Home » Blog » NOW SHAME ON MSNBC CABLE NEWS!
Blog for America
NOW SHAME ON MSNBC CABLE NEWS!
Linked to groups: Kingston Democracy for America
I was disappointed last week when ABC excluded a number of the Democratic candidates in the New Hampshire debate. Likewise, FOX cable news did the same with a number of the Republican candidates in a scheduled debate on its channel. Tonight, I regret to say, I'm equally disappointed with MSNBC cable news for not allowing (D) Rep Dennis Kucinich to participate in tonight's debate in Nevada.
Rep. Kucinich has been the winner in most of the on line Internet elections various progressive groups have held. But MSNBC decided to exclude him. Unlike ABC and FOX cable news, I was hoping MSNBC cable news would set the right example, and allow Kucinich to participate. The MSM has too much clout with these policies of exclusion. The American people shouldn't have the candidate field reduced down to who the MSM feels are the front runners.
The general election is still ten months away! More candidates participating means more opinions and views, more ideas, and more choices for the American voter. This only better serves a Democracy and its election process . Lets be real here. If the lower polled candidates aren't getting equal air time, it puts them at a major disadvantage. We want the American political process to be Free and "Fair". By being excluded, the process hasn't been fair to many of the candidates.
Jeff Morris-Saugerties, N.Y.- DeJaVu57
According to the exit polls, African-Americans voted over70% for uncommitted. It could spell trouble for HC in South Carolinia.
I choose Dean! Both of 'em. And Judy too.
The GOP wants to destroy government, but Dems want the people, or call it society, to have their voice reflected in government..
Good post, Jeff - I agree. I enjoy listening to Dennis.
ooohhh.....good one Paine
shame on this blog for string people along making them think they have a true choice its all about power the dems don't want to give up all that cash and power the repugs are the same way! dfa dances around the real truth why dont you talk about real facts. why is the dollar in in the toilet why the dems wont stop the war why we dont have are freedom of speech why do we have open borders, why does all the dems support the war? why? dfa why? please tell us no you wont! why because you are feeding off of the america people too. lies, its all for nothing the country is dead, democracy where is it? change your name dfa you suck if you were for democracy you would have said something about fox cutting out ron paul from the debate but now its a dem so you speak up to late we all see it.
Imn2Paine
Tue, 01/15/08
Reply to this
The GOP wants to destroy government, but Dems want the people, or call it society, to have their voice reflected in government.. lol do you have anymore jokes you could do stand-up!i al lmost fell out of my chair grow up paine greenhorn
DANIEL ROONEY,
you are under the influence of a very powerful drug: thinking. Please, realize that tomorrow will seem different fro today, and this is a life lesson.
BFA is not an ideal. Or, better said, it is not your ideal. BFA is a dance. There are no borders/boundries (none but the gal/guy next to you). Let it be what it will: pregnant chaos.
The GOP wants to destroy government, but Dems want the people, or call it society, to have their voice reflected in government..
Wrong on both counts. The GOP, and about half the DCDems, want government to serve corporate interests and funnel taxpayers' dollars to them.
The whole "eliminate government" thing is a scam to attaract votes, just as universal heath insurance has been for Democrats since it was put into their platform in 1948.
LOL...Captain Hook. I thought Tinkerbell myself
bfa what does that stand for bad for america? i though it was dfa?
BFA is not an ideal. Or, better said, it is not your ideal. BFA is a dance. There are no borders/boundries (none but the gal/guy next to you). Let it be what it will: pregnant chaos.
That should be in a banner at the top of the page.
How can a BLOG be bad FOR AMERICA?
Did Hillary cry -- or talk about about how personally hurt she is that anyone would think she meant for her surrogates to smear Obama?
15.
Sitka
Tue, 01/15/08 ditto there hope for some here!
If you've finally read a post other than your own, maybe there is!
I only seen half of the debate and now that it's over, it looks like a draw.
Imn2Paine
Tue, 01/15/08
Reply to this
DANIEL ROONEY,
you are under the influence of a very powerful drug: thinking. Please, realize that tomorrow will seem different fro today, and this is a life lesson. you all dont have a clue what the hell is going on in this country.....................!
Tweety is gushing over HC. I think his blood sugar might be low.
Barack and Hillary still signing autographs. John must have had a plane to catch.
Don't go to the tables John, they'll just take your money. Bet max on the penny slots.
Sitka
Tue, 01/15/08
Reply to this
15.
Sitka
Tue, 01/15/08 ditto there hope for some here!
If you've finally read a post other than your own, maybe there is!
why waste my time its all bull shit all you want to do is cut people down if you think being on this blog is going to change things your right were you need to be.
if you think being on this blog is going to change things your right were you need to be.
That must surely explain what you think you're doing here too.
Barack and Hillary still signing autographs. John must have had a plane to catch.
Or no one asked.
Okay - did Tweety watch a different debate than all of us. I thought Barack and John did well. Hillary was still raising her voice saying *I, I, I*. Sheesh. I hope this won't be the narrative of all the pundits.
Sitka
Tue, 01/15/08
Reply to this
if you think being on this blog is going to change things your right were you need to be.
That must surely explain what you think you're doing here too. some body need to save your your sorry asses it plan as day you cant>}
Daniel Taylor
Old World Thinker News
January 9, 2008
The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values.”
- Zbigniew Brzezinsky, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era
As the world moves toward world governance in a new globalized era, technologies that enable extended life spans, and technologically augmented abilities are being developed. These upgrades for the human body come at a high cost, and are unattainable for a large number of people, causing additional societal conflict and the rise of new aristocratic classes defined by their level of "enhancement". Diseases are mostly eradicated among elites, while a large percentage of the population is left still vulnerable. A high tech overlay of sensors and monitoring devices tracks workers activities. Their heart rates, facial expressions, and overall state are monitored to maintain maximum efficiency. Supercomputers run Sentient World Simulation software designed to enable testing of efficient social management and psychological operations against the population in a virtual world. Artificial Intelligence makes health, political and educational decisions that were once made by human beings. Advancing technology offers miraculous cures, while opening doorways to new forms of tyranny and manipulation unimaginable in the past.
In the hands of a hubris filled, power hungry elite who exercise control over world affairs, advancing technology presents disturbing possibilities. When examining these developments in technology, human nature, and the nature of power are vitally important aspects that must be considered. Utopian ideas are one of the ideologies fueling both trends to world governance and advancing technology. Will these trends benefit the average man, woman and child as we are told they will? Or, will a New World Order be constructed solely for the benefit of a tiny elite? History tells us that the latter is most likely.
Go to Media Matters, Tweety as he is called, is being accused of being a sexist and too hard on Clinton. Guess that is why is he gushing over Clinton, because I truly believe it was her worst debate.
To me the best moment of the debate was when Hillary wouldn't back down on her fear mongering comments in NH. Barack talked about the politics of fear that got us into the war in Iraq. It was good.
Another good one was the Energy Bill - John Edwards mentioned that they (big oil) were all donors to her campaign. LOL
Missy Comely Beattie
Counterpunch
January 6, 2008
Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh recently said that Barack Obama is our "only hope" to "lead a reconciliation between the Muslim countries and the US." Why? Because Obama’s father was a Muslim.
I simply don’t follow Hersh’s logic here. Seems to me the actions of a president are more important than some familial affiliation with a particular religion-not to mention that candidate Obama has aligned himself with Israel.
These are some of Obama’s comments during a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC):
"Our job is to rebuild the road to real peace and lasting security throughout the region, "Our job is to do more than lay out another road map."
"That effort begins with a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel: Our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. "That will always be my starting point."
And calling for sustained military support to Israel, Obama said: "We must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs."
For Barack Obama to say that "our job is to lay out another road map" for peace while we are providing military support to Israel as the country launches attacks on Palestinians is hypocrisy. There is more than a conflict of interest for the US to go to the table, act as peace brokers, and make demands. But, then, that is what we do as self-appointed police officers to the world. We decry the violence in Kenya. Condi Rice has just made a statement that it must stop. But the violence perpetrated on the Iraqi and Afghan populations by her boss’s policies continues without end. Our violence is good violence. Anyone else’s is barbaric.
It matters little to me that Barack Obama says he was against invading Iraq. After all, he votes to continue funding it. If this presidential candidate wanted to mend relations with Muslims, he could start by voting against additional war funding.
And he could say no to AIPAC-but this would be political suicide
Michael Carmichael
Global Research
January 14, 2008
The mainstream Italian media are reporting both the rigging of the New Hampshire primary for Senator Hillary Clinton and the official demands for a swift, accurate and impartial recount. In an article written by Marcello Foa, one of Europe’s most respected journalists, it appears that vote tallies for all Democratic candidates as well as Republicans were reduced by Diebold vote-counting machines.
In an analysis of the hand-counted ballots, the influential Milanese newspaper — Il Giornale, reports that all Democratic candidates except Senator Hillary Clinton made gains when the New Hampshire ballots were manually tabulated, while Senator Clinton made inexplicably large gains where ballots were tabulated by computerized scanners.
According to the report, Ron Paul should have finished third in the Republican primary rather than fifth. Thus, it would appear that both Barack Obama and Ron Paul were the primary targets of vote-rigging operations in New Hampshire.
Il Giornale cites the Princeton study that alerted public attention to the vulnerability of computerized voting machines used throughout America to deliberate vote-tampering and election-rigging via manipulation of the memory cards.
The state of New Hampshire is equipped with computerized tabulation machines manufactured by Diebold, devices that have received a massive amount of negative publicity after the public awareness of vote-rigging surged dramatically following the presidential election scandal of 2000.
In previous statements, former President Jimmy Carter — who has a global reputation as one of the foremost authorities on election procedures — has frequently pointed out that the United States of America does not meet international criteria for electoral security.
Hi Folks,
Off to snooze land, but I thought all three did very well. John Edwards' passion for middle class people came through. I had a sense of why so many support him. He speaks from the heart, used the word, personal many times.
Hillary came across as tough and knowledgeable, somebody many wouldn't want to tangle with.
Obama came across, in my opinion, as nuanced, very reasonable, articulate, seeing perspectives that others didn't.
For me, Obama seems to have the finer intelligence, the mind that has the greatest breadth, but frankly, all the candidates are talented, committed, and very capable and each one of them seems to me to be able to begin the repair work that will be necessary when this, (I have so many names for Bush, just fill in your favorite) leaves office.
It was a good up close and personal look at the candidates, and I'd bet that it didn't change many people's minds about the one candidate they preferred. Rather, it probably reinforced that preference.
I loved it when Obama said he had an extraordinary wife and *above average* children (Garrison Keillor reference). Probably missed by quite a few people though.
Hey Trippi got a new suitcoat!
Huffpo's headlines:
Obama Admits Lack Of Bureaucratic Skills, Clinton Compares Him To Bush ... Obama Asked About Muslim Smears ... Kucinich Nixed ... Major Vegas Paper To Endorse Obama ... New Polls Show Virtual T
Tweety cat just shows what is wrong...the candidate supports getting in the mix.
Tweety just does a dog and pony show.
Bread and circus.
Romney is the most dangerous one of the bunch to liberty, I'd have just as soon see McCain knock him out for good today You think we have it bad under Bush wait until a few years of Romney.
There are a majority of counties using unverifiable election machinery.
49. Phil - My husband agrees with your comments about Romney. I was hoping McCain would win. Put him next to Obama or Edwards. It's a beautiful picture!!! ;-)
Sitka - I never heard Obama say such a thing -- really lame. Wrong headline. What an uphill battle - going against the Clinton slime machine. She's happy now -- the damage has been done.
