home

Friday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:45:00 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I've got court this morning so it's up to you to keep each other informed. What's of interest in the news and what's on your mind today?

I'll be back late this afternoon.

Bumped by BTD.

By BTD Apropos to nothing, here's one of my favorite artists singing a song by one of the greatest, if not the greatest, songwriters:

NOTE - Comments closed. New Open Thread.

< Double Standards | The Crying Wolf Syndrome >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Friday Open Thread | 175 comments (175 topical)
    Oh, thank GOD (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:48:42 AM EST
    I have a conspiracy I want to float out!

    Northern Trust No 10209 is the name of the trust the Obama set up to buy their home.

    10209...1 20 9

    Jan 20, 2009...

    J'accuse!

    funny :-) (none / 0) (#9)
    by Klio on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:05:46 AM EST
    but maybe it's the house address?

    [I agree, you're way is funnier]

    [ Parent ]

    That is not the house address. (none / 0) (#56)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:51:44 AM EST
    TL does not want it to be given out on her site.

    But, if you want, WSJ online has a video of one of their reporters doing some "investigation" into the whole thing, and he clearly and loudly gives the address to his taxi driver. You can also go to google maps street view and look around in his neighborhood 'till you find his house.

    [ Parent ]

    HA HA (none / 0) (#10)
    by coigue on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:05:50 AM EST
    Hee Hee.

    [ Parent ]
    Excellent..... (none / 0) (#74)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:41:06 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Samantha Power (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by dk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:51:06 AM EST
    AP reports that Samantha Power resigned from the Obama campaign.

    Samantha Power resigns post with Obama (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:53:22 AM EST
    per CNN. Maybe she'll actually start teaching.

    Power said Obama's Iraq Pullout Plan Not Sincere (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by catfish on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:40:14 AM EST
    From The Page:
    Foreign policy confidant and TIME contributor tells yet another overseas interviewer that troop withdrawals might not come as fast as promised: "He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator."

    "You can't make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009. . . . So to think - it would be the height of ideology to sort of say, `Well, I said it, therefore I'm going to impose it on whatever reality greets me.'"



    [ Parent ]
    Transcript from Politico (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by Salt on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:35:38 PM EST
    The host, Stephen Sackur, challenged her:"So what the American public thinks is a commitment to get combat forces out in 16 months isn't a commitment isn't it?"

    "You can't make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009," she said. "He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator. He will rely upon a plan - an operational plan - that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn't have daily access now, as a result of not being the president. So to think - it would be the height of ideology to sort of say, 'Well, I said it, therefore I'm going to impose it on whatever reality greets me.'"

    "It's a best-case scenario," she said again.

    No Creds left these folks surrounding Obama are sinking him, now I understand that ultimately his fault but if Dems loose in Nov we still need margins in the Senate.

    [ Parent ]

    So, I guess that means (none / 0) (#16)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:09:17 AM EST
    she'll be spending more time with her family...

    [ Parent ]
    And, uh, do consulting (nt) (none / 0) (#24)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:16:23 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    What does a community organizer do? (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by katiebird on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:00:37 AM EST
    I honestly don't know.

    organize people (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by coigue on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:08:23 AM EST
    locally toward desired ends. For instance, I do some of that in my hometown on sustainability issues. We have had a sustainability forum to educate policy makers, and we gather voices to be heard at city councils, etc.

    I am sure Obama's involvement was more in-depth, I don't remember my facts on this though

    [ Parent ]

    No one does ... (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:08:59 AM EST
    that's why Obama keeps saying it.

    [ Parent ]
    My Dad was a community organizer. (5.00 / 5) (#73)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:40:16 PM EST
    I can tell you what he did. He worked in Chicago for an entity called The Cardinal's Committee for the Spanish Speaking. (Long time ago he started in the late 50s). As such he was tasked with easing the transition of newly arrived Latinos, primarily from Puerto Rico which is where we were from. The newcomers (won't call them immigrants cause Puerto Ricans are citizens) were mostly young men, many who had left their families behind and came to Chicago looking for work...much as my dad himself did.

