May 18, 2008
Please wait, your request is processed...
texanna
Recent comments by this user
Louisiana Win Good and Bad for Progressives, Bad For Republicans
I certainly hope that all of Sen. Obama's supporters who maintain that he offers a whole new way of governing that involves the electorate will follow through on the obligation they're taking on by following carefully the actions of these new Blue Dog Dems/Republicrats and indeed holding their feet to the fire. Of course, they will find out just how easily the elected Representatives ignore emails, phone calls and faxes and do whatever they want. Should we start a pool now to see when those newly aware citizens fall back into the ennui they were in before their hearts were set aflutter by someone that could utter more than one intelligible sentence in the same speech? posted 05/05/2008 at 09:53:54
NC Political Class Says Edwards Lacks Clout
No clout, huh? Sounds like no one owned him - isn't that what he was saying all along? This article gives the reason that I was and continue to be an Edwards for President supporter. He truly was the only candidate that wasn't completely owned and beholden to the multi-nationals, some cabal inside the party, the corporatist media and the MCI. All of which excluded him from the corporatist media-MCI primary campaign script, so he had to go and go badly. First it was the denigration to pretty boy status with nothing but a $400 haircut and then he just wasn't given any media notice, because, hey, he just didn't have anything to say that was worth the airtime or the ink! I sincerely hope he sees the same amount of difference between the two candidates we've been left with as I do -- which is not much difference at all -- and just waits to see who ends up with the nomination. At that point we can all get behind that person and get somebody, anybody, without an "R" after their name elected to the WH. Of course, that was the mentality in 2006 and look how well that turned out! posted 05/04/2008 at 09:11:47
An Army of Women
I wish I could share in the author's optimism about the future of women's positions at the upper levels of our government, but I just do not. When Hillary is beaten back and beaten up sufficiently the lesson will be well-learned by women of all ages -- stay in your place girl or else...! Do you have close girl friends? Better be prepared for the "L" word. Have you got detailed ideas about policies and positions? Be prepared for being characterized as a wonk and a really boring one at that. Certainly not a rock star, which is a much better characteristic for being President. Have you ever actually reached across the aisle and gotten actual legislation passed? Better be prepared to be characterized as a party traitor. Have you ever gotten mad? Better be prepared for that "B" word, and worse, yet, if you're pre-menopausal, they'll go straight for PMS. Wow, you REALLLY don't want her finger on the big, red button, do you? Since you will only get a chance to ascend to the highest levels after many, many years of hard work you will probably have developed many, many relationships. Be prepared to be characterized as a user of people, since, of course, you could only have ascended to those heights because of your associations which you will be characterized as a complete abuser of. I am not a supporter of either candidate, but I would definitely say I am a sympathizer of Sen. Clinton. posted 05/04/2008 at 09:42:32
Krugman Hits Obama Over Working-Class Voters
Please tell me where I advocated that the election of Sen. Clinton would be a return to the 90's. I don't believe you'll find that thesis, since I did not advocate it nor do I think it. I do think, however, that it really won't matter much whether Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama ends up in the WH, because their policies and positions are so very similar and the obstacles that either will be faced with are so large.
And, I still maintain the keystone of Sen. Obama's campaign strategy has been to discredit the Clinton Presidency. Really, it was the only thing he could do given that Clinton's strategy was to run as a virtual encumbent. That said, no one seems too concerned about the negative attacks he's made in executing that strategy and how they might be dividing the party. posted 04/25/2008 at 18:03:39
And, I still maintain the keystone of Sen. Obama's campaign strategy has been to discredit the Clinton Presidency. Really, it was the only thing he could do given that Clinton's strategy was to run as a virtual encumbent. That said, no one seems too concerned about the negative attacks he's made in executing that strategy and how they might be dividing the party. posted 04/25/2008 at 18:03:39
It would be difficult for Sen. Obama to now start acknowledging that there was prosperity in the Clinton administration years because he's spent the whole of his campaign to date lumping Clinton with the Bad Republican group that has run this country into our current economic state. So, he can't build on the Democratic ideals you bring up, because he's so trashed them during his campaign. I don't know if I'm typical of any other voter, but that strategy has been a big turnoff for me. While Clinton gets taken to the wood shed for supposedly making Obama unelectable he gets a completely free pass for turning the Clinton years into a blot on the Democratic Party's history. posted 04/25/2008 at 10:30:42
Keith Olbermann's Idea For Beating Hillary: Literally Beating Hillary
Didn't the Golf Channel fire one of their women sportscasters for making the same remark about Tiger Woods? In that conversation, the man that was giving the commentary with her started the thread by saying that the only way the other golfers were going to beat Tiger was to ...and the woman picked up the thread and said something ...into an alley. Poof, she was gone. And boy there were a lot of comments after the article and I don't remember any of them excusing her with '..it's not what she meant." or "...boy you black people are just way too sensitive!". posted 04/25/2008 at 17:51:11
Obama and Generation Jones: It is Our Time to Lead
I was not taking issue with your characterization of how generations might approach struggle. I was taking issue with your assertion that somehow Boomers are responsible for the mess we're in and that they are now to be pushed aside because it's the next generation's turn at the wheel. As a Boomer I can tell you that I don't think Boomers have ever really had a chance at running things. Our parents and our older, pre-Boomer siblings have hogged the stage for the most part since the 60's to the extent that the epic changes we thought we had begun in the 60's never got off the ground. We're still arguing about women's equal pay and the right to make decisions about their own bodies; we're still having race problems; we're still trying to spread democracy at the point of a gun and on and on. BTW, I think that notwithstanding his birthdate, Shrub is not a Boomer at all, but rather like our older siblings who are still mired in the Strong Father Social Dynamic. Finally, I took issue with your saying that one generation should take precedence over another at a time in our history where people are living with vitality to every-increasing numbers of years. Isn't it time to stop separating the electorate into generations? Or, is that inclusive stuff from Sen. Obama just for the stump speech? posted 04/25/2008 at 18:16:53
So, how does this sentiment fit in with the inclusive meme that Sen. Obama is campaigning on? Where is the "new politics" in your thesis, which is solely based on old political stategies, i.e., divide the electorate into niches and appeal to each with the appropriate message? Your article throws ageism into the race/gender fray -- good work! posted 04/25/2008 at 10:17:11
Is This Primary Irreversibly Shredding the Democratic Party? I'm Skeptical.
