Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

Yay...Craig in the Morning! Better get some shut eye now so to be up early for that (comes at 5:30 am for me).

Wait...Wednesday was the 16th - Thursday is the 17th...or did I miss that already? I'm confused (not difficult).

New news...old news...nothing matters as long as Obama's opponent is Hillary, the candidate everyone loves to hate...it will be a different story when Obama goes up against McCain.

OBAMA & AYERS

" ...asked Barack Obama about his long relationship with terrorist William Ayers — who has admitted setting a bomb in the Pentagon and whose Weather Underground girlfriend was killed while making bombs. (Finally, Barack Obama is beginning to be asked about these worrisome relationships of long standing.)

To this day, William Ayers expresses no regret. Ayers told a New York Times reporter...”I don’t regret setting bombs.” He said, ”I feel we didn’t do enough.”

Obama’s long associations include Ayers’ sponsorship, contributions and fund-raising work for several of Obama’s campaigns, as well as their joint membership on the board of the Woods Foundation. The two men have also appeared together on panels.

Both Barack Obama and William Ayers — sitting together on the Woods Fund board — “voted to donate $75,000 of the largesse they controlled to the Arab American Action Network.”

The AAAN was “co-founded by Rashid Khalidi, a longtime supporter of Palestinian ‘resistance’ attacks against Israel,” and widely considered himself to be a dangerous radical, according to an opinion piece on April 11, 2008...

The most pressing problem for the Democratic party is to consider the effect of Barack Obama’s longtime relationship with William Ayers in a general election contest. Larry Johnson spoke to the Times UK about what the GOP and its 527s will do with such proven information:

Larry Johnson, a former counterterrorism official at the CIA said: “They’re going to kill him with this. The guy is an unrepentant terrorist, so please, Barack Obama, explain why you aligned yourself with him. It is a fundamental question of judgment. By the time he [Obama] was hanging around with Ayers, his position was well known. He [Ayers] was not a freedom fighter; he belonged to a violent terrorist group.”

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/16/obama-asked-about-william-ayers-in-tonights-debate/

I was only able to see the last 40 minutes of the debate.

If Hillary is on the ropes, it sure didn't show here.

She was in command of the issues and made very clear her case for her candidacy.

Hannity interviews Rove about William Ayers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JishkSYhx34

"That summer she went to work at the most important radical law firm in America at that point: Treuhaft, Walker and Bernstein in Oakland. They defended the Panthers. Two of their partners were members of the Communist Party--including Bob Treuhaft, who was married to Jessica Mitford. I talked to Bob Treuhaft not long before he died, and he said he was certain that Hillary came there because she subscribed to some of the kind of law they practiced and the kind of clients they defended. In her so-called autobiography, "Living History," she put in a couple of sentences about living in Berkeley with Bill that summer and working at that law firm, but she makes it sound like their work focused on postal rate increases. There's not a word about radicals."-C Bernstein

What a disgraceful performance by these two so-called newspeople. Almost an hour of tabloid journalism questioning before we ever got to anything Americans are really interested in. Gibson and Stephanopoulos epitomize all that is wrong with the MSM today. The whole event looked like a right wing talking points hit job orchestrated by Fixed News Channel. I always knew Gibson was a right wing tool. But Stephanopoulos, actually using questions from Sean Hannity of all people? And about William Ayers?? ABC needs to fire everyone at the News operation from top down. And while your at it please apologize to America for wasting so much of our time on nonsense.

Yours truly, A bitter Pennsylvanian

I never thought I would live to see Charlie Gibson attacked.

But then, for most of my life I didn't know about the Church of Obama.

Immediately after leaving the Clinton administration, George wrote a tell quite a bit book. The Clintons see him as a turncoat.

Gibson is the most benign of the anchor community..
He was perfect for Good Morning America..He is good ole Charlie.
You wlll remember that when Hill was the frontrunner she took the brunt of the attack in the first bunch of debates.
I don't know if this tact is a good one or not.
I think Obama seemed tired tonight. At the last debate they both were drained I thought.
Hillary must have gotten some rest. She was at her best tonight.

Hillary looked presidential Wednesday during the debate. She was glowing. Obama seemed defensive, boyish and tired. Not at all like someone I'd want running America. For once two newspeople asked Obama some tough questions at a debate and all the Obama fans are complaining, trying to demonize poor ole Charles Gibson and sweet faced Stephanopoulos.

Craig, don't be so sure that the Rev Wright issue and Rezko are behind Obama. I doubt Hannity and the swift boaters would agree with you. The Republicans
are just beginning their assault on Obama.

Oh boy, did Hillary look smashing. Her hair was done just so, I mean she must have told her hair stylist to give her the "presidential special". And her choice of pant suit? Smashing.

Obama, positively passe in contrast. I mean, who wears a suit to a debate?

Give me a break. You timid Democrats are soooo scared of the bogey man Republicans. I love how Hillary said that she had baggage. Uh duh! That's why she'll never be president.

George Steph will get a pat on the head tonight and Bill will toss him a cookie for a job well done. Still, it ain't gonna matter. She's still behind, will remain behind and she'll be in the audience with an awkward smile when Obama is sworn in.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/04/debate-surfaces-obamas-weather.html#comment-69043

ah, Ivy Green, if you're still there, it is the 17th -- today, i had the right day but the wrong date on there. all fixed now.

Prof Marcia,

I don't think Craig is saying Rezko and Rev Wright won't come up in the general election, but his point was that they'll be old news, so no shock to the public and less likely to have news folks with an appetite to keep digging for more information on them.

Craig, I still remember my old dogs, I remember them often. And I could tell how you miss Rebel, too. Damned dogs.

Mr Obama kept saying, "It was forty years ago!", while the others were saying, no what about right after 9/11 and the Woods Fund board. As you say, that will raise some interest.

I thought both did alright with a slight lead to Mrs Clinton. The wonk in her was clearly visible without being tedious.

Stinky and I are off to get prescriptions filled. Your parents know all about that.

Good, appearance Craig! You'll be back.

GORDO...

Ask Larry why Bill gave clemency to two of them terrorists and if he had any ties to them.

Even Republicans were pissed about the {pardon\clemency} as well as Democrats.

My favorite line was when Hillary said she thought the Bush administration had been so incompetent that the Republicans should apologize for the last 8 years and not run anyone at all in the 2008 election.Well, she worded it better, but it made her seem really human, like something you'd say to your friend over a cup of coffee. I would give a slight edge to Hillary overall last night.

This debate was on ABC, not C-SPAN, entertainment is their goal, 2nd hr was up against American Idol, so what would you do if you were running the network. Obama was the frontrunner, has had pretty much of a free ride so far, there is not much left to dish out on Hillary, so why not go after him, it's new, it's fresh.

stephanopolous on Imus.......

Did I hear correctly that Hannity or some other right wing radio guy got to Stephanopoulos and had him ask about William Ayers.

Interesting that ABC jumped on the Rev. Wright story and now the Ayers story, but Hannity has been on it for months and it went nowhere. Were the networks scared to touch it until nowl.

so Craig after you've had a good nights sleep..who do you think won the debate? i think Clinton did a great job and was very presidential..Obama looked like a 5th grader

Craig you were good as usual on Imus. Sorry to hear about your dog. It's must of been hard on you.

Wow...what a difference not getting thrown a bunch of softballs by NBC makes for Obama in the debate. He was stuttering and stammering all over the place and that was on the important stuff...policies.

Very sad for him that the first half of the debate focused almost completely on his dubious relationships and...so called...misstatements. Clinton was smart to stand back and let them have at it.

Looks like MSM agrees with me...weakest debate for Obama so far...and I thought NBC said he was just getting better and better after the last debate. I guess it wasn't that Obama was getting better it was that the questions were getting easier.

Clinton looked good...took a backseat for the most part in the first part of the debate and showed her command of the policies in the second half of the debate...whether you agree with her or not on her approach to the issues...she was better prepared with her answers and took a couple of opportunities to cut Obama's legs out from under him a couple of times.

Oh, but Rezko & the Rev would raise a big stink in the general. There are a lot of people who don’t pay attention to politics, or at least to the other party, until then. A McCain ad with a soundbite of Obama’s preacher damning our country…yeah, that’ll go over big.

Couple that with the relationship with Ayers & the vote to donate money to a group with the word “Arab” in it and the GOP will be playing the terror card, again. They will paint Obama as an enemy of the people, as a sleeper cell of one. Don’t think they wouldn’t do something that despicable.

The GOP wants Obama to win. Hil’ry would be a much tougher candidate in a match-up with McCain.

BTW, her performance last night was stellar & she is the one to bring both sides together to work on the issues.

"The guy is an unrepentant terrorist, so please, Barack Obama, explain why you aligned yourself with him."

He's aligned with these people because underneath it all...like A LOT of the people he surrounds himself with who are overtly anti-Israel...I suspect Obama is secretly anti-Israel but an anti-Israel platform isn't going to fly in either of the major parties so he has to pander to the pro-Israel crowd in order to get elected.

good morning gang....
thanks for all your comments on last night's debate..... I think I made the right choice for myself to watch the ball game and AI..... the only opinions that count are those of the voters to come..... it should prove interesting....

what a weird ball game.... pitching totally collapsed on both sides..... but my side was worse..... congrats to all you Yankees fans....

Craig.... I missed your Imus appearance this morning..... got up very early to work and forgot to change the radio station....

gotta get back to work.... I want to get as much done as I can before heading off to lunch with some book club buddies..... we're going to a sugaring house restaurant..... gonna order buckwheat and blueberry pancakes with real NH made maple syrup..... YUM!

mornin', all. Just a quick check in - work requires my attention today. Didn't see the debate, but it doesn't sound like too much is likely to have happened that will sway many primary voters. From what I can tell from the post mortems, Craig was right - if it was going to be at all interesting, it would have to be personal. Apparently Gibson, Stephanopolis and Clinton heard that message. I can't get too excited about it any more. PA will come and go, the remaining primaries will come and go, enough super delegates will declare to make it clear which candidate will be the nominee and then the general election will swing into high gear.

I'm not yet fully convinced that Hillary can't win the nomination - the PA polls continue to be all over the place and she is ahead in at least 4 of the remaining contests, but it is an uphill climb. I only hope that Obama, if he's the nominee, can do better than he has defending his associations with people the majority of voters don't care for than he has to date. Those associations will be featured front and center in the Repug strategy, plus he's going to have to do a better job of convincing people that his string of brief careers has seasoned him enough to be a better choice than McCain. If the response to his positions is that he looked tired and responded like a fifth grader, he won't beat McCain. And finally, he'll heve to defend his record as the most liberal Senator in the Senate. Again, that will be a front and center issue, to which he'll have to respond and explain why he was and it was a good thing for Americans or why the rating is wrong. I hope he's up for that task. It ain't just raising money on the internet and winning caucuses.

Renee, now that's the NH I loved.

What a bunch of stupid "debate" questions. The MSM always focues on silly crap like Bosnia snipers and bitterness rather than Iraq, the economy, health care, etc.

Nash - you must have turned it off during the commercial. Since they have beat health care to death in other debates...I guess they skipped that question, but just before the break and after the break, they covered foreign policy, Iraq, Iran, Israel and the economy - especially taxes. It was very wonky in the second half.

Celebrity Endorsements:

Obama: Bruce Springsteen
Clinton: Elton John

Other endorsements you may not have heard about.

Obama: Rolling Stones
Clinton: Kiss

Obama: Tom Jones
Clinton: Wayne Newton

Obama: Elvis
Clinton: Ricky Nelson

Obama: Peter, Paul, and Mary
Clinton: Tiny Tim

Obama: Patridge Family
Clinton: Spinal Tap

Wendy: You are right. After listening to the stupid opening questions, I decided to watch one of my Mystery Science Theater DVDs. ("The Girl in Gold Boots.")

