Nice video, Craig. I think Sen Obama will probably have trouble coming up with a national security staff with the same level of professional qualifications/gravitas as Mrs Clinton.
She may be able to pickup a couple of the peacocks, but these aren't the types that he or the country need.
Maybe he could get a few retired professors from a couple of the national war colleges to camp out with him as a genuine public service. That group includes some very bright people.
He/we don't need a bunch of uniformed jerks trying to push their own radical agendas. Unfortunately, he probably doesn't have enough understanding of the technical aspects of warfare to know when he's being given a snow job.
So campers, whaddaya think - with six weeks between Mississippi and PA, think we could get back to discussing and arguing issues instead of throwing invectives and accusations of stupidity at each other? Could get awfully boring around here.
All she has to do is put up a commercial with the key lines from her China speech in a commercial and combine the women issues with the trade issues ... one whale of a commercial.
I was thinking about that Dream Ticket and decided Sen. Obama is nice and all that, but I want Stephanie Tubb Jones. She basically told Noron to shut up because she couldn't answer a question if Noron kept talking.
"I'm pretty, I don't have to be polite or shut up about MY opinion" just got set back on her vapid little heels by a beautiful, strong, brilliant woman. Hillary Clinton is darn lucky to have her for a spokesperson.
Hi Craig,
I like your kitchen. haha
I am going to my FIRST democratic meeting tonight at 7. What should I expect? I have never gone to any political meeting in my entire 67 year life.
This should be interesting. I am setting the ground work for a potential run for a state office. How is that for high hopes. From psychologist/counselor to state rep. haha
Nice video technique! I like it, but it may add to the legend started by Imus after you had been on, saying "I had Craig Crawford on...he's about half a wack-bag..."
Joe the Communist may not have been watching & listening, but I have, and it's no secret Imus of WABC is not the Imus of WFAN.
Remember when Bernard and I-man made the jokes about Limbaugh's Viagra issues , when Limbaugh had customs issues with multiple bottles of the pills?
That was funny, but now all Imus does is give daily praise to Limbaugh and Hannity, and we get multiple blessings from St. Imus placed on Brit Hume's head.
Now, we also get jacked-up on the "fairness" of FOX News...how I-man NEVER notices any bias or right-slanting of the news.
One of the reasons I loved Imus of WFAN was that he was a live-wire, independent as a registered repugg could be, his poking fun of pols was great television. Now he pushes FOX News as "great" and sucks up to the aforementioned reactionary blowhards.
I do applaud his trying to "be better", but Karrith is just not funny. Tony was just hilarious today with his commentary which Imus said was "genius"---it WAS genius material, I loved it. Karrith is just not funny and worse, she cannot deliver comedy. As she is about to hit a punchline, she invariably stumbles and stammers and ruins the bit. So he failed there in selecting a quality comedian.
Carl Jeffers of LA is a brilliant pol-analyst and he should be on more often. The woman named Debra (is it Dickinson?whatever) was controversial but interesting.
Jeffers challenged Imus to stand by his promises to incorporate race dialect and Imus is doing much better, but he could do even more.
He praises the great John Lewis, who happens to be my personal US political hero , but I don't think he ever has had him on.
My point, in condensed version: Imus has changed, praising the right and NOT making fun of them, and that is why I became an I-man fan in the first place. I have to record and FF a lot of the show now---I cannot listen to that goddam Brit Hume or any of those assholes from FOX Noise.
A few more random questions to contemplate as we stare down the barrel of the next seven weeks:
--More debates? How many and where?
--Edwards delegates? Will he want to sit on them all the way to August? Or is now the better time to play kingmaker?
--Hillary tax returns? I can't imagine she won't be hammered on these in direct proportion to the hammering of Obama on Revko.
--Talking heads? What will they find to talk about to fill the yawning gap of cable time? So will they have to start manufacturing the news to an even greater extent than they have to this point?
--Bill Clinton? Does he just go back to New York for awhile?
--Hillary's ground game. Does this seven-week respite give her the opportunity to undo her big mistake and actually build an organization in places like North Carolina?
--Seven weeks? Jeez. Do you know how long that is? Will we all survive it?
hi pogo...no biking yet...it's been weeks on end here, and last night we got another deep layer of snow...my stoop is a two-steps-up stoop, and the entire porch had about 4 inches of snow, and it broke my back shoveling the walk...it felt like a foot of new snow but I didn't even check...I bought a new bike Saturday, on sale, nothing fancy, just a cheapo to use for running my dog.
Pogo,
thank you thank you. Do you think black jeans would work or do I need to dress up? Remember i live in Wooster, Ohio small town. The office is a small place in the middle of town.
Jamie, didja ever see anyone so HAPPY in your life as Tubbs-Jones was in the victory party last night in Columbus?
She and Governor Ted really delivered the vote, good job, Madame Representative and Governor Ted!
Carol, I've been to Wooster, and Mrs. Pogo, her ex- and their daughter all went to college there - I'm trying to recall, is there a traffic light there or just a 3 way flasher? I'd think jeans should be fine, if not a little too formal. Maybe wear snow boots and you should feel perfectly comfortable. Of course at 67, I'm betting you really don't care much, but then again, you never get a second chance to make a first impression and wouldn't want to screw pup your political careeer before it really begins (of course that first impression will probably be on people you've known for years, so it might be a little late to worry about that anyway).
Ok It's obvious I did something wrong when I tried to repost my comment from the last thread but I have no Idea how that happened. When I sent the post it was just mine but when I looked at it it was obviously something else. I am so....SO ...sorry,
Carol, I've been to Wooster, and Mrs. Pogo, her ex- and their daughter all went to college there - I'm trying to recall, is there a traffic light there or just a 3 way flasher? I'd think jeans should be fine, if not a little too formal. Maybe wear snow boots and you should feel perfectly comfortable. Of course at 67, I'm betting you really don't care much, but then again, you never get a second chance to make a first impression and wouldn't want to screw pup your political careeer before it really begins (of course that first impression will probably be on people you've known for years, so it might be a little late to worry about that anyway).
Pogo,
LOL well, we have a few lights. haha
Ok I will wear my jeans. Yes, I have met several because of helping with Hillary's campaign. In fact they encouraged me to go to the meeting. So we will see.
This will be a new chapter in my life. I am very young looking and at heart so maybe I would be a good candidate for something lolol I was on a local school board for 8 years. In fact I was the first woman on that school board. They were all farmers.
err, don't know how I got a double on the last post- I only submitted it one. I SWEAR.
And Carol, that should have been "screw up your political career" - an unfortunate (but oddly funny) typo.
I guess Truebeliever really liked the last thread and comments.LOL Maybe Craig could scrub it.
Well, Li'lPogo called needs sustenance - they had spaghetti at school for lunch, and since he was home sick yesterday after eating spaghetti, he wasn't particulary interested. Everone keep it between the lines.
Don't fret. These things happen. Something like this has happened before......well....not exactly like this, but since you are authentic, maybe you just had an authentic technical moment. ;0)
Come to think of it, I think True has hit on a great punishment for Bart Simpson: Make him transcribe all of our crawfordslister comments on a blackboard over and over again.
it's ok, truebeliever, all scrubbed and fixed now.
fyi: easy method for posting link to any past comment -- just click the date and time line to the right of commenter's screen name, then copy the url that appears in browser address bar and paste that into a new comment. it automatically creates a link.
The Noron/Jones interview doesn't seem to be up, at least not yet. Hope they might reshow, but Noron did look a shade stunned even though she recovered fast and ended the interview as soon as possible without looking too abrupt.
It's no big deal. You were there, but HAL was in control.
For what it's worth, I posted on the old thread AFTER you brought it all over here. Needless to say, I'm not risking a re-post. Besides I was directing my comments to Pogo, and he's already left for the day.
Can't find my previous post. But I've been haring all day about the chaos and confusion last night at the TX caucuses. It's all true. Now there's talk of ending the "Texas Two Step" primary process.
Craig, nice pots! Pans too!
About taking down the server, I was thinking it was TM that was over loading the servers, what with all the little packets flying around & taking up server space. Then I got to thinking, maybe it was another blog(s). Nope it's TM, and for being so popular & bringing in so much traffic to CQ, Craig should get a raise and voted 'most popular' and 'most likely' to succeed.
Obama blamed his primary losses on Hillary's criticism and news coverage that benefited her at his expense. Yeah , blame the press for being mean to you. Now you're sounding whiny.
Ok now that I am a bit shaky I think I will stop and have a couple on my way home. So Sorry again and hopefully when I check back in later I won't be such a jughead. after noon all.
I was reading the story of Bush supporting McCain. Some conservatives are threatening to sit out the election because they don't have a candidate for this election.
You know, Obama could probably get the most bang for his buck if he simply bought every Democrat voter in Pennsylvania the Sally Bedell Smith book on the Clinton years ("For Love of Politics")
It's a one-stop shop forcing you to remember everything you ever wanted to forget about the Clintons. (Bimbo eruptions, Travelgate, Vince Foster, Webb Hubbell, gays in the military, the Lippo Group, James Riady, John Huang, Ira Magaziner....et al). And the whole framework of the book was how Hillary was calling so many of the shots, pissing off Bill's staff constantly contributing to a dysfunctional White House.
I'm a Hillary backer, so I've already hurled it across the room several times and it's pretty beaten up. It's a totally biased hit-job...but it's also just well-reported enough to be effective.
And now for a change of pace, something to make all you northerners shovelling snow jealous. We Florida rednecks KNOW how to party, 'specially when Bike Week rolls around every March. Women's Coleslaw Wrestling!! Yeah!!
"But the superdelegates were created to lead, not to follow. They were, and are, expected to determine what is best for our party and best for the country. I would hope that is why many superdelegates have already chosen a candidate to support.
Besides, the delegate totals from primaries and caucuses do not necessarily reflect the will of rank-and-file Democrats. Most Democrats have not been heard from at the polls."
At the beginning of this article it is interesting to note that much of this superdelegate business is in response to Ted Kennedy shenanigans. How ironic.
Warning: release your tax filing and make it clear when you will release the archive. These are the only two things Obama can attack. He may attack your credentials on being C in C, but that's easy:
1. You pushed Bill to defend Kosovo
2. You backed plans to cripple Saddam's army in Desert Fox and advised Bill the Republicans had a point about the dangers of Saddam.
3. Clear record on Senate and CONSISTENCY between speeches to AIPAC and sanction vote, Speeches in Congress and vet support, funding military, Patriot Bill, against Port deal, increased funding for Homeland security in NY, etc.
4. Understanding the difficulties in brokering Middle East deal
5. Meeting with Foreign Leaders
6. Meeting with military leaders
7. Understanding the complexities -Gore deal with Russia was a failure leading to teachnology/weapons for Iran/ stepped back from the brink against NK and tried to secure plutonium -life is making hard choices.Pakistan showed the dangers of waiting too long to react to nuclear weaponization programs.
