 4:07 PM
I just wrote a new blog entry on the democratic race for presidency. Would love to hear comments. it was a free write, and I didn't edit.
Also, the new Vanity Fair has a story called "Doris Day: America's Lonely Sweetheart". Has anyone got the new issue? It has Madonna on the cover. I've been worried about Doris since her son Terry died and I am wondering what might be in the story.
Thanks.
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 4:10 PM
George, it is a close call on the comparison. I would say Bush has more to his credit, but more in terms of incompetence. If Bush was so much worse than Carter, why did he get two terms. Or do you think Bush stole two terms?
It was very incompetent how Carter first allowed Zbig to handle Afghanistan and then Iran and the policies in South and Central America by Carter stunk. About the only thing Carter did right was to get Egypt and Israel together. But then extremists killed Sadat. The very same vermon today's extremists come from. If they had there way they would get rifd of most Muslim governments and replace them with fundi robots to the greater cause.
Given what Bush faced after 9/11, some have a good case that Bush was better than Carter. I would have trusted Carter to convince Musharraf, contain Saddam, reject Chavez, lecture Assad or even get NK to the table. He might have instead lectured us as to why OBL attacked us. Now that would have been a great fireside chat.
One thing is for certain, we don't want to return to Carter, do we? And how is Obama moving away from that? With another speech?
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 29, 2008 4:12 PM
Harborwoman
I think followups will be posted at the link. I have great hopes for them. They have a lot of good ideas.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 4:15 PM
Clintin "mis-spoke" on the campaign trail today.
She said there are people out there trying to stop these elections.
Incorrect. There are people saying she should end her campaign because they don't see any way she can win.
The elections will happen regardless, and the Dems should use all remaining contests to to sign up new voters.
(Mind you - I don't think Clinton should quit now. I am having too much fun - and I agree with the point that it makes both candidates stronger - as long as they don't smear each other. I think she should step down sometime in April or May - or at whatever point she reaches the same conclusion that Leahy did.)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 4:16 PM
Warren
Dangerous or difficult dog laws vary from state to state.
If your dog is known to be difficult/dangerous the presumption of fault is with you.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 4:22 PM
Warren: Um, for me, it's not really an "election" when there is only one person on the ballot. Has John McCain been campaigning in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina and Oregon and somehow I missed the coverage? I think most people get her point.
Posted by: Ally
| March 29, 2008 4:25 PM
Maxtrue:
Last name = Power.
(Jeez! if you are going to tear someone down and treat her like a "monster" - at least get the woman's name right.)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 4:29 PM
Here's a funny story , one that has gotten a lot of laughs over the years. At a group I belong to , there was a regular poster named Dan. He and another guy spent late nights going back and forth with each other (lightheartedly making fun of each other). Anyway , about 7 or 8 years ago , Dan decided to leave the group. When Dan left he said "I am leaving this place to go and find myself." The guy he used to trade barbs with every night made this legendary remark: "Dan left to find himself , but himself had a head start!"
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 4:31 PM
KGC:
"If your dog is known to be difficult/dangerous the presumption of fault is with you."
No worries. I'll just put Lucy on the stand.
http://www.mycockerspaniel.com/past_contests/sep06.htm
(She could win the jury over ; )
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 4:33 PM
well my birthday is the same birthday anniversary of Lucille Ball and also the bombing of Hiroshima. I always joke that's why I'm often funny and often explosive. :-) Anyone else wanna share a birthday they share with someone famous?
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 4:34 PM
Warren
Lucy is very cute but when she is wearing her muzzle it will be harder to tell.
http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=2007_Press_Releases_through_June&template=/PressRelease/PressReleaseDisplay.cfm&PressReleaseID=695&PressReleaseCategoryID=2&ShowArchives=0
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 4:35 PM
ET
Here is the DD website with some commentary. She is 84, lives a quiet luxurious life and rarely leaves home though friends visit.
http://www.dorisday.net/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1975
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 4:36 PM
Hey Warren- I was born and raised in Pittsburgh.What I meant was how Kerry looked dressed up in hunting gear. Obama did NOT fit in. And he knew it. Oh yea he picked Pitt in his bracket! Not pandering though....
Posted by: Melanie | March 29, 2008 4:37 PM
George,
1. His support of Columbia (which Oabama would reverse) led to the uncovering of the fact that Chavez gave $300,000,000 to FARC which then tried to get enriched uranium. Buh's constant objection to Chavez did resonate and Chavez lost his referendum of dictaorship despite the US Press defending Chavez.
2. Castro is gone and Bush did not yield.
3. Syria has been isolated with some sanctions and Bush supported the strike on a secret nuclear facility in Syria that Assad was working on with help from NK and Iran. While Zbig was going to talk about shared goals with Assad, someone killed one of the worst terrorists that enjoyed safe passage in Syria.
4. The NIE even concludes that Bush led sanctions on Iran made them stop their nuke program to build a bomb. Most experts agree that our invasion of Iraq had a lot to do with that as well as turn Gaddafi.
5. Bush supported the color revolutions with much success, has promoted NATO expansion and missile defense. These policies backed in large part by Europe have thwarted Russia's desire to reassert it's influence. In China, Bush has failed to thwart Chinese military build up, but has proceed to win some support from China over NK while creating better communication between our military leaders and theirs. Carter on China or Russia....LOL
6. Militants....the record is there...google it.
6. In the Sudan, Bush has been a leading voice in increasing the role of intervention in Darfur. He has given record amounts of money to Africa winning enormous praise from Liberals around the world. He has certainly called for more action in Darfur, Somalia and Kenya than Obama has. US NAvy has acted repeatedly to stop priacy. Think Carter would do that?...LOL
7. Bush got India and Pakistan to back off and for Musharraf to decalre himself an ally in the GWOT. Bush got Musharraf to allow the US to confirm the safe storage of Pakistani nukes. Until Obama spoke up, Musharraf had masked a few Predator attacks on militants. In Afghanistan, Bush drove out the Taliban and restored a Democratic Afghani government.
8. Bush got Gaddafi to come clean making a joke out of Liberal claims that he was building an irrigation system.
9. Bush ended the chance of Saddam getting nukes or causing more trouble. There is now a chance Iraq might move towards a reformed view of Islam.
Can you imagine what Bush might have achieved if sensible Democrats were allowed to reform and improve the thrust of Bush's foreign policy? The simple rejection of everything Bush has tried, advocated or envisoned is a foolish approach to foreign policy. To conclude that everything Bush has done refutes "traditional" foreign policies is also misguided.
I hope I answered that for you.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 29, 2008 4:40 PM
Tom , here is who I share a birthday with:
Laura Bush , Walter Cronkite , (The late Art Carney) , Ralph Macchio , Eric Karros , Markie Post and Loretta Swit. I was born on the same day and year as Matthew McCaughney and Sean (P. Diddy) Combs.
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 4:43 PM
The chief worry is that Clinton may carry her recent winning streak into Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina and other states, leaving her with unquestioned momentum but fewer pledged delegates than Obama. Party leaders then would face a wrenching choice: Steer the nomination to a fading Obama, even as signs suggested Clinton could be the stronger candidate in November; or go with the surging Clinton and risk infuriating Obama's supporters, especially blacks, the Democratic Party's most loyal base.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/03/29/politics/p064437D20.DTL
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 4:44 PM
I share a birthday with Boris Karloff.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 4:45 PM
Oh and Will Rogers , too.
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 4:45 PM
Damn Max,
Explain to me why we aren't trying to re-elect him to a third term? I'm confused!
Posted by: Rezdog
| March 29, 2008 4:45 PM
Maxtrue:
I agree that tough measures must be taken with the raidcal leaders on Iraq, Syria, N. Korea, etc.
But referring to the entire country as an "enemy to US" simply feeds into the propoganda war the extremists are waging.
And like I said - being stupid about measures such as sanctions - makes matters even worse. I think there should be oversight in place to prevent such countries from obtaining certain types of weapons. But often times the world places ecnomic sanctions on a country because its leader is off the reservation (e.g., Iran, N. Korea). What happens? The people suffer, poverty spreads, the people become more extreme and even moderates begin to support the leader we are trying to remove power from.
And when the UN passes sanctions - who do you think that is blamed on by the extemists? You got it. The United States of America.
(And making personal insults about world leaders - as McCain has and Bush does all the time - is childish and counter-productive. And Obama's policy of meeting with our allies as well as our so-called enemies is the right path - even though it must be tread carefully.)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 4:49 PM
Warren,
I treat Power like a monster, how so? In fact, I've used her comments lately to actually refute some new Obama claims about his foreign policy. Powers is no monster, just a lose cannon with some very impractical ideas and a selective reading of history. I hope Hillary makes her Ambassador to the Sudan or Saudi Arabia.
I make lots of typos...get used to it.
Its bad enough I have to post so many facts that one ought to know given one's passion about a candidate's record and history.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 29, 2008 4:49 PM
ET
You get Lucille Ball and I get Desi Arnaz
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 4:57 PM
Ally:
The result of putting the war on "the card" is depressing the American dollar. And increasing American debt to China. Not a good combination.
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:01 PM
Warren.
McCain will bring this up. The NIE despite a foolish wording of deabatable evidence stated clearly that Bush led sanctions caused Iran to blink. No one said that Americans don't like Iranians. We know the people support better relationshps while their hardline government does not. Shall we wait until they have a bomb, or make it difficult on them through sanctions?
Obama failed to support sanctions on Quds who deliver weapons to Hixb'Allah, intel and support to Chavez and probably FARC, weapons to Iraq and even the Taliban and AQ working in Afghanistan. No, he wants to talk.
Bush brought in others over NK and was rather blunt with Musharraf. Hillary. like JFK has gone to Europe and has talked to many allies. Her General was the leader of NATO. I can post the articles here, but if Obama thinks our defense is most served by building news schools, hiring new teachers and bringing prosperity to all the countries that dislike us while opporessed and brain-washed by their own leadership, we will never be safe. It is an absurd solution to pressing problems. Sudan will hardly let us re-educate their people, nor will Iran. You make too much of talking. We do talk, but what will this produce? We talked to the Taliban and they increased their violence thinking we were acting weak. We talked to Sadr, but he now thinks Maliki is getting to powerful for his, or Iran's interests. Pelosi visited Assad and he responded by killing more Lebanese leaders who oppose his influence in Lebanon. When we invaded Iraq, Gaddafi gave us a call.
Of course we must talk, but that isn't the basis of how we craft our NSS. Iran recently said it will not talk to the Democrats should they win. Better relations means people visiting have the opportunity to discover what Iran is up to. NK wants rewards before they even reveal the full extent of their nuclear program.
Let's be serious. The Obama approach is not serious. Purty words like Carter leading to what?
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 29, 2008 5:03 PM
HW
Snark is just silly, but for anything else:
All that is required for evil to exist is that good men do nothing. If he attacks anywhere. I attack.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 5:03 PM
Hey - didn't Wendy call me "Doris Day" - I need to go pick up Vanity Fair...
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:05 PM
Civil law. I don't have the stomach for criminal law...
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:07 PM
HarborWoman
Here is another link this one to the panel on economics http://www.atrios.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 5:08 PM
Just a reminder of what it took for women to get the vote
http://jdurward.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 5:09 PM
Jamie...
At this point, if he 'speaks', you and your compadres attack. And, with that, I think I've said enough. I don't think anyone here can doubt my opinion on this issue.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 5:10 PM
ET
You get Lucille Ball and I get Desi Arnaz
Posted by: Jamie | March 29, 2008 4:57 PM
Heheheheh Jamie, maybe we were made for each other... or is it made for divorce? ;-)
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 5:11 PM
Thanks, kgc! Another excellent link!
