Merry Christmas. Firstiness to the Deans.

10pm CT

Is everyone snoozing? Mom is and I'm close. Nice day with family - old and new.

We had the Planet Earth DVD's playing throughout the day as we made merry. Nice to see the little ones getting into it.

Speaking of nature - just saw a newsflash that a tiger got out of its cage at the San Fran zoo and killed a visitor - ugh!!

Hope everyone had a lovely day.

I'm just having dinner...relaxed bigtime all day, in my jammies.

Thank you muchly for the holiday card, Denise.

Listener did a *wonderful* job (esp. the scenic aspect of Mount Mansfield); and it was very thoughtful of you to think of me!

I'm in my nice red jammies now but can barely keep my eyes opened. The wine I had shipped for dinner was so yummy.

Yes listener really does a fine job making personal greeting cards for sure.

Glad you liked it - and I think of you often!

Nighters

And Christmas is almost over! Ten to go, and then begins Boxing Day!

11:50pm

Hey gang - Again - Christmas/Holiday blessings to all.

-------
Because I'm a political junkie (there is no cure except maybe a Dean or Gore
presidency) I am linking to an article from Daily Kos regarding some
questions posed to our candidates from the Boston Globe Pls note Edwards' non
answers.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/1...

Good morning, everybody

The day that could not speak it's name, according to the spouse, is over.

Yeahhhhhhh!

bbl 

Here's a little D&G to get us back into the real world, altho I really enjoyed being away from the fray for awhile.

This is a good link to the greed article.  While the church is spouting off about greed, it should also admit to controlling its parishioners for 2000 years, using fear. *&^% religious hyporcrites!  If you look behind and under greed, you'll see fear.  Apparently the *church* doesn't look very deeply.......

Great dancing tonight.  May the *great awakening* occur now.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article3284881.ece 

4.

Well speaking of pajamas --

My wife told me she wanted fleece pajamas for Christmas.

So I went to the local mall here and all they had were microfleece pajamas.  I inquired where are the macrofleece pajamas ?

The clerk didn't know.

So, I purchased and wrapped the microfleece pajamas and put it under my small Christmas tree ---

on the BIGGEST day of the year !

I hope everyone had a Happy Christmas (as the Brits) and, I echo 5. puddle, Happy Boxing Day today !

6. Good morning everyone and happy day after Christmas. mary vb I was going to link that KOS article but you beat me to it. I read only Obama's responses (in the Globe article you can sort by candidate) and came away feeling warm and fuzzy there at least.

5:49 AM ET

the Holidays aren't over yet, Kwanzaa has begun

for the little guy the unwrapping was as fun as the presents, but the one that got him off my lap and onto the floor playing was a simple toy airplane with easy rolling wheels which were an invite to putt around through the wrapping paper

which will be the candidate to come through first with the simple little message that will attract the attention of those with a shorter attention span than the policy wonks that inhabit the early states

But now, have a good look at John Edwards's response to question 2.

2. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites -- a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

As I've said many times, we do not need a march to war with Iran. I strongly oppose George Bush's doctrine of "preventive war" and believe that force always should be an option of last resort. I opposed the recent Kyl-Lieberman bill declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, which I believed was the first step on the administration attacking Iran. I believe that the 2002 bill authorizing force in Iraq does not in any way authorize the use of force in Iran.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

that looks straightforward to me; what am I missing?

The problem with the question of a war authorization is that Congress did indeed pass such authorization before Iraq was invaded under the guise of "intelligence" suggesting "imminent" threat when there was none. I think a candidate that acknowledged that they were fooled would look at such reports in the future with more scrutiny. Ron Paul's appeal to many anti-war young people (who may look no further at his record) is that the Rose Garden ceremony had the Democratic Leadership complicit and in a prominent role.

