home

No Excuses, No Spin Open Thread

What I really like about this Super Tuesday in the Democratic race is that the time for spinning and the time for excuses is over. We have two solid, talented, well funded and well known candidates. The voters know them. They have had time to consider their choices. Throw out New York and Illinois if you like, but no one has any excuses in any other state. If your opponent wins, he won. If you win, you won. I do not want to even hear about moral victories now. Winning means winning.

This also holds for tonight's Super Bowl. I do not want to hear about distractions, injuries or spying. When the Giants shock the world tonight, I do not want to hear New England whine about the pressure, the Media or Tom Brady's ankle or hangnail. Winning means winning.

This is an Open Thread.

< A Leap Of Faith | Tsunami Tuesday: Polls and Delegates >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Are you ready for some Giants football? (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:23:12 PM EST
    Go Giants!!

    Signing off now (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:26:46 PM EST
    Enjoy the game or the movie, whichever you end up watching.

    Parent
    Delegates are awarded proportionaly (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by ding7777 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:24:08 PM EST
    so they will both win

    giants over pats? (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Turkana on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:41:25 PM EST
    are you sure this wasn't supposed to be posted under your previous headline?

    bah!

    Why did Obama endorse the Pats? (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:50:55 PM EST
    Because Hillary already had the Giants?  Will this hurt Obama?  

    Parent
    haven't you been reading the blogs? (none / 0) (#78)
    by Turkana on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:17:50 PM EST
    obama already has the race won...

    Parent
    I know, I know. And now he's got (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:28:00 PM EST
    Maria Shriver.

    Parent
    for all of you this is (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:56:29 PM EST
    an excellent article about Hillary and sexism

    Wow. Haven't read much from Robin Morgan (none / 0) (#18)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:18:57 PM EST
    lately.  Thanks for the link; I must read her more -- one of the too-often-unsung greats of those "excesses of the '60s and '70s."

    Parent
    nice link (none / 0) (#19)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:32:06 PM EST
    thanks.

    Parent
    Robin Morgan (none / 0) (#53)
    by vdeputy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:09:11 PM EST
    Thanks for the link - what a terrific piece of writing!

    Parent
    Great Article - Thank You n/t (none / 0) (#201)
    by MO Blue on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:25:04 AM EST
    Post this link everywhere possible (none / 0) (#211)
    by lily15 on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 11:07:49 AM EST
    It needs as much exposure as possible.  It is excellent.  Thank you so much...now let's get to work linking it on other blogs...as often as possible  everybody..needs to do it...every vote counts.

    Parent
    Ahh Waited all day (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:04:51 PM EST
    Saw this on Moyers,  Katy Couric asked the candidates what book they would take to the White House other than the Bible.  These were the answers:  

    BILL MOYERS: Welcome to THE JOURNAL. Earlier this week on the CBS Evening News Katie Couric asked the presidential candidates what one book (other than the bible) they would take to the white house with them if they win. Here are their answers:

    SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: WEALTH OF NATIONS by Adam Smith because we may be entering some pretty shaky economic times.

    SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Doris Kearns Goodwin's book TEAM OF RIVALS. It was a biography of Lincoln, and he was confident enough to be willing to have these dissenting voices.

    MIKE HUCKABEE: There's a great book by Francis Schaeffer that had a real influence on me, WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? And it talks about the dignity and worth of each individual.

    SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: I would certainly bring a--my copy of the Constitution because there apparently was not a copy in the Bush White House the best I can determine. So I would bring THE FEDERALIST PAPERS.

    MITT ROMNEY: JOHN ADAMS by David McCullough. A truly great leader who made a difference for America, and his example is one I'd want to follow.

    For me, case closed.  She is taking the play book on what America is, the Constitution, so that she does not forget.  Go Hillary.  

    The Federalist Papers (2.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:38:08 PM EST
    They're interesting as far as looking at the original motivations for specific aspects of the Constitution, but are far from a progressive guide to governance.  'Specially the essays written by Alexander Hamilton.

    But I think those books are quite revelatory.  McCain subscribes to somewhat dated economic theory, Obama has the consensus shtick, Huckabee is a fundie, Clinton wants to game the system, and Romney combines high Toryism with the desperate desire to look like a President.

    Parent

    Game the system? (none / 0) (#22)
    by Virginian on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:48:29 PM EST
    Please explain the rational behind that backhand?

    Parent
    rationale (none / 0) (#23)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:51:57 PM EST
    Clinton can't do anything without certain folks saying she is the devil.

    If the woman climbed a tree to save a cat, they'd say she was just trying to make herself look taller than everyone else around her.

    Parent

    This victimhood song is getting old. (none / 0) (#28)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:12:46 PM EST
    let me tell you what is getting old! (5.00 / 0) (#32)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:25:44 PM EST
    that is snide putdowns of democratic candidates without any support or commentary. many of us have differences and concerns about the different candidates and put them out there. but you simply try a repub talking point about hillary's gaming the systems. please!

    Parent
    You know what's old? (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:55:43 PM EST
    Replying to all defenses of Senator Clinton with accusations of "claiming victimhood." That's what's old.

    Is she criticized unfairly? Yes, she is.

    Is it often sexist and misogynist? Yes, it is.

    Is she held to an impossible double standard? Absolutely.

    Is it claiming victimhood to point this out?

    NO IT IS NOT.

    Because despite all of the above, she's winning. And I suspect that's what's really bothering you.

    Parent

    Backhand? (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:12:12 PM EST
    That's her entire rationale for her candidacy.  Her theory of change is that she can wheel and deal with Congress, in an LBJ like matter, to get all the nice things that we want.

    Yes, I condensed it a bit snidely, but I did the same thing for all the candidates, including the one I'm voting for.

    Parent

    It was a backhanded compliment (none / 0) (#79)
    by Virginian on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:26:50 PM EST
    even you admit it...I just want to know what proves that she will "game it" that implies stretching the confines of the rules to bring about ends that were not originally intended to be within the construct...that is what Bush has done to a large degree (and broken the rules too)...I am not sure thats what you meant, thats why I want clarity.

    Parent
    Who ever said that the original intent was great? (none / 0) (#87)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:48:57 PM EST
    The people who wrote the Constitution didn't trust poor people, minorities, or women.  They did lots of fine things, but they weren't saints.  They created undemocratic structures that we've been fighting against for two centuries.  And the upper class have created more barriers since then.  The oil companies and the drug companies and the insurance companies will throw tons of money at us.  There's a filibuster that can thwart all but the most popular legislation.

    I should note that gaming a system is not about breaking the rules.  It's about playing to win.  And as long as we have this system, it makes perfect sense to play it to win.

    It's funny that I have to explain Clinton's theory of change to a bunch of Clinton supporters.

    Parent

    You're changing the subject (none / 0) (#92)
    by Virginian on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:02:55 PM EST
    I'll just take that to mean

    1. you don't actually have an answer for my question

    2. you'd rather argue than answer a legitimate question regarding your statement...


