Tim Russert is a narcissist. He loves the sound of his own voice.

Russert is really, really tuned in to skin color.

John “God so loved the Jews he gave them the Nazis to drive them back to Israel” Hagee…
___________

LOL!

And placed His Chosen Peeps on the only patch of real estate in the region without oil under it.

Why does Russert still have a job?

Obama can’t bring this issue up now, or they’ll jump all over him for “playing the race card”. But Russert will get his comeuppance when Obama is elected. He’ll be shut out.

He’s a snake in the grass, as one would expect from a vocal member of the whore church.

Right! and the bottleneck between Africa and Europe/MidEast where rampaging armies crossed to and fro

Notice the Hume alley-oop to excuse Russert while affirming the GOP efforts at prying Jewish voters away from Democrats by inserting the anti-Semitic talking points being promulgated by the RNC.

Is there any wonder 70% of Americans think the media is out of touch?

One need only witness the beltway circle jerk on MTP with the withered and dessicated champions of the Washington wisdom affirmers.

I am sure that these people were all as shocked as Bush in regards to the high price of gas too.

-G

P.S. Democratic party identification is the highest ever polled by Rasmussen.

The TV networks “personalities” like Tim Russert are constantly looking for a way to distinguish themselves from each other by creating flashpoints and controversy to the point that it has compromised and distorted a lot of their coverage.

It isn’t just Gloria’s Bolger’s terrible makeup assistant as Christy pointed out the other day, it’s the inaccuracies that come out of her mouth that are even worse than her makeup.

Good Morning Jane,
The next time Tim plays “gotcha” I just wish Barack would ask “Tim, what is your point here, why do you ask that kind of a question?”

it’s because Harry Belafonte and Barack Obama both have a name that starts with the letter ‘B’ and if you didn’t notice, they’re (black)

I thought SNL did a pretty decent job of capturing Russert last night.

Dick Cheney Controls Tim Russert

Unconscious, unthinking racism is the hardest kind to root out. Russert’s line of it is of the type “I’m no racist but I wish you folks would confine your uppityness to basketball.” Russert needs to be asked why he is a racist because maybe, just maybe this will get him thinking about just how racist his questions are.

And, his full Christian name, recall, is Sheik bin al BaraBlackHusseinOsamaBama. Peace Be Unto Him.

Wasn’t there lots of similar talk right after the last debate? No fooling!

Funny, BobbyG!

Obama missed a golden opportunity to stop this nonsense in the last debate. He should have used some sarcasm saying “you’re not going to hold me responsible for everything said by a black man, are you?” Or “Is John McCain going to be held responsible for everything said by white men as I am by black men? Something snarky.
I lack the snark gene, but you get the picture.

Hmmm yes, but that’s why he went with Barry (snark)

Remember when it was okay to like the name Hussein (as in King Hussein of Jordan)?

hello Jane, from Paris…*g* *G*

[snip]

Russert will get his comeuppance when Obama is elected. He’ll be shut out.

If there’s any justice in the world….but I stopped believing in justice quite some time ago (about the time boosh came to power). :-(

Then they would have accused him of playing the race card.

Kind of damned if you do, damned if you don’t moment

“confine your uppityness to basketball”
______

If I ever got Pumpkinhead on the court, I’d say “put a sock in it and check ball, motherfucker, and don’t bring that weak shit into my house.”

Right before I planted my elbow in his ribs.

;)

And, his full Christian name, recall, is Sheik bin al BaraBlackHusseinOsamaBama. Peace Be Unto Him.

Not far from the “truth”. Wing-nut radio calls him Barak Mohammed Hussein Obama.

I get a kick out of the theory that Obama is a double agent for bin Ladin.

Biodin did you hit any of the jazz and piano bars in the Latin Quarter?

Why Bobby, how positively uppity of you *g*

sorry for the mispelling of Biodun.

Yeah and the mental gymnastics that go along with that.

Leftists area bunch of capitulating week-kneed people without any fight in them and they are about to launch a fascist takeover of America with the ruthlessnes of the Nazis and Stalin.

-G

good one – lol

Russert should be made a laughing stock because of this. He should not be alowed to “moderate” any additional debates. Minimum he should explain himself, though I don’t think that is possible.

This Primary is about substance, not scaremongering

If you are a Democrat or Independent, please consider voting for Barack Obama.

This is not a case of Obama’s judgment versus Hillary’s experience. It’s judgment versus weaker judgment AND weaker experience. Hillary Clinton has run a nasty low blow campaign. Her latest fearmongering “red phone call” ad really takes the cake. When her thug in chief Marc Penn was asked to name one “red phone call” moment he couldn’t. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03…..ref=slogin

But Obama did. Her Iraq war vote. That was her test. She failed with flying colors. And she has the nerve to fearmonger on Obama about his experience! She can’t win on the merits so she’ll try anything, including winning by scaring people. She said that Obama is like Bush, and once again it’s the pot calling the kettle black.

Contrary to her claims, America doesn’t need experience like Hillary Clinton’s. Everything big Hillary Clinton has done has been a failure (except covering for Bill’s indiscretions, that is):

1. Health care non-reform in the early 1990s. Funny how she claims to be such an expert at this when she failed at it so badly that the crisis is still snowballing 15 years later!

2. Her support of Bush’s war in Iraq was a huge mistake. She picked up the red phone and said sure Mr. Bush, you can take us to war before the inspections process finished and before we finish our business in Afghanistan. Her mistake on Iraq extended way past her vote in her ongoing support for the war until November 2005, long after most Democratic politicians who voted for the war woke up to what was going on. Now she says Bush duped her. Nice spin. Last Fall, once again she voted for another warmongering Bush bill, this time against Iran. Is that the experience we need? Heck no!

3. Hillary Clinton’s current campaign is another example of her underperformance. The Clintons were the clear favorites. Yet they ran out of money. They had no plan B after not winning on Super Tuesday (reminds me of Iraq). She has had to fire a string of people for low blows and poor performance. They change their message every two weeks.

Obama, in contrast, has been level headed and steady in his positive message of bringing people together. He knows that the fight fight fight attitude will work no better than last time Hillary tried it at health care reform. Obama is tough, but knows how to use his toughness to lead rather than divide. He has fought and passed ethics reform in Washington, as well as transparency in government. He exposed the atrocities in health care for our veterans and passed laws to address it. Obama is the steady performer with better judgment who can get things done.

Morning, Biodun. Anything important happening???

not so far but maybe tonight–something to do after that famous dinner date I told you guys about in earlier threads. BTW, dinner is usually eaten as late as 9 PM, at least in restaurants…

Hasn’t Obama frozen out FOX?

