elp37's Comments (12)

“Now that I've stopped weeping, I can say thank you Michael - though I admit (after reading every other pundit's opinion) I wasn't expecting to hear my thoughts echoed by anyone anymore. Yours is the reasoning that struck me at once - after I confirmed it wasn't a joke. And it's a gift to hear my views validated - to be reminded, I'm not alone.”

“Please LoveLifeLaughter What photo are you referring to and what interview? I am trying to help Neda Soltani, have someone at the Daily Beast working on the story and need information. The photo of Neda Soltani (NOT Neda Agha-Soltan) was mistakenly used and she is currently in danger in Tehran. Please write me and let me know where you have seen the interview and what you are referring to in your comment.

See http://neda-soltan.blogspot.com”

“Matthew Alexander's information on interrogation is vital to the debate and should have greater circulation, i.e. I'd like to see him question Liz Cheney on Morning Joe.

I was somehow led to believe this article was going to give me an insight into Dick Cheney's motivation, what's behind the present Cheney media blitz. I thought that: through an interpretation of what Cheney is not saying - his omissions or out-right lies - we would be better able to understand him. And thus understand why we went to war in Iraq ----so we have a glimmer of hope that we (the US) don't fall for the same hype (war-cry) next time.

Some of us saw all of this: the lies, the rush to war without cause, from the beginning - albeit without evidence. What we've never been able to fathom is "How the rest didn't". Was it naivety, foolishness, callowness, fear? - what? We all grew up with the Boy Who Cried Wolf - yet just over a year ago we were on the verge of condoning a war with Iran.

I think we still must get to the bottom of this - despite the perils. Though I agree with Obama - that releasing the torture pictures would probably only advance the causes of al Qaida. I don't know how they wouldn't help us. Perhaps - if I understand Alexander correctly - we should prosecute Cheney. Now that's a slam dunk! He's already confessed, so we wouldn't have to prosecute lesserlings”

“All I really mean is - why bother talking about something that's been in the bag for months?”

“What I can't figure out is why hasn't anyone asked if this wasn't all decided already on June 5th around 9pm. When Hillary and Obama met at Diane Feinstein's it was around the time of Hillary's concession and before Obama named his running mate. Certainly he asked her what it would take for her to lay down arms, call a truce and back him. Certainly, whatever she asked him for was granted. She wasn't miffed when he didn't announce her as VP choice - she seemed quite aware that he couldn't be seen as having chosen her because he had to - rather than because he wanted to. Does anyone honestly think Hillary left that meeting without some concrete assurance she would be rewarded? Take a look at the photos following that meeting. Take a look at the photos of Hillary the day the leak about Secretary of State came out. Ring any bells? Why did she seem to respond - in so many ways - as if she had already known? Isn't it likely that Obama had to play as if this was a new idea and that she was not the only choice? Didn't Bill respond surprisingly quickly to allow to be vetted? How can anyone say they hadn't already sealed this deal 5.5 months ago?”

“Everything I've read and thought is expressed here. Except 1: after wrestling with "why, why, why" for days I come to only one possible thought - and it's a frightening one. Is it possible this was arranged in July? Is it possible that Obama sold his soul at that famous secret - not so - meeting at the home of Sen. Dianne Feinstein on June 5th at 9PM? Remember she came out smiling - everyone speculating she'd been offered VP? And she wasn't unhappy when she didn't get VP? And she seemed to already know about the offer of Secretary of State before she went to Chicago - that knowing smile (smirk) of hers as she got off the plane, as she met staffers? Hmmmn? Maybe the vetting of Mister will dunk the deal - but otherwise - how can Obama go back on his word - if that was the word he used to get Hillary to relinquish her quest for the nomination? And what now? If he were to back out of it, would she make a public stink? Could she say, "But he promised me and he lied!"? Poor Barack - I'm very sorry for this.”

“I meant to end the previous comment with -

Your case (if there is to be one) should be tried - not on earth - but in "SECOND LIFE".