    Parent
    I don't see a question asked that I didn't answer. (none / 0) (#99)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:26:11 PM EST
    To summarize:

    1.  Gaming the system is not the same thing as breaking the rules.
    2.  The system sucks, and therefore absent a change it should be gamed towards good aims.  
    3.  Bush has, you know, broken the rules.  Many times.  He has also gamed towards crappy aims.

    Care to ask a specific question?

    These accusations from y'all are really lame.  This time it's intellectual dishonesty?  Really classy...

    Parent

    As for gaming the system, (none / 0) (#105)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:03:54 PM EST
    look at who Clinton compared herself to.  LBJ.  Read Master of the Senate.  That's what I mean.

    Parent
    And honestly... (none / 0) (#29)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:18:14 PM EST
    ... I think I mocked Obama worse than Clinton.

    Parent
    with all due respect it isn't necessary to (none / 0) (#39)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:43:14 PM EST
    mock anyone. why would you want to do that? why not discuss them as candidates and their proposals?

    Parent
    Levity. (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:51:36 PM EST
    I found the exercise mildly amusing.  And again, I was poking fun at my candidate much more than yours.  Chill out.

    Parent
    my candidate was edwards and (none / 0) (#44)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:55:21 PM EST
    is now clinton. i don't know who your candidate is. i am glad you defined what you meant about gaming the system.

    however you define it, which by the way is not how i would, it will be necessary to have strong leadership along the lines of fdr or lbk because left to their own devices the present dem leadership is dim to say the least.

    Parent

    There was a clear context. (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:00:21 PM EST
    Not only was there a clear context that anyone should have been able to pick up, the entire blogosphere had a huge discussion on theory of change very recently.  I'm appropriating language that has been used before in a similar way (see Atrios' pithy summary on theories of change).

    So please do not insinuate that I was trying to smear Clinton, because that's absolutely not true.

    Parent

    "gaming the system" does have (none / 0) (#52)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:07:48 PM EST
    a certain sniff to it. i wasn't the only one who had concers regarding that. as i said, i am glad you defined what you meant.

    Parent
    Irrational concerns. (none / 0) (#144)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:00:57 PM EST
    ramo, enough already! (none / 0) (#210)
    by hellothere on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 09:15:20 AM EST
    your responses are shall we say a little over the top. be sweet now!

    Parent
    Did Obama really read this book? This is review (none / 0) (#127)
    by ding7777 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:03:01 PM EST
    is at a high-schooler's level...

    SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Doris Kearns Goodwin's book TEAM OF RIVALS. It was a biography of Lincoln, and he was confident enough to be willing to have these dissenting voices


    Parent
    maybe (none / 0) (#128)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:04:54 PM EST
    if he gets the nom, someone will pass him a copy of the Happy Goat.

    Parent
    Happy Goat? Is W still reading My Pet Goat? (none / 0) (#133)
    by ding7777 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:20:02 PM EST
    Goodwin, of course, gained notoriety (none / 0) (#146)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:08:23 PM EST
    as a plagiarist, sadly.  Odd that Obama would commend a liar -- but perhaps revealing.

    Parent
    she was the one (none / 0) (#172)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:20:01 PM EST
    that was supposed to be covering the kerry side of one of the '04 debates and all she wanted to talk about was the red sox.  total dis of kerry i think it was on msnbc.  

    Parent
    The Patriots have an unfair advantage. . . (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:10:49 PM EST
    due to the PATRIOT Act, they're entitled to engage in warrantless spying on the opposing team (and probably dissenting members of their own team).

    Good one Larry! (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Teresa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:14:40 PM EST
    Go Giants...Go Puppies. I just turned the Puppy Bowl on Animal Planet for my two little dogs and they're going nuts. This is so funny.

    Parent
    Why don't the Obamacrats (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by jen on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:19:17 PM EST
    see what's happening here?

    Frank (Ugh) Luntz on Maher show last night

    A little about Luntz in case you don't know him (lucky you)

    ---------------------

       

    Luntz earned his stripes by helping set the stage for the Republican Revolution of 1994 by co-authoring Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America." Over the past dozen years, he helped keep the national debate over global warming in a holding pattern by counseling GOP candidates "to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue."

        Bill Moyers revealed on "Now" that Luntz's early advice to the Bush administration on any Iraq war messaging included this: "No speech about homeland security or Iraq should begin without a reference to 9/11."

        Frank is the supreme reality reframer who took the estate tax and turned it into the "death tax," turned school vouchers into "opportunity scholarships," and turned drilling for oil in a wildlife preserve into "responsible energy exploration."

        Samantha Bee of the Comedy Channel's "The Daily Show" once noted that Luntz had "made a brilliant career of spraying perfume on dog turds."

    ----------------

    So tonight, Luntz was beside himself, salivating over Barack Obama. The next JFK... Yet another neoconical republican who was nearly dancing in his chair with giddiness telling us that Barack is it... The next president.

    Every day there's a new one... Almost like some memo went out. Some new talking point...

    Forgive my cynicism.... but I've earned it. I am one of those icky older people still using up space and oxygen who really should be dismissed and cast away to make room for the new. For the Change.

    These are the same dudes who have been lying to us all for the longest time now, about everything. Working against everything we hold dear. And now they have leaped on to our side? It makes one cynical. And I have this memory of those other 90's- the ones that didn't suck. And I have not yet seen the hateful, evil, racist Bill or Hillary Clinton, the ones I keep hearing about. So when I see an entire gang of right wing talkers- lining up one right after the other- to extoll euphoric about a democratic candidate for president... Well, more flags than there are at the UN spring up in my brain with little alarm bells attached to them. My BS radar kicks into gear and I have a really hard time, no - I have an impossible time- buying that all these rightists are suddenly truly itching to see a Barack Obama presidency.

    Wonder who it will be tomorrow? Has Kristol jumped on the love train yet? This is getting eerie.
    ____

    And here is the YouTube of Luntz on Maher tonight. Remember-- this is the Republican's Language Framer Deluxe. The clip is kind of long, but here are some of the more relevant snips from it: (between 02:45 and 05:00)

    LUNTZ:
    Barack Obama has engaged independents-- (to the crowd)
    How many of you want Obama as the next president?

    (Audience: predictable woooos and hooooos)

    LUNTZ:
    This guy really is the real deal-- I feel like he's channeling Bobby Kennedy.

    LUNTZ:
    I think the public is post-partisan, they've had enough of republicans and democrats.... they want someone to do the nation's business - to not be focused on lobbyists and special interest groups- {...} --- to say to Washington...Go to Hell!

    (Audience: predictable rousing clap clap claps, Luntz then instinctively dives in for the kill)

    LUNTZ:
    And Obama has done that on the democrat side!

    LUNTZ:
    If it's Obama / McCain ...it's almost like Dwight Eisenhower vs John Kennedy.