8. Difficulties with China their spying and military build up v our trojan horses to moderate them towards the West.
9. Missile defense but better review
10. 3Gwarfare and the need for 4Gwarfare (this one will stump Obama and remember -know the names of the world players.
11. Stress great feeling for the Clintons and how it helps in India, Europe and Africa as well as the hispanic vote and that helping in South America v Obama
12. No rewards for terrorists and carrots mean squat without sticks...learn some JFK quotes.
This should provide a good basis for defending the C in C line of defense. Say, "I attended Senate Armed Services Committees but did you attend your Committee?
Who lent Rezko the money to help him help Obama? Did Rezko help Obama's friend Khadili in 2002?
Powers, Malley, Zbig play what role in Obama staff? How are they consistent with your position on Israel?
Nail Obama on Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Pakistan.We have talked and what?
Ask Obama what he would do if Columbia needed our help. What if Chavez gave $300,000,000 to FARC?
Here's a great one: If Quds is helping spread influence in South America via Chavez and is helping FARC (a terror group) why did Obama vote against sanctioning Quds? Because Bush is a greater danger than Quds? LOL If Quds is in Lebanon helping to arm Hizb'Allah, in Syria and even in Iraq, why did Obama say he wouldn'ythave voted for sanctions though he was too busy running for President to actually vote?
I could go on but for now, this is Basic Obama defense 101. I hope Hillary is listening. Also, and I can't stress this enough, go after biased reporting and commentary. Start a media gone crazy video of the day on Hillary's site. HIre a fact checker and put clips on Youtube complete with hilarious commentary of the commentary. Don't let media out of the cage.
Also, make sure staff does not say things that damage Hillary. Hire someone just to keep track of everyone. Reponse time is the second best thing after not making a mistake in the first place.
Wendy...your post hits on one of my major problems with the whole debate about superdelegates. It's a ridiculous debate. The Claire McCaskills of the world (just to pull a random example from MSNBC today) would have us believe that the only purpose of superdelegates is as a rubber-stamp. And it's patently illogical. Why even HAVE superdelegates if they have no power to affect the outcome?
Say what you will about the wisdom of creating this class of delegates way back when, but that's a decision we're now stuck with. And to argue now that they somehow shouldn't throw their weight around is just dumb.
Maxtrue, too bad Obama has quit smoking. Because he'd definitely need to go burn one after reading your last post.
Basically, the swimsuit competition is over...and now he has to start answering actual questions. And saying "I would wish for world peace" may be good enough for Miss America, but it's not good enough to be president.
Super delegates are in a tough place. They thought that it would be an honor to be a SD, and now they have to face decisions may effect their entire political careers.
Superdelgates are to prevent Republicans and Independents from highjacking the Party's nomination. If one candidate wins more Democratic votes, wins the largest Blue states but trails another who gets Republican help and delegates from Red States, Superdelegates are vested to protect Registered Democrats. Now put Florida delegates on the sideline which would give the former candidate the led and the need for Superdelegates increases. Had Democrats prevented Republicans and Independents voting in Democratic primaries, Hillary would have no need for Superdelegates.
If I were Obama I would take an offer to be VP. He will not win this fight, nor should he. More Democrats have voted for Hillary and many of Obama's States, Republicans and Independents with go Red come November.
Hey....maybe Renee should try shredding some cabbage and throwing it in the hot tub with Rick. Who knows what kinda sparks might fly up in snowy Vermont?
Max...I agree, and great post. But more to the point, the whole Democratic primary construct is a ridiculous Rube Goldberg contraption that expends all kinds of calories and engages in untold levels of mathematical complexity...to what end, exactly?
I posted earlier today that a simple winner-take-all format (such as the GOP uses) would basically have Hillary leading Obama 1,737 to 1,537. That gets us to the same logical endpoint you got us to in your last post. And with a whole lot less room for acrimony.
Lard, I try. Zogby ought to find another line of business. If Hillary stays on message, avoids being ugly, shows emotion and calm and keeps using that make-up artist, she will keep rolling. I wouldn't push Florida now, but hell, re-vote Florida. She still wins and then this primary is over.
Obama was bitter and boring last night. And Obama, the whole world is watching if you will become President? I think far more women around the world, opressed much more than Blacks, I watching if Hillary will win. Cheap shot and it falls behind the sheer number of victimized women from Darfur to Indonesian, from Saudi Arabia to Iran. I'm sure Ahmadinejad is watching to see if he'll have to insult a woman, let alone negotiate with her.
Shelia, popular vote includes Republicans who voted to knock Hillary out and many Independents who now see McCain as a better choice. Obama trails in votes cast by Democrats. Doesn't that bother you? Should Republicans decide the Democratic primary along with Red State delegates that will remain Red States come November, or do you think Utah will go Blue, or Texas? LOL Obama picks up caucus delegates from States that have no Democratic numbers to go Blue. Fine logic.
Leher and others leave FL and MI out based on rules rules rules.
If I am a superD trying to decide the way to vote that is good for the party...I'm taking FL and MI pop vote into consideration...among other things.
When I say Hillary has a pop vote argument...she should use FL and MI pop vote too.
W/ FL and MI...if you give O' the unpledged votes in MI they are only 200K apart. If you don't...she wins pop vote. While they don't count officially...superDs should keep them in mind when making decisions for the party moving forward.
Are the superdelegates' votes private and confidential (like regular voters' ballots supposedly are) or do they become a matter of public record, so we know which superdelegates voted for each candidate?
Sorry Shelia. You're a good sport, but you might want to admit the facts here. Democrats have not given Obama his lead, Republicans and Independents have.
And Lard, you are right. Now in New York, Independents and Republicans can't vote in the Democratic primary. Democrats have screwed up. Now the one clause that can prevent the highjacking is being attacked by the more Liberal candidate as Florida is unseated. Re-vote, but Obama won't do that because he loses. Now how honest is he for that?
I agree, closed Primary. If Obama can't convince Democrats he's the better pick, then tough luck. He built his whole strategy on taking advantage of the Party's stupidity. Should he win and then gets beaten, prefect end to a dubious story. Not to take away from his character, just the method he used to pander Right and Left and slam the middle as Republican Lite.
LardassLiberal -- Thanks; it's sort of reassuring knowing that the delegates/superdelegates will know that they can be held accountable (not that Mr. Bush seems to care about being held accountable).
Hillary just needs not to screw up on stupid, trivial stuff. I agree, there should be a full-time position created in the campaign with that being the job description.
Putting the press in the bathroom next to urinals -- no matter how innocent the explanation is -- is just the kind of stupid and trivial mistake I'm talking about. It gets you nothing, it potentially could cost you a lot.
Pennsylvania -- with it's closed primary -- should be her oyster. She should kick ass there, and if they blow it they deserve to lose. But I hope her campaign is also looking at North Carolina. I don't care what the numbers or the situation-on-the-ground there is right now, but they have basically two months to come up with a winning strategy. A great showing there would truly make her impossible to stop.
I have to say this. Maybe, just maybe this party is morphing into a new Democratic Party. In your party Former Republicans and Independents are irrelevent and in my Democratic Party they are not.
Have a good evening guys. Happy pontificating over and over and over again.
I Trust Jim Leher before I trust all of you sources....no offense. lol
OK, Pile on me, been a long time.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun
Lehrer...the same one who admitted his total failure to do his job in the run up to the war in eyerack..and he hasn't done much since. Bring back McNeil.
yes you would want republicans in the Democratic party because that is who you are....not that is a bad thig if you have actually become a democrat--what we don't want is Repubicans and right leaning indies posing as Democrats.
At the Convention when they do the roll call of the states, the spokesperson for the state announces the delegate totals. These are usually in line with the delegate count as awarded at the primary and/or caucus. In addition, the SDs are declared and counted within those roll call votes according to which state the SD is from. You may not know exactly how a particular SD voted but by comparing the primary vote to the total vote, you can tell how many went where.
Now the SDs can announce ahead of time or not as to whom they are supporting.
Once you have gotten through the first roll call if no one goes over the top for the nomination, all bets are off and let the horsetrading and arm twisting begin.
Another Horrible Night for Hate Hillary Clubbers and More on the Way
"This was the worst night yet for the packs of obsessive charter members of the hate Hillary Clinton club. Their first bad night came back in January when despite the gleeful, hopeful but totally false and overblown anticipation of the wrong headed pollsters that predicted a smash Obama victory, Clinton bagged New Hampshire. Tuesday's outcome was much worse for them. The same gleeful, hopeful, but just as wrongheaded pollsters and even more wrongheaded pundits deliriously wrote the epitaph for Clinton ("the end is in sight," "her Waterloo," "will Clinton stand down," and on and on the blarney headlines screamed."
Jamie...but to get to Benjamin's original point, I do think it's basically public knowledge about how each delegate is voting. If not public, in the sense of being posted on an official roll...at least it's public in the sense that the candidates will know for damn sure at that stage which individuals are with 'em, and which are against 'em.
The interesting thing about today, which none of you seem to be noticing because you're all too busy trying to piss on each other is that repugs crowned their nominee today and no one seems to care.
Shelia, many Republicans I have communicated with during the primaries have told me they were voting to dump Hillary. I did make calls for the Clinton campaign and had opportunity to listen, They are hardly what the Democrats need to welcome into the Party, though I'm sure Obama welcomes their vote. And if the New Democratic Party you talk of is represented by a more Liberal figurehead in Obama, how would this actually win over Republicans? Perhaps a more moderate candidate has a chance to do what Obama claims he WILL do.
Funny, that now Republicans blogs have come to the realization that Obama is far more a threat to their conservative ideals than Hillary. So I think your logic here is faulty, but I know the spin Obama wants us to believe.
Whatacrock is fitting. I suppose Utah's delegates decided by a few thousand should be equal to NY or Ohio deicided by millions. And in NY, Republicans can't vote in the Democratic primary. You can say what you want about the Superdelegates but if they were to decide based on the popular vote, there would be no reason to have Superdelegates. Or can't you see the self-evident? Yes, the DNC rules make perfect sense...LOL. Am I to assume they are now articles of faith in the Church? I'm sure after this primary, the wise elders might clarify some things, but onward faithful Democrats, the blood-letting awaits. To hell with Registered Democrats and upward into the realm of glorious speculations where Rush and Obama dance in the light of hope.
And while you're speculating, here's some stuff Obama's sure to love:
" The rebels have released six hostages _ all Colombian politicians _ since Uribe tried to end Chavez's mediation role with the FARC in November, accusing the Venezuelan president of overstepping his mandate. The most recent to be freed said last week that hostage Ingrid Betancourt, a former presidential candidate who also holds French citizenship, is extremely ill.
Betancourt has become a cause celebre in France. French contacts with Reyes are mentioned in several documents, including a request that the French envoy, identified only as "Noe," be granted a meeting with Marulanda.
References to U.S. diplomatic overtures are scintillating, if vague.
In a Dec. 11 message to the secretariat, Marquez writes: "If you are in agreement, I can receive Jim and Tucker to hear the proposal of the gringos."
