Thursday Afternoon Open Thread

It's unusual that all three writers here are working offline at our day jobs at the same time but that seems to be the case today.

Here's an open thread for you. And thanks to all who responded to BTD's earlier request for support. The kind words and donations are very much appreciated.

< ACLU Obtains Key CIA Torture Memos | Move On Ten Years Later >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    63% Say obama dog and pony show (5.00 / 6) (#4)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:04:26 PM EST
    to the Middle East and Europe does not make him more fit to be president...


    I think I am more surprised (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by CST on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:06:35 PM EST
    By the 30+ % who apparently think it did.

    One trip does not make a president.  I think the trip helped show the American people that he was fit more than it actually made him fit.


    It was such an odd idea, IMO. (5.00 / 6) (#7)
    by MarkL on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:10:55 PM EST
    How did his Berlin speech go today?
    I assume that he spoke in German, to show how cultured he is. I mean, it's so embarrassing when Americans don't know foreign languages, don't you think?

    MarkL....have missed your wit lately... (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:13:13 PM EST
    you cracked me up, as usual.

    I expect the big black SUV's at my door any day now...am hispanic and can't even speak Spanish...oh the horror!!


    Same here. (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by LoisInCo on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:19:56 PM EST
    When my father got out of the army and we settled in Michigan I was sent to an "enrichment class" at my new elementary school. It was in spanish and I sat there for 15 minutes trying not to be seen. The teacher finally called on me and I stammered my way through " I don't speak spanish" and the entire class looked at me like I was some sort of alien. Heh. I was upset more that they didn't allow me to go anymore and they had all sorts of cool computer games for us to play! (Oregon trail anyone?)

    Nice Staging in Berlin (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by santarita on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:52:26 PM EST
      It looked staged to me:  The sea of American flags in the first block of fans with the lighting on them as if they were to be highlighted.  I don't discount their fervor but I am a little suspicious about the flagwavers.  I would like to have seen more crowd reaction.  And I wonder if there were something else going on - like rock music to attract the crowd.  On the other hand, it's summertime and people like being outdoors for summer events.

    American flags?! Hmmm (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by MarkL on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:07:27 PM EST
    Someone (or some organization) (none / 0) (#86)
    by weltec2 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:27:27 PM EST
    might have been handing them out.

    There indeed (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:42:26 PM EST
    were two concerts prior to Obama's speech and their campaign handed out the flags...

    So Germans Were... (4.00 / 1) (#79)
    by santarita on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:34:25 PM EST
    Used as Campaign Stage Props.  Nice.

    Is anyone else tired of such obvious manipulation?  I don't care which party is doing it, such manipulation is tacky and makes the candidate look like they are less about substance and more about show.


    Can someone please confirm? (none / 0) (#11)
    by cmugirl on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:14:43 PM EST
    I heard that in his speech, Obama was telling Germans about German history - apparently they don't know.

    LOL.. like that fact he was speaking in (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by MarkL on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:25:59 PM EST
    front of a monument moved by the Nazis to its current location?

    If you had made the exact (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by zfran on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:17:15 PM EST
    same trip, with the same personnel, same dressers, same writers, same advisors, same press, etc. etc., you, too, would look "fit" as you say. Take a look at the man himself, not the candidate and what "handlers" and the like make him look like, imho.

    Yes and No (3.00 / 0) (#21)
    by CST on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:23:58 PM EST
    Yes to this:
    "Take a look at the man himself, not the candidate and what "handlers" and the like make him look like, imho."

    I have, and am in no way shape or form voting for him because of anything he did on this trip.

    No to this:
    "If you had made the exact same trip, with the same personnel, same dressers, same writers, same advisors, same press, etc. etc., you, too, would look "fit" as you say".

    I am 23 and certainly would not look fit to be president.  Also, I don't think just anyone could've made that trip and done as well as he did.  See Bush, George W. and any trip he's been on...


    We agree in principle. But (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by zfran on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:26:29 PM EST
    at 23, you could be made to look "fit" to be a presidential candidate. Don't sell yourself short. Perhaps, they could even make you look a little older and wiser.

