home

Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat

I am off now but J. will be back soon. What do you think was the most undercovered story of the past two days? I say Shaq being traded to the Suns. I can not believe what little coverage this has garnered. Shaq was once the best player in the league. And are the Suns worried about their chemistry? How does Shaq possibly fit with a running team especially given his physical problems and age?

If you do not find Shaq as interesting as I do, propose your own undercovered story. This is an Open Thread.

< Whoopi Goldberg Switches From Obama To Hillary | California Delegates Awarded: 207 to 163 >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Jeez (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by cdo on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:22:06 PM EST
    He is really making it tough for me to keep my promise to vote for whoever the nominee is. My mantra is of course, "supreme court,supreme court"...Now I'm gonna have to go sit in a corner and repeat that for like an hour or so.

    Ohmmmm, ohmmmmm (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:23:04 PM EST
    Supreme court....

    Parent
    Obama girl didn't vote for Obama (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by magster on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:45:59 PM EST
    No wonder Obama lost New Jersey.

    Since this is an open thread, HuffPost (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:10:13 PM EST
    has a story re Hillary's worst outfits, as in clothes choices.  No, I didn't open the link.

    If you opened the link (none / 0) (#115)
    by dwightkschrute on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:07:18 PM EST
    You might see that it's Hillary that's making fun of her own outfits. She "pokes fun of her past looks in the latest issue of Us Weekly, where she rates eight ensembles."

    Sorry if I ruined everyone's fun of assuming everyone is out to get her.

    Parent

    I think I had at least 5 (none / 0) (#135)
    by Cream City on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:44:38 AM EST
    of those outfits.  And worse.  I've still got my leather vest, beaded and fringed down to the knees.  And my puffy-sleeved, ankle-length dress I made from a Rudi Gernreich pattern (remember his HORRIBLE swimsuits? -- and made from an Indian bedspread.

    My daughter found the box of this stuff some years ago and went to a Halloween party as a hippie.

    Parent

    My sister in law had a fringed buckskin like (none / 0) (#136)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:52:11 AM EST
    outfit consisting of a short jacket and tight pants.  Kind of a female Wild Bill Hickok thing.  1970.  When I asked her later what ever became of that outfit, she sd. her daughters wore it for Halloween and made fun of her.  

    Parent
    ever since my friend broke her back (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Jen M on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:46:28 PM EST
    She has been in chronic pain. Since she is fatally allergic to NSAIDS she has a huge problem with pain control.

    For the second time, the pain clinic she attends was closed by the DEA.

    What was it Bush was saying about government dictating medical treatment?

    Sorry... (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:42:13 PM EST
    ...to hear about your friend, Jen.  As someone who lives with chronic pain, I can relate.  

    Nobody should have to be in pain when there are alternatives (effective ones, at that) available.

    Got to love that conservative compassion.

    Parent

    All of you (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:27:38 PM EST
    STOP the nastiness.

    AS for whether Hillary needed the cash or not, I find the Obama supporter argument here simply ridiculous but everyone is entitled to be ridiculous.

    But no more nastiness.

    I will delete everyone;s comments if this keeps up.

    So STOP IT!

    Listening to Conservative (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:42:08 PM EST
    Uhh, they don't like McCain cause he wants to close Guantanamo, voted against the tax cut, is against torture. Man, if we lose to them, shoot me now.

    You left out a few... (none / 0) (#74)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:50:05 PM EST
    ...like not securing (i.e., build the border super-fence with moats and sharks with lasers on their heads) and not wanting to conduct a mass deportation.  That one is a biggie to the con masses.  

    BWT--I can only shoot you now if they win in November when I perfect my time travel machine. I've got a few kinks to work out with that.

    Parent

    yea...list (none / 0) (#80)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:57:08 PM EST
    not complete.

    Parent
    While we're enjoying the dustup (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by tnthorpe on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:06:20 PM EST
    between C and O, now even sexier with more money added, over at the DOJ, Mukasey is busy shielding the probable felons in the WH from anything like responsibility. On Digby's front page:"The Attorney General is saying that the President can do anything he wants, break the law any way he wants, as long as the President's own Justice Department, populated his own handpicked officials, validates it. And he's saying it directly to members of Congress, essentially telling them that they don't exist. They have no power to prosecute because the Justice Department won't take up the case, and the courts have no power to adjudicate because these are official state secrets. There is only one branch of government that matters." Great reporting at TPM too.

    I couldn't care less about  the entertainment tonight coverage of the primary and I want to see the candidates to address this asap.  

    What about Johan? (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by kdog on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 09:09:44 AM EST
    The Amazin' Mets get the best pitcher in baseball in his prime for basically a bag of baseballs.

    Look out NL.....

    Talkleft posting links to ABC? :-) (1.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Aaron on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:53:02 PM EST
    What next The National Review?

    Political Punch

    As I've said in the past, Jeralyn needs to change the title of this blog to talkright-leaningmoderate, and if you keep posting links to ABC and their right-wing smear campaign of Obama, perhaps talkright is more appropriate.  That Network is behind Hillary Clinton's campaign all the way now that they've had to face the realization that no corporate Republican can become president in 2008, now that Romney has dropped out, Hillary is their corporate friendly fallback candidate. They know she'll say whatever she has to, tell the American people virtually any fairytale, in the hopes of deceiving or frightening them into voting for her.  And ABC endorses those tactics wholeheartedly.