I’d chime in, but when I turned the tv on to watch Russert, all I got was the LA Marathon.
Like watching grass grow.
And the color commentators…wow, I bet his legs are hurting right about now.
Wow, look at all those legs running.
Ha!
But, it’s on in the background.
And, it’s not giving me a stomach ache.

pas de sweat…

Russert is a lacky. He’ll be replaced by another lacky in a heart beat if he doesn’t tow the line. Lackies are a dime a dozen. So, Tim will be a dutiful lacky and obey the criminal bosses to stay in their favor. Money makes the world go round, world go round, world go round….

hi there, he says with some trepidation…*g* *G*

yes, see 34…*g*

Sorry to have been seemingly OT.
The point I did not make was It Is All A Marathon.
Not a sprint.

Hi DuckSoup.

you said it qg!! thats it in a nutshell…. tim and chris mathews both know the drill – otherwise they’d lose their well-paid jobs…..

As you say…pas de sweat.
No drama in Sylmar, CA.
Thank God.
You can have Paris.

Got a diamond ring in your pocket?

You are f***ing funny.
Crack me up, g-friend.

NOW the sun decides to come out! Why couldn’t it have done that yesterday so that we could do the whale count? grrrrrrr Well at least it might warm up enough to go lay out on the hammock, read and listen to a bit of music.

Beware of men with bling in their pocket….just waiting.

PetePierce, thanks for the NAFTA links in the previous thread.

Has Tim Russert denounced Fred Phelps yet?

-G

Better yet, has he rejected and denounced Phelps? *g*

From the link in the post to Jane’s other post:

“Okay, so let’s accept Russert’s argument that this is a fair line of inquiry. If that’s the case, then why isn’t he pressing John McCain about radical religious extremist uber-nut John Hagee?

Mr. McCain, who has been on a steady search for support among conservative and evangelical leaders who have long distrusted him, said he was “very honored’’ by Mr. Hagee’s endorsement. Asked about Mr. Hagee’s extensive writings on Armageddon and about what one questioner said was Mr. Hagee’s belief that the anti-Christ will be the head of the European Union, Mr. McCain responded that “all I can tell you is that I am very proud to have Pastor John Hagee’s support.’’

So, when are they going to ask McCain how he feels about potential Antichrist Tony Blair????

Hagee is friggin’ batshit nuts in a handbag. Today, Kay Bailey Hunchington was asked about Hagee’s Catholic remarks, i.e., the great Whore, and she just said McCain doesn’t agree with everything Hagee believes….but the biatch never said that it was wrong to call the Catholic religion the great Whore herself, instead, she schmoozed the Hagee group.

Huge double standard where the Dems are concerned. Russert and Wolf should be ashamed.

I think it’s time to go back to big-name tag-team news shows.

Just imagine.

DBrooks & Timmeh, & then Tweetie scheduled just right for a snooze-alarm.

Russert is a preview of things to come. Hillary isn’t the problem. Who will be the candidate for prez will sort itself out and each will choose their favorite. The who is right and who is wrong side is just that – a side show. The pros and cons and likeness will be dissected by news panels and pundits each according to his/her own bias. The circus train continues down the track.

It is worthwhile to pay close attention to the baddies because they are giving away their mode of swift boat operation coming down the line. It ain’t Hillary who is the bogeyman here.

I agree.

Obama, in contrast, has been level headed and steady in his positive message of bringing people together

That message makes me nervous..as in:

Obama believes he will be able to neutralise McCain by drawing on the expertise of independent Republicans such as Hagel and Lugar, who is regarded by Obama as a potential secretary of state.

Larry Korb, a defence official under President Ronald Reagan who is backing Obama, said: “By putting a Republican in the Pentagon and the State Department you send a signal to Congress and the American people that issues of national security are above politics.

timesonline

There you go injecting logic into the conversation. just.stop.it.please. *g*

Did someone say she was the boogeyman and I missed it?

I would just like to respectfully and simply say to anyone, I cannot buy Senator Clinton’s reasons that she uses to butress the experience card. I think that come Wednesday, it’s going to be seen as part of a failed infrastructure in her campaign. People who really scrutinize the hype find that her experience claim is really a facade, and there is a strong case to be made that what Obama did with his life after college compared to what she has done with hers counts more as to real experience that is going to matter in the White House.

This campaign has (and I guess inevitably been so much about superficial bullshit).

I find it humerous that with all that money, and all the researchers that neither Howard Wolfson who is making millions of dollars consulting for Hillary from the oh so very sophisticated, very expensive Glover Park Group and George Stephanopolis who is the Chief Washington correspondent and graduated summa cum from Columbia University and was the valedictorian of his class and is anchored in D.C. and liasoned with the Senate for real, are so stupid when it comes to what committee controls what in the Senate.

They both persist with the incorrect information–meaning they are too lazy to get off their highly paid asses and pick up a phone or do two mouse clicks to find out that in fact Obama is not on any committee that oversees Afghanistan any more than Clinton would be as a member of the Armed Services Committee. In fact it could be argued that Clinton has more oversight of events in Afghanistan as regards NATO or our troops by virtue of her seat on the Armed Services Committee.

For the umpteenth time, someone needs to teach Wolfson and ABC that Obama’s subcommittee has nothing whatsoever to do with Afghanistan. But lookee here. Guess whose committee does:

STRUCTURE OF SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES

Senator Reed
Subcommittee Chairman
Senator Kennedy
Senator Byrd
Senator Nelson (Florida)
Senator Nelson (Nebraska)
Senator Bayh
Senator Clinton

Senator Dole
Ranking Member
Senator Warner
Senator Collins
Senator Graham
Senator Cornyn
Senator Martinez

As to the Senate Sub that directly oversees Afghanistan in fact, contrary to what Stephanopolis and Howard Wolfson have incorrectly said repeatedly, it is not Obama’s Committee–it is clearly Senator John Kerry’s committee.

But they don’t expect America’s children left behind to be smart enough to make the ID do they?

John Kerry’s Committee not Obama’s oversees Afghanistan on Senate Foreign Relations

Get it right Wolfson and Stephanopolis. If you’re the ABC Chief Washington correspondent you ought to be able to. Last I checked, the Senate does meet in Washington, D.C. where Stephanopolis works and lives.

morning folks … just joining… since i really don’t care about russert, been reading the morning papers.

is clinton really saying that mccain would be a better prez than obama?

