ThinkFast: February 6, 2008
ThinkFast: February 6, 2008
In the “biggest day of U.S. presidential voting before the November 4 election to succeed President George W. Bush,” Barack Obama won 13 states and Hillary Clinton took eight. John McCain “won nine contests, including victories in California and the Northeast, to take a commanding lead in the Republican race.” See the results here.
Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell testified yesterday that a failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences” and “severely degrade the capabilities” of intelligence agencies to protect the country.
McConnell said yesterday that “Al Qaeda is gaining in strength from its refuge in Pakistan and is steadily improving its ability to recruit, train and position operatives capable of carrying out attacks inside the United States.”
In prepared testimony today, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, “says U.S. forces are ’significantly stressed’ by fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.” “The pace of ongoing operations,” says Mullen, “impacts our ability to be ready to counter future threats.”
Facing a “draconian” budget that would “cut in half the $400 million allocated in advance by Congress for fiscal year 2009 and cut $220 million from the $420 million already planned for 2010,” public broadcasters are “scrambling” to secure federal funding for their programs.
The subprime crisis has brought “boarded-up homes and broken dreams to thousands of minority families inner cities.” Reuters reports that urban renewal will need to be at the top of the next president’s “to do” list.
Cases of racial harassment filed with the EEOC increased 24% last year, “a time of racial turmoil that included the Jena Six controversy and an outbreak of noose displays.” The number of filings increased from 5,646 in 2006 to 6,977 in 2007 while “the annual figure has more than doubled since 1991.”
The AFL-CIO has filed a lawsuit Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, claiming that new Labor Department disclosure rules “should be held unlawful and set aside.” In a report last year, Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Scott Lilly described how the new rules are part of an effort “to undermine the reputation of the labor union movement.”
Republican leaders continue to squabble about how to deal with earmarks. The Hill notes that Reps. John Boehner (R-OH), Adam Putnam (R-FL) and Eric Cantor (R-VA) are “the only Republican leaders who have voted for more than half of the anti-earmark amendments offered on the House floor since the 2006 election.”
And finally: Right-wing pundit Glenn Beck took a shot at Keith Olbermann, stating, “If I saw Olbermann standing on the subway [platform], I might think for a moment about pushing him, but I wouldn’t.” Olbermann responded: “The subway remark summarizes who Glenn is. If he (or anybody else) fell in front of a train, I hope I’d have the courage to emulate Wesley Autry and try to save him.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
This November, vote for the Insurgency.
http://www.tshirtinsurgency.com
Or, if not, vote for Obama, but tell everyone you voted for Ron Paul.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:11 amAnd finally: Right-wing pundit Glenn Beck took a shot at Keith Olbermann, stating, “If I saw Olbermann standing on the subway [platform], I might think for a moment about pushing him, but I wouldn’t.†Olbermann responded: “The subway remark summarizes who Glenn is. If he (or anybody else) fell in front of a train, I hope I’d have the courage to emulate Wesley Autry and try to save him.â€
oh you goofy bushbots need to be dropped off in the middle of the ocean without a life raft…. if you can make it back to land, we’ll scoop you up and throw you out again… if after 5 successful tries, then you can apply to become citizens all while under probation for the rest of your lives.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:12 amDirector of National Intelligence Mike McConnell testified yesterday that a failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences†and “severely degrade the capabilities†of intelligence agencies to protect the country.
Bullsh!t
February 6th, 2008 at 9:12 amRight-wing pundit Glenn Beck took a shot at Keith Olbermann, stating, “If I saw Olbermann standing on the subway [platform], I might think for a moment about pushing him, but I wouldn’t.†Olbermann responded: “The subway remark summarizes who Glenn is. If he (or anybody else) fell in front of a train, I hope I’d have the courage to emulate Wesley Autry and try to save him.â€
And that highlights the difference between neocons and just about everyone else.
Too bad it is a point that will be lost on most chimpy-humpers.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:13 amMcConnell said yesterday that “Al Qaeda is gaining in strength from its refuge in Pakistan and is steadily improving its ability to recruit, train and position operatives capable of carrying out attacks inside the United States.â€
Nothing like elections in the US to get those terrorists all fired up, eh?
February 6th, 2008 at 9:14 amTried to post this several times last night, but technical problems prevented it.
I urge posters to go to reich-wing sites like freedom’s watch, gathering of eagles, redstate, and similar links to boast that antiwar candidates are getting the most $ donations from the troops.
I tried it myself, but there seems to be a lifetime ban against my posting at these sites.
Why do the reich-wing nut jobs hate freedom of speech?
February 6th, 2008 at 9:14 amDirector of National Intelligence Mike McConnell testified yesterday that a failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences 
Indeed. And passing it will have even greater consequences.
Mike, if Bush & the Telecoms have nothing to hide, WHY DO THEY NEED IMMUNITY?
February 6th, 2008 at 9:18 amMcConnell said yesterday that “Al Qaeda is gaining in strength
Well that wouldn’t be because Bushco practically abandoned finishing the job of getting Al Qaeda, while invading Iraq for made up reasons ( Big ass lies ) would it?
“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.”
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
f-kin’ neos
February 6th, 2008 at 9:20 amAnd that highlights the difference between neocons and just about everyone else.
Comment by Wayne — February 6, 2008 @ 9:13 am
Agreed!
Glenn (neoCon): thoughts of violence towards those that have opposite views.
Olbermann (progressive): would possibly risk life to save another (no matter what his/her political view
Nice role models, there, righties. Nice role models.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:20 amLet’s go, Obama!
February 6th, 2008 at 9:24 amThose who violate your constitutional rights must do do with impunity. That’s the only way Bush&Co can preserve your freedom and democracy.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:26 amRepublican leaders continue to squabble about how to deal with earmarks. The Hill notes that Reps. John Boehner (R-OH), Adam Putnam (R-FL) and Eric Cantor (R-VA) are “the only Republican leaders who have voted for more than half of the anti-earmark amendments.
That’s our tan man, Boner. Yep, he’ll bow to Bush, lie to the public, lie about the Dems, claim he’s against earmarks and then vote for them.
Typical Republic hypocrite, who speaks from both sides of his mouth while waving the Bush Banner.
God, I thought Hasturd was bad…
February 6th, 2008 at 9:26 am#4 Wayne -
I thought the same thing. It’s really sad that Beck can make a joke like that… “Ha ha – I don’t agree with Olberman because he uses facts and common sense, so I’m going to make a joke about murdering him! Ha! I’m clever!”
Perfect response by Olberman. “Dude, I don’t like you. But I’m still a human being and would try to save your sorry arse.”
February 6th, 2008 at 9:27 amDidn’t w just tell us in the SOTU that the terrorist were “on the run?” Now it turns out that they are on the run to regroup and become stronger. w and his cronies take opposite sides on any question so that the foot soldiers in their movement (doughy, limpy, LIEberjoke, etc.) will have a talking point to try to counter any progressive view. This is just one more attempt to cover the whole topic.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:29 amMike McConnell testified yesterday that a failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences†and “severely degrade the capabilities†of intelligence agencies to protect the country.
So failure to give immunity to criminals who violated the Constitutional Rights of practically everyone in the US is a threat to the criminal regime that inhabits the White House. We know that already.
These asswipes are scared sh!tless that the telecom CEOs will spill everything to defend themselves if it gets to court.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:31 amI say let it all be aired in open court, so we can find out how deep the slime pool really is.
I’m dissapointed that Hillary took California, but Obama is only what, 100 pts. behind Hil?
Obama!
USA!
Obama!
USA!
Here’s hoping that Obama zooms Clinton on March 5th to secure the Democratic nomination for the 44th Presidency of the United States.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:32 amLast night found MN’s Democratic party turnout nearly 4X as high as the ‘04 & ‘06 elections. That’s remarkable. It’s also indicative of how enthused voters, particularly young voters, are about Mr. Obama.
I was glad to Obama the first choice, but I have no idea how Mittany won the R side. ND also chose Mittany & Obama, but Paul, I believe, had his highest totals to date with 21% of the vote. He even beat Huckabible.
With McCain ‘winning’ Nationally, maybe today is the day Rush’s head explodes live on-air.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:33 am“The Glenn Beck Program”
This man has convinced himself that he’s America’s primetime voice, and ABC joined in on the ego stroking.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:38 amYesterday’s primaries showed that early primary voting may not be a good idea. Edwards got a lot of votes that probably would have gone to Obama because of early voting in many states. I also expect that by the time the election came around, many people who voted early for Hillary wished they could change their votes after watching her the last week before the primary.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:40 am#16 Yes, we can. Obama indeed! New hope for america and perhaps the only hope.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:42 amDirector of National Intelligence Mike McConnell testified yesterday that a failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences†and “severely degrade the capabilities†of intelligence agencies to protect the country.
