home

Friday Afternoon Open Thread

I'm off to work, here's an open thread.

Please remember, be civil, no racism charges or personal character attacks and if you have been commenting here less than 30 days, you are limited to 10 comments a day. We only have room for 200 or so on each thread. And, if you are a chatterer, see the rules, you get no more than 20, no matter how long you've been here.

There are inflamed passions out there and I prefer reasoned discussion. Sniping is not appreciated. Drive-by hits without substance will be deleted.

Lots of rules, but these are unusual times and the internet has no eraser. Think before you post, the preview button is your friend.

Update 4:00 pm MT: Comments now closed.

< Clinton May Have Lost, But Sexism Remains Rampant | Did Obama Win On Iraq? No >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The reason we come and stay (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:42:49 PM EST
    here is the rules allow for discussion.  Thank you.  

    Amen (and thanks to Jeralyn, BTD, et al) (5.00 / 7) (#45)
    by kempis on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:12:03 PM EST
    What Stellaaaa said.

    I just want to take an Open Thread opportunity to thank Jeralyn and Big Tent and all involved in the community here for providing this space. It's truly helping me to deal with the frustration (and grief) of this nomination process.

    It's so nice to post somewhere where people actually understand that if you support Hillary Clinton it's not because you're menopausal (though I am) or a racist (which I'm adamantly not).

    I support her because, after looking closely at both candidates, I  honestly think that she's the superior one. I was infatuated with Obama until the debates began and Hillary blew me away. I knew she was knowledgeable about politics and policy, but I had no idea how much. Furthermore, her incredible ability to communicate in beautifully organized, well-supported paragraphs and never, ever lose sight of the question awed me. She's one smart cookie.

    Obama is smart, too. He's grown considerably as a candidate in the past year. But he lacks the seasoning and the depth of knowledge of the woman whose policies he's cribbed off of. How some people don't see that he's in no way as prepared for the office as Hillary is beyond me....

    Anyway, I'm being more long-winded than I intended. I just really wanted to express my gratitude for this oasis here at TL.

    Thanks, Jeralyn, BTD, all of you....especially now.

    Parent

    It reminds me of Daily Kos (none / 0) (#11)
    by Fabian on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:53:45 PM EST
    back in the good old days.  Maybe they weren't that good, but they were a sight better than they are now!

    I think the saddest part of the decline of the Big O is that even diaries that call for moderate, deliberate and civilized discussion end up with flame wars in the comment threads.  The only safe places to be are the very, very dry, detail oriented diaries that have nothing at all to do with election politics.

    Parent

    I'll take your word for it. I don't go there (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Joelarama on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    anymore.

    Parent
    The overall attiitude there (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Fabian on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:14:45 PM EST
    makes my usual reaction of:

    "Gee, what the __ did Hillary Clinton ever do to you!"

    There's nothing objective about primary coverage there at all.  Even discussions of polling isn't about the numbers.

    Parent

    I've never been "there"... (none / 0) (#65)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:19:20 PM EST
    but I'll tell ya what Clinton, Obama, and McCain have done and will do to me....they advocate for me to be harrassed by the state and be subject to arrest most everyday of my life.

    It's not just a popularity contest to some of us...there are legit reasons to dislike and distrust the 3 stooges.

    Parent

    Teddy K (5.00 / 7) (#5)
    by nell on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:49:11 PM EST
    Ted Kennedy says no VP spot for Clinton. I say good becuase she will be President, and even if not, she doesn't need to be training her boss. But just check out his reasons:

    Kennedy: No veep slot for Clinton
    It's fun to think about, but there are so many obstacles, and Ted Kennedy isn't buying, he said on Bloomberg Television's "Political Capital With Al Hunt," which airs this weekend.
    Obama should choose a running mate who "is in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people," Kennedy said. "If we had real leadership -- as we do with Barack Obama -- in the No. 2 spot as well, it'd be enormously helpful."

    Yes, please keep telling me I have to support your boy in November for the sake of Roe v. Wade.

    It's comments like these (5.00 / 7) (#7)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:51:02 PM EST
    Obama should choose a running mate who "is in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people," Kennedy said. "If we had real leadership -- as we do with Barack Obama -- in the No. 2 spot as well, it'd be enormously helpful."

    which make me wonder if ol' Ted has fallen off the wagon again. In what universe has Obama shown any leadership qualities to date? I guess my definition of 'noble' and his are very different.

    Parent

    Oh, so now we are not noble either? (5.00 / 8) (#18)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:58:36 PM EST
    Obama should choose a running mate who "is in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people,"
    Just keep digging you guys and your base is taking a walk. Or, maybe the idea is to elect John McCain just as long as it is not Hillary. Seems we have a whole group of Cheneys wanting to get into power.

    Parent
    Yikes even Ted has insulted us. (5.00 / 5) (#30)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:06:39 PM EST
    Im kind of shocked by this, actually.

    Parent
    He's (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:08:08 PM EST
    still peeved about not bringing Massachusetts for Obama.

    He's being passive aggressive.

    Parent

    Deval Patrick (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by kempis on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:19:20 PM EST
    ...has probably helped to sour a lot of Massachusetts voters on Obama, who actually does not poll very well against McCain there.

    I have some friends in Massachusetts who report that Patrick, who wooed the voters with an Axelrod-orchestrated campaign promising "hope" and "change" {erp}, has hit the ground with a sickening thud. He's been a pretty resounding disappointment, promising a "new politics" and delivering the same old corruption and obvious pandering.

    It seems the loftier the campaign rhetoric, the harder the fall.

    Parent

    Mass. and Deval (none / 0) (#102)
    by Binx on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:36:17 PM EST
    The real thud for Deval has been running into the buzz-saw of Speaker of the House Sal DiMasi. That and his support for casinos (which DiMasi was against). As a MA resident I'll give you that you have an argument for the "pandering" but the "corruption" and "politics as usual" is not from Deval, it's the entrenched, party-pols that control everything. There's no new politics unless it's THEIR new politics.

    Parent
    Yup (5.00 / 0) (#109)
    by CST on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:40:10 PM EST
    I think Deval gets a bad rep.  We have the best economy in the country right now in Mass with really low unemployment and actually some economic growth.  Sure, there are problems, but given that we are in a national recession I'd say someone's doing a pretty good job.  The casino thing is a little stupid, but not a dealbreaker for me at least.

    Parent
    Casinos (none / 0) (#132)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:50:46 PM EST
    Are the proposed casinos privately or publically owned? Are they NA owned and operated?

    Parent
    The bill failed but.... (none / 0) (#141)
    by Binx on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:56:17 PM EST
    The bill didn't pass but the idea was 3 private casinos. I'm not for the casinos so I must admit I didn't pay that close attention.


    Parent
    Not to mention CA. (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:22:35 PM EST
    Ted insulted us when (5.00 / 7) (#35)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:08:23 PM EST
    he said he was passing the torch.  As if the torch was his to pass.  That really did me in.  I lost any affection I had for the guy.  

    Parent
    Sounds more like he's in charge of the (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by Anne on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:20:50 PM EST
    torches and the pitchforks to me.

    Honestly, I was more offended by his comments about the nobler aspirations - for one because I think there is a lot of nobility in working to better people's lives - and I emphasize "working" because with Obama showing all the signs of being averse to work, the last thing we need is a VP with his head in the, um, clouds all the time, too.

    I get that it's important to inspire people, but come on - how much more inspiration do people need to fix energy and health care and foreign policy than sky-high-and rising energy costs, more and more people without health insurance and a war that seems to be on a path toward endless?  Sure, he can wax poetic, have people fainting in the aisles at the sheer brilliance and beauty of his rhetoric ( which I really don't see, myself), but that isn't going to help me pay my health insurance premiums, or fill my tank or help me put food on the table.

    Why do they not get that?


    Parent

    Ted Kennedy (none / 0) (#80)
    by bjorn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:26:38 PM EST
    is a sad, sad man.  He is "bitter" and "clinging" to the glory days of his brothers.  It is only going to take a couple more comments like this to push me over the edge and join the Don't Vote for Obama gang.  Their comments just make Obama look bad and they cast doubt on his ability to unite the party.  

    Parent
    Maria....How Can You Be Surprised By (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:09:01 PM EST
    anything anymore...I am not surprised, but I am certainly displeased everytime one of these morons come up with another lame argument against Hillary.  Kennedy is just trying to stay relevant, but is doing a lousy job.

    Parent
    I sure think McCain (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by abfabdem on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:09:25 PM EST
    has been given a huge opening to appeal to older voters since we have been trashed by our own party who thinks we do not matter and are not needed.  Thanks Donna, "progressive" blogs and Air America.  We can take the hint.

    Parent
    CNN uses "WORM" :-) (none / 0) (#244)
    by Cream City on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:07:22 PM EST
    Looking at my TV screen right now, CNN's banner is:

    "Losing His Bearings" Uproar
    What Obama Really Meant

    Are the media starting to mock Obama with this acronmyn so common in blogspace?

    Parent

    He was never on the wagon (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by andgarden on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:05:01 PM EST
    I agree (none / 0) (#29)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    he's as dry as W.

    Parent
    Ah, well, he claimed to be. (none / 0) (#162)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:05:57 PM EST
    You're right -- silly me for actually believing anything he says anymore.

    Parent
    Wow (5.00 / 6) (#49)
    by chrisvee on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:13:19 PM EST
    Here's  part of the problem.  With party elders saying things like this (Clinton doesn't share noble aspirations for the American people??  Clinton doesn't provide real leadership??) how do we expect unity?  

    I feel as if we're hurtling towards a cliff.  BTD said many weeks ago that things need to be dialed back a bit and he looked to the Obama campaign to set the tone (I hope I'm doing justice to his thoughts and not misrepresenting them).  No one is listening and instead we're getting this pile on situation that is only going to carve the divisions deeper.

    I'm getting very depressed about November.

    Parent

    Unfortunately for ol' Teddy (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:16:58 PM EST
    the state of Massachusetts disagrees with him.  Has he not picked up a hometown paper or turned on the news in MA?

    Parent
    I rarely if ever use the (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by ruffian on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:35:43 PM EST
    Oh.My.God  construct, but

    Oh. My. God.  

    and I'll add:

    Wow. Just...wow.

    Parent

    Says the guy who went to the convention (5.00 / 6) (#8)
    by Jim J on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:51:07 PM EST
    against Jimmy Carter a lot further behind than Hillary is now.

    Parent
    Ted was way, way behind (5.00 / 5) (#41)
    by datadriven on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:10:13 PM EST
    The delegate tally at the convention was in part:

    Jimmy Carter - 2,129.02
    Ted Kennedy- 1,150.48
    Hugh Carey - 16
    William Proxmire - 10
    14 others - 40.5

    Carter led Kennedy by about 2.7 million in the popular vote, and total turnout was a fraction of what it was this year.