My hope is that Obama or Edwards win Nevada and SC.
17. LOL!
I should add that Chuck Todd seemed to give a more level-headed recap of the debate. Tweety is just an idiot. Good grief.
John Edwards' passion for middle class people came through.
Especially when he voted to make bankruptcy harder, to make their kids schools worse, to tap their phones, and to send their sons and daughters to Iraq.
I guess that means Hillary also has passion for the middle class since she voted for all that too.
any vote totals for Dennis tonight from MI? how did he do?
Mitt Romney would not have been re-elected had he run again for the governorship in Massachusetts.
And THAT is the unreported fact, which the nation needs to know.
He lost in NH, because WE in N.E. don't like his squishy penny-loafers.
It just comes down to trust, and with Mitt...you have to read the fine print.
BUT, I know a Marine/Republican who will vote for Mitt just so that Mitt keeps going and WASTING his money.
Sitka - I never heard Obama say such a thing -- really lame.
I was comparing headlines and pointing out that how they're worded makes a difference in how they're perceived.....
but here's what he actually said......
"I have a pretty good sense of my strengths and my weaknesses. I am very good at teasing out from people who are smarter than me what the issues are and how we resolve them. I don’t think there is anybody in this race ...
... who can inspire the American people better than I can.... But I'm not an operating officer. Some in this debate around experience seem to think the job of the president is to go in and run some bureaucracy. Well, that's not my job. My job is to set a vision of "here's where the bureaucracy needs to go.' "
<>Apology accepted.
"Romney is the most dangerous one of the bunch to liberty,..."
I've always thought so as well, Phil. Also the most dangerous in that he "appears" less looney than Huckabee on the religious wacko scale...got the tall, handsome image. People will want to like him.
Our toughest adversary of the bunch, imo.
There are three candidates with large enough support to fight all the way to the convention and that is where which two pair up really counts. If Edwards doesn't win he will determine who does.
don't bet on Hillary just yet Chris
From the Detroit Free Press, Phil
President - Dem Primary
Michigan - 5079 of 5385 Precincts Reporting - 94%
Name Party Votes Vote %
Clinton , Hillary Dem 304,713 55%
Uncommitted Dem 218,390 40%
Kucinich , Dennis Dem 20,628 4%
Dodd , Chris Dem 3,598 1%
Gravel , Mike Dem 2,245 0%
Good on Obama. We don't need a bureaucrat...we need leadership....though I think he'd be more of an incrementalist than a "big vision" guy. mho.
My hope is that Obama or Edwards win Nevada and SC
My hope is that Kucinich wins. But I can't see a hair's difference in the records of Edwards and Hillary that I should prefer one over the other.
Karen we did it again.
Go Cubs! LOL
"Romney is the most dangerous one of the bunch to liberty,..."
Don't worry about Romney. Mike and his ouija board have called it for McCain.
61. cC - I don't agree. I think Obama has a much broader vision. Of the three - I think he is the deepest thinker truly. I think Hillary is the incrementalist. Just my .2cents
so did Kucinich campaign in Michigan to get to 4% or did he honor the DNC wishes that the Democratic side not be contested?
so did Kucinich campaign in Michigan to get to 4% or did he honor the DNC wishes that the Democratic side not be contested?
Don't know, but he strikes me as someone who doesn't give a damn about what anyone else wants him to do.
I heard about an exit poll which showed that 10% of the GOP primary voters in MI were Democrats. I wonder if they're calling it a success of their subversion attempt over at dKos?
so no gaffes or winners in Nevada? that the blog concensus?
Good on Obama. We don't need a bureaucrat...we need leadership...
It all depends on how it's spun. I first heard about it when Matthews said Obama admitted he knew nothing about running a beauracracy. He compared him to Bush.
So I looked it up and learned that Matthews was characterizing what Obama said in an unfavorable manner -- just like the HuffPo headline Mary posted. But how many people will spend 2-3 minutes finding out for themselves?
Kucinich supporters are pulling a code pink on Leno tonight yelling about letting him in the debate while being drug off
Jay doesn't have a clue as to what the fuss is
Matthews is a Clinton shill
Oh I hope they don't edit it out when it comes on here, Phil!
LOL...love those Code Pink gals
Night Karen - don't forget to dream what I do :)
Go Pistons.
It is being posted on other blogs that in MI 20 precincts had a computer glitch, that they could not report the uncommitted votes, but there is no link. Has anyone heard this?
70. mary vb, you may well be right about Obama on the "vision thing"...that was more of a gut feeling that I expressed. I support JRE over the other two because of the issues he campaigns on. Like Pat in Colo., I can see positive aspects in all of them, actually. I hope that by Super Tues. JRE catches fire.
Sitka, in common usage, to call someone a "bureaucrat" is a pejorative....that's how Obama was using it. and of course, every syllable uttered by a candidate will be spun by opponents.
"Moderation and Reason are First "
Yes, makes you wonder why a majority of Republicans (nod to paine;) in this country voted twice for the most extreme administration in 60+ years. Utterly unreasonable.
I hope that by Super Tues. JRE catches fire.
~~~~~~~~~~
Clinton doesn't wear well, so as long as she stays in, the later states loom more important. But if Obama wins 15 of the states he will have a pretty good lead. The more states that get to see all three the further Edwards gets because he is fighting for market share with the Clinton demographic more than Obama right now but when Obama switches over with the status quo support because he is less a threat than Edwards that is when the real fight for the direction of the Democratic Party and America begins, and then by the end of the process whoever catches the Al Gore dream of a more global vision wins. Edwards has shown the most capability for personal growth during his public service, so I'm still betting on him.
puddle
my son is looking forward to his first class with Andrei Codrescu tomorrow, I sent out a e-mail blast with my change of address, and got a response back from him trying to get me to support Clinton "now that Gore isn't running"
I'm going to be using his contacts to write the platform language on wetland loss and the hypoxia in the Gulf since it is the link between Iowa and Louisiana, and he is a master of language.(I met him here in Iowa doing a story on the subject)
Printable version Democrats set aside race dispute 
Analysts say the Democratic nomination race is wide openThe row had focused on who had done most for civil rights in the 1960s.
A third candidate, John Edwards, used the debate to question his rivals' financial backers.
Nevada will be the next stage in the gruelling race to decide who will stand for the Democrats and their Republican opponents in the presidential election this November.
A primary election held in Michigan on Tuesday will not affect the contest as Democrats in the state were barred from sending delegates to the all-important final party convention
DANIEL ROONEY,
Yep you got it man.I guess these people haven't been around long enough to know whats really going on. Of course I'm sure they love illegal immigration as well.
On Another Note:
Lets refresh our memories on the Clintons criminal past, shall we?
Why else would anyone want to remove a crook like Bush so bad and then want to put another crook and traitor like Bill Clinton back in the White House? We had alot of people talk about his traitor ways, even major newspapers and major news channels but nobody had the guts to stand up for American law, not even the politicians that took the oath to serve and protect us and .... where the hell were the police? And did Hillary stand up for the America she loves so much when her partner in crime was selling us out? No! she helped cover it all up and where are all her financial records and why won't she release them? Must be something to hide there aye? If those two weren't in politics one of them would have killed the other by now. Its a sick and disgusting relationship they have, its not healthy for them and it ain't healthy for America. Hello, national security laws were broken! Can you say treason?
So lets get the traitor Billy back in the White house to sell out anything that is left. Bill Clinton should be BANNED from the White House! Bill is the reason China is on the rise, the big stuff happened with them like giving China our Military secrets and technology right before Billy left the white house, as well as giving North Korea 2 Nucelar Reactors which they used to make the Nucelar weapons they now have and have sold and given the technology to Iran so they can be our enemy as well, now we have to pay North Korea the bribe money to keep peace and keep the nukes shut down. Thank You Bill Clinton. Bill Clintons traitor ways are still costing us Billions of dollars in bribe money to this day and every year. Don't be fooled by the media telling everyone the bribe money is to help North Korea, you don't help your enemies, you pay them bribes. Sure enough, as Hillary gets farther into this election process all this will be rehashed and relived. And poor Chelsy Clinton will have the relive the terrible criminal years that her parents lived, including the sex scandle with monica. What great parents aye? You can also so go to YouTube and search for Clinton crimes or Hillary Clinton crimes, I'm sure you will be educated. Damn, you people have short memories!
Good morning, BFA. I'm not *officially* working today, but do have many things on the agenda, so blogging time is late and short ... at least I was able to read through the threads this am.
So glad to see T2T4 here more often; hope that she's now officially *with computer.* Great recap of the debate, Pat.
It is interesting to see how trolls ooze out of the woodwork the more popular the Dem candidates become. Stat's *R & M* leads (altho he's not the worst of the bunch), the renamed *Faux* (how apt), and others.
Ah well, such is freedom of expression. Living quite close to Voltaire's old home, I do value it. But cC's quote about our enemies' not needing help to *define* us is a good one to keep in mind.
Even with MI vets' support, 'Cain couldn't pull it off, it appears. Perhaps that is an indication that fewer vets will vote *Republic* this year.
The Romney machine came through and, in the end, that same machine may take him to the nomination. 'Cain doesn't really seem to have a comparable one. While I believe that any of our candidates is definitely head and shoulders above, Romney is indeed scary.
The vacation story with the dog strapped to the top and the fact that he views his four sons' work on his campaign as the equivalent of our family members' being in Afghanistan and Iraq that would have done it for me, totally apart from his stands, if I had ever become insane enough to think of voting for such as he. Those two stories are real indications of the man.
=================
January 16, 2008
Romney Beats McCain in Michigan Vote
By JOHN M. BRODER
ANN ARBOR, Mich. — Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who ran as a son of Michigan though he left the state nearly 40 years ago, won a commanding victory Tuesday in the Republican primary here with a message aimed at voters deeply anxious about the state’s ailing economy.
Mr. Romney defeated his principal rival, Senator John McCain of Arizona, by winning a clear plurality of Republicans and conservatives, who turned out in greater numbers than they had in the 2000 primary, which Mr. McCain won.
“Tonight marks the beginning of a comeback,” Mr. Romney said in declaring victory at a hotel rally in Southfield. “Tonight is a victory of optimism over Washington-style pessimism.”
Mr. Romney needed a victory in Michigan to save his candidacy after finishing second to Mr. McCain in New Hampshire and to Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, in Iowa. Mr. Huckabee finished third in Michigan.
With 97 percent of the electoral precincts reporting, Mr. Romney had 39 percent of the vote, compared with 30 percent for Mr. McCain and 16 percent for Mr. Huckabee. Ron Paul, the antiwar congressman from Texas, came in fourth with 6 percent of the vote.
[...]
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/us/pol...
Really not happy to see this for lots of reasons but especially because one colleague, who has been a very dear friend for years, has just left to work with IDPs (internally displaced persons) in this seemingly unending conflict.
I salute all those who attempt to define humanity in all the world's conflicts, who sometimes pay for those ideals with their lives.
And I curse ALL those who, knowing better, deliberately make the world a more dangerous place with their cockamamie policies.
===============
Tamil Tigers kill 24 with bus bomb
Randeep Ramesh, South Asia correspondent
Wednesday January 16, 2008
Guardian Unlimited
More than 24 civilians were killed and dozens wounded when a roadside bomb blew up a crowded bus in southern Sri Lanka, as a six-year ceasefire between the government and Tamil Tiger rebels ran out.
