![]()
There’s a reason last night’s final debate comment from Hillary Clinton — and her respectful gesture to Barack Obama — brought a cheering Texas audience to its feet. To be sure, the debate had ended, but the moment served as a perfect metaphor for what these two extraordinary Democratic candidates have come to symbolize for this year’s elections.
From the CNN transcript:
CLINTON: You know, the hits I’ve taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on every single day in the lives of people across our country.
And I resolved at a very young age that I’d been blessed and that I was called by my faith and by my upbringing to do what I could to give others the same opportunities and blessings that I took for granted.
That’s what gets me up in the morning. That’s what motivates me in this campaign.
(APPLAUSE)And, you know, no matter what happens in this contest — and I am honored, I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored.
(APPLAUSE)CLINTON: Whatever happens, we’re going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we’ll be able to say the same thing about the American people, and that’s what this election should be about.
There was some speculation on the post-debate analysis about whether Hillary Clinton was foreshadowing the end of her campaign, now that the most recent polls show Obama closing the gaps in Ohio and Texas. It’s true that during the debate, she did not repeat the implication that Obama wasn’t qualified, and she stayed away from a back door fight over won delegates — that will "work itself out." But I don’t think throwing in the towel was the point.
Her final line was one she might have borrowed (with irony) from John Edwards, at an earlier moment in this campaign when the Democratic party essentially recognized that retaking the Presidency and indeed the point of government service was a duty owed to the American people. It is they who have suffered through the dreadful years of the Bush Administration, and it is their economic future and security that are at stake.
Almost everything else in the debate involved details about how a Democratic President will begin to address the appalling neglect and injustices the Bush regime has inflicted on the country. These details will eventually matter, but for now, the main message Democrats are delivering is that we have two exceptional candidates who understand what has happened and who are both committed to do something about the mess we’re in, to address the problems with intelligence and compassion and to pursue solutions with energy and determination. We have not had a government like that in nearly at least a decade, and the thunderous applause last night was all in anticipation of its imminent return.
The notion that government is an essential force to improve the lives of ordinary people is not only a rejection of George Bush, but also of Ronald Reagan. John McCain and his Republican followers have no idea what this is about, and that is why they will lose the country.




204 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Yes. And good-bye to all that.
All that bushist fascism stands for. Stood for.
Beautiful, Scarecrow.
Scarecrow!
Scarecrow, Thanks!!!
good morning – coffee is almost ready…
one thing I see in Clinton is that she is a very good Democrat. In spite of all the yowls and howls of those who think she is a Truly Awful Woman, she still is looking out for her party and her country…
Obama has come an awful long way since he’s started this thing. He really should thank Hillary for a fine education.
Good morning, Scarecrow.
You’ve written a nice summary of last nights debate.
Civil, fair and nothing over the top.
I appreciate your words and attitude.
Where is everyone? Some news hangovers?
O God, I hope you are right. Both very smart adults. Good morning. Thanks for a good start.
Amen, there. And when Obama wins, he should appoint her Attorney General, IMHO.
Great S’crow.
Can you imagine how great they could be if they were working together?
Hey. I hadn’t heard that suggestion before. I like it.
A lot.
Morning Old Coastie. How ya be?
Perhaps, like many who have gone before her, Hillary learned how to say hello, when it was time to say goodbye.
What do you mean? We’re here…
lol, yup
That’s just so different from the wet-pants Republican crowd telling us we’re all going to die if we don’t do exactly as they say. I really felt good about her when she said this. I think she has been very poorly served by her staff, but I take this statement from her to mean that she won’t just fade away after March 4. She may drop out of the race, but it looks like she will continue to serve our country. That will be to our benefit.
Morning Biodun.
How’s tricks?
Still in Evanston. Heading to LA Sunday afternoon…
The Onion today has a headline stating that Americans still undecided about who to vote against. This November people will head to the polls excited to vote for the democratic nominee.
I guess great minds time-stamp together…among other things…*g*
I’ve got to say, though, that this is pretty shocking, from the NYT:
I know there are a lot of people who think she should go on the SC – and I’m not saying she should not. But right now, the place that needs someone with steel to clean it up is DOJ. That is an unholy mess and I see HRC as someone who not only has a very clear sense of what justice is and what the Constitution says, but who also has the steel to do the cleaning job that needs to be done.
Ha, my old man was the assistant basketball coach at ETHS in 54!
I’m not a Clinton supporter, but I’ve always believed that if she loses her first phone call will be to Obama “Congrats. What do you need and how can I help?”. And Vice Versa.
Boxturtle (And she’ll mean it)
The sooner the dems pick their nominee the better. They need to heal up after the rather long and somewhat (as usual) unfair (Thanks MSM) “race”.
The dems will likely take the WH regardless of who is the nominee, but it is MORE important that the coat tails be long and that the progressive caucus grows by leaps and bounds and the DINOs are quarantined where they can do no harm.
The legislature has a lot of work to undo bush and we also need to clean up the court. It has become a wing of the repug party and far right agenda. This is not a conservative court is a quasi fascism one. That’s scary. That HAS to change.
If Clinton were made AG, absolutely everything she did to reverse the horrors of this administration would be framed by the GOP and media as “revenge” for Bill’s impeachment trial and slights the family has put up with from the Republicans all these years.
Not that I have a problem with that necessarily, but I want it taken more seriously than that.
Great post, as always Scarecrow. Thanks.
well, let’s see… it’s 530am and raining… still sleepy I think…
;-)
How do these slugs come up with these “fees” for “service”? Absolutely nothing to do with working Americans.
The two Americas. And wide wide gulf between them.
I agree. That’s why I think Edwards should be the point person on the clean-up, whether it’s as VP or AG. I’d like to see Clinton stay in the Senate until a SC position opens up.
They can frame it anyway they want.
Seriously or not, as long as whomever gets the post cleans up that mess.
I agree with Toby, that HRC has the steel to do it.
The economy is beyond Fed tweaking. Ourt government has to rethink its laissez-faire approach to wall street and capital. They need to be held accountable NOT BAILED OUT and then seriously reigned in. If we continue on with the same fixes for the broken model we will simply crash on the Dem’s watch. Then fascists will take over and a real street fight will ensue. Blood will flow.