    According to the breakdowns it didn't (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by tree on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:05:14 PM EST
    convince much of anyone who wasn't already convinced.

    Only 39% of Democrats say Obama's travels this week make him more qualified to be president, while 42% disagree. Eighty-six percent (86%) of Republicans and 67% of unaffiliateds feel the same way. The gap widens when how an individual plans to vote is factored in: 44% of likely Obama voters see the travel as a positive, while 89% of those who plan to vote for McCain disagree.

    Only 44% of likely Obama voters see the travel as positive. Looks like it wasn't a net gain. How much campaign cash did he blow on this? Or was it all picked up on the taxpayers' tab?


    american idol! (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by hellothere on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:40:32 PM EST
    Not only that, but I heard that (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by hairspray on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:54:27 PM EST
    he likened himself to the president already (Jon Stuart did a parody of that 2 nights ago) and yesterday Obama said that the Senate Banking committee was "his committee."  He is not on that committee.  What is going on with this guy?

    I don't think Rasmussen is asking the right (5.00 / 0) (#90)
    by MyLeftMind on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:53:01 PM EST
    question.  The point of the trip isn't to make Obama "more fit to be President" as their headline presents it.  The point is to undermine the GOP's ability to claim he hasn't even traveled to the middle east recently.  They (and Faux News) had a clock displaying the amount of time since Obama's last trip, which was over two years.  Now his campaign has destroyed yet another false ploy they were using against him.  

    It's not a dog and pony show, it's a winning strategy.


    Iraq team barred from Olympics (5.00 / 0) (#6)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:07:42 PM EST
    From the AP:

    The International Olympic Committee has upheld a ban on Iraqi teams at the Beijing Games, saying Thursday the government missed the deadline to address accusations of political interference.

    The IOC decision culminates a drawn-out internal feud in Iraq that many see as an extension of Shiite payback to Sunnis who once held a cozy niche in Saddam Hussein's regime.

    In May, the government dissolved the National Olympic Committee. Among the claims was it was illegitimate because it lacked a legal quorum -- but four members of the committee, including its chief, were kidnapped two years ago and their fates are unknown.

    There is also a potential sectarian rift. Iraq's Youth and Sports Ministry is dominated by Shiites, while the NOC includes several holdovers from the Saddam-era Olympic Committee, once run by his feared eldest son, Odai.

    So much for that whole "sports is not political" thing, huh?

    The IOC.... (5.00 / 0) (#46)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:40:29 PM EST
    seems so shady don't they?

    Or is it just my knuckleheaded self seeing all beuracracies as inherently shady.


    Obama team working on transition (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by cmugirl on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:13:14 PM EST
    I posted this elsewhere, but I think the comments were closed shortly after.

    The Obama team is working on his transition into the WH.

    "With less than six months to go before he would be sworn in as the nation's 44th president, Sen. Barack Obama has directed his aides to begin planning for the transition."


    Get the seal back out of storage, (5.00 / 6) (#13)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:18:06 PM EST
    shine up the crown and lets pick a date some time next week and just declare that Obama is the next president of the U.S.

    Because you know (5.00 / 7) (#59)
    by tree on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:17:45 PM EST
    the general election has been going on for so-ooo long now... Its so divisive to have an actual election. Shouldn't McCain just concede now before he tears the country apart?

    and yes geez how dare mccain actually (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by hellothere on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:42:15 PM EST
    criticze obama! please! i'd like to see a real campaign instead of victory dances at the goal post.

    Has he written (5.00 / 7) (#25)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:42:42 PM EST
    all his State of the Union speeches yet?

    He has more than one speech? (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:48:49 PM EST
    News to me.

    I don't see anything particularly... (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by sj on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:50:29 PM EST
    ... wrong about this activity (or at least I wouldn't if I wasn't already miffed at the actions of the RBC).  

    Nevertheless, your comment cracked me up.


