In the grater scheme of things, Dean is first.

Grater?  Watch your hands handling that scheme of things.

Now that Edwards has jumped into the 'remarks" fray against Hillary, it will interesting to see if our Edwardians follow his llead and begin piling onto her intead of Obabma.

mary vb
Mon, 01/14/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well, whether Americans like it or not.......the US armed forces have certainly had their share of gaffes the last 20 or so years..........................the Vincennes, the Italy gondola incident, and the Japanese research vessel that was wiped out by the nuke sub surfacingto impress the Congressman on board.................and these are the ones we know about.....................

The Vincennes though, IMO was the key incident because that disaster pretty mych set the tone for damaged and maybe irreparable Iranian/US relations....................granted it was a mistake(so they say........a wopper) Bush1, in his typical repugnant way refused to offer an apology to the Iranians............"the US doesnt apologize to anybody"..............and people wonder why we are so disliked as a nation and people?

My eyes REALLY aren't working this morning.

Howard's first.
Inept pollsters are last.
Frustrating Mainstream Media is horrible!
I called my local ABC affiliate today to complain about ads for the upcoming "Dance Wars" competition.
I find it appalling that they call this contest a "WAR".
Our children are fighting and dying in a real (if illegal and immoral) WAR in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I believe that calling a dance contest a "war" trivializes the word, and will only serve to make the TV watching public more immune to the horror of a this very real WAR.
I understand that a war against an idea is unwinnable (remember the war on poverty, the war on drugs?). But this country is at WAR, and our sons and daughters are DYING, not being out-danced. Yes, we need to end this war, but we also need to be sure that people don't become so accustomed to the word that they forget what it really means.
Jane

the upcoming "Dance Wars" competition.

It conjours up the image of a floor full of ballroom dancers all trying to kick, bite, and gouge each other as they do their lifts and twirls. 

Evolution played a cruel trick on humans -- it made us so smart that we became stupid.

great post, Jane - I totally agree.  thank you.

Now that Edwards has jumped into the 'remarks" fray against Hillary, it will interesting to see if our Edwardians follow his llead and begin piling onto her intead of Obabma

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

Now that Al From has declared victory for the DLC by whittling it down to their two candidates. I fail to see the distinction.

Hillary and Bill are liars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/us/pol...

This needs to be pointed out EVERYWHERE.

Now that Al From has declared victory for the DLC by whittling it down to their two candidates. I fail to see the distinction.

Thank the corrupt and manipulative nomination process which allows From and his ilk to do it.

And I'll remind you that just a few years ago Edwards was praising From and his ilk. 

Those that fail to see the corporatist control of DC and the war machine are destined to fight many more wars and not just the fake ones.

Edwards to his credit has opened his eyes.

Come to think of it, I don't remember Obama ever kissing up to From and the DLC. He even demanded that they remove his name from thier membership list. So maybe he isn't their candidate.

Edwards to his credit has opened his eyes

and seen the polls. 

Obama The Target of Dangerous Code Words

Obama had just beat Clinton --badly -- in Iowa. She is tired, defeated, maybe afraid.

At a New Hampshire coffee shop, a woman asked if she was OK. Clinton teared up, her voice quavered: "I have so many opportunities from this country, I just don't want to see us fall backward," she replied. "This is very personal for me -- it's not just political, it's not just public."

Listen to the words. "I just don't want to see us fall backward." Backward to what?

To that black man. That black man who beat Hillary. That black man who made the white woman cry.

White New Hampshire voters came to her rescue. Poor Hillary. Don't worry -- we will protect you. We will save you.

Our racial wounds are deep, their impact subliminal. Words have consequences. In these sensitive times, they can activate our most unconscious fears and tap the deepest recesses of our ugly history. Every black man in America knows it. Especially Barack Obama.

Listen to the words.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/washington/739385,CST-EDT-laura14.article

I truly believed we were above these tactics, seems I was naive.

I have to say thank you to John Edwards for his stance.  It would be easy for him to stay out of it and see where the pieces fall.

Obama The Target of Dangerous Code Words

I guess racist code words from Hillary are an improvement over calling Obama a crack dealer. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/14/politics/main3707428.shtml

SUMTER, S.C., Jan. 14, 2008

AP) Democrat John Edwards on Sunday waded into a dispute between his rivals, criticizing comments by Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband that some have considered disparaging to Barack Obama and black people generally.

"I must say I was troubled recently to see a suggestion that real change that came not through the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King but through a Washington politician. I fundamentally disagree with that," Edwards told more than 200 people gathered at a predominantly black Baptist church.

...

Sen. Hillary Clinton recently was quoted as saying King's dream of racial equality was realized only when President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, while Bill Clinton said Obama was telling a "fairy tale" about his opposition to the Iraq war. (Click here to read more.)

Edwards did not name either of the Clintons in his speech, but turned the argument back on them.

"Those who believe that real change starts with Washington politicians have been in Washington too long and are living a fairy tale," he said.

...

Edwards, ... "What the election is about is about building one America," he said.

John Edwards isn't going to stay out of questions of race, especially as they lead to a disparity of wealth and opportunity.

I was suggesting that Hillary had made such an outrageous remark that it was MLK but LBJ that had gotten us the Civil Rights Act, that that particular flap needed no further comment.

Was thinking about BIll Clinton's remark that Obama was a fairy tale.

I did not have sex with that woman - ???

I have to say thank you to John Edwards for his stance.  It would be easy for him to stay out of it and see where the pieces fall.

He's trying to push a tottering Hillary down and move into second -- his natural place in the scheme of things.

Edwards, ... "What the election is about is about building one America," he said.