    (and then he drops the real gem:)

    LUNTZ
    Hillary Clinton can be defeated by Republicans.
    If Barack Obama gets the nomination... I dont know how to beat him.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Vk2UhFWCXY

    h/t ms in la @ CCN

    if i were obama the last person i'd want (none / 0) (#33)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:27:56 PM EST
    in my corner is luntz.

    Parent
    That's the thing (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by jen on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:40:40 PM EST
    We're being set up by the same gang that has been tearing down liberals, progressives and the Democratic Party for 30 years. WHY are so many falling for it NOW? It's crazy-making!! WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!

    Parent
    luntz will turn on obama so fast (none / 0) (#40)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:46:29 PM EST
    you can't say scat fast enough. the attempt will be subtle, but there it is. the "will" of the people don't you know.

    Parent
    honestly (none / 0) (#47)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:02:26 PM EST
    he'll have these obama people turning on him in droves and they'll never know what him them.  

    Parent
    that may be true, but i don't think that (none / 0) (#51)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:05:42 PM EST
    luntz much cares. the thing is repubs don't care what we think.

    Parent
    And after Luntz (none / 0) (#49)
    by oldpro on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:03:57 PM EST
    my second fav...the charmer who got all the face time on FOX by endorsing Hillary against McCain...typing her infamous self to Hillary in the Dem/public eye and driving them to ... umm...gee....Obama?  Just a guess, of course..

    Parent
    Here is HRC responding to (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:40:16 PM EST
    a question about that questionable offer:

    HRC ON COULTER

    Parent

    Obamacans (none / 0) (#142)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:57:53 PM EST
    Is the proper term.


    Barack + GOP = `Obamacans'


    Parent

    Talking Points Memo Evidence Against Hillary NOT (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by nycvoter on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:37:29 PM EST
    has anyone seen Josh Marshall's latest evidence without evidence against Hillary?  He has a blurb -LA Times find evidence of push polling by Clinton against Obama (not exact quote) and links to an LA times article which is one person's story of a push poll call received and about how smooth the caller was and that's it!!!! that's what they call evidence. He's a joke.

    he now has an update (none / 0) (#115)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:21:54 PM EST
    saying the story is bogus and he shouldn't have been so quick to run with it.  so i will give him credit for that.  

    Parent
    C'mon (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:39:08 PM EST
    We knew it and we are not "journalists"

    Parent
    Credit For (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by squeaky on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:10:50 PM EST
    Him being quick to run with it?

    Parent
    But between his his original and updated (none / 0) (#129)
    by ding7777 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:06:56 PM EST
    posts, DKos probably had 15 "recommended" Hillary Hate diaries

    Parent
    JFK comparisons (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:11:53 PM EST
    Another wonderful tidbit from Moyers.

    KATHLEEN HALL JAMIESON

    Well, and that's part of the problem with the analogy back to John Kennedy from Edward Kennedy and Caroline Kennedy. Because the Presidency was tragically cut short before John Kennedy had been able to get enacted most of his legislative agenda. And as a result, you don't have many specific accomplishments that you can turn to. And you have Bay of Pigs, an admitted mistake. And you have a campaign that was predicated in 1960 on a missile gap that didn't exist...
    It is because on both sides, they move back and they select the pieces that they want you to remember. And they feature those pieces. And to some extent, people who haven't lived through those times, and a large part of the electorate hasn't lived through those times, are now being invited to see a part of the past without seeing in its full historical context. At a certain point, we're substantially misrepresenting the historical whole.

    transcript

    Since this is an open thread, I (none / 0) (#56)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:17:25 PM EST
    wanted to share this with you.  I asked a friend, who is an anybody but Hillary dem, if he was following the articles about Rezko/Obama relationahip.  He sd., just HRC's crack during the debate.  Then he immed. brought up the article about Bill Clinton, the donation to his library, and the visit to a "Stan" with the uranium guy.  

    Parent
    Maddening... (none / 0) (#60)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:37:21 PM EST
    You will love this.  You know the great community organizer attribute?(  He touts he Saul Alinsky roots.  Well, guess what, Hillary wrote her senior thesis at Wellsely on Alinsky and she interviewed him. He was so taken by her that he offered her a job.  But what floats around in the blog world?  
    That she was a goldwarter girl in high school and a corporate lawyer.  I have no idea when the Children's Defense fund and the Legal Services Administration, compared to the Law Firm Obama worked for, are higher marks?  (who offered Obama a job cause he was so taken by him: Rezko)...ha..ha

    Parent
    I would welcome more information (none / 0) (#62)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:43:31 PM EST
    about that law firm experience, which Obama characterizes as a civil rights law firm.  How does the firm's representing Rezko's interest fit into that description?  I also read somewhere, with no attribution, that a Rezko business partner worked in the law firm as a lawyer at some point.  

    Parent
    law firm (none / 0) (#64)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:50:37 PM EST
    It's not all civil rights they also advise developers and others who develop affordable housing .  Don't know the percentage of work.  But one of the partners left to go work for Rezko.  

    law firm

    Parent

    Link doesn't link. (none / 0) (#68)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:04:23 PM EST
    Take two on link... (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:58:26 PM EST
    Here's a piece on law firms, his (none / 0) (#82)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:30:35 PM EST
    and hers:

    McClatchey

    Parent

    I would welcome (none / 0) (#85)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:42:00 PM EST
    testimonials from folks he helped during those years.  I would welcome testimonials from tenants in slumlord buildings run by Rezko in Obama's district.  I would welcome someone scrutinizing this fellow before we put the whole of the democratic party behind him.

    Parent
    Now this link is interesting (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:33:53 PM EST
    ABC news is reporting this:

    "If Clinton is the nominee, 15 percent of Democrats say they'd rather vote for McCain; if Obama's the nominee, 20 percent say they'd go to McCain. A key factor is the extent to which those intraparty tempers cool after the Democratic race is decided."

    that would defeat Obama big time....

    Here is the link....

    Obama is still talking about how some (none / 0) (#63)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:46:15 PM EST
    of his supporters might not vote for HRC but all of hers would vote for him.  

    Parent
    he's a fool (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:27:52 PM EST
    if he thinks hillary won't go all the way to the convention and fight him for the nomination. but he won't even be close so it won't matter.  this will all be over on tuesday.  

    Parent
    from your mouth to God's ears...:-) (none / 0) (#183)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:02:50 PM EST
    Not All (none / 0) (#66)
    by squeaky on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:56:15 PM EST
    Some here have said that they would never vote for Obama if he gets the nomination.

    Parent
    You can add me to the list (none / 0) (#101)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:35:41 PM EST
    of non-Obama voters.  Obama doesn't instill my confidence at all, and I won't have a Democratic version of Bush in the White House destroying Democrats for years to come.

    I'd just as soon have McCain in there so he can further wallow in the Iraq War.

    The Supreme Court?  I'm 44, have no kids and won't.  My relatives vote Republican.  It's their problem.

    Parent

    it IS an interesting link (none / 0) (#185)
    by Satya1 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:15:21 PM EST
    I wish it also examined independents.