McConnell is so full of $hit. The only thing giving the telcoms immunity would do would be to further erode the rule of law. Bush still maintains that the telcoms did nothing wrong. So, since they did nothing wrong, they don’t need immunity. Besides, we still don’t know the whole story of what went on with their spying. If we give them immunity, we will never know the whole story.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:42 amThe Bush Government and rightwing radio, seeking to push innocent people in front of trains and fear monger the entire nation into giving up all of their privacy rights to megacorporations.
Such is America in 2008.
-GSD
February 6th, 2008 at 9:43 amComment by Zimzone — February 6, 2008 @ 9:33 am
Despite the horrors of the Iraq invasion, we can take at least some comfort in our democratic turnout, which will close wounds, and Obama is the visionary of our times.
And Minnesota is a great state, but has its share of kooky Republicans (Read: Bachmann).
February 6th, 2008 at 9:44 amMcConnell said yesterday that “Al Qaeda is gaining in strength from its refuge in Pakistan
Of course AQ is gaining strength in Pakistan. Since Bush isn’t interested in capturing Osama and has allowed him to function unfettered in Pakistan, it stands to reason that AQ would gain strength. It’s time for us to make Busharruf step up to the plate and do the right thing. Otherwise, we should not give Pakistan another dime of our aid money. We have already given them billions and we have nothing to show for that investment.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:44 amComment by bilbobaggins — February 6, 2008 @ 9:40 am
Personally, I’m not real impressed with Hillary’s republican style dirty tricks she and her campaign have employed so far.
But then, I am not real impressed with her republican-lite Senate voting record either.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:45 am“The pace of ongoing operations,†says Mullen, “impacts our ability to be ready to counter future threats.â€
And Osama and other enemies of the US are sitting there right now laughing their a$$ off. They don’t need to attack the US. George Bush has attacked the US from within and done more damage than AQ or any other enemy could possibly do to this country.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:45 ampublic broadcasters are “scrambling†to secure federal funding for their programs.
Another government program that the Republiscums would love to drown in a bathtub.
I say take the money from the bloated military budget. There is still money in the bloated military budget for Star Wars. I thought that program was scuttled a long time ago.
Bush has broken our government and it may never recover.
Way to go Bush and the Republicans. May you all rot in hell for what you have done to this country.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:47 amIn a report last year, Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Scott Lilly described how the new rules are part of an effort “to undermine the reputation of the labor union movement.â€
Actually, it is more of an effort to kill the unions. That has been a goal of the Republiscum party since Regan took office. And they were doing a very good job of it until recently when labor unions started gaining in membership.
This is another big reason to vote Democratic in the next election. If you don’t want your pay and benefits to go back to where they were before the Unions came along, vote Democratic.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:49 am#16 Yes, we can. Obama indeed! New hope for america and perhaps the only hope.
Comment by whatevah — February 6, 2008 @ 9:42 am
Obama has the qualities in spades to be a 21st Century president. Obama loves new ideas, is strikingly intelligent, and cares deeply about all of our communities. The Presidency to him, I’m sure, is not an entitlement.
No need for Obama to complete a second term in the Senate or run for Gov. of Illinois. He’s equipped right here and right now to be our next president.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:50 amComment by Zimzone — February 6, 2008 @ 9:33 am
————————-
You’re right about the turnout! It was completely insane at my precinct in Champlin. I arrived 20 minutes early and the line was already long.
Do you know the final turnout numbers? Last I heard, it was something like 203,000 Dems and 80,000 Repukes!
Go Obama!!! It will be very hard to vote for Billary if she gets the nomination.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:50 amOlbermann responded: “The subway remark summarizes who Glenn is. If he (or anybody else) fell in front of a train, I hope I’d have the courage to emulate Wesley Autry and try to save him.â€
All I have to say is that Olbermann is one classy guy and Beck is the definition of the word scum. Don’t you just love how all these talking heads and right wingers talk about killing people. I don’t think I have ever heard anyone on the Democratic side of the fence fantasizing about killing people they don’t like.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:52 am“Barack Obama won 13 states and Hillary Clinton took eight.”
—————————
I am happy that Obama did as well as he did yesterday, and that Hillary isn’t just steamrolling her way through the primaries.
But I am disappointed with the way the media (including TP!) are describing the process — “won (state)”, “took (state)”, “(state) goes to __________”, etc.
This isn’t the Electoral College, people! Except for a few states whose Republican primaries are winner-take-all, the delegates are apportioned. So even if Obama “won” Connecticut, Hillary still made off with about half the delegates. Likewise, Obama grabbed many delegates from states that Hillary “took”.
People are confused enough about how our convoluted primary system works. Why the media needs to make it more so is beyond me.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:54 amCases of racial harassment filed with the EEOC increased 24% last year, “a time of racial turmoil that included the Jena Six controversy and an outbreak of noose displays.â€
Of course racial harasssment has increased in this country, the neocons have made racism sexy again.They’ve made violence against people who think or look different fashionable. When people complain about it, the cons scream “PC police” when something bad happens they try to wash their hands.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:54 amI urge posters to go to reich-wing sites like freedom’s watch, gathering of eagles, redstate, and similar links to boast that antiwar candidates are getting the most $ donations from the troops.
I tried it myself, but there seems to be a lifetime ban against my posting at these sites.
Why do the reich-wing nut jobs hate freedom of speech?
Comment by Uncle Ho
You may be able to post it once, if you are not already banned, but expect to be banned immediately after making a post like that. The right wing only believes in freedom of speech if you agree with them, unlike TP where right wingers are free to post as long as they don’t stink up the place to the extent where everyone else wants to leave.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:54 amWhen screaming blame for all the evil this administration has done to our country let us not forget the enabeler’s of our own like Palosi and Reid…After all Palosi screwed us by taking impeachment off the table and Reid did a bang up job when he brought forth
February 6th, 2008 at 9:56 amthe bill that had immunety to the telacom’s when there were 2 other’s that would of held them accountable…Let’s be equal on our critacism…..Blessings
“Go Obama!!! It will be very hard to vote for Billary if she gets the nomination.
Comment by Vet —
Using the Right’s frames, I see. Does anyone really think that Hillary is such a shrinking violet, that her presidency will be run by her husband? If so, you haven’t been paying any real attention to her character. Bill will have many suggestions, no doubt. But a Hillary presidency will be just that. She will wear the governing pants.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:57 am“Mike McConnell testified yesterday that a failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences†and “severely degrade the capabilities†of intelligence agencies to protect the country.”
———————————————–
In other words, if we don’t allow telecoms (or anyone else) to break the law at the request of the President or Vice President, life as we know it will cease to exist. Nice try, McConnell — but we’re not buying this “be very afraid” crap anymore. It reeks of desperation, and it’s a pity you don’t see that.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:57 amI think that Democrats should take a page from the Republican Handbook to ensure that a Democrat is elected President in 2008!
Fight for the candidate of your choice until the Convention selects a nominee.
Once a winner is chosen, support that candidate! It’s what the Republicans did with then-Gov. Bush! He was a major failure, BUT the Republicans backed him! Now he’s a major failure as President!
If Democrats continue to bash Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama after they are chosen as the nominee, then expect 4 more years of the Failure that is the Bush Administration!
February 6th, 2008 at 9:57 amComment by Wayne — February 6, 2008 @ 9:45 am
Wayne,
The 90s were the best of the 20th Century, but I’m concerned about the DLC-pushed triangulation. I believe that the definition of compromise comes out in favor too often of Republicans. I’m concerned about NAFTA. I’m concerned about corporations owning influence over our government and our colleges. The Clintons did well handling the economy during the 90s, but I’m afraid the trade deals have got the better of us. Obama, I’m sure, would be no less capable than the Clintons than handling the economy but would shun trade agreements and would make jobs access and middle class strengthning a focal point.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:58 amMcConnell said yesterday that “Al Qaeda is gaining in strength from its refuge in Pakistan and is steadily improving its ability to recruit, train and position operatives capable of carrying out attacks inside the United States.â€
———————————
On the other hand, Mike — you’re correct on this one. We’ve been trying to tell y’all this for some time now. Yet, the focus is still on Iraq. Can you explain this?
February 6th, 2008 at 9:59 amI’m dissapointed that Hillary took California, but Obama is only what, 100 pts. behind Hil?
Here’s hoping that Obama zooms Clinton on March 5th to secure the Democratic nomination for the 44th Presidency of the United States.
Comment by McWars
The problem is with California’s early voting. Hundreds of thousands of people in California voted early, as evidenced by all the votes that Edwards got. I also suspect that a lot of people regretted voting for Hillary after her last week on the campaign trail. She told some pretty big whoppers and got caught in them.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:59 amMcConnell said yesterday that “Al Qaeda is gaining in strength from its refuge in Pakistan and is steadily improving its ability to recruit, train and position operatives capable of carrying out attacks inside the United States.â€
Why are we in Iraq again?
February 6th, 2008 at 10:03 amActually, it is more of an effort to kill the unions. That has been a goal of the Republiscum party since Regan took office.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 6, 2008 @ 9:49 am
Actually it has been the goal of Republicans since the 1880s when they would send US troops to kill striking mine workers.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:04 am“It reeks of desperation, and it’s a pity you don’t see that.”