Writing two days before his death, Reyes tells his comrades that "the gringos," working through Ecuador's government, are interested "in talking to us on various issues."
"They say the new president of their country will be (Barack) Obama," he writes, saying Obama rejects both the Bush administration's free trade agreement with Colombia and the current military aid program.
Reyes writes that his response to the Americans was that the United States would have to publicly express these positions." From AP today in regards to FARC's recovered laptop. I suppose one could just replace Obama with Carter and we would have the same result.
One last FACT. The attacks on Mexico's pipelines several months ago, resembled the tactics and planning of AQ in Iraq. Bet McCain has some interesting questions for Obama, if Hillary doesn't.
"There is no rule in the politics of Democratic Party conventions that says that the contender with the largest number of pledged delegates short of the total required for nomination should automatically, by dint of that achievement, be handed the party's designation. This argument is now being put forth by Senator Obama's campaign.
Now today some in the Obama campaign and in the media are dismissing the importance of Hillary Clinton's victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island as unimportant. For they argue that, by any careful analysis of the delegate selection process under the present Democratic Party proportional representation system, whatever delegate totals Senator Clinton wins through the end of this year's primary season, will not be able to overcome Senator Obama's current unsurpassable lead over Senator Clinton and therefore Obama will deserve the support of the so-called "super delegates" and should gain the nomination. But that is not how it works as we have seen in past Democratic conventions. A lead in pledged delegates is not enough. You still have to convince your party that you are the best nominee. That is what the next stage of this election is all about."
Brian...no one seemed to be pissing on anyone until you arrived. You should really look into buying a dependable adult undergarment. There are several options.
Yep, if one doesn't believe in your man Barak, then we all might as well be Republicans. You keep over-looking the tactical move by Republicans and Independents to shoot at the tougher opponent Hillary. You reject the fact Democrats are voting more for her and "hope" the Republicans and Indies will turn out for Obama in November. Back in Iowa they didn't think McCain had a prayer. Go ahead dooty, re-vote Florida and watch Obama lose again. Then will you be happy and support Hillary?
Yes Utah is going Blue. And Brian, why shouldn't the rest of the country follow NY? Here Independents and Republicans can't vote in our primary. Sure great rules the DNC came up with. Maybe the DEMOCRATCIC primary will end up in court as Florida once again sues to have their vote count. Or maybe all those people in Florida are really Republicans.
I have heard far more Obama voters say they wil stay home or vote for McCain ......for example on this list
alpha 1906 said the entire African American community in the US will sit out the election if Obama is not the candidate.
"Go ahead dooty, re-vote Florida and watch Obama lose again. Then will you be happy and support Hillary?
So,little boy Blue I have always said that I would vote for the Democratic candidate whom ever that be. The idea is is to elect a Democrat. I am a Yellow Dog Democrat. Ever heard of one of those? you may not have been here long enough to remember me saying that before many times.
If Obama's logic is accepted, then their is no purpose to the Superdelgates. Again, if you allow Republicans and Independents to vote, then Superdelegates are need to prevent a highjacking by those who are not Democrats. To assume these non Democratic votes are benign is about the same realism Obama presents in foreign policy. TE Ao post I put up is just one example of moves made by our adversaries based on Obama's words. Yes words mean something, and unfortunately, mean somethng quite dangerous. Maybe Russert will ask Obama if he plans to cut off military aid to Columbia and reject NAFTA for Columbia.
As far as resolution to Democratic problems, re-vote Flordia and Michigan. I doubt Obama wants that. Rumor had it Hillary created a strom on Cleveland that prevented Obama from winning. In Texas, Hispanics wonder why Blacks enjoy far more delegate power. Also Canada is investigating the talks between the Obama camp and their officials.
Like GAFerraro tremendously, but that was one of the worst argued opinion pieces I have ever read. It's like she's an attorney and none of the facts are in her client's favor.
Really -- cruise through the comments. Hundreds of them, and I only saw one in first 40 or so that was a lukewarm endorsement of Ferraro's position on superdelegates.
12th comment is only positive one; others use words like "absurd", "capricious" and "this is why the Democratic party has lost so many elections."
"... Republicans have been organized in several states to throw their weight behind Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic rival of Hillary Clinton. At least three former fundraisers for President Bush flushed his coffers with cash early on in the race, something the deep pockets haven't done for any candidate in their own party. With receipts topping $100 million in 2007, the first-term Illinois senator broke the record for contributions. It was a remarkable feat, considering that most Americans had not even heard of him before 2005.
The Time article went on to explain that rank and file Republicans were switching parties this spring to vote for Obama in the Democratic primaries. Though not mentioned in the piece, a group called Republicans for Obama formed in 2006 to expedite the strategy. Many states have open primaries, allowing citizens to vote for any candidate, regardless of their party affiliation. In Nebraska, the mayor of Omaha publicly rallied Republicans to caucus for Obama on February 9th, according to Fox News Channel. Called crossover voting, the tactic is playing a crucial role in what appears to be a Rove-coordinated effort to deprive Clinton of the nomination."
Only skimmed the comments, but want to say: I think open primaries is the way to go, even if you end up with some Limbaugh-inspired mouth breathers crossing party lines to interfere in your party's nomination.
Because for every miscreant there are dozens of well-intentioned voters who are independents or opposing party members voting their consciences, and why disenfranchise them? Point is to put up a candidate with a large enough base to win.
RE Florida and Michigan: I think they should revote in those states, open to indepedents if the original vote was -- and scheduled with enough time for voters to change party affiliation if they must to participate.
And then go with the results. It it's Hillary -- a clean vote. If it's Obama -- a clean vote.
It was a spoiled election in both states, and not fair to maneuver the results after the fact.
If it's expensive to fund the redo: democracy ain't always cheap.
Look at Iraq. Calculate the cost per vote there. Lives and money.
all the double- triple- and quadruple posts and the testicle testing really got me laughing..and what the hell..after the past few weeks, who couldnt use a good laugh?
i see GORDO is still hunting down blog-o-spherical nonsense.. i'm glad some things dont change :)
Shelia, I did respond to your remark further up and the one you questioned was in fact, directed at dooty. No problem.
Clinton tried to enlarge the party by his concept of "New Democrat" and more centrist liberal willing to work out real compromises to break the dead lock. He was despised by the Left for such a position. While Obama entered as a Lieberman mentor and spouted centrist lines, even suggesting nuking Iran, he decided to go Left of Hillary's centrist roadblock and pander to the more Liberal while claiming a uniter's mantel. Audacity of Hope does not trash NAFTA, yet on the stump he flipped to pander. He talked tough to AIPAC and supported widening sanctions, yet flipped on the stump. He spins pleasing words to Jews, but Malley, Zbig and Powers will not go away, notrwill Khadili or Rezko who gets his money from a Saddam crony. He makes pledges on public financing, but tries to wiggle out. The problem is just as I said months ago: as people vet his record and words they see far more triangulation and pandering than by Hillary. He wants inclusion and rejects Florida. He says he speaks for the Democrats, yet enjoys a small lead handed to him by Red States and non Democrats.
The pressure by Blacks on those Blacks supporting Hillary is disgusting and as I have said, the Superdelegates are there to prevent the interests of Democrats being highjacked by delegates and votes coming from outside the Blue Zone. Of course in battle States, red/blue mix counts, but many States Obama has taken in small caucuses simply don't represent the vested interest of the greater cause. Put another way. Obama doesn't have a prayer if Hillary States didn't vote. Hillary would have trouble too, but the comparison makes the point.
We can disagree, but this battle will go on. I think Obama comes under more intense vetting, Hillary takes Penn and it will get down to Florida and Superdelegates. In a dog fight, I think Obama loses, so perhaps making a deal for VP might be the best thing for him to do, or at least a deal that if Obama loses Penn, he is assured a VP spot, though I am not sure that helps Hillary. Adams and Jefferson couldn't get along until they were very old dudes.
I think it is important to know that there are indies out there that feel McC is better then BHO. Actually, I think if any of you would see McC in person you may have a different take on his ability to win this race.
Do rank & file democrats & many of the sd's realize that it is distinctly possible that although more Democrats actually voted for Hillary as their choice to be the Democratic nominee of the Democratic party she may not be the nominee?!
While it may be elementary to those intimately following this election, the media repeats daily that Obama has won the popular vote & more states, leading most people who do not spend quite as much time as many here, to simply believe that Obama has won more Democratic votes, not that in fact his lead for the most part should be attributed to Indys & Reps.
Shouldn't it be a prime consideration of the sd's that they select a candidate that a majority of the Democratic party's members voted for?
I think it is important to know that there are indies out there that feel McC is better then BHO. Actually, I think if any of you would see McC in person you may have a different take on his ability to win this race.
Just saying what I have observed.
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 8:42 PM
While I admire your obvious passion for McCain. There are those of us who admired him and followed him for years. Would have voted for him too if He hadn't denied his own long held beliefs and bowed to Bush in order to get this nomination.
I believe quite a few on this blog feel a bitter pill when It comes to mcCain. Thanks for your comment though.
Hey Coreen...I love your logic. As far as the media repeating its daily lies, I've finally figured out a GREAT way to pass the time during the next seven weeks.
Let's strip Tim Russert naked, smear him with pig's blood, throw a couple of log chains around him...and then set him loose in a fenced field with a couple of hungry Alaskan malamutes. Now THAT would be entertaining!!
(And after he's done, we could move on to Chris Matthews)
Oh. I forgot one detail. There needs to be, like, a foot of snow in the fenced field. Mainly to slow Tim down for the dogs and to better highlight the pig's blood as he futilely stumbles away. But also so he can talk about how much it used to snow in Buffalo. We gotta give him something, after all.
If it gets down to the superdelegates and if I understand right, BHO wants them to vote for the person who has the popular vote nation wide. What do they do with the Caucus counts? Were they included in the popular vote? I think they just determine the delegate counts in that primary. I can understand a super voting based on popular vote if they were not commited to anyone, but if they were a friend of a candidate and gave them their word they would vote for them but the popular went a different way I am not so sure they should change their vote. If I was a super I would have a problem with that. Also should they vote based on what their district or state voted if they were not commited to a candidate. I am not sure what the right answer would be. Glad I don't have to make that decision.
If I were a SD I would vote for who ever I wanted....... Unless of course, my whole livelyhood depended on it..... there are so many problems with this method......
"If it's expensive to fund the redo: democracy ain't always cheap."
Couldn't agree more, dog....those states have to vote, and have them count. Howard Dean has been a great disappointment. Harold Ford would have been a much better choice.
The popular vote is interesting. BHO is leading if you take out FL and MI. Adding them both in Hillary is leading. If you just add FL, BHO is still leading. In any case it's very close. Pa could flip the numbers. I don't know what to do with the Caucus counts.
There is all kinds of problems with this method but that's what we got and we got to live with it. In the future this system got to go. I hate to see any of the SD's getting death threats over this. It's not worth it. If I was a SD and got a threat I would go to my candidate and talk to them about it and together we could make a decision.