The defence ministry said the bus, on a run regularly used by schoolchildren, was destroyed by a Claymore-style mine packed with explosives, nails and ball bearings - the signature bomb of the Tamil Tiger rebels. The wreckage was then raked with bullets.
A second bomb hit an army personnel carrier 12 miles south of the first attack, wounding three soldiers, the military said.
Local hospitals told news agencies that no children had been killed by the bus bomb. Witnesses described the scene as a bloodbath.
"I was on my way to take my one and a half month old baby to the doctor. I heard a loud noise and I thought it was a bomb, so I went under the seat of the bus with my baby and we heard firing for about five minutes," housewife TM Lalani, 27, told Reuters from Buttala hospital.
"Everybody was screaming and I saw people on the ground in a bloodbath," she said. "My leg got injured from pieces of glass. Luckily my baby has not got any injuries."
The bomb signals a new phase of fighting between security forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam - separatists who are designated as a terrorist group by Britain, India and the US.
Although war has raged in the north and east for months, the Sri Lankan government's decision to end a formal truce has been criticised by international observers who say it will increase fighting and kill off peace prospects.
[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,33208...
Benny 16 is finally getting some well-deserved flak.
================
Pope pulls out of visit to Rome university after outrage at his views on Galileo and science
· Government divided on protest over 1990 speech
· Row over letter signed by more than 60 teachers
John Hooper in Rome
Wednesday January 16, 2008
Guardian
Pope Benedict XVI last night called off a visit to Rome's main university in the face of hostility from some of its academics and students, who accused him of despising science and defending the Inquisition's condemnation of Galileo.
The controversy was unparalleled in a country where criticism of the Roman Catholic church is normally muted. The Pope had been due to speak tomorrow during ceremonies marking the start of the academic year at Rome's largest and oldest university, La Sapienza. But the Vatican said last night it had been "considered opportune to postpone" his visit.
The announcement followed a break-in and sit-in at the rector's office yesterday by about 50 students and a furious row over a letter signed by more than 60 of La Sapienza's teachers, asking that the invitation to the Pope be rescinded.
The signatories of the letter said Benedict's presence would be "incongruous". They cited a speech he made at La Sapienza in 1990, while he was still a cardinal, in which he quoted the judgment of an Austrian philosopher of science who wrote that the church's trial of Galileo was "reasonable and fair".
The letter said: "These words offend and humiliate us." Among the signatories was the physicist Prof Luciano Maiani, who was recently appointed to head Italy's main scientific research body, the Consiglio nazionale delle ricerche.
[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,33208...
Speaking of people whose policies are deliberately cockamamie, here's yet another *success* of putzCo.
Even under the worst of the Iraq sanctions' era, Saddam was able to ensure decent health care for his citizens.
(I was no admirer of Saddam, but, believe me, to the Iraqi citizens now captive under our illegal occupation, he looks halfway decent in ways that do count.)
But according to putz and Clueless, all is improving in Never-Never Land.
===============
Iraq's healthcare left in disarray after invasion
· Experienced staff emigrate due to lack of protection
· Bribery is part of system, says independent report
Sarah Boseley, health editor
Wednesday January 16, 2008
Guardian
The full extent of the destruction of Iraq's healthcare system and the devastating impact it has had on its people is documented today in a new report which indicts the allied invasion force for failing in its duty to protect medical institutions and staff.
The report, by an independent team of researchers and advisers from Iraq, the UK, the US and elsewhere, says the provision of healthcare "has become increasingly difficult" since the invasion. "Doctors and nurses have emigrated en masse, exacerbating existing staff shortages.
"The health system is in disarray owing to the lack of an institutional framework, intermittent electricity, unsafe water, and frequent violations of medical neutrality. The ministry of health and local health authorities are mostly unable to meet these huge challenges, while the activities of UN agencies and non-governmental organisations are severely limited."
The report, by the organisation Medact, tells how the charges for healthcare, abolished by the coalition forces in a flurry of idealism, have been quietly reinstated by health authorities unable to pay salaries and buy the drugs they need. Worse, patients now have to pay bribes to get into hospital. The report tells of one young woman, Aseel, in labour for three days with no pain relief, doctor or midwife. Her family decided they would have to find the money to get her into hospital.
"After parting with my first bank note to secure petrol from my neighbour, we prayed for safety during our long trip to Diwaniyah maternity hospital," said Aseel's husband. "Thankfully we arrived safely, and were greeted by the open hand of the security guard. We parted with another note to get in. It took a long time to find a midwife. Eventually a sleepy midwife answered my pleas and we exchanged papers, notes and promises to bring more notes. Amin was born the next morning.
[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,33208...
Speaking of Never-Never Land fantasies and cockamamie policies ...
================
Robert Fisk: Bloody reality bears no relation to the delusions of this President
As a bomb explodes in Beirut and Israel kills 19 in Gaza raids, Bush takes his Middle East peace mission to Saudi Arabia (and signs off $20bn weapons deal with repressive regime)
Published: 16 January 2008
Twixt silken sheets – in a bedroom whose walls are also covered in silk – and in the very palace of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, President George Bush awakes this morning to confront a Middle East which bears no relation to the policies of his administration nor the warning which he has been relaying constantly to the kings and emirs and oligarchs of the Gulf: that Iran rather than Israel is their enemy.
The President sat chummily beside the all-too-friendly monarch yesterday, enthroned in what looked suspiciously like the kind of casual blue cardigan he might wear on his own Texan ranch; he had even received a jangling gold "Order of Merit" – it looked a bit like the Lord Chancellor's chain, though it was not disclosed which particular merit earned Mr Bush this kingly reward. Could it be the hypocritical merit of supplying yet more billions worth of weapons to the Kingdom, to be used against the Saudi regime's imaginary enemies.
It was illusory, of course, like all the words that the Arabs have heard from the Americans these past seven days, ever since the fading President began his tourist jaunt around the Middle East.
[...]
http://news.independent.co.uk/fisk/artic...
The loss of credibility is and will continue to be something tragic for us all ...
================
Leading article: The proof of a foreign policy that has failed
Published: 16 January 2008
President Bush started his visit to Saudi Arabia by presenting his hosts with a very large and very glittery bauble: a sale of super-sophisticated weapons worth a cool $20bn. Even with the US dollar as weak as it currently is, this is still an enormous amount of money and it buys an impressive quantity of hardware.
The deal may face obstruction by the Democrat-controlled Congress; it might even be turned down. But Mr Bush was sending his own message. So far as the White House is concerned, Saudi Arabia is still Washington's No 1 ally in the region. The US may no longer have troops stationed there – their presence proved too inflammatory – but it still regards the Kingdom as a last bulwark against hostile forces, and favours it accordingly.
In almost every respect, the relationship is absurd. It exemplifies the double standards that persist in US foreign policy. When he came to office, Mr Bush made great play about his mission to spread freedom and democracy throughout the world. These were the supposedly universal values for which he invaded Iraq, once the weapons of mass destruction had been proved not to exist.
[...]
http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading...
Froomkin's latest tour d'horizon ... and I'm off for now.
Have good ones!
====================
Nation Wants a New Direction
By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Tuesday, January 15, 2008; 12:42 PM
Americans overwhelmingly want the next president to set the nation in a new direction.
Gary Langer writes for ABC News about the latest Washington Post-ABC News Poll: "Seventy-nine percent of Americans say the next president should set the nation on a new course rather than following the direction in which Bush has been leading. (And two-thirds feel that way strongly.)
"For the first time this is even more than said so about Bush's father, 75 percent, the summer before he was voted out of office in 1992. And it's vastly more than the most who ever wanted a new direction after Reagan (58 percent) or Bill Clinton (48 percent).
"It holds in both parties, albeit to different degrees. Ninety-four percent of leaned Democrats, and 57 percent of leaned Republicans, say they want the next president to take a different direction than Bush's. Claims to the mantle of 'change' are likely to continue apace for the next 10 months."
Bush's job approval rating, driven down by growing economic worries along with continued opposition to the war, is now at 32 percent -- an all-time low in the Post/ABC poll.
Compare that to the 17 percent of Americans who said they agreed with the statement: "We need to keep the country moving in the direction Bush has been taking us."
And, if you do the math, that leads to the conclusion that even among Bush's remaining supporters, almost half think it's time to try something different.
[...]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
Good morning, everybody
I've put yesterday's diary up on BFA, but it takes a while to register. So I don't have the address.
Freedom and Democracy are simply code words for American hegemony.
Freedom = Obedience
It's interesting that Huckabee wants to conform the Constitution to God's law.
The Constitution is simply a compendium of how the state is supposed to behave.
Somebody needs to do something about the DLC.
Democratic Losers Clique
100. Sorry about that. The wrap still doesn't work in Opera and I keep getting suckered.
It's interesting that Huckabee wants to conform the Constitution to God's law.
The Constitution is simply a compendium of how the state is supposed to behave.
Funny, when you copy it, the whole thing shows up. Computers are strange. Reminds me I need to go check news on the recount which is supposed to start today.
Willard' Brain--Dry Cleaned, not Washed
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/us/politics/16letter.html
9 Jewish Leaders Say E-Mail Spread Lies About Obama
By JAMES BARRONPublished: January 16, 2008The leaders of nine Jewish groups released an open letter on Tuesday condemning what they called “hateful e-mails” that they said spread lies about Senator Barack Obama’s religious beliefs and his intentions.
The anonymous e-mail messages have circulated for months, saying that Mr. Obama is a Muslim and carried a copy of the Koran when he was sworn in at the United States Senate.
He is a Christian who has attended Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago since he was a community organizer there in the 1980s.
The e-mail has been so persistent that Mr. Obama was asked about it Tuesday at the Democratic presidential candidates’ debate in Nevada. He replied: “I am a Christian. I have been sworn in with a Bible. I pledge allegiance and lead the Pledge of Allegiance sometime in the United States Senate, when I’m presiding.”
Mr. Obama’s campaign has long been concerned that people would come to believe the misinformation as the e-mail messages were forwarded and reforwarded. “If you get this e-mail from someone you know,” Mr. Obama said in November at a rally in Iowa, “set the record straight.”
But at the debate on Tuesday, he pointed out that he had gone on to win the Iowa caucuses anyway, and to do well in the New Hampshire primary.
The Jewish leaders seemed to be responding to reports that the e-mail was now being spread deliberately among Jews. In the letter, they said that the “hateful e-mails use falsehood and innuendo to mischaracterize Senator Barack Obama’s religious beliefs and who he is as a person,” and that they were an “attempt to drive a wedge between our community and a presidential candidate based on despicable and false attacks and innuendo based on religion.”
...
The TV is announcing that the recount will begin today. I've not received any notice inviting participation.
Obama will continue to face those attacks, Edwards would the minute he became front runner, and Clinton gets it here even a few posts above.
Republicans have ruled on fear and hate and the closer they come to defeat the fuller the sewer will become with their hate filled garbage.
Obama's faith matters to him, and it is to his credit he has not made it an issue. We may have to accept that he may have to talk publicly to debunk the rumor hate a la swiftie response, and shouldn't hold it against him as a defensive matter.
104. If nothing else, it's useful for Jews to know they're not the only ones about whom lies are spread. Misery loves company because it makes it easier to bear. When people take things personally, they tend to waste a lot of time and energy trying to figure out what they did wrong and what they can do to correct it. Then, when it becomes apparent that there is nothing they can do, they feel stymied and helpless. Which is, of course, the whole idea to begin with.
Christianity teaches us to turn the other cheek and forgive those who sin against us. Sometimes that puts us at a disadvantage. On the other hand, it keeps us from being consumed by hate and suspicion.
