home

Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:00:27 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

More thread.

(Comments now closed.)

< Open Thread | Hillary and McCain's Passport Files Also Breached >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Open Thread | 219 comments (219 topical)
    more thread more thread (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:02:40 PM EST
    chomp chomp chomp
    slow day for me today.

    over at MyDD they are trumpeting the comments of some anonymous "high placed clinton campaign official"
    saying Hillary only has 10% chance of taking the nomination.
    think it was Dick Morris?

    10% is still a chance.
    excuse me while I cling tighter.

    I suspect the (5.00 / 4) (#40)
    by standingup on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:25:38 PM EST
    latest onslaught of press and blog posts that suggest Hillary has no way of winning was in the pipeline waiting for the MI and FL re-votes to be shot down.  The timing is right and there are too many articles, talking heads on cable and bloggers all on message for it to be coincidence.  


    Parent
    a pair of threes is a pair of threes. (none / 0) (#221)
    by cy street on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:48:21 PM EST
    it does not take a conspiracy to call out a bluff.  i just used my common sense.


    Parent
    Joe Trippi (none / 0) (#224)
    by tek on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:51:13 PM EST
    was on CBS saying that Clinton could take the nomination but she has to win PA and NC and IN.  PA and IN no problem, but I don't know about NC.

    Parent
    The race fundamentally changed... (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Exeter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:45:36 PM EST
    ...when the Wright videos received more coverage than any other event this campaign season. The reality is that most voters first introduction to Obama was from his preacher saying God D##n America.

    Instead of asking who should tell Hillary to drop out, it should be who is going to tell Obama he should step aside for the "best of the party."

    Even before this, he still hadn't won white democrats in a SINGLE state.    

    When the poll numbers continue to show Obama tanking, the super delegates will drop him, especially after all the media lemmings start running the other way after Clinton blows Obama out of the water in Pennsyvania.

    Parent

    He did win them in Wisconsin though (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by lilburro on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:21:40 PM EST
    right?  He really did well, demographically, in WI.

    I really appreciate your second paragraph.  When people say "best for the party" it usually just means "the best for Barack Obama."  "Best for the party" is usually just a guise for pushing the other candidate out of your way.

    Parent

    he peaked in Wisconsin (5.00 / 1) (#211)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:42:31 PM EST


    Parent
    No (5.00 / 1) (#222)
    by Shawn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:48:34 PM EST
    Wisconsin was 51/48 Clinton among white Democrats. He did win them in Vermont and Illinois though (53/46 in IL - shockingly narrow, if you ask me).

    Of course, Hillary hasn't won the black vote anywhere, even in Arkansas or NY. Both sides of the coin are fairly depressing.

    Parent

    Obama (5.00 / 1) (#228)
    by tek on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:53:42 PM EST
    is from IL, that's why he won.

    Parent
    Uh yeah (5.00 / 1) (#232)
    by Shawn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:56:03 PM EST
    I heard.

    Parent
    Oops... (5.00 / 1) (#239)
    by Exeter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 06:06:52 PM EST
    You're right, he did win Illinois and Vermont and white Democrats.  Illinois doesn't really count because its his home state -- although, it still should give everyone weak knees that he still lost white democrats in southern Illinois. That was his home state where he supposedly is loved and adored by 110% of the population.

    Parent
    That was about the odds I gave (none / 0) (#4)
    by jes on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:05:13 PM EST
    the campaign over the last weekend. But Bowers cheered me up on Monday or Tuesday and gave her 15%. The Clintons are trying to lower expectations yet again. So evil.

    Parent
    yeah, a high placed campaign officail (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by NJDem on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:09:17 PM EST
    would say that and then post it on mydd.  Are people that stupid?  I think not.  

    Remember when there was that article in the NYT about low campaign moral and then they refused to publish a letter by the HRC camp flatly denying it.  Sheesh Louise.  

    More Wright fodder--today in an interview BO said he didn't know about the incendiary remarks made by Wright.  So which is it?  I can't even follow the double-speak at this point...  

    Obama (none / 0) (#22)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:18:54 PM EST
    knew of and heard "controversial" sermons but not the 3 sermons on 9/11, G-D America and Hillary.   As an example, Obama has said that he heard Wright talk about adultery in a crude way....No doubt, Obama heard some of the sermons that wandered off into discussions of white oppression....

    So, when Wright occasionally was close to the edge Obama was there, and the 3 times Wright fell off the cliff he was not there....

    Three sermons have fueled the entire controversy....And, from what we know now, those three sermons were not typical at all....  

    Parent

    Could he have been talking about (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:23:50 PM EST
    the Clinton smear when he says he heard Wright talk about adultery in a crude way?

    I have a hard time believing he only fell off the cliff 3 times (I've seen more than 3). Especially since he had no problem with including those sermons on a DVD for sale to the public.

    Parent

    I think we need to be (none / 0) (#59)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:34:38 PM EST
    specific....Right now everyone assumes Wright was all G-D America all the time...

    There are three sermons so far:  9/11 tin foil hat sermon, G-D America sermon, and the anti Hillary sermon, which is very recent.....

    There was a fourth sermon on June (perhaps July) 22, 2007 that Hannity was going to showcase via Newsmax, to show that Obama was lying that he was not present during really, really bad sermons.   Newsmax had published an article last July making the accusation.  But Obama was giving a speech in Florida that day--on tape.  Ooops.  Retraction.....Bill Kristol had to amend his NY Times editorial....

    The wingers have been looking for more bad stuff and sermons and proof Obama was there...They have been going through the tapes for at least two weeks now.....Only 3 of the really bad ones so far....

    If it is only 3, and the rest of the "controversial" tapes are just race grievance sort of stuff, this issue will die down.

    Parent

    not sure where you are getting your info (none / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:37:24 PM EST
    but there are hundreds of hours, not only of video but of audio, and if you think you have heard it all.
    well
    you havent.


    Parent
    I've seen 2 different 9/11 ones. Can't decide (none / 0) (#88)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:45:25 PM EST
    which was more offensive. You don't seem to have seen the Bill Clinton smear, and a few others. Fox has shown about 6 videos I believe.

    The Right has been on this for at least a year, iirc. I think this is just the tip of it.

    You do know that Wright was uninvited to Obama's running for President event right? For a good reason . . . Alexrod said something along the lines of 'they didn't want to expose him to the voters'. OY!

    Parent

    So, uninviting him (none / 0) (#100)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:51:03 PM EST
    was a good thing, right?  

    Parent
    probably (none / 0) (#107)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:53:05 PM EST
    it might also have been a good idea to develop a strategy for this this bites him on the ass.
    which he clearly did not do.

    Parent
    But it means that -- well , what did Obama (none / 0) (#132)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:03:18 PM EST
    really mean that he didn't realize until recently that being in Wright's church would be an issue?

    Parent
    Depends on how you look at it (none / 0) (#140)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:06:48 PM EST
    It says they definitely knew he was a problem. Not good if this 'problem' would have reared it's head in the GE.

    Imo, he should have been more upfront. Hiding the issue really goes against what he says he/his presidency would be. I would have liked to see him do something more pro-active about it during the last 20yrs. He's supposed to be a leader who can unite. I call it a missed golden opportunity.

    Parent

    Best predictor of future behavior (none / 0) (#74)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:00 PM EST
    is past behavior

    If you catch someone doing something once, it is natural to assume that it was not the first (or the last) time...

    The 3-times seems to be total bull...especially considering that the congregation was into what he was saying...otherwise you'd have probably heard crickets...

    good ministers know their flock, they stick around because they preach what their congregation likes to hear, so it is very hard to believe that Wright just wandered off a few times

    Parent

    well (1.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:50:16 PM EST
    John Wayne Gacey only killed a handful of times.

    Are we to judge those isolated incidents as indicative of how he lived his entire life?

    And then he had that photo with Rosalyn Carter!

    Parent

    You really (none / 0) (#103)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:51:52 PM EST
    think that analogy is apt?

    Parent
    The analogy (none / 0) (#241)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 06:24:23 PM EST
    is apt because it proves how ridiculous the original statement is.

    Would have us believe that Wright is some sort of split personality who one day screams "G D America," then humps his podium another to humiliate a former first lady and current US senator, then posits that AIDS was created to kill black people (I suppose the gay people were guinea pigs?) then at another time screeches about the "U-S of KKK-A" ...yet, because on other days he talked about helping the poor and the homeless, those inflammatory statements are somehow negated?

    Lookit, you could say the same thing about David Duke.  He supported a charity to help single mothers and homeless vets at some point.  Does that make him a good guy?

