!

Late polls show a Huckasurge in South Carolina.

The GOP meltdown looks like it may continue apace.

This may be Hollywood Fred’s Waterloo also.

-G

THE INEQUITIES ARE DISTURBING

Alan Rickman. Oh. my. dog.
It’s been love since Die Hard.

I was wondering where you were going with the Rickman picture.

No one will win a nomination today—but some may lose it. Several dems have dropped out already- and Edwards is probably going to join em soon.

In the gooper party, though- it’s the night of the living dead—they won’t DIE–no matter how many times they get the crap kicked out of em! Freddie? Rudy, Paul? They should be back home sippin martinis- but instead they keep trudging along–strange.

Yeah, I totally have a thing for Alan Rickman.

That man’s voice … ah ….

News:EPU’d

Hillary Clinton has listed BOTH Reagan and Bush Sr. among her favorite presidents on her official website. http://www.hillaryclinton.com/…..w/?id=4674

This goes to the heart of why I disdain her. This makes her Obama attack on this matter ludicrous. (Bill Clinton is also on her “favorite presidents list).

lol, yeah the “Mwrowr” said it all!

Hi, PW! He certainly does look “rugged”.

PW – the Wall Street disparities are disgusting, and coincide with the whole Bush economic program. Will we hold the Wall Street honchos accountable? No, they got big bonuses for f’ing the country.

Gone fishin’.

L and okk.

How dare you insult Dinkweed Hunter by exclusion!

-G

http://lh5.google.com/caulfiel…..Slide4.jpg

executive pay

“Today, we’re completely out of line with other advanced countries. The share of income received by the top 0.1 percent of Americans is twice the share received by the corresponding group in Britain, and three times the share in France. These days, to find societies as unequal as the United States you have to look beyond the advanced world, to Latin America. And if that comparison doesn’t frighten you, it should.”

Paul Krugman, writing in Rolling Stone, about a million years ago. Long piece, worth re-reading.

speakin’ of insurance, there’s this. Far too complicated for my kitchen table-level economic understanding, but I think a key is that municipal bonds are no longer considered insured in some quarters.

Scary.

They came for the working class and most MSM said nothing…
They came for the middle class and most MSM said nothing…
They’re comin’ for the cities now…and this is a lot more potentially lethal than Katrina or 9/11…

Unfortunately it’s too hard for Grandpa Charlie and Company to understand, much less report on. So bring on the bread and circuses….

A couple of days ago I listened to a one-hour interview with former Bush speech writer David “Axis-of-Evil” Frum. He was hawking a new book on how the Republican phoenix can rise from the ashes. Listening to the guy gave me more understanding of Paris in the Terror. I can’t quote him exactly, but one statement was very close to this:

“…there are more distinct divisions between classes in our society, now that success receives greater rewards and failure brings on greater punishment.”

He said it with a mater- of- fact coldness ( in essence that it is the correct way of things that failure to achieve success warrants punishment and the lower classes are receiving their necessary punishment) that it reminded me of Heinrich Himler. I felt like, “Okay, that did it. Break out the guillotines.”

He was great in “Dogma.”

Oh my, yes, extra Rickman. One of my favorite movies is Truly, Madly, Deeply. Great stuff.

Two requests:
Does anyone know of an active Nevada blog

Does anyone want to post at Kos the Clinton website I list above at 8 (there is a 24 hour wait for new subscribers). Thanks in advance for both!

Frum is despicable. Vile. Just like so many of the far right flaccid fascists.

-G

Saw Alan Rickman in London during the 80’s (when I could still afford to travel). He played Valmont in Dangerous Liasons. OMG is all I can say.

Hello, everyone! How are we this chilly morning? I’m late because I had to go to the post office before it closed. Brrrrr!

Wall Street’s five biggest firms are paying a record $39 billion in bonuses for 2007, a year when three of them suffered the worst quarterly losses in their history and shareholders lost more than $80 billion.

Bonuses for 2007 will exceed the $36 billion distributed in 2006, when the industry reported record high profits.

Yeah. Gotta love this shit. Heads of Citi & Merrill Lynch etc drive their companies into the toilet and always walk away with eight figure parting gifts.

Back in November my wife, who was Director of Quality for the Environmental Division of The Shaw Group and had been with the company for 23 years (through 3 successive corporate owners) and had a uniformly off-the-scale excellent personnel file, got kicked to the curb in a re-org (the new COO didn’t like the idea of a Skirt working out of Vegas as Head of QA). Two weeks notice, four weeks’ severance, and the cancellation of our health coverage on the last day of her notice. I was getting a root canal and crown at the time, and they denied payment. Cost me $1,14 out of pocket.

Whatever.

I may be shuffling some stuff around in my 401k this weekend.

I just got one of my statement. Lost money in the 2nd half of 2007. I will be doing likewise.

The gates on their exclusive communities won’t save them when the security guard leaves them open. And this in a country that is armed to the teeth.

OK, duh, jeez…2 posts, 2 typos. Get coffee.

Much of the gooper rhetoric comes from business thinking gone bad.

It’s a maxim of corporate life that successful firms reward high achievers and punish (fire) low achievers- so they take that bit of wisdom and transfer it to society in general- thinking that it makes sense to set up a society where success is rewarded and failure punished- so it’s RIGHT to have a society where those who bring the least to the table get the crap kicked out of em rather than a helping hand. It’s mindless sloganeering.

Yes, yes and yes.

I first found out about him from Die Hard. My then-BF took me to see the film because he liked Bruce Willis in the Moonlighting TV series; I’m not normally an action-film fan or a Bruce Willis fan, but I went anyway.

Rickman not only steals the damned film out from under Willis, he also has more chemistry with the female co-star Bonnie Bedelia than Bruce Willis does — and Bedelia’s supposed to be Willis’ estranged wife!

This needs to get out all over the place – in big, bold print!!

Goopers commit the fallacy of composition regularly- assumimg that what’s true for a part is also true of the whole.

kinda looks like the dKosers are over that pie fight.

“I was getting a root canal and crown at the time, and they denied payment.”

F*cking. Unreal.

Sue the bastards, BobbyG. I suggest calling up John Edwards.

HRC constantly trips my BS meter. I would have liked to like her, but I don’t believe her.

Hezbollah’s Nasrallah appears in public in Lebanon to launch ghoulish taunts at Israel.

“He said Hezbollah had the “heads of your [Israel’s] soldiers, we have hands, we have legs”.”

Speaking of despicable.

-G

Uh. Greaaaat.

It never seems to occur to them that, at some point, the large number of “failures” start trying to think a game they can win at.

I’ll get right on it;

“Her list of favorite presidents – Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan – demonstrates how she thinks.”

Third paragraph from the end.

LOL, yeah, I’d had the root canal done, but they put the permanent crown in one day after her notice ended, so UUHC denied the $1,014 claim.

A-yep. Even if they take out the first dozen or so, there will be more.

The Cons’ problem is that they forgot to leave the last little crumb of hope. When people have no hope, they say “fuck it, we’re dead anyway” and attack.

YES! Can you post it over at Kos? I am not a subscriber

huh? link?

I agree that Obama never said that he endorsed Reagan and HRC apparently does,if this list is valid. I don’t understand how she could. But, while I saw John Edwards on Obama’s case about the reference to Reagan, I didn’t see where HRC criticised him for that. If she did, it really was dumb.

Well, we just saw one of the Wall Streeters kill his wife and take a plunge off a bridge.

Sounds like the terror is coming home to roost.

-G

Me either :(

just general demeanor of comments in threads. Looks like they’ve been at it on this topic.

I really fell in love with Rickman in Dogma, and he’s such a good actor that it took a while before I realized he was the same person I’d seen years before in Die Hard. Particularly striking since Willis plays pretty much the same character in everything.

My first reaction on landing at the post is, “Who is this hunky looking guy?” Mwrowr indeed!

I saw Alan Rickman at a shoe store in London several years ago.

Today or previously? Has it made it as a diary? Is Kos an HRC supporter…I don’t remember?

But no president can do it alone. She must break recent tradition, cast cronyism aside and fill her cabinet with the best people, not only the best Democrats, but the best Republicans as well.. We’re confident she will do that. Her list of favorite presidents – Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan – demonstrates how she thinks. As expected, Bill Clinton was also included on the aforementioned list.

OK, Lincoln and TR I can understand. Even Ike, should she have chosen him.

But RONALD EFFING REAGAN?!

Mister Destroy-PATCO-Just-Because-I-Can?

Mister Kick-Off-My-Campaign-In-Philadelphia-MISSISSIPPI?!

Mister Rape-All-Social-Programs-While-Helping-Out-My-War-Profiteer-Buddies?