    Everyone in the media business knows who ABC works for these days, and it sure isn't the American people.

    The execs over at ABC are desperately afraid of Barack Obama and the Obama campaign, because they fear anyone who would give control of this country back to its people.  They're shaking in their boots right now, and this piece of smear propaganda is another example of how petrified they all are.

    Obama 08, UNITED WE STAND!  

    Thin skin out there? (none / 0) (#119)
    by RalphB on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:22:00 PM EST
    I'm sorry but that was pretty funny.  Something tells me Tapper doesn't like any of them.  But at least he used real quotes from real named people.

    That beats ridiculous conspiracy theories at least.


    Parent

    Dalton, are you saying that the media (none / 0) (#121)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:27:14 PM EST
    can't be negative toward Obama because they will be perceived as possibly racist or at least made to appear that way?

    Parent
    Ha. Hard to top that. How about the (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:12:30 PM EST
    equivocating quarterback being wooed by both OSU and University of Michigan?

    I thought... (none / 0) (#78)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:54:29 PM EST
    ...the new savior brought a quaterback with him, Oculus?  Iowa got the prize QB they had lined-up before the coaching/system change.

    Hope he's a good one!

    Parent

    You are probably right. I'm pretty good (none / 0) (#93)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:13:16 PM EST
    on baseball stuff and should never have started in on football!

    Parent
    You mean the media darling of the (none / 0) (#99)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:22:02 PM EST
    Capital One bowl?

    Parent
    We probably should talk about that... (none / 0) (#108)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:51:59 PM EST
    ...with Florida being 2-4 this decade against Big Ten teams in bowl games.  

    BTD might start crying or something!

    Parent

    *Should not* (none / 0) (#111)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:56:25 PM EST
    That's what I meant...

    Parent
    I think "or something" (none / 0) (#112)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:57:44 PM EST
    is much more likely than crying, although J has severely curtailed a disappointed Gator fan's options here.

    Parent
    I almost... (none / 0) (#114)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:07:10 PM EST
    ...feel sorry for the poor dear.  Almost...

    Teehee.

    Parent

    I would jump in here to rag him since my (none / 0) (#123)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:30:50 PM EST
    Vols whipped his Gators Tuesday but I'm scared he'll bring up our football score.

    Parent
    He's pretty busy expressing outrage at (none / 0) (#129)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:09:32 AM EST
    Shusster for impugning Chelsea Clinton's character, excoriating comments in a DK diary, and reminding us in Rezko is STILL not an issue.  So, bottom line, go ahead.  

    Parent
    My mother just called and said that she (none / 0) (#2)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:14:51 PM EST
    just saw Obama on TV and he said that HC needs to disclose where she got the $5 million to put in her campaign. Did anyone else see that?

    Not from rezko. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:19:01 PM EST
    Speaking of... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:21:03 PM EST
    firedoglake My obsession diverted

    Parent
    Have you read Citzen's diary at (none / 0) (#22)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:07:31 PM EST
    DK rebutting your linked one?

    REZKO

    Parent

    You made me look (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:44:26 PM EST
    It's the standard don't look behind the curtain, Hillary did worse. Nothing new. My point is no one has really done on the ground research, everyone relies on the Chicago Sun stuff, when we need lots of new info. I find his role negligent and he sold the community up down the river.

    Parent
    wait till (none / 0) (#79)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:55:24 PM EST
    thta trial starts. It was suppose to start on Feb. 25th, but apparently the "powers that be" got it postponed for a week....Hmmmm..wonder why??

    Parent
    The Chicago (none / 0) (#83)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:59:39 PM EST
    Machine at work I think O is desperate, They are sending out all these attacks about the money etc. desperate... (I made a song, remember the Oscar Meyer bologna song, just change the name)

    Parent
    I have no idea if the Chicago Sun-Times is a (none / 0) (#95)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:16:29 PM EST
    supermarket tabloid or a respectable competitor to the Chicago Trib.  But here's an idea.  We all subscribe (kind of like to Bill in Portland Maine at DK) and you take a couple of months off to be Stellaaa, female reporter; you could also sit in on the Rezko trial like Emptywheel.  How about it?  Maybe you would even get on TV!!!!!

    Parent
    I can get inside info (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:10:14 AM EST
    My grandfather was Syrian...I can talk a bit of Arabic and get him to tell me the truth. Ha...ha...!!

    Parent
    naw... (none / 0) (#46)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:12:05 PM EST
    I have my Rezko angle....

    Parent
    the diary at kos makes the case that (none / 0) (#92)
    by hellothere on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:09:48 PM EST
    obama's former firm is not a sleezy firm. however, i find that firedoglake researches her writing and isn't prone to "attacks".

     

    Parent

    I don't think the law firm (none / 0) (#130)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:11:13 AM EST
    is "sleazy."  One of their clients certainly is though.  

    Parent
    and that's not to say that some members of (none / 0) (#131)
    by hellothere on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:32:14 AM EST
    the firm may be not so desirable. please note i don't put obama in that group.

    i have found firedoglake to be careful in her research and i don't think she would post something she didn't believe especially in this regard.

    Parent

    I skimmed that post; didn't see any (none / 0) (#133)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:35:20 AM EST
    factual statements members of the firm had been disciplined by the state bar.  That would be my test.