    Parent

    Absolutely (none / 0) (#121)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:58:20 PM EST
    after murder #1 you can reasonably start digging into his past and say "are there other things we don't know about" and if it is found that he has done it before, it is not reasonable to be surprised by it

    So absolutely conclusions can be drawn...

    with that said, of course there are always exceptions, but the exceptions don't make for good controls

    Parent

    And 33 (none / 0) (#129)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:01:10 PM EST
    is hardly a handful...

    but it was suspicion about one murder that lead to the evidence of the others...so the analogy is completely apt

    Parent

    Murder = Wright sermon? (none / 0) (#159)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:12:10 PM EST
    You are saying Wright is guilty of murder?

    Parent
    that is also the one (none / 0) (#160)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:12:32 PM EST
    that most offended my religious relatives.
    and there is a LOT of that sort of stuff.
    I have seen at least a half dozen just as bad.

    Parent
    This is a must-read! (none / 0) (#93)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:47:54 PM EST
    The Obama Bargain

    by Shelby Steele

    Bargaining is a mask that blacks can wear in the American mainstream, one that enables them to put whites at their ease. This mask diffuses the anxiety that goes along with being white in a multiracial society. Bargainers make the subliminal promise to whites not to shame them with America's history of racism, on the condition that they will not hold the bargainer's race against him. And whites love this bargain -- and feel affection for the bargainer -- because it gives them racial innocence in a society where whites live under constant threat of being stigmatized as racist. So the bargainer presents himself as an opportunity for whites to experience racial innocence.

    This is how Mr. Obama has turned his blackness into his great political advantage, and also into a kind of personal charisma. Bargainers are conduits of white innocence, and they are as popular as the need for white innocence is strong. Mr. Obama's extraordinary dash to the forefront of American politics is less a measure of the man than of the hunger in white America for racial innocence.

    More at the link...

    Parent

    Shelby Steele (none / 0) (#116)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:28 PM EST
    has some interesting analysis. CNN used to have him on until they decided to back Obama.  Steele was on Dobbs yesterday and is supposed to be back on as Dobbs wants to continue 'the' conversation.

    Parent
    I saw that yesterday -- it was fascinating stuff (none / 0) (#135)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:05:00 PM EST
    so thanks for the reminder to watch when he's back.

    Parent
    I have a hard time believing he was selling them (none / 0) (#95)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:48:27 PM EST
    to the public if they were not the norm.

    I don't know too many people who willing sell  'mistakes' online. Especially in relationship to their livelihood  ;)

    Parent

    All were sold (none / 0) (#155)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:07 PM EST
    is what I heard....The good, the bad, the ugly....

    Parent
    I still don't get why. (none / 0) (#186)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:26:07 PM EST
    He makes his money off his work, etc. I don't think he thinks there is anything wrong with what he said. If he did, there wouldn't be repeat incidents and he certainly wouldn't be selling a message he didn't think was right. Imo anyway :)

    Parent
    And what was on Obama's tapes (none / 0) (#139)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:06:32 PM EST
    from Wright that Obama took with him to Harvard?  I haven't seen anything more about those tapes -- of other sermons, I presume -- noted in Obama's book.

    Parent
    Presumably talks (none / 0) (#149)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:15 PM EST
    about Christ....

    There are a lot of Wright sermons.....Only a few offend....

    Parent

    Here's an interesting (none / 0) (#144)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:07:59 PM EST
    take on the whole Wright affair from Orcinus.

    His point is that the media completely ignores the anti-Americanism of conservative minister and power broker Sung Myung Moon.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#233)
    by tek on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:57:29 PM EST
    but Americans know about that guy and it certainly influenced our opinion of Bush.  Really, I don't find it particularly effective to say we should ignore Wright because the MSM didn't cover some other egregious preacher.  The media is not fair, but Obama still showed bad judgement and the worst part of it is that this is apparently how he really views white people.

    Parent
    She only had a -7% chance... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Marco21 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:10:37 PM EST
    of winning New Hampshire and a -45% chance of winning California so I am not so worried.

    yeah (none / 0) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:12:20 PM EST
    a more interesting question might what are Obamas chances of self immolating.


    Parent
    Politico says it would take meteor (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:14:20 PM EST
    striking him.

    What do you think are the odds the Obama fam. will be at Trinity UCC Easter Sunday?

    Parent

    meteor (none / 0) (#17)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:16:36 PM EST
    It could happen!

    Parent
    Except the U.S. Navy might implode (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:18:33 PM EST
    the meteor in mid-air as a tactical exercise.

    Parent
    Sshhh Captain... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:19:11 PM EST
    Hillary has Bruce Willis on a shuttle as we speak!
    ;)

    Parent
    Bruce Willis (none / 0) (#36)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:23:57 PM EST
    is a Republican....

    Parent
    Uh oh! (none / 0) (#49)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:28:49 PM EST
    Foiled again!   :0

    Parent
    How I wish I had a job (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:11:46 PM EST
    Watching teevee... MSNBC: Richardson is the nail in the coffin, train has left the station, Hillary it's over.  Richardson called for Clinton to drop out.  Political heavy weights all together, makes Tweety so proud, telephone calls are rampant.  It's clear that with MI and FL not counting Clinton needs to get out.  Here's a good one,...  Hillary has run off a cliff and is hanging there in the air (like a cartoon)

    Now, they are going after Bill.  Per Tweety, only one way to read, these two are the only ones who love their country.  Mike Allen appears to be a prophet today.  He's getting quoted all over.

    I got sick of working more than 60 hour weeks for two years, but now it doesn't look so bad.

    hanging there in the air (like a cartoon) (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:19:42 PM EST
    so the only real question left is who is the roadrunner and who is the coyote.

    you have to admit some of Obamas recent tactics have had "ACME" written all over them.

    beep beep

    Parent

    ACME, I like that (none / 0) (#45)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:27:27 PM EST


    Parent
    honestly (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:32:50 PM EST
    cant you just imagine that photo of Bill and Wright coming out of a box marked "ACME CAMPAIGN DIRTY TRICK #5"

    Parent
    my mental visual esactly (none / 0) (#112)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:55:59 PM EST


    Parent
    Yes, that's it (none / 0) (#118)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:57:56 PM EST


    Parent
    MSNBC daily finds a new "nail" (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:43:26 PM EST
    in the coffin it is amazing how many nails Hillary's coffin...it never seems to be enough...every time "she's done, and should drop out" is rationalized, it is for a different reason...

    Parent
    What I think the problem is . . . (5.00 / 3) (#110)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:53:57 PM EST
    they forgot to put Hillary IN the coffin.  ;)

    And I don't think they can since Obama can't knock her out. So, they can nail all they want, the coffin is empty at the moment.

    Parent

    Funny line! Yep, it's just carpentry (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:07:39 PM EST
    because it's certainly not journalism.

    Parent
    They (none / 0) (#145)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:08:39 PM EST
    have been trying to get her to drop out before.

    They forget one thing - the voters want her to stay.  They keep saying it over and over in primary states.

    She will kick Barack's arse in the upcoming primnaries.

    Parent

    WOW! That's pure mental illness you just described (none / 0) (#18)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:17:05 PM EST
    No other way to put it.  The MSM has moved on to industrial grade Kool-aid now.

    Parent
    just like 2000 (none / 0) (#33)
    by magisterludi on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:23:14 PM EST


    Parent
    Yeah except that this time... (none / 0) (#56)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:32:33 PM EST
    ...they are going to flip to McCain...all except Olbermann who will still be in Obama's pocket but no on will be listening to his "special comments" against John McCain.

    Parent
    But I'll be watching (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:00:25 PM EST
    with the volume off, bowl of popcorn by my side and a beer in my hand.

    Parent
    Obama has had 3 giant chances to seal this deal. (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by hitchhiker on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:12:11 PM EST
    Once in New Hampshire
    Once on Super Tuesday
    Once on March 4th

    He couldn't do it.  He's ahead in delegates by virtue of wins in states we won't carry next fall--a great primary strategy, but not enough to carry him into the "clear choice of Democrats" category.

    If it were not so close, she'd be gone by now.  If it were impossible for her to win enough popular votes to have a good case to bring to the SD's, she should give up and ask her supporters to help Obama win.

    But with so many Democrats preferring her to him, and with so much at stake in the GE, there's every reason to let it play out.  The MSM should hold its freaking tongue and let the people decide.

    Obama's inability to close (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:19:08 PM EST
    is really concerning. Raise your hand if you think PA will be any different.

