home

Thursday Morning Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 08:51:40 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I've got nothing for you yet. So tell me what is going on.

< Is Kaine a Smokescreen for Kathleen Sebelius? | FL, OH, PA Polls >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Thursday Morning Open Thread | 202 comments (202 topical)
    One more time (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 08:55:47 AM EST
    I police my threads as I see fit.

    No insults of me period. No more warning. first insult - you are permanently banned from my threads.

    No repeating falsehoods. If you have your falsehood deleted and insist on repeating it, you will be banned from my threads.

    No complaining in a thread. Write an e-mail. If you complain in a thread, you will be banned permanently from my threads.

    Off topic comments will be deleted. If you persist in posting off topic comments, you will be permanently banned from my threads.

    Understand, these rules are for my threads only. I will have no say on Jeralyn or TChris' threads.

    If you do not like the way I run my threads, then do not comment in my threads.

    This is not open to public debate. If you want to tell me something about this issues, then write me an e-mail.

    Yes, Please Read BTD's rules (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:42:21 AM EST
    BTD controls his threads. If he bans someone it means they may not comment on his threads. He has my support in this.

    [ Parent ]
    I Remember Back During The Primaries (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:26:36 AM EST
    when commenters were able to write truthful opinions about the candidates without the fear of being banned/delegated.  Personally, I stopped lurking and started commenting because in most other mediums, I was witness to total sellout to a particular candidate.  The so-called "news" media had transformed into nothing more than a collection of advocates.  I was appalled at what I was seeing.

    In this medium, if a reader disagreed with what he was reading, he was able to state his opinion.  That's the democratization of the news provided by the blogs, and I'm sure one of the most important factors in their success.  We no longer have to be passive sponges, either soaking up everything we read, or having to choose to go elsewhere if we don't agree.  During my time commenting, I was fortunate enough to get some of this off my chest, and on occasion, find a sympathetic audience.

    Alot of what has gone on lately, however, is members being banned or deleted for stating opinions that contradict the FP's opinions.  Many are not insulting or factually incorrect.  Since the time that we decided to become an advocate, critical opinions seem to be much less welcome, thus "holding feet to the fire" is more peripheral than it used to be.  I find it increasingly difficult to support this group.  Just as we refused to be 'whipped' into conformance during the primaries, we will probably be just as stubborn now they we are in the GE season.  I am not debating the rules, only lementing that they don't seem to be applied consistantly.

    So, I'm left again to examine my options.  Whatever I decide, it was a great ride for awhile.


    [ Parent ]

    I've been away for a while (5.00 / 0) (#107)
    by Plutonium Page on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:22:26 PM EST
    What can't we complain about?

    Can I complain about going to the gym?

    [ Parent ]

    Polls again! (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 08:59:28 AM EST
    According to CNN Obama is losing ground in FL OH and PA. They say the loss in FL is due to independants that are now leaning towards McCain by 5 points. I hope this doesn't drive Obama even further to the right!

    I would have really thought that leading up to the convention, he would have used this time to seriously work at solidifying the Dem base. Where are these millions of new followers? They don't appear to be showing up in any of the polls yet.

    I wonder how many (none / 0) (#4)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:03:02 AM EST
    of those potential new followers are even on the radar screens of pollsters?


    [ Parent ]
    Well, that's one way to look at it (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:08:10 AM EST
    In reality, Quinnipiac says that Obama remains ahead in all three states.

    Not by much in OH or FL, but Kerry lost both. Florida was supposed to be a lock for McCain. Not so much, it seems.

    [ Parent ]

    FL is a lock for McCain (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:11:47 AM EST
    Book it.

    [ Parent ]
    I think so too. (none / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:14:30 AM EST
    and if Obama trys to take a state by picking Kaine McCain might pick Ridge and PEN would be gone too.
    that is if he could get away with it.

    [ Parent ]
    Ridge wouldn't really help him in PA (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:16:50 AM EST
    He hasn't even won an election since 1998.

    [ Parent ]
    I dont think so (none / 0) (#12)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:18:55 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well, he's yet to spend a dime (none / 0) (#8)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:15:48 AM EST
    so that's apparently what he thinks.

    To me it looks at least as competitive as Virginia, and frankly I like Obama's chances in Florida there better than in Ohio.

    [ Parent ]

    totally opposite (none / 0) (#21)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:33:27 AM EST
    Ohio Obama can win.

    [ Parent ]
    My honest feeling is that Florida is (none / 0) (#29)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:42:21 AM EST
    a more attractive long-term target. I think Obama can win there, and I'm glad he's trying.