    Carter was desperate to heal the wounds caused by the infighting. And there's probably video on the web somewhere of Carter akwardly following Kennedy around the stage at the end of Kennedy's speech trying to stand next to him.

    Parent

    In other words... (5.00 / 11) (#19)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:59:28 PM EST
    Hillary, with her decades of Party loyalty, exemplary service, legislative achievements, very high public approval in her state as Senator, and 91% Progressive voting record, is not fit to tie the shoes of an inexperienced, elitist, lying, race-baiting empty suit.

    Explain to me how that is anything but misogyny.

    Ted Kennedy 2.0 should be very, very ashamed of himself right now.

    Parent

    Give me a break (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by CST on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:11:36 PM EST
    Condescending, yes.  Unhelpful to the Democratic party, yes.  Stupid, yes.  Misogynistic?????  HOW?   Let's stop reading everything as a gender vs. race thing for once and just let people's words mean what they mean without spinning them.

    Parent
    Don't tell me how to feel about what he said. (5.00 / 5) (#62)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:18:53 PM EST
    There is no logical basis for his words except misogyny. In every fact-based respect, HRC is much more qualified and more of a leader than Obama. You simply cannot argue that. What strong leadership positions has he taken as a Senator? Does he have more, or less, experience than HRC?

    Every freaking time anyone brings up the misogyny directed towards HRC we are shouted down. And almost always...by males. Yet the words "fairy tale" are somehow racist. Puh-freaking-leez.

    Parent

    Let's not jump to conclusions (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by CST on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:23:29 PM EST
    First of all, I am not a male.  Second of all, I never claimed "fairy-tale" was racist - that's my point, it's gone too far on BOTH sides.  Finally, maybe, just maybe, he doesn't like Hillary for his own personal reasons.  I am not saying he should've said what he said, obviously it was stupid and unhelpful.  But lets leave people the personal freedom to have an opinion without assuming they are being biased because of race or gender.  Just because you disagree with him doesn't make it misogynist.

    Parent
    His statement was not (5.00 / 6) (#89)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:32:02 PM EST
    that he didn't like Hillary. It was that she did not have the leadership quality of Obama and did not represent the nobler aspirations of the Democratic Party the way he did.

    There is no factual basis for what Ted said. What other conclusion am I supposed to draw? He hates HRC for her freedoms?

    Please, disagree with me if you'd like, but stop telling me how to feel and what I'm seeing with my own eyes. I'm forty years old and I know misogyny when I see it.

    Thanks very much.

    Parent

    Right, it just makes him an embarassing (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by RalphB on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:32:27 PM EST
    drunken a-shole, like lots of others in the dem congress.  He's got to be one of the biggest hypocrits around, considering the '80 race.

    Parent
    Sure (none / 0) (#94)
    by CST on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:34:10 PM EST
    No problem with that statement.

    I am not trying to defend Kennedy by any means.

    Parent

    He offered women kisses (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by abfabdem on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:44:29 PM EST
    for votes at some campaign stops.  Yuck.

    Parent
    Also used the "Sweetie" word again (5.00 / 1) (#215)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:42:19 PM EST
    yesterday. ARGH.

    Parent
    Ted Kennedy??? (none / 0) (#204)
    by CST on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:30:19 PM EST
    Really, ew.....

    Parent
    No, Senator Obama did that. n/t (none / 0) (#211)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:36:40 PM EST
    IS there... (none / 0) (#125)
    by Binx on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:46:17 PM EST
    Is there any chance folks are parsing Kennedy's words too intensely? I mean, there is a way to interpret his use of the word "nobler" as merely reflecting the overall them of "Hope." Just because he used the word "nobler" doesn't make Hillary "not-nobler".

    Parent
    Reasonable people may disagree.... (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:59:57 PM EST
    ...but I tend to think he did in fact mean to suggest that Obama was noble, Clinton not so much.

    Parent
    Not to mention (5.00 / 3) (#167)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:08:37 PM EST
    lacking in those leadership qualities that Obama apparently exudes. Sadly, I am too low-informed, under educated, female and old (even though I'm younger than BHO) to be able to perceive it.

    Parent
    Is this the tenor encouraged? (none / 0) (#249)
    by chrisblask on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:30:24 PM EST
    is not fit to tie the shoes of an inexperienced, elitist, lying, race-baiting empty suit.

    ?

    Just want to know what the groundrules are.

    Is this a Dem/Progressive site or another Hillaryis44?  Is the site intended to promote Dem/Progressive candidates/issues or only a single person?

    Seriously, just want to know where I am...

    -chris

    Parent

    I Guess Ted Wouldn't Qualify for VP Either... (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    And there in lies the problem (5.00 / 5) (#63)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:18:56 PM EST
    Kennedy and Kerry backing Obama is pure jealousy.  Ted could NEVER be JFK.  Kerry lost to a buffoon.

    They should would hate for Hillary to pull off something NEITHER one of them could.  So what do they do?  Go against their entire state and support Obama.

    How...presidential.

    Parent

    It begs the question (none / 0) (#100)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:35:33 PM EST
    who Kennedy and Kerry think should be in the VP slot.

    Kennedy exhausted his political capital years ago. He had to call on more popular members of his family to stand with him in his endorsement since his, alone, was without value.


    Parent

    Me thinks (none / 0) (#168)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:09:26 PM EST
    you're right.  Kennedy is basically done.  He's a member of the old guard that a true blue liberal and Massachusetts dem couldn't possibly vote against.  The sacrifices his family has made for our country is beyond reproach.  And don't forget the Special Olympics.

    But I agree his political capital is probably all spent.  He's definitely using his no-hassle rewards card from Capital One at this point when it comes to political prowess.

    Parent

    I Will Be More Than Happy If Obama Picks (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:08:59 PM EST
    someone else for VP.  Never thought it was a good idea to begin with. Obama's VP pick will not win my vote. It is up to Obama to win my vote.

    Kennedy just couldn't help but put a dig at Hillary into his comment. Feel that unity. (sigh)

    Parent

    Perhaps he is still smarting (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by abfabdem on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:10:42 PM EST
    that his own state voted for her despite his Obama endorsment.

    Parent
    If Obama is at the top of the ticket... (5.00 / 6) (#43)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:10:43 PM EST
    we lose in November.

    Hillary being VP would not help obviate his negatives.

    Obama might even be too toxic for VP at this point.

    Parent

    Compare and contrast (5.00 / 5) (#73)
    by chancellor on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:22:45 PM EST
    John Edwards saying this morning how terrific both candidates are v. Ted Kennedy saying that only Obama provides real leadership. Which one do you think is the better Democrat?

    Parent
    Maybe it is time (5.00 / 3) (#123)
    by Manuel on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:45:30 PM EST
    for Ted Kennedy to be primaried.

    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#170)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:10:27 PM EST
    hmmm, who do you propose?  Caroline?

    Parent
    Good. I don't want her as VP. (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by davnee on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:34:22 PM EST
    I want her to run in 2012 clean of any association with Obama (and spared of the insult of playing Lily Tomlin to his Dabney Coleman).  Actually I was a bit put off by her use of the term "white" in her comments yesterday.  She's 100% correct, of course, and I don't think it's remotely racist to point out what she is pointing out, but I think she should tread carefully on this point in the current media environment.  I think she should keep an eye on 2012 and the need to make nice with AA's then.  She doesn't want to give the IACF lunatic meme even the slightest shred of credibility.  She needs to be pure to ride to the rescue in 2012.  Of course, if the Clintons know more than we do about her continued prospects for 2008, then I retract what I say and she should let it all fly now.

    Parent
    Heh. (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:40:15 PM EST
    Excellent base-covering! :-)

    Well, I know. I get kind of eeked out when she says stuff that could be interpreted as racist too.

    You know what weirded me out? When her campaign said this:

    "If you have a social need, you're with Hillary. If you want Obama to be your imaginary hip black friend and you're young and you have no social needs, then he's cool."

    I thought, Ew! That is totally racist. WTF is she talking about?!

    Amazingly, she always turns out to be right, though. Chris Bowers really proved her point. That description fits the Obama bloggers to a tee.

    Parent

    I can't believe this bs came out of Teddy's mouth (5.00 / 3) (#119)
    by Monda on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:44:18 PM EST
    These charges are piling up.  Racist, not noble, Bubba etc.  The GOP must be laughing, even they don't get this nasty.  

    Parent
    Set aside VP (none / 0) (#105)
    by ruffian on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:38:08 PM EST
    Does anyone still think she has a snowball's chance in Hades of being elected Senate Majority Leader?

    I htink N.Y Governor, as someone suggested yeaterdya, is looking better all the time.

    Parent

    We have a Gov already (none / 0) (#134)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:51:03 PM EST
    and he seems to be ok so far.

    Parent
    And we don't need a governor.... (none / 0) (#192)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:21:32 PM EST
    looking to use the governership as a springboard to something bigger and better...we already have a Senator who has her eyes on a bigger prize, and barely bothers to show up to work for us:)

    Parent
    It cracks me up how folks (none / 0) (#213)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:41:14 PM EST
    are taking other people's jobs to offer as a consolation prize for Clinton. When I heard the Gov one I just busted out laughing. iirc, it was right when our new one was sworn in. He hadn't even warmed the seat yet.

    If she goes back to the Senate, I have a feeling we will have different representation.

    Parent

    You mean our (none / 0) (#227)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:55:11 PM EST
    new new governor, don't you? The old new one sorta kinda messed up in a big way. ;)

    Parent
    Yes, our new, new one. lol!~ (none / 0) (#232)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:10:12 PM EST
    That reminds me, need to call my friend. Our newest scandal is her rep I believe. {grin}

    Parent
    I love New York politics (none / 0) (#235)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:22:41 PM EST
    I really do. It's always something!

    Parent
    Yeah, I'm gonna miss them (none / 0) (#240)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:50:43 PM EST
    when I move, but then I'll have CA politics!

    I love being a "Coastal Girl".

    Parent

    Meanwhile (none / 0) (#246)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:10:44 PM EST
    I have to say I don't miss Chicago politics. (I used to live there and I hated every minute of it) Good luck in Cali!

    Parent
    What a coincidence!! (none / 0) (#220)
    by abfabdem on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:48:50 PM EST
    I have a Senator who hardly shows up for work!  In fact he missed more votes than any other Democratic candidate!!  

    Parent
    I hear that.... (none / 0) (#230)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:56:49 PM EST
    That's why I think you would have to be nuts to vote for either one of them.

    Parent
    NO (none / 0) (#142)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:57:05 PM EST
    she needs to be in a place where she can affect the NATIONAL agenda.

    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#152)
    by zyx on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:01:09 PM EST
    None for Teddy, either.

    Or--OMG!  Don't tell me???

    Parent

    In a world where (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Edgar08 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:54:53 PM EST
    Oliver Willis can say what he wants.

    Where an Atlanta Journal Constitution cartoonist can say what they want, it does become increasingly frustrating to be silenced.

