home

Weds. Night Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat

Your turn. Open Thread. Play nice. Hasta luego.

NOTE -Comments closed.

< While OlbermannThrows A Sorrow and Pity Party . . . | More Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Thanks BTD. According to Tweety and (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:08:09 PM EST
    April Ryan, a spokesperson for Urban Radio, Monica Lewinsky is the new comeback kid of this election. Ms. Ryan brought her up first in Tweety's defense but I'm sure he got a tingle up his leg.

    I'm so starved for talk ... (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:17:15 PM EST
    about actual issues that I was about to bring one up, but my current issue-starved mind seems unable to think of one.

    Can someone bring up an issue, any issue?  You know like something that effects real people?  So I can get the bad taste of political strategy conversations out of my mouth.

    Think of it as a palette cleanser.  The blogospheric equivalent to lemon sorbet.

    March Madness? The most wonderful (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:23:16 PM EST
    time of the year.

    Parent
    Can't come soon enough for me. (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:25:12 PM EST
    ...my spouse and I will be able to sit in the same room and watch television again. He's upstairs watching you know who. Me, I'm watching HGTV.

    Parent
    Okay (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by hitchhiker on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:47:44 PM EST
    I'm 1500 miles from home and I spent the day at the hospital sitting with my critically injured brother and the rest of my family.

    Not your standard sad story . . . he was an alcoholic who lived on the absolute margin -- just barely getting by, small-time gambling, letting his health go to hell.

    He had a small stroke last year that left him with tunnel vision and a permanent sense of confusion.  Then last Friday, the ultimate series of unfortunate events: drunk on his ass, a 2nd stroke, and a bad fall down a flight of stairs.  Brain injury.  Surgery to relieve swelling that required removal of the occipital lobe.  If he wakes up, he's blind.

    So . . . we're here trying to be okay with what we have to do.  He could probably survive for quite a while in this condition; we're all hoping he just slips away but I don't think that will happen.

    So what's my issue?
    The end of life his life is promising to be unexpectedly healing to the rest of us.  For him, it's just a dismal, grotesque, horrible thing.

    See?  No politics at all.

    Parent

    My brother was an (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by echinopsia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:44:41 PM EST
    Alcoholic, convicted felon, wife beater, liar, cheater, thief. Died at 42.

    I had a dream the other night that he was still alive. Woke up relieved that it was a dream.

    I feel your pain (not being snarky).

    I also felt a very peculiar form of grief when he died. Sad that he'd wasted his life causing so much pain to the people who loved him.

    Parent

    Well your brother's story (none / 0) (#64)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:02:01 PM EST
    is painfully similar to my Dad's story.

    I hope that whatever is best...happens.

    Parent

    Sounds an awful lot like my Dad's story (none / 0) (#76)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:07:30 PM EST
    Best wishes for you and your family in a trying time.


    Parent
    Then avoid Olbermann (none / 0) (#60)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:00:28 PM EST
    ...who is clearly off his rocker devoting a 15 minute "Special Comment" to bloviating on the non-scandal of Ferraro's comment.

    One more so-called "liberal" bites the dust...

    Parent

    Olbermann (none / 0) (#142)
    by gish720 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:43:33 PM EST
    Just sounds really off his rocker, speaking like an elocution teacher, don't know what has made him this angry. I haven't watched his show in some time and clearly he's consumed with this self righteous indignation shctick.

    An unrelated question; could someone please explain to me what the "okey-doke" thing means?  I honestly don't have a clue.

    Parent

    Words, (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:04:32 PM EST
    Malcolm X used the words hoodwink, bamboozle, been had, etc.  Obama used hoodwink, bamboozle, and okie-dokie.   They all mean the same thing.

    Parent
    Indeed... (none / 0) (#196)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:14:27 PM EST
    "You've been hoodwinked. You've been had. You've been took. You've been led astray, led amok. You've been bamboozled."

    Parent
    I was confused too... (none / 0) (#171)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:59:39 PM EST
    ...but looked it up in the Urban Dictionary.  Apparently it means you've been conned or tricked.

    Parent
    As in ... (none / 0) (#212)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:26:00 PM EST
    being tricked into saying yes (okey-doke), thus cons or tricks came to be referred to as "the okey-doke."

    Parent
    Okwy dokey is just a varian of OK, isn't it? (none / 0) (#217)
    by dianem on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:31:25 PM EST
    That was what it meant when I was growing up. Is there some other context?

    Parent
    It's a sad day (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by Manuel on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:39:48 PM EST
    when I find myself agreeing with Pat Buchanan.

    and other are turning to Fox news... (none / 0) (#129)
    by Kathy on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:35:05 PM EST
    for NEWS.  Dogs will be mating with cats soon.

    Did anyone watch NBC news tonight?  They showed a clip of Obama opening up a paneled white door, walking past an array of international flags, walking up a US flag-lined area, stepping up onto a blue-carpeted platform surrounded by suits and grasping the podium...

    Yeah, it looks like they are staging him now as if he's already the POTUS.  Unbelievable.  It would be laughable if this wasn't the same thing Bush did back in 2000.  Remember that, how he acted like he'd already won so much that people started to believe him?

    Parent

    Yeesh. Dd the staging have that whole ... (none / 0) (#164)
    by Ellie on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:55:22 PM EST
    ... "dick in a box" thing happening?

    I got somethin' real important to give you
    So just sit down and listen


    Parent

    Wow (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:59:34 PM EST
    KO is livid.  He looks like he's about to pop a cork.  He's scowling his nose is wrinkled he's so disgusted... apparently he doesn't like Bill or sleeping children.... he's ranting again.  No, I'm not going to turn up the volume.  I am having a glass of wine and don't want to harsh my mellow.....

    Thanks for mellowing my mellow (none / 0) (#61)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:00:46 PM EST
    You are too funny.

    Parent
    Well, I wonder how many people are like (none / 0) (#183)
    by MarkL on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:08:33 PM EST
    me on this issue: the incredibly histrionic, eye-popping rage over something pretty innocuous---and true---is grotesquely funny.

    Parent
    Keith Olbermann (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by Coldblue on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:02:53 PM EST
    deserves to have the top rated diary on Daily Kos.

    He keeps like company.

    hey KO (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by TheRefugee on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:04:52 PM EST
    count me out of being an even sometimes viewer anymore.  Your sanctimony is only exceeded by your hypocrisy.

    Opening:  "I'm not choosing sides in the battle between Obama and Clinton."

    Um, KO, you made that evident weeks ago.  You are the national spokesman for Obama.

    Basically you just called Hillary Clinton a racist.  You just called Hillary Clinton a liar.  

    You don't make any comparisons to Obama.  Obama hasn't patently and vociferously denounced the phrase "She's a monster"  or the person who spouted the words.  Obama didn't force Powers out, she resigned of her own accord.  Why aren't you holding Obama's feet to the fire sparked by the words of his supporters?  Because Jesse Jackson Jr has a history of misogynistic and homophobic comments is Obama "awash in the mess" of JJ Jr's beliefs and statements?

    Two-faced?  Double standard?  Hypocritical?  Sanctimonious bloviating?  Yes to all.  Go away Keith you besmirch the memory of the one you try to pay homage to, Edward R Murrow.  

    Goodbye Keith, Good night and good luck.

    Did he really say (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:09:38 PM EST
    that he wasn't choosing sides between Obama and Clinton?

    That alone blows my hair back.

    Yep, Wiley will never get my viewership again.  What a scumbag.

    Parent

    Say what? (none / 0) (#92)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:15:09 PM EST
    Chemoelectric said he was kind to Clinton.  Really?  Knowing MSNBC and KO, I find that hard to believe.  What did he say that was nice?

    Parent
    He addressed her as Senator rather than (none / 0) (#104)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:20:01 PM EST
    Monster. That's about it.

    I need to read the transcript to fact check but he said Powers resigned by dawn the day after her comment. Wasn't it two days?

    The most stupid was calling the 3:00 am ad borderline.

    Parent

    Timing (none / 0) (#205)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:21:36 PM EST
    Was that from when she said in the article or when she got caught?

    Parent
    Power made the remarks to the newspaper (none / 0) (#211)
    by Dawn Davenport on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:25:35 PM EST
    a week ahead of when she resigned, which was a day or two after the story broke, about the same length of time it took Ferraro.


    Parent
    Well, his hair looked good ... (none / 0) (#203)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:20:00 PM EST
    and that's about the only kind thing I can say about KO tonight.