I see that I also share a birthday with Franklin Pierce. Was he a good president? I can't remember....
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 5:13 PM
Max
Was it Carter's incompetence that led to overthrow of The Shah?
What was different between Reagan's policy and Carter's policy towards the left wing government in Afghanistan?
Even Zalmay Khalilzad ,a member of the neocon crowd, have argued that it was the abondonment policy of Reagan/Bush that allowed Afghanistan to slide into lawlessnes and provided the fertile ground for the Talibans.
Max
You must be kidding!
There are more lift wing governments now in Central/South America than in the Carter era.
Bush convinced Musharraf?
Bush's policy have given rise to the "Iran- centric" Shia wave.
Look at the similarities in MO between Maliki and Musharraf.
Hear the utterances coming out of the military leadership.
The military is stretched thin.
At least Fallon spoke truth to power.
max ,have you considered signing up or do you subscribe to the Bush/Cheney view of some other volunteer but not me?
Its called burden sharing.
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 5:16 PM
HW
Franklin Pierce
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Pierce
Not so much. Alcoholic, ineffectual.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 5:17 PM
hmmm some others on 6 August...
Andy Warhol, Barbara Windsor, Louella Parsons, Lois Nettleton, Robert Mitchum, Geri Halliwell, Catherine Hicks, Soleil Moon Frye (she was Punky Brewster), Piers Anthony, and Randy DeBarge More at: http://www.nndb.com/lists/736/000106418/
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 5:17 PM
You know, when Harbor wrote "Franklin Pierce" I was soo excited. I thought "he was a brilliant drag queen. Then I realized I was thinking of Charles Pierce..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Pierce
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 5:19 PM
Everybody has a tree to hug, I suppose.
Even if that tree is a poison oak.
Chacun a son googoo.
Posted by: 9/11 survivor (sort of) | March 29, 2008 5:22 PM
Maxtrue:
I am not talking about the Crusades where we go into Iran and Syria and "re-educate" them.
Instead, I am talking about increasing the social conditions in such countries. Doing that will lead to better education and technology and an increase in moderates and progressives and a decrease in extremism.
And the US does not have to foot the entire bill. (I bet a fraction of the amount we are spending for the war in Iraq - would do a lot of good).
But more importantly, it is just about increasing trade between such countries and the rest of the modern world. Change will happen on its own.
And you may dismiss "hope" - but this is exactly what prevents people from blowing themselves up.
(And I also think a major focus is and must be to inhibit nuclear proliferation. And there are many ways to go about that - including both carrots and sticks.)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:23 PM
Oh shoot, Jamie! That site said he was good looking and inoffensive, giving him lots of friends, but that he also had a reputation as being one of the worst presidents in history. Poor Franklin!
I think I'll try to find someone more to my liking to share my birthday with. For now, I'm sticking with Boris Karloff!
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 5:23 PM
Warren
I wouldn't focus on Hillary's misstatements.It happens from time to time on the trail.
What pisses me off are some "Chicken Hawk" Repugs who argued that they are strong on defence , more patriotic when they or their families have not served and would not serve in the military.
The burden and sacrifice is skewed just like the tax cuts , no bid contracts ....the whole works.
Then servicemen have endless trouble navigating the bureaucrcy at the VA, families have to be supplimented by food stamps.
Where is GORDO and Maxtrue?
Defend that BS.
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 5:25 PM
EuroTom...
I think I might have preferred Charles....
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 5:29 PM
George:
I agree that Obama should not focus on Clinton's missatements. Both candidates should stay on the high road.
(But I have the liberty of not running for President - so I can get away with a lot more. And even if the Clinonites "can't handle the truth!!" - I am going to keep expressing it ; )
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:29 PM
"is it made for divorce?"
Supposedly they stayed friends, so shall we just call it "irreconcilable differences". :-)
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 5:30 PM
Time to do a little work for "the man" - Obama is not paying my bills!!
Later peeps!
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:31 PM
By your standard Obama lied today when he said he did not take money from lobbyists.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 5:31 PM
ET
For that type of President, you need to think of James Buchanan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Buchanan
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 5:32 PM
KGC:
Muzzle it KGC.
(Hah! that one was for Lucy!)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:33 PM
Is it unpatriotic to say the "surge" is not working.
(I need to be sure since I don't wear one of those tiny American flags made in China):
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080329/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
OK - really off to work now...
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 5:36 PM
Warren
I assume you are kidding about Lucy's potential threat. But if you are not, if your dog bites, you will need a good criminal lawyer.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 5:38 PM
Found three I like better than Franklin...I also share a birthday with Harpo Marx, Billy the Kid, and Bruce Hornsby.... :-))))))
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 5:48 PM
"I also share a birthday with Harpo Marx, Billy the Kid, and Bruce Hornsby.... "
That's quite a RANGE :-)
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 5:56 PM
Well...I hate to admit it, but Miley Cyrus was on the list, too.... :-(
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 5:59 PM
Barack Obama says he’s trying to make healthcare more affordable yet he never mentions that his wife is one of thirteen vice presidents at a not for profit hospitable that in 2005 reported earnings of over 100 million dollars in profits in part by charging minorities three and a half times as much as whites for insurance for the exact same care
In July of 2006 Senator Obama told a group of college activists
"You’ll have groundless opportunities when you graduate, and it’s very easy to just take that diploma, forget about all this progressive-politics stuff, and go chasing after big house and the large salary…"
What he told the Chicago Sun Times only after an embarrassing investigation of his purchase of the stately $1.65 million "U.S. Senator Barack Obama expressed his regret late Friday for his 2005 land purchase from now indicted political fund raiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko…"
Next he tells a union group that opposes the amount of compensation to the CEO of Wal-Mart that there is a
"moral responsibility to stand up and fight for a better economic future with adequate wages healthcare and retirement benefits…"
In 2005 the CEO of Wal-Mart received $10.5 million in total compensation, what Senator Obama did not tell the union members is that was in that same year the CEO of Tree House Foods received 26 million in total compensation, a company who’s revenues were 409 times less than Wal-Mart; maybe that’s because he is embarrassed of the fact his wife sits on the Board of Directors of Tree House Foods, a company that had low paid Hispanics.
In the future when you hear Obama’s fancy rhetoric please do not be swayed by it, because simply put Senator Obama is just another Jessie Jackson con artist that profits off the misery of his own people and other minorities. The next time you hear the Obama campaign scream for Hillary’s tax statements also be fair and look into Senator Obama’s background as well, do not be suckered in by fancy speech and oratory skills he possesses.
Its difficult because the media will not provide information that is critical of Obama, all you hear all day is the mainstream media critical of Hillary and her lies ok fine that’s fair but you have to apply an equal standard to Obama as well, and not to do so is irresponsible journalism at the very least and conspiratorial journalism at worst.
--Heather
Posted by: Heather
| March 29, 2008 6:00 PM
For HW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C4Z2ggtnL0
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 6:01 PM
Warren
the ones who disturb me the most are the Repugs(like GORDO and Maxtrue) who do not have the courage to voice their support for McCain.
They are adopting the Hannity/Limbaugh/Rove stratedy of fanning flames of mischief to create a wedge in the party.
They cannot credibly point to any successful Bush policy
They have been incharge for 2 terms and look at the mess they have created:
National debt up 40%.
Iraq broken and owned after been duped by Chalabi.
The present unravelling of the financial markets costing approximately $1 trillion so far to extinguish the raging flames.
The empowering of China and the reemergence of Russia on the geo-political stage.
The threat of an alliance between Pakistan/Iraq/Iran/syria/Lebanon
One could go on and on yet they have the temerity to talk about Democrat incompetence.
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 6:07 PM
Jamie
That explains your combative nature,a true Sag
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 6:13 PM
Thanks for the Bruce Hornsby link, Jamie! I wasn't familiar with him before.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 6:15 PM
George...
Jamie's not the Sag...I am....
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 6:17 PM
CNN just referred to those backing Sen. Clinton as "Clintonistas". What media bias? Do they secretly want McCain? Let's create deep seated bitterness so that McCain can slide in with a narrow victory.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 6:17 PM
George, I'm a gentle and maleable Pisces ever willing to give way to a new path of least resistance.
At least until the Tsunami wipes you off the face of the earth. :-)
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 6:20 PM
I see where the confusion was. I was quoting Harbor Woman back to herself. She is a Sag as was my mother ... She is a fighter and rescuer.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 6:22 PM
Jamie
But a straight shooter.
Please down mention McCain ,thr thought of having Phil Gramm cleaning up this financial mess is really scary.
HW
Nice to learn you are part of the sag club.
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 6:28 PM
Interesting...I don't think of myself as a fighter or a rescuer, unless it's rescuer in the sense of often being for the underdog, but I do think of myself as a straight shooter. I try to call 'em as I see 'em.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 6:34 PM
BHN
When one considers the reckless stewartship,it hard to ignore their BS.
15million homeowners with negative equity in their homes, nearly twice that total on the border line,
Iraq, the trillion dollar financial bailout., health care issues , social security ......
To climb out of this will be a long hard slog ( to quote Rummy)
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 6:36 PM
George...
Are you also a Sag? My mom was, and my brother is.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 6:36 PM
Jamie, you're a Sagittarius? No wonder I like you....I'm a Leo. Have a bunch of Sag friends.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 6:38 PM
HW
Yes I am. Share common "earthday" with Steven Spielberg and Brad Pitt.
Posted by: George | March 29, 2008 6:41 PM
Patsi...
I'm the Sag. Jamie's a Pisces. My first husband was a Leo.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 6:47 PM
Pretty heady 'earthday' company there, George! Steven and Brad....
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 6:51 PM
Is it unpatriotic to say the "surge" is not working.
Posted by: warren | March 29, 2008 5:36 PM
My "surge" hasn't worked so well lately; certainly not as good as 10 years ago. ;-)
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 29, 2008 6:57 PM
Patsi,
Confusion abounds.
I am a PISCES with a LEO Ascendant (how's that for a mask to hide behind?) and a GEMINI moon. We won't discuss what happens whenever I get anywhere near an Aries or Aquarius (just stand aside and watch the fireworks) ... so much for Astrology R Us.
At least five personalities to go with every occasion ...
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 7:03 PM
I went to see Craig today, in Charlottesville!!
CC was at Barnes&Noble, with Joe Bageant.
Craig was funny, informative and, in a word... "adorable"!! Mr. Bageant, uh not so much...he seemed a little grouchy(IMO).
The topic was "A fix for political junkies". Mr. Bageant called political junkies, "yackety-yacks".
The moderator referred to HRC as a "power monger".
As usual, Craig was the voice of reason.
The Q&A did not last long enough...only about 45 minutes. I was working up my nerve to ask a question about "spindrooling"...but time ran out. Oh well, c'est la vie...
Overall, it was a wonderful day!! The drive to/from Charlottesville was beautiful!!
Have I mentioned I no longer have a mad crush on Vince Gill??...LOLOLOLOL!! {8~{)
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| March 29, 2008 7:08 PM
LIL
Ooooh Lucky You. Did you get a chance to chat with our fearless leader? We really, really need to do another get together sometime soon.
Why are you no longer hooked on Mr. Gill and who has replaced your former idol?
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 7:10 PM
Well at least it sounds like Wild Bill is actually talking some sense:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080329/ap_on_el_pr/bill_clinton
(And hopefully he is down off the stump for McCain...unbelievable! It is almost like the Obama campaign was on to something when they said the Clintons would say anything to win...)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 7:14 PM
But don't worry - the new politics needs some old-school politicians to take on all the thugs in the GOP.
