"I will step in," Pelosi told the paper. "Because we cannot take this fight to the convention...It must be over before then."

I caught it on CNN

Consider that the part of Rev. Wright's videos where he brings up the word that Hillary ain't never been called is one of the least-discussed aspects of those videos.

But coming across as a Public Access political ranter is not what I think religion should be about.  I wish he had been on Public Access, then I wouldn't have seen the audience standing up and applauding.

EPIC/MRA:

Michigan (600 LVs, May 19-22, MOE +/- 4%)

Obama/Clinton 51
McCain/Romney 44

McCain 44
Obama 40

When asked about her husband's security in the White House and Clinton's RFK remarks at a Phoenix fundraiser Tuesday, she reassures the crowd saying:

"Send us good vibes. Pray for us. Think positive thoughts. But most of all, be vigilant. Be vigilant about stopping this kind of talk. It's not funny. You don't have to like Barack to dislike that kind of talk. Be vigilant about stopping that kind of talk."

I'm more concerned about the free passes he's been given on Wright and other issues by the DNC.

In any other election, he would have been weeded out for these associations and gaffes (and guilt-by-association is a legal term -- it doesn't mean you don't consider a person's character in light of who they hang with; this is common sense).  

Giving him a free pass isn't simply a matter of magnanimity.  The reason they were dropped in the past is that these kinds of issues tend to resurface with other ramifications.  They tend to flag character issues that will surface in other ways.  They make the candidate unelectable.

That seems to be the case with this guy so far.  

My Obama-campaigning friends, after the Wright story broke, said, "What would you like him to say?"

This illustrates exactly the problem. The Obama fans tend to see things as public relations issues, image problems, rather than reality problems.

He really does have a character issue -- not a perception issue.  It's not what he says, or how he presents himself, it's who he is -- and I'm not talking about race.   I'm talking about his inability to commit, his inability to make a statement and stick to it, I'm talking about choosing his associations on the basis of how they will advance him, and jettisoning them when they don't (like the "typical white grandmother" who paid for his expensive Hawaiian education, for one).

People see this.  The Appalachians who are paying for their patriotism by sending their children to Baghdad see it.  They detect flimsiness and opportunism and elitism -- because they've had to pay all the way.  

I said to an Obama supporter recently, "With Hillary, we know who her team will be." I have no idea, given who Obama surrounds himself with, who will be on his team. (And if they're halfway decent, can we elect them?)

Wright was on his campaign team before the scandal broke.  Had it not broken, would he or Fr. Phleger be leading the National Prayer Breakfast?

There's every reason to question the judgment of this man.

"Send us good vibes. Pray for us. Think positive thoughts. But most of all, be vigilant. Be vigilant about stopping this kind of talk. It's not funny. You don't have to like Barack to dislike that kind of talk. Be vigilant about stopping that kind of talk."

My only concern is how it affects the attitudes of my president AND OF the people he would appoint.

If I didn't know from previous experience that you were not born with a sarcasm gene, I'd say that was tongue in cheek. Sadly, no.

It's all part of a strange pattern that you and Jeralyn both employ: Post something obviously meant to inflame your readers and provoke maximum comments, while denying that was your intention with silly, silly statements like "First of all, this has nothing to do with Barack Obama."

Then to top it off, you both dare posters to "cross the line" when they notice this tendency of yours. The line of course being as arbitrary as possible each time.

The most bizarre and incoherent comment that is pro-Hillary comments are regularly high rated.  Non-pro-Hillary rated comments are regularly troll rated.

State your case politely and without insulting people and you won't find many of those ratings from people here.  Accuse the women here of "fevered paranoia" because we object to rampant misogyny, and you'll get a few 1's.

As I explain in this book, Washington has become the home of the permanent campaign, a game of endless politicking based on the manipulation of shades of truth, partial truths, twisting of the truth, and spin. Governing has become an appendage of politics rather than the other way around, with electoral victory and the control of power as the sole measures of success. That means shaping the narrative before it shapes you. Candor and honesty are pushed to the side in the battle to win the latest news cycle...

Ironically, much of Bush's campaign rhetoric (in 1999-2000) had been aimed at distancing himself from the excesses of Clinton's permanent campaign style of governing. The implicit meaning of Bush's words was that he would bring an end to the perpetual politicking and deep partisan divisions it created. Although Washington could not get enough of the permanent campaign, voters were seemingly eager to move beyond it.

