Wednesday Early Evening Open Thread

I've been at work all day and still have motions to write and a hearing tomorrow to prepare for before returning to blogging.

Here's a place for you to keep each other up to date on the news and exchange some thoughts.

All topics welcome.

< Bob Novak Hits Pedestrian, Drives Away | Journalist Peter Lloyd Free on Bond in Singapore >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I've been waiting for an open thread (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by andgarden on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 05:55:49 PM EST
    so I could point everyone again to Jay Cost's HorseRaseBlog. He did tremendous work on the popular vote throughout the primary, and now he's looking at the demographics and political trends of the swing states. He has started with Ohio.

    In my opinion, he actually does a good job of what Nate Silver attempts to do.

    Wow. I could wallow at that site (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:35:37 PM EST
    for hours.  Just clicked through for a fast skim there but found myself reading, reading . . . and then scrolling down to read earlier entries, too.

    So see the earlier entry about Obama's ad buy, too.  Audacious?  Not really, considering the money he's got for the 50-state strategy.  But nope, not so.  He's skipping the Appalachians yet again.  Will the Western strategy, instead, work as well?  Hmmm.


    he's skipping (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:37:44 PM EST
    WV in the general after so many of the super dels there supported him even though Clinton beat him by so much?  LOL

    Not just WV. 5 states thataway (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:55:10 PM EST
    in and along the Appalachians.  Really dumb to do, I think.  But this is why Axelrove gets the big bucks -- to decide who doesn't matter to Dems anymore.

    which ones (none / 0) (#63)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:19:34 PM EST
    beside WV and KY?

    See the site; link above, for more info. (none / 0) (#80)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:16:41 PM EST
    57-state strategy, apparently (none / 0) (#98)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:20:01 AM EST
    I liked it! (none / 0) (#73)
    by Fabian on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:41:43 PM EST
    Of course, my state is the first post there, laid out in all its multicolored bipartisan glory.  All hail the Buckeye state! ;-)

    A nice detailed breakdown too.  Heck, according to their map, you could probably tell which way Ohio is going by picking a handful of swing counties and just polling them.  Too bad the public pollsters don't poll by county.  


    There's No Doubt About It (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:12:37 PM EST
    "The Cafferty File" on CNN is Jack Cafferty's platform to say exactly what he wants to say but can't -- unless a viewer's opinion syncs exactly with his that he can read on-air as a 'viewer's comment.'

    It's been more than 6 weeks since she suspended her campaign, but Cafferty still can't quite ease his teeth off of Hillary's ankles. What gives?

    Jim....My take is he has become a bitter (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:16:47 PM EST
    old man....I remember when I enjoyed watching Jack Cafferty.  Those days are long gone.  You can be sure he will really be straining when he has to finally report the facts on the pitfalls of everything obama.

    American Morning (5.00 / 0) (#7)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:20:05 PM EST
    Yeah, I actually enjoyed his work back when he was an 'American Morning' regular ... Soledad O'Brien and Bill Hemmer were the anchors at the NYC street-side studio.

    Solly and Bill kinds got the short end (none / 0) (#10)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:24:17 PM EST
    of the stick at CNN...Soledad is doing a special on black women and their families, but for the most part, you don't hear too much from she or Bill...maybe Wolf could give up some of his airtime and Jack could give up all of his!

    Soledad Proved To Be... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:32:36 PM EST
    a complete air-head when she gushed about Jeremiah Wright's speech in Detroit-NAACP, saying it was a "home-run" and he's "very good and funny." Of course, we all know what happened right after that and his next speech in D.C.

    And her analysis of the Exit Polls on Primary Nights were elementary at best; it wasn't rocket-science to decipher the polls at all.

    Bill Hemmer was bounced off CNN and has apparently seen his star rise over at -- wait for it -- Fox News.

    But here's the kicker: Soledad hosts the "Black In America" CNN Special, and he's anchoring a special on the same topic for Fox News, slated to debut next month.


    Does that make them soulmates? :) (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:34:07 PM EST
    Every Wright speech.... (none / 0) (#124)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 09:27:14 AM EST
    is a home-run in my book.

    Love 'dem rabble rousers:)


    I liked the two O'Briens together. (5.00 / 0) (#25)
    by Joan in VA on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:42:23 PM EST
    Soledad and Miles were an enjoyable morning pair. Miss both of them.

    One of the reasons I don't watch (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Joan in VA on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:21:52 PM EST
    CNN anymore is my fear that he will say something before I can change the channel. He just appears suddenly and spews some trash to the unsuspecting. He is definitely wallowing in his CDS.

    That's one of the reasons (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:30:39 PM EST
    I stopped CNN also. I still watch Lou on occasion because he actually covers our food issues and he's pretty funny about the press being in the tank for Obama and Obama in general.

    I Absolutely Appreciate (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:35:54 PM EST
    Lou Dobb's relentless effort to expose FDA's deficiencies in food and medication safety.

    He can go a little too far with his illegal immigrant coverage stories, but he gets an A-Star for staying on top of consumer safety issues.