The Clintons aren't going anywhere - no matter what happens in this election.
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 7:17 PM
"the Obama campaign would say anything to win"
After all if you have run six campaigns in 12 years without bothering to do the job you've been elected to do, you get very good at doing nothing but winning the next election.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 7:19 PM
I didn't call him lazy ... anything but lazy ... If anything he has been very, very, very energetic at achieving goals.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 7:24 PM
I totally agree with Bush's decision to not boycott the Olympics in China.
(What hogwash! Leave it to France and that newly-minted-arrogant womanizer. But I must admit - his new wife is smoking ; )
And I think he will do well in France. They are more into Napolean over there as opposed to Washington and Lincoln...
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 7:24 PM
Jamie
After the Q&A was over, lots of people went up to talk to CC and JB!!
I am what some people call, "painfully shy"...I stood there for a minute or so, willing myself to just walk up and say, "hey!!"(I had my two books, that CC probably would have signed...right??).
Honestly, I started havin' "Santa flashbacks"...like when I was a young child and my Mom would try to coax me to go up and (just)say hi to Santa...LOLOLOLOL!!! I am such a wimp..I couldn't do it.
Maybe next time...
But I am glad I got to see CC, in person, at least!! Isn't he just the cutest thing???
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| March 29, 2008 7:26 PM
Oh LIL
He will be sooooooooooooo disappointed. He is exactly as he comes across on TV (if anything nicer) .. next time get over the first 30 seconds of painful whatever and march right up there to say, "Sign This!"
There has to be somewhere in the middle of the country or major hub near airport where there is a speech of book signing ... Las Vegas was Soooooooooooooo much fun.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 7:31 PM
Jamie:
I am a Pisces too! (on the cusp of Aquarius).
I knew I liked you.
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 7:32 PM
Obama and Clinton have been tied to predatory lenders
Obama campaign finance manager is the sister of a Clinton campaign staffer
News to break soon
Posted by: rushopsII
| March 29, 2008 7:35 PM
Oh...believe me...there were lots of people who wanted to talk to Craig...he is probably still there!!
I would go to Vegas, to meet everyone!! I am OK, in a group...it's just the one-to-one(say hi to Santa)scenario that gets me all in a knot.
I wanted vadaryl and Iris to go with me, but today is their daughter's(Hilary)birthday...so they couldn't go.
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| March 29, 2008 7:40 PM
President Clinton Will Visit Salem..
Monday
1:30-3:30
Chemeketa Community College
About 1 minute from where I live..
Posted by: Oregon Democrat | March 29, 2008 7:48 PM
"Right now, among all the primary states, believe it or not, Hillary's only 16 votes behind in pledged delegates," said Bill Clinton, "and she's gonna wind up with the lead in the popular vote in the primary states. She's gonna wind up with the lead in the delegates [from primary states]."
Bill Clinton's decision to flatly predict that his wife will finish ahead of Obama in the pledged delegates and popular vote which come strictly from primary states comes as his wife's advisers concede that the former first lady will not be able to catch Obama in the total number of pledged delegates.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/03/bill-clinton-it.html
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 7:50 PM
Heather:
Obama does not often mention Michelle when it comes to the issues - because the candidate's spouses are pretty much irrelevant. (Of course we know the exception).
"You’ll have groundless opportunities when you graduate, and it’s very easy to just take that diploma, forget about all this progressive-politics stuff, and go chasing after big house and the large salary…"
Obama passed on just this opportunity. He could have worked at the best law firm in Chicago - and would have been a rich and successful partner right now.
And do you really want to bring up Wal-Mart. It was Hillary - not Bill - that served on the board. And I bet when their tax returns come out we are going to see what kind a "fat cats" the Clintons really are. (Just in time for PA.)
"In the future when you hear Obama’s fancy rhetoric please do not be swayed by it, because simply put Senator Obama is just another Jessie Jackson con artist that profits off the misery of his own people and other minorities."
I denounce and reject that statement Heather.
Even though I still think you are a delightful lady (it seems you just have a little case of "Clinton fever").
(I have said some pretty mean things about Red Sox fans myself ; )
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 7:51 PM
The doctor admonished the men: "Courage in women is often mistaken for insanity."
There is a T-Shirt in there somewhere.
http://jdurward.blogspot.com
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 7:52 PM
I thought we were all going to meet in Puerto Rico in June. We can have the Puerto Rican Primary Party (PRPP) to celebrate the end to the myth of the black-brown divide floated by the media....
They make T-Shirts for everything!
http://www.palmercash.com/product.asp?3=1080
*enthusiasim for the PRPP flies out the window*
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 7:59 PM
The Obamas sure are generous. .4% charitable contributions..Of course that increased for the past couple of years...Audacity of HYPE...
Posted by: Oregon Democrat | March 29, 2008 8:00 PM
Despite what so many others are saying:
"My attitude is that Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants. Her name is on the ballot and she is a fierce and formidable competitor," said Obama, adding that the notion that Democrats have been split by the prolonged nominating contest "is somewhat overstated."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080329/pl_nm/usa_politics_dc
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 8:03 PM
Warren...that's an encouraging post.
As long as Obama and Hillary continue to not engage in direct trashing of one another, or denying one another's right to stay in the race, there is hope for the party.
This optimism of mine will persist even assuming that "staffers" and "surrogates" and "cableheads" and "bloggers" on both sides continue to engage in the most vicious trashing of one another.
I think as long as the candidates, themselves, personally, stay above the fray...there's hope for healing. All it will take is a great speech from the podium by the loser in Denver, in prime time of course.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:09 PM
Crawford's'Listers are a wise, eclectic group with matchless taste and sophistication...
I'm working on a video project and need some help. I'm looking for the names of the most iconic female fashion models and actresses from the 1920s to the current day. I am thinking along the lines of Lauren Becall, Marilyn Monroe, Audrey Hepburn, silent film stars and WWII pinup poster girls.
I certainly do not want to distract you from your other discussions, but if you could attach something like this: "(MM-Heidi Klum)", to your post, that would work.
I need lots of images of lots of beautiful women. (which really sums up the majority of my personal issues)
Posted by: MadMustard
| March 29, 2008 8:12 PM
Has Michelle Obama gone a Shuttle mission..don't see her much..
Posted by: Oregon Democrat | March 29, 2008 8:14 PM
MM-Ingrid Bergman
MM-Ava Gardner
MM--Hedy Lamarr
MM-Marlene Dietrich
MM-Babe Paley
Those are the five most beautiful women not on your list, pre-1960, that I could think of right off the top of my head. Hope that helps for openers.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:17 PM
Air America lost their Sacremento station today..They complain it is because advertisers don't like how they stand up to major corporations.
Perhaps it is because most of their hosts are crackpots. Crackpot radio succeeds on the right because such a large portion of the GOP is made up of crackpots.
The crackpot part of the Democratic Party is very small.
Air America has lost much of its original audience and will continue to do so.
Posted by: Oregon Democrat | March 29, 2008 8:21 PM
Warren...I don't think folks on the level of you and I will get past the "trashing"...or the Carvilles or Tweetys or Wofsons or Russerts, or whatever. We'll be hitting below the belt all the way up to Denver.
Point is...as long as the candidates themselves, in the most personal way,l keep the door open to eventual reconciliation...it could happen. That might be the ONLY purpose for even having a convention in Denver, when it all comes down to it.
Think about it this way: Will the GOP ever have had a more BORING convention than it will have this year? That alone will help the Dems, if they play it right.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:21 PM
We could use a distraction...
Sophia Loren
Grace Kelly
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 8:21 PM
Warren...you have to prefix those suggestions with "MM" so they're searchable by Mad Mustard.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:22 PM
Jayne Mansfield
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 8:22 PM
"I'm the Sag. Jamie's a Pisces. My first husband was a Leo."
ROFL. And you divorced him! My ex was a Scorpio. I don't think I even know many Pisces....an innordinate number of my friends, oddly now that I think of it, have been either Sags or other Leos. My daughter is a Taurus and my son a Libra.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 8:22 PM
LL / MM
They are right up there : )
(so this is what it feels like to be underneath Jayne Masfield....hah!)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 8:24 PM
I like Jayne Mansfield's daughter, Mariska Hargatay on Law and Order SVU
Posted by: Oregon Democrat | March 29, 2008 8:26 PM
Warren...actually, if "MM" were a bra size...that might be the same thing as "Jayne Mansfield"
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:27 PM
The Meek and Weak at Newsweek
"Meet Johnathan alter. First he told Hillary Clinton to bow out of the race before Ohio and Texas. Now he thinks the governorship of New York should be Clinton's "consolation" prize. Thinking forward, you know, also again asking Clinton to bow out, this time after Pennsylvania:
What's in the water over at Newsweek? Between Alter and Richard Wolffe, the feminization of the political news at that magazine is remarkable. Maybe at mid-life both men need to up their testosterone take."
http://taylormarsh.com/
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 8:28 PM
Mad -- The greatest of them all: Suzy Parker.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 8:30 PM
The "party elders" of the Democratic Party are about as insightful as a random selection of patients from an Alzheimer's ward. Who really cares what they think or say or do? They have not led the party effectively for about four decades. Why should they start now?
The only two Dems to be elected president since 1964 have both been "outsiders" shunned by the so-called "party elders."
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:30 PM
MM--If you're really covering the waterfront, you absolutely cannot leave out Betty Page. It will definitely add to the "kinky quotient" of whatever it is your up to.
Also...
MM--Dawn Wells
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:38 PM
Thanks, that is exactly what I'm looking for. Many of the women that you named were not yet on my list yet. I've got about a week of precious IP access that I plan to fully exploit, which has become mighty hard to come by lately.
Thanks guys and gals.
Posted by: MadMustard
| March 29, 2008 8:39 PM
Mad..you need to come back for real. We all miss you here...definitely the oldtimers. Think about it.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:41 PM
As an optimist and HRC supporter, I like the scenario.
As a Floridian I am annoyed that they continue to ignore and disenfranchise us. There is a petition drive moving through Florida that (with a one million goal) demanding the DNC to count our votes. If anyone is interested you can request the petition at:: jimh@markitelligence.
It is for Florida citizens all parties. If you are from Florida and would like to help, just get in touch with email above, tell tehm elaine sent you to his email.
Thanks
Posted by: elaine of tampa
| March 29, 2008 8:42 PM
MM -Madge Bellamey
MM- Louise Brooks
MM- Billy Dove
MM -Clara Bow
These were 4 of the beautiful Silent Film Stars..
Posted by: Gidget
| March 29, 2008 8:43 PM
I noticed that you all were talking astrological signs. It's always been an interest of mine. Isn't it interesting that Obama and Bill Clinton are both Leo's. Must be responsible for that silver tongue thing!
Posted by: truebeliever | March 29, 2008 8:43 PM
Gordo:
That is exactly why I think Taylor Marsh is a set back for the feminist movement.
She sounds like a pig-headed jackass!!
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 8:44 PM
Jamie...
Yes, I think if I were running for president and things were at this relatively late stage...and my principal opponent had no way of garnering the required number of delegates before the convention...and I have won the last two major states and am lined up to win the next major state...I think that might be motivation enough to stay in.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:46 PM
I do agree with all who think the demand to have Hillary withdraw is disgraceful. 130 delegates separate them, that seems close to me. Pat Leahy needs to retire.
Posted by: elaine of tampa
| March 29, 2008 8:46 PM
LL:
That is exactly what she is thinking. Of course, your motivation removes from reality the two-month stretch when she was losing, the 11 in a row streak and the fact that to get the required number of delegates - the remaining Super D's will have to ignore what almost everyone is saying outside the Clinton camp, i.e., victory goes to the winner in pledged delegates - and break Clinton's way about 65% to 35% - when in fact the trend amongst the Super D's is going in the opposite direction.