Good effing GOD, woman!

To this day, the residents of DC refuse — REFUSE — to call National Airport by the name the GOP Congress forced on it. It took months for DC to put out new signage for the place with the vile “R” word on it, and that only after the Republicans threatened to pull all city funding if they didn’t.

What?

Honestly, that is really sad. I say this having lost a relative to a similar suicide in the great depression.

Don’t forget to give Phoenix Woman some Digg love on this. Spread the word!

There are a few straggling diaries. I don’t read dKos much any more and really have no idea who kos likes.

My first reaction on landing at the post is, “Who is this hunky looking guy?” Mwrowr indeed!

In the UK he’s known as ‘the thinking woman’s crumpet’, as his intelligence and decency shines on his face.

I can’t find it now, but I recall seeing that the source of that “favorite presidents” quote was an interview HRC did with someone who asked “Which presidential portraits would you like to have hung in your White House?”

That’s a very different question than “Which presidents would you model your adminstration after?”

You can criticize her for a lot of things, but her choice of portraits to hang in the White House, should she win, is probably way, way down on the list.

Oh my goodness. Link?

Mortgage company executive plunges to his death in NJ.

-G

Sad, two kids. As this fiasco unravels the reality hits home.

GregB January 19th, 2008 at 8:55 am
38
Hezbollah’s Nasrallah appears in public in Lebanon to launch ghoulish taunts at Israel.

“He said Hezbollah had the “heads of your [Israel’s] soldiers, we have hands, we have legs”.”

Speaking of despicable.
_______

have a link?

Peterr: Thanks for that. I hope you’re right.

Thing is, it would make no sense for her to fawn over Reagan, since he’s far less popular with the average American than he is with the Beltway pundits who profited from their hagiography of him.

The story about the growth of Iraqi narco-terrorism with al qaeda is worrisome. I still believe that when the US military leaves that Iraqis will take down AQ on their own, but this kind of deepening entrenchment with a local source of funding in the form of poppy cultivation is kind of a shock.

Here’s a link to the financial officer suicide/murder link:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne…..5268.story

Good point, but notice, she did not say Jimmy Carter, or any number of other presidents. THis seems to have been calculated for popular consumption. And why George Bush senior? What in heaven sakes did he do?

Gotta love this shit. Heads of Citi & Merrill Lynch etc drive their companies into the toilet and always walk away with eight figure parting gifts.

As I said yesterday, I’m eminently qualified for one of these jobs. I’d prefer to be made the head of a film studio.

I’ve got this great idea for a movie: special effects out the wazoo, high-intensity action, etc. I figure about $1 Billion in costs. Starring Bea Arthur.

Nasrallah speaks in public in Lebaon.

From Yahoo.

-G

There’s also the fact that the editorial was reprinted on her own website.

… donations must be faltering …

How’s it goin’ dood ?

I take her choices to be an attempt to acknowldge that the White House is, in some respects, the People’s House. The list has the most recent several occupants of the WH, plus several all-time greats. Sounds reasonable to me.

Oh, and thanks for the H/T’s PW! I read Pierce whenever I can just because.

And it truly is beyond believable that Wall St is giving out all these mega bonuses as rewards for losing money and driving companies into the ground. I mean I’m sure I can do as they are doing for far less money and do it far more efficiently. Especially if losing money IS the goal that it seems to be these days.

Peterr, also note that this is up on HER website as HER favorite presidents (granted the piece was written by a newspaper in support of her rather than a staff member). But if what was said was known to be wrong, she should correct it if she puts it up on her website. In short, she was proud to have it up there. And so in key ways it speaks for itself.

Phoenix Woman January 19th, 2008 at 8:57 am
43
In response to PeteCO @ 28
A-yep. Even if they take out the first dozen or so, there will be more.

The Cons’ problem is that they forgot to leave the last little crumb of hope. When people have no hope, they say “fuck it, we’re dead anyway” and attack.

_______________

these people have no understanding of history. it’s probably never occurred to them that what happened to France in the 18th century and Russia in the 20th century could happen in the U.S. in the 21st century.

Charles Pierce is always awesome.

… and Alan Rickman … *g*

I will vote for whoever is nominated and have tried not to disparage any of the Democrats. But I really don’t understand why they would put this on their website. Not only does it name RR (who began dismantlement of the New Deal and Great Society programs), but it lists six Federalists or Republicans, compared to four Democratic-Republicans or Democrats. This one is beyond me.

Yup

The Yahoo article did not run the most inflammatory rhetoric of Nasrallah. Al Jazeera did.

-G

Agreed. She could have found a way to highlight the endorsement without reprinting the problematic quote.

Yup!

But of course – what was I thinking? thanks. *g*

The particularly galling thing for us personally (see my #25), is that my wife’s company had record revenue and backlog, and their stock was way up at the time she got canned.

Yes, it was one of those great twisted stories. Unfortunately a lot of those seem to be popping up about HRC from our side, very much like the machine of the right. KOS is not a supporter, BTW. I do not like what is happening in our press (the blogs). Even here I find too much unsubstantiated stuff being spread about her. It is not happening to Edwards or to Obabma. So all I can say is WTF??

Rickman as Alexander Dane in Galaxy Quest: Priceless.

The NJ exec:

Over the past few years, the federal government filed several tax liens against Buczynski, an executive vice president at Fieldstone Mortgage Co.

By 2006, he owed more than $656,000 in back taxes.

Fieldstone went bankrupt last November in light of the subprime lending collapse and laid off most of its employees.

Earlier this week, the company requested in court to pay $1.1 million in bonuses to the few remaining staffers and executives, including Buczynski.

But Buczynski didn’t stick around for the payout.

Instead, he wrote a horrifying conclusion to a modern tale of corporate excess and failure.

Police said Buczynski, 59, murdered his wife, Marci, 37, in their Marlton, N.J., home yesterday and then jumped to his death off the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

Authorities have yet to determine exactly how Buczynski killed his wife, who was found by police in her bedroom.

Investigators were searching the Delaware River for Buczynski’s body last night.

The couple left behind two sons, ages 14 and 8, authorities said. Neither was at home, on Atlanta Drive near Topeka Court, when their mother was killed.

A couple of random thoughts:

1) Those poor boys!

2) Notice the age difference between Buczynski and his late wife. He married her when he was in his early forties and she was in her very early twenties. Was she really a person to him, or just a mark of his studliness in business and in bed? (Notice that he killed her but not his sons. That’s suggestive to me.)

Petro….whashappening?

-G

… waves to Fahrender …

Forget the last century, most Americans have already forgotten the lessons of the past 2 Presidencies …

O/T but interesting– Tom Ridge:

WASHINGTON – The first secretary of the Homeland Security Department says waterboarding is torture.

“There’s just no doubt in my mind — under any set of rules — waterboarding is torture,” Tom Ridge said Friday in an interview. Ridge had offered the same opinion earlier in the day to members of the American Bar Association at a homeland security conference.

“One of America’s greatest strengths is the soft power of our value system and how we treat prisoners of war, and we don’t torture,” Ridge said in the interview. Ridge was secretary of the Homeland Security Department between 2003 and 2005. “And I believe, unlike others in the administration, that waterboarding was, is — and will always be — torture. That’s a simple statement.” …

Not a lot of good guys in power in that region. But then, peace negotiations are rarely necessary between “good guys.”

My take on it is they try to falsely frame or cast themselves as all of America. Anyone against them or their policies is therefore anti-American.

Fox News is America. F
Keith Olbermann attacks Fox News daily. T
DailyKOS is where Keith Olbermann blogs. T
Therefore, Fox says dailyKOS is anti-American. F

Fox News, the Neocons, Swiftboat liars and right-wingers like to wrap the truth (a.k.a. reality) in their false shit sandwich. And since reality has a well-known liberal bias, they are trying to wrap us in their shit sandwich. In 2000, they took out Al Gore. In 2004, they got John Kerry.

By Grabthar’s hammer, by the sons of Worvan, you shall be avenged!

- Tom

Hey GregB … just watching with interest, your nomination process, where sizzle sells over substance once again … how’s you and when the heck are you coming to Toronto ?!!

Bravo to Tom Ridge for that.

-G

Sounds like a great set of facts to support a Gender/Age(?) discrimination case.

A-yep. Which means that you won’t see or hear about Ridge’s remarks anywhere where the average American can see or hear about them.

Yes, it’s peculiar how Repugs regain their morals once leaving the Bush administration …

lol Yes!

A state of perpetual war doesn’t breed a lot of poets.

Does Canada allow visits from members of torture states still?