    My father did a variety of things ranging from helping them find jobs and housing to orgazining social activities and events to bailing the unlucky ones who got arrested out of jail in the middle of the night (and once we even fostered kids of a widowed man who was arrested and spent a year in jail). He also worked on community organizing around housing issues. Meeting of the original Woodlawn Organization (TW0) were often held in our house and I remember Sol Olinsky and Nicholas van Hoffman as people who often had lots of loose spare change in their pockets which my brothers and I would hunt for under the cushions when they left.

    I could say more but that's probably more than you wanted to hear. ;-)

    [ Parent ]

    Saul Alinsky? (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by desertswine on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:00:55 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Yes Saul, sorry and thanks. (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:32:08 PM EST
    I didn't even notice I mispelled it. Wish I could remember more about him than just the pocket change thing. That's what mattered most to me at the time.

    [ Parent ]
    You (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by tek on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:23:08 PM EST
    should write a memoir.  That's a great story.

    [ Parent ]
    No not too much -- it's interesting (none / 0) (#85)
    by katiebird on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:58:25 PM EST
    I don't know why it suddenly dawned on me that I didn't have any idea what Obama meant by the phrase.  

    [ Parent ]
    What did you think (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by GDKitty on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:02:15 AM EST
    of some of the responses to the original story about the "Monster" remark?  I was floored by all of the "Power was finally telling the truth about Hillary" remarks (e.g. politico, huffpo, TPM).  

    I guess I still surprise too easily :(  Still can't believe that TPM allows commenters to use the "C" word.  What's going on over there?!

    Depressed in Canada,
    GDK

    Not surprising (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by spit on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:05:54 AM EST
    the Obama campaign has to be very, very careful to make sure that the bulk of the electorate doesn't get too much of a glimpse of the severe Clinton hatred that goes on in a portion (not a huge one, to be clear, but a loud one) of its supporters, IMO. It's very ugly.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't go over there (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:09:09 AM EST
    Do you mean the real "C" word that is so disgraceful to a woman? And who were they using it on? Not Hillary, I hope.

    I have already said to a friend that I can just hear what will be said about either when in the WH. Everything will be the B or N word. Just like we always call Bush that idiot. Oh wait, he is.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by GDKitty on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:18:59 AM EST
    For e.g. this comment.

    I can't read that without feeling a sharp sock to the gut :(

    [ Parent ]

    Hillary can use this to her advantage (none / 0) (#41)
    by cmugirl on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:40:04 AM EST
    The original meaning of that "c" word was "one who possesses magical powers"

    You may write your own ad now.

    [ Parent ]

    As Matt Stoller says (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by Steve M on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:13:16 AM EST
    the tone comes from the top.

    There is no chance that Obama staffers talk about Clinton publicly in terms less respectful than what they say privately.  We all know that's not how it works.

    How well I remember the Las Vegas debate where Obama acknowledged his responsibility for the tone of his campaign and apologized for the memo from his SC press secretary about the Clintons' supposedly racial remarks.  Two days later, when an Obama-supporting union started running ads on Spanish-language radio saying "Hillary doesn't respect our people," and the Obama campaign was asked to denounce it, they firmly declined.  The tone was set a long time ago.

    [ Parent ]

    Worse, Obama's Spanish-language ad (none / 0) (#44)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:42:28 AM EST
    in Nevada that went under the radar of the English-language press but not Latinas -- as he called Clinton a term that translates colloquially to "f**king whore."

    [ Parent ]
    Isn't TPM The Blog That Wrote A Post On (none / 0) (#92)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:13:50 PM EST
    a Clinton supporter who was racist? Can we expect them to expose their own commentators  who are  bigots and hate women and what their candidate preference is?

    [ Parent ]
    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by rooge04 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:05:34 AM EST
    perhaps now he won't have someone that think it's appropriate to call a Senator and a Presidential candidate from the same Party as a monster. Oh and you know...wondering if it's "good for the Jews."

    and.. (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:05:10 PM EST
    and having to ask like, eight questions about her.

    [ Parent ]
    What a horrific meltdown. (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:14:25 AM EST
    Or is it that Obama's advisers have been  running off at the mouth and the press only just started reporting it?

    Good questions, these are all non US Press (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Salt on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:29:13 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    A subtle shift in the coverage (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by Camorrista on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:52:25 PM EST
    Normally, I wouldn't cite David Brooks, but since he's a weather vane for the direction of the conventional press, take a look at today's column....

     http://xil.in/brooks/  

    In essence, he says that once Obama goes on the attack, he'll become just another pol, a one-term senator, running for president on a light resume.