But at least it looks like the race has taken a positive turn - at least for this weekend...
(I am off to do some drinking!!)
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 8:53 PM
Warren...have a glass of McCallan 12-year old neat...and toast the blog!
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 8:55 PM
(kinda sucks I am always trying to crush the hopes of "you people" . . . Obama has the fun job!!)
que sera...
Posted by: warren
| March 29, 2008 8:58 PM
Oh for goodnesss sake,, pass the good Scotch. A few sips and I am soooooooooooo agreeable.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 8:59 PM
Night gang. I'm renting "Across the Universe" off DirectTV..
See you all tomorrow!
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 9:00 PM
Enough Conflict. Off to watch Torchwood. If you haven't watched it, bought it, got addicted to it ... BBC
Posted by: Jamie
| March 29, 2008 9:00 PM
Jonathan Schwarz:
Penny Pritzker, Obama, and the Massive Housing Crisis
Who is Penny Pritzker?
Pritzker is the national finance chair of Obama’s presidential campaign. She’s from one of America’s richest families, the founders of the Hyatt hotel chain, and is herself the 135th richest person in America.
She also has an ugly history as the former chair of Superior Bank in Illinois, which (1) was created thanks to a giant S&L bailout by the government; (2) then helped invent the securitization of subprime mortgages; and (3) then collapsed in 2001 thanks to massive financial chicanery.
Interestingly, she lives in a fancy Chicago neighborhood just a short stroll away from Austan Goolsbee, a University of Chicago professor who’s one of Obama’s main economic advisors. It’s really quite wonderful how Goolsbee can maintain his deep admiration for the Free Market while living a few blocks away
http://thismodernworld.com/4222
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 9:03 PM
"That is exactly why I think Taylor Marsh is a set back for the feminist movement. "
And the movement has been waiting breathlessly for your opinion.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 9:15 PM
UPDATE: Mark Halperin makes a good point about the double standard at play here. Why has the Obama campaign gone after Clinton so hard lately? Halperin's reason number 9: "Because they can: the media continues to highlight the Clinton campaign's negative tactics in a disapproving way, but only rarely points out the intensified negative tone and rhetoric Obama's campaign has been using - even though it conflicts with the candidate's professed desire for a new kind of politics."
In fairness to Clinton, Halperin is right: the Obama campaign has indeed gotten away with murder. They've been having it every which way from Sunday: attacking Clinton with impunity while claiming some sort of political high ground, and playing the put upon victim when attacked or criticized.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 9:21 PM
"the 11 in a row streak "
Of states where Obama will be mostly be crushed in the general. "Oh yeah! Obama won Idaho!"
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 9:21 PM
"Obama is no longer the sure-footed campaigner who piled up wins and delegates in February, and the superdelegates' obligation to the party is to nominate the sprinting Clinton, even if it angers Obama backers." AP 3/29
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 9:25 PM
MM Brigitte Bardot
MM Lena Horne
MM Madonna
MM Hillary Clinton
(tiny giggle)
Posted by: unlikely_burrito
| March 29, 2008 9:29 PM
MM.....Jean Harlow
Posted by: sturgeone | March 29, 2008 9:38 PM
John Heileman at New York Magazine:
According to a Democratic strategist unaligned with any campaign but with knowledge of the situation gleaned from all three camps, the answer is simple: Obama blew it. Speaking to Edwards on the day he exited the race, Obama came across as glib and aloof. His response to Edwards’s imprecations that he make poverty a central part of his agenda was shallow, perfunctory, pat.
Clinton, by contrast, engaged Edwards in a lengthy policy discussion. Her affect was solicitous and respectful. When Clinton met Edwards face-to-face in North Carolina ten days later, her approach continued to impress; she even made headway with Elizabeth. Whereas in his Edwards sit-down, Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about health care, insisting that his plan is universal (a position she considers a crock), high-handedly criticizing Clinton’s plan (and by extension Edwards’s) for its insurance mandate.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 9:38 PM
Much is being made of PA Senator Robert Casey's endorsement of Barack Obama. Some got so carried away they suggested Casey be Obama's VP nominee. Others saw through that pretty quick. Where does Casey stand on issues? Here's some of his positions:
He believes Roe v. Wade should be overturned and opposes embryonic stem cell research.
He supports Bush's warrantless NSA spying program and thinks the Patriot Act is a vital tool and a necessary one.
He supports the death penalty and opposes legalization of all drugs.
On the war in Iraq, he's been against a deadline for withdrawal.
He supported the Defense of Marriage Amendment and opposes gay marriage.
He supports teaching "abstinence plus" in schools and the posting of the Ten Commandments in government buildings:
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 9:39 PM
"The controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. has "dared to unwrap the flag from around the cross" in his sermons -- not because of a lack of patriotism, but out of concern, a Dallas preacher said Saturday at a panel discussion at the State of the Black Church Summit."
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/552040.html
An interesting article about Reverend Wright.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | March 29, 2008 9:47 PM
Howard Dean Endorses McCain
"Howard Dean 2004: The Medals Matter
"The real issue is this," Dean said in March 2004, when endorsing formal rival Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., "Who would you rather have in charge of the defense of the United States of America, a group of people who never served a day overseas in their life, or a guy who served his country honorably and has three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star on the battlefields of Vietnam?"
McCain, by the way, has been awarded the Silver Star, the Legion of Merit, two Bronze Star Medals, a Purple Heart and the Distinguished Flying Cross."
http://tammybruce.com/
Posted by: GORDO | March 29, 2008 9:51 PM
I am all for the separation of church and state, all this religious talk, and churches' rights talk makes me very uneasy.
Posted by: unlikely_burrito
| March 29, 2008 9:53 PM
Madfmustard,
Lana turner Betty Grable Jeanne Crane,Shelly winters,.I have a large coleection of pictures of the stars from the twenties on.They are 8by 10's and some are on linen paper
Posted by: painter
| March 29, 2008 9:55 PM
even have some movie stills and a picture of the little rascals and a lot of the leading men of the times.
Posted by: painter
| March 29, 2008 9:57 PM
It must be tough when all you have to rely on are the regurgitated arguments of Politico, Drudge and Peggy Noonan.
Talk about boring.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 9:57 PM
Here's a great youtube of OBlameless and company attempting to cunfuse a TX delegate
http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/03/29/report-any-political-dirty-tricks-right-here/
Posted by: econsmed
| March 29, 2008 10:00 PM
Michael just shot Salazzo and McCluskey......
Posted by: sturgeone | March 29, 2008 10:02 PM
"Whereas in his Edwards sit-down, Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about "
oops....Obama needs to not get into a battle of wits with Elizabeth Edwards.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 10:03 PM
Lardass and Warren...
I don't think either of you is here right now, but I hope you'll see this when you return...
I went to school in Meridian, MS (until he moved to the MS coast) with the kid who was driving the car the night Jayne Mansfield was killed. His name was Ronnie Harrison, and he was also killed in the accident. I believe he drove into the rear of one of those fog machines we kids used to chase...could be wrong about that last bit, though.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 10:07 PM
Hi Jack!
Do you still have relatives in the Ozark area? I was through there during the floods in my recent travels. It was kinda nasty. Hope family, friends, and property were all ok. My brother lives in Nixa. He was fine there but he had property in Galena that is toast. Looked like lots of people were affected.
Posted by: truebeliever | March 29, 2008 10:08 PM
"Elizabeth Edwards isn't happy with what Michelle Obama is saying on the campaign trail about the effects of John Edwards' decision to accept federal matching funds for his presidential campaign.
"I'm surprised and disappointed in Michelle," Mrs. Edwards said at a campaign event Monday night.
Mrs. Edwards comments were spurred by a voter recounting a conversation Mrs. Obama had with his 17 year-old daughter, claiming the Illinois senator's wife told his daughter not to support Edwards because the spending caps he is subjected to for accepting federal campaign money will seriously hinder his chances in a general election."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/01/elizabeth-edwards-disappointed-with-michelle-obama/
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 10:20 PM
MM-Rita Hayworth
Theda Bara
Clara Bowe
I want to state categorically that those last two were way before my time.
I think Painter meant Jeanne Crain. She'd definitely be on my list.
Posted by: EdVB
| March 29, 2008 10:25 PM
Just reviewing the history of the Edwards Obama relationship.
I don't think any endorsement for Obama is coming.
Elizabeth Edwards thinks he is a holier than thou fraud
who stole all his good ideas from her husband.
I rather doubt she has changed her mind,
Feel free to pass over my posts.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 10:31 PM
Time will tell. But, for now, Obama's flattery through imitation only further proves that Edwards has significantly shaped the Dem debate thus far [AMY DUDLEY].
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2007/08/do_as_i_say.html
I always thought the Edwards scenario where a divided party turns to him was a fantasy. Maybe not.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 10:37 PM
MM...
Thelma Todd
Betty Grable
Carole Lombard
Racquel Welch
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 10:39 PM
Among the examples the Democrat cited was the much talked about moment at the Yearly Kos convention on August 4 when Edwards called on all the candidates in the Democratic field to "not take a dime" from lobbyists. That prompted Sen. Hillary Rodham to say "a lot" of lobbyists represent "real people."
Edwards, moments later, asked for a show of hands from audience members who have a Washington lobbyist working for them. As you might imagine, only a tiny smattering of hands went up.
So how does Obama play into this? The very next day Obama asked an audience in Nevada, "How many people here have a federal lobbyist?"
Why have a copy when you can have the original?
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 10:41 PM
Thanks LL, warren, Patsi, Gidget, unlikely_burrito, sturg, painter and EdVB; you’s guys are the best! That gives me a good list to work. If you think of anymore, let me know. I’ll have to devise a way to share the lucrative residuals with y’all.
Unlikely_burrito; Hillary Clinton? (tiny giggle back at’cha)
painter; do you have any scanned images to share?
EdVB; you are a youngster. Never a doubt.
Posted by: MadMustard
| March 29, 2008 10:41 PM
Theme music for this place?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwc5YSAc-7g
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 10:42 PM
Carole Lombard
Good call Corey
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 10:43 PM
MM......Isadora Duncan?
Posted by: sturgeone | March 29, 2008 10:44 PM
Pretty and funny , KGC.
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 10:46 PM
KGC-
When the race began, while I always supported and worked for HRC, I (mistakenly) thought JE was her biggest challenger and frequently said that it was a win-win because I would be happy with JE too....this week, when Al Gore's name kept surfacing as the "compromise" I keep thinking..."no, no...what about John Edwards"
~G
Posted by: Gidget
| March 29, 2008 10:48 PM
Pretty and funny ,
Yes. I have seen most of her movies and she was great. My Man Godfrey is one of my favorites
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 10:50 PM
MM-Julie London
Dorothy Provine
Julie Newmar (and anyone else, who was ever cast as Stupefyin Jones in L'il Abner. I guess you could say the same for Daisy Mae.)
Posted by: EdVB
| March 29, 2008 10:52 PM
france' current first lady'' she would get my vote
damn lucky french
Posted by: mqw | March 29, 2008 10:54 PM
MM Isabella Rosselini
Posted by: sturgeone | March 29, 2008 10:54 PM
Gidget
If the Super Delegates had complete faith in Obama it would be over. But some unease holds them back.
If there was a large of enough group they could make the argument for a compromise candidate. The ultimate in ranked voting everybody's second choice.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 10:56 PM
Mad -- don't know if you are still checking the board, but if I'm not mistaken, Suzy Parker was considered the first supermodel.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 10:56 PM
What I didnt know till this day is.......that it was Barzini all along.......