I want to throw a remark out about a news story of consequence to me personally, cloned cows.
Replicative cloning should pose absolutely no threat to food safety. Transgenic modification must use cloning technology to advance to a level of commerce in the pharma products produced. Whole different issue and no way should those animals be treated the same in the food supply as ones that are simple copies of an existing one for breeding purposes.
Cattle clones so far have been all replicative, their offspring number in the thousand now. It is a shame to continue to dump that milk.
But again that is a different safety question than others. Can we be scientifically literate enough to note the difference? (when we have Presidential candidates raising hands against evolution?)
most of the blog baby namesake cows are descended from embryo transplants and that now common procedure faced the same critics back in the seventies when I was pioneering on farm use
the cost of a clone is now less than the value of some breeding animals and milk is a safe abundant part of the diet in no small part because of advances in genetics
the reason clones will never be widespread is because they are one generation behind the advancement
but the fact that the national dairy herd is one third the size with increased total production (and the positive impact that has on environmental effects) is because they have tripled in productivity
I'll be interested in Nevada polls today, I'm not one that debunks them because of results. People really do change their minds minute to minute.
another fighter for ALL of us, has succumbed (rest in peace Judah):
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080116/ap_on_re_us/obit_folkman;_ylt=AoykAgMDYpqTJb82GkgQWmUXIr0F
Famed cancer researcher Folkman dies
By MARK PRATT, Associated Press Writer Tue Jan 15, 7:03 PM ET
BOSTON - Dr. Judah Folkman, a groundbreaking researcher who worked to cut off cancer from its blood supply, curing the disease in mice and giving humans hope for a cure, has died. He was 74.
Folkman died late Monday in Denver, said Elizabeth Andrews, a spokeswoman at Children's Hospital Boston, where Folkman was director of the vascular biology program.
"I think he was one of the most important investigators of our time," said Dr. David Nathan, president emeritus of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. "Losing him is like watching a Roman candle go out."
Robert Cooke, author of the book "Dr. Folkman's War: Angiogenesis and the Struggle to Defeat Cancer" said he died of an apparent heart attack.
Folkman's research has led to 10 cancer drugs currently on the market that are helping more than 1.2 million patients worldwide, including Avastin and Thalomid. Dozens of other drugs based on his ideas are being developed.
Folkman championed the idea that cancer needs a growing network of blood vessels to survive, and that blocking that process, called angiogenesis, will stop or even eliminate tumors.
...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080115/NATION/513973288
'Hillary' producer is ready for Obama, tooBy Robert Stacy McCain
January 15, 2008
The producer of a new documentary about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton says he will produce a similar movie about Sen. Barack Obama, should the Illinois Democrat defeat the former first lady for the party's presidential nomination.
"We already have our research staff working on Obama and, if he is the nominee, we will have a film out this summer, just like this one," said David Bossie, president of the conservative group Citizens United and executive producer of "Hillary: The Movie," which premiered last night in Georgetown.
Mr. Bossie also told The Washington Times he expects a federal court to issue its ruling today or tomorrow on a pending Federal Election Commission case that has so far prevented the airing of TV advertisements for the Clinton documentary.
"I can put it in theaters, I just can't let anybody know it's there," said Mr. Bossie, adding that he expects the case ultimately to be appealed to the Supreme Court. "Michael Moore advertised his movie; I want to advertise my movie."
...
I'm glad the federal court ruled to block advertising for "Hillary: The Movie":
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/us/politics/16ads.html
Court Puts Ad Limits on ‘Hillary: The Movie’
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESSPublished: January 16, 2008WASHINGTON (AP) — A conservative group must abide by campaign finance laws if it wants to run advertisements promoting its anti-Hillary Rodham Clinton movie, a federal court ruled Tuesday.
The group, Citizens United, had hoped to run the television advertisements in key election states during peak primary season. The ruling means it must keep its commercials off the air or attach a disclaimer and disclose its donors.
...
So clever. Found this on the DNC community blog;
Again, here is a quicklist of the points:
1. Obama is Diversion;
2. Obama was an unknown and gained lots of money really fast;
3. Obama gets positive news reporting by conservative news agencies (give me a break!!! I'm not that stupid!!!);
4. The conservative news agencies and Republicans are hoping Obama runs for President, Clinton would be impossible to beat;
5. Once Obama is chosen to run for president, the News agencies WILL turn on him scaring America into voting Republican (Stinks like Karl Rove);
6. All you Democrats and Republicans please unite behind Clinton to for a new leadership approach.
Spread the word!!!
What is it about Clinton folk that they have this problem with tenses?
I read a lot of stuff from everywhere. This article cited below is interesting on Obama's ground game. No wonder Clinton's camp got desperate in NH. They played about every dirty-trick possible. I just hope we find out the NH's election integrity truth before Super Tuesday. It's up to the candidates but the I think the DNC and the RNC both need to at least address the issue in a statement. The NH State Parties need to make statements too. I hope somebody in the NH legislature calls for an investigation. The NH folks need to keep election integrity up front and center in the media any way they can. Does anybody know if any of the other races on the ballot had discrepancies in the exit polls compared to the final count?
---
Dean 2.0 by Noam Scheiber
What Barack Obama owes to people-powered Howard.
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?i...
Monica Smith
Wed, 01/16/08
Reply to this
So clever. Found this on the DNC community blog;
...
6. All you Democrats and Republicans please unite behind Clinton to for a new leadership approach.
+++
That's interesting, for I know that this blog (ie. BFA) here gets republicans who lurk and some who post (the more the merrier, it shows the drawing power of a diverse, albeit somewhat small blog community and activist group).
In contrast, a blogger on the DNC blog does a shout to republicans ? It sounds more like a shout out full of boastment to an audience that's not really there.
but the fact that the national dairy herd is one third the size with increased total production (and the positive impact that has on environmental effects) is because they have tripled in productivity
I'd like to know more about the positive impact on the environment. Are free-range cows a negative? Is milking cows by hand a negative?
Phil, you need to get out more:
To get an idea of the type of language Matthews regularly uses when covering Clinton, take a look at this sampling:
"I hate her. I hate her. All that she stands for."
"She Devil"
"Nurse Ratched"
"Madame Defarge"
"Witchy"
"Anti-male"
"[U]ppity"
"She's going to tell us what to do."
"Her scolding manner in terms of her public speaking"
"[L]et's talk about the troops ...Will they take the orders?"
"[D]oesn't she know she looks like a fraud?"
"Look at those eyes. Look at the cold eyes that she's giving him. Look at that cold look."
"[L]ike a strip-teaser saying she's flattered by the all the attention"
On Sen. Clinton’s endorsers: "castratos in the eunuch chorus"
"Let me tell you how short Hillary's leash is."
"Is she a convincing mom?"
On Sen. Clinton’s laugh: "What do you make of the cackle?"
"[S]he's clapping, like she's Chinese. I know the Chinese clap at each other, but what is she clapping at? I mean, it's like one of these wind-up things."
"[S]he was giving a campaign barn-burner speech, which is harder to give for a woman; it can grate on some men when they listen to it -- fingernails on a blackboard, perhaps."
"Is there, out there in the country or out in the Atlantic Ocean, some gigantic monster -- big, green, horny-headed, all kinds of horns coming out, big, aggressive monster of anti-Hillaryism that hasn't shown itself: it's based upon gender ..."
"[B]eing surrounded by women, does that make a case for commander in chief -- or does it make a case against it?"
"Is she hemmed in by the fact that she's a woman and can't admit a mistake, or else the Republicans will say, ‘Oh, that's a woman's prerogative to change her mind,’ or ‘another fickle woman’? Is her gender a problem in her ability to change her mind?"
"[T]he reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around."
"She may have gotten The Des Moines Register's endorsement the other day, thanks to her husband's lobbying with its female editors and publisher ..."
She may take the brunt of his vitriol and sexist commentary, but Clinton is far from the only woman targeted by Matthews. Here are some other notable examples:
On House Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
Described her as "scary"
Suggested she would "castrate" House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
Wondered how she could disagree with President Bush "without screaming? How does she do it without becoming grating?"
On Michelle Obama during the first Democratic presidential debate:
"I thought Michelle, whatever you say about Obama, his wife looked perfect -- perfect for the occasion ... I'm sorry, those things are important. You guys are ignoring it. Some people are, by the way, just watching tonight. They stopped listening a half-hour in, and they noticed how pretty she is -- Michelle -- and they said, ‘I like the fact he's got this pretty wife. He's happily married. I like that.’ " After Matthews’ take on Michelle Obama’s appearance, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell was compelled to remind Matthews that Mrs. Obama is a Harvard-educated lawyer.
On potential future female presidential candidates:
"[T]here's not even another on the horizon. Where are the governors? Where are the big-state women governors? Where are they? Name one. They don't exist." (Note: Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell, and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius all run states with populations comparable to male governors who have recently run for president, including Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Bill Richardson.)
On women who live in the suburbs who "may not work outside the home":
"They're talking around election time -- the husband and the wife -- you know, she says, ‘I sort of like this Hillary, the first woman president. She's pro-choice.’ And the husband says, ‘You know, dear, you know, this is going to kill our tax bracket. You know that tuition thing we pay every couple of years for the kids, every year, we can't do that if we get a higher tax bracket. We have to pay more money.’ "
On right-wing radio talk show host Laura Ingraham:
"I get in trouble for this, but you're great looking, obviously. You're one of the gods' gifts to men in this country. But also, you are a hell of a writer."
On CNBC anchor Erin Burnett:
"Come on in closer. No, come in -- come in further -- come in closer. Really close ... No, you're beautiful. I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding. You're a knockout. Anyway, thank you, Erin Burnett ... It's all right getting bad news from you, even, OK?"
remember the purple shirts of SEIU union members ? they're back four years later, being sported by a divergence of people who represent that union :
I didn't say he was a good shill Monica, and yes dairy cows use the planets resouces even if they, more than anyother livestock, give back.
It has been quite a few centuries since the house cow was valued for the body heat she gave off although my wife's grandmother told of such a cold winter she remembered of her childhood in the old country, when the cow was kept at the other end of the domestile..
One of the "news" shows had a story about car farts, burbs and manure as possible energy sources.
So whatdoyouthink Phil...hang a power cord on your cows and let 'em rip.
s/b cow farts....gees
Don't worry about Romney. Mike and his ouija board have called it for McCain.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
yes sitka.......ahh the olde Quija board.........even today, and this may be significiant.......a sorta red neck radio station(sorta) here in NC even said today that Edwards would acrry states like Virginia and NC........Obama and Hillary are to "rock starrish"..........and in the polling here, inly Edwards beats Mccain, the other two lose.......
Now, here in a red state this is noteworthy, and whomever this person was (some gig wig in elctions in the south) hinted at southerners disastisfactin with Bush and the repub candidates.....
So, its quite simple really.........and I agre with him..IF the Democrats want to win in 2008 you go with Edwards........IF you want to roll the dice with Obama then take your chances.......Hillary is asking for disaster.........but losing elections is what the Democrats are famous for lately........
Mccain still wins, but Edwards almost pulls it out.........stick Obama at VP if you want to make the masses happy............but Edwards is the key.
Which farm animal produces more methane -- cows or pigs ?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neither rd......its the son of that Nebraska farmer who hasnt taken a bath in 2 weeks.........