You guys: re your technicolor plans for Tim Russert:
what if he LIKES it? We have no idea what the guy does on his days off, and he may have a masochistic streak, given the crowd he occasionally runs with.
The rules were the SD's could make their own decisions. What would you do if you were a SD. If I was not commited to anyone I would use the popular vote, that could override what my state voted for. If I was commited to someone that would stand no matter what. Personal friendship is very important.
Jamie...Honey? Fire ants? Tim Russert? I like you.
Or, better yet, to channel Hedley Lamar in Blazing Saddles...
"Kinnnnnnky...."
Still...I think my Alaskan-malamute-pigsblood-snowy-fenced-field scenario trumps because it accommodates the gratuitous Russert-invoking-Buffalo angle.
Other way leave FL as is, for whatever reason BHO put his name on the ballot and it was a fair election. In MI he left his name off, I would have a re vote there.
Comments
** so..close.
I know BH from NYC is here already, although I can't see him.
Posted by: pogo
| March 5, 2008 3:13 PM
What happened to my post? boy this place is acting wierd today.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 3:17 PM
Note my comment - I saw it, refreshed the page, then it was gone. The honor is legitimately yours.
Posted by: pogo
| March 5, 2008 3:21 PM
BREAKING NEWS : OBAMA FIRES TIM RUSSERT AND JOE SCARBOUROUGH
HE KEEPS CHRIS MATTHEWS AND KEITH OBERMAN(hints they may be gone after pennsylvania)
jack cafferty may be in the running to replace them
Posted by: zumper | March 5, 2008 3:24 PM
Since I can't see web cam...can anyone tell me what this one is?
Posted by: Patsi | March 5, 2008 3:28 PM
zumper you posted that already on the previous thread. We weren't impressed the first time and less so the second time.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 3:30 PM
Nice video, Craig. I think Sen Obama will probably have trouble coming up with a national security staff with the same level of professional qualifications/gravitas as Mrs Clinton.
She may be able to pickup a couple of the peacocks, but these aren't the types that he or the country need.
Maybe he could get a few retired professors from a couple of the national war colleges to camp out with him as a genuine public service. That group includes some very bright people.
He/we don't need a bunch of uniformed jerks trying to push their own radical agendas. Unfortunately, he probably doesn't have enough understanding of the technical aspects of warfare to know when he's being given a snow job.
Posted by: Flatus
| March 5, 2008 3:33 PM
zumper, I enjoyed it all 4 times on the prior thread and the once on this one too, but really, enough is enough.
Posted by: pogo
| March 5, 2008 3:34 PM
Oops, second para of my last should read:
"He may be able to pickup a couple of the peacocks, but these aren't the types that he or the country need."
Posted by: Flatus
| March 5, 2008 3:35 PM
So campers, whaddaya think - with six weeks between Mississippi and PA, think we could get back to discussing and arguing issues instead of throwing invectives and accusations of stupidity at each other? Could get awfully boring around here.
Posted by: pogo
| March 5, 2008 3:39 PM
btw, just out of curiosity, how'd you change your names?
Posted by: pogo
| March 5, 2008 3:40 PM
All she has to do is put up a commercial with the key lines from her China speech in a commercial and combine the women issues with the trade issues ... one whale of a commercial.
I was thinking about that Dream Ticket and decided Sen. Obama is nice and all that, but I want Stephanie Tubb Jones. She basically told Noron to shut up because she couldn't answer a question if Noron kept talking.
"I'm pretty, I don't have to be polite or shut up about MY opinion" just got set back on her vapid little heels by a beautiful, strong, brilliant woman. Hillary Clinton is darn lucky to have her for a spokesperson.
Posted by: jamie | March 5, 2008 3:43 PM
pogo post anonymously and you can use any nick you want.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 3:44 PM
Pogo,
We need to permanently post these instructions along with the three link rule.
Click on "comment anonymously".
Type in any name you want
Don't put a check in "remember info" unless you want to keep the name.
Post as usual.
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 3:47 PM
testing testicles tests.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Hussein Horsedooty! | March 5, 2008 3:55 PM
Jamie...you mean it's this easy for me to create my alter ego?
Posted by: Lardassama bin-Liberal | March 5, 2008 3:57 PM
just seeing if this works
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 3:58 PM
Hi Craig,
I like your kitchen. haha
I am going to my FIRST democratic meeting tonight at 7. What should I expect? I have never gone to any political meeting in my entire 67 year life.
This should be interesting. I am setting the ground work for a potential run for a state office. How is that for high hopes. From psychologist/counselor to state rep. haha
Posted by: Carol
| March 5, 2008 3:58 PM
Since NAFTAGate...the polls have swung dramatically for Hillary:
Gallup Daily: Clinton 48%, Obama 44% (was tied yesterday and he had a 6 point adv. the day before)
Rasmussen is Clinton 48%, Obama 43% (that is an 8% gain since NAFTA Gate)
I believe these numbers do not fully reflect yesterdays results...so the next few days will be interesting.
Posted by: Wendy FIGHT ON! | March 5, 2008 4:01 PM
cool - now just to come up with a clever(er) nom de post
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:01 PM
Jamie wrote: "She basically told Noron to shut up because she couldn't answer a question if Noron kept talking."
Jamie - I must see this video - is it on the MSNBC site?
Posted by: Wendy FIGHT ON! | March 5, 2008 4:02 PM
testing testicles tests.
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: Hussein Horsedooty! | March 5, 2008 4:03 PM
carol,
You can never go wrong wearing black.
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:03 PM
Nice video technique! I like it, but it may add to the legend started by Imus after you had been on, saying "I had Craig Crawford on...he's about half a wack-bag..."
Joe the Communist may not have been watching & listening, but I have, and it's no secret Imus of WABC is not the Imus of WFAN.
Remember when Bernard and I-man made the jokes about Limbaugh's Viagra issues , when Limbaugh had customs issues with multiple bottles of the pills?
That was funny, but now all Imus does is give daily praise to Limbaugh and Hannity, and we get multiple blessings from St. Imus placed on Brit Hume's head.
Now, we also get jacked-up on the "fairness" of FOX News...how I-man NEVER notices any bias or right-slanting of the news.
One of the reasons I loved Imus of WFAN was that he was a live-wire, independent as a registered repugg could be, his poking fun of pols was great television. Now he pushes FOX News as "great" and sucks up to the aforementioned reactionary blowhards.
I do applaud his trying to "be better", but Karrith is just not funny. Tony was just hilarious today with his commentary which Imus said was "genius"---it WAS genius material, I loved it. Karrith is just not funny and worse, she cannot deliver comedy. As she is about to hit a punchline, she invariably stumbles and stammers and ruins the bit. So he failed there in selecting a quality comedian.
Carl Jeffers of LA is a brilliant pol-analyst and he should be on more often. The woman named Debra (is it Dickinson?whatever) was controversial but interesting.
Jeffers challenged Imus to stand by his promises to incorporate race dialect and Imus is doing much better, but he could do even more.
He praises the great John Lewis, who happens to be my personal US political hero , but I don't think he ever has had him on.
My point, in condensed version: Imus has changed, praising the right and NOT making fun of them, and that is why I became an I-man fan in the first place. I have to record and FF a lot of the show now---I cannot listen to that goddam Brit Hume or any of those assholes from FOX Noise.
Posted by: Dexter
| March 5, 2008 4:05 PM
A few more random questions to contemplate as we stare down the barrel of the next seven weeks:
--More debates? How many and where?
--Edwards delegates? Will he want to sit on them all the way to August? Or is now the better time to play kingmaker?
--Hillary tax returns? I can't imagine she won't be hammered on these in direct proportion to the hammering of Obama on Revko.
--Talking heads? What will they find to talk about to fill the yawning gap of cable time? So will they have to start manufacturing the news to an even greater extent than they have to this point?
--Bill Clinton? Does he just go back to New York for awhile?
--Hillary's ground game. Does this seven-week respite give her the opportunity to undo her big mistake and actually build an organization in places like North Carolina?
--Seven weeks? Jeez. Do you know how long that is? Will we all survive it?
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 4:06 PM
HHD, your testicles are apparently fine. lol
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:06 PM
hi pogo...no biking yet...it's been weeks on end here, and last night we got another deep layer of snow...my stoop is a two-steps-up stoop, and the entire porch had about 4 inches of snow, and it broke my back shoveling the walk...it felt like a foot of new snow but I didn't even check...I bought a new bike Saturday, on sale, nothing fancy, just a cheapo to use for running my dog.
Posted by: Dexter
| March 5, 2008 4:11 PM
Dex, nice to see you.No cycling in OH at present from what I hear from the mistake on the lake. You OK otherwise?
LL, Bill's headed for Wyoming, then Fort Lauderdale for a couple of weeks of R&R..LOL
Seven weeks will seem like an eternity.
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:12 PM
Pogo,
thank you thank you. Do you think black jeans would work or do I need to dress up? Remember i live in Wooster, Ohio small town. The office is a small place in the middle of town.
Posted by: Carol
| March 5, 2008 4:13 PM
dex, you anticipated my question. You must be related to Carnac.
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:14 PM
Jamie, didja ever see anyone so HAPPY in your life as Tubbs-Jones was in the victory party last night in Columbus?
She and Governor Ted really delivered the vote, good job, Madame Representative and Governor Ted!
Posted by: Dexter
| March 5, 2008 4:18 PM
Did someone actually just copy and paste the last thread and all comments in their entirety?
Or was that just HAL the computer making mischief again?
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 4:20 PM
Carol, I've been to Wooster, and Mrs. Pogo, her ex- and their daughter all went to college there - I'm trying to recall, is there a traffic light there or just a 3 way flasher? I'd think jeans should be fine, if not a little too formal. Maybe wear snow boots and you should feel perfectly comfortable. Of course at 67, I'm betting you really don't care much, but then again, you never get a second chance to make a first impression and wouldn't want to screw pup your political careeer before it really begins (of course that first impression will probably be on people you've known for years, so it might be a little late to worry about that anyway).
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:21 PM
truebeliever, WHAT THE HELL YOU DOING?
Posted by: Dexter
| March 5, 2008 4:21 PM
Ok It's obvious I did something wrong when I tried to repost my comment from the last thread but I have no Idea how that happened. When I sent the post it was just mine but when I looked at it it was obviously something else. I am so....SO ...sorry,
Posted by: truebeliever | March 5, 2008 4:23 PM
Lardass, it has truebeliever's signature on it...Jesus , people!!
Posted by: Dexter
| March 5, 2008 4:23 PM
Carol, I've been to Wooster, and Mrs. Pogo, her ex- and their daughter all went to college there - I'm trying to recall, is there a traffic light there or just a 3 way flasher? I'd think jeans should be fine, if not a little too formal. Maybe wear snow boots and you should feel perfectly comfortable. Of course at 67, I'm betting you really don't care much, but then again, you never get a second chance to make a first impression and wouldn't want to screw pup your political careeer before it really begins (of course that first impression will probably be on people you've known for years, so it might be a little late to worry about that anyway).