DC
Posted by: sturgeone | March 29, 2008 11:00 PM
True believer.
They live South east of Ozark, up on a big ridge and the road follows the ridge out. If high water gives them any trouble then look out for a man called Noah and his boat.
I talked the wife in to taking a vacation or at least a few days away from the blackberry and email. I think I've got her talked into a few days down in southern Mo / northern Arkansas. We are "rocks and sticks" type of people. I told her that 65 down to Ark. 7 along the Buffalo river is a fun day drive with a lot of spots to stop and walk and look around.
Do you have any other ideas that two out of shape hikers might like.
Not into the branson touristy stuff but junk shops might be fun.
Jack
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | March 29, 2008 11:02 PM
"No one chased anyone away or suggested they no longer post. You are free to make your case."
Be damned!!!!!!!!!!!! Let's see if this gets through the Craig Crawford scrutinizing or his sidekicks who seem to monitor if you are a pro-Billary supporter. I’ve posted at least a couple of times only to be told it will be checked before posting. NEVER HAVE SEEN ANY POSTINGS I’VE MADE. One was about the pathological liars called the Clintons detailing many of their lies. Never made it. I kept waiting and waiting…never showed up. It is for damned sure that Craig Crawford is for the bitch that will destroy the Democratic Party before she will go down to defeat and it is for damned sure that Craig Crawford and others will never be ones who ever show up on any of my media resources. Never again. I used to respect you. No more!!
Yes, I was “chased away” because I do not agree with the majority of you Billary posters on here. I say damn you and her to hell.
Maybe this post will make it!! But I don’t bet on it!!
Craig gives these little “Captcha’s” you must copy, but when you copy them exactly as they are shown on screen, you never get posted. I will not “sign up” for any forums or blogs ever again because I did once for years on another forum and had some moron from SW Kansas post under my name. I don’t need to tell you the rest.
How deficient does one need to be mentally to destroy a political party to which they are a part of unless they are the “winner”. She can go to God Damn Hell and I hope she and feel for sure that she and BJ will.
Posted by: Karolenna | March 29, 2008 11:09 PM
MM
http://cosmetic-makeovers.com/2007/08/25/famous-movie-star-faces
You may have seen this but it's famous stars from the silents to now morphing into each other. Also lists names.
Hope it helps.
_G
Posted by: Gidget
| March 29, 2008 11:13 PM
Thanks Corey; Racquel Welch is like EdVB’s Julie Newmar. I hit my forehead and say… “of course!”
Patsi; I had never heard of Suzy Parker before, but she’s a lovely lady.
Posted by: MadMustard
| March 29, 2008 11:13 PM
Adam West once said "Julie Newmar gave me special feelings in my utility belt." LOL!
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 11:18 PM
How deficient does one need to be mentally to destroy a political party to which they are a part of unless they are the “winner”.
Posted by: Live Demonstration | March 29, 2008 11:19 PM
Wow. Just got finished watching "Across the Universe." Awesome movie about love.
But after checking back in here and reading Karolenna's last post, I think I'll lock up all the butcher knives in my house, blow out any candles that are lit and make sure there's not a bucket of pig's blood hanging over my bed. That post was SERIOUSLY channeling Piper Laurie in "Carrie."
Chill out, Karol. Tomorrow's another day.
Night all.
PS...
MM--Piper Laurie
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 29, 2008 11:25 PM
That is a great video Gidget, thanks for the link. I won't be able to top that.
It has a wealth of names.
Posted by: MadMustard
| March 29, 2008 11:25 PM
is korleanna pro obama or clinton ?
can you say valium
Posted by: mqw | March 29, 2008 11:27 PM
Karolenna...
I had a post on autism held and never posted. No big deal. I know there are sometimes reasons for posts being stopped, like three or more links included in them, but other times it seems random or accidental. I wouldn't be too concerned about it, if I were you.
I really don't believe that Craig has chosen your posts to hold and never post out of some malevolence toward you or Obama.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 11:28 PM
As Karolina is posting anon. as I am,
the rejection she maybe feeling isn't something directed just at her. I know she likes to feel special. I think they reject anon. type posts about half the time just to mess with us stubborn/lazy types. At least half of mine are rejected no matter how carefull I type in the letters.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | March 29, 2008 11:29 PM
" I say damn you and her to hell."
Karo, take a pill.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 29, 2008 11:31 PM
I see the narcissistics are in bloom.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 11:34 PM
Jack...
Maybe I'm more careful than you or Karolenna, but I've only had one post held...ever...and I still have to do the captcha thing because I haven't figured out how to get that damned key.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 29, 2008 11:35 PM
Normally, I am just a reader or observer of the informed and mostly civil opinions you guys post.
However, Karoleena's outburst was stunning, and seemingly deranged.
Causing me to merely post:
WOW! Hope she is not near other humans, small animals, nor sharp objects.
Posted by: MC | March 29, 2008 11:41 PM
" I say damn you and her to hell."
Karo, take a pill. "
Hum, lol
That reminds me of my days of youth and indescretion.
I remember a gal who would rant just like Karolina.
Pills and cheap wine would get her started everytime.
Sometimes we would haul her ass to town. Where prop her up at the bar, then get a table near by and watch the fire works as some poor unsuspecting cowboy would hit on her.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | March 29, 2008 11:42 PM
I used to work with a guy named Chad. Chad and I were good friends. Occasionally , Chad would go off on a rant at work in front of the other dozen or so people we worked with. We used these little screwdrivers to pick foam off the back of our parts. A few people I worked with used to put green gauze tape on the handle of the screwdrivers to make the handle softer on their fingers. Chad hated when people did that. One night , Chad went on a rant in front of all of us. He said , "If you're gonna put green tape on the screwdrivers , take it off when your hour rotation is up! I hate it when people put green tape on the screwdrivers! I've gotta waste my time taking the green tape off of the screwdrivers! Think about other people , not just yourself!" When he finished talking , somebody said "What the hell was that about?" One guy said , "I think Chad is wrapped a little too tight." Another guy said , "I don't think he's wrapped at all!" It was pretty funny!
Posted by: Corey
| March 29, 2008 11:43 PM
Thanks HarborWoman not to worry.
I'll take this opportunity to say I admire your courage and compassion.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 29, 2008 11:46 PM
hw
It just sort of randomly accepts my version of its captcha letters or rejects them.
It has accepted the last 3 , it will always take the second attempt.
I'm just too lazy to get a key so if it is something important I copy before posting
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | March 29, 2008 11:54 PM
Jack--
You picked a great place to go hiking (or just walking!). One of the festivals that I cater the kids area for is located in Jasper Ark. on Hwy 7 just down from Harrison. It is absolutely beautiful there. I couldn't think of a better place. As long as you don't mind kissing your A** on the way around the curves getting there!!
If you go to Jasper there are several junk shops there if I remember right. People are great there too. Jasper is one of my favorite festivals that I do. I usually stay around the fishing areas cause my other half loves to fish. There may be bigger mountains around, but the Boston Mountains are among the most beautiful around. I hope you have a great time Jack!!!!!
Posted by: truebeliever
| March 30, 2008 12:00 AM
karolenna's wick's set a bit too high......she's sooting up her chimney.......
How'd ya like to wake up next to that in the morning?
lol
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 12:10 AM
Thanks, kgc. I think Bush was bullshitting us about there being any compassionate conservatives, so I'm going for the compassionate liberal position.
Corey...I think your Chad was hanging...around with only half a load of bricks, or perhaps little green-tape wrapped screwdrivers.
Smart move to save your writing, Jack! It's frustrating to lose posts.
Posted by: harborwoman | March 30, 2008 12:12 AM
I have to admit this new system of posting anon. is an absolute
pain in the butt. Several times I have tried posting using it because it use to be easier than typekey. I kept having to resign in on typekey. I never seem to be able to type the letters in correctly. I have actually not posted a couple of times because it was too frustrating. I'm way too busy to have to fight with something all the time.
Posted by: truebeliever
| March 30, 2008 12:15 AM
if you get the catchpaw rejection, just click on the "back" arrow and then on the "post a comment" and there's yer post.......in all it's glory.......
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 12:15 AM
"hums "We Are Family*
Channeling Robin Williams...
Posted by: Patsi
| March 30, 2008 12:31 AM
Okay , the last part of this video is what we need here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtAW-rA_sgM
Posted by: Corey
| March 30, 2008 12:43 AM
MM
Dolly Parton
Posted by: Julie-Young73 | March 30, 2008 1:57 AM
(Oh boy - I think Karolenna and Maxtrue have been hanging out...)
MM - Uma Thurman
(and nice one with Madonna!)
MM - Angelina Jolie
MM - Julia Roberts
MM - Natalie Portman
And to all . . . buenas noches.
Posted by: warren
| March 30, 2008 4:47 AM
The coals have died down, So I'll just throw some gasoline on the fire.
Obama was the first to play the race card
Sean Wilentz
is the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus professor of history at Princeton University
Quietly, the storm over the hateful views expressed by Sen. Barack Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has blown away the most insidious myth of the Democratic primary campaign. Obama and his surrogates have charged that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has deliberately and cleverly played the race card in order to label Obama the "black" candidate.
Having injected racial posturing into the contest, Obama's "post-racial" campaign finally seems to be all about race and sensational charges about white racism. But the mean-spirited strategy started even before the primaries began, when Obama's operatives began playing the race card - and blamed Hillary Clinton.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/20080330_Obama_was_the_first_to_play_the_race_card.html
Posted by: Bowmanc | March 30, 2008 5:13 AM
nice catch, Mr Bowman
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 6:23 AM
a word or two from a senator who was REALLY against the war from the start:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-robert-byrd/4000-souls_b_93150.html
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 6:28 AM
Bill Press:
True, Clinton hasn't locked up the nomination yet. But neither has Obama. True, even if she wins every delegate in every remaining primary, Clinton can not reach the magic 2024 delegates necessary to secure the nomination. But neither can Obama. True, Obama leads in delegates, the number of states won, and popular vote. But Clinton leads in electoral votes.
Plus, and here's the most important point: It's not over yet. Until it is, we can't be sure of the outcome. And it would be a big mistake to end it prematurely. There's been many a boxing match where one fighter won 14 rounds, only to get knocked out in the 15th.
All these Obama supporters calling on Clinton to drop out aren't helping their candidate, either. They make Obama look like he's afraid of a fight. And they themselves look like a stereotypical bunch of men telling a woman she can't hack it in politics, so she might as well get back in the kitchen.
No, Hillary Clinton should not quit this race. And neither should Barack Obama. They're both great candidates. Either one of them will make a great president. So let the primaries continue and let the voters decide. If Obama ends up the nominee, I'll do handstands on the White House lawn. But only if he wins it, fair and square.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-press/should-obama-drop-out-of-_b_94038.html
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 6:38 AM
Good Morning Craig, Everyone
Great job on Hardball Craig sitting next to Mrs. Greenspan.
Off to Mass with my daughter.
Back later.
Sincerely,
Heather
Posted by: Heather
| March 30, 2008 7:28 AM
It would seem that Sen. Obama stretches the truth again. No connection to Camelot.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/29/AR2008032902031.html?nav=rss_politics/elections
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 7:36 AM
Al Gore weighs in:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/28/gore-dem-race-will-reso_n_93869.html
MURFREESBORO - Former Vice President Al Gore said Thursday that he expects the Democratic nomination fight will "resolve itself" before the party's convention in late August.
Gore told The Associated Press that he sees no urgency in endorsing a presidential candidate.