    He'll want fresh pretzels, I'm sure. (5.00 / 5) (#26)
    by MarkL on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:44:38 PM EST
    Arugula. (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by Maria Garcia on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:50:27 PM EST
    And waffles! (5.00 / 5) (#36)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:57:06 PM EST
    I suspect some "aides" (5.00 / 0) (#73)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:11:30 PM EST
    "friends" and "advisors" are just itching to get their piece of the political pie.

    a little early for a transition, isn't it? (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by andjustice4all on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:57:31 PM EST
    Shouldn't he pick a Vice President sometime before the inauguration?

    Law of unintended consequences. (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by Rhouse on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:18:28 PM EST
    High gas prices save lives, via AP link.
    (Okay, tiny url http://tinyurl.com/63y6n3 instead). So not being able to afford to go anywhere does have an upside to it.

    Maybe people will read some books. (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by MarkL on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:24:19 PM EST
    In several languages, of course.
    Sigh. Like I'm going to go back and read Russian any day now.. heh

    Porter Goss on Ethics Committee? (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:06:17 PM EST
    They must have a lot on Pelosi. Jeez.........

    Rudy Giuliani's kid kicked off golf team (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by scribe on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:13:24 PM EST
    at Duke.  So, now he's suing, saying it's hurting his chances of having a career as a pro golfer.

    He's making a federal case out of it, too.

    I'm not going to download Little Rudy's complaint, because the article says it's 198 frickin' pages long.  I have to say this - the longest federal complaint I ever filed was 58 pages long and it had a lot - too much, said the judge when he told us to replead it - of facts pleaded in it.  So, I'm dying to find out what could possibly have been so bad about getting kicked off the college golf team without a reason being given that it took 198 pages to say it.  And, who the lawyer he hired is and why this lawyer went about it this way.

    And then, says the suit, the coach said young Giuliani had to get a letter from each member of the golf team saying they wanted him back, before the coach would take him back.

    Now, I'm not the best at interpersonal dynamics and being a coach of an athletic team, but it seems pretty obvious that Giuliani must have seriously alienated someone - and maybe the whole team - with something he said, did or didn't do.  I mean, this is something that would be done to discipline a 4th grader who'd behaved badly.  So, why was young Giuliani turned into a pariah?

    Here's the article from a Duke paper.  Some of the comments are priceless - I commend them to you.  (Psst - everyone's sure 9/11 had something to do with it....)

    To his credit, he didn't have his dad file the suit for him.  Good thing - who knows what "Giuliani time" translates to in a Durham accent....

    "Makin' a federal case..." (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:10:45 PM EST
    That is classic scribe...

    What the hell is stoppin' hime?  You don't need a degree to get in the PGA ya piker!

    How embarassing for the Guiliani family....my brother or nephew did that I'd disown 'em:)


    This is probably one moment (5.00 / 0) (#102)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:43:07 PM EST
    when Rudy is grateful that the media has covered the division between him and his children.

    His Atty (none / 0) (#43)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:26:41 PM EST
    Andrew is represented by Durham, N.C., attorney Robert Ekstrand, a Duke law school lecturer and attorney for several former members of the Duke lacrosse team in a civil suit over sex-assault allegations. The suit does not ask the court to order Andrew's return to the team. It does seek unspecific monetary damages and the return of Andrew's training privileges.



    So, why did he need to use (none / 0) (#44)
    by scribe on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:39:48 PM EST
    198 pages for the complaint?

    Most college seniors, called upon to do a complete (auto)biography, couldn't get 198 pages out of their entire lives....


    400 words or less (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:47:43 PM EST
    198 pages? Jimmy Buffett said you should be able to do an autobiography in 400 words or less. With considerably less life experiences I attempted it and was done in 200.

    Large Type, Double Spaced (none / 0) (#53)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:57:35 PM EST
    And doubles as a thesis? I dunno.

    Maybe he's writing his thesis (none / 0) (#61)
    by scribe on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:22:47 PM EST
    on the value of life experience?  [Simpsons' sub-reference]

    On the radio coming home from work, (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:49:38 PM EST
    I heard that Obama has scrapped plans to visit wounded American troops in Germany because he didn't think it was appropriate for him to do so - something about him being in campaign mode now and not US Senator mode.  Hey, what's a few wounded soldiers when you can appear before hundreds of thousands of Germans?