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton escalated her attack on Senator Barack Obama’s qualifications to be president on Saturday, arguing that both she and the presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain, could offer voters a “lifetime of experience” while Mr. Obama could only hold out his 2002 speech opposing the Iraq war.

nyt linky

I’m just drivin’ by, but I do have to say I think Obama handles this silliness well – he makes the point that these aren’t his views and renounces them, makes an additional point about the underlying theme (in the Ohio debate, he talked about the historical bridges between the black and Jewish communities dating back to the civil rights movement – addressing the notion that he’s a closet anti-semite), and, through his tone and conversational easiness, suggests without saying how moronic the line of questions is.

There just aren’t a lot of gotcha moments with Obama, because he never appears to be “gotten”.

Plus, you gotta like the rapid response on the 3AM phone ad.

How about boggeywoman :D

Also the “experience” idea is one that has two faces. Many people are very wary of Hillary simply because her “experience” was gained while she was an “unelected” or “unconfirmed” policy advisor to the President. She had no experience as an elected official when she attempted to initiate the wholesale revisions of the National Health Structure. This may have been a part of why her effort, as important as it was, failed.

Obama also has experience as an elected State legislator and, while there, introduced an ethics bill that is being used to crack-down on corrupt machine-politicians in Illinois. He authored and had passed legislation on everything from urban pollution sites and activities, to low-income housing requirements for developers, to anti-ethnic profiling laws AFTER 9/11.

In terms of legislative and electoral experience Obama trumps Clinton by years.

Is anyone else sick of primary season?

I feel like the blogs are so focused on the primary that other important issues are being ignored. For instance, what’s the latest news on telcom amnesty in the House?

Yeah in that respect, he reminds me of mr wobbly–absolutely the worst person to try goad into an argument

He did for awhile….hope that ban will continue in effect.

I like boogeyperson…more inclusive *g*

In terms of legislative and electoral experience Obama trumps Clinton by years.

Plus, it’s good to note that experience – however measured – doesn’t correlate terribly well with success. See, for example, Abraham Lincoln.

Not this one, there have been threads posted on a number of relevant topics

yeah, that’s an interesting one. immed’ly sets off my alarms, but … i can see a case for “post-partinship” and all that. and it’s not necessarily the case that all repubs are automatically worse than any demo. and finding a way to actually pull everyone in rather than getting set up w/ another scorched-earth thug campaign the instant obama’s in office (as happened during bill clinton) could be a key part of changing the scene. so, i dunno …

i do know i’ve been much happier about obama’s foreign policy and economic advisors that i’ve been about clintons … and i’d sure rather have susan rice talking to the press than mark penn …

but this is certainly worth questioning. if obama turns out to be lieberman in hip clothing, i won’t be too happy.

OT> But enough of tweety already…..

BAGHDAD, March 2 (Reuters) – Pomp and ceremony greeted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on his arrival in Iraq on Sunday, the fanfare a stark contrast to the rushed and secretive visits of his bitter rival U.S. President George W. Bush.
His warm reception, in which he was hugged and kissed by Iraqi officials and presented with flowers by children, was Iraq’s first full state welcome for any leader since the U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam Hussein in 2003.

So that where all wolfies flowers are. Ef you bush!

Senate Subcommitees on Foreign Relations: Obama has Nothing to do with Oversight of Afghanistan on his Sub but Clinton is on Two Subs that directly oversee Afghanistan

Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs (Afghanistan’s relationships with the U.S. are overseen by this committee–and Obama is no where to be found. His committee deals with Europe and last time I checked Afghanistan is not in Europe on my maps.

John F. Kerry, Chairman
Christopher J. Dodd
Russell D. Feingold
Barbara Boxer
Benjamin L. Cardin Norm Coleman, Ranking Member
Chuck Hagel
Vacant
George V. Voinovich

In contrast Clinton is on two committees that directly oversee armed services in Afghanistan. This shows how hypocritical the media and a campaign can be in lying to the American public–that’d be both Wolfson and George Stephanopolis who either know better and are lying or don’t know better and are just damn lazy–too lazy to click their mouse a couple of times.

SENATE ARMED SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE WITH CLINTON ON TWO COMMITTEES THAT DIRECTLY OVERSEE AFGHANISTAN AND OBAMA ON NONE

Senator Reed
Subcommittee Chairman
Senator Kennedy
Senator Byrd
Senator Nelson (Florida)
Senator Nelson (Nebraska)
Senator Bayh
Senator Clinton

Senator Dole
Ranking Member
Senator Warner
Senator Collins
Senator Graham
Senator Cornyn
Senator Martinez

SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT

Senator Akaka
Subcommittee Chairman
Senator Byrd
Senator Bayh
Senator Clinton
Senator Pryor
Senator McCaskill

Meanwhile in the Middle East:

*Saudi and Gulf states warn their nationals to leave Lebanon.

*US deploys USS Cole and two other naval vessels off the coast of Lebanon. Hezbollah denounces, pro-US President Siniora states he didn’t request naval presence.

*Palestinian militants continue barrages of rocketsfrom Gaza while Israel continues to throttle Gaza with embargo.

*Israel carries out military incursions into Gaza killing dozens.

-G

not yet, plus French women of Algerian heritage don’t really believe in diamond rings precisely because their Algerian heritage…I was in Algiers, BTW, in 1978, with my then wife, and the Algerian Immmigration authorities tried to give her a hard time because of her Jewish last name on her US passport–until I came to her rescue. “Elle est votre mariee?” one of them asked me. “Mai oui,” I responded. They promptly stamped our passports and we got on the ferry back to Marseille, just in time to watch the soccer world cup on TV–Argentina womn that year–”Les Argentines!” The youth of Marseilles went wild that night–roaming the streets drunk out of their skulls. I had no idea Argentinans had s lot of fans in Marseille.

If this had happened in Paris I wouldn’t havebeen surprised. A lot of Argentinian writers hung out in Paris in those years/days–Julio Cortazar among them…

Robert Novak (Bwahahahahaha) is now asserting that Obama made a major gaff in referring to Farrakhan as “Minister Farrakhan” showing (subconciously, I suppose) that he holds him in high respect. While I don’t quite understand why a Muslim would take on the sobriquet of “Minister” (which is absent in Islam), I really don’t understand how using his “title” is much different than referring to the Reverend Jim Jones, Ayatollah Khomeini, Mullah Omar, Minister Sun Mung Moon, Sheik Muhummad, President (or General) Musharraf, or any other title used by those individuals indicates that the user of that form believes or adheres to the belief system of that person.

I do refuse to refer to Robert Novak as a journalist, anymore. But thats merely recognizing that he’s a propagandist. In fact I might actually start referring to him as Minister…”Minister of Propaganda”.

BTW, re: politics:

Here in France, everyone I’ve met so far is for Obama…no surprising there..