To me Obama's main appeal is that he wasn't there. (I don't think much of finding solutions in the "middle" or the other appeal of changing the tone by getting along, I want someone who will stand up)

the three way tie means the anti Hillary vote is split in two, but I could live with a prolonged process that turned into a two man contest

John Edwards won't be steamrolled by anyone, including a Congress bent on authorizing war. Bush had way too easy a time getting Democratic support last time, and it is a stain on Edwards record. Had he made the tough vote he would be cruising to an Iowa victory right now.

Admittedly a bit quirky.

13.  What you are missing is that the answer is retrospective, dealing with an historical hypothetical (wouldn't have done such and such), rather than referencing his own knowledge vis a vis the Constitutional provisions.  Also, you seem to have missed his reliance on the word "believe."  Belief is a clear give-away.  Belief is unprovable and irrefutable.  

Edwards has obviously learned the trick of evaluating another's behavior negatively in order to give the impression that his behavior would be opposite.  It leads the reader or listener to form a conclusion for which there is no predicate.  If, later on, behavior is inconsistent with the commitment one thought had been given, one may feel deceived but have no proof.  Edwards could argue that he never said he would act differently from Bush (who hasn't acted, btw) and that would be accurate.  

Edwards is very good at making people believe.  He's very good at turning the question to his own advantage.

local news headline

AXE WIELDING NAKED MAN ATTACKS DEPUTIES

the story ended "The man's name was withheld due to a possible mental committment."

and now I will make a naked appeal to include the Wellstone Mental Health Parity provisions into any Universal Health Care Plan

got your attention didn't I?

sensationalism or the simple message, which will win over the jaywalkers?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Monnica your post on Hannah is a good analogy

Edwards is very good at making people believe.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You can't win the race to the White House without that being true of the candidate.

bbl

OK.  So, I have discovered that I can compose in Opera and avoid the wrap problem by simply composing without a break and then putting in paragraph breaks when I'm all done. That's how it worked on the Edwards answer.  I haven't read the Globe questions and answers and the spouse seems to have missed them too.  Will check later.  For the moment, I need to do a screed on brainwashing, flip-flopping and dry-cleaning.  What do you think those three things have in common?

Last week saw Virginia's governor Tim Kaine campaigning for Barack Obama.

This week it's my MA governor Deval Patrick doing the same:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/12/26/report_patrick_to_stump_for_obama_in_three_key_states/

December 26, 2007

BOSTON—Gov. Deval Patrick reportedly plans to make visits to three early presidential voting states on behalf of Democrat Barack Obama.

Patrick's political committee tells the Boston Herald that the governor will deliver speeches in the coming days in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

...

This coming Jan 4 will represent a year that Deval has been in office.

I'd give him an A- for what he has accomplished *.

*  (A+'s are for perfect people and IMO there's no such people on earth)

Phil, if you like quirky headlines, you should check out OCICBW

The mad priest makes a habit of looking for quirky headlines, many having a humorous religious link.

It's a blogspot site, so if you have a blogspot account, you can leave comments.  Actually, blogspot seems to have some system where you can post as anonymous as long as you don't offend--i.e. the default is open-door unless you crash the party and behave rudely.  LOL 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/22/AR2007122201762.html

Racial Undercurrent Is Seen in Clinton Campaign

PLAYERS and PLAYERS
Sunday, December 23, 2007; Page A02

It has unfolded mostly under the radar. But an important development in the 2008 Democratic battle may be the building backlash among African Americans over comments from associates of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton that could be construed as jabs at Sen. Barack Obama's race.

These officials, including Clinton aides and prominent surrogates, have raised questions or dropped references about Obama's position on sentencing guidelines for crack vs. powder cocaine offenses; on his handgun control record; and on his admitted use of drugs as a youth. The context was always Obama's "electability." But the Illinois senator's campaign advisers said some African American leaders detect a pattern, and they believe it could erode Clinton's strong base of black support.

Here's a sample of how the issue is playing out:

From the "Tom Joyner Morning Show," Dec. 14:

Tom Joyner: "Yeah, man, they are coming after you now. So the story about the Clinton campaign putting out this statement not to vote for Barack Obama because he used drugs, and then yesterday I understand that she apologized and the campaign worker quit."