    Parent
    Pat just (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:09:17 PM EST
    told Rachel to shut up on Abrams show.... they are discussing Geraldine.

    Like Manuel (above) (none / 0) (#83)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:11:31 PM EST
    I'm also getting a little nervous that I agree with Pat (race is a big contributing factor to Obama's success)....

    :-(

    Parent

    Well he is obviously correct :-) (none / 0) (#95)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:16:30 PM EST
    Not Rachel. The other lady. (none / 0) (#84)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:11:32 PM EST
    Kelly (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:19:37 PM EST
    Sheshe interrupted him while he was talking by  talking about black men in America... And he told her to shut up... I about bfell off my chair!

    Parent
    Sorry, but she should have been told that (none / 0) (#152)
    by Cream City on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:46:51 PM EST
    sooner by Abrams.  I can't listen to two people talking at once.

    Too bad Buchanan had to say it, but somebody had to stop her nonstop stuff for the sake of the viewer.

    And, yes, Buchanan is one of the best on tv these days.  I also am undergoing attitude adjustment in saying that.  But it's not me; it's how bad the rest of them are in the media.

    Parent

    Don't get me (none / 0) (#163)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:54:02 PM EST
    wrong... I'm with you on that. But I just couldn't believe he actually told her to shut up. I haven't seen Pat so that before.

    Parent
    why does it make you feel better (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by cy street on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:18:14 PM EST
    to belittle mister obama or miz clinton?  we are fortunate as a party to be in this situation so far as i can tell.  the battle being waged is driving up voter rolls, keeping their names in the free national media and proving to the voters at large that these two have the steel to lead the country.

    one will lose.
    one will win.

    what is gained by engaging in the mocking, character assassinations and clever back biting that goes on here?

    it reminds me of the recount in two thousand.  only this time its dem on dem.  sad if you ask me.

    i will be pleased to support the clintons or the obamas.  i look up to both.  why does the party have to torn apart on the basis of what is projected upon one or the other?

    this blog outpost and others like it might consider a what reconciliation looks like before it's too late.

    Considering our tiny, netty world... (5.00 / 4) (#109)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:23:19 PM EST
    As an outsider of the inner blogger realm, political campaigns, the media, and DC, I have been confused by the Obama's current campaign strategy. To whom does the Obama campaign and Keith Olbermann express their outrage?

    I noted elsewhere, I think the Obama campaign changed its strategy recently to reclaim the narrative in the media in a particular way. At first, I thought that meant to target the few remaining undecided voters and states in the nomination process. However, the national tracking polls show that the race has completely calcified. There is nothing but movement within the statistical error range, with each candidate gaining 45% of the likely Democratic voters week-to=week. What if the Obama campaign came to the realization that unity is no longer an effective political strategy?

    That would explain the heightened alienation of Clinton voters in the past week--they are not targeting us or independents at the moment. Greg Sargent suggests as much: "The Obama camp is now ratcheting up its public and private efforts to neutralize [Clinton's electability] argument, in hopes of persuading the super-dels to follow the winner of the pledged-del count." Enlarging that to a general strategy, the Obama campaign, with a six week hiatus until the next primary, appears to have abandoned the primary fight in order to marshal the superdelegates in the future.

    This also means that the Obama campaign is willing to shoot the moon with its own constituency: there is nothing he can say or do that will alienate his 45%. So, the current gambits over Florida/Michigan and charges of racism against esteemed superdelegates in the Democratic Party are not directed at the party rank-and-file. If we accept BTD's positions on Obama's gambit over Michigan/Florida and the pillory of Ferraro, it seems possible (I won't say reasonable) to consider that the Obama campaign wants to intimidate superdelegates. The Obama campaign is working over superdelegates such that it is next to impossible for them to enforce party rules in a way that disadvantages his current delegate lead.

    That said, the Obama-blogosphere and Keith Olbermann must also have superdelegates in mind. High-profile bloggers aside, Olbermann is not a stupid man, he must realize the potential to alienate 45% of his current viewers with a strong denunciation of the Clinton campaign on trumped-up charges of organized, coded racism. Yet, Olbermann, and MSNBC, like the blogs, are willing to risk that. If not for viewership, then, Olbermann's efforts must be for effect, and MSNBC then believes that Olbermann will have an effect on superdelegates' behavior.

    Over the weekend, I believe TL exposed the fact that Obama lost his electability argument in Texas and Ohio. The Obama campaign's last resort at this point seems to be to hamstring the party leaders so that the "rules" work in his favor.

    Oje, you've left me gob-smacked. (none / 0) (#133)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:38:42 PM EST
    Your argument is unassailable to me. Especially, as to the super-dels being intimidated by charges of racism. "Racism" was the first charge that effectively 'gored' Senator Clinton. I posted upstream about the difference between the outcomes of the Ferraro and Paterson stories this week.  

    Parent
    How would he (none / 0) (#138)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:41:10 PM EST
    get the Clinton supporters back?  I agree there is nothing he can do to alienate his base, but the number of her supporters willing to vote for him is falling.  Are you suggesting he just doesn't care about alienating Clinton supporters?  I don't see that working for the GE.

    Parent
    We are a tiny world... (none / 0) (#144)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:43:43 PM EST
    Talk to non-bloggers, and they only know vaguely of the charges or the actions of the campaign (especially since sites like CNN report "fair and balanced"). Plus, rank-and-file democrats remain united for both candidates, only the blogosphere is in a state of immolation.

    Parent
    Not true (none / 0) (#151)
    by dissenter on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:46:39 PM EST
    Most of my friends don't go near blogs...and I've heard from three of them today saying they vote for Nader if BO is the nominee.

    Parent
    Well, I am thinking of the exit polls... (none / 0) (#173)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:00:37 PM EST
    Like I said, I am just trying to get a grasp of events for myself. I do not understand the point of offering preposterous proposals and objections to a revote or the pillory of a superdelegate with Ferraro's stature in the party.

    My anecdotal evidence is not as uniform as yours, but I live/work in a high Obama density environment.  Could Obama miscalculate the pushback? Sure. Might they expect? Yes. Perhaps they hope time heals all.

    Parent

    No healing (none / 0) (#180)
    by dissenter on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:06:21 PM EST
    My friends are from IA, VA and CO. All women. And they aren't looking for a make up kiss. They are simply done.

    Parent
    Hmmm... (none / 0) (#192)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:13:08 PM EST
    I should think that, with the Supreme Court on the line, women voters are the most elastic group of voters to alienate.

    If Democratic women do not come home to the Democratic party, they will create conditions in which Roe v. Wade is overturned. That may be a good thing in the long run - considering that the Democratic party, the bloggers, and the media seem to have deeply disturbed views of women and feminists - but that is risky choice to make for the immediate future.

    Besides, V.P. candidate Granholm or V.P. candidate Boxer or any number of other Democratic officeholders might sway them.... or, Obama has decided to bend to the will of voters and accept the Dream ticket.

    Parent

    Oje (5.00 / 1) (#215)
    by Kathy on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:26:39 PM EST
    the Supreme Court threat has become a flashpoint for me.  A couple of weeks back, every time I said something negative about Obama as a possible nom, people kept throwing up, "what about the Supreme Court?!"  Then, Obama made a comment about abortion being a "moral issue" and that he could understand the other side, and it got me to thinking that he was using just the kind of soft language that has been used over the last ten years to push through hateful legislation like the third trimester ban, and the Supreme Court stopped being a threat that worked for me, because Obama says he is a uniter and a changer, and I wondered if abortion was something that he would use as a bargaining chip to get some of this compromise he's talking about done.  Because, make no mistake-in order to get the republicans to move on things, he is going to have to sacrifice some core dem issues because he doesn't have any chits in his pocket, because he lacks the experience and the relationships a president needs to get things done.  Is abortion going to be one of those bargaining chips?  

    Is he going to sign more laws limiting a woman's right to choose, mandating time outs, mandating waiting periods (for all those women who are going to the store for bread but decide to get an abortion instead), mandating ultrasounds, mandating partner notification...?  Because those are the "moral issues" the right has been trying to legislate for years.

    (and I say this as someone whose friend was forced, here in Georgia, to carry a dead fetus in her womb for three weeks because the procedure to remove it was illegal.)

    Parent

    Or they may decide that the Dem (none / 0) (#200)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:17:59 PM EST
    nominee would not defend them as hard as they would hope.

    Parent
    Nice Try (none / 0) (#201)
    by dissenter on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:19:20 PM EST
    Thanks for the concern. We are aware of the Supreme Court. However in my state I don't have to worry about that. You might find this shocking but women are not always one issue voters. Some worry about social security. Some worry about amateurs running foreign policy. Some worry about taxes. You do get the picture.