    Parent
    CAN YOU BELIEVE (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:55:31 PM EST
    that a commentator gets away with saying this, in this day and age.....Geeeezzzzzzz....

    "Look the only people for Hillary Clinton are the Democratic establishment and white women... it would be crazy for the Democratic party to follow the establishment that's led them to defeat year after year... White Women are a problem - but, you know... we all live with that..." - Bill Kristol, Fox "News" Sunday

    yeah white women are such a problem....that makes me so mad!!!!!

    LINK

    I think what Kristol (none / 0) (#96)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:23:41 PM EST
    meant was that women are a problem for HIM.

    Parent
    What's in a name? (none / 0) (#131)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:12:42 PM EST
    All of you (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:14:35 PM EST
    Obama supporters should ask yourselves, why is the MSM (corporately owned of course), plus most of the republican commentators all pulling for Obama....because he is the easiest to defeat!!!! AS you can plainly see Hillary is very popular with mainstream democrats...she would be awesome in the GE and would prevail big time...As mentioned in another thread, 15% of Obama's supporters would not vote for her BUT 20% OF HILLARYS WON'T VOTE FOR HIM.....thats a huge problem!!!!

    ahtyrio (5.00 / 0) (#97)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:24:48 PM EST
    you are wrong--Obama said that Hillary's supporters would vote for him.  I heard him say it so it must be true.

    Parent
    Better read the article again (none / 0) (#188)
    by Satya1 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:34:26 PM EST
    As mentioned in another thread, 15% of Obama's supporters would not vote for her BUT 20% OF HILLARYS WON'T VOTE FOR HIM.....thats a huge problem!!!!

    No, the ABC article said:  If Clinton is the nominee, 15 percent of DEMOCRATS say they'd rather vote for McCain; if Obama's the nominee, 20 percent say they'd go to McCain.  

    If you read the top of the article you would have caught this:

    Among the general public overall, it's a 49-46 percent McCain-Clinton race and a 46-49 percent McCain-Obama race

    The article does not even remotely support your claim, "she would be awesome in the GE and would prevail big time".

    Parent

    so the wording is democrats (none / 0) (#190)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:44:07 PM EST
    instead of supporters...OK...It is still a bigger percentage would not vote for Obama no matter how you spin it...and I believe that Florida voters prove that Hillary is more than able to have a landslide victory in November...

    Parent
    Yes a bigger percentage of democrats (none / 0) (#195)
    by Satya1 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:59:24 PM EST
    would not vote for Sen. Obama.  But a bigger percentage of total voters would not vote for Sen. Clinton.  The independents and any crossover Repubs more than make up for it as the numbers at the top of the article show Sen. Obama "winning" against McCain by 3 and Sen. Clinton "losing".

    Parent
    but what (none / 0) (#197)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:12:21 AM EST
    about the "be a dem for a day" voters that will vote for their republican candidate  now that Obama is nominated.....Now that they helped nominate Obama who is perceived to be the weakest candidate? I submit that noone really knows how many of those there are...until it is too late of course....anyway, this is all guesswork until November....may the best candidate win...:-)...remember that one of the precincts he won in nevada was historically republican...

    Parent
    if I chose to not vote (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:24:49 PM EST
    in the general election, if Obama wins, it won't be because of Obama himself...It will be because I have never in my 63 yrs on earth, seen such blatent media manipulation and I just refuse to play into their hands...It disgusts me and it is a sham to our form of government....

    I Won't Back Down (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Aaron on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:14:04 PM EST
    Well I won't back down, no I won't back down
    You could stand me up at the gates of hell
    But I won't back down

    Gonna stand my ground, won't be turned around
    And I'll keep this world from draggin' me down
    Gonna stand my ground and I won't back down

    [Chorus:]
    Hey baby, there ain't no easy way out
    Hey I will stand my ground
    And I won't back down

    Well I know what's right, I got just one life
    In a world that keeps on pushin' me around
    But I'll stand my ground and I won't back down

    Hey baby there ain't no easy way out
    Hey I will stand my ground
    And I won't back down
    No, I won't back down

    (Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers)

    Obama 08


    Unfortunately (none / 0) (#137)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:45:14 PM EST
    Obama has a long record of backing down.

    I know Tom Petty. And Barack Obama is no Tom Petty.

    Parent

    when Obama (none / 0) (#140)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:56:08 PM EST
    had a chance to help these people that were losing their jobs he did nothing...Gee he really cares about Americans....Baloney!!!! He is all flash and no subtance in my book!!!

    LINK

    Parent

    Tom Petty (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by Coldblue on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:18:00 PM EST
    was hot. Best halftime in a long time!

    "American Girl" -- a Clinton song :-) (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:41:20 PM EST
    Often played at her rallies, played it today -- if I heard it correctly from a room away?  Go Tom Petty!

    Parent
    My observation as a classical music (none / 0) (#118)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:35:07 PM EST
    fan is that classical musicians age better than rock stars. although Petty looks good.  But that guy with all that stringy black hair.  

    Parent
    Another endorsement for Clinton (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:42:14 PM EST
    from a truly great woman.  This will be BIG in Oklahama -- and nationwide in Native nations.

    Oklahoma City, OK -Wilma Mankiller, the first woman Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation and the first female in modern history to lead a major Native American tribe, announced her endorsement of Hillary Clinton today. Chief Mankiller will serve as a National Campaign Co-Chair for the Clinton campaign.

    "I am honored and humbled to have the support of a deeply respected woman who knows what it takes to lead a nation," Clinton said. "Chief Wilma Mankiller has worked for change her whole life and is an inspiration to so many of us who have followed in her footsteps."

    I wish the endorser had a (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:43:45 PM EST
    different last name.  This could be fodder for a day or so.

    Parent
    Oh please. (none / 0) (#139)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:52:45 PM EST
    You think it WASN'T fodder when she was the first woman chief of the Cherokee nation?

    Mock her name and look like a different kind of racist.

    Parent

    I was only making an observation. (none / 0) (#171)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:19:58 PM EST
    Sorry.

    Parent
    The thing is (none / 0) (#184)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:05:30 PM EST
    that because she is a woman and an Indian, there probably will be mockery of her name in the MSM. And no one will call them bigots for it.

    Parent
    I actually have heard her speak -- and heard (none / 0) (#149)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:13:10 PM EST
    her marvelously humorous stories about explaining her name to non-Natives. . . .  She is a wonder.

    Btw, her name denotes that she is of the "warrior" clan of the Cherokee -- it's simply a literal translation, by English speakers, of the term.

    Parent

    Touchdown Giants!!! (5.00 / 2) (#141)
    by byteb on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:57:28 PM EST
    35 seconds left.
    Sweet.

    Giants shock the world!!! (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by robrecht on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:08:35 PM EST


    Giants win! (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by byteb on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:31:09 PM EST
    From a wild card to Superbowl Champions.