Comment by missmolly
The desperation is real, because the threat (of another DNI taking over next year, and being given all the data he’s been keeping hidden to protect the Bushies) is real.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:04 amComment by barfly — February 6, 2008 @ 9:57 am
————————–
I agree that she is her own person, and not controlled by Bill. She’s even closer to being a Repuke then Bill is.
Everyone should read Greg Palast for some insight on the Clintons.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:05 amfailure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences†and “severely degrade the capabilities†of intelligence agencies to protect the country.
But we can’t discuss the classified details of why or why not this may be needed, so just trust us on this one, OK?
February 6th, 2008 at 10:06 am“I agree that she is her own person, and not controlled by Bill.”
Then lay off the “Billary” crap. You don’t have to do their work for them, y’know?
February 6th, 2008 at 10:08 amComment by bilbobaggins — February 6, 2008 @ 9:59 am
Exactly, and I hold a strong belief that most of those Edwards voters would have flocked to Obama if they had the option of re-casting their ballots in light of his exit from the race.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:10 amMcWars; The 90s were nothing. The 60s was a happening. Standing up against the man & Questioning authority. Civil rights movement & massive antiwar demonstrations.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:12 am#47 – “Then lay off the “Billary†crap. You don’t have to do their work for them, y’know?” Comment by barfly — February 6, 2008 @ 10:08 am
Apparantly, some of us progressives/liberals do have to attack our own side when the Republicans don’t do it often enough.
Despite how sad the Republican state of affairs is, there is a chance that we see Pres. McCain in 2009, simply because we spend all our time bashing people of our own party.
If we WANTED to win the Presidency we’d support the Democrat Nominee, no matter who they are! I hope, and pray, that we get out collective act together and suppor the candidate, even if we hate him/her!
February 6th, 2008 at 10:13 amEveryone should read Greg Palast for some insight on the Clintons.
Comment by Vet — February 6, 2008 @ 10:05 am
And their role in Musharraf’s coup.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:13 amComment by McWars — February 6, 2008 @ 9:58 am
Yeah, I thought Clinton did an ok job, except for signing NAFTA, DMCA, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”and finishing the deregulation of the media Reagan started. Bill was always too much a corporate whore for my tastes.
I always thought it was hilarious the republiscums tried to paint him as a liberal. Bill was everything but liberal.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:16 amTurn out the vote! It is scaring the hell out of the dividers and the erstwhile dictators!
February 6th, 2008 at 10:17 amMcCain thinks of America as an empire,and he will be the one who tries to do everything to stretch this empire to reach every corner on this planet.
McCain needs to read history that such thinking is not new..and many empires carried these thoughts before,until theses empires no longer exist.
We are a country that lives above its means to accomodate such views; to continue the war dreams of McCain.Sacrifice will be so high by this nation reaching a critical point.
McCain still dreams of many military adventures…he stated that himself..more wars and more frontiers…he said that we are in Korea, Japan and Germany…I can’t see why we shouldn’t be in Iraq for 100 years”.
He will add many countries to his list of military adventure..’bomb bomb bomb Iran’ will be his first ,he sang the war songs himself already.
He is not thinking about the reactions to his wars, or the economic aspects of what he is planning…he always thinks war is the first solution regardless of consequences. With Lieberman,Neocons,and the PNAC planners around him ,then McCain got all the push for war he needs.
McCain will put us in war with another superpower, in search of his American empire dreams. And that’s World War III, the dream of the Pedhoretz,the Giuliani, the AIPAC and the all backers in the war party cabal.
I think the American people are now wise enough not to be fooled .
They already saw what twisted thinking by some war leaders can lead to.
History taught us that leaders who reach to wars first,as the only solution…can take their countries to an ultimate disaster.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:18 amObama, I’m sure, would be no less capable than the Clintons than handling the economy but would shun trade agreements and would make jobs access and middle class strengthning a focal point.
Comment by McWars — February 6, 2008 @ 9:58 am
Obama skipped the vote on the really BAD Peru trade deal. If he was against it he should’ve been there to EMPHATICALLY vote NO.
Hillary skipped the vote as well.
Obama naively (or politically calculatingly) said…”The Peru trade deal had labor and environmental agreements in it.”
Yes Mr. Obama, all the trade deals have such agreements. Problem is they’re never enforced. The workers end up being wage slaves or WORSE…real slaves. EVERY TIME.
Most believe Mr. Obama supported the trade deal even though he didn’t vote on it.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:19 amComment by Uncle Ho — February 6, 2008 @ 10:12 am
I think too often in economic terms. The social movement of the 60s exceeded any glory of corporate-controlled GDP numbers. That’s where lasting comfort rests.
My apologies for being ignorant.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:19 amApparantly, some of us progressives/liberals do have to attack our own side when the Republicans don’t do it often enough.
—————————-
That’s the problem. Hillary is neither Progressive nor Liberal.
That said, I would still vote for her over any Repuke candidate, since our system doesn’t realistically allow for a third-party candidate.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:22 am…failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequences†and “severely degrade the capabilities†of intelligence agencies to protect the country.
How so, pray tell?
It’s like shining a light on cockroaches: watch how they scramble and run.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:27 amI always thought it was hilarious the republiscums tried to paint him as a liberal. Bill was everything but liberal.
Comment by Wayne — February 6, 2008 @ 10:16 am
Heh, and repugs oppose Hillary because of a somewhat screechy voice? Hannity and Beck would be guaranteed continued wealth and airtime under Mr. and Mrs. Triangulation. But I won’t give them pointers; they can ride the wave into secured irrelevance this fall.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:27 amGlenn Beck is an a**hole. No other way on earth to describe him.
Yes, I’m also hoping that Limbaugh’s head explodes on air today!
February 6th, 2008 at 10:28 amIf we WANTED to win the Presidency we’d support the Democrat Nominee, no matter who they are! I hope, and pray, that we get out collective act together and suppor the candidate, even if we hate him/her!
Comment by Democrat Soldier — February 6, 2008 @ 10:13 am
Actually I would vote for a potted plant before voting republican. That said, we must also hold our own accountable for their own actions or else we also become the same kind of hypocrites the Republicans are.
I was bashing Hillary’s Senate voting record before she ever became the media’s crowned Democratic candidate.
Co-sponsor for the Flag burning amendment? WTF?
Thank you, but I don’t believe I will stop critiquing her bad choices, even if I pull the lever for her next November. I already bleed for my right to speak my mind.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:30 am“If we WANTED to win the Presidency we’d support the Democrat Nominee, no matter who they are! I hope, and pray, that we get out collective act together and suppor the candidate, even if we hate him/her!”
Comment by Democrat Soldier
As I said, don’t use their frames and do their work for them.
It’s “democratic nominee.”
But anyway, this sounds suspiciously like the rhetoric of the Right. We always castigate them for “putting party over country,” and when you advocate doing this, it rubs me the wrong way. Vote for the candidate who you think wiil be good for the country, and advocate for them in this way, not simply “the democrat(ic) candidate.”
And in a side note, I just hope that now 9/11’s presidential aspirations have been throttled for good. I don’t care what party he belonged to, I just couldn’t stomach that guy.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:31 amIf we WANTED to win the Presidency we’d support the Democrat Nominee, no matter who they are! I hope, and pray, that we get out collective act together and suppor the candidate, even if we hate him/her!
Comment by Democrat Soldier — February 6, 2008 @ 10:13 am
What if we believe the Democratic nominee will be little better than the Republican? What if we believe the push for a 3rd party candiate is more important than supporting the current two-party system (actually its party 1 and party 1a). Are we allowed to make such a complex calculation and support it here if we deem its the fastest course to correct the ills of the county? Or must we fall in ideological line like a bunch of Huckabee’s?
They told me to shut up because Pelosi and Reid would bring change to the Legislative branch. Why should I belive these two right of center Dems will not produce the same disappointment? Especially when both their records seem to point to that obvious fact.
I’m not saying that Obama cannot win me over. He just hasn’t yet. He must EARN my vote. I will not give it to him because of some lofty rhetoric. “Yes WE can” is a slogan. I don’t fall for slogans.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:33 amEven as we speak, every Republican in America is on his knees, praying for another terror attack.
“Please, Lord,” they’re saying, “Let us get hit hard. I don’t care how many people get killed–just so long as it hurts the Democrats.”
That’s how much the Right love America.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:34 amWhat did we miss?
Political Vendetta in Alabama.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:36 amComment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda — February 6, 2008 @ 10:33 am
I am right there with you. I believe that too.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:41 amLooks like Wayne, Barfly and myself (2million) all think along the same lines on this topic.
I have reason to believe Hillary and Barack will not return Habeas Corpus (UNACCEPTABLE)
I have reason to belive Hillary and Barack will not investigate and prosecute the Bush administration for their many crimes (UNACCEPTABLE)
I have reason to believe Hillary and Barack will happily use some of the unconstitutional powers the “Unitary exective” Bush has claimed (UNACCEPTABLE)
How can any Democrat vote for these two without having these major questions answered? Why do you give your vote away so easily? Do you put party before Constitution and law just as the Repubs. do? How does that make us any better?