    Parent
    didya see these (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by jes on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:25:00 PM EST
    pretty maps at mydd?

    Parent
    why do you think they want to stop the game? (none / 0) (#41)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:26:00 PM EST
    I am getting pretty angry at the disrespect and disregard the media shows to over half of their Democratic audience.  Don't they realize that Clinton is leading nationally right now, meaning that MUCH of their viewership is not interested in non-stop Obama adulation??

    They can't be serious if they think Clinton is going to drop out now after re-gaining momentum and is on the way to victory...  It's surreal and frightening what is happening.

    Parent

    heres the good news (none / 0) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:27:50 PM EST
    Hillary has been dealing with the surreal frightening MSM for decades.  if anyone can beat them it is she.

    Parent
    true enough (none / 0) (#215)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:43:53 PM EST


    Parent
    Easy (none / 0) (#79)
    by badger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:56 PM EST
    They're looking at losing big in blowouts in PA and WV, and probably not doing too well in the remainder of the primary schedule. The momentum of the campaign is about to shift, and Obama may not have any big wins in the late primaries leading up to the convention.

    That in turn makes the Wright problem seem even worse and makes Clinton's 'big state' argument stronger.

    Parent

    Media trying to reduce those "blowouts" (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:28 PM EST
    by telling voters in those states (along with the rest of us, but they're the targets) that voting for Clinton will be a vote wasted because she can't make it, she'll have to drop out, etc.  You can bet that's the message on the ground there, in the calls to voters there.

    We have to do our part to blow that back -- to do phone-banking with solid figures, to write letters to the editor to get another message in the media, etc.

    This is not just reporting the news.  This is media attempting to shape and make the news.  Fight it.

    Parent

    That's what bothers me also (none / 0) (#48)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:28:16 PM EST
    He spent how much on the 3/4 primaries?

    He can send his surrogates out all he wants to try and smear Clinton as dishonest etc, but I think they don't even know how to get that message to her voters. And if he can't get his message or his smears to be effective with her voters, how the heck is he going to do it in the GE?

    Parent

    Hillary's wins on 3/4 (none / 0) (#78)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:52 PM EST
    were quite emphemeral.  Before 3/4, Obama had a pledged delegate lead of about 159.  He now has a pledged delegate lead of 171.

    Because she is behind, every state that she does not win by landslide is one more missed opportunity.  In some ways, by not winning Ohio big enough, and by losing the delegate contest in Texas, Hillary actually lost on 3/4.  She is not catching Obama, whose lead in the popular vote has remained very strong.....

    Hillary is running out of chances to put Obama away......She might yet pull it off but she has come nowhere near that so far....

    Parent

    if she had actually lost in Ohio and Texas (none / 0) (#101)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:51:11 PM EST
    we wouldn't even be blogging about a Hillary Clinton campaign right now or her leading in the polls as we head to Pennsylvania.

    We may have not even heard of Jeremiah Wright until it was way too late after the convention.

    Parent

    The bar to measure him by (none / 0) (#63)
    by independent voter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:37:09 PM EST
    is whether he can overcome a 19 point deficit?
    If he cannot, then he has no chance? How do you rationalize that?


    Parent
    He has been unable to win (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:44 PM EST
    a seriously contested primary in a big state. You can pooh-pooh that, but it's a problem.

    Parent
    He shouldn't be facing a 19 point deficit (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:57 PM EST
    Do you see why?  His campaign and supporters are begging, demanding, shouting all over the place that Hillary needs to quit.  But here he is facing a 19+ point deficit in Pennsylvania and 25+ deficit in West Virginia.

    Has Obama's campaign been conducting itself like an inevitable frontrunner for the past 2 weeks?  Be honest.  The math is supposed to guarantee his nomination, but yet all these worries and insecurities keep bubbling up.

    What is there to be afraid of?  Just go back to Chicago and relax and wait for the convention.

    Parent

    This is from frontloading in his favor (none / 0) (#163)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:14:47 PM EST
    -- frontloading the primary calendar with caucuses and with states likely for him, because he was supposed to cinch it by now.

    Now, with no more caucuses and with states good for Clinton, we see the desperation in the calls for her to quit.  Tough on him, but we and the super-delegates need to see how the rest of these states do to get better predictors (because caucus states and red states aren't useful) of how each candidate could do as our nominee in fall.

    That's what the primary season is supposed to be for -- not playing us as pawns in a pre-scripted game plan written by Axelrod, Dean, Brazile, Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin, et al.

    Parent

    Who frontloaded the schedule? (none / 0) (#230)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:54:07 PM EST
    Hillary was quite comfortable with a frontloaded schedule, which was designed to finish off pretenders such as Obama, when she assumed and said publicly she would have it all sewed up by Super Tuesday on February 5, 2008.

    She was outperformed by a rookie....

    Parent

    DNC -- and I imagine you can see (none / 0) (#236)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:59:03 PM EST
    who has been getting all its support, now that we've been able to watch Dean, Brazile, et al., at work.

    Parent
    He (none / 0) (#147)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:09:34 PM EST
    will get pounded in PA.

    Parent
    Obama is ahead (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:38:41 PM EST
    because of "Dem for a day" and Repubs who won't vote for him in Nov.
    But hey - let's trash the candidate attracting the Democratic vote - and make her bow out NOW due to Obama winning by encouraging voters to break the law.


    Parent
    look at it this way (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:14:18 PM EST
    every instance of them saying this will make any possible victory that much sweeter.

    Parent
    MSM is loving (none / 0) (#53)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:30:50 PM EST
    this.  Clinton/McCai...eh, yawn.  Obama/McCain ....yeeeeehaw!

    Now excuse me, Obama is uh-ing.

    Someone snoops in Clinton's data. No Action.
    Someone snoops in Obama's data.  Fired.
    Someone snoops in Obama's data.  Fired.
    Someone snoops in Obama's/McCain's data. Suspended.

    Parent

    The Clinton info... (none / 0) (#143)
    by kredwyn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:07:51 PM EST
    was used in a training session...or so I heard on the radio coming home from work.

    Parent
    Comcat TV's to start watching you (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by DandyTIger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:20:28 PM EST
    Here's a nice, but scary topic. Apparently comcast is working on set top boxes with cameras in them, so they know who's watching what. Of course they're only to make the system easier to use and to know who's preferences to use while watching. See the article here. They'd never use it to monitor anything or collect data otherwise. And of course they'd never let the authorities tap into that sort of information. Not comcast.

    Another Reason (none / 0) (#58)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:33:11 PM EST
    to get Direct TV.

    Parent
    AMEN (none / 0) (#61)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:35:07 PM EST
    hate cable.  I have dish which is even better.
    more HD.


    Parent
    digital cable and IPTV (none / 0) (#83)
    by DandyTIger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:42:52 PM EST
    are two way. As are many DVR based systems and all Video on Demand systems (either on those transports or over the phone for satellite). Analog cable and satellite are nicely one way. The new revolution going on with TV over the internet (watching TV direct from networks, youtube, etc.) is two way, but can easily be made one way with free anonymous proxy servers out there.

    I'd like to see some legislation that makes you have to opt in for this clear privacy loss (or at least able to opt out). Because that's my information; I own it. I'm not holding my breath.

    By two way I mean, data is collected for every service selection (channel change) and duration, and any interactive transaction. Yep, pretty much everything. And that data is associated with the paying client ID.

    Parent

    The overused adjective "Orwellian" (none / 0) (#92)
    by badger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:47:47 PM EST
    definitely applies here.

    Parent
    Tin foil (none / 0) (#138)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:06:30 PM EST
    over my comcast box.

    Parent
    Is it just me, (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by NJDem on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:20:30 PM EST
    or every time the media says HRC is done, she rises from the dead.  I'd take these new charges that her campaign is over as good news.  Seriously.  

    bingo (none / 0) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:21:55 PM EST
    it always the desperation weapon of choice

    Parent
    Very appropriate comment (none / 0) (#39)
    by blogtopus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:25:30 PM EST
    on Easter Weekend.

    Do you think they're trying to set up the 'she was dead on Friday, was out Saturday, and came back Sunday' narrative?

    Hey, if Obama can be compared to JC, what's wrong with a little holiday fun? :-)

    Anybody know a good Easter Joke? How about this:

    Q: Why can't Jesus eat M&M's?
    A: Because they keep falling through the holes in his hands. (alternate answer: He can eat them, but they keep slipping out of the hole in his side.)

    Parent

    just wait till the grownups get home (none / 0) (#50)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:29:35 PM EST
    mister

    Parent
    My favorite Easter joke (none / 0) (#115)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:25 PM EST
    Hey, did you hear they canceled Easter this year?