    He is totally immersed in CDS....did Hillary (none / 0) (#11)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:24:52 PM EST
    turn him down for a cabinet appointment?  WTF :)

    I actually (2.00 / 0) (#79)
    by tek on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:11:26 PM EST
    used to like him.  I guess he can't stand the thought of a woman in the WH.  Of course, so many of these Obama lovers are recent converts from the Republican Party.

    sher, what are you doing here? (none / 0) (#108)
    by weltec2 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:10:21 AM EST
    tek's post belongs here. Your troll rating does not. Jeralyn would you please look at sher's rating record. She troll rates all the best posts and posts almost nothing.

    Hooold on... (none / 0) (#49)
    by weltec2 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:45:54 PM EST
    Read the file carefully. Cafferty is NOT attacking Hillary. He's grumbling about PUMAs. Also, read the comments. I thought he was pretty balanced in his choices.

    By using... (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:18:49 PM EST
    "Hillary Clinton supporters" in his question, he's not doing her a favor at all by linking her to that group.

    He's not fooling anyone with his psuedo-pat-on-back conciliatories for Hillary in his lead-up to the question.

    Anyone who's watched The Situation Room will know how much he really hates Hillary. IMO, he's laying the groundwork for the Obamans to slam her in the event that The Precious One loses in November.

    There are million other topics for him to rant and whine aboot; just lay off Hillary and anything Clinton-related already.


    I do appreciate your point. (none / 0) (#84)
    by weltec2 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:53:47 PM EST
    I just thought that THIS time, he wasn't so bad.

    Is the banking committee really obama's (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:21:32 PM EST
    committee....some beg to differ.  Why does he keep making these gaffes?  I am sure people are wondering what is up.  This is much more than just misspeaking.


    His committees have expanded over on (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:27:42 PM EST
    project vote in the last couple months. Went from 4 to 11. Mostly sub-committees of committees he's already on. Some only have 2 members . . . . looks like more resume padding to me.

    He's not even ON the Banking Committee. (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:45:32 PM EST
    "My committee" indeed.

    They're not gaffes (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:53:52 PM EST
    when he's not called on them.  This is one of the few times that has happened.  Otherwise, crickets from the media.  (And most media aren't gonna do anything with this one, either.  They're busy being groupies!)

    Really lies is much more appropriate (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:06:28 PM EST
    a way to explain them....

    Sher is lurking and down-rating again :) (3.50 / 2) (#93)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 11:52:13 PM EST
    Isn't that against site rules? An offense that can result in being banned? Permanently?

    Hey Sher....too tired to post or do you only (none / 0) (#104)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:00:42 AM EST
    have time to troll rate anyone who isn't falling for obama?

    Pssst (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:15:22 AM EST
    You are one of the biggest down raters at TL for anything remotely positive for the Dems winning in November.

    Actually, that statement isn't supported (5.00 / 0) (#110)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:32:12 AM EST
    by Pssst's history. I only looked at the past 60 ratings, and there are two ratings of 1, one rating of 3, and the rest 5's. Appears that Psst is actually one of the more enthusiastic upraters.

    We're talking about sher's troll rating (5.00 / 0) (#115)
    by weltec2 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:11:25 AM EST
    history, not Pssst's rating history.

    Coral Gables....now that you got that off (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:20:25 AM EST
    your chest, we can move on... :)

    lol (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 09:43:20 AM EST
    And the day after...that deserves a 5 :)

    Fiendish Feds Filched mt Follicles. (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Ben Masel on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:51:39 PM EST
    I flew United, Milwaukee>Ohare>Austin for Netroots Nation last week.

    Landing, 2 bags out of 66 passengers were not on the carousel, mine and agnostic's, another raucous Dailykos poster. We were told they'd been mistakenly sent to Scranton, would be delivered to out hotel around midnight. Actually arrived 4:00 the next afternoon, with 2 pieces of tape, one from TSA, and another from Homeland Security. Missing, my hairbrush, and Ms. Agnostic's scarf.

    As I connect the dots, when our dossiers were run, an alert HSA drone noticed empty datafields for our DNA. No longer empty.

    Can you say creepy and scary?? (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:58:02 PM EST
    Oh, man (5.00 / 0) (#100)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:31:42 AM EST
    my sympathies.  As somebody who's had an FBI dossier since the '60s, at this point, I don't dare even try to get on an airplane these days.  (Lucky for me, I can't afford to go anywhere anyway.)

    Do you suppose The One will get rid of the no-fly list, or pare it down from the one million names it's said to have on it now, if he's elected or not?


    No-Fly /= Watch List. (none / 0) (#118)
    by Ben Masel on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:44:22 AM EST
    TSA's No-Fly is ~7,000, TSA Watch list 70,000. It's HSA's watch list that numbrers 1,000,000.

    You guys must.... (none / 0) (#126)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 09:50:30 AM EST
    be really cool.

    My respect and my sympathies for the hassles goes out to ya.


    No cool involved (none / 0) (#148)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 01:58:21 AM EST
    for me, anyway.  In the '60s, any anti-war activist who came to the attention of The Authorities for any reason got an FBI file on them. J. Edgar was really keen on that kind of stuff.  But from what I understand, those files still exist and the Bush machine has incorporated them into the criteria for putting people on watch lists.  (We're by definition unreconstructed anti-Americans, doncha know.)