    Women tend not to vote for people that they have a visceral dislike for.

    Parent

    Sorry, I didn't mean to offend... (none / 0) (#210)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:24:17 PM EST
    I was just responding with possibilities... I certainly do not think that women are single issue voters...

    Parent
    and... (none / 0) (#214)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:26:37 PM EST
    This is what I had in mind. Corrente shows that women were open to both candidates before the latest round of attacks. I will leave open the reason why they tend to support the Democratic party, rather than one Democratic candidate to this point.

    Parent
    Mommy dear (none / 0) (#208)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:23:13 PM EST
    My mom is not on the net and she is not happy.

    Parent
    excellent analysis! n/t (none / 0) (#147)
    by OldCoastie on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:46:09 PM EST
    So what do you think will happen? (none / 0) (#148)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:46:27 PM EST
    Can the Dem superdelegates be intimidated over this issue even if it means potential loss in GE?

    Someone over at TPM already said that superdelegates will not be intimidated over something like this, they'd rather live through a few weeks' worth of "storm" but move towards GE.

    Do you agree?

    But I wonder if they can be intimidated on two fronts: this and their own constituencies.

    Parent

    I Think The Super Delegates Are Already (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by MO Blue on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:06:58 PM EST
    thinking that they will lose the AA vote if Obama does not win and that is already making a strong impact on some of their decisions.

    Parent
    I dunno... (none / 0) (#184)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:08:39 PM EST
    In the past, the Obama campaign's efforts to define democracy and the will of the voters as the "pledged delegate count" failed. But, as we saw in 2000, the power of a party to overturn what appears to be the "winner of the initial vote" is a difficult prospect, particularly after the media buys in to the notion of a "winner."

    I should say, though, that I think that the campaign, the blogosphere, and the media (overly generalized) are on three distinct trajectories with their own motive power and interests. That creates three different pressure points on the superdelegates, not just one orchestrated and nefarious plot. That is what makes any response by Clinton or superdelegates so unwieldy.

    Parent

    I agree and I believe they are catching on to this (none / 0) (#218)
    by Salt on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:39:58 PM EST
    Icon Dems, regardless of what Rachel believes, being used as red meat thrown under the campaign bus charged as divisive racist and being used as an inflammatory prop for the Clinton bad Obama good rehabilitation routine yet again, same events we saw play out when Clinton won NH.  And regardless of what Obama's strategy this race will not be ended prematurely, he is not winning the Big States needed in Nov and signs are he can't pull States like Ohio after the NAFTA fumble and I don't see the Dem Governors being intimidated with by this behavior. And there are signs this isn't working this time no one other than KO and activist bloggers are running to his rescue if that was the plan, JF has coattails and was the wrong target.  A next step for all might be to re focus on what the Party can bring to the Country the good stuff, take on McCain Bush, get the racist fish hook out our noses, and don't let it be reinserted or tweaked again we all know real racist when we see one charges of racism requires more than words you don't like being used.

    Parent
    Can I share good news? My nephew will be (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:30:08 PM EST
    home for R&R on Monday! He's been gone almost ten months and it's his third tour. He has five kids with my niece (yours, mine and ours) and they all live full time with them. They aren't in on the surprise.

    Great news. Those kids will be... (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:33:56 PM EST
    ...over the moon!

    Parent
    That is awesome! (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:34:27 PM EST
    Enjoy!!!

    Parent
    congrats to him and his family as well as you (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:34:42 PM EST
    Congrats! (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by smott on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:37:18 PM EST
    to Teresa and your nephew!

    Parent
    Thank all of you so much. I have shared our (none / 0) (#135)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:40:21 PM EST
    fears and pain with many friends at Daily Kos this past year and I can't go there any longer. I just needed to share the good news. Thanks.

    Parent
    Lovely piece by Nuala O'Faolain about Hillary's (5.00 / 1) (#206)
    by jawbone on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:22:40 PM EST
    work in Northern Ireland with women.

    Thank you, Susie Madrak, for this post.

    http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/11/20/56/hillary-in-ireland/

    This may be an objectional comment, but.... (5.00 / 1) (#220)
    by miriam on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:05:48 PM EST
    From where I sit and from what I'm hearing, there are more and more women who are truly enraged by the treatment Hillary Clinton is receiving from the O campaign and from the media.  (I'm a historian and work in the area of women's history.)  They are vowing not to vote for O if he wins the nomination, and the Supreme Court appointments by a Republican president are secondary to their fury at learning how mysognistic this society truly is.  And they are highly suspicious, anyway, of O's ambiguous record on women's choice in the Illinois Senate.

    Here is what I'm beginning to hear with increasing
    frequency: Obama cannot win against McCain and many women will not vote for him in any event.   They are saying their emphasis will be on helping the congressional candidates, because when McCain is elected he will be effectively hog-tied by a Democratic House and Senate.  And better that, they say, than having yet another incompetent amateur, and unrealistic dreamer, in the White House.            

    Make it stop (none / 0) (#2)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:08:11 PM EST
    I can't take it anymore.  No one is a racist, they just say racist comments.

    LOL... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:14:23 PM EST
    ...heard that one during the Olbermann/Robinson pattycake game.  And of course Obama has never ever claimed anyone was racist.  Only his surrogates who of course don't speak for him (unlike Clinton's surrogates who are scripted by Hillary herself).

    Parent
    "I've been oppressed (none / 0) (#9)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:14:21 PM EST
    since the garden of Eden"  "What's an apple anyhow?"  [Eugene Robinson]  Um. OK.  VERY respectful.  If this race has proved anything, it's the inability of anyone in the media to have a serious discussion of either racism or sexism without smearing each other endlessly.  Unbelievable.

    Parent
    I hate to say it (none / 0) (#18)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:19:20 PM EST
    I don't think it can happen on this blog either.

    I've been trying to point out some things that seem perfectly sane and unoffensive to me, my wife and at least one other person I've discussed it with.

    And those comments keep getting deleted.

    I'll try again.  I'm perfectly willing to admit, in fact I see no weakness or insecurity whatsoever in the observation that a part of Clinton's support comes from women who are supporting her because she's a woman.

    I know that's part of why my mom supports her.

    I know the dreams of women who have been fighting their whole lives are wrapped up in this.

    Now by the same token, could I say the same thing about black people and their support for Obama?

    Not without being called a racist.
    </deleted comment>

    Parent

    It's pretty complicated though. (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:30:03 PM EST
    Lots and lots of women support Obama instead of Hillary (apparently there is generally a generation gap between those who support Obama and those who support Clinton).  There is nothing wrong with supporting someone who comes from your own underrepresented, oppressed group, from a group that rarely holds the (let's call them) the reins of power.  Latinos supporting a Latino/a would be similar.  

    It all depends upon whether you're making your point about this support respectfully.  Saying "women do the same" or "blacks do the same" can often appear, or be, disrespectful and too general/charged to be informative.

    When we say 'women support Clinton' we should think - what women?  From what groups?  From what economic classes (etc.).  When we say, blacks support Obama, we should think - what blacks?  From what groups?  What classes?  Etc.  If we want to analyze things fairly.

    Parent

    Well - If you (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:31:46 PM EST
    keep it as "demographics", then you can say...

    There may be a tenedency of one demographic group to feel connected to a person of same demographic.

    I wonder if there have been any studies on this?

    Parent

    I haven't seen your deleted comments but (none / 0) (#21)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:28:49 PM EST
    maybe they were considered off topic? Or maybe you phrased it differently. We have discussed this many times on this blog. I think AA's are extremely proud of Obama and many women feel the same about Clinton. I think that's pretty apparent to everyone.

    I'm not the least bit angry with people who vote according to who they identify with. I'm very angry at the media and many bloggers for their behavior in this campaign.

    Parent

    LOL (none / 0) (#26)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:35:56 PM EST
    Well they were deleted.  

    Nah. Um. Some of them were off topic.

    One was in an Open Thread, so, maybe I did say it differently then.

    I've just been trying to figure how I'd feel if Geffen said this:


    If Clinton was a man, she would not be in this position. She happens to be very lucky to be who she is. And the country is caught up in the concept.

    I would have to muster a whole hell of lot of energy to express even 1/10000000th of the outrage I see expressed over Ferraro's comments.

    In the end, I'm not sure I'd disagree with the comments.

    Geffen calling the Clinton's liars.  I disagreed with that.  Big time.