    McCain chimed in that it is never inappropriate to visit wounded servicemen and women...

    Does Obama's decision make any sense to anyone else?

    Yes. (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by LoisInCo on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:51:35 PM EST
    Because those soldiers might ask him some actual questions and he wouldn't want to be seen getting impatient with them like he was with Katie Couric.

    He got impatient with KC? (none / 0) (#58)
    by nycstray on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:15:21 PM EST
    interesting . . .

    If he's in campaign mode, (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by misspeach2008 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:53:52 PM EST
    then his campaign is paying for all of his expenses, right? And I guess those wounded soldiers don't have the right to vote? Or maybe there aren't enough of them to make a difference? Or maybe they got run over by a bus?

    His campaign (5.00 / 0) (#54)
    by MichaelGale on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:02:33 PM EST
    did not care about the troops who voted in MI nor Fl since they will never know if theirs were counted or given away.  Why would he care now?

    Since the taxpayers are paying for these (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:11:25 PM EST
    photo ops, and I am very sure the soldier's are paying taxes, ya think he could have stopped to see them?  Honestly, he looks more and more unpresidential every damn day!

    Yes, To Me (5.00 / 0) (#68)
    by daring grace on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:59:53 PM EST
    Because if he did include visits to wounded soldiers some people might construe it as a cynical exploitation of their suffering for campaign photo op gain.

    Surprising, but some people might.

    Of course, now that he's changed his schedule, some people might just say he's dissing the soldiers.


    Not To Mention (2.00 / 2) (#74)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:17:50 PM EST
    That the later part of the Mid East and Europe part of the trip are funded by campaign $$.

    Had he visited the wounded soldiers TL cultists would have shrieked about Obama using the wounded for Photo OPs.


    You may be right (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by LoisInCo on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:55:58 PM EST
    about that. But as he had already schedualed the visit (and I assume the soldiers were informed) , it seems to me that the photo-op hit would have been the least damaging one. Perhaps he could have mitigated that by not allowing photos except ones taken by or for the soldiers themselves. (Where possible.)

    Anyone who has the ability to (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:19:23 PM EST
    really should watch the BBC coverage of the speech today. I find it much more balanced and fair as far as how the rest of the world saw this event today and the trip as a whole.

    Also, Canadian news has been interesting as well.

    Clawhammer killer's accomplice endorses Obama (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by RonK Seattle on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:42:02 PM EST
    ... shortly before his controversial execution (discussed  in an earlier TL post).

    Dateline Parchman, MS - Dale Leo Bishop was executed last night:

    "For those who oppose the death penalty and want to see it end, our best bet is to vote for Barack Obama because his supporters have been working behind the scenes to end this practice."

    The actual killer - who was tried separately, who was not mentally ill, and who did not ask the judge for the death penalty in a bout of depression - is serving a life sentence.

    Talk about a rousing endorsement.... (none / 0) (#64)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:47:17 PM EST
    it speaks volumes....:)

    Ummm... (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:00:52 PM EST
    tree was not organizing against a candidate just pointing to a site with more information on a subject that as requested.

    Planning on being (5.00 / 3) (#70)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:02:53 PM EST
    an unrepentant Hillary supporter until she gives me a reason to quit.  Or until Obama wins my support.

    Three months until November.