What’s SC?
Oh yeah? Northwestern? That’s on the list of my son’s college choices…because of of the Merrill School of journalism…Brown, Cornell, and U Penn are the others… (He was here with me but went back to Minneapolis Tuesday morning…)
I would not want to see Clinton at DoJ (Fitz!) or on the SC. While I know she’d be good at DoJ, she wouldn’t be able to do her job with all the cries of “revenge motivation” from the GOP.
If I were Obama, I’d put Bill Clinton as Sec Of State and try to make Hillary a key senate chair. I’m gonna need someone like her to move things through the senate.
Boxturtle (Conyers as Atty General has an EVIL sound to it. :-) )
Supreme Court
Fine post, Scarecrow. I took it the same way you did. I cheered at home because I took it as a statement that she understood how important the election is to the country and the party; that she knows Obama would do an excellent job; and she is not so driven and egotistical that she will push her campaign to the point of damaging the more important goal of defeating the Republican candidate. It was a fine statement.
Biodun,
It’s forecast to be rainy on Sunday, in LA, but sun should be here M – W. Good beach weather. :)
How long have these people been running for president? Like a year now? And the conventions don’t end until sometime in August. So the parties are running against themselves for months and months and months, and then they get barely three months to run against each other.
Our election process has gotten seriously screwed up. I suspect that the corporate media has been behind this distortion of our political process because they benefit the most from it. The American people certainly do not.
We need public financing of political campaigns. We need to get the big money out of our political process.
Hill needs to have a larger profile in the next period if she is not the nominee. Senate leader, cabinet post, but not send her back to the senate as NY’s junior senator. Too humiliating and does not recognize her rather (flawed) strong run for the top stop.
Hillary Clinton ran a great campaign…..for the 1990s. But times have changed. Today’s modern candidates use web 2.0 social networking technology plus good old fashioned shoe leather to get the message out. The Clintons ran a consultant-centric big state campaign. Obama ran a bottoms up 50 state strategy. It’s a very clear Howard Dean vs. Terry McAuliffe approach.
That would be the Medill School of Journalism (speaking as an NU alum myself).
Oh, That SC.
Interesting…..very. And, a long term gig. I like it! A little karma, huh?
SCOTUS…
and if it is “revenge”, then it is her revenge on behalf of the American People, on a political party which thought it was above the law and whose members thought it was OK to turn this country into a place where people are afraid of what they say, what they write, who they talk to on the phone, etc. The great harm that has been done to this country, its belief in itself, and to the foundation of the Constitution is horrific — if the GOP tries to couch this as being payback for Bill’s impeachment, then they are just…being stupid and it will be seen as such.
very nice ms clinton, very nice indeed
hat’s off
< insert broad smile here >
Good Morning Scarecrow, what a warm and wonderful post!
Is that an invite? Which beach do you frequent? I go to Laguna…
Because the media and politics never plays a role in DOJ investigations?
I know they should not, but that does not mean they do not.
Thanks…I have a Merrill on my mind, a certain Jan Merrill. (Please don’t ask.)
Did you guys hear about the security stand-down at the Obama event in Texas on Wednesday?
Not a good precedent, eh wot?
The convention scheduling is a by-product of the public financing rules we have right now. They separate primary contributions and expenditures from general election ones, and so both parties want to save all their general election bucks as long as possible. The ideal scenario, according to the conventional wisdom from the party perspective, is to have a nomination wrapped up well in advance so they can spend all their “primary” funds attacking the other side, then have the convention to formally anoint a nominee, and then attack the other side with general election funds.
This year, with Clinton and Obama continuing to go at it longer than folks expected, that wisdom may get turned on its head. The longer the Democrats continue to hold up not one but two good candidates like this, the more John McCain looks pouty, small, and in the pocket of his lobbyist friends.
Great post, scarecrow!
Of course, it’s an invite. I like all of them…but if we hit up Laguna, we might be able to get Loo Hoo to come meet us for dinner, after she get’s outta school. That would be cool. She’s down that way…a little further, but’s it’s doable.
lincoln, got to love the man;
god bless
Nothin’ er, untoward. She’s the other half of family friends we’re visiting here (in Evanston).
he-he…
Ordered by the Feds, I might add.
Oh, and Old Coastie too. An impromptu meet up, as it were.
Is this also the electorate that gave us 2 terms of George Bush? The first one was stolen. But when he was RE-ELECTED, I lost all faith in the judgement of the people in this country. Yes, the media is responsible to a degree, but the people are totally responsible for their ignorance.
Hey… What is not seriously screwed up in the country?
Seriously.
Our military is a wasteful resource sucking polluting monstrosity.
Our environmental policy does nothing, as our shit engulfs us.
Our energy policy is non existent.
We still have racism – remember Jena
We have a huge drug problem
We have 2.5mm in prison
Our schools are falling behind the rest of the world
Our vets are treated like shit
Our people have no health care
Our jobs are disappearing like smoke up the chimney
Our dollar is worth nothing
The guilty are promoted and not held acnountable
We torture
We were told to be consumers and we were addicted to debt.
Our athletes are dopers
I don’t see too many positive developments.. Iphone, Ipod, WiFi? Who cares?
Hey don’t get me wrong — I think the GOP in a cancer on America that needs to be cut out and destroyed. (or maybe just soaked forever in formalin)
However, with every media outlet talking about “Hillary’s Revenge” in the DOJ, I think that the media/GOP would become VERY concerned about the “politicization” of the DOJ under this “evil liberal bitch”.
And I don’t want anything to interfere with cutting that damn cancer out.
Sounds like a plan…(We should go private now before Mods get mad…*g*)
I DID remember you, before your he-he. :)
Good morning everyone.
Not totally. There is a presumption that the MSM is providing some balance and accuracy in their reporting, that they are fulfilling their franchise to inform the public.
They’re not. They’re making money and dumbing down America.
All that and more.
FDL toobz acting up…
I’m with you there, but as the Wicked Witch of the West said, “This must be done delicately…lest we ruin the spell..”
How do we do that? How do we make sure that these folks don’t just go underground and then pop up again? Without their being impeached, I don’t think there is anything short of a prison term to prevent them from coming back – that’s how we ended up with Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld et al after Watergate. No one was held accountable for their actions. How do we do that?