here, here, nellie! Most of them are shills for whichever multi-national corporation owns them and can't be trusted at all. I say, let Indiana and North Carolina have their say. If we aren't grown up enough to come together after the dust settles, well, we don't deserve to win the general election. posted 04/24/2008 at 21:24:13
McCain opposes equal pay bill in Senate
What did I miss in this story that would've provided the reason for the picture showing McCain and Clinton together under the headline saying McCain voted against this bill? I doubt I'm the only one that would think that maybe Sen. Clinton was not in favor of the bill either since she's in the picture with him, while in reality her position AND her vote were polar opposites from Sen. McCain's. Sad to see HuffPo become yet another disingenuous media massager. posted 04/24/2008 at 15:29:44
Obama The Less And Less Magic Negro
Very interesting article. I think your thesis is one way to explain the idolization fad that swept so many up in a thrall in the early stages of the primary. Since I am really angry about the last 7 years and really don't want to just put it all behind us -- I want prosecutions -- I was never enthusiastic about Sen. Obama's vision. And, since I don't think, per John Dean's most recent book, that you can compromise with the current group that calls themselves Republicans, I didn't think much of his proclamations about a new way to do politics. But mostly, I am just too damn old to not be cynical when someone tries to sell me something that doesn't ring true. And for me, I don't think it's possible to reach the pinnacle of American politics at such a young age with such a thin national resume and not be a politician through and through. I just don't think that happens. Yet, that is what they are trying to sell me. posted 04/24/2008 at 21:11:49
Kids Be Gone: High Pitch Only Teens Can Hear Used As Deterrent (AUDIO)
A better technique would've been playing classical music, something else that drives teens nuts but is very pleasant to everyone else. This technique was employed brilliantly by a McDonald's in downtown Dallas a few years ago and the loitering problem was solved almost within a day! Also, the ACLU would
have no problem with an effort to improve the musical sensibilities of our younger generation, would they? posted 04/24/2008 at 09:25:37
have no problem with an effort to improve the musical sensibilities of our younger generation, would they? posted 04/24/2008 at 09:25:37
New Republic: Obama's Coalition Shifting From Moderates To McGovern-esque
I disagree with your disingenuous characterization of Sen. Obama. He has been carefully placed and mentored on the national stage by powerful people at the highest levels of the Democratic Party. Do you think an Illinois State Senator just called up the scheduler at the last national convention to say he'd like some prime time to say a few words? Do you think that he just whipped together a national campaign staff and strategy based on his successful single campaign for a state senate seat? Do you think that he just looked in the yellow pages for the big money angels to get things up and going initially? Please! You might wish to suspend reason, but there are a great number of us that know it ain't so. I am not saying that these things disqualify or in any way take away from Sen. Obama's intellect, ideas or potential capacity to be a good or great President so please, don't presume that I completely dislike Sen. Obama. posted 04/24/2008 at 09:41:42
Jimmy Carter: Rice "Not Telling Truth" About Hamas Meeting
Let's see, Jimmy Carter vs. the Bushies -- gee, that's not really a fair fight, is it? Seriously, how in the world do the Bushies expect ANYONE ANYWHERE to believe a word they say? If Jimmy said that not only did no one tell him not to go but that they all dressed up in red dresses and visited him in his Georgia foundation offices, I'd still believe him! Frankly, I think the Bushies just can't stand to see that there can actually be results from talking to somebody. posted 04/24/2008 at 09:22:29
End John Cornyn's Silence
Great post, Rep. Noriega! I'm glad you're putting the spotlight on this sham of a Senator who has done nothing but add to the bad rep our great state has had to suffer for too long. Nothing makes me more angry than to drive behind some overlarge, gas-guzzling SUV that has a "Support Our Troops" magnetic sticker plaster over the "Cornyn for Senator" sticker! posted 04/24/2008 at 09:32:06
White Men
Nora, your point is a good one but unfortunately too many have missed it. The Sen. Obama supporters once again are all about the if -you're-not-with-us-you're-against-us point of view. Thus the page after page of comments that include the daily ritual of really obnoxious insults about Sen. Clinton and her supporters, and they count you as one of those supporters. Now that may be true, but this article was spot on in identifying "the true deciders" in this primary campaign and what is most likely the rationale that group will use when they make their vote. Maybe the most virulent of the responses don't enjoy looking in the mirror. I think in therapists terms this is called "owning your sh*$^t",isn't it? posted 04/21/2008 at 09:31:12
Who Will be Thrown Under the Clinton Bus Next?
BitJam, are you sure you're responding to my comment? The reason I ask, is that most of your comment doesn't seem to relate to anything I wrote. I didn't discuss appeasement. I'm pretty sure that I was indicating I think the war is a bad idea and that I would've liked for it to have ended a long time ago.
If you are responding to my comment, then you missed my point. The point I was trying to make is that MoveOn, a generally successful progressive organization does seem to be developing a bad habit of making some less than positive decisions. Decisions that sometimes end up creating a situation that is contra to what they're trying to achieve. In this case I was very much against the decision to endorse Sen. Obama before the primary was over. That decision created some very hard feelings on the part of the millions of MoveOn members who are supporters of Sen. Clinton. An endorsement of whoever gets the nomination would've been better, I think. And, now this endorsement is being brought up in the campaign. So, you tell me why it was a good decision. Why is it better to have a conversation about MoveOn members who support Sen. Obama and whether or not they were a problem in caucuses than it is to have a conversation about what the two candidates plan to do about investigating and prosecuting, if necessary, the criminal acts of the Bushies? posted 04/20/2008 at 17:11:32
If you are responding to my comment, then you missed my point. The point I was trying to make is that MoveOn, a generally successful progressive organization does seem to be developing a bad habit of making some less than positive decisions. Decisions that sometimes end up creating a situation that is contra to what they're trying to achieve. In this case I was very much against the decision to endorse Sen. Obama before the primary was over. That decision created some very hard feelings on the part of the millions of MoveOn members who are supporters of Sen. Clinton. An endorsement of whoever gets the nomination would've been better, I think. And, now this endorsement is being brought up in the campaign. So, you tell me why it was a good decision. Why is it better to have a conversation about MoveOn members who support Sen. Obama and whether or not they were a problem in caucuses than it is to have a conversation about what the two candidates plan to do about investigating and prosecuting, if necessary, the criminal acts of the Bushies? posted 04/20/2008 at 17:11:32
You know what -- MoveOn chose to get involved in this primary campaign by endorsing Obama, so they should get over it. If they didn't want to play politics, then they shouldn't have played politics. It wouldn't be the first time that MoveOn shot themselves in the foot, now would it? Anyone remember the Gen. Betrayus ad? While there was nothing wrong with the sentiment and they were well within their right to buy the ad the end result was to give something for the Neonuts to distract millions of people who do not think of themselves as progressives and who do get their information from the corporatist media. The echo chamber of the corporatist media was so loud that the real message that the progressives were trying to get out got drowned out and voila, the war went on. Now, MoveOn has become another distracting issue in this primary campaign to the detriment of coverage about the real issues of this campaign. posted 04/20/2008 at 12:16:21
I Was A Clinton Volunteer
I'm amazed that you were unaware of the two way street of vile epithets that this primary campaign has devolved to. As far as I can tell, Sen. Obama's supporters seem to think that there is one America with one exception -- no Clinton supporters are allowed. posted 04/20/2008 at 13:02:59
What Everybody -- Pro and Con -- Missed About the Debates (Plus, a Fun Pop Quiz!)
I'm really just over this flap about the lousy media we've got. No one seemed to mind a bit when the media was busy ignoring or totally dissing the other candidates -- Kucinich, Biden, Dodd, Richardson, Edwards. Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton were fine with everything back then. Now, when the media turns on them, well, the corporatist media isn't so great anymore. Frankly, the media we've got has been around awhile and the only thing I'm surprised at is that there is anyone who hasn't been aware of the low bar of what passes for journalism in this country. posted 04/18/2008 at 21:26:39
Talk to Women for A Change
Alright, I'll modify, - so typical of so many men that unless something directly affects them they really can't be interested. Does that seem a more fair statement to make? Because, in my long years of experience of working with and dealing with men, that's been true. Tell me when was the last time that you made an effort to see things from a female point of view? Because, I can tell you that women constantly make an effort to see things from a male point of view in order to make our way through the male-dominant society that we've got. posted 04/20/2008 at 12:27:03
LongTom, first of all, I am not a Clinton supporter and I don't know why you lept to that assumption. Secondly, your second sentence is a perfect example of the level of mysogny that is so rampant in this country. Why do you feel so comfortable in tossing around those accusations? Why is it so completely OK to say and write those kinds of opinions about this woman? You might not like her policy positions or Senate voting record, both of which are so very similar to Sen. Obama's, but why not focus on that instead of the insults you tossed out here? posted 04/20/2008 at 12:23:23
See, SFreeborn, you're very first sentence is so very typical of the misgyny rampant in this country and in this particular primary. You completely leave out Sen. Clinton's Senate for New York and refer to her only as a former President's wife. Now why is that? Why is it so easy for you to denigrate and insult as if the only reason she were elected more than once by the people of New York state is because she was somebody's wife? posted 04/19/2008 at 08:16:51
Maybe Sen. Clinton didn't appeal directly to women voters in the debate because she's tired of being beaten up as a whiner and her statements denigrated in the process. Sadly, I am pretty sure that I will be long-since dead before women will achieve equality in this country. Now why is that? Probably because there are millions and millions of men such as Gibbons that are surprised that there is a gender gap. I mean, it's not as if there has been a dearth of information out there about the glass ceiling or the pay gap. So typical of men, if something doesn't directly affect them they really can't be bothered. posted 04/18/2008 at 15:34:43
The Very Serious Debate, Starring The Very Serious George & Charlie
Indedave, I think another solution might be to remove the profit motive of the corporatist media altogether by having publicly financed elections. With no millions to pursue in advertising fees the corporatist media actually engage in real journalism. Another benefit is that we might get a wider and better field of candidates from which to choose instead of the scripted candidates we currently end up with from the corporatist media. So far as I can tell, none of the remaining candidates has a position on publicly financed elections, but it would be interesting to ask them. posted 04/17/2008 at 21:57:32
Really? Funny, I don't remember this site or any other being wall-to-wall with articles about how the media was so deplorable. About how unfair they were. About how they just weren't focused on the REAL issues. posted 04/17/2008 at 21:51:16
So, where was all this hue and cry and angst about how terrible the media is when the corporatist media was busy culling out the other legitimate candidates? Where was all this uproar when the media went off on the Edwards' $400 haircut tear? Where was all of this upset when they were treating Kucinich as if he were nonexistent? I might be able to muster up some of the anger at the silliness of the corporatist media if the supporters of Sen. Obama had been this vocal all along. posted 04/17/2008 at 16:12:16
Obama Going Negative? Mailer Hits Clinton On Trade
terragazelle, go to www.factcheck.org and input Obama health care plan and get the facts regarding who's covered and who's not.