    Parent
    I'm waiting (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Coldblue on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:18:23 PM EST
    for the Obama-Giants analogy.


    not sure (none / 0) (#151)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:20:47 PM EST
    I think Obama was for the Patriots wasnt he?? Not sure but I think Sen. Clinton as for Giants?

    Parent
    McCain bet on the Patriots ... and lost! (none / 0) (#155)
    by robrecht on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:23:27 PM EST
    OK who was for who please (none / 0) (#159)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:29:23 PM EST
    enlighten me :-)

    Parent
    McCain bet Giuliani on the Jay Leno show ... (none / 0) (#174)
    by robrecht on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:23:19 PM EST
    ... the other night and McCain gave him the full point spread.

    Parent
    Obama endorsed the Patriots prior (none / 0) (#186)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:25:50 PM EST
    to today's game.

    Parent
    I'm waiting (none / 0) (#152)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:21:57 PM EST
    for the Hillary with a sling-shot analogy

    Parent
    It's all over DKos... (none / 0) (#153)
    by Teresa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:22:17 PM EST
    That was expected n/t (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Coldblue on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:29:11 PM EST
    NO WAY! (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jgarza on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:31:47 PM EST
    I want excuses and spinning, I have to wait till March to vote.  There better not a be a winner. Hillies, Obamaniacs, get your spin ready.  I wanna see these two b**ches come to Texas and tap dance for my vote!

    No presidential candidate has ever come to Texas and fought for my vote.  

    Extradition is the only thing (5.00 / 0) (#111)
    by oldpro on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:13:27 PM EST
    that would drag me to Texas again.  Once was enough.  Jesus.  You people drill for oil in your PARKS fer Crissakes.

    Parent
    actually (none / 0) (#164)
    by Jgarza on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:03:51 PM EST
    I live in Austin, we have one of the largest park systems of any city.  Large green belts, spring fed pools, low pollution, Texas does not only consist of Houston and Dallas

    Parent
    Glad to hear it... (none / 0) (#168)
    by oldpro on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:12:49 PM EST
    I'm a parks person!!

    You'd better not be fibbing because if I ever get to Austin (again - Zezus...you can see all the way to Oklahoma from that tower!) and you're not telling the truth I'll hunt you down like a dog!

    And THEN...I'll call your mom.

    Parent

    Ausitn is quite nice (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by RalphB on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:29:17 PM EST
    I live there as well and it's a nice city.  Quality of life doesn't suck yet and, if we're lucky, we can keep it that way.

    Traffic is worse than it used to be but it still beats Dallas.


    Parent

    Must be Lady Bird's legacy... (none / 0) (#202)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:36:10 AM EST
    Here is an interesting analysis (none / 0) (#5)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:34:00 PM EST
    of the polls to date
    For what it's worth, I am watching a "Murder She Wrote" episode on TV and they are discussing a female candidate that is being falsely accused..LOL

    Per AP, Huckabee is calling (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:35:53 PM EST
    for Romney to drop out, saying it is a two-man race between McCain and Huckabee.

    Hahahahaha . . . (none / 0) (#11)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:56:35 PM EST
    God musta made him do it.  Huckabee hearing voices?

    Parent
    Giants? (none / 0) (#12)
    by squeaky on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 01:57:20 PM EST
    I am not a sports fan, but don't the Patriots have a chance to make sports history. Isn't that worth rooting for, human achievement and all?

    Or is it considered better to root for the underdog?

    Underdog squeaky..... (none / 0) (#209)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 08:54:11 AM EST
    Who roots for Goliath?  

    Parent
    OK, I That. (none / 0) (#212)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:16:57 PM EST
    Generally my position.

    Giants did it.

    Parent

    oddest thing. (none / 0) (#14)
    by cpinva on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:07:02 PM EST
    the wp sports section has a brief preview of the game. when all is said and done, you'd just assume the giants were the favored team. not so, it's the pats by 12.

    go figure.

    Used to like football (none / 0) (#16)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 02:12:15 PM EST
    but don't like the micromanagement from the side lines.  Makes it boring.

    I love real Football...world cup kind of football.  Send those guys out there, with no body armor and for 90 the duke it out.  Best part, is pleasing to the eye.
     

    Parent

    Used up all my football chromosomes (none / 0) (#43)
    by oldpro on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:53:59 PM EST
    before I was 50...and that was 21 years ago!

    Still have some ragged baseball and basketball synapses intact tho for the occasional diversion.  Nostalgia gives baseball the edge...peanuts, hotdogs, and Uncle Art playing for the Giants...badly...(grandma never recovered but he did...barely).

    Parent

    Thanks! (none / 0) (#24)
    by robrecht on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:02:01 PM EST
    Just put this on for my 3- and 5-year-olds and they're lovin' it!

    Puppy Bowl!! (none / 0) (#25)
    by Jen M on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:04:24 PM EST
    I'm rooting for the beagle

    Kitty Half Time was a bust. (none / 0) (#110)
    by oldpro on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:11:45 PM EST
    Maybe not to the pootie crowd, tho...except for the one staying in the container looking out the 'window' and staying there the whole time!

    Parent
    I kept thinking (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Jen M on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:52:07 PM EST
    that is not a kitty I'd want to adopt -- poor fraidy kitty.

    Parent
    Giuliani as VP (none / 0) (#31)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:20:11 PM EST
    Listen to this theory my uncle has for why he would vote for a McCain/Giuliani ticket:  McCain is old, so Giuliani will probably end up with the job.

    To which I said, "Your strategy is to vote for a candidate in hopes that he'll die?"

    And he said, "Yeah."

    So, there you have it, folks.  McCain's  strategy to get the base republican vote should be to remind folks that he's old and might die soon. (Better keep that mother of his off the trail, though.  Man, I wanna be her when I grow up.)

    i have never seen hillary play victim. (none / 0) (#38)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:41:56 PM EST
    though she had a right to in some cases i could mention but won't. your comment about her gaming the system is not supported. so please refrain.

    Context! (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:50:09 PM EST
    The context of this is that Hillary sees the Federalist Papers as a guide for governance.  The system that I was clearly referring to is the one explained in these documents - the original Constitution.  Being able to effectively game it is not a bad thing!  That's what LBJ did, and that's why Civil Rights through Southern filibusters.  That's what FDR did to get the New Deal passed.  That's what Lincoln did, and what every other great President did.

    I don't know why Clintonistas are giving me grief for having to audacity to give Clinton a compliment!

    And you're turning Clinton into a victim.  I was criticizing you, not her.

    Parent

    Mrs. Bill Clinton: (none / 0) (#45)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 03:55:59 PM EST
    you say that like it's a bad thing (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Nasarius on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:03:10 PM EST
    How do you expect people will pay for the public insurance plan? This makes perfect sense to me: treat it as a tax, and exempt only those who have private insurance. If everyone opts for the public plan, it's de facto single payer.