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:23 PM
Craig...you might just want to shoot this thread in the head and repost your video as an entirely new thread. If that's possible.
Don't beat yourself up too much, True. Hell...the computer's been playing tricks on everyone the past couple days. :)
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 4:25 PM
Pogo,
LOL well, we have a few lights. haha
Ok I will wear my jeans. Yes, I have met several because of helping with Hillary's campaign. In fact they encouraged me to go to the meeting. So we will see.
This will be a new chapter in my life. I am very young looking and at heart so maybe I would be a good candidate for something lolol I was on a local school board for 8 years. In fact I was the first woman on that school board. They were all farmers.
Posted by: Carol
| March 5, 2008 4:28 PM
err, don't know how I got a double on the last post- I only submitted it one. I SWEAR.
And Carol, that should have been "screw up your political career" - an unfortunate (but oddly funny) typo.
I guess Truebeliever really liked the last thread and comments.LOL Maybe Craig could scrub it.
Well, Li'lPogo called needs sustenance - they had spaghetti at school for lunch, and since he was home sick yesterday after eating spaghetti, he wasn't particulary interested. Everone keep it between the lines.
Posted by: pogo bin agogo | March 5, 2008 4:30 PM
Seriously I am SO SO SORRY. The whole thread was not in the box when I sent my Post. I don't know how that happened.
Posted by: truebeliever | March 5, 2008 4:34 PM
Poor Truebeliever,
Don't fret. These things happen. Something like this has happened before......well....not exactly like this, but since you are authentic, maybe you just had an authentic technical moment. ;0)
Its OK.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 4:40 PM
Come to think of it, I think True has hit on a great punishment for Bart Simpson: Make him transcribe all of our crawfordslister comments on a blackboard over and over again.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 4:45 PM
ha, you kids been playin with threads again?
it's ok, truebeliever, all scrubbed and fixed now.
fyi: easy method for posting link to any past comment -- just click the date and time line to the right of commenter's screen name, then copy the url that appears in browser address bar and paste that into a new comment. it automatically creates a link.
Posted by: Craig Crawford
| March 5, 2008 4:49 PM
The Noron/Jones interview doesn't seem to be up, at least not yet. Hope they might reshow, but Noron did look a shade stunned even though she recovered fast and ended the interview as soon as possible without looking too abrupt.
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 4:49 PM
True,
It's no big deal. You were there, but HAL was in control.
For what it's worth, I posted on the old thread AFTER you brought it all over here. Needless to say, I'm not risking a re-post. Besides I was directing my comments to Pogo, and he's already left for the day.
Posted by: EdVB
| March 5, 2008 4:50 PM
Actually Craig and Lard and ED,
I thought someone WAS REALLY wanting to make a point..... LOLOLOLOL
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 4:53 PM
TB
lol
Stuff happens don't let it worry you
I will admit your post was a prize winner.
Glad I have lots of bandwith.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | March 5, 2008 4:54 PM
And with that Truebeliever moment,
Its time for Chris Matthews, Later.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 5:00 PM
Oh someone mentioned Clinton taxes. She has announced that she will release them on or before April 15.
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 5:07 PM
Sheila
Your tougher than I am,
2 net works I will not watch, Fox and MSNBC
When it comes to politics I like some intelligent comments an views.
Jack
Posted by: whskyjack | March 5, 2008 5:07 PM
Can't find my previous post. But I've been haring all day about the chaos and confusion last night at the TX caucuses. It's all true. Now there's talk of ending the "Texas Two Step" primary process.
Craig, nice pots! Pans too!
About taking down the server, I was thinking it was TM that was over loading the servers, what with all the little packets flying around & taking up server space. Then I got to thinking, maybe it was another blog(s). Nope it's TM, and for being so popular & bringing in so much traffic to CQ, Craig should get a raise and voted 'most popular' and 'most likely' to succeed.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| March 5, 2008 5:09 PM
Obama blamed his primary losses on Hillary's criticism and news coverage that benefited her at his expense. Yeah , blame the press for being mean to you. Now you're sounding whiny.
Posted by: Corey Huckawontbe | March 5, 2008 5:10 PM
Obama is circulating a memo asking why Hillary won't release her tax returns.
Posted by: Corey Huckawontbe | March 5, 2008 5:11 PM
"Craig should get a raise and voted 'most popular' and 'most likely' to succeed."
And CQ should get even bigger servers to handle the increasing mob. Maybe they could borrow more until after November.
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 5:12 PM
Obama is circulating a memo asking why Hillary won't release her tax returns.
Posted by: Corey Huckawontbe | March 5, 2008 5:13 PM
I don't think Barack has much experience being criticized.
This is first race where he has been challenged at all.
I notice that when criticized or challenged, he gets that, I'm going to hold my breath until I get my way..look.
Posted by: Oregon Democrat | March 5, 2008 5:13 PM
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=6811314&ch=4226716&src=news
For some irreverant fun , video of Bush tap dancing, No , I don't mean questions! LOL!
Posted by: Corey Huckawontbe | March 5, 2008 5:14 PM
Ok now that I am a bit shaky I think I will stop and have a couple on my way home. So Sorry again and hopefully when I check back in later I won't be such a jughead. after noon all.
Posted by: truebeliever | March 5, 2008 5:22 PM
"video of Bush tap dancing"
I suppose it's too much to hope that Larry Craig is involved.....
Posted by: Patsi | March 5, 2008 5:22 PM
Evan Thomas is an a-hole.
Posted by: Patsi | March 5, 2008 5:24 PM
Evan Thomas is an a-hole.
Posted by: Patsi | March 5, 2008 5:26 PM
Bush = buffoon.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| March 5, 2008 5:30 PM
Corey Huckabee is a hater, why would you want to be him?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 5:32 PM
Corey,
I know I put up the info. He can take his memo and ...
She announced today that she would release her tax returns on or before April 15 once the final was completed.
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 5:36 PM
It's Huckawont be. As in Huckawont be our next President.
Posted by: Corey Huckawontbe | March 5, 2008 5:40 PM
Norman Thomas' grandson amuses me, but then again he as a penis, I can understand your contempt Patsi.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 5:44 PM
I was reading the story of Bush supporting McCain. Some conservatives are threatening to sit out the election because they don't have a candidate for this election.
Posted by: Corey Abdul Jabbar | March 5, 2008 5:49 PM
ah, ok Corey, too much THC. :)
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 5:50 PM
"Sen. Obama, time to call us about Rezko: (312) 321-2417"
http://www.suntimes.com/news/commentary/823666,CST-EDT-edit04b.article
ROFLMAO
Posted by: Hill Yeah Wendy! | March 5, 2008 5:53 PM
You know, Obama could probably get the most bang for his buck if he simply bought every Democrat voter in Pennsylvania the Sally Bedell Smith book on the Clinton years ("For Love of Politics")
It's a one-stop shop forcing you to remember everything you ever wanted to forget about the Clintons. (Bimbo eruptions, Travelgate, Vince Foster, Webb Hubbell, gays in the military, the Lippo Group, James Riady, John Huang, Ira Magaziner....et al). And the whole framework of the book was how Hillary was calling so many of the shots, pissing off Bill's staff constantly contributing to a dysfunctional White House.
I'm a Hillary backer, so I've already hurled it across the room several times and it's pretty beaten up. It's a totally biased hit-job...but it's also just well-reported enough to be effective.
http://www.amazon.com/Love-Politics-Hillary-Clinton-White/dp/1400063248/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204757742&sr=8-1
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:03 PM
Here's why the server's clogged:
Traffic Rank Trend. Click around on the top for other views.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/video-trail-mix-webcam-edition.html
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| March 5, 2008 6:07 PM
And now for a change of pace, something to make all you northerners shovelling snow jealous. We Florida rednecks KNOW how to party, 'specially when Bike Week rolls around every March. Women's Coleslaw Wrestling!! Yeah!!
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/orl-bikweek-coleslawpg,0,7031314.photogallery
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:13 PM
Here's why the server's clogged:
Traffic Rank Trend. Click around on the top for other views.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/video-trail-mix-webcam-edition.html
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| March 5, 2008 6:15 PM
Lard,
Now I've seen it all....Cole Slaw wrestling? And with females yet. lol
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:16 PM
Here's why the server's clogged:
Traffic Rank Trend. Click around on the top for other views.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/video-trail-mix-webcam-edition.html
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| March 5, 2008 6:17 PM
Sheila...did you click through the whole gallery? Some pretty scary stuff in there.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:18 PM
:-)
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| March 5, 2008 6:19 PM
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/myseattlepix/latest.asp?photoID=1009257
Here's one for you LL
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:19 PM
Bear Sweetie,
If you are lurking, would like to hear from you. I care....
chefstonesheila at gee mail dot com
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:20 PM
Lard, yes I did.
I love Pictures and I love they crazy things people do for fun!
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:21 PM
Sheila...Awesome! A cross-dressing hybrid of Marge Simpson and Larry Fine of the Three Stooges!
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:23 PM
HEY! Now I recognise her!
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:24 PM
"But the superdelegates were created to lead, not to follow. They were, and are, expected to determine what is best for our party and best for the country. I would hope that is why many superdelegates have already chosen a candidate to support.
Besides, the delegate totals from primaries and caucuses do not necessarily reflect the will of rank-and-file Democrats. Most Democrats have not been heard from at the polls."
At the beginning of this article it is interesting to note that much of this superdelegate business is in response to Ted Kennedy shenanigans. How ironic.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/opinion/25ferraro.html?pagewanted=all
Posted by: Hill Yeah Wendy! | March 5, 2008 6:26 PM
lard,
Going around the country, here is what the Chicago Trib is looking at. ;0)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/orl-springbreak2008-pg,0,7641268.photogallery
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:28 PM
And finally from me,
Here is a shot from Winter abroad. Nice to be in Florida for now.
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/03/05/nytfrontpage/20080305POD_12.html
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:34 PM
Well it seems Hillary took some of my advice.
TO THE HILLARY CAMP!!!!!!!!!!!
Warning: release your tax filing and make it clear when you will release the archive. These are the only two things Obama can attack. He may attack your credentials on being C in C, but that's easy:
1. You pushed Bill to defend Kosovo
2. You backed plans to cripple Saddam's army in Desert Fox and advised Bill the Republicans had a point about the dangers of Saddam.
3. Clear record on Senate and CONSISTENCY between speeches to AIPAC and sanction vote, Speeches in Congress and vet support, funding military, Patriot Bill, against Port deal, increased funding for Homeland security in NY, etc.
4. Understanding the difficulties in brokering Middle East deal
5. Meeting with Foreign Leaders
6. Meeting with military leaders
7. Understanding the complexities -Gore deal with Russia was a failure leading to teachnology/weapons for Iran/ stepped back from the brink against NK and tried to secure plutonium -life is making hard choices.Pakistan showed the dangers of waiting too long to react to nuclear weaponization programs.
8. Difficulties with China their spying and military build up v our trojan horses to moderate them towards the West.
9. Missile defense but better review
10. 3Gwarfare and the need for 4Gwarfare (this one will stump Obama and remember -know the names of the world players.