    The whole thing is so totally irrational that I'm not keen on taking the chance of getting severely hassled at an airport unless I have a really strong need to fly somewhere.


    Gotta disagree... (none / 0) (#149)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:44:27 AM EST
    if the authorities deemed you enough of a threat to their criminal war to open a file on you, that makes you pretty damn cool brother.

    Looked, but didn't see any previous (5.00 / 0) (#41)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:24:57 PM EST
    posts on Wexler's current problem. Also haven't watched any "news" TV today, but last night was a hoot.

    So, is it true that Wexler isn't a resident of Florida? He was trying hard to get away from the reporters who were trying to ask him about his registered residence in Florida...a home in an over 55 community (none of his 3 children allowed) where his mother-in-law lived. His only known residence is in Maryland. Although a congressman doesn't have to live in their district, they do have to live in the state!!

    My daughter was especially delighted because she was still furious with him over his appearance at teh R&B committee meeting in May.

    That's unfortunate (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:31:25 PM EST
    about Wexler because I think he's a decent guy but I fear that slimeball O'Reilly has got the goods on him. Do you or anyone know Wexler's standing in Florida?

    Not sure what you mean by his (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:42:33 PM EST
    standing? I'm thinking it is brand new today.

    I always thought Wexler was top notch, too. At least until I saw his performance at the Rules Committee meeting. His hollaring and refusal to accept 100% seating of the Florida delegates probably didn't serve him well, but I don't know that for sure.

    I know if I found out the rep who was on my ballot lived five states away from mine, it would be the last time I voted for him/her, though.


    He is my Rep (5.00 / 0) (#57)
    by MichaelGale on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:05:18 PM EST
    and does a good job mostly.  Until of course the R&B committee.  He was obnoxious and helped give away Florida.

    He represents a part of Palm Beach County that is heavily Jewish, and he is loved. In fact, the district overall has supported him and will continue to do so. If he is challenged in the election, he will win.  

    Haven't heard about his residency problems.  Where is that?


    Many articles online & was on TV yesterday (5.00 / 0) (#87)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 10:18:24 PM EST
    He's still not saying where he pays taxes (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 11:07:07 PM EST
    which sounds crucial.

    When will they learn?  This has run lots of good guys out of Congress -- like Wisconsin's Gaylord Nelson, founder of Earth Day, etc.


    It appears he moved out of FL (5.00 / 0) (#91)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 11:43:41 PM EST
    in 1996, but says he has always been honest about it with his district residents.

    I wonder if he would have gotten into this pickle if he had performed more honorably at the R&B Committee meeting in May.

    Seems one can never get too comfortable, and his actions in rejecting the idea of seating FL delegates at 100% may have been one moment of outrage too many. There was a day when I loved listening to him, but that was the day when he could calmly articulate his position.


    Yeh, I've seen the "but I said so" (5.00 / 0) (#95)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:10:19 AM EST
    before, too, and it didn't do the trick.  Most voters felt tricked -- and in a state with high property taxes here, while the Senator was paying far less elsewhere.  Florida's taxes are so low that maybe it won't have the same result there, though.

    But much as Floridians love Wexler, according to posts here, they might look at how much Wisconsin loved Gaylord Nelson.  Until it didn't anymore -- because it gave the GOP a wedge, and that was it.


    thanks (none / 0) (#119)
    by MichaelGale on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:12:42 AM EST
    I did not read anything yesterday. too busy.  But thanks to you, that link fit right into my schedule.



    just saw my first 527 ad against Obama (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:31:01 PM EST
    on CNN.  This one says Obama is not a flip/flopper because a flip/flopper only holds one position at a time.  Obama holds two positions at the same time.  So, he is "Both Ways Barack", worse than a flip/flopper.

    They listed campaign finance reform, gun control and a few other examples during the ad.

    Yeah I saw that one too. (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:34:26 PM EST
    I would say that the message they are peddling is effective, the ad itself is done kind of poorly in my opinion. I didn't even recall it once until you brought it up.

    Recent Polling (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:49:32 PM EST
    It's always good to throw some factual statistics out on an open thread.

    Using the most recent poll from each state, McCain is leading in none of the states won by Kerry in 2004.

    By comparison Obama currently leads in the following states that were won by Bush:

    New Mexico

    I do not believe (5.00 / 0) (#54)
    by MichaelGale on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:56:46 PM EST
    he will win Florida nor Indiana

    Where are these... (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:58:16 PM EST
    "factual statistics" from?

    Hard to imagine he leads in Florida, Virginia and Missouri, but the others seems possible. Good for him!

    The election season's still young...


    From a variety of polling outfits (none / 0) (#59)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:09:02 PM EST
    They are only the most recent poll from those states. Obviously it could just be a good Obama stretch. It's not averaging, it's not cherry picking...just the most recent regardless of the polling outfit.

    I agree Florida and Missouri will be tough.