    I don't know if this qualifies (5.00 / 7) (#14)
    by hitchhiker on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:57:20 PM EST
    as seasoned discussion, but here goes.

    This morning it hit me what feels familiar about many of Obama's online fans -- I've met these people before.

    In 1988 I was in downtown Seattle where a group of aging liberal peacenik types were standing on the sidewalk in front of a hotel.  On the top floor of the hotel, hanging from the windows, was a dozen or so young men, all in white shirts and narrow ties, all with closely trimmed hair and big orthodontist smiles on their faces.

    The aging liberals were out there to protest something (sorry but I don't recall what) and the young men were in town for a gathering of Young Republicans.  These were the heady days at the end of the 2nd Reagan term . . . the triumph of the Soviet fall just around the corner . . . big tax cuts, de-regulation all over the place, nothing but contempt for the old liberal base, talk of welfare queens in Cadillacs milking the system, scorn for the very idea of peace.

    The Young Republicans were in a triumphant mood, cat-calling to their elders below and enjoying themselves.  They owned the future; these old people were on the outside with no power and no plan.  It feels to me like that's where we are right now.  The smug, "you don't count because we won" feel of things like the Chris Bowers post is precisely the same.

    What happened to the Young Republicans?  Did they stick it out with W through 2 elections?  Do they regret anything?  What will happen to their current incarnation?  

    When Donna B. said the other day that we ought not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, I heard her making an effort to advocate for the big tent . . . it was a weak effort, but that's what I heard.  Bowers seemed to be saying that the tent was full enough without the old base, thank you very much.  Our choice is to come along for the ride and keep our mouths shut or go away.  It ought to make people like John Kerry sick, but it doesn't seem to.  What am I missing?

    The money (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by Leisa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:06:17 PM EST
    machine that politicians love is driving this train...

    The powers that be see this $$ from Obama supporters and go weak in the knees.

    Never mind that Hillary also raised a considerable sum.  Her $$ paled in comparison.

    The same thing happened with Bush Jr...

    Parent

    Of course, the money is coming from... (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:07:54 PM EST
    I know!! (none / 0) (#133)
    by Leisa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:50:57 PM EST
    That is why Edwards confuses me about his concern about Hillary's $$ sources...

    Parent
    Wall Street - that was clear (none / 0) (#234)
    by Boo Radly on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:20:26 PM EST
    many months ago. Think CNBC.  They went into campaign mode for BO - hour after hour of how awful Hillary would be for investors. Strange? Not a chance - that's why those shills are working so hard on all the MSM's. There is no mystery here - never was.

    The daffy young "fans" have no idea. The party "elders" are rubbing their hands together.

    The new wave of trolls today signaled they think there is blood in the water. Their new concern mode is laughable. Almost as laughable as Ted using the word noble in the same sentence as BO. New low levels are being set lower everyday.

    I vote my conscience. Hillary is the only D I will vote for this year. I will continue donating and supporting her until she is elected or decides to quit.

    I only have cable for my childrens programs and I have cancelled every mag subs. but VF. Now I am canceling VF too. My Gran had a saying, "I'd just as soon eat the devil as drink his broth".  

    Parent

    Those Young Republicans (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by abfabdem on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:12:50 PM EST
    should have enlisted in the armed forces to show their war support.  But something must have happened on the way to the recruitment office.

    Parent
    Brazile (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by Step Beyond on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:18:44 PM EST
    When Donna B. said the other day that we ought not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, I heard her making an effort to advocate for the big tent . . . it was a weak effort, but that's what I heard.

    That was what I heard from her as well. And I can't stand her so I'm not predisposed to give her the benefit of the doubt. But I really think she wasn't talking about not needing people, but rather not needing only them.

    I think some of those who are advocating that we don't need the old base or who are remaining silent, simply are so caught up in the thought of winning (whether or not that is reality based) that they have lost all reason.

    They began slowly, by putting out a message you couldn't disagree with - hope and change. Who's against that? Then they sold out some issues by saying that the hope and change was more important. The issues would be taken care of once we had the movement established. Then once people were invested in the movement enough, they could put forth ideas that the people once would have recoiled from and now they just went along.

    It's fascinating. They actually made themselves the very thing they were deriding years ago. That whole group think, blind loyalty, adulation that caused a segment of the population to refuse to see that Bush was a lousy president.

    Power corrupts. And apparently the thought of achieving power corrupts as well.

    I want to make sure I'm clear, I'm not talking all Obama supporters. This is cleary a small online group (not all online supporters either).

    Parent

    Um, actually they turned into (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by MarkL on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:33:08 PM EST
    Jack Abramoff and Grover Norquist.

    Parent
    what is missing is respect for your elders (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:45:49 PM EST
    and I've seen this snot nosed 20 something year olds on up  30 somethings up close,its very basic. This class never had to wait for a bus to go to school, they got rides and got the latest toys and never had to worry about the  things the 60s kids did, like a draft or blue collar work awaiting them after college because that is what there was. Trust fund kids some of them.

    The craven shallow remarks that comes from behind a monitor makes them appear credible,but rude and obnoxious. In my grandmother's day, they'd get their ears pulled and told to do some chores. and no tv.

    Parent

    Careful not to strereotype.... (5.00 / 2) (#166)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:08:29 PM EST
    I'm 30 and walked my arse to school or took public transportation, collected bottles and cans to buy my first Nintendo, and have done all kinds of work from selling sh*t to digging ditches.

    Remember they called all those 60's rich colege kids who were exempt from the draft smoking dope and listening to the Beatles priveledged trust fund brats back in the day too...and that's just as stereotypical.

    Back when I was a teen and started getting turned on by the music and rebellion of the 60's generation, my father was sure to remind me that while those rich college kids were having a ball "changing the world", the working class slobs from my neighborhood were fighting and dying in the jungles of Vietnam.

    Parent

    yeah maybe (5.00 / 0) (#181)
    by hitchhiker on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:14:48 PM EST
    that's another reason (among many) that this f-you attitude makes me so angry.

    My brothers were all in the service during the late 60's, and 2 of them went to Vietnam.

    If our working class Catholic family with its low education (I was the first college graduate, and I paid for it myself) and dependable Democratic votes is going to get the big old sneer from the new Kreative Klass, what's the point?

    So far, as near as I can tell, Senator Obama is not interested in my vote.  Which means, either he thinks he owns it, or he thinks he doesn't need it yet.  

    News flash to him:  I own it, and you only have a few months to make your sale to me.  Time's a wastin'.

    Parent

    He assumes he has it . . . . (5.00 / 0) (#196)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:23:09 PM EST
    along with all the 'blue' states.
    Heh, by the time he gets a clue, it's going to be too late. Guess he doesn't really understand the "the fierce urgency of now" after all.

    Bloody fool.

    Parent

    It's not just Obama... (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:33:51 PM EST
    the Democratic party has taken the working class freedom loving stiff's vote for granted for 20 years.

    You guys are late to this party...I stopped voting Democrat in 2000, with the exception of Kerry in 2004 when I let my anti-Bush feelings trump my integrity. I've regretted that vote everyday since.  

    Third party all the way for the rest of my life...I urge all the Dems late to the awakening to join me.

    Parent

    Yeah and we were also smoking that good (none / 0) (#179)
    by Florida Resident on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:14:41 PM EST
    stuff in Vietnam.  Hey we listened to the same music and protested against the war when we got back home.  

    Parent
    Yeah man... (none / 0) (#203)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:29:46 PM EST
    I'm smoking what I'd bet is better stuff and still listening to those records:)

    I'm pretty much done protesting though...sorry to say I've lost hope.  The war making police state won...I don't see the point of getting myself locked up over it.  I'm in duck and cover, try to squeak out a free existence in the shadows of society mode.

    Now if we brought back the draft, that might get the numbers in the street to get me back in the game.  

    Parent

    the revolution (none / 0) (#163)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:06:25 PM EST
     The revolution will not be text-mailed!

    Parent
    sHOOT! (5.00 / 2) (#173)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:11:11 PM EST
    I meant to say:

     The revolution will not be text-messaged!

    Parent

    You're not wrong (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:12:48 PM EST
    They're also the Naderites who carried on and told me in 2000 that there was no difference between Republicans or Democrats and that I should vote for Ralphie in order to 'make a statement'. When I tried to argue about SCOTUS and the environment and 101 other differences between Gore and Bush, I got told I was an idiot. So did others.

    So deja vu all over again. Only now I'm being told I'm NOT a Democrat (vs. 'only' being one) and that I should worry about SCOTUS and the environment and all those other things. Personally, I'm beyond caring.

    Parent

    Imagine what could have been... (none / 0) (#209)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:35:01 PM EST
    if Al Gore hadn't stolen all of Nader's votes.

    Parent
    Or disenfranchised (none / 0) (#226)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:53:49 PM EST
    all those well-meaning Republicans in Florida?

    Parent
    NYT: Down and Out in Connecticut (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by datadriven on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:58:07 PM EST
    You have to love today's NYT editorial which bemoans the massive rise in inequality in Connecticut.

    The solution: investments in education, universal healthcare, expansion unemployment coverage and, get this one, "steps must be take to ensure that service sector jobs are a road into the middle class." Hmmmm... It would would seem that HRC was the one candidate (after Edwards dropped out) who was actually advocating several of these provisions, but she gets slammed again today on their editorial page.

    I'd be interested in a bit more detail on the steps that would link entry level service jobs to middle class life. The length of time that it takes a young worker to support her/his family has been climbing for about three decades.

    Service sector jobs (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by waldenpond on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:16:24 PM EST
    as a way to the middle class?  The NDP (New Democratic Party) sure has some interesting ideas.  I live in a town that has lost it's manufacturing base.  Take a drive down main street.  They turn in to service communities... hotels, restaurants, appliance repair, etc.  

    We have shifted from a ...
    manufacturing society: outsourced
    Techical R&D and service society: outsourced
    To what: an Investment society?:  no jobs, simply make your income off of the cheaper labor of other countries.

    Our whole country is going to look like main street.  How all people are going to be raised by nursing, teaching, banking industry etc I don't know.  Has it dawned on people that even teaching is being outsourced as it can be done for less money over the internet.

    Parent

    thats the new base that is voting for Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:50:18 PM EST
    and the one the Brazile's are trying to diss and throw under the bus.

    Its the product of the Bush years, whose goal was to morph the middle class into the working poor class.

    Its the new class and they better get on board.

    Parent

    Got an invitation (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:58:30 PM EST
    Guess what I got to say to the bundler.  Man that felt good.  Just string my posts together and you will get a good clue.  

