Watching the Democratic primary process lately has been compared to watching a slow moving train wreck, and then getting to watch it again a week or two later. But last night between Kentucky and Oregon results both Democratic candidates reached out to each other, and to each other’s supporters, calling for Democrats to unite once the nomination fight is over. They’ll need that unity to help dissuade the White House from starting another war.
From Senator Clinton’s Kentucky victory speech last night:(Update: TPM now has the video.)
You know, the state motto of Kentucky is, "United we stand, divided we fall," words that have a special place in our history. They inspire American revolutionaries to unite the colonies, to defy an empire, and create a new nation, to invent a new form of government, of the people, by the people, and for the people, and they bound our nation together in service and sacrifice, even in our darkest hours.
We will come together as a party, united by common values and common cause, united in service of the hopes and dreams that know no boundaries of race or creed, gender or geography. And when we do, there will be no stopping us.
We won’t just unite our party. We will unite our country and make sure America’s best years are still ahead of us.
And Obama responded from Iowa:
The road here has been long, and that is partly because we’ve traveled it with one of the most formidable candidates to ever run for this office. In her thirty-five years of public service, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has never given up on her fight for the American people, and tonight I congratulate her on her victory in Kentucky. We have had our disagreements during this campaign, but we all admire her courage, and her commitment and her perseverance. No matter how this primary ends, Senator Clinton has shattered myths and broken barriers and changed the America in which my daughters and your daughters will come of age. [And for that we are grateful to her.] [as delivered]
Some may see the millions upon millions of votes cast for each of us as evidence that our party is divided, but I see it as proof that we have never been more energized and united in our desire to take this country in a new direction. More than anything, we need this unity and this energy in the months to come, because while our primary has been long and hard-fought, the hardest and most important part of our journey still lies ahead.
It’s vitally important the two candidates reconcile and unite the two great coalitions they have assembled. The priority now is to minimize the alienation on both sides, and we all have to be part of that effort.
______________
Unity efforts cannot begin soon enough. Those wiser than I seem convinced that cooler heads in the Pentagon will prevent the Administration from overtly attacking Iran. But this White House is not led by cooler or wiser heads, and by October they and McCain may be desperate men, willing to take greater risks to avoid likely election defeat.
Whatever may be happening behind the scenes, it is clear the public debate about that next war is happening now. It’s not just in the White House ambiguous denials of war plans but in the daily exchanges between Obama and McCain, echoed by the White House, about whether it is strong and wise to be willing to talk with adversaries like Iran or, as McCain wants to paint it, reckless and naive, even appeasement as Bush claims.
To his credit, Obama is defying the conventional wisdom that Democrats are safer talking about the economy and not challenging Republicans on national security. That conventional wisdom has always been nonsense and never more so than now: 80 percent of Americans believe we’re on the wrong track, and most know they were deceived about the Iraq threat and ill-served by a belligerent Administration too quick to demonize and too unwilling to talk.
Last night, Obama reminded Americans that the Bush/Cheney/McCain policies have been a disaster for America’s security, its international reputation and its self respect.
But this year’s Republican primary was a contest to see which candidate could out-Bush the other, and that is the contest John McCain won. . . . The Bush Iraq policy that asks everything of our troops and nothing of Iraqi politicians is John McCain’s policy too, and so is the fear of tough and aggressive diplomacy that has left this country more isolated and less secure than at any time in recent history. . . .
Bush and McCain have already been undercut by those in their own party, including Chuck Hagel, Secretary Gates and former Secretary of State James Baker. And McCain has left himself vulnerable by seeming to argue against diplomacy when Americans are sick of war.
Democrats can take advantage of this moment if the Party’s leadership, including Senator Clinton, reinforce arguments like those Obama is making (as Clinton and others did in response to Bush’s "appeasement" remark), and make them to those supporters who claim they might vote for McCain. That is what leaders do.
Update: See Senator Kerry’s statement on the news that Israel is negotiating with Syria.
Clinton Photo by Barbara Kinney
Related posts:
- Clinton Talks Positively About Snowe’s Trigger
- Memo to Jay Cost: Obama Won a Larger Percentage of the Popular Vote in 2008 than Reagan in 1980
- Bolton, Clinton, North Korea: One of Those Good Problems
- Private Health Insurers Threaten Americans to Prevent Public Plan Competition
- Jon Voight: Obama is a “False Prophet”
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Good morning, Scarecrow.
Scarecrow!
a cheerios good morning to you Scarecrow
Good morning Scarecrow
Indeed not. It is led by certifiable mad men. If codpiece were not pres. he would be in an institution by now and as for that piece of shit darth vader he would have been dealt with by his shooting buddies. Is there no way to rid us of the evil that these men do?
scarecrow… please, i beg you. i’ve so od’ed on being told what my priorties are and what i have to do. i want no part of a fake unity that depends on the suppression of dissent requires that i stfu and do what i’m told.
It’s 8am, doors to the Forum don’t open for another two and a half hours and the approaches are already clogged. Community radio doing special traffic reports. This is huge for Tampa.
If cooking up a phony reason to attack Iran is in the republican interest, explain to me why they are not going to do it?
Please no McCain… the nation has been destroyed by the pukes… how much more blood and treasure can they take from us, from the world with their insane policies?
This nation is a shadow of its former self, even with its hideous racist past. This is like living in a never ending nightmare. Can’t we wake up and get our nation and values back?
?