    Parent

    I agree with you! (none / 0) (#24)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:34:04 PM EST
    Isn't it identity politics at its starkest?

    Personally, I see nothing wrong with that when there's no double standard. We have two distinct groups defined by their unique social issues. So it only makes sense that they would identify with some candidates more than others.

    What surprises me, however, is that Clinton has an acknowledged feminist record, in her life and in her actions. I probably need to learn more what Obama's record is in race relations.

    Parent

    But you can't be like, (none / 0) (#29)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:40:14 PM EST
    a "blackist."  Comparing sexism and racism is a little like apples and oranges.

    Parent
    Why? (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:46:23 PM EST
    Both are hurtful, negative and damaging. Or do you mean to say one can still get away with sexism?

    Parent
    Lately I'm beginning to think they can (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:50:58 PM EST
    I mean reading the Papers and listening to radio and watching TV

    Parent
    I don't know what you mean. (none / 0) (#52)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:55:35 PM EST
    I'm trying to say pro-women's issues = feminist.  Pro-black issues does not equal "blackist."  It's hard to stand up for African-American issues in the same way as women's issues, I believe.  I don't know what word would describe a black person standing up for black issues the same way a woman could a woman's.  See what I mean?

    Parent
    I think I understand (none / 0) (#58)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:59:27 PM EST
    But what's the implication of this? If I take your thought to its logical conclusion it means that AA voters only have race to rely on, to get that kind of identification. Is that what you mean, I'm not sure...

    Parent
    I meant my remarks as a response to (none / 0) (#79)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:09:20 PM EST
    this paragraph:

    "What surprises me, however, is that Clinton has an acknowledged feminist record, in her life and in her actions. I probably need to learn more what Obama's record is in race relations. "

    I just think it's easy to align some of Clinton's views as feminist, but that it would be harder to align Obama's views as pro-African American.  (Feminist = pro-choice, etc.)  Standing up for African-American issues and rights is not as easily identifiable as standing up for women's issues and rights (can we think of one issue that would make us say, ah!  a supporter of African-American issues!).  Or so I think.  I can't think of a word that describes that.  Maybe my mind just ain't working.  Is that clearer?  I don't mean to imply anything but that, and I don't understand what you think my implications are.  Are we getting our signals crossed or what?? ;)

    Parent

    got it now! (none / 0) (#93)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:15:40 PM EST
    :-)

    so, two thoughts off of that:

    • Obama in fact tried to avoid the perception of "AA candidate"

    • who were the candidates in the past who stood up for AA issues and rights (Al and Jesse I guess)


    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#108)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:23:17 PM EST
    Obama tried to avoid being the AA candidate when he spent months invoking MLK and harkening back to the '60s civil rights era?  Or standing beside Oprah when she claimed voting for him would bring MLK's dream into reality?  Or when his campaign decided that any mention of his self-described drug use was off limits for reasons of his skin color?

    Plenty of past candidates have stood up for civil rights.  Heard of Hubert Humphrey?  And really - what initiatives has Obama endorsed to further civil rights?  His entire vision of equal opportunity appears to boil down to voting for him.

    Parent

    Well he only did that in SC, didn't he? (none / 0) (#117)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:27:52 PM EST
    I want to say that was meant for the specific demographic, not for the general electorate, right?

    Parent
    Well, imagine if we had a term like (none / 0) (#118)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:28:08 PM EST
    "blackist."  Obama is trying to avoid the perception of being the AA candidate.  If there were a term or body of beliefs defined as "blackist," perhaps we'd be in a better place.  'AA candidate' suggests he only serves a certain constituency, only understands a certain place.  It suggests he's only 'for' a certain group.  

    If we had a term like 'blackist,' it would suggest we were advocating to reduce disparity between races.  The way 'feminist' suggests advocating to reduce disparity between genders.  But we don't.  

    Being an 'AA candidate' and being 'a blackist' would be two different if not mutually exclusive things (as being a feminist and being a 'woman candidate' would be).  I think if we had a category like 'blackist' it would help in our media coverage and ability to view those issues.  Hypothetically.  It could turn out to be a wack disaster.  But right now we're still in a begrudging place regarding racial disparity, if not in total denial.  "So blacks have it worse.  On average.  STATISTICALLY.  So what?"  

    Parent

    Oh, (none / 0) (#150)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:46:31 PM EST
    did you think I meant blackist as in black supremacist or "reverse discrimination"-ist?  I did not mean it like that at all!  I meant it as an imaginary concept that would envelop the empowerment of African Americans and issues that most disproportionately affect them in society.  

    Parent
    If you're asking me, I didn't (none / 0) (#170)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:59:32 PM EST
    I'm still thinking about your concept though. In my mind, you have an "advocate for women's rights" and an "advocate for AA rights", which probably encapsulates what you were talking about. Then we have the following:

    Clinton:

    • candidate for Dem nomination
    • advocate for women's rights
    • woman

    Obama:
    • candidate for Dem nomination
    • AA

    Dan Abrams, btw, just made a direction comparison between AA and feminism as issues, without any problem

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#188)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:10:43 PM EST
    your two advocate categories ("advocate for women's rights" and an "advocate for AA rights", ) encapsulate what I'm saying.  

    But some people would say Obama and Clinton are equals in advocating for women's rights.  Their policies ARE the same.  I would say Clinton HAS done a lot of speaking out for women's rights as human rights (speech in China, for instance).  

    When we say women's issues though, we basically know what we're talking about...abortion, health-care, issues re: rape, etc.  When we say AA issues, I think the consensus is less clear, as these issues are often wrapped up in gender and class concerns as well.  I certainly think Obama and Clinton are much better advocates for AAs than McCain!  But Edwards was probably even better, on issues.

    It is reminscent of the flap over whether Obama would attend the State of the Black Union.  Being an advocate for AA issues is a tricky situation esp if you're AA.  But being a feminist and a woman can also be hard, as some stats suggest (as Paul in Correntewire suggests today).  Being percieved as too connected to your own demographic alienates people from other demographics.  In Clinton's case, white men.

    Parent

    Stanley Fish in the NY Times had a piece where he (none / 0) (#37)
    by pukemoana on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:45:16 PM EST
    said that a person from an under-represented group voting for someone from that same group isn't necessarily voting on just the shared attribute, but potentially on the hope that the shared attribute might lead to greater recognition of issues facing that under-represented group.  but he used more than one sentence . . .

    Parent
    Everyone reads absolutism into it (none / 0) (#31)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:41:07 PM EST
    I said "part of."

    Parent
    Im fine with your comment as long as you (none / 0) (#67)
    by Salt on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:03:04 PM EST
    also understand that we support Senator Clinton because we believe she is the stronger candidate, with an excellent resume and it's a plus for some that she is a woman as well.

    Parent
    We wouldn't be supporting Courtney Love (none / 0) (#71)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:05:56 PM EST
    And I think any sane person would assume that even Ferraro knows that Obama supporters wouldn't be supporting Bobby Brown.

    Parent
    We should just use the term 'bigotry' (none / 0) (#87)
    by Ellie on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:12:59 PM EST
    It's simply more practical to isolate that particular hostility, hatred and desire to oppress on the basis of -- filling in the attribute of gender, race, creed, LGBT orientation, etc. -- from mere thoughtlessness or boneheaded comments.

    And in passing, I want to know why women, black voters and latino voters have to explain and justify their votes, but the whole system bends to what pleases / flatters white (southern) men or white men generally actually and no one says, "Boo."

    When's the last time you saw white men (and trickling  down from that distinction along the RW attributes) being pestered to explain their voting patterns for like?

    Parent

    This is excalty the same campaign tatic used (none / 0) (#50)
    by Salt on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:54:14 PM EST
    After NH to tarnish Clintons joy, discussing the specific is a red herring, JF was this weeks Ala. red meat the Gay Marriage Amendment the attack on her a fellow Dem was intended to inflame and drive up turn out and enraged voters she was a pawn.  We've watched this same politic for 8 years now how can it not scream exploitation of a group to fear and hate?  There is not merit or honor in this none.

    Parent
    The Clinton campaign doesn't believe in (none / 0) (#4)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:11:00 PM EST
    apologies per Eugene Robinson. Really? That's all they've gotten done lately. KO says Obama immediately apologized for the "tears" comment. Is that true? JJ Jr. didn't.

    The only apology I've ever heard (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:11:55 PM EST
    From Obama is the one regarding Samantha Power.

    That's it.