Edwards must not have gotten the memo that his supporters have been attacking that idea coming from Obama.

21.

rae -

and don't forget Big Dog's "but I never inhaled"

Phil wrote "Now that Al From has declared victory for the DLC by whittling it down to their two candidates. I fail to see the distinction."

There is one.  If your powers of discernment are on a par with Al From's, best of luck to you.  You'll need it. 

I think the Clinton surrogates that Hillary is always *distancing* herself from (and some she isn't) is a problem. It shows what sort of campaign the Clintons are running. To me, another big problem is as the NY Times points out - she and Bill aren't being honest about this Iraq War Resolution. She went on MTP yesterday and claimed she voted on Chuck Hagel's resolution. In fact, his was scrapped by the White House. The resolution she voted on was much more fierce and authored by none other than Gephardt and Lieberman.

Edwards, ... "What the election is about is about building one America," he said.

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

Edwards has had that theme for six years that I know of, but I think it might take more than one election to accomplish. maybe even more than one generation

I think Al Gore might be ahead of the curve seeing the challenge as being building one world. 

Just breezing over some really good comments from the overnight crowd last night.

A blogger from the Obama website wrote: with hillary we have a nation divided ...  

That ought to become a slogan from the Obama and Edwards campaigns.

JIM HIGHTOWER ON OUR TREPID DEMOCRATS

http://www.alternet.org/story/72875/

What I am hearing from across the country is a surge of angst and discouragement. In conversations, calls, emails, and letters, people in general (and progressives in particular) are expressing profound dismay at the deterioration of America's democracy, not only because of the BushCheney regime, but also, and especially, because of the fecklessness of the Democratic Congress.

The damage now being done to America's political psyche by the Democrats' fizzle is way out of the ordinary. These writers are smart, engaged, committed people who are not easily surprised or discouraged by negative political developments. They constitute the grassroots base of progressive activism in our country, and it is truly worrisome that even they are becoming dispirited -- especially as we head into a watershed election year.

The capitulation Congress

It is not some vague funk that's afflicting the public, not some general ennui caused by seven years of Bushdom. Rather, it's a growing despair -- and a rising national embarrassment -- brought on by an ongoing series of specific, disheartening collapses by Democrats, who are turning out to be weaker than Canadian hot sauce.

Maybe they think that people aren't noticing this. Maybe they hope that since Bush & Buckshot are so awful, Congress will get a pass. Indeed, Bush's job-approval rating is now down to an all-time low of 24% in the latest Zogby poll. But get ready for a shock, Dems-Congress's job-approval rating is 11%. Eleven! Even among Democrats, the approval rating is a mere 14%. Tellingly, only 10% of union members and 8% of liberals give Congress a positive job-performance score.

AND THEY STILL EXPECT TO WIN NEXT NOVEMBER!

Clinton is from the Lieberman/Gephardt wing of the party and that is why she never apologized for her vote. I give her credit for being honest in that detail she got the war she voted for. She just voted again for Kyl/Lieberman and will get the next one too

MORE UPBEAT STUFF FROM JIM KUNSTLER

http://www.kunstler.com/

The dark tunnel that the US economy has entered began to look more and more like a black hole last week, sucking in lives, fortunes, and prospects behind a Potemkin facade of orderly retreat put up by anyone in authority with a story to tell or an interest to protect -- Fed chairman Bernanke, CNBC, The New York Times, the Bank of America.... Events are now moving ahead of anything that personalities can do to control them.

The "housing bubble" implosion is broadly misunderstood. It's not just the collapse of a market for a particular kind of commodity, it's the end of the suburban pattern itself, the way of life it represents, and the entire economy connected with it. It's the crack up of the system that America has invested most of its wealth in since 1950. It's perhaps most tragic that the mis-investments only accelerated as the system reached its end, but it seems to be nature's way that waves crest just before they break.

This wave is breaking into a sea-wall of disbelief. Nobody gets it. The psychological investment in what we think of as American reality is too great. The mainstream media doesn't get it, and they can't report it coherently. None of the candidates for president has begun to articulate an understanding of what we face: the suburban living arrangement is an experiment that has entered failure mode.

funny things with the blog.  I've lost the blue sides again.

Anyway, my take on the race kerfuffle is that the Clinton's are trying with all their might to distract from the Iraq war issue.  The piece in the New York Times had to have been announced to them, since there's a comment from the campaign.

The truth still is that the invasion plans and siting of Air Bases in Iraq were planned during Clinton/Gore and Bill held off giving the go-ahead and relied on his negotiating skills.  Bush Two came in and said "f... that" and sent them into Kuwait to prepare for the invasion and Hillary, perhaps out of pique with her dilly-dallying spouse, went along full-tilt and now regrets it.   And Bill feels guilty and doesn't have the guts to admit that he fluffed it.

That putting U.S. Air Bases in Southwest Asia was just as bad an idea as putting them in Southeast Asia is unacceptable--even though some people in the Pentagon seem to have seen the light.  Which is why you have the Air Force General Dunlop writing an op-ed offering support for more big guns in exchange for the Air Force pipe dream. 

The capitulation Congress

Capitulation is just a cover for collaboration. 

I see the Latino endorsement of Obama as a positive development especially if McCain gets their nomination as one of the sponsors of immigration reform

I was just reading the Jim Hightower column John quoted from when he cited it.  Here's more:

"There is a solid core of progressives in Congress -- roughly 72 in the House and 10 in the Senate -- and they are battling the bastards every day, as well as cajoling, haranguing, begging, confronting, and otherwise pushing the leadership and the old guard of the Democratic caucus to stand with the people. These members are making a tremendous fight inside the system. In the House, for example, there's the unstinting, determined antiwar effort of Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey, the unrelenting investigative work of Henry Waxman, the insistent pressure by Jan Schakowsky to stop the outsourcing of military functions to private contractors, and the general inside work of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

"The bad news is that practically no one outside Washington knows about these legislators' inside work. Nor are we outsiders connected to (much less enlisted in) their insider efforts.