But we DO have the WWW the most amazing tool for democracy.
And we have FDL!
If you’re still here:
Did you get my comment re: Dr. Kathryn Huff last thread?
I missed the debate but skimmed the live blogging. The line that caught my eye was this from bluetexan’s coverage:
Note that Obama was a lecturer in constututional law at the University of Chicago for eleven years. And apparently Hillary saw nothing wrong either; at least she did’t challenge him on it.
So it seems that Bush and Cheney have managed an Orwellian transformation in Amercia’s notion of the presidency from the job description in the Constitution to that of Big Brother. Wow!
The Republicans, the cons, will never go away. They are a part of the balance of the universe. The best we can hope for is to marginalize the lizard-brain portion of humanity for a little while on our small part of the globe.
Hillary Clinton is a very good person. She wasn’t treated fairly by the MSM or the left wing blogs. Firedoglake, Talkingpointsmemo, … none were fair to Hillary.
they have to be held to account, we are still haunted by the ghosts of S&L and Iran Contra to name two more.
Wow, those are stunning fees — for failure. Where’s the clause that says you get fined for 10 straight losses? If Hillary loses, I think it will largely attributable to these two men, although Hubby and surrogates can take a bow.
I was thinking Majority Leader for HC. Not my first choice but a real possibility and certainly better than Give-em-Hell-Harry.
That comment is a throw away line for the paranoid re terra.
The job is to serve the people and their needs, protect their rights, and advance their quality of life.
that’s the direction I see for her future, and same – not my first choice but a real possibility.
“May have borrowed from John Edwards”? Absolutely borrowed from John Edwards, who was not only the superior candidate, but the superior debater. I don’t even watch the debates anymore now that John is out; but when I saw this comment by Hillary quoted in the WaPo this morning, as well as a reference to Edwards when Hillary discussed her universal health plan, I gave Hillary credit for recognizing John Edwards’ enormous impact on this campaign. Remarkably, Edwards never used a speechwriter, and yet his words, and the ideas he put forth, are being routinely copied by the two remaining candidates. John was the real deal, and the nation has missed an incredible opportunity to elect a transformational president.
They avoided the over reach question as well.
I agree. The oath of office says nothing about keeping the American people safe. Even though keeping people safe is an important part of a president’s responsibility, his duty to defend and protect the constitution is his primary, sworn duty. To ignore this is to invite further disaster.
Hillary created her own problems by NOT backing away from her AMUF vote and the flag burning law and so forth.
She is not evil, but she is flawed and she certainly could have had more support from the left if she didn’t do those boneheaded things and acted a bit more progressive.
The left is not fond of critters who suck up to the right.
Even Obi’s across the aisle reach is not playing well on left. The left wants to have the right to shut up and let the left take the con and get behind the LEFT approach as opposed to play in the center to make everyone happy.
What you said
As I understand the Senate, making her majority leader would step on several VERY senior senators that Obama will also need on his side. But I agree she’d probably be a good one.
Maybe I’m an optimist, but I think we’re going to be VERY close to an effective fillibuster proof majority in the Senate. A skilled politician in a key position could m=ake all the difference so I’m for keeping her in the Senate.
Boxturtle (I don’t understand why I DON’T like her for president, yet I do like her in almost every other position)
Does no one think it is frightening that the FEDS ordered a security stand-down at an Obama event in Texas?
I was with a right wing friend of mine whose every response is usually “you are full of shit” or some such nonsense, but when the talk got around to Hillary he got visceral. Hatred and venom poured out of his mouth. I am fairly well versed observer of the political scene over the years and I honestly don’t remember anything that Hillary has done that is of much to dislike let alone hate like this guy does. He is not the only one like this from my experience. It is a testimonial to the effectiveness of right wing talk radio and the mentality of the right and it is stunning. So with Barack we won’t have this built in animus to fight; the hatred hasn’t had 18 years to fester like with Hillary no matter how absurd or unfounded. Also I think he will have an easier time making points against McCain since he never was for the war in Iraq in the first place. Hillary’s last comment and her dignity is inspiring, the choice is difficult.
I would think that Clinton’s larger donors I might be a little bit peeved about this. Smaller donors too.
I remember how pissed I was when Darcy Burner’s dweeb went off the reservation, and I only gave her $25.
Actually, I think if you fully investigated things you would find that FDL has treated both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama quite even handedly, as they did all the other candidates. FDL has made a conscious decision to point out both good AND bad from all sides during this primary season.
I was bothered by the constant references to “Commander in Chief”. I despise this Bushism, the President may indeed be the C-in-C of the Armed Forces, but never of the people. The common use of this title has a very unpleasant dictatorial ring to it.
Amen, sister!
Where do you get the idea that the PRIME role of the president is to protect the constitution?
He takes an oath to uphold it, but the duties go beyond that.
Oh my!
Yes, I do.
Just a drive-by to say: Caw, Caw, Scarecrow! Good Job!
Exactly. “Commander-in-chief” with no qualifiers is a synonym for “emperor.” We’ve got to stop using such terminology, or else Cheney has won.
Bush turned that oath into just a bunch of words.
oh man….that is beautifully said
Every elected official takes an oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution more or less.
How about the:
faithfully execute the office of president?
The president’s roles and duties and responsibilities include more than preserve, protect, and defend.
Okay, poor choice of words on my part.
Boxturtle (Why do I only see things like that AFTER hitting submit?)
People should be talking about this, and loudly. This incident sets a precedent that should be nipped in the bud. There was no guarantee that some racist gun nut would not have slipped through, at an event in Texas. “Large crowds” are no excuse for such an action as he draws large crowds everywhere.
Right. So here is the full job description from Article II:
Never said they didn’t.
Who sent the anthrax? How about some sleuthing CIA, FBIA, NSA and so forth… we got some unsolved crimes there.
Bush obviously failed in his oath to preserve and protect the constitution.
Hey… that’s impeachable!
and never,EVER spoken about by the MSM,who were the first to be attacked by said stuff…WEIRD or what?