Can’t remember which of the firedogs was/were raving about the Pete Seeger special on PBS recently but I’m catching a rerun and it is every bit as wonderful as the pup’s review…….thanks so much for the recommend!

amusing … david ignatius (wapo linky) complains that obama won’t really be bi-partisan enough, cause look:

He wasn’t part of the 2005 Gang of 14 bipartisan coalition that sought to break the logjam on judicial nominations, but neither were Clinton or other prominent Democrats. He did support the bipartisan effort to get an immigration bill last year, winning a plaudit from McCain. But he didn’t work closely with the White House, as did Sen. Edward Kennedy.

uh … having a senator (salazar) who was part of the gang of 14 doesn’t exacly make me think that obama not doing that was a bad thing. And oh my god! he didn’t work closely w/ the bush white house on immigration! Not exactly kennedy’s best moment …

novakula, minister of propaganada ;) good title.
but hopefully soon to be lost and he can become minister of hate-and-calumny-crying-alone-in-the-wilderness -about-having-lost-his-chance-for-nightly-milk-and-cookies-with-the
-white-house-minister-of-truth

We need to stay on top of this and get it out in the open…this could end up being an explosive regional all out war which could result in dire repercussions for the elections and everything else. JMHO

Don’t look now, but the Iraqis are greeting someone with flowers and sweets and it is the President of Iran.

Heckuva job.

-G

The latest news is that there will be about two weeks more of posturing about amnesty with the phony fear campaigns Bush is launching. Four of the of the best places to follow this are:

FDL (Christy and Jane and others)
Salon Glenn Greewald
Marcy Wheeler does a fantastic job on FISA with her commenters at EW
Cboldt’s blog is covering it like a glove

The “liberal” position on the Surveillance State Glenn Greenwald

George Bush Told the Truth on FISA Yesterday Glenn Greenwald

Senate by Cboldt

Here’s quintissential hypocrisy for you on the part of the Bush administration and Wiretapping:

In LA this soon, a wiretapping trial will begin and one that follows will put one of the heads of a powerful law firm on trial. The charge is wiretapping for divorce clients married to very wealthy powerful, well known people:

Eclectic Mix to Testify at Hollywood Detective’s Trial

Meanwhile back at the D.C. Ranch, Attorney General Mike Mukasey refuses to enforce the contempt citation of the Senate for Karl Rove or to investigate any aspect of illegal wiretapping since 2000 in any serious manner. There will never be an appointment of a Special Counsel, nor will there be a serious investigation on anything by Mukasey except for individuals that DOJ prosecutes.

As Glenn says, once the immunity train leaves the station, we will never have a chance to find out the extent of criminality on the part of not only the Bush administration but the attorneys for the Telcoms, and Comcoms (your Internet Service Providers) many of whom came straight from the ranks of DOJ to increase their income by working for the large companies that wiretap you.

1,774 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen lee5 and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

“…if obama turns out to be lieberman in hip clothing, i won’t be too happy.”

I also HAD the same questions about Obama until he began to come down on the right side of some real issues includin’ telecom immunity. Instead of movin’ to the right when challenged, he has consistently let his actions and votes speak for ‘im. He is brilliant and has some very smart political ad visors. He has co-opted “bipartisan” into a vocabulary that is distinctly progressive…his political rhetoric is beautifully thought out to work on at least 2 or 3 levels at once and speaks to several constituencies at once without alienating any.

Obama was assigned to Joe Lik*derman as a mentee when he (Obama) first came to the Senate…I think it’s clear that Obama rode Ol’ Joe until he was accepted by beltway folks as a benign centrist all the time inoculating himself against jest the sort of right-wing attacks of “liberal” and “radical” that have fallen flat up to this point.

This guy is the real deal and I only worry about his succumbing to the “Kennedy syndrome”…we gotta have this guy’s back!

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITON, WE’VE GOT A LEADER NOW, ALL WE HAFTA DO IS TELL ‘IM WHERE WE’RE GOIN’!!!

Looks like you still don’t want to talk about NAFTA.

When pundits start talking about the issue of the economy ranking higher than the economy in people’s concerns they should be reminded that all things are integrated in this country. Educational and health reform are tied in with the economy. Tuitions rise with inflation and students can’t afford to attend college if scholarships are gone and their wages stagnate. Health care costs exponentially increase and insurance is impossible to afford or obtain for those already ill. And the war…

Nobel winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has come to the conclusion that the Iraq War Triggered Our Continuing Economic Woes. He and his team of analysts have shown that the war will, conservatively, cost as much as WW2 – even when inflation is considered into the measure. The war will ultimately be a $3 trillion rat-hole that redirects revenue into a non-productive (if not destructive) adventure from just about every essential program within the country. It also affects State and Local economies, and they show the credit-crisis, bankruptcies, and the sub-prime housing boom-crash.

Yeah Reuters at my @71.

Don’t think we are going to see too much in the dead propaganda sheets here.

i’m not pete … and am concerned about nafta. But, it seems to me like the real nafta problems are more wrt mexico than canada. if anything, we’re the bad guys wrt canada, lacking environmental and worker protections and using those to game the “free” market. Am I missing something wrt canada? (honest question.)

Nation of Islam aka 5% er’s are not really Muslim as much Malcom X found out and converted to true ‘Islam’ shortly before his assassination.

An interesting side story is Obama’s chief economic advisor, Austan Goolsbee. He is (still?) the chief economic advisor for the DLC. Having a person that the DLC thinks so highly of as the possible next Sec of the Treasury is interesting to think about.

I’m not exactly pleased with Kennedy’s help on NCLB either.

They actually had someone in Iraq commenting on the difference of the State Visit with Full Honors accorded to Ahmadjinedad vis-a-vis the way Bush and other Administration urinaries“luminaries” have to skulk into the country in the dead of night.

…and finding a way to actually pull everyone in rather than getting set up w/ another scorched-earth thug campaign the instant obama’s in office (as happened during bill clinton) could be a key part of changing the scene. so, i dunno …

I dunno either– it didn’t work very well for Bill Clinton, did it? Remember he made Republican Bill Cohen his secretary of (state or defense?).

Do you seriously think we can work with these people? Talk about Lucy and the football!

It’s just weird that his centrist rhetoric hasn’t put off more so-called “liberals”.

Tim Rusty is responsible for not doing his journalist duties of asking the tough questions from 2001 to today, and he’s part of the reason why the Bush Regime has been able to get away with what they have. Sad. Sad that Timmah doesn’t see this.

Like an oil thief in the night.