    Parent

    Just to revise (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:15:13 PM EST
    He apologized about the 'wasted lives' comment.

    And also the 'd-punjab' episode.

    Parent

    I don't recall Obama saying anything (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by MarkL on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:12:20 PM EST
    at all about the "tears" comment, actually.

    Parent
    Olbermann (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:12:43 PM EST
    Never lies.


    Parent
    Wow. (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:15:50 PM EST
    Obama's press secretary?

    Just watched the Obama BS about "right wing attacks."  Right.  Maybe Harry and Louise live in, I don't know, Florida?

    Parent

    Given what Obama has engaged in in the past (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by andgarden on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:15:45 PM EST
    I can't help but laugh.

    Parent
    ditto Im with ya (none / 0) (#89)
    by Salt on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:13:19 PM EST
    gotten? lol, can't use with have. That's the (none / 0) (#13)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:15:46 PM EST
    hillbilly in me comin' out I reckon.

    Parent
    I used to really like Eugene Robinson... (none / 0) (#34)
    by OrangeFur on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:43:49 PM EST
    ... whatever happened to him?

    Parent
    I don't know (none / 0) (#5)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:11:10 PM EST
    Maybe Geffen was calling all white people liars.


    Likewise McPeak... (none / 0) (#16)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:18:31 PM EST
    ...who claimed Clinton didn't have the gravitas once she cried on television.  And this was, of course, not slam on her gender.  

    What's with Obama's pants... (none / 0) (#17)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:19:15 PM EST
    ...which never quite meet his ankle?  Apparently even his tailor borrows from the Kennedy era...

    How about this topic?? (none / 0) (#25)
    by smott on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:34:25 PM EST
    The tanking economy!
    Do we have any good breakdown of their various plans? ARe there any? We know McCain is a self-admitted non-expert on the economy...

    It gives me the willies 'cause anybody remember when we head a Dem Congress and a Dem WH and the economy cratered?

    Yes. Carter....

    According to exit polls... (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by OrangeFur on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:47:59 PM EST
    ... the economy ranked 49th on a list of voter concerns, behind 1) what Geraldine Ferraro ate for breakfast, 2) exactly what kind of monster Hillary Clinton is, and 48) is Hillary's laugh too loud? At least that's what you'd guess from following the national news.

    From what I understand of them, I like Hillary Clinton's plans the best. They seem the most attuned to the actual economic situation we have. Generally, I feel that Obama's three main economic advisers, while highly respected, are too centrist and unwilling to let the government try to intervene. Their opposition to stronger action to curb the housing crisis is not an accident.

    Parent

    Actually... (none / 0) (#68)
    by smott on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:03:36 PM EST
    I'm from PA, and here per SUSA, the economy is the #1 concern. At least among us Democratic voters.


    Parent
    Wrong. You must follow your orders (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Cream City on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:34:40 PM EST
    from the media and observe the list above.

    Your issues do not matter.  The media's issues do.

    Parent

    Stagflation (none / 0) (#30)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:40:24 PM EST
    is the economic term for what we are experiencing.

    Stagflation occurs when the economy isn't growing but prices are, which is not a good situation for a country to be in. This happened to a great extent during the 1970s, when world oil prices rose dramatically, fueling sharp inflation in developed countries. For these countries, including the U.S., stagnation increased the inflationary effects.

    Having lived through this already.... there is no easy way out of this.

    Parent

    New Topic: American Idol (none / 0) (#32)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:43:23 PM EST
    (yeah, this pertains to voting!)

    Doesn't the kid with the dreadlocks look an awful lot like John Travolta? and he sounds like him too!


    I think he's cute.... (none / 0) (#48)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:52:33 PM EST
    ...but yeah, the John Travolta voice, I hadn't thought of that. But I watched last night for the first time this season.

    Parent
    Who you going to vote off (none / 0) (#53)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:55:51 PM EST
    Who didn't you like... yes,it's sad, we watch.  So what?  I didn't think he had a very good performance last night.  Care to guess who Simon wants to win?  It's sort of like trying to pretend talking heads aren't biased.

    Good lord.... KO is still talking....  Volume is off, he's now posting articles....  What's he saying?  I can't stand to listen....

    Parent

    The young woman who sang.... (none / 0) (#62)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:00:50 PM EST
    ...the countrified version of We Can Work it Out. That arrangment was really bad and it made her sound bad. I also didn't like the one named David Hernandez. He was too over the top for me.

    Parent
    Oops, correction...she sang 8 days a week. (none / 0) (#86)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:12:24 PM EST
    Bad advice (none / 0) (#141)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:43:00 PM EST
    Yes, she took Simon's advice and tried to make it country.  Is that the one?

    Parent
    Yeah her. She's in the bottom three... (none / 0) (#149)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:46:28 PM EST
    ..but she actually sang the song better tonight. I think she got behind the beat last night.

    Parent
    One of my pet peeves about Wiley (Olbermann) (none / 0) (#72)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:06:03 PM EST
    was the way he was so condescending about American Idol.

    Heyyy, it's a freaking variety show, just mindless entertainment.  Get over yourself!

    He also freaks out about Dancing With the Stars, another on my list of wonderfully mind-resting entertainment.

    Probably the country girl should go.  She's been reasonable, but she was pretty bad last night.

    I loved Chickeezy(sp).  Can't even remember what he sang, but I loved the interpretation.  I thought the blonde girl was good too.

    In past seasons, I could remember names, but they just kind of blend together this season.

    Oh, the John Travolta wannabe sang Hallelujah last week.  WONDERFUL.

    Parent

    When was the last time we had steady growth (none / 0) (#33)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:43:29 PM EST
    in the economy?

    Um (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:44:14 PM EST
    the Clinton era?

    Parent
    But haven't they been saying that (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:46:10 PM EST
    those where bad years and the cause of all our problems : >

    Parent
    Yes they were AWFUL! (none / 0) (#41)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:47:23 PM EST
    Can I have them back?  Puh-lease!!!!

    Parent
    Well... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by OrangeFur on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:48:43 PM EST
    I've always said that while I didn't mind the peace, it was the prosperity that I couldn't stand.

    Parent
    According to Dubya (none / 0) (#40)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:47:18 PM EST
    we still have steady growth! LOL!!

    Parent
    According to Dubya (none / 0) (#45)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:49:08 PM EST
    Mission was Accomplished.

    Parent
    According to Dubya (none / 0) (#55)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:56:51 PM EST
    he has just recorded what we have typed... it will make the world safer!

    Parent
    well it won't be the first time they done (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:06:11 PM EST
    it to me.  They can file it with the rest of my file.

    Parent
    Mess with their heads (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:12:59 PM EST
    I like to drop random words such as.. 'bomb', 'terrorist', 'Bush is a moron' in my text to keep them busy.  I occasionally like to give them something to balance it out and sneak in a 'Gonzales is smart' to keep them hoping.

    Parent
    Sometimes I look up an cryptic Arabic word or (none / 0) (#101)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:18:45 PM EST
    something that Parsi.

    Parent
    should say sounds Parsi (none / 0) (#102)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:19:20 PM EST
    Like the Onion headline (none / 0) (#65)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:02:08 PM EST
    "Our long period of peace and prosperity is finally over"  in the article about Bush being elected.

    Prescient that Onion  :-)


    Parent

    weren't they? (none / 0) (#75)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:06:40 PM EST
    The NYT has identified (none / 0) (#35)
    by Patrick on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:43:52 PM EST
    Kristen.  Here's her myspace page

    Oldermann is on! (none / 0) (#47)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:52:29 PM EST
    It's actually quite funny! Like a bad imitation of O'Reilly, I can't quite find the right word

    O'ReillyMann (none / 0) (#49)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:53:29 PM EST
    to me.

    Parent
    Beep Beep... (none / 0) (#51)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:54:40 PM EST
    ..I will forever think of him as Wily Coyote from now on.

    Parent
    Yes my only issue (none / 0) (#56)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:57:21 PM EST
    is we have to think of a new name for Tweety.  The real Tweety was actually pretty smart and creative....

    Parent
    I refuse to listen (none / 0) (#54)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:56:39 PM EST
    lalalalala.  What's he saying?

    Parent
    I don't know (none / 0) (#63)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:01:15 PM EST
    I'm not listening to the actual words. But let me tell you, he doesn't make a good preacher. He's trying to whip himself into some kind of frenzy, so his intonation is very exagerrated (how do you spell this?  :-)

    Parent
    He's parrotting the 60 minutes (none / 0) (#57)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 07:59:02 PM EST
    hesitation thing.