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7189204.stm
Last Updated: Tuesday, 15 January 2008, 13:26 GMT 
The government wants trees to be replanted
Sierra Leone has re-imposed a timber export ban because of what it says is indiscriminate plundering of forests by Chinese and other foreign companies.
"They just invaded and started doing what they felt like doing," Forestry Minister Joseph Sam Sesay told the BBC.
He said the ban would remain in effect until a policy was put in place to help local communities benefit from logging.
It comes a month after newly elected President Ernest Bai Koroma declared the Gola Forest a national park.
...
...
I like being around people who aren't toxic
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
seashell,
Stick around love, at least to the election night.......thats my plan......and dont worry about sitka, give the guy a break......look, probaball the other day he probabaly simply broke a guitar string on his base , amajor disaster for a middle aged man still playing in a band................
Some observations on the debaye last nite..........dont these people ever study JFK in the 1960 debates? That guy was cool, clean, low demeanour and profesional.............here are my grades based on appearance..............
1) Obama B+ good temperament, a little cold looking but broke it up a bit ......
2)Hillary C-........too much makeup.......occasional smirk, glaring eyes.....vindictive looking at times........occasional humaneness
3)Edwards D+........those glaring, squinting eyes when questioned......occasional good demeanour.......phoniness shows thru on occasion.....that yuk yuk laugh has got to go......
God bring back the Kennedys please................
132.
I missed the dem debate, for which reason:
door number 1) I watched the movie The Crying Game instead;
door number 2) I worked my second job;
door number 3) I was at the Mitt Romney convention hall in Michigan eagerly awaiting the candidate who has the best hair.
an interesting evolutionary development for the prey animals that became ruminants was the development of the four stomach system so they could graze quickly in the safety of the open and then hide and ruminate and digest the food by chewing their cud
cows spend very little time eating, they gobble it down, and the lay around ruminating, in a process that will prove to be something like that for cellousic ethanol as they digest fiber that is inedible for one stomach animals, and a by-product is methane which they mainly belch, maybe that is why a Wisconsin bar scene late after a Packer win might resemble a barn because all that time spent hanging out with dairy cows leads to similar habits
I'm interviewed about my politics in the current Holstein World online and you can't help but notice how beautiful the animals in the ads are if you go check it out.
dairy animals eat the stalks of corn, the by-products of ethanol, bio-diesel, beet sugar, potato chips, cannery by-products like the husks from sweet corn headed for the cans, but the stems of alfalfa are where they mainly take fiber from growing plants that is totally un-nutritious for single stomach animals like humans and turn it into cheese, butter, yogurt, and milk
from the Obama '08 blog:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/michaelpipe/CjSL#comments
NH Recount By Joe in Vermont 2 minutes ago The NH recount starts today. See link to the story in the "Manchester Union-Leader". Kucinich has given them 25,000 and will kick in more if the early results show a meaningful difference. Don't know about you, but I think everyone owes Dennis a lot of thanks. He should have been in that debate last night as well.http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Kucinich+hands+over+%2425%2c000+to+start+NH+recount&articleId=c5b584b0-6965-4ded-bdd4-b554a0a11399138.
but ya know, if all 50 states went the caucus way, Diebold and their ilk would still find a way to machine count heads:
I am not so sure McCain wins if nominated. Any Repub platform is a hard sell and especially McCain with his 100 year war in Iraq idea. Add the fact the folks are worried about the economy and are demanding health care. The Repub platform doesn't really face the issues people are really concerned with. The Repub platform is essentially everyone for themselves and screw you, I got mine. It was like that when I was a Repub and is like that now. It is going to be harder to win by scaring folks.
The big question while the public is lining up more and more supporting the Dem platform, will their contempt for the Dem Congress push them away?
My problem with the three major Dem candidates is besides all having questionable voting records, HC is too much like a Repub on Iraq , Patriot Act, and fund raising , BO still votes like one and JE voted like one.
I cut them a little slack because being a Senator means you have to cut deals to get legislation passed or to modify bills that would be even worse. That is the dirty part of the job description. The fundraising issues is playing the hand they are dealt with. The flawed system demands capital to win so go out there and get the most capital you can. That means committing acts of politcal prostitution. JE is not in the pockets of the money folks yet and if he can still perform then being free of big money liabilities is almost reason enough to support him.
JE has the best Iraq exit and best health care plans (of the major candidates). If he were on the ballot yesterday, I would have voted for him.
The easy thing to do is to whine and cry about them all as they all have flaws (maybe even Dennis). But this is the field we have or are stuck with. I don't like most of them and really despise HC as someone who will sell us out to the highest bidder the fastest.
http://www.holsteinworld.com/aa07/index.php#~~~~~~~~~~~pregnancies in my herd from her son, and if one ends up just like her, I will be cloning her
I don't see Hillary actually selling out to the highest bidder, more insidious (sp?) than that as there is a general funding of a certain direction of policy by a cabal of special interests that favor a certain marriage of government and corporate power
Hey Phil I to am dismayed about 1/3 of the cows producing more milk than before. My concern (as in all our farming these days) is for the quality of life for the animals. Your learned opinion on clones is appreciated - thanks.
Here's a clip from Arthur Frommer's blog -- apparently if you get stuck on a plane and you're in NY State, they have to provide you with clean toilets, water, food. So if you get stuck, make sure it's in NY. It's unbelievable to me that Congress can't pass a law about providing these things to ALL of us if stuck in a plane -- actually the air lines should be forced to deplane us, I think.
quote
Jan 15, 2008
Starting now, you've got rights if you're stuck on a grounded airplane in the State of New York; shouldn't your state pass a similar bill?
To the surprise of many, a Federal district court recently upheld -- repeat, upheld -- the New York Passenger Rights Law which requires that airlines supply food, water, fresh air, and clean toilets, to passengers in a plane stuck on the tarmac for more than three hours. That statute went into effect at the beginning of this month, and all us should be aware of it.
unquote
http://www.frommers.com/blog/2008/01/sta...
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-labor16jan16,1,371631.story?track=rss
Obama gets major labor endorsementDurazo, L.A. County federation head, cites hopeful's background as part of her motivation.By Robin Abcarian, Los Angeles Times Staff WriterJanuary 16, 2008 The head of the politically powerful Los Angeles County Federation of Labor said Tuesday that she is endorsing Barack Obama for president.
The endorsement by Maria Elena Durazo is a coup for Obama that could help the Illinois senator in his uphill struggle against Hillary Rodham Clinton to win substantial support among Latino voters in Southern California. Obama has won the backing of other Los Angeles-area Latino leaders, but this is probably his biggest such endorsement yet, given the broad reach of the county labor federation.
...
my comments with the cow picture got cut off, I'm using her son and if the offspring look like gramma there I will be cloning one
prettiest cow in the world, lives in Mercersburg PA
144,
I agree with you. The problem is not so much as a sellout, but the entire process is flawed. As a counterpoint, maybe HC should be praised for taking advantage of the environment she is in?
I know that is very Republicanoid of me.
Good morning everybody!
Sitka - I just read your post about one of my comments concerning Huffpo's *lame* headlines. I wasn't calling you lame - rather Huffpo for such a poor headline. Hope that was clear! ;-) I need to use more complete sentences. LOL
Did anyone else note the clip on the news yesterday of Bush with the Saudi prince dancing with the long silver sword? He was kind of smiling but his expression it appeared to me was one of total defeat -- as if he was smiling to keep from crying. Here was the 'leader of the free world' going to beg the Arabs to free some oil. And of course we don't know what was happening behind scenes -- what the Saudis were demanding behind scenes. I think that 'photo op' is a symbol of all the cr*p that has visited us since he took office.
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/200...
Morning Folks,
Thinking some more about the debate. Just some perceptions: Hillary's characterizing George Bush's visit to Saudi Arabia with "hat in hand to get lower oil prices as pathetic". That was almost a Howard Dean in its directness. But, I have to ask, Hillary Clinton, if you knew the pathetic nature of George Bush's incompetence and the malfeasance he would allow and perpetuate in office, where was your leadership in the Senate and why was it wasted on "the flag burning resolution" and why for heaven's sake did you vote for the Kyle-Lieberman Resolution?
I saw her steeliness, and some may regard that as strength, but as far as inviting different perspectives, that didn't seem likely to me, and I would argue that we need different perspectives. One of the worst aspects of this administration is that it is and has been a closed loop; anyone who disagreed was evicted and demonized.
She isn't very likeable either. She just isn't, and that may be because of her authoritarian manner. She punished disagreement according to news articles about how she handled the healthcare issue when Bill Clinton was elected President. I don't like those characterisitcs very much, but if we are to have someone with greater flexibility and a more open way of doing things, the American people have to step forward and do their part.
That's where I like Obama so much. He repeatedly said that the American people would have to do their part, to mandate the changes they want. It was very Howard Dean of him in philsophy, and it resonated with me.
Do we deserve an Obama, I have a modicum of hope that we do. He is a visionary leader in the sense of believing that the American people should be the ones to help set the direction of this country. Again, the quality of his thinking is very high.
With John Edwards, I have to take into account the hectoring (yes, sometimes it seems that way, Sitka, but I'm glad for it) that his record simply doesn't match his rhetoric or passion. The young woman who died before getting the liver or kdney transplant, something in me wants to say, if you cared that much, John Edwards, why didn't you pay for it as an example of what should happen. You are wealthy beyond most people's imagination, and yet, this woman died because the insurance company took so long to be forced to pay for it. That may be unfair, but for me that is a question.
I do think all the candidates are viable, have some great talents, but Obama is extraordinary. He seems to hold still the real belief that Americans coming together can do it, and for me that resonates Jack Kennedy's challenge, What can you do for your country.
Just some input.
Annilow
Wed, 01/16/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Any patriotic American who witnessed Bish in the ME , should have reached the conclusion just how much certain countries have literally hijacked this nation.............
I watched the recap of the debate for maybe five minutes. Chris Matthews was even more insufferable than usual. Did you see Keith on the screen -- grinning? I think he was just laughing to himself at the absurdity of Matthews' comments. Why is this man given such a platform?
I do think all the candidates are viable, have some great talents, but Obama is extraordinary.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well again Pat, this all sounds very pretty......but will it WIN you an election? This is where people will have to eventually separate reality from fantasy.......so far, from what I see and hear.......nobody, with MAYBE an exception in Edwards, beats Mccain............
Did you see Keith on the screen -- grinning?
I dropped in at the last of the roundtable and saw Olbermann slap Matthews down for something. Tweety was taken aback by it for several long seconds. I'm afraid I can't remember enough to even paraphrase it.
111
Thanks for posting that rdorgan. I work for the company that discovered and manufactures Avastin. Dr. Napoleon Ferrera was also very instrumental in this type of research. Took him 30 years to come up with a drug that stops the blood supply to tumors. I'm sure he knew Dr. Folkman very well.
After seeing this morning's coverage of the debate last night, I have to wonder -- was Edwards really even there?
so far, from what I see and hear.......nobody, with MAYBE an exception in Edwards, beats Mccain...
Micahel Ellis, are you arguing for electability the way the DLC argued for Kerry?
Obama talked about making the difficult decisions when the polls are not in your favor. That's the kind of President I want, someone who can reason, get a variety of perspectives, and make the decision that requires integrity and courage.
No, my argument isn't meant to be pretty. I want frankly to take my country back, to see its ethical standards raised, to trust in the belief that the President holds those standards himself/herself.
Can he be elected? I don't know. I do know that I've stopped condemning George Bush because it's a waste of energy. Where were the American people for Pete's sake? This is a Representative Democarcy, and yes, Bush may have stolen the elections both times, but he came close enough to stealing them. Where we were?