The public invisibility of most progressive lawmakers is a failure of America's conglomerated, celebrity-riveted media, of course, but it's also a glaring failure of the progressive movement's strategy. The focus of these stalwart Congress members and the Washington organizations that surround and support them is locked on the inside fight. Simply put, they don't play to the outside.

" . . . .

"Rather than thinking of themselves as lone rangers fighting in Washington on our behalf, congressional progressives need to act like leaders of a mass movement, mobilizing and targeting us to be ground troops in a fight that belongs not just to them but to all of us.

"This collaborative approach has proven highly effective in the past. As a young antiwar activist in 1970, I was part of one such outside-in effort. Sen. George McGovern and Rep. Al Lowenstein created the Committee for a Vote on the War, headquartered in two townhouses on Capitol Hill. I was among the staffers whose job was to coordinate grassroots war opposition with the legislative actions of anti-Vietnam lawmakers. The insiders and leading outsiders jointly developed strategy, with a steady flow of information, vote checks, and action items going both ways. The local forces could not only move at a moment's notice to approach a targeted lawmaker, but they could also deploy members of Congress out to the hustings to bring information, rally the forces, generate media coverage, and unify the effort.

"I don't know how to recreate something like this, but I believe it must happen. We can't have a successful progressive movement if our elected officials are disjoined from the movement."

the suburban living arrangement is an experiment that has entered failure mode

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

runamuck developers certainly

AND THE GOOD NEWS IS............

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080113_the_end_of_the_road_for_george_w_bush/

The Gilbert and Sullivan charade of statesmanship played out by George W. Bush and his enabler, Condoleezza Rice, as they wander the Middle East is a fitting end to seven years of misrule.  Despots stripped of power are transformed from monsters into buffoons.  And this is the metamorphosis that is eating away at the Bush presidency. 

Bush stood in Jerusalem, uncomfortable and palpably bored.  He mouthed platitudes about a peace settlement that mocked the humanitarian crisis he aided and abetted in Gaza, the rapacious land grab by Israel in the West Bank and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  The diminished George Bush, increasingly irrelevant at home and abroad, is fading into insignificance.  A year from now one half expects to see him stand up at the next president’s inauguration and screech “I’m melting!  I’m melting!” as he sinks into a puddle of slime.  He will return, I expect, to his ranch, where he will be able to spend the rest of his life doing the only task for which he has shown any aptitude—cutting down brush with a chain saw. 

35. Thanks for posting the rest of the Hightower essay Tom. The progressive minority of Democrats certainly are doing their best.

from the Obama '08 website:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/CVW7#comments

The choice is this - vote for Barack Obama or be stuck with the Clinton's or worse yet another Republican White House for the next 4 to 8 years.   Period.   That is the choice.   I have watched the people on this blog discuss for a year Dean and Gore and Kucinich and Edwards.  They are not going to win.   Does it not make sense to anyone here to rally behind the one candidate that can beat Hillary Cltinon, that can beat any of the Republican candidates ?   No wonder Democrats have lost the last 2 elections.   Honestly, this is frustrating to read.  

Real ID: From "No Fly" to "No Drive" Lists?

Truth News | January 14, 2008
Kurt Nimmo

ABC breaks the ice for us: in the future, and not too far into it, the process of getting and renewing a driver's license will become more difficult, stressful, and fraught with all manner of unnecessary nonsense supposedly designed to protect us from terrorists, or rather CIA patsies paraded about to frighten us into submission, and as well prevent illegals from taking to the roads, never mind Alaska, Connecticut, Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Washington and West Virginia allow illegals to hold a license, thus demonstrating the above is little more than a threadbare excuse.

Of course, when the rubber meets the road, we discern the real reason � a national ID, complete with RFID and possibly biometrics, is all about easing us into the control grid.

According to apparatchik Michael Chertoff and the commissariat of Homeland Security, the whole affair is a matter of national security. "We are now over six years from 9/11," Chertoff impatiently declared, "we live every day with the problems of false identification. Simply kicking this problem down the road year after year after year for further discussion, further debate and analysis is a time-tested Washington way of smothering any proposal with process."

In other words, never mind that most people oppose Real ID and civil libertarians warn of vexing abuse, Chertoff and the neocons are itching to get us all in lumbering databases, the next step in a plan that will ultimately result in the chipping of the population at large.

"I think the time has come to bite the bullet," Chertoff continued, "and get the kind of secure identification I am convinced the American public wants to have," or rather the government tells them they must have, as most people hate the idea and eighteen states have passed legislation rejecting the law and Congress has refused to put any money into implementing it.

The choice is this - vote for Barack Obama or be stuck with the Clinton's or worse yet another Republican White House for the next 4 to 8 years.   Period.   That is the choice.   I have watched the people on this blog discuss for a year Dean and Gore and Kucinich and Edwards.  They are not going to win.   

...

+++

Julie -

Ummmh, Dean and Gore are not running.

We don't know yet if Edwards, especially, or Kucinich could pull off a win.

But I do get the gist of what you are saying -- CHANGE is never the easy road to take.

"Show me your papers"

once there is a requirement for an ID there is always probable cause to stop someone, next the checkpoints

ask Palestinians how that has worked out

do we have a good candidate running against senselessbrenner?