    Good Special Comment (none / 0) (#70)
    by chemoelectric on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:05:03 PM EST
    That was a good and really very kind to Hillary Clinton Special Comment, delivered with sadness rather than anger. I'm glad that BT has no credibility on the issue of Keith Olbermann's credibility, so I watched it. (Keith Olbermann probably has lost credibility with only a tiny number of people; it is crucial not to generalize to others one's own opinion. It is the TV Pundit Fallacy.)

    I see (none / 0) (#204)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:20:22 PM EST
    He took the "It's sad she's a racist shrew" approach as opposed to the "I'm angry she's a racist shrew approach."

    I didn't watch it.


    Parent

    Pat says (none / 0) (#74)
    by Polkan on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:06:16 PM EST
    that Ferraro story will end up hurting Obama's campaign big time.

    He's absolutely right. (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by auntmo on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:36:28 PM EST
    I'm sure this comment... (none / 0) (#81)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:10:37 PM EST
    ...would deem me "racist" in some circles, but is it that hard to imagine that liberals - who have spent decades campaigning for equal rights - may have a bias in proving that they've succeeded to the point where an African-American can become President?

    Ferraro gets crucified for acknowledging that the concept of liberal guilt does indeed exist.

    Parent

    And following liberal guilt comes (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Cream City on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:40:49 PM EST
    liberal fatigue.  I read studies about that, and I doubted it.

    I no longer doubt it.  I am weary of being forgiving for the misbehaviors we see.  So I have become "a woman of a certain age" -- so watch out.  We may be the most terrifying force in the world.

    And I'm not forgiving anybody of anything unless they grovel and go away and leave me alone forever.  I'm done with them.  I have things to get done.

    And now I do them in sensible shoes and get a lot more done than I ever did.  Watch out, fools of the world.  After liberal fatigue, comes ANGER again.

    Parent

    If you're talking about Buchanan (none / 0) (#82)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:11:25 PM EST
    I suspect he's very right about that.  He seems to be the only professional without a horse in this race.

    Parent
    Still he's Pat Buchanan... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:26:20 PM EST
    And I'm old enough to remember his speeches at the Repug conventions and I don't trust him for one second. Sorry.

    Parent
    BINGO (none / 0) (#100)
    by Kathy on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:18:35 PM EST
    Did you see her rip Axelrod a new one on NBC?

    Very nice.

    Parent

    I saw end of the NBC Evening News interview (none / 0) (#174)
    by jawbone on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:00:40 PM EST
    with Geraldine Ferraro, and I thought she was able to make her points and position pretty well.

    Did anyone see the entire interview? How'd it seem to go?

    Parent

    Can you help me understand (none / 0) (#154)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:48:03 PM EST
    how it will hurt Obama's campaign.  I just don't see it.  The media is piling onto her.  As I see it, it's destroying her, not hurting Obama.

    Parent
    It will hurt Obama (5.00 / 3) (#194)
    by Kathy on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:14:18 PM EST
    because we know the Clintons (for better or worse).  We know Geraldine Ferraro.  These are three people who have taken enormous hits for their stands on civil rights for all Americans-black, brown, gay, transgendered. They have been working for progressive causes their entire adult lives.

    To call them racist is, to a lot of people, uncomprehensible.  And insulting.

    And Obama does not want to be the aa candidate.  He wants to be the candidate.

    I have a sneaky feeling they think they are winning this news cycle.  Such a disconnect with what the real people are thinking.  They'll get a big slap in the face come PA.

    Parent

    If it gets carried too far (and already is in (none / 0) (#168)
    by Teresa on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:57:20 PM EST
    my opinion) there may be a backlash. My mom preaches to her kids that we always have to vote and we do. She told me tonight that she most likely will sit home in November. She has never read a blog but was an avid viewer of MSNBC until recently. She is really upset to the point of depression at how they are trying to paint the Clintons as racist.

    This woman just does not not vote. She votes in even every county and town election in her tiny town. She belongs to the Democratic Women's Club. I know she isn't alone.

    I think Pat B. is referring to what BTD has been inferring though.

    Parent

    Obama's latest email contained an (none / 0) (#77)
    by halstoon on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:07:51 PM EST
    interesting notation.

    According to Plouffe, "more than half of the votes that Senator Clinton has won so far have come from just five states. And in four of these five states, polls show that Barack would be a stronger general election candidate against McCain than Clinton."

    Think that argument will get played on TV? Will it work at all?

    I wish he would stop (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:22:39 PM EST
    He tries to go on the attack but somehow misses and leaves himself open to ..... oh, I don't know, how about...   well he's getting anywhere from 3-6% Republican support.  Do you think he can maintain that in the GE?

    Clinton has won states worth 163 delegates to Obama's 82 delegates for the GE?

    Did you know that of the Blue states, she has nearly 9 million votes to his 8.6?

    Did you notice that he is weaker in state a,b,c than Clinton?

    He's opened himself up to the analysis that everyone is concerned about.

    Parent

    To be fair... (none / 0) (#125)
    by smott on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:34:14 PM EST
    Just because one wins a state in the primary doesn't mean a) they win it in the GE or b) the other might not also win it in the GE.

    BO's won a ton of states that are almost certain to stay red.

    ...but just because HRC wins say OH, or PA, or FL, does that mean that OB will not?

    The last SUSA poll I saw has him winning the electoral college narrowly, but losing PA/MI/FL...so he gets a few reds.
    She wins PA/OH/MI/FL...does it the old fashioned way.

    We need to be careful with the notion that because candidate A wins a state in the primary, candidate B will not also hold that in the GE.

    Parent

    It is possilble in some cases (none / 0) (#159)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:52:03 PM EST
    Example... say Clinton won a state with 400 votes and Obama got 200.  The Repubs had 600 so the state might be close in the GE.  If 25% of Clinton support falls off, the Repubs have a greater chance at taking the state.  Yes, I understand that the same can happen in reverse.  My concern is that more of Clinton supporters are saying they will not vote for Obama than Obama supporters won't vote for Clinton.

    Parent
    Well, let's look at only the white vote then (none / 0) (#143)
    by Cream City on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:43:33 PM EST
    and note that Gore and Kerry both got 41% and lost.

    Look up that stat so far this year for the Dems.

    Parent

    If that is true, imagine what would happen (none / 0) (#176)
    by halstoon on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:03:12 PM EST
    if the black vote evaporated on Hillary?

    Parent
    "You forgot Poland!" (5.00 / 4) (#112)
    by Kathy on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:23:55 PM EST
    I mean--seriously?  All he can do is say he won more states?  There were, like, eight votes in Alaska.  Yeah, that's the same as California, buddy.  Rack 'em up!

    Parent
    To be fair, they do vote in AK. (none / 0) (#178)
    by halstoon on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:05:27 PM EST
    That doesn't say it means as much as CA, but if all these states don't count, why are they voting?

    I do get your point, though. Haha.

    Parent

    True (none / 0) (#187)
    by NecSorteNecFato on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:10:36 PM EST
    and funny, AND with a Family Guy reference. Rock on Kathy. :)

    Parent
    He Uses Rovian Math (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by MO Blue on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:42:15 PM EST
    He counts a state as a win if he loses the popular vote and wins the delegate count. He, also, counts a state as a win if he loses the delegate count and wins the popular vote. Using two different sets of criteria to determine what constitutes a win makes it a lot easier to put wins in your column.

    Parent
    For dim bulbs maybe (none / 0) (#85)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:12:00 PM EST
    Half the population of America lives in just five states.


    Parent
    Maybe, but there is also (none / 0) (#94)
    by halstoon on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:16:15 PM EST
    the point about Obama outperforming her against McCain in 4 of those 5.

    It looks like they've found their attack against the big-state strategy.

    Parent

    an internet poll? (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:18:05 PM EST
    New Polls (none / 0) (#122)
    by waldenpond on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:30:56 PM EST
    New polls.  She's beating Obama nationally again.  NH and MI are a concern.  Clinton did better.  In CA if 20% of Clinton's support drops off and Republican turnout picks up, Obama is in trouble.

    People keep saying Clinton's negatives are higher because that fits their story.  Everyone chooses to ignore poll after poll is showing that more of Clinton supporters will NOT vote for Obama than vice-versa and that number is increasing.

    Obama has Republican support that I think will fall off in November.  Obama has independent support that McCain can pick off.  I think he has serious vulnerabilities.

    Parent

    Which new polls? (none / 0) (#167)
    by halstoon on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:56:12 PM EST
    RCP still has Obama up nationally.