February 6th, 2008 at 10:49 am“How does that make us any better?”
Comment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda
I think we should name this the Clinton Quandary. Bill’s self-serving triangulation will be practiced by Hillary (with certain refinements), and will give republicans additional political ammo. Democrats will lay low, and hope not to get hit in the crossfire. How does this address our many institutional woes?
February 6th, 2008 at 10:56 amI don’t think I have ever heard anyone on the Democratic side of the fence fantasizing about killing people they don’t like.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 6, 2008 @ 9:52 am
That’s weird, you can read calls to have Bush, Cheney et al hung here at TP almost everyday.
February 6th, 2008 at 10:56 am#62 – “this sounds suspiciously like the rhetoric of the Right. We always castigate them for “putting party over country,†and when you advocate doing this, it rubs me the wrong way. Vote for the candidate who you think wiil be good for the country, and advocate for them in this way, not simply “the democrat(ic) candidate.— Comment by barfly — February 6, 2008 @ 10:31 am
Yeah, it should sound like their rhetoric! It IS their rhetoric!
Sorry if it rubs you the wrong way, but can you suggest a another way to keep a Republican out of the Presidency for 2009? Right now, I can’t.
I’m all for voting for the person who represents your values, but who would you rather see being sworn-in on Jan 20th, 2009?
I know that a McCain Administration is another 4 years of “continuue the massive failures of “Dubya” Bush.”
February 6th, 2008 at 10:56 amBE AFRAID! BE VERY AFRAID!!!
Al Qaeda seen planning attack on US
February 6th, 2008 at 10:56 amWashington Times – 2 hours ago
By Sara A. Carter CIA Director Michael V. Hayden told the Senate intelligence panel yesterday that his agency had resorted to waterboarding while interrogating three high-level al Qaeda members.
Pakistan Is Threatened, Intelligence Chief Says Washington Post
Intelligence Chief Cites Qaeda Threat to US New York Times
“What did we miss?
_______________________
Al-Qaeda fighters in Iraq are training young children as gunmen and kidnappers, the US and Iraqi militaries alleged on Wednesday, releasing a video of masked and armed youngsters.”
Forgive my bad memory, but how ofter did this happen under Saddam?
February 6th, 2008 at 10:57 amthis sounds suspiciously like the rhetoric of the Right. We always castigate them for “putting party over country,â€
Comment by barfly
and yet, time after time they divide us and get a republican elected…..hmm
Maybe we should stick to the party line long enough to regain power and then clean house….
you think you are exercising your right to free speech yet you are infuencing peoples opinions when you blast one of ours, whether what you say is true or not and in some cases it it not true….when you do this you divided us….
under bill and this applies to hillary
I never would have seen us in Iraq-invasion and occupation of soverign nation.
I never would have had to worry about unitary presidential powers
I never would have to worry about the kind of corruption leading to the kind of devestating depression that we now face.
ect….
there are differences
February 6th, 2008 at 10:59 amI support obama but I will vote for hillary.
hillary is not george bush
i thought this was kinda funny… how to spin (still) bad news:
US Productivity Increases 1.8%, More Than Forecast (Update2)
February 6th, 2008 at 10:59 amBloomberg – 1 hour ago
By Shobhana Chandra Feb. 6 (Bloomberg) — Worker productivity in the US grew more than forecast in the fourth quarter as companies cut employees’ hours at the fastest pace in almost five years.
UPDATE 2-US productivity rises, labor costs growth muted Forbes
Productivity growth slows in fourth quarter MarketWatch
GO OBAMA!!
He is actually ahead in the delegate count from last night
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8358.html
but Hillary leads in the Super Delegate count, thus far. What is up with that Super Delegate thing, anyway? Why do the Dems want a Shadow Electoral College in their selection process? If Hillary wins the nomination based on a majority of Super Delegates that’ll be a heart breaker for the ages.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:00 amdamn right, fred (tho i’ve not read more of the conversation than your last comment as i write this)
OVERWHELMING DEMOCRATIC VOTER TURNOUT.
THEY CAN’T STEAL IT IF IT’S NOT CLOSE.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:01 am#57…vet,
I agree with what you said:”That’s the problem. Hillary is neither Progressive nor Liberal.”
When I hear McCain..I don’t agree with anything he says about wars, but I know what he says..
But Hillary can have the same views as McCain..but she is trying to fool a lot of people that she is the peace maker.
She is trying to fool people that she will fix their mortgages…and that she feels their pain…HA HA
Hillary never had to worry about paying a morgage since 1979 when she was the governor’s wife, then the President’s wife…
Hillary learned how to sell the crowd what they want to hear…these guys she and her husband had 35 experience with this…She keeps talking about her experience…does not she.
And she will run the country from day one…as if other presidents will run it from day three or day 4…
I don’t trust what she say.Clintons selling themselves well with their 30 years connections and political careers…but that does not mean they are the best solution to our current problems…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:02 amI’m all for voting for the person who represents your values, but who would you rather see being sworn-in on Jan 20th, 2009?
Of course, its a hold-your-nose moment. But that doesn’t mean that we must use the same rhetoric as the Right. Talk about how bad the republicans have been to the economy, our continued safety, our environment; there’s a whole raft of issues to float on. But don’t go the party loyalty route. It leads to demogogery, and ultimately, defeat.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:03 amthe super delagates can change their vote anytime, up till the election…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:03 amhere’s hoping they will bow to the wishes of their people…
i think most will…
That’s weird, you can read calls to have Bush, Cheney et al hung here at TP almost everyday.
Comment by Keltoi — February 6, 2008 @ 10:56 am
Unlike Glen Beck, we’re not paid millions of dollars a year and given a national media platform from which to wish death upon people whose greatest “crime” is having the nerve, nay, the unmitigated GALL, to simply disagree w/ Glen’s view of the world.
I don’t agree w/ all the posters that call for hangings here, but they are talking about folks they perceive, and perhaps correctly, as war criminals.
Keith Olbermann isn’t responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis… Botch is.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:05 amThat’s weird, you can read calls to have Bush, Cheney et al hung here at TP almost everyday.
Comment by Keltoi
dumbass here thinks we would execute without a trial……that’s just repulbicans dummy….man trolls are dumb.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:05 amMohammed Al-Askari, spokesman for the Iraqi defence ministry, told the news conference that the videos were a “sign of desperation by Al-Qaeda.â€
On the other hand, you could also come to the conclusion they’re teaching them young these days, and training the next whole generation… could be a long one, no?
February 6th, 2008 at 11:07 amFred; voting for Billary is voting Republican-lite.
I will NOT vote Republican nor Republican-lite. If that means voting Green or even Communist party, so be it. I have to follow my conscience.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:07 amcool…
Glittering Oscars party cancelled
BBC News – 4 hours ago
One of Oscar night’s most exclusive gatherings – the Vanity Fair party – has been cancelled in solidarity with striking writers.
Oscars Strike Out with Vanity Fair E! Online
Vanity Fair Cancels Its Oscars Party New York Times
maybe that will help step up the process of getting an agreement…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:07 amkeep the faith WGA…
from the “good luck with that” dept.
US, UK urge allies to share Afghan combat burden
February 6th, 2008 at 11:09 amReuters – 51 minutes ago
By Sue Pleming LONDON, Feb 6 (Reuters) – The United States and Britain, the foreign countries with the most troops in Afghanistan, called on reluctant NATO allies on Wednesday to share the burden of combat against hardline Taliban guerrillas.
Rice, Brown Press Allies for Support in Afghanistan (Update3) Bloomberg
Thinktank voices fears over democracy in Afghanistan Guardian Unlimited
“and yet, time after time they divide us and get a republican elected…..hmm
Maybe we should stick to the party line long enough to regain power and then clean house….”
This sounds just like the republican’s Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another republican.”
And, it also resembles what occurred on the first Clinton watch. The republicans thought they could just gloss over their problems until after they got into power – and we were saddled with the Contract on America crowd, who were to evolve into the Rubberstamp Republicans.
So Fred, you advocate that we should go the same route?
February 6th, 2008 at 11:11 amKeltoi; Go read about the Nuremberg and Tokyo war crimes trials. Compare what the accused in those trials to the actions of Bush/Cheney. Logic can not help but conclude, that like the defendants of those trials, Bush/Cheney et al, are war CRIMINALS for which justice to be served is hanging.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:11 amFred; voting for Billary is voting Republican-lite.
I will NOT vote Republican nor Republican-lite. If that means voting Green or even Communist party, so be it. I have to follow my conscience.
Comment by Uncle Ho
I respect that, I just don’t wish to throw this away. Until there is a viable 3rd party……that seems to be all you accomplish…peace.
We can have this disscussion here and maybe change each others minds…
maybe not but it will help to clear the air…..get the real facts out not just passionate attacks……
February 6th, 2008 at 11:13 amSo Fred, you advocate that we should go the same route?