-G

GAWD DANG I LOVE guys like Hagee! They show you with all the pretty paint and geegaws knocked off just what these wackjobs are REALLY like. Loks like Obama got caught with his pants on fire over that whole Canada/NAFTA thingy huh? Seems quite a few Unions are demanding he be a little more…clear…about his nonanswer answer. Since names and dates are posted in the story and now the Obama guy won’t talk to da press “talk to da campaign” BWAHAHAHAHA!

I always thought Dick Cheney owned Tim Russert.

In all fairness, though, the reason that Russert asked Colin Powell about Belafonte’s comments was that Belafonte’s comments were about Powell. That was normal and appropriate.

raising hand rapidly!!

Your question is a good one, but first, that isn’t what I was talking about. Did you check out my link? It was about Obama lying when he claims he will renegotiate NAFTA.

As to your question, I think it’s not just NAFTA but trade agreements in general– they are heavily weighted in favor of multinational corporations. They should include rules for enforcing labor and environmental laws, and this will help everyone. If we have to stiffen up our laws to meet Canada’s standards then great.

Let’s be more precise. The old “One Drop Rule” made anyone with one iota of black blood, black. Pretty racist. Why do progressives continue such racism? Just because it lets them “claim” people like Obama and Tiger Woods as black?

Obama should be responsible only for those who are half and half…not for all blacks or all “one drops.” Bob Marley (half and half) took the One Drop and redefined it in terms of the reggae rhythm, btw.

http://newsprism.wordpress.com

Any word from any of the candidates about the murderers from Israel invading Gaza and the West Bank or are they too tied up in banalities about who said what to whom and who stole what words from whom? Elections in this country are a joke.

well, I don’t know if we can work with “those people”, but I do think we have to.

I also reflect about a couple of my work colleagues, who I think are decent people, but definitely confused politically. and speculate that obama may be able to appeal to them, not just in the general election, but more important afterwards.

so, take ken salazar as an example. he’s very much part of the problem (to my mind) even though a dem. i think he can be influenced to do better, although he’ll always fall back on the wrong side of things given a chance. is chuck hagel theh same, on the other side of the mirror? i dunno.

but, i’m pretty sure than any attempt to govern by casting one side as essentially evil is going to fail. how you avoid that while staying true to liberal and progressive values is the key question. i certainly don’t have the answer.

I think Timmeh sees it. He’s probably getting insider trading tips directly from Cheney. No proof of that, of course, but there’s gotta be something in it for him.

oh yes, i did read the link (and had read it before you posted). my question was in response to it…

timmy only hardballs dems and this particular dem candidate…. obama

I never bought the “Joe Mama” was Obama’s mentor meme. These assignments are basically “orientation” exercises and have nothing to do with how people actually vote. It would be like someone being labelled as a “follower” of their college-orientation advisor.

Obama actually “rejected and denounced” association with the DLC when he was placed on their list of “New Democrats” back when he was an Illinois State Legislator. He told them that he was NOT a member, that he opposed their positions on a number of issues…including NAFTA, and that he wanted them to stop referring to him as affiliated with him.

In addition, Lieberman’s centrist Blue-Dog “New Democrat Coalition” (look it up on wiki) actually had at least one surprising member. But that wasn’t Barack Obama. Care to guess?

Looks like you still don’t want to talk about NAFTA.

Are you kidding me? You think every point I make has to be about NAFTA?

Both Obama or Clinton misportray and misconstrue NAFTA along with the media, and neither of them says they’ll reject it. They mickey mouse around with how they nebulously “might tweak it”.

I’m not discussing every point in terms of one candidate or the other anyway. Let’s get some reality into your head here.

Are you looking at NAFTA to advance some candidate? Because I’m sure as hell not. Neither candidate has a clue on the lack of impact of NAFTA in the economic situation in places like Ohio one way or the other in reality.

You’ve been fooled by the MSM hype on NAFTA as the giant cause of economic gloom and doom and the coming recession in this country. It’s not.

Read what I spoonfed you and learn:

The Politics of Trade in Ohio

Despite Nafta Attacks, Clinton and Obama Haven’t Been Free Trade Foes

Neither Clinton or Obama have discussed NAFTA in a way that is really relevant. NAFTA has much less impact on jobs and economic situation in towns in Ohio and other places than either campaign would have the public most of whom don’t know NAFTA from the boob jobs on Britney and J-Lo.

I have other things to do than comment on FDL today. I did talk about NAFTA. Are you kidding?

In the first place I’m not an economist nor am I an expert on NAFTA. If you want an economist’s informed, expert view here, I’d ask EKAHN who probably forgets more about the impact of NAFTA in a minute than I could learn in a lifetime, and frequently IDs herself as a career economist so I assume she is.

I directly linked you to two articles that discussed NAFTA in a sensible non-biased way. What the hell is it that you think I don’t want to talk about in terms of NAFTA. Why the hell would I witholding information if I had it on NAFTA. “Don’t want to talk about NAFTA?” I have no problem with talking about it but it’s not an area I have a lot of information on. It’s really an overhyped issue in terms of the Obama Clinton race if that’s what you’re referring to.

NAFTA has nothing near the direct impact on the situation in Ohio this minute that the superficial media hype has given it. I made that case with the links I gave you that you obviously haven’t read.Here’s the skinny on the real context of NAFTA. Please read it and learn. NAFTA isn’t the issue that is really impacting the economy in places like Ohio. There are much more significant issues that neither candidate is touching because they don’t know what the hell can be done about it.

And everything they talk about doing that can’t be done by Executive order has to get through Congress. Who is better at getting that through Congress should be a choice for voters.

One more post and I’m out to enjoy a summer day. Catch up with me some other time and do a little reading if you’re obsessed with NAFTA apparently to advance one candidate or the other.

I’m trying to look at issues here. NAFTA is not being accurately portrayed as to impact by either candidate. Rather it’s being manipulated as to the media and both Democratic candidates.

I give up.

clinton2 and obama, and McBus for that matter, are all financed by the same corporations and all are in favour of “free trade” or, to put it another way, in favour of corporations being able to do what ever they want and not give a flying fig about the worker. If anyone thinks for one moment that obama or that clinton woman are going to do one thing to upset their financiers they are smoking something I want.

None of them are going to move to get us out if Iraq and none of them will be able to do anything about healthcare for all. It is not going to happen. This whole “election” is a beauty contest with the candidates being put up by the same major corporations. It is a joke.

As I just posted, and I am Pete, NAFTA is not the major reason if it’s even a minor reason for the plight of people in Ohio and other towns in this country who are economically distressed. It is an issue that’s being manipulated by both candidates and the media who know most oftheir viewers don’t like subtlety or sophistication in their issues, but like them dumbed way down so they are simple. NAFTA has become the poster child vintage the last two weeks for urban and rural economic/job woes. That’s just not the case.