-G

He even made purchasing the Boston Herald respectable when he was writing sports there early in his career.

Maybe. But, Cheryl is just moving on.

I love it: now we gotta pay $7,200 a year for COBRA coverage or go without health insurance.

… only if you’re on a Hockey team … *g*

PW! Looks like Newsweek is calling out most of the rest of the media on the staph strain as well.

CORBA is only a reasonable system to people who’ve never had to use it.

Yeah, it’s better than nothing, but not by much.

As politics in the Democratic party reveals itself in the primaries and caucuses that are taking place, I was wondering if anyone knows of any polls taken to just break down American’s internal political divisions: What percent of the electorate considers themselves conservative Dems; what percent liberal or progressive Dems, what percent moderate Dems; what percent Independents lean left, middle and right; and what percent of Rethugs likewise? Also, definitions that distinguish amongst the various groups?

I ask this because I don’t understand what makes a self-defined conservative a Democrat instead of a Rethug; or why a self-defined liberal or progressive would not be a Dem rather than Rethug. I kinda understand the independents wanting to maintain their independence (or doesn’t want to get the party fundraising calls or whatever) but…

I have a feeling that the self-defined liberals or progressives are a smaller group than they image themselves to be in total. I also think that there is something under the surface of politics these days that is more sinister than most of us want to believe. It’s almost like all the current pols are privy to a secret that us peons are not, and it manifests itself in strange behavior like Nancy Pelosi taking the subject of Impeachment off the table. I’m not sure she’s ever really given a viable rationale for telling the WH they can do anything they want for the rest of their term as well as prior to her coming into the majority with impunity. I think that’s a strange and cowardly act for a Dem and it sets a bad precedent, and it’s not the only example. Whatever is going on, I think it pretty well calls for the removal of almost all incumbents in favor of all new blood (I could never call for getting rid of Teddy or Feingold or Byrd, for that matter.) But I doubt that enough of us feel this way, so I’d like an idea of percentages. I’d like to know just how much of a minority are we.

I just would like to add that, despite having Bush- Lite (Harper) as our Prime Minister, our courts are upholding Human Rights and Freedoms more than ever, so don’t give in to Bushco’s bullying or Pelosi/Reid’s abject surrender … keep fighting the good fight !

She [Sen. Clinton] listed several presidents that she admired and mentioned she liked Reagan’s communication skills. She did not say Reagan was her favorite President. She didn’t say anything close to that.

This was posted by Kos last night.

PW, you give me da swoon with that picture. Rickman, ahhhhh.

Reagan’s communication skills ?!! *gasp*
I didn’t know he had any, except to deny ever being in charge of of the worse policy decisions. Bush43 came along and took up Ronnie’s gameplan … will HRC do the same ?

Heaven help us if Mary and Helen see Alan’s pic. *g*

understandable. But *just in case* – there’s a very short Statute of Limitation period on those cases – 6 months IIRC. Initial complaint must be filed with EEOC within that time.

just an FYI – and I’ll leave it alone now.

Petrocelli January 19th, 2008 at 9:18 am
89
In response to fahrender @ 75
… waves to Fahrender …

Forget the last century, most Americans have already forgotten the lessons of the past 2 Presidencies …
______________________________
Reply

i think that some of these people are pretty well educated but they are so arrogant and tunnel-visioned, so lacking in empathy for anyone not of their class, that they can’t believe that their behavior could lead to violence against them.

On her website, it is a list her favorite presidents (nothing about qualities) and as I mention above, it is in the form of a newspaper column supporting her. If she does not agree with it she would not have posted it on her website. This is damning in its own right, and in terms of her attack of Obama over this same issue.

Wait, Alan Rickman sent you a photo for giving him a staph infection? I’m confused…

The only problem I have with Alan Rickman is that he is SUCH a good actor that he sucks the air out of the room in every Harry Potter scene he is in. His scenes end and I think “Okay, well, that was acting, now back to whatever these folks are doing.” The same was true when Richard Harris was Dumbledore of course: moving from one of his scenes to scenes with lesser actors was like stepping off a cliff.

Reagan/Bush Sr.

Iran Contra.

I also think that there is something under the surface of politics these days that is more sinister than most of us want to believe. It’s almost like all the current pols are privy to a secret that us peons are not, and it manifests itself in strange behavior like Nancy Pelosi taking the subject of Impeachment off the table

Yep.

Good idea. I tend to tune out FDL and dKos (especially) when it is in circle firing squad mode (a.k.a primary season)

I prefer the progressive caucus building and pushing the center-right left.

Plus all those corrupt folks – Rumsfelds, Cheney, etc.

I would have to say that HRC has run an amazing PR campaign against Obama and she wouldn’t have put this on her site unless enough focus groups had approved it … it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

So it wasn’t just the accent ?!! *g*

S & L, Iran Hostage Crisis, …

Thanks for this, Pete!

I am concerned that this blog will not be taken seriously with all this gushing movie-star fandom.

Read the full quote. It’s in the context of a newspaper editorial which endorses her.”But no president can do it alone. She must break recent tradition, cast cronyism aside and fill her cabinet with the best people, not only the best Democrats, but the best Republicans as well.. We’re confident she will do that. Her list of favorite presidents – Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan – demonstrates how she thinks. As expected, Bill Clinton was also included on the aforementioned list.”

This editorial is posted on her own website, for public consumption. Even if the source of the original quote is her talking about presidential portraits, her own people are taking it out of context to make it look like she favours Reagan & Bush One.

Intentional or incompetent? You decide.

nice typing to y’all.

i’m about to take advantage of some Dresden Kul-cha tonight. goin’ to hear Kurt Masur conduct the Dresden Philharmonic in the Shostakovitch Symphony #13. i’ll be back later …..

Nevada Caucuses Gail Collins

Hispanic Vote Fight Starts in Nevada

That and all this talk about music and sports. We need to talk about nothing but the fact that the end of the world is right around the frickin corner, er, I mean economics.

I said I was taking a short sabbatical from all the camaign stuff, but i need a fix. I’ve never gone this long (a week) without following politics since I was a teenager. Just a little. I’m gonna check out the paper to see what the latest Repug poll is down here.

Wait, Alan Rickman sent you a photo for giving him a staph infection? I’m confused…

And he enjoyed every minute of it! (Just kidding!)

Agreed on his abilities to command the screen. To ‘Rickman’ something is to take it over with the minimum amount of exertion or screen time. He single-handedly saved Robin Hood: Prince of Dweebs from being yet another boring Kevin Costner vanity piece, even with a ton of his scenes on the cutting-room floor.

SEIU refusing to endorse Lipinsky in Il (per Kos). SEIU, as I have mentioned before, is a fabulous union – and one of the most politically active. They are also in the mix in Nevada.

I am concerned that this blog will not be taken seriously with all this gushing movie-star fandom.

Hey – I’m pushing for a high-budget action movie starring Bea Arthur. What’s not to be taken seriously with *that*? heh.

And why George Bush senior? What in heaven sakes did he do?

He has done nothing much for heaven, but he has done a lot for Hell. Kommander Guy’s Daddy did publicly start the New World Order. Actually his Daddy, Prescott Bush started it, with his support of the Nazis. We now have a Dictatorship run by Blackwater, and Halliburton. Her list of favorite presidents… George H.W. Bush and Reagan – demonstrates how she thinks. Hillary thinks we need an even more evil New World Order. (Michael O’Hanlon, Mark Penn, Howard Wolfson, James Carville, Rupert Murdoch…) ANYONE BUT HILLARY!

What is at stake is more than one small country, it is a big idea—a new world order.

“… and cancel Christmas” … one of the most memorable lines of all time …

Don’t forget biofuels! ;-)

(I suspect Mack’s just jealous. Tell ya what: I’ll put up a picture of Marge Helgenberger next time around, just for the guys.)

“You, 10:30. You, 10:45. And bring a friend.”

LOL !!!

His delivery is peerless … has been, since Die Hard …

Never better than as the angel in Dogma.

“Why a spoon, cousin?”

“Because it’ll hurt more, you twit.”

((( EDP )))

When I read that it went straight in the “Save” folder. The comparison of the US with Latin America is devastating, effective, and needs a wider airing. It’s more true now than it was when Krugman wrote it in 2006. Or becoming more evident, I should say. Here it is again, for those who missed it.

Done. Like Rudy.