Comment by barfly
only if you want to win. The game is in front of you. The rules are established. You cannot change the rules or the outcome by saying it aint so or it aint right….that’’s all I’m saying
just because we failed to clean house then doesn’t mean we couldn’t do it this time….just because we failed once doesn’t mean we are doomed to failure every time….we could do it differently…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:16 am“I respect that, I just don’t wish to throw this away. Until there is a viable 3rd party……that seems to be all you accomplish…peace.”
So, all the polling that indicates the american people wish change, and every republican running is embracing Bush’s policies – but Fred doesn’t believe in political pendulums?
You’re acting like a beaten wife, Fred. Man up.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:18 amYou’re sounding very nervous, keltoi. how’s it feel watching your treason party bury itself?
February 6th, 2008 at 11:18 amI will NOT vote Republican nor Republican-lite. If that means voting Green or even Communist party, so be it. I have to follow my conscience. Comment by Uncle Ho — February 6, 2008 @ 11:07 am
I agree Uncle Ho. If people would just put up media blinders and quit worrying about who is electable; quit listening to the whisperings of wasted votes by those who control the population, people could vote with conscience and have a positive change. As it is, too many fall into the fear that their “vote will be wasted”, and they fall victim to hype.
I will vote my conscience, and sleep well knowing that even if the outcome is not what I wanted, Idid what I believed in and with the ideals this country was based on. Throw away your integrity to get second from the bottom is not my idea of what this country is about.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:19 amFred; voting for Billary is voting Republican-lite.
I will NOT vote Republican nor Republican-lite. If that means voting Green or even Communist party, so be it. I have to follow my conscience.
Comment by Uncle Ho
so you’ll just happily hand the repigs another term to continue the destrucion of the USA? not too smart.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:20 amUncle ho, you and I can disagree…….that would not change the fact that when the bullets start flying that we would be standing back to back…..we agree on much more than we disagree on.
keltoi thinks that when we talk about an execution that it doenst include a trial……..that’s because the republican way is to just take them out behind the chemical building and shoot them in the head. That’s where the confusion comes from……
February 6th, 2008 at 11:20 ama failure to provide legal immunity in FISA legislation to telecom companies “will have far-reaching consequencesâ€
would a VETO have the same repercussions?
February 6th, 2008 at 11:21 am“only if you want to win.”
Man, that says it all.
You have no moral authority. You have just squandered it with this statement.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:21 amShould be “were based on”
February 6th, 2008 at 11:21 amYou’re acting like a beaten wife, Fred. Man up.
Comment by barfly
I’m sorry barfly…..I will not engage you on this level…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:22 amShould we torture?
“only if you want to win.â€
Should we bomb innocents?
“only if you want to win.â€
Should we use depleted uranium?
“only if you want to win.â€
February 6th, 2008 at 11:23 amYesterday’s primaries showed that early primary voting may not be a good idea. …
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 6, 2008 @ 9:40 am
for many reasons…
it’s great for the front-runner, which is why hillary was pushing it so hard…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:23 amNo. Moral. Authority.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:24 amYou’re sounding very nervous, keltoi. how’s it feel watching your treason party bury itself?
Comment by Lefty Patriot — February 6, 2008 @ 11:18 am
Nervous? No, I am heartened by last night. I have hope. I think Hillary may have been mortally wounded last night because she failed to put Obama away. Obama is now like Eli Manning in that final posession – he has the ball, he can make it happen, though it will not be easy.
As for the Rs, McCain was always my first pick among them. I think anyone who is paying attention knows Obama will destroy McCain. Likewise, McCain will win the vote of independents if stacked up against Hillary and the Far Right will come out of the woodwork to vote against Hillary. Hillary is the only chance the Dems have to lose this election.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:25 amShould we destroy their infrastructure?
“only if you want to win.â€
Do you think this a game?
February 6th, 2008 at 11:26 am#79 – “But don’t go the party loyalty route. It leads to demogogery, and ultimately, defeat.” Comment by barfly — February 6, 2008 @ 11:03 am
Once the Republicans are ultimately defeated, I’ll believe you. Until such time, why eschew a practice that works?
February 6th, 2008 at 11:33 amBE AFRAID! BE VERY AFRAID!!!
Al Qaeda seen planning attack on US
Comment by katy — February 6, 2008 @ 10:56 am
Yeah, The “attack” will probably happen right before the Nov. election and Bush will have to suspend the election to “preserve Democracy”.
I put nothing past these jokers.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:34 amWhen I was in high school they always talked about voting for the man not the party…….what I later learned was that that was a way for republicans to get young people to start voting for a republican instead of voting with the party that brought us through the great depression….the democrats…..
February 6th, 2008 at 11:37 amFred, Lefty; I have to be able to live with myself. I feel that by voting GOP or Billary, it is assent to an illegal, immoral, and unjustified war. To me, it would be approving the continuation of the death & dismemberment of troops and Iraqis alike- I can’t do that.
Some say that we must stay to fix what we broke. I think the best we can do is to withdraw unilaterally. Pull out ALL the troops and contractors. No permanent bases and no claims to their oil. Let the Iraqis sort things out for themselves. It IS THEIR country, NOT OURS.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:37 am#103 – “Hillary is the only chance the Dems have to lose this election.” Comment by Keltoi — February 6, 2008 @ 11:25 am
That will only happen if the Dems refuse to support Sen. Clinton.
If the Dems fail to support their nominee, then we deserve 4 mour years of Bush Administration care of Pres. McCain.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:37 am“I put nothing past these murderers.” Would seem more appropriate to me.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:38 ammy parents and my Grandparents voted the party line…..democrat. My Grandfather would roll over in his grave if I voted anything but democratic.
There arguments for both sides……
February 6th, 2008 at 11:38 amHillary is the only chance the Dems have to lose this election.
Comment by Keltoi — February 6, 2008 @ 11:25 am
Actually I agree with that. Hillary, whether deserved or not, is a walking target for the swiftboating Noise Machine and people are tired of Dynasty Presidents after having 2 Bush(whackers).
February 6th, 2008 at 11:39 amcomment by Wayne @ 11:34 am
I fear that you may be right. Welcome to Nazi Amerika.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:40 amIf the Dems fail to support their nominee, then we deserve 4 mour years of Bush Administration care of Pres. McCain.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — February 6, 2008 @ 11:37 am
I am sorry. I can’t support someone like that.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:40 am#114 – “I am sorry. I can’t support someone like that.” Comment by Bluedahlia — February 6, 2008 @ 11:40 am
I can understand. I’m really going to hate President McCain in 2009, though.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:43 amSo will I Democrat Soldier.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:44 amI understand Uncle Ho, my question is…what makes you so sure Obama will be able to get us out of there. Hillary would bow to congressional and senate demands…..unlike bush. We decide by our overall decisions. It is just as important who our representattives are…..will you not work with them just because they don’t believe everything exactly as you do….is politics not give and take………get and lose…..
Hillary didn’t get us there….and I don’t believe she ever would have.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:45 amI’m sorry barfly…..I will not engage you on this level…
Comment by Fred — February 6, 2008 @ 11:22 am
Yeah, c’mon, barfly, Fred is way too high minded to let a debate devolve into the realm of personal invective.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:47 amaw, c’mon barfly @ 11:23 am…
you know that’s not what it’s about…
…
i’ll say it again:
something i heard sam seder explain, beautifully, the other day:
“Voting is not about self-expression – not about expressing your conscience – it must be pragmatic…â€
give the democrats the white house and a real majority in congress – and hold them responsible – is the only way to save the country at this time…
OVERWHELMING DEMOCRATIC VOTER TURNOUT.
IF IT’S NOT CLOSE THEY CAN’T STEAL IT.
worry about the other changes AFTER getting these criminals out of d.c.
…
besides, until the electoral college is abolished, there is no chance of a 3rd party win… and public financing is a start to all that…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:47 am…
Comment by katy — December 14, 2007 @ 10:13 am
Comment by katy — January 19, 2008 @ 3:21 pm
Yeah, c’mon, barfly, Fred is way too high minded to let a debate devolve into the realm of personal invective.
Comment by Keltoi
pay attention k…..the following describes you.
that side of me only come out when I am dealing with people like this:
from a post by JMOHR:
It is time that we treat good_golly and other similar vermin in the manner that all such subhumans should be treated:
1. There is absolutely no pretense of civil discourse. They are simply wrong. There is absolutely no debate and nothing they say can create a legitimate debate.
2. Let them know that they are criminal scum and will not be debated. They need to learn that their beliefs are not just wrong but criminal and absolutely immoral. These scum have too long gained a semblance of legitimacy by claiming that you have a right to civil debate. They do not.
You are criminal scum and will not be debated. You need to learn that your beliefs are not just wrong but criminal and absolutely immoral. You and the scum like you have too long gained a semblance of legitimacy by claiming that they have a right to civil debate. You do not.
3. Let them know that we believe they are no better than any other terrorist. They advocate crimes against humanity. They need to know that we will label them as what they are.
You are no better than any other terrorist. If you support this administration then you advocate crimes against humanity. You need to know that we will label you as what you are.