159. the DLC has decided that Edwards no longer exists
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/dlc-leaders-cut-edwards-out/
Micahel Ellis, are you arguing for electability the way the DLC argued for Kerry?
I had hoped after 2004 that Kerry had proven once and for all that electability is the biggest canard of all.......
If the public is still supporting the long war then McCain wins because no one supports a longer war then McCain.
Fom this vets point of view, supporting anything other then get the troops out ASAP is absurd. The dieing goes on as long as we are there. What is McCains exit point? He doesn't have one.
JEs Iraq exit plan is the best.
the DLC has decided that Edwards no longer exists
And after all the nice things he said about them and votes he cast with them!
Maybe in the future he'll choose his friends more carefully.
168,
nonsense.
JE gets them out in a year; BO and HC by the end of their second term, Repubs leave them forever.
152. Well said, Pat. I have come around to Obama. I do think he is extraordinary. I felt Hillary made some cheap shots. To me, she was somewhat shouting - should have been more conversational. I also believe she is an authoritarian. That's what my husband called her last night. I think I've had enough of one authoritarian presidency for a lifetime.
gotta run for a while
will play more later.
fyi - Sitka and any others interested in seeing the Nevada lawsuit loose it's shirt (bad pun I know, please excuse me)::
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jan/16/timing-may-sink-lawsuit-aimed-strip-voting/
Timing may sink lawsuit aimed at Strip votingWed, Jan 16, 2008 (2 a.m.)
Not all votes in a caucus are created equal, and Nevada’s Saturday contest is no different.
But that doesn’t mean a legal challenge to stop the party from holding special precinct meetings for Strip workers will succeed.
The lawsuit seeking to block the Democratic Party from having caucus sites on the Strip faces significant legal obstacles, election law experts said Tuesday.
U.S. District Court Judge James C. Mahan is to rule on the lawsuit Thursday; his decision could reverberate throughout Nevada and the national political contest.
A doctrine allows courts to throw out a challenge if the person bringing it has unduly delayed taking action, to the detriment of the opposing party.
Called the doctrine of laches, “it gives the court the power to say, even if a suit has merit, you’re bringing it up too late,” said Richard Hasen, a professor specializing in election law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
It appeared that the plaintiffs, another legal expert said, “just waited too late in the day to entertain these types of issues.”
The doctrine is meant to prevent last-minute litigation when rules could have been challenged earlier, said Edward B. Foley, professor of law at Moritz College of Law and the director of the election law program at Ohio State University.
“The court is likely to ask: Why couldn’t they have brought this sooner? Why is it filed now?”
...
...
Sitka
Wed, 01/16/08
___________________________________________________________________________
I dont care for Quija boards myself...in 1965 I asked it where i would eventually live and it said Utah.....hmm........plus, i heard that when you play the Quija game, it opens up the spirit world or something like that.......that kinda scares me.
JE gets them out in a year; BO and HC by the end of their second term, Repubs leave them forever.
<>You're behind the times. They're all promising to ge out in 9 months -- except for the "embassy troops."Dems may not deliver, but they sure as hell know what to promise.
The question is, who are you going to believe -- the ones who voted us into Iraq, or the ones who didn't?
(But we're forgetting Kucinich, who has the best plan because it is immediate and complete.)
People cannot vote in a caucus, unless a convenor is available, folks (i.e., residency status=can't vote in another town, etc.).
Nearly half of of the towns/cities in my county don't have one as yet. Our county Chair is a thug (also a former Deaniac--people won't lift a finger for him).
http://mainedems.org/PenobscotCountyCauc...
Secondly: even if someone voted absentee (which we can do up here...well in advance), the vote wouldn't count, as no convenor was present--nullified.
Third: those who vote absentee cannot vote on the 2nd round of winnowing out, so they're semi-disenfranchised.
Fourth: turnout is exponentially lower, vs. primaries--esp. for lower income marginalized populations; due to time-limited stipulations (date/hour of attendance), lack of transportation and childcare; shift work, and elders (see inclement weather fmi--it was minus 36 below during our '04 caucus).
Can you say *women*?
Even for those towns/cities who *do* have a convenor: who's to say that the caucus is advertised appropriately--well in advance (they aren't); and they're run legitimately.
Many in my county were run crookedly in '04. Upon filing complaints w/the state Dem. party, there was a dire lack of accountability, re: corrupt sKerry conveners in some areas.
Mine certainly wasn't. I was Howard's victory captain...had a copy of the rules in my lap (and studied them in advance)!
I know bloggers in ME who still aren't registered in their place of residence; and haven't bothered to read the procedural rules as yet--they haven't a clue, re: process of how a caucus actually *works*.
...which is scary.
State legislatures are too damned cheap to run primaries is the issue, so pls. don't shower caucuses w/praise, 'cuz it's unwarranted.
If you reside in a smallish town or city; and your employer or someone else (who is influential) is in the room, your privacy & daily life issues may directly conflict w/your votes within said public sphere.
Actually, the small piddly towns are where you pick up easy delegates.
If only a couple of folks show up, it can be over in less than 15 min.; and you garner an automatic state convention delegate (sans any hassles) for your candidate.
During '04, a husband & wife were the only two in their entire town who showed up at the Dem. caucus in their tiny town; so that was one state convention delegate for Dean.
Many towns in ME are uber-'red', however, if you can manage to hold a caucus, it's a strategy to pick up easy delegates (strategically speaking)--must have a convenor, though.
Poof. Done. Two people=one proportional delegate for Dean.
Micahel Ellis, are you arguing for electability the way the DLC argued for Kerry
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hi pat, i guess you could say that.......but just because something doesnt work the first time doesnt mean it wont work second time around......its 2008 now, not 2004........you may recall my posts I dont support and will not vote for any of the 3, but taking into account all ther platforms, debates, demeanour, goals, etc etc......plus the big random element, the amercian voting public, it keeps coming up Edwards..........now, I dont like him anymore than any other Obama supporter, but I see a Edwards/Obama ticket giving the Mccain military/eveangelical/right wing ticket a good run for their money............
just because something doesnt work the first time doesnt mean it wont work second time around.....
It's been said that the very definition of stupidity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
The question is, who are you going to believe -- the ones who voted us into Iraq, or the ones who didn't?
___________________________________________________________________________
Well, this is where people have to do some sould searching..thats in the past......people make mistakes, I still to this day fail to understand how anyone coiuld have voted for that war and Bush, but its time to move on..........Edwards has come clean on it at least althoiugh i question his integrity on that, but hey............even John Lennon apologized and was forgiven when in 1966 he said 'The beatles are bigger than Jesus Christ" (this was taken out of context of course.....
JFK, in 1961 pulled a boner with the bay of Pigs, yet he was forgiven and it was forgotten........
The list goes on and on........Obama smoked dope or crack when he was a teen ager..personally i say, so what? Does that make him a crack dealer today?
Until Obama starts speaking with specifics and plans and alters his foreign policy stance, i dont take him seriously.............he makes a good speecch, but thats all right now and he knows it.
Sitka wrote: Maybe in the future he'll choose his friends more carefully.
Edwards is not friend of the DLC and hasn't been for some time. Your anti-Edwards spin has affected your brain, I think. There is a reason they tried to destroy him and now are trying to ignore him. They can live with Obama and love Clinton.
But they are deathly afraid of an Edwards presidency because he is taking on their corporate masters and their funding sources. Too bad you have become such a corporate sponsor yourself, whether you admit it or not.
Monica Smith
Wed, 01/16/08
Reply to this
Christianity teaches us to turn the other cheek and forgive those who sin against us. Sometimes that puts us at a disadvantage. On the other hand, it keeps us from being consumed by hate and suspicion
How refreshing, a post that actually is positive towards the believers in Christ. Thank you.
Sitka
Wed, 01/16/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well,not really........ever heard the old saying "if you dont suceed, try try again"..........we arent trying to make a light bulb here, but trying to win an eelction...............dont worry, the powers that be tha really run the show behind the scenes will out up Hillary or edwards.........lets see if it pans out that way......
dog soldier
Wed, 01/16/08
Exactly....both Obama and Clinton will have forces in Iraq to fight "Al Qaida". That will require permanent bases even though Obama says he opposes them.
Edwards will remove all combat troops in the first year. Only thing left will be a marine contingent to protect the Embassy (which is true everywhere).
This may be unfair, but I've decided we need to up the ante on this military exit thing. You see, the ground troops are there for one purpose only--to protect the bases from being shelled and mortared and the supply lines from being interrupted. Now, casual consideration would lead one to think that the purpose of the bases is to accommodate the troops that are guarding them. But that's not, in fact, the case. These are Air Bases. These are Air Force enterprises. The Air Force is who controls air and missile defense assets. So, the question that needs to be answered is what's the time-table for getting the Air Force out.
There have been a couple of reports recently about the Air Force which seem designed to be distracting. First there was the story out of Texas where Bush Two visited a high tech installation which is tracking things in Iraq. Then there was the news about 40,000 pounds of bombs being dropped in ten minutes. Then there was the Bush visit to the Air Base in Kuwait, no doubt designed to tell the media in the entourage that's where the air war over Iraq is coming from. So, the question of Balad and al Asad didn't even come up. Even though that's where all the action is. And it's the Air Force that's a provocation to the region.
171.
mary vb
Wed, 01/16/08
...I have come around to Obama. I do think he is extraordinary. I felt Hillary made some cheap shots. To me, she was somewhat shouting - should have been more conversational. I also believe she is an authoritarian. That's what my husband called her last night. I think I've had enough of one authoritarian presidency for a lifetime.
----------
I’ve spent some time too yesterday to watch all three "majors"..., lol.
Sorry, could not find anything "extraordinary" in Obama except smooth/balanced talk, a-le Clinton (he) renewed.
Clinton's (she) with target to demonstrate clearly her assertiveness was very funny to watch.
Edwards disappointed to the degree that now I think his "unscripted" suggestions..., lol, WELL WHITHIN verified by Demos political gurus' script.
All three probably will agree to move "combat" troops from Iraq to Kuwait...like it'll make any significant change in foreign POLICY..., lol.
No it'll not! Policeman of the World stays the same policeman even if it'll be moved to an "easily reachable from" location.
Overall, all these pseudo progressives will yield their power exactly THE SAME MUCH as people will MAKE THEM TO...., no more, only less if there is a chance.
Dean-Paul revolution has begun anyway..., lol.
Watch it! It's been televised daily.
Well, this is where people have to do some sould searching..thats in the past......people make mistakes,
and some get it right in the first place. I'll put my trust in the latter.
Edwards is not friend of the DLC and hasn't been for some time
Yes. The NEW Edwards.
There is a reason they tried to destroy him and now are trying to ignore him.
I haven't seen an effort to smear or destroy him. He's ignored because he hasn't won but one primary (his home state) in 5 years of campaigning and polls so low nationally.
...ever heard the old saying "if you dont suceed, try try again"..
Yes, I've heard it. But only only the stupid try the same thing again and expect a different result.
Exactly....both Obama and Clinton will have forces in Iraq to fight "Al Qaida". That will require permanent bases even though Obama says he opposes them.
Edwards will remove all combat troops in the first year. Only thing left will be a marine contingent to protect the Embassy (which is true everywhere).
They all three say the same thing. The question is which to believe -- the ones who voted the troops into Iraq?
Edwards will remove all combat troops in the first year. Only thing left will be a marine contingent to protect the Embassy (which is true everywhere).