    Parent
    working people (5.00 / 0) (#50)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:05:36 PM EST
    recognize that payroll deduction might be the best way to do this.  we aren't as stupid as you seem to imply.  yes it will hurt a little, but i think it's a sacrifice we all have to make.

     a leader is someone who asks us to sacrifice for the common good.  only one person in this campaign is doing that and her name is hillary clinton.  

    Parent

    I just heard Caroline Kennedy speaking (none / 0) (#55)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:14:27 PM EST
    from notes at a rally for Obama in L.A.  Not very persuasive.  Michelle Obama and Oprah were up next but TV cut away to rebroadcast the latest Re
    Republican and Democratic debates.

    Parent
    Ahh (none / 0) (#67)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:58:23 PM EST
    the sacrifice for the common good.  Individualism is a dirty word.

    Parent
    has anyone considered (none / 0) (#83)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:39:23 PM EST
    how much money we will all personally save with universal healthcare?  Homeowners insurance, car insurance, umbrella policies, business insurance--all these have hefty deductibles and premium for healthcare costs caused by accidents.

    Parent
    SO (none / 0) (#95)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:23:31 PM EST
    who pays for the health care in all of the examples socialized healthcare?

    Parent
    socialized healthcare? (5.00 / 0) (#108)
    by hellothere on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:08:20 PM EST
    that is such a "cute" word that is brought up when convenient. we pay for public school education and any number of other amenities including the national highway system. does that it mean we are socialists? huh?

    Are france, england, canada, and germany socialist countries? when an important component in society such as health care fails and the few reap through political contacts and lobbyists, i say change it. of course anything can be abused such as the way the health care system is now run by the insurance companies and the drug companies.

    Parent

    this is the problem with you people (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:24:07 PM EST
    stop it now!  the so called progressive wing of the democratic party is trying to knee cap hillary clinton by charging her with socialism.  honest to god you are doing the republicans work for them!

    Parent
    socialism (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:30:06 PM EST
    is when the government owns the means of production.  socialized medicine would mean that the federal government would take over hospitals.  hillary clinton is not proposing that!  hospitals and providers remain private enterprises.  she is talking about socializing insurance and the fact is that is the best way to do it.  it is the most efficient way to do it.  in fact, private insurance will still be available for types of care beyond the basic insurance package she is proposing.  it will just be much cheaper because it will now be competing with the much bigger government run program.

    hillary clinton is going to break the insurance industries death grip on health care in this country.  the time for talk and half measures is over.  if you argue the merits of the issue, it is obvious that this is what we need and this is why hillary people will never go to obama.  we will go to the convention and hillary clinton will be the nominee, even if obama stays in and greatly damages her advantage on this issue, which is all he seems to be doing right now!

    Parent

    obama is the most progressive (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:49:14 PM EST
    on the war, but hillary's plan is condemned as socialist?  i mean this is getting laughable if that's your man's position then his campaign has no intellectual integrity!  it's a self contradiction.    

    Parent
    how is Obama (none / 0) (#162)
    by Judith on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:53:56 PM EST
    more progressive on the war?  He wasnt even in the Senate at the time of the vote he blames Hillary for.  They both want it ended. I'd say it is a tie on that one.

    Parent
    are you (none / 0) (#175)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:25:39 PM EST
    deliberately missing my point that this a claim that obama supporters make to justify their support for him, "that he was right" on the war i.e. more "progressive" yet on this issue hillary's plan is "socialist" and therefore undersirable.  i am arguing that his position contradicts itself on its face with regard to how progressive he is.  and of course the claim that he is more progressive on the war in itself is bogus.  that is another issue.  but that is what his supporters say you aren't questioning that are you?

    Parent
    well... (none / 0) (#100)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:28:39 PM EST
    "socialized healthcare" tells me where you stand on this issue, but I hate football, so I'll give it a go:

    The taxpayer picks up the bill.  Since the risk is spread to 300 million people instead of a handful here and there, we all end up paying much less.

    Not to mention the number of lawsuits and medical bankruptcies being dropped and thus clearing the courts.

    Parent

    It's only "socialized" (none / 0) (#214)
    by jondee on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 03:40:12 PM EST
    and "socialist" when the first priority of a Govt program isnt paying back the big donors.

    Trillions for bloodsoaked neocon global jackoff fantasies and Govt contractor highway robbery, ok.
    Universal Health Care, un-American and "socialist".

    Jonathon Swift wrote about species of collective lunacy like this 300 years ago.

    Parent

    wtf (none / 0) (#199)
    by english teacher on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:15:53 AM EST
    is obama now the ayn rand democrat?

    buy a clue.

    Parent

    Btw, The fact (none / 0) (#215)
    by jondee on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 03:55:35 PM EST
    that you believe "the Govt" -- rather than everyone -- "owns" the means of production under socialism betrays how little faith you have in the possiblitiy of Govt being a democratic representation of the will of the people.

    The idea of democracy just got to "socialistic" for most Americans.

    We're not gonna take it. Never could and never will..

    Parent

    Why do they (none / 0) (#216)
    by jondee on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:11:33 PM EST
    have to be mutually exclusive?

    I dont hear you pissing and moaning about "the common good" when Shrub goes on and on about protectin' us from terrorists, terrorism and terror.

    Parent

    Republican Obama Fans (none / 0) (#57)
    by vdeputy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:18:06 PM EST
    On both MTP and George Stef. this morning, all the Republicans agreed that their party is shaking in its boots at the thought of going against Obama. Then they all proceeded to say why Obama should win.  I guess they just really want the Dems to do the right thing although it would supposedly against the Repubs self-interest - NOT!

    Wow looks like (none / 0) (#65)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 04:55:56 PM EST
    Hillary is really attracting the huge crowds too...Good for her and a shame that the media just ignores this fact!!!!

    Wow. (none / 0) (#192)
    by Satya1 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:47:54 PM EST
    10,000 - that's a big crowd, in L.A.

    Obama pulls in 15,000 in Boise.

    Parent

    Maria Shriver just endorsed Obama (none / 0) (#69)
    by byteb on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:04:40 PM EST
    Wonder what Arnold thinks about that one?

    I'm sure he is fine with it. Does (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:07:13 PM EST
    explain his haste to endorse McCain though.  

    Parent
    good point. (none / 0) (#74)
    by byteb on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:09:23 PM EST
    Poor timing. Isn't the superbowl (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:09:32 PM EST
    just starting?

    Parent
    Maria Shriver just endorsed Obama (none / 0) (#70)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:05:37 PM EST
    at Obama rally in LA.  Powerful.  

    The just released CBS national poll (none / 0) (#103)
    by Teresa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:58:05 PM EST
    asked if the Ted Kennedy endorsement made you more or less likely to vote for Obama. Answers: 12% more likely, 9 % less likely and 79% don't care.

    Do you know if Maria has more influence in California than Ted does nationally (you are in Calif. aren't you?).

    It certainly pumped up DKos. They are on their second thread with over 800 comments plus multiple diaries on it.

