home

Friday Afternoon Open Thread

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

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

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

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

Update 4:00 pm MT: Comments now closed.

< Clinton May Have Lost, But Sexism Remains Rampant | Did Obama Win On Iraq? No >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

    [ Parent ]
    Yikes even Ted has insulted us. (5.00 / 6) (#30)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:06:39 PM EST
    Im kind of shocked by this, actually.

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

    He's being passive aggressive.

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

    [ Parent ]
    Yup (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by CST on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:40:10 PM EST
    I think Deval gets a bad rep.  We have the best economy in the country right now in Mass with really low unemployment and actually some economic growth.  Sure, there are problems, but given that we are in a national recession I'd say someone's doing a pretty good job.  The casino thing is a little stupid, but not a dealbreaker for me at least.

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

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


    [ Parent ]
    Not to mention CA. (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:22:35 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Ted insulted us when (5.00 / 8) (#35)
    by Stellaaa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:08:23 PM EST
    he said he was passing the torch.  As if the torch was his to pass.  That really did me in.  I lost any affection I had for the guy.  

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

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

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

    Why do they not get that?


    [ Parent ]

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

    [ Parent ]
    Maria....How Can You Be Surprised By (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:09:01 PM EST
    anything anymore...I am not surprised, but I am certainly displeased everytime one of these morons come up with another lame argument against Hillary.  Kennedy is just trying to stay relevant, but is doing a lousy job.

    [ Parent ]
    I sure think McCain (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by abfabdem on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:09:25 PM EST
    has been given a huge opening to appeal to older voters since we have been trashed by our own party who thinks we do not matter and are not needed.  Thanks Donna, "progressive" blogs and Air America.  We can take the hint.

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

    "Losing His Bearings" Uproar
    What Obama Really Meant

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

    [ Parent ]

    He was never on the wagon (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by andgarden on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:05:01 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I agree (none / 0) (#29)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:06:22 PM EST
    he's as dry as W.

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

    [ Parent ]
    Wow (5.00 / 7) (#49)
    by chrisvee on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:13:19 PM EST
    Here's  part of the problem.  With party elders saying things like this (Clinton doesn't share noble aspirations for the American people??  Clinton doesn't provide real leadership??) how do we expect unity?  

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

    I'm getting very depressed about November.

    [ Parent ]

    I don't think you need to worry about Nov. (none / 0) (#248)
    by chrisblask on Fri May 09, 2008 at 04:24:15 PM EST
    The GOP has it's own problems which make Dem problems look like a bright sunny day.

    I'm new here so I hope it isn't trolling to say anything nice about Obama supporters, but among us it is very very very much the mantra to treat Clinton supporters well.

    I have been part of Obama Rapid Response for five months, and we, at least, among Obama supporters have made extreme attempts to play clean and keep the party together.  I have seen a number of vociferous Obama supporters using overly strong terms (I've allowed myself to be goaded to there as well at times), but in the face of MyDD diaries filled with "Obambi yada yada" it isn't entirely unexpected.  No excuses for ever losing my own cool, but at the very least she has always been "Sen. Clinton" in everything I write.

    The question for Dems right now is whether they agree with Obama and Clinton or with Bush and McCain.  Simple question, and a simple call to action.

    Best to all.

    -chris blask

    [ Parent ]

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

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

    Oh. My. God.  

    and I'll add:

    Wow. Just...wow.

    [ Parent ]

    Says the guy who went to the convention (5.00 / 7) (#8)
    by Jim J on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:51:07 PM EST
    against Jimmy Carter a lot further behind than Hillary is now.

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

    In other words... (5.00 / 13) (#19)
    by madamab on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:59:28 PM EST
    Hillary, with her decades of Party loyalty, exemplary service, legislative achievements, very high public approval in her state as Senator, and 91% Progressive voting record, is not fit to tie the shoes of an inexperienced, elitist, lying, race-baiting empty suit.