    No, why did they do that?

    They found the body!

    Ba-dum-dum.

    Parent

    I'm telling.. Moooommmm (none / 0) (#154)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:02 PM EST


    Parent
    Yes, only that this time she's not even dead (none / 0) (#44)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:27:11 PM EST
    She is in the lead in the polls and Obama is the one who just had a near death experience.  But you know, momentum only exists when it's for Obama.

    Parent
    And taking the weekend off (none / 0) (#52)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:30:12 PM EST
    Hillary is smarter yet again. While these windbags keep pumping this stuff out they should realize nobody is listening. It is Easter. March Madness is in high gear. The weather is nice..at least where I live. The only real discussions will be at the family dinner table when people say, "ya, did you see those videos."

    Whatever. And go Kansas Jayhawks.

    Parent

    You got it. March Madness to the max (none / 0) (#170)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:19:55 PM EST
    in this house, making my spouse cheerful even while shoveling (nooooo, not more!) another foot of snow that marked the first day of spring here. . . .

    Why cheerful?  He's a Hoosier.  Indiana plays tonight.  He can't even think about politics.

    Btw, did I see someone here writing about Bruce Pearl?  Is he still a jerk?  Used to coach in my town.  We could tell you stories, oh my, yes we could.

    Parent

    But look at the timing (none / 0) (#113)
    by standingup on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:14 PM EST
    MI and FL re-votes go down in flames.

    Richardson comes out to endorse with rumors that more are coming soon.

    Big push on meme that there is no way for Clinton to drop out now.  

    All with the hopes that Clinton will drop out at which time they can seat the FL and MI delegates for Obama and everyone can unify in Denver behind Obama.  

    Parent

    They (none / 0) (#158)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:56 PM EST
    can kiss my you know what on the "unity" in Denver thing.

    Parent
    Josh Marshall (none / 0) (#201)
    by standingup on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:33:59 PM EST
    has an interesting post up suggesting something similar. Snarky title - Step 8: Acceptance? - is his presumption that Clinton supporters are accepting the end is near.  His inbox wasn't flooded with the expected number of emails when he noted the end was near.  (of course it could be that fewer supporters are reading his site but he didn't consider that in his post)  

    Yet this afternoon, just before going to a meeting, I posted a link to The Politico article on Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the nomination and expressed my agreement with it.
    ...
    This is, I grant you, a highly unscientific measure. But I wonder whether the collapse of the revote negotiations, the revelation that the campaign is  in debt and the Richardson endorsement together are collectively forcing a moment of realization.

    I tend to think it is more wishful thinking on Josh's part.  I don't see Clinton supporters accepting that it is time for her to toss in the towel, especially without the FL and MI re-votes or getting some portion of their vote.  This could get very nasty for the Democratic party.  

    Parent

    Well it's nice to see the author of (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:31:18 PM EST
    Such misogyny is being promoted on the Orange Blog as well.
    CNN people staying home (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:57 PM EST
    CNN having a discussion with two supporters in PA...

    Q: real character issues

    Clinton Supporter: Issues, records, accomplishments, economic development etc. talk about real issues that affect real people.

    Obama supporter: Plouffe was not attacking, merely stating how many people feel about Clinton.  Rendell, Ferraro, this is not about race.  Obama moves people.

    Q: Why aren't Dems ahead of Repubs?  

    Clinton supporter: don't have one candidate yet.  Come Nov. the choice will be cut and dried.  Well all work our backsides off to make it happen.

    Obama supporter: don't underestimate Repubs.   Obama has leadership.  Clinton is not direct, she didn't address Rendell and Ferraro.  Obama took   higher ground, sticks and stones etc.

    I notice a significant difference in the face of the candidates and it is not attractive.

    Why don't Hillary lovers write Josh anymore? (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:40 PM EST
    Gosh, I have NO idea:
    Hillary's campaign is DEAD, I tell you!

    Here is what I wrote to JMM:


    ....

    It's because they've given up on YOU, since you are so in the tank for Obama. We might as well post at DailyKos.
    Frankly, the main thing you'll find on pro-Hillary blogs are two things: first, total rejection of Obama as a dangerously unqualified candidate; second, a belief that his campaign is finally imploding, both from the gaffes he is making, and from the information that is coming out. Yes, he's still a favorite for the nomination, but for November? The prospects look bleaker and bleaker.
    You're probably going to mention McCain: if the choice is between dangerously unqualified and dangerous, it's hard to say which is worse.
    You're probably thinking that Obama has a lot of accomplishments. Sure, but not in areas relevant to being President. He's no more ready to be President than Paul Krugman is.
    For me, the last straw with Obama was learning that his vaunted accomplishments in the IL Senate were part of a package dropped in his lap during his last year, to pump up his resume for the Senate run. Then, once elected to the Senate, he couldn't even be bothered to do his job.
    By the way, speaking of interpreting silences, the lack of any coverage on Kerry's and McCaskill's racist gaffes says a lot about TPM.
    McCaskill said she was glad there was finally a black candidate who is not a victim, and this merits zero coverage?
    Kerry says that Obama is uniquely qualified because he is black, and no coverage?
    Say it ain't so!

    I guess you're just a typical Jewish man. Oh well.
    In my view (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by rilkefan on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:18:22 PM EST
    That's not very helpful.  The tone will just make him happy to continue with his current views.

    FWIW my email:

    Perhaps the reason you haven't gotten a lot of emails from HRC supporters on this question is because many of them have come to the conclusion it's not worth the effort to respond to TPM anymore.  I for one assumed that you're familiar with the counterarguments on liberal blogs to the Politico calculation but can't be bothered to discuss it or the related issues.

    But I certainly expect most HRC supporters are aware that the Obama-approved disenfranchisement of the FL and MI voters makes her likelihood of clearly winning the popular vote very small, despite her large and increasing poll leads in several coming states, and that her chance of winning the nomination is correspondingly low.


    Parent

    He may not like the tone, but surely (5.00 / 0) (#174)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:21:49 PM EST
    he will have SOMETHING to say about Kerry and McCaskill.. it's pretty telling TPM won't discuss those.

    Parent
    Oh MarkL. That last line was baaaaaaaaad. (none / 0) (#166)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:17:57 PM EST
    Shame on you.  /snark

    I gave up on JMM a long time ago.  Personally emailed him about his bias and he had the audacity to tell me that he wasn't for BO!  We had several correspondences over the matter and the way he disses Hillary with sexist remarks.  I am sickened because I was an early visitor to the site.  We had some nice conversations through email for several years, but no more.

    Parent

    Likewise I've been reading TPM since (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:26:09 PM EST
    2001, before 9/11, and had many email exchanges with Josh.
    Basically, I think he has been lost in the weeds for  a long time, discussing the "political implications" of everything without discussing the policy.
    For example, when one of Hillary's advisers said something quite nasty about Obama in a  conference call on health care, Josh was all over that... but he had NOTHING to say about whose policy was better.
    That is what I care about.
    Likewise, I just don't care what Andrew Cuomo  or Bill Shaheen say, and I don't care MUCH about what Jesse Jackson Jr. says---there is very little information contained in those statements about who is the better candidate, or even the more 'upright' one.

    Parent
    I second the motion. (none / 0) (#207)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:38:01 PM EST


    Parent
    Well, I doubt I will get one. (none / 0) (#209)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:38:10 PM EST
    We have had a couple of testy exchanges recently. If he recognizes the email, he won't reply.


    Parent
    Nice selective quoting (5.00 / 0) (#167)
    by badger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:17:58 PM EST
    The WaPo piece is about "Top Ten Flip-Flops" - 5 for Obama and 5 for Hillary. Of course you're not outraged about the 5 for Obama, all of which are on substantive policy issues, which the Clinton-Balkan item is not.

    Selective quoting like this makes people look like dishonest shills. You don't want to be one of those, do you?

    Heh, well (none / 0) (#192)
    by otherlisa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:28:33 PM EST
    HP Sauce is the guy who said earlier today that Clinton supporters would be back to stirring Mucinex in their ice-cream after Obama becomes the nominee.

    So I've already got him on "ignore."

    Parent

    Couldn't Obama step aside (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by JerseyBeth on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:26:54 PM EST
    gracefully in June and not force a brokered convention if Hillary had the momentum and was the one with at least a shot at winning in November.    I can't believe Obama would want to subject himself to what could be  a resounding loss in November, especially when half of his own party could be complaining about buyer's remorse.