    They also have Obama up by 4 over McCain, while Clinton beats him by less than 2. According to RCP, Obama beats McCain by 10 in IA. Clinton loses to McCain by 10.

    The two of them perform about the same in PA, OH, and FL, though McCain has an extra 4 points on Obama in FL.

    Rasmussen has Obama up 5 on Clinton today. On that same link he notes that Obama is down 1 to McCain while Clinton is tied; essentially a three-way tie, but the point does go to Clinton for now.

    I could not find where Clinton did better in NH and MI. I know SUSA had Obama doing better than Clinton in both places.

    As for the drop-off/pick-up scenario, I would guess the same could be said for both sides.

    If you have links, I'd be interested to see what they say.

    Parent

    Yes and No (none / 0) (#90)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:13:47 PM EST
    From Plouffe I doubt most would believe the sun rose in the East.  I also think it's a totally bogus indicator of nothing.


    Parent
    OK, here is a subject. Oil & gas (none / 0) (#91)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:13:57 PM EST
    In December, the Enron Loophole bill which was attached to the Farm Bill passed and signed into legislature. This bill would help put a cap on speculation trading of energy commodities which was a loophole in the Enron Bill. But, it is not working. When the original bill came into power, the traders were restricted and so they found a commodity that they could manipulate. Well, there is a lot more to the story. But, I would like our candidates to explain what they would do to stop the rising costs of gas and heating oil. Currently, $3.47 a gal. To explain what the Wall Street traders are doing (Goldman-Sach is the biggest)is our dollar is now low, due to the excess energy costs and recession that we are not experiencing. So a trader can buy a barrel of oil and sell it to another country and make big bucks. Thus, it just keeps going up. A sort of Catch 22. But, the Enron Loophole bill was suppose to stop this. Why doesn't it work?  

    Speech Police (none / 0) (#99)
    by Sunshine on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:18:35 PM EST
    So KO has assigned himself to judge whats racist and what not...   Who is going to be the sexist judge?   The hissey fit he just had was not normal, is something else bothering him (maybe a little sexism)?...  Are we now supposed to report racist remarks to KO ?   Maybe Rush Limbough can be the sexist judge...

    I was born and raised in the South (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:26:08 PM EST
    I know racism when I hear it. What Geraldine Ferraro said was racist. Period. I can also tell you one of my black male friends who voted for Hillary in the Florida primary emailed me and he was livid.

    w

    e are tired of those kind of
    statements;  We get the job because we're black.  Not
    because we have done almost everything under the sun
    and have the credentials.  

    Access Denied: We usually don't get an interview
    unless someone says something----don't get in the
    door--unless someone says something---then when we do
    get a position--you get erased or your experience and
    background minimzed--always pointed out what you don't
    know or have not done--therefore you can't.  

    If there is a revote- that is one vote Hillary lost.

    Ferraro did Hillary no favors with her comment. Hillary should have asked her to step down immediately.

    Parent

    I wonder who's experience (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:30:52 PM EST
    And background is being erased here in this election.


    Parent
    Hint: it's not Obama (none / 0) (#153)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:47:32 PM EST
    and every insensitive thing you hear isn't racisr.  Some of them are true.


    Parent
    If there was ever a more perfect example (none / 0) (#156)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:49:43 PM EST
    Of someone with very little service time getting a job before someone with decades of services time, I haven't seen it.


    Parent
    There is overt racism (none / 0) (#165)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:55:38 PM EST
    and there is as you put it "insensitive remarks".

    Is the difference in who said it?

    If David Duke said what Ferraro said, would you consider it racist?

    I would. Its indefensible, regardless who said. I used to admire Ferraro.  

    For the record, I don't consider what Bill said as racist or insensitive.

    Parent

    I wonder if Keith is as discerning as you (none / 0) (#195)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:14:25 PM EST
    I think not.


    Parent
    I don't care who makes a statement (none / 0) (#213)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:26:08 PM EST
    if it's in the sense of an affirmative truth.  In that case I hardly think it makes someone racist.


    Parent
    I wouldn't argue that Hillary is not a woman (none / 0) (#155)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:48:52 PM EST
    of real accomplishments and experience. Obama has not questioned her experience- just her judgment. I have to say I was disappointed with her judgment. That would not prevent me from voting for her.

    Parent
    Well, he does question her experience. (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:55:54 PM EST
    It's part of the new phase of his campaign.  Tea parties.  Meeting foreign leaders.  Etc.  Trying to push through healthcare.  He questions it.

    Parent
    Molly Bloom, who said that and (none / 0) (#161)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:52:50 PM EST
    what do you have in mind when you quote it? "Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"

    Parent
    Robert Hunter and Jerry Garcia (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:00:11 PM EST
    Scarlet Begonias

    as for the what- res ipse loquitur

    Parent

    Molly, meaning of "res ipse loquitur" ? (none / 0) (#198)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:15:34 PM EST
    Good to know "the light" quote is from a Grateful Dead song.
     

    Parent
    Res ipsa loquitur (none / 0) (#216)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:27:24 PM EST
    The Grateful Dead (none / 0) (#219)
    by Warren Terrer on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:55:33 PM EST
    said that.

    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#162)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:53:11 PM EST
    They have questioned her experience, but no matter.


    Parent
    Personal opinion (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by nell on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:51:01 PM EST
    does not make anything so. I had a conversation today with a friend of mine who is African American and she said she thought Ferraro was speaking the truth, she said she feels the media has walked on eggshells around him because they are afraid of being labeled as racist,and readily ackowledges that black support has solidified around him at least in part because there is identifcation. She is an Obama supporter and will continue to be an Obama supporter, but that does not blind her to what the realities are.

    Parent
    yes, I think Ferraro spoke what a lot of (none / 0) (#186)
    by MarkL on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:09:45 PM EST
    people are thinking. I admire her for not backing down.

    Parent
    As a Southerner, can you tell me about (none / 0) (#190)
    by jawbone on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:11:07 PM EST
    "the ol' okee doke"--or however it's spelled. Obama uses it seem to seem to say someone's agreeing with you to your face but actually meaning/doing something else. It's a "hoodwink," a "bamboozle."

    Is it a Southern term? Black term?

    Where I come from it was simply a form of OK--agreement.

    How does it fit with the tone and accompanying words Obama uses?

    Very curious. (And I have read that it has something to do with Malcolm X or dialogue from a speech in the Malcolm X movie. Have no idea if that's what's going on in that part of Obama's stump speech.)

    Parent

    Jawbone, link for the Bamboozle Video (none / 0) (#209)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:23:15 PM EST
    ---------------------------------------------------
    Barack Obama: There will be Bamboozling. It's a great YouTube video, with a montage of movie clips and Obama speeches where he cribs lines from MalcolmX, MLK, Deval Patrick etc.

    Parent
    Ferraro Race Story vs. Paterson Race Story (none / 0) (#107)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:23:06 PM EST
    --------------------------------------------------
    Is anyone else disturbed by about how much media traction the Ferraro story got relative to the Orlando Paterson story? Could it be that the Ferraro story was capable of being successfully spun into a racist smear against the Clinton campaign; while the Paterson story back-fired and exposed the media itself as anti-Clinton race-baiters?  

    Further to that point, how likely is it that the outcome of this election will be determined by corporate America and their minions in the MSM. Firstly, do they want to see a Democrat in the White House  in '08? I think not.

    Doesn't it stand to reason that the MSM would be actively pimping stories that undercut the more viable Democratic candidate, i.e. Senator Clinton, while giving the less viable candidate a relatively free pass?

    Thus far, the charge of racism has been the most insidious, and effective, weapon against Senator Clinton. In all probability, such charges will continue to escalate throughout the primary process and it will be done in an increasingly reckless manner.

    Witness the NYTimes BIG op-ed piece (3/11/08) about the 3am ad being "racist": in the estimation of renowned race-relations historian Orlando Paterson.

    Paterson, said after "repeated viewings" he became increasingly aware of the 3am ads's "racist" subtext: the specter of Obama being part of the threat, the lurker outside the house of the good white folks. Paterson concluded that the ad, deliberately, played this way because there was no image of a sleeping black child.

    I read his piece online on Sunday evening and expected it to go nuclear for at least a week - I thought this is it - Hillary can do nothing now that isn't "racist". But curiously the story sank like a stone. WHY? SEE HERE at Taylor Marsh: Orlando Patterson Should Check the Ad (3/11/08, 12:10pm) .