- but my mike got cut off.”

“Charles -
I didn't pay a lot of attention to this during the campaign - sorry.
And another apology - I couldn't read the whole post - just too long.

BUT I offer you this.
First: Sorry you lost your job and all - but you missed a great opportunity. Or maybe it's not too late....

Namely: "Joe the Plumber" doesn't really exist.

There was only a fictitious character created to help John and Sarah hold on, during the last few weeks of their campaign.

The character - "Joe the Plumber" - was a bogus - disingenuous - alienating - fear mongering lime-light seeking, Joe Six-Pack dumb American kind-a-guy, who was supposed to be the "Average Joe" - a guy who might vote for Sarah Palin.

The character was played by a 2 bit actor called Sam Wulzbacher. And the media and dumb "Americans" ate it up.

Why don't you defend yourself honestly?

Why the hell don't you tell it like it is?

Why can't you simply say you wanted this character to die - to end - to stop being used to further reduce the intelligence of all?

Charles, please tell your attackers: that John McCain should have been truthful and should have told the flocks that "Joe" is imaginary. Joe Wulzbacher got paid well - and he got what he wanted - in their pseudo American dream -- his 1,000,015 minutes of fame and lots of contracts tuboot.

How can a fictitious character sue you? The court case”

“I have been wrestling over this issue since the first time I heard Ayes mentioned, did my own research and was quite interested in why he was so well respected.

But what has discouraged me is whether following this line of inquiry at this time would do Obama a lick of good. There's such complexity and inbeddedness of the players.

Look - you have McCain, whose shingle says "I'm a Vietnam POW" and Ayres, who gave up everything to fight an illegal war. And you have a young upstart intellectual, who criticizes the present day war...

And the next thing you know Palin is accusing Biden of hanging out the "white flag of surrender".

Then the economy tanks, McCain's ship is sinking - his only tactic is no longer meaningful. Still, McCain is of a generation, who have a terrible time admitting error or changing course.

Wasn't there a way to somehow interweave past; Vietnam hero, war protester terrorist - with a fear for our future - communist terrorist president?

I wasted time wondering if McCain was trying to redeem Vietnam. It doesn't matter. But it's how he has gotten to where he is. So I think he fears letting it go.

I do believe if Ayres hadn't conveniently shown up McCain would have had to invent him.

We grandstand about educating people around the world, in order to promote democracy, while following a policy of dumbing-down our own citizens to control election outcomes. You can't have it both ways.”

“Same thing I said over yonder:

If poor Joe, hadn't had that little devilish desire to get on TV; if he hadn't made up that bongo story and posed a false question to Obama there wouldn't have been a mythical tale for McCain to latch on to.

But Joe lied. He told a whopper. And McCain got wind of it. And he ate it up. And poor John McCain lept before he looked - AGAIN.

John went out of his way to center his final chance - his one last shot - in the 11th hour - on a cardboard, hypothetical, gotcha question - which went terribly wrong.

Seems McCain vetted Joe and his "question" as thoroughly as he vetted his running mate. The risks of being a maverick ~ I guess.

I have no pity for Joe - whether he is aspiring to the American dream or not. If you make up stuff to get on TV - don't whine and be offended if it goes wrong.

McCain has to take responsibility for his actions. It's trigger-happiness. It's those gnarly decisions - like choosing Palin, or choosing the uber-base, or choosing to run a smear campaign, or choosing to put all his nuts in Joe's toilet. I guess that's what turned Powell off.”

“I appreciate your honesty - few are admitting that no matter how good Obama is, no matter how high the road he travels, they can't get past the color of his skin. The McCain campaign hasn't even started yet - and maybe they're praying they won't have to - but I'm sure their coffers are full of racist spots ready to roll.”

“It's probably already been said - but there's only one hope out there for Hilary - and that's if Obama loses now, McCain flops as president and 4 years from now Hilary wins the 2012 nomination.”