McCain got 26 percent in the Florida poll, followed by former front-runner Rudy Giuliani with 22 percent, Mike Huckabee 17 percent, Mitt Romney 16 percent, Fred Thompson 7 percent and Ron Paul 5 percent.
Poll by South Florida Sun-Sentinel and the Florida Times-Union

Giuliani dominated statewide polls, making a victory here look inevitable. But in the past few weeks his numbers have plunged. A recent Florida poll showed him two points behind Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and a national poll had him in fourth. Thursday, a new Strategic Vision poll, one in which Giuliani had led since 2005, had him tumbling to third in Florida behind McCain and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.
-Orlando Sentinel

Now this is funny. Katherine Harris showed up at one of his events. He definitely has taken on the smell of a loser. “She was not here with the campaign,” said Giuliani spokeswoman Maria Comella. “It wasn’t coordinated.” LOL. Loser. Stick a fork in him. See if he’s done.

OK. That’s my campaign coverage fix.

Is the Football Giants/GB line still 7?

Economic growth – tax cuts for the wealthy.

Economic slowdown – tax cuts for the wealthy.

At least Bush is consistent /s

The best laugh of all in that movie was the casting for God.
A voice unbearable by human ears indeed.

Careful dood, some of us like her and not just cuz she’s Canadian … *g*

Did I read that right? They wanna put an extra 800 bucks in my pocket? I remember my dad being so pissed because McGovern got trashed for proposing $1000.

She was awesome, Carlin was no slouch either.

Exactly! And that is the change that Ronald Reagan and the following generation of Reaganite Republicans brought to America; they turned it into a banana republic. And that is why Obama’s paens to them are so outrageous, e.g., this from the Reno Gazette (via HuffPo):

“I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10 to 15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom.”

Oh, don’t forget this.

Dammit, I was really hoping that Rudy would win the Repug nomination … it would have been great theater to watch him get hammered by the Dem nominee …

I can vote for any of the Dems and I can enjoy any of the Repugsgetting hammered by the Dem nominee. I have no preference, really.

Maybe he’s trying for the Rack vote.

((( wigwam )))

Obama & Hillary are obviously saying this because it will get them more votes … which makes it more frustrating to watch Edwards lose to them …

Run Al Run !!!

Challening conventional wisdom with dumber than dirt ideas is no mark of distinction.

I’m sorry. Who said that?

Who is that?

Cheer up, it’s better than you think! It’s true that self-defined liberals are a minority, as are self-defined conservatives. But many more independents are supporters of liberal policies than conservative ones (see here.) Basically, the decades-long demonization of “liberals” by the right succeeded in making people disinclined to call themselves liberals, but didn’t actually change their basic beliefs.

As for the state of impeachment, I think that’s a simple political calculation, one that I disagree with, but I understand. The leadership calculated that the Republicans were in such lockstep (unlike the Nixon-era Republicans, some of whom had a sense of shame) that there was not going to be a conviction in the Senate, and that the right-wing noise machine would put tremendous effort into painting it as nothing but revenge for Clinton. And it would suck up most of the oxygen, preventing much else from getting done, and any other accomplishments from getting any publicity (though I think they underestimated how much the GOP would block anything from getting done anyway.)

Thus they believed it was better for long-term Democratic control to try to enact a positive agenda, and to have it clearly be the fault of the GOP if it didn’t pass. Heck, they may have even thought it was better for the country in the long run, and not just the party, to have the Dems solidly in control than to impeach Bush but risk losing that.

Personally, I don’t agree; I think it’s very important for the future of the country to declare unequivocally that what the Bush Administration did is not permissible no matter who gets elected, and impeachment is the only way to do that. But I do understand it. (Either way, I think it was a very bad idea to explicitly take impeachment off the table, rather than keeping it for leverage.)

But it’s not a dark undercurrent, it’s not that they know something we don’t that puts us in a worse position. It’s just politics.

Dumber than dogshit is what I say. But I’m reserving that for Dana.

Obama!

I hear what you’re saying but it’s still tough to top “Lying Sack of Cute”

Tell ya what: I’ll put up a picture of Marge Helgenberger next time around, just for the guys.)

Is she on one of those CSI shows?

I nominate Santanico Pandemonium

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtd3iTnNL8o

or you can just call her Salma Hayek…

“I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10 to 15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom.”

That’s an accurate observation. It’s not praise. (or it is if you’re not paying attention).

Contrast with “She must break recent tradition, cast cronyism aside and fill her cabinet with the best people, not only the best Democrats, but the best Republicans as well.. We’re confident she will do that. Her list of favorite presidents – Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan – demonstrates how she thinks.”

Which is a press release, on her own website.

Again.

We on the left are faced with the choice between a DLC/A*P*C candidate and a bipartisan who seems to be following his mentor across the aisle. AAARRRGGGHHH!!!

See, i’ve been puposely not following this for a week. I was hoping you weren’t going to say that. God, what have I missed in the past week that made him spout such horseshit?

That is funny.

I dunno about you, but I’ve been calling every Merkun I know connected to Gore, begging them to make him run and I still think he will … eternal optimist that I am …

Who is that a picture of?

Steve Gillard on reagan

http://stevegilliard.blogspot……-2004.html

I love Alan Rickman and have sat through some terrible movies as a result.

Phoenix woman her eis something to warm you up as you are NOT there …but it is beautiful to look at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKZpjoKqkGc
Enjoy!

Damn, I so hope you are right.

NBC calls Nevada for Romney

Catherine Harris, bro. Check out the lungs on that. She gets my vote, if you know what I mean.

I need help.

“I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10 to 15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom.”

That’s an accurate observation. It’s not praise. (or it is if you’re not paying attention).

I agree it can be read as not being praise. And it can equally well be read as being praise, because he didn’t so much as say “of course, the change I want to lead is in a different direction.” I think this was entirely intentional, and that’s what bothers me about it, not the citing of Reagan.

If you like and trust Obama, your reaction is “of course he meant change in a new direction, he wasn’t praising Reagan.” But you don’t come into office leading a movement by being coy about its direction, and I do think we need a movement.

I want to like Obama, and in many ways I do, but things like this just make me nervous.

I just would like to add that, despite having Bush- Lite (Harper) as our Prime Minister, our courts are upholding Human Rights and Freedoms more than ever

Hey Petro,

I see Harper as a bush heavy, the only difference is that Harper does not have a bevy of sociopaths giving him advice. He has not found all the necessary henchmen to make sure the vision is met. If he’s reelected, watch out, he’ll have found his goons.

It would appear that even the lung-lover vote didn’t come out for K last time.

You’re shitting me. This is waay o/t. But, ladies, don’t be insulted or say how superficial I am but that photo of Katherine Harris show that every woman – every woman – no matter what race, what height, what weight, what complexion, whatever – every woman looks better wearing less makeup than a rodeo clown. Try it sometime, Ms. Harris.

We’ve got some work to do, not the least of which is getting a strong Liberal Leader before the next election …

Now this is funny. Katherine Harris showed up at one of his events. He definitely has taken on the smell of a loser. “She was not here with the campaign,” said Giuliani spokeswoman Maria Comella. “It wasn’t coordinated.” LOL. Loser. Stick a fork in him. See if he’s done.

That’s frickin’ hilarious. I’d heard she was there, but hadn’t heard about that part of it. She sure knows how to pick ‘em.

You may be right.

But there’s also the possibility that Nancy Pelosi knows exactly what Bush & Cheney will do if she allows impeachment to go forward. They may very well have spelled it out for her in very minute detail. And it’s not pretty.

Most likely it involves being more of “a war Preznit.”

imho

Um … the last time Katherine went without makeup, 5 Supreme Court Justices turned to stone … *g*

Sorry, but the only way I can see the Rs as a “party of ideas” is if the definition of ideas is doing everything in their power to dismantle the societal safety net and abolish the gains made across the board by all levels of society since the New Deal. For that is the only ideas they’ve had.

The party of marketing slogans and packaging? Absolutely. But not of ideas.

The Tammy Faye Baker rule

who here remembers when Lia Belli took Tammy Faye for a makeover

Hi PW: I remember AR from “Truly, Madly, Deeply.”

Here’s my vote for the most disturbing picture with Rickman in a starring role:

Closet Land

wherein a young children’s book author is hauled in to answer an authoritarian government official’s (Rickman) questions about the subliminal political messages they claim are hidden in her books.

I tend to agree. Just as I believe that BushCo has told Pelosi and Reid that if any funding bills don’t make it to his desk as requested, he will literally allow the troops on the ground to run out of everything including ammunition and food just so he can blame Ds.

I believe that he is that much of a sociopath, even though the Pentagon could re-work funds from different areas to cover things, Bush would not allow them to do so.

And that is part of the reality I think they are trying to not have to show us.

Thus they believed it was better for long-term Democratic control to try to enact a positive agenda, and to have it clearly be the fault of the GOP if it didn’t pass. Heck, they may have even thought it was better for the country in the long run, and not just the party, to have the Dems solidly in control than to impeach Bush but risk losing that.