1,849 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Scarecrow and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
This primary battle is nothin’ if not a fight between the old and the new….the youthful positivist and the tired and scared politician whose politics and arsenal of responses to experience are based on the last war for which she and those like her are responsible. As Obama has said, this election is not about candidates and leaders but about US…the citizens who own this country and are responsible for puttin it back together.
So let’s not wait for “she who should remain forever nameless” to offer conditions of reconcilliation becaquse this is not about her or what she can gain from losin’ this is about we citizens comin’ together to unite in front of a new leader…we don’t need to wait for either poltici9an to begin to unite. Indeed, I say, we don’t need Mrs. Bill and the sooner we realize it the sooner we can make her disappear.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, THE LEADERS OF THE PAST ARE MARCHIN IN THE WRONG DIRECTION!!
POK so clinton2 won Kentucky. now…… will she do us all a favour and break her ankles?
Inre C-span Washington Journal-I believe that Marsha Blackburn is actually Tom Delay in drag! I mean, look at her…
Boy oh boy I am so with you on that.
from yesterday’s grit tv (longer rough transcription posted in previous thread)
addressing the problems of the democratic party (and our leaders) is every bit as important to me as making sure mccain does not become our next president.
I believe that the Dem nominee is speaking there today.
Yes, it is time for reconciliation, but not abdication of progressive goals and principles. The important work now begins. I feel so much more positive now that the primary decision has all but been made. BBC News this morning:
Obama ‘within reach’ of victory
Aha!
Hey, Scarecrow! G’mornin’ from gorgeously springily MN.
And now Chuck Hagel who speaks against McCain and says the “I” word, referencing indirectly Nancy Pelosi’s empty table. Booyah!!
which one of these do we get to pick from?
1 a: to restore to friendship or harmony b: settle, resolve
2: to make consistent or congruous
3: to cause to submit to or accept something unpleasant
(CNN) — Even in a state Hillary Clinton appears to have won by 35 points, a majority of Kentucky voters say the New York senator attacked Barack Obama unfairly.
According to the exit polls, 54 percent of voters said Clinton launched unfair attacks on Obama, though that didn’t seem to deter voters there from supporting Clinton — 55 percent of those who said Clinton attacked unfairly still voted for the New York senator.
Clinton faced a similar statistic in West Virginia last week. There she won by 41 points, but nearly 60 percent of voters said she made unfair attacks against the Illinois senator.
raven, what do you think the unfair attacks were? (no cable here so i’m pretty clueless about the campaigns).
As my wife pointed out the time for a “graceful” exit has long passed. clinton2 will be remembered for ever as a divisive person, running a divisive campaign putting her own interests above the interests of the American people. Her best bet is to STFU, buy Bill a box of cigars, file for divorce and rejoin the WalMart board.
I’m not :)
listening to music instead. I only have to put up with so much as part of my civic duty, and she isn’t on the necessary list.
The entire “McCain” approach she used was bullshit, is bullshit unfair? You decide.
It looks like my efforts at reconciliation might start with you, my friend. I don’t mean to lecture (well, maybe some), and I’d be the last person to tell you to shut up. I’ve never suggested that to you. And I’ve never suggested either of this candidates is a saint or a savior of the planet.
My plea is to those who desperately want their candidate to win, but are unreconciled to the other. Some can take that step; others not, but I think the effort is worthwhile.
Obama is holding a rally at the St Pete Times Forum at noon. The doors open at 10:30 and the area around the Forum is a nightmare already.
SD, when you say Community Radio, are you talking about WMNF (88.5 FM)?
oh, i’m not challenging you – i really didn’t know what the reference was too. i can’t tell that there was a “mccain” approach, since i wasn’t listening to the campaigns. if you say it was there, i believe you.
Dat’s da one! Greatest little radio station on the planet.
We must never let this slip from our minds, they’re capable of ANYTHING
At Obama Tampa rally today they are not allowing bags, purses, or signs inside the building. (per WMNF)
Radio says no bags, signs allowed. They hand out Obama signs at the door so there are no homemade signs/banners allowed. Telling people to park in Ybor City or the Channelside area and take streetcar to the Forum. It’s 8:30 in the morning fer cryin’ out loud. Combined with the usual morning nightmare I’m sure glad I’m on the other side of the pond and don’t have to deal with it. I can follow it online at work.
Are you required to sign a loyalty oath?
The part that totally eludes me is how waging another immoral, pre-emptive war mitigates against election defeat. I would think, hope (oh, hell, I might even pray) that the American people would rise up en masse in absolute opposition and vote the bastards out. Am I delusional (be kind)? Oh. Sorry for potty mouth, kinda, sorta.
Where are you? I’m over in Goofport.
i dunno either, that’s why I said “you decide”. Personally I have despised both Clinton’s for years and there is no going back.
No, that’s only at McCain rallies.
Maryland. It’s streamed on the Web. Like their music.
Randy’s playin’ some great tunes. Wasteland of the Free was my doing.
McMurtry, “Can’t Make It Here”
you aren’t delusional, but you are suffering from Reason — and in Bush World, there is no such thing.
Aha. I heard that request too. Wasn’t paying too close attention though.
Far out. I thought youse was a local. For Goofport, read Gulfport, south of St Petersburg.
Clear Channel it ain’t.
So the issue, then, becomes, “How big is Bush world?” Are we making it smaller? Is it small enough yet to drown in Grover Norquist’s bathtub?
Scenario. Obama’s small plane crashes. Bushco ties it to terroristists trained in Iran. If enough people believe that bullshit an invasion of Iran would be almost “popular”. It does not matter who then gets “elected” clinton2 or McBus1 as they are both the same . In fact the elections may well have to be cancelled altogether.