    If Obama is going (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by misspeach2008 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:04:58 PM EST
    to "win anyways", why are you so concerned about criticism of him? Jeralyn has asked that there be no name calling of the presidential candidates, and the only name calling here is directed toward Senator McCain, which I find juvenile. Those of us who have feline tendencies only respond when things like being accused of a being a Republican front are posted in the comments. Sometimes questions about things like Senator Clinton's debt come up, and we try to link to "approved sites" to help answer the question, but a JSND site may have the quickest answer. The ship has sailed for some of Senator Clinton's supporters to support Senator Obama, but if he is going to win without us, then it makes sense to continue to "hold his feet to the fire". Criticizing his campaign strategies and discussing his policy positions is part of that. I think you misunderstand the motive behind it, but then most Obama supporters do. I know of no poster at TL who is happy about the prospect of John McCain as president. Some just feel equally or more unhappy about a President Obama.

    i think name calling of any candidate of (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by hellothere on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:01:41 PM EST
    a leading political party says more about the poster than the one being called the name. sure express opinions about their actions and positions. but as you say name calling under any condition is so silly and juvenile. it also would lead tl down the road of a cheerleader site which i am sure that jeralyn and the rest of the folks who lead the blog here would not want either.

    Speaking of the Spanish Inquisition... (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by tree on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:26:42 PM EST
    Maybe I should be punished with the comfy chair.

    scary isn't! (none / 0) (#96)
    by hellothere on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:06:06 PM EST
    My recommendation (5.00 / 4) (#80)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:35:35 PM EST
    You stop discussing other groups.  I followed the link... I saw info on the Denver group.  It looks like they want Clinton's name in nomination.  So what?  Do you really think the superdeez would vote against Obama at the convention?  Really?  That has got to be the oddest thing from an Obama supporter.  I happen to think Clinton should be treated as other candidates have historically been treated.  If the rules include having a vote at the convention, so what?

    Amen (5.00 / 3) (#103)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:57:09 PM EST
     If the rules include having a vote at the convention, so what?

    Wouldn't it look really bad for Obama if suddenly the DNC abandoned a rules that gave even Howard Dean a role call vote?


    I'd like to see Hillary empowered, not (none / 0) (#94)
    by MyLeftMind on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:03:51 PM EST
    defeated yet again.  The demand for roll call does the opposite of empowering her.  Instead, it: 1) Identifies who in the party leadership can be targetted for supporting Obama, and 2) Keeps us in the primary until the convention.

    I'd like us to take a different strategy, which would empower both Hillary and Obama and which would move us past the negativity of the great divide so that Dems can win the election.  I think that by establishing concurrent goals instead of competing goals, we create a win-win situation for all of us.  


    Hillary defeated.... (4.80 / 5) (#101)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:33:11 PM EST
    interesting perspective.  Some think Clinton's run is something to be celebrated at the convention.  A quick roll vote for Clinton, not enough votes, have a few cheers and then have the roll for Obama where all states would have their votes behind Obama, Clinton gives a speech for Obama and the big celebration would begin.

    I think of this the same way as the MI/FL debacle.  Obama could have been generous, he was in a position to be so.  Allowing the full votes would have shown grace, demonstrated control of the party, respected the voters etc.  There would have nothing to be angry at.  Obama could have ended that discussion, he could end this one.  Having a few minutes to celebrate Clinton and her supporters will only garner good will.

    We will be in the primary until the convention, that's how it works.  Clinton's supporters have been discounted throughout the campaign.  It is not a different strategy to continue to do the same thing.  'get over it' is not going to work.  It's a good thing Obama doesn't need those votes.


    A quick roll vote for Clinton (2.00 / 1) (#104)
    by MyLeftMind on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:57:29 PM EST
    means the targeting of anyone who votes against her.  Why feed that frenzy?  What does it do for our party besides destroy it even more?  Let's celebrate her historic run with the actual empowerment of her and her/our issues.  She's my Senator, I'd like to see her jump seniority and get Sen. Majority Leader.  What a shakeup of Congress!  And what a declaration of the importance of half the Dems voting for her.  On top of it, we the voters get two powerful Dems promoting our leftie agenda.  I don't know why the MI/FL thing happened the way it did.  Maybe it took a clear stand against seating all delegates to negotiate who the SuperDs were going to support.  The leadership had to do something, the race was too close and people from both sides were already posting lists of Superdelegates to target next time they had to run for office.  

