HeresJohnny

Actually, it isn't really that hard to figure out what we can negotiate for with Iran. For all of Ahmadinejad's bluster, Iran's foreign policy is cool and calculating. They want to become the dominant power in the Middle East, and they feel they need to get nuclear weapons to prevent the US from attacking them. A secondary goal would be expanding Shiism through the M.E. Iran's clerics well know that, though posted 05/15/2008 at 23:02:59

Thank you, gorilla, for beating me to the punch. I'm not sure how impressed the Knesset would be if Bush said, "And oh, by the way, sorry about my grandfather helping to finance the Nazi war machine, and profiting off the labor of your fathers and mothers in the concentration camps. Our bad." posted 05/15/2008 at 11:18:42

This is not a news article; if anyone bothers to actually read what little information is in the article, it would be obvious. It's all about the process of the case, nothing about substance. Let's summarize: Prosecution had four counts of perjury in its original indictment, and each contained multiple cases of perjury. Bonds' lawyers smartly moved for dismissal because the prosecution's indictment was a mess, and the judge ordered the prosecution to rewrite their indictment with each case of perjury as a separate count. That's it. He lied fourteen times (according to the prosecution) in the original as well as the superseding indictment. The new one is just laid out better.

The title of this article is extremely disingenuous; unless you read the whole thing, you would think that they hit Bonds with something new. A better title would have been "Feds rewrite indictment against Barry Bonds to cover their own stupidity". posted 05/14/2008 at 09:10:24

It's better to keep your mouth closed, and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt. Thank you, Ed Luttwak, for removing all doubt. A right-wing tinfoil-hatter, who'da thunk his drivel would actually get published? I'm sure the knuckle-draggers will try to make hay with this tripe, but it probably won't get very far. posted 05/13/2008 at 10:17:26

As one of the very few thick dullards who cruise this site, I'm truly offended. The bottle-in-front-of-me should be the first option. I'll expect you to get to work right away on correcting this injustice. posted 05/12/2008 at 09:57:10

The issue here is the possibility of skirting campaign finance laws. What's to stop Monsanto from giving millions to Cindy McCain, with the understanding that it will get some favors from McCain down the road? Yes, it's true McCain wouldn't be able to use that money in the general election without reporting it to the FEC, but it would be available to him during and after his presidency, if he won. And because she won't release her tax returns, we'd never know. Any good accountant could hide that money from Monsanto's balance sheets. Maybe I'm conspiratorial by nature, but I see this as a definite problem, as it was with Teresa Heinz Kerry. posted 05/09/2008 at 08:58:42

Reports of Hillary's demise are greatly exaggerated. She lays low for a while, starts out slow with a couple well-chosen media appearances, who knows? As a known quantity, if she can remix her persona a little bit, the door is probably still open down the road. We do know this- she won't just give up. Give her props, she's tough. posted 05/09/2008 at 08:49:58

The three people arrested were fleeing a triple shooting, if anyone was paying attention. As Chris Rock once said in his 'How not to get your ass kicked by the police' sketch, if the police gotta come get you, they're bringing an ass-whupping with them. After losing one of their own, they were not taking any chances. Was the force excessive? Yes. Would most of us do the same to three suspected shooters fleeing a triple shooting? I'm not sure how I'd react. I bet if they had a helicopter recording the shooting and then the attempted escape, we might feel differently. posted 05/07/2008 at 23:04:51

Indeed, hold your nose and vote for him. 'an opportunist, a liar, or a poor judge of character'? Weigh Clinton (and McCain) by that standard. Who comes out on top? We know that politicians are a craven lot, by and large. We expect them to lie to us, to be opportunistic, to count as 'friends' anyone who has a lot of money to contribute. We have to get beyond that. I want someone who will undo the damage that has been done to the Constitution and our governmental process over the last eight years, and I trust Obama to do that much more than I trust either Clinton or McCain.

I'm sure Obama has lied to us a little bit here or there about things in his past. But he has shown a willingness to be right about things that matter, even if his positions aren't popular at the time (Iraq war, gas tax 'holiday' nonsense). I trust him to do what he says he will do; I don't too much care if he heard his pastor slag America, or he idolized his father even though his white family members cared for him. I have to tell you, pretty much every boy idolizes his father, whether they deserve it or not. This is nothing to hold against him. posted 05/07/2008 at 09:13:40

Normally, I wouldn't believe anything Ballmer says, but he's actually telling the truth here. The strategy is to buy their way into online ad sales and compete with Google. Yahoo may not be enough by itself to do that, but MS is dead in the water without it. posted 05/01/2008 at 14:31:54