    Parent
    yup and a very good one too! (none / 0) (#150)
    by hellothere on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 10:42:00 AM EST
    i was thinking about the firm member who resigned to go into business with obama's mentor.

    Parent
    No sleezy or sleazy or sleasy (none / 0) (#139)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:13:35 AM EST
    But negligent. They did not structure the deals properly, they exposed the non profit and endeagered the projects by representing Rezko and the non profit. To me that is what is the meat of the case. The syphening of funds from the projects when they had to have adequately capitalized reserves. But who cares about the details, they just want scandal. So people keep doing a bad job.

    Parent
    stella, thanks! you are the expert here! (none / 0) (#151)
    by hellothere on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 10:42:37 AM EST
    Desperate (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:22:33 PM EST
    If he continues he is appearing desperate. She is mighty cool.

    Parent
    Teresa (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:28:15 PM EST
    I saw it and commented in another post.  This goes with what Obamabots were saying yesterday, that because Bill was paid for making speeches in foreign lands by non-American countries, he was using foreign money to finance Hillary's campaign.  Now, two things: (1) I get a good chunk of foreign income and I donated to the campaign.  If Bill is guilty of diverting foreign money, then I am, too.  (2) And this is the important part: Hillary Clinton easily earned 5mm bucks from her book advance and royalties, so to say it's not her money, too, is total bullsh*t.  This just goes along with Obama's spin to link them both together, like he's running against Bill, too.  Even on his donation site yesterday, he had "Bill and Hillary Clinton gave $5 million to fund their campaign.  Help us stop them."  So obvious it's kind of insulting.

    As to the question of this thread: Most under reported at least on tonight's news:

    California delegates assigned: Clinton ahead of Obama by 44

    But, I really don't trust anything I read lately.  Can someone confirm that this is in other places and is generally accepted?  And by someone, I mean someone partly sane?

    Parent

    Thank you Kathy, (none / 0) (#10)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:45:19 PM EST
    My most uncovered story: Hillary Clinton wins Alabama. Remember Nevada and how much play Obama got for winning one more delegate though she won the popular vote? Well, she got 21 in Alabama to his 20.

    Seems that this time, Obama counts the people instead of the delegates.

    Parent

    Interesting. (none / 0) (#17)
    by lilburro on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:57:37 PM EST
    When did this happen?  Alabama remains aglow on his website map.  DUN DUN DUN.

    Parent
    Alabama (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:35:48 PM EST
    She got 21 delegates, he got 20.

    This is interesting.  CNN backs up the NY Times as saying Hillary leading in delegates.  I watched both NBC and ABC news, and they said NOTHING about her winning both the delegates and the popular vote.

    That's why I am asking folks here--is this true or is this crap?  The media has my head spinning and I don't really trust anything they say.

    Parent

    DELEGATE COUNT PER CNN (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by felizarte on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:56:03 PM EST
    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/dates/#20080205

    CLINTON:
    Pledged   840
    SuperD    193      TOTAL   1,033

    OBAMA
    Pledged   831
    SuperD    106      TOTAL   937

    These numbers include Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and So. Carolina

    Parent

    MSNBC differs (none / 0) (#81)
    by kenosharick on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:57:44 PM EST
    They say Obama is leading the count. They also may as well have an Obama for president scroll on their screen, they are so obviously biased. They als claim he is dramaticaly ahead of mccain in polls- 2 points is hardly dramatic.

    Parent
    msnbc has become a huge disappointment. (none / 0) (#94)
    by hellothere on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:14:34 PM EST
    Sorry but! (none / 0) (#140)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:20:00 AM EST
    What a bordello, does the Democratic party not have official numbers? Why does the media make the numbers? I am confused. Bring back the smoked filled rooms. (ha...ha, that will keep out all my Berkeley new age anti smoking liberals).

    Parent
    the least covered story? (none / 0) (#126)
    by skippybkroo on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:58:39 PM EST
    Skippy, I will do it (none / 0) (#141)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:24:59 AM EST
    as soon as the primary heat dies down. And I get caught back up at work after my move.

    Parent
    This is leeching the wind beneath his wings (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Ellie on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:09:57 PM EST
    These pissy comments from Obama don't intersperse well with his inspiring lofty talk. Since hoops have taken over as the alpha sport ...

    Team Obama's still aiming flying elbows at HRC in such a way that make their star look like a jerk and a phony. Media are still being friendly but he's going to be hit hard with a few T's if he keeps this up.

    Trying to conjure bad press for her fund-raising while his campaign is using his own to quantify his popularity kind of takes the gloss off his image as a morally=driven, spiritual visionary. He should stay above the tawdriness of carping about his opponent's finances.

    More importantly, the day after the "Kiss and Makeup" Debate he should have shifted away not just from focusing on HRC as his natural enemy but from using the man-2-man defence.

    HRC's campaign is smarter by going after BushCo more frequently (and directly) and deflecting Team Obama's shots with some elbows and blocks of her own, but more adroitly. She's covering two offences by playing the zone D.

    Least covered story in these parts? Area woman goes slightly crazy during third week of no Ugly Betty.

    Parent

    i agree (none / 0) (#125)
    by skippybkroo on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:54:08 PM EST
    he's no better here than he accused bill & hillary of being before this super tuesday fracas.

    i am firmly in neither camp.  