Despite the purported efforts of the supposed “best teams on TV” the TV media is distorting NAFTA as are both campaigns. NAFTA is not, I repeat not the main cause for economic woes in urban or rural centers in the USA.

Boy is it getting old for CNN to put the same fucking show on regarding this primary election for six months. They’ve been saying thesame thing regarding March 4 6 months ago that they’re saying today without a comma of change.

I’ll post this again–I hope someone reads it for a change:

The Politics of Trade in Ohio

Despite Nafta Attacks, Clinton and Obama Haven’t Been Free Trade Foes

Ooh– sounds like I struck a nerve.

And it sounds like you didn’t follow my link. That or you just don’t have an answer for it. The link is not about whether NAFTA is good or bad, it’s about the fact that Obama is lying when he says he plans to renegotiate it.

Follow the link.

You’re putting Clinton and Obama in the same bus as McCain?

OMG. I don’t usually consider myself living in a fairy tale, but I hope you’re wrong on this.

Obama actually “rejected and denounced” association with the DLC when he was placed on their list of “New Democrats” back when he was an Illinois State Legislator. He told them that he was NOT a member, that he opposed their positions on a number of issues…including NAFTA, and that he wanted them to stop referring to him as affiliated with him.

But Obama’s chief economic advisor also has/had the same position with the DLC. I don’t think the DLC’s economic advisor is likely to have a progressive economic policy.

Could be. I’ve always said that these assholes will alert each other before another big terrorist attack or before the market crashes, so they can cash in their chips. Disgusting. All of them.

eorge Stephanopolus and Howard Wolfson joined the crowd showing his ignorance–he said Obama’s Committee didn’t hold hearings on Afghanistan. And he kept persisting. Only one problem for ole political science Columbia summa cum laude George.

He didn’t hold a hearing on Afghanistan because in fact his sub Committee does not have jurisdicition over Afghanistan. It’s a European sub. Afghanistan is not in Europe. If they knew what they were talking about as far as the Senate, the Committee that is charged with being responsible for Afghanistan and holding any hearings on it is not Obama’s it’s in fact Senator John Kerry’s.

Subcommittee Senate Foreign Relations: Kerry’s Committee is Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs Not Obama’s

Clinton will soon leave the campaign trail arrogantly having refused to answer many questions that appeared once again in yesterday’s NYT’s that I have been asking for months and have yet to appear in the FDL log vetting her that would never happen–among them

1) Why did you refuse to release tax returns? On or around April 15 Senator Clinton will not be part of the primary campaign. It will be long over by Wednesday.
2) Where did the $5 million come from that you poured into your campaign? The information disclosed to the Senate is nothing like a tax release and it is purposefully vague by requirement of the Senate who doesn’t want to release their returns.
3) Who are the museum contributors?
4) Why won’t you release your WH documnets including your secret health care plan docs. There are 1.6 million of them discovered after you claimed as far as you knew they were released.

When Russert hit her with the tax returns (I suppose of course she was being bashed in the debates unequally) she again said “I might release them” With a day left in her viable campaign that ship has sailed.

It seems the print media are asking many of the same questions I have been for months and months:

When you’re in Bosnia, and your husband is President, and you’re warned snipers are around and the Secret Service moves your husband’s welcoming speech, I’m sorry that doesn’t qualify for foreign policy experience any more that the groupies for the Rolling Stones qualify as singers or someone who received a gun shot wound to the abdomen last night or a knife wound to the abdomen qualifies as a surgeon.

The 3AM phone call says to me–we think your really stupid so here’s this commercial. Sorry–too many of us aren’t buying.

On the Press Bus, Some Questions Over Favoritism

McCain Channels His Inner Hillary

A Wake Up Call: The Red Phone Fairy Tale that America is Not Dumb Enough to Buy

Russert is starting to seem strangely out of date with his questions from the Lee Atwater school of the 1980’s.

I think Obama has some of the Reagan teflon on this stuff: nothing bad seems to stick.

Russert main problem now is the hypocrisy of allowing his good friend John McCain to accept and honor the support of the bigot Haggee — without addressing it.

Anyone with a brain can see Russert’s very sadly dated racism on this. It’s as bad as Matthews on the subject of women.

How true…the origins of the Elijah Muhammad’s “Nation of Islam” derive as much out of the Masonic fraternal organizations that existed in the late-19th and early-20th centuries as it did Islam. It was given the Islamic image mainly because the founders wanted to break from the Christian churches “of the masters”. Islam was viewed as a more militant, and alternative, religion…fighting with British colonialists in Africa and the Middle East. But t’s rumored that none of the founders could read Arabic, and had not actually read the Koran. Everything they got was second- or third-hand, often from critics of Islam that exagerrated and misinterpreted the tenets of the faith. The whole idea that Elijah Muhammed was a “new prophet” for example, is completely antagonistic to Islam…and much of his “new Scripture” is equally at odds with both the Koran, and the hadith (collected teachings of Muhammed).

As was inevitable many followers of the Nation of Islam began to investigate Islam more deeply and, like Malcolm X, discovered these contradictions. A schism was thus inevitable. Farrakhan has moved ever so slowly to ridding the NOI of non-Islamic tenets…but it still remains a personality-based organization. And there remains a gang-oriented style to it…recently both a publisher and a reporter of an Oakland, California newspaper were murdered for discussing embezzlement from the Black Muslim bakery in that city.

You didn’t strike a nerve. Again, economic theory is far from a strong point for me. I read other people and talk to other people to constantly try to learn more.

But I am smart enough to know that NAFTA is being manipulated if your agenda is to advance a candidate in this primary.

I couldn’t begin to be very deep in how NAFTA impacts anything. It’s just way far from any area of remote expertise that I might have. ECAHN (spelling correct now) practically lives on this blog at all hours of the day anyway). She is a real expert in economics and you’d be far better in using your time to take up NAFTA with her if she will.

I did my best with NAFTA. It’s not a real issue in this campaign insofar that neither Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton plans to change NAFTA in any major way. The problems in Youngstown Ohio that people are struggling with have nothing to do with NAFTA. They are other economic issues.

I take care of people who have millions of dollars as well as people who have next to nothing and I can tell you NAFTA ain’t the cause. Period.

I’m not your NAFTA guru. Find someone who is but it’s been way fucking distorted in this current campaign and both candidates are distorting it frankly as is the media and apparently they’ve sucked you in.