You know I had never heard of McMurty until last week when a dude told me about him. Knew about his old man, the brother is tellin it.
*G*
well, of course I haven’t seen Grover’s bathtub; but he’s so dirty I doubt he actually has one.
Okay, this scares the billy hell out of me. Remember that Paul Wellstone was my senator. And my blog colleague is totally wacked out over the possibility of someone offing Obama. We are of the MLK, JFK, Bobby Kennedy generation. We don’t want to consider the possibility, but it keeps rearing its ugly head. So when we say we have Obama’s back, we have to mean it metaphorically and literally, yes? What have we become?
His new album is even more political than the last. He was here last year and the crowd blew his mind. Every time WMNF played “Can’t Make It Here” you could hear the wingnut heads exploding around Tampa Bay.
as far as preventing another war, I have what I believe is the proper scenario and perspective;
first, we have no conventional assets to engage in yet another theatre
with what’s left of those assets,(which have been deliberately squandered by this administration) we can still attack but we can’t prolong, we can wound but we cannot prevail
and we will be dividing our resources yet again, the president yet again falling for the age old tactic where the enemy divides us to conquer us
and everyone knows this
the only purpose of an attack on Iran would be to test our nuclear arsenal and then the ramifications that would follow
now, pelosi or conyers can CLAIM all they want that THEN they would be impeached
but then they could not be impeached, there WILL be martial law, elections WILL be suspended and congress WILL be adjourned, dismissed, neutered or jailed, or all three
we MUST stop him BEFORE it happens, before he SAYS it’s going to happen, cause once he says it there will be no stopping his declaration of ”national emergency” and martial law
nothing will stop him and that is indeed the path they are on
they have seen the democratic turnout, they have seen the masses of people woodstock strong, they have felt the vile hatred for themeselves and they know with no doubt, without a catastrophe they will be handing all the power they’ve amassed in their coup of our government will go to a black man, a democrat, a clinton, a women and probably all three
Has attacking Iran been established as immoral? My understanding is that all military personnel are obligated to disobey immoral orders.This administration can be expected to issue immoral orders.Can our troops/pilots differentiate morality? What is the story? Can we help to clarify?
and ps, they ain’t gonna let that happen, if anyone thinks they are gonna let that happen, you have not been playing along
The bushies have a history of being around when small planes carrying their “enemies” have crashed. This is just one article so nothing would surprise me.
Illegal orders, not immoral orders.
When the country goes to war, it’s often the case that support for the CinC goes up, don’t you think? Regardless of the pretext, if/once Iran strikes back, the natural response would be support the troops — and those who argued, “we shoulda talked” are drowned out. That’s my view of what would likely happen, but it’s just a guess about how it might impact the election. Whether it would actually happen that way or not, I think the right believes it would happen.
The right side media have been suggesting we’re already at war with Iran. Countless stories about Iranian weapons/training for those killing US soldiers in Iraq. Numerous efforts — including by McCain — to conflate Iran/extremists/al Qaeda. Repeated statements about how Iranian nuclear program cannot be allowed.
So the provocation case has been set for months.
Just what do you mean by that?
Thank you. Is attacking Iran legal?
That’s what I’m talking about. Can you say Lam Son 719?
And we have been providing BushCo cover via the blathering presidential campaigning. I can’t tell you how angry this makes me and should make all of us (yes, I’m should-ing us). Holy feces! So. What must we do now? How can we make an impact? Deluge whom with what?
Sure, I can say it. What does it mean?
nuking Iran would certainly have people in Pakistan, as well as the population of Afganistan, keeling over with radiation poisoning. Israel would not doubt find some excuse to nuke some arabs (they loves that killin’ they do) so armageddon would be here and all the christian nutfucks would have a fundraising bonanza. Bush would no doubt get a percentage.
I mean I’m really scared for his safety. Keep trying to convince myself that that’s just tinfoil crap. Having a hard time believing myself.
Lam Son 719
Limited incursion
In the current situation I would say no, but I have to whip out my “I am not a lawyer” card with that answer. International law is pretty specific.
Bushco will go to war no matter what the Democrats do, they have nothing
to lose, McCain is a stand-in, if he loses the Democrats have the mess to
clean up with no help from the Republicans. Reconciliation efforts will
only work if Bill and Hillary can be reconciled, they can bring their
supporters along if they try. We should try to unite, but it will not
deter Bush.
Yea but there is zero you can do about it, he knows the score. Having someones back, to me, means protecting them physically. We can’t do that.
Scarecrow, one thing that would really help is for everyone to acknowledge the real strengths and weaknesses of both candidates. Obama supporters on these threads need to recognize explicitly that HRC has everything it would take to make a great president: experience, brains and guts. Obama people need to realize that he lacks experience, and they have to hope that the other two qualifications are enough to overcome that lack.
HRC supporters need to realize that there is a real longing for change. I have said before that I am sick of baby boomers, and I am one. Obama represents a real change from the past, in a way that HRC cannot, because she is irrevocably tied, at least for me and many others, to the political wars of the past.
HRC comes out of a long tradition of Democratic candidates with a strong record of supporting laws that support and encourage the hopes and aspirations of the working people of the nation, and the people of Kentucky and West Virginia and others respond to that. She sounds a lot more like John Edwards and Jim Webb than Obama does. Obama is more like the technocrat Democrats, like Adlai Stevenson, and we all know how that turns out for us. He inspires many, but does he inspire enough?