    I have concerns about Obama,  and I am a loyal democrat who leans left.  Everyday of Hillary Clinton's life has been officially recorded since her husband's Presidential campaign in 1992.   We know where she has been every single day.  Almost TMI.  At this point I don't feel I know enough about Barack Obama to vote for him for President.  No one I know even heard of him before he gave his 2004 keynote address.   And  I am a loyal democrat who leans left.  If I have trust issues with him, imagine how more mainstream Americans feel and how they would be likely to vote in November.  

    And it seems there is more vetting is to come.  Not much was made of the ABC News retrospective of 11 or so uninhabitable slums Rezko built in Obama's district.  There is also Michael Ayers and some questionable family connections in Kenya which have received little or MSM attention.  Seems those issues will be given more attention too.  Also,  Obama said he didn't retain his schedules and records from his days in the Illinois legislature because of limited space for storage.  I don't buy that.   I for one want to know what he's done and where he's been for the last decade or so.

    I am not suggesting he even consider stepping aside now, but if in June Hillary has the upward momentum and is the one with a shot at winning, wouldn't the prudent thing be for Obama to gracefully step aside and avoid a brokered convention?  He could try again in 2012 or 2016 and probably have a better shot as a more known commodity.  If he accepts a half hearted nomination and blows it this November, he would probably be a political pariah.  Just my thoughts.  Thank you for reading.

    I dont think he will ever concede (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:35:47 PM EST
    thats why I agree it will go to the convention.
    he doesnt have to.  his flying monkeys like HP whatever will keep spinning what ever crap he shovels as will the MSM.
    we will have to take this nomination.
    and Hillary is just the b***h to do it.


    Parent
    Why would she lie about something so easily (5.00 / 0) (#213)
    by jawbone on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:43:10 PM EST
    refuted? If true, that is dumb, dumb, dumb. A misremembered location? What?

    Did the WaPo writer ask her or her campaign about this? I saw no mention of questions to them.

    This does bother me--but so did WaPo reports that Gore had said he discovered Love Canal--until the students in the class where he spoke produced the tape which proved the Big MCM (Mainstream Corporate Media) Papers' reporters were wrong, wrong, wrong.

    Unfortunately, that story lives on in people's minds, with the occasional incorrect reference to it by MCMers (members of the MCM).

    China (none / 0) (#2)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:04:43 PM EST
    Wow, China is really digging themselves a hole. ABC is reporting they may ban live feeds from the Olympics. China is kinda like BO, give them enough rope......they hang themselves on their own hypocrisy and manipulation.

    On the upside (none / 0) (#5)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:06:53 PM EST
    It might cost NBC a whole bunch of money lol

    Parent
    According to Politico (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:05:06 PM EST
    The election is over and the media is conspiring to keep it going.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9149.html

    don't help spread their propaganda (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:14:33 PM EST
    haven't you noticed a pattern the last 2 days where the MSM is conducting a major operation to try to rescue the Obama campaign from implosion?

    It looks like Obama called in all the favors he could (Richardson, Larry King, Anderson Cooper, Chris Wallace, Politico, MYDD's Jonathan Singer, Mark Halperin, etc) in order to stop the bleeding.

    That article you link to and others like it which surfaced today and last night are part of an effort to change the narrative for Obama.

    Their delusion factor is skyrocketing right now.  If they think that any of this chatter will stop the primary and force Clinton to quit before Pennsylvania and West Virginia, they are in for a painful detoxification process.

    Parent

    exactly! (none / 0) (#84)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:43:18 PM EST
    the media isn't going to let their darling drown.


    Parent
    And yet (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:06 PM EST
    Josh Marshall sites the Politico article with approval, because it's just being 'candid'.

    Can he sink any lower in shilldom?

    Parent

    Vandehei is a tool (none / 0) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:07:04 PM EST
    and Allen is a twitchy idiot.
    IMO

    Parent
    Oh dear. I hope Fast Eddie (none / 0) (#8)
    by jes on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:09:23 PM EST
    doesn't close down April 22nd before I have a chance to cast my vote. Or maybe we can have an election with only Obama on the top of the ticket in PA - that would seem fair in Obama world.

    Parent
    The less votes the better at this point (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:11:21 PM EST
    For Obama I think.


    Parent
    You mean like the MI election? (none / 0) (#70)
    by independent voter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:38 PM EST


    Parent
    yes (none / 0) (#133)
    by jes on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:04:09 PM EST
    Hillary will 'voluntarily' take her name off of the ballot for noble and pure motives. Exactly.

    Parent
    Obama: I've been in pews... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Grey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:17:39 PM EST
    ...for Some Wright Controversial Remarks.  Another admission, here and here:

    On Wright, Obama said he had not changed his position when on Tuesday he admitted he had been present in the pews when Wright had uttered controversial remarks. In his most specific explanation yet, he said he had been present during Wright's condemnations of U.S. foreign and domestic policies. But he said he was unaware that Wright had called HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, a U.S. government plot to wipe out African Americans -- a charge Obama called "out of line and off the wall." Nor was he aware that Wright, who brought him to his Christian faith, married him to his wife and baptized his children, had declared, "God damn America" until such sermons burst onto the Internet and cable television in recent days.

    There is no excuse, no excuse, for the media's dogged insistence in ignoring this. Twice now Sen. Obama has acknowledged that he was present during sermons like those we've seen on YouTube even though he had previously denied it.

    Do your jobs and start asking some questions about this and, if you don't get answers, I want to see articles about the fact that you asked and you didn't get a response.

    Enough of these Hall Passes for Obama.

    Can the press stop blowing him? (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Marco21 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:26:57 PM EST
    I love this quote from the article in particular.

    "In his most specific explanation yet, he said he had..."

    His most specific explanation yet? Sounds like they're excited he keeps leading them on, like he's leaking tracks off his next album or something.

    this is journalism?

    Parent

    Don't (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:17:35 PM EST
    you worry.

    The media might stop talking about the Wright issue -

    but the people will not forget.

    Parent

    Please explain (2.00 / 1) (#32)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:22:20 PM EST
    the inconsistency....He knew of some remarks but not the really over-the-top stuff that everyone is commenting upon.....  

    Parent
    this episode of (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:24:48 PM EST
    "what he really meant"
    brought to you by bloggers for Obama.

    Parent
    This deserves a tshirt (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by blogtopus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:37:17 PM EST
    but the wearer would get beaten to a pulp by hooligans.

    Parent
    a BO comment of mine (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:13 PM EST
    got the delete ax the other day

    Parent
    but thats pretty damn funny (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:29 PM EST


    Parent
    With pleasure (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Grey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:32:11 PM EST
    Last Friday, Sen. Obama did not limit himself to denying he never personally heard the stuff we've been watching on TV and YouTube.  He actually said he had never heard any controversial statements at all.

    Now, he's twice said he has heard "controversial" sermons.  I think that means he's been dishonest.  In fact, I'm actually rather certain that means he's lied about it.  And that means that the media should start asking some questions.

    Parent

    Obama's doing a Gary Hart on us.. (5.00 / 1) (#206)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:36:35 PM EST
    The main difference is that Donna Rice was a lot hotter than Rev. Wright.

    Parent
    He LIED... here's the link,,, (5.00 / 1) (#242)
    by Exeter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 06:27:08 PM EST
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmoScodDCcM

    Fox: Senator, quick yes or no, if you had heard controversial statements would you have quit the church?
    Obama:
    "If I had heard them repeated, I would have quit the church"

    Parent

    Please post a link (1.00 / 1) (#94)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:48:24 PM EST
    to the comment where Obama says he did not hear "controversial comments."  I have never heard him say that....He has been really careful to say "the comments the subject of the YouTube videos" or similar qualifying language.

    Please quote the language that shows that Obama is lying.....

    Parent

    I personally heard him say it (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:51:46 PM EST
    at least 10 times the day he made the rounds to cable stations.  he said it in every interview.

    if he said it, its out there.
    find it yourself.

    Parent

    I heard it too (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:52:27 PM EST


    Parent
    I will and will post it her if I can (3.00 / 1) (#109)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:53:41 PM EST
    If this thread is still up etc.

    Parent
    goodle this (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:58:17 PM EST
    Obama admitting he heard the comments

    Parent
    FOX interview (3.00 / 2) (#128)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:00:53 PM EST
    Here is Obama's inteview on FOX:

    When I saw these statments, many of which I had heard for the first time, then I thought it was important to make a very clear and unequival statement.

    None of these statements were ones that I had heard myself personally in the pews. One of them I had heard about after I had started running for president and I put out a statement at that time condemning them.