4. Let them know that we wish them the fate of all terrorists to include exclusion from civil society, imprisonment and death in a very public execution.
5. If you meet one in public, then I suggest that you help them follow the golden rule – do to them that which they would do a terrorist. They can have no complaint. They set the rules of engagement.
Comment by JMOHR
February 6th, 2008 at 11:51 amI can understand. I’m really going to hate President McCain in 2009, though.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — February 6, 2008 @ 11:43 am
After 4 years of President McCain I’m sure that’d spark a 3rd party. The sooner we get there the sooner we may actually be able to address and solve the real problems. Hillary or Barack may offer a slight detour or tourniquet. Eventually the real problems of the country will have to be dealt with. There’s nothing to suggest Hillary or Barack is willing to do this dangerous work. This country will probably have to hit rock bottom, like a junkie, before it can recover.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:51 amThat will only happen if the Dems refuse to support Sen. Clinton.
If the Dems fail to support their nominee, then we deserve 4 mour years of Bush Administration care of Pres. McCain.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — February 6, 2008 @ 11:37 am
Why risk it? To secure the Clinton legacy? It isn’t worth it. So help me, I cannot understand why Hillary has the support she does. Dems are flirting with disaster.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:51 amIf your conscience allows for pushing for the lesser of two evils, then by all means follow it. I believe if more people ignored this rhetoric and followed their conscience, maybe we wouldn’t have this problem in the first place. People are always scared of something, though. Follow your conscience always and deal with the problems it brings as they come forward. Don’t compromise your ideals because of what might happen. Deal with what might happen with your conscience.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:52 amComment by JMOHR
Comment by Fred — February 6, 2008 @ 11:51 am
Fred, I have had plenty of exchanges with JMOHR and they have never regressed to the playground name calling you thrive on. How about you let JMOHR speak for himself, hmm? I have utmost respect for him and his service.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:54 amWhy risk it? To secure the Clinton legacy? It isn’t worth it. So help me, I cannot understand why Hillary has the support she does. Dems are flirting with disaster.
Comment by Keltoi — February 6, 2008 @ 11:51 am
I don’t get it at all, and I was particularly surprised to see how well she did in California yesterday. What the hell are these people thinking?
I know she’s pulling huge numbers from women, and that women have a disproportionate role in the Democratic, er, rolls but still. Do people really want to embrace a new aristocracy? Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton? I mean WTF?!!
February 6th, 2008 at 11:56 amAfter 4 years of President McCain I’m sure that’d spark a 3rd party. The sooner we get there the sooner we may actually be able to address and solve the real problems.
Comment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda
I’m not looking for a fight…..ok…..just my point of view….I just want to point out that this is exactly what Nader said……..just sayin.
please everyone persue your own direction but keep the conversation alive….
February 6th, 2008 at 11:57 am#122 – “Why risk it? To secure the Clinton legacy?”
No, to keep another failed Republican out of office!
“It isn’t worth it. So help me, I cannot understand why Hillary has the support she does. Dems are flirting with disaster.” Comment by Keltoi — February 6, 2008 @ 11:51 am
It’s only “disaster” when the Dems refuse to support the candidate. Nothing more, nothing less.
I remember when Sen. McCain was “too old” in 2000, but do you think that the Republicans will say that if/when he wins their nomination?
The worst enemy the Democrats have is themselves for refusing to support their own candidates.
February 6th, 2008 at 11:58 amHow about you let JMOHR speak for himself, hmm? I have utmost respect for him and his service.
Comment by Keltoi
then maybe you should re read the post….it was a quote…….sorry dumbass piece of shit tard fu(king troll.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:00 pmI disagree Democrat soldier. I believe the worst enemy is the person who has given up on their ideals because they don’t want to have to deal with the ramifications for following those ideals.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:01 pm“Once the Republicans are ultimately defeated, I’ll believe you. Until such time, why eschew a practice that works?”
Comment by Democrat Soldier
Because it warps you – into a conservative. If you cannot draw a moral line because you’ve already espoused a “whatever it takes” attitude, it severely impedes your ability to make a moral case – like republicans, and the issue of torture.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:01 pmFred; we DO agree on things probably 99% of the time. But this is where I have to differ with you.
Hillary DID vote to authorise in 2002 another Tonkin Gulf Resolution. Hillary said recently that she would pull ONLY combat troops from Iraq, leaving other troops there and not before 2013. Hillary also voted in favor of naming Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. 3 strikes and you’re out.
Obama has taken positions about Iran that makes me uncomfortable as well. Recently Obama has been praising Reagan. Reagan? I mean, WTF? Ronnie declared ketchup a vegetable for school lunch programs and called the Contras the “the equivalent of our founding fathers.”
There are no guarantees with any candidate, but we have to decide on their statements, positions on issues, and hope for the best.
But I can’t vote for someone who is only nominally better than the GOP candidate. I am not a neo-Nazi and I can’t be a “good German” who goes along and/or remain silent.
We will have to pick this up another time, work is being cancelled due to the winter storm we are having here in SE Michigan.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:01 pmBecause it warps you – into a conservative. If you cannot draw a moral line because you’ve already espoused a “whatever it takes†attitude, it severely impedes your ability to make a moral case – like republicans, and the issue of torture.
Comment by barfly
I humbly disagree barfly. During the 60’s and 70’s good democrats went to the streets to protest what Lyndon Johnson was doing in viet nam. We ended the viet nam war…..I don’t care what you have heard….opposition to the war in the streets are what ended it…..we continued until Nixon gave in……
February 6th, 2008 at 12:06 pmShe will wear the governing pants.
Comment by barfly
I think you meant the people she will be working for.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:13 pm“Voting is not about self-expression – not about expressing your conscience – it must be pragmatic…â€
give the democrats the white house and a real majority in congress – and hold them responsible – is the only way to save the country at this time…
.
those who are wanting a 3rd party need to realize that it will take
a CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION
to eliminate the ELECTORAL COLLAGE.
seems good ol’ ralph should have been busy with THAT all these years…
at the very least, he could’ve been rounding up and grooming 3rd party
candidates… but has he?
hmmmmm…
February 6th, 2008 at 12:14 pmI believe if more people ignored this rhetoric and followed their conscience, maybe we wouldn’t have this problem in the first place. People are always scared of something, though. Follow your conscience always and deal with the problems it brings as they come forward. Don’t compromise your ideals because of what might happen. Deal with what might happen with your conscience.
Comment by Bluedahlia
Best post in the thread.
Thank you so much for common sense.
Are you married? ;)
February 6th, 2008 at 12:16 pmthen maybe you should re read the post….it was a quote…….sorry dumbass piece of shit tard fu(king troll.
Comment by Fred — February 6, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
RHF must be so proud….
February 6th, 2008 at 12:19 pm139 I used to be a nieve idealist too. right up until the clintons got elected. I expected big changes…they didn’t come….obviously the clintons are not the democrats that I grew up with…..they are still better than bush. voting to soothe your concience is what you do when you are young…..voting to get the things done that you want done is what you do as an adult.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:22 pmthey are still better than bush. voting to soothe your concience is what you do when you are young…..voting to get the things done that you want done is what you do as an adult.
Comment by Fred
Yeah, I’ve heard the same motto since kid.
Never worked for me. I’m still an anarchist.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:26 pm“During the 60’s and 70’s good democrats went to the streets to protest what Lyndon Johnson was doing in viet nam. We ended the viet nam war…”
That’s hardly “whatever it takes to win,” is it? When you use those words, it betrays the fact that tactically there is little difference between democrats and repubs, if both sides will do “whatever it takes to win.”
And that also was said of the Vietnam war – by democrats, at the time.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:26 pmGlenn Beck took a shot at Keith Olbermann, stating, “If I saw Olbermann standing on the subway [platform], I might think for a moment about pushing him, but I wouldn’t.â€
——-
And “The Most Trusted Name In News”, CNN, gives this guy a platform so he can pollute the minds of Americans, why?
February 6th, 2008 at 12:27 pmFred; we DO agree on things probably 99% of the time. But this is where I have to differ with you.
Comment by Uncle Ho
There will be other things Uncle Ho. We will thrive because of our differences…..this is really a minor difference….we agree on most.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:28 pmLook, vote your conscience; but whenever someone takes a ride on the “Do Whatever it Takes to Win” waterslide, they shouldn’t be too surprised at who they meet at the bottom…
February 6th, 2008 at 12:31 pm#133 – “If you cannot draw a moral line because you’ve already espoused a “whatever it takes†attitude, it severely impedes your ability to make a moral case – like republicans, and the issue of torture.” Comment by barfly — February 6, 2008 @ 12:01 pm
I can see where you’re coming from. You see it as “If you give up your morals to win, how is that good?”
I see it as “If your morals keep you from ever winning, how is that good?”
Ideally, a third party would be a viable “no” to all the current parties. Nader didn’t win, but he made sure that VPres. Gore lost!