    Of the three you mention.
    Florida - Rasmussen
    Virginia - PPP
    Missouri - Research 2000


    Oops (5.00 / 0) (#64)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:20:08 PM EST
    you skipped Ras' Ohio poll, which has McCain up by 6.  Funny, it's right under the Florida poll.

    Also, for all the talk about Georgia, Ras has a 10pt lead for McCain there.  I never really bought that Obama could pull off GA. (same link).


    No Oops (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:28:28 PM EST
    Was no need to list Ohio or Georgia. They remain in the same column as 2004. Both went to Bush in 2004.

    I was just highlighting those that are currently different from 2004.


    Uh, no. (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 10:03:17 PM EST
    Ohio isn't on the list of Bush states in which Obama leads, therefore one assumes that McCain leads there -- as the Ras poll indicates (although that's a historical outlier -- McCain does lead in the averages, but only by a point or two).

    Neither of those first 2 pollsters (5.00 / 0) (#69)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:29:02 PM EST
    has been credible. Especially "PPP."

    Never even heard of "Research 2000"

    Nice try, dude! But you're reachin' too far


    Not at all (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:36:35 PM EST
    Not reaching at all. I told you up front exactly what it was. The most recent poll out of each state regardless of polling outfit.

    This about. . . (4.33 / 3) (#86)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 10:03:50 PM EST
    Never even heard of "Research 2000"

    says it all.


    Larry (4.33 / 3) (#88)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 10:28:46 PM EST
    What that comment actually shows is that JimWash pays very little attention to polling. Other than giving us that insight, his comment added nothing.

    Whether you like a particular polling outfit or not, it still holds that in the most recent poll in each state, McCain leads in none of the states the DEMs won in 2004 and trails in quite a few states the GOP won in 2004.

    It's a long way to November, but McCain is definitely starting out well behind.


    C-Gables....that was a bit rude. (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:27:22 AM EST
    Indeed. . . (none / 0) (#92)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 11:46:15 PM EST
    that was my point.  R2K is a pretty well known firm, I wouldn't myself advertise that I'd never heard of it when expressing an opinion on polling.

    That said, I don't find this early polling all that useful.  Certainly, Obama has a consistent lead.  But I think we'll need to wait for the conventions to see real interest.

    Unfortunately for McCain, barring something genuinely unforeseen (eg Obama is the father of John Edwards' love child, or something) I don't see how it gets one lick better for McCain from here on in.  His convention is going to be pretty darn depressing while Obama's talking to six hundred million people, or whatever, in a stadium.  McCain really has no good VP move -- he has to pick an anti-Choice religiously oriented conservative to maintain his shaky base but that will hurt him with swing voters.

    And god help him if he coughs, even once, between now and November.


    There are a couple of good VP picks for McCain. (5.00 / 0) (#121)
    by misspeach2008 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:21:44 AM EST
    I'm not a McCain supporter, but it gets tiresome when Obama supporters, who are having a hard time figuring out who would be Obama's VP choice that would hurt him the least, fail to realize that the religious right is not the only group of voters that McCain could go after with his VP pick.

    Zogby is also well-known (none / 0) (#130)
    by Valhalla on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 10:48:34 AM EST
    but not well-respected, or accurate.

    Smartypants! (none / 0) (#131)
    by JimWash08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:23:44 AM EST
    JimWash pays very little attention to polling.


    Why should polling matter so early in the season? There are a million and one pollsters in this country; heck, my colleague in the next office is a self-confessed pollster too.

    There are a few notable and reliable pollsters, and then there are run-of-the-mill pollsters who appeal to specific groups and demographic.

    Give it a rest with the polls; it's only July.


    And in today's news... (none / 0) (#135)
    by NJDem on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:53:00 AM EST
    FWIW: JM is gaining in swing states


    Missouri? Which source -- (5.00 / 0) (#56)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:00:30 PM EST
    for all of these?  Or are some of these states from some polls, some from others?

    Please do link from the start.  Saves bandwidth, with all the requests for same that follow.  Seems we've said this before about these unsourced statements.


    I am worried about Obama's recent rhetoric (5.00 / 0) (#65)
    by ajain on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:21:04 PM EST
    His talk about the "war on terror" is really pissing off and seemingly there is going to be a troop escalation in Afghanistan, a place where no western power has "won" a "war" in modern history. This with his talk of unilaterally bombing Pakistan just worries me that will exacerbate anti-American sentiment in the region. People already hate the US military presence in Afghanistan and simply the threat of unilateral bombing has generated some outrage in that region.

    I just hate that kind of Bush talk.

    I heard a report today (5.00 / 0) (#75)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:54:01 PM EST
    about Obama's recent comments on the prospect of Iran gaining nukes.  He said something along the lines of needing both carrots for negotiating but also a BIG STICK for motivation.  It sounded suspiciously like Hillary's debate answer that Iran should be fully aware that they would be destroyed if they ever used a nuke on another nation.

    I happened to agree with Hillary's answer.  Now it sounds like Obama agrees as well.


    Another episode of "What Hillary Said." (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by Angel on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:07:21 PM EST
    obama on the "me too" tour.... (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:26:41 PM EST
    Same bellicose stuff (5.00 / 0) (#99)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:25:29 AM EST
    about how the world cannot permit Iran to have a nuclear bomb and that military force is "on the table."  I wouldn't mind if it weren't for the lambasting that Hillary got for saying thing actually more sensible and less belligerent.