    This is how Brooks closes:

    "In short, a candidate should never betray the core theory of his campaign, or head down a road that leads to that betrayal. Barack Obama doesn’t have an impressive record of experience or a unique policy profile. New politics is all he’s got. He loses that, and he loses everything. Every day that he looks conventional is a bad day for him.

    "Besides, the real softness of the campaign is not that Obama is a wimp. It’s that he has never explained how this new politics would actually produce bread-and-butter benefits to people in places like Youngstown and Altoona.

    "If he can’t explain that, he’s going to lose at some point anyway."

    Unless I've overlooked something, I don't believe a column like this would have appeared even a month ago.

    [ Parent ]

    Hillary coming to Scranton Monday night (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:58:55 PM EST
    I was checking the weather out in NEPA where I live. I see the announcement that Hillary will be at Scranton High School Monday night at 6PM. Tickets being given out at 4PM. I was born in Scranton but do not live there. BUT, I am close enough to try and get there to give her support and drag along a few of my Hillary friends. Now, I have to get off work early. I work in a very Republican office but actually told the owner yesterday that I had made my decicion to support Hillary. There goes my annual raise. Ha. No, he understands. Well. I know he will vote for McCain. Gawd, I love these closed primaries. Does anyone know if they sell T-Shirts there before I go and buy them on line?  

    Right song at the right time, thanks (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by riddlerandy on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:16:21 PM EST


    i wanna to live with (none / 0) (#100)
    by hue on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:26:40 PM EST
    a cinnamon girl

    [ Parent ]
    Hey! (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:56:17 PM EST
    How come it is when Obama's advisor says that Clinton and Obama aren't prepared for the 3am call, that's honesty, but when Clinton says that she and McCain are ready, that's not?

    Or is it so honest that it hurts?

    In Hal Hartly movies a line is repeated (none / 0) (#117)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:01:52 PM EST
    "An honest man is always in trouble."

    When has Obama ever been in trouble?

    [ Parent ]

    Uh, 'cuz honestly none of the 3 (none / 0) (#119)
    by halstoon on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:03:36 PM EST
    have ever been in that position, which was the point the adviser actually made, and it's true. Only a president or vice president or other higher ups could claim that preparation. All 3 of the remaining candidates are Senators without executive experience. Remember, Sen. Clinton did not hold security clearance, so she wasn't even in the room--legally--when President Clinton answered that phone.

     Clinton cut a promo for the GOP candidate, which ain't good.

    That's honest.

    [ Parent ]

    Yep. (none / 0) (#128)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:15:32 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    FYI (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:24:17 PM EST
    The BBC (my favorite channel) will air the Samantha Power interview that contains the wink-wink on Iraq tonight at 7:00pmPT.

    Link

    Do I get this right? (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by GOPmurderedconscience on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:24:22 PM EST
    "Progressive" bloggers and "liberal" talkshow hosts are whining about the fact that not enough Republicans voted for Obama this time?

    How about the fact that Obama is unable to appeal to DEMOCRATS to win many of these states?

    Moreover, there is no real evidence that Rush & Co. really had an influence in TX. Check this from the Houston Chronicles:

    "CROSSOVER VOTE?

    Some Republicans had been urged by radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh to vote in the Democratic primary for Hillary Rodham Clinton to keep the race alive. But there was not evidence of that occurring on a large scale. Network exit polls showed about 9 percent of the Democratic primary turnout was self-identified Republicans, who cast 52 percent of their ballots for Obama."

    Jeralyn, (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by ghost2 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:25:10 PM EST
    I just want to thank you and BTD for keeping a civil environment AND enforcing it in this blog.  Even in this heated primary battle, this blog (knock on wood) has maintained its tone and quality.  

    Thanks and Well done!

    Obama rejecting VP slot (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:34:08 PM EST
    Since Hillary is poisoning the well by saying that McCain is better qualified to be CINC, making it impossible for Obama to run against McCain in the general, Obama should up the ante by saying that he would never, ever be her VP.

    Hillary has been hinting if people vote for her, they get Obama too--a very subtle way to undermine Obama.  And she could always change her mind about VP and get her preferred milquetoast, Bland Bayh.