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

no offense Julie but if the Obama supporters got behind Edwards he wouldn't have any trouble defeating Clinton and the other Republicans either

As you probably know, I'm not much for movies, but the spouse watches them all the time.  And I can't help but see bits and pieces.  So, I suddenly remembered that he'd been watching a movie the other day in which the petition by MLK to LBJ to move forward with civil right legislation was covered.  The title of the movie, made for HBO by Frankenheimer is Path to War.

It's a movie, of course, and not fact, but the consultant on it was Michael Beschloss and he's got a good reputation as an historian.

In the part I saw, MLK made an elloquent plea to LBJ and the latter ended up tricking Wallace into asking for national guard troops to help implement the law.

I think the point I want to make is that the laws demanding equal service for black mandated behavior from the agents of government and the affirmative action requirements were put on governments to keep them from wiggling out of their obligations.  Many African Americans have been disappointed because they assumed that they were supposed to get some sort of preferential treatment, rather than just equal treatment.  Others, like Robert L. Johnson don't seem to understand that the law doesn't incorporate moral values as an imposition on individuals, but merely directs how the agents of government, at all levels, have to act. 

Obama won't get a majority of the delegates anytime soon with Edwards in the race, but neither will Clinton, and I for one think the more states that get to weigh in on the future direction of our Party and hence America the better.

on to the convention

"Ummmh, Dean and Gore are not running."   I know that.  This is my point exactly.  Some here were waiting for Gore to jump into the race until a short while ago.  We need to turn our attention to the current race and the current candidates.  There is only one candidate who can bring a new dynamic to American politics and a begin to repair our image around the world and that is Barack Obama.   If we divide up our vote we all lose.       

(repost from yesterday)

263.
Phil Specht
Sun, 01/13/08

Reply to this

Kerrey's remarks were pretty offensive.  Will the Hillary who has "found" herself rid her team of all the jerks?

+++

Phil -

In other words, the song "Who Let The Dogs Out" comes to mind.

Edwards (thank God) is not staying out of it.  He graciously has defended Obama by saying Obama's campaign is "no fairy tale". 

If Obama does not get to the dem nomination, for some reason, but yet Edwards is still in the running against H Clinton, my support is strongly behind Edwards.

no offense Julie but if the Obama supporters got behind Edwards he wouldn't have any trouble defeating Clinton and the other Republicans either

It would make more sense for Edwardiacs to get behind Obama in that regard. I mean, who jumps to the ship that's lower in the water and even looks like it's sinking?

40.

Exactly right Julie.

However, I recall that the same thing happened here in 2004 when many here said they would vote for Dean, who had already lost the nomination to Kerry, but they would not vote for Kerry.

To them it was a choice between Kerry or Nader and we know where that went wrong in Florida. Though Edwards' basically seems to support Obama, he is still vying for votes in SC. If he dropped out of the race, then his supporters may or may not support Obama. I would vote on the former -- they will support Obama. That could mean the end of the Clinton race -- or not:))

The Clinton lies and dirty tricks are not going to stop. They have learned much from the Republicans now to lie, cheat, win, and then ignore how you won and expect everyone else to forget it too, which they probably would.

This race is basically become one about honesty. Clinton is anything but honest. She is just another GWB in a skirt.

something is secure when it is either tied down or locked up. 

Yes, there are people who are convinced that the role of public officials is to control the populace.  These public officials need to be removed.  The role of the agents of government is to do the will of the people.

People do not want to waste their time showing documentation every time they turn around.

It's interesting that the airlines are supposed to be the enforcing mechanism.  people won't be able to get on commercial planes, if they don't show proper I.D.  The reason the airlines are being chosen is because, as private corporations, they are actually able to discriminate, as long as they don't do it to a "protected" category of people.  Just as they can require that you show a ticket, they can require an I.D.  Whether the T.S.A., a government agency, can enforce it on their behalf is another matter.  While it may be reasonable to check that people aren't carrying on weapons, I'm not sure that excluding people for not having an approved I.D. is going to work--i.e. be constitutional. 

And a brokered convention would be the Iowa caucuses all over again for you, what with politicians fawning all over you for your support -- while the rest of us get to watch and trust your impeccable honesty and judgement. 

Here's to hoping the people decide it before the convention and not the politicians and politicos decide it at the convention.

50.  they were already good at it in 1996.  Just ask Fred Thompson.

49.

sitka

It is the man, Obama, who is inspiring voters, not Edwards who is signing the same old song.

Edwards could easily be VP on an Obama ticket and make a good VP as well. Obama/Edwards would be an impossible duo for Repugs to overcome.

If Edwards dropped out of the race the full force of both the Republican and Clinton machines would be directed at one candidate Barack Obama and we would end up with the status quo whoever won the election because they would bring him down.

Who will keep the progressive agenda on the table if Obama has no pressure from the left?

55

Good Morning Phil,

Are you saying Obama has no chance?

Don't you think they would bring Edwards down as well?

Guess we will have another Republican.  Because I truly believe the Republicans are laying in wait for HRC.

Maybe Bloomberg or hopefully Al Gore will enter the race if it is HRC.

Remember to vote for Roy Carter for your DFA All-Star this week.

The man has earned it, I'll go into detail later.

p.s.

Make sure all your friends and loved ones do to.

All the best,

Mike Cooper 

Edwards could easily be VP on an Obama ticket and make a good VP as well.

Been there. Done that. It would be politically smarter for Obama to choose Hillary for VP since she has more supporters than Edwards, more money power too, and a big political and press machine.