    I wish he'd stop pouring money into Georgia, though.

    [ Parent ]

    Long term? (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:55:03 AM EST
    There's 90 days to the election.

    [ Parent ]
    And Q Poll says Obama's ahead for now (none / 0) (#44)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:03:03 AM EST
    I don't see any reason for him to give up on the state.

    [ Parent ]
    he hasnt spent a dime and he is (none / 0) (#23)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:35:15 AM EST
    gaining.  what does that tell you?

    [ Parent ]
    The national numbers matter (none / 0) (#27)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:40:58 AM EST
    You tell me why McCain should be behind in Virginia and Forida?

    [ Parent ]
    george (none / 0) (#32)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:44:46 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    How much? (none / 0) (#11)
    by LarryInNYC on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:18:49 AM EST
    I think you're wrong.  Well -- I know you're wrong in the sense that Florida is clearly not a "lock" for McCain.  But I also think you're wrong that McCain will take Florida.  I think Obama will.

    [ Parent ]
    According to the Q poll, (none / 0) (#13)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:22:32 AM EST
    everything is about the same as in the 2004 exit poll, but this time Obama is winning Hispanics instead of losing them.

    [ Parent ]
    Watch and learn (none / 0) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:32:57 AM EST
    Lock.

    [ Parent ]
    Not a lock. (none / 0) (#24)
    by LarryInNYC on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:37:00 AM EST
    How do you define "lock"?  I would say always ahead in the polls (like Obama nationally).  But McCain has been dropping in Florida polls and I believe most show them tied and some show Obama ahead.

    [ Parent ]
    I define a lock (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:39:01 AM EST
    as McCain will CERTAINLY win Florida.

    [ Parent ]
    Why is it (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:55:42 AM EST
    that the internet seems to attract certain people with a derangement sydrome where they hang on your every word to find things they can trash?

    I've seen this on ever list I'm on, from politics to pet health.  And I've never seen such behavior in "real life".

    Why is it that some people so vocally object to other people having their own opinions, but feel they can only do so while hiding behind their computers?

    So, so wierd. Please help me understand.

    I suspect (5.00 / 4) (#43)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:01:17 AM EST
    for the same reason a perfectly nice person can turn into a swerving cutting you off maniac when they get on the freeway and are anonymous.

    [ Parent ]
    So you're saying (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:05:04 AM EST
    that the only thing that ensures human decency is the lack of anonymity?

    Good analogy, btw.  

    [ Parent ]

    " lack of anonymity?" (5.00 / 0) (#93)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:56:55 AM EST
    yeah
    pretty much.

    [ Parent ]
    That's exactly it... (none / 0) (#60)
    by skuld1 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:36:57 AM EST
    <nt>

    [ Parent ]
    at least when it comes to internet message boards (none / 0) (#61)
    by skuld1 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:38:41 AM EST
    I guess we can't edit our posts here.  Wanted to clarify that I was only referring to internet message boards.

    [ Parent ]
    That was my thought, too (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by BernieO on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:06:39 PM EST
    But I think the fact that our culture tolerates much more disrespectful behavior, even to our president is also a factor. The media showed more deference to Richard Nixon even after it had become clear what he and his people had been up to than they ever showed Bill, Hillary, or Gore.

    I think the right wing attack machine has a lot to do with this change. It's ironic that so many of them claim to be devote Christians and deplore the crudity of our culture.

    I am voting for anonymity + a lowering of standards.

    [ Parent ]

    your are right (5.00 / 0) (#121)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 01:14:37 PM EST
    and Nixon got better treatment because he was not a democrat.

    [ Parent ]
    An infectious disease called.. (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:07:21 AM EST
    Keyboard Commando?

    [ Parent ]
    I've been wondering about this for a while (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:04:38 AM EST
    now too! It's amazing the irrational vitriol and hatred that gets spewed on the net towards people the perpetrators hardly even know!

    [ Parent ]
    Because Commenters Feel Safe Enough (none / 0) (#67)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:01:17 AM EST
    To make provocative statements like this:

    If you cared about this country maybe you would have voted for someone who could win the GE?

    link

    Do you think it is wrong for people to object to other's opinions, and sometimes get into heated arguments? Are you advocating for no objections to others opinions? And why do you think that this only happens when "people are hiding behind their computers?

    There are people that say you should never discuss politics among casual acquaintances, or even friends (in real life). That is because heated arguments are likely to ensue.