    To respond, Obama should issue a statement saying that under no circumstances would he accept a VP slot....If offered it, he would reject it....So, voters, it is Obama or Hillary, not both....That would poison Hillary' s chances against McCain, just the way Hillary is poisoning Obama's.  Let Hillary think about a nomination where half the convention walks out and she loses forever the AA community, and Bill is no longer the first black President....

    For Obama, it would be President or bust, or actually Governor of Illinois....The Superdelegates would have to factor in to their decision making that the only way to get Obama on the ticket is in first position....

    That's hardball...It would be interesting to see it play out that way.

    Axelrod should call Wolfson (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:37:06 PM EST
    and tell him to knock off the CINC stuff, or Obama issues his Shermanesque statement about VP.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually Hillary didn't say Obama's (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:50:46 PM EST
    not qualified to be CIC---she left that up to Obama.
    Are you saying that simply asking the question convinces people that Obama is not qualified? raises eyebrow

    [ Parent ]
    That Is Absurd (none / 0) (#143)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:40:21 PM EST
    Both Obama and Hillary will serve the better interests of their party, not your fainting spell.

    [ Parent ]
    True--with respect (1.00 / 0) (#147)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:45:21 PM EST
    to Obama--he probably wouldn't do it....Hillary, on the other hand, has no problem going there.

    [ Parent ]
    Moreover, (1.00 / 0) (#151)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:50:42 PM EST
    Obama could say Hillary could not in good conscience offer him VP because everyone acknowledges that VP has to be qualified to be CINC.  So, she obviously is not really sincere in her suggestions to the contrary anyway....

    That would really rock her back on her heels....

    [ Parent ]

    Good Thing (none / 0) (#161)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:11:01 PM EST
    The two Democratic candidates are not functioning anywhere near the lowest common denominator of their supporters.

    Both would accept the VP slot. Both are almost identical in their ability to beat McCain or any GOP candidate at this point. So give your divide and conquer strategy a rest. Leave it to the GOP, that is unless you are GOP.

    [ Parent ]

    Better yet, leak (none / 0) (#170)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:32:28 PM EST
    it out to the media as an anonymous source from a very high campaign official....That way Obama can't be blamed for it.....

    Don't worry, it won't happen, Obama does have the best interests of his country at heart.  

    [ Parent ]

    I don't see how that could work (none / 0) (#144)
    by Polkan on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:40:36 PM EST
    except for creating the following perception for Obama:

    1. Selfish
    2. Dividing the party

    I'm sure Clinton wouldn't do anything like that at all. If Obama does this, what does he win for the price of hurting himself so much?

    [ Parent ]
    Hillary is already doing that (1.00 / 0) (#148)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:46:00 PM EST
    with her CINC comments....

    [ Parent ]
    For BO it's all about ME..ME..and ME. Grow up (none / 0) (#149)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:47:51 PM EST
    already.  If he were to do this he would show the world that it IS all about him and not the party and not the country.  

    [ Parent ]
    Same can be said about (1.00 / 0) (#153)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:52:56 PM EST
    Hillary....

    And, if Obama is such a bad guy, so inexperienced, why should Hillary or her supporters care if he says no to VP?  It would expose Hillary's CINC talk about Obama as b.s.

    But, you are right, Obama probably would not do it.....

    [ Parent ]

    No, it can't. You have not been paying (none / 0) (#154)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:55:41 PM EST
    attention.  She has said repeatedly that the Democratic Party will be united in the general election.  I have yet to hear that from BO.  In fact, MO said she wasn't sure whether or not she would support Hillary if she were the nominee.  

    [ Parent ]
    CINC? (none / 0) (#177)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:45:07 PM EST
    McCain can be CINC but Obama can't?

    [ Parent ]
    I'm (none / 0) (#168)
    by tek on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:30:44 PM EST
    sure Hillary could find a very acceptable VP without Obama.  His people are saying they'll bolt the party if he isn't the nominee anyway.  Lots of them aren't Democrats to begin with.

    [ Parent ]
    Cool, if she doesn't need him (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:44:08 PM EST
    He is personally better off as Governor of Illinois, assuming Hillary wins the nomination....The danger for him is if he is perceived as selfish...If she doesn't offer him the VP slot in the event she wins the nomination, it would probably be a great relief to him.