Obama/Edwards have 44 delegates to Clinton's 24 it is right in the margin at the top right.

so does Edwards/Obama ... 44 to 24

as long is Edwards is in the race it will be close to two to one which is where a progressive majority in the party can keep it

as soon as Edwards is gone it is a 50/50 fight

you all are nuts if you think the Clinton machine with unlimited corporate support is going to roll over

but sure when it comes down to the 50/50 fight I expect the Obama backers to side with Edwards just like you expect us Edwards supporters to side with you now

may the best argument for the direction of America win  

Maybe Bloomberg or hopefully Al Gore will enter the race if it is HRC.

I've read that Bloomberg's more likely to if it's Obama. But pundits don't really know any more than we do. 

44

No offense Phil but why don't the Edwards supporters get behind Obama?

Obama will keep the progressive agenda on the table as president alot more than Hillary will.   If we allow Hillary to elected we're out of luck.  

Obama/Edwards would be a good combination to beat the Republican candidates.    

you all are nuts if you think the Clinton machine with unlimited corporate support is going to roll over

It isn't nice to call or imply your fellow blogger are nuts. Chalk it up to frustration. 

Julie Stipich
Mon, 01/14/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Julie,

The Dempcrats have lost the lost in 2004 primarily by the candidate they put up and a reluctant population..........even then it was close........one thing Ive learned about American politics, never give in or up.......remember Dean in 2004?  It sure looked like this guy was a shoe in for the nomination and Kerry was dead in the water..........yet dean lost and Kerry got the nod........

Now, Obama may win the nomination..........but I wont be surprised if either Hillary or edwards gets it..............

It isn't nice to call or imply your fellow blogger are nuts. Chalk it up to frustration. ___________________________________________________________________

Hmm...........hit F5 and refresh.............Edardiacs, Edwardians............yawn, move on to knock knock jokes........theyll get more laugh if thats the attention you are seeking.

If Edwards dropped out of the race the full force of both the Republican and Clinton machines would be directed at one candidate Barack Obama

The full force of the Clinton machine is directed at Obama. The GOP is still having to split their attacks between the two. Nobody is paying any attention to Edwards. 

What I am saying is that it is good for Barack Obama to have John Edwards in the race besides it being good for America, because it makes it much more difficult for Hillary Clinton to get to a majority of the Denver delegates.

John Edwards defeats all of the Republican candidates in national polls and he beat Clinton once and lost to her once.

If Barack Obama can't beat the both of them in South Carolina or Nevada he isn't as strong a candidate as you think, but Edwards pushing her into third in South Carolina would be a big help for Obama even if he had a long fight ahead to get the nomination from Edwards

Hmm...........hit F5 and refresh.............Edardiacs, Edwardians............

Some people have said they enjoy the pet names for various supporters.

Your opinion has been filed in the proper place......

No offense rae but why don't the Obama supporters get behind Edwards?

If Barack Obama can't beat the both of them in South Carolina or Nevada he isn't as strong a candidate as you think

True enough. But what will it say about Hillary, and especially Edwards, if they lose? 

why don't the Obama supporters get behind Edwards?

People don't jump on a band wagon without wheels. 

Do you think President Bush is fanning "Iranophobia"?Yes70%19799 No30%8593 Total Votes: 28392

Lol Phil, I love you.  I guess it is because each of us want our candidates to win. 

The Democrats had a very strong field to start this process and still do and I see no reason to let Iowans decide who the nominee will be, smart as they are. lol

let some of the March states have a say

Here's to hoping the people decide it before the convention and not the politicians and politicos decide it at the convention.

sound more  like a hellmary or a prayor! hoping isnt working we need action !we are under attack here>{

Hey Sitka would you please (if it  is no trouble) please repost the photo of you and your cat at the computer (I never saw photo) but would love to.  For some reason no photos will come up on the previous thread?  My computer is very very old.

I'm for keeping Edwards in the race as long as he and his supporters can feasible keep the CHANGE fight open.

I suspect that what Julie and rae are referring to, is that similar to what happened with Kucinich in Iowa seemingly backing Obama as second preference and now with Edwards backing Obama twice (once in the last debate in NH where he brought about forces of CHANGE [Obama and him he said] versus forces of  STATUS QUO [Clinton]and second this past weekend saying Obama campaign is "no fairy tale"), there's been a Lost In Translation to their respective Kucinich and Edwards supporters to likewise chime in support of Obama's campaign -- (doesn't mean that Obama is supposed to be those supporters first choice, just means we're all in this together).

Other that sometimes Phil and occassionally cChalfonte, I don't recall anybody else in the Kucinich and Edwards supporters' camps here say something positive about Obama (If I missed anyone, I apologize).

As for the neutrals, Sitka often and lesser-so Mike, have been complimentory towards the Obama message and campaign strategy. 

Phil Specht
Mon, 01/14/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dont worry..........its gonna end up Edwards..........somehow.  And sitka with the other Obama supporters will HAVE to vote for him on election day...................or else do the honourable thing..................

sound more  like a hellmary or a prayor! hoping isnt working we need action !we are under attack here>{

So I take it you aren't even bothering to hope Paul wins the GOP nomination? 

typo - can feasible    s/b - can feasibly

typo - Other that    s/b - Other than

I post a lot.

I'm pretty sure you can find fifty of my posts that are positive for Obama, rdorgan.

I have to post more positive Edwards ones just to balance out all the sitka drag

Sitka often and lesser-so Mike, have been complimentory towards the Obama message and campaign strategy.

I haven't been complimetary toward them -- just helping to shovel up the manure being dumped on him lately.