As to getting plans through Congress, frankly, Sen. Obama has about as much chance as Sen. Clinton at doing that. My concern with Sen. Obama is that in his efforts to be conciliatory with the Republicans - who are genetically predisposed to win or obstruct -- is that he would end up with the kind of health care plan that he got through the Illinois Statehouse when he was a state senator. A plan that as far as I can learn was so heavily influenced by the health care industry that it bore little resemblance to the plan that most in Illinois thought they were going to get. posted 04/18/2008 at 10:23:10
As to getting plans through Congress, frankly, Sen. Obama has about as much chance as Sen. Clinton at doing that. My concern with Sen. Obama is that in his efforts to be conciliatory with the Republicans - who are genetically predisposed to win or obstruct -- is that he would end up with the kind of health care plan that he got through the Illinois Statehouse when he was a state senator. A plan that as far as I can learn was so heavily influenced by the health care industry that it bore little resemblance to the plan that most in Illinois thought they were going to get. posted 04/18/2008 at 10:23:10
kid5rivers, let's review the most recent example, shall we? I refer to the TV ad wherein it is pointed out that Sen. Obama's health care plan would leave 15million people uncovered. This number is a number that has been accepted by Obama's own people among others. Now how does this ad fit into your assertion that Sen. Clinton's ads only contain lies? I'm pretty sure that's not the only example that would refute your blanket statement. Look, neither one of these candidates is pure as the driven snow and both are pretty skilled politicians, which as has been so often pointed out, is a blood sport, not a tea party. posted 04/17/2008 at 22:11:38
OK, so let me get this straight -- when Sen. Clinton does something like this mailer the Obama supporters go completely batsh*&^^t crazy and when Sen. Obama does it they're perfectly OK with it? What a joke. I'm just amazed that anything that shows just how political Sen. Obama is has made its way onto this blog. It would be easier for me to seriously consider Sen. Obama if he were just portrayed as the real politician that he is instead of the saint the his supporters keep trying to tell me his is. posted 04/17/2008 at 16:43:55
The ABC Debate: A Shameful Night for the U.S. Media
How is anybody surprised at the trivial nature of the "debate" of last night? The corporatist media is all about trivia and pretty much anything they can sensationalize and use to distract from the real, tough issues. Issues that they think we're too dumb to really get. The media wrote this campaign script before the primary season started and they've been very thorough at carrying it out, even when they had to get ham-handed and actually lock out that pesky Kucinich who just wouldn't get the message that he had been written out. The script makes sure that they collect as much of those millions and millions that have been raised by the candidates and as far as I can see, they're doing that job very effectively. posted 04/17/2008 at 09:57:44
Justice O'Connor, I Think I Love You
Yeah, I'll bet Justice O'Connor went straight to the Guantanamo decision just so she could keep the conversation from going to her deciding vote in the coup d'etat that was executed by SCOTUS in 2000. I sincerely hope that everyday that woman wakes she realizes she's still in Bushland and she's directly responsible! I hope this event was free, because if it wasn't, anybody that paid wasted their money. Before SCOTUS allowed our Constitution to be tossed out the window I had a lot of respect for Justice O'Connor. She was an old-style Conservative, reasonable and rational instead of knee-jerk. In December 2000 she took everything she had done to that point and flushed it down the drain in one vote. posted 04/16/2008 at 21:57:03
100% Of Clinton's Current Pennsylvania Ads Are Negative
Did I miss something? Is it not correct that Sen. Obama's plan will not cover 100% of the people and that by everybody's account, even his own, there will be about 15 million people that will still be uncovered? Also, what's negative about encouraging people to CALL Sen. Obama's campaign and urge them to reconsider their plan? Jeez, if this is what Sen. Obama's supporters consider negative ads they are in for a rude awakening when the Republicans get going! posted 04/16/2008 at 21:43:54
USA Today: Obama Is Surrounded By Lawyers From Lobbying Firms
I was not surprised at the inability of the hard-core Sen. Obama supporters to accept the truth . Folks, if Sen. Obama is the Democratic nominee you all are going to have to take off the rose-colored glasses and get real. Your guy is just as much of a politician as any of the others. His positions and his voting record aren't much different from that other candidate that you would like to think of as Medusa incarnate and he's taken money from the corporatists like everybody else. The only candidates that didn't take that money are out of the race. Oh, and step outside into the big, bad world and discover that there are a whole lot of people that don't idolize your guy, they even -- horrors! -- think Sen. McCain is a better choice. Oh, and please don't go off on my comment as if I were a Sen. Clinton supporter, because I was an Edwards supporter and don't see much difference between the candidates left to us by the corporatist media. I will, however, support whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee because either of these candidates is WAYYY better than the alternative. posted 04/16/2008 at 22:10:28
'The Harvest of Shame'
Sen. Sanders, you didn't mention whether or not the workers going into the field were illegal immigrants or not, but I suspect that one reason that the growers are able to get away with the kind of employment practices you've described is that a good many are illegal immigrants. For workers from Mexico the wages you've described are a big attraction because of the economic conditions of Mexico. Which brings up the question as to why ICE hasn't conducted any raids on these growers as they have started to do with the meat processors. The growers' associations must've contributed more heavily to the RNC than did the meat processors. At any rate, as long the growers have slaves as a labor force they will treat them as slaves. I applaud your efforts to raise the pay rate and improve the working conditions of the farm workers, but don't we also have to shine that bright light of public scrutiny on who the labor force is? posted 04/16/2008 at 09:01:33
Obama, The Rookie
jsarets, Edwards tried the mad-as-hell campaign strategy and got tagged as too angry whenever the corporatist media wasn't completely denigrating him with stupid haircut stories. Many times, however, there were articles written about how the American electorate doesn't want somebody to be mad, they want somebody that will make them happy. And, lo, we have Sen. Obama who does just that from all the accounts of his supporters. posted 04/15/2008 at 21:07:33
S1mon, since the Senate voting records and policy positions of Sens. Clinton and Obama are so very similar (and that is not just my opinion), does it follow that there is no significant difference between Bush and Sen. Obama to the point that he, too, would be unlikely to alter much, if anything? BTW, I'm not a Sen. Clinton supporter, so please don't take off on my question with a bunch of arguments trying to convince me that Sen. Obama is so very different. posted 04/15/2008 at 16:00:56
Well, ChukIgnorris, I really don't see how I insulted anyone. So, either you've misunderstood the comment I posted, or your tolerance level is way too low in terms of being insulted. I am firmly of the opinion that the bombast on this blog has gotten so poisonous that I don't read half the articles in hopes that I won't have a bias built up in me as to whichever of the remaining candidates makes it to the general election. Candidates that I did not support, BTW, and still do not find much difference between even to this day. And, I still say that if you think Sen. Obama is all that, step away from the keyboard you might be as surprised as I was that there are a whole lot of people that don't even to the point of voting instead for McCain -- something I could never do. posted 04/15/2008 at 15:52:09
yes, but my relatives vote and I don't think even in Bushland that your cat can. posted 04/15/2008 at 15:46:30
lafrance, please know that I am not a Sen. Clinton supporter. I was an Edwards supporter and he's gone. I find very little difference in the positions of the two candidates that the corporatist media has chose for me to choose from. I will support whichever candidate runs in the general election. So, don't ask me to defend Sen. Clinton. My comment was meant merely to point out that there are a lot of people that don't participate in blogs, progressive movements or the campaigns and they see things a bit differently than those that do. Frankly, I was a bit surprised by my relatives' positions since clearly I do keep up with the blogs and I am involved in activist activities of progressive organizations and it hadn't occurred to me that in this really important election there would be anyone that wasn't knowledgeable about why ANY Democrat would so much better than ANY Republican. So, I say again, get out and about and check out the people that aren't in the blogosphere echo chamber. posted 04/15/2008 at 15:45:30