Fairness in how we treat competing candidates is in the eyes of the beholder, I suppose. Jane has written numerous posts criticizing the media’s (esp., MSNBC) misogynist attacks on Clinton, and we’ve all wondered about the more aggressive advocates on her staff, especially when it seemed they wanted to drag us towards race baiting. I always felt Clinton was much better than the people around her, wrote that she would be a formidible candidate, that she shouldn’t be attacked with right wing talking point; but I also wrote a critical piece on her Iran Kyl/Lieerman vote. I’ve written several posts on the theme we have two exceptional candidates that the voters seemed to be very happy with. I wrote that no matter how we resolve which of the barriers — race or gender — get broken by the selection, we needed to make sure everyone knew we were ready for both to fall.
Has there been any comment about this by Obama or anyone in his campaign?
I remember seeing something about it here on the toobz just before the debate last night. Nothing at all on the teevee, so it never really happened..
It is our job to keep pointing out when they use “their” language and move them over to the frame that we want….. My issues is the use of the term “illegal immigrant” and many of you know that….. people are not illegal, the act of crossing the boarder is a misdemeanor offense no greater than a speeding ticket. Do call someone who is a speeder an illegal driver?
I have stopped candidates in mid speech and suggested another way to say it. I reinforce it when I hear them use the terms that do not divide such as undocumented workers, persons….. never have I had someone challenge me afterwards but thanked me.
So write to the Obama campaign and complain on the language use…. let them know that words so matter. Look at the sh*t storm that hit when he event mentioned Reagan.
if only we had a table for that
The ‘progresives’ are not a majority. The dems have to have their base working class making under $59k, else we have McGovern, Mondale, or Dukakis again. Politics is the art of the possible. I fear that you’ve let right wing propaganda foul your brain in re the Clintons and left in re reality.
It is startling. We need to get to the bottom of it quick. First it should be verified that Obama and his staff didn’t order it out of naivity, which is unlikely. Then, whatever committee has oversight,I guess Henry Wexler’s, needs to get busy ASAP. The only thing more dangerous I can imagine would have been if his speech had been somewhere in the Idaho wilderness.
It’s interesting to me that Obama has not yet directly connected his statements about keeping America safe with his line that he wants to “end the mentality that got us into war.” What does he mean?
Uh…only if that “steel” includes the ability and intention to investigate past criminal/corrupt practices. It is unacceptable to sweep under the rug and forget about the massive criminal activity promulgated by the Gonzales and, now, Mukasey DOJ.
I would also like to see a major reform of the DOJ: unlatch it from the Executive branch. Make it much more independent. No more doing the bidding of the President, but rather, doing the bidding of the Constitution and all the duly enacted laws of the land.
the banking industry wants the government to buy the debt, I am amazed the president said no but give him time
here’s what has to happen;
the banking industry must be forced to keep the low rates on the adjustable rate loans and they have to keep or sell their assets privately, NOT get the government to take this debt, unless they are willing to take quarters on the dollar
I’ve seen no public statements, but you can bet that his staff is having some serious discussions with his federal protection detail, who according to the local police were the ones that told them to stand down.
Good Morning everyone….. going for coffee and my walk…. then I might be able to write a comment with the correct pronouns and articles…. sheesh…anyone want a cuppa?
Your comment reminded me of Sheldon Whitehouse’s Diagrams on before and after Bush in regard to how many people have access to DOJ from the executive branch. Am I remembering correctly?
Right, if a tree fell in the forest and the msm didn’t report it, did it really fall?..
I haven’t heard or read any comment from the Obama camp. If they have any sense, they will make a BIG deal out of it to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
I see this irrationality in my own family. I am opposed to Clinton on substantive grounds (though her healthcare reform proposal is superior to Obama’s Milquetoast proposal) and neutral on Obama. My sister, a GOPer, has an irrational hatred of all things Clinton. Because she knows I do not support Clinton for the nom, she assumes I am in her camp of irrationality and thus sends me REALLY annoying winger email crap.
I don’t care for the Clintons and their minions (Carville, Penn, Emmanuel, etc) but I do not irrationally hate them (except for Carville, Penn, Emmanuel…and it isn’t irrational hate, it is reasoned hate based on objective substance).
BREAKING!!!
NYTimes to go online later this afternoon to answer questions about McCain article…said they’ve received about 2000 letters. You can go to NYTimes.com if you want to pose questions or monitor session…
Used in it’s correct sense, it is a very good term, emphasising the fact that the civilian leadership stands above the military. It was very useful during Truman’s firing of MacArthur. I don’t think either HRC or Obama used it, except in regard relationship to the military. I detest such foreign invented terms as “Homeland” and false names for Acts, such as “Patriot Act,” but I don’t like to surrender meaningful terms and names to the radical right.
Of course, if he does make a big deal out of it, the msm will blast him for not trusting in the good will of his supporters. He could then remind them that he’s not Bush and does not screen out people who disagree with him.
I hope he is alluding to our obscenely bloated defense spending causing an arms race and actually making us less safe, but for some reason I doubt it. It would be interesting to hear him reconcile those two statements, wouldn’t it?
It’s amazing how such memes as “The number one job of the president is the safety of the American people” take on a life of their on in the collective subconscious, crowding out such gems as:
— “Those who would trade essential liberties for a bit of safety deserve neither.”
— “Give me liberty, or give me death.”
— “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”
Plus I would like to see someone in that position who has worked as a USA. Would help with credibility within the organization, which I think will be an essential quality for someone mandated to clean up the mess.
“John McCain and his Republican followers have no idea what this is about, and that is why they will lose the country.”
Scarecrow, well said, and so true.
One more
Thomas Jefferson said that when the gov’t fears the people it is democracy and that when the people fear the gov’t it is tyranny.
SanderO, I like your way of thinking!
This non college educated, elderly, white woman who supposedly fits ALL the criteria to be a Hillary supporter is so adamently opposed to Billary…….. because of her similar stands of the Lie-berman ilk these last 14 years, as so many of the incumbent DINO’s………… very much fear Billary in a place of real power. Any trust of her/them is long gone!
Oh, John & Elizabeth I so miss you!
The banks are unable to sell their debt. Most of it is vapor debt with no real value.
Banks are insolvent but as long as people are trading these useless financial instruments their balance sheets look plumb. They’re not. And that is the trouble.