Obama will lose the racist vote, and HRC will lose the misogynist vote. The media dislikes both of them. This election matters. Picking a candidate in this setting is hard, and it isn’t clear what we should do.
A little humility would go a long way, on both sides, I think.
International law, you are killin me over here!
You’re right, of course.
Good Morning Scarecrow and Firedogs,
.
ooh boy, first cuppa
the cabal is definitely functioning within an 04 mindset – (just look at how they’ve campaigned in the 3 special elections)so it would follow they think they could use a military strike to bolster their sinking political fortunes
and frankly I’m not even sure Cheney would be troubled with little things like the will of the people after his 8 Year Bender
fwiw, I don’t think a majority of the people will be out waving flags and honking horns in front of the mall this time –
so yeah, it all comes down to Jane’s wounded coyote – who or what is gonna stop ‘em ?
A very, very small group.
Just what “experience” do you think she has? I think that is bs.
I think that reconciliation will come from those in the campaigns pointing out that there are great risks that face a people that can’t be torn from their common objectives and needs by those who would use red-button issues to split us. It’s sort of like the first step in Alcoholics Anonymous giving up alcoholism…”Please God give me strength to change what a can, and give me the wisdom to know what is not changeable.” People need to see what they can and need to change…and to ignore those aspects of people that are ingrained in their beings…once they do that they can unite against a common foe.
Many of those that voted for Clinton, even in the South and Appalachia and rust-belt, did so because of reasons other than race…and those people are certainly going to look at the real issues and swing to the eventual Democratic nominee in the Fall. Others may be what I call crypto-bigots…they will vote for a white over a minority when all things are equal or if they have some doubts about the minority. Given the proximity of Clintons and Obamas proposed policies for the most part these people will use other subtle differences (”experience”; or rumors that Obama hasn’t been “properly vetted”) to justify their vote. In their own mind they aren’t racist, and would likely bite their lip and vote for Barack in the Fall. They just need to have their doubts assuaged a bit and the distinctions with McCain made clear. Then there are the 10-20% of Hillary’s “supporters” that really weren’t. These were Republican cross-overs that had no intent on voting for a Democrat in the Fall. They will likely go back to McCain, and would have done so even if Hillary had been the candidate.
Then there are the ones who ARE racist, who support the Democratic agenda espoused by Clinton and Obama but would never vote for a black, even when there are no other options. Some of these may be so torn between voting their own economic interests…and their countries best interest…and voting Republican. These folks may actually not vote at all, or find a third party candidate.
I think Bush and the GOP will do everything they can, and that includes illegal activities, to prevent Obama from winning in November.
Election fraud, suppressing voter turnout, even a “false flag” terror attack in October could be a possiblity.
It’s not tinfoil to realize Bush and Cheney have a criminal nature and know that Obama in the WH could very well mean that the full extent of their crimes against the nation will be revealed.
i think it (the work towards reconciliation) is worth it too.
but the genuine kind. not the kind that requires censorship or pretending i think better of a candidate than i really do. your comment pushed a sensitive button, not perhaps so much because of what you wrote (if i had read it in a vacuum), but because i am really, really angry about being told i’m (and others) are sexist (either implied or straight out) by front pagers because i don’t like the clintons (even though i’m no fan of obama’s). i’m furious about what i saw happen to kiddo. i’m tired of censorship and i’m tired of seeing mccain held to a different standard than a presidential candidate who happens to have a D by their name. i’m tired of what is beginning to look like more like adherence to a predetermined narrative instead of reality testing. and all this while i see our D congress continue to fuck us over with very little push back (except for fisa – thank you to everyone who has contributed to that effort).
i spent some time yesterday reading pro-clinton blogs and now i think that my anger is nothing compared to what i read. i don’t know where all the anger is coming from, but i think it is just as real as my own. i don’t know what to do about that except to try to listen. and i do want to do something constructive. think i’ll go take a walk now.
p.s. i left a list of hearings for today in the previous thread.
This is brilliant, and it applies to me. I am so busy-brained being angry at the Clintons without seriously considering Obama’s vulnerabilities, I have become the blindly loyal person whom I disdain. Erk!
Why are some still battling Clinton vs. Obama. That’s so yesterday.
I think Obama would be very cautious about using small planes after what happened to Wellstone.
Can we stop a class war? Jim Webb was on the tube this morning talking about the Scotch Irish that populate Appalachia. Historically blacks and poor whites have been pitted against one another in order for the powerful to maintain power. It is still playing out during this primary. I hope that the Dem nominee can find a way to unite these two groups. I hope that progressives can see that while racism definitely played a role in the Appalachian primaries we need to see the underlying class issues to find common ground rather than to disparage them. Hillary, like the Republicans, exploited those feelings. I hope Barack can help them see we are all on the same side in our fight against the Republican way of life that hurts us all.
according to some recent revelations, the group of people that will not be happy with the president will be tracked down and jailed
You know, it may well be BS, but perception is reality, and a large portion of the populace believes she has what it takes. This from the afore-mentioned blindly loyal Obama supporter. I hope to heck there is some massive strategery going on to harness every positive perception the Dems have going for them. And what’s the deal with the HuffPost headline (haven’t read it yet) about an Obama aide replacing Dean? What kind of strategery is that?
Seems to me, the repubs would have to go to court for a ruling as to legality in this non-emergency situation or knowingly open the door to their own prison cell. How can they just start a war for fun?
Agreed. Humility is helpful.
there is that Bob Barr body
IMHO, it’s easier to say “I will support the Democratic nominee for President.”