    She does stand, however, a much better chance of winning with Obama than without.  She would need his seal of approval if she wins because any win would be with fewer pledged delegates than Obama....

    [ Parent ]

    The legalize cocaine thread.... (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:49:50 AM EST
    reminded me again of the theory floating around that Moses was likely tripping when he came up with the ten comandments and saw the burning bush, etc.

    Good thing the tribe of Israel didn't prohibit the use of drugs, eh?  He might have been stoned to death instead of leading the Israelites out of slavery:)

    Most Likely A Grain Of Truth (none / 0) (#29)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:21:19 AM EST
    A hasidic friend of mine claims there is documentation that Rebbies in the old times carried around a pouch of 'shrooms. Every day they took a small amount.

    That certainly jibes with the fact that spiritual leaders of many cultures depend on Shamans to guide them. The Shamans get insight from drug use.

    [ Parent ]

    I'd say more than likely..... (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:38:35 AM EST
    I mean how else do explain talking burning bushes that aren't consumed by the fire?  Booming voices from the sky?

    It's gotta be drugs:)

    [ Parent ]

    hehe (none / 0) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:12:55 PM EST
    Sooner or later we shall know

    ....one way or another.

    ;-)

    [ Parent ]

    The researcher claims it was most likely (none / 0) (#89)
    by halstoon on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:05:31 PM EST
    the acacia tree, not 'shrooms.

    The idea that Moses was high was clear to me even before I got high, but was cemented once I did.

    You gotta be on drugs to come up with that kind of stuff!!

    ;o)

    [ Parent ]

    Imagine (none / 0) (#171)
    by tek on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:33:18 PM EST
    if they had banned drugs?  We never would have had all those vicious religious wars in Europe, never would have had Oliver Cromwell in England, never would have had the religious right in the U. S.  Oh well, one can dream, right?

    [ Parent ]
    Perhaps.... (none / 0) (#178)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:53:07 PM EST
    the world could have been saved from religion and drug-induced mysticism...by totalitarianism.

    You can keep that alternate dimension friend.

    [ Parent ]

    Unfortunate to see Power resign (none / 0) (#7)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:04:06 AM EST
    She'll probably be replaced with some standard fare person who won't deviate from our status quo policy one bit.

    Why? (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Democratic Cat on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:12:53 AM EST
    Was she that unique? If he thinks her views are valid and important, he'll find someone else that reflects those views.

    She didn't resign because people looked at her foreign policy views and say 'OMG, that's nuts.'  She resigned because she made a mistake and said a pretty outrageous thing about the opponent, and so her staying would hurt the Obama campaign. Nothing to do with her foreign policy views, which can still be adopted by Obama if he so chooses.

    [ Parent ]

    Not sure about that (none / 0) (#23)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:15:39 AM EST
    I think when people start looking at her foreign policy ideas....nuts is definitely going to enter the picture.

    [ Parent ]
    Could be (none / 0) (#27)
    by Democratic Cat on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:18:35 AM EST
    I don't know what her foreign policy views specifically are, but am only familiar with her work regarding genocide.


    [ Parent ]
    Don't worry (none / 0) (#30)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:23:05 AM EST
    dissenter doesn't know either.

    [ Parent ]
    her policies aren't gonna go down (none / 0) (#31)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:24:02 AM EST
    in middle america or Florida. I can see Lou Dobbs having a field day with this woman. As I understand it, she backs a North American Union - uniting US, Canada and Mexico (like the EU). Some of the comments she has made about the middle east will piss off jews in large numbers. Frankly, there are lots of things. If I have time today I will look for a link (her articles) for you.

    [ Parent ]
    The fact that (none / 0) (#47)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:44:16 AM EST
    here comments will piss people off does not make her policy ideas bad.  

    [ Parent ]
    Her purpose in life (1.00 / 0) (#99)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:24:57 PM EST
    was to help Obama get elected.

    Her policy statements clearly made her a HUGE liability.

    As a McCain guy I hated to see her go.

    [ Parent ]

    Power admitting that ethnic cleansing (none / 0) (#50)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:46:13 AM EST
    is essentially what Obama plans in Iraq is a bad policy idea, I would hope that even you agree.

    [ Parent ]
    Link? (none / 0) (#53)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:47:33 AM EST
    you got a link for that?