The write downs are basically an admission that assets on their ledger are worth nothing.
When bank like CitiBank take a $15BB write down, they are say that that account is not worth boo.
So what the fed is doing is lending them money… (a bad credit risk gets lower and lower interest on a loan… jeez that the opposite of what banks to to you and me.. they raise our interest at the slightest BS cause) so that the bank won’t collapse and trigger a chain reaction since they are all tied into each other and all insolvent.
Speaking of which, can’t we just do away with the Department Of Homeland Security and the Thousands Standing Around (TSA) now?
All they have done, it seems, is to force us to inflict our smelly feet on our fellow passengers.
John and his wife clearly got it and they want to help the people… not the rich people.
what you said.
What a waste. A total waste of resources.
The reeaction to the debate here last night was interesting. There was a palpable desire to feel comfortable with the two candidates, especially Obama since he is the likely nominee, precisely because neither candidate has been a friend to or responsive to progressives. Our own debate has shifted to the general election and the contrast between the sleazy geriatric warmonger McCain and either of the Democratic candidates who by simple contrast with him look stellar. But it is important to remember that the progressive agenda is not about pie in the sky wish lists but real solutions to real problems. In so far as all of the candidates try to act that this isn’t so, our nation’s problems will remain unaddressed and unresolved.
I, for one, place a lot more trust in the skills of the US Secret Service than I do in the skills of any local police force. If the Dallas cops were acting like bad TSA screeners and patting down every little old lady and four year old kid, the USSS was right to tell the cops to stand down a bit and deal with real security issues.
It I were the candidate, I’d be very comfortable putting my security in the hands of the Secret Service. They, more than the local cops and more than all my campaign advisers, have the expertise that’s needed here.
Just MHO, YMMV, etc.
??
this is what i think depresses me most about the primary season. no one thought this a year ago – or, imo, had reason to. and the neither senator obama nor senator clinton are different people than they were a year ago.
i’m all for supporting them when they do good and as an important alternative to mccain. but where did all the rose colored glasses come from?
Not to mention the 30 nautical mile radius Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) that Chimpy throws up everywhere he goes. And the bullshit Washington DC Air Defense Authorization Zone (ADIZ) thats been blocking the north-south airways along the Eastern Seaboard for the past 7 years making VFR flight in the northeast almost more trouble than it’s worth.
Sorry for the rant.
amen. thank you!
i thought i was going crazy (more than usual) for a bit there.
I agree selise. Obama is great but he’s far from perfect. Why is Hillary so great, she represents a power hungry political dynasty. Hillary showed her true colors when she skipped the FISA vote, clearly choosing her political career over the interests of her constituents.
Almost! IIRC, every time a trade takes place, a sale occurs. So perhaps “unable to sell is a bit of an overstatement” but it sure as hell is the right idea.
And the problem is that nobody knows what realestate-backed loans are worth, because nobody know what our subprime-inflated realestate is really worth. But it’s not going to be worth much with lots of forclosed properties flooding the market — a simple matter of supply and demand.
Here’s an example of how well the Obama side of the party is doing. Yesterday afternoon I received a phone call from a very polite and articulate young woman asking me if I knew any students who might be interested in working next summer as local organizers for the Democratic party. I’m sure many of you on this site have gotten similar calls. I was so impressed with the way she talked, and like all of us, I get a lot of cold calls. If she is any indication of the quality of the young people he and MoveOn have assembled, we are going to have a great election cycle. I just hope that Obama doesn’t relax his efforts after March 4, but continues to stump and advertise coming down to the Convention. The important work over the next four months is to imprint the notion on the American people that the Republican party has betrayed America. That branding is crucial. It will be good for the Republicans, too, in the long run. They can reform as a respectable conservative opposition, instead of the band of crooks they became after Nixon.
Have you read the TSA blog?
I was over there a couple weeks ago after they started it. Woo were people pissed and expressed it…. The TSA bloggers kept refuting people who said that taking shoes off was not a health hazard quoting some study. But someone who stated he was an epidemiologist started linking “real” studies and knocking down their strawmen…. it was very funny…. like germs can’t grow on the floor ….. The other section was the restriction of liquids….. woo that was not a happy topic….
hmmm very interesting as they now have a front page article dealing with TSA theft which I posted links to from a Seattle TV station of the Seattle Airport …. they are admitting their is a theft problem….
http://www.tsa.gov/blog
Now don’t you feel safe?
SanderO, I am sure you have seen the most recent inflation numbers. These result from speculation in the oil markets driven by hedge funds trying to recupe losses from the housing market debacle. They also arise from the fed’s interest rate cuts. It is something of a double whammy which hits lower and middle class Americans the hardest. Higher energy costs, higher overall costs, and the reduced value of savings.
Selling a debt is fine as long as the debtor pays his obligation.
But when the rate cranks up and it looks great on a balance sheet, it throws the debtors (mortgage holders) into a financial tailspin. They walk away because they can’t pay. The underlying collateral – “the property” is now tanking in value and to recover even THAT value is an expense, not an asset,so these bundled mortgages are a disaster to manage. And impossible in many cases to sort out. A very dumb idea of some bankers which is now bitting them.
Hey but everyone got their transaction fees! So who gives a rat’s ass?
Actually, I thought all of the Democratic candidates were pretty good, with the exception of Gravel, whose personality was a turn off to me. But I watched last night’s debate and left it with the sense that both candidates were very smart, rational, pragmatic, non ideological, had a sense of history and a lifelong interest in public policy, and believed in promoting the common good. Since those characteristics are all the opposite of the people who have governed for the last seven years, I have some hope that we can begin to repair the damage, both foreign and domestic. I’m only depressed if I think we may lose the executive or legislative branches again, or that so much damage has been done that we will never recover.
Yes, and the cost of food up 4% last year and climbing still. More and more of us wondering when the boom hits us again and harder until we can’t take it any more either.
the oilspeculators will continue to smash and grab as much of Americas tresure as they can steal,till Darth leaves office kicking and screaming,remind your republican friends,the poor to middle class ones at least,the rich are always in high cotton
via moon of alabama i see that turkey has invaded iraq. any other big news this morning?