Neither Clinton nor Obama were
profiles in courageagents for change as US Senators. As liberals/progressives imho we need to focus our efforts on the local level and in Congressional races, where we can have some impact.Candidate Clinton said yesterday she was in until the Convention? Sounds to me like it is up for discussion until June…
A large portion of the populace couldn’t pour piss out of a boot if the directions were printed on the heel.
Ding ding ding.
but obaman is no longer tied to the forces that helped get him elected
he no longer need worry about which concerns well fund his campaign, if he is true to the people, the people will fund it
he actually is our bestest hope right now for a progressive candidate who serves the people, not the corporate contributers
time will tell
Supreme Court
Agree.
Doesn’t matter. They vote.
Wiping liquids off monitor.
It seems to me that they have already opened the gaol door as wide as it can be but there is no impetus from the Dem leaders to throw the bastards in. As for starting yet another illegal invasion of a country why not? If it serves their purpose of remaining in power and accumulating even more wealth that is all they need for an excuse. As for fun they get their jollies from watching snuff movies.
I rest my case.
OK, now for a heartwarmer:
[Mod Note; Edited by Mod. To avoid any copyright issues, please do not post entire articles — include a link instead. Thank you. ]
It doesn’t matter what 80% of the country believes. What is important is that they do not want to hear defeatism from their prez. The winnng strategy on foreign policy is to say how the U.S. can be strong and powerful, appealing to the visceral in the voters, not the intellectual. The kind of approach cited above is a losing strategy on foreign policy.
I love your optimism, but he’s more tied to it than ever before. Each electoral vote is tied to a state. Each state democratic party is tied to donors. All the K street money that used to go to the GOP, a lot of it is finding its way into Democratic coffers. It’s that machinery which Gets Out the Vote, and represents the party at the precinct level. Yeah, the net roots have had some success raising a few bucks. IMHO until we nationalize Congressional elections, or find some other meaningful way to wrestle control of elections and the legislative process away from corporations, we’re in deep trouble.
Every time I move back to an Obama/Clinton ticket, I shudder a little, trying to imagine how Obama could possibly deal with Hillary/Bill viewing him as a squatter in their former home. For purposes of winning the election, I think this is an unbeatable “team.” Practically speaking, I can’t fathom how it could work beginning on January 21, 2009.
while what you’re saying might be true in general, it is not AS true for obama
his campaign can rely on individuals and survive very niceley, in fact, if he makes it his platform it will more then survive it will thrive
will he seize the oportunity?
again, time will tell
When JFK took LBJ on board he signed his own death warrant.
I cannot stand the idea of an obama clinton ticket, we are giving them every single tool they have prayed, we are looking in their play book and then doing what it hopes in it’s wildest imagination we do
there are better, more progressive, more electable candidates then hillary
of that I believe every single person is certain
must earn, will see all up a few chapters in the day
Then there is a god!!
speaking of cooler, wiser heads – just what is HRC doing ?!?!? (not an invitation for flammage dogs)
I’m asking bec ever since NC/IN, thought this was some dance the camps were doing wrt paying down her debt, jobs for some of her staffers, and a position like SCOTUS for her – pretty traditional stuff – but the tone has been a little too strident for that scenario – help a sistah out here
Edwards tried it and got his butt kicked.
I think for the purposes of this election, with the SC nominations hanging in the balance, the Democratic candidate has to do everything within the law that it takes to win. The margin matters, because a lot of Dems run on the Presidential candidates coattails.
I understand that the infiltrated dems just barely have any power at all and can’t really do much. The 2008 election should improve that situation, but until then I must resign myself to living in a criminal rogue nation thanks to the Gathering Of Psychopaths in the Republican party. Thanks for your help.
awww,
ok, last comment before I hit power button;
she is hoping the republicans unleash what she believes will be the fatal blow, and she hopes they unleash before the convention
she wants to be the last man standing, she knows she cannot possibly win unless there is default
she counts on defualt
here’s the real issue though
if she had campaigned WITH obama AGAINST mccain she would probably be the candidate today, the fact that she took on obama instead of mccain was her downfall
I’ll tell you another thing;
if she comes out and says;
“I will introduce articles of impeachment post term”, I believe she might still win
but obama would surely answer in kind if it were as effective a statement as I believe it would be
power…off
Saw that. Great story. Smart bird.
he didn’t get his butt kicked, the republicans made sure the press wouldn’t cover him
that’s why he lost, that’s the only reason he lost
by all
OT – Kennedy heads home after tumor diagnosis
Not a direct response to your question, but fwiw, I think in some ways an Obama Presidency will be a net loss in the short term for people of color in the US. They are overwhelmingly poor and the white supremacists among us will rub their noses in Obama’s victory. They will use it as proof that their poverty is solely a result of their own laziness. White supremacists will use an Obama Presidency as proof positive that the US is colorblind and each of us an equal opportunity to be a millionaire. ….
That was a helluva post.
I’m way too stupid to give it’s due.
But, even I could see intelligence it took to describe voting patterns so efficiently, clearly and imho, accurately.
and now for something completely different:
from the House Oversight hearing EPA’s New Ozone Standards — the witness was “nonresponsive” to put it politely, and then toss in some Issa and well, enjoy
Oddly I’d say just the opposite…Hillary tried to out-policy wonk Obama…detailing issues to the point where even specialists weren’t sure what she was referring to. Obama stuck to broader themes and ethical stands. I suspect that your seeing Hillary’s folksy affability as the link to Edwards and Webb…but that’s something that is pretty much an age-graded thing. It’s similar to why Dubya was attractive to that same demographic. Younger people don’t really find that stuff as appealing to them in a President. They are electing a leader…not a buddy. I think Obama has a much more realistic view of the Middle Class and Poor…after all he worked with those groups while Hillary was first lady. A telling difference occurred when they last debated when they discussed at what economic level they would allow the Bush tax breaks to expire. Obama said about $200K for a family, but Clinton agreed with the moderators that it would be about $250K per person (i.e. a half million per couple).