    Explain to me how that is anything but misogyny.

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

    Thanks very much.

    [ Parent ]

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

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

    I am not trying to defend Kennedy by any means.

    [ Parent ]

    It's like people who ask . . . (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by Palomino on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:25:43 PM EST
    "If Hillary were a man, would it be sexist for <Obama> <the MCM> <Obama's supporters> to <fill in the blank>?"

    If Hillary were a man, Obama wouldn't even be in this thing anymore.

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]
    No, Senator Obama did that. n/t (none / 0) (#211)
    by eleanora on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:36:40 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    IS there... (none / 0) (#125)
    by Binx on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:46:17 PM EST
    Is there any chance folks are parsing Kennedy's words too intensely? I mean, there is a way to interpret his use of the word "nobler" as merely reflecting the overall them of "Hope." Just because he used the word "nobler" doesn't make Hillary "not-nobler".

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

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

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

    ?

    Just want to know what the groundrules are.

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

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

    -chris

    [ Parent ]

    I Guess Ted Wouldn't Qualify for VP Either... (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:06:55 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    And there in lies the problem (5.00 / 5) (#63)
    by txpolitico67 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:18:56 PM EST
    Kennedy and Kerry backing Obama is pure jealousy.  Ted could NEVER be JFK.  Kerry lost to a buffoon.

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

    How...presidential.

    [ Parent ]

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

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


    [ Parent ]

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

    Hillary being VP would not help obviate his negatives.

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

    I love being a "Coastal Girl".

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

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

    Or--OMG!  Don't tell me???

    [ Parent ]

    In a world where (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Edgar08 on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:54:53 PM EST
    Oliver Willis can say what he wants.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The same thing happened with Bush Jr...

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

    What happened to the Young Republicans? (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by Palomino on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:28:43 PM EST
    They're older now, and they're founding blog empires like DKos and FluffBO.

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

    yeah maybe (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by hitchhiker on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:14:48 PM EST
    that's another reason (among many) that this f-you attitude makes me so angry.

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

    He assumes he has it . . . . (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by nycstray on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:23:09 PM EST
    along with all the 'blue' states.
    Heh, by the time he gets a clue, it's going to be too late. Guess he doesn't really understand the "the fierce urgency of now" after all.

    Bloody fool.

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

     The revolution will not be text-messaged!

    [ Parent ]

    You're not wrong (5.00 / 2) (#175)
    by janarchy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:12:48 PM EST
    They're also the Naderites who carried on and told me in 2000 that there was no difference between Republicans or Democrats and that I should vote for Ralphie in order to 'make a statement'. When I tried to argue about SCOTUS and the environment and 101 other differences between Gore and Bush, I got told I was an idiot. So did others.

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

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

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

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

    Service sector jobs (5.00 / 4) (#56)
    by waldenpond on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:16:24 PM EST
    as a way to the middle class?  The NDP (New Democratic Party) sure has some interesting ideas.  I live in a town that has lost it's manufacturing base.  Take a drive down main street.  They turn in to service communities... hotels, restaurants, appliance repair, etc.  

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

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

    Its the new class and they better get on board.

    [ Parent ]

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

    Speaker of the House

    Nancy Pelosi

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

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

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



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

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

    Gallup

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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

    [ Parent ]
    My opinion-- (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by ezgo on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:12:04 PM EST
    I really think the Democrats don't want any part of winning the presidency in November.  Something tells me, they don't want Hillary Clinton to win because of Bill Clinton sexual act while in White House.  These delegates and super dee's know who (Clinton) has the better chance against McCain... but, they fear the Clintons.

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

    [ Parent ]
    check out these amazing images (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:12:42 PM EST
    from the volcano erupting and causing an end-of-days lightening storm in Chili:

    Link

    you have to scroll down and click to enlarge them

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

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

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

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

    [ Parent ]

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


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

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

    [ Parent ]