I have logged in and out.  I have deleted Talkleft from my favorites and added a new one.  Nope, still defaults to flat, it is driving me up the wall.

I find the rhetoric divisive and hateful.

It is also going to spell big trouble for Obama in the fall.

Do I like the hateful rhetoric coming out of some white religious conservatives? No. Don't like that either.

Please.  Pelosi wants her very own gold-plated ATM card to use at the Bank of Obama and thinks helping him to short-circuit the process will do the trick.  Wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out that she is using threats of non-support to strong-arm however many still uncommitted SD's there are in Congress.  It has noting to do with the actual principles involved and everything to do with power; she must believe Obama will be the next president and will punish her somehow for not being on the bandwagon.  Yeah, things sure will be changing in Washington if Obama is elected, huh?

And there is more that is money realted from Pfleger to Obama dn for Obama to Sabina at the tune of 200K.

His comments seem fairly obnoxious but I'm not sure why I should care about them.  

From The Buzz

The Buzz is that longtime Hillary pal Arthenia Joyner will be making the Clinton campaign's presentation to the DNC's rules and bylaws committee. The Tampa state representative, an attorney and civil rights activist, goes way back with Clinton.

And for those keeping track so far that is:

Jon Ausman, DNC member, uncommitted currently but former Kucinich supporter and the one who brought the appeal

Raul Martinez, Clinton supporter and former Hialeah mayor who is currently running against Republican Lincoln Diaz-Balart for a House seat

Janee Murphy, Obama supporter and DNC member

Senator Bob Graham, uncommitted currently as he doesn't want to declare prior to the RBC meeting and former Governor and former Senator

Senator Bill Nelson, Clinton supporter and current Senator

   Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan says George W. Bush's political guru Karl Rove arranged a private meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in 2005 when the two men were under mounting suspicion for leaking the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson.

    Calling the scene "one moment during the leak episode that I am reluctant to discuss," McClellan writes in his new memoir that "in 2005, during a time when attention was focusing on Rove and Libby, [the meeting] sticks vividly in my mind. ...

    "Following [a meeting in Chief of Staff Andy Card's office], Scooter Libby was walking to the entryway as he prepared to depart when Karl turned to get his attention. 'You have time to visit?' Karl asked. 'Yeah,' replied Libby."

    In the new book, What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and the Culture of Washington Deception, McClellan doesn't offer substantive evidence that Rove and Libby used the meeting in 2005 to coordinate their cover stories.

    "I have no idea what they discussed, but it seemed suspicious for these two, whom I had never noticed spending any one-on-one time together, to go behind closed doors and visit privately," McClellan writes.

    "At least one of them, Rove, it was publicly known at the time, had at best misled me by not sharing relevant information, and credible rumors were spreading that the other, Libby, had done at least as much," McClellan said. "I don't know what they discussed, but what would any knowledgeable person reasonably and logically conclude was the topic?"

Preachers will talk about how a people who have been enslaved can more easily understand what the Hebrews suffered, and perhaps have a better grasp as to the things that enslave us all today. Not once have I ever heard hatred preached because it directly contradicts the Christian message of liberation.

Paterson issued a memo earlier this month saying that gay New Yorkers who marry where it is legal will have the right to share family health care plans, receive tax breaks by filing jointly, enjoy stronger adoption rights and inherit property.
Paterson cited a February ruling in a New York Appellate Division court in which the judges determined that there is no legal impediment in New York to the recognition of a same-sex marriage.
While gay rights advocates hailed the move, the feeling was not unanimous.

[snip]

Paterson defended himself Thursday, saying: "This is not an end run around the Legislature. I am following the law as it always has existed."

He said failure to issue the directive would leave the state open to lawsuits claiming the state deprived gay couples of civil rights enjoyed in other states.

Of his critics claiming the action is unconstitutional, Paterson said they "should get a little better informed."

Massachusetts is currently the only U.S. state that recognizes same-sex marriage, but its residency requirements would bar New Yorkers from marrying there.

Canada is among the nations where gay marriage is legal. In California, gay couples will be able to wed beginning June 17 -- unless that state's Supreme Court decides to stay its own ruling.

It has been more than a century since Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman ordered that the coastlands confiscated in the Civil War be divided into 40-acre plots and distributed to thousands of former slaves.

After Abraham Lincoln's assassination, Andrew Johnson rescinded the order and took back the land that had been distributed. Since then, the idea of compensating African-Americans for the sins of two and a half centuries of slavery has hovered in the background, far from reality. But now the movement for reparations is gaining steam.

NYT