While I agree that the first hour of questioning was assinine, it did serve one purpose. For more than 20 years Senator Clinton has been dealing with assinine questions and rumors. She has taken it all, lived her life with grace, and come back fighting.

Sen Obama gets one hour of it and turns petty and whiney with an army of defenders coming out the next day to scream UNFAIR!! Well he better get used to it fast because if he is the nominee, this was only a taste test.

From the beginning she has been one of the best possible people for the job, but the public seems to want to give it to an amateur instead. Maybe this will make them and the SDs think twice.

Speaking ofhealth care a great and funny healthcare commercial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCHIuAShX8A

Jack

some people are looking at this debate thru a prism of what they want.......

---greenfield

Obama: Tom Jones
Clinton: Wayne Newton

Nash you have this one backwards. Tom Jones really likes older women. He's still married to one. Newton is into cradle robbing. :-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNhvYavW5Is&feature=related

Rupert Murdoch goes on a profanity laden

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/136581.asprant about Tony Hendra's "My Wall St. Journal"

oops

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/136581.asp

sounds suspiciously like Tony Hendra's voice, I must say..........................

For more info on Senator Ron Wyden's "healthy Americans act"
http://www.standtallforamerica.com/page/s/careyoukeep

I like the looks of it. It is far better than anything any of the candidates have proposed.

Jack

Renee,

or anyone else, who may know the answer:

What's a sugaring house restaurant?

maybe?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GxM6mAK60Y

EdVB

A sugaring house is where maple sap is converted to maple syrup. Many of the places that make the syrup also have restaurants and/or gift shops attached that use the products.

EdVb

Here's one http://www.rathbunsmaple.com/

EdVB

Sugaring is the term for turning 40 gal. of maple tree sap into 1 gal. of maple syrup. A sugaring house is where you boil all the liquid off.
What Renee will get is maple syrup that was made that day on site.

I'm jealous

Jack

Nash wrote: "You are right. After listening to the stupid opening questions, I decided to watch one of my Mystery Science Theater DVDs. "

LOL - I can't say I blame you there.

So Who Is This Bill Ayers??

..."Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn (now married to Ayers) were two of the most infamous domestic terrorists ever to be allowed to continue to walk the earth in America, thanks to a screw up in the surveillance. But that didn’t stop Ayers from bragging on what he did. “i don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough”
–Bill Ayers, September 11, 2001

Weatherman, AKA Weather Underground Organization, was a violent U.S Radical Left group. They called themselves a revolutionary organization whose purpose was to carry out a series of attacks to overthrow of the Government of the United States.

So what exactly DID Obama’s friend, campaign ally and Woods Foundation Colleague and his wife do?

For starters, the Weather Underground claimed credit for a bombing in Chicago, which they referred to as a “kickoff” of what they called their “Days Of Rage”. Their book. entitled, “Prairie Free”, strongly called for a unified Communist Party.

The Weather Underground blew up several Chicago Police cars at that time as well.

Next, these slime balls held a “war council” to firm up plans to remain underground and commit acts of sabotage against the US Government. They bombed several police cars in Berkley. Then they detonated a bomb at the San Francisco Police Department, during which one officer was killed and several others were injured. When 36 sticks of dynamite were discovered at a police precinct in Detroit, Bill Ayers just happened to be in town.

Later, several of the Underground’s own members died when they accidentally blew up their own bomb factory in New York. No loss. The bomb was intended to be used at an officer’s dance at Fort Dix. The bomb they were going to use was packed with nails for maximum damage. Fortunately those nails ended up stuck in their own miserable dead asses instead. Then another bomb factory was discovered in Chicago’s North side. Their weapons cache was also discovered in an apartment in Chicago’s South side. Then they blew up the National Guard building in DC.

They claimed credit for the explosion of the San Francisco Hall of Justice, which never occurred. Later, an undetonated explosive device was discovered on the premises. Then the NY City Police headquarters was bombed. Then they bombed the Presidio Army Base in San Francisco in honor of the anniversary of the Cuban Revolution.

Next, they bombed the US Capital. Another of their bomb factories was discovered in San Francisco. Then they bombed the office of California Prisons, The New York Department of Corrections in Albany, NY, and William Bundy’s office at MIT Research Center.

They bombed the Pentagon. They bombed the 103 Police Precinct in New York. Then they bombed the ITT buildings in both New York and Rome, Italy. They bombed the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. They bombed the Office of California of Attorney General. They bombed Gulf’s Pittsburgh headquarters. Then they bombed the Anaconda headquarters. They bombed the State Department. They bombed the Banco De Ponce in Puerto Rico as well as the Kennekot Corporation. They also committed the Brinks Robbery in conjunction with the Black Liberation Army.

So, let me ask you: If you had any judgment at all, and if you billed yourself as a “Uniter,” would you go to Bill Ayers’ home and be on the Woods Fund with him for years? Would you take a political contribution from him and let him introduce you around? Would you mind if your sister brought Bill Ayers home to meet the family?"

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/17/so-who-is-this-bill-ayers/

WaPo appears to have curtailed Kurtz article on the debate in his Media Notes this morning. Only can get the first page. Sounded like he was giving a pretty balanced critique; but maybe that's why they "lost" it in cyberspace.

To go along with Craig's take...here are a few brief observations from others in the MSM of last night:

Hillary dominates Philadelphia focus group. ‘NYDIA HAN: The real take away is this. We now know who won the debate according to our focus group. Take a look. Senator Clinton is the debate winner, at least according to our focus group. 23% believe Senator Obama won while 50% believed Senator Clinton won.” [WPVI Post-Debate Analysis, 4/16/08]

ABC News Rick Klein ‘'Clinton is back to the strong presence we saw early in the cycle.' [ABC News Political Radar, 4/16/08]

NBC News Chuck Todd ‘Obama ‘did not have a good night. [MSNBC Post-Debate Analysis, 4/16/08]

NBC News' Chuck Todd’Obamas answer on Ayers and the flag ‘were simply weak. ‘His answer on Ayers and the flag question were simply weak; He seemed unprepared for them; Kinda surprising because he normally has a decent rant against "old politics" and yet "old politics" questions seemed to stump him.” [NBC First Read, 4/16/08]

The Atlantics Marc Ambinder ‘[T]here's no way Obama could fared worse. [The Atlantics Marc Ambinder, 4/16/08]

Washington Post Chris Cillizza ‘ Obama ‘struggled quite a bit when asked about Rev. Wright. ‘…He struggled quite a bit more when asked to answer for Wright, his former pastor.” [Washington Post, The Fix, 4/16/08]

New York Times Katharine Seeyle: Hillarys ‘in her element as she goes into details. "Shes becoming expansive, seemingly in her element as she goes into details; Mr. Obama does not look as thrilled to be still standing there." [New York Times, The Caucus, 4/16/08]

Talking Points Memos Josh Marshall ‘Hillary ‘certainly seems more self-assured. ' ‘She certainly seems more self-assured on the Iran question than Obama did. The question of extending an American security umbrella to Israel is very dicey. And he could clearly see he was on delicate territory.” [Talking Points Memo, 4/16/08]

Philadelphia Inquirer blog ‘‘Obama is again less certain, and rambles a bit. ‘Obama is again less certain, and rambles a bit when asked about the Washington D.C. gun ban. Gibson asks him to deny that he has ever advocated a complete ban on hand guns in 1996. Obama says no. But whatever the truth, no other answer is possible.” [Philadelphia Inquirer Blog, 4/16/08]

NBC News Matthew Berger ‘Obama ‘tried to have it both ways with Israel. ‘Obama's answer on an Iranian attack on Israel tried to seem to have it both ways: highlight his support for Israel but not lock him into treating an attack on Israel like an attack on the U.S. But it may have looked more like a no because it wasn't a firm yes. Clinton's answer seemed more direct.” [NBC First Read, 4/16/08]

Transcript from last night

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4670271&page=1

Craig: Listened to you on Imus this morning. Great to hear your analysis (and funnies) as usual. Have you cut ties with MSNBC? Matthews and Olbermann have lost their journalistic integrity so I don't watch anymore, but gather from some posts that you haven't been on. David Gregory is pretty good and I do watch that couple times a week, but haven't seen you there either. Anyway, what's the story? Maybe I'll start a thread on the MSNBC blog about having you on more often. After NYTimes mag article on Matthews the other day, they need to increase the talent quotient.

No Whining About the Media

By David Brooks

Three quick points on the Democratic debate tonight:

First, Democrats, and especially Obama supporters, are going to jump all over ABC for the choice of topics: too many gaffe questions, not enough policy questions.

I understand the complaints, but I thought the questions were excellent.

For the life of me I can’t figure out why he didn’t have better answers on Wright and on the “bitter” comments. The superdelegates cannot have been comforted by his performance.

Final grades:

ABC: A
Clinton: B
Obama: D+

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/no-whining-about-the-media/index.html?hp

David Brooks has been unreasonably kind to Obama so this is not the usual spin.

toast

It was interesting that Pat Buchanan said to Keith O after the debate it was the first he heard of Ayers or must of forgot about what was said about him. He must have a short term memory loss because he was on Hannity's show the other day and they disucssed this. Do these talking heads think we are all stuck on stupid.

You think it gets rough in here? Take a look at what the commenters are doing to ABC this morning. There could well be some pink slips if these remarks are any indication of what may be going on behind the scenes

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/DemocraticDebate/comments?type=story&id=4666956

My other thought was that Pat was playing to the MSNBC execs and acting like he knew nothing about it because they did not want to give any credit to FOX or hannity for bringing up the issue for months and they didn't.

EdVB,

This is the Real deal. Parker's Maple Barn in Mason, NH

Parker's Maple Barn: a New England dining legend

MASON, N.H. --Parker's Maple Barn is located in the middle of nowhere. From any direction, you're sure to experience endless winding roads, pine trees that join for miles, and disbelief that 79,000 people living in Nashua are only 20 minutes away from seemingly the most quiet place on Earth.

Why anyone would want to travel to seemingly the other side of the universe for bacon and eggs is sincerely answered upon arriving at the bumpy, dirt parking lot. You feel like you're home, at a nice, warm safe place -- perhaps a reminder of what New England used to be like before the population boom and commercialization of scenic areas.

The maple barn is actually an authentic 1800s dairy barn and silo. Inside, the antique cow stanchions integrated into handmade wooden tables and antique farm items hanging on the walls create an instant time warp atmosphere set to dim lighting, bright service, and absolutely electrifying comfort food.

http://www.visitingnewengland.com/parkers.html

[repost]

My take on the debate:

I could of done without the first 45 minutes. It was uncomfortable to watch - and did nothing to make the potential nominees look Presidential. Good for Obama pointing that out.

I see two problems for Clinton. First, with respect to the nomination - it looks like she is going to have a tough time arguing to the Super D's that Obama can't win the general election after tonight. Especially after she brushed off questions about her credibility as "no big deal." (She can't very well go back on her word now.) I am not sure how the Super Delegates overturn the primary without the argument that Obama can't win the general.

Anyways, the more critical problem is her position on Iraq. Agreeing with Wolfson's categorical statement - that she would begin to pull out troops within 60 days - even if the generals on the ground said it was a bad idea - was a big mistake. She should have thrown Wolf-boy under the bus and backed off of that position.

I do not see how a Democrat can win the Iraq debate against Senator McCain taking that position - having no clue what the conditions on the ground would be in January and Patreus's testimony that conditions are "fragile" and "reversible". And stating that she would insist on a 60-day timetable no matter what would be front and center in the general election - and it could not be dismissed as a distraction. (She is damn near coming close to unelectable.)

Obama left himself 16 months and made clear he would consult the generals on the ground for tactical decisions - in contrast to HRC giving them a 60-day deadline - and basically telling them to "make it work" even if they don't agree. (Not listening to the generals was part of how Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld made such a mess in Iraq.)

I also thought Obama's answer about the CIC setting the "mission" sounded more Presidential.

(And I know everyone got a big laugh from HRC saying that she wishes the GOP would just give up and not run a candidate this year - but that sense of entitlement will not score any points with the swing voters in the middle.)

Drat...I slept through Craig in the Morning, but I will catch the replay on the various Imus recaps.

So thrilled, though, to get a nod from the C-Man...thanks, Craig...your interaction and feedback to your readers is so appreciated. Thanks always.

P.S. I was feigning befuddlement about the date typo...I know how easy it is to make cut-and-paste mistakes since I make them all the time.

Thanks for the "sugaring house" answers. We have some maple farms around here which provide the same service, and I wondered if that might be the case.

I just talked to our telephone receptionist about the term "sugar house restaurant." She said this year was the best ever for her husband as far as the volume of maple syrup. They don't sell it. Just produce enough for themselves and their kids' families. She said, "Other places have sugar houses, we just use our shed."

Sen Obama should pay someone to go get a still of the shot that was just on MSNBC of him walking and chatting with PM Gordon Brown. They were laughing, gesturing and both looking confident ... Gotta give him credit for physical presence. Michelle Obama is right. She likes accessories, she's married to one.

That's my "make nice" for the day.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/04/debate-surfaces-obamas-weather.html#comment-69101

no ties cut, Lynn, these things are cyclical. Comments about MSNBC are best directed to their message board: http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/board.aspx?BoardID=780

Another transcript of the debate

http://moonshinepatriot.blogspot.com/2008/04/democratic-debate-abc-april-16-2008.html

The Weather Underground opposed pointless imperialist wars and tried to prevent big corporations from dominating the political process.

Boy, it's a good thing we didn't listen to them.

Wendy:

"Obama ‘tried to have it both ways with Israel. ‘Obama's answer on an Iranian attack on Israel tried to seem to have it both ways: highlight his support for Israel but not lock him into treating an attack on Israel like an attack on the U.S."

Perhaps because Obama understands that the Constitution would prevent him from making such a committment without the authorization of Congress. Perhaps it is also complicated by the fact that he would be making such a commitment based on a hypothetical given at a debate as opposed to responding to an actual world event.

(I guess Hillary only engages in hypotheticals when she believes it is in her own political interest to do so.)

Pat B. (one of her biggest fans) even called her out on this point.

So it was alright for Bill to grant clemency to two of the Weather Underground members I guess.

Did the Clinton's receive any money for those clemencies like Hillary's brothers received for other pardons Bill granted?

Do the Clinton's have ties also to any other members of the Weather Underground?

I think this needs to be looked into more.

More radical skeletons in the closet:

One summer Hillary worked for a law firm with two partners who were commuinst party members. They were defending the Black Panthers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marc-cooper/hillary-and-the-commies_b_97131.html

The Black Panthers had a lot of guns, and they were bitter.

Maybe they took Hillary duck hunting in Oakland.

After last night, Obama must agree to the North Carolina debate.

Otherwise, it would seem he thinks he would not come off well compared to Hillary.

Looks like O's disciples are back on the attack this morning. I'd hate to be in their position this morning.

The bizarro world of Barack Obama

"Welcome to the bizarro world of Barack Obama. He is personal friends with an unrepentant terrorist and takes his campaign donations and claims this is the same as Hillary being married to the President who pardoned two members of the Weather Underground who had served six years in prison. And Rosenberg actually apologized for her crime.

I disagree with Bill Clinton’s decision. I think he was wrong. But I blame him, not Hillary. Hillary did not put him up to it and Hillary did not benefit from the decision. So what is Senator Obama’s point? Hillary is not friends with an unrepentant terrorist. Barack is. Explain that one to us Mr. Obama."

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/16/hillary-the-weather-is-just-fine/

Here's some more Terrorists that were pardoned or granted clemency by Bill Clinton.

FALN Terrorist granted clemency or pardoned.

http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/faln.htm

Bill liked letting Terrorists go I guess.

MSNBC politics message board stinks, but I just posted:

http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?boardid=780&ThreadID=635478&BoardsParam=page%3d2%26HIPDelay%3d1

Those who are frustrated with biased MSNBC coverage and/or would like to see Craig on more often should post.

Of course Hillary did the right thing on the FALN issue and opposed it.

here is the voting record on things Military (not counting his undying support of the war). Here is how Senator McCain, who wants to run as a war hero, supports the troops.

McCain's voting record speaks for itself ... and him.

August 2001
McCain votes against increasing the amount of cash available for veterans' medical care

March 2004
McCain votes against creating a reserve fund for veterans' medical care

March 2006
McCain votes against increasing veterans' medical services funding

May 2006
McCain votes against additional funding to the VA for health care facilities

September 2007
McCain votes against the Webb Amendment, which would have provided for adequate periods of rest between deployments to Iraq

Yo soy un demócrata amarillo del perro.

Yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!

Why the Titanic sunk: cheap rivets.

Why Clinton will sink: cheap shots.

Hillary:
yada yada yada Rev. Wright,
yada yada yada bitterness,
yada yada yada Weather Underground,
yada yada yada (insert racist code words here).

Am I the only one that is tired of the All Barak All The Time cable news? First it was MSNBC drooling over him, then it spread to CNN. To put it bluntly, I don't see how he can sit down with so many media folks stuck on his butt.
Best line of the debate was Hillary, "I have a lot of baggaage and people have been riffeling thru it for years"
I started out supporting Sen. Obama, but his lack of clear policy or answers has scared me.

"The Weather Underground opposed pointless imperialist wars and tried to prevent big corporations from dominating the political process.

Boy, it's a good thing we didn't listen to them."

Yes and chose to resort to terrorist tactics to get their point across - this included the deaths of innocent people.

I'm not sure this does Obama any favors by praising a terrorist organization that a current friend of his once belonged to and that same friend still praises the terrorist acts of.

It is not a bad thing to oppose imperialist wars...it's the tactics one uses in that opposition that is problematic.

warren,

I do not see how a Democrat can win the Iraq debate against Senator McCain taking that position - having no clue what the conditions on the ground would be in January and Patreus's testimony that conditions are "fragile" and "reversible". And stating that she would insist on a 60-day timetable no matter what would be front and center in the general election - and it could not be dismissed as a distraction. (She is damn near coming close to unelectable.)

Posted by: warren

For what it's worth I believe your right, and I fail to see her reasoning.

toast

And I still have not seen why Hillary is not ask about the money her brothers received from pardons they got Bill to grant either.

One brother had to finally return $400,000 dollars and the other one is in a lawsuit right now IIRC.

The Polls are all over the place and there seems to be folks reading and watching different thing from the comments.

And how much money have the Clinton's received for any of the other pardons and grants of clemency Bill issued?

Now I am befuddled for certain...Weimaraner or Wiener Dog? Sounded like Craig was referring to the breed known as the "Gray Ghost," but Imus thought he meant a dachshund ("wiener dog"). A Weimaraner would be a big mouthful for an alligator, but a dachshund would be a tasty morsel.

I used to live in Altamonte Springs...my wiener dog got eaten by fire ants, but survived.

"All pundits should be like Craig Crawford."
D. Imus

Wendy:

Nixon killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Vietnamese civilians. Bush killed tens of thousands innocent Iraqi civilians.

The white upper and middle-class revolutionary wannabes in the Weather Underground killed a handful of people. For that, they were condemned by the vast majority of people on the left who were, and still are, non-violent.

By comparison, the U.S. right wing LOVES violence and hardly anyone in government of the mass media ever criticizes them.

Last night illustrated Obama's weaknesses for the general election.

Now, let's sit back and watch the usual suspects savage the Clintons instead of defending their candidate.

OD...

She admitted she lied about her trip to Bosnia. This time she didn't say she misspoke, but that she said something she knew not to be true.

Clinton admitted LYING.

But I'm sure all the Clinton supporters will try to spin that too.

Anon..Thank you for illustrating my point..

Oh, what a great day!!!

anon-p:

No one is concerned about HRC's skeletons right now. Last night was an inquisition of the presumptive nominee by three prosecutors. He may have looked bad since he was on the defensive all night - but he did not make any huge mistakes (unlike HRC - see my post above re: Iraq). In other words, Hillary again needed a game-changer - and she did not get one.

(She also gave a bit of a preview of her concession speech in the first five minutes).

This debate showed what happens when you have 21 freaking debates. They have been through the issues - and the only current events they addressed was the campaign gossip that us and the pundits care a lot more about than the majority of voters.

It's Obama's nomination to lose, at this point. He should NOT do another debate and he should only do prepared speeches. No questions from the audience. No cable news appearances. No fundraisers. No questions from the audience. I'm semi-serious here: He has the best chance of cruising to the nomination the less opportunities he has to underperform or make gaffes.

Hi everyone,

I think the issue with Obama is that being presented as an Washington outsider, people need to know who he considers his insiders. Who are his acquaintances, who is the man behind the face. Being that he is fairy young, he has already acquired list of shady characters.

This will reflect a pattern of choices he has made. It's like that old saying birds of a feather flock together-or the other one - if you want to know a man's character look at his friends.

I suspect most people on this blog don't hang with people anything like Rev. Wright , Rezko, or Ayres.

I think this will really sink him in the general, unless he counter balance with some positive acquaintances, mentors or friends.

OD: "Last night illustrated Obama's weakness in the general election?"

Last night illustrated the fact that the Clinton campaign consists of nothing but stupid swiftboat slogans, AND that the MSM would rather cover that than deal with substantive issues.

Have you read the polls? Nearly EVERYONE hates Hillary, thanks to her dirty campaign.

THAT could be a weakness in the general election.

AP

Repeat after me: Women are no longer chattel. They do not belong to fathers, brothers, or husbands.

Hillary Clinton is not her father
Hillary Clinton is not her brother
Hillary Clinton is not her husband

--------------------------------------
Now if you can find anything she has SAID OR DONE that upsets you, go for it but attacking her for the actions of family members just plain STUPID.

The days when a woman who was practically a saint in her private actions such as Lucrezia Borgia can be blamed because her brother poisoned her husband to arrange a better marriage are about 500 years out of date.

OK, women with Yale law degrees aren't chattel, but how about cocktail waitresses and interns?
-Bill (how dare you question my private affairs) Clinton

I have mirrors that are deeper than Gibson's and Stepho's questions and Crawford's analysis isn't a whole lot deeper.

Obama didn't do well but I doubt that he expected a Grand Jury interrogation filled with "Have you stopped beating your wife?" questions. I wish he'd gotten angrier and started answering questions they weren't even asking for the first hour... social security, the war, the tanking economy, the national debt.. ad infinitum.

Nash: Exactly my point. If you really believe that the nearly EVERYONE in the entire country hates Hillary Clinton, the best thing Obama could do is just sit back and relax for the rest of these primaries. Get off the circuit. Don't give that big f*$%#@g whore any ammo. Right?

Last night Hillary finally acknowledged that Obama was electable and could win in November, however she tried once again not to answer the question.

Obama on the other hand said "Absolutely and I've said it all along". He than said he thought he was the better candidate.

He had no problem answering the question, because he has not been telling the SD's that Hillary wasn't electable like she's been doing about him.

She made her case to the SD's about his being unelectable moot when she admitted he could win.

Or was she lying about that?

Jamie:

"Now if you can find anything she has SAID OR DONE that upsets you, go for it but attacking her for the actions of family members just plain STUPID."

You mean like going after Obama for what Ayers and Rezko did and what Wright said? On this point we agree - it is stupid. (And I thought Obama's point on Tom Coburn was pretty good to illustrate this point.)

(btw, I don't know if the "Bosnia" story upsets me - but it is video evidence of her lying to the American people 3 times - she did it - and it is a legitimate weakness in the general. I don't believe in "guilt by association" - but "credibility is key" - especially against the "Straight Talk Express")

Actually, Obama should be able to take those questions and handle them easily and presidentially. He should be smart enough to know they may be asked.

I bet Michelle Obama could have shut them down with ease!

: )

"ABC News' Teddy Davis and Talal Al-Khatib Report: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., maintained at Wednesday's ABC News debate in Philadelphia that his handwriting does not appear on a 1996 questionnaire stating support for a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of handguns. The Democratic presidential frontrunner made this claim even though a copy of the original document suggests otherwise."

Misstatement or lie...you decide...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/obama-forgets-w.html

I do hope that Clinton supporters recognized one thing from the debate. I know many of you have been turned off by some of the agressive and mean-spirited attacks you see on this blog.

But Obama - despite having every right to and given a clear opportunity - chose not to throw Clinton under the bus and did not attack her on Bosnia.

(I do not think he will be so nice to McCain - and I think it the long run - he will be rewarded for not tearing into Clinton the same way she tore into him).

Excuse me, I keep hearing about dirty politics. I havn't seen this from Sen. Clinton'camp, any more than from Sen. Obama's. For those that think he walketh on water...He is a politition.

Jamie...

Repeat after me...

Obama is not Rev. Wright
Obama is not Louis Farakan
Obama is not a Muslim
Obama is not a Marxist
Obama is not Ayers
Obama is not a bad Father or Parent
Obama's mother is not a bad Mother or Parent

Show me the difference when guilt by association is used against Obama, but doesn't matter when used against Hillary.

The Democratic presidential frontrunner made this claim even though a copy of the original document suggests otherwise."

Bull --Everyone knows it's Bill Clinton's handwriting and he wrote it at a Klan meeting which screwing the Grand Kleagle's wife

Well Wendy , I say he has a problem with that one.

His name, his handwriting, and his answers in black and white.

http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?boardid=780&ThreadID=635478&BoardsParam=page%3d2%26HIPDelay%3d1

Those who are frustrated with biased MSNBC coverage and/or would like to see Craig on more often should post.

Nothing changed, he's still headed to be the nominee!

If Obama gets torn to sheds in the GE, it will be because of things he has done and/or said in his life. Nothing Clinton says now or does now ( prior to picking a dem. nominee) will be relevant.

They each stand alone in this primary contest and they are BOTH fighting to win.

Wendy! It is very reminiscent of the "pushed the wrong button" issue. And the didn't see the Punjab memo story. And the didn't hear Wright sermons or read the bulletin scandal. And the "Ayers is just a guy in my neighborhood" response. And the 5 hours of work by his law firm for Rezko explanation.

Clinton's story about Bosnia makes her a LIAR so that makes Obama what? Deaf? Blind? The intern did it?

"shreds"

DB: I happen to agree with you. That's why I say to Obama: Just sit back and be crowned.

AP

I've never said any of those things about him. I've said that he is too inexperienced to be President and that many of his claims of public service had more to do with self service than public good,.

Black liberation theology doesn't particularly bother me. I don't agree with Wright and Farkhan about Israel nor Ayers about blowing up innocents to make a political statement. Obama can't be blamed for their positions or actions unless he ascribes to the same ideas and actions.

Nash

I find it odd that you defend them.

I do not defend our governments actions

I do not defend terrorist actions whether foreign or domestic

I believe we should mind our own business and don't believe in imperialistic war and at the same time, I don't believe that bombing innocent people here at home will change the course of our government either.

I cannot, myself, excuse any of it. I'm glad you find it easy to do. I would think an ardent Obama supporter such as yourself would condemn all kinds of violence for any purpose. You seem to excuse it based on the right wing government actions. That is your right.

But, I have to say, even though the MSM would have us think Senator Obama is some sort of peacenik, with friends like Wright, Auchi and Ayers and supporters that excuse domestic and foreign terrorism as somehow payback for what the US has done...I have to wonder about him.

I believe that the Woods Foundation is a Charity so if your using guilt by association than what's the difference with Hillary's time with Walmart?

Or how about Tyson Chicken?

These debates are providing great footage for the GE attack ads.

Jamie...

My point exactly. However, theres a lot of that being posted not only on this site, but all over the web.

Wendy!...

I don't believe that Nash condones it, but its clear that he understands why they did it. Are we not also doing the same thing even now while I'm typing this in Iraq and very possibly soon in Iran?

Got to go now and will check back later.

We should all be discussing issues and not this BS anyway.

Obama should have answered, " Yes, I know Ayres, we were on a charity board together."

I wish they would have asked Obama what comments Rev. Wright made to Rolling Stone, which led Obama to un-invite the Rev to speak.

*running through waving*

Hi y'all. Keep up the good work.

tt

AP

My problem is seeing my candidate blasted on this site for things she never said or did. It would be nice if we could all stick to the facts rather than just repeating slanders.

Of course this site also proves that almost all of us can come up with better questions and analysis than the talking heads. Maybe they should come here for a little insight. :-)

Historical note for today: Apollo 13 made it home safely after having that "problem"

anon-p,

What is the distinguishing standard between those who hate and urge destruction who you loathe and call "Germans" or "Nazis" (or, at best, "good Germans") and those who hate and urge destruction who you find acceptable?

Former Youth Wants To Know.

Handwriting’s on the Wall … Err, the Questionnaire

"Sen. Obama’s Handwriting Appears On Questionnaire Supporting Total Handgun Ban.

Tonight, Sen. Obama flatly denied his handwriting appeared on a questionnaire where he expressed his support for a total gun ban:

That’s not the case, you can see his handwriting on the very questionnaire here:

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_080328_obama_iviquestionaire_091096.html

Oops! He got another one wrong guys. I suppose now he’s going to issue another one of his “what I meant to say was…” memos or deliver one of his famous speeches to undo the damange caused by getting caught out in this blunder, eh?"

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/17/handwritings-on-the-wall-err-questionnaire/

didn't BHO say that he was about 7 when Ayres was in the Weather Underground? I don't think he condones that kind of activity at all and to insinuate that he does is shameful.

Yo soy un demócrata amarillo del perro.

Yo soy Horsedooty!

The "Where's Waldo" subject about Craig is getting some nice feedback and not just from us

http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?boardid=780&ThreadID=635478&BoardsParam=page%3d2%26HIPDelay%3d1

Wendy
"with friends like Wright, Auchi and Ayers "

come on there is no need to be untruthful here.

Wright is a friend and mentor of Obama.

The other two have no real connection to Obama except they run in the same political circles. There are thousands of people who have the same tenuous connection to Obama. Some saints and some devils.

Jack

Last night I read the 1996 questionairre. The Obama campaign admits that the writing on it is Obama's.

I also noticed that on one of the answers it starts out "I".

I've worked on several campaigns and candidates have either filled out the questionairre themselves, wrote a roughdraft and checked and approved, or dictated, checked and .

I would give him the benefit of the doubt, that during a long , grueling campaign..you sometimes just step in it.

The usual suspects on this site certainly would not do the same for Senator Clinton.

I'm back home tonight and work on the campaign for several days before I need to be out of town for work again.

Burrito:
"Obama should have answered, " Yes, I know Ayres, we were on a charity board together.""

Yes!
And then went on to explain all the good work the charity was doing in the Chicago area.

Those people who keep bring up the Woods Foundation up as if it is a problem don't know how silly you sound.
Did you also worry about the trilateral commission and black helicopters?

Jack

I wish Craig had a daily program with Rachel Madow.

I also wish Craig would not appear on Imus. The positive aspects of Imus do not compensate for his actions or having Bernard as part of his program.

It's simple; just answer the questions correctly, then move on, people can deal with the facts. Obama tends to get muddled down when he answers questions about these characters, and it seems to comes across as he is trying to hide something.

That's all I am saying.

Unfortunately, some of Obama statements do not ring true. That is why people want to get to know him better, and better understand his various connections.

I think Hillary made it clear that she doesn't think she is going to win. I think she wants to embrace and nurture her "political capital" and hold on to in the years to come.

~it is absolutely beautiful here today ~ off to the dog park ~

peace & enjoy

Current Derby Contenders still in the field
http://www.kentuckyderby.com/2008/contenders
with handcappers top ten

War Pass
Pyro
Tale of Ekati
Colonel John
Gayego
Big Brown
Z Humor
Monba
Court Vision
Z Fortune
Adriano
Recapturetheglory
Smooth Air
Cool Coal Man
Anak Nakal
Eight Belles
Cowboy Cal
Visionaire
Big Truck
Denis of Cork
Tomcito
Atoned

Jamie

Have you got a $2 window?

I pick Cowboy Cal to win.

No reason just like the name.

Jack

Thanks, Jamie. Yes, very flattering comments about Craig and suggestions that MSNBC can't take analysts who don't drink the koolaid. Along these lines, I came across the following:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801260001

"I really think the evidence-free bias against the Clintons in the media borders on mental illness."

Want to find the TRUTH? If so, then look in the "SHADOWS".

forgot to post msnbc message board link in praise of Craig and MSNBC's need of his objectivity:

http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=635478

I've got a ton of work to do, and not sure why I feel so strongly about this, except that I think the Obama-infatuated media have done the country such a disservice. Plus, I feel bad about the alligator getting Craig's dog when he was a kid. Anyway, MSNBC needs to hear from Crawford fans so he gets Matthews chair when he leaves to run for Senate!!!

Jack,

Ayers gave speeches together with Obama, they served on the same board. Ayers threw a fund raiser for Obama and in an attempt to distance his relationship with Ayers in 1995, Obama said their children attended the same school. Obama did not have children then. To compare this relationship which Obama on other occasions has termed a "friendship" with the pardon of two repentant Weathermen, is deflection. If Ayers was the only one, it would be different, but Khalidi, Rezko, Auchi know each other and money has flowed. It is the circle which includes Wright as Woods Fund gave Trinity money because of Obama.

Obama sat on the same board and sat in the same pew. He had poor answers and the questions were hardly as nasty as they will get. I have been saying this for some time, but few listen here. Obama fumbled the economy questions and even lied about his signature on some gun questions. He has a lot of nerve slamming Hllary months ago for being untrustworthy and his act will not convince the majority of voters.

I suppose when people come forward to say Obama toasted Auchi, it won't matter that Obama said he never met or talked to Auchi. You do see why Obama has distanced himself from these people, so why are you claiming they are unimportant? If you are right, then Obama wouln't care. He does care and his lack of response to the Hamas newsletter and his stuttering mess of an answer about Israel will add to why Jews will probably vote for McCain over Obama.

Even his answer regarding Iran was absurd and I wonder why Hillary didn't bring up his promise to AIPAC to sanction Iran and then not even voting on the Kyl Bill. Jack, if you can't see the BS, what can I say?

Last night at the Press diner all the reporters laughed at the Hillary jokes, but frowned at the Obama jokes. Now there is some objective crew. Obama is lucky the experiance issue didn't come up. Then Hillary would have asked about that trip to Pakistan or mentioned what Obama was doing while she was in Bosnia. Hanging out with Ayers and Khalidi while getting funding from Rezko/Auchi....LOL

A poor showing for Obama. He only flies when left before Obama supporters to wax rhetorical about the unity he will bring. His campaign has certainly sparked discord and we ain't even to the GE yet.

"Good luck had just stung me
To the race track I did go
She bet on one horse to win
And I bet on another to show"

The Band , Up On Cripple Creek
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIpfhEwlw5c

Jack

I think Olberman is, in his own way, just as bad as the Fox boys.

I saw replayed briefly last night and it is so clear that he is in the tank for O. MSNBC is such a disappointment.

At times I almost feel sorry for Chris Matthews. There is something wrong there. I'm not a doctor or a psychologist so I won't diagnose, but it is clear that there is something wrong with him. At one point I thought (non-professioa diagnosis) that he might be drinking again..but it appears that he has what I would call wild mood swings..It is pretty painful on camera.

At times he is entertaining and insightful, and in the next segment he is off the board.

gordo:
"look in the "SHADOWS"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyxpVn61iJg

Jack

Oh, don't be such pansies about the campaign. It's gonna get a lot uglier in the general, so best to build up some scar tissue now. If it's too hot in the kitchen for Obama now, he's gonna melt come fall.

Hil'ry is much tougher & more capable of winning in November...and ultimately, that is what counts. I was not a Hil'ry supporter when this began, but she is clearly the best choice. Here's hoping the Dems aren't so short-sighted/blinded by love for BO, that they forget that picking a nom is not the end-goal.

I love this blog; politics, actual horseracing & maple syrup. I guess we're having an online Derby party this year, again?

KO started coming off the rails before he started shilling for BO. Too much good press for those special comments or something. Anyway, I've cut back to MoJo & a smidge of Hardball...and, it pains me to say it, I actually miss Fluffy Carlson. Nice to hear what he has to say on MoJo.

Last friday there was talk of hillary had some kind of bombshell that she would let lose after the debate. Has anybody heard any more about this.

This is what makes Obama so disingenuous

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGZmNjgyMmU3NDZhYjcxZDYyNWJjNzYxODM0OGE3ZjE=

He flubbed the Israel question and had no response to the above. And by the way Obama, Hamas, is not just a group. People have elected it their government. Is this the sharp logical consistency they teach in Constitutional Law class? Why Obama is a huge mistake is that his worst moments are when he tries to pivot center. His history and record like advocating a total gun ban keep him from making a convincing case. Given his propensity to shoot himself in the foot, I would hardly write off Hillary. More connections to Ayers and Auchi will come. People will vet Obama's advisors. It will become obvious that Obama will not survive a GE battle and hopefully Pennsylvania will send that message loud and clear. You think Florida will back Obama? Ohio?

Instead of reversing the slide, Obama added to it. But what do I know?

She was not going to announce it prior to the debate so that she would not be asked about it. I never found any link about it. I heard this from several people last week but they could not find it either. They thought it came from a source that started with a "N" like National or Nations.

Jamie,
i was a big Pyro fan until I saw Big Brown in the FL Derby. That horse is fast and has a kick too. Not sure why C. John is at the top of many touters cards I must look at some more video.

Jack, . . just reading up on it, I think CCal had a good second last week, so he's sure to be a high price longshot in May

Over 10 million people watched last night.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/top-ratings-for-penn-debate/

Obama's Rezko's connections behind him?

Not so. Just this week there has been not only sworn testimony that Obama was at the party Rezko held for Auchi, a billionaire tied to Saddam Hussein and since banned from the US, but also newspaper articles publishing other remembrances of Barack toasting Auchi. The Rezkos could not have afforded to buy the land they gave to the Obamas without Auchi's money:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sneed/896844,CST-NWS-SNEED16.article
April 16, 2008
BY MICHAEL SNEED Sun-Times Columnist
A Pinocchio problem? To fib . . . or is it a faulty memory?
...Obama's handlers may be telling the press Obama has NO "recollection" of a 2004 party at influence peddler Tony Rezko's Wilmette house, but a top Sneed source claims Obama not only gave Rezko's guest of honor, Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi, a big welcome . . . but he made a few toasts!

=============

And after his ties to Auchi and Rezko are resurrected look for his connection to his cousin Odinga, for whom he campaigned in Kenya in 2006. After Odinga lost the presidential election his followers rioted for months, including burning Christians alive in their churches. After over 1,000 dead the president has just today sworn Odinga in as prime minister, in a power-sharing move.

That's going to go over big here.

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/290390

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7351842.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7176683.stm

Max,

Not trying to start anything cause I don't have time this am, but

How do we have peace in the middle east without involving the
elected Pal govt.? Bomb or starve them out on existence?

Tom T Hall: Faster Horses

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGPDlTvx0PQ

Jack

Just realized that last night was the correspondents' dinner and that Craig was with us. Has he developed a tree phobia? Did Helen have another date and he got stood up?

10 million is 9 million more than watch Olberman.

I would like to see a three-way debate (Clinton, Obama, and McCain) ... with the Iraq war as the one and only topic.

Would like presidents Bush and Carter to be the moderators. Would lke the audience to be comprised entirely of generals, professional military analysts, and representatives of allied governments.

After debate, poll audience for winner with selected commentary from audience members regarding their vote.

Publish full transcript on web and in every major newspaper (purchase from newspapers as full-page ads by debate sponsers ... i.e. both major parties).

Repeat weekly for:
Economy
Health Care
Social Security
Environment
Energy

Elect a president.

Seems to me current system is broken. Needs fixing.
Could this format work if the American public thought it was a good idea? Why? Why not?

(Okay ... I know it is not practical, but .... )

vadary------------------------

Whatever the Clinton campaign has on Obama, it needs to be used in such a way as to leave no "fingerprints". Hillary does not want to be linked to it - that's the problem - how to get the info out and not suffer a backlash from the Dems and MSM. For the good of the country and planet, the Clinton campaign should "crush" Obama - even if it means a McCain win in the GE. Obama is very dangerous, most of you have no idea because you live in a MSM world - you need to look "behind the curtain".

Hey Max - how bout HRC's position on Iraq?

That did not sound too centrist too me. And it feeds right into the Right Wing's narrative on this issue.

Big mistake. You can talk about Obama's guilt by association till your blue in the face...

But it does not change the fact that Hillary is losing the Democratic nomination - and she is making mistakes in her desparation that are making her almost unelectable in the general.

Why you ask - not because some flimsy guilt by association charges - but legitimate charges that matter. Her position on Iraq and her credibility.

Jack

Everybody gets to look at the horses on the link I posted. I'll do another update in a week of the contenders still in the running. Once the post draw is done, everyone gets to pick their horse (more than one person can pick the same horse). Bragging rights only but I can give you an on line link for that $2 (and much much higher window)

The Twin Spires club handles their own betting for Churchill Downs and a whole lot of other tracks. Good, well run and honest.

https://www.twinspires.com/content/

Child:

A political debate - where you are usually forced to take extreme positions and attack your opponent to score political points - is not the best way to determine policy.

Would anyone care to compile a list of McCain's Shames?

Let's start with two instances of the rules of investigation and punishment being bent and twisted in his favor like pretzels --

The Savings and Loan criminal scandal...

And Cindy McCain's drug thefts.

Add to the list what you please and then both objectively (morally, ethically) and politically (distortions 'r us) compare these to EVERYTHING which is or could be cited against either HRC and BOH.

Work out strategies which the candidate, the DNC and the 527's might pursue these against McCain.

Anyone game? (Not gamy.)

Frankly, I don't think we need some big bombshell.

Just let Barack keep talking.

McCain's shames:

His position on Iraq and the Bush tax cuts.

(i think we should leave Cindy out of this. I don't see how that will move any voters - and could backfire.)

And maybe his supporters think a story like that is necessary to get out into the media to offset what I find to be "defining moment" of character for me - his divorce from his first wife. :

http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcaindiv.htm

"Before John McCain's tour of duty in Vietnam, he married Carol Shepp, a model from Philadelphia. On his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam in 1967, McCain was shot down and captured.

While he was imprisoned, Carol was in an auto wreck (1969), thrown through her car's windshield and left seriously injured. Despite her injures, she refused to allow her POW husband to be notified about her condition, fearing that such news would not be good for him while he was being held prisoner.

When McCain returned to the United States in 1973 after more than five years as a prisoner of war, he found his wife was a different person. The accident "left her 4 inches shorter and on crutches, and she had gained a good deal of weight."

While still married to Carol, McCain began an adulterous relationship with Cindy. He married Cindy in May 1980 -- just a month after dumping Carol and securing a divorce. The newlyweds honeymooned in Hawaii."

Now that's what I call character. Or a real character. Yup, till death do us part - or until you are seriously injured become 4 inches shorter and fatter. McMorality.
http://www.the-pork.org/Topic832203-22-1.aspx

Niether Rez,

Embargo the Gaza completely and provide humanitarian support. Provide security clearances for honest workers. Until Hamas renounces terror, stops the promotion of hate education and builds rockets, they ought to be isolated. It is actually quite simple and consistent with former Liberal policies regarding terrorists. The UN should be brought in to secure the Egyptian crossing and coastal waters. Eventually the Palestians will get tired of their leaders and compromise. "Talking" often yields the response we just saw after Carter visited and it is funny the Press had nothing to say about this. They filter what ever they can.

Even the Indians didn't take the Hamas tact and with international observers, a real peace treaty would be enforced. The Hamas connection to Obama will not be deflected by Obama's dancing. The Carter mission has shown the effectivness of talking in the climate of our anticipated retreat The biggest lie that Hillary made last night concerned Iraq, but she did make clear that what would happen if we pulled our troops is presently an unknown. Once the consequences of a rapid pullout become clear, this equation changes. I suspect Obama agrees despite the pandering on the campaign trail.

Nice try Warren...

play the McShame game: 3 off top my head.
1.anti-abortion and with it I presume against Fed spon. E-stem cell research.
2. Obviously his Iraq war policy.
3. extending Bush tax cuts.

Niether Rez,

Embargo the Gaza completely and provide humanitarian support. Provide security clearances for honest workers. Until Hamas renounces terror, stops the promotion of hate education and builds rockets, they ought to be isolated. It is actually quite simple and consistent with former Liberal policies regarding terrorists. The UN should be brought in to secure the Egyptian crossing and coastal waters. Eventually the Palestians will get tired of their leaders and compromise. "Talking" often yields the response we just saw after Carter visited and it is funny the Press had nothing to say about this. They filter what ever they can.

Even the Indians didn't take the Hamas tact and with international observers, a real peace treaty would be enforced. The Hamas connection to Obama will not be deflected by Obama's dancing. The Carter mission has shown the effectivness of talking in the climate of our anticipated retreat The biggest lie that Hillary made last night concerned Iraq, but she did make clear that what would happen if we pulled our troops is presently an unknown. Once the consequences of a rapid pullout become clear, this equation changes. I suspect Obama agrees despite the pandering on the campaign trail.

Also - on the college tour - McCain talked about trying to work with the Democratic nominee to get rid of 527s.

(He must be anticipating that the nominee will be Obama. Clinton would never agree to that ; )

Zogby? The Official Obama pollster .... please. He hasn't been correct yet.

Jamie

I'm not much not betting. Just a $2 bet to have an interest.
What I like to do and havn't done it in years , is to get a place along the rail and listen to them run the stretch.

Jack

Zogby isn't evil, but if it favors father left, Palestinians, or anything anti-Israel, the Zogby numbers are going to be about five points from believable.

Thanks, guys -- very, very good stuff for just starters.

Now... here is a big question.

I've read a lot of good strategies which were proposed here for (or against) a variety of candidates.

What do you think can be done to alienate McCain from the worshipful press?

What will get blood in the water again? (There was some over his horribly managed first phase campaign in 2007. Just not enough.)

What about the McCain waffle on torture

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/13/mccain-waterboarding-fail/

Max,
So who talks with Hamas to accomplish your suggestions?

btw leave us Indians out of it. lol

Lynn C:

That one has some potential. As of late, McCain is back to saying that we must ban all torture.

Child:

A political debate - where you are usually forced to take extreme positions and attack your opponent to score political points - is not the best way to determine policy.

Not policy. Educate voters. If a politician takes extreme position in-studio audience (experts in the field) would vote for who won debate and explain why they thought so ... based on their expert opinion on the subject matter ... evaluating candidate's grasp of topic. Knowing that their answers were evaluated by experts might disuade candidates from typical "feel good", "issue avoidence", or "extreme position" answers.

Thanks warren.

Zogby polls are a joke. Here is a link to polls of concluded primaries. Compare these numbers with the vote.

http://www.pollster.com/08presidentialprimary.php

BB Later Max,

DW just invited me out to lunch at the 'Indian" casino LOL

"What do you think can be done to alienate McCain from the worshipful press?"

Nominate someone they will worship even more....

(Any ideas ; )

Child:

Obama talked about making much more of the government transparent by putting more hearings on C-SPAN. He also talks about using the internet to increase transparency.

I am all for it. (I just don't like debates.)

Warren,
"Any ideas "

Not a clue

Jack

How to alienate the voters?

Despite the attempts to show McCain's temper is just one of frustration, his campaign has shown concern about all of his past displays of temper and intemperate speech. A collage of his "f u's" bad taste jokes of his own and laughing at others bad jokes to remind people he is a crazy old coot.

Lynn

It didn't hurt that she could afford his political career as well. Just some more Republican morality. These are the guys who criticize Hillary Clinton for not dumping her husband rather than working through the problems. I guess they think the wedding vows come with an escape clause for injury, illness, and weight gains.

In case you were thinking of picking up a pet

http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/900050,petsmart041708.article

And the reaction

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Y73sPHKxw

Oh this campaign has gone on too long. In doing the search for that Viorst quote I found that I had made the same point back last December when a similar question appeared. :-)

Gordo, she can let Hannity expose it. Then let someone working for ABC know about it and they can run with it like they did with Wright and Ayers.

It doesn't make any difference who lets it out, Gordo's dabs are all over it.

warren,

As of last night...

I don't think there is anyone else left.

McCain and the press may be the nation's last great case massive fidelity.

jamie & flatus,

It's because he cares, he cares!

Many marriages/ relationships fall apart after a spouse/partner has been on active duty.

Here's one Iraq Veteran who made his diamond engagement ring into an eye after his fiance dumped him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/nyregion/27towns.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

From past history, I agree that the Republicans will consider as "issues" questions of personal associations and other topics addressed to Obama in the Philadelphia debate. I believe Clinton was stating an opinion shared by many Democrats when she said that questioning Obama on the extent of his association with Ayers is relevant because it will be a General Election issue. Obama should not respond to these questions by dismissing them as unimportant or irrelevant because they are the old way of doing politics. They will be the "current" way of doing politics in the General Election. He can't claim that he will be "fully vetted" by the end of the primary season if he dismissed as unimportant answers to those very questions that would result in vetting.

Burrito, I guess that makes her the apple of his eye.

vadary---------------------

I'm not sure Hannity can be trusted - sure, he would like to break the news about Obama, but by naming the Clinton campaign as the source he could destroy both.

Wendy,

With regards to this post, April 17, 2008 10:41 AM

The rest of the world thinks we are a terrorist organization. People may have cringed when Revs. Robertson and Wright declared in their own way that we deserved what happened on 9/11/01.

You know what? I have yet to meet a person not born in the US who didn't express sympathy for what happened that day but then declared that it was only a matter of time before someone punched us in the nose.

I have no idea about this Obama and Ayers connection but I don't see how knowing a member of the Weather Underground is worse than pardoning two members of the same group. I wonder if he raised more money for Obama than was paid to the Clinton's for the pardon.

If we are going to do guilt by association, why do we care more about Ayers & Obama than the Rumsfeld/Bush & Hussein connection?

At what point will we drop our selective outrage and hypocrisy and actually try to do something to improve this country?

jamie,

Do you think someone should check his -- what did he call it during the Good O Days? Oh, yes -- his chestrogen levell!!!

Quick quiz --

Who is Hannity's best buddy at MSNBC?

Hey after a triple bypass I figure big dog is glad to have a hearth to come home to. :-)

Burrito,

The saddest part of looking at all those wounded soldiers is the fact that every Republican in Congress would be more than willing to take a picture with them before they were wounded. Now in their current state, they refuse to meet with them if they are asking for improved benefits for being in the service.

Unfortunately, the people who got screwed over the worst by this administration have continued to be it staunchest supporters.

jack,

Ask not for whom the troll bawls...

9/11

When did Jesus change his middle name? It's always been Jesus H. Christ in my part of the world. I never asked what the H stood for, and I'm definitely not going to ask about an "F".

EdVB,

the H stands for Hussein of course.

Yo soy un demócrata amarillo del perro.

Yo soy Hussein Horsedooty!

9/11

In regard to the press and their love affair with McCain.

One thing we know won't work is reason. Whining and complaining gets some respose but with a serious down side. I think a successful way to attack might be to question their with-it-ness.
When you look at all of McCains current economic deas the are all retread Bus senior ideas. His health plan is "suffer" and foriegn policy everything is Iraq forever. Nothing new and the luster is of of the straight talk express.
Of course if Obama keeps looking like he has since South Carolina....................................

wish we had the Obama of December but I fear we're stuck with the Obama of March and April.

Jack

"Ask not for whom"
(rest is snipped as mercy to any stray inocent that might wonder in)

Jack
blinks his eyes a couple of times
wrinkles his nose
then gives a violent shudder.

He is heard to mutter as he walks away from the computer, " God I need a drink after that one".

Jack

Bob Dylan - All I really want to do

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

Why the Titanic sunk: cheap rivets.

Why Clinton will sink: cheap shots.

Hillary:
yada yada yada Rev. Wright,
yada yada yada bitterness,
yada yada yada Weather Underground,
yada yada yada (insert racist code words here).

Posted by: nash | April 17, 2008 10:39 AM

There he goes again !!!

Max,

Not only doe he shoot himself in the foot, he brags about his aim.

Jack...

Here's another version...

Summer of 1965 ... Cher's first hit record...

ALL I REALLY WANT TO DO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69qNwwEgVgI

In this version she does one line as herself and then imitates sonny

9/11,

I guess that puts Senator Obama in good company, but I don't think I could get our priest to start using the H or Hussein at Sunday Mass. Just like parents, who only mention their children's middle names when the kids are in trouble, Jesus only gets the middle initial treatment, from people, who are upset, and this time, can't blame it on their kids.

I am very glad Craig continues to appear on Imus...if he didn't, we wouldn't have nearly as much to know and love about him. Who else gives Craig a whole 10-15 minutes of talk-time that allows him to ruminate about really the "important" events? ...his dog and the "childhood alligator trauma" (scarred for life, no doubt); his folks and their ongoing quest for "more Imus" (if not for Craig's parents, there wouldn't have been "one more Cardinal"); pesky squirrels tiptoeing through the straight-from-Holland tulips; the ordeal of his ankle-breakage and recovery...and so much more. I'm always happy to see Craig wherever he appears, but most especially on Imus.

This is the best speech to come out of the Bush Administration in years in my opinion...

http://www.hud.gov/news/speeches/2008-04-16a.cfm

Oregon dem: I agree with you 100% about Olbermann. Every bit as bad as Fox. As to Matthews, if you haven't seen, you might be interested in NY Times magazine article on him this past weekend.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/13/magazine/13matthews-t.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=Chris+Matthews&st=nyt&oref=slogin

I don't watch any MSNBC shows anymore except David Gregory (because he's balanced). Think they don't want Craig C on because he tells it like it is and started thread on the (ridiculous) MSNBC politics message board, which got some very favorable response:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/13/magazine/13matthews-t.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=Chris+Matthews&st=nyt&oref=slogin

Tom I kinda like this version too

It is Cher and Glen Campbell singing it as a duet.

She is more mature and probably at her best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9ZYhvJThCk

Jack

Ivy Green. I have to listen to Imus streaming online or watch on YouTube, as he's not on radio where I live, nor does my cable system get RFD. Anyway, noticed yesterday people posting about Craig not being on MSNBC coverage and started a thread on their message board. Some very flattering comments. You can add one at:

http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=635478

Sorry, I pasted in the wrong link above. MSNBC has done the country a disservice with the constant Obama infomercial. Regardless of who you're for, the propaganda is disturbing.

Craig, Why didn't you mention that Bill Clinton pardoned two members of Ayer's group as he was leaving office or that he pardoned a bunch of FALN members responsible for bombings in New York City, as well? It seems to me that pardoning these folks is a far more serious issue than simply being acquainted with them in the community.

EdVB,

I'd say the "F" was a very familiar gerund reduced to its first initial.

Thanks Jack...

Here is PUNK CHER from her one album band called BLACK ROSE...

Since she endorsed Hillary I sort of listened to it this time as if Hillary sang it to Barack... Ok weird, but still kick ass I think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omdLRZE5Zh4

Thanks Lynn..Good article

Every time I see the anti Keith comments I chuckle because you are all missing the point of his "bias". It's not that he is anti Hillary, he is anti stupidity and incompetence.

When he has Clinton spokespeople on his show, he is always respectful and asks them quality questions and always gives that person an opportunity to answer. He never shouts them down.

If you haven't figured it out, he is a bit elitist, but he is able to laugh at himself too.

Nilssonny and Cher!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6ypT6VzfNfE

You are right in one respect Bear..O does not confront Clinton spokesman in person. He is a big chicken. We do get it.

That reminds me.

Hannity's best buddy at MSNBC?

Olbermann!

Cue The Kinks, please!

"Everybody's in showbiz/Everybody's a star..."

correction

He got caught tryng to claim he knew NOTHING t about the Hamas-Trinity newsletters

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/opinion/17bartels.html

"Small-town, working-class voters were also less likely to connect religion and politics. Support for President Bush was only 5 percentage points higher among the 39 percent of small-town voters who said they attended religious services every week or almost every week than among those who seldom or never attended religious services. The corresponding difference among cosmopolitan voters (34 percent of whom said they attended religious services regularly) was 29 percentage points.

"It is true that American voters attach significantly more weight to social issues than they did 20 years ago. It is also true that church attendance has become a stronger predictor of voting behavior. But both of those changes are concentrated primarily among people who are affluent and well educated, not among the working class.

"Mr. Obama’s comments are supposed to be significant because of the popular perception that rural, working-class voters have abandoned the Democratic Party in recent decades and that the only way for Democrats to win them back is to cater to their cultural concerns. The reality is that John Kerry received a slender plurality of their votes in 2004, while John F. Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey, in the close elections of 1960 and 1968, lost them narrowly.

"Mr. Obama should do as well or better among these voters if he is the Democratic candidate in November. If he doesn’t, it won’t be because he has offended the tender sensitivities of small-town Americans. It will be because he has embraced a misleading stereotype of who they are and what they care about."

Larry M. Bartels, the director of the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics at Princeton, is the author of “Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age.”

Bear wrote: "the Rumsfeld/Bush & Hussein connection?"

What makes you think I don't care? If you'd read my post to Nash, I did include my dislike of US imperialistic war - this, of course, includes the current one that is the fault of the Bush administration.

So I return the question. When will we read everything other's post and stop the "selective outrage" at the part of the persons posts that we don't like because it criticizes Obama?

Until we can't Bear it anymore, unfortunately Wendy.

Ollie Johnston died on Monday, the last of the Disney animators called "the 9 old men" (even when they were in their twenties. The obit explains why!)

He wasn't a member of The Firehouse Five Plus Two. (His best friend, neighbor and book collaborator Frank Thomas was.)

But when I was between 3 and 6 and living in LA, he'd often be out with them when they played at Disneyland. And he'd be giving away hundreds of original cels from Disney shorts and features and being so nice to everyone who came by!

Did I carefully keep mine? No way -- I wore it out from touching it and tracing over it.

But I do have five of the books he wrote with Thomas...

Well, speaking of Frank Thomas.....

http://stubbornfacts.us/politics/2008_election/a_fresh_angle_on_obamas_sneers

I suppose Bear doesn't know about any of this either...

of course that was a humorous inversion of the name if people didn't get it..

Maxtrue,

I don't know what the matter is with Kansas.

But I do know that Frank Thomas animated this scene with a song no Presidential candidate could ever sing --

"I've Got No Strings On Me!"

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6s3Zxm6LytA

Yeah, it's in Italian. But the puppeteer's name is Stromboli, right??

Max

LOL

BTW

You've Got Mail

Hello!! How can anyone believe anything said by this guy when he changes on a daily basis??

I'll catch up reading and leave a response later for 9\11, however I wanted you to see how these War Criminals treat our Soldiers.

"FRESNO, Calif. (April 17) - Forced to leave the combat zone after his two brothers died in the Iraq war, Army Spc. Jason Hubbard faced another battle once he returned home: The military cut off his family's health care, stopped his G.I. educational subsidies and wanted him to repay his sign-up bonus.

Army Spc. Jason Hubbard helps carry the casket of his brother Nathan Hubbard on Aug. 31 in Fresno, Calif. Military rules forced Jason Hubbard out of the service after both his brothers died in Iraq. Then the military cut off his family's medical benefits, stopped his education subsidies and tried to force him to repay his $6,000 enlistment bonus."

Read how the Military Denied Benefits to Surviving Son by reading the link below. This is disgusting.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/military-denied-benefits-to-surviving/20080417072509990001

Makes me want to puke those Son of a Bitches.

O.D.

He isn't a back stabbing pussy as many on this page are. I think Olberman has been getting the wrath because he has been too direct in his criticisms.

Bear, but it's not up to Keith Olberman to decide for me or anyone who is and is not stupid and incompetent. He should provide the facts and let people decide. I stopped watching after his soft-ball interview with Obama the Friday night the Rev Wright stuff broke couple days after his RIDICULOUS special comment about how Hillary Clinton should have distanced herself from Geraldine Ferraro.

bear,

A little experience of Olbermann. It's not definitive by any means but it is quite real.

Three years ago a close friend of mine married a well-known figure.

A number of crises began almost immediately.

One of them involved a former step-daughter of hers calling the NYT wedding desk with false claims about my friend's lying about a Masters and a PhD. in neuroscience and psychology.

She got her way by alluding to launching a Jayson Blair scale scandal.

So for the first time ever the NYT Wedding page ran a retraction.

That did a lot of damage to my friend's practice.

Then Olbermann picked up on it and ran it for four days, calling my friend "the fabulist bride".

I saw the first broadcast and got together a bunch of affadavits along with an official letter from U.C.L.A. attesting to her having both the masters and the doctorate --

And I sent them via messenger to be delivered by hand the next morning at Olbermann's P.A.

She called me to acknowledge the receipt (I had asked for that) and assured me she had just given the papers to him.

He continued to push the story for three more days despite the proof.

(This was during the germinal version of Oddball and Worst Person On Earth.)

Some time later I did some consulting work there. I confronted Olbermann in a direct, uninflected, lowkey manner.

I work in opera. If he could sing, he'd be Angela Georghiu.

He can't sing. But he can yell. Scream, too.

Now... who did he hurt here without caring?

My friend and her ex-husband are pioneers in the diagnosis and treatment of many forms of autism.

They are pioneers in the development of the creation of communities (with schools and social services) for families with autistic children.

Olbermann certainly had the proof to justify cutting the story the moment he was shown the evidence.

What he did damaged this excellent practice for several years.

Did he care about the truth?

In this case I know for certain that the truth did not interest at all.

I wonder if there is a condition called Arroganceberger's...

Thank you for that 9/11. It adds to my already low regard. Yes, Obambi and Uberman share similar traits. They love to stroke themselves while acting like they're stroking our own moral outrage. Pompous, inaccurate, egotistical, petty and self-righteous would be just a few sordid attributes.

He and Mathews make a slimy pair. As you point out, imagine the truth behind the crap we see and how much more pathetic than what we suspect.

I can only wonder how Obama mania figures into this.

Mast, totally agree with you. Other problems:

Obama's claim not to have K street at arm's length. Utter nonsense:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/10/AR2008041004045.html

and reneging on public financing pledge, for which Wash Post took him to task the other day:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/13/AR2008041301994.html

"When it was in Mr. Obama's interest to present himself as the ethical savior of an imperiled campaign finance system, he was happy to do so, especially since it didn't seem especially likely at the time that he'd be the nominee. But the real test of a candidate is whether he will stick by an announced principle even when that's against his own interest. Now Mr. Obama could become the first nominee since Watergate to run a campaign fueled entirely by private money. "

sorry, "mast" was supposed to be max

Max,

We been through this drill a dozen times with the same old BS questions you keep posing. I take is if you wrong on one point then the WHOLE theory IS SUSPECT.
Most people could care if you right or wrong and so you spew and spew thinking no one cares or questions the BS.
The fact is Max you're wrong on several points and i'll call you on it every time.

1)Obama lied about his endorsing a total gun ban. BS

2)He lies when he says he had a flimsy relationship with Ayers. It was a business relationship through WF work and his University job BTW he could still have met him with his kid's school relationship if Ayers still associated with the school after Ayers' kids graduated.

3)How much money did Woods Fund give to AAAN that found its way to Hamas?
I believe WF funded the org about 75K over 2 years. Maybe enough to purchase a couple cases of AK-47s with ammo, hardly very threatening.

4)He lies when he says he knows nothing about the money from Auchi going to pay for getting him his very house.

I believe he has Obama trust which has a conventional mortgage with a local bank, not owned by any of these people you name I have the name of the mortgage company if you need it.

6)He lies when he says he didn't know his own wife worked for a supplier to Wal-Mart as he blasted Hillary on Wal-Mart.
Never read this anywhere and how would he know every deal his wife's firm had business.

I know....Lynn

And we have left out how Obama thought it quite shrewd to let his campaign maill suggest racism and tpush he Bosnia lie to deflect his problems. We know about his advisors and the signals they are known for.

That is why Obama has delivered the most disingenuous campaign fiction in recent memory. He hailed Bush 1 and left Bill out. Sure, let's return to Bush's foreign policy. What was that again?

And of course Frank Davis had no effect on Obama but living abroad 5-10 left Obama an expert in foreign affairs. Pakistan made him so smart he put forth some briliiant suggestions that actually united Pakistanis...Bravo.

You see, Obama is a uniter.

1. The evidence that Obama's personal notes were on the affirmation of the total ban have been established. That is why he was asked the question. See the Politico story.

2. He met Ayers before he had children. Ayers threw a fund raiser for Obama and then both sat on the same board. They also gave speeches together and attended some of the same parties. He has been quoted as calling Ayers a friend and said nothing despite critical of Ayers sitting on the same board after the 2001 Ayers interview. People have come forward to say they saw them together and Obama says, well we had connections through school and boards. Nothing suggests Obama had the slightest contempt for Ayers who gave Obama a check which was only returned after bad publicity.

3.The fact that Obama approved money for AAAN despite their affiliation with Cairs and Khalidi's known support of Hamas is not a crime, but it goes against Obama's spin. Go to Obamawtf and read the article on the numerous connections that Obama must have known about invloving pro-Palestinian groups. Then come back here and tell me they are all wrong. The idea is that by giving AAAN money (and Rezko too) they certainly had a better chance to advance their cause. Americans will be the judge of whether these ideas are mainstream, yes? Today we see more fruits from Hamas. This association goes to suspicion as to why Obama took weeks until Press pressure made him denounce the Hamas article in the Trinity Newsletter.

4.I never said Auchi bought Obama's house. What is clear is that a broke Rezko after the party that Obama attended for Auchi, recieved the cash he needed to buy the land required to close the Obama house deal. Without that money how could Rezko pay over $600,000 for land he didn't need? Get your story straight. And the trial may very well make this a qpq they might investigate.

Your answers are not refutations and perhaps you can try again. I suggest first, you look at the article printed at Obamawth (the one fronmthe Free Canadian Press) and examine the multitude of links and connections. I don't think Obama can have it both ways, that is be the smartest and most intellectual candidate running and also the most clueless, uniformed poor judge of character running as well.

The only reason you keep going through this drill, is that you never get it right. Yes, Custer got creamed, but the gattling gun changed that. The Republicans are going to up the narritive aready substantiated by slow vetting past the MSM Obama filters. Next will be the Auchi toast, the total ban memo vetting, the accounts of parties with Ayers and the money he raised. Even the Wright story goes on because no one really believes Oprah walked out and Obama just didn't hear those sermons. Essentaly, this is your problem: the narrative is fair. It was not createdout of the blue nor rests on one or two ot three people. It is a story that is fairly consistent. That is the problem and every week new details emerge.

Or put another way (and I admire the American Indian for such wisdom)

He speaks with forked tongue

9/11 that's a terrible story! Did your friend ever get any satisfaction equivalent to the damage done her? I can excuse a lot of things but not those things involving malice. Simply terrible.

flatus,

She was in a very difficult divorce from a well-known hedge fund owner and philanthropist -- the constraints were very great.

They've since remarried.

For 9\11...

"What is the distinguishing standard between those who hate and urge destruction who you loathe and call "Germans" or "Nazis" (or, at best, "good Germans") and those who hate and urge destruction who you find acceptable?

Former Youth Wants To Know."

I did not say I found it acceptable 9\11. I said I understood why they did it. The fact of the matter is 3 people died and they were Underground members.

Right now we have Iraqi citizens blowing up our soldiers because we invaded there country illegally and are now an occupying force. They do not want us there and have made that very clear.

Now the War Criminals in the Peoples House are ready to carry out more Crimes Against Humanity by taking us into another War with Iran and all we can do is bash each other and the candidates we support.

So what is our priorities?

When will the people scream out about the destruction of Our Constitution and demand that these War Criminals are brought to justice and held accountable for their War Crimes.

I said it before and I'll say it again Welcome to America the Fourth Reich. We definitely have the Government we deserve.

In another comment I said that Hillary did the right thing in opposing Bill's Clemency of FALN Terrorists.

I was thinking the same thing. Maybe it should be forwarded to FOX. Isn't it sad, that one would even have to think of FOX, to vet some truth about MSNBC?

I wish Craig would follow this up. My first posts here talked about my contempt for the pundits and nothing so far has told me I am wrong.

Now the "Press" wants that House version to protect THEIR freedom of speech. This is exactly what I am talking about Craig. Shall we give them this power? Look at what the Fourth Estate is doing to politics. You just witnessed real journalism when 9/11 posted his story.

Lou Dobbs had an interview with McCarthy, author of willfull blindness, who talked about the associations of Obama, Ayers, Kalidi, plo.

Cannot find the interview on his website and missed part of it. Perhaps someone knowledge can find it. His book is about the terrorist organizations I gathered.

"I never said Auchi bought Obama's house."-maxtrue 7:59

"He lies when he says he knows nothing about the money from Auchi going to pay for getting him his very house"- Maxtrue 5:36

Could of fooled me max! LOL

Yeah Max , I bet you get good objective info from a webaite named Obama wtf wtf:).

What's with the Custer crap, save it for an appropriate forum or for someone who's interested, will ya!

Max, i've gone to a reception a my daughter's former daycare and she's 32. Met some interesing people there.

I think it is safe to say that BHO is a fan of Jay-Z.

Not only has BHO used the song, "I got 99 problems(but a bitch ain't one)", during several of his campaign stops...today, while explaining his debate performance, BHO used Jay-Z's move from the "Dirt off your Shoulders" video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWLHQ3S-Oq8

Both songs are from Jay-Z's "The Black Album".

BHO is the hip-hop candidate...so much for being an elitist...hilarious!!!

Yes, dismiss the article because you don't like the name. THEY did not write the article but merely posted a well foot-noted review. And look at your comtempt based on a name but it was okay for Trinity to publish a slam by Hamas with their name on it. Its not okay to vilify Ayers but obamawth is off-limits.

I brought up Custer because he showed arrogance and stupid tactics. He didn't even utilize the gattling guns available. I merelty thought you could relate to such an analysis.

And as you clearly reposted, I said money from Auchi going to pay for GETTING him his very house. Without the additional land, there was no deal. Auchi helped fund that critical condition by giving Rezko 3.5 million. Do you get it now? Facts are tough things to get around like Obama's personal notes on the very affirmation of the total gun ban.

I'll spare you anymore references to Custer, though the real reasons for his defeat was covered up for years. I suspect the same will be true if Obama goes down to McCain. Probably bitterness or race will be the excuse and not simply that the majority of Americas didn't buy his having it both ways.....

Max:

Perhaps you should go get some fresh air. Or start coming up with an explanation to justify "General Hillary's" radical left-wing position that - she can categorically say that in 9 months - without having any idea what will be going on in Iraq at that time - she will begin withdraw troops in 60 days even if the generals on the ground say it is a bad idea.

I'm not sure of your point Rez. Did these people give you any money, hold fund raisers for your run for office?Will you meet them again, give speeches at functions with them or sit on a board with them? Did they blow up any buildings? Were they happy about that? Are you planning to run for President? If so then perhaps you might choose your associations well. I wouldn't be hanging out with people repeatedly that will reflect badly on your public positions later on.

Was that your point?

I was having more fun when republicans were the opponent.........

Rez - I would ignore this guilty by association BS. As soon as you start to argue against it - you give it more credit than it deserves.

I think it is safe to say that Ayers Wright Rezko and any other kook the Right Wing Attack Machine (or the Clintonites can dredge up) - will not be on the Cabinet and will not have any influence on the decisions Obama makes in the White House.

Warren, actually her specific words were brilliant. I explained them before. She has based this strategy on our "not knowing what the consequence will be". Very important point. I know, you don't understand what this means. It puts raises Obama 10 bucks and puts his phoney baloney in the spot light.

When we finally see the consequences beginning which EVERYONE is speculating about, the equation changes. This is hardly more of a lie than what Obama is spinning....brilliant actually. Power already said Obama was bullshitting about his plan. He was startled last night....about many things.

Warren, lay off the weed ---you just called the man Obama dedicated his book to, Mr.Audacity himself a kook. What does that say about Obama? And that Kook Rezko helped Obama, was his principle political backer. I hope Republicans don't cut and paste your post....LOL and that Kook Ayers, well, just another in what appears a litany of Kooks Obama assembled....lol

Kook Aid

Max:

I agree that we should challenge the "we don't know what will happen if we leave" argument. It is GOP BS that has allowed them to string this occupation as far along as they have (all while making little to no progress . . . to say the least.).

(But to tell ya the truth - that is fine with me at this point. Bush is a lame duck in Washington - and his reputation is far worse in the Middle East. W and his administration simply can't do what needs to be done in the region. They lack credibility - and you can't engage in meaningful diplomacy without credibility.)

Anyways, my main criticism of Clinton is purely political. McCain will take her to town - for essentially making "war plans" - 9 months out and without consultation with the people on the ground. And he will be right.

Add that together with Hillary voting for the war before she was against it - and Hillary could have trouble on this issue. McCain is running on Iraq (as well as political courage) - and Hillary does not match up well against him.

(Whereas Obama will symbolize a real change - and to tell ya the truth....that GOP BS sounds a little like your position against Obama - "we can't elect this guy - who knows what will happen?" Perhaps it will work out better than you expected...perhaps not. But that is a risk we take every 4 years - and I am ready for something different this time.)

Maxtrue:

This is not Star Wars. Its an election.

Hillary has a host of military advisors who endorse her candidacy.......including Wes Clark......

And this is no time to panic. The GOP is great at false confidence. I watched all their primaries and debates and there were people mad as hell that McCain was going to get the nomination.

They are now laying down the same line of BS that the Dems were talking about at the beginning. "We have this thing wrapped up." No way. Not against Obama.

(If Obama wins the nomination - you don't think the Obama-maniacs will grow in size? He makes politics fun and speaks in terms that people can understand and is getting a whole new generation involved in politics...and this is only the primary.)

Anyways, the GOP is way behind in organization - and that is usually where they outshine the Dems every year. Obama has built an operation. And despite all the critiques - the Clinton Machine is still strong.

I think last night Hillary made very clear that if she loses this thing - "fair and square" (which is a tricky thing in politics and in this case I think it means basically "on her terms") - the Clintons will join forces with Obama and deal the GOP a historical loss (which is the only way we can do a complete 180 from the Bush Years. We don't need to just turn the page. We need to start a new chapter.)

Warren, staying or not staying is not a decision for the military or its generals. It is purely a political decision made with the advice of the military leadership.

I can imagine only one circumstance that could cause her to significantly modify her decision.

That circumstance is, if Egypt, the Saudis, the Emirates, and Turkey all came together and said they want us to stay and that they would join us, in country, as equal partners in helping Iraq achieve lasting stability.

I said "could" not would.

There could be some military exigencies that could cause minor adjustments in the schedule, but nothing of major significance.

It's going to take some sane military minds to pitch in with the extraction of our involvement in Iraq.....the military is not "picking a leader".

sane military minds.......like all the ones who got fired for not hoorahing our trek into Baghdad.....

"Hillary has a host of military advisors who endorse her candidacy.......including Wes Clark......"

And G.I. John McCain will point to his own military service and argue he was correct on "the surge".

Warren,
I do not think there is an ice cube's chance in hell of getting republicans to vote Obama.

They would rather stick knitting needles in their eyes.

The Hillary supporters will be pissed, and if they truly believe that Obama is an empty suit or shady, they won't vote Obama either.

So you are down to the middle swing vote. I think it will split, however not equally, the GE campaign will determine the winner, not really the qualifications but who ever puts forth the better message, who ever has the best ad campaign.

* unless some unforeseen event takes place that sinks one of the two candidates.

McCain? lolol.

"I can imagine only one circumstance that could cause her to significantly modify her decision."

And I can imagine the another. That is the whole point!

That is why you don't make such a categorical promise.

If you listened to the testimony from Patreus and Crocker - you would realize they never spoke in such categorical language. (Only political campaign managers do - and I can't believe Clinton adopted that position.) Actually - their testimony sounds a lot more like the way Obama speaks. Thoughtful, deliberate and careful.

(He doesn't just shoot off his mouth like a Clinton.)

Here's your McCain:

http://blog.reidreport.com/uploaded_images/mccain_bush-hug-713122.jpg

no.....he shoots off his mouth like an obama

does anyone on this blog live in PA?

Hannity & Combs just had 4 people debating Obama remarks last night. Ari Fleischer said he should not be the nominee on just the subject of the capital gains, because he clearly did not know what the was saying.
The thing is they agree that the democratic party does not want to put in Hillary and will put up a man than is soiled, and whose judgement is far from good. Even with the Iraq war issue, the gop will win this one if Obama is put up again McCain. As he is a loser..with all the baggage and lies.. An extemely good argument... I happen to agree.. even though they are repubs. There argument has foundations.

Julie

Warren, you, as Mr Obama, are speaking with color of authority about something you and he know next to nothing about.

This pretty much describes all the Obamaniacs whining all over the Internet today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvUNFmB7Jl8

Wesley will say to Obama, hold on a minute, " I'll have to check with Hillary and see if I am allowed to talk to you yet."

Wendy - lol - that's funny

Hannity & c also just showed the audience reactions to Pa polls, Ob & Casey went down the drain to low teens/20.

Hillary & Rendell went to High 78/80's..

Julie

sturg:

That picture represents Mark Penn's flawed thinking that a Democratic win is "inevitable." Talk about elitist. That guy knows nothing about Middle America (besides poll numbers) and he has been the chief strategist of the Clinton campaign.

And that strategy - has almost rendered her unelectable. I don't see how she can tear down Obama, get the Super D's to overturn the election and beat John McCain.

(Especially given all the mistakes she has made along the campaign trail - which would provide plenty of ammo, i.e., "new material". against her in the general. She already had high negatives to begin with.)

NEW THREAD

Flatus just hit it out of the park, Bravo. One mind here that is actually working. The problem the US is facing unlike our other situations in the past: we were not invited in. Turkey, the Kurds, and yes, even the Sunnis will not want us to go if the shit looks like it's going to hit the fan. They know what Obama will do and believe me they don't want Carter/Zbig. That is the game Hillary is playing now. Bravo. Obama's retreat is smply that. Hillary's ploy is to force an invitation backed up with real support. The UN is going to re-mandate our mission. Most of you are asleep.

You think Europe and the Sunnis want to let Syria grab Lebanon? Or Iran to step into Iraq? Are you all so clueless? Our allies (leadership that is) would prefer McCain. That is why we're finally seeing some action from France.

Geez Warren, yes, lay off the pot. You just posted a Republican ad calling Obama's mentors and friends "kooks". And Looks don't count....LOL You think Hillary the Hawk is simply capitualting? She talked about Iran and the other threats. This is a shrewd move. And she will reveal her thinking and explain "unknown consequences" only after she gets the nomination (if she does). She raises Obama $100 and he isn't sure what's up, is he? He is losing the Iraq rant, fumbling the economy and healthcare and is about to get his ass spanked some more with the growing details of his flimsy relationships.

LOL

So if we do stay longer, it will be with help and part of a broad invitation.

"Warren, you, as Mr Obama, are speaking with color of authority about something you and he know next to nothing about."

I could say that about a lot of people on this board. And that is the beauty of America - the people rule. And Obama is speaking for us and Washington is trying to shout him down and put him back in his place. But it ain't happening.

(Sorry to spoil your coronation.)

Wow Clintonites. I just watched Keith-O.... He was way over the top. He really should be wearing an Obama 08 button on his lapel.

(I know I have poked some fun . . . but I don't know if I could watch him if I was a Clinton supporter.)

Why doesn't somebody bring up White Water and Hillary's not so stellar Health Care Program when she was in the White House?

NEW THREAD!!!

I love the Obama “change” people. What are you changing to? So far Obama speaks others speeches and chants catchy phrases that hit hot buttons but who is behind the curtain. If the haze of admiration ever wears off and there is brief pause in the music, there might be some significant scrutiny of this person that the male press has anointed as the Democratic nominee. However, after the thrashing that ABC received for even asking simple questions that he angrily stumbled around with but never answered and then shrugged off, I doubt that there are really any hardball players willing to take on that wave machine. Come on guys, work through your “reluctance”, pull back the curtain and take a little peak and let us know what you really see.

If he is the nominee the voters will have a choice of “Bush Lite” – because Obama also doesn’t have a clue what he is doing, or “Bush On Steroids” with McCain, who unfortunately does know what he is doing. Now let’s think … who knows this game and how to play? For a real change in the system we have now, not some imaginary theoretical land of Oz, Hillary is the more intelligent person with a better vision of where we’ve been, in depth knowledge of what is really happening now and she is better equipped to develop plans that will deliver a better future for all of us, not just the male version of America.

Obama is pretty and he gives pretty speaches. There is no there there. He does not have any clean/clear ideas on policy.
He was not in the senate when they voted to let Bush go to war, he never saw the intel reports. I know that Clinton has been accused of not reading the reports, but I know she was under alot of pressure from New Yorkers. Remember, the Bushies were telling us that Sadam not only had weapons of mass destruction, but that they KNEW where they were. Her bad. But to keep saing that He was against the war is about as important as my being against the war.
If all the 'BHO' groupies really want change, its time to give a woman a chance. Unfortunatly, Washington is what it is. I don't know what kind of change the hopeful hangers on have in mind, but he is after all, just a man.
Most of the issues that democrates care about are issues that they have to fight for-a womans right, health care for all, tax relief for the working families.
I keep hearing that people just don't like Clinton. Why? If they answer that question you usually find that they are using Republican talking points from the 1990's. Sen.Clinton has spent her time in the senate working for the people of NY, and for the most part they have been happy with her job. Those years in the senate have given her experience. Mr O hasn't even completed one term.
I am glad to see people interested in politics, more should be. But it is plain silly to jump into something with some happy happy! change change! hope hope! we will make everything better chant and not have any real idea of what your getting. What is his record of voting? Present? -sounds pretty wishy-washy to me. In his sort time in the senate he has voted exactly as Mrs C. Where's the change?

As I understand it, the following are the positions of each candidate regarding the Iraq war:

Clinton: Begin pull-out of troops within 60 days of taking office.

Obama: Begin pullout of troops dependent on advice of military leaders.

McCain: Continue war for at least 100 years (which would make him 171 years old by the time he left office).

I didn't read all the above.

In case it's not been posted, Bill Clinton pardoned some Weathermen and commuted Ayers wifes sentence.

And it's "worse" for Obama how?