Your article will not be well-received by Sen. Obama's supporters, in fact, I predict it will fall on deaf ears. This past weekend I had an interesting experience that I suggest everyone who thinks that Sen. Obama is our next President should have. The experience was visiting with relatives that I think are generally intelligent, rational, kind-spirited and who get their news from the corporatist news media - print and TV. In short, I think, reflective of a large per centage of the voters in this country. To a one of them, they vowed they would NEVER vote for Sen. Obama. None of my points about ANY Democrat being better than ANY Republican could disabuse them of their mulish stance. My relatives had varied reasons, but most centered around their estimation that he couldn't get the job done, whether out of Iraq or turning the country around. Conversely, all of them vowed that they "...would vote for Hillary, but never Obama!". Sen. Obama's supporters need to get out of their echo chamber and take off their rose-colored glasses and just start listening. They might be unpleasantly surprised that a lot of people just do not see the star quality they see. posted 04/15/2008 at 09:51:43
Why American Airlines' Big Public Sad Meltdown is Good
naugiedoggie, you are correct in stating that your market size is going to shrink geographically because of the increase in fares that will add to your cost of doing business. You will either find more business in the geographical area that you can make a profit within or your income will be reduced. Or, you will find other ways to service those customers at the edges of the geographical boundaries of your market. Your customers may have to look for someone who is more local and maybe they will find someone who is just as good as you, or maybe not, or maybe they will find someone better. That part of the equation is a variable. The constant is that the way we have been doing business or travelling is going to change, and the numbers of people travelling is going to recede to pre-deregulation levels. I bet, though, that the services and the mentality of the carriers and their employees won't go backwards! So, while your bags may get there and your flight might not be cancelled or be horribly late, you won't enjoy the experience any more than you do today. posted 04/12/2008 at 09:58:00
The only way that your air travel nirvana state can be achieved is if demand goes away with the airlines that go away. The only way that I can imagine that happening is that fares rise to such a level that most won't be able to afford it. Frankly, that doesn't sound like such a great outcome, but then, those free market results rarely are! posted 04/11/2008 at 21:45:01
Eight-Hundred-Year-Old Jong Responds to Callow Youth Taibbi
Oh, SNAP! That was really a lot of fun to read. posted 04/11/2008 at 22:15:07
Why A Woman In The White House?
zippy, first I want to disabuse of your notion that I'm a Hillary supporter. I am no more a supporter of Sen. Clinton than I am of Sen. Obama. I supported Sen. Edwards initially precisely because I saw no difference between either Obama or Clinton and there were several things about each of them that I wasn't happy with. Since Edwards left the race, I continue to see little difference between the candidates, but will support whoever is in the general election because I do see a lot of difference between the Democratic candidates and Sen. McCain. Having cleared that up, I'd like to point out that I don't take offense at anyone criticizing Sen. Clinton's policy positions on their merit, but too often that is not the case. Rather, the criticism tends to be very personal and usually framed around her gender. Why don't you try to dispassionately to take a look at some of the ways that the media portrays Sen. Clinton's campaign and then get back to me. BTW, I raised a very successful daughter by telling her that the sky's the limit because I was sure that would be the case after the upheaval of the 60's. 40 years later and after a lot of hard work of my own in a mostly male profession, I see that might not be the case. Today, she finds she works harder, longer and has to fight like hell for equal compensation in a major corporation. posted 04/12/2008 at 10:16:43
Ms. Reardon, you have contributed another well written article that will fall on the same deaf ears and virulent minds as have your others. Sadly, I do not think there is any hope for a woman to be elected President of this country. Sen. Obama's supporters say "...just not Hillary!", but there is no one in sight that is on a track for that office. In fact, if Sen. Obama were a woman I don't think he would be where he is today. Can you imagine that ANY woman would be groomed, advanced and supported with such a thin federal office resume? I don't think so. Tell all the little girls that you know -- you can't be anything you want to be in this country. There are many things you can be, but there are limitations. And, even when you do succeed, likely you will have to work harder, longer and be treated with less respect than your male colleagues. posted 04/11/2008 at 22:06:36
Petraeus: I Will Never Hold Office In This Country
I'm really glad that the Gen doesn't want to seek political office, because it will save me the effort of voting against him! posted 04/10/2008 at 21:50:27
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki Disagrees With Petraeus: US Forces Can Start Withdrawing
Al Maliki seems to be operating under the misimpression that sovereign control of Iraq is in his or any other elected Iraqi official. What do you want to bet we won't hear a peep about this statement from the corporatist media today? I mean it just wouldn't do for the Iraqis to be saying something completely, totally different from the pronouncements of our Dear Leader, would it? posted 04/10/2008 at 15:59:58
As Expected, A Sobering Assessment
Unfortunately, a good many of us thought that we did make a loud and clear statement in the mid-term elections of 2006. The elected representatives chose not to understand us. Instead, they pretended that we told them something else -- like ..."we want a social agenda passed and we definitely don't want to go all political on the Bushies and seek impeachment of anybody!". Furthermore, since that time, whenever any one of the Representatives or Senators has hit the keyboards and written an article that gets posted on a blog the comments go into several pages and usually always have as a main theme "...shut up and do something!". I know many people that have written and called their Senator or their Representative and do so even now, and what effect has that had? No, I think these people choose not to listen and not to understand and I can only think that it's because they've got a vested interest in the status quo whether they've got a "D" or an "R" after their name. Where are term limits when you need them? posted 04/10/2008 at 16:18:02
Petraeus and Crocker: Déjà Vu All Over Again
Rep. Conyers, your article shows that you do understand the problem, but gives not hint as to what you as a Representative with power to effect a solution would actually do. Sir, don't you understand that you're just adding to the great frustration among us, the Citizens, by telling us something is terribly wrong but you're not going to do anything about it? Back in 2006 we elected you all to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, because we already knew there was something wrong! Instead of you all doing what we wanted, or even seriously trying for that matter, we get Rahm Emanuel telling us that we elected you all to effect a social agenda and we get Spkr. Pelosi telling us that before things even got underway she was discarding her ace, impeachment. So, either come up with a solution and start doing something right now, or respectfully, just be quiet. posted 04/10/2008 at 11:03:10
Perino Gets Testy With Dem Leaders
Ooooooh, Dana got annoyed, that must have been really intimidating for the WH Press Corps! This trade agreement is bad on so many levels for so many people from the unions to the small, peasant farmers in Colombia that will be further disadvantaged. Pesky unions, indeed! posted 04/09/2008 at 21:52:33
Patrick McHenry (R-NC): Timeline of a Young Chickenhawk
What an idiot! I wonder how proud his constituents are of him now? posted 04/09/2008 at 21:39:30
On the San Francisco Olympic Torch Relay
Madam Speaker, it would be really swell if you could develop just a scintilla of that indignation for the poor shlubs right here in this country suffering under the boot of the Bushie War Criminals. People you could per the powers of your office actually do something for should you just be moved to do so. posted 04/09/2008 at 10:27:31
Should Democrats Eliminate Superdelegates and Caucuses in 2012?