    [ Parent ]
    It's easily findable on the 'Net (none / 0) (#55)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:50:59 AM EST
    and I no longer am playing your games. I know what you'd do next with it.

    [ Parent ]
    That is not what she said. (none / 0) (#95)
    by halstoon on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:17:58 PM EST
    She did mention "moving potentially people from mixed neighborhoods to homogenous neighborhoods." (italics mine)

    She immediately lamented it was "tragic that it's the equivalent of facilitating ethnic cleansing, butwhich is terrible but if that is the choice of people there..." (emphasis added.

    Her extended remarks can be found here.

    1. She said it was a potential idea.
    2. She acknowledged such a move would be tragic
    3. She called it a terrible result [of the sectarian strife in Iraq]
    4. She made it clear such a move would be the choice of the people there, not the president here.


    [ Parent ]
    Powers resignation is a big coup (none / 0) (#12)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:07:05 AM EST
    for Hillary's camp.
    Where is Obama's momentum going to come from now?
    Will he call another news conference and demand that Hillary release her tax returns?

    Rasmussen daily polling (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:12:55 AM EST
    5 days ago, Hillary and Obama were tied.
    Today Hillary is ahead 6 points.
    Obama followers with buyers' remorse?


    [ Parent ]
    it's called a hangover (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:10:13 PM EST
    drunk on hope...there always is a morning after...

    (with a nod to NoQuarter)

    [ Parent ]

    This is past Obama this is a Party Disaster (5.00 / 5) (#33)
    by Salt on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:27:00 AM EST
    it wont help Senator Clinton this issue is a massive black eye to the supposed I'll end the war Congress and Party, this Iraq nod and wink speaking for Obama has far reaching consequences its not just his campaign that's down the toilet now, but the Party's integrity and that of the Dem Congress, shot, absolutely shot as not being truthful or really intending to get us out and save our soldiers.  Confirmation we are being strung along that it isn't about Dem margins in Congress.  This is an outrage, an absolute outrage a fiasco for the Party in 2008 this came from Obama closest adviser.  

    Where is Move On I want to hear from them on this today hopefully?


    [ Parent ]

    What is with the tax returns? (none / 0) (#20)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:12:57 AM EST
    I don't get that one. Like they are going to blow the whole thing wide open and she will be nailed to the wall. Thank goodness there is NO ONE in the Obama campaign who ever fudged on those contributions to charity deductions. Like the chipped vases and stained coat or faded breadspread. Maybe EVERYONE should have their tax returns published.  It just gets old. Apparently she makes more money than BHO.  

    [ Parent ]
    It's humorous (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Steve M on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:16:50 AM EST
    Obviously every single tax return the Clintons have filed since Bill left office has been submitted with the expectation that the day would come when they have to disclose it again.  It's hard to imagine there could be any smoking guns in there, although I'm sure Daily Kos will find something to rant about.

    It's all a game where they let the Obama campaign work themselves into a lather demanding the documents, only to look foolish when nothing comes of it.  It's a very standard political gambit.  We're not talking about documents created back before Hillary ever thought about running for President.

    [ Parent ]

    So Are You Saying (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:26:00 AM EST
    That the Clintons are not claiming ill gotten gains because their tax returns are sure to be looked at. Isn't that tax fraud? Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

    Snark alert....

    [ Parent ]

    Hee hee (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Steve M on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:42:52 AM EST
    I'm a lawyer.  What you call fraud I call "sanitizing."

    [ Parent ]
    hahahaa (none / 0) (#52)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:47:10 AM EST
    Good one. Maybe it is time for me to get a good lawyer like you to help me with my tax returns...  I have always had a problem with the kind of math that those forms require.

    [ Parent ]
    On the subject of tax returns, (none / 0) (#123)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:09:19 PM EST
    I'm not rich, but take until April 14th every year before I file my taxes. Hundreds and thousands of people do.

    The Clintons are worth millions and, unlike me, might need every minute to provide documentation to their accountants before their accountants file.

    Obama doesn't have as much money so he filed early.

    He has no right to make this an issue, or demand that she files her returns early, just because he says so.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Jonathan Chait (none / 0) (#26)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:18:13 AM EST
    sums up my views on the current Hillary strategy pretty well.

    She doesn't care about the Party. She only cares about winning.  