    Speaker of the House

    Nancy Pelosi

    Sunday, June 1, 2008   ~ San Francisco
    5:00pm ~ Co-Host Reception        5:30pm ~ Cocktail Reception       7:30pm ~ Co-Chair Dinner

    Monday, June 2, 2008   ~ Silicon Valley
    6:30pm ~ Co-Host Reception          7:00pm ~ Cocktail Reception

    Pelosi 100 Chair: Raise $100,000 in 2008 by May 31st
    (Qualifies for Pelosi 100 Convention Package, Sunday evening San Francisco Pre-Reception and Dinner,
    and Monday evening Silicon Valley Pre-Reception and Reception)
    Chair: Raise $50,000 by May 31st
    (Qualifies for Speaker's Cabinet Gold Convention Package, Sunday evening San Francisco Dinner
    and Pre-Reception, and Monday evening Silicon Valley Pre-Reception and Reception)
    Co-Chair: Write $28,500 by May 31st
    (Qualifies for Speaker's Cabinet Gold Convention Package, Sunday evening San Francisco Dinner
    and Pre-Reception, and Monday evening Silicon Valley Pre-Reception and Reception)
    Host: Raise $10,000
    (Qualifies for Supporter Convention Package, Pre-Receptions and
     Receptions in San Francisco Sunday evening & Silicon Valley Monday evening)
    Co-Host: Write $7,500
    (Qualifies for Supporter Convention Package, Pre-Receptions and
    Receptions in San Francisco Sunday evening & Silicon Valley Monday evening)
    Guest: Write $1,000
    (Receptions in San Francisco Sunday evening & Silicon Valley Monday evening)
     



    I think (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:00:40 PM EST
    People are screaming for a third party candidate.  I know I am.

    See Gallup, where Hillary has opened up a bigger lead against McCain than she had before:

    Gallup

    I was for Gore (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by Fabian on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:10:04 PM EST
    then he didn't run.  Gore doesn't want to be President.  I understand that.  A brokered convention with Gore as the nominee wouldn't be fair to voters.  I understand that.

    I still want to draft his butt into the Oval Office though, because I'm selfish, selfish, selfish!

    Bless me, my internet confessors, for I do not always have a generous spirit.  

    Parent

    Can you imagine... (none / 0) (#217)
    by p lukasiak on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:43:19 PM EST
    Can you imagine how awful Obama's negatives must be, to be behind Clinton in theoretical matchups against McCain?

    Parent
    check out these amazing images (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:12:42 PM EST
    from the volcano erupting and causing an end-of-days lightening storm in Chili:

    Link

    you have to scroll down and click to enlarge them

    thanks capt (none / 0) (#60)
    by Jlvngstn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:18:25 PM EST
    I love storm pictures and while these are small they are really beautiful.

    Parent
    did you click (none / 0) (#67)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:19:35 PM EST
    they are bigger than the thumbnails.
    but not big enough.

    Parent
    no, just went back and clicked (none / 0) (#79)
    by Jlvngstn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:26:04 PM EST
    much better at that size.  I love the supernova shots from Hubbell as well.  

    What a fantastic storm this was.  Big enough to enjoy  :)

    Parent

    from a safe distance :-P (none / 0) (#86)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:30:40 PM EST
    we, being effects guys, were trying to convince the company we really really needed to go to Chili to see it first hand.
    not the storm obviously but the eruption.


    Parent
    typhoons volcanoes tornados eathquakes (none / 0) (#184)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:15:54 PM EST
    she seems to be doing that a lot lately.

    Parent
    Holy Cow! (none / 0) (#129)
    by aquarian on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:49:02 PM EST
    Nature proves again how irrelevant we really are.
    Awesome pics.

    Parent
    I love when nature does that.... (none / 0) (#174)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:11:37 PM EST
    and people are running around screaming "save the planet"...lol.

    The planet will be here supporting life long after we are extinct.  Mother Nature is more powerful than we can even imagine...we're no different than fruit flies in the big scheme of things.

    Parent

    Tomorrow's a sad anniversary (5.00 / 3) (#68)
    by scribe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:20:20 PM EST
    On May 10, 1933, 75 years ago tomorrow, the first of the big public book-burnings in Germany took place.  At some, up to 70,000 people attended as truckloads of books by disfavored authors were piled and set alight.

    It bears remembering that it is a short step from burning books to burning people.

    you dont have to go that far back (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:23:52 PM EST
    ask the Dixie Chicks

    Parent
    Post West Virginia Clinton spin (5.00 / 6) (#83)
    by p lukasiak on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:28:22 PM EST
    You know all this talk in the media and from Obama supporters and surrogates about Obama being the "presumptive nominee" and how "impossible" it is for Clinton to win the nomination?

    When the WV results come in, Clinton surrogates should point to them and say "West Virginia says to the Democratic Party that after being told that Barack Obama would be the nominee, overwhelming numbers of voters sent a message to the Democratic party -- he might be YOUR nominee, but he's not OUR candidate."  

    and...

    "Barack Obama talks about a 50 state strategy, but how much time did he spend in West Virginia when people were most intensely focussed on the question of who they would vote for in the primary?   Hillary Clinton didn't write off North Carolina, despite being down by 25% in the polls -- she went to North Carolina fully expecting to lose to Obama, but knowing how important it would be in November if she is the nominee for North Carolina voters to know that she shares their concerns.   Senator Clinton doesn't campaign in her "comfort zone", shes making sure that all Americans know that she wants to be their President. "  

    Amen (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by davnee on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:54:01 PM EST
    I was talking about this earlier.  Obama should be in WV right now listening to voters and playing the concerned statesman.  He should be signaling to everyone everywhere that he is ready to go to the mat to win the blue collar vote.  It's insane cowardice to refuse to fight for votes that are hard for you to win but that you ultimately need nonetheless.  

    As for Clinton, I don't even think turnout matters that much anymore in WV.  Sure the more the better, but I think the popular vote argument is not ultimately going to be what turns this, if it can still be turned.  It is electability.  We need to see what the media does with the astonishing margins on Tuesday.  Even if the vote is depressed, the result will still be stark.  If the media cracks even slightly, gives us even a hint of comeback kid narrative, even in a few places, then she can boost turnout in even bigger Kentucky and perhaps get on a roll to PR.  

    Even if the WV result doesn't result in the comeback kid narrative, it could still result in a media critical mass on the all blue collar white voters are racists narrative, which could backfire on Obama in profound ways both in the level of drool we will see coming from R's as they start counting the votes of insulted white Americans everywhere, and perhaps in the size of the seismic shockwave that may go through some of the supers as they realize the cold reality of the demographics of an Obama Party.  Will some supers signal that enough is enough?  Will some supers signal to Clinton that she has their blessing to go nuclear on Obama?  

    Sure these are all longshots and highly contingent outcomes, but the fact is they are not impossible or even implausible outcomes.  HRC is in it to win it.  And I don't think she's crazy to think she still has a chance.

    Parent

    Gore (none / 0) (#223)
    by p lukasiak on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:49:21 PM EST
    Will some supers signal that enough is enough?  Will some supers signal to Clinton that she has their blessing to go nuclear on Obama?  

    no.  Going nuclear on Obama would be a mistake.

    What I see SDs doing is pressuring people like Gore and Edwards (still can't hear an "m", btw) to endorse Clinton based on her being able to re-create the same coalition that brought us the only two term Democrat since WWII.  

    and that is how it will be phrased -- 'don't mess with success' will be the theme, not that Obama is 'unelectable', just that he's unproven, and Clinton has shown that she can win in November, and why take a risk?

    Parent

    Nervous (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by nell on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:55:11 PM EST
    I am getting nervous about WV and KY. I will be making calls all weekend, but what I am hearing so far is that people are feeling very dispirited and like their votes don't matter anyways. We cannot afford low turnout.

    Over at TM, someone posted about how she talked to an 84 year old woman in WV who was for Hillary, as are all of her other women friends in their prayer circle, but they just feel so sick and depressed at the way she has been treated. One woman stressed about this so much she has developed more health problems. The woman said some of her friends felt too sad to even go to the polls because they figured what is the point.

    How sad is that?

    So now I am nervous about WV and KY, we are banking on HUGE margins and I fear we will not get them because Hillary supporters won't turnout.

    Get to WV or phone bank this weekend, please!

    Parent

    I've said this before: (5.00 / 2) (#172)
    by chancellor on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:11:04 PM EST
    Phone bankers must stress that it is unconscionable for the media to determine who will be the nominees in this race. It's imperative that every voter's voice be heard above the cries of the media, and that only if they vote their hearts is there still a chance for Hillary. Don't give up now because Hillary isn't giving up on you.

    Parent
    Perhaps (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:16:30 PM EST
    We can say to would-be Hillary voters in WVA that feeling dispirited is exactly what those claiming Obama is the presumptive nominee want to happen; & the same thing was tried in New Hampshire, and women turned out in high numbers to prove that we are almost as resilient as the candidate and will not be silenced.  

    Parent
    Phone banking for Hillary link: (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:18:29 PM EST
    http://tools.hillaryclinton.com/calling/

    you can do it from the comfort of your home :)

    Parent

    Perhaps (none / 0) (#189)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:18:37 PM EST
    We can say to would-be Hillary voters in WVA that feeling dispirited is exactly what those claiming Obama is the presumptive nominee want to happen; & the same thing was tried in New Hampshire, and women turned out in high numbers to prove that we are almost as resilient as the candidate and will not be silenced.  

    Parent
    Hm, and FL/MI are states left out (none / 0) (#236)
    by Boo Radly on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:29:40 PM EST
    What if Clinton were winning? (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by dmk47 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:33:27 PM EST
    So, judging by comments here, bringing the party back together doesn't seem to be getting off to a great start, though I tend to doubt blog comment posters are very representative, so I'm still pretty confident about November.

    But I'm really curious about how things would go if the shoe were on the other foot. So suppose Clinton had turned things around more dramatically at the end of February, picked up huge delegate margins in Texas and Ohio, got near parity in PA, found a wellspring of new SD support, and fought to a draw in NC and a huge win in Indiana. I.e., suppose Clinton had become the all-but-certain nominee on Tuesday.

    Now, in that case, there would still be tens of millions of Obama supporters without whose votes Hillary couldn't hope to win the fall election. A lot of them would be extremely disappointed about how things had gone. So, for all the Clinton supporters, this is an honest question: If the roles were reversed, how do you think the Clinton campaign and supporters would/should try to work towards party unity, and how would/should you?


    The difference is that Hillary is acutely (5.00 / 6) (#107)
    by MarkL on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:39:22 PM EST
    and visibly aware of the need for unity, while Obama seems to think that saying the word "unity" over and over will work like an incantation to bring people together.

    Parent
    like he said McCain was losing his bearings... (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:57:21 PM EST
    dude, as much as McCain is a bad nominee
    for his party, he commands respect that even I
    would give him.

    Yet Obama not even been nominated officially is acting like a peacock. Geez, the arrogance of that man is off putting.

    Parent

    He got away with it against Hillary, but (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by MarkL on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:00:55 PM EST
    I think his taunting will backfire badly against McCain. Like you, I respect McCain on a personal level. I think he has some decency.


    Parent
    Wartime is not the time to taunt a POW (none / 0) (#180)
    by Cream City on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:14:47 PM EST
    and imagine if more POWs are taken in Iraq and/or Afghanistan as the election nears.