I dissagree with your evaluation, though those are contributing factors, I am convinced our inflation rates are caused by how much paper the fed is printing, so much, they had to stop reporting the m3 index
I am amazed we don’t have even more inflation but this is mostly because china and suadi arabia are too sophisticated to spend the money they are aquiring, if they devalue our dollar their debt becomes worth that much less
but that can’t hold for long, they have to spend that money some time
I’ve had two digital cameras stolen by the TSA. One had all of my Oscar night pictures on it when I came home from LaLa Land in 2003.
Exactly. That’s why I’m making an issue of Obama’s Orwellian nonsense that “My number one job as president will be to keep the American people safe.” It’s important to understand where the real aisle is. The presidential contenders are on the other side of it. For example, even Chris Dodd, whose father was a prosecutor at Nuremburg, said he wouldn’t prosecute members of the Bush administration.
LOL. You should be able to fly without restriction over Crawford before too long.
my point was only that what is said during a campaign, while very important, may be less of a predictor of their governing ability and goals than their actions while in government. i don’t want to lose sight of that in the glare of fancy marketing campaigns.
Rose colored glasses, Selise? How about a little perspective.
Think of the entire range of Democrats in the US Congress — from Constitutional guardians like Feingold, to well meaning, but ineffective like Leahy, to silly people like Feinstein, to hacks like Rockefeller and Republican lites like the dozen or so we always lose when it really matters. We have Bush dogs and progressive caucuses; mods and conservatives. From this highly diverse party, the two remaining candidates have liberal/progressive ratings near the top of the scale. They’re people who devoted their lives to public service; who seem to give a damn about those less well off; who’ve worked hard on reform of all kinds. They seem to be decent humans when you translate how they believe government should respond to people.
We tend to be hypercritical here, sometimes, maginifying every defect and failing, but the notion that these are not “progressive” Democrats is, in my view, absolute gibbersih.
Much of the run up in the price of oil is by the producers whose dollars are worth less and less. So they up the price to keep their ROI from tanking.
epu-ed but Knut at 138 makes a strong point…just remove the March 4 and it’s perfect. An ongoing process.
saddlyyes @ 144…what Rummy-invasion did to eye-raq, Rethug-rule has done to America.
perris, I agree it is hard to know what is happening with the money supply except to know that it has increased a lot and has contributed mightily to the weakening of the US dollar. But that has been multi-year. What is happening now is driven by more proximate factors. The money supply issue will hit later if and when China and the Gulf States decide to start divesting themselves of their US dollar denominated holdings.
what he said. And don’t expect a progressive to get to the top in THIS system.
best hope is for a stealth progressive to shed their centrist stance and govern over to the left. Not probable but possible.
I second selise in this. You are looking at the Democratic candidates with rose colored glassess. We have been critical of both here and with reason. That is not being hypercritical. That is being realistic. They are not the Second Coming and to think that they are will only lead to misunderstanding and disappointment when they take office.
Strangely, when Edwards suspended his campaign, both Obama and Clinton shifted to the left in hope of picking up his support and that of his those who were voting for him — a very interesting process. But now, in anticipation of the general election Obama is shifting back toward the so-called center, which is well to the right of the average American voter but more to the liking of the the MSM and the the CEOs of their holding companies.
And who exactly used the term “second coming?” What kind of strawman argument is that? No one has claimed either candidate is “ideal,” whatever that is, nor has anyone ignored the votes/attitudes we find truly troublesome. If you don’t like either candidate, that is your right, but don’t put words in my mouth.
Look:
Even the barbarians didn’t think the credit crisis would last this long.
A firm affiliated with leveraged buyout giant Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., run by billionaire Henry Kravis, was forced to seek a two-week delay on the repayment of billions of dollars of debt after failing to find investors to refinance.
KKR Financial Holdings, whose stock has fallen 50 percent in the last six months, said yesterday that it had reached an agreement with its lenders to delay repayment of the short-term debt while it continues discussions on restructuring.
On a relative basis, i.e., compared to any Republican candidate, the Demcoratic candidates are stellar. But when the leading Democratic candidate is using vile RNC talking points to attack his opponent, praising the opposition as “the party of ideas,” noting with admiration Reagan’s impact on the country, and repeating Bushisms such as “My number-one job as president will be to protect the American people,” then we as progressives have much to be concerned about.
Bad move this year. The votes are not in the center.
Conventional wisdom on that is wrong. Tell them I said it.
maybe we have a different definition of “progressive”?
it’s not that i don’t think obama and clinton are probably the best we can do with the constraints of a corrupt political and media culture – but that doesn’t make them extraordinary. and that doesn’t make them progressive.
i’m reminded of how over the top our expectations of speaker pelosi were and then how disappointed we were – and i’d like to try to avoid that this time… and i think one necessary corrective is to work at being members of the reality based society.
p.s. have you been reading matt stoller and especially paul rosenberg’s analysis of obama at openleft?
p.p.s. and if you were calling my comment gibberish – i think that was out of line.
Foe sure! But we have a beginning and let’s hope Qbama bings us more progressives along with him and ““We The People” realize WE are the Government!
Let’s get Our Democracy back & end Corporotacracy!
I didn’t. I quoted you:
That is something of an either/or strawman argumet of your own. Clinton is and has been a DINO. Obama has been a DINO in training. Neither qualifies as progressive. Neither has mounted any outreach to progressives. My reference to the Second Coming simply points out how distorted and revisionist your perspective is.
Conventional wisdom is that it won’t cost them anything. Maybe so, but it costs America. It costs in terms of the sanity of our political discourse. It reinforces the the nonsense of the MSM to say shit like “my number-one job as president will be to keep the American people safe.”
Deep in EPUlandia, but I must say, how proud I am of my country. Really, really proud. Two of the field of candidates for President are fine people and would make excellent Presidents.
But I am proud because we are not Pakistan, or Burma, or Guatemala, or Kenya, or any number of countries where the political process is fraught with assasinations, bombings, death squads, and intimidation.
Plagiarism? Boinking a lobbyist? Good grief, that’s the worst we have to deal with?
re: “second coming”
i thought that is what you were alluding to with this line:
By far the most progressive of the contenders was Edwards. But, as Feingold has pointed out, his voting record was not particularly progressive at all.