11. Stress great feeling for the Clintons and how it helps in India, Europe and Africa as well as the hispanic vote and that helping in South America v Obama
12. No rewards for terrorists and carrots mean squat without sticks...learn some JFK quotes.
This should provide a good basis for defending the C in C line of defense. Say, "I attended Senate Armed Services Committees but did you attend your Committee?
Who lent Rezko the money to help him help Obama? Did Rezko help Obama's friend Khadili in 2002?
Powers, Malley, Zbig play what role in Obama staff? How are they consistent with your position on Israel?
Nail Obama on Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Pakistan.We have talked and what?
Ask Obama what he would do if Columbia needed our help. What if Chavez gave $300,000,000 to FARC?
Here's a great one: If Quds is helping spread influence in South America via Chavez and is helping FARC (a terror group) why did Obama vote against sanctioning Quds? Because Bush is a greater danger than Quds? LOL If Quds is in Lebanon helping to arm Hizb'Allah, in Syria and even in Iraq, why did Obama say he wouldn'ythave voted for sanctions though he was too busy running for President to actually vote?
I could go on but for now, this is Basic Obama defense 101. I hope Hillary is listening. Also, and I can't stress this enough, go after biased reporting and commentary. Start a media gone crazy video of the day on Hillary's site. HIre a fact checker and put clips on Youtube complete with hilarious commentary of the commentary. Don't let media out of the cage.
Also, make sure staff does not say things that damage Hillary. Hire someone just to keep track of everyone. Reponse time is the second best thing after not making a mistake in the first place.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 6:35 PM
Wendy...your post hits on one of my major problems with the whole debate about superdelegates. It's a ridiculous debate. The Claire McCaskills of the world (just to pull a random example from MSNBC today) would have us believe that the only purpose of superdelegates is as a rubber-stamp. And it's patently illogical. Why even HAVE superdelegates if they have no power to affect the outcome?
Say what you will about the wisdom of creating this class of delegates way back when, but that's a decision we're now stuck with. And to argue now that they somehow shouldn't throw their weight around is just dumb.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:39 PM
Maxtrue, too bad Obama has quit smoking. Because he'd definitely need to go burn one after reading your last post.
Basically, the swimsuit competition is over...and now he has to start answering actual questions. And saying "I would wish for world peace" may be good enough for Miss America, but it's not good enough to be president.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:44 PM
Lard,
Be that as it may....but I for one am getting off on the whole scrappy mess.
We are the Democratic Party and Democracy is a debate. Its a fight and an argument in order to come to a consensis.
All the arguing is an education for the country. Exactly what we have needed for the last 20 years.
GO DEMOCRATS!....Borrowing from my good friend across the aile. Renee
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:46 PM
Super delegates are in a tough place. They thought that it would be an honor to be a SD, and now they have to face decisions may effect their entire political careers.
Kind of ironic.
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 6:48 PM
Superdelgates are to prevent Republicans and Independents from highjacking the Party's nomination. If one candidate wins more Democratic votes, wins the largest Blue states but trails another who gets Republican help and delegates from Red States, Superdelegates are vested to protect Registered Democrats. Now put Florida delegates on the sideline which would give the former candidate the led and the need for Superdelegates increases. Had Democrats prevented Republicans and Independents voting in Democratic primaries, Hillary would have no need for Superdelegates.
If I were Obama I would take an offer to be VP. He will not win this fight, nor should he. More Democrats have voted for Hillary and many of Obama's States, Republicans and Independents with go Red come November.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 6:48 PM
Hey....maybe Renee should try shredding some cabbage and throwing it in the hot tub with Rick. Who knows what kinda sparks might fly up in snowy Vermont?
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:48 PM
The Count for Popular vote was reported on Jim Leher tonight. It has Obama at 600,000 more in the popular vote.
Which is a penny in a pond, but even I was surprised to see my Kahuna ahead.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 6:52 PM
Max...I agree, and great post. But more to the point, the whole Democratic primary construct is a ridiculous Rube Goldberg contraption that expends all kinds of calories and engages in untold levels of mathematical complexity...to what end, exactly?
I posted earlier today that a simple winner-take-all format (such as the GOP uses) would basically have Hillary leading Obama 1,737 to 1,537. That gets us to the same logical endpoint you got us to in your last post. And with a whole lot less room for acrimony.
End of story.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 6:55 PM
Lard, I try. Zogby ought to find another line of business. If Hillary stays on message, avoids being ugly, shows emotion and calm and keeps using that make-up artist, she will keep rolling. I wouldn't push Florida now, but hell, re-vote Florida. She still wins and then this primary is over.
Obama was bitter and boring last night. And Obama, the whole world is watching if you will become President? I think far more women around the world, opressed much more than Blacks, I watching if Hillary will win. Cheap shot and it falls behind the sheer number of victimized women from Darfur to Indonesian, from Saudi Arabia to Iran. I'm sure Ahmadinejad is watching to see if he'll have to insult a woman, let alone negotiate with her.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 6:58 PM
And before you guys pile on,
I Trust Jim Leher before I trust all of you sources....no offense. lol
OK, Pile on me, been a long time.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 7:00 PM
And the whole argument about how "open primaries" help produce more electable, moderate nominees has also been shown to be hogwash this year.
Should he be nominated with the clear aid of these open primaries, Obama will be hammered as being far more liberal and less electable than Clinton.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 7:01 PM
Sheila...we'll pile on...but only if you bring the coleslaw and vegetable oil!!! LOL.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 7:03 PM
Shelia, popular vote includes Republicans who voted to knock Hillary out and many Independents who now see McCain as a better choice. Obama trails in votes cast by Democrats. Doesn't that bother you? Should Republicans decide the Democratic primary along with Red State delegates that will remain Red States come November, or do you think Utah will go Blue, or Texas? LOL Obama picks up caucus delegates from States that have no Democratic numbers to go Blue. Fine logic.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 7:03 PM
Leher and others leave FL and MI out based on rules rules rules.
If I am a superD trying to decide the way to vote that is good for the party...I'm taking FL and MI pop vote into consideration...among other things.
When I say Hillary has a pop vote argument...she should use FL and MI pop vote too.
W/ FL and MI...if you give O' the unpledged votes in MI they are only 200K apart. If you don't...she wins pop vote. While they don't count officially...superDs should keep them in mind when making decisions for the party moving forward.
Posted by: Hill Yeah Wendy! | March 5, 2008 7:05 PM
Are the superdelegates' votes private and confidential (like regular voters' ballots supposedly are) or do they become a matter of public record, so we know which superdelegates voted for each candidate?
Posted by: benjaminblue | March 5, 2008 7:05 PM
Benjamin...I think all delegates votes have to be public and on the record, super or not super.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 7:09 PM
Sorry Shelia. You're a good sport, but you might want to admit the facts here. Democrats have not given Obama his lead, Republicans and Independents have.
And Lard, you are right. Now in New York, Independents and Republicans can't vote in the Democratic primary. Democrats have screwed up. Now the one clause that can prevent the highjacking is being attacked by the more Liberal candidate as Florida is unseated. Re-vote, but Obama won't do that because he loses. Now how honest is he for that?
I agree, closed Primary. If Obama can't convince Democrats he's the better pick, then tough luck. He built his whole strategy on taking advantage of the Party's stupidity. Should he win and then gets beaten, prefect end to a dubious story. Not to take away from his character, just the method he used to pander Right and Left and slam the middle as Republican Lite.
Thank you Howard Dean.....
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 7:11 PM
LardassLiberal -- Thanks; it's sort of reassuring knowing that the delegates/superdelegates will know that they can be held accountable (not that Mr. Bush seems to care about being held accountable).
Posted by: benjaminblue | March 5, 2008 7:13 PM
Hillary just needs not to screw up on stupid, trivial stuff. I agree, there should be a full-time position created in the campaign with that being the job description.
Putting the press in the bathroom next to urinals -- no matter how innocent the explanation is -- is just the kind of stupid and trivial mistake I'm talking about. It gets you nothing, it potentially could cost you a lot.
Pennsylvania -- with it's closed primary -- should be her oyster. She should kick ass there, and if they blow it they deserve to lose. But I hope her campaign is also looking at North Carolina. I don't care what the numbers or the situation-on-the-ground there is right now, but they have basically two months to come up with a winning strategy. A great showing there would truly make her impossible to stop.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 7:18 PM
before I leave Max,
I have to say this. Maybe, just maybe this party is morphing into a new Democratic Party. In your party Former Republicans and Independents are irrelevent and in my Democratic Party they are not.
Have a good evening guys. Happy pontificating over and over and over again.
Go Democrats!
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 7:31 PM
I Trust Jim Leher before I trust all of you sources....no offense. lol
OK, Pile on me, been a long time.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun
Lehrer...the same one who admitted his total failure to do his job in the run up to the war in eyerack..and he hasn't done much since. Bring back McNeil.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | March 5, 2008 7:31 PM
"Well it seems Hillary took some of my advice."
Yeah, right, I'm sure she's waiting with bated breath to read your next post for more advice.
Good thing you are in no way involved with the DNC party rules making.
Those menacing "Red state delegates".... why not draw and quarter them too.
Posted by: whatacrock | March 5, 2008 7:34 PM
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun
yes you would want republicans in the Democratic party because that is who you are....not that is a bad thig if you have actually become a democrat--what we don't want is Repubicans and right leaning indies posing as Democrats.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | March 5, 2008 7:37 PM
Benjamin
At the Convention when they do the roll call of the states, the spokesperson for the state announces the delegate totals. These are usually in line with the delegate count as awarded at the primary and/or caucus. In addition, the SDs are declared and counted within those roll call votes according to which state the SD is from. You may not know exactly how a particular SD voted but by comparing the primary vote to the total vote, you can tell how many went where.
Now the SDs can announce ahead of time or not as to whom they are supporting.
Once you have gotten through the first roll call if no one goes over the top for the nomination, all bets are off and let the horsetrading and arm twisting begin.
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 7:39 PM
katie......WAY OFF BASE.
I'm not going to forget that slam.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 7:40 PM
Another Horrible Night for Hate Hillary Clubbers and More on the Way
"This was the worst night yet for the packs of obsessive charter members of the hate Hillary Clinton club. Their first bad night came back in January when despite the gleeful, hopeful but totally false and overblown anticipation of the wrong headed pollsters that predicted a smash Obama victory, Clinton bagged New Hampshire. Tuesday's outcome was much worse for them. The same gleeful, hopeful, but just as wrongheaded pollsters and even more wrongheaded pundits deliriously wrote the epitaph for Clinton ("the end is in sight," "her Waterloo," "will Clinton stand down," and on and on the blarney headlines screamed."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-hutchinson/another-horrible-night-fo_b_89967.html
Posted by: GORDO | March 5, 2008 7:43 PM
Chef Hussein
not a slam....am I remembering wrong? Didn't you vote for Ronnie Raygun and at least one member of the Shrub clan....if I am wrong...I apologize
I thought you were a reformed Republican....