    Parent

    Ugly Betty was on (none / 0) (#142)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:26:31 AM EST
    Hillary's Town Hall meeting on Hallmark. She's a strong Hillary supporter. I can't get into that show but always end up seeing a few moments of it as I'm waiting for Grey's Anatomy to start.

    Parent
    Least covered story? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:21:45 PM EST
    Britney.

    yup, brittney got out of the hospital again (none / 0) (#96)
    by hellothere on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:18:38 PM EST
    and i didn't know it. gee! (snark)

    Parent
    Story never to be covered on this site (none / 0) (#12)
    by dwightkschrute on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:47:08 PM EST
    Turns out the Clinton campaign was exaggerating their financial woes in order to raise more money.

    I saw that too (none / 0) (#14)
    by independent voter on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:53:00 PM EST
    I feel terrible for her supporters, and I really mean that.
    I've been on her website and they all are extremely loyal.
    It's a little sickening that she basically LIED to get them to pony up.

    Parent
    you people (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:05:37 PM EST
    are so anxious to invent any scandal you can to put down Hillary...Get over it...and while you are at it. She is doing great and her numbers show it....

    Parent
    you've called her (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by english teacher on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:15:28 PM EST
    a liar on three threads now for crying out loud.

    she never pushed the notion that her campaign needed money.  

    all the garbage about her loaning the money and being broke was based on anonymous sources.  

    but that is enough for you to call her a "liar" and accuse her of "bilking" supporters on three threads here.  

    so please wise up remember they have accused her of murder for crying out loud there is nothing the media will not make up to throw at hillary.  

    this kerfluffle seems a perfect case in point.

    Parent

    Anonymous sources??? (none / 0) (#30)
    by dwightkschrute on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:34:09 PM EST
    I know some people aren't happy with all of her top aides but I don't think they're anonymous:

    Members of Senator Hillary Clinton's senior campaign staff have agreed to work without pay for the month of February.  Communications Director Howard Wolfson called the move "a show of solidarity with Hillary Clinton".- ABC News

    The campaign confirmed that some of her top staff members, including manager Patti Solis Doyle, would go without pay in order to save her cash-strapped campaign. - National Journal

    Parent

    Look (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:29:08 PM EST
    Your theory is utterly ridiculous imo.

    But what is very clear is that youu have posted 10 times already.

    Enough.

    Parent

    Which means it must be the rumor of the hour (none / 0) (#82)
    by andgarden on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:59:10 PM EST
    at dkos.

    Parent
    Desperados (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:01:31 PM EST
    That vicious liar. You guys are hillarious...(get it..Hillarious)

    Parent
    you guys (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:10:04 PM EST
    create viral lies...

    Parent
    they'll get over it!! (none / 0) (#20)
    by ghost2 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:04:58 PM EST
    don't worry, but thanks for your sweet concern.

    Parent
    I was a single mom for many years (none / 0) (#32)
    by independent voter on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:40:47 PM EST
    so the sarcasm is completely inappropriate here.
    If the bulk of her support is really blue collar women, this is a terrible way to repay their loyalty.

    Parent
    independent (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:53:28 PM EST
    I think you are buying the media's negative spin on this.

    Let's not forget: Obama raised 32mm in one month.  Hillary raised 13mm that same month.  He was almost three to one on her, and she put cash into her campaign to compete with him on media buys.

    Meanwhile, Obama was out there trying to raise millions more.  It was not a "trick" on her part, it was trying to catch up with Obama.

    She asked for money, she got it.  Now, she is back even with Obama.

    I think many of us here have been in the single mom spot, and I don't see what has changed from yesterday.  She was outraised almost three fold.  That's the message we responded to.

    Parent

    OK, I'll try not to go negative (none / 0) (#39)
    by independent voter on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:59:30 PM EST
    I read some of the posts on her website about this and there was a lot of: it's my last $10, can't afford my bills, etc. Maybe it's just drama by the posters, but sheesh

    Parent
    why don't you go and investigate some (none / 0) (#100)
    by hellothere on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:24:18 PM EST
    of obama's finances. the fact is his campaign also puts money for for shirts, posters, etc in as contributions. hillary's campaign doesn't do that. i skews the numbers in his favor. write about that!

    Parent
    independent (none / 0) (#41)
    by ding7777 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:06:23 PM EST
    Hillary's base came thru for her and Hillary raised more money than expected, so she is not immediately cash strapped.

    What part is terrible?

    Parent

    If it was a ploy (none / 0) (#51)
    by independent voter on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:18:08 PM EST
    Do you see what I'm saying? It's one thing to say, hey troops, Obama is raising way too much money and we have to all pitch in to match or top his receipts. It's entirely different to put out press releases that you are short of cash, people are not being paid, and then say, well we didn't really need the money I loaned my campaign.
    I find it to be an integrity thing, and I'm sure I will be crucified for expressing my opinion.
    Luckily, you are all so much more fair minded than the other websites

    Parent
    Did you read the (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by ding7777 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:44:29 PM EST
    article?

    We were outraised in January which we took steps immediately to address," she told ABC News' Jake Tapper today.

    "Since Tuesday we've raised millions of dollars on the Internet. So we're going to be fine. And you know my staff is so dedicated that they stepped up and said we want to do our part. I did my part. But we're going to be in very good financial shape, people are rallying around. And I think by the end of the week we're going to be back on track," she said

    .