February 6th, 2008 at 12:36 pmThat’s hardly “whatever it takes to win,†is it? When you use those words, it betrays the fact that tactically there is little difference between democrats and repubs, if both sides will do “whatever it takes to win.â€
And that also was said of the Vietnam war – by democrats, at the time.
Comment by barfly
I’m just saying that democrats in power did prosecute the war….johnson…we did vote for him….he did things we didn’t approve…eg escalated the war.
We did not support that as the repubs have supported torture….we stood up and were heard……we do not give them free reign just because they were elected……the republicans do……
It actually cost us the election….to Nixon…….he bombed hanoi for 300 days with B52’s and we escalated the protests…….guess who the protesters were…..democrats……there were no republicans at the protests……I doubt if any of them even know where the wasington mall is.
I would like to add that I respect and admire you and 2mill for your passionate defense of what you believe…..there is nothing wrong with that and I don’t wish to demoralize you…….at all…..peace
February 6th, 2008 at 12:36 pmand barfly…….I’m really sorry to have to say this but yes….it is a game…….
February 6th, 2008 at 12:40 pmI also admire those with stong ideals and passion. But I’m not sure I can survive another Republican presidency. So I’m going with the Rude Pundit on this one:
“(Good liberal caveat: Unlike the nutzoid Republicans who are flipping out over McCain, if Clinton does manage to become the nominee, this blog will support her like control top panty hose. Besides, either way, beating up on McCain’s gonna be fun.)”
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/in-brief-obama-won-even-before-latest.html
February 6th, 2008 at 12:42 pmthis blog will support her like control top panty hose.
Comment by mary
hmm interesting metaphor………never thought of them as support though…..heh…..
February 6th, 2008 at 12:45 pmThe Phuckabee wins in the South shows what ignorant, superstitious savages the south has as a population.
Buck Fush
February 6th, 2008 at 12:49 pmFrom Wash Times:
“With Hillary Clinton, John McCain would start as a very moderate favorite,” pollster Scott Rasmussen said. “McCain would have the edge among independent voters. He is viewed very favorably by independents and Senator Clinton struggles in that area.”
Pollster John Zogby agreed, saying, “Obama does better against McCain than Hillary does because she is so polarizing. … A lot of people will simply be voting against her.”
The senator from Arizona beats the senator from New York in 14 of 17 head-to-head polls taken since Dec. 6, but he wins just five of 17 against the senator from Illinois over the same period. Analysts say Mrs. Clinton is so divisive that she would drive moderates and some independents to Mr. McCain. Mr. Obama, conversely, could draw from the pool of supporters who have delivered wins to Mr. McCain in a host of presidential primaries.”
Save yourselves, Democrats, vote Obama
February 6th, 2008 at 12:51 pmComment by Fred — February 6, 2008 @ 12:45 pm
Oh yes, control top panty hose are very supportive don’t you know.
Myself, I only wear the damn things for weddings! Invented by sadists.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:54 pmMiss Molly #32,
February 6th, 2008 at 12:54 pmYou complain of the vocabulary used by the media – I agree completely. This morning on CNN: the report concerning the tragic tornadoes in the south contained this headline, ” Forty-four dead and hundreds “wounded.” As if the the tornadoes were inspired by terrorists and gunmen, or tornadoes are ammuniton in war.
I’m not looking for a fight…..ok…..just my point of view….I just want to point out that this is exactly what Nader said……..just sayin.
Comment by Fred — February 6, 2008 @ 11:57 am
Don’t worry Fred. I don’t fight with people who show they have a conscience and appear to be sincere.
If Hillary or Barack had incorporated a degree or two of what Nader stands for in their platform I wouldn’t be in this position. But they continue to spend more effort wooing those on the right. Why is this?
I believe a politcal system should have 3, 4, 5 or more parties. This two party system only serves a small fraction of the people. Third parties are healthy. If the two major parties refuse to listen to us a third party vote is a good vote. Eventually they’ll get the message.
You can bet if Hillary loses a close one to McCain the Dems. in 2012 will realize they can no longer win without listening to the left wing of the party.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:08 pmI’m looking forward to whomever the Democratic nominee is, just whomping the shit out of McCain.
He’ll get so desperate, he’ll start making appearances in a fake tiger cage to garner sympathy…
February 6th, 2008 at 1:13 pmUntil the electoral college system is abolished I don’t see a third party candidate doing anything but being a spoiler.
The way it works in Canada, for example, is that the third party (or fourth etc.) can win individual seats and then the other parties have to woo them to form a majority voting block (assuming no one party got the majority to begin with obviously – so these third, fourth, fifth party candidates CAN be spoilers too by siphoning off votes for either of the two main parties).
But back to the case of no one party getting the majority – then, although the third party didn’t have enough votes to win the prime minister’s job, the third party actually has some sway. The party that successfully wooed them to join together on voting has to keep them happy enough by leaning their way somewhat.
That’s how the New Democratic Party (NDP) has survived over the years with what most people consider an extremely progressive agenda. And it’s what the Green party is aiming for also. If the Liberal party has to join with the NDP and the Greens then their agenda will lean more to the left.
Here, not so much. I think I described that pretty well. If not, I apologize.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:15 pmWe’re all just trying to play the cards that we’re dealt……I’m left of center leftie myself…….I’m so left that I’m really socialist……I’m a Karl Marx, John Lennon kind of a guy….ya know…..
I mean even Mau had workers party revolt….
February 6th, 2008 at 1:15 pmI also like the way they more or less have to call general elections after a no-confidence vote.
Here you’re stuck with these jokers long after their expiration date.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:17 pmAn excellent discussion on this thread – the hillary dillema. Edwards should have won it anyway. I’m ready to draw fire for this, but here it goes. I would rather have a war-mongering president that did not put party and politics over the people (read McCain [most of the time]) who also has environmental concerns and a real concern about the deficit than a war-mongering president who will say whatever she needs to in order to procure and maintain power and who will NEVER, AND I MEAN NEVER get anything done because the other side hates her so much. Plus, I would love to see the wingnuts’ heads explode when McCain gets the nomination. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
I’ll vote for Obama if he gets the nomination, although he probably won’t be able to get anything done either. If Hillary gets the nomination, I’ll go third party.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:23 pmRHF must be so proud….
Comment by Keltoi — February 6, 2008 @ 12:19 pm
What, that you were called out on your sh*t by someone else, and they pointed out what a complete illiterate (dishonest) moron you are? Yep, VERY PROUD!
Comment by republicans hate facts
He has no idea….I’m a nam vet and a retired construction worker…….I been taking it easy on em.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:23 pmIf Hillary gets the nomination, I’ll go third party.
Comment by jpoke42
why don’t you just vote for mcayn……you already said you loved him.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:26 pmno, fred, I didn’t say I loved him. The statement was to show how dissatisfied I would be with a Hillary nomination.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:40 pmI know she’s pulling huge numbers from women, and that women have a disproportionate role in the Democratic, er, rolls but still. Do people really want to embrace a new aristocracy? Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton? I mean WTF?!!
Comment by gummitch — February 6, 2008 @ 11:56 am
That’s very SEXIST you know. She’s articulate, she’s quick, she debates well, she’s more experienced, and she’s NOT A RELIGIOUS BIGOT. Sorry, but that makes her a front runner for me in this race.
Comment by republicans hate facts — February 6, 2008 @ 12:10 pm
What’s sexist about pointing out polling numbers? Would you like to dispute the fact that she has gotten more support from women than Obama has?
You’re entitled to your opinion about the best candidate, but try to do it without accusing me or anyone else as being sexist for not being a fan of Clinton.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:40 pmno, fred, I didn’t say I loved him. The statement was to show how dissatisfied I would be with a Hillary nomination.
Comment by jpoke42
very easy to misunderstand on these threads, just trying to be sure I understand your intent.
So you’re basically saying you would rather have mcain than hillary whether it means you actually voted for mccain directly or not.
That is a popular stance on this thread……
February 6th, 2008 at 1:50 pmThe only positive thing I have to say about Hillary is her experience on trying to get universal health care, but I would put every nickle I am worth on betting against she could ever get that done. Hillary in office would regalvanize the republican party. The only thing that would get done under her watch is expanding the military and some sort of amnesty package, both republican angenda items. Have any of you looked at her votes supporting big oil companies?
Hillary represents more of the same… disgusting. I will not and can not put party over all.
February 6th, 2008 at 1:59 pmwith a democratic congress, barack or hillary could get whatever kind of healthcare package they want… and get it right, if not the first time…
and that’s what it’s all about…
February 6th, 2008 at 2:08 pm169 – Katy, I wish it were that easy. The repubs will fillibuster till the cows come home before any sort of u-healthcare is passed.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:10 pmI’m not going to try to convince you jpoke. Hillary did try to get you health care….how did you show your aprreciation?
I wouldn’t bet every nickle you are worth on her failing….
as far as hillary in office galvanizing the repubs……they are as galvanized as they can be…..it doesn’t matter who we get they will still be galvanized the same….why do you fear them, their day is over…they have destroyed themselves…..we now have to pick up the pieces and put things back together……….you going to help or not?
oil company money, etc…..yep, it takes money to win and election…..go ahead and name me one that ever got elected without this dark side……ok then tell me how it can change in the immediate future……what, nothing. I didn’t think so……
obviously you didn’t read some of the posts above….I know you don’t like hillary but you cannot compare her to george bush.