I think the caucuses have to go -- they are hardly representative of the electorate. Caucuses favor those with flexible schedules, no kids, no physical challenges and a lot of energy. As to the super delegates, I'm not sure about this part of your question. After all, while we can all participate in the primaries, do we really participate when the campaign is over? Do we care enough to attend meetings and keep the Party going when there isn't an important election? Don't those that do keep the Party going between the major campaigns maybe have a better idea of what is best for that Party and shouldn't they have a greater voice for their continued participation than the rest of us who just show up every few years? But, most importantly, I think the Democratic Party needs to get real about the primary schedule. Why do they keep letting Iowa and New Hampshire go first? These states are not remotely representative of the majority of the country. Maybe we wouldn't be having the FL and MI problem now if the Party had done something about this problem sooner. Rotate the first honor or just tell Iowa and NH that they've had their time and it's over and move on, but do something about this problem for sure. posted 04/07/2008 at 20:50:04
Obama's Lobbyist Fib
Bubba, you are spitting in the wind telling the truth on HuffPo about Sen. Obama's clay feet. His supporters will NEVER believe their guy is human and -- horrors, worse than human, he's a politician! They refuse to acknowledge that he's owned by the same folks that own the other candidate, that his record is pretty much the same, that his positions are pretty much the same and the likelihood is that his Presidency would be pretty much the same. Because, to admit any of that would mean that they had been fooled and no one likes that. I could be a lot more enthusiastic about Sen. Obama is he was really as real as everyone wants him to be instead of the myth they've invented. posted 04/07/2008 at 21:16:05
Kos: Clinton's "Destructive Coup Attempt" Good For Democrats
I've got a suggestion for Kos -- put a sock in it! Why are you trying to disenfranchise the voters in the remaining states? Why are you ignoring that there are many millions of people that do support Sen. Clinton and do not see her as the vilest human since Ghengis Khan? If you seriously want Sen. Obama to win the general election - should he advance to that contest - then you'd better quit pushing the supporters of Sen. Clinton away. posted 04/07/2008 at 21:07:13
The Power of Patient Advocacy
Two things come to mind with regards a national, single-payer health care system. First, if every American and/or American family that still thinks they've got insurance were struck with a catastrophic health problem forcing them to confront the hard fact of how limited that benefit truly is, there would be such an uprising for a different, better way that politicians would not be able to ignore it. Second, if those in the Congress and the Executive Branch were forced to give up their current form of health insurance and become insured in the same way as the those they're supposed to represent, they would be tripping over each other to enact whatever legislation was necessary to go back to "the good ol'days" of the single-payer health care system they currently enjoy. posted 04/05/2008 at 10:07:01
Rhodes Says Air America Breached Her Contract
I got a chuckle when I read the quote from Randi regarding AirAmerica having ruined her hardwon reputation, because I mostly think she ruined it all by herself over the last few months. At first I was OK with her swoon over Sen. Obama, but then the comments regarding Sen. Clinton became increasingly more shrill to the point that they were really kind of offensive -- and I'm not even a supporter of Sen. Clinton. Since Super Tuesday I got in the habit of giving her a shot, but it usually didn't last more than about 10 minutes before she was off and running on an anti-Clinton rant and I would have to go back to NPR for some rational radio. You see, after all the dust on this primary has settled, Democrats are going to have to join hands and be one behind whoever gets into the general or we will not defeat the NeoCons. It's that simple, and railing at and insulting the other candidate is not going to make that process easy. posted 04/07/2008 at 21:32:54
The Paulson Plan: Doing What He Wanted To Do Anyway
While I had not yet applied "The Shock Doctrine" to the Paulson plan, there was immediately a hearty level of skepticism on my part when I heard he had introduced his proposal for reorganization of the country's financial regulation. I mean, why on earth would any of us allow this regime to change anything at this time. But where are the voices of the Congressional leaders regarding this scheme? As usual, totally silent on these important matters while talking everywhere about how super delegates should execute their responsibilities and endorsing candidates so as to further muddy the waters of this swirl of a primary campaign. posted 04/01/2008 at 09:57:56
Honesty Not Race, Expediency Not Courage
Thank you for a balanced look at the true politician side of Sen. Obama, who is too often presented in the framework of saviour. From the posted comments you have managed to rile the Obama supporters who would rather not look at reality because it apparently just doesn't fit their narrative. I am particularly amused at the assignations of your loyalties by the Obama supporters, while nowhere in your article do you endorse Sen. Clinton or try to contrast her in a positive light as compared to your bio of Sen. Obama. The holier-than-thou, smug attitude and posturings of Sen. Obama have been two of the things that have put me off about him as a candidate. After one too many saviours over the years, I am extremely skeptical when a politician comes out draped in that mantle. It is completely unrealistic to think that anyone that gets to the biggest political rung of all is anything but a pure politician of great skill and alliance. As many have said, it is not a tea party, but rather a blood sport. Which has left me to wonder what I'm supposed to be distracted from while I'm enlisted in the audacity of hope? posted 04/01/2008 at 11:07:13
Could the Republicans Pick the Democratic Nominee? -- The Untold Story of How the GOP Rigged Florida and Michigan
Before all of the maneuvering at the state legislature level there is the problem that the DNC has been ignoring for too long -- why do they let two of the smallest, whitest states lead the primary campaign? Why haven't they, long ago, set up some more equitable way for the primary to proceed? By continuing to let the Iowa caucus and NH primary lead off the campaign they've continued to frustrate the other states that are more representative of the general electorate until this year that frustration boiled over into a chaotic rush to move up primary dates. The DNC and more recently Howard Dean put the problem into play by doing nothing substantive to change the situation and now they want to make others responsible. And, apparently, they've compounded the problem by being ham-fisted with two of the largest and most important states. Now, why are they doing that? When it comes to politics, nothing is usually as it seems so what's going on in the Democratic Party that is being played out in the campaigns of Sens. Clinton and Obama? The only other thing that I found interesting about this article is that it is one of the rare ones on Huff Po that shows Sen. Obama to be a politician in all regards instead of the next saviour of the world. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it just isn't the way he's usually presented. posted 04/01/2008 at 09:31:35
Dear Democratic Elite: Back Off
Ms. Marsh, you have once again put into words exactly what I was thinking and feeling. I was an Edwards supporter precisely because I didn't like or see much difference in the stances of either Sen. Clinton or Obama. Since Edwards' departure I still haven't come to be a supporter of either of the candidates we're left with. But I can tell you that my sympathies lie with Sen. Clinton more than Sen. Obama, because of the misogyny of the press and the vile things that Sen. Obama's supporters have said about Sen. Clinton. Furthermore, with each new endorsement by another of the Old White Guys' Club of the Democratic Party I just hear yet another guy telling all of us women where they think our REAL place in this world should be -- certainly not POTUS! Why should I be any happier about that impression than a supporter of Sen. Obama's would be that minorities shouldn't aspire to the Presidency? Why aren't the Party elders putting pressure on the press and the campaigns to address the real issues we should be talking about instead of trying to run one of the candidates out? posted 03/29/2008 at 13:04:49
Beyond Jeremiah: A New Kind of Media for Obama's New Kind of Politics
Gee, Shaun, you must've been hard at work on your PhD studies not to have noticed before now that there is a problem with our media. Or, maybe you were OK with it when it seemed to be slavish in its positive coverage of Sen. Obama. Whichever is the case, welcome to the party. Now that you're here, and you've noticed the tactics used by what currently passes for media, have you also thought about what we could do to change this media? Say, I know, how about reinstituting those pesky regulations that prevented consolidation? Maybe that would take the corporations out of the picture so that the media could stop being the outlet to keep us distracted from anything serious while their agenda continues to roll merrily along. Or, maybe we could institute some kind of regulation regarding the definition of the term "news" so that no one would mistake the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly or yes, even some of the AirAmerica hosts as such. Ahhh, not much likelihood in any big changes as all the candidates that the corporatist media has created for us pretty much are beholden to the interests that want to maintain the status quo. posted 03/29/2008 at 11:53:25
University Of Chicago: Obama Was A Professor
I am less concerned about the semantics of his former status with the University of Chicago than I am about his association with it at all. UC was the genesis of Milton Friedman and his Free Market Economics theories. Theories that were put into practice by his disciples, the "Chicago Boys" and others throughout the world that can be traced directly to our current economic problems as well as those of nations from the 50's to the present. How influenced is Sen. Obama by this association? What does he think of Friedman and his descendants? Would he try to enact real change for the USA by moving away from these doctrines and theories by say, changing our relationship/control of the World Bank or the IMF? His speech last week that was supposed to be a major policy speech on economics didn't seem to offer me much in the way of what his actual policies might be, just that what we've got isn't working. To which I say, "NO, DUH!". Before you Obama supporters go nuts, I am not a Clinton worshipper or Clintonista or any other silly name you'd like to tag me with just because I'm not wearing Obama Rose-colored Glasses. posted 03/29/2008 at 12:15:00
"Countdown" with Keith Olbermann Turns Five: Hurting Democrats November Chances?