See, Redshift, I understood all of that, too, perhaps better than most of us here. I’ll even go one step farther and include the fact that Pelosi may have been trying to preempt the idea that she is allowing, even encouraging, impeachment proceedings so that she can go down in history as the first woman President. But then something else happened. It was the FISA fix in August just before they went on their summer break. When I firt heard Bush’s comments, I actually laughed and said to myself, “Oh, yeah, that’ll happen, because Congress is just there to kiss your butt!” Then when it did happen, I literally felt like someone hit me in the stomach. That’s when I started wondering what was going on under the surface that was making so many Dems look like putty in the hands of Repug tactics. What is in the water! Do they put coward pill in each Dem’s hand before they enter the halls of Government these days? You can barely find a Democrat with the courage of his convictions anymore. It seems like some of the Freshman have been delegated to take turns voting the wrong way on stategic legislation. Here’s my problem: When these guys lay down in front of the steamroller that is the Republican noise machine, they are representing me (all of us really!), so does that make me a coward too? When the Democratic Reps. in Congress allow the Rethugs, even the President, to disrespect them with impunity, they are allowing that to happen to me, too. So I can’t allow them to make a coward of me, or of all of us. The only thing I can think to do is completely change the framework within which they all work. If enough people, both left and right, come to believe that their representation is betraying their ideals, perhaps we can work toward getting someone who will not fold like a cheap suit. I sure hope so, because I’m getting tired of watching their less than savory antics.

FWIW, here is the transcript of Obama’s pean to Reagan:

I don’t want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what’s different are the times…I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn’t much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.

There’s also Cheney’s unfettered access to full-on FISA eavesdropping of Congresscritters, their supporters, business partners, and loved ones. Don’t discount the power of that leverage. It explains a great deal.

imho

We’ve got some work to do, not the least of which is getting a strong Liberal Leader before the next election …

We’re screwed, doode!

NBC calls Nevada for Romney

So did CBS a few minutes ago! Said they’d have the results of the Dem caucuses later. (I’m assuming the Dem caucuses take place at a different time, a few hours later than the Rethugs.)

Which of these candidates makes you more nervous;
The one who observes “”I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it.” and “I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10 to 15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom.” in the course of an interview;

Or the one who posts a newspaper endorsement on her website, which includes the statement
“She must break recent tradition, cast cronyism aside and fill her cabinet with the best people, not only the best Democrats, but the best Republicans as well.. We’re confident she will do that. Her list of favorite presidents – Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, George H.W. Bush and Reagan – demonstrates how she thinks. “

I know which one bothers me the most. I’d say it’s pretty cut and dried.

Hey, I’m going to go have some lunch. You guys and gals take good care of Howie or whoever shows up next, ‘kay!

See ya!

I’m waiting….

Going back to Obama’s quote:

“I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10 to 15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom.”

one has to wonder exactly which Republican ideas he finds so noteworthy:
- Rove’s many ways to disenfranchise black voters?
- Privatization of Social Security?
- Deregulation of the mortgage market?
- Any of the 300+ items on Hugh’s list.
- Any of Abrahoff’s clever schemes?
- Tom Delay’s many innovations?
- Slave labor and forced abortions in American protectorates?
- The use of torture?

These ideas have certainly challenged wisdom both conventional and unconventional.

I wonder if TradMed will anoint Romney the front-runner. He’s won three states — Wyoming, Michigan, and Nevada.. He was ahead in delegates even before winning Nevada. Will the media step away from their McCain crush?

Someone speculated elsewhere that the media loved McCain in 2000 because the booze flowed freely on his plane; I wonder if they can even get coffee on Romney’s plane….

Why are you not responding to my #191?

There’s also Cheney’s unfettered access to full-on FISA eavesdropping of Congresscritters, their supporters, business partners, and loved ones. Don’t discount the power of that leverage. It explains a great deal.

Yep, that’s part of it too! I just don’t like where we’re at, at all. It’s like our Representation placates us. They don’t believe they work for us. They seem to think if they can just keep us fooled into believing that everything they do is for our own good, that they know what’s best for us and they act accordingly, they can keep their jobs and continue with business as usual and nobody has to be the wiser. No, sir, I don’t like this at all!

Neither one!

Here’s the press release. The relevant commments are in the final paragraphs.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/…..w/?id=4674

It’s campaign rhetoric, so I don’t think it’s cut and dried at all. But I’m for Edwards, so I don’t have to make that choice.

LOL–

Hillary Girl think’s wiretapping you and Telcom Immunity is fine. In my new fast rising on Amazon list book, The Audacity of Hillary (who married a guy from Hope but offers none) I have a chapter on Hillary’s keeping mum on wiretapping and being a Reid girl when it comes to immunity.

Glenn Greenwald: Obama Unequivocably Opposes Telcom Immunity

Obama had his campaign issue this statement:

Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd’s efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same. It’s not clear whether he can return for the vote, but under the Senate rules, the side trying to end a filibuster must produce 60 votes to cut off debate. Whether he is present for the vote for not, Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster.

Hillary Girl Remains Mute on Telcom/Comcom Immunity to this second! Hillary Girl would bring you a lot of Bush

It’s nonsense to say that Obama’s comments indicate an intent to endorse Reagan/Bush/Bush. Clinton’s active inclusion of that editorial on her website strongly suggest she agrees with the writer’s sentiments. There’s a huge difference.

Not yet. After 2/5/08 you probably will.

Breaking News. Apparently with the assistance of a virtual landslide of Mormon voters, Mitt Romney defeated the other Republican candidates in the Nevada C*cka*sses. Competing candidates disappeared from the campaign. “It’s a Donner Party for Romney”, stated MSNBC pundit Tim Russert. “Things haven’t been this lopsided since I went on John Stewart! It’s clearly a huge win for Romney, after Michigan…it really sets him up for defeat in South Carolina!”

Are you aware that posting repeated comments demanding that someone respond to you is pretty obnoxious? We’re not standing in a room having a debate here; people come and go, and people don’t have infinite time and choose to respond to comments where they wish. If you want to take the lack of a response to mean that you “won,” you can (though you would be wrong), but you don’t have some kind of right to demand a response.

If we’re not having a debate, what are we here for? Posting a comment that strongly implies a candidate endorses the opposition, and then taking off without waiting for or responding to a rebuttal is pretty damn rude, IMO.

Especially when they clearly don’t have a leg to stand on.

Nah Wigwam–Not gonna let the cheap shots trying to link Obama with Raegan pass. My link has explicit Raegan Opposition from Obama’s book. Nothing could be more surrealistically false, and he’s made that clear but you haven’t read his speeches or his book. He is totally opposed to what Raegan believes–he was talking about the fact that Raegan had ideas that were new–and then has gone on to make it explicit that he opposed all of them but admires having new ideas.

I hope this clears it up for you. You actually don’t have to wonder because he’s given speech after speech and spent many years of his life actually opposing Raeganomics and Raegan’s ideas working in the neighborhoods. By the way, a little history lesson. Obama spent years organizing labor in Chicago–Raegan opposed labor and fired the Air Traffic Controllers.

Go back and study:

1) Obama’s speeches oppoing Raegan’s ideas
2) What Raegan did when he was in the Oval Office and compare it to Obama’s career in Chicago.

I’ll help you there. One doesn’t have to wonder unless one takes Obama’s statement out of context. Obama has smashed Rove by the way in speech after speech. Hillary Girl has not uttered one word on Telcom Immunity because she’s with the Reidster. Obama has opposed it strongly.

People who are so desparate to try to superficialy take Obama’s comments on Raegan out of context and supply/apply them as evidence of Rove support need to read them (probably for the first time, closely)

The Notion Obama Supports Raegan is Absutd on its Face The Daily Kos

“As I mentioned before, this discussion of Reagan in the context of popular and political trends is an intellectual exercise. Someone who supports environmental regulation on the scale of a 100% carbon auction system, a Democrat with a strong organized labor record at the national and state record, someone looking to make health care available and affordable for anyone who desires it bears no fathomable relationship to the essentials of Reagan administration policy. Obama’s notion of how this history changed the political narrative of the past few decades is fundamentally accurate… and he cites the creation of that narrative in order to change it, not to embrace it.”

One has to wonder exactly which Republican ideas he finds so noteworthy:

Notion Obama Supports Raegan Ideas or Rove LOL is Absurd On its Face–The Daily Kos quoting Audacity of Hope Opposing Raegan

It’s nonsense to say that Obama’s comments indicate an intent to endorse Reagan/Bush/Bush. Clinton’s active inclusion of that editorial on her website strongly suggest she agrees with the writer’s sentiments. There’s a huge difference.