I never had to worry about unitary presidential powers under clinton…I never had to worry about unilateral premtive war with clinton…..I never had to worry about our economy tanking completely because of corruption under clinton , etc.
they are not the same.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:11 pm169 – Katy, I wish it were that easy. The repubs will fillibuster till the cows come home before any sort of u-healthcare is passed.
Comment by jpoke42
kid, it’s called a supermajority and it’s fillibuster proof……we had it for 40 years before 1990
February 6th, 2008 at 2:12 pmwe had it for 40 years before 1990
Comment by Fred
guess it was 1994 to be exact…..
February 6th, 2008 at 2:15 pmWTF are you talking about? Last time I checked, Clinton was calling for universal health care, and Obama was saying he’d withdraw from Iraq starting 60 days into his presidency. Don’t be a RIGHT WING STOOGE!
Um, I’m not a right wing stooge. Selling Insurance Policies isn’t healthcare. Guaranteeing healthcare for all, paid for with a progressive tax IS healthcare. Why are Hillary and Barack more concerned with helping Insurance companies sell policies?? Eliminate the insurance companies, eliminate the profit motive. Healthcare is a right for every human being. Will you be there to help people battle as every claim they make is disputed by the for profit companies? Are you pimping for them or something>
All the troops must come home as quickly as possible. Leaving 40,000 or 50,000 troops there for 2, 3 or 4 years is not acceptable to earn my vote. This is what I believe Hillary will do and Barack too.
You dance with them that brought you. This country is not a parliamentary system, and you can’t easily rewrite the constitution. Stop whining and realize that even thought it’s slow for you to get what you want, the same is true for the extremist xtians!
You don’t need to rewrite the constitution to have 3 or more parties. We need access to the media to get our message out. Where do Hillary and Barack stand on breaking up media monopolies? Who will they appoint to head the FCC? Why is Hillary taking Rupert Murdoch’s money?
Actually that’s EXACTLY the whine that the Republicans used to justify their losses in 2006 – that they didn’t listen to the base. It’s rare that simple, don’t be so naive!
Not being naive. Just willing to look at the big picture. What it will take to afftect permanent change.
Comment by republicans hate facts — February 6, 2008 @ 1:18 pm
February 6th, 2008 at 2:27 pmFred, you are much more of an optimist than I. You have much more faith in the party than I. My faith in the party was destroyed over the events of the last year. They were elected to end the war and what did they do…. NOTHING. Either they are cowards or they are just as bought and paid for as the repubs – no other way to explain it. The majority of the people said STOP THIS WAR and they did nothing. Time and time again they gave the king whatever he wanted. The way I see it, Hillary was right there leading the way.
Although I disagree with much of your post (171), it is sincere and thoughtful. My primaries were last night, I threw the switch for Obama – although I should have just voted for Edwards since my state went to Hillary anyway. The time for debate between Hillary and Obama is over for me.
My only hope is that Obama wins and he finds some backbone and forms his own thoughts when he gets into office rather than going with the flow as I perceive him to have been doing as a freshman senator. He talks a good “one liner” game, lets hope he really can get change done.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:28 pmjpoke, vote third party, it’s your vote.
But please don’t come back whining about President McCain’s new war of the week.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:32 pmP.S. I’m caucusing in Washington state for Obama on Saturday…!
February 6th, 2008 at 2:33 pmMy only hope is that Obama wins and he finds some backbone and forms his own thoughts when he gets into office rather than going with the flow as I perceive him to have been doing as a freshman senator. He talks a good “one liner†game, lets hope he really can get change done.
Comment by jpoke42 — February 6, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
I have said before it is possible that Obama, once in office, will astonish the nation with how radical he really is. I think he would have the political skill and capital to do some crazy things. It is only a hunch, he may not be playing possum and it is possible he is as status quo as he basically appears, but particularly in the foreign policy arena he might break the mold. But I suspect that is largely hope talking. He is the only potential iconoclast in the trio; McCain has a tiny chance of being one too, I guess, but he is awfully long in the tooth for it. Hillary is the embodiment of status quo.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:37 pmok, some of you are willing to drive us into the ditch to get to the repair shop….that is your right. Nader lead that charge and we wound up in the ditch. Our citizens have suffered because of it. I just want a better life than what the repuglycans offer……
I don’t think hillary is as bad as you have been led to believe….you honestly believe then, by your own statment that Hillary would have invaded and occupied Iraq……
February 6th, 2008 at 2:38 pmI have said before it is possible that Obama, once in office, will astonish the nation with how radical he really is. I think he would have the political skill and capital to do some crazy things. It is only a hunch, he may not be playing possum and it is possible he is as status quo as he basically appears, but particularly in the foreign policy arena he might break the mold. But I suspect that is largely hope talking. He is the only potential iconoclast in the trio; McCain has a tiny chance of being one too, I guess, but he is awfully long in the tooth for it. Hillary is the embodiment of status quo.
Comment by Keltoi
no one gives a big rats ass what a phony republicna boot licking fool cares……
yeah fool….come here and say Obama is a racist…..that’s got to be the stupidist thing a human ever said…..
you have a hunch……..well move away from senator craig silly girl. What a fool. You actually think someone cares what you think….that you have a hunch…..that obama could do some crazy things……wtf does that even mean.
did you have a hunch that bush was going to destroy America….why didn’t ya tell someone..
February 6th, 2008 at 2:43 pmyeah fool….come here and say Obama is a racist…..that’s got to be the stupidist thing a human ever said…..
Comment by Fred — February 6, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
You’re right, it is the stupidest thing a human being ever said. Except it wasn’t me who said it. Your good buddy RHF called him a bigot in #136…he is pretty damn stupid.
February 6th, 2008 at 3:00 pm181 fool you can’t even read….it’s an evaluation of somenting someone else said……now you have pulled your own panties down……ugh.
don’t make me have to post that Comment by JMOHR again keltoi….you jut take your troublemaking ass on down the line…….
February 6th, 2008 at 3:06 pmFred, you repost one of my comments in 181, start rambling on about “you this, you that”, then say I have “pulled my panties down” (WTF?) because I think you are talking about about something I said.
You are a weird guy. Take your own ass down the line.
February 6th, 2008 at 3:41 pmto the troll keltoi
February 6th, 2008 at 3:48 pmyou are only here because you are the “wierd little guy” who comes here to disrupt….you have nothing to contribute except dissention….you are a known commodity…..you are despised by many who know you for derailing good conversations with your inane right wing reugycan speak nonsense……you will be followed and vilified wherever I can find you…….you are just what JMOHR says of your type…….please see post #120 for reorientation on your way out please.
“Obama has taken positions about Iran that makes me uncomfortable as well. Recently Obama has been praising Reagan. Reagan?”
Comment by Uncle Ho — February 6, 2008 @ 12:01 pm
If you actually watch the clip, it seems to me, that he was simply making an historical observation that Reagan embodied the change that America was ready for at the time. He never once said that the direction that Reagan took the country was a good one.
Just to clarify… That was bothering me for a while, too.
February 6th, 2008 at 3:56 pm“This country will probably have to hit rock bottom, like a junkie, before it can recover.”
Comment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda — February 6, 2008 @ 11:51 am
Oh S%#$&! And here I thought this was “rock bottom”.
February 6th, 2008 at 3:57 pm“Sorry, but Obama THINKS he’s a WHITE MAN, and talks down to the black community, and says they are 100% RESPONSIBLE for their plight”
Comment by republicans hate facts — February 6, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
A strong majority of blacks have chosen to disagree with you. Does that make you a better judge for what type of leader they should choose?
“then refuses to show up and meet the mayor of San Francisco because he doesn’t want identified with Gay Marriage.”
Prove it.
February 6th, 2008 at 4:02 pmrhf – didn’t you blame Obama’s attitude towards African-Americans for part of why he didn’t win California?
I just read this:
‘Obama proved once again his popularity among African-Americans, taking almost 4 out of 5 black votes in California. But Clinton more than compensated by winning among Latinos by a 2-to-1 margin and among Asian-Americans by a 3-to-1 margin.’
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/06/BA3IUT6L8.DTL&tsp=1
February 6th, 2008 at 4:57 pmfrom the same article (SFGate) regarding California:
‘As in her other primary victories, Clinton benefited from an enormous gender gap. While they ran just about even among men – with Obama holding an 18-point edge among white men – exit polls showed Clinton with a huge 59 percent to 34 percent advantage with women.’
February 6th, 2008 at 4:58 pmMcConnell said yesterday that “Al Qaeda is gaining in strength from its refuge in Pakistan and is steadily improving its ability to recruit, train and position operatives capable of carrying out attacks inside the United States.â€
Well, damn, invade Iran right away so that we can keep them “over there” just like in Iraq.
February 6th, 2008 at 7:49 pm