    Seems that the 3am ad does, in fact, clearly include an image of a sleeping black child. So, in summary, a high profile NYTimes story was proven to be a clear-cut case of a BLATANTLY negligent, trumped-up attempt to race-bait the Clinton campaign.

    Questions: Did that become A STORY in the MSM at all? Outside of Taylor Marsh and the Daily Howler, was it covered in the blogosphere? Has the NYTimes issued an apology or a retraction? Has Paterson issued a retraction or an apology to the NYTimes and/or to Clinton? Has Paterson been publicly or privately reprimanded for his slanderous incompetence? Has anybody been fired?

    Has the Obama campaign been asked to weigh in on this incident?

    It has gotten to a point where the Clinton campaign, or any innocent bystander, will be called "racist" if they even dare point out this latest, incontestably, fraudulent charge of racism.

    That my friends, may ultimately get Obama nominated and John McCain elected.




    Parent

    It is a narrative looking for an opportunity... (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:41:28 PM EST
    It is the same strategy as labeling Kerry a flip-flopper or Gore a "liar/reinventor" (Daily Howler). It is not necessary that the chargers be true, just that the meme be pervasive and repeated frequently. And, tt is the "pattern" that the narrative constructs, not the truth or validity of any concrete accusation.

    Events will occur, "surrogates will become heated," and that moment the campaign will pounce again with the same narrative. The truthiness eventually takes hold, not because any, or even one, of the accusations are true, but because the narrative is the reality.

    Parent

    Oje, direct link to Orlando Patterson story (none / 0) (#185)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:09:36 PM EST
    ------------------------------------------------
    In case you haven't seen it: The Red Phone in Black and White, NYTimes, 3/11/08.

    Has TL covered this piece and it's aftermath?

    Parent

    yeah, I read it... (none / 0) (#207)
    by Oje on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:23:02 PM EST
    and it is ridiculous. "Birth of a nation" is a very academic reference, to me. He has many academic supporters, so invoking that movie sort of is a key brick and gesture for academics who want desperately to see a "pattern of racism" in Clinton's campaign.

    Parent
    I know it's tempting... (none / 0) (#119)
    by DudeE on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:29:48 PM EST
    ...to rebut Patterson by claiming "but there is an African-American in the ad!"  But it only gives credence to his lame argument.

    I always laugh when I see advertisements carefully orchestrated to show a "slice" of the public which includes a smattering of females, Asians, Latinos, African-Americans and one white guy tucked in the back somewhere.  Ironic how, as our rhetoric becomes more and more coarse and caustic, our efforts to offend no-one get more and more ridiculous.

    Parent

    DudeE, I'm wondering, just how does the (none / 0) (#157)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:49:53 PM EST
    actual presence of a sleeping black child in the 3am ad "lends credence to his (Orlando Paterson's) lame argument" - an argument that found the ad to be "racist" because he thought that no black children were represented in the ad.  

    And what do you have in mind when you say: "I always laugh when I see advertisements carefully orchestrated to show a "slice" of the public which includes a smattering of females, Asians, Latinos, African-Americans and one white guy tucked in the back somewhere."

    I can't picture that. Were you being sarcastic?

    Parent

    This blog is actually pretty nice... (none / 0) (#110)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:23:27 PM EST
    ...not that we're perfect or anything but the moderators slap sense into us when we go catfish crazy.

    5 years (none / 0) (#111)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:23:27 PM EST


    and (none / 0) (#191)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:12:59 PM EST
    US Deaths- 3,974

    Iraqi Deaths- ????????

    Parent

    Doing the right thing (none / 0) (#116)
    by chemoelectric on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:27:26 PM EST
    I want to make a brief comment on inferences people make about other people's motives.

    Glenn Greenwald has written about this: people who cannot recognize when others are acting in some fashion because they think it is the right thing to do. Instead they are (supposedly) doing it as a political maneuver, or out of bias and hate, etc.

    I want people to think about that, because I believe some of the people who make the second sort of inference do it because they have been trained by TV punditry, rather than because they are empty inside like those TV pundits themselves. Think about it and try to re-evaluate everything that is discussed here at TL, with "it was the right thing to do" as a new possibility for explaining someone's actions.

    This would mean a lot (none / 0) (#123)
    by Kathy on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:31:33 PM EST
    if it came from someone else.

    Parent
    Sorry, no idea who you're talking about... (none / 0) (#130)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:35:42 PM EST
    ...Keith Olbermann?

    Parent
    Oh jeez, what a load of concern (none / 0) (#134)
    by RalphB on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:39:09 PM EST
    If you're talking about Ferraro, I agree. (none / 0) (#189)
    by MarkL on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:11:01 PM EST
    She was doing what she thought was the right thing. Olbermann? False outrage---he probably gets more angry when a hair is out of place.

    Parent
    I just have to say I'm really sorry (none / 0) (#137)
    by hillaryisbest on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:41:05 PM EST
    we have lost the effort of a great lady - Geraldine Ferraro.  Disagree with her if you like.  But I love her gusty attitude, her service to the country, and her symbolism as an icon to gender equality.  This election is figuratively killing some of our great ones now.  We should be begging these people to contribute.  Instead we are shutting them out.  That is such a shame to me.  I think she should have been allowed to have her own viewpoint and serve in her fund raiser capacity with the Clinton campaign at the same time.  

    I;m just hoping that Al Gore and (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:43:55 PM EST
    ..John Edwards stay out of it. Somebody's going to need to pick up the pieces.

    Parent
    And Jimmy Carter. He spends his time (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by Cream City on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:52:09 PM EST
    hanging around with the homeless, after all.  What is he up to in their, um, habitats?

    I agree.  We are being swiftboated out of every one of our best Dem votegetters for the general election to help the nominee.  Discrediting more of them by the day.  No one is safe from this.  Wait and see.

    Parent

    Gore-Edwards (or w/Clinton) my write-in fallback (none / 0) (#202)
    by Ellie on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:19:23 PM EST
    I'll be writing in my ticket if TeamO keeps up this crap of fomenting every minor stupid comment into a full blown race war.

    It's jsut to take over several news cycles, and if Obama's in that much of a hurry to take down the Bad Monster Lady and unifyingly run into the "friendly" arms of McCain, Obama and his scorched earch policies should bear the brunt of yet another embarrassing, avoidable Dem loss.

    I'd bet that BO's claim to fame when the dust dies down after his team is done taking HRC out by whatever means necessary, so to speak, he won't be known as one of the civil rights giants but as the Black John Kerry.

    One woman's opinion. (Sick of this DIVISIVE crap. Just because TeamO can go to that well, doesn't mean they should every freakin' time. It will extract a price down the road and severely limit how the Dems can campaign.)

    Parent

    w00t! (none / 0) (#175)
    by kredwyn on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:01:46 PM EST
    Top Chef starts tonight!

    Just sayin'

    Geraldine Ferraro (none / 0) (#179)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:05:41 PM EST
    was recruited to be VP with Mondale because she was a woman.

    She may have "helped him lose" too because she's a woman.  As bad as it is for women now, it was far worse in 1984.

    Identify politics is reality.  She was just stating that.

    It's a little cynical (none / 0) (#182)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:07:47 PM EST
    But it's a consistent position.

    She easily admits the same thing about herself as the VP pick back in 1984.

    When it comes to dogwhistles I know who is most likely to come running when words like "hoodwinked" and "bamboozled" are being bandied about.


    I Was Talking Back to KO (none / 0) (#193)
    by zfran on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:14:01 PM EST
    Didn't watch the whole thing, however, please, someone answer my question....if the networks all break down the vote by black, white, brown, etc. is that not racial within itself? Women, men..gender bating?? The networks talk (endlessly) about the fact that the AA community votes 90% for Obama and the White community votes 70% for Clinton (albeit the #'s in Mississippi). So why is there such outrage that someone talks about Obama being advantaged for being black. I think the more correct verbage to use might be one-half black man and one all white woman.

    Hate the leader, (none / 0) (#199)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 09:17:22 PM EST
    love the agenda.  

    Dems are going to have to learn this kind of hard-edged politics no matter what come fall.

    Politics is dirty.  Pride in your leader is dumb.  Dear Leader is Damn Leader.  I swear, I get the feeling other countries have already learned this.

    just a thought.

    Maxim Thorne is fired from Obama's camp (none / 0) (#221)
    by zyx on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:51:16 PM EST
    and there is a media blackout.

    I guess he was a minor player--but c'mon, the guy had TWO Yale degrees...why not chatter about it?  What's with these Cable Gossip "News" guys?