    [ Parent ]

    LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:45:30 AM EST
    You think that's a flame?  That's hillarious.

    [ Parent ]
    It Is To Someone (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:54:39 AM EST
    Who cares about the country, and has another opinion than you do about the nominee. On the street, you could provoke blows with that statement. Try telling that to a vet who lost a limb for this country and likes Obama. It belongs with statements like you are unpatriotic for criticizing the war, a traitor, etc.

    It is no wonder you do not understand, if you think that  comments like that are benign and not provocative.

    [ Parent ]

    No point really... (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by desertswine on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:04:01 AM EST
    • Exxon Mobil has biggest profit ever at $11.68B - Jul 31 8:46 AM US/Eastern
    • Bush declares significant progress in Iraq war - Jul 31 8:42 AM US/Eastern

    I just thought it was interesting how these two headlines were juxtaposed this am. Just like that.

    Or conflicting views (none / 0) (#51)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:17:57 AM EST
    How about these two headlines for multiple personalities this morning. One from the Washington Post and one by the NY Times.

    U.S. Economy Grows at Healthy Pace in Quarter

    G.D.P. Grows at Tepid 1.9% Pace Despite Stimulus

    [ Parent ]

    About the "progress" in Iraq.... (none / 0) (#53)
    by EL seattle on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:25:12 AM EST
    Does anyone know of a website or organization that is regularly tracking the numbers of Iraqi refugees?  I've seen news stories about them (very occasionally) but I have no idea if any of them or many of them feel safe enough to return home to Iraq.  

    I'd think that one of the more accurate ways of measuring whether the "progress" is actually "significant" is to note the point at which Iraqi refugees start coming home at a rate that's comparable the the speed at which they fled.  But who's keeping track of that?

    [ Parent ]

    The Story Of The Refugees (5.00 / 0) (#58)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:35:25 AM EST
    seemd to only be important when they were needed politically.  I remember some numbers... 4 million displaced and over a million who fled the country.  They aren't going to return home.  The most important factor in the decrease in violence in Iraq is the fact that most neighborhoods are been 'cleansed.'  That clock won't be turned back.

    [ Parent ]
    Electronic Iraq (none / 0) (#103)
    by tree on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:15:50 PM EST
    is a good clearinghouse site for reports on Iraq that you don't get from the MSM, and they have a search function.

    Electronic Iraq

    [ Parent ]

    Remember GrooveTube? (none / 0) (#89)
    by magisterludi on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:50:32 AM EST
    "Exxon - Sign of the Double Cross".

    [ Parent ]
    Even weather reporting is political (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:13:30 AM EST
    I was surprised last night to see that all of our local TV stations were reporting weekend temperatures about 5-8 degrees higher than the National Weather Service is reporting. This is important, since the National Weather Service is reporting temperatures below 70 for the weekend. BRRR!

    I live in the Seattle region where this weekend we have Seafair, the big hydroplane races that bring folks from all over the region.  I am sure it's a big retail boon for the area.....

    ...so I suspect the very Republican, local TV stations are fibbing about the weather forecast so that people don't stay away justifiably due to the weather....hmmm.

    Never thought I'd see the day when even the weather would be political, but I think I'm seeing it now!  I've seen the hyping of snow forecasts, etc, but never of warmer temperatures.  

    That's odd. (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:27:25 AM EST
    [insert Doctor Who joke here]

    I track the weather religiously, especially when it is hot.  I have to know when to close the house up to keep it cool so about 3F-4F makes a difference to me.  5F-8F is a huge gap!  

    [ Parent ]

    That would be a corporate slant (none / 0) (#75)
    by lizpolaris on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:26:23 AM EST
    rather than a political one.  It would benefit local corporate interests to predict better weather in an area to attract visitors.  Not sure what political benefit there would be in changing a forecast unless some politician is holding an outdoor rally.  So maybe what you are observing is advertisers putting pressure on your local station to err on the side of profit.

    [ Parent ]
    Which to me is the same (none / 0) (#86)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:46:25 AM EST
    as partisan Republican.

    [ Parent ]
    I detest Seafair (none / 0) (#100)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:10:27 PM EST
    I detest everything about it. The overlong parade on 4th Ave, the Seafair Pirates, the hydroplanes, the Blue Angels, the drunks, all of it. I usually make sure to be out of town Seafair weekend but this year I have family coming into town, so... we will hopefully be staying away from downtown and the south end of mighty Lake WA.