Again, on a relative basis, our candidates are wonderful. But when we get down to absolute standards, they leave much to be desired. And, tactically speaking, just like the conservatives on the other side, progressives would be well advised to dig in their heels a bit. Don’t be too happy with these candidates. Make them earn our promise of support by picking a real progressive as VP.
Agreed, but I like our comparision set to be say the members of the European Union, rather than the banana republics. ;-)
selise — the “gibberish” comments refers to how we describe the candidates, not to you, personally. I think it’s fair to describe these candidates as progressive, when placed in context, on many issue; you and Hugh can disagree. There doesn’t seem to be a standard definition, so we’ll just have to disagree.
I agree with you about the need to be reality-based, which I interpret to mean we need a realistic view of who these candidates are. I’m more sanguine on some social issues, much less so on most foreign policy issues, where, as I’ve stated in prior posts, it’s not clear they truly have a fundamentally different mindset from the one that got us into Iraq. Obama’s remarks in Pakistan, both of theres on Iran are troubling.
re: reagan.
yeah, i still haven’t gotten over that one yet either. matt gave, imo, a good analysis:
doesn’t sound like a progressive to me…. or at least, at the very minimum, shouldn’t the view that obama is not progressive have some consideration beyond it being “gibberish”?
Way EPU’d, but whut the heck…. at least it’s on topic, at least as far as I can see…
Yesterday morning, I wrote Senators Clinton and Obama each a letter, identical except for the placing of names therein. Below is a copy.
I don’t agree. As a Clinton supporter, I was astonished by the unfair, and often vehement anti-Hillary coverage from the left netroots. Even handed would be TalkLeft, maybe myDD, although they are moving away from that. Dkos, which got me into political blogging, never sees the light of day on my computer anymore because of the Hillary hate. FDL I now visit sporadically, when it used to be every day. I understand that bloggers have opinions which can cause biases. Bias I can deal with, but I detest the level of Hillary hate that is, for the most part, prevalent throughout the progressive blogosphere. As a partisan democrat, I will vote for the democratic candidate, but I am digusted by the vitriol spewed toward one of our party’s most progressive members.
agree completely – especially your view on tactics.
Oh, I see, I describe the crowd’s reaction to the possible return of decent government, so that must mean I think Obama and Clinton are Jesus Christ?
Yep, but sometimes those banana republics get upwards of 90% participation and stories of people walking ten miles and waiting in line for five hours to cast their vote for the first time in their lives. Imagine that kind of participation in this country!
Scarecrow. In case you return to read more of the comments, a belated THANK YOU for a wonderful post.
Thank you, Adie.
Obama and Clinton are now progressives. Who knew? I expect FDL can close up shop because we are all so ably represented by these progressives. What a load off my mind. Or maybe just what a load.
in the spirit of the current moment on the thread, you EARNED it! ;->
P E A C E
Some at FDL have been most equitable, some not. Did you do equivalent analysis? Were Obama and Edwards subject to the same scrutiny as Clinton?
it wasn’t a statement in support of your view that it is fair to describe obama and clinton as progressive – it was a statement dismissing disagreement (and that is what i objected to).
I’d like to add my thanks, not only for this post for the stream of excellent posts.
On the question of whether it’s “fair” to call Obama and Clinton “progressives,” I most certainly do not consider them progressives. To me, both are DLC centrists. Hillary is a card-carring DLCer, and on most issues Obama is to the right of her.
Both stared out with impressive credentials as community organizers, Hillary as a disciple of Saul Alinsky. Those credentials can be used to make a case that they are progressives, so I can’t say that it is unfair to call them “progressives.” But at this point, I wouldn’t use that term to describe them. YMMV.
FDL is organized on the term “progressive”. It’s a relative term. It’s interpretation can range from somewhere just to the left of conservatism to a belief in anarchy. In the present circumstances, I personally believe we have to go a ways to recover freedoms, protections, services, and relationships that were destroyed, before we can advance. Under some definitions, that would make me reactionary in that I think we have restore a past condition. In my viewpoint, anyone who believes that government has a role to promote the general welfare is liberal, progressive, or simply superior over anyone who believes otherwise.
So, there are always going to be fault-line frictions along the span of progressive thought. As long as each of us treats the others’ viewpoints with dignity and respect, there should be no offense taken. I apologize if I sometimes speak otherwise.
I think you hit the right points. People aren’t all one thing or another. I find much to like in both candidates; and much to be concerned about. The appropriate definition of what is or is not “progressive” probably needs work. I’ve never suggested either is the best progressives we could imagine. I believe these are both good candidates, and they they possess progressive qualities.
My post focused on the notion of the role of government in addressing the nation’s problems, and here I find their positions fundamentally progressive. It’s straight out of the New Deal, or the Great Society. Folks can add all the caveats they want, and I probably agree with many of them.
Bob Geiger is back at the Agonist!!!!!
The Clintons essentially ran a negative campaign based on “experience”. It would seem that given a meaningful and positive alternative, no one would want to repeat the the “Clinton experience”.
IMHO, the Clinton presidency was the brightest spot in American politics in the past three decades. Of course, part of it was the good fortune of the dot-com economic boom, which probably would not attend a second Clinton presidency.
But, think of it this way, GWB sent this nations troops into Iraq for an objective that had already been achieved by Clinton at almost no cost in terms of American blood and treasure. That’s pretty good way to achieve objectives. It brings to mind one of my favorite quotes:
As presidents go, Bill Clinton was so all that bad.
Nevertheless, I did vote for Obama on Super Tuesday.
If you are willing to base the American economy on 66% foreign oil dependence, as the Clintons agreed to do, and then tell everybody the economy is great, then so be it. I do not want this great country to go near the Clintons if I can help it ever again. At least Obama has the potential for something different, the Clintons want to stay at the Bellagio. They always will. And to my mind they will always be complete phonies.
Oh, don’t worry. I’m certain Obama and his magic dust will Unite us all and sooth away all your cares and worries. Don’t let reality get in the way of the fantasy!
Good point. Now, where is it written that the President’s primary job is to do x or y? Let’s look into this and get it clarified!
I suppose “faithfully execute the office of President of the United States” is primary, though that isn’t very specific.
Curious, it says c-in-c ‘when called into the actual service’. It doesn’t say ALL the time.