    Deeply profound (none / 0) (#147)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:33:36 PM EST
    It's basically the same strategy the U.S has used in those type of negotiations for the last 100 years reduced to sound-bite size.

    Of course the Hill (may it be with you), came up with it first and then transported herself it the present to save us -- yet again.


    My Pet Blogger (5.00 / 0) (#70)
    by Fabian on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:29:14 PM EST
    has got her far right groove back!  During 2007, after the Dems took over Congress she was in a slump.  She could barely summon up the energy to do a little gratuitous Hillary bashing.  As for supporting Bush'n'Cheney?  Forget it.  They were invisible to her.

    Now?  Well, she's still not cheerleading for the GOP but oh, has she ever gone on a librul, feminist, Dem & Obama bashing spree.  I do like to keep an eye on the True Believers and she's a great example of the GOP Base.  

    I have to give her credit.  Her blog was where I first learned about CDS so it was quite a shock when I saw supposed lefties repeating the exact same things as a die hard rightie.   Live and learn, live and learn...

    Offshore Drlling Takes a Photo Op Hit Today (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:50:41 PM EST
    Here's a McCain campaign funny for the day in an environmentally sad sort of way.

    He has canceled his trip to New Orleans tomorrow for a photo op on an offshore oil rig. Seems a tanker collided with a barge dumping 400,000 gallons of fuel oil into the Mississippi closing down 29 miles of the river by New Orleans today.

    Always With A Halo (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by JimWash08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:12:53 AM EST
    Why do photographers love to take pics of Obama from such angles?

    I couldn't tell you how many such photos I've seen with his logo or some other circular image as a backdrop for his head.

    Really, it seems like a deliberate stunt now by press photogs!

    Well obama is definitely no angel... :) (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:29:41 AM EST
    It is simply freaky (none / 0) (#138)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:12:02 PM EST
    to project that kind of image on a politician no matter who it is.

    Think there's some photoshopping involved?


    Funny thing is... (none / 0) (#146)
    by JimWash08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:18:11 PM EST
    That picture I linked to was on the front page of the Denver Post website.

    Jeralyn could tell us if it appeared in the print-edition too.


    I've been waiting for an open thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by pie on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:01:45 PM EST
    so I could bring up the fact that the foreign press is not sycophantic.

    Someone here actually bragged about an Andrea Mitchell comment about Obama.


    Just wow.

    Is This It? (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:40:24 PM EST
    Mitchell: "You're Seeing...What Some Would Call Fake Interviews"

    I guess the honeymoon's coming to an end for many in the MSM ... hopefully they'll be compelled to do some real, unbiased and objective reporting



    Oh my, (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by pie on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:07:46 PM EST

    I mentioned this yesterday...Andrea wasn't (none / 0) (#32)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:54:05 PM EST
    happy, and what is with the Pentagon picking out pics for the press?  I understand the press plane didn't even leave until July 20....things that make you go hmmmmm?

    the pentagon is supplying the pics (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:35:43 PM EST
    because they are providing the transport.  This is being paid for by the tax payers, not the Obama campaign.  This is a senate "fact finding' trip, not a campaign event.  You wouldn't really know that though, would you?

    Fact-Finding Trip? (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:43:49 PM EST
    LOL, is that what the cool kids call it now? :)

    I remember. (none / 0) (#37)
    by pie on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:09:52 PM EST
    It was flyerhawk.

    Can you post a link, please? (none / 0) (#18)
    by bridget on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:33:28 PM EST
    what did Mitchell say?

    Someone made the comment (none / 0) (#20)
    by pie on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:35:09 PM EST
    on an earlier post.

    I tend to disregard what he says.  He didn't provide a link.


    Here's a link (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:39:38 AM EST
    novak (none / 0) (#3)
    by Carolyn K on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:04:17 PM EST
    What was his blood alcohol level?

    probably zero (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:07:54 PM EST
    it was 10 am, he was on his way to work.

    You can probably expect the old double standard (none / 0) (#14)
    by Saul on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:30:08 PM EST
    However, he just might have some problems since I understand the guy he hit was a lawyer, and ex Harvard law revue writer.

    Should be review not revue (none / 0) (#16)
    by Saul on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:31:33 PM EST
    Yeah, Harvard Law Revue was Obama's (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by MarkL on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:19:16 PM EST

    Obama will speak in front of the Siegessaeule (none / 0) (#13)
    by bridget on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:29:52 PM EST
    on Thursday in Berlin; the famous historic Siegessaeule has a golden Figure on top and is called "Goldelse." It is a v. beautiful monument.

    Obama will speak in the direction of the Pariser Platz with the Brandenburger Tor further in the background (Obama wanted the Brandenburger Tor with him on the pics). I read in one paper that Obama copied Reagan's visit this way. Ah well! Obama will be surrounded by loads of historic sites that's for sure.
    The speech is planned for 19.OO - 1945 and the city  is looking forward with great excitement to welcome the Dem nom in Berlin.  