    And I still say that the prospect of the first Vietnam veteran ever to be president -- and probably the last prospect of one -- will matter to some of those veterans as voters.  Even the draftees, even those against that war, include many who care about veterans' issues.  

    I was married to one, I talk to more, and they don't see Obama as listening at all.  One said he couldn't find any veterans among Obama's advisers -- other than Wright!

    Clinton, yes, they see her as hearing them on veterans' issues.  McCain, definitely yes.

    Parent

    Speaking of wartime, I know that (none / 0) (#197)
    by MarkL on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:24:05 PM EST
    McCain will get lots of votes from people who are not happy with the Iraq war, not because they opposed it in principle, but because Bush messed up so badly. They think that McCain is the kind of guy who could win a war.
    I've heard this from Democrats, in fact.

    Parent
    Hmm... (none / 0) (#219)
    by dmk47 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:45:06 PM EST
    I still say that the prospect of the first Vietnam veteran ever to be president See: Kerry, John

    He couldn't find any veterans among Obama's advisers

    Let's see (some are policy advisers, the rest are surrogates): Sam Nunn, David Boren, Lawrence Korb, Scott Gration (a retired major-general), Lowell Weicker, Harris Wofford, Merrill McPeak (I know you guys hate him but he is a veteran), John Kerry, Patrick Murphy (the only Iraq vet in Congress I believe), Cliff Alexander, Susan Cuddy (the first female gunner in the navy!), Richard Hearny, John Nathman, Ralph Wooten, and most recently George McGovern. That took 5 minutes, there's more where it came from.

    I think (Navy Cross winner) Jim Webb's going to be the vice-presidential nominee. Who do you think it will be?

    Parent

    We can't even agree on the badness of McCain? (none / 0) (#171)
    by dmk47 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:10:57 PM EST
    "Losing his bearings" was in re: McCain effectively calling Obama an enemy of the state. "Losing his bearings" is a much more polite response than treason-baiting deserves. If your view on Iraq is like mine or Obama's or Hillary Clinton's McCain believes you're "raising the white flag of surrender." He and his online supporters think you are "not anti-war, but on the other side."  

    But I don't want to get O/T because I remain very interested in the question: How, if the roles were reversed, would Hillary and her supporters be likely to work towards unity, and how should they (not necessarily the same thing)?

    Parent

    feel free (none / 0) (#198)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:24:07 PM EST
     Feel free to remain very interested in your question, but here is no thread here to remain on.

    New open thread: grammar. let me correct myself: "..there is no thread here on which to remain." Is that more correcter?

    Open thread = no thread

    Parent

    how to do it... (5.00 / 4) (#113)
    by p lukasiak on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:41:10 PM EST
    the most important thing is to not insist upon using the "Clinton frame" when responding to the questions and concerns of Obama voters.  

    For instance, I would NEVER say to an Obama supporter under those circumstances "Obama did it too" or "Obama is worse" in response to criticism of Clinton.

    Instead, I'd treat them like spoiled children that I had to pacify and could not discipline.  

    Rather than directly contradict them, I'd ask them what they thought about information that contradicts their beliefs, for instance.

    Eventually, they'd think I actually cared about their concerns, and come to believe that if I supported Clinton, she couldn't be all bad...

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:46:17 PM EST
    Clinton supporters would start by not forming a Bowersian new party that deliberately discludes Obama supporters.  Clinton supporters also wouldn't pull a Ted Kennedy and insult Clinton and thereby insult everyone who voted for Clinton.

    Per Bowers, via TalkLeft

    Cultural Shift: Out with Bubbas, up with Creatives. . . . Obama has all the markers of a creative class background, from his community organizing, to his Unitarianism, to being an academic, to living in Hyde Park to shopping at Whole Foods and drinking PBR. These will be the type of people running the Democratic Party now, and it will be a big cultural shift from the white working class focus of earlier decades. . . . Culturally, the Democratic Party will feel pretty normal to netroots types. It will consistently send out cultural signals designed to appeal primarily to the creative class instead of . . . the white working class.


    Parent
    Hey I liked Bubba (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Florida Resident on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:53:33 PM EST
    even though I was born in Puerto Rico and raised living between San Juan and NYC.

    Parent
    If Things Were Exactly Reversed, (5.00 / 2) (#155)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:01:45 PM EST
    I probably wouldn't even go on Obama blogs initially. I would let them work through accepting the situation themselves. When I did go on the Obama blogs I say what a great campaign he ran etc.

    Clinton IMO would have stopped further criticism of Obama and focused her message on we are all in this together to beat McCain and right the wrongs of the Bush administration. Hopefully, she would have made her surrogates toe the same line.  

    Parent

    Clinton never attacked those (5.00 / 2) (#165)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:08:23 PM EST
    who didn't vote for her when she lost, just thanked her supporters and moved on. The outrage fanatics who have been hating on her aren't going to vote for her no matter what, but everyone else is winnable if she sticks to substance, the economy, and taking America back from the neocons.

    Clinton has been making her case on experience, qualifications, and electability and giving substantive policy speeches about exactly where she wants to take the country and why. If she is the nominee, she'll keep doing that and let the voters decide whether she or McCain would take the country in a different direction from Bush.

    Parent

    Let's say that's true (none / 0) (#191)
    by dmk47 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:20:47 PM EST
    Let's say "Clinton never attacked those who didn't vote for her when she lost" --- that's not how it looks to Obama supporters. I promise. Hillary would have needed them to have a shot of winning in the fall. So how could she have done it? How would you have helped her?

    I don't mean this just as an academic exercise. One of the main motifs here and other Clinton supporting blogs is that y'all are really mad --- let's say justifiably so for the sake of argument --- about the way Obama supporters have been acting since Tuesday, and that's one of the big obstacles to you voting D. in the fall.

    So, show us the right way to do it, by telling us how you'd do it if you guys finished ahead and we lost.

    Parent

    Hillary has not flamed - cursed -shrugged off (none / 0) (#237)
    by Boo Radly on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:36:38 PM EST
    any group of voters, I don't really think your question is comparing apples to apples.

    Sorry - I know that's not helpful.

    Parent

    MT Gov Schweitzer says vote until the end (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:34:31 PM EST
    "Ya know, it's nearly tied," Schweitzer said in an interview. "I think it's been good for the Democratic Party. There's millions of new voters, lots of excitement and energy. I don't know, let the voting continue. Might as well let Montana finish the voting."

    link

    Good for Brian--he's a super who won't declare until MT votes, but I think he's doing his best for Clinton. He and Sen Baucus are both rumored to be leaning her way if she can stay viable until June 3, not sure about Tester. At least they haven't joined the deafening chorus of WWTSBQ.

    Interesting (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by ruffian on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:44:57 PM EST
    I thought Obnama was supposed to be the darling of the mountain west.
    Good for Baucus and Schweitzer for at least staying undeclared.

    Parent
    Mountain West (none / 0) (#208)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:34:31 PM EST
    Lots of people here think sexism hurts Hillary here the most, but really it's libertarianism. Obama being so undefined and not really putting forth any policies of his own is hugely appealing to a big swathe of voters here. They can attribute their own opinions to him and vote for what they think he'll do.

    Parent
    Quick How-to question?? (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by K Lynne on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:34:46 PM EST

    Can someone tell me if there is a way to read closed comments with all of the comment threads expanded (versus collapsed, where I have to individually 'open' each thread)?

    Thanks...

    Just pick "Nested" from the drop down (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by Anne on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:37:58 PM EST
    list where you are currently seeing "Threaded," and click on "Set."

    It's just underneath the post, right above the comments.

    Parent

    yeah but (none / 0) (#206)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:30:52 PM EST
    that nested option box disappears when comments are closed. I have the same question. See "Thursday Night Open thread"

    Parent
    Wow - you're right! (none / 0) (#210)
    by Anne on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:35:32 PM EST
    What I usually do is click on the parent comment at the top of each collection of comments attached to it, and find that it at least opens all those "children," which keeps me from having to open them up one-by-one.

    Parent
    true that (none / 0) (#214)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:41:22 PM EST
    yes but still too much going back and forth page-wise.

    Parent
    Glad its not just me... (none / 0) (#228)
    by K Lynne on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:55:12 PM EST
    I sometimes read TL on my Treo (teeny tiny screen), and it is very easy to get lost when trying to open / close threads.  If anyone knows of a way to set the default for closed topics to 'nested', I would be forever in your debt!

    OK, maybe not forever.  How 'bout very grateful??

    Thanks!

    Parent

    I didn't kmow that (none / 0) (#242)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:52:41 PM EST
    I'll have Colin our webmaster change it. I hate when just the title to the comment shows.

    Parent
    THANKS (none / 0) (#243)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:04:44 PM EST
    I had assumed it had something to do with not allowing posting. T'would be handy when those threads get filled up quickly.

    Parent
    I think it's fixed now (none / 0) (#247)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:21:24 PM EST
    Colin said it is, can you let me know?

    Parent
    Don't know if this was posted earlier today, (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Anne on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:36:36 PM EST
    but this is part of the memo from the McCain campaign, responding to Obama's "losing his bearings" remark:

    To: Interested Parties
    From: Mark Salter, Senior Advisor
    Date: May 8, 2008
    Re: Senator Obama's Attack Today

    First, let us be clear about the nature of Senator Obama's attack today: He used the words `losing his bearings' intentionally, a not particularly clever way of raising John McCain's age as an issue. This is typical of the Obama style of campaigning.

    We have all become familiar with Senator Obama's new brand of politics. First, you demand civility from your opponent, then you attack him, distort his record and send out surrogates to question his integrity. It is called hypocrisy, and it is the oldest kind of politics there is. ...

    It is important to focus on what Senator Obama is attempting to do here: He is trying desperately to delegitimize the discussion of issues that raise legitimate questions about his judgment and preparedness to be President of the United States.

    Through their actions and words, Senator Obama and his supporters have made clear that ANY criticism on ANY issue -- from his desire to raise taxes on millions of small investors to his radical plans to sit down face-to-face with Iranian President Ahmadinejad - constitute negative, personal attacks.

    Senator Obama is hopeful that the media will continue to form a protective barrier around him, declaring serious limits to the questions, discussion and debate in this race.

    Senator Obama has good reason to think this plan will succeed, as serious journalists have written of the need for `de-tox' to cure 'swooning' over Senator Obama, and others have admitted to losing their objectivity while with him on the campaign trail.

    Full text can be found here: The Page

    So, who will the media defend if Obama is the nominee?

    Very well said. (5.00 / 3) (#110)
    by MarkL on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:40:12 PM EST
    Obama has a poor record going one on one with McCain. This exchange is yet another example.

    Parent
    huh? I"m just saying McCain can play (5.00 / 2) (#118)
    by MarkL on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:44:15 PM EST
    the game better than Obama.