Well, I have stopped watching Mr. Olbermann since he's started in on his anti-Clinton stance. I'm sure he's not missing me, but I refuse to participate in anything that will make it difficult for me to support the Democratic candidate - whoever that should be. I was an Edwards supporter and have not been able to settle on either of the candidates that the corporatist press (of which Mr. Olbermann is VERY much a part) pre-selected for me. But I definitely don't want to develop a personal bias towards Sen. Obama as a result of sympathetic feelings that piling on of Sen. Clinton might engender in me, because whoever ends up being the nominee he/she will need ALL of the Democratic Party's support to beat back the Republicans and their candidate, Sen. McCan't. posted 03/29/2008 at 12:04:50
Senator Leahy To Clinton: Drop Out
Gee, I'm so amazed -- yet another Old White Guy wants the little lady to just sit down and shut up! I might suggest to Sen. Leahy that there are plenty of reasons I can think of regards his performance as a Senator that would cause me to tell him to pack it in. Maybe he could devote a bit of time to doing something substantive with his Senatorial position about the problems that we've got on our plate right now and let the primaries continue until all have had their say. Come back and talk to us again in June, Sen. Leahy, and until then why not just do the job you have? posted 03/29/2008 at 12:31:49
Gore: Dem Race Will "Resolve Itself," No Urgency To Intervene
Once again, Mr. Gore has demonstrated why we all would've been better off had not SCOTUS facilitated the coup d'etat of the NeoCons. Everyone that is in hysterics over this primary, take a deep breath, count to 100 and try, just try, to remember that come general election time we are ALL Democrats -- not Obamatons or Clintonistas or any other derogatory name foisted on us by the corporatist media. The corporatist media is the only one benefiting by and continuing the mud fight that they have dragged this primary into. If Sen. Obama's supporters truly believe that all voters are equal in weight, then let the remaining voters in the remaining primaries have their say. In the meantime, if we stop with the stupidity that the corporatist media so enjoys distracting us with, we might get the candidates to focus on the serious things that we should be discussing and maybe we might just end up with a better candidate as a result. posted 03/29/2008 at 12:25:00
Hillary's Honorable Future: A History Lesson
Dendera, I take issue with your description of my comment as being "rabid". Please do look up the definition of the word in the dictionary of your choice and I'm pretty sure that in none of them will you find a definition that matches the tone of my original comment. Now, if you had made reference to my sarcasm, I would accept that, because that was my intent. Finally, I believe that if you reread my comment, there was no direct mention of Sen. Clinton or anything related to whether she is a deity or not. And, that would be because I think there are many things about Sen. Clinton and some of her positions that I wish were otherwise. However, I recognize that politics is not a tea party, but rather a blood sport and those that participate at the highest levels are less than pure. posted 03/29/2008 at 10:59:36
Thanks for the advice, now all of us little ladies will just go quietly back to the place that you, much more knowledgeable men have assigned us to. posted 03/28/2008 at 10:04:18
Boomers: The Iraq War and Your Second Chance to Save our Democracy
JacobSinger, you keep ignoring that our parents lived far longer than any generation before them and were active in politics far longer as a result. If memory serves, I believe it was the older, WWII-era voter that Reagan and the NeoCons appealed to -- the generation that was the Strict Father generation -- as well as the children they had before they went to war that never broke from the Strict Father family construct as did the Boomers. If anything, Boomers were disengaged from the process because after the turmoil of Vietnam they just lost steam and began to have families to raise and labored under the mistaken notion that we had changed things with the activities of the 60's. That is the disappointment I referred to -- we really hadn't because we really hadn't wrested the actual power from our parents fully. posted 03/29/2008 at 11:13:32
While I applaud your article and the well-thought ideas on how to reframe a conversation about the military with conservatives, I completely reject that our current situation can be laid solely at the feet of Boomers. If we had no conversation about Vietnam after we finally left, then lay that mistake on the World War II generation who were in power at the time, Nixon then Ford then Carter then Reagan then Bush I. Even though Shrub is the President, I think it's generally agreed that the levers of power in this administration are being pulled by Cheney, who by birth is specifically not a Boomer and in fact his ideologies seem to be more aligned with those the WWII era. As a Boomer, I often feel like we haven't been as effective as it seemed we would be, because we could never get our parents to get out of the way. Part of what has put me off about Sen. Obama's candidacy is the impression that he thinks Boomers have had their chance and are now not to be part of the solution in favor a new generation. posted 03/27/2008 at 16:54:19
Pelosi Should Recant, then Zip It Up on Pumping Obama
I totally agree with the position of this post and I'm amazed that it found its way onto HuffPo, the all-Obama-all-the-time blog. I was not surprised to see the comments by the supporters of Sen. Obama. To look at the headlines for the other postings and news items on HuffPo you'd think that it was Sen. Clinton who has caused the problem and stepped in it. While Sen. McCain is getting a free ride from the corporatist, traditional media Sen. Obama is getting not only a free ride but slavish adulation by the netroots. Ultimately, I don't think this is going to benefit anyone. posted 03/27/2008 at 21:14:55
"You Can't Do It With Force": Will the 44th President Listen to Jeffrey Sachs?