    Bridget....I am past caring where obama (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:36:16 PM EST
    speaks.  When he starts to walk his talk, then it might pique my interest again.  Will he be parachuting in to the event? :)

    No, he's being carried in (5.00 / 5) (#27)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:47:02 PM EST
    on a shield borne by six naked ladies, not including Angela Merkel.

    let me see ....I'll let you know if he does ;-) (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by bridget on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:48:35 PM EST
    I just started to read up on the visit in the German press.

    you know after all the Brandenburger Tor brouhaha I thought people might want to know were he ended up ... but I know what you are saying.

    I haven't thought about it until now but if he starts talking in German a la Kennedy I don't know should I laugh, should I cry? Guess it depends what he comes up with :)



    Stealing a line from others: (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by Rhouse on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:52:25 PM EST
    "Ich bein ein Beginner!"

    obama says "I like bratwurst" (5.00 / 4) (#34)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:59:52 PM EST
    ...the crowds go nutz...he has to be whisked away by police escort...blech

    Actually, they're trying (5.00 / 6) (#31)
    by ChrisO on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 06:53:37 PM EST
    to find a way to have him land on a carrier.

    Score! (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:12:42 PM EST
    thanks, you speak for me. (none / 0) (#60)
    by hellothere on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:14:22 PM EST
    Copying Reagan? Don't tell me he's (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by MarkL on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:20:06 PM EST
    visiting Bitburg.

    I'm honestly shocked... (5.00 / 0) (#53)
    by weltec2 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:55:44 PM EST
    He asked to do that and they turned him down, rightly considering the request rather impertinent from someone who is not yet even the official nominee for POTUS. What changed?

    Obama just wants to make sure the Brandenburger (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by bridget on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 10:50:32 PM EST
    Tor gets on the pictures - but the gate is much further in the back. He will actually stand in front of the Siegessaeule but I read by speaking in the direction of the Pariser Platz the gate will get on the pics somehow. Does he want to be somehow connected to Nov. 9, 1989 when the wall fell and East Germans streamed thru the BT? Unification? Who knows.

    I also read that lots of people will only be able to view him from the back (that could be easily avoided since there is plenty of room on the street) because of his obsession with the gate in the back pics.

    I know, I am shaking my head while I am typing ....

    btw. later on he will march thru the gate which should make it on the US evening news acc. to one paper ;-)


    My understanding was that (5.00 / 0) (#94)
    by weltec2 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 11:58:12 PM EST
    originally he wanted to stand in front of the Brandenburger Tor to give his speech but he was told that it was reserved for Heads of State. So this would appear to be a kind of compromise that they have made with him which he is in a way flouting by insisting upon walking through it, reporters and photographers in toe, anyway.

    Maybe he could top it off by having a cup of coffee at the nearby Starbucks. :-


    And yet, they let Project Runway (5.00 / 0) (#96)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:14:07 AM EST
    or some such modeling shoot use the Brandenburg Gate, according to the link.  Hmmm, it sounds like Chancellor Merkel just maybe doesn't like Obama?  Maybe she had an affinity with Clinton?  It would seem that many a woman leader around the world must have winced at seeing what this country did to a sitting Senator and former First Lady respected by women worldwide for decades now.

    Maybe Merkel saw the "Dirt Off My Shoulder" video.  Music is the international language, and the meaning was more than clear.


    "And yet they let Project Runway (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by weltec2 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:49:50 AM EST
    or some such modeling shoot use the Brandenburg Gate."

    But that was not State business and not in front of a crowd of thousands. That is far different from allowing someone to deliver a major speech in front of a crowd which is what BO wants to do.


    Ah, that distinction makes sense (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:11:38 AM EST
    as even our White House has been a backdrop in movie shoots.  But not for massive political rallies by foreign potentate candidates. :-)

    Well (5.00 / 2) (#106)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:14:30 AM EST
    I actually think Merkel is conservative and has an affinity with Bush, a certain rude incident notwithstanding.

    At any rate, I think the public opinion polls in Germany were pretty conclusive as far as people having a problem with the originally planned rally.  I guess if we were to analogize it to our own country, we probably wouldn't care a whole lot if someone were shooting a movie at the Statue of Liberty, but it would probably seem kind of weird if some random foreign politician were holding a political rally there.  Unless they were French, I guess!


    "a certain rude incident" (none / 0) (#109)
    by weltec2 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:27:53 AM EST
    Actually at the G8 Hokkaido Summit here in Japan, Bush just could not keep his hands off of her. It continues to be a serious embarrassment. I think it's a control thing. I have one picture of him stroking the back of her head as he is talking down to her like she is a child. Another with his arm right hand on her shoulder. Another with him holding her hand as they are standing next to each other in a line of other people who are of course not holding hands. Bush just has to touch her. It is deeply disturbing. It is like he has to make her into this child that he can manipulate. In each of the pictures she is looking very uncomfortable.

    thanks for posting about the Japan Summit (none / 0) (#114)
    by bridget on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:03:22 AM EST
    I haven't seen those pics and must look for them. V. interesting.  