I think that Obama should examine many of Clintons initiatives and see if they are worthwhile to incorporate in his policies…and he should consider whether she would be suitable for a role in his Cabinet or (later in the Courts). There are other individuals that might be able to broaden his appeal to many in Hillary’s base. A female or Hispanic Vice-President might be appropriate IF that person could defer their ego to being part of an Obama Administration. But Klobuchar or Richardson come to mind, as does Edwards in another capacity. All the candidates had many fine advisors, as well as some real duds and IMO scoundrels. Obama should not be averse to taking the creme de la creme…smart, qualified and creative individuals. No more of this “Bush loyalty uber alles” selection process.
Thanks for the link, Nomolos. It’s an old article, but I think very relevant.
not sure I agree with you.
I don’t think it’s just me, but I’m sick of being bullied by a small group of vociferous hatemongers. They aren’t the boss of US.
I’m not sure what I said that you disagree with?
I don’t think it will be a net loss, not evenin the short term.
Excellent as always Scarecrow!
Scarecrow:
If Bu$h Co wants war, then they shall have it.
The Military has NO choice.
The people have no choice.
The world has no choice.
Once ‘the war’ of the moment has been enjoined, ALL dissent must cease, all questions must cease …
Now Rep. John Conyers has said he will begin impeachment proceedings should Bu$h Co do ‘it’.
Quess what John? By then, IT WILL BE TOO LATE …
If Bu$h Co detect a ‘crisis’, then they may implement Directive 51 (which ‘Directive’ Rep. Conyers had not even heard of until several months ago …) at that point, where in hell will we be?
I know others here disagree with me, however, should Bu$h Co wage war with Iran, and it is unrealistic to think, for a even second, that it will be a ‘conventional’ ground-forces exercise, it will be Naval and Air Force bombardment, perhaps even ‘nuclear’, then it is my firm conviction that the ‘Rapture’ is on the way and the human species in very dire straits. indeed. Do not forget that Russia has sent very clear signals regarding their ‘position’, and considering their nuclear capablities, we would be foolish indeed not to factor in their ‘response’ as well as the likely response from others.
If Bu$h Co takes the killing to Iran then we had better expect that killing will come home, to America.
If …. then ….
Consequence, far more serious than we have experienced ever before, will exact its pound of flesh from each of us … ‘it’ will no longer be something, conveniently, ‘over there’, it will be here …
Those battles were not “class wars”. They were the use of race to prevent the unification of the working class…to prevent a true “class war”. Henry Ford intentionally used black “scabs” rather than whites to prevent mixed race unionization. Cross-Union organizers for minority workers were vilified as “Communists”…and attacked much more harshly than White labor organisers. There was a lot of effort by big businesses to foment racism and to segregate workers by ethnicity. That was never broken down in the UMW until very late. AFL-CIO and UAW workers dealt with those issues decades earlier.
Ok now I get it. Thanks for the clarification.
I hope I’m wrong.
Chanced upon the rerun on C-Span 1?2 early a.m. Mr. Henry *was* somewhat less than pleased with issa. Every time I think shuler is bad, it would be good to remember he could be the issidiot.
*sympathies going out to all pups who are burdened with the twit*
Playin’ catch up this morning, so somebody may have mentioned this midthread. The only way the “i” word will be on the table is when the Rethugs realize its the only way to prevent their total obliteration as a party/brand, and they put it on the table themselves
perris, Cliff Schecter, has a new post up that would seem to support your position.
My apologies.
The headline is wrong…if one reads the article it says simply that Obama wants to have people on the DNC Committee. Now if Dean was made part of the cabinet…he’d have to be replaced. But Obama certainly has a lot of leverage right now in terms of $$$ in hand and fundraising. Much of his warchest for the Primaries will need to be distributed by the Convention and a new fund built for the General election (one can’t merge the two funds). Thus he’s in a position to contribute serious money to Democratic candidates this Fall.
speaking of scenarios – man oh man, have been chewing on one for the other party that could really work for them, more so than a military strike – and one Richard Cheney is more than capable of attempting it
. . .but fleshing it out on screen would set the Mods hair on fire and we love our (((Mods)))
but retaining a Republics majority isn’t why they want to go in to Iran although I’m sure they’re hyping it up as they try to garner support for a strike
Local cops doing training exercises the next three Wednesdays on crowd control, dealing with riots, civil disobedience.
One starts to wonder….
I was with you to the last part. Not sure what to do? It’s already been decided by the voters. To do anything else will provoke civil war in the party. I’m not issuing threats, its just that the next generation of Democrats has spoken loud and clear. I understand that some feel it is not a pragmatic choice, but at this stage it doesn’t matter and Clinton’s supporters need to come to grips with that. I have admired Clinton throughout adult life for taking all the BS, but as a woman she needs to know when to fold ‘em (just like a male candidate) or I fear it will be a long time until we have another female candidate. If it seems she is not willing to play by the rules, then that will harm any future female candidates and I think that a lot Clinton supporters do not see that risk.