    The other statements were ones that I just heard about while we were... when they started being run on FOX and some of the other stations. And so they weren't things that I was familiar with

    And

    No, no. Wait, wait, Major. I didn't know about all these statements. I knew about one or two statements that had been made and as a consequence, as I said, if it was just a function of one or two statements, then that's not something that would have led me to distance myself from either my church or my pastor.

    He knew about some but not all.  Was not present for any...That's how I read that.

    Parent

    unbelievable (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:02:06 PM EST
    really

    Parent
    Can't You Picture (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:04:20 PM EST
    The 527 campaign commercial on this? It will be ugly, ugly, ugly and the party will have only themselves to blame...AGAIN

    Parent
    That's two (1.00 / 1) (#141)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:07:35 PM EST
    Why don't you post the quote that supports you?.....

    Parent
    Where is the statement Obama made? (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:25:23 PM EST
    "One of them I had heard about after I had started running for president and I put out a statement at that time condemning them."

    I never saw or saw word of such a statement.  Would it not have been brought forth again now to show that Obama did take a stand?  What did he say, when did he say it, to whom, etc.?

    Parent

    Olbermann (1.00 / 1) (#137)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:06:08 PM EST
    Here is Obama on Wright on Olbermann's show:

    You know, frankly, I didn't. I wasn't in church during the time when the statements were made.  Now, I think it's, Keith, important to point out that he's been preaching for 30 years. He is a man who was a former Marine who served this country, a biblical scholar, somebody who's spoken at theological schools all across the country, and is widely regarded as a preacher.  That's the man I know.  That's the person who was the pastor of this church.

    I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally, either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew.  He always preached the social gospel and was sometimes controversial in the same way that many people who'd speak out on social issues are controversial.

    But these particular statements that had been gathered are ones that I strongly objected to and strongly condemned.  Had I heard them in church, I would have expressed that concern directly to Reverend Wright.  So, I didn't familiar with these until recently.

    He knew Wright was "controversial" but did not hear "these particular statements."


    Parent

    what Obama supporters dont get (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:28 PM EST
    that really bugs me is this,
    this hairsplitting crap may work to win a democratic nomination, I dont think so but its possible, but it will not work in a general election.


    Parent
    It only works with Obama supporters (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:24:30 PM EST
    now.  He heard comments, but doesn't discuss what type of comments he was willing to sit through but found controversial.  There may be tapes of him in church.  It is a church that follows Black Liberation Theology.  If there aren't tapes in his church, tapes can come from other churches that follow this philosophy.  This message will be presented to voters in the GE.  Some want to pretend none it will make a difference because they feel it should not make a difference.

    Parent
    It makes sense to me (1.00 / 1) (#164)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:15:21 PM EST
    He knew Wright was on the edge but not how bad it really got....And it still has not been established that the tapes that have been shown are the norm.....

    Parent
    john kerry didn't shoot himself (5.00 / 2) (#169)
    by english teacher on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:18:27 PM EST
    to get out of vietnam either, but lots of republicans still believe he did.  or did you miss the past two presidential elections?

    Parent
    Yes, the fear is that (2.00 / 1) (#191)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:28:32 PM EST
    we have to play by their rules.....And that may be the case....But first let's see what the truth is before it becomes distorted....

    Parent
    Again, only "recently"? Then why diss (5.00 / 2) (#190)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:28:08 PM EST
    Wright, as Obama did, more than a year ago in cancelling at the last minute Wright speaking at Obama's campaign kickoff event?  Statements about it say that Obama decided Wright was too controversial.  Why?  Because of things Wright had said?  If so, then we're back to how can Obama say he was aware of this only "recently"?

    This reminds me of trying to unravel Watergate statements.  I think there's still a smoking gun here, too. . . .

    Parent

    one thing is damn sure (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:32:56 PM EST
    it aint over.  

    Parent
    yes, BHO is quite the master of parsing (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by magisterludi on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:12:34 PM EST
    and ambiguity. He also seems to have a bottomless supply of pixie dust.

    Parent
    dont be dissin pixies (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:22:15 PM EST
    it WILL get ugly

    Parent
    As I recall, during The Speech, (none / 0) (#30)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:21:35 PM EST
    Obama sd. he was in church when The Rev. made some of his inappropriate remarks and that Obama confronted him later about those remarks.

    Parent
    Right (none / 0) (#42)
    by Grey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:26:37 PM EST
    Which is why I said that this is the second time he's acknowledged being in church for some sort of "controversial" comment.  Which means that, last Friday night, he lied on CNN, MSNBC and FOX News.  Obama denied he had ever heard anything "controversial" at all, so it's the media's job to ask him why he lied and what exactly it is that he heard.

    The speech was, in parts, fantastic, but the questions remain.


    Parent

    Obama and McCain don't lie... (none / 0) (#71)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:39 PM EST
    ...according to the MSM, they just misspeak. Since everyone knows what they mean, no need to question. The Clinton's on the other hand, since "everyone" knows what they really mean they can feel to interpret it as they like, irregardless of what was actually said. When Snarky McCain is pitted against FootInMouth Obama, Snarky will trump FootInMouth.

    Parent
    Please post the (none / 0) (#97)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:49:38 PM EST
    quote....People's recollections can differ.....

    Parent
    Here's the portion of the speech I was (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:00 PM EST
    thinking of.  Actually Obama says he condemned some of what Wright sd. in chuch.  Obama didn't say he discussed this condemnation with Wright.

    I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy.  For some, nagging questions remain.  Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy?  Of course.  Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church?  Yes.  Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views?  Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.  


    Parent
    Yes, he heard (3.00 / 1) (#185)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:25:39 PM EST
    "controversial" comments--probably including those about Bill Clinton's adultery.....

    You would need to show that Obama disavowed ever hearing anything controversial said by Wright--as opposed to him hearing the G-D America and 9/11 comments, the two comments that do the most damage...Obama has never said or implied that he went to a congregation of the "frozen chosen" or that Wright didn't push the edge--Obama has repeatedly said that.

    All of the Obama comments that I have heard are consistent with this idea:  He heard "controversial comments", but not the G-D America or 9/11 comments, while he was in the pews.

    It is a matter of degree and nuance....Obama is saying that he didn't now how bad it got.....I am frankly tired of a media world where detail and complexity are ignored.  

    Parent

    no one who is buying it (5.00 / 1) (#219)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:45:25 PM EST
    no one who is not currently an Obama supporter seems to be buying those excuses.  20 years.  Say with it me. 20 years.

    Parent
    Were there (3.00 / 1) (#223)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:50:01 PM EST
    "bad" comments from 20 years ago when Obama joined?

    After you have a relationship and then the stuff hits, it is less easy to sever ties....

    Parent

    He never said that he confronted him about it... (none / 0) (#124)
    by Exeter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:59:36 PM EST
    ...he just said:
    A) That he had heard "controversial" statements
    B) He was going to "abandon" Wright or the church.

    He did say on several interviews on last Friday night that he had never heard any controversial statements and that if he did he would confront Wright and if they continued he would LEAVE THE CHURCH.  He was without admitting to not being honest beforehand when he said the line about being in church during controversial statements-- likely in an attempt to call off the dogs that were probably on the verge of finding such evidence. It is interesting that the media has not covered this.

    Parent

    Man, they must be worried (none / 0) (#20)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:17:47 PM EST
    All Obama support, all the time.

    Corrupt media needs to be called out right now (none / 0) (#26)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:20:01 PM EST
    It's getting to the point where I really do believe that maybe Hillary Clinton needs to hold a press conference and let the media have it.  Just call them out by name.  Keith Olbermann first to the plate.

    Parent
    McCain vs McCain (none / 0) (#34)
    by flashman on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:23:46 PM EST
    During what should be a victory lap for John McCain, he has become his own opponent in the race for the Whitehouse.  Having won the Republican nomination, and with the luxury of no real Democratic opposition as of yet, McCain embarked on a publicity tour of the Middle East, the purpose of which is, ostensibly to show case his foreign policy credentials.  Instead however, he repeatedly exhibited his lack of knowledge about the region at numerous press events.  During the worst of the events, he was corrected by his travel companion, Joe Lieberman after repeating his frequent gaffe that Iran is training Al Qeada operatives.  McCain evidently don't know the difference between Al Qeada and Sunny extremists, and has missed few opportunities to show off his lack of knowledge.

    The best attack dog to turn against McCain is McCain himself.

    Why aren't there any polls for Indiana? (none / 0) (#46)
    by NJDem on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:27:48 PM EST
    I know the state borders IL, but is anyone familiar with the state?  Any idea how it will go?