    Parent
    So true (5.00 / 0) (#187)
    by chancellor on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:16:58 PM EST
    I remember when the Dems decided to appoint Obama last year as the point man to work with McCain in crafting some type of legislative reform bill. McCain managed to postpone meeting with Obama to the point where Obama tried to do an end run on McCain. McCain absolutely cut Obama off at the knees--it was brutal--and the whole effort was taken off the burner.

    Parent
    I don't think McCain (5.00 / 0) (#199)
    by DJ on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:24:30 PM EST
    is playing the victim here.  He's calling Obama out on his hypocrisy and putting him on notice that he will not let it go unanswered.

    Parent
    You and the entire Obama contingent (5.00 / 0) (#212)
    by MarkL on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:40:12 PM EST
    are unable to distinguish between political and personal attacks. Saying Obama is too close to Hamas is ordinary politics. Implying that McCain is a senile old coot is a nasty personal attack.
    Similarly, Clinton was completely within her rights to question whether Obama was qualified to be CIC---that's political. In my opinion, Obama's relentless attacks on Hillary's character were personal, petty and not warranted.

    Parent
    Me. (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:43:34 PM EST
    Losing his bearings referring to McCain is a way to say losing his marbles. Same thing. Very subtle.

    Parent
    LOL, Jesse Jackson did win South Carolina. (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:06:56 PM EST
    I don't think that comment was too subtle on Bill's part. I think he was clearly talking about race, but that didn't make it necessarily racist in my opinion and it clearly wasn't intended to insult Obama. On the other hand, however you parse Obama's words they were clearly intended to be an insult to McCain, which is perfectly okay in my book, but he should expect to be called on it. That's part of a political campaign.

    Parent
    Not subtle IMHO (none / 0) (#238)
    by daria g on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:38:02 PM EST
    There's going to be more, they're trying to tell a story. I think.

    It troubles me greatly if that's the campaign they plan to run vs McCain, who's showing off his war heroism and service right now.  What will it do to the long term prospects and image of the Democrats if we're in the position of having to support that strategy to get our candidate elected?  I know the GOP operatives stoop to that level but we should be better than that.

    Parent

    That letter (5.00 / 0) (#146)
    by DJ on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:58:31 PM EST
    calls Obama out.  Wish Hillary would have been allowed to write it.

    Parent
    Even if it is a slender reed (5.00 / 0) (#147)
    by davnee on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:58:47 PM EST
    the McCain camp is good to fire this warning shot and lay the groundwork for this position.  The hypocrisy of Obama's campaign has been breathtaking.  Clinton has not been able to really contest it since they are from the same team.  But McCain can take the catalogue of all Obama's abuses of Clinton and use it as his evidence of the intentional nature of every subtle (and not so subtle) slur launched his way.

    Parent
    but its disprespectful given McCains (5.00 / 0) (#153)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:01:18 PM EST
    military service and POW status. That in it of
    itself is reason to never say stuff like that.

    Parent
    Let's wait and see how the Media plays it. (none / 0) (#135)
    by Florida Resident on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:51:31 PM EST
    As noted above, CNN is playing it (none / 0) (#245)
    by Cream City on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:09:38 PM EST
    right now by bannering it with "What Obama Really Meant."  A bit of mockery of Obama and not a good sign, huh?

    Parent
    Re the "losing bearings" crack... (none / 0) (#145)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:58:16 PM EST
    ...yes the outrage was a trifle faux, but they sure nailed him pretty good on everything else. It is exactly how he ran his campaign against Hillary.

    Parent
    but its disprespectful given McCains (none / 0) (#154)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:01:36 PM EST
    military service and POW status. That in it of
    itself is reason to never say stuff like that.

    Parent
    but its disprespectful given McCains (none / 0) (#156)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:01:49 PM EST
    military service and POW status. That in it of
    itself is reason to never say stuff like that.

    Parent
    Well, there was that empty suit comment (none / 0) (#221)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:49:04 PM EST
    Even if it is true, McCain will use that a lot and Obama would say Old. Ha.

    Parent
    I would like to ramble for a moment (5.00 / 0) (#122)
    by Florida Resident on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:45:03 PM EST
    When this election cycle started there was talk that anyone the Democratic party would nominate was a sure bet to win the GE in 2008.  Then the MSM and every talking head started talking of Hillary as the presumptive leader even before the race started.  The DLC started to worry (Many Clinton haters and whatever there) so they went out looking for someone who they could run against her that could undermine her appeal to minorities that was higher than the other possible nominee's at the time.  They found it in a person who in 2004 had promised his constituents in Illinois that he would finish his full term.  That is the part were it all started going wrong.

    You see the DLC types did not take into consideration a couple of realities about the American electorate;

    1. Any woman running would have a percentage of the voters in the GE voting against her just for the fact that she was a woman.  Add the fact that it was Hillary and in the extreme right it gave them motivation to vote in GE so they could vote against her.

    2. Any black person running would also have a percentage of the voters in the GE voting against him/her just on the basis of the color of their skin.  Add to that the fact that the person they chose was not necessarily a person that a large number of Democratic voters felt was the best choice to be the nominee and it could spell trouble in mobilizing the vote come the GE.

    Now, here is my point.  It was, I don't care what anyone says a hard battle either way.  But from there on the situation got even more complicated and that was the fault of no one but the Democratic Party (think of the MSM as in a feeding frenzy).  Problem lies that after NH when it became apparent that Obama had weaknesses in primaries the decision was made that they would alienate the black vote against the Clintons.  It was easy because both the MSM and the majority of the Blogosphere apparently hate the Clinton's success.  I don't know maybe it is a inherent dislike to the Idea that Bubba could outsmart the enlightened Bloggers and Pundits, maybe there is a sexist tinge to this whole issue.  But if you take notice and forget your love of your candidate of choice it was at that time that the polarizing began in the Party.

    Now I ask myself, is it too late to fix the problem.  I don't know but I guarantee you that if after Oregon Mr Obama claims victory without including the Fl and MI votes the party will pay a price.  And I have a very bad feeling about some other so called Blue States where the demographics are not conductive to make him more attractive as a candidate than McCain.
    I finish with this thought don't list the numerous bad things that McCain is.  The MSM will protect him call it negative campaigning and it will make those same demographics even angrier at the Democrats might even have a down ticket effect.

    A 'Victory Lap' before actually winning? (5.00 / 4) (#144)
    by stevenb on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:57:54 PM EST
    Notice the sheer hypocrisy of Obama via this quote from the NY Times:

    "Mr. Obama has not spent much time in Washington during the campaign and he has hardly ever been spotted in the House, where all senators have floor privileges. He didn't exercise those privileges in his own chamber Thursday, missing two Senate votes on a flood insurance bill."

    The last line is telling: while PRETENDING to be the possible nominee, he misses two Senate votes!, i.e., not doing his damn job. Another blatant example of how Obama is all image and very little substance.

    He's too busy pandering for SDs (none / 0) (#178)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:14:18 PM EST
    doesn't even have time for WV, how the heck can you expect him to have time to do his JOB.

    Parent
    Here's Chelsea's Mother's Day message - (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by Anne on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:00:45 PM EST
    made me cry.

    Happy Mother's Day

    And I gave more money.

    Beautiful. (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:27:46 PM EST
    TY for linking that, donated again in my mom's name. I can't think of anyone I'd rather give money to than Chelsea's mom and Dorothy's daughter :)

    Parent
    Love that Chelsea. (none / 0) (#177)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:14:16 PM EST
    Chelsea (5.00 / 0) (#185)
    by DJ on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:16:06 PM EST
    is evidence of the wonderful mother she has.  Just wonderful.

    Parent
    Cried and then donated..again! Thank you. n/t (none / 0) (#182)
    by DJ on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:15:15 PM EST
    Only in america (none / 0) (#241)
    by Jlvngstn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:52:26 PM EST
    you just gave more money to someone who is worth 100 Million dollars?

    can you spot me 2300, was thinking flying to the caribbean and wanted to upgrade to first class?

    Parent

    Thank god.... (none / 0) (#250)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:56:23 PM EST
    I'm not alone J-man...it's insane ain't it?

    I've been begging mt TL friends to stop sending their hard earned dough to any of these snake-oil salesman for months.

    It really breaks my heart...but whatever gives you pleasure I guess.  

    Parent

    Somerby is a treasure (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by Manuel on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:23:00 PM EST
    Great analysis of Krugman's and Robinson's columns.


    Not politics, but half funny, half sad! (5.00 / 0) (#224)
    by Molly Pitcher on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:50:15 PM EST
    "The Florida State Separtment of Education released the scores for the writing portion of the Florida Comprehensive Test (F-CAT) Thursday. The news was mixed in the Bay County area.

    Overall, 4th graders F-CAT writing scores are not only down from last year, their not even passing."

    Looks like the reporter and editor went to Bay County schools (and I am not pointing to the typo in the first line).

    It must be over (none / 0) (#2)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:43:09 PM EST
    TL has largely gone back to legal issues posts.  Sigh, so long HRC.


    Can I ask you (none / 0) (#3)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:44:33 PM EST
    did you switch?  Or did you never have a preference?  Just curious

    Parent
    Preference (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:46:39 PM EST

    I like the legal posts.

    Parent
    Following the money (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by Chimster on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:52:27 PM EST
    Look at the amount of comments for legal issue articles as compared to comments about the primaries. This blog has shot up due to interest in the presidential nomination. I'm sure many people will ditch TL when this is over, but I like the way they think here. So, TL will always have a place in my bookmarks.

    I can't wait to see how they tear apart McCain. Because they were here for me when the other blogs weren't (DKOS, etc), this will be my main Hub for all things politics moving forward (especially if Hillary does not get the nomination).

    Parent

    We've been sharpening our wits (none / 0) (#27)
    by scribe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:05:33 PM EST
    for McSame, all these months.

    Parent
    Stick around. BTD may (none / 0) (#70)
    by oculus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:21:31 PM EST
    start analyzing something besides the Dem. contest.  He is quite good on other subjects, not just this one.

    Parent
    That would be nice. (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by scribe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:34:52 PM EST
    While we  gear up for that, one should take the time and read up on the Congressman Vito Fossella story, including a wonderful piece from today's NYDN, headlined:  "What to tell kids when daddy has two families."

    See - Mr. Family Values Vito has answered the age-old question "what will we tell the children?"

    And another article, with possibly the best lede of the year:  "From Teflon to toast."

    Parent

    Tell the kids: Daddy has (none / 0) (#106)
    by oculus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:39:07 PM EST
    two families.   That's rich.

    Parent
    That's the headline (none / 0) (#157)
    by scribe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:03:36 PM EST
    The tabs have been having all sorts of fun with this all week. One gets the sense that there was a decided race for last to know between the public and Mrs. Fossella, with the public coming in dead last on this one.  The press, it seems, knew and was ready for this one to erupt.

    Parent
    I haven't followed it, except the AP (none / 0) (#194)
    by oculus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:22:51 PM EST
    headlines.  Wondered why he felt the need to bare his soul at this particular moment in time.