Repeal ID (sponsored by Future Sen., Tom Allen (D-ME)--go, Tom!

www.tomallen.org

Is your Rep. a cosponsor (32 @present)? Neither "bipartisan" Collins or Snowe support the Senate equivalent. Go figger.

H.R.1117
Title: To repeal title II of the REAL ID Act of 2005

http://tinyurl.com/36fopt

I don't think Mainers need to be concerned about thim pesky "Canuck" evildoer terrists (just summah complaints, who clog traffic & damage the roads/infrastructure).

"REAL ID, REAL OPPOSITION Lawmakers and others call the program too costly and a threat to privacy
Maine must sign up for a federal identification program by May 11 or its driver's licenses may not be usable for such activities as air travel."

http://tinyurl.com/ypm3np

Morning, Folks,

Apologies again, Seashell, am eating humble pie.

Just a thought. As I've reread the Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson comments by Hillary, I"m thinking maybe this is just more polemics and unfair politics.  From the words themselves, I don't see Dr. King being diminished at all.  It seems to me that Hillary was trying to say that it does take a President to effect those goals and principles that others have put forth.  That's simply true.

Dr. King wasn't a member of Congress.  It did take President Johnson and the Congress to make Civil Rights into law. I think it's more than likely that Clinton was trying to show that there has to be a partnership between public leaders and the President and Congress.

I have the sense that this gambit, if it was a gambit, isn't really very fair to Clinton.   

I have to post more positive Edwards ones just to balance out all the sitka drag

I only post about Edwards in response to the swill some post about him. So shutting me up is completely in your power.  

sp=Real ID.

Fuggetabout "collaborating" w/Rethugs.

Bang 'em upside the haid w/a two by four.

I post a lot.

I'm pretty sure you can find fifty of my posts that are positive for Obama, rdorgan.

...

+++

Phil -

I know you have been positive towards Obama.  I simply don't have a calculator next to me to keep count with all the ones you've posted (smile).

There isn't a National Holiday for Lyndon Johnson Pat.

I know you have been positive towards Obama.  I simply don't have a calculator next to me to keep count with all the ones you've posted (smile).

You have more than enough fingers. 

rd wrote "I don't recall anybody else in the Kucinich and Edwards supporters' camps here say something positive about Obama."

Indy does all the time, in between shots that he takes at him.  I think he's conflicted. 

I see that Huron John has succinctly brought up the subject of the sliding U.S. economy.  Thanks Huron.

Well, pundits are all saying that the U.S. economy is right up Hillary's alley and that if the election has this as the top concern on voters minds', this would mean that Hillary would beat any dem challenger candidate.

So, the floor is given to Edwards and Obama supporters, to research and indicate what are the economic planks of their two respective campaigns and how either of those two planks is superior to Hillary's.

Anyone ?

89.

Thanks Tom, yes Indy Steve too.

#86, True, Phil, but how has Clinton diminished Dr. King?  I think it was a pundit who came up with the characterization that Clinton was trying to show that a White President had been the reason we have a Civil Rights Law.  I jumped on that opinoin and pretty much agreed with it, but looking at her words again, I really don't think it's a given that she was doing that.

I guess my point is that it's so easy with opinons and interpretations all around us, 24/7 to take them as truth.  That's all. 

many people find the conservative side of Obama appealing, the man of deep faith who lives his Christian values, the conciliator, facilitator, humble man who puts concerns for healing above the tactical advantage of division

because this is a real part of who he is he is that rarity which is an authentic candidate

it is also the part of him which would let him drift to the right towards a more comfortable and less confrontational change agent that may end up compromising with the status quo

those of you that are more comfortable with the direction of our country or that path to change are certainly welcome to keep your own views

I'm simply one person who thinks we need to go further than half way, and will keep mine.

opinions, opinions, darn fingers.

* rdorgan
Mon, 01/14/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In baseball terms, I call em as I see em.............Obama is simply not going to win it..Im sorry.

91.

(sorry if I sound two much like a teacher, giving out an assignment [smile, or as the Brits say "you cheeky monkey"] but I'm currently writing a letter to the president of the Nevada State Education Association, aka teachers' union, indicating that I feel that if they bring a lawsuit in Nevada this week asking that nine polling stations on the casino strip be closed, that that would be disenfranchinsing a fellow union's [aka Culinary Union] members, largely Hispanic, from voting)

Phil wrote "many people find the conservative side of Obama appealing, the man of deep faith who lives his Christian values, the conciliator, facilitator, humble man who puts concerns for healing above the tactical advantage of division."

I personally don't give a shit about it, or about it's purported appeal, but I do know it's given emphasis way beyond proportion by people who who support other candidates, primarily Edwards' supporters.

* rdorgan
Mon, 01/14/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In baseball terms, I call em as I see em.............Obama is simply not going to win it..Im sorry.

+++

Mike -

In the 2004 playoffs, the Red Sox were 0-3 versus the Yankees.  It sure looked like Boston was going down to their New York competitors.

They didn't and ended up 4-3.

I don't give up so easily either.

So, the floor is given to Edwards and Obama supporters, to research and indicate what are the economic planks of their two respective campaigns and how either of those two planks is superior to Hillary's.

Well, from what I've heard, Obama wants to sit down and work with corporate America and Edwards wants to impale them on pitchforks. Obama's promise seems the more likely to actually be implemented.

They both propose irresponsible middle income tax cuts.

Obama is for hope and unity, but I can't tell whether Edwards is for or against it from listening to his supporters.

Edwards sounds greener. But then, there's that pesky record of his again.....

So it may come as a surprise that Edwards' lifetime voting record on the environment, determined by the League of Conservation Voters' scorecard, is 63 percent (that would be a D-) -- quite a bit lower than Kerry's 92 percent, one of the highest records in Senate history.