    Parent

    Maria's endorsement will get lots more (none / 0) (#106)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:04:34 PM EST
    attention than Ted's in CA.  She has a great reputation on issues liberals care about.  

    Parent
    wouldnt Bill Richardson's (none / 0) (#107)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:08:06 PM EST
    endorsement for Hillary trump that?? He is half Latino....and just endorsed her....

    Parent
    incorrect (none / 0) (#165)
    by Jgarza on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:08:58 PM EST
    he has not endorsed her.

    Parent
    yep he is waiting to endorse till (none / 0) (#167)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:12:44 PM EST
    he can see a clear winner and be in their administration lol....which is what I think Edwards is doing too....hmmmmm...

    Parent
    I've always like her a lot. I don't (none / 0) (#109)
    by Teresa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:09:45 PM EST
    understand her choice in husbands though. (Though my ex-husband was a big Republican but I didn't realize that until is was too late.)

    Parent
    Who cares (none / 0) (#113)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:16:35 PM EST
    The East Coast establishment still think that the Kennedy's mean something to Latinos and other people.  Mathews et. al. kept saying how this was the blow that would get Hillary.  People remember that life was good under the Clintons.  Anyway, Robert Kennedy was the one who has the pull with Latinos, worked with Chavez, not Teddy.  

    I really get angry at this passing the torch to a man thing and not letting the people vote.

    Parent

    It doesn't mean anything to me either. (none / 0) (#123)
    by Teresa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:48:33 PM EST
    I think most endorsements are worthless for anything other than some free publicity. Obama has some conservative/moderate endorsements lately that actually come across as negative to me.

    If I'm Hillary Clinton and I win this race, I sure would remember some of this. I guess they will always be too common for some people.

    I think Hillary should have saved some of her endorsements to use now.

    Parent

    So you don't expect Joan Baez's (5.00 / 0) (#180)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:44:43 PM EST
    endorsement of Obama to tip the scales his way?  Who will Judy Collins endorse?  Who cares?

    Parent
    Baez part of the "excesses of the '60s" (none / 0) (#181)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:50:39 PM EST
    but I don't suppose that the incredibly ahistorical Obamaites would be capable of synthezing that to see the irony.

    Parent
    It is pretty funny isn't it. Married to (none / 0) (#182)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:55:50 PM EST
    one of the premier war protestors, writing protest songs.  Hugely popular with everyone in the streets protesting the war.

    Parent
    for all that dont realize it yet (none / 0) (#76)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:11:47 PM EST
    the difference in premium cost is outlined here in a mandate vs nonmandate cost...it is a big difference....

    for a non-mandate $4400.00
    for a mandate      2700.00

    So not even close as far as I am concerned about affordability....

    LINK

    I juar listened to an interview of (none / 0) (#86)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:46:42 PM EST
    HRC on Fox News.  Then the talking heads, including Mara Liason and Juan Williams of NPR.  Is this unusual?  

    NPR says Richardson endorses Clinton (none / 0) (#102)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:50:59 PM EST
    Looks like the Big Dawg's sitdown to watch the Super Bowl with Richardson paid off even before the kickoff!  From NPR:

    "On the Democratic side the news was New Mexico's Gov. Bill Richardson's endorsement of Hillary Clinton. Having been the first Hispanic American presidential candidate, Richardson had the potential to help Barack Obama with a constituency that has been slow to warm up to him.

    "But Richardson, who will watch the game with Bill Clinton Sunday night, stuck with the family that elevated him to two Cabinet-level positions in the 1990s. . . ."

    Parent

    Well! (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:59:38 PM EST
    I must say, it's nice to finally see someone who is loyal to the Clintons for all they have done.

    Dance with the one what brung ya, as we say down here.

    I knew I liked Richardson for a reason.  

    Meanwhile, back in the Batcave, I hope someone put that hideous mailer from the Obama camp under John Edwards' nose.

    Parent

    looks like he ended up not doing it (none / 0) (#166)
    by Jgarza on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:10:38 PM EST
    I Think NPR Got It Wrong (none / 0) (#203)
    by MO Blue on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:49:52 AM EST
    Richardson did watch the football game with Bill. They talked with reporters at half time and no endorsement was given. Info per TPM.

    Parent
    Garninishing Wages (none / 0) (#90)
    by fgcualumni2002 on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:59:09 PM EST
    Hillary really stepped in it today:

    WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.

    The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC's "This Week," she said: "I think there are a number of mechanisms" that are possible, including "going after people's wages, automatic enrollment."

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ 20080...f31zJPGCtsE1vAI


    sign me up! (none / 0) (#125)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 07:52:12 PM EST
    You should (none / 0) (#134)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:25:59 PM EST
    realize that ABC is

    Anything But Credible

    Parent

    Stepped in what? (none / 0) (#135)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:26:07 PM EST
    Obama has said that he'd ask the non-covered/non-participants to pay fines in the amount of unpaid premiums if (when) they show up in emergency rooms.

    So who pays those fines if the non-participating person ends up dead or disabled and unable to pay the fines?

    We do. And health care costs more for all of us, even those who CAN eventually pay the back premiums.

    If Hillary stepped in it, Obama's in it up to his waist.

    Parent

    Garrison Keillor (none / 0) (#91)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 05:59:38 PM EST
    endorses Obama.  Who is left to jump on the bandwagon. KEILLOR

    Does Obama know Lake Woebegone is fictional?

    So is this campaign sometimes.. (none / 0) (#94)
    by Teresa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 06:17:18 PM EST
    I feel like I'm watching the Rocky version of politics.

    Parent
    Grocery Store (none / 0) (#132)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:19:57 PM EST
    So, Super Bowl Sunday, great, here I thought no one would be at the "Berkeley Bowl"  (the local and I would say original, organic, local, family owned) grocery store.  

    Duh' it was packed, all those clever old time lefties all had the same idea.  As we were all bumping into each other, laughing at our cleverness.  

    Whole Foods here was crowded too (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 08:34:47 PM EST
    And the parking lot was full.  I don't watch football, but I did turn it on to see Tom Petty. He did a really good set.

    Parent
    just stop it (none / 0) (#145)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:05:25 PM EST
    you are the one pushing the point.  

    Excuse me. (none / 0) (#157)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:26:02 PM EST
    Someone drastically misinterprets what I say (I still don't see how you go from saying that a candidate is being effective in working the system to deep-seated Hillary hatred and/or misogyny), I defend myself, and I'm pushing the point?  Funny how that works.

    Parent
    I suggest (none / 0) (#148)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:10:22 PM EST
    that if you want to be seen as complimenting Senator Clinton, you do it in a way you don't have to defend and explain for 20 posts.

    It's not hard.

    I suggest... (none / 0) (#154)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:22:50 PM EST
    ... that you don't throw around words like sexism and misogyny so casually.

    Saying that the premise of Clinton's campaign is that her experience allows her to most effectively game the system is not at all offensive to her.