"What have we got, five months left?" he said in a brief interview after a speech at Middle Tennessee State University.
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 7:38 AM
MM......Josephine Baker
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 7:41 AM
HW
Call me and I'll walk you through getting a permanent Typekey. Since you aren't one of the people who constantly changes their name, having the little key means you never have to fiddle with the magic letters ever again.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 7:42 AM
Jamie,
let's see if MSM will make a case out of this one(probably not)... LOL.
It will fade into obscurity up until the point when (if he gets the nom) faces JmC in the generals...LOL
anyway,
Th dutch press had a nice pice about the media circus in the USA. As one pundit put it: This is exactly why we will not steep to this level. If it were in Holland, Hillary would allready have been the nominee, solely based on totally different media coverage...
There..
Enjoying a read all day in my bed today, occassionally checking the overcast heavens above Amsterdam.
Posted by: Jason | March 30, 2008 7:57 AM
Some magic from 147 years ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YhTwR5qB3E&feature=related
Here is the article about these first sounds
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8739021?source=most_viewed
You tube has several modern versions of "au Claire de Lune" if you would like to hear the folk song.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 8:03 AM
No Lester...No Amy... 8(
And WTF is Brzezinski doing on the Today show?? I like my Sundays to be "snark-free"...thank you very much!!
I think, from being on Morning Joe, her face is in a permanent "sneer"!! Didn't her Mom ever tell her, "watch out or your face will freeze like that"...LOL!!
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| March 30, 2008 8:39 AM
Jason:
Was that an article or on TV there?
Would love to read it - if article - see their perspective.
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 8:40 AM
"Obama spokesman Bill Burton acknowledged yesterday that the senator from Illinois had erred in crediting the Kennedy family with a role in his father's arrival in the United States."
Now...did he err, misspeak or LIE...
I'm sure the press will agree that he erred
If Hillary had done this...it would be a LIE
note the capital letters on LIE - like BIG LIE
ROFL
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 8:43 AM
Now...did he err, misspeak or LIE...
--Wendy
Did anything ever happen with BHO's college law professor claim?
You know...all politicians lie, but usually all lies are pounced upon, by the MSM. This election it is all very one sided.
Posted by: LushIsLinda
| March 30, 2008 8:52 AM
""I think there's no room for hate, and I could not sit and tolerate that kind of language, and especially over a very long period of time," said Philadelphia's newly elected mayor, Michael Nutter, in an interview with ABC News' David Muir.
"If I were in my own church and heard my pastor saying some of those kinds of things," he added, "we'd have a conversation about what's going on here, what is this all about, and then I would have to make my own personal decision about whether or not to be associated or affiliated."
Asked by Muir if he would he have quit Obama's church, Nutter said, "Absolutely." "
So do you think that IF MSM criticizes Nutter for this the same way they criticized Hillary for this, they're being racists?
I mean whenever someone criticizes Obama for anything, they're racists. Will Nutter get the same treatment as Obama for fear of racism? Will be interesting.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4549699&page=1
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 9:03 AM
OK sorry . . . just one more really great quote from Nutter from the story.
""Somehow, someway, for some people there's an automatic assumption that a mayor who is African-American or some other elected official has to support another African-American," Nutter said.
"I thought that when Dr. King said that he wanted people to be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character, I thought that's what he was talking about," Nutter added."
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 9:06 AM
I am sending this on at the request of a friend.
Dear Friend,
John McCain's campaign spending is breaking the law. He elected for public funding when his campaign was having trouble. But now that he is the presumptive nominee, he is, by his campaign's own admission, around $4 million over his legal spending limit.
I just did my part to stop McCain from breaking the law by signing the official FEC complaint against him.
Please help out by adding your name here:
http://action. firedoglake. com/page/petition/mccainfec/kfni
Thanks!
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 30, 2008 9:06 AM
http://action.firedoglake.com/page/petition/mccainfec/kfni
The link again
Posted by: EuroTom
| March 30, 2008 9:07 AM
madmustard
I don't have copies of pictures but I can take pictures of them and put them on a disc and send to you.I have dial up so would take forever to transfer.Live in rural area sohigh speed unavailable.Looking into satelite
Posted by: painter
| March 30, 2008 9:16 AM
LL and Wendy talked about Professor Obama:
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/clintons-tortured-path-to-vict.html#comment-60423
It's an incredible pass he's been given on this. Let's consider another scenario that people may be able to relate with more easily:
If an ensign (the navy equivalent of a second lieutenant) is commanding a rowboat, he is the captain of that vessel and is addressed by that title.
But, if that same ensign then goes to the officers club and applies for a membership card saying "I'm Captain Kool" , he'll either be taken to the loony bin or the brig.
Certainly all the real captains will have a great laugh at Ensign Kool's expense.
Senior Lecturer Obama's situation is like Ensign Kool's. He's a professor in his classroom, but that's where it ends. If he goes to the faculty lunch room and introduces himself as Professor Obama, the real professors in his midst would surely have raised eyebrows at his presumptuousness.
In my eyes, he has perpetrated a misrepresentation of significant proportions. .
Posted by: Flatus
| March 30, 2008 9:23 AM
If you watch the video of the Nutter interview...it ends by him saying..."This is the United States of America. I can support anyone I want to."
Love that!
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 9:26 AM
Thanks anyway painter, I'm faced with that same pricey connection option myself.
Posted by: MadMustard
| March 30, 2008 9:32 AM
While I do believe his "Professor" lie is among one of his minor lies...more resume padding really...we all do it so I can forgive him. I will say that I have worked at Law Schools most of my professional career and i can tell you that the title of "Professor" is a BIG DEAL and people get very touchy about it.
We don't have lecturers at the Law School I'm currently at--we have
Adjuncts (guest lecturer)
Clinical Professors (teach and run clinics)
Associate Professors (probably more like a regular lecturer)
and Professors (full Professor with tenure)
I can tell you the Associates are ALWAYS trying to get the PR people to drop the "Associate" from their titles...helps them look better. Our PR folks won't do it because...as noted by Flatus...it ticks the full Professors off.
It is quite the interesting dance having more to do with ego than anything.
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 9:33 AM
OBAMA's mistatements
--"THE FACT CHECKER" STRIKES - WashPost A1 - "Obama Overstates Kennedys' Role in
Helping His Father," By Michael Dobbs: "Addressing civil rights activists in Selma, Ala.
, a year ago, Sen. Barack Obama traced his 'very existence' to the generosity of the
Kennedy family, which he said paid for his Kenyan father to travel to America on a
student scholarship and thus meet his Kansan mother. The Camelot connection has become
part of the mythology surrounding Obama's bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.
… It is a touching story — but the key details are either untrue or grossly oversimplified.
"Contrary to Obama's claims in speeches in January at American University and in Selma
last year, the Kennedy family did not provide the funding for a September 1959 airlift
of 81 Kenyan students to the United States that included Obama's father. According to
historical records and interviews with participants, the Kennedys were first approached
for support for the program nearly a year later, in July 1960. The family responded with
a $100,000 donation, most of which went to pay for a second airlift in September 1960.
"Obama spokesman Bill Burton acknowledged yesterday that the senator from Illinois had
erred in crediting the Kennedy family with a role in his father's arrival in the United States.
He said the Kennedy involvement in the Kenya student program apparently 'started 48 years
ago, not 49 years ago as Obama has mistakenly suggested in the past.' "
Obama LAUNDRY LIST OF LIES. 1.) Selma Got Me Born - LIAR, your parents
felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth,
as Selma was in 1965. 2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - LIAR, he was
a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan
Government. 3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - LIAR, he was part
of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had 4.)
My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - LIAR, your cousin Raila
Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election
in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first widespread violence in decades. 5.) My Grandmother
Has Always Been A Christian - LIAR, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according
to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn?t allow her to have been one
of 14 wives to 1 man. 6.) My Name is African Swahili - LIAR, your name is Arabic and ?Baraka?
(from which Barack came) means ?blessed? in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so
is Obama. 7.) I Never Practiced Islam - LIAR, you practiced it daily at school, where you
were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 25 years,until your wife made you change,
so you could run for office. 8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - LIAR, you were
registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check
your own book). 9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - LIAR, not one teacher says you could speak
the language. 10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience - LIAR,
you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn?t even speak the language. What did you
learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.
add the denials of him hearing rev wright's sermons and him being a law professor ...where is the MSM
on all these "mistatements"....
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 9:35 AM
on second thought I can send them one at a time.Give me your e-mail
Posted by: painter
| March 30, 2008 9:38 AM
Wendy
On C-Span this morning, Chuck Todd mentioned that word is leaking out about John Edwards reaction to Sen. Obama. While Edwards has not endorsed one of the other, he found Sen. Clinton to be substantive with detailed plans. He found Sen. Obama to be glib and shallow with a hodge podge of thrown together items picked up from others.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 9:48 AM
tz - LOL -
go ahead and add I don't take PAC/Lobbyist/Special Interest money
We know he has an active campaign to get donations from "family members" of PAC and Lobbyists in effect taking laundered PAC/Lobbyist money
Also, as of his last filings, he has now taken more money from the Financial special interest (Securities & Investments and Commercial Banks and the like - you know the ones he blamed for our economic and housing meltdown the other day) than either Clinton or McCain
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 9:49 AM
David Brooks?
Permit me a polite guffaw.........
Uh.....make that a horselaugh.
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 9:51 AM
Jamie:
Well I'm glad someone else sees the truth besides us. Good to know Edwards has no rose colored glasses on. I hope that's true as it would be funny.
It would also be funny if he endorsed Hillary and used those exact words in doing it.
I know no politician would ever do that...but it would be funny.
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 9:53 AM
Hey Jamie:
Are you still watching C-Span? did you just hear that last caller ticked off about the media.
"She says the media sold us Bush in 2000, they sold us the Iraq war and now they're selling us Obama."
ROFL
Good point!
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 9:59 AM
wendy
too bad the MSM wont do their job as rest assured the GOP will
if gore or kerry had her guts and fight we never would have ended up with GW
as a 67 year old male i really am proud of a woman who has no quit in her .....i cant understand why she dosnt get 95 percent of the female vote .....they may never get this chanch for a woman to be president for a long time
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:00 AM
I'm beginning to think that maybe a shark has been jumped and a certain "coulda been a contenda" is in line for a one-way ticket to Palookaville. If he managed to squirm into the VP slot he might still come out ok.
I could be wong......
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 10:04 AM
Remember how women got the vote
The women were innocent and defenseless. And by the end of the night, they were barely alive. Forty prison guards wielding clubs and their warden's blessing went on a rampage against the 33 helpless women wrongly convicted of "obstructing sidewalk traffic."
They beat Lucy Burn, chained her hands to the cell bars above her head and left her hanging for the night, bleeding and gasping for air. They hurled Dora Lewis into a dark cell, smashed her head against an iron bed and knocked her out cold. Her cellmate, Alice Cosu, thought Lewis was dead and suffered a heart attack. Additional affidavits describe the guards grabbing, dragging, beating, choking, slamming, pinching, twisting and kicking the women.
Thus unfolded the "Night of Terror" on Nov. 15, 1917, when the warden at the Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia ordered his guards to teach a lesson to the suffragists imprisoned there because they dared to picket Woodrow Wilson's White House for the right to vote.
For weeks, the women's only water came from an open pail. Their food--all of it colorless slop--was infested with worms. When one of the leaders, Alice Paul, embarked on a hunger strike, they tied her to a chair, forced a tube down her throat and poured liquid into her until she vomited. She was tortured like this for weeks until word was smuggled out to the press.