You have a right to your opinions, as do I, so I’m going to let the insulting and dismissive tone of your response go. But I didn’t like Obama’s comments on Reagan when I heard them, before anyone else had a chance to criticize the remarks. I also didn’t like his attitude about being a poor operating officer who would need good people beneath him to keep track of what his cabinet and other underlings were doing. He is indeed untried as an executive level player, kinda like putting the creative genius in as CEO. Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn’t. But he just doesn’t inspire much confidence in me. As for me, I’m an Edwards fan, although Feingold has even given me pause with that within the last few days. I guess I’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

Thank you for so eloquently expanding on my points.

When it takes such a big defense to explain what he really meant

maybe you should be talking to your candidate
and take a close look at someone like Claire Mccaskill
she is likely a reagan democrat

My answer is and continues to be John Edwards… Obama is just to slick and my gut feel of him is distrust
As for Hillary you know that the rethuglians will be motivated if she is on the ticket and every crazy will come out of the wood work!
The reason MSM doesn’t give Edwards is the rethuglians don’t want ot face him in the fall.

One has to wonder exactly which Republican ideas he finds so noteworthy:

Notion Obama Supports Reagan Ideas or Rove LOL is Absurd On its Face–The Daily Kos quoting Audacity of Hope Opposing Raegan

People who are so desparate to try to superficialy take Obama’s comments on Raegan out of context and supply/apply them as evidence of Rove support need to read them (probably for the first time, closely)

Nah Wigwam–Not gonna let the cheap shots trying to link Obama with Raegan pass. My link has explicit Raegan Opposition from Obama’s book. Nothing could be more surrealistically false, and he’s made that clear but you haven’t read his speeches or his book. He is totally opposed to what Raegan believes–he was talking about the fact that Raegan had ideas that were new–and then has gone on to make it explicit that he opposed all of them but admires having new ideas.

I hope this clears it up for you. You actually don’t have to wonder because he’s given speech after speech and spent many years of his life actually opposing Raeganomics and Raegan’s ideas working in the neighborhoods. By the way, a little history lesson. Obama spent years organizing labor in Chicago–Raegan opposed labor and fired the Air Traffic Controllers.

Go back and study:

1) Obama’s speeches oppoing Raegan’s ideas
2) What Raegan did when he was in the Oval Office and compare it to Obama’s career in Chicago.

I’ll help you there. One doesn’t have to wonder unless one takes Obama’s statement out of context. Obama has smashed Rove by the way in speech after speech. Hillary Girl has not uttered one word on Telcom Immunity because she’s with the Reidster. Obama has opposed it strongly.

I apologise if you found the tone of my comment dismissive. I just don’t have much patience with Rovian smear ‘n’ spin tactics, especially when they come from certain factions of the party I support.

It might help Obama’s cause if he would actually show up in DC the next time the retro-active immunity stuff is on tap rather than issuing statements and then staying away.

Right on the nail…he sure hasn’t spent much time in the Senate doing his job,,,

They didn’t call him Teflon Ron for no good reason. Yes Ronnie had good communication skills…far better than Gore or either Bush.

The one thing I have with using second-hand editorials as a source of “Hillary’s Favorite Presidents” is that I did a rather wide search and could find no original confirmation of it.
So where did that list come from?

In addition it left out the one Republican President that Hillary, and other Democratic Presidential Candidates, agree is far-and-above the best. That’s Theodore Roosevelt.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q…..ent=safari

Dude. Let me tell you a little story.

A couple of years ago, we had this senate primary in Virginia, with a guy named Jim Webb. I wasn’t enthusiastic about either of the candidates, but the supporters of Webb, particularly the online supporters, were so obnoxious to anyone who didn’t support him, and completely dismissive of anyone’s concerns about his record, considering them all illegitimate and most of them as attacks (to be refuted not with facts but with counter-attacks) that by the time he got the nomination, I had no interest in working on his campaign. I supported him and worked my precinct for the local Dems, but didn’t get involved in his campaign directly. It’s too bad, because it sounds like the people who did had fun, but there it is. (And lest you think this is just bad judgment on my part, the same thing happened with the Kerry campaign after Dean dropped out, and I have no regrets about missing that.)

My point is that yes, odds are I will be campaigning for either Clinton or Obama in the end, and yes, I’d prefer Obama of the two, and I would appreciate it if Obama supporters would behave so I could do that enthusiastically rather than by gritting my teeth.

Not every criticism or concern is an attack, and few if any of them here are attacks intended to help Clinton, so saying “Clinton is worse” is a pretty weak defense. Some concerns are legitimate even if you don’t agree with them, and it doesn’t hurt you to acknowledge that. Not everything requires a nuclear response. Doing so doesn’t win you any friends, and after the primaries are over, whoever wins is going to want friends, not grudging supporters. I appeal to you to help make it so.

By the way, a little history lesson. Obama spent years organizing labor in Chicago–Raegan opposed labor and fired the Air Traffic Controllers.

Is it considered bad form here to call someone a presumptuous little twit?!! Here’s a little history lesson for you: Ronald Reagan was a union President when Obama was still in diapers, and way before he blew apart the Air Traffic Controllers! You might say Ronald Reagan was an enigma; someday you may find Obama to be an enigma, that remains to be seen. But try being careful who you’re presuming to preach to.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/…..w/?id=4674

Third from last paragraph.

Damn you wigwam…
Don’t you know that you’re supposed to keep your take and your opinion – your opinion – to yourself?

Oops! I just got back from laundry and breakfast. What did I miss? It’s not looking good upthread.

I agree with you, this is only the primaries so we should try and be civil to each other. Creating angst will only turn people off from participating in the election. We need everyone one we can get to make sure we have a Democrat in the White House this time next year.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I refer you to my #213.

OT EPA Invokes Executive Privilege In Denying Emissions Waiver In CaliforniaOver at C&R http://www.crooksandliars.com/…..alifornia/
What fucking kind of bullshit is this?? Where is Hugh… Add this one to his list!!

I hope I’m not speaking out of turn when I point out that at no point does he suggest that Obama was organising in Chicago at the same time Reagan was firing ATC’s.

Who’s being intemperate?

Both Petes, I’m not at all happy with Clinton or Obama. What the hell is wrong with those people — both have talked about how they are going to get Republicans into their cabinets as though that a feature instead of a bug?

At least Edwards has been mostly saying the right stuff, but his record when he was actually in the senate ain’t so good either. (And, neither was the speech he made when he was in Israel.)

Here’s Feingold on Edwards’s record:

The one that is the most problematic is (John) Edwards, who voted for the Patriot Act, campaigns against it. Voted for No Child Left Behind, campaigns against it. Voted for the China trade deal, campaigns against it. Voted for the Iraq war … He uses my voting record exactly as his platform, even though he had the opposite voting record.

When you had the opportunity to vote a certain way in the Senate and you didn’t, and obviously there are times when you make a mistake, the notion that you sort of vote one way when you’re playing the game in Washington and another way when you’re running for president, there’s some of that going on.

It might help Obama’s cause if he would actually show up in DC the next time the retro-active immunity stuff is on tap rather than issuing statements and then staying away.

It would be great in an ideal world. I’ve pointed the problem out on no less than seven previous threads. But the fact is, and you’d be doing the exact same thing, that the idiots from the states compressed the primary season in a way to make it impossible for the only two Democrats left in the race with a chance at the nomination to show up for votes until after Super Tuesday. That’s a fact. Glenn Greenwald has acknowledged it repeatedly as he did in this link:

Greenwald Quoting Obama Opposing Immunity

Here’s the sad truth about S. 2248 better known as the Intelligence Bill coming up next week on the apron before Super Tuesday. Let’s look at exactly how it’s going down.

First of all, the immunity prevision aside, the rest of the bill is a piece of crap. It is everything you don’t want. It cedes power in every part of it to the DNI and DOJ as to what constitutes illegal wiretapping.

Now let’s look at the anatomy of the situation on the floor of the Senate next week. It’s grim. I’ll show you why. The rat bastard Reid doomed it and he’s working against Dodd on every front to get what Bush wants passed.

Reid brought the Intelligence Committe version of S. 2248 to the floor as you know.

The real oppoistion to this bill with immunity, besides a lot of us, and a lot of alert people, in the Senate are Dodd, Kennedy, and Feingold. The rest of your Democrats have licked Bush’s ass.

Let’s focus in on the 60 vots (3/5 majority necessary to either amend the bill to include immunity or to invoke cloture on a fillibuster) because that’s what this contest is going to revolve around.