    And I never believe the weather guys. But if my totmato plants don't start getting more heat real soon they are not going to be so bountiful!

    [ Parent ]

    Obama camp outrage over the (5.00 / 0) (#71)
    by Grace on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:16:29 AM EST
    Paris Hilton/Britney Spears Celebrity ad...  

    Oh boy!  Is it just me?  They seem so thin skinned.  Many people would find it flattering to be compared to two beautiful blonde women.  

    I don't find the Bush/McCain ad to be so terribly negative either.  

    Public views of "what is offensive" seem so twisted this year.  

    Flattering? (5.00 / 0) (#76)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:28:43 AM EST
    Nice snark. And you mean democrats, but I guess "Obama camp" is snarky shorthand for you.  Atrios puts it best, imo. Succinct and to the point.


    He's An Uppity Negro Who Wants To F*ck Your Sister [profanity edited by me]

    Atrios
    And the NYT also not so bad.

    The Obama comeback Ad, a bit understated but still good, imo.

    [ Parent ]

    I mean (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Grace on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:52:39 AM EST
    "Obama camp."  Lots of Democrats aren't voting for Obama this year but perhaps you haven't noticed that since you're too busy confusing us with Republicans (many of whom ARE voting for Obama).    

    [ Parent ]
    You Self Aggrandizing Position (1.50 / 2) (#96)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:00:46 PM EST
    Is laughable. But why not, lot's of people create fictions of 'us against the world', in order to assuage their feelings of powerlessness.

    It is the very essence of cult behavior. 'The end is near', is hovering somewhere in the background music.

    [ Parent ]

    For a smarty pants, Atrios can be really dumb (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Ellie on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:06:32 PM EST
    Rilly?

    THAT's what he took away from a lame editorial?

    That black presumptive Dem nominee Obama, who, it turns out, incredibly, HAPPENS to be black (y'all), yeah he's black (y'all) was coming to f*ck Atrios's sisteran/or any other white guy's sister, which is what Stoopids believe?

    Way to foment that feelgood worship Obama or you're a racist Unity Pony fauxgressive equality-ishness!

    [ Parent ]

    Atrios's Comment Is Vulgar (5.00 / 5) (#102)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:14:26 PM EST
    and making every dang thing about race is wearing thin.  The "post racial" campaign is setting race relations back by decades.

    [ Parent ]
    lol (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:19:38 PM EST
    The McCain ad is vulgar, Atrios comment is a parody of the ad, and amazingly funny considering how real the sentiment is in America.

    [ Parent ]
    Atrio's Comment Has Nothing To Do With The Ad (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:24:23 PM EST
    It's just a tactic to call everything racist.  

    The Ad was negative, but not racist.

    [ Parent ]

    That Is Absurd (5.00 / 0) (#115)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:53:47 PM EST
    I find it hard to take you seriously, but just in case you are being sincere I will attempt to help you out.

    If the atrios comment had nothing to do with the McSame ad why did he link to this?  Random coincidence?

    John McCain has signed up GOP operative Terry Nelson as his campaign manager -- yep, that would be the same Terry Nelson who produced the infamous, racially-charged "bimbo" ad attacking Dem Tennessee Senate candidate Harold Ford, Jr.

    tpm


    [ Parent ]

    Ah, The Old Political Trick Of Conflation (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 01:48:02 PM EST
    The ad we're talking about was not the same as the "bimbo" ad.  This in nothing more than political conflation.  It's hard to take you serious, since you can't make the case based on the merits ( or lack thereof ) of the ad in question.

    [ Parent ]
    Old Trick? (3.50 / 2) (#140)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 02:15:48 PM EST
    Not an old trick at all. It should come as no surprise that the McSame team hired Terry Nelson, This new campaign ad clearly has his fingerprints all over it.

    You can choose to ignore the dogwhistles all you want. It is clear to me that overlaying Paris Hilton, and Britany Spears, with the image of Obama is all about miscegenation, a crime in some states of the Southern United States until the late twentieth century. Also we see (or don't see) the age old racist meme played out about fearing the oversexed black man going to rape your lilly white (GOP) daughter. The rockstar touch just adds another level of irresistibility aka sexual prowess to "the dangerous negro" meme.

    [ Parent ]

    "what is clear to you" (5.00 / 3) (#142)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 02:22:58 PM EST
    you know what.  you live in a sad and scary world.
    I feel a little sorry for you.