    Indiana is (none / 0) (#86)
    by PlayInPeoria on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:43:39 PM EST
    is red state. IL has been blue state since Bill Clinton.

    Parent
    Bayh (none / 0) (#127)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:00:31 PM EST
    Evan Bayh is the senator from there and is a big HRC booster from early in the campaign.  His father was Birch Bayh so the family name carries some weight.  Not sure how much difference it will make, but the Bayhs are some of the only Democrats who consistently win statewide races in IN.

    Parent
    Also (none / 0) (#220)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:45:40 PM EST
    Wanted to add that my mother is making a lot of Hillary calls in Indiana - everyone is for Clinton, McCain or undecided.  She's made calls in other states and usually gets a few Obama people in the mix too but not this time.

    FWIW

    Parent

    Like so many states in the southern Midwest (none / 0) (#214)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:43:30 PM EST
    such as Illinois and Ohio, Indiana is two states -- first settled by Southerners across the southern half and then some.  De facto slavery for decades, illegally despite the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.  Home of William Henry Harrison, Northwest Territory governor and one of the worst jerks in the history of this great country, not only a slaveholder but for the way he went after Tecumseh and his people (Harrison loved him Andy Jackson's Indian Removal Act of 1830).  

    All these legacies live on there.  I still see grits, hush puppies, etc., on the menus -- and south of Indianapolis, Confederate flags (no, Indiana was not in the Confederacy, officially, but google Copperheads) and those garden sculptures of blackface kids fishing, eating watermelon, etc.   (I actually found a factory there that makes them, with rows of Hoosiers painting them.)  It's the home of the modern KKK, and Indiana is famed as the state where the KKK -- although revived across the Midwest in the 1920s -- actually took over the statehouse, the legislature and governorship.  

    Northern Indiana is, of course, more northern and industrialized . . . but it still can seem quite southern in spots, perhaps much like Detroit in Michigan (as both were destinations for even more southern whites than AAs in the Great Migration).  

    There are pockets of prosperity.  Indianapolis has done progressive things, such as becoming long ago a metropolitan municipal structure to stop the stupid city-suburb battles that crippled schools.  And it has done an extraordinary job in renewing its urban center with a convention district -- so you see sushi instead of grits.  But I'll never forget sharing a sushi restaurant with guys in plaid flannel shirts and hunter's hats that they never took off in the restaurant.

    A beautiful state, with Bloomington one of the most gorgeous campuses you'll see.  But a troubled state educationally, economically, etc.  I do wish we would see polling there.  I don't get why not.  That even the locals aren't polling there may mean they don't want to know what this election could show.


    Parent

    I was hoping to see her use her (none / 0) (#51)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:29:42 PM EST
    B*tch Power to instill some backbone in congress . . .

    Endorsements... (none / 0) (#60)
    by mike in dc on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:34:41 PM EST
    ...Richardson's endorsement is expected to be the first of a wave of high profile endorsers for Obama in the coming weeks.  I'm just wondering how narrow the criteria for "high profile" is.  I know there's Gore, Pelosi, Reid, Edwards, Carter and maybe Biden.  But who else would qualify?
    Any sitting senator?  Any congressman in a leadership position or from a key upcoming state?

    I think any 3 out of the above 6 endorsing Obama would be very bad news for Clinton, superdelegate-wise and media-wise.  Gore obviously has some influence within party ranks.  Pelosi and Reid can round up SD votes in Congress.  Edwards would bolster Obama among working class whites and what few uncommitted progressive remain to be had.  I don't think Biden or Carter would do much other than to further the perception that Obama's about to clinch this thing.

    I don't think fighting things out to the convention is realistic for Clinton, because nobody in the Dem establishment really wants to see that happen.  If they could do it without backlash, they'd probably end this thing now.  As it is, I expect, assuming Obama has arrested the primary-season damage from Wright, that this thing will be over before June, probably right after NC/IN or OR.

    Endorsements vs Democratic voters (none / 0) (#66)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:38:37 PM EST
    Let's see which will matter more on April 22nd.

    Parent
    Well, on the other thread....... (none / 0) (#82)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:42:34 PM EST
    ...we were speculating about a Kucinich endorsement.  

    Parent
    I think.... (none / 0) (#90)
    by mike in dc on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:45:57 PM EST
    ...that Kucinich and a bloc of Ohio congresscritters is holding out for which candidate can offer a specific package/plan to help out Ohio economically.

    Parent
    I was kidding but wouldn't it be sweet... (none / 0) (#106)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:52:44 PM EST
    ...to see Kucinich finally getting major attention and becoming "an important figure" in the Democratic party in the eyes of the MSM? And they would have to show his endorsement speech live on all the cable news networks.

    Parent
    I could care (none / 0) (#172)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:21:31 PM EST
    less if they all endorse Obama.

    Hillary is my candidate and the only one I'm voting for.

    And the Dems better not start asking me for any more money.

    The Dems have taken women for granted too long.  

    Parent

    No Kidding (5.00 / 0) (#196)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:31:57 PM EST
    The DNC called me the other night for cash. I told them not only no but to take my name off their rolls - that I would never, ever give them a dime again - and not to call me.

    I also went to the DNC website, and had them delete my email address. Same for Moveon and a number of other organizations.

    I am not kidding, I'm done with this party, the far left and anything that resembles it. They have lost their minds. They sound and act like the right wing. I sat around the other day and asked myself why the hell I go to Iraq and Afghanistan for people like this.

    I support Hillary and will continue to give her money and help but past that, I'm finished. And I have been a life long supporter financially to a lot of other organizations. I am currently in a quandary over NARAL. I don't want my cash being used to help Obama. So...I have one dilemma there.

    I don't know if it is just me, but the train wreck these people have managed to create will have long implications as far as I am concerned.

    Parent

    Indeed (none / 0) (#125)
    by badger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:59:54 PM EST
    Gore's endorsement was significant in locking up the nomination for Howard Dean.

    Parent
    If ever there were a time for these high-profile (none / 0) (#238)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 06:06:32 PM EST
    super-delegates to come out and endorse Obama, it was at the height of the Wright controversy.  It would also perhaps have made a difference in the March 4th primaries, and yet, there was nothing then, and all he's managed is Bill Richardson on a Friday - the slowest news day of the week, and on Good Friday, to boot - when people are traveling for the Easter holiday, going to church, etc.  

    Color me unimpressed.

    The truth is that if the polling is to be believed, the Wright debacle sprouted legs very quickly, and the damage control is the equivalent of trying to clean up behind elephants with diarrhea; no matter how many shows and interviews Obama makes himself available for, he has not been able to move past it, and Bill Richardson cannot help him.

    People can smell fear, can sense blood in the water, and are repulsed by desperation.  And whether Obama wants to admit it, and whether his supporters want to admit it, they have come up against something they cannot overcome.

    And the superdelegates are not stupid - I would not be surprised if some who came out early for Obama are having second thoughts.

    If Obama cannot stop the bleeding in the next week, I think he's d.o.n.e.

    Parent

    I think it's going to the convention (none / 0) (#62)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:35:58 PM EST
    no matter who endorses who when.
    But that's just me.  ;)

    I kinda Agree too (none / 0) (#77)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:36 PM EST
    But it occurs to me that Clinton should angle herself for Majority Leader if she gets shoved aside. We will need a real democrat in there in that case because McCain will be president, I suspect Hillary would then be president in 2012 - on a wave of really pissed off women. That is if the party survives that long.

    I don't think endorsements are going to help Obama but the amount of Kool aid drinking from other Dem leaders is astounding. I really didn't think they would be stupid enough to back someone who can't win but then after watching the media and some of the statements from them, I could be dead wrong.

    One thing I am sure of...Barack Obama will not be elected president in 2008 and I will be dropping out for awhile or finding a new party.

    Parent

    I know some (5.00 / 0) (#177)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:23:09 PM EST
    pissed off women.  They will not be appeased.

    The Democratic party has taken us for granted for too long.  They better prepare for a hard time in the GE.

    Parent

    MSM (5.00 / 0) (#200)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:33:41 PM EST
    was finally discussing the PA polls and noting that a large number of Clinton supporters are 'passionate' (as one less than astute talking head put it) in their support.  Chuck Todd said superdeez are going to have to look at who will loose more, the AA vote, or the older wimin' and use that info when they make a decision.  WHAT?? Someone said the superdeez can make an independent decision.  He said that they have their own interests in mind and they want to win.  WHAT??     I've never used caps before.