Interesting, particularly in light of Chuck Hagel’s reference to impeachment for Bush. But everyone is talking about after the fact. What I’ve learned here this morning is that after the fact is entirely too late. Needed to happen months ago. Didn’t. Needs to happen now. Won’t, unless . . . what??? What swings the balance here, from the Dems still hibernating over the winter into spring???
Thanks for the post scarecrow….It is so nice to read balance and sane voices in the progressive blogosphere. What a difference between FDL and the Jeralyn of Talk Left meltdown that occurs every election night and day of a primary vote.
I know there are some of you who would like to see John Edwards as Attorney General, and I would agree with that, but if he were on the ticket as Obama’s running mate–that would be an unbeatable ticket. He was the one candidate who could get the conservative vote.
say what?
Selise, what did you get from the pro-Clinton blogs? I am curious what your opinion was.
I think you’re right. Can someone help me/us understand precisely what is at stake with respect to breaking the rules about seating MI/FL? What are the numbers involved there re delegate count et al? What is best/worst case scenario with this? I can’t seem to get my tiny mind around this.
Remember Watts, Detroit, Newark?
there was a poll (TPM ? Kos ?) that showed the various vp scenarios – adding JRE jumps right out as the winner – if reliable polling continued to show same the Obama camp would surely consider it although right now the smart kids are saying Sibelius or Webb
When John Edwards was still in the running, he was the candidate who could beat all the repub candidates if the vote were held then…
Well they already had that with Condi and Colin and Oprah and Michael Jackson and just about every sports star. There’s a reason they don’t want Obama to win…he’ll provide an alternative model for urban African American youth. Suddenly they will see other alternatives to being either a rapper or an athlete. And there is no way in the world that Obama’s policies will be as bad in generating poverty or increasing the slope of the economic pyramid as McCains.
Racists will do what they will do…no need in assisting them in their efforts by acting obescient to their ideas. One can defer having a black, or woman, or Catholic, or Jewish Presidential candidate forever if one says “it’s never happened before…and there will be opposition from bigots”. At some point one simply has to jump in and swim when one has a strong and deserving candidate. The voters have chosen.
I’m unaware of the positions that Edwards held that were “winners” with conservatives. What were they?
but for some reason he was never taken seriously by the MSM.
Hmmmm…
but I don’t want him as VP or AG, want him in charge of taking down der Department of Homeland Szecuritee
I saw that poll of potential vps; I think it tested reactions in Pennsylvania only, IIRC, and JRE did very well. Many didn’t know Sibelius.
My brothers wife is so spitting angry at Sen. Clinton that she has begun to swear like a trucker.
I hope this matter can be brought to good conclusion.
-G
I. Want. Edwards. I’m sure he’d be gratified! *g*
Agree. In a symbolic way, it’s huge.
Yes and I don’t think HRC would have been any better than Obama. Edwards, however, might have been a lot better, not just for people of color, but the poor. Moot question, however.
By the way, the Israeli’s have been negotiating with…gasp….Syria!
-G
Your guess is as good as mine. Here’s one of the reports.
Please forgive my ignorance, but can someone tell me where Christy is?
Scarecrow and others,
here is the aforementioned VP poll – Scarecrow is correct, it is PA.
Survey USA
btw – did everyone see Gov. Sibelius veto of Voter Id in KS ? loved it !
Oh..I dunno…I think he *was* taken seriously by the MSM. He just wasn’t *their* chosen candidate.
Couldn’t agree more. As the mother of biracial children, I do not fear an Obama candidancy. Am I naive enough to think that there won’t be difficult aspects? Not at all. But give my children a president who cares about their future and implements policies that show it, all the while leading by example? That is a short and long term positive development. If even of a fraction of the dissaffected urban AA population sees that education can reap huge rewards in this society, then it will help. I do not fear the hatemongers, they have been here for generations. If Obama can have a successful presidency then there will be less of them in the future – racism is often fear of the other. Just having him there on the TV day after day acting in a rational manner cannot help but dispel some of the fears.
pups new thread
TBogg uptop
I’ve been reading the pro-Clinton blog Tennessee Guerilla Women. The anger is palpable.
Short, well-deserved vacation.
heh.
thanks Scarecrow!
The numbers are from December 2007. None of the conservatives I know, even know who Edwards is. If they did, I can’t see them voting for him.
My view is that it is essentially the Clinton campaign that is now the barrier to resolving the Michigan and Florida issues. The Michigan Democratic leadership, predominantly Clinton supporters suggested a “compromise” that seated ALL of her won delegates. In addition she would get some of the slate that went “Uncommitted” (even though people that voted for these clearly could have voted for her, but chose not to). Obama would get the rest of the “uncommitted” since all the other Candidates had.
Obama’s team agreed to this plan, as did the Clinton supporters in the Michigan delegation. But Clinton stymied the deal and insisted that he should win ALL the delegates, or the ones that were Committed and that all the rest remain unaffiliated. This despite the fact she would take home even more delegates than she won.
The MI compromise if it had been accepted would have allowed a Florida delegation to be seated. Once MI was seated in a split delegation, Obama would have enough delegates to win even if Florida was entered with a delegation made up in the matter that occurred in the Primary, Obama would still far outpace Clinton.
My suspicion is that the Super Delegates will act quickly after Obama’s big Oregon win…they don’t want it to appear that Puerto Rico is the deciding race and let the issues of Vieuques and the FALN pardons rise to a head as political issues. The Republicans would have a field day if they can talk as if Clinton bought off PR votes by her husband freeing “terrorists” in his last-day pardons that also allowed Marc Rich to walk free. PR is not a State and their voters cannot legally vote in the Presidential election – but if they are decisive it wll look as if a non-US State decided the Presidency.