I have no partisan issue in tweaking NAFTA as a solution to jobless situation or mortgage foreclosures in Ohio or anywhere else. The problems are far more than NAFTA. Ohio has been left behind, but Clinton doesn’t have a clue as to why they have or how to pull them out.

Fortunately after Wedesday, what she says can be said in a mirror, but not a lot of people will be listening to her anymore. That’s “a good thing.”

Again, the point is that Obama is lying about it.

I appreciate your honesty in saying you don’t fully understand the economics of NAFTA, and I admit I don’t either. But that wasn’t really the point I was making.

I was simply saying that Obama is lying when he promises to renegotiate NAFTA. He’s just lying to make political points in Ohio.

That’s all I’m saying. Peace, bro.

*Palestinian President Abbas breaks off talks with Israel as violence begins to spread to the West bank.

*Venezuela is sending tanks and thousands of troops to the border of Columbia ratcheting up regional tensions.

Tell me, over and over again.

-G

I’m going out with my dog to enjoy a summer day. When I get back sometime tonight, I’ll be more than happy to follow your link.

But I can’t say it more explicitly. NAFTA is being distorted and pimped out as an issue in this campaign by both democratic candidates. It might have been better never mentioned.

Neither of them plans to change NAFTA substantively and even if they thought they could, and they aren’t offering anything more than minor tweaks 99% of what any candidate is promising to do would have to be gotten through a Congress that the Constitution has intentionally made difficult to get through.

So besides your link do you have (leave it for me to catch later)any substantive argument as to why either candidate’s distortions of NAFTA have much of anything to do with economic struggling and joblessness in towns in Ohio or anywhere else?

What’s your reaction to Dave Leonhardt’s article?
You let me know later tonight or tomorrow. How’s that.

The power of the people (in numbers) is much greater in reality than the power of the people running or involved with corporations. The American people are getting involved, because the corporations’ actions are impacting the economy. There is a shift occurring. The idea that the corporations are actually that powerful is an illusion that has historically been proven wrong time and time again by history. The corporations depend on the people, not the other way around. People are alive and thinking. Corporations are just the result of ideas. People change their thinking and their ideas and that awareness and power that results is more powerful and will outlive any corporation ultimately. We the People have to take our power back. We have the power. They’ve been getting away with murder, because the people were asleep, but they are waking up now in droves and aren’t going to put up with this anymore. JMHO.

Naw he’s not lying about it. At least you’ve finally admitted you’re trying as usual to do what Jane has complained about–see every issue in your candidate’s best light if it’s Hillary Clinton.

Both candidates are distorting NAFTA. My two articles analyzed that competently.

They are trying to tap into economic distress because the polls right now show health care and the economy as the two top issues, unless your family member is in Iraq in which case all 3 of them are intertwined.

I never have a problem saying I have no expertise in many many areas. I have never seen the point of trying to pretend I know a subject where I’m in essense a student.

But again people who think NAFTA is being portrayed correctly or correctly given the promininence it has been by media or either candidate are being suckered and not doing their homework.

They aren’t going to do it by watching TV, and CNN is pathetic. I could get more incisive commentary from my dog.

From your link:

We were surprised and disappointed to learn that your top economic adviser reportedly had a secret meeting with a representative of the Canadian government where he dismissed your anti-NAFTA rhetoric.

According to Canadian news outlets, your adviser, Austan Goolsbee, told the Canadian Counsel General Georges Rioux that your criticism of NAFTA is “just politics” and should not be taken seriously.

I just find it odd that the content of a secret meeting is know by some canadian outlet.

If you think Obama is lying you can or already have voted against him or maybe you vote for whom you think lies the least.

I try to remember that Congress wouldn’t pass most of the issues as the candidates discuss them.

In areas where I do know something–legal and medical–I can tell you that not much is being done period.

Legally are country has never been worse and FISA is the posterchild for it. You are having your ass wiretapped off and nothing is stopping that.

Medically, the plans advanced by both candidates don’t address a number of issues and Kirk has frequently been articulate and very good at pointing out many of these.

Enjoyo your day.

I think the only rational conclusion one can come to is that people who watch russert, and worse, respond to his venal, ignorant assault on integrity and cognitive thought must be masochists.
.

and has been refuted, denounced and rejected by all involved *g* but we get the point Riesz, you think Obama is lying. Next topic.

1,774 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Steve-AR and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

“But Obama’s chief economic advisor has/had the same position with the DLC.”

This, on it’s face is a concern except that as the campaign grinds on Obama will continue to be forced to distance himself from the direct opposition as he has had to do against Mrs. Clinton – and very successfully. What this means is that what he needs to say and do in order to win contests against folks like Mrs. Clinton and, ultimately McCrazy, places him in a position that we ken hold ‘im to. And that’s the dynamic of the moment today…as Obama increasingly articulates positions distant from the status quo in order to be elected, then we as his constituency are in a position to keep him on message and as he is successful we convince ‘im that the progressive message will gain him the political support he needs to act progressively when elected.

KEEP THE FAITH AND DON’T GET BOGGED DOWN IN COUNTIN’ ANGLES ON THE HEAD OF THE PIN SO THAT YA FERGET ABOUT THE THREAD!!

Oh shit, that should be “ANGELS”

From wiki:

The New Democrat Coalition is an organization within the United States Congress. It is made up of 20 Democratic Senate members and 44 Democratic members of the House of Representatives who claim moderate and pro-business stances. The group was founded in 1997 by Representatives Cal Dooley (California), Jim Moran (Virginia) and Tim Roemer (Indiana) as a congressional affiliate of the avowedly centrist Democratic Leadership Council, whose members, including former President Bill Clinton, call themselves “New Democrats.” As of February 2005, the House New Democrats are chaired by Representative Ellen Tauscher (California), with Representatives Artur Davis (Alabama) and Ron Kind (Wisconsin) serving as co-chairs. Representative Adam Smith (Washington) serves as chair of the group’s political action committee.

The Senate New Democrat Coalition was founded in the spring of 2000 by Senators Evan Bayh (Indiana), Bob Graham (Florida), Mary Landrieu (Louisiana), Joe Lieberman (Connecticut), and Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas).
The NDC has worked to craft and pass legislation, including Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) for the People’s Republic of China, fast track Trade Promotion Authority, digital signatures, and H-1B visa reform and continues to work on matters such as privacy, broadband, expanding e-learning opportunities and making government more accessible and efficient through the use of technology. Many in the party’s left-wing criticize the group, however, for their alleged lack of focus on social justice and the poor, the party’s traditional base.”

The following Senators belong or have belonged to the Senate New Democrat Coalition.