I heard Edwards agree with O/C that he'd leave some forces on the borders to prevent al queda from taking over in the region.
I've decided we need to up the ante on this military exit thing.
Then you should vote for Kucinich.
The last place you're going to hear the whole story about Edwards from is his supporters.
Jo*in*Vermont
Wed, 01/16/08
Yes, he did say he'd have a contingent in Kuwait, but not in Iraq. Personally, I don't think that is even necessary because the US can have a force anywhere in the world basically if absolutely necessary. Iraq will take care of the few remaining AQ there. They are already doing so in Anbar.
Having combat troops in Iraq requires permanent bases. Both Obama and Clinton will do that.
Sitka
Wed, 01/16/08
You smear and misrepresent Edwards all the time. But, of course, i don't think you have that much influence.
Yes, Edwards has been the recipient of many smears by the MSM funneling DLC talking points. You obviously don't watch cable news often which is a good thing.
The last place you're going to hear the whole story about Edwards from is his DETRACTORS.
Sitka, make positive points about Obama and we can discuss things.
Make smears and constant personal attacks about Edwards and his supporters and you'll get blowback.
The DLC can live with Obama. Axelrod (Rahm's good friend) is Obama's main campaign advisor and was fired by Edwards in 04. Look at who the candidates surround themselves with and it tells more about who supports them and who they will hire.
Clinton - union-busting, Morris friendly Mark Penn.
Obama - Axelrod, friend of Rahm and the DLC.
Iraq:In their own words........
Edwards: I don't make those kind of evaluations. I'm doing what I think is the right responsible course for America, which is to get all our combat troops out of Iraq in the first year of my presidency; end combat missions and have no permanent military bases. America needs to end its occupation of Iraq and I will do that as President.
Obama: I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. I will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. I will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq.
Hillary: Can't find anything specific.
Make smears and constant personal attacks about Edwards and his supporters and you'll get blowback
If citing Edwards record is a smear, then it says more about the record than me.
The last place you're going to hear the whole story about Edwards from is his DETRACTORS.
Just detracting his record. It's the one thing he can't change.
190.
Indy Steve
Wed, 01/16/08
....
Yes, he did say he'd have a contingent in Kuwait, but not in Iraq. Personally, I don't think that is even necessary because the US can have a force anywhere in the world basically if absolutely necessary. Iraq will take care of the few remaining AQ there. They are already doing so in Anbar.
-----
Yes, the "US can"..., lol.
Does it mean it has to? Does it mean it needs to?
That the whole question!
...lol, recall Clinton (he)...with his book about Monica....:
"Why I did it? Because I COULD!".
Let's wait some more when US won't because it CAN'T.
And good luck with killing "few remaining AQ there"..., lol.
Hey Phil, If you're still on here. Last night you asked for thoughts on the debate and also some questions on Dennis here in Michigan. Dennis got 4%, (including my vote) but as far as I know he did not campaign here in Michigan. He did have one ad on Youtube aimed at Michigan.
I thought the debate was pretty much a three way tie. All three were pretty good (b+), and no one made any major errors. Chris Matthews crowned Hillary the winner; but I think it's just the way his inside the beltway mind works. I don't think anyone who watched the debate objectively would think that. Matthews claims Hillary stole the Iraq issue from Obama. She asked a very good question, and he gave a very good reply. Only in D.C. would someone see the nuance that Hillary won that exchange. I watched the debate closely and when that happened I never gave it a second thought. Overall the debate was extremely close; just like the polls.
I was extremely proud to vote for Dennis yesterday.
former
Wed, 01/16/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Agred on the foreign policy thing....all 3 are basically wrong in their own way...they are forgetting that, according to the experts anyways (sorry sitka, no Quija board for this one, just common sense) the US was attacked by Al Qaida in 2001(and other times) for putting troops on Saidi soil...............the I/P problem and the US' position and inability to contribute in a positive way had been a disaster.....the US over reliance on foreign oil, from the ME primarily and this is a major threat as we are beholdend to said nations...............
Politicians wont talk about the first 2 much and only graze the surface on the third one..........
John Edwards was so passionate last night at the Debate. He really showed the hunger to want to make the changes he's talking about. And, he does have the best policy for America to move forward.
The bold changes John Edwards talks about, is the only way we will receive the Real change that voters are looking for.
I think even though as the pundits talk that the Corporate/Moderate candidates Clinton and Obama are adopting some of Edwards policy and trying to move towards his message, it's not genuine,, especially because they're aren't changing their policy.
It seems if people think they're going to get any bold change from those candidates, they are only projecting their own desires, it's not coming from those candidates. Obama hiimself constantly says he doesn't believe in idealism and bold changes, you must compromise and that is his entire manner of doing things. That is why he is also professing to have Corporations in his policy making meetings.
I thought it funny how Axelrod tried to jump on John Edwards NEVER taking Lobbyist / Pac money, and saying Obama doesn't either, Trippi said "No, he's NEVER taken their money", Axelrod said "Oh, I thought you meant just this campaign".
Obama is correct, he is the "symbol". As he also calls himself, the blank slate, for people to form their own opinions. That is why his record matters and it doesn't match what he claims. Too bad Russert didn't ask about the interest cap amendment that Obama didn't support. Instead of just the Bankruptcy Bill. Even Hillary supported that Amendment to cap interest to a maximum 30 percent.
Edwards also is showing to be the clear winner against all the Republicans as found in CNN's latest Poll.
Sitka
Wed, 01/16/08
Obama on Iraq: there's a contradiction in getting combat troops out of Iraq AND leaving troops in Iraq to take on Al Qaida. That can't be done AND it requires operational bases which would be permanent.
Edwards seized on this and made a great point against Obama on this contradiction. Look, folks, Al Qaida is real and is a threat. We can't ignore it completely.
You smear and misrepresent Edwards all the time.
It's called citing his record.
But, of course, i don't think you have that much influence
Surely not. I know he isn't polling at 9% nationally because of anything I point out. Obviously just about everybody sees Edwards for what he is.
Clinton and Obama are adopting some of Edwards policy and trying to move towards his message, it's not genuine,,
Was it genuine when Edwards did the same to Dean in 2004? Is the NEW Edwards of today even genuine?
Sitka wrote: The link I posted above shows that Edwards can live with the DLC.
All your Edwards' attacks and presumed problems are years old. Edwards clearly represents a threat to the DLC/Rahm/Schumer/Clinton Standard operating procedure. It is anti-thetical to a grassroots Democratic party.
Edwards focused his responses on how entrenched interests will derail or delay all progressive reforms in the Congress. You must change the culture in DC not by working with them but by taking them on, and galvanizing public support to do so.
The DLC is not attacking Edwards now, because they have two candidates they desire. Clinton they would love. Obama, they can live with.
It was funny how Obama liked John Edwards proposal on removing all troops from Iraq. Hubby said, DOH! Obama found something else to copy Edwards on.
John Edwards has promised to remove all combat troops and have no bases in Iraq. Hillary and Obama weren't committing to that saying they will have to leave some troops there to fight.
John Edward specifically stated there would be no fighting forces in Iraq. How can you claim to Iraqi's you are no longer occupying them if you leave combat forces there. He said, to ensure safety should the need arise, he will have troops near by in Kuwait should they need to respond.
188. I said "we," not a candidate. Besides, Kucinich is no longer an option in NH. Our primary is done.
Also, I read through Kucinich's plans very carefully and he does make exceptions for hunting al Qaeda. Now, since I happen to think that alQaeda is a figment of the insurgent imagination (whenever the Americans ask questions, somebody in the crowd whispers "al Qaeda did it" because they know that's what the Americans want to hear and will believe. Iraqis remind me a lot of those exterminators to PROMISE that their one-time treatment will get rid of all the bugs for life, especially if you sign a contract that lets them come back every six months just to check and collect their check), it doesn't impress me. What did impress me was that there was no mention of the Air Forces anywhere. "Troops" means Army, National Guard, Marines. You know, the guys that are pulling 15 month tours of duty while the Air Force tour is FOUR MONTHS and, if that interferes with someone's day job, they can trade with another and reduce it to TWO MONTHS, which is exactly what Rumsfeld was predicting when he outlined how the redeployment of forces from Germany would work as part of the BRAC process.
The Pentagon has gotten away with lying for so long they do it as a matter of course.
I don't deny that Edwards has made mistakes in the past. And neither does he. I admit some of the mistakes were doozies.
The key is that he alone has not made excuses, taken in new information, and changed his position. That is a model for all of us to follow because we all make mistakes. He who lives in glass houses....
The Air Force is who controls air and missile defense assets.
lol, really
Clinton and Obama are identical on Iraq. Only Edwards commits to NO offensive combat troops in Iraq and No permanent bases. And that will be achieved in the first year of his Presidency. The occupation continues otherwise.
All your Edwards' attacks and presumed problems are years old.
It's called a record, and it tells you more about what a politician will do than promises.
Only Edwards commits to NO offensive combat troops in Iraq and No permanent bases.
And Kucinich. Maybe he and Edwards should form another alliance?
Combined they could poll at 10%.
Linda,
Great graphic. This is something most people aren't realizing. That Edwards has very good polling against ALL possible repubs. He is our best chance at having a progressive who has taken on special interests win the White House.
I can live with Obama but I just don't think he will be uniting DC any time soon! First, you have to clear up the corruption and chase out the scoundrels who have taken our gov't. hostage.
john nelson
Wed, 01/16/08
...
I was extremely proud to vote for Dennis yesterday.
+++
john -
I've been proud of Dennis lately too. Takes a lot of guts to go up against a state like New Hampshire, asking for a recount of votes.
I don't deny that Edwards has made mistakes in the past. And neither does he. I admit some of the mistakes were doozies.
The key is that he alone has not made excuses,
The key is that other don't need to make excuses nor apologize. They got it right in the first place. You can't trust those who helped make Bush's messes to clean them up.
Edwards promised to work to raise the min. wage to $9.50 and indexing it to inflation, which is close to a "living' wage. Some states already have it that high (Washington and Oregon).
Edwards has very good polling against ALL possible repubs
So did Kerry. Remember "I'm electable"?
Indy Steve
Wed, 01/16/08
...
I can live with Obama
...
+++
From your consistently negative posts about Obama, it sure don't look that way.
Sitka
Wed, 01/16/08
Obama voted for war funding, and hasn't been strong against the war while Senator. Particularly during 04. He wasn't the VP candidate which Edwards was which limited what Edwards could do or say.
Clinton voted for IWR in 02 like Edwards but still defends her vote by deceptively arguing she was voting for more inspections.
Edwards regretted his vote and publicly reversed it without excuses over two years ago. He has remained consistent since.
Edwards: I don't make those kind of evaluations. I'm doing what I think is the right responsible course for America, which is to get all our combat troops
note the word combat--they are not the issue
out of Iraq in the first year of my presidency; end combat missions
note repetition of word combat--still not the issue
and have no permanent military bases.
the U.S. has no permanent bases anywhere, not even in the U.S.
America needs to end its occupation of Iraq and I will do that as President.
As soon as Maliki signs a status of forces agreement "inviting" the U.S. to stay the occupation will be over. If Edwards doesn't know that, he's incompetent. If he does, he's promising something he won't need to deliver.
Obama: I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq.
The removal will already have started next summer.
I will remove one to two combat brigades each month,
Note the use of the word combat--same meaning as when Edwards says it
and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.
Again with the combat
I will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq.
Note the use of the future tense for something that, under a different name, has already happened.
Everything's true and every thing's a lie. People get paid a lot of money to do that.