    [ Parent ]
    How? (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 02:27:42 PM EST
    There is not one thing in the ad that implies Obama is going to get sex from Hilton or Spears.  The ad is about 'celibrity' and never once mentions anyting about sex.  Only twisted, depraved minds are capable of 'seeing' sexual content where none exists.  

    I'm so tired of Obama's people making everything about race.  What happened to the "post racial" candiate?  They pull that old, tired, worn-out race card out of their back pocket each time they think it'll boost their numbers, and of course it worked in the primaires, so they'll keep going to that well as long as they can.

    And, BTW, it's very dishonest to continue to bring Terry Nelson up, since he was fired from the capaign a year before the ad was made.  I think we were told yesterday to only post facutal information.  To claim that someone who was fired a year ago is proof the ad is racist is disgracefully dishonest, especially since the informaiton of his dismissal is conveneintly left out each time.

    [ Parent ]

    lol (1.50 / 2) (#158)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:08:02 PM EST
    Sick and twisted mind. Thanks, I strive towards that, but I find it hilarious that you see racism in the 2006 Terry Nelson's infamous, racially-charged "bimbo" ad attacking Dem Tennessee Senate candidate Harold Ford, Jr. but you miss it in his latest bit of racist dogwhistling.

    I guess the overlaying of images was too sophisticated or subtle for you. Or you are a bit slow and need a few years to get it.

    [ Parent ]

    It looks more like (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by tree on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:28:45 PM EST
    YOU are having difficulty understanding the overlay of images and rather than seeing the obvious comparison to content-less celebrities you've had to create something that isn't there.

      Those who can't see that for some Obama is viewed as  a political "candidate-lite" and more of a celebrity than a public servant, won't be able to see what the ad is targeting and will rely on old stereotypes to explain it. Its a blind spot for them, but it won't stop them from insisting that the rest of us have faulty vision.

     

    [ Parent ]

    You Are A Target (5.00 / 0) (#173)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:52:10 PM EST
    Obviously as one who agrees with the Obama presumptuous meme. But there is another target namely racists. Yup, we still have a lot of them in America, in case you have not noticed.

    Paris Hilton is not only a talentless hack, she is also an heiress who recently lost a big GOP battle regarding inheritance tax. She is a  GOP wet dream. Britany Spears also is not just an loser, she also loves BushCo and that love is returned. She was going to perform at the 2004 convention, but got pregnant, and dropped out.

    To me, and others, the ad appeals to two groups, just like the Harold Ford, Jr. video did. Not sure why you would argue that this ad only speaks to your crowd, but not racists as well.

    Could be that you hate Paris Hilton and Britany Spears, and cannot imagine that anyone would consider them as one of their own?

    [ Parent ]

    Why would racists even NEED to (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by tree on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:00:26 PM EST
    see a picture of Hilton and Spears to get them to vote against Obama. If they think black people are scary r inferior then they won't vote for him, period. McCain doesn't need to run any ad to get their votes, and if he did run an ad, all it would need is a picture of Obama.

    "Gee, I think Obama's a scary inferior black man but I was all ready to vote for him anyway until I saw that ad with a shot of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears in it, talking about celebrities." Yup, you got the racist mindset all figured out don't you. As some poster here says, "hilarious".

    [ Parent ]

    Good One (3.00 / 1) (#177)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:18:50 PM EST
    So we do not need to worry about racism being used by the GOP this time around, because no racists will vote for Obama anyway.

    Glad that we have that sorted out.

    [ Parent ]

    Maybe So (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:25:36 PM EST
    But showing pictures of Paris and Brittney aren't going to turn any racists.

    [ Parent ]
    Wow, I'm betting you've impressed (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by tree on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:32:32 PM EST
    yourself with how well you beat the stuffing out of that straw man. The rest of us, not so impressed.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes (1.00 / 1) (#188)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:45:32 PM EST
    The rest of you, as you so aptly put it (PUMAs no doubt) looved the ad.

    Not surprised that GOP slime tactics appeal to you.

    [ Parent ]

    Hmmm... (none / 0) (#193)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:51:18 PM EST
    Lying ( nobody said they loved the ad )

    Race-baiting

    Fabricating ( ie We hate Brit & Paris )

    Half-truths ( McCain announced hiring Nelson -- Fired a year ago )

    Conflating ( Obama ad is Ford ad )

    ... all in a day's work, eh squeaky?


    [ Parent ]

    you have milked this GOP connection before (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:13:11 PM EST
    please explain what that has to do with this ad.
    or anything else.
    why, by you argument, would the GOP be slandering two of their own by "fading" them into Obama.
    I seriously dont get that.