1) When and if a provision to provide Telco Immunity is added to the piece of crap Reid brought to the floor, the Ditto Head Rethugs and the complicit Dems easily have 60 votes to oppose it.

2) When Dodd, Kennedy, and Feingold gear up to fillibuster, their forces lack the 60 votes to prevent invoking of clouture to sustain the Dodd forces fillibuster.

So look at it this way: Next week the attempt to stop Telco Immunity is 60 Vote Screwed to the Wall.

Take a look at Glenn Greenwald’s latest article on this from Thursday:

Lawbreaking telecoms (and Harry Reid) still conniving to obtain immunity from Congress

The real oppoistion to this bill with immunity, besides a lot of us, and a lot of alert people, in the Senate are Dodd, Kennedy, and Feingold. The rest of your Democrats have licked Bush’s ass.

Exactly! And the ass-lickers include both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton. That’s what pissing me off.

If either of them would get their ass back to Washington and show leadership in this fight, I could respect him/her.

It would be great in an ideal world. I’ve pointed the problem out on no less than seven previous threads. But the fact is, and you’d be doing the exact same thing, that the idiots from the states compressed the primary season in a way to make it impossible for the only two Democrats left in the race with a chance at the nomination to show up for votes until after Super Tuesday.

You may support your candidate vociferously, but you are not entitled to the presumption that they aren’t obligated to stand on principle. Just this once.

Thanks for your response. I refer you to my #213.

Serious question; when did Obama say he would be prepared to have Republicans in his cabinet? I’m not disputing what you’re saying, I just haven’t heard that said before and I’m curious about the source.

Per http://blogs.abcnews.com/polit…..-hed.html:

ABC’s Sunlen Miller Reports: Barack Obama has often said he’d consider putting Republicans in his cabinet and even bandied about names like Sens. Dick Lugar and Chuck Hagel. He’s a added a new name to the list of possible Republicans cabinet members – Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Obama regularly says he would look to Republicans to fill out his cabinet if he was elected, but at a town hall event in Manchester, N.H., he was pushed to name names.

“It’s premature for me to start announcing my cabinet. I mean, I’m pretty confident. but I’m not all that confident. We still got a long way to go,” Obama said.

But then the GOP names started to flow.

Sen. Dick Lugar: “He’s a Republicans who I worked with on issues of arms control, wonderful guy. He is somebody I think embodies the tradition of a bipartisan foreign policy that is sensible, that is not ideological, that is based on the idea that we have to have some humility and restraint in terms of our ability to project power around the world,” Obama said about his Senate colleague.

Sen. Chuck Hagel: “A Vietnam vet, similar approach and somebody I respect in a similar fashion,” Obama added.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: “What (he’s) doing on climate change in California is very important and significant. There are things I don’t agree with him on, but he’s taken leadership on a very difficult issue and we haven’t seen that kind of leadership in Washington,” Obama said of the California governor.

Yet another innovation from the party of ideas.

You may support your candidate vociferously, but you are not entitled to the presumption that they aren’t obligated to stand on principle. Just this once.

Let’s distinguish between the principle I support or what I want to happen and what I say realistically is going to happen. I think I’ve zeroed in on the Immunity situation also in a very precise correct way.

I support that the candidates get into the Senate and fight Telcom Immunity. I want to for the hundredth time, remind everyone that even if Telco Immunity is out of the law, and I don’t see the votes given what Reid has done, the rest of the bill is awful. Read it. It google’s easily. It’s S. 2248 or I’d be glad to pull it up for you.

What I want to happen, the principle I support, is that Senators vote on the bills. How about another principle–that these piece of crap Democrats like Reid, Feinstein, Pelosi, Hoyer and many others stop rolling over and supporting every big vote Bush wants in theHouse and Senate.

What I’ve said will happen, a much different thing than the principle I support is that Obama and Hillary Girl are in a fierce race for the Democratic nomination now in the time leading up to Feb. 5 Super Tuesday.

What I’ve said will happen, is they won’t be spending time in the Senate when every precious second counts to try to win States that are going to make or break them for the nomination. That’s pretty simple arithmetic to me. Time spent in the Senate voting vs. time before Super Tuesday to get the votes you need to be President. So you can talk about principles all you like, but they aren’t my principles–I’m just telling you what’s going to happen as to campaigning vs. going back to Washgington before Super Tuesday.

And I’m accurately zeroing in on the problem Reid has created–the collosal obstacle now to getting rid of Telco Immunity because it’s front and center on the Senate floor and you need 60 votes to either block it or add Telco Immunity back to S. 2248 the way Reid has put it on the floor.

He might be surprised (and she might be as well) if as the two survivors of the process to this point, just how many votes they might pick up if they suspended the campaigning and put principle first rather than just talk about it. Dodd has already stated that he will filibuster each and every amendment on the telecom immunity bills so there will be a lot of votes and a lot of opportunities for the Constitutional Law professor to show his true respect for the Constitution. Action not words mean far more to most informed voters.

Let me make it simple:

Yet another innovation from the party of ideas.

Obama said and he made it clear in his book, and all this week including today. He said Republicans had had a lot of ideas. And he said that although they were on terrible ideas, at least they had them. And trying to capitalize on it’s not helping Hillary girl this afternoon and her crybaby husband who knows he can’t win and now is crying about the caucuses and voter supression. Clinton is making a fool out of herself bitching about Nevada, and her husband is looking awfully un-Presidential.

There are three superficial pieces of mud people have consistently tried to pin on Obama:

1) Leiberman (laughable) Voters aren’t IDing Obama and Leiberman and neither is Obama.
2) That Obama said he supported either Reagan or Republican ideas. He said he supported having ideas, but not the content of the Republican ideas. Two very different things.
3) The ridiculous Rezco claims that moved LHP to say she thought Obama had gotten an interest free loan of laundered Rezco money. That’s dispelled by the facts in this Chicago Tribune article laid out plainly:

Chicago Tribune 4/24/07: Not One Scintilla of Evidence Rezco was Mentor to Obama or Money Lender

You are talking about the very thing that’s needed from these candidates: leadership for a change. The pun is exactly the point.

Dodd has already stated that he will filibuster each and every amendment on the telecom immunity bills so there will be a lot of votes and a lot of opportunities for the Constitutional Law professor to show his true respect for the Constitution.

I don’t think any issue in a long time has been as important to me as wiretapping. I hate the way this has unfolded, and I hate the arrogance on the deep relationship between not only Telcos and Comcos (your ISP provider is a comco and they are turning over your emails and surf sites to the government right now. I’m following this bill very closely, and I’m pointing out how Dodd’s terrific effort which will probably be substantially supported by Kennedy and Feingold is being run off the rails by Reid and people like Feingold, and of all people Sheldon Whitehouse. The Democrats on the Intelligence Committe have been horrible and the deal they made was directly made with Addington and Cheney in a meeting with Jello Jay at the White House.

I fully agree with you that they should be fighting vigorously against immunity and the rest of the horrible bill because it’s equally as bad.

I’ve been following every motion and brief in every law suit filed against the Telcos by EFF and the horrible opinion of the 9th Circuit already ruling against the EFF but not totally using State Secrets.

Please read:

1) The link I provided to Glenn’s articles
2) Get the New Yorker for this month January 21, 2008 and read the article by Lawrence Wright on what McConnell is trying to do. He wants all your emails to be available to him legally. He wants to make it overtly legal that you’re always wiretapped, and your emails and searches always belong to the government.

I hope you’re also aware that the FBI has a building as big as 3 football fields and a billion dollars already spent to make you part of a biometric data base–I’ve linked the plan many times that is so bad it’s only 20% accurate.

Andrea Mrs. Greenspan Mitchell is so biased for Clinton she’s too dumb to be able to read the numbers off the cue card. LOL

I guess big Al isn’t sweet on her for her ability to understand numbers, but he’s a big part of this recession we have now so it’s just as well.

Obama said and he made it clear in his book, and all this week including today. He said Republicans had had a lot of ideas.

Well bully for them. He has been noting this wonderful feature of the Republican party all week. I however consider it a bug, because nearly all of those ideas ideas, which Senator Obama finds so noteworthy, have been bad for America.

I’ve read the Greenwald stuff and McConnell’s interview and am well aware of the FBI drive for a biometric database.

But excusing Obama because it seems like a lost cause is NOT a way to impress folks with his leadership and dedication to the Constitution. sometimes it is necessary to take those lost cause stands.

And by the way, you’re probably the only person around who actually believes that Andrea Mitchell is biased in favor of Senator Clinton or any Democrat.