...

From columnist Derrick Z. Jackson of the Boston Globe, Dec. 15:

"That leaves open as to how far the Clinton campaign, whose poll leads have evaporated in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, will go to stereotype Obama as not only naive, but cast him in a sinister light in a nation where black drug use and criminality is exaggerated in the media . . . ."

...

Besides wishing everyone a happy Boxing Day, also want to wish a happy first day of Kwanzaa !

Mike -

I just heard that the Bruins will be playing the Hurricanes this Fri evening.

Before I go, Phil, I think a good case could be made that including mental health services in the comprehensive health care program can be funded by a decrease in funds for the incarceration of those who suffer from mental conditions, as well as "stabilization" units which provide no improvement for the clients.  There's more than enough money to fund the care; it just has to be allocated properly, on the basis of patient need, rather than industry convenience.

get ya Giants tickets ! :

New England 28, Miami 7

By HOWARD ULMAN, AP Sports Writer
December 23, 2007

...

after becoming the first team to go 15-0 in the regular season with a 28-7 win over the Miami Dolphins on Sunday, it will mean more if the Patriots have a higher number than the New York Giants on the scoreboard at the end of their game next Saturday night.

...

the Patriots moved to the best start in league history. The old mark: Miami's 14-0 in 1972 when the season lasted just 14 games.

...

If the Patriots beat the Giants, then go unbeaten in the postseason to finish 19-0, they'll join the Dolphins as the only teams to post a perfect record from opening day until the clock in the championship game runs out.

At the same time, the Patriots need six points to break Minnesota's single-season record of 556 set in 1998.

Brady is one shy of Peyton Manning's NFL record of 49 touchdown passes set in 2004 and tied with Dan Marino's production in 1984; Moss needs one touchdown reception to tie Jerry Rice's mark of 22 set in 12 games in 1987, a strike year.

...

There was a championship feeling in the air even before the game began. Three Red Sox players -- David Ortiz, Curt Schilling and Kevin Youkilis -- along with owner John Henry drew a huge ovation when they paraded onto the field with the trophies from their World Series wins in 2004 and 2007.

...

23.  Whence Clinton supposed support from African Americans was supposed to come has always been a puzzlement to me.  Because Bill made Ron Brown Secretary of Commerce?

I will grant that there was a southern undercurrent of opposition to Bill Clinton (Black Willie) as a "...... lover"--a categorization white southerners are very familiar with--which earned him enough credit with the black community to excuse his dissing of Sister Soulja as something a white guy had to do to convince red necks that he wasn't going over-board.  Also, there was some truth in the assertion that "welfare as we know it" needed to be ended because the way the system was structured was designed to keep beneficiaries in a permanent empoverished condition.  However, the pudding did not turn out as most would have wanted as regards welfare and the same could/should be said about health care.  That Hillary persuaded Bill to go to Africa and make a big to-do about HIV didn't really do a whole lot for African Americans.

The assertion that "It takes a Village" to raise a child may well have raised expectations that haven't materialized since American children are no better off than they were (no healthier, no better educated, no more free).  Indeed, the record is rather miserable, and it didn't just get that way in the last seven years (while Hillary was a Senator).  It's true that the Family and Medical Leave Act got passed and signed during Bill's tenure, but that was Dodd's baby.

And then, we should not forget that the Clintons' behavior in the White House/Oval Office was rather tawdry and provided grounds for the argument that honor needed to be returned.  That the promise hasn't been kept is not their fault; that there was reason to make it, is.

What it sounds to me like is that we're getting ready for an argument that American blacks are either fickle or ungrateful.  Which, of course, will appeal to white prejudice.

Perhaps we should say that Hillary is having a whole series of Sister Soulja moments.

It's not really possible to lose what you didn't have.  What better than to assert you didn't want it anyway.