    [ Parent ]
    OK (none / 0) (#178)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:25:28 PM EST
    Do you think that the blonde in the Harold Ford Jr hit piece was a democrat? Paris and Britany had a twofold purpose. You and PUMA's see the empty suit presumptuous layer, because you hate Paris and Britany.

    The other target, racists, do not see the empty suit talentless meme, because they love Paris and Britany and want to protect them. I realize that it is hard for you to believe that anyone would think Paris or Britany were anything but talentless bobble heads, but obviously many people looove them.

    Get it.


    [ Parent ]

    Your Argument Is Very Presumptous (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:28:40 PM EST
    The whold "love and hate" argument is baseless.  You don't know who loves and who hates these ladies.  You making up more hurlage to cover up the hurlage you started out with.

    [ Parent ]
    Hurlage. (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by tree on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:33:21 PM EST
    Apt term.

    [ Parent ]
    Got It (none / 0) (#186)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:42:44 PM EST
    You loved the ad. Nuff said.

    [ Parent ]
    Nope. (none / 0) (#187)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:44:25 PM EST
    I said it wasn't racist.  You have a habit of misquoting/misrepresenting.

    [ Parent ]
    You Did Not Like It? (none / 0) (#190)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:46:26 PM EST
    Really? Why's that?

    [ Parent ]
    I said it wasn't racist. (none / 0) (#195)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:52:49 PM EST
    You are dishonest when you claim something about me that you don't know.

    [ Parent ]
    please (5.00 / 2) (#196)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:54:34 PM EST
    try to keep up.
    you said it wasnt racist. so clearly you loved it.


    [ Parent ]
    Let's Make A Pact (none / 0) (#199)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:58:38 PM EST
    In 2012, we discuss issues.
    Real issues.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks, Captain (none / 0) (#201)
    by tree on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:59:03 PM EST
    for the belly laugh!

    [ Parent ]
    Unable To Answer A Simple Question? (none / 0) (#200)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:58:50 PM EST
    Did you like the video? Why or why not?

    [ Parent ]
    Ha! (none / 0) (#191)
    by tree on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:47:31 PM EST
    A lovely zen-like illustration of the pointlessness.

    Argument:

    The whold "love and hate" argument is baseless.

    Response:

    Got it. You loved the ad.


    [ Parent ]
    I think Im glad (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:55:49 PM EST
    there are only 4 more comments in this thread.

    [ Parent ]
    You Did Not Like It? (none / 0) (#192)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:49:26 PM EST
    Why is that, I am surprised. Almost all your comments to date are reflected in that ad.

    [ Parent ]
    soooo (none / 0) (#185)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:41:05 PM EST
    racists love the blond bimbo twins and want to protect them from the scary looming black man.

    you win.
    Im speechless.


    [ Parent ]

    Overlaying Of Images? (none / 0) (#164)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:20:59 PM EST
    Which does not occur?  One image fades out as the other fades in.  This does not in any way imply sex.  To the contrary, it's the very lack of sophistication of your argument that fails.  If you want me to believe the ad is about sex, you'll have to do better.  No matter how many time you write it, it just doens't ring true.

    [ Parent ]
    What Was It About The (none / 0) (#166)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:25:21 PM EST
    Harold Ford, Jr. video that made you think it was a racist dogwhistle? Or did I get that wrong too.

    [ Parent ]
    That Video Is Irrelevant (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:26:38 PM EST
    I'm talking about THIS video.  

    [ Parent ]
    it had a blond bare sholdered (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:32:19 PM EST
    white woman seductively asking Harold Ford to "call her".


    [ Parent ]
    heres link (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 03:34:29 PM EST
    Link

    so do us all a favor and describe it as dog whistle.
    since it actually is.


    [ Parent ]

    I face a bit of a dilemma this weekend (4.00 / 4) (#110)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:32:44 PM EST
    with an invitation to a birthday party.  From an AA friend with a lot of great activist AA friends.  

    For the first time, I feel unwilling to go to one of her great parties, because I bet that there will be political talk.  And race talk.  And for the first time, I feel just talked out about it all.  

    Thanks for the race fatigue, Obama.  Not enough you ran me out of the Dem party.  Now I might just miss birthday parties, too.

    [ Parent ]

    I agree. (5.00 / 0) (#112)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:35:00 PM EST
    The ad was racial.  And sexist as well, considering Britney and Paris were framed in such a way to take a shot at Obama.