    Her email stated:

    We poured our heart, our soul, and -- you better believe -- tens of millions of dollars into February 5. Now it's time to build our resources back up for what we know will be a long and hard-fought contest.

    Its some anonymous Democratic consultant throwing dirt who's calling it a "stunt".  

    Parent

    you are not being criticized (none / 0) (#58)
    by english teacher on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:28:34 PM EST
    for expressing your opinion.  you are being criticized for the fervency of your effort push the idea that clinton lied or engaged in a ploy.

    you are buying in to the angle of motives.  what happened happened.  the media reported huge numbers for obama.  the media reported clinton was strapped for cash.  her people responded.

    to take that chain of events as making clinton a liar engaging in a ploy of deception sounds like something rush limbaugh would say.  

    it's how right wing smears operate:  take the most unflattering possible interpretation and push, push, push.  

    there are many more reasonable explanations of what happened, but you reach for the most extreme one that just so happens to paint hillary as a liar and deceiver.  

    that is why you are drawing fire.  

    i for one find the whole situation awful because it is money being wasted on the media to give them a story.  so on the scale of why all this is happening as an exercise in successful media manipulation, the whole thing is quite tragic.  but that is hardly clinton's fault.  

    Parent

    As one who kicked in $50 yesterday (none / 0) (#97)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:20:11 PM EST
    (my only contrib. to any candidate in this primary), I must say I probably would not have done so w/o the  news Hillary Clinton loaned $5 mil. to her own campaign.  I'm glad I didn't click on $250.  

    Parent
    How terrible do you feel? (none / 0) (#86)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:02:59 PM EST
    Thanks for your concern indi.

    Parent
    Oh bull crap. She raised some money and (none / 0) (#15)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:53:30 PM EST
    didn't take them up on their offer to go without pay. She is still short of the kind of money Obama has for his advertising blitz.

    Parent
    Teresa (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:19:26 PM EST
    No kidding.  It's amazing how these things get spun around so that they are Hillary's fault.  The line yesterday was she was quitting.  Today, it's "she can't run her campaign/she can't run the economy" and tomorrow, it apepars, it's "she had the money all along and she was tricking folks into sending her more."

    Uh, okay.

    It was theorized yesterday that they freaked because Obama raised 30mm in one month.  She put money to buy media to counter his.  End of story as far as I am concerned, but apparently, the msm, who seems intent on bashing her as much as they can, thinks not.

    Parent

    The articel on CBS (none / 0) (#16)
    by independent voter on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:57:19 PM EST
    said she didn't NEED to lend her campaign money...so why did she do it, then? This was actually discussed on another thread here yesterday and BTD said there was no angle for Hillary to "pretend" she needed the money.
    Guess that is not true

    Parent
    Oops *article (none / 0) (#18)
    by independent voter on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:58:03 PM EST
    Without viral Huffington Post and DKOS (none / 0) (#45)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:11:33 PM EST
    hate articles, you'd have never known she loaned herself anything.

    Maybe she had a cashflow issue that turned out not to be the case at all.

    And BTW, "anonymous sources not affiliated with either campaign" offering opinions are not real news sources.

    Parent

    Well reading blogs (none / 0) (#59)
    by dwightkschrute on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:28:46 PM EST
    Or hearing from the numerous major media outlets that were on the Clinton campaign conference call when Clinton aides brought it up. Oh and then went further and verified it with other campaign sources. Ah and then also reported the quote when Hillary spoke about it later that day.

    Yeah "anonymous sources" like Hillary, Wolfson, Penn, and Solis Doyle and "hate articles" by CNN, LA Times, New York Times, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS.

    Parent

    The campaign said (none / 0) (#27)
    by dwightkschrute on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:20:47 PM EST
    They said they were short money, numerous Clinton aides said they were going without money for the whole month. Then after 1 day raising $6 million everything is fine everyone's getting paid.

    So in a campaign that pays a 1/2 million for an hour infomercial on Hallmark, $6 million is the difference between people getting paid or not?

    Parent

    I think the difference (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by ding7777 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:12:35 PM EST
    was between Obama's 32 million and Hillary's 13 million January donations.

    She needed the money to stay competitive.

    fwiw - What I read was that the aides volunteered to go without pay... not that they actually did.

    Parent

    LOL! (none / 0) (#42)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:07:18 PM EST
    So the rumor run by the Huffington Post to make Clinton look bad turned out to be false.

    And that's a reason to hate Clinton.

    Parent

    It was not a rumor (none / 0) (#54)
    by dwightkschrute on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:21:51 PM EST
    It was something the Clinton campaign said on a conference call, and confirmed with every major news outlet.

    Parent
    No, the campaign was asked the question and (none / 0) (#62)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:30:43 PM EST
    Wolfson didn't know if there had been a loan and said he'd find out. He did and later confirmed the rumor for the press.

    The lack of money compared to Obama is not something they'd really want to broadcast if they could keep it quiet.

    Parent

    excuse me but i see so much clinton lies and (none / 0) (#132)
    by hellothere on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:33:48 AM EST
    exaggerations, i no longer believe abc.

    Parent
    no exaggeration (none / 0) (#143)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:28:15 AM EST
    they offered to go without pay but when the money started rolling in they were told it wsn't necessary.