Dylan, you can't dog Isiah Thomas like that. He's not a horrible coach, just a world-class nimrod when it comes to evaluating and acquiring talent. He has, in fact, shown himself to be at least an average coach in terms of Xs and Os. So he has that going for him. As coach only, and not GM, he does a passable job. Just don't put him in as executive anywhere (the Knicks, the D-league, etc.). Leave the hard work to his backcourt teammate, Joe Dumars, who has more than proven himself at that position. posted 04/28/2008 at 10:44:00

Are you kidding? If I were Obama, I would be salivating - SALIVATING - at the prospect of running against McCain, a guy who apparently doesn't have a clue about any of the issues that are going to prove decisive in the general election. It's hard to make the case that you are THE national security candidate when you cannot discern the difference between Sunni and Shia, between al Qaeda and al Sadr, between bin Laden and Iran. Economy? 'I'm not much of an expert on the economy.' But the lobbyists running his campaign are, apparently. I know I'm missing other issues, but Obama will have a field day hoisting McCain on his own petard. posted 04/28/2008 at 11:16:21

Let's not forget ESPN, Semper. Disney is such a Colossus of a media company that its reach extends nearly everywhere. Hannah Montana? Check. History Channel? Check. Club Penguin? Check. Touchstone Pictures? Check. Miramax? Check. Disney is only the second-largest media company in the world. This hatchet job of a 'debate' was disappointing, but not surprising. No surprise that George showed himself to be a hack, but I'm still shaking my head about Charles Gibson. I must admit I didn't see that coming. posted 04/19/2008 at 21:58:01

Thanks, Jesse, for a cogent analysis of our current political situation. It's refreshing to hear the truth being spoken by someone with a national profile. There is a political wind blowing out there that wants to form a third party, and many of the commenters have pointed to a likely group (Ventura, Ron Paul, Chuck Hagel, Mike Bloomberg, et al) that could get it started. If it were done the right way- local to national, instead of trying to field a presidential candidate right off the bat- it could become a true alternative to the duopoly. History suggests such a move is unlikely, but if it did come to pass, I'd be willing to join.

Joe Scarborough should be a bit more circumspect. A dead woman was found in his office, not Governor Ventura's. posted 04/02/2008 at 09:21:44

Sure, Hillary Clinton reminds me of Stallone. Frank Stallone. posted 04/02/2008 at 09:32:57

Look, everyone, I hate to intrude with a moment of reality, but here's the situation. We can talk about the nomination until the cows come home, but the die is cast. We have about 800 superdelegates who can vote for whomever they choose, and the delegate math as it stands will likely provide neither candidate the 2,025 votes needed to secure the nomination. So, it will fall to the superdelegates to be kingmaker. Knowing this, there is no way Clinton drops out of the race; as she sees it, she still has a very real chance. The superdelegates will do what they do, and all outcomes are valid. The system was set up this way, and it will play out this way. Maybe it gets changed as a result of what happens this year, but it's not changing now. This race will continue, like it or not, until the party elites decide to end it. posted 03/28/2008 at 11:37:39

I didn't attack him. I pointed out that he doesn't disclose that he endorsed Hillary, and then publishes a series of articles attacking Obama. Had he disclosed his endorsement, it would have been easier to evaluate his arguments. Then I brought up two issues that give me pause when considering Clinton's candidacy. As for the 'wetting myself over the 90% pro obama writers on this site', you're making things up. There is nothing in what I wrote to suggest your conclusion. Reading comprehension; you don't have it. posted 03/28/2008 at 12:01:22

I find it interesting that your bio is not posted, Ambassador Wilson. If it were, people could find out more readily that you endorsed Hillary in July 2007, and therefore classify this post as advocacy rather than analysis. I won't claim to touch on all of your arguments, but try to address the more problematic ones.

You are wise to confront the Bosnia issue. Your spin is noted, but not convincing. Hillary claimed that she had to run across the tarmac in order to avoid sniper fire. Sadly, 'Tube don't lie. The real question is, why did she feel it was necessary to embellish the story? Two possibilities present themselves, each with worrying consequences vis a vis her candidacy: Either she lied to make it look like she was more 'experienced' than her record suggests, which makes her claim of 'experience' lose luster; or she doesn't remember such a significant event in her life clearly, which would be a grave concern indeed when that 3am call comes through.

Left unsaid is the issue of Hillary's tax returns. Obama recently released his own, and it was unnecessary to belabor the point that Hillary has yet to do so. She says she will release them a few days before the PA primary, but she's giving the impression that she has something to hide. I want to know how she was able to loan her own campaign 5 million dollars; we deserve to know. posted 03/26/2008 at 15:15:48