    However, Josh Marshall's concern is pretty lame.  It's nice that he seems to grasp the way images of AA men and white women are opposed to each other and manipulated [to the detriment of both], but he has been far too insenstive to sexism to lead here.

    [ Parent ]

    I disagree (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by Grace on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:50:24 PM EST
    It wasn't racist.  It was meant to point out big celebrities, like Obama who travelled the world attracting big crowds wherever he went.  

    If they had shown anyone of any color who attracts a big crowd, there would have been offense taken.  An ad showing Snoop Dogg or Will Smith would have been deemed just as offensive and possibly racist as well.  

    Obama is "the rockstar."  He wanted the label.  He got it.  Now he seems to want to push it away because it doesn't seem as cool as it once did.

    [ Parent ]

    The Ad (5.00 / 0) (#116)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 12:59:17 PM EST
    Was layered, literally and figuratively. You are only seeing one layer. Many who are racist will respond to the other layer. Digby explains about dogwhistles here.

    A snippet:

    See, it works on two levels. That's why it's called a dogwhistle --- only the racists can hear the racism in it.

    This is a complicated mode of communication that's been developed on the right for many decades. It's not something I just made up. There are dozens of examples: "welfare queen" and "Willie Horton," the "Hands" ad by Jesse Helms and most recently, the Harold Ford "Call Me" ad in 2006.




    [ Parent ]
    Why not Brad Pitt (5.00 / 0) (#123)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 01:23:06 PM EST
    and Angelina Jolie?  

    Paris and Britney have been given relentless negative attention for their behavior.  They are seen as completely superficial sex objects by most.  At the very least, drawing the comparison is not classy.  And considering the historical narrative of threatening black men v weak white women (from "King Kong" to OJ to the Vanity Fair cover of recent), drawing the comparison is not racially sensitive.

    I actually thought their inclusion was kind of a dogwhistle to Obama's past drug use.

    [ Parent ]

    Brad and Angie may be wildly (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 01:39:37 PM EST
    popular, but there is substance to them - they've adopted children from Africa, she has been very involved with the problems in Darfur, they bought a home in New Orleans and have been working to rebuild the area.  They don't just talk about what matters to them - they do things to back up their words.

    Paris and Britney were chosen for that ad because they are vapid.  Celebrity and notoriety, sure - but for what?  Sex tapes, family money, divorce and child custody issues and mental problems.

    [ Parent ]

    "Sex tapes, family money, (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 01:47:35 PM EST
    divorce and child custody issues and mental problems."

    None of which Obama has.  


    [ Parent ]

    you are wasting your time anne (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 01:50:25 PM EST
    no matter how many times this is explained to them they will feign ignorance.

    the intent of the ad is obvious.  and it worked.
    they are turning Obamas celebrity status into a liability.  
    if they can do it to a war hero who is surprised they  can do it to a content free celebrity.

    [ Parent ]

    the other poster is correct (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:35:55 AM EST
    they did a snappy come back ad.  which means they thought the first one worked.  and it did.  
    it was interesting that Obamas add talked about "old  politics" actually the word old was used about 10 times but it was the Obama add that looked old to me. it sounded prickley and thin skinned while the McCain ad was funny.
    grainy black and white image of McCain and all.

    [ Parent ]
    Are You Serious? (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by daring grace on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 04:56:26 PM EST
    The ad itself aside, you write that many people would be flattered to be compared to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears.

    Really? A lot of men you know would like be compared to those two?

    And Clinton--if Obama or McCain had compared her with Spears and Hilton you would have found that flattering?

    [ Parent ]

    Indeed. Twisted I think because we've got (none / 0) (#87)
    by vicndabx on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:47:26 AM EST
    folks; who my gut tells me haven't ever really been the target of certain offenses, taking up the outrage mantle for folks who may have been offended in the past but aren't particularly offended now by what the folks carrying the mantle think they should be offended about.

    [ Parent ]
    I haven't seen the ad (none / 0) (#143)
    by CST on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 02:26:49 PM EST
    But this from politico is hilarious:

    Also, the Hiltons are apparently McCain donors...

    [ Parent ]

    Judge Rules Against Executive Privilege Claim (5.00 / 0) (#82)
    by The Maven on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:39:52 AM EST
    I haven't seen this mentioned here yet (apologies if it has been), but this morning a federal judge -- John D. Bates, nominated by Bush (!!) -- seems to have flatly ruled against the Administration's claims that Harriet Miers (and by extension, John Bolten and others) is immune from Congressional subpoenas.  The full 93-page decision is available here, and an AP wire service report summarizes the opinion.