Which is not, *rdorgan, to say that I support Obama.  Only that the Clinton candidacy is getting more unattractive day by day. 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap;_ylt=Aoz.MiP.o_OvKX4f1fIptba8vLYF?gid=2007122302&prov=ap

Boston 103, Orlando 91

December 23, 2007

AP - Dec 23, 10:14 pm EST
More Photos

BOSTON (AP) -- Opponents expect big scoring nights from the likes of Ray Allen, Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett.

But Rajon Rondo?

Often forgotten in the Celtics' star-packed starting lineup, Rondo matched a career high with 23 points -- including his first two 3-pointers of the season -- and Boston cruised to a 103-91 victory over the Orlando Magic on Sunday night.

...

Pierce scored 24 points and Garnett had 21 points to go along with 12 rebounds for the Celtics (22-3), who have the best record in the NBA. Allen scored 22, marking the first time in over eight years the Celtics had four players with better than 20 points in a game.

...

*rdorgan

My concern is that Obama has been suckered by the consultants he hired on.  A goodly number of them are re-treads from the Gebhardt campaign which was not a campaign that was designed for success.  The Gebhardt campaign was designed to take Dean out.  Dean, to a certain extent got suckered by Trippi.  Now these players are doing the same for Obama and Edwards.

Obama made a mistake in calling Edwards out on the "support" from 527s.  I know that the media have been looking for "attacks" but it still isn't smart for the candidates to get into it.

When Hillary announced that now it was going to be fun, she was like one of those people who organize dog fights and considers them a spectator sport. 

23.  Whence Clinton supposed support from African Americans was supposed to come has always been a puzzlement to me.  Because Bill made Ron Brown Secretary of Commerce?

...

Which is not, *rdorgan, to say that I support Obama.  Only that the Clinton candidacy is getting more unattractive day by day. 

+++

Thanks for that comment.

I feel comfortable if any dem (pref is, of course, Obama, followed by Edwards, then Dodd, then Biden, etc.) candidate wins except Hillary.

I liked Hillary's campaign in the beginning but especially in the last couple of weeks, it seems like it has become desparate.  It IMO is nothing like the 1992 campaign run of Bill's that seemed positive.

Will I vote in the general election if Hillary becomes the dem candidate ?

To be truthful, I don't know.

31.

Yep, I've posted a number of times on the Obama '08 blog of late that negativity is so yesteryear and staying positive is the way to go.

I would hope that Edwards supporters here are doing the same on the John Edwards 08 blog.

Morning Folks,

As much as I dread Christmas, it was a very nice day.  Our children invited inlaws from every sibling, and it was a true extended family.  They presented a feast and the atmosphere was one of generosity and kindness.  It was memorable. The food was also delicious: lots of hor d'oeves, some new and fairly exotic, lamb, turkey, a variety of salads and potatoes, good wine, and trifle for dessert.  

It was one of the nicest feasts I've ever attended, and it is so comforting and gratifying to see children take on the responsibilities of generosity and care of family and doing it with grace and good humor.  

As a parent, I feel a big sigh of relief.  They turned out well.  They are living their lives according to their values and choices, and they are honorable and good people. Thank you World!

 Will post a disturbing report from the Washington Post after I go back to Truthout and get it.

While I'm convinced that humans are hardwired into propitiating the divine, I am horrified at the politicalization of religion, the oppression, the exclusivity of it.  We certainly are in an era of bigotry, polarization, and theocratic impulses.

Here's the article from the Washington Post.  Oh, and the YouTube Mike Gravel and Redstate presentation I think was badly done and a misjudgment on the part of Mike Gravel who is  a hero to me.

  Congress's Bullying Pulpit
    By Sally Quinn
    The Washington Post

    Sunday 23 December 2007

    As a child, I went to a small school in rural Alabama near an Army post where my father was stationed. It was a very Christian town, and our teacher was "born again."