So, refresh my memory. Some women won't vote this year because--why, exactly? We have carpool duties? We have to get to work? Our vote doesn't matter? It's raining?
Last week, I went to a sparsely attended screening of HBO's new movie "Iron Jawed Angels." It is a graphic depiction of the battle these women waged so that I could pull the curtain at the polling booth and have my say. I am ashamed to say I needed the reminder.
There was a time when I knew these women well. I met them in college--not in my required American history courses, which barely mentioned them, but in women's history class. That's where I found the irrepressibly brave Alice Paul. Her large, brooding eyes seemed fixed on my own as she stared out from the page. Remember, she silently beckoned. Remember.
I thought I always would. I registered voters throughout college and law school, worked on congressional and presidential campaigns until I started writing for newspapers. When Geraldine Ferraro ran for vice president, I took my 9-year-old son to meet her. "My knees are shaking," he whispered after shaking her hand. "I'm never going to wash this hand again."
All these years later, voter registration is still my passion. But the actual act of voting had become less personal for me, more rote. Frankly, voting often felt more like an obligation than a privilege. Sometimes, it was even inconvenient.
My friend Wendy, who is my age and studied women's history, saw the HBO movie, too. When she stopped by my desk to talk about it, she looked angry. She was. With herself "One thought kept coming back to me as I watched that movie," she said. "What would those women think of the way I use--or don't use--my right to vote? All of us take it for granted now, not just younger women, but those of us who did seek to learn." The right to vote, she said, had become valuable to her "all over again."
HBO will run the movie periodically before releasing it on video and DVD. I wish all history, social studies and government teachers would include the movie in their curriculum. I want it shown on Bunko night, too, and anywhere else women gather. I realize this isn't our usual idea of socializing, but we are not voting in the numbers that we should be, and I think a little shock therapy is in order. It is jarring to watch Woodrow Wilson and his cronies try to persuade a psychiatrist to declare Alice Paul insane so that she could be permanently institutionalized. And it is inspiring to watch the doctor refuse. Alice Paul was strong, he said, and brave. That didn't make her crazy. The doctor admonished the men: "Courage in women is often mistaken for insanity."
Reprinted from Houston Independent Media
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:05 AM
from Joke Klein
about Obama's failure to woo Edwards
"This flies in the face of Obama's public image: the natural politician, whose emotional intelligence is off the charts, whose first instinct is conciliation. Not good news for Dr. O...and all the more reason why he's going to have to (re)prove himself in settings other than arena rallies. He needs to re-establish his ability to make a one-on-one human connection, especially with working class voters. He has a Pennsylvania bus tour coming up this week...and perhaps we'll see more from him then. "
Gee Joke you might consider the media got it wrong from the start and promoted a false public image and this is the real Obama - as Elizabeth Edwards said
a holier than thou fraud who stole all his good ideas from her husband.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 10:05 AM
"i cant understand why she dosnt get 95 percent of the female vote .....they may never get this chanch for a woman to be president for a long time"
TZ - I don't understand it either. But I think that's just how women are ROFL. Especially since we have one of such incredible quality. Great ideas, smartest person in the room, dedicated to public service and an incredible track record...and as we've learned...a gutsy, resilient person.
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 10:09 AM
wendy
if women young and old either see's that movie or at least reads that article ...just maybe they will wake up and stick to their gender
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:12 AM
painter that’s okay, you and I need to use our connection time as a valuable resource. I bet I’ll be able to secure enough suitable images. Thanks for the offer.
Posted by: MadMustard
| March 30, 2008 10:13 AM
doing my own informal polling
obama will never be a legitimate nominee
in most people's view'' no matter what the outcome of this fiasco they call a primary
americans do have a sense of fair play. this thing seems to have been rigged from the start' in favor of obama
Posted by: mqw | March 30, 2008 10:16 AM
TZ
That was quite a laundry list. It looks as if it is made up of true, half true, twisted and false (as in discredited as urban legends) statements. This is a disservice to those who back Sen. Clinton, and I would like to see citations of some sort for each of those items other than just traveling around as one more email.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 10:17 AM
TZ - I'm going to see if it is OnDemand and check it out.
Frankly, my view, is that the boys have had their chance and it's time to let the girls have it - the fact that we have such and incredible (perhaps even once in a lifetime) woman running for President should be all we need to know.
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 10:17 AM
Tz It consumes less space if you link to items rather than copy and paste. A link to that article about the women's vote was put up yesterday.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 10:21 AM
John Kerry........horselaugh # 2
Lieberman........horselaugh # 3.
it's been quite a morning for humor.
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 10:21 AM
Ann Kormblutt of the Washington Post (Compost)
thinks it is perectly ok to repeat annon, statements about Clinton especially ones that hold her up to ridicule
I wonder how Ms Kornblutt will feel when people start repeating all the annon things written about her on bathroom walls make in into the mainstream
I read that she is a moron who has all her columns written by the Obama campaign and she wipes up the thrill on Chris Matthews leg
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 10:22 AM
jamie
most of the content came from his books and statements he's made......i got the list from politico
also add "rezko is like thousands of donors and im not that friendly with hin"
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:22 AM
its a shame the sexism is so bad in this country...the bashing this woman has taken is pathetic......for the life of me i cant understand why she keeps going.....
wendy: blacks were alowed to vote 40 years before women
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:26 AM
Wendy
Iron Jawed Angels is now being shown in theaters (mainly art houses). It isn't on the HBO documentary list as yet.
My blog has a picture from the beating that the article describes. http://jdurward.blogspot.com
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 10:28 AM
GOOD FOR YOU JAMIE
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:32 AM
TZ
"most of the content came from his books and statements he's made......i got the list from politico"
I was talking about citations that disproved those statements. Are those on politico as well?
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 10:33 AM
Karo -- if you are still around....is this the message you are getting?
"Text entered was wrong. Try again."
For several days I got that despite the fact that I was only trying to post the name of my favorite Brooklyn Dodger! I finally got on Typekey or whatever that deal is where you stay signed in.....I do understand your frustration.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 30, 2008 10:34 AM
i sent the article to arianna huffington .....what a joke its probably already in her shredder
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:34 AM
jamie
i didnt see any one trying to disprove them
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:36 AM
jamie
most of the obama supporters were answering "so what" and then went on to bash clinton
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:39 AM
This is an instant classic
this girl has been recording the Obama campaign shenanigans in the TX caucus. This includes the Obama campaign calling Hillary's delegates to confuse them about their delegate status.
Stick with this one to the end when she calls the guy out...worth it.
Obama and his supporters should hide their heads in shame over this video evidence...hahahahahahaha
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nROKBU_KlZw
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 10:42 AM
so far......the voices of Gore and Edwards are thundering in their silence.......
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 10:44 AM
jamie
the trouble with pasting a link not everyone clicks and reads .....seeing it in the thread at least they may read it ....but i do agree with you a link does save a lot sapce
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:46 AM
Sturg
Al Gore said today (or yesterday) let the primaries go on.
But there was no reporting on that because Ann Kornblutt had her nead up Tweety's butt and didn't hear it. Oh and it's a sourced statement and she only repeats annon gossip
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 10:46 AM
I see what Al Gore said as defending his right to silence.......yep........
Al Gore weighs in:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/28/gore-dem-race-will-reso_n_93869.html
MURFREESBORO - Former Vice President Al Gore said Thursday that he expects the Democratic nomination fight will "resolve itself" before the party's convention in late August.
Gore told The Associated Press that he sees no urgency in endorsing a presidential candidate.
"What have we got, five months left?" he said in a brief interview after a speech at Middle Tennessee State University.
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 7:38 AM
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 10:49 AM
TZ If you go on to Snopes and enter "Obama" in the search, you get report after report of the false items that are circulating around in emails. His campaign can't spend too much time denying all of the nonsense everytime a new variation comes up.
I don't mind gigging him on the untruths such as the Kennedy relationship, Civil Rights March stuff, or father's poverty, but the Moslem connection is pretty thin as he had no real relationship with his father's family until a single visit in his late teens.
He wasn't raised in any religion as his mother's family was pretty much agnostic so he doesn't seem to have had any church relationship at all until his marriage.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 10:50 AM
lushlinda said, "No Lester...No Amy... 8(
And WTF is Brzezinski doing on the Today show?? I like my Sundays to be "snark-free"...thank you very much!!
I think, from being on Morning Joe, her face is in a permanent "sneer"!! Didn't her Mom ever tell her, "watch out or your face will freeze like that"...LOL!!
yet, here you are being as much of a snark as you accuse Mika of....
Yo soy un demócrata amarillo del perro.
Yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!
Posted by: yo soy Horsedooty!
| March 30, 2008 10:52 AM
Women are their own worst enemies.A lot of them are jealous of another woman doing good.One reason they are not coming out in droves for Hillary
Posted by: painter
| March 30, 2008 10:57 AM
Wendy isn't pretending to be a journalist.
Posted by: Poynter Fan | March 30, 2008 10:57 AM
jamie
jamie
i dont believe the muslim part .....but no one seems to know what he was ....the only trhing i cant find out if his middle name was given at birth or was taken after he dropped BARRY and went to barrack.......but some of those "mistatements" ive heard him say in debates and on the stump.......my point was why hasnt the MSM vetted this guy the same way clinton is vetted ....everything she or her family says is scrutinized and obama gets a free pass on almost everything
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 10:58 AM
More TX shenanigans
enjoy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEMSJ4EDbHI
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 11:02 AM
He was named Barack at birth. He used Barry in high school to try to blend in with a more "American" sounding name.
You are right that there has been very little vetting of many of his claims and statements while Sen. Clinton has had every examined in detail normally reserved for clinical slides under a microscope.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 11:04 AM
Well...I'm glad this is how we pick our nominee
cheating, manipulating, voice of the few
this is all just dandy
Democrats...not so democratic...
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 11:05 AM
jamie
the problem is what has the GOP have on him that the MSM may have also and if things come out in the general...he could be destroyed and the dems will be left with a flawed nominee because they didnt vett him
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 11:09 AM
"Iron Jawed Angels"
Truly a powerful film. Warren -- you should watch this.
Posted by: Patsi
| March 30, 2008 11:09 AM
he was vetted??
the MSM sat on the wright sermons for a year ....if they came out when they should have he wouldnt be in the position he is now ne would be in his senate office
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 11:21 AM
TZ, That's why in 2002 Rezko out of blue sky gave money to one of Obama's old Columbia buddies, Khadili. This is the "not really friends" network...LOL. And this happened while Khadlili's organization, AAAN, just happened to asking for money from Woods Fund that Obama was a board member (1999 - 2002). Are we so stupid that we can't see Obama was a key nexus in all this? Where is that nice Jewish friend from CColumbia days Obama introduced to Rezko and directed to Woods Fund? Why KHadili? What Obama is worried about is that AAAN is linked to Cairs, the group Al-Hanooti was involved with. Of course, Al-Hanooti was just arrested for spying for Saddam and getting money to the three Amigos ( 3 US senators) to travel to Iraq where they never mentioned to Saddam a word about inspections (which is the reason they later defended their "mission"). I suppose it is a matter of time before the Press egged on by reputable blogs investigates the connections between Auchi and Al-Hanooti. The Press will explore the links between those charities and political money men. Follow the money.