    Parent
    Super Delegate List (none / 0) (#13)
    by Saul on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:52:19 PM EST
    OH MY GOD (none / 0) (#28)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:21:50 PM EST
    now that pig David Shuster said while filling in for Tucker, that Hillary has Chelsea out pimping for her....Those people at MSNBC are such pigs...Hope media matters calls them on it...

    they actually said (none / 0) (#29)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:33:05 PM EST
    "pimping"?

    Jesus.

    Parent

    Segue: "pimping." (none / 0) (#35)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:46:38 PM EST
    Huff Post says sex workers get more business during Republican national convention than during Democratic national convention.  

    Parent
    He was on Monday night fussing about (none / 0) (#53)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:19:47 PM EST
    Chelsea lobbying super delegates on her mom's behalf. He asked Gray (sp?) Davis, former California gov. about it and he laughed and said they are always being lobbied. After Davis was off air, Shuster made another comment about it. He thinks a candidate's daughter shouldn't do that.

    Parent
    Sounds like Shuster's version of (none / 0) (#113)
    by RalphB on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:03:05 PM EST
    Imus's nappy headed ho comment.  Hope he gets his butt kicked off TV for it, but it won't happen.

    Parent
    No calling people pigs here (none / 0) (#146)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 02:01:00 AM EST
    I like David Schuster -- Jane of firedoglake and I  had dinner with him in Iowa last month during their cuacuses. His wife is very cute and they make a great couple. He's a good guy. If he said something worng (and yes, I agree it was wrong) you should call a pal of his to ask who should be the one to broach it to him.

    Parent
    for all of you talking about (none / 0) (#33)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:45:27 PM EST
    the unfair media coverage of Hillary here is proof...

    I wish they would add (none / 0) (#48)
    by ding7777 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:15:23 PM EST
    blogs to the list

    Parent
    Do you know the source??? (none / 0) (#52)
    by dwightkschrute on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:18:14 PM EST
    Did you read the report or check where you were linking?

    It says Fox News "provided more balanced coverage than its counterparts on the broadcast networks." and "FOX treated the Democrats slightly better than the Republicans"

    The Center for Media and Public Affairs is a conservative mouthpiece. They attacked PBS in 1992, they attacked Michael Moore for Fahrenheit 9/11, and they said Gore got slightly better coverage than Bush during the 2000 campaign.

    Parent

    gore got better coverage than bush? (none / 0) (#105)
    by hellothere on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:34:05 PM EST
    now that is a phony story i won't let fly by. anyone with a brain and the ability to read or listen knew that bush was adored and gore was ambushed in 2000. next!

    Parent
    Oh no he didn't (none / 0) (#36)
    by NJDem on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:47:54 PM EST
    if Shuster actually said the word "pimping", he best expect a call/visit from a seriously-pissed Bill Clinton.  

    By the way, has anyone noticed that the man who they say can't be discipline and whom HRC has no control over, has been on perfect behavior since SC?

    Oh, and in terms of fundraising, I have one word: Barbra (Steisand if you couln't tell from the spelling). I know she might not be what all the cool kids are listening to, but who wouldn't pay to see her sing live?  I also hope they bring her back if/when HRC wins to sing "Happy Days Here Again"!

    So a liberal walks into the CPAC Convention... (none / 0) (#40)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:01:47 PM EST
    ...and much hilarity ensues.  Be sure to read all about it at Sadly, No!.  Mister Leonard Pierce's hommage to HST's 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas', 'The Beast is Red' is a great read.

    Firedoglake article (none / 0) (#43)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:08:49 PM EST
    Interesting article in Firedog Lake

    Obama's Message of Hope, Change, and Unity Is the Weakest Part of His Campaign
    By: Swopa Thursday February 7, 2008 1:53 pm

    Partial quote

    If Clinton does manage to overcome Obama's lead in ready cash, it'll be because she found an effective way to undermine the superficiality of Barack's platitude-laden ads and speeches. That's the weak underbelly of his campaign, and if Axelrod was less egotistical smarter he'd be looking for a way to shore up Obama's high-concept appeal by connecting it to more specific and tangible policy results before it starts to wear thin under prolonged media scrutiny.

    Make a rule now on how superdelegates (none / 0) (#49)
    by Saul on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:17:35 PM EST
    should cast their vote  is what Abrams of MSNBC just said.  Basically he said that a rule should be made now before the end of the primaries and caucuses and that rule would be that all super delegates must cast their vote for whichever nominee has the most pledge delegates when all the primaries or caucuses are over.

    It's a really tough call to me. (none / 0) (#56)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:27:33 PM EST
    Do the number of delegates outweigh the number of people who voted? The way they are allocated, with the Nevada and Alabama situations especially, doesn't seem fair to me. I sure don't know the answer, but it's a mess for sure.

    If nothing else, I hope this close election allows for a different kind of reform than we got last time. Half of all Democrats are going to be mad no matter what they do. The first thing I'd do is get rid of the caucuses. My niece for example has five kids and her husband is in Iraq. How is she supposed to caucus? She can easily go vote during the day.

    Parent

    delegates (none / 0) (#66)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:36:02 PM EST
    So far as I can find out (checking CNN, MSNBC and found something on MyDD, too) it seems like that at this point in time, Clinton leads in delegates by 44, has the popular vote and leads in superdelegates by almost 100.