Dr, Sachs is hardly the humanitarian that your article implies -- just ask the people of Bolivia, Poland or Russia. As a proponent of the Chicago Boys' "Shock Doctrine" he has been the saboteur and not the saviour of many developing countries as has been ably documented by Naomi Klein in her book, "Shock Doctrine". Yes, he has done some humanitarian thing such as advocating for providing bed nets, but these minor efforts pale in contrast to the large-scale problems he's created. The USA will continue to reap the negative rewards for our actions until we divorce ourselves from the control of the economic theories and policies that Milton Friedman passed on to us through his Chicago Boys and their subsequent work through the IMF and the World Bank. As all of the candidates that the corporatist media have left for us to haggle over owe a great deal to these Big Money interests, I don't hold out much hope that anything of substance along this line will occur with the election of our 44th President. At some point, we as citizens are going to have to recognize that our agenda and our safety is never going to be achieved until we remove money from the equation and have publicly financed elections. posted 03/29/2008 at 11:36:01
AT&T CEO Says Hard To Find Skilled US Workers
Hard to find skilled workers, huh? Maybe if they contributed their fair share to the local tax base the local school systems could produce those workers. In reality, these corporations negotiate sweetheart deals with local governments that allow them to shirk their tax responsibilities for the privilege of having the HQ. The mayor and local governments look like heroes for bringing the big corporation to town, while the school system suffers. posted 03/27/2008 at 10:34:59
A Misunderstanding on Iraq
Well, Katrina, have you successfully pressured Sen. Obama to make any changes? Has he seen the light and decided that increasing the size of the military is not the way to change our International face? Has he seen the light and decided that the military contractors, Blackwater, CAKI, et al, have to be done away with? Has he seen the light and decided that our embassy in Iraq should be a normal embassy instead of a country unto itself? Has he seen the light and disavowed the "over the horizon strike force" as part of his withdrawal strategy? When he does these things via a major policy address, let me know so I can tune in. Until then, I think you've been caught up in the hope/hype with no assurance that it will be fulfilled. Oh, and all Obama supporters, please don't presume that I'm a Clinton supporter, because I don't see any difference between the two candidates, but will support the one that goes to the general election. It's just that in this article, Katrina is explaining why The Nation gave its endorsement to Sen. Obama and I am challenging her reasons for doing so. posted 03/27/2008 at 10:20:34
Who Gets Us Out of the Mess?
JasonEverettMiller, open your eyes with regards Sen. Obama. I'm not saying he's vile, despicable, an empty suit or anything else, just that he's a politician pretty much the same as all of the others. That is not to say that he wouldn't be a good President should that happen, but live in the real world and understand that he's going to owe pretty much the same people as the other candidates and there will be a price to pay for that support. Remember the question that Edwards asked and was never answered in the Nevada debate -- "...what do you think these contributors expect for their money?". posted 03/26/2008 at 10:38:11
Yes, pdpobol, I totally agree with you regards "The Shock Doctrine" as a primer on how our economic policies have wrought havoc on our politics and the way we have conducted ourselves internationally since the 50's. I was concerned about Sen. Obama's connection to The University of Chicago early on and those concerns have not been allayed to date. posted 03/26/2008 at 10:31:30
I thought it was interesting that Rubin was part of the Clinton administration and therefore instrumental in getting rid of the very regulation that would've kept this from happening. Yet, he's the guy saying that regulation should be part of the solution. I'd really like to hear him say, "Boy, really got that wrong!". Anyway, I agree that with Barney Frank, without the pro there shouldn't be any quid. Also, if the guys we all know are they guys that got us into this mess, then who is there to get us out?
Finally, I think Sen. Obama's supporters are going to be very surprised at your accounting of his Wall Street/Banking donations. Since he's spent the whole campaign giving the impression that he hasn't taken that kind of money, it's got to be a bit dissappointing to find he's a mere mortal politician, not much different from the other one in more respects than many care to acknowledge. posted 03/25/2008 at 20:58:24
Finally, I think Sen. Obama's supporters are going to be very surprised at your accounting of his Wall Street/Banking donations. Since he's spent the whole campaign giving the impression that he hasn't taken that kind of money, it's got to be a bit dissappointing to find he's a mere mortal politician, not much different from the other one in more respects than many care to acknowledge. posted 03/25/2008 at 20:58:24
not one of the sheep, you just don't get it do you? It's not about the risky loans it's about the spreading ripples throughout the economy. Oh, and plenty of people that would like to sell their house just because they want to move to another city or it doesn't suit them anymore CAN'T, and that is not their fault. posted 03/25/2008 at 20:52:11
Why I Was Right About Iraq
getalife80, the decision to take up the Resolution was NOT Daschle's idea, it was Cheney's. Remember the breakfast at the WH that Shrub and Darth hosted for the Congressional leaders at the time, Daschle (Sen Minority Leader), Lott, Hastert and Gephardt (Minority leader in House of Representatives)? It was at that meeting that Daschle said the resolution shouldn't be considered before the election, that it would politicize the discussion of the possibility of going to war with Iraq. adn Cheney's response was simply that "..it had to be now.". Do you suppose that maybe Daschle was reminded of the anthrax letter his office had received just the year prior? Don't you find it interesting that of that group of 4 Congressional leaders Daschle and Gephardt left their offices at the next available opportunity? posted 03/26/2008 at 11:13:37
I presume that the "something" you refer to is the despicable Oil Revenue Sharing Law that would pretty hand over their oil to Darth's Energy Task Force attendees. It would be great if Nancy would be as vocal about that piece of *&)^%% as she was about China vis-a-vis the Dai Lai Lama! posted 03/24/2008 at 15:20:15
NYT's Krugman Finds Candidates' Financial Policy Lacking, Finally
Yes, it would be great if the economy or the Wall Street meltdown were being addressed by the candidates, but then that wouldn't be nearly as interesting for the corporatist media to cover as the back-biting that they are reporting. At this point, when the candidates do say something that is informational, I suspect the reportage to the point that it has no value. Maybe they should just have a blog and post everyday, then there wouldn't be a middle man to interpret it for me. posted 03/24/2008 at 21:02:53
Clinton: Protect Reputable Home Lenders
I didn't see anything attributed to Sen. Clinton where she referred to herself as CIC of the Economy. I suspect this was a headline that the HuffPo constructed to continue their Obama preference. posted 03/24/2008 at 15:30:23
Profiteering, From the Civil War to Your Wallet
Great post, and I second the questions you want asked and answered. Unfortunately, they're not sexy or titillating and way too hard for the hairbrains that pass for journalists today; so I don't think we'll get any satisfaction about these important issues. If Sen. Obama's supporters were half as passionate about that "holding his feet to the fire" thing as they are to defending him at all costs, maybe we could get his answers. BTW, I'd like to hear Sen. Clinton's answers to these same questions. To date, the best I've been able to find as to what these two think about some of the things you've mentioned was their response to Boston Globe questionnaire wayyyyy back at the beginning of the primary. And, even then, the questions were narrow and so were the answers. posted 03/24/2008 at 21:44:05
Connecticut Newspaper Apologizes For 2006 Lieberman Endorsement
Way too little way too late. The apology does nothing to reinstate any value such an endorsement for any candidate now or in the future. posted 03/23/2008 at 17:22:31
Remember Health Care? It's Still a Problem
Back in '93 the Congress was controlled by the NeoCon Republicans who had no intention of changing the status quo. They were wolves in sheep's clothing, to be sure, feigning a conciliatory spirit to be made privy to the findings and the intended recommendations of the Health Care Reform Task Force. They then took that information and before anything could actually be proposed they killed the findings, the proposed recommendations and they started by discrediting and smearing Sen. Clinton as a presumptive nobody who had no standing to be doing this in the first place. Remember, at that time, the country was more conservative than progressive, Clinton having been elected with a 43% majority of the popular vote. I think that Sen. Clinton has acknowledged that she did not handle working with the opposition very well, and did learn quite a bit about how to work more successfully with them in the future. posted 03/24/2008 at 09:41:07
ProudLiberalDan, you've just voiced one of my big concerns about Sen. Obama. Couple his non-universal plan with his post-partisan, unity talk and I think we will fall further short of our goal to fix our healthcare crisis, since the Republicans are all for the current "free market" conditions. Still, some is better than none, I just wish I didn't have to settle for such a less-than condition on this big issue. posted 03/24/2008 at 09:31:29
Clinton, Obama Reconciliation Becoming More And More Impossible
Keep it up, Countess. When we all have to hold hands and in some cases noses, comments like yours won't make it any easier to do so. No one can win the general election without ALL of the Democrats behind them, just remember that the next time you're tempted to continue the tone that the corporatist media has egged us all into. posted 03/23/2008 at 12:05:02
TV SoundOff: Sunday Talking Heads
Jason, while I appreciate that you dutifully take our medicine for us every week and watch this crap, I think you should be careful how you characterize the candidates and their surrogates. You have the podium as a poster on HuffPo and with that position I think you have a responsibility not to add to the acrimony of this debacle of a primary. Unless Sen. Obama doesn't need the supporters of Sen. Clinton, which I don't think is the case, it serves your guy no good to add fuel to the back-biting, name-calling fire. posted 03/23/2008 at 10:55:22
Interview With Walter Pincus On The State Of The Press
ChimpmasterDJ, it seems to me that reporting has been all about repeating what politicians say, but doing so by cherry picking and then putting those cherries together to fit the drama that the corporatist media creates to keep us all distracted from addressing the really important stuff. Unfortunately, this practice doesn't confine itself to the corporatist, traditional media outlets -- you can even see the same practice here on HuffPo in the headlines for the various articles. posted 03/23/2008 at 11:09:19
Thank you for posting this interview. While it is somewhat comforting to know that I am not alone in my estimation of the current situation with regards our corporatist media, or the side effects thereof, it is completely depressing at the same time. Mr. Pincus and Helen Thomas should be the next recipients of the Medal of Freedom, if they would have it after the honor has been so devalued by Shrub. posted 03/22/2008 at 14:29:08
Newsrooms Revolt!