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | March 5, 2008 7:43 PM
Jamie...but to get to Benjamin's original point, I do think it's basically public knowledge about how each delegate is voting. If not public, in the sense of being posted on an official roll...at least it's public in the sense that the candidates will know for damn sure at that stage which individuals are with 'em, and which are against 'em.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 7:44 PM
The interesting thing about today, which none of you seem to be noticing because you're all too busy trying to piss on each other is that repugs crowned their nominee today and no one seems to care.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 7:52 PM
Shelia, many Republicans I have communicated with during the primaries have told me they were voting to dump Hillary. I did make calls for the Clinton campaign and had opportunity to listen, They are hardly what the Democrats need to welcome into the Party, though I'm sure Obama welcomes their vote. And if the New Democratic Party you talk of is represented by a more Liberal figurehead in Obama, how would this actually win over Republicans? Perhaps a more moderate candidate has a chance to do what Obama claims he WILL do.
Funny, that now Republicans blogs have come to the realization that Obama is far more a threat to their conservative ideals than Hillary. So I think your logic here is faulty, but I know the spin Obama wants us to believe.
Whatacrock is fitting. I suppose Utah's delegates decided by a few thousand should be equal to NY or Ohio deicided by millions. And in NY, Republicans can't vote in the Democratic primary. You can say what you want about the Superdelegates but if they were to decide based on the popular vote, there would be no reason to have Superdelegates. Or can't you see the self-evident? Yes, the DNC rules make perfect sense...LOL. Am I to assume they are now articles of faith in the Church? I'm sure after this primary, the wise elders might clarify some things, but onward faithful Democrats, the blood-letting awaits. To hell with Registered Democrats and upward into the realm of glorious speculations where Rush and Obama dance in the light of hope.
And while you're speculating, here's some stuff Obama's sure to love:
" The rebels have released six hostages _ all Colombian politicians _ since Uribe tried to end Chavez's mediation role with the FARC in November, accusing the Venezuelan president of overstepping his mandate. The most recent to be freed said last week that hostage Ingrid Betancourt, a former presidential candidate who also holds French citizenship, is extremely ill.
Betancourt has become a cause celebre in France. French contacts with Reyes are mentioned in several documents, including a request that the French envoy, identified only as "Noe," be granted a meeting with Marulanda.
References to U.S. diplomatic overtures are scintillating, if vague.
In a Dec. 11 message to the secretariat, Marquez writes: "If you are in agreement, I can receive Jim and Tucker to hear the proposal of the gringos."
Writing two days before his death, Reyes tells his comrades that "the gringos," working through Ecuador's government, are interested "in talking to us on various issues."
"They say the new president of their country will be (Barack) Obama," he writes, saying Obama rejects both the Bush administration's free trade agreement with Colombia and the current military aid program.
Reyes writes that his response to the Americans was that the United States would have to publicly express these positions." From AP today in regards to FARC's recovered laptop. I suppose one could just replace Obama with Carter and we would have the same result.
One last FACT. The attacks on Mexico's pipelines several months ago, resembled the tactics and planning of AQ in Iraq. Bet McCain has some interesting questions for Obama, if Hillary doesn't.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 7:53 PM
KGC said this, "what we don't want is Repubicans and right leaning indies posing as Democrats."
I suspect that there are several on this list already. Several posters have stated they would vote for McCain if Obama was the nominee.
yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!
Posted by: Hussein Horsedooty! | March 5, 2008 7:54 PM
Amen doots, amen!
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 7:57 PM
Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates
"There is no rule in the politics of Democratic Party conventions that says that the contender with the largest number of pledged delegates short of the total required for nomination should automatically, by dint of that achievement, be handed the party's designation. This argument is now being put forth by Senator Obama's campaign.
Now today some in the Obama campaign and in the media are dismissing the importance of Hillary Clinton's victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island as unimportant. For they argue that, by any careful analysis of the delegate selection process under the present Democratic Party proportional representation system, whatever delegate totals Senator Clinton wins through the end of this year's primary season, will not be able to overcome Senator Obama's current unsurpassable lead over Senator Clinton and therefore Obama will deserve the support of the so-called "super delegates" and should gain the nomination. But that is not how it works as we have seen in past Democratic conventions. A lead in pledged delegates is not enough. You still have to convince your party that you are the best nominee. That is what the next stage of this election is all about."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-schlesinger/obama-and-the-myth-of-ple_b_89977.html
Posted by: GORDO | March 5, 2008 7:57 PM
I suspect that there are several on this list already. Several posters have stated they would vote for McCain if Obama was the nominee.
yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!
Write on! The purpose of the primary is to find a candidate not take your marbles and go home if your candidate loses.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | March 5, 2008 7:58 PM
Gordo you bring new meaning to the word "tedious" .
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 8:01 PM
Brian...no one seemed to be pissing on anyone until you arrived. You should really look into buying a dependable adult undergarment. There are several options.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 8:04 PM
Yep, if one doesn't believe in your man Barak, then we all might as well be Republicans. You keep over-looking the tactical move by Republicans and Independents to shoot at the tougher opponent Hillary. You reject the fact Democrats are voting more for her and "hope" the Republicans and Indies will turn out for Obama in November. Back in Iowa they didn't think McCain had a prayer. Go ahead dooty, re-vote Florida and watch Obama lose again. Then will you be happy and support Hillary?
Yes Utah is going Blue. And Brian, why shouldn't the rest of the country follow NY? Here Independents and Republicans can't vote in our primary. Sure great rules the DNC came up with. Maybe the DEMOCRATCIC primary will end up in court as Florida once again sues to have their vote count. Or maybe all those people in Florida are really Republicans.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 8:05 PM
I have heard far more Obama voters say they wil stay home or vote for McCain ......for example on this list
alpha 1906 said the entire African American community in the US will sit out the election if Obama is not the candidate.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | March 5, 2008 8:05 PM
KC that's not what alpha said, oh skip it, this is dull as dish water.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 8:09 PM
Max,
I'm the one who mentioned that My Democratic party was morphing. Brian said nothing on it and Dooty was just coming back on the slam I got.
just straightening out things. Don't want people blamed for my post.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 8:09 PM
Brian ------------------------
Just staying on message!
Posted by: GORDO | March 5, 2008 8:11 PM
kudos to Keith for the 3:00 AM phone joke!
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 8:12 PM
Let's see,
Brian enters debate
Brian mischaracterizes debate
Brian spews a couple random insults
Brian gets bored with debate
Brian leaves
All is well here in Crawfordland
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 8:12 PM
"Go ahead dooty, re-vote Florida and watch Obama lose again. Then will you be happy and support Hillary?
So,little boy Blue I have always said that I would vote for the Democratic candidate whom ever that be. The idea is is to elect a Democrat. I am a Yellow Dog Democrat. Ever heard of one of those? you may not have been here long enough to remember me saying that before many times.
yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!
Posted by: Hussein Horsedooty! | March 5, 2008 8:13 PM
Gordo it's a fine line between staying on msg and being a psycho serial killer, you've crossed it.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 8:13 PM
"Brian gets bored" doesn't say much for you Lard does it?
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 8:15 PM
KO is showing the "ghostbusters" spoof of the 3 AM ad. I wonder if he will show the Obama copies West Wing speech.
http://kara.allthingsd.com/20080304/west-wing-obama-mashup/
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 8:16 PM
They will sit it out to their own detriment.
If Obama's logic is accepted, then their is no purpose to the Superdelgates. Again, if you allow Republicans and Independents to vote, then Superdelegates are need to prevent a highjacking by those who are not Democrats. To assume these non Democratic votes are benign is about the same realism Obama presents in foreign policy. TE Ao post I put up is just one example of moves made by our adversaries based on Obama's words. Yes words mean something, and unfortunately, mean somethng quite dangerous. Maybe Russert will ask Obama if he plans to cut off military aid to Columbia and reject NAFTA for Columbia.
As far as resolution to Democratic problems, re-vote Flordia and Michigan. I doubt Obama wants that. Rumor had it Hillary created a strom on Cleveland that prevented Obama from winning. In Texas, Hispanics wonder why Blacks enjoy far more delegate power. Also Canada is investigating the talks between the Obama camp and their officials.
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 8:16 PM
Brian...don't you have a baby rattle to play with, or a Binky to chew on? Find them.
Meanwhile, we adults on the blog need to make "grownup talk."
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 8:17 PM
Wendy and everybody referring to the Geraldine Ferraro NYTimes op ed -- check out the readers' comments section.
Here's link to the op ed: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/opinion/25ferraro.html?sq=Ferraro%20superdelegates&st=nyt&scp=2&pagewanted=all
Like GAFerraro tremendously, but that was one of the worst argued opinion pieces I have ever read. It's like she's an attorney and none of the facts are in her client's favor.
Really -- cruise through the comments. Hundreds of them, and I only saw one in first 40 or so that was a lukewarm endorsement of Ferraro's position on superdelegates.
12th comment is only positive one; others use words like "absurd", "capricious" and "this is why the Democratic party has lost so many elections."
http://community.nytimes.com/article/comments/2008/02/25/opinion/25ferraro.html
Honestly, folks, if Obama was claiming this argument, I would be rejecting and denouncing him and it.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 5, 2008 8:17 PM
"Meanwhile, we adults on the blog need to make "grownup talk."
I see you too engage in magical thinking.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 8:19 PM
I think I understand the concept of Obama Rules
1. No rules should be changed if it involves making Clinton stronger
2. Any rule can be changed if it makes Obama stronger.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | March 5, 2008 8:22 PM
Bamboozling the American electorate again
"... Republicans have been organized in several states to throw their weight behind Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic rival of Hillary Clinton. At least three former fundraisers for President Bush flushed his coffers with cash early on in the race, something the deep pockets haven't done for any candidate in their own party. With receipts topping $100 million in 2007, the first-term Illinois senator broke the record for contributions. It was a remarkable feat, considering that most Americans had not even heard of him before 2005.
The Time article went on to explain that rank and file Republicans were switching parties this spring to vote for Obama in the Democratic primaries. Though not mentioned in the piece, a group called Republicans for Obama formed in 2006 to expedite the strategy. Many states have open primaries, allowing citizens to vote for any candidate, regardless of their party affiliation. In Nebraska, the mayor of Omaha publicly rallied Republicans to caucus for Obama on February 9th, according to Fox News Channel. Called crossover voting, the tactic is playing a crucial role in what appears to be a Rove-coordinated effort to deprive Clinton of the nomination."
http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html
Posted by: GORDO | March 5, 2008 8:24 PM
Only skimmed the comments, but want to say: I think open primaries is the way to go, even if you end up with some Limbaugh-inspired mouth breathers crossing party lines to interfere in your party's nomination.
Because for every miscreant there are dozens of well-intentioned voters who are independents or opposing party members voting their consciences, and why disenfranchise them? Point is to put up a candidate with a large enough base to win.