I thought Clinton gave equivalence to LBJ and King, Pat.

there was none or we would have a joint Holiday, and I do think it was a direct interjection of race into the campaign, where there had been none

to Obama's credit he didn't take the bait

If anyone is interested - Keith Olbermann has a diary up over at Daily Kos. Don't have time to link though. check it out...

Mike wrote "Obama is simply not going to win it..Im sorry."

No, you just said Edwards is.  We all appreciate that you've publicized your prediction before the actual event, in contrast to your record of nearly flawless forecasts regarding presidential elections that have already taken place.

#86, True, Phil, but how has Clinton diminished Dr. King?

...

+++

Pat -

It's a long-tested pattern out of the Clinton (aka republican handbook) -- rinse and repeat.  Hillary recently stated to a group of gathered African American reporters, etc. that she's in an interracial marriage.

[insert, cricket sound]

She then moved onto something else but this is the pattern with her and Bill -- I'm one of you, America already has had a black president, what's the big deal ?, but a woman president ?, now that would be somthing new, is their thinking about what they want to tell Americans.

See the big picture ?  IMO Hillary and Bill use African Americans like props but their main goal is to stay in power (kind of like Russia's Vladimir Putin) at all costs. 

Obama is inspiring but Edwards is not.  To who?  To you?  Then I expect you to vote for him.  Although I respect Obama's oratorical abilities, I don't find his campaign inspiring.   He will not get my vote (in the primary).

Hillary was a Goldwater Girl and therefore must be a conservative Republican, because she was then and we know people never change over time. 

Let's let the primary season play out and see what happens.  Trying to get candidates to drop out and support whoever your choice is just plays into those who want to control our choices.  Certainly during the primaries and caucuses.  There may be a time when one candidate has an insumountable lead, and it may be time to suspend campaigning, but that time isn't now. 

I find candidates who find a need to suck up to the "believers" vote distrubing in a nation where, by the Constitution, there is no religious test for office.  That's true if they are Democrats or Republicans.

#99, That was the interpretation I took also, Phil, but rereading the words, I don't see that.  I guess this is where interpretation comes in and how crucial it is in making up our minds about issues and candidates. 

I remember a professor a long time ago who said that you can't argue interpretation.  I had never thought of it that way before, but I think he was absolutely right.  It's a little like arguing which color is best blue or yellow or which ice cream flavor is best,  you just can't prove it.

I look to the words, but I don't really see the evidence for the interpretation that she was diminishing Dr. King.

By the way, that doesn't mean that I like the Clintons' politics.  I don't like her policies at all. 

Tom I do canvass, go door to door ,and talk to people about political choices all the time, and do know that Obama won in Iowa more because of who he is than what his positions are.

hey all - nice big list of grassroots all-star candidates are up - let's not forget about them in all this presidential hubub:

http://democracyforamerica.com/gras

LBJ (along w/RFK & JFK) dragged their feet w/African Americans, folks.

King was also not terribly cooperative in advocating for folks like Fammie Lou Hamer (my fav feminist, BTW).

LBJ only signed it the week after King's funeral.

King had finally spoken out about Viet Nam--pissed off Johnson...let Hoover finally move in on him in retaliation (FBI), etc.

Johnson didn't appreciate African Americans being beaten/hosed appearing on national TV--nor of Fanny Lou Hamer's ripping the MS delegation a new one....

http://tinyurl.com/2uz4gt

Billary can't possibly be that ignorant about that era.

Read Fanny Lou's oral history interview (intersection of gender & race--toss in class, also).

http://tinyurl.com/yozock

[...]

"Hamer: President Lyndon Baines Johnson. I've got a book somewhere here on it. But it was somebody very close that knew what was going on that said he said, "Take them cameras off"--see because, I found out after then women and men from over the country wept when I was testifying--because when I testified, I was crying too. But anyway after that time I think the president became very angry, especially with the black delegation, and a lot of the stuff they covered up. But we've been victimized so much that we didn't watch what was going on. So, they carried me to one meeting and at this meeting they told me if we didn't compromise for the two votes-at-large, that the vice president --see, Johnson had put Humphrey on the spot and told him that if he couldn't calm us down then he wouldn't let him be his running mate for vice president. This is the kind of politics we were exposed to. Then they had a big meeting of everybody else except us in Mississippi and just decided they were going to tell us what to do. And when we came back to this church, at this meeting at this church, they were saying what Dr. King, James Foreman, Roy Wilkins, and it was other big people, and Senator Humphrey."

[....]

#105, I agree with the pattern, rdorgan, and I find the idea that we've already had a black president distasteful and pandering.

I'm still bothered though by Obama being characterized as a black man.  He's biracial. That old shibboleth that if you had one drop of African blood you were Black seems so racist to me.  

I'm a descendent of Irish, Scots, German, French, and maybe Native American (they always denied it.), and if I'm described as Irish in my forebears, then isn't there something wrong in that? 

Clinton keeps insisting that 'Obama's campaign' is playing the race card when they have actually tried very hard to stay out of this conversation.  I would find her more 'innocent', perhaps, if she wasn't trying so hard to keep the story going and lay the blame on Obama.

Mike wrote "Obama is simply not going to win it..Im sorry."

Mike thinks he owns the one Ouiji board that actually works. 

# 110, Mainefem,

Very interesting, glad to read it. 

rich wrote "Although I respect Obama's oratorical abilities, I don't find his campaign inspiring.   He will not get my vote (in the primary)."