    No Merkel is just fine with Obama (none / 0) (#111)
    by bridget on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:38:33 AM EST
    and re the modeling shoot that is really something completely different. You and I could take pics around the gate as much as we wanted etc. ...

    Merkel hat a problem with some politician from a foreign country making a campaign speech at the Brandenburger Tor.

    It is true that leaders from the SPD (the opposition party) criticized Merkel but I actually think things worked out pretty well the way it did.


    Is she? Source/story/link? (none / 0) (#128)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 10:40:51 AM EST
    I haven't seen anything re her and little re other countries' leaders' reactions except Maliki.  All I've seen is much on her unhappiness with Obama wanting to use the monument.

    And the Der Spiegel link implies otherwise than what you saw -- so what did you read and where?  Thanks.


    Yep (none / 0) (#142)
    by CST on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:52:24 PM EST
    This is from Reuters.  Their headline "Obama politically and physically fit: Merkel"

    It's pretty funny actually.


    Funny, yes (none / 0) (#143)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:06:25 PM EST
    but I have to say that I don't read her quotes quite as favorably as you do.  Maybe she'll turn on tv? :-)

    Well (none / 0) (#144)
    by CST on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:13:45 PM EST
    I don't think it's an endorsement, but it's hardly negative.  I think she was being very toungue in cheek and trying not to make a statement.

    Honestly, I think she'll avoid picking sides in this one since she is probably a bit more conservative but her country sure does love Obama.


    Fit (none / 0) (#145)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 01:49:03 PM EST
    As compared to who....  hmmmm...  I guess it is obvious.

    No - everybody can walk thru the BTor (none / 0) (#113)
    by bridget on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:50:11 AM EST
    and if Obama wants to do it that's just fine

    I think it was just a bit of a tongue in cheek remark by the paper.

    It was holding a huge rally with making a campaign speech at the gate (as a foreigner running for Pres  on top of it) that Merkel wasn't thrilled about.


    Yes, you're quite right. (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by weltec2 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:21:56 AM EST
    My only quibble was that after going through the process of having his first choice rejected it just seemed a bit petulant to me his making a potential photo op of going through the gate anyway.

    The whole incident seems like (none / 0) (#127)
    by tree on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 09:59:12 AM EST
    poor foreign diplomacy to me. To publicly hold out for a speech location that the head of Germany feels is inappropriate doesn't seem like a smart diplomatic move. IF he becomes President he'll have to deal with Merkel on matters. Why create a source of dispute and tension, no matter how small, over something as supremely inconsequential to German-American relations as the site of his campaign speech? Unless he just wanted to try to throw his weight around from the git-go. It doesn't bode well for his foreign policy creds.

    And I hear that Britain and France are upset that he's short-changing them as compared to Germany. Foreign policy is a lot more delicate and nuanced than just finding a "kick-@ss" photo-op.


    No, he's still not sked (none / 0) (#81)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:19:01 PM EST
    for the big B gate.  You're confusing buildings.

    Just watched a clip on TV (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 07:06:25 PM EST
    of McCain actually repeating today his "would rather lose war/win election" smear on Obama. Why do Dems always get stuck with this unpatriotic meme? 40% of America will fall for it every time. (sigh)

    question (none / 0) (#61)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:18:07 PM EST
    Probably no one here will know.  But, since I stopped watching MSNBC myself, I have no idea.

    Was there are reporting on MSNBC about McCain's "media love of Obama" video since it covered so many of their personalities?

    I doubt Tweety Matthews said anythigng about it since he was basically the "star" of the show.

    Well, Tweety (5.00 / 0) (#66)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:23:57 PM EST
    responded to those videos and criticism of his coverage in an interview with Jay Leno.

    I'd rather be honest and say what I feel than sit there like some kind of statue and say, 'Oh that was noteworthy.' I'm a frickin' American. I do have a reaction to things. And I do react emotionally to my country. I care about this country, I want to look out for it. It's my job. I'm not just some umpire. I take a side -- us. That's who I'm rooting for.

    Uh, OK?! Yes, Tweety, you are an American. But you are also a television journalist. Have your "emotional reactions" off-camera on your own time, and stick to unbiased and objective reporting -- if at all possible? K-thanks!


    Ha ha (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:30:46 PM EST
    He looks so ridiculous when his comments are put out there side-by-side like that.  The best is part where he says Obama's "the world's gift to us."

    Sigh.  It comes too late to help my gal, but I am glad someone's finally mocking the infinitely mockworthy unfiltered adoration-fest.


    Jon Stewart (5.00 / 0) (#101)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:40:26 AM EST
    had a really hysterical bit with his "reporters" on the Obama world tour, half of whom were supposed to be with McCain but went with Obama.  By the end, they all giddily confessed to having "boners" whenever The One speaks.

    Lou Dobbs mentioned it (5.00 / 0) (#67)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:26:53 PM EST
    Or rather, there was a quick bit about it by his sidekick (I don't know her name).  He thought it was pretty funny, although I suppose he would.