RE Florida and Michigan: I think they should revote in those states, open to indepedents if the original vote was -- and scheduled with enough time for voters to change party affiliation if they must to participate.
And then go with the results. It it's Hillary -- a clean vote. If it's Obama -- a clean vote.
It was a spoiled election in both states, and not fair to maneuver the results after the fact.
If it's expensive to fund the redo: democracy ain't always cheap.
Look at Iraq. Calculate the cost per vote there. Lives and money.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 5, 2008 8:30 PM
Celtics v. Pistons
Preview of the Eastern finals
Best game in basketball going tonight.
Not on ESPN or any other national TV outlet
If Obama can fix that, I'll vote for him.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 8:31 PM
all the double- triple- and quadruple posts and the testicle testing really got me laughing..and what the hell..after the past few weeks, who couldnt use a good laugh?
i see GORDO is still hunting down blog-o-spherical nonsense.. i'm glad some things dont change :)
Posted by: tylenol
| March 5, 2008 8:31 PM
It's on local tv here. But , the Pistons are losing.
Posted by: Corey Abdul Jabbar | March 5, 2008 8:32 PM
Shelia, I did respond to your remark further up and the one you questioned was in fact, directed at dooty. No problem.
Clinton tried to enlarge the party by his concept of "New Democrat" and more centrist liberal willing to work out real compromises to break the dead lock. He was despised by the Left for such a position. While Obama entered as a Lieberman mentor and spouted centrist lines, even suggesting nuking Iran, he decided to go Left of Hillary's centrist roadblock and pander to the more Liberal while claiming a uniter's mantel. Audacity of Hope does not trash NAFTA, yet on the stump he flipped to pander. He talked tough to AIPAC and supported widening sanctions, yet flipped on the stump. He spins pleasing words to Jews, but Malley, Zbig and Powers will not go away, notrwill Khadili or Rezko who gets his money from a Saddam crony. He makes pledges on public financing, but tries to wiggle out. The problem is just as I said months ago: as people vet his record and words they see far more triangulation and pandering than by Hillary. He wants inclusion and rejects Florida. He says he speaks for the Democrats, yet enjoys a small lead handed to him by Red States and non Democrats.
The pressure by Blacks on those Blacks supporting Hillary is disgusting and as I have said, the Superdelegates are there to prevent the interests of Democrats being highjacked by delegates and votes coming from outside the Blue Zone. Of course in battle States, red/blue mix counts, but many States Obama has taken in small caucuses simply don't represent the vested interest of the greater cause. Put another way. Obama doesn't have a prayer if Hillary States didn't vote. Hillary would have trouble too, but the comparison makes the point.
We can disagree, but this battle will go on. I think Obama comes under more intense vetting, Hillary takes Penn and it will get down to Florida and Superdelegates. In a dog fight, I think Obama loses, so perhaps making a deal for VP might be the best thing for him to do, or at least a deal that if Obama loses Penn, he is assured a VP spot, though I am not sure that helps Hillary. Adams and Jefferson couldn't get along until they were very old dudes.
Can a President fire a VP?
Posted by: Maxtrue | March 5, 2008 8:39 PM
I think it is important to know that there are indies out there that feel McC is better then BHO. Actually, I think if any of you would see McC in person you may have a different take on his ability to win this race.
Just saying what I have observed.
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 8:42 PM
Can a president fire a VP?
Max...don't think so. At least not directly. A VP is just as much an "elected" official as a prez, and can only be impeached or resign.
But...we get ahead of ourselves...
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 8:44 PM
Do rank & file democrats & many of the sd's realize that it is distinctly possible that although more Democrats actually voted for Hillary as their choice to be the Democratic nominee of the Democratic party she may not be the nominee?!
While it may be elementary to those intimately following this election, the media repeats daily that Obama has won the popular vote & more states, leading most people who do not spend quite as much time as many here, to simply believe that Obama has won more Democratic votes, not that in fact his lead for the most part should be attributed to Indys & Reps.
Shouldn't it be a prime consideration of the sd's that they select a candidate that a majority of the Democratic party's members voted for?
Posted by: Coreen | March 5, 2008 8:44 PM
A VP is an elected official, he/she cannot be fired, only impeached.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 8:45 PM
I think it is important to know that there are indies out there that feel McC is better then BHO. Actually, I think if any of you would see McC in person you may have a different take on his ability to win this race.
Just saying what I have observed.
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 8:42 PM
While I admire your obvious passion for McCain. There are those of us who admired him and followed him for years. Would have voted for him too if He hadn't denied his own long held beliefs and bowed to Bush in order to get this nomination.
I believe quite a few on this blog feel a bitter pill when It comes to mcCain. Thanks for your comment though.
Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun | March 5, 2008 8:47 PM
Hey Coreen...I love your logic. As far as the media repeating its daily lies, I've finally figured out a GREAT way to pass the time during the next seven weeks.
Let's strip Tim Russert naked, smear him with pig's blood, throw a couple of log chains around him...and then set him loose in a fenced field with a couple of hungry Alaskan malamutes. Now THAT would be entertaining!!
(And after he's done, we could move on to Chris Matthews)
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 8:49 PM
Where's Waldo? J Edwards?
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 8:51 PM
nekkid Tim???????????????
stabbing ot my mind eye (hat tip EdVB)
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | March 5, 2008 8:53 PM
No Passion, I am a HRC supporter. I just feel that when you actually go beyond the politics and try to judge the candidates it can get very blurry.
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 8:54 PM
Oh. I forgot one detail. There needs to be, like, a foot of snow in the fenced field. Mainly to slow Tim down for the dogs and to better highlight the pig's blood as he futilely stumbles away. But also so he can talk about how much it used to snow in Buffalo. We gotta give him something, after all.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 8:56 PM
"Tim Russert naked"
My dogs would run away from that !
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 8:59 PM
eww ewwwww ewwwwwwwwww Punkinhead nekkid.. ewwww
Posted by: estrogen deprived tylenol | March 5, 2008 9:11 PM
I choose not to envision Tim Russert in any manner.
Last night when msnbc called texas for Hillary, you would have thought he was at a funeral.
Posted by: Coreen | March 5, 2008 9:11 PM
Oh...one other detail I forgot: The exact type of fencing around the snow-covered field. But I'm going to let Dexter decide that one.
Should it be split-rail?
Barbed wire?
Pig wire?
Yuppie vinyl-white?
Or an invisible electro-shock fence?
Dex, it's 3 a.m. You are our president. Our babies are asleep in their beds. You have to make the call. So what is it?
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 9:25 PM
"Norman Thomas' grandson amuses me, but then again he as a penis, I can understand your contempt Patsi. "
You know so little, Brian. Like you, I have a great fondness for peni.
Posted by: Patsi | March 5, 2008 9:28 PM
If it gets down to the superdelegates and if I understand right, BHO wants them to vote for the person who has the popular vote nation wide. What do they do with the Caucus counts? Were they included in the popular vote? I think they just determine the delegate counts in that primary. I can understand a super voting based on popular vote if they were not commited to anyone, but if they were a friend of a candidate and gave them their word they would vote for them but the popular went a different way I am not so sure they should change their vote. If I was a super I would have a problem with that. Also should they vote based on what their district or state voted if they were not commited to a candidate. I am not sure what the right answer would be. Glad I don't have to make that decision.
Posted by: vadaryl
| March 5, 2008 9:30 PM
"Oh, Lois... Lois... how in blazes is my name "Brian" when I behave so utterly like Stewie? Damn you -- I shall kill you all!"
Posted by: Brian In Infancy | March 5, 2008 9:33 PM
"You know so little, Brian. Like you, I have a great fondness for peni."
Sadly for you it's not mutual, hence your bitterness.
Posted by: Brian Hussein In NYC | March 5, 2008 9:34 PM
If I were a SD I would vote for who ever I wanted....... Unless of course, my whole livelyhood depended on it..... there are so many problems with this method......
Posted by: march5 | March 5, 2008 9:34 PM
"If it's expensive to fund the redo: democracy ain't always cheap."
Couldn't agree more, dog....those states have to vote, and have them count. Howard Dean has been a great disappointment. Harold Ford would have been a much better choice.
Posted by: Patsi | March 5, 2008 9:37 PM
The popular vote is interesting. BHO is leading if you take out FL and MI. Adding them both in Hillary is leading. If you just add FL, BHO is still leading. In any case it's very close. Pa could flip the numbers. I don't know what to do with the Caucus counts.
Posted by: vadaryl
| March 5, 2008 9:41 PM
"(And after he's done, we could move on to Chris Matthews)"
LL
There won't be much left. Quite awhile back,I stripped him nude, slathered him in honey and staked him out on a fire ant hill.
Posted by: jamie "instructions R Us" | March 5, 2008 9:45 PM
There is all kinds of problems with this method but that's what we got and we got to live with it. In the future this system got to go. I hate to see any of the SD's getting death threats over this. It's not worth it. If I was a SD and got a threat I would go to my candidate and talk to them about it and together we could make a decision.
Posted by: vadaryl
| March 5, 2008 9:47 PM
If the the super delegates are required to vote a certain way there is no point in having them.
According to Obama when he talks about Fla or Mi everyone knew the rules. The rule is the sds are not bound in anyway.
Oh right....that doesn't work in his favor. So the rule must be changed.
Posted by: Super Delicate | March 5, 2008 9:51 PM
You guys: re your technicolor plans for Tim Russert:
what if he LIKES it? We have no idea what the guy does on his days off, and he may have a masochistic streak, given the crowd he occasionally runs with.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 5, 2008 9:53 PM
The rules were the SD's could make their own decisions. What would you do if you were a SD. If I was not commited to anyone I would use the popular vote, that could override what my state voted for. If I was commited to someone that would stand no matter what. Personal friendship is very important.
Posted by: vadaryl
| March 5, 2008 9:58 PM
Jamie...Honey? Fire ants? Tim Russert? I like you.
Or, better yet, to channel Hedley Lamar in Blazing Saddles...
"Kinnnnnnky...."
Still...I think my Alaskan-malamute-pigsblood-snowy-fenced-field scenario trumps because it accommodates the gratuitous Russert-invoking-Buffalo angle.
Posted by: LardassLiberal
| March 5, 2008 9:58 PM
aw cmon... tweety nekkid too? I may not be able to define obscene, but I know it when I see it, and that's obscene!
Posted by: tylenol
| March 5, 2008 9:58 PM
Easy decison leave FL and MI out. I don't like that but rules are rules. Their SD's would be left out too.
Posted by: vadaryl
| March 5, 2008 10:00 PM
Super Delicate: you are making a broad statement that is not supported by the facts. And Florida and Michigan were very badly handled.
A lot of whining on this blog. Makes it less appealing to visit.
Posted by: dog hussein dog | March 5, 2008 10:00 PM
Other way leave FL as is, for whatever reason BHO put his name on the ballot and it was a fair election. In MI he left his name off, I would have a re vote there.
Posted by: vadaryl
| March 5, 2008 10:01 PM
What SD facts do you mean?
Posted by: vadaryl