    During my investigoogling, I also found that if the superdelegates are forced to vote based on who "won" their state, then Hillary will get 25% to Obama's 15%.

    I don't know if I am just talking out of my a*s here, but no one has really been able to cite a source that says otherwise.  And of  course the news did not cover it AT ALL, which makes me think that perhaps it's true.

    Any thoughts?

    Parent

    I don't believe anything from any media (none / 0) (#70)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:43:17 PM EST
    anymore. The only people I trust right now are BTD and Jeralyn. I know Obama supporters think they aren't fair but someone needs to point out what the media is doing.

    On the weird delegate counts, I think the concentration of AA voters in certain areas hurts Obama when it comes to allocating the delegates. I know that is the case in Alabama but I don't know enough about California to say. But if it is also that way there, I can see why HC may have picked up more delegates than was first projected.

    Parent

    I tried reading how Texas (none / 0) (#73)
    by ding7777 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:48:09 PM EST
    will allocate delegates - my head started hurting before I even finished the article

    Parent
    Me too. I think the weird way they are (none / 0) (#76)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:52:56 PM EST
    doing it will save Obama there. Certain areas count like caucuses and those are the areas he should do well in. At least that's what I think I read.

    Parent
    I don't see Texas rules saving Obama (none / 0) (#116)
    by RalphB on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:09:05 PM EST
    126 delegates selected from the primary results on Mar 4th.  Then 24 pledged and 35 unpledged delegates picked at the State Convention in Austin June 6-7.

    Remainder are super-delegates named at the convention.  People keep saying Texas is part caucus and ground game will matter.  The only ground game will be who buys the most margaritas at the State Convention in Austin.


    Parent

    the delegate partitioning (none / 0) (#77)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:53:45 PM EST
    reminds me a bit of how publishers game the NY Times list by making sure they send authors to NY Times reporting stores.  This used to work back when the main place people bought books were (surprise) book stores.  Now, not so much.

    Parent
    Obama set up (none / 0) (#87)
    by kenosharick on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:03:46 PM EST
    The Obama people are trying to change any rule that MIGHT favor Hillary, and are setting it up so tht a win by her will look tainted- they are callingthe long staning DEmocratic system "Undemocratic."

    Parent
    this is interesting (none / 0) (#50)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:18:00 PM EST
    athyrio (none / 0) (#75)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:51:07 PM EST
    Nice!  I haven't read an article in a while that doesn't start with the thesis "Hillary Clinton is evil and devisive and did I mention evil?"

    It was certainly slanted her way, but so am I, so I won't complain!

    Parent

    thanks, i really enjoyed the article. (none / 0) (#134)
    by hellothere on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:41:20 AM EST
    In other Colorado news today... (none / 0) (#55)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:25:56 PM EST
    Conservative Republican Rep. Larry Liston, R-Colorado Springs (of course!) said the following at a seminar on health care:

    "In my parents' day and age, (unmarried teen parents) were sent away, they were shunned, they were called what they are. There was at least a sense of shame."

    "There's no sense of shame today. Society condones it ... I think it's wrong. They're sluts. And I don't mean just the women. I mean the men, too."

    Who knew shaming was making a comeback?


    Hawkeye (none / 0) (#63)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:31:50 PM EST
    I hope someone pointed out that it wasn't the "parents" (plural) who were sent away and ostracised.  It was the girls who got pregnant.  The boys walked.  They were considered lucky to have dodged a bullet.

    Parent
    Oh... (none / 0) (#65)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:35:42 PM EST
    ...the blogs have been on-fire over this.  It really got the wing-nuts out from under their rocks.  There were the usual level-minded (read: sane) people doing battle against the overwhelming stupid.  

    Parent
    Shaming Has Never Gone Away Within The Republican (none / 0) (#67)
    by MO Blue on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:36:12 PM EST
    party. They love to shame people, especially women, all while they are actively engaged in the sexual behavior that they condemn.  

    Parent
    so his and her scarlett letters? (none / 0) (#102)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:29:32 PM EST
    some saying this will go (none / 0) (#61)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:30:25 PM EST
    to the convention and if so, how long will Obama's speeches endure without debating details. He cant put this off forever. We need far more than one debate that is one on one. plus the economy is growing worse and Americans are getting more upset. If this goes all the way, people will be mad at whomever they percieve as prolonging it. If Hillary wins two of the three biggies in the future (Texas, Ohio, and Pa.) then Obama will be under intense pressure to settle this....

    Democratic Math

    Shaq... (none / 0) (#64)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 08:32:29 PM EST
    ...is a huge gamble on the part of the Suns, IMHO, BTD.  It goes against their whole style of play.  Pretty hard to play up-tempo ball with a lumbering, aged giant.  

    I can only hope this gives the Nuggets a better chance of beating them should they meet in the play-offs.  

    But will it sell season tickets? (none / 0) (#103)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:30:19 PM EST
    The Suns... (none / 0) (#147)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 09:06:38 AM EST
    ...really weren't hurting to put people in the stands.  And with his huge contract, I don't think they could sell enough extra tickets.

    So, I think it is mainly a gamble that Shaq can put them "over the top".  As with most things these days, a quest for instant gratification.

    Parent

    Strange That Is (none / 0) (#85)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:02:20 PM EST
    The most undercovered story of the past two days? I say Shaq being traded to the Suns.