    This was decades ago, but I remember clearly how she used to tell us that we must accept Jesus Christ as our personal savior. Then she would ask for hands to see who had. By age 11 I had become a nonbeliever. My father was in the Army and had fought in World War II and Korea; I concluded quickly that no loving God could have allowed those atrocities to be committed.

    But we had all seen our teacher, when crossed, call an unlucky member of our class up to the front of the room, make the student lie down on her desk and be paddled. The humiliation was worse than the pain. So, when she called on us to admit that we had accepted Jesus as our savior, I dutifully raised my hand.

    Thank goodness, those days are over, you might be thinking. Nothing like that could happen in this country today.

    Well, think again. It happened this month, right here in Washington.

    On Dec. 11, H.R. 847 was passed in the House of Representatives. Just listen to what our lawmakers have resolved:

"Whereas Christmas, a holiday of great significance to Americans," it begins, "is celebrated annually by Christians throughout the United States...." It goes on to state, among other things, that "Christianity [is] the religion of over three-fourths of the American population," that "American Christians observe Christmas, the holiday celebrating the birth of their savior, Jesus Christ," and that "Christmas is celebrated as a recognition of God's redemption, mercy, and Grace."

"Now, therefore be it Resolved, that the House of Representatives ... expresses continued support for Christians in the United States ... acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States ... rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and expresses its deepest respect to American Christians."

    For brevity, I have omitted the resolution's references to Christianity around the world.

    This resolution passed with 195 Democratic yea votes, 177 Republican yeas and nine Democratic nays. No Republicans voted against it. Ten House members voted "present." Forty were not there, including the bill's sponsor, Rep. Steve King of Iowa.

    Among those voting for the resolution was a Jewish member of Congress who has asked me not to print his name. He was outraged and appalled by the bill, he told me. But he was also afraid. He thought it would hurt him with his mostly Christian constituency if he voted against it. He told some of his colleagues about his anguish. They advised him not to be stupid. It would be better for him politically if he voted for it.

    It's possible that the 10 who voted "present" also had problems with the bill but decided it was safer not to vote against it. One could also assume that some of those who were absent were not there so as not to have to deal with the problem.

    Earlier this year the House also passed resolutions honoring Islamic and Indian holidays but nothing that so equated a single faith with America and Americans.

    How could this happen, in what will soon be 2008, in a pluralistic, multicultural, multireligious society, a society based on the concepts of religious freedom and separation of church and state? What were they thinking?

    This resolution was as anti-American as anything Congress has ever passed. It disenfranchised and marginalized millions and millions of men and women, reducing them to second-class citizens.

    How about this next time around: "Whereas all holidays have great significance to some Americans, be it resolved that the House of Representatives expresses its deepest respect to Americans of all faiths and non-faith alike."

  -------

* rdorgan
Wed, 12/26/07

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

IF the Patsies win against NY it wil be slightly watered down as NY wil most likley be resting tis starters for the playoffs..thats what Id do anyways......NY doesnt care about NEs undefeated season, I dont..........they are prime bait to fall to someone in te playoffs...the presure is al on them now..................IF Ny i smart, Id play my subs, give NE the game............and prepare for the playofs where Ny can do some damage..IF healthy which they really arent................

new thread

New Thread does not work for me. There is no way to click onto the comments.

12:34 p.m. ET

Re: the Boston Globe questionairre:

Republican John McCain says that if he is elected president, he would consider himself bound to obey treaties because they are "the law of the land." But Mitt Romney says he would consider himself free to bypass treaties if they "impinge" on his powers as commander in chief.

Democrat Hillary Clinton says "in very rare instances," she might attach a so-called signing statement to a bill reserving a right to bypass "provisions that contradict the Constitution." But Bill Richardson says if a president thinks that parts of a bill are unconstitutional, then "he should veto it," not issue a signing statement.

The problem with Hillary's answer is there is no constitutional authority for a president to bypass any part of a law that has been passed by Congress and signed by the president.

Though Bush always claims that, there is no proof that he has ever done so since it would be unconstitutional for him to do so.