As I've written previously, this is a function of former Dean supporters who have failed to recognize the identity in character between Dean's former campaign and Obama's current one.  The failure may or may be intentional or inadvertent, but it's nonetheless real.

Dean's former opponent is getting your vote.  He couldn't before, but he hadn't yet apologized for his abysmal record in the Senate at that time, so there wasn't a need then to simply act like it didn't exist.

Hillary was a Goldwater Girl

You can take the Girl out of the Goldwater, but you can't take the Goldwater out of the Girl. 

84.  Bringing up Lyndon Johnson forty years later is a gratuitous distraction.  The point?  Who knows?

All I know is that HRC is no LBJ.  And the "great leader" role doesn't really suit her, since she's always following someone around.

I am particularly irked by the phrase "results oriented leadership" that they put in R.L. Johnson's mouth, since that's an idea they stole from Dodd. 

Obama won in Iowa more because of who he is than what his positions are. 

I'm afraid those who think that way are always the ultimate deciders of our elections. 

sp=Sorry, Fannie.

Phil wrote "Tom I do canvass, go door to door ,and talk to people about political choices all the time, and do know that Obama won in Iowa more because of who he is than what his positions are."

I believe you do, and suspect the possibility that you're correct.  My specific comment was that Obama's reputation as a political conciliator, much like Dean's as as a Vermont governor, stems from a technique he uses to get laws passed, and that it's commonly blown out of proportion as some driving force or central aspect of his candidacy.

94.  Hillary was no doubt trying to assert that it takes great leaders to get things done.  It's the same attitude she's taken on the "cap and trade" vs. the carbon tax issue.  SHE knows better what needs to be done.

Perhaps when she went to law school they forgot the course on "agency." 

rich wrote: "I find candidates who find a need to suck up to the 'believers' vote distrubing in a nation where, by the Constitution, there is no religious test for office."

Disturbing at least to the extent it isn't applied to Edwards own efforts in that regard, evidently.

112.

Pat -

Indeed.

Well, it's not just AA's in SC, it's also hispanics in NV.  Here's a letter I just wrote to the president of  the teacher's union in NV (endorsed Hillary's campaign), in regards to their pending lawsuit against polling stations, which would disproportionately disenfranchise nv's Culinary Workers Union (endorsed Obama's campaign -- large population of hispanic members in the CWU):

Dear Ms Lynn Warne –

My younger brother in Connecticut is a high school teacher.  I’ve come to learn to admire and appreciate all the hard work that teachers perform, through seeing the work that he sets out to and accomplishes every day.

New Thread: http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/23532#comments

I am particularly irked by the phrase "results oriented leadership"

What results is Hillary talking about? Her failed health insurance plan that brought down the Democratic Party in 1992? Her vote for Bush's 2001 Bankruptcy revision -- NCLB -- Patiriot Act -- Iraq invasion.

Like Edwards, she has a record that belies her rhetoric.

oops, draft was posted in # 123, the correct letter has typo - release that "we...  corrected to - realize that "we...

#123

Thanks, rdorgan.  A good letter, important.

I watched the rerun of Bill Maher last night and saw his consternation at what the writers' union is doing.  Frankly, unions need to reform also.  When they don't look at the big picture, they are not doing their job either. 

You're welcome, Pat.

Fannie was illiterate, but she did participate in some oral histories in later years...thankfully.

She had no issues surrounding "voice" (unlike idiotic Billary, who claims to just recently found hers in New Hampstuuh).

:::wink:::

The MS "Loyalist" Democratic party started as a rendition of today's DLC--they did *not* want Fannie's Democratic Freedom Party to be seated at the convention...nada.

All that upper crust so-called "feminist" Wellesley education wasted on Billary. Spare me.

[...]

"Hamer: You know it wasn't nothing, and that's the beginning of my learning of politics. Now, I learned politics at its fullest--well, that's where politics was in 1964 in Atlantic City, New Jersey. I will never forget what they put us through. You see, by me being a Mississippi housewife and never exposed to politics, or nothing else too much, because I was just a housewife, a farmer, and they couldn't understand why that we had to--we didn't feel like that we had to take other people's word. So, they first began to kind of drill us on this when they told us, you know, that Dr. King--now Dr. King, this was funny, too, because at first he had said that what we were doing was right and he'd help us carry it out. But it began to be pressure brought about on different people, you know. Like President Johnson, I would hear them talking about all of this big funeral of his, but I'll never forget him either. Because the time [that] I was testifying, it was a man there, very close, that told me that he said to get--told them people with the cameras "to get that goddamn television off them niggers from Mississippi" and put it back on the convention, because, see, the world was hearing too much."

[...]

*Tell it*, Fannie!

127

no problem, pat

fyi - new Front thread

Since LBJ's act did create the reality of the electoral map known as the "red states" when white racists jumped to the Republican Party (where did Reagan start his campaign?), I think that it is as good a starting point as any for a historical discussion of how our present state of political affairs came to be. When you are "against" government you are "against" the federal government enforcing civil rights laws.

Of course it is to Clinton's advantage to be the one to interject race and paint Obama as the best black candidate, rather than just the candidate who he is. The problem for Clinton is that the war party candidate Lyndon Johnson wouldn't have won in 1968, and there aren't very many states she would carry that he wouldn't have.

Race didn't matter in Iowa and it would be good to know that we as a nation have moved on; this little kerfluffle shows that we are not quite there yet.

Obama won in Iowa more because of who he is than what his positions are. 

positions may change as cicumstances arise - who he is appears, to me, to be a big factor in how one deals with those circumstances.  Obama is thoughtful - he listens well and does not appear to make rash decisions.  that's important to me.