    For the last two or three days that has been a big subject at my local pub. Not being a fan, I would of thought it was big MSM news too, by the way they were talking about it.

    Congress (none / 0) (#88)
    by doubtful on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:03:49 PM EST
    Nobody but TPM is covering the sham of a congress and the hearings today in the House Judiciary committee with Mukasey. He will not enforce the contempt citations against any executive officer if the house votes for them.

    While we were sleeping, the country has fallen. Sorry to be a wet blanket, but basketball players and even the presidential race pale to the importance of this.

    Hey Hillary Supporters (none / 0) (#89)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:05:37 PM EST
    Be Proud

    upps here is the link (none / 0) (#91)
    by athyrio on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:06:23 PM EST
    Now it makes sense. (none / 0) (#109)
    by ding7777 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:52:40 PM EST
    Axelrod is trying to derail Hillary's online support by painting the $5 million loan as a "ploy"

    Parent
    You are a realist Dalton. Good for you. (none / 0) (#101)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:26:09 PM EST
    I'm shocked that anyone doesn't understand that she is/was way low on funds to compete and to think that they'd imply otherwise just to raise money is silly. At least they have discovered internet fundraising.

    When Dr. J and Freddy Brown (none / 0) (#104)
    by oldpro on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:31:46 PM EST
    retired I sorta lost interest in basketball...for a while...my kid (48) is a fanatic tho...even in fantasyland for years.

    Downtown Freddy Brown? (none / 0) (#106)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:37:47 PM EST
    One of the best Iowa ever produced.

    Parent
    Yup. He was so much fun to (none / 0) (#127)
    by oldpro on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:08:30 PM EST
    watch when he played for the Sonics.  It seems to me he was one of the first reliable 3-point shooters...hence, the nickname "Downtown" I assume?

    Parent
    You are correct... (none / 0) (#149)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 09:10:08 AM EST
    ...he was one of the original long-range bombers.

    It is sad that the Sonics will probably end-up moving out of Seattle.  I always enjoyed going to the games with my nephews when I go out to visit.  

    Ah, good old corporate greed...

    Parent

    My son is really PO'd... (none / 0) (#152)
    by oldpro on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:46:05 PM EST
    but did not support the public building them a new venue at taxpayer expense and that was the blackmail for keeping them in Seattle area.

    Parent
    Waterboarding Decison - Mis-shaped and Misformed (none / 0) (#107)
    by john horse on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:42:14 PM EST
    Per TPM, CIA Director Hayden said
    "In my own view, the view of my lawyers and the Department of Justice, it is not certain that that technique would be considered lawful under current statute," he told the House Intelligence Committee after publicly disclosing that the CIA had used waterboarding on three of the enemy combatants.

    He explained that the method was used because of "mis-shaped and misformed" political discussion about waterboarding.

    (emphasis mine)

    Though the lawyers at the CIA and the Dept of Justice now think that waterboarding may be unlawful, the torturers who waterboarded prisoners will not be prosecuted because they were acting on the "mis-shaped and misformed" political opinion of the Bush administration per the mis-shaped and misformed political opinion of Bush administration's new Attorney General Mukasey.  

    This administration continues to reach ever lower levels of depravity and perversity.

    I'm sure there is a logical reason for it (none / 0) (#117)
    by flyerhawk on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:17:52 PM EST
    But apparently TalkLeft has missed the news that Obama has agreed to debate Hillary Clinton in Cleveland on Feb 26th.  Of course the debate is on NBC so I'm sure the fix is in. :)

    there were originally two debates (none / 0) (#120)
    by Kathy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:23:45 PM EST
    he agreed to.  Any idea why he backed out of the second one?

    Parent
    I think he is also doing one more that was (none / 0) (#122)
    by Teresa on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:29:07 PM EST
    already on the schedule for a total of two. One new one and one old one.

    Parent
    The other one (none / 0) (#124)
    by flyerhawk on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 10:34:06 PM EST
    hasn't been firmed up yet.  From Obama...

    "I think we said we will do two more debates, and at least one of them will be in Ohio," he told the Cleveland paper.

    "What we don't want to do is have a debate every few days, given that it is very important for me to actually reach voters, something that may be less important for Sen. Clinton to do because she is better-known in many parts of the country," he said Thursday.



    Parent
    amazing that on the same day (none / 0) (#128)
    by english teacher on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:53:02 PM EST
    he threatens to take the nomination fight all the way to the convention and makes an implicit threat at the so called "superdelegates" he also passes up the opportunity to meet his opponent in the arena and settle the matter once and for all.  maybe that's because he can't, but she can.

    makes him look like a coward in my opinion, although i know the conventional wisdom says it's the "smart" move.  

    Parent

    Obama states he and his wife (none / 0) (#137)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:08:44 AM EST
    previously released their income tax returns, and, in light of Hillary Clinton's loaning $5 mil to her campaign, he "suggests" the Clintons do the same:

    HUFFINGTON POST

    Hillary talks about issues and Bush (none / 0) (#144)
    by athyrio on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:33:00 AM EST
    and the state of the economy...all Obama can do is attack Hillary while refusing to debate her...what is wrong with this picture...can we all spell manipulation??

    Parent
    He has apparently agreed to 2 more debates. (none / 0) (#145)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:34:45 AM EST