    I imagine that this subject will be taken up by others later today.

    The Series of Tubes (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 05:04:45 PM EST
    is quickly going down the tubes.

    First Senate poll out of Alaska since the Ted Stevens indictment.

    Begich(D) 50
    Stevens(R)37

    Alaska

    FWIW (5.00 / 0) (#204)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 05:52:10 PM EST
    billmon is Baaacck

    I, for one, missed him. Hopes he sticks around for awhile.

    interesting game (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:01:39 AM EST
    trying to figure out how this could effect our own politics:

    Prime Minister Ehud Olmert intends to hand his resignation letter to President Shimon Peres the day after the September 17 Kadima primary and ask him to entrust the new party leader with forming a new government, Olmert's associates said Wednesday night.

    I wonder (none / 0) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:18:19 AM EST
    do you think Ludacris thought he was doing Obama any favors with this

    Yeah what a moron. Ludacris is quick to (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:24:55 AM EST
    point real or imagined racism, then gives the Rethugs every opportunity to blow the dogwhistle. Btw, did anyone see R. Maddow the other day pretty much call out P. Buchanan on his racist "uppity" meme on Obama? I missed it, but I heard it was absolutely tasty!

    [ Parent ]
    So, you think the biggest (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by dk on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:29:57 AM EST
    problem with the Ludacris' lyrics is that they gave Republicans a reason to be racist?  Oy.

    [ Parent ]
    this is going to be a big deal I think (5.00 / 0) (#20)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:33:03 AM EST
    one more under the bus.  eventually.

    [ Parent ]
    It looks like he's going (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by dk on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:40:45 AM EST
    with the "McClurkin double flip somersault with twist" move.  I.e. denounce it just enough to get a pretty quote in the papers, but not enough to alienate the potential voters who are eating up the misogyny.

    [ Parent ]
    dk please pay attention to the comments. Capt. (5.00 / 0) (#28)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:42:01 AM EST
    Howdy was talking about the song controversy in relation TO OBAMA. Of course the lyrics were offensive and stupid on many levels (race, sex, and just general disrespect)

    [ Parent ]
    Why do you think I'm (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by dk on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:51:50 AM EST
    not paying attention to comments?  I think the fact that the lyrics were misogynistic and specifically disrespectful to someone who deserves respect is more damaging to Obama than the idea that they might be giving fodder to racists.  After all, I doubt racists were going to vote for Obama even before these lyrics came out.  However, some non-racist women might have, and might be turned off by this.

    [ Parent ]
    you know (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 09:53:59 AM EST
    I honestly think the stuff about McCain in a wheelchair is just as offensive.  its horrible.

    [ Parent ]
    Me too. (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:21:37 AM EST
    As the parent of one kid with cerebral palsy, I see nothing ha-ha funny about disabilities - wheelchair or no.

    It gives me so much pleasure to see things like wheelchair shopping carts and motorized shopping carts in a grocery store.  It says "The disabled belong here.".

    [ Parent ]

    What Did You Expect (1.00 / 1) (#62)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 10:44:15 AM EST
    from a rapper?  The success of this 'art' is due to it's offensiveness.  It will probably play well to it's audience, and not get much attention outside that.  Unless, of course, the media gets obsessed with it, and even it that happens, why should I expect it to be any more damaging that Rev. Wright/Rev. Plager?

    [ Parent ]
    I disagree (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:08:13 AM EST
    did you actually listen to all those lyrics.


    [ Parent ]
    I Did (2.00 / 0) (#73)
    by flashman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:22:55 AM EST
    I'm really not a fan or rap music, but I've heard enough to know that offensiveness is, not only common in its lyrics, but also a reason for it's success.  That's why its audience is mostly confined to young, rebellious gansta wanna-bees.   I'd say an overwhelming majority of the country never hears these lyrics, except that the media has now picked up on it.

    [ Parent ]
    You've been listening to the wrong stuff (5.00 / 0) (#79)
    by CST on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:35:34 AM EST
    First of all, rap started out as an outlet against the brutal life in the ghetto in the 80s.  Yes it was angry and violent, because people were angry and life was violent.  However, it was also very political in the beginning.  Then the 90s came, and after biggie and 2pac died there was an effort to make rap less angry and violent, so it switched to a more commercial "money and hos" theme.  At the same time Clear Channel took over all the airways and stifled any outlet for the more honest, political, and yes sometimes angry and violent rap.  However, there have always been artists who have kept up the me