    Parent
    I won't ditch after the election (none / 0) (#82)
    by Pootsteen on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:27:26 PM EST
    because I came here originally years ago for the legal issues. No matter how impossible it has been for an Obama supporter to join in the election threads, I am not just someone who came to be in an Obama-supporter free zone and will ditch when it's over!

    Parent
    I look at 200 plus comments... (none / 0) (#116)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:42:25 PM EST
    on a post about what some assh*le on the boob tube said compared to 8 comments on a post about the gulag in Guantanamo or a post about our skyrocketing prison population and I get very, very worried about the future of our nation.

    Maybe when this circus we call an election rolls outta town more TL'ers will take notice of the issues that all 3 of the stooges ignore at our nation's peril.

    Parent

    I read a lot of those but am not a lawyer (5.00 / 4) (#128)
    by Cream City on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:48:47 PM EST
    so generally refrain from commenting.  But I appreciate those posts for educating me on many issues as much -- or more, because I lack the legal background -- as the political ones.

    Parent
    Exactly. (none / 0) (#148)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:59:27 PM EST
    I was trying to figure out a way to say this--I care about legal and constitutional issues, but I would need to learn even to make a dumb comment and much more for an intelligent one.

    Parent
    I have zero legal background.... (none / 0) (#229)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:55:36 PM EST
    I came to this site...shoot it must be 6 years ago now...as a criminal angry at the police state and have learned so much from this blog and it's commenters about crime, justice, war, freedom, life.

    I'm still just a dumb opinionated knucklehead...but I know the bacon is burning and I come here to keep an eye on the fire.  

    To me the election coverage is a distraction...especially since I consider the frontrunners all to be pretty clueless, or worse ambivalent, on the issues of crime, justice, war, and freedom.

    Parent

    well don't be afraid to ask questions - (none / 0) (#160)
    by scribe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:04:53 PM EST
    even if you don't want to comment.  The questions which get raised in the comments often make the "legal" posts all the better.

    Parent
    Thanks! If questions (none / 0) (#190)
    by Cream City on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:19:44 PM EST
    won't be seen as dumb, that would educate me even more.  I long read a local lawyer's blog about local legal cases, which helped me understand so much more than our local media did.  But said local blogger is a neocon and got more and more political . . . and I just couldn't take those of his posts anymore. :-)

    Parent
    I advise reading here with the knowledge (none / 0) (#200)
    by oculus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:25:11 PM EST
    Jeralyn is a criminal defense attorney and an active member of NARAL.  I say this as a former prosecutor.  

    Parent
    naral? (none / 0) (#239)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:44:04 PM EST
    I think you mean NACDL. I spent 1994 - 2003 with them advocating for our issues with members of Congress. It got too frustrating, and when the watered-down Innocence Protection Act passed despite years of work on the original (which Hillary was a co-sponsor of by the way), I gave it up for good.  I saw in 2002 when I started blogging that blogging had a greater reach -- even greater than being a pundit on tv. I don't believe we will get major changes in Congress until our elected officials know their constituents -- the public-- want them.

    I write about these issues not to debate with other lawyers but to highlight them for non-lawyers.  When enough people understand the arbitrariness of the death penalty, the risk that innocents are on death row, the failure of the war on drugs, that the U.S. does engage in torture, that increased wiretapping is a threat to all of us, that released sex offenders are not pariahs who need to  be refused employment and a place to live, that the undocumented are human beings and not illegal, etc, etc, then they will make their feelings known and our elected officials won't be afraid to act.

    So ask all the questions you want. I probably don't have time to answer many of them, but I can refer you to links where you can read what I think is the straight scoop. Also, there are still plenty of lawyers who comment here -- Scribe for one -- Peter G. for another -- who may have time to answer.  

    Parent

    oh happy day ! less garbage to read through (none / 0) (#158)
    by thereyougo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:04:01 PM EST
    and its not over.its  the math the math that pesky math.

    Parent
    Chris Carney for BHO (none / 0) (#6)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:50:33 PM EST
    So much for voting your district's wants.
    Clinton's new supporter was Rep. Chris Carney, D-Pa. His congressional district voted overwhelmingly for the former first lady in the Pennsylvania primary on April 22.
    He is a new Congressman and he is mine to boot. He got in because Sherwood had big baggage. But, he is wrong about this and has not exactly supported the Democratic position. Maybe the Democratic Party is split because we allowed so many near Republicans to get into office because of the desire to win control. So much for how that went.

    Huh? (none / 0) (#10)
    by nell on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:53:28 PM EST
    He endorsed Hillary as that is how his district went, he did not endorse Barack.

    Parent
    Full release (5.00 / 5) (#12)
    by nell on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:54:11 PM EST
    BREAKING NEWS: Congressman Chris Carney (PA) endorses Senator Hillary Clinton

    U.S. Rep. Chris Carney announced Thursday that he's backing Hillary Clinton in the presidential primary

    Carney reported meeting with Clinton Wednesday, "and let her know Thursday that I am supporting her."

    "I have watched this primary process very closely, and as I said I would do, I have weighed the temperament and leadership displayed by Sens. Clinton and Obama during the course of this campaign," Carney said in a statement. "We are extremely fortunate to have two very strong candidates vying to lead our nation. Pennsylvania's 10th (Congressional) District (voters) overwhelmingly chose Sen. Clinton in the Pennsylvania primary and I will respect their decision."

    Rebecca Gale, his press secretary, said he was traveling with a congressional delegation to the U.S-Mexico border to evaluate border security and unavailable for comment.

    A full story will be available in Friday's print edition of The Daily Review.

    Parent

    I WAS WRONG. Sorry for the mixup (none / 0) (#21)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:02:54 PM EST
    This one is my goof.Big time. I was reading the story on Obama picking up 5 new Supers. I was reading the names and did not see it as a Clinton pickup. But, having said that, he still has been somewhat of a disappointment. At least now I am not mad at him and will have to go and vote him in again.  

    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#24)
    by nell on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    No problem, I just got scared that he had changed his mind or something. I believe she has gotten 3 since Tuesday. He got 5 today, or just since Tuesday?

    Parent
    The headline was for 5 for Obama (none / 0) (#53)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:15:08 PM EST
    And one of them is saying, 'it is all over'. Gosh, I really wish we could pull a Truman. Ha.

    Parent
    Scared Me Too (none / 0) (#58)
    by flashman on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:16:48 PM EST
    I though I had been dreaming...

    Parent
    This is what is wrong with the rush of (none / 0) (#16)
    by ding7777 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:58:11 PM EST
    getting a 50 state strategy.

    You have "Democratic" labled politicians who do not promote the Democratic values

    Parent

    And, when you do, you can make (none / 0) (#51)
    by scribe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:14:09 PM EST
    examples of them so others get to see what Democratic values are not, and what happens to DINOs.

    FWIW, Chris Carney has/had three basic problems.

    First - for his district, he's actually considered a liberal.  Nationally, not so much, but PA-10 is a lot more conservative than the nation as a whole.  

    Second - he got elected and immediately decided that a good idea would be double-crossing the Blue America (and other Dem Base) folks who (a) put his name on the map, (b) got money and recognition to him and (c) organized support for him.  So, before the election he was pro-gay rights, pro-choice, pro-labor, pro-whatever the Dem Base is for.  After the election - he's anti all the same things.

    Third - there's something off about him, in the sense that I think he's spooked up.  He worked in intelligence as a reservist (and, IIRC, worked in Doug Feith's Office of Special Plans stovepipe) and just happened to have an incumbent with a ~30 years' younger mistress and an inconvenient lawsuit by her.  And, it seems he has lots of friends in the military-industrial-espionage complex.

    Right now - he's a Dem.  We needed the numbers.  But, as soon as we can get a better one, he should be primaried and sent home.

    Parent

    I know (none / 0) (#64)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:19:09 PM EST
    I got this mailing from him one time and in it he took credit for something or other. Like it was his bill. All he did was vote yes. But I worry about him also. That was why it was so easy to read the story and believe. I think I had heard a month ago he was leaning towards Obama. Maybe that is why I could think it true. He is up for election, guess he did not want to be tossed out if he did.

    Parent
    Bloomberg (none / 0) (#23)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:03:49 PM EST
    Ok, I have an idea Mr. Bloomberg, get Hillary as Pres, you get VP, we give you 12 years.  That will kick some you know what.  Good government with big business.  

    Heh. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:05:23 PM EST
    Many New Yorkers would strongly object.

    The junior Senator, yes.

    The mayor, not so much.

    Parent

    Looking for a deep pocket (none / 0) (#32)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:07:02 PM EST
     

    Parent
    Buffet? Gates? Spielberg? (5.00 / 0) (#81)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:26:40 PM EST
    I know emotions are fast and furious, but I feel like the Democratic Party is not my party anymore. I am on the outside looking in. What happened? It was always the party of the fair and the middle class. Never, and I mean Never, did I ever think that some people could grab control and not give a darn about the rest of the party. This is more than a movement. It is a purge.

    Parent
    I feel you Stellaa. (none / 0) (#50)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:13:56 PM EST
    It's just that Bloomberg is so not viable. He is a corporatist from hell.

    The only good thing about him is that he seems to be somewhat interested in improving the environment. But even in that respect, when he had a chance to do something about the air quality in New York, he chose the least viable, most punitive option - which didn't pass the legislature.

    Parent

    He's a traitor, Stellaaa. (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:15:27 PM EST
    In 2001 when we needed Democrats most, he left our party and became a Republican and stayed through two elections as mayor of NYC. He only moved to independent when the R's became less popular. And reportedly he was going to run third-party if Clinton was the Dem nominee, but not if Obama was, which would seem to indicate he would never support her. I wouldn't vote for him for dog-catcher.

    Parent
    Bloomberg's nothing more than an opportunist (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by so tired on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:30:13 PM EST
    with a shaky record on women's issues to boot. The Dems would be wise to steer way clear.

    Parent
    Kennedy must be very nervous (none / 0) (#36)
    by shoephone on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:08:54 PM EST
    remembering the way Obama was trounced by HRC in the Mass. primary -- even with all that help from the annointed ones, Kennedy, Kerry and Patrick. Oh, by the way, I haven't heard anyone challenge Kennedy on his SD endorsement of Obama -- I mean considering that he is obviously not following the will of the people in his own state... and McCain choosing Romney as a running mate may not help matters.

    If McCain chooses Romney (none / 0) (#54)
    by CST on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:15:18 PM EST
    Not only will McCain lose any hope he had of Massachusetts in a landslide, he will lose the rest of the country as well.  We HATE Romney in Mass.

    Parent
    If I was McCain (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by dissenter on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:16:35 PM EST
    I would take Christine Todd Whitman and then watch Obama lose in a landslide.