I guess the Republican idea that the government is our enemy is completely wrong and their idea about c-in-c as dictator (during a time of war) is completely wrong and their idea that ‘defending the country’ is primary above all other duties is also completely wrong.
Have the Republicans bee right about anything…ever?
Can anyone cite a quote or speech of Obama’s where he talked about repudiating Republican ideology or Reaganism or the like?
How did Obama vote on that?
The “when called into service” phrase modifies the “militia of the several states.” There has never been a time with the U.S. didn’t have a standing military of varying size.
In my view the word Progressive doesn’t relate directly to Conservativsm or Liberalism. It refers to a hyper-aggressive effort to make great leaps forward by making big changes to fix problems or enable possibilities. That’s what Teddy Roosevelt did and he was hardly a Liberal. But, OTOH, FDR did a lot of both. He transformed America AND much of it was with Liberal programs.
So, the differences are incremental change or big bold changes AND whether those changes are done in a Conservative way or a Liberal way.
In the case of John Edwards he was clearly seeing the same problems as most of us and he wanted to be a Progressive. Which KIND of Progressive he would’ve been probably depended upon the specific issues.
In the case of Clinton there seems to be a very wide range of issues and views on how to handle them, but not a lot of energy to be Progressive.
In the case of Obama I see little Progressive zeal, but a voting record of Liberalism. I’d guess he’ll be a lot less like the activist Carter and the Conservative Bill Clinton and a lot more like Truman or Mondale & Dukakis. Eh, okay, but not quite what we need, in my opinion.
A little time and space from last night..
Her “we’ll be fine” clearly lifted from Edwards both in stump and debates was heartfelt..(but would have meant more if she hadn’t done the xerox thing.)
Same with the “taken hits” part
http://gregmitchellwriter.blog…..oming.html
not making a value judgment..just embracing the irony
oh yeah a little Renzi reading from TPM
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..ndictment/
I have only one question for the “Obamanables” who are so jazzed about this election. If you are 22 years of age or older did you vote in the last election. There seems to be a lot of people who are new to this and I can’t believe they are all under the age of 22 which would have made them legally able to vote in 2004. So if you are so passionate about ending the war and about who or who did not vote for the war and you had a chance to throw out the creep who started the war and you knew by then that War criminal Bush was going to continue the crimes of his presidency why didn’t you come out in droves in 2004 to vote him out. I think all this HYPE OF HOPE is very silly and to quote Bob “YOU JUST WANT TO BE ON THE SIDE THAT WINNIN” Or you want to be cool. I will not vote for Obama if he is the nominee. That won’t make much difference I know but I will know that I was true to my self. I will vote local but not for president.
Gee that means you will have to vote against Obamanable here is how his vote for Feb 12 is recorded:
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
If you want to be consistent then you have to not vote for anyone considering. And by the way it is my belief that if Obama ws in the Senate when the IWR was voted on he would have supported it especially if he had visions of the oval office dancing in his head the calculus would have been to great against him. THe mind set of course was that the war would be a cake walk and be over and not really an issue in this election and if it had been a raging success and he had voted agaisnt it he would have been bludgeoned with OH YOU DON”T WANT TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY AGAINST EVIL MEN…or some such nonsense
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Obamanables vote Feb 12…..gee I guess he was out politicking just like Hillary does that mean you have as much contempt for him as you do for her…be consistent now!
I think the possibility of the Obama election, let alone that he has come this far is a very healing step for this country. No, it is not racial parity or redemption, but it is a meaningful point that we are reaching. And coming soon enough that some of the 60s activists are still alive to see this day/possibility.
Another thing I really like is an Inaugual photo of Obama/Michelle with W. Which one is more polished, brainier, more professional, better looking etc etc etc. And the stark realization that the mean spirited, petty character of W (if I can use that word) let alone his evil ,mendacity, selfish, narcissitic, lying, incompetent, smug self has in many ways provided the impetus for this outstanding historical moment. God’s plan? Who knows. But I think it is just delicious: guess who Barb may have to invite to Maine?
Chris Matthew just admitted he was ‘touched’ (up his other leg?) by Clinton’s plagiarized closing comments.
Half of that ‘touching’ close was written by John Edwards, and the other half be her husband Bill in an early 90’s speech.
He was on Obama like mad for his use of Patricks’ words.
But gets shivers at her fake words?
Isn’t Matthews just the epitome of a why women are driven to silicon?
What a Dickhead.
I do not hate Hillary. But I am mystified as to why she deserves to be nominated to the Supreme Court or Senate Majority Leader when she has no particular qualifications for either post.
It strikes me that people are proposing this either because (a) they have been supporters of her failed bid for the presidency and feel she deserves at least SOMETHING big … (b) They have not been supporters but they think Obama should make nice and give her a little bitty consolation prize, like, you know, the Supreme Court or SML. or (c) she’s famous, so she should wind up with something suitable to her famousness. None of these, to put it mildly, are good reasons.
Let me point out that Hillary, as far as I know, is neither a distinguished jurist, nor an especially accomplished or senior leader in the Senate. She has done absolutely nothing to justify her being nominated for, let alone taking, either position. Her chief activity in the Senate has been kowtowing to Bush and not making waves with senior Senators, her main achievements in law involve the Rose Law firm, which I imagine would be brought up at any confirmation hearings that might be held.
There are probably hundreds of more distinguished lawyers/judges, and ceratyinly a number of Senators (Dodd, Leahy, Feinberg?) vastly more qualified for eiother of these positions.
Hillary Clinton is going to be the President of the United States. We only have 11 months before she’ll be sworn in as commander in chief. Don’t feel bad when she wins because she is going to work hard for you everyday and this country will see a President second to none as she is willing able and ready to do whatever it takes to bring us all together to take America back to her glory.
Hillary Clinton is a mastermind and she is going to build together with the people of America a masterpiece of which the world has ever seen before, we will all be in awe of the blessings God has bestowed on us through the hard work, dilagance and competence she will bring out in this country ready to serve our leader President Hillary Clinton.
Thank you God for such a blessing. Thank you God.
I have a lot of love in my heart for this country and Hillary Clinton has shown the commitment and love for her country everyday now for many years and she is the one we will be pleased to call President.