    My plan doesn't discount Hillary supporters.  I think many have already decided to vote for Obama.  Others will vote McCain or leave the top blank, essentially the same thing.  I think Obama will win even if nothing is done, but my idea is to use the accumulated disaffection for some good, instead of for divisiveness and more hard feelings.  We all know the intent of the unmentionable groups is to keep the conflict going, and some of those people are Republicans still stirring the pot of dissent.  

    But for the others who truly are Democrats, and who want to promote and support Hillary, this offers a win-win solution.  Hillary comes out ahead even though she's not the presidential candidate, the party leadership gets a slap on the hand for being flakes about standing up for our issues, the demands come from the people, not from Hillary per se, and Obama isn't emasculated or made to look less presidential by the demand to replace Reid because the party has to do it, not him.

    The end result  would be a huge landslide with clear mandates from the rank and file democrats who demanded this.  What's a little roll call compared to that?


    Good grief (5.00 / 5) (#105)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 09:05:34 PM EST
    She is NOT going to become Majority Leader. She is a Junior Senator and you thinking it is the best plan certainly isn't going to make it happen. I'm pretty sure that Senator Clinton isn't sitting around waiting for anyone to map her career for her, she's got a pretty strong grip on what she will pursue.

    This explains why (none / 0) (#119)
    by sj on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 02:24:25 PM EST
    ...you went about marking down comments of mine that were completely innocuous.  I decided to see if it was done in retribution.  And what do you know?  I somehow gave a 2 to this comment.  Oddly enough, it's a comment that I appreciate.  

    The 2 was given in error.  Unlike your ratings which (it seems to me, although I could be wrong) were personal and made in fit of pique.

    I'm changing the rating on this comment to what it should have been to begin with, and frankly I don't expect you to respond in kind.  Nor am I sure when I'll start reading your comments again in the future.


    Odd, I hadn't thought anyone would target... (3.50 / 2) (#110)
    by sj on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:07:29 PM EST
    ...the votes against her.  But now that you mention it, I could see someone targeting the votes for her.  If there's any targeting taking place at all, that is.

    But in any case, you having a plan is meaningless.  The election for Majority Leader is in the hands of the Senate.  Period.  And it ain't gonna happen.  Sadly.


    well you just posted a link (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by nycstray on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:47:50 PM EST
    that says "/joinourmovement".

    If you don't like this site, don't use it and don't support it. If you like it, use it and support it. It's really quite simple  :)

    A couple of observations from (5.00 / 3) (#85)
    by camellia on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:58:57 PM EST
    today -- this evening on the local NBC affiliate's 5 o"clock news, the anchor, commenting on The Speech in Berlin, said ...... "three OTHER U.S presidents have given speeches in Berlin".

    And, today I got a call from "Contact Group"-- the young man mispronounced my name, which is pronounced as spelled; when pressed hard he admitted that Contact Group is funded by the DNC.  I agreed to answer his questions -- #1: if the election were held today, would I vote for  candidate  Senator John McCain, or candidate Senator Barack Obama?  I said "neither".  He said ?????  I told him I plan to write in Hillary Clinton.  He said -- oh, I thought she was out of it.     Grrrrr.  So, I told him that Obama and McCain are so far only the Presumptive candidates.  Seemed to be news to him.   Then he asked who I planned to vote for in the Virginia Senate race -- Jim Gilmore or Mark Warner.  Told him my cat would be a better senator than Gilmore, so I would vote for Warner since my cat isn't old enough to run.  Finally, he asked my age and whether I would contribute to the DNC.  Oh, Joy!  Told him my age is a secret known only to me and my dead mother, and that I will contribute to the DNC when my mother is restored to life.  Such fun!

    Why we're pissed (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by jen on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:02:31 PM EST
    and why many of us won't just get over it.

    The Donna Brazile - Karl Rove Connection

    Anti-Fox Rap (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:03:23 PM EST
    From Nas.

    More of that.

    Digby Gets It Right (5.00 / 0) (#111)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:42:34 PM EST
    Four Star Surrogate.

    I hope they bring him back into the fold. The hell with a bunch of hanky wringing hissy artists. This guy is necessary.