    I don't know that it will be the most effective ad (the Pump one is probably more effective if before a general audience, not just an internet one) but it's the funniest campaign-authored ad so far.  Imho.


    i didn't notice this myself (5.00 / 0) (#74)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:47:30 PM EST
    when i watched it.  But, later read an explanation of the portion of it on the plane where the female reporters were yelling at the person standing in their line of sight of Obama when tey were suppoedly trying to get a good look at his crotch.

    I can imagine the kind of comments they are getting from their peers now.   LOL


    ROFL! How shameless! (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 08:57:21 PM EST
    I must have totally spaced-out from listening to the song to care about the love-fest clips, because I don't remember that. But, I totally could imagine it.

    Along the same lines, I remember a video surfaced on YouTube where the female press members were squealing with delight when, on a weekend flight, Obama appeared on the plane in very ordinary clothes -- regular T-shirt and his brand of tight mom-jeans (also see the pic of him riding a bicycle along Lake Michigan with the wife/kids) LOL.


    the explanation even went farther (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:05:04 PM EST
    the commenter then claimed after the offending person moved out of the way, Obama, realizing what was going on, struck an appropriate "pose" to give the ladies what they wanted.

    Ugh (5.00 / 0) (#102)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:41:28 AM EST
    I was very puzzled by that part (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:18:36 AM EST
    and remember it well, wondering what the heck the women were yelling about "agent, down!"

    Now I sorta wish I didn't know.  Reading the reason makes me, well, taste a bit of bile in my mouth.

    Ya gotta love the response, though, from a media person to whom I sent the video.  He usually has a sense of humor, including about the media idjits.  But no, this one is so embarrassing that the response was, immediately, "those clips all are taken out of context!"  Uh huh.  Like media never do that.  

    Plus, I had seen many of those clips in context.  And that didn't improve the impact a bit.


    I had the same problem at first (none / 0) (#129)
    by Valhalla on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 10:46:17 AM EST
    Had no idea what that was all about -- first time through I just thought it was mocking the effect of a bunch of supposedly professional women for squealing like teenage girls at an Elvis concert in his black leather days.

    Now I wish I could go back to my own interpretation, that was bad enough.


    CNN has a live feed (none / 0) (#132)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:32:33 AM EST
    at the Victory Column. Surprise, surprise, there is a a free rock concert going on to rile up the crowd.

    Has everyone seen the lovely german poster?


    The State Department (none / 0) (#133)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:43:51 AM EST
    has told all government workers they cannot attend...lol.

    The White House must be bothered by the crowd.


    I must confess (none / 0) (#134)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:48:26 AM EST
    I too am a little disconcerted by the crowd. Obama himself was trying desperately to play down the million screaming fans memo. I think he is starting to realize this may backfire. But the visual is stunning and something inside me tells me it's not in a good way.

    Has any other candidate ever had a blatantly political rally on foreign soil?


    I know this comparison is nutty (none / 0) (#136)
    by NJDem on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:58:11 AM EST
    but that doesn't mean it isn't going to be made (in fact it already has--shouldn't they have seen this coming?)  LINK

    And I agree this whole event may backfire--just too much, too soon.  But I guess ve shall see...


    AS the crowd grows (none / 0) (#137)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:03:55 PM EST
    and CNN takes the most flattering view and shots of it as possible, I am becoming more and more uncomfortable.

    Since, in Obama's own words, this will not be "a wonkish policy speech" because they are not voters and this isn't a political rally; (really? /snark) what is the purpose exactly?!

    In Obama's own word fog way:

    "Hopefully it will be viewed as a substantive articulation of the relationship I'd like to see between the United States and Europe."


    "I think the world is keenly interested in this election and I think they're hungry for a sense of where America is going, certainly there's a curiosity factor involved," Obama responded when asked if he was surprised at the attention he has received.

    But he says he didn't study or even think about Kennedy or Reagan's speeches here. (again, really?!? /snark) "They were presidents, I am a citizen," he said.

    Yep...color me very disturbed.


    Has Obama (none / 0) (#139)
    by tree on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:17:54 PM EST
    EVER given a "wonkish policy speech" to large crowds? Color me surprised if he has.

     This all seems designed to build on his "coolness" and his superficial popularity. It Hope/Change 2.0, now without the hope and change.

    If he was trying to build his foreign policy cred he'd do better to just talk and listen to foreign leaders. If he wants to hobnob with the common folk he'd do better to interact in a small setting and listen as well as talk. He isn't learning anything when he does all the talking.

    But maybe he's just trying to build his "rock star" cred. I've heard here that that is his strongest asset. Sigh.  


    I agree about the backfiring (none / 0) (#141)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:50:59 PM EST
    as well.  In the midst of a domestic economic crisis, doing a very long video and photo op in Germany is rather tin-eared.  

    McCain's campaign sucks, so I don't see them making hay out of this very unusual, grandiose situation.  He's over there having fun, while we pay for four dollar gas.  I would think this is having more of a negative than a positive effect on undecided voters.  And there is a significant bloc of those.


    Is anyone watching this? (none / 0) (#140)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 12:32:33 PM EST
    The crowd started to slowly diminish after the concert finished and this speack is neither "lofty' or particularly interesting. Whatever, most of what he says is probably going over the heasds of the young crowd anyway.