    Parent
    PA Primary (none / 0) (#76)
    by PlayInPeoria on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:14 PM EST
    The number of Democrats increased 1.7 percent -- from 3,883,378 in November to 3,948,775 as of March 4.

    Sen Clinton is trailing Sen Obama in popular vote by 813,945 (3%).

    Current poll that have her at 58% lead. Math says she will still need about 182,200 to catch him in the popular vote.

    Add current (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by PlayInPeoria on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:29:53 PM EST
    polls for WV. When will gain about 162,225.

    I've been working the poplular vote all day.

    She can beat him on the popular vote with out FL & MI.... If she keeps the momentum. She is closing in on him in NC.

    As for the delegate race... she can come close.

    I beleive the pressure for her to drop out is going to increase... as long as she keeps her current momentum.

    Parent

    She'll get it. (none / 0) (#183)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:24:58 PM EST
    I think she'll win PA by about 300-400K.

    Parent
    That's the calc with the largest number (none / 0) (#226)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:53:15 PM EST
    for the popular vote.  There are other ways to count it, as super-delegates would be wise to do, that take the margin down to a tenth of that, only 80,000 or so -- including Michigan and Florida, for example.  (See varying calculations at realclearpolitics.com.)

    So Obama's count and the media's count and Clinton's count and the super-delegates' count may differ, depending upon their agendas, huh?

    Parent

    I'm not going (none / 0) (#235)
    by PlayInPeoria on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:58:56 PM EST
    by any canpaign counts. I did my own numbers. I wanted to know FOR SURE if she could catch him in popular vote... and she can.


    Parent
    So now Obama (none / 0) (#87)
    by americanincanada on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:44:33 PM EST
    says he was in the pews for condemnation of american foreign and domestic policy but that he was not aware of the aids views or the 'god d*amn america?

    WTF did he hear then? This constant evasion and lying is going unchecked. Why?

    The MSM idiocy (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Lou Grinzo on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:08:46 PM EST
    Why has no one said the following:

    A politician goes to a particular church regularly for 20 years.

    The minister says something incredibly inflammatory, something that could Look Very Bad for said politician.

    How does the politician not know about it within days of the event, even if he wasn't present for it?  Does he not talk to anyone else who was there?  Was there no press coverage?  Did no one who knows him call his office and give him a heads up?

    And if he does find out about these statements, why does he choose to keep attending the church?  Why doesn't he say something to the minister in private?

    Bill Clinton may not have inhaled, but Obama is asking us to believe he didn't exist.

    Parent

    Apparently (none / 0) (#156)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:11 PM EST
    Oprah was able to figure it out.

    Parent
    As Reported By The Great Historian and Statesman (none / 0) (#96)
    by flashman on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:49:00 PM EST
    Sinbad.

    Reminds me of Gore (none / 0) (#114)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:17 PM EST
    Saying he invented the internet.


    Parent
    perfect (none / 0) (#98)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:50:03 PM EST
    the WAPO is going back years to "debunk" some meaningless trip but cant bring themselves to "debunk" any of Obamas lies in the last week.
    There Fact Check on Obama (none / 0) (#111)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:55:00 PM EST
    His lies are understandable given the circumstances, he's a great guy for not throwing his pastor under the bus.

    Parent
    Rather obnoxious comment at TPM (none / 0) (#104)
    by rilkefan on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:52:19 PM EST
    about "acceptance".

    Strike that, he's using AA parlance.

    Step 6 (none / 0) (#117)
    by rilkefan on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:51 PM EST
    is acceptance in AA.

    So I don't know how annoyed to be.

    Parent

    Seriously, JMM and his crew are the ones who (none / 0) (#123)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:58:35 PM EST
    need to join a 12-step program.

    Parent
    if Hillary wins (none / 0) (#136)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:05:06 PM EST
    I definitely want a franchise for this.
    the Hillary 12 step program is going to be BIG.


    Parent
    LOL. One reason I keep coming back day after (none / 0) (#151)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:26 PM EST
    day after day.....do I need to join a 12-step program?  Heh.  

    Parent
    Speaking of that word (none / 0) (#122)
    by Lou Grinzo on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:58:25 PM EST
    I have a theory that if Clinton wins the nomination and then the GE, on election night as she makes her way to the podium we might hear an instrumental version of Elton John's "The B__ is Back."

    OK, it would be a bit too cheeky.  But if it happened the sheer, well, audacity would make me laugh until I was struggling for breath...

    Oh good! Obamacas for Wright (none / 0) (#162)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:14:09 PM EST
    link

    One choice comment:


    Re: Standing up for Rev. Wright: please help (2.00 / 1)

    Hey, I don't believe the government spread AIDS into the AA community...

    But then, it's not as quite as completely off the wall nutzo as some folks would claim.

    None of this is a reason to vote for or against Obama -- but frankly, I think it's legitimate to give Wright a bit of leeway on the matter.

    I'm not sure whether to tell this person to go Reagan himself or go Buckley himself, but one  of them should be said.

    How can you do it (none / 0) (#212)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:42:55 PM EST
    I skulk at some sites and am amazed at the tortured logic.  I never stay long or I would break my computer.

    Parent
    When I get ready to launch a (none / 0) (#237)
    by Fabian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 06:02:28 PM EST
    "You are all deluded!  Get your heads out of your ***es!" comment, I leave.

    I started dk in 2005.  It took me a while to venture to the Free Republic and understand the mentality there, which is at first appalling and then ludicrous.  When dk began to look decidedly freeperish, people pointed it out.  They were shouted down.  It's the freeping and the shouting that finally did it.

    I still read dk, but I'm down to a handful of comments a day.

    Parent

    TPM (none / 0) (#179)
    by Oje on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:24:14 PM EST
    Over at TPM, Josh Marshall decides that his shilling for Obama and alienation of readers who voted for Clinton becomes the measure of his truth-speaking.

    Note to Josh: Hillary Clinton's voters have moved on from TPM, and grown to accept your biases against Hillary and for Obama. We do not accept that Obama has won this nomination yet. Perhaps now you may realize what it is to live in Drudge's bubble world--talkback is non-existence because the only ones who read you are the choir!

    NYTimes on 3 new Obama ads--one just for PA (none / 0) (#182)
    by jawbone on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:24:52 PM EST
    Ad expressly for PA mentions maternal grandparents re: their war work (he, soldier in WWII and she, in bomber factory), plus their care of Obama.

    Making up for throwing Grandma Under the Bus?

    (Big thnx to sarastic nunnamed one for the very helpful, very explicit directions for using the link icon. Note: I also had to click on a message to allow the box to open, which flummoxed me at first. Thnx also to Teresa and anyone whose name I forgot to note.)

    Hillary needs donations, per NYTimes blog (none / 0) (#195)
    by jawbone on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:30:19 PM EST
    Following Oje's link to JMM took me to another NYTimes Caucus post, saying that Hillary's campaign is in the red.

    I donated today (none / 0) (#197)
    by otherlisa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:32:26 PM EST


    Parent
    NBC, the whole MCM, is gaga over passport files! (none / 0) (#202)
    by jawbone on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:34:11 PM EST
    I thought MSNBC's Locker Room Boyz had gone Gossip Girl last night, but, damn, this is the biggest story to hit since...well...whatever soccer ball the six year-olds swarm after.

    And Obama seems to be doing a drama queen thing about it as well.

    Eeeek!

    JMM has the audacity to pass off the fib (none / 0) (#203)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:34:59 PM EST
    that Hillary's campaign must be over because she's in the red. Hello? Anyone remember where McCain's finances were a few months ago?
    If Obama's numbers continue to tank, all the money in the world won't help him.

    Hillary blogs vs Obama blogs (none / 0) (#208)
    by Coral Gables on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:38:06 PM EST
    Hopefully TL doesn't just become the Hillary equivalent of some other (Obama) blogs lately. I still think highly of both candidates. What I find amazing is, I commented on another blog site this morning that they weren't so much a pro-Obama blog as much as a trash Hillary blog and I garnered a quick response from the head man pretty much saying "you're damn right that's what I am".

    There are many posters and owners of many Dem blogs right now that have become nearly Rovian in their approaches to taking the other candidate down. Sometimes we become exactly what we have always despised. Thankfully the hosts here have stayed even handed. Let's hope the posters can also.

    Yep n/t (none / 0) (#218)
    by rilkefan on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:45:24 PM EST


    Parent
    What "analysis" by Mike Allen! (none / 0) (#234)
    by jawbone on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:58:16 PM EST
    That is sickening--wonder if they've erased it from the Politoco site.

    Open Thread | 219 comments (219 topical)