Merlin7, I think your post goes directly to the point of Ms. Crier's piece, since I think that MSNBC has gotten to be all-Obama-all the time as their current format. And, BTW, I'm not a supporter of Sen. Clinton, either, just someone that would like to hear some real news reporting about the real issues for a change so that in the general, I'll be able to develop some level of enthusiasm for the Democratic candidate that I most certainly will vote for. posted 03/22/2008 at 14:15:14
Catherine, your post is right on point. I have been harping on the corporatist media's part in this debacle of a primary campaign since they started by shutting out the other voices, Kucinich, Edwards, Biden, Dodd and Richardson, in favor of the drama that they could develop between Sens. Clinton and Obama. Now with the corporatist media's dream primary well underway, I have been trying to resist the tension that they are all so happy to incite. The number of stations that I will tune in to has been contracting rapidly of late, because I just can't take it anymore. I'm put off by almost all of them at this point. Getting either of the candidates to address the truly serious issues that are concerns to me has not happened in this environment of he said/she said news coverage. But, what are we to do? There doesn't seem to be any change in sight before this primary is all over, and with that outlook, how can anyone be sure we've truly selected the best candidate instead of the one that was pre-selected for us? posted 03/22/2008 at 14:12:49
John Edwards Unlikely To Endorse
did you actually follow the link you inserted after your assertion that "Obama has pledged to return constitutional liberties, Clinton has not:"? I ask, because the Reuters article, which had link to a Nation article, which had the link to a Boston Globe article about responses to a BG questionnaire pretty much showed that the candidates hold pretty much the same view with respect to the powers of the Executive and what they think of the way Shrub has stunk up the place, as well as what they would do should they win the WH. Anyway, thanks for the link(s). posted 03/23/2008 at 13:20:41
aicon, if I remember correctly, Mr. Edwards' campaign was not an anti-war campaign. Instead, it was a campaign of populism, i.e., getting the death grip of the corporatists off of our government so that we could return to a "we" instead of "me" way of doing things. The Iraq war was a part of his campaign, because it does have an effect on how our tax dollars are being spent. Other really important points were his position on health care reform, which would've excluded PHARMA and Big Insurance from participating in that effort. Also, one of the important points of Edwards' campaign was campaign finance reform, as in publicly financed elections So, why would Sen. Obama's war position be a good reason for Edwards supporting Sen. Obama when there were other important things that they weren't in agreement on? That there were significant differences between Edwards and BOTH candidates probably accounts for why he can't make up his mind about who to support. Frankly, I don't blame him -- as a former Edwards supporter, neither can I. posted 03/23/2008 at 12:57:54
Crunch Time: John Edwards Needs To Step Up For Barack
joebhed, you said very well what I have been thinking for a long time. posted 03/22/2008 at 17:33:00
14 Painful Things Hillary Knows -- Or Should Know
MelindaPost, your comment is pretty much what I was thinking, so thanks for saying it. posted 03/21/2008 at 21:13:23
From GENder Gap To GENeration Gap?
Let me get this straight, the kids that the Boomers have raised, who rhapsodize about the New Politics of Unity and Dignity are actually engaged in the generational disenfranchisement of their parents? These kids that we, the Boomers, have taught tolerance and inclusion and fairness to are so willing to throw us over the side if they don't get their way? Well, that one isn't too hard to understand as I thought that Boomer parents were by and large way too permissive. Anyway, I find it interesting that this movement that is supposed to be all about a new way and a new inclusion seems to have a lot of people that they think are not relevant and pretty much OK to disregard or discard entirely. The Boomers are not responsible for the mess this country is in! Cheney is not a Boomer (born 1941), Reagan was not a Boomer, and most of the people that put the Bushies into office were not Boomers, they were people in their 60's and 70's back in 2000. These are the people that have screwed up our country. Finally, when I go to MoveOn events, guess who's there -- Boomers! Guess who isn't -- Millinials! posted 03/21/2008 at 17:57:50
We, The O-Boomers
indie17, again, not a statement that is much different from statements made by Sen. Clinton. I don't think either of them is going to actually pursue prosecution, in fact, Sen. Obama's assertion that he wants to "...leave old fights behind..." pretty much precludes doing that, I think. Jimmy Carter, was another candidate that wanted to do that and let the Nixonians go scot free giving us Cheney, Addington, Rumsfeld et al who took that lesson of no prosecution and worked it into the current regime. Who are we going to foster for the coming decades if we don't prosecute? And, which candidate can you tell me has said they would? And, which candidate have you heard specifically address the odious PATRIOT act and how it has shredded our Bill of Rights? No, we've been all about the stupid politics of identity brought to us and fostered by the corporatist media. posted 03/23/2008 at 11:49:03
Boadicea, exactly how does your comment address the thread? Nowhere did I let Sen. Clinton off the hook with regards corporate money, and as far as I know she's pretty much been very public about these contributions - even embracing them. Remember, someday soon, we are all going to have to join hands and be one big party. It will be easier to do that if we don't have to overcome such emotionally charged accusations. posted 03/22/2008 at 14:33:42
Popular Stories on HuffPost
From the AP: Democrat John Edwards endorsed former rival Barack Obama on Wednesday, a...
*** UPDATED BELOW *** President Bush has said repeatedly that he would not insert himself into the...
Utterly insane goings-on tonight on...
It's a pretty well known fact that most women - attractive women -...
Just off the House floor today, the Crypt overheard House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers tell two...
Tonight, Keith Olbermann unleashed what may well have been his...
The AP reports on Obama's swift and forceful response to Bush and McCain's criticism of...
The Tennessee GOP hasn't yet had their fill of Obama dirty tricks. A few months ago,...
***UPDATE*** Roughly five hours after making comments about...
Sixteen tips for getting good sleep. There's a lot of advice out there about getting good...
George W. Bush is unworthy of the presidency. He is a disgrace to himself,...
A lot is being said right now to the effect of, "What took him so long?" Some people...