    Do you honestly believe (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:29:01 AM EST
    all the race baiting Obama has used is good for the party?

    Or does Obama use it to win?

    [ Parent ]

    Its not and its not good (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Salt on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:41:52 AM EST
    it not victimless it exploits pain how did it help Katrina victims to hear from a prominent Representative that Senator Clinton did not cry for them or work for their community did not care about their pain their suffering, sure it was a lie, but did that not also harm them it did me, this stuff re victimizes people through exploitation like when Ann Coulter attacked the 911 widows this has to stop, same thing with the Miss attack Ad again intended to imply Clinton is lording it over them, this Obama she says, We, it hurts people it not hopeful it inflames passion which is the intention I suppose no honor in it though.

    [ Parent ]
    It makes him unelectable in NOV. (none / 0) (#36)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:33:05 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Have you thrown away (none / 0) (#40)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:39:34 AM EST
    any vestige of objectivity that you once had?

    You think that Barack Obama has been running on his race?  

    [ Parent ]

    I believe that his biggest victories (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:42:57 AM EST
    were achieved through use of the racism card.
    In fact, many of his supporters would agree with me.


    [ Parent ]
    If you mean the use of the racism card (1.00 / 0) (#97)
    by halstoon on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:22:12 PM EST
    by the Clintons, then yes, I agree. They brought it up and made it an issue in South Carolina and subsequently cost themselves a lot of votes.

    Please link to one comment where Barack Obama brought up his race as a factor.

    [ Parent ]

    Believe what you want (none / 0) (#49)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:46:13 AM EST
    I'm sure his victories in Iowa, Wisconsin, Washington, Maine, and Vermont were all because of the race card.

    Oh that's right.  They aren't the "big" victories.

    Amazing what you can convince yourself of.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama lost the primary in WA (none / 0) (#66)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:11:36 PM EST
    btw... just so you know.

    [ Parent ]
    Um, no (none / 0) (#79)
    by Socraticsilence on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:08:29 PM EST
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Democratic_primary,_2008

    [ Parent ]
    BTW, not only did he win the primary, (none / 0) (#98)
    by halstoon on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:23:59 PM EST
    which was just a beauty contest, but he won the caucus, which did determine the delegate apportionment.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes. If very cleverly. (nt) (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:45:06 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Spoken (1.00 / 1) (#51)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:46:58 AM EST
    like a true Republican.

    [ Parent ]
    Games from you again. (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:51:52 AM EST
    Stop it here.

    [ Parent ]
    Uh no (none / 0) (#60)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:57:13 AM EST
    You seem to think that you can say whatever you want about Obama because you have the home crowd on your side.  

    I have no reason to support that.

    Clever use of race?  Give me a break.

    [ Parent ]

    I think Obama's race baiting (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:05:04 PM EST
    was designed to get the AA vote to abandon Hillary and if also got some white sympathy/guilt votes all to the better.

    [ Parent ]
    I think that (none / 0) (#63)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:08:35 PM EST
    Hillary Clinton is in fact an alien.  

    Just a matter of opinion.

    [ Parent ]

    Sorry, I didn't realize you had nothing to say (none / 0) (#67)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:11:50 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Yet says it over and over again (nt) (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:18:07 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Whereas (none / 0) (#71)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:27:51 PM EST
    all you say is "Hillary is great. Obama is bad".

    Very insightful stuff.

    [ Parent ]

    I thought (none / 0) (#70)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:27:18 PM EST
    we were just throwing out random opinion based on nothing.  At least that was the clear implication of your comment.

    [ Parent ]
    Well I'm sure it feels better.... (none / 0) (#111)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:53:22 PM EST
    ...to get it off your chest. But be careful or someone might accuse you of alien bating. ;-)

    [ Parent ]
    Honestly (none / 0) (#38)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:37:01 AM EST
    I'm tired of hearing from Clinton supporters that Obama has been race baiting.  Obama is not NBC.  He is not CNN.  And he is not DailyKos.  If they are race baiting then take it up with them.

    The MLK/LBJ comment was a minor gaffe by Hillary that the press made a big deal out of.

    Bill's comment about South Carolina and Jesse Jackson was just plain stupid.  

    Jesse Jackson's comment was blown out of proportion.