It is also interesting the Press has not made any connections yet to the friends of Obama that are anti-Zionist and the associations connected to his Pastoral friends such as Wright, Meeks, Jackson and their buddy Farrakhan who they refuse to reject, denounce or oppose. It is clear that Khadili, who helped invite Ahmadinejad to Columbia has not renounced his earlier PLO position when he was a spokesperson. He just switch from the PLO to Hamas...LOL
As Jamie showed two days ago, AAAN collaborates with Cairs. I showed exactly what Cairs is all about. They oppose the existence of Israel. Even Khadili's AAAN wants Israel to return to the pre-1948 border...LOL. Now for those who think this story is just that, a story that will not resonate. Here is what HAMAS is up to
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1206446102177&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
NOw who wants to associated with this running for President? Is it fair to link Obama to this IN ANY WAY?Well, this is the kind of thinking that Khadili supports collaborating with groups who have already had members arrested, deported or indicted. These groups have raised millions for Hamas. I posted a link here to a letter circulating on the Trinity newsletter that days later was a story on 360 over at CNN. It echoed the views now an exhibit of hatred in GAZA. Obama can act like this is news to him and now say Rezko, Khadili and others were not really close friends. He can distance himself from his Pastor of twent y years, but either Obama is an idiot not worthy for high office or he is lying. You make the pick. The story will grow because there is substance that will surface, not because of a witch hunt like Hillary's Foster conspiracy.
Obama talks of mean and nasy people in the world and then manages to associate with anti-American rhetoric in his Church and HAMAS supporters that go back to his Columbia days. He did not reject Khadili, nor did he ever have problems because Rezko got money from Auchi. Is that clear? Note some rejection by Holywood of Obama over these anti-Jewish associations. David S switched to Hillary.
Finally, Obama supporters are probably sad this morning. It appears that Sadr has blinked. In the first really bold move by Maliki, Sadr has called back his fighters. There is a bounty hanging over his head and perhaps he should take a vacation again in Iran. From the AP this morning.
(BAGHDAD(AP) The Iraqi government has welcomed an order by Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to pull his fighters off the streets.
Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh told Iraqi state TV in an interview that the decision is "positive and responsive."
Sunday's offer was contained in a nine-point statement issued by his headquarters in Najaf.
Al-Sadr also called on the government to stop what he calls haphazard raids and release security detainees who haven't been charged.
Violent clashes have broken out over a government crackdown in the southern city of Basra.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
BAGHDAD (AP) _ Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr is offering to pull his fighters off the streets of Basra and other cities if the government halts raids against his followers and releases prisoners held without charge.
The offer is contained in a nine-point statement issued by his headquarters in Najaf.
Al-Sadr is demanding that the government issue a general amnesty and release all detainees. The statement said he also "disavows" anyone who carries weapons and targets government institutions, charities and political party offices.
There was no immediate comment from the government.) AP
So, news media was wrong over the weekend that Bush's hopes were going to bust and that McCain is a fool. It was amazing how quickly media was salivating over the prospects. Frankly, media is pathetic as objective journalism. If Obama really had a target out on those mean and nasty people, he would stand tough against Iran, denounce FARC as a terror group, end friendships (not a dialogue) with HAMAS supporters and stop hiding behind race to defelct reasonable public rejection of anti-America, antii- white and anti-Jewish trash spewing forth from Cairs, AAAN, the friends of Khadili and Wright, his church, Meeks, the circle of buddies that Jesse and Farrakhan hang out with.
For those who say my comments are "just about associations", how can it be that a candidate America knows little about is not defined and clarified by the firends, mentors, supporters, advisors he has kept for the last twenty years? Why has this particular and problematic circle appeared and not a more benign one? Did the media or the Republicans invent this web? So let's be honest. When Michelle exaggerates her life's story and says some pretty bad things, or when Obama's advisors say some questionable things, it feeds the suspicion created by Obama's tangle of associations he actually elevates in his first two books. This is why many have connected his advisors policy histories to the anti-Israel stuff coming from some of Obama's :former" friends. This is exactly what Nader was talking about. Obama was very pro-Palestinian up to his run for President. He created a story to build is campaign rhetoric around and brought this tangled web of associations and disturbing ideas into the public arena. Now, when this whole sales pitch takes fire, he throws his Grandma under the bus, pretends he has no knowledge, or no real bonds. I guess he is hoping he can spin his way out of a hole he created and get more to drink up.
If we suspend reason, fail to investigate troubling associations and collaborations (yes money was involved with Rezko, Auchi and Woods Fund), then we can't bitch when the shit hits the fan. Liberals ought to be tired of pretenders, poor judgment, bad credibility and selective principles. Ideals, character and judgment, record, policy and history should define who Democrats vote for. When Obama says he would return us to traditional foreign polcies of Reagan and Bush1, I must laugh. If you don't see the BS Obama is spouting, then don't cry when the Emperor Has No Clothes.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 30, 2008 11:21 AM
Wendy, tz, Jamie\
With regard to your comments about the journey of women to obtain the right to vote & the current situation women have been presented with--to either vote for Hillary or Obama, there was an informative (but not decisive) article in the wash. post that discussed the issue of sexism vs. racism facing women (white & black).
The difficulty of answering the problem created by Obama's entering the race has bothered me from the outset. At that time it was clear that Hillary was running (an historic event to say the least), so he and/or his backers advised him to get in to force another choice (no less historic) presenting the dem. electorate with the rapidly approaching trainwreck. A true cynic, I continue to maintain that the Clinton-haters among the party's elite created this monumental disaster & the dem. party will be harmed for a long time as a result.
The added complicity of the media in undercutting Hillary at every opportunity has only inflamed the situation.
I do not believe there will be a moment of re-conciliation that will allow the anger that has developed on both sides to subside.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/23/AR2008032301954_3.html?sid=ST2008032400084
Posted by: Coreen | March 30, 2008 11:26 AM
We'll come back to those cat-in-the-bag candidates later, but first let's look at what we do know about this candidate. We don't know much, as the mainstream media are working as his cheerleader and campaign manager, and are not vetting him at all. Instead, despite damning information that is bubbling to the surface, the mainstream media are giving him a free pass.
http://www.thebulletin.us/site/index.cfm?newsid=19355969&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=8
Vetted? I guess the news hasn't gotten to the people in Pennsylvania. No wonder he wants to stop the campaigns.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 11:26 AM
Serendipity is a wonderful thing. While researching events in 1860, I came across this little nugget of information:
The Saud family moved to exile in Kuwait when the Ottoman Empire conquered much of Arabia
Things seem to have been thoroughly screwed in that part of the world for centuries.
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 11:32 AM
Oh Bri Bri there you go again...
tz...I wouldn't put the effort into typing about it...
Lil Bri Bri's comment only reflects poorly on him...not those it was written about.
;-)
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 11:35 AM
AMEN WENDY
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 11:37 AM
Senor Horsedooty,
You will like this little tidbit from 1860
In Mexico City the Hosteria de Santo Domingo restaurant began serving Chile en Nogada, a chili dish that displays the national colors (green, white & red).
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 11:39 AM
Bush Administration: Raw arrogance and Incompetence.
--Chuck Hagel
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 11:40 AM
Chile en Nogada, a chili dish that displays the national colors (green, white & red).
I took a cooking class and we made this It's wonderful but you have to peel the brown skin off walnut pieces to make it. A lot of work
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 11:42 AM
heres a tidbit
in 1924 the dems cast 103 ballots at their convention
results: cooledge was elected
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 11:42 AM
I aint peelin' no danged walnut.....
Posted by: sturgeone | March 30, 2008 11:44 AM
see this link about the Law Professor title ascribed to BHO from University of Chicago Law School.
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html
Wendy said this up thread, "While I do believe his "Professor" lie is among one of his minor lies...more resume padding really...we all do it so I can forgive him. I will say that I have worked at Law Schools most of my professional career and i can tell you that the title of "Professor" is a BIG DEAL and people get very touchy about it.
We don't have lecturers at the Law School I'm currently at--we have
Adjuncts (guest lecturer)
Clinical Professors (teach and run clinics)
Associate Professors (probably more like a regular lecturer)
and Professors (full Professor with tenure)
I can tell you the Associates are ALWAYS trying to get the PR people to drop the "Associate" from their titles...helps them look better. Our PR folks won't do it because...as noted by Flatus...it ticks the full Professors off.
It is quite the interesting dance having more to do with ego than anything"
Yo soy un demócrata amarillo del perro.
Yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!
Posted by: yo soy Horsedooty!
| March 30, 2008 11:48 AM
Max
I completely agree...the hypocrisy is endless...the Obama lies are endless. You know I agree 100%
It's just that when it comes to Brye, I don't think HE is worth the effort.
Continuing to vet Obama is worth the effort and that is my focus.
If I'm going to get carpal tunnel, it should at least be for something worthwhile. Scrolling by Brye's ramblings is much easier.
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 11:52 AM
thanks jamie when she said, "
Senor Horsedooty,
You will like this little tidbit from 1860
In Mexico City the Hosteria de Santo Domingo restaurant began serving Chile en Nogada, a chili dish that displays the national colors (green, white & red)."
Posted by: Jamie Author Profile Page | March 30, 2008 11:39 AM
I have heard about this and seen pictures of it but never had the pleasure. Maybe some day.
Yo soy un demócrata amarillo del perro.
Yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!
Posted by: yo soy Horsedooty!
| March 30, 2008 11:56 AM
Horsedooty
They are supporting their guy - if you go by what they wrote...the Senior Lecturer is equivalent to the Associate Professor at the school I work at...and believe me...as I said earlier...there is a distinction - the Professors will tell you that.
It appears for them lecturer is the equivalent to our Adjuncts.
But then again, who cares. My boss changed his title from Director of IT to CTO because it made his resume look better...the Dean of our school asked one day..."when did he become the CTO?" Of course...they didn't stop making him use that title either.
ROFL
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 11:57 AM
Just for the record
Yesterday the first name calling (bully) was done by an Obama supporter
and today the first name calling (stupid) was done by an Obama supporter
If anyone is keeping score
;-)
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 12:00 PM
well people i have to go play a poker tournament ....its been a pleasure to post and read on this blog and all but one are pretty classy people who debate without personal attacks ....have a great day
Posted by: tz | March 30, 2008 12:08 PM
BTW
I also completely agree with you about moving back to a centrist viewpoint away from the polarizing extremes of the extreme right (Bush) or the extreme left (the Obamaramas). The centrist view is the true position of compromise for an extremely diverse country.
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 12:18 PM
Hey Brye
I got it handled...but thanks.
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 12:19 PM
Max
shoot me off an e-mail
acousticgtrwmc
gmail
Posted by: Wendy!
| March 30, 2008 12:24 PM
Racist must mean something else.
Posted by: Ima Racist II | March 30, 2008 12:29 PM
New thread. It's lonely upstairs.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 12:31 PM
testing
Posted by: harborwoman
| March 30, 2008 12:32 PM
woohooo harbor has joined the Key Club
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 12:36 PM
Max
Simmer down , why are you so hot?
The negative news out of Ohio , that of Camp Hillary not paying creditors is a worrying sign.....liquidity crisis
Is this the beginning of the end of the long movie ... "The Wizard of Oz"?
There will be a private dinner hosted by Brangelina for Hillary and Barry , they will kiss and make up and the dems will heal the breach by Denver.
Posted by: George | March 30, 2008 12:40 PM
NEW THREAD
Posted by: Jamie
| March 30, 2008 12:42 PM
Posted by: George | March 30, 2008 12:40 PM
More Obama lies. More of the she doesn't have any money baloney. Big Fat Liars.
Yet an Obama flak acknowledged Clinton does have the money to go forward. Liar Liar Liar
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker
| March 30, 2008 12:51 PM
Max
Sadr and Maliki are cut from the same cloth!
They are performing a well choreographed dance ...."The Musharraf Dance"
Posted by: George | March 30, 2008 12:51 PM
Post A Comment