Only Dodd said he would get all the troops out and even he wasn't asked about the Air Force, which doesn't have troops. What are the people who aren't aviators called?
Obama is saying nothing new about his plans to BEGIN removing troops from Iraq immediately and have them all out in 16 months. He has been saying this since he announced his candidacy.
If anyone else is saying the same thing then it is him/her that is parroting Obama. It's only natural though to mimic the apparent leader.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
January 16, 2008
"Obama gets major labor endorsement"
The head of the politically powerful Los Angeles County Federation of Labor said Tuesday that she is endorsing Barack Obama for president.
The endorsement by Maria Elena Durazo is a coup for Obama that could help the Illinois senator...to win substantial support among Latino voters in Southern California. Obama has won the backing of other Los Angeles-area Latino leaders, but this is probably his biggest such endorsement yet, given the broad reach of the county labor federation.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-labor16jan16,0,656548.story?coll=la-home-center
Edwards promised to work to raise the min. wage to $9.50 and indexing it to inflation, which is close to a "living' wage
Was a that as a senator? If so, was it before or after he and Hillary voted for Bush's bankrutpcy law written by the credit card companies?
210. some people might think that the Navy had all the ships at sea. LOL
Obama voted for war funding
That's one reason I don't support him either. But there's a huge difference in voting for funding as Obama has done and voting for invasion (and funding) as Edwards did.
Monica Smith
Wed, 01/16/08
Nothing is permanent in your view, if you don't consider permanent bases in the US "premanent". LOL. Even the earth and the universe isn't permanent. That is precious.
Combat troops is a term meaning OFFENSIVE forces which will go out and seek targets to destroy. We do have permanent bases all over the world.
Kucinich and Richardson had the most aggressive out of Iraq policy, not Dodd.
217. Actually, what it takes is money. The SoS settled for a $25,000 down-payment for ten precincts and Kucinich can back out if nothing turns up.
Chain of custody is going to be a problem. How absentee ballots are handled may legitimately occasion suspicion.
Joan* In*Florida
Wed, 01/16/08
Edwards said it first and he started his campaign before Obama. But the who said it first debate is silly in my view. None of the top three plans are ideal, but of the three, only Edwards clearly states no offensive combat troops and no permanent bases.
January 16, 2008
Obama’s people are trumpeting their endorsement by Jack Carter, oldest son of former President Jimmy Carter.
I believe Jack Carter also endorsed Howard Dean in 2004 and worked in his campaign.
228. Actually, it was the Pentagon which issued that clarification about the designation of bases and specified that there are no permanent bases. This is not my invention. This has been discussed often enough that the candidates should be in the know. It they continue to use the phrase, they are being deceptive.
* rdorgan
Wed, 01/16/08
He hasn't sold me -- yet. Not convinced with the uniter message. Guess I'm too old and been through too many fights to believe that. The "uniter" vs. the "fighter" is simplistic but sums up the different approaches. It's going to take a fighter to make meaningful progressive reforms, IMO.
And as long as Edwards is in, I'm all in for him. However, I recognize problems and disagree with some of his positions too.
Speaking of the Navy, and the Straight of Hormuz Incident.........
as the small craft approached, the ships received a radio message in English, warning that "I am coming to you. You will explode in a few minutes." The ships' captains were within a few seconds of directing their crews to open fire.
Now it turns out, according to the Guardian of London, that a widely known radio hacker who calls himself Filipino Monkey — a guy who often pesters ships in the Gulf — may have been the one sending the radio message. There was, apparently, no real threat.
Sitka
Wed, 01/16/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The thing is.......Kerry was NOT electable IMO......just a few of his gaffes about voting for the 87million thing, his vote for the war........his previous VN war tossing of th medals etc......all these things closed the window of opportunity against Bush who, IF the Democrats had put up Dean who basically didnt have any REAL smudges against him..........Dean maybe could have pulled it off. You may recall, he never got the chance.........
The way I imagined it way bwck was simply, say 20 minutes before a debate with Bush(IF dean had been nominated) heres Howard, short sleeves rolled up, determined gritty look on his face, flanked by hundreds if not thousands of well wishers and supporters going into the debate.........Dean would have mopped the floor with Bush, and THATS the kind of candidate the Dems should have noiminated.........a fighter
Kerry and Obama remind me of each other, Kerry even endorsed Obama(what a mistake for Obama)..........sit down, poo poo it all......sit down and negotiate.....bring us all togther.....BULLSHIT........Bush sang the same song and dance in 2000...........
Let's get real here folks. Edwards is not going to win this race. Perhaps he is running for Clinton's VP, who knows.
Support whoever you like but if Obama does not win the nomination, Hillary and Bill Clinton will -- it's as simple as that as I think everybody here knows it by now.
228. Aggressive, perhaps. But not as specific.
Richardson had the advantage of not being currently in the federal government and therefor not privy to classified information which the candidates (and Senators) are provided on condition that they not reveal what they have been told. Richardson alos let slip early on that there's a problem with Turkey which he would send Holebrook to fix. He only mentioned it once. He was probably advised that Turkey's desire to get rid of our ICBMs ought not to be discussed.
Hi,
Jumping in again. I didn't see a great deal of difference among the three candidates on Iraq. Frankly, if Al Qaeda is a threat, you know that we will oppose it whether we bomb camps, position troops within Iraq or Quwait. I think there's political realism we should take into account. No American President will allow a threat to go unaddressed (except George Bush, who will create one).
When I attended the Estes Park caucus training, the representative for Edward, Wade Norris, spoke of God, of a personal path discovered, of John Edwards' personal stake in the problems of the middle class and poor.
Again, at the debate, John Edwards spoke of his personal conviction. For me, I'm glad it's a personal conviction, but I want more than that. I want it to be an American conviction that we as a people have to address the inequities, the injustices that are perpetrated on the middle class and poor. I felt, and it is a feeling, that it was a mission, a religious conviction, and something in me is leery of that. So, once again, it comes down to preferences, to temperamental and intellectual affinities, really hard to argue.
I don't think, though, that Obama is in any way a blank slate, a feel-good pie -in-the-sky orator. I know his record in the Illinois Legislature, his work as a community organizer, his Presidency of the Law Review are examples of his commitment, of his capabilities, and they are anything but vague and abstract. His record is the most liberal and humanitarian of any of the three candidates.
It seems to me that Edwards' passion is very important to many people. It also seems to me that the vision of a country that could agree on basic values and would be a participant in the Washington decision making and there is the high intelligence to effect that is a huge draw for me and many others.
Hillary Clinton puzzles me. She seems to me to be the old guard, very much in the mode of what we have had for too many years: the Bill Clinton prsidency, the Two Georges, and I am really done with that, and frankly, gender doesn't mean anything by itself. It's the character, the person and the record that means, for me at least, the most.
Joan* In*Florida
Wed, 01/16/08
Reply to this
January 16, 2008
Obama’s people are trumpeting their endorsement by Jack Carter, oldest son of former President Jimmy Carter.
+++
Joan -
That's good news but not really for those who say they "can live with Obama".
Obama gets major labor endorsementtemplate_bastemplate_bas223Obama voted for war funding, and hasn't been strong against the war while Senator. Particularly during 04. He wasn't the VP candidate which Edwards was which limited what Edwards could do or say.Edwards regretted his vote and publicly reversed it without excuses over two years ago. He has remained consistent since.``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````I don't understand why Edwards was limited as to what he could say as VP. Shouldn't he have spoken his mind?Also I'm wondering how Edwards would have voted on funding the war if he had still been in the Senate.I really didn't like the way he danced around the Yucca Mountain issue last night
http://www.bluehampshire.com/showDiary.d...
...Service Employees International Union (SEIU) state councils from Iowa, California, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Minnesota, Michigan, West Virginia, Ohio and Oregon announced they have endorsed Senator John Edwards for president, totaling close to one million SEIU members. ...
---
Union endorsements of a candidate is one thing but actually getting their members to vote and work to GOTV beyond their union membership for the endorsed candidate is another.
Union endorsements don't always mean their members are willing to make personal contributions either.
Joan* In*Florida
Wed, 01/16/08
Like we "knew" Obama would win New Hampshire! Only two small states have voted. This is much different and more fluid than 04, Joan. And the slight by saying he is running for CLinton's VP? That was low.
I don't appreciate the implied "get with Obama or we'll get Clinton" message. Edwards is in the race, he has a strong progressive message, and he's taken the much harder "fighter" route rather than the pandering "i'm a uniter" message.
I will agree that he has to win a state eventually, but even if he doesn't, he could be a king/queen maker in Denver.
Must read from Bev Harris' blog on the NH recount
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/...
VERDICT: New Hampshire is unable to document its chain of custody properly, lacks written procedures, its secretary of state has said he doesn't know where its memory cards are, and LHS has been encroaching on state elections with near-total control. I'll be preparing a Special Report when I return from New Hampshire with documents and video to support this assessment.
Michael Ellis -
Have you done your football predictions yet ? I scrolled through your posts here and haven't seen anything yet. Did I miss it ?
only Edwards clearly states no offensive combat troops and no permanent bases.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
and is the only one to speak forcefully against Kyl-Lieberman the day of that vote, and unlike Obama never has threatened tto put troops into Pakistan
they have similar health care plans because after Edwards laid his out in detail the other two came up with plans similar enough for only policy wonks to argue over
my take:
we have one member of the War Party
that leaves us with two other choices
but if you want a President to focus on domestic problems and tone down the militarism there is only one because both the others have plans to "beef up" the forces
I do think that Obama would be successful at diplomacy and that would be his first choice, but he certainly isn't as big a threat to war profiteering corporations that Edwards is
rae hart
Wed, 01/16/08
Rae,\
When you agree to be someone's VP candidate, you recognize that the Presidential campaign is dominant. Biting your tongue and going with the plan in public goes with the territory.
Which is why Dean would make a TERRIBLE VP, BTW!!
I don't appreciate the implied "get with Obama or we'll get Clinton" message. Edwards is in the race, he has a strong progressive message
Kucinich is in the race too. And his message is much stronger and more liberal than that of Edwards.
Susan Rowe -
That's great about those state SEIU endorsements for Edwards. It's the Dean thing in him, that's why I like Edwards and he would jump to my first choice for president, if for any reason, Obama exits the nomination process early on.
oh, BTW, in the upcoming Nevada caucus, Obama has gotten the Nevada SEIU endorsement.
Denise
Wed, 01/16/08
Reply to this
Must read from Bev Harris' blog on the NH recount
...
+++
Denise -
a SHOUT OUT to Bev Harris and Dennis Kucinich !
rd
I say I can live with an Edwards presidency too, but I know that he would be just another insider taking instructions from the DLC. He is not a strong leader in any sense, that's why he is not polling higher. Nor is he inspiring -- the same old speech we have heard for too many years.
But Edwards would be better than the Clintons, but nothing close to the leadership you would have from Obama. Nobody could ever convince me otherwise. I have watched ALL the Democratics candidates. I settled on Dodd or Obama long ago as being the only candidates to offer real leadership. Obama also offers change, something Dodd may not have done.
Sorry, my post is a little messed up.
Guess what I'm saying is you have alot of excuses for Edwards, but certainly do not extend that courtesy to Obama.
When you agree to be someone's VP candidate, you recognize that the Presidential campaign is dominant. Biting your tongue and going with the plan in public goes with the territory.
Edwards didn't have to bite his tongue because his message was the same as Kerry's -- even though his record was actually a little worse.
oh, btw, to anyone who says they "can live" