Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

Craig,

You have mail.

Here we go again. Obama already said she wishes she would have re-phrased that...that her critics should read the entire statement to absorb the full context.

BREAKING NEWS: Plane goes missing...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31040692/

Krugman

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/opinion/01krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

" ---- hold hands, play nice, clean up after yourselves and if you are really, really good you can have a cookie."

jamie, our guru mama

O'Reilly's campaign against Dr. Tiller:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/05/31/tiller/index.html

re krugman

http://www.cartoonbank.com/product_details.asp?sitetype=1&sid=129587&did=4

If it is all taken out of text why would Obama & Gibbs say she would restate it or that she had poor choice of words?

with the govt satellite coverage worldwide, it's very likely that someone knows where that french plane is but are reluctant to expose their sweep of surveillance.

wonder if this will revitalize the bermuda triangle talk

craig, gibbs & co probably were holding off for the hearings, building anticipation, hoping for big splash show and letting the judge wow the folks in her own words and reworded words. patience. it's all in the timing.

Good morning everybody.
Buford, good point.

When attacked by the right wing machine apologies and explanations are viewed as a weakness and just results in a doubling of the attack.

The proper response to any reporter wanting to play the "He said something nasty about you , what do you have to say" game is " did you read the entire transcript? Then quit being foolish" They need to attack not explain. And the proper attack imo is ; anybody who runs around quoting the rightwing spin machine has no credibility in this debate.

Jack

Question besides the White House Campaign program responses...

Would her comments disqualify her to sit in a Jury?

Did she pay her taxes and / or have "fellow latin" helpers in the yard or house?

whskyjack,, The surprise is how the leftwing anger attack machine is still not in full blown mode.. Give them a little time to figure out a response - they may have to use a little brain power on this one

"Give them a little time to figure out a response - they may have to use a little brain power on this one"

a snarky monday to you too, ping.
jack made a good suggestion and the wh would be wise to respond accordingly imo.

Ping

As the attack machines primary purpose is fund raising(either for the cause or in Rushbo's case his personal pocket) why should you see the left need to go into full attack mode? They have Rushbo and company doing it for they.
Nothing they like better than for Rush to be the spokesman for the Republican party.

Jack

ping, your questions re taxes and employee situations (especially re social security & benefits she pays help) are legitimate areas.... can tell more about people by their interactions with service people than their words about same.

patd... The Taxes and Employee was a little joke with Obama's history of appointments.

whskyjack. It is the angery left that are pulling el rushbo to the front and center as they truly fear the day the center does gather itself again

"When attacked by the right wing machine apologies and explanations are viewed as a weakness and just results in a doubling of the attack.

The proper response to any reporter wanting to play the "He said something nasty about you , what do you have to say" game is " did you read the entire transcript? Then quit being foolish" They need to attack not explain."

Good points Jack. And they need to stop listening when bullies and thugs demand apologies. STOP apologizing.

I'm out of here. Got my Father in laws Yard /Estate sale to organise this week. Lord the man accumulated a lot of junk.
Carol
I missed your usual morning chitchat, The wife woke me up at 430 this am so I could have coffee with her before she took off to the airport.
I thought "good, I get to chitchat with Carol in the morning" But you were a no show girl :-(

Catch you next time

Jack

PS -- for all the bird lovers out there:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/5399061/Bird-uses-body-as-dam-to-stop-drainpipe-soaking-chicks.html

Ping

El Rushbo is a wall flower that has to be pulled out into the center of attention?

Who would a thunk it. ;-)

Patd and Patsi, good to see you this AM
now I am out of here.

Later

Jack

patsi, greater love hath no bird than to puff feathers for her brooder.

oops, should have read

greater love hath no bird than to lay down her puffed feathers for her brooder.

This whole attack on Sotomayor is really sticking in my craw. It is another example of the right wing picking and choosing two or three words, redefining what was meant by those words and then attacking the redefinition without any regard fro the facts or feelings involved. They value destruction of the perceived enemy more than they value the truth.

I agree the only way to handle this is absolute refusal to back down. Redefine back to original intent, force the reading of the context, and don't back down.

If you want to be mean, attack back against some "White male, privilged class judge who has never known a moments discomfort". Don't they bring their "experience" to being a judge and never once rule against a corporate power or person of equal privilege?

mornin'

puh-lease! How about "our backgrounds inform our decisions and no decision is made in a vacuum. We all like to think our won background makes our decisions better than those of others with different backgrounds? Just like Justice Alito said, his family's immigrant bachkground helps him make better decisions. Jay-sus. How hard is that?

OK, proud papa time. If it's another weekend, it must mean anouther AAU basketball tournament championship - this time with LP at the point. (Won the Championship game 63-29). Kid's got game.

Craig

MSNBC and Starbucks are pairing up. Does this mean Starbucks gift cards for all regular trailmixers?
I'll say nice things on Twitter every morning while sipping my vente Latte.

that would be "own background"

Wahoo!

Pogo,

Congratulations to LP

I'll start the wave on the west coast. Are there T Shirts?

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2009/05/this-was-recess.html#comment-232293

Corey,

I picked up the Boyle news on the Comcast news and my Google reader.

With Sotomayor .. History is just repeating itself just the players have changed sides..

Why so defensive?

"This whole attack on Sotomayor is really sticking in my craw."

Same here, Jamie. And I agree with all of your post -- and Pogo's as well. OBVIOUSLY people's backgrounds have an effect. And stop with the groveling to tyrants.

"History is just repeating itself just the players have changed sides..Why so defensive?"

How? Tell me why "suddenly" being a Puerto Rican woman is up for question. Who else has been questioned on being proud of gender and ethnicity?

Sotomayor nomination = contrived political drama. It's summer- slow news cycle. Turn off the TV and you wouldn't even know there is a fake controversy. GOP has to whine about something... what else do they have to do, besides lose elections?

Ping Pong

When the froth at the mouth yahoos on the right start yowling "Racist" at a truly accomplished woman - Yes I get damned defensive.

Rush and Newt particularly deserve to have something dire afflict their vocal chords permanently.
How they can say the things they have said and have it echoed all over the media but FOX particularly is so ugly and disgusting as to be beyond the pale of acceptable human behavior forever.

Money or no money, I would fire Rush immediately, pay out the fat slug's contract and never allow him near a microphone again. Let him exercise his first amendment rights on a street corner somewhere.

jamie, thanks - it was in Princeton, WV. T-shirts would be over the top.

Curious, Ping, who's defensive? Responsive and explanatory (here) does not equal defensive. But you are right, only the sides have changed.

Patsi.... I agree... no more apologizing and no more groveling....
re: OD.... I was wrong... you are right....

pogo.... Congrats to the proud papa!
too bad about the Cavs.... the Magic look unstoppable.... I'll be rooting for them come Thursday....

Jeffrey Toobin says it well and certainly seems to agree with the thoughts expressed here.

"Diverse Opinions"

"It's hard to attribute any of her opinions directly to her gender or to her ethnicity, but, as she has observed, her background is inseparable from her views--a circumstance that has applied to every Justice who has ever served on the Court.

At this point, one can say only that Sotomayor looks to be what the tableau of President and nominee in the East Room suggested--a fitting representative of a changed and changing nation."

"Rush and Newt particularly deserve to have something dire afflict their vocal chords permanently."

Jamie.... my sentiments exactly..... but for pure pleasure.... I'd pick another hole....

Forgot the link to Jeffrey Toobin-New Yorker

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2009/06/08/090608taco_talk_toobin

Definisive maybe the wrong term.

Lets not confuse issues.

So Sotomayor is the first SCOTUS Nominee to be attacked for elements outside of specifics Judical qualifications?

Ummmmm

How interesting would it be if Sonia comes back and says Obama and Gibbs spoke to soon - and she stands by her statement.

If last week is any indication - this nomination fight could get natsy.

Craig,
You are so right on this one.

In politics, there are basically two ways to deal with opposition attacks: ignore them, or aggressively and consistently counter-punch.

Ignoring them only works of there is a short half-life and they will quickly fade from the front page. Supreme Court nomination fights never do that. So, the administration must counter-punch to prevent the criticisms from becoming conventional wisdom.

It almost seems that the Obama administration believes that, in the end, Sotomayor will be confirmed (and she will), but that's a different issue. The right is using the nomination to regain the offensive. If you're Obama, you can't allow them to do that. You need to punch back, and in this case, as Craig says, the nominee has to defuse this particular controversy.

Sometimes the Obama administration seems to forget that they need to be both tactical and strategic at the same time.

Renee, there was no joy in Mudville (sorry for mixing sports metaphors) Saturday night. The finals will be an interesting matchup - My money is on LA - Gasol will match up better against Howard than Ilgauskis did, and who is going to match up on Kobe - maybe Turkoglu? But then again, Orlando did beat LA twice in the regular season, but both games were close, so who knows?

Well, I don't believe she's been renting Long Dong Silver.

I should have mentioned that my video rental answer was in response to this: "So Sotomayor is the first SCOTUS Nominee to be attacked for elements outside of specifics Judical qualifications?"

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2009/06/white-house-fumbles-sotomayor.html#comment-232330

The Mother Mistle Thrush was a treat, Patsi, thank you. lol

I have been searching by sound for a similar-looking bird, the Wood Thrush, a robin-relative whose flute-like song is my favorite of all bird songs. This weekend I may have heard him, but the call was faint and far-away. It's been so long since I heard one, I almost forget the sound. Thank goodness for this site with the recordings.

http://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Wood_Thrush/sounds

(^_~)

Ping

The only one I can remember receiving anything similar was Thomas. I did not then nor do I now think he is qualified to be on the court, but his treatment was excessive. To my mind there was never adequate evidence presented about the pornography and sexual harrassment charges.

Bork sank his own boat with his own statements. Alito just refused to answer any questions. He deserved to be grilled. In all of these cases, the criticism was mainly at the hearings not all over the air waves prior to the hearings.

Calling this woman a racist and misconstruing her record of judgements over decades is a blatant lie and unforgiveable cruelty. Of course, cruelty is what the far right does best, bless their little evangelical souls.

No, Ping, she's not. That unfortunate trend began with Thomas I'd say. She is the first SCOTUS nominee to be openly attacked because of her ethnic background and thinking that it might make her a better justice.

Louis Brandeis, to name one SCOTUS nominee that was openly attacked because of (his) ethnic background. I'm sure we can think of many others.

There may have been those who attacked Brandeis for his Jewish heritage and Zionist support , but the primary rap against Brandeis was his radical anti-corporate positions in a post WWI era of expansion. And of course the RW attacked him for his "free seech" and "privacy" legal positions, as well as his Federal Reserve and FTC establishment involvment.

Judge Sonia will emerge stronger for this trial by brush fire, and the Straw Men may get burned by their own match.

"There may have been those who attacked Brandeis for his Jewish heritage and Zionist support"

My understanding is indeed there was.

I believed Anita Hill. I don't think she was either a nut OR a slut, as she was branded by the right.

Judge Sotomayor seems like an intelligent, gracious person. She should not get into the back and forth with the Republicans.

In the hearings she will come accross and a very positive addition to the Court.

Also, I have great sympathy for Susan Boyle. I hope things work out for her.

"across well" it is early..i'm not quite awake yet

It's not even "Republicans" that are attacking Sotomayor, it's 2 or 3 media whores up to their same old tricks, and you people fall for it every time. Rush Limbaugh?! It's 2009, for crying out loud... you ain't wise to his routine, yet?

Patsi,

I don't believe Hill was a nut or a slut either. I do think that some of the rhetoric surrounding her testimony was over the top and rabidly emotional. If it had been presented better with a greater concentration on the lack of substance with Thomas, the left would have looked better even though I doubt they would have been successful.

Thomas may be at best a mediocre jurist, but I don't think anything could have stopped the appointment and HIll was almost destroyed in the process.

Thank you Dark lord...
Who is saying what?

This is a continued MSM and angry left liberal attempt to continue to misbrand Republicans as I will state again... the true fear that when the centric views which dominate find a voice things will get back in order.

Rush the entertainer is getting many goats.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2009/06/white-house-fumbles-sotomayor.html#comment-232375

dark lord,

We are aware, but unfortunately the other media whores groveling for ratings don't seem to be or don't care. They are the ones making his microphone louder and giving him more power than he deserves. That noise is what we object to because there will always be about 25% of the people who actually believe the noise, and that is dangerous.

Joe, I don't doubt that - that was the era of muckraking journalism after all, but Bandeis' ethnic roots was not the focus of his nomination fight, and in the end he was confirmed by more than a 2-1 margin. His nomination problem, to the extent that he had one, was that his career had been very high profile prior to his nomination and he was a strong trust busting advocate. Remember that he was nominated in the wake of his strong support for Wilson over Teddy Roosevelt. Ironically, before his support for Wilson, Brandeis was a Republican, at least in name, but his economic philosophy was certainly more Dem - at least by modern standards - than Rep.

His judicial opinions after ascending to the court were monumental, and in one respect (Erie v. Tompkins) set the stage for the way cases are dealt eith in federal court today. Erie, ironically enough, was a decision that strengthened the states' role in federal court lawsuits by doing away withthe concept of federal common law in favor of application of the law of the jurisdiction in which the case at question arose. It was a conservative, states' rights opinion from one of the three Musketeers.

and 25% that believe the words just words...

So are we the remaining 50%?

The more things Change the more they stay the same.

Just move the titles and winners.

Off to work to find the trickle over effect of the stimulus but heck .. Barack announced the end last week so what is the worry.

Best to all

Pogo,
I'm not arguing except the point that Judge Sotomayor is not the first nominee to be attacked on ethnic basis.

One good thing coming out of all this political brouhaha is that more people are reading Edmund Burke. That can't hurt. Now if they would actually read Adam Smith and my favorite David Hume

http://thinkexist.com/quotes/david_hume/

"Also, I have great sympathy for Susan Boyle. I hope things work out for her."

Same here.

"I don't think anything could have stopped the appointment and HIll was almost destroyed in the process."

Probably right. Those harassment cases are almost impossible to prove anyway. Especially when they've gone unreported, as they almost always are. (Certainly back then.)

That goddamned TV sure has a death-grip on the boomer generation, eh?

"Just move the titles and winners"

ping, don't you mean "whiners"?

m'lord bloggingham, i bow to your wisdom today. agree that we're in a slow season of reruns and any old red herring in the storm is welcome to be hung on it's own or the media's petard....
mixed mets make the perfect grovel sound... of course a fulsome slavering drool helps too.

If Anita Hill had filed a timely complaint when the harassment occurred, Clarence Thomas would have never been nominated.

joe, I am pretty sure that there have been those who have questioned the fitness because of their background of every SCOTUS candidate who was not an Anglo Christian white male - but the issue in my mind is not whether there were bigots who opposed them because of their ethnicity, but whether the confirmation fight was dominated by such ridiculous criticism unrelated to their political and legal background. That is why I pick Thomas out as the first to receive such treatment rather than Brandeis or Cardozo, although support for Cardozo was so strong - unanimously confirmed on a voice vote -despite his Jewish heritage - he was an agnostic (there doesn't appear to have been much if any question about his Portuguese heritage) that it's hard to say that he was opposed because of his ethnicity.

GM bankruptcy.....estimates are that they could have saved $6-8 billion of our money if they had filed 6 months ago.....what a shock.....:)

As long as there is some gov't ownership I won't be buying a GM or Chrysler vehicle. Ford looks great and I may even consider a US built foreign.

Pogo,
Are you saying that the opposition to Sotomayor is because she is Puerto Rican/Hispanic? Or that this is the dominant reason? While racism and sexism is always a background issue in our America, I don't hear that as the dominant criticism.

In my view, her comment that a Latina Woman would reach better judicial decisions than a white male was, even the context, a stupid statement. (Not that everyone doesn't make stupid statements.)

"If Anita Hill had filed a timely complaint when the harassment occurred, Clarence Thomas would have never been nominated."

Most people do not file these cases, especially when their entire career can go down the tubes because of it. Easy to say she should have done it then. Not so easy when you walk in those shoes.

I don't think that anyone I've listened to objects to the use of one's backgrounds and ethnicity as a foundation for their thoughts.

I think most of the argument against Sotomayor on this issue is that her comments indicate that she thinks her background and ethnicity somehow offer a superiority "better than" element to her deliberations.

Not an attractive quality in anyone especially a judge.

Joe -- You realize don't you that she was talking about race and gender decisions....

http://mediamatters.org/research/200905290049

'just sayin'

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2009/06/white-house-fumbles-sotomayor.html#comment-232393

Jax

That might be important if it had ever been reflected in her actions as a judge. The reason the right is harping on it, is that there is absolutely no evidence that she has ever done anything but uphold the law. Decades of experience, hundreds of cases, less than ten appeals and less than half of those reversed ... this woman is a phenomenal jurist.

Since they can't say she did a bad job, they have to call her a bad person.

If she had made the point that different people with different life experiences bring about different, and important, perspectives, that would have been fine. The 'sound bite,' though was unfortunate -- or to use the shorthand -- stupid. If not, it would not have caused the White House from saying it could have been phrased better -- and I bet before long she says so too.

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life"

she uses the words "hope" and "would"..... not exactly what one would call strident language.... more of a statistical possibility or odds betting type conjecture.

"If Anita Hill had filed a timely complaint when the harassment occurred, Clarence Thomas would have never been nominated."

"Most people do not file these cases, especially when their entire career can go down the tubes because of it. Easy to say she should have done it then. Not so easy when you walk in those shoes. "

I guess I'm in the wrong place today. All I said was what was in the first quotation. I was not saying what "should have done." In the end, she came out with it anyway, here career is what it is, and Thomas is an associate justice.

Jamie,
Nevertheless....They are her words.....they aren't fabricated.......if what you say is true then she'll have no problems......Right now we can only go by her words until she comments on what she really meant.

Words mean alot and while this may have been a poor choice on her part I'll believe it when she says it.......not some spin from the latest talking head....We'll hear from her soon I suspect......I for one will withhold my judgment until then.