    Parent
    Are you from NJ? (none / 0) (#76)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:25:01 PM EST
    Hmmm (none / 0) (#136)
    by abfabdem on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:51:42 PM EST
    I always respected her, especially when she left the Bush Administration's sham of an EPA.

    Parent
    Local politics in my focus (none / 0) (#71)
    by spit on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:21:58 PM EST
    Mayoral race is heating up in Sacramento, and the only dem challenger with a shot said in a debate the other night that "marriage is between a man and a woman". I had already decided not to vote for him, to be fair, for a whole lot of unrelated reasons, but seriously, in a major urban area in CA, with a pretty good sized LGBT community (downtown is actually pretty queer), running as a democrat? I wasn't that worked up about the race, but now I'm PO'ed.

    But a fair number of people are unhappy enough with the incumbent that I fear he might still have a shot. He's a minor celeb, so he starts with that bonus, too.

    Fear? The Clintons? (none / 0) (#78)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:25:51 PM EST
    So Democrats are afraid of winning now?  No wonder they are fast becoming the opposition party of nothingness.

    Since Pelosi "impeachment off the table" and "gas tax is DOA" (god forbid FISA be DOA)...shows how little if any cajones the Dems have (save the Clintons).

    Hillary should pull a Lieberman and run independent.  I don't know if she could pull it off but it would be fun watching.  I for one would quit my job and work for it full-time.


    You live in Gary-- so yes, you can? :-) (nt) (5.00 / 3) (#131)
    by Cream City on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:50:44 PM EST
    me too... (none / 0) (#90)
    by p lukasiak on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:32:15 PM EST
    seriously.  Clinton has been positioning herself to campaign as a moderate for eight years now.  If anyone can grab "the middle" as a third party candidate, it would be Hillary Clinton.

    And while a deadlocked Electoral College would mean a President Pelosi until it was resolved, IMHO even Pelosi would be better than either McCain or Obama.

    Parent

    McCain the (none / 0) (#87)
    by Leisa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:31:09 PM EST
    maverick... who do you think he will pick for VP?


    Question is will they go all in for moderates? (5.00 / 0) (#176)
    by davnee on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:14:05 PM EST
    The R's have a big choice here.  Do they run to the right with the VP pick to placate the base or do they run to the middle with the VP pick to pick off all the indies and blue collar dems that are suddenly very much in play?  Essentially, do they contrast McCain or do they double down on McCain?  I'd imagine they are currently conflicted on this.  If they pick a Crist or some other moderate, will the base keep its powder dry?  If the Republican base can stomach a moderate in the VP slot in the name of victory and still turn out in their reliable numbers, man the R's are going to blow Obama out of the water.

    Parent
    Lindsey Graham? (none / 0) (#112)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:40:41 PM EST
    Charles Crist of Florida?   I looked on the RNC site to see other names and there is a whole bunch of stuff on Obama. In fact, it was more Obama than McCain. Ha.

    Parent
    yeah (none / 0) (#137)
    by Leisa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:53:09 PM EST
    They are ready to go for Obama and then some.

    The VP is the most important pick for McCain right now.    They are thinking about the base of democrats that are not happy with the DNC, that is for sure!

    Parent

    I tell ya it won't be Pawlenty (none / 0) (#183)
    by DFLer on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:15:52 PM EST
    MN Gov. Pawlenty's 2 terms have been plurality, not majority, wins

    Also, he couldn't even carry the GOP caucuses for McCain. They went to Romney

    Parent

    Kennedy hated Bill before the 'act' (none / 0) (#88)
    by BarnBabe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:31:43 PM EST
    Do you remember when the Clintons went to Hyannis Port in the 90's. And when the boat was docking Teddy was not even going to go down and greet it. Jackie told him to do it because he was running for re-election that year. Kerry did not get full support, the Clintons gave it to Wes Clark. And Dean did not get full support. Now, let's see, those 3 all against Clinton. And Teddy and Kerry and Dean all ran for President. How did that work out?  

    TeamObama + Creative Class: Wii came here to Rool (none / 0) (#95)
    by Ellie on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:34:14 PM EST
    At least with Dance Dance Revolution players get to pop and lock off some @ss lard. (I love playing that.)

    Just on the merits of personal health and fitness it's a more worthy pursuit than the online game of everyone using their new iPhones for hive-minded astro-trolling in a daily round of Get Bad Monster Lady.

    This is what the Democratic Leadership has become (none / 0) (#201)
    by stevenb on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:26:45 PM EST
    Consider leaving the party...

    LINK

    Kennedy: No veep slot for Clinton

    It's fun to think about, but there are so many obstacles, and Ted Kennedy isn't buying, he said on Bloomberg Television's "Political Capital With Al Hunt," which airs this weekend.

    "I don't think it's possible," he told Hunt of the joint ticket, continuing that:

        Obama should choose a running mate who "is in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people," Kennedy said. "If we had real leadership -- as we do with Barack Obama -- in the No. 2 spot as well, it'd be enormously helpful."

    Ouch.

    BTW did anyone see the despicable Byron York's (none / 0) (#205)
    by zyx on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:30:46 PM EST
    recent piece about Michelle Obama?

    here

    http://tinyurl.com/3e977x

    "Michelle Obama's Tale of Woe"

    It's actually kind of funny.  She doesn't appeal to me too much, and she sure doesn't appeal to him.  I guess she does appeal to some people.  We shall see.

    Heh, I've seen her do that routine (5.00 / 0) (#222)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:49:19 PM EST
    and flipped the channel after a few choice words  ;)

    Ya know, I didn't realize I was supposed tio be angry because "they" made me pay back my student loans . . . lol!~ The very loans that gave me the freedom to be me and earn a living at it. Geeze. You'd think I woulda had a clue . . . .

    Parent

    The Other Obama is not ready (none / 0) (#225)
    by Cream City on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:53:36 PM EST
    on day one.  The Jackie makeover is not enough.  

    I've watched Cindy McCain now, and she is ready.

    Michelle Obama actually came from the working class and could use that for her husband's sake.  But the bitterness . . . maybe that's where he got the idea that the working class thinks that way?

    Not so.

    Parent

    Another idiotic Taser incident (none / 0) (#216)
    by scribe on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:42:58 PM EST
    In Kamloops, British Columbia, a team of three officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police three times tasered an 82 year-old man lying in his hospital bed, when he became delirious from a lack of oxygen and would not let go of a knife.  Surprisingly, the old codger survived.  The officer in charge said:

    "'OK, get him because we got more important work to do on the street tonight,'"

    The RCMP claims they had no other option but to taser the old man.  Not like he was going to be running around or anything, seeing as he was post-bypass surgery and delirious from lack of oxygen and all.

    My encounters with Canadian law enforcement have always been polite, but have never included the RCMP.

    New World Order man.... (none / 0) (#231)
    by kdog on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:07:06 PM EST
    even the peace loving, friendly as hell Canadians are on board with it.

    We better get used to it or take up arms...these are our choices.  In the near future, getting tased will be a rite of passage like spending the night in jail is now.

    I always say "if you've never been arrested you were never really free"...pretty soon I'll have to change it to "if you've never been tased you were never really free".

    Parent

    Interesting Senate Candidate (none / 0) (#218)
    by Ella on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:44:15 PM EST
    I've been following the Senate Candidacy of a guy in Georgia- Rand Knight (www.knightforsenate.com).
    He seems to have some sound ideas on looking at all major issues as one and treating them as such. I suggest checking him out-

    Here's a sample from his "Green Deal"-

    Energy, Water, the War in Iraq, Healthcare, Education, the Economy and Jobs: these issues are not mutually exclusive, but literally one single issue. Rand Knight's proposal for solving this one, over-arching issue, is called `The Green Deal'. The Green Deal is a vision for a new future. One in which a strong green economy provides opportunity and security for all Americans.

    1.)    Create Green-Collar Jobs- Green-Collar jobs would provide a stable, career oriented growth economy to support our middle class for generations to come. Green jobs exist in manufacturing, construction, operations and maintenance, and new installations of water and electrical-power infrastructure. Retrofitting buildings for energy and water-efficiency; building new, energy efficient mass transportation networks; building cars that are plug-in hybrids and that run on clean energy; revolutionizing energy and focusing on solar, wind and hydro power as well as biofuels are all examples of green jobs that build green profits and green savings. Every dollar we invest in Green-Collar jobs will strengthen the middle class, reduce carbon pollution, improve quality of life and provide a federal and local tax base to pay for healthcare, Social Security, education and infrastructure, which, in turn, will generate more jobs.

    2.)    Use tax base garnered through Green-Collar jobs to fund domestic programs- As the richest country in the world we must provide healthcare for our citizens- right now in Georgia one and a half million people are without health insurance, that's about 18% of our population. We also need to provide a world-class public school system for our children, in Georgia less than 62% of high school freshmen graduate. Here and in many other parts of the country our infrastructure is literally crumbling before our eyes. 20% of Georgia's bridges are classified as functionally deficient or structurally obsolete. It is mandatory to make these improvements soon. As Senator, I will always vote to fund programs which directly affect the health and wellbeing of the people of Georgia.

    3.)    Amend Trade Agreements- American workers are losing their jobs to countries that have no regard for labor rights or environmental standards. We must close the loopholes that make it profitable for companies to ship our jobs overseas. Additionally, we must use our market power to encourage our trade partners to adopt environmental and labor friendly standards. We must embrace a mirror trade system that will require our trading partners to meet our standards-- the standards of a new green economy coupled with our labor regulations- otherwise corporations will continue to ship jobs off shores.

    4.)    Improve Physical Health- Clean energy means cutting carbon emissions- which will lead to improvements in general health as we will be polluting the environment far less. These health improvements will save us money on healthcare. Also, cutting carbon emissions will reduce the progression of global climate change, which means fending off an increase in infectious diseases, droughts and natural disasters that already extract enormous costs in our health, our food supply and our job base.

    5.)    Make Corporations more aware of their demands for natural resources and the implications for resource extraction and consumption on climate change, ecosystem health and the general health of the citizens- Georgia needs a fighter who will restore democratic values. Democrats want to take care of each other- we want to make sure our people are healthy, educated, and safe. Rand Knight is ready to go to battle for Georgia and stand up for working people. For too long we've allowed George Bush, Dick Cheney and Saxby Chambliss to take from the American people and give to the corporations- they abuse the power of the government and weaken the economy of our Country.  The United States' debt has reached almost 9 and a half trillion dollars and has been increasing, on average, 1.5 billion dollars per day since 2006. Our total debt is over 65% of our Gross Domestic Product.

    Our hard-earned money has been given to foreign corporations, our jobs moved offshore, and our healthcare taken away while our citizens fight wars overseas. Rand doesn't want to see one more person die in the Middle East in an attempt to secure oil, especially with the immense capacity for domestic energy right here at home.


    Rasmussen (none / 0) (#233)
    by cannondaddy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 03:14:06 PM EST
    is going to stop daily polling for the Democratic nominaton.  

    Comments now closed (none / 0) (#251)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:59:05 PM EST