Blanche Lincoln (AR, founder), Dianne Feinstein (CA, by 2001), Tom Carper (DE, by 2001; co-chair from 2003),
Joe Lieberman (CT, founder), Bill Nelson (FL, by 2001), Evan Bayh (IN, founder), Mary Landrieu (LA, founder, co-chair from 2003), , Debbie Stabenow (MI, by 2001), Conrad (ND, from 2000), Ben Nelson (NE, by 2001), Tim Johnson (SD, from 2000); Maria Cantwell (WA, by 2001); Herb Kohl (WI, from 2000). An unofficial, and disputed source, places both John Kerry (MA, from 2000) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY, from 2001) within the New Democratic Coalition.

Former senators Bob Graham (FL, founder, chair from 2000-2003; retired from Senate in 2003); Max Cleland (GA, from 2000; defeated in 2002); Zell Miller (GA, by 2001; retired from Senate in 2004); John Breaux (LA, from 2000; retired from Senate in 2004); Jean Carnahan (MO, by 2001; defeated in 2002); John Edwards (NC, from 2000; retired from Senate in 2004); Bob Kerrey (NE, from 2000; retired from Senate in 2000); Richard Bryan (NV, from 2000; retired from Senate in 2000); Chuck Robb (VA, from 2000; defeated in 2000)

The following members of the House of Representatives currently belong to the New Democrat Coalition.
Art Davis (AL-7), Vice-Chair, Harry Mitchell (AZ-5), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8), Vic Snyder (AR-2), Ellen Tauscher (CA-10), Chair, Lois Capps (CA-23), Adam Schiff (CA-29), Jane Harman (CA-36), Loretta Sanchez (CA-47), Susan Davis (CA-53), Ed Perlmutter (CO-7), John Larson (CT-1), Joe Courtney (CT-2),Chris Murphy (CT-5),
Tim Mahoney (FL-16), Kendrick Meek (FL-17), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL-20), Ron Klein (FL-22), John Barrow (GA-12), David Scott (GA-13), Rahm Emanuel (IL-5), Melissa Bean (IL-8), Baron Hill (IN-9), Bruce Braley (IA-1), Dennis Moore (KS-3), Ben Chandler (KY-6), Charlie Melancon (LA-3), Russ Carnahan (MO-3), Shelley Berkley (NV-1), Rush Holt (NJ-12), Tom Udall (NM-3), Steve Israel (NY-2), Carolyn McCarthy (NY-4), Gregory Meeks (NY-6), Joseph Crowley (NY-7), Vice-Chair/Whip, Eliot Engel (NY-17), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20), Michael Arcuri (NY-24), Brian Higgins (NY-27), Bob Etheridge (NC-2), David Price (NC-4), Mike McIntyre (NC-7), David Wu (OR-1), Darlene Hooley (OR-5), Jason Altmire (PA-4), Joe Sestak (PA-7), Patrick Murphy (PA-8), Chris Carney (PA-10), Allyson Schwartz (PA-13), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD), Charles Gonzalez (TX-20), Nick Lampson (TX-22), Henry Cuellar (TX-28), Jim Moran (VA-8), Jay Inslee (WA-1), Rick Larsen (WA-2), Brian Baird (WA-3), Adam Smith (WA-9), Vice-Chair, Ron Kind (WI-3), Vice-Chair.

I just find it odd that the Obama campaign has not issued a clear denial.

And it’s not unusual for events at “secret” meetings to be leaked, as I’m sure you know.

it’s hearsay. i find it as creditable as the leaks from the current admin.

clear denial

Your question is a good one, but first, that isn’t what I was talking about. Did you check out my link? It was about Obama lying when he claims he will renegotiate NAFTA.

As to your question, I think it’s not just NAFTA but trade agreements in general– they are heavily weighted in favor of multinational corporations. They should include rules for enforcing labor and environmental laws, and this will help everyone. If we have to stiffen up our laws to meet Canada’s standards then great.

The history of NAFTA was that it took the US-Canadian agreement, altered many of the provisions to integrate Mexico into it, and then went forward. The Canadian-American agreement was one which allows cross-border Unionization and (originally, at least) the environmental and labor standards in both countries were close to parity.

THAT’s precisely what does need to be renegotiated…we need to move BACK TO the original US-Canadian standards…which even allowed cross-border strike actions, BTW. I don’t know what Obama’s economic advisor precisely told the Canadian ambassador. Obama says that his position on re-negotiation of NAFTA is quite clear and that his public statements are precisely what was told the Canadians.

But it’s very odd that a private conversation with someone from the CONSERVATIVE (and GWB-supporting) government of Canada that appears to distort Obama’s position was leaked out. If something leaked out from Carl Rove’s office would it be accepted without undue skepticism, I wonder? The current Canadian Government is no friend of working-people. So why would they leak out something that would cause an issue with a supposed “pro-NAFTA” candidate being elected? The answer is “They wouldn’t”…they would, instead, “keep the secret”. So the logical reality is that this “leak” is an effort by the Canadian Conservatives to sabotage Obama’s campaign.

Ironically even the Green Party of Canada uses the same language as Obama. NAFTA needs “fixing”.

Timmy boy is puppet for the wingnuts. If you look at the Questions he asks the Democrats and compare them to the praise questions he asks McCain or even Huck boy you will find the answer to “Why” he asks these questions. I have been sending him emails for almost a year now trying to get him to debate me on these questions but he has no guts to face his foes

I can’t believe this question is being asked. Everyone knows the answer to it. Barak Obama and Colin Powell were asked about Belefonte becuase all three are black. Obama and Powell are two prominent black men who have no public record of endorsing radical black men like Belefonte. Their opinion is valid because his comments can be deligitimized if they disavow him. No white man can be asked that question because he will be considered racist if he says something negative about Belefonte.

This was a legitimate question to see where such men stand on principles and race. Instead of principles OR race. This is precisely why Obama was forced to “disavow and reject” Farakan in the debate. Where does he stand, with the side of principles or that of race. The two are not the same.

Sweet jesus and holy fucking snow fleas. Every time I think the room could not get filled with any more stupidity and banality Brit Hume walks through the door.

really good article on the use of Farrakhan to “torpedo” political campaigns. 0n Alternet, “The Farrakhan Distraction” by Linda Mamoun.

My favorite are the “good whites” below-the-radar racists, who happily accept the Obama/Farrakhan : McCain/Hagee comparison, for the fundamentally no reason beyond the fact that the members of both pairs are the same color.

In particular, it matters not in the least to these “good whites” that McCain ACTIVELY SOLICITED Hagee’s endorsement, while there was no connection whatsoever between Obama and Farrakhan. Well, no connection except for the black-thing, and the Muslim-sounding names.

But that’s enough for “good whites”.