    As for the 20 posts, you might have a point were I not saying the same things over and over again.

    Parent

    Obviously (none / 0) (#156)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:24:46 PM EST
    it's because you aren't being very convincing.

    Parent
    Funny... (none / 0) (#161)
    by Ramo on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:37:18 PM EST
    ...that there's no rebuttal on the merits.  Despite how many Clinton supporters arguing against me?

    Parent
    What merits? (none / 0) (#169)
    by echinopsia on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:13:01 PM EST
    "Winning" I guess would best be decided (none / 0) (#163)
    by cannondaddy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:56:57 PM EST
    by delegate count.  I don't think that's happening on Tuesday.  I think it's going to come down to superdelegates.  I think Florida & Michagan should have a do-over and caucus so that they could legitimatly send delegates.

    Who pays (none / 0) (#170)
    by horseloverfat on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:13:56 PM EST
    the cost of a do-over?  Do you suppose Florida voters might take offense at needing to do a do-over, the first time not counting?  If I lived in Florida, I would be PO'ed.

    Parent
    My understanding (none / 0) (#176)
    by cannondaddy on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:26:28 PM EST
    is that it has been done before.  The voters in both states should be mad, at their state Democratic leadership.

    Parent
    if obama (none / 0) (#179)
    by english teacher on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:30:31 PM EST
    pushes a do over in florida he will get humiliated.  what is he really thinking here?  that he will get more votes?  the people of florida voted and he got trashed.  if it comes to the florida delegates, which it won't, they will be seated for hillary.  

    Parent
    Endorsements probably count (none / 0) (#173)
    by athyrio on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 10:21:40 PM EST
    more for republicans as Bill Clinton, I think, once said, Democrats fall in love and Republicans fall in line....which is probably true...apparently with TK's endorsement, it didnt even help carry Mass. his own state which is pretty embarrassing for him...

    From an article in Sunday NY Times Mag. (none / 0) (#187)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:32:19 PM EST
    26 Ways of Looking at a Female Voter, by Linda Hirshman, includes:

    In one recent study, women said they vote to protect their interest.  Wereas men said they vote because they enjoy politics.


    Any truth to (none / 0) (#189)
    by Saul on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:34:39 PM EST
    what I heard at a bar the other day.   That many Hispanics will vote for Hilary and not Obama because there is a competion  as to which minority group is bigger.  The theory being if Hispanics vote for Obama a black that would someway dilute the significance of the Hispanics which claim they are the biggest minority group and if they vote for Obama they somehow would not be the number one minority.  Anybody else heard of this theory?

    Interesting perspective (none / 0) (#191)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:45:32 PM EST
    I was reading Der Spiegel, the English version, some of the German articles have been very perceptive.  This one I think people will find interesting:  
    I was one of the children he talks about
    Hearts vsMInd

    They brought up a historical reference, that I of all people should remember:  

    Obama is not the first to use this approach. But history shows it can end in disaster. In 1972, the candidacy of Senator George McGovern caught fire among young and educated Democrats united in their opposition to the Vietnam War. To the surprise of the party establishment, the soft-spoken, dovish McGovern began running away with primary victories in such liberal states as Wisconsin. Because of the youthful exuberance of his following -- much like Obama's today -- the press began calling the McGovern juggernaut "the children's crusade." As one who was there, I remember how closely it felt like an extension of the civil rights movement.

    In the end, the children won, marginalizing the adults (the party regulars) and giving McGovern the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. But in the general election, McGovern failed disastrously, losing 49 of 50 states to Richard M. Nixon. The movement that could gain control of the Democratic Party, always tilting left during the primary season, was fatally out of touch with the rest of America when it came to a head-to-head battle with the Republicans. It is a lesson that Bill Clinton never forgot during his more centrist campaign in 1992.



    McGovern "dovish." (none / 0) (#194)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 11:58:41 PM EST
    Who writes this stuff.  

    Parent
    but think (none / 0) (#198)
    by Stellaaa on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:12:26 AM EST
    They keep giving the JFK perspective, no one talks about the McGovern,(I was one of them).  Remember how we lost?  Can we afford it?

    Translations are sometimes awkward.  

    Parent

    So, you must be the other person (none / 0) (#204)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 01:02:41 AM EST
    who voted for McGovern, eh?  I was soooo sure he would win.  

    Parent
    I remember well how (none / 0) (#205)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 01:09:16 AM EST
    the youth went all out for McGovern and the democratic party was split terribly...they won the day and made it all the way to the general election, and then were defeated horribly...Yes this Obama movement reminds me of that...Can we stop it...who knows?...how much damage will it do?...time will tell....will Karl Rove take advantage of it...You betcha!!!!

    Parent
    Why? (none / 0) (#206)
    by Stellaaa on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 01:41:12 AM EST
    Why did I have to read a German magazine to get this analysis?  I totally missed it.  They keep invoking JFK, and bamm...this is the analysis.  

    Parent
    European (5.00 / 0) (#207)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 07:59:41 AM EST
    news is always vastly different from our "news."  They don't start from a positive point of view, for one, so that gives them the ability to see things for what they are rather than for what Americans want them to be.  I get a tad irked sometimes, like "no one can call my sister a sl*t except me."

    I traveled to France, Germany and England a few days after the Iraq war started, and I was shocked to see what they were reporting there as opposed to back home.  And the funny thing is, CNN International picked up stories about looting and mass casualties and how unplanned post-invasion strategy was while...CNN in the US was still trumpeting our great liberation.

    Absolutely amazing.

    Parent

    The DailyO strikes again (none / 0) (#196)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:06:54 AM EST
    with a gigantic front page diary about why a FP'er supports Barack Obama.

    Good for them.  I hope they enjoy that their part in splitting the party in two.

    if this guy Obama (none / 0) (#200)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:16:45 AM EST
    can't win with all this slanted media coverage, than he is just pitiful....enjoy it while it lasts....

    Parent
    Where is the evidence (none / 0) (#213)
    by jondee on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 12:44:20 PM EST
    that this coke-addled, bi-pedal d*uchebag's taxcuts are working in anyway that would warrant them being made permanant?

    This galloping, delusionary arrogance and tunnel vision that flys in the face of any and all contraindications exemplifies, once again, how completely out of touch the quasi-religion of "movement conservatism" is.

    Parent

    I do it. (none / 0) (#208)
    by Edger on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 08:18:18 AM EST
    Not free, but fast and inexpensive. My email is in my profile. Send an email - I'll reply with reference sites I've built for you to look at.

    Obama St. Louis Saturday 20,000 in attendance (none / 0) (#217)
    by Aaron on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 06:43:41 PM EST
    Obama Rally, Edward Jones Dome, St Louis MO ( 02-02-2008 )

    I ran into the video crew from NHK (Nippon Hōsō Kyōkai) the Japan Broadcasting Corp. at the press sign in table.  You know it's big when those guys show up.  I did the traditional Japanese exchange of business cards with one of the cameramen, cool.  :-)