He might be surprised (and she might be as well) if as the two survivors of the process to this point, just how many votes they might pick up if they suspended the campaigning and put principle first rather than just talk about it. Dodd has already stated that he will filibuster each and every amendment on the telecom immunity bills so there will be a lot of votes and a lot of opportunities for the Constitutional Law professor to show his true respect for the Constitution. Action not words mean far more to most informed voters.

If Obama can be there for the Senate vote, he has said explicitly in several speeches he will fight tooth and nail against immunity. I can put them up for you. I already put up Glenn Greenwald’s quoting him:

Obama issued this statement:

Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd’s efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same. It’s not clear whether he can return for the vote, but under the Senate rules, the side trying to end a filibuster must produce 60 votes to cut off debate. Whether he is present for the vote for not, Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster.

Hillary Girl has issued no statement whatsoever on Telcom Immunity or S. 2248.

Actually, Senator Clinton did issue statements supporting Senator Dodd’s efforts against the immunity prior to Senator Obama vowing support. Neither showed much support the first time through.

I presume that the government is archiving the content of every phone call and email — diskdrives etc. have gotten sufficiently cheap that it’s technically and financially feasible. If they aren’t reviewing those archives, they

might

be able to argue they aren’t violating the letter of the law, but I suspect they’ve turned their analysis tools loose on them.

Nope.

And by the way, you’re probably the only person around who actually believes that Andrea Mitchell is biased in favor of Senator Clinton or any Democrat

.

No, as a matter of fact, I’m among hundreds of people who have written about Mrs. Greenspan’s bias, and Mrs. Greenspan was totally disigenuouss throughout the Libby trial. It’s a shame they couldn’t have put her on the stand to grill her because she lied about what she knew.

Watch Andrea closely. She is heavily biased for Clinton–but it’s not going to help.

Watch her on any issue–she misses every nuance. She’s a surface girl.

I’ve tried to be clear. I agree with you those stands should always be taken, and Obama should be there to take it–and before Biden should have been there and now that Edwards is probably out of the race practically, he should go back on the floor since he’s the big fighter for the little guy and campaign for immunity. He has floor privileges as an ex-Senator and he could symbolically provide a lot of support. He can go to the Senate and hold press conferences right outside the chamber.

Biden will be back now. He didn’t go before. Let’s see what he does.

Hillary will not go back to fight for Immunity.

But excusing Obama because it seems like a lost cause is NOT a way to impress folks with his leadership and dedication to the Constitution. sometimes it is necessary to take those lost cause stands.

Exactly! Sunshine and fair-weather leadership is no leadership at all.

As you well know, they are archiving all the content except for the White House emails, servers, and those of the RNC which will never see the light of day, because if they haven’t been destroyed they will be hidden forever.

I have enjoyed your comments and analysis over at EW, and I’m trying to keep up with all the programs that I can find out about that are trying to collect our emails and matrix or data. It ain’t easy.

He has floor privileges as an ex-Senator and he could symbolically provide a lot of support. He can go to the Senate and hold press conferences right outside the chamber.

Do “floor privileges” give him the ability to participate in a filibuster? Hmmmmmm.

I’m not excusing Obama because it seems like a lost cause.

I’m telling you that you wouldn’t be there if you had the schedule to campaign for President of the U.S. against one other person who has a huge organization and tons of money leading up to Feb. 5. Obama is running for President. He didn’t make the dumbass primary schedule. Egotistical Representatives and Senators from States pushed it on the DNC. And I’ve railed against it.

It has nothing to do with fair weather. It has everything to do with a race for the Presidency going on now leading up to Feb. 5.

That’s why Obama isn’t going to be on the Senate floor.

I’m excusing him for campaigning for the nomination for President. Call and write your Congressional and Senate Representatives and tell them the primary schedule sucks. Because it does.

Do “floor privileges” give him the ability to participate in a filibuster?

No.

This is another case of simple answers to …

Do “floor privileges” give him the ability to participate in a filibuster? Hmmmmmm.

No. Floor privileges do not give Kingmaker and delegate dealer John Edwards the ability to speak on the floor of the Senate in the regular context although he could speak as a guest–plenty of foreign dignitaries have. And he can’t vote or participate in the fillibuster.

But he has every right to show up and be on the floor and relatively few groups of people can do that. And he can schmooze his ass off while on the floor and try to drum up support for Dodd’s filibuster.

Rule 23 Access to Senate Floor

This is another case of simple answers to …

Help me out with this. What is this? What case? Of simple answers by whom to what?

Uh Pete? You missed the exception that keeps Edwards OFF the floor during a filibuster:

(2) in the employ of or represents any party or organization for the purpose of influencing, directly or indirectly, the passage, defeat, or amendment of any Federal legislative proposal.

Actually, Senator Clinton did issue statements supporting Senator Dodd’s efforts against the immunity prior to Senator Obama vowing support. Neither showed much support the first time through

.

Can you locate any? Watch where her fat ass is when it comes on the floor and what she says next week when the spotlight is on her.

Senator Clinton statement against retroactive immunity

And please, you do not have to agree with Senator Clinton on issues but you can do it with being insulting to her in that gratuitous fashion you just used.

Well bully for them. He has been noting this wonderful feature of the Republican party all week. I however consider it a bug, because nearly all of those ideas ideas, which Senator Obama finds so noteworthy, have been bad for America.

LOL. What has been noted all week, as I’ve posted 50 times now here and other threads and you ignore and in his book written many weeks ago, is that they had ideas and they were very bad but they had new ideas.

You refused to read the Kos quotes from his book and the debunking of this Raegan support crap as flawed as the Leiberman support theories and the Rezco corruption theories didn’t you?

Obama Critical of content of Reagan’s Ideas in his book and consistently

IMHO, the best thing that either candidate could do in their campaign for the Democratic nomination for the presidency is to show leadership for a change. Action talks; bullshit walks.

And please, you do not have to agree with Senator Clinton on issues but you can do it with being insulting to her in that gratuitous fashion you just used.

You believe Hillary will be nailed to the Senate floor then helping Dodd on ole S. 2248 then?

Why with her numerous opportunities to be in the limelight, and her bullshitting with Tyra Banks who can’t repress an “uhuh” after every burp from Hillary like an Amen–hasn’t Hillary mentioned the upcoming major issue going to the floor of the Senate next week?

Let’s all be very careful about using terms that might be considered sexist on this foul mouthed fem blog.

If you will notice, I have stated that they BOTH should be on the floor of the Senate on this issue and not out campaigning and that I fault BOTH of them for their failure to do so in December.

And I haven’t heard much from Senator Obama on this important issue either, so please do not hold her to a higher standard.

Just as Clinton did not ask to read the PDEs when she could have in the White House, she obviously hasn’t read the rest of the totally equally bad S. 2248 which even without immunity gives control of wiretapping not to a Court, or to Congress, but to DNI and DOJ.

I am quite unimpressed by those Obama quotes. I have to run off to a wedding now, but will try to put something together later this evening. Later.

I’m not. I agree with you entirely that they should be back in an ideal world and should both be much more active. I wish I could be on the floor to speak against immunity. It has huge implications and I know you have appreciated this not only because of the lawsuits, but because of the illegal partnership between the Telcos and the Comcos and the Bush administration with all kinds of behind the scenes breaks for them against the little guy.

This goes way beyond them buying lobbyists. This is direct whoring by the Bush administration to them.

You have been complaining about folks extrapolating from Obama statements to derive his views on various topics without evidence.

And here you extrapolate Senator Clinton’s views on the other issues of S. 2248 based on what she DID NOT mention in her statement.

That’s a pretty good talent you have there.

I am quite unimpressed by those Obama quotes. I have to run off to a wedding now, but will try to put something together later this evening. Later.

They were the same as the Hillary quotes. You haven’t forgotten her in this have you?

You have been complaining about folks extrapolating from Obama statements to derive his views on various topics without evidence.

And here you extrapolate Senator Clinton’s views on the other issues of S. 2248 based on what she DID NOT mention in her statement.

That’s a pretty good talent you have there.

You can quibble ’til the cows come home. But the reason that S. 2248 is very probably going to pass with Immunity is that scores of Democrats in the Senate are supporting Immunity.

The two candidates have been marginal in this. Edwards who is now a Kingmaker, is marginal in this.

Hillary’s voting record has been very very pro Bush. She pushed being in Iraq. She pushes staying in Iraq.

The House Bill stripped immunity. The Democratic Senate Majority leader is pushing immunity. That’s the problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..re=related

PetePierce @ 265:

Edwards isn’t in the Senate any more, so he can’t vote on immunity anyway. Obama and Clinton can.

That being said, it’s time for us to get on the horn and push killing it one more time.