The Dark Lord understands why real old dudes talk about the weather... which is pretty nice today. Sure was hot yesterday. Well, maybe the Dark Lord will see you tomorrow. Heard it might rain.

Gotta run.....teaching my youngest son to drive a forklift this afternoon....gotta make sure there is nothing of value anywhere close......all the best

"Right now we can only go by her words until she comments on what she really meant."

No Jax, We don't need to go by her words. We can go by her record. She could say she the sky is green with pink polka dots, but if in the course of her work, she always judged the sky is blue, it wouldn't matter what she said.

Since actually looking at her career would be a loss for the right, they would rather blather on about her "reverse racism". She must be a reverse racist, she has a funny name.

I thought that after G Will had his say today,,,,things would clam down,,,about Soto,,,but Obama's team is handling it badly,,,(Axle,rod),,,they should tell them to read the whole think in its entirety,,,it not,,,that they could not possibly have a worthwhile opinion.

GM,,,filed for bankruptcy,,,,they should have done it a lot sooner,,if that is what they had in mind,,,,,,,the only ones that are really going to hurt,,,are the workers,,and small stock holders,,,,,,the GREEDY,,,MONEY hungry Union Bosses,,,are going to get 17% of what is left,,,,,,is this why they did not file before,,,,they had to get their hands on the $?? TONY,,and Corey,,,,Im sorry for you and you co-workers!!!

Patsi,,,,thanks for that Reagan ,,,link,,,,I keep saying ,,that the D's should never let up on the truth about him,,and about the harm he did to our country,,,,there are lots of opportunities to do so,,when, speaking about the economy imo

"If not, it would not have caused the White House from saying it could have been phrased better -- and I bet before long she says so too."

Yeah. If they beat her long enough she'll realize her "place."

Joe, I'm saying that the criticism of her is over perceived racism and sexism reflected in her 2001 comments that her heritage and experience influence her decisions, taken out of context to make that charge - as opposed to examination of the decisions she has made and her judicial philosophy. That criticism is clouding reasoned examination of her record. The "reverse racism" criticism of the firefighter case is a bootstrap to that charge of racism - the
decision does not support the criticism. The criticism is as a result of her acknowledging rather than rejecting her ethnicity and believeing that it imporves her decisions because of the perspective it gives her. The same criticism did not arise from the similar comments from Alito - but then he is a white male. Why Thomas' comments about his experience as a black man weren't pummelled is pretty obvious to me.

The criticism is based in racism. That's what I'm saying.

remember the nominee about which a senator said in his defense "Even if he is mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they, and a little chance?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Harrold_Carswell

the judge may have also made history in other aspects re scotus nomination.

Funny thing about GM, everyone I talk to down here in Cowboy Cadillacville believe GM is making the highest quality vehicles on the market.

I'm sure going to miss my Saturns. I'd put my Coupe up against any Toyota I've ever owned.

My stance is this: I don't care if she did mean exactly what she said. I listen to men pontificate all the time about what women should do regarding abortion, harassment, and any number of things they know nothing about. Yet they have historically made many decisions about us.

don1, not to worry... saturn may still be with us yet

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=afamEClg9TCc

I love GM. My Chevy Cavalier is a wonderful car and my dad was a Buick man all the way. The day traders in the stock are making a bundle today with the jump from 75 cents to over a dollar. The government will eventually sell its stock and those in now, could do very well.

Solar, The unions really took it on the chin for the car company. One of the reasons GM will be in a potentially profitable position following the bankruptcy is that they are now out from under the legacy costs of reitrement and medical insurance and the salaries are now in line with the rest of the industry and competitive. There are a lot of GM retirees out there who will be glad for those stock holdings that will now fund their pensions.

Yay! Thanks for that.

I still reserve the right to hate Fords though.

Don

I have always liked the Chevy trks,,not better than the fords,,,,but they were a lot easier to work on,,and parts were cheaper too

If I had the extra cash to buy one or two I would,,and one of the small pick-up size dump trks,,,,,should get a terrific bargain right now,,,,,How does it feel to be 50,,and a few days older,,,no diff I bet ? and I will give you an answer about your last post a little later,,in between exercises,and ,two way radios, and will finish in a cpl of minuets,,,,,

So I can go to Lunch,,,,without,,,, Pogo,,,he sleeping today haha

Jamie,,,,thats right,,,and I truly feel for the Union memembers,,,and wish them the best,,,,,,It is the Union Bosses that im upset about,,,not the workers,,,or anyone other than ,,the Secretive Management Union Officials,,,but I get your point,,,and agree with it

Don,,,,not = lot better than the fords

NEW THREAD.. http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2009/06/obamas-highstakes-auto-gamble.html