    Any other accusations of race baiting by the Obama campaign amount to nothing except in the eyes of people that really really really want to see it.

    [ Parent ]

    You forgot (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:49:44 PM EST
    the exploitation of the fairy tale comment....race baiting.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama is race baiting (5.00 / 0) (#156)
    by sancho on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:01:11 PM EST
    Other than his inexperience card (I used to be an anti-war community organizer), and his "charisma" appeal, it is his best card. It is also why he is likely to lose the GE, if he gets there. He'd win as VP though, if he does not destroy the Dem brand this cylce first.

    [ Parent ]
    Bill's comment about Jesse Jackson (none / 0) (#54)
    by cmugirl on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:49:38 AM EST
    was nothing.  Even Jesse Jackson said this about it:

    According to a January 28 post on The New York Times blog The Caucus, Jackson himself has said that he does not "read anything negative into Clinton's observation."

    The post also quoted Jackson saying: "Bill has done so much for race relations and inclusion, I would tend not to read a negative scenario into his comments."

    And this is an Obama supporter, so can we PLEASE stop using this to say the Clintons were race baiting (especially when the Obama camp put out a 4-page memo in SC  about capitalizing on the Clintons' so-called race baiting

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html

    [ Parent ]

    I don't care (none / 0) (#65)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:10:14 PM EST
    one way or the other about Bill Clinton's comment.  It was stupid.  And whether the Jesse Jackson thinks that Bill Clinton is the bees knees makes not one bit of difference.

    Barack Obama's campaign didn't say a thing about the comment.  The media did.  

    [ Parent ]

    Obama's (none / 0) (#68)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:14:29 PM EST
    SC Press Secretary was circulating a 4-page memo on alledged anti-racists comments - that is part of Obama's campaign  

    [ Parent ]
    Bothered (none / 0) (#172)
    by tek on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:35:22 PM EST
    to look at what the DNC is doing since this election cycle started?  There are the people who don't care about the Party, don't care about the country, only care about their own power.  And Obama is their personal creation.

    [ Parent ]
    APAIC Trial Coming UP (none / 0) (#37)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:35:43 AM EST
    Sort of. It is true that AIPAC distanced themselves from Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman as soon as they found out that they were caught. Hard to believe that it is not business as usual.

    Two former senior analysts for Aipac, Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, are charged with violating the World War I-era Espionage Act when they told colleagues, journalists and Israeli Embassy officials information about Iran and Iraq they had learned from talking to high-level United States policymakers.

    Unless the government suddenly backs down, the courtroom will become the stage for an extraordinary parade of top officials being forced to testify about some of the unseen ways American foreign policy is made.

    NYT

    Business as usual.... (none / 0) (#110)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:50:12 PM EST
    what other foreign nations have lobbies working on their behalf in Washington?

    Could explain why our best interest, namely peace, is so foreign to our foreign policy.

    [ Parent ]

    None (none / 0) (#127)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:12:32 PM EST
    Israel has a unique status. We are working for them and they are working us. And I am sure that the case will be dropped, greymail will shut it down.

    [ Parent ]
    buyer's remorse.... (none / 0) (#58)
    by fperkins on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:53:19 AM EST
    I just checked on my "thank you for your contribution" emails and I'm thinking I might have gotten a teeny bit carried away in my enthusiasm/fervour for my candidate.  As the fundraising efforts and results escalate into the stratosphere I can't help but wonder if many of us are going to be paying credit card interest rates on  our donations for a little while.  And while I'll probably continue to be drawn in by some of those fundraising appeals, I'm a little uncomfortable with the knowledge that the MSM are going to benefit so much.  But then again, at least I am going to have a nice new blue cap pretty soon.

    What will be will be.... (none / 0) (#62)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:06:39 PM EST
    save your couple hundred bucks (I hope it's not more than that!), if I'm correct there is a world of economic hurt on the horizon, regardless of who wins of the 3 stooges in the race.

    Hillary or Obama will only waste your money on deli platters and high-priced yet pretty useless consultants.  If you feel the urge to give, find a noble charity.

    [ Parent ]

    Great advice (none / 0) (#81)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:17:32 PM EST
    but they won't take it.

    [ Parent ]
    Everybody wants to be a part.... (none / 0) (#84)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:40:36 PM EST
    of a the "team" it seems.  My feeling, they'd spit on