    MLM (4.66 / 3) (#78)
    by tree on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:29:03 PM EST
    Clinton's site doesn't answer the questions that sj asked. I linked to a site that does.

    Haven't donated yet... (2.00 / 1) (#3)
    by sj on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:03:48 PM EST
    ... but will next payday which is coming up.  

    I've got three questions:

    1.  Is there some kind of setting that will correctly indent parent/child comments, because sometimes it seems to get wonky.  Oh.  New thought:  or is that it just gets a little weird when comments are deleted?

    2.  Anybody know where can I go to find out the status of Senator Clinton's campaign debt?

    3.  re:  Senator Clinton and the convention.  What is the difference between having "her name on the ballot" and having her name "put into nomination" at the convention.

    Any help on one or more of these very frustrating questions will be appreciated(oh, and yes, I did try to find these things out by myself already, but the Google wasn't responsive to my search parameter selection).

    Thanks. :)

    Nesting (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:23:48 PM EST
    Yes, the comments look odd after deletions.  Use the parent button.  To fine tune your preferences, try.... these options from hillct.

    According to another blogger (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by misspeach2008 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:45:28 PM EST
    who I can't link to, the difference is like being asked to make the first ceremonial pitch in a baseball game (on the ballot) and being one of the pitchers in the bullpen as part of the roster for the game (nomination). For the votes to count, the person must be duly nominated.

    Try HeidiLi's blog. (5.00 / 5) (#56)
    by tree on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 05:11:06 PM EST
    Here for questions regarding Clinton debt and nomination.

    Thanks but... (2.00 / 1) (#107)
    by sj on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 10:57:40 PM EST
    ...your links don't answer my question.

    Haven't seen this posted yet... (none / 0) (#1)
    by sweetthings on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:39:47 PM EST
    CNN claims that Obama is trouncing McCain among Hispanics.
    A new poll out Thursday shows strong support for Sen. Barack Obama among Latinos.

    Obama's approval rating with registered Latino voters, the nationwide Pew Hispanic Center poll found, is at 66 percent versus 23 percent favoring McCain.

    Obama's "strong showing in this survey represents a sharp reversal in his fortunes from the primaries, when Obama lost the Latino vote to Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly 2-to-1," according to Pew Hispanic Center associate director Mark Hugo Lopez.

    I'd love for BTD or andgarden to verify this, but if it's true, then McCain is in deep, deep trouble.

    At the same time, he's losing Scandinavians! (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 02:48:07 PM EST
    With his Minnesota lead almost gone, according to Quinnipiac in the most recent poll.  And Obama is dropping in electoral college projections, too.

    There and everywhere, the polls are so all over the place that I don't think that we can count on a thing at this point.  Of course, Obama could follow up on the European trip with another trek to Puerto Rico.  And especially Mexico.  As of course, there is no single "Latino/a bloc" -- it ought to be broken down better by the pollsters.  

    Same goes for Scandinavians.  Just ask a Dane. :-)


    Must be that old viking (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:18:23 PM EST
    streak some of them have: they reserve a certain amount of grudging respect for any McSame who could lie through his as* in the interests of looting and pillaging in faraway lands.

    The faraway land is . . . Minnesota? (none / 0) (#112)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 12:10:12 AM EST
    Probably not.  Pillaging is not a Minnesota nice sorta thing.

    Looting, though, happens even there -- as there is something fishy still about the horrible bridge collapse.  That Republican gov in Minnesota just couldn't explain clearly what went down with the inspections before the bridge went down.


    i always say look at who order the poll. (none / 0) (#92)
    by hellothere on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:02:42 PM EST
    the media produce and pay for many of the polls. do we belive anything else they say and write?

    More, not so good news for obama... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:11:40 PM EST

    Guess we just have to wait to see how this all plays out...


    And not so good news for us (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:20:39 PM EST
    But be of good cheer: Jesus'll be Rapturin' us up any day now.

    But some of us are going to be (5.00 / 5) (#45)
    by misspeach2008 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:40:08 PM EST
    Left Behind.