‘And what’s the deal with the HuffPost headline (haven’t read it yet) about an Obama aide replacing Dean? What kind of strategery is that?’
Could that mean that Dean is the pick for VP???
Thanks, SC.
I hope she’s enjoying herself.
And, I think unification is extremely important.
Oh, thank you, thank you. I have been pretzeling over this for some time.
I’m thinking not. But that’s just me.
Clean up the monitor and put your boot back on!
8^)
fwiw, I would point out that Gov Sibelius is a card carrying member of the DLC. I realize that some here don’t mind this at all.
With regard to reconcilliation, it seems to me Obama is doing about all he can by going on down the road, turning toward McCain, and effusively complimenting Clinton on everything. Still, it may not be enough. As I understand it, the Clinton supporters are outraged when he looks past her.
It seems like somebody didn’t play enough team sports in their youth.
As Obama keeps saying, I’ts not about him, it’s not about her, etc.. With all the problems we have as a nation, it’s not even about the first African-American president or the first female president. Like Lincoln’s position, either of those two objectives are desirable, but saving the Union comes first.
right
Ah, Geraldine Ferraro syndrome.
“The one that is the most problematic is (John) Edwards, who voted for the Patriot Act, campaigns against it. Voted for No Child Left Behind, campaigns against it. Voted for the China trade deal, campaigns against it. Voted for the Iraq war … He uses my voting record exactly as his platform, even though he had the opposite voting record.” -Russ Feingold
One could add votes against placing limits on campaign expenditures by oneself, voted against rules on “downer cows”, voted to eliminate the inheritance tax for those passing on over $1 million, supported the push tax cuts including the amendment that jiggered the tax rate to include more millionaires into the breaks. He not only voted for the Iraq War Authorization Amendment, he shot down all the Amendments to restrict its duration and scope. During his Senate tenure Edwards voted 60 times with the Republican majority in opposition to his own party consensus. Even more often he voted against the “progressive wing” of the Party.
In the Senate Edwards was pretty much of a centrist-Blue Dog…a member of Lieberman’s New Democrat Coalition.
Edwards was a different individual when campaigning for President than he was when Senator.
If true (and why would it not be?), this is enlightening. Thanks.
Well, I’ll tell ya what. There have been plenty of people around here trying to convince me that I should vote for her because the stakes are so high and we have to have a democrat. This in spite of the fact that she can’t win. They better get with some of these folks and start convincing them.
some of us care plenty about keeping the reins of power out of DLC hands period.
was merely pointing out a Dem forcefully, finally stood up to the flim flammery that is “Voter Fraud”.
I hear ya!
You’re right. In Edwards’ behalf, we probably would have never seen him representing North Carolina in the Senate, if he had run on his more recent platform.
Even the MSM talking heads agree on the math, the consensus is that it
is about the “psychology” in the Clinton camp… it has been since winter
and the logic has not changed… no one can talk to the power couple
about it yet, it is up to them to end this Nixonian power grab.
No, I believe she is a person with serious potential. I think the DLC is pushing her as a rising star within the Party. The SOTU rebuttal this year was a nice little favor. I wonder who awards such things? Doctor Dean?
Scarecrow:
Regarding comity between the two groups of ‘partisans’ …
The brunt of responsibility for achieving this (assuming ’tis possible) must rest on the shoulders of the ‘loser’. Said person must exhibit real and genuine ‘leadership’ and lead by persuasion as well as by example.
THAT will be the true test and measure of capacity, intention, and ‘belief’ …
Some responsibility, in fact, a great deal, belongs to the ‘followers’.
If this is not undestood, then we all shall lose.
If it is understood, then no one truly loses …
Should some of the partisans not be able to bring themselves to vote for the ‘other’, so long as they don’t vote for McCain, then they must be allowed that choice without being taken to task … period.
Included with the ‘right’ to vote, is the ‘right’ NOT TO VOTE … and such a choice is no less ‘proper’ or ‘appropriate’ than voting in good conscience. (Frankly, those ‘partisans’ who would vote for McCain because ‘the other cannot win’ must fail the test of good conscience, and one must wonder at their understanding and grasp of reality …)
Appreciate the background, had no idea.
Russ was my first choice for Pres, so you’ll get no argument from me. As Russ is well aware, however, Edwards is from NC. I suppose that explains some of it.
no need to opologize ever, we are here to compare notes not to agree with one another
most of the times our notes happen to agree but sometimes not so much
I stand corrected on my terminology. My point is exactly as you have stated which was for the wealthy class to pit various working class groups against each other.
Well since it is so fahionable to root for Obama I guess I will have to piss on that parade, I am not a Hillary fan nor do I intend to vote for Her or “the empty suit”. In all fairness, it should be obvious that Hillary is the only one that has a chance to beat McCain and the Main Stream Media, to wit, she is the only one to win the big important states that the winner will have to carry, and she did it without the help of the black vote. Now we all know that if Obama wins the nomination he will get at least 90+% of the black vote, but how much of the rural white vote will he lose, how much of the female vote will he lose, how much of the “working mans ” vote will he lose. I can see a “Insane McCain” presidency on the horizon. Thank god I don’t have a horse in this race. I made up my mind a long time ago not to vote Democratic when Pelosi took impeachment off the table.
Thanks, belatedly, for the info. Enlightening, indeed.