    I'm counting on it.... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:43:09 PM EST
    I've seen some of the folks who say they will be saved...not the crowd I wanna hang with for eternity.

    Leave my arse behind...please.


    it will be "heaven" so to speak! (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by hellothere on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:03:38 PM EST
    I look forward to an increase in Obama (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:22:45 PM EST
    double-speak as he attempts to move his numbers back up in those states.

    Oh, wait - I meant nuance...yeah, that's the ticket...


    Very troubling signs ... (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:46:52 PM EST
    Obama really should be 10+ ahead in Michigan.

    I really think his spongy economic message is hurting him in most of these close battleground states.


    Polls (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:46:24 PM EST
    Here's the CNN take on recent polls. Obama is losing his leads in CO, MN and MI According to them Obama's lead in MN has gone from +17 to +2.
    I still don't see how this race can even be a race. With Republican's in the tank and the economy along with them, this should be an out and out landslide for Democrat's.



    I don't believe that MN poll. The same (none / 0) (#31)
    by tigercourse on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:49:47 PM EST
    company has him up over 10 in WI. If he's over 10 in WI, he's up more then 2 in MN.

    The lead in MN (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by eric on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 04:07:47 PM EST
    isn't 17 but its more than 2, I am pretty sure.  These polls are simply too far apart to be believable.  My purely speculative guess?  MN is about a 8 pt lead.  Dems are doing well here in part because the Republican Governor is so cheap that the roads are crumbling and the bridges are falling.

    It should be a 20 point lead, but alas, we have suburbs here, too.


    MN and WI can be quite different (none / 0) (#113)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 12:15:12 AM EST
    and especially in the case of Obama.  There still aren't enough Somalians -- the beautiful new Minnesnowtans -- in the Twin Cities to come close to the African American voting bloc in Milwaukee.

    The two states are similar up north, with the Farmer-Labor vote in Minnesota and ye olde Populists in Wisconsin.  And Wisconsin is getting bluer along the Mississip, in part because of the 'Snowtans lving on the east side of the Big Muddy.

    But when you go from their farthest-apart borders, from eastern Wisconsin to western Minnesota is quite a far stretch that gets you some different groups.

    Plus, plus, plus -- the economy in Minnesota is good, or at least as good as it gets these days.  Whereas Wisconsin's economy has been down for some time and is getting worse by the day.  (7,000 more jobs gone in metro Milwaukee or something alone, said today's paper. . . .)


    My (none / 0) (#16)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:18:46 PM EST
    question w/r/t Hispanics is do they poll enough?

    If you know any in central OH (5.00 / 0) (#72)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:07:12 PM EST
    tell them there is a research and focus group they can sign up with.

    I keep washing out of their focus groups.  If my demographic is over represented, maybe the Hispanic group is under represented.  $50 for participating in a focus group!


    Hey Jimwash08 (none / 0) (#35)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:56:52 PM EST
    I deleted your comment, thought I was in the speech thread.  Apologies.

    Not A Problem (none / 0) (#37)
    by JimWash08 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 03:58:15 PM EST
    I wanted to delete it after I posted it :)

    So, thanks.


    what do you all think of (none / 0) (#82)
    by NJDem on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:51:14 PM EST

    The Obama's have some strict house rules for their girls--no b-day and x-mas presents.  And I thought he was shying away from this kinda stuff?

    Unique (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:11:53 PM EST
    Not what I did, or would do if I could go back in time, but that's true of many practices and ideas the Obama's have that are contrary to what I live as reasoned thinking.

    Hard to imagine what those slumber parties from 1-8 must have looked like.


    i highly recommend that you give your (none / 0) (#95)
    by hellothere on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:05:22 PM EST
    money directly to obama's campaign.

    I already give monthly to both (none / 0) (#99)
    by MyLeftMind on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:11:12 PM EST
    Obama and to Hillary to retire her debt.

    No (none / 0) (#116)
    by squeaky on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 11:08:16 AM EST
    No your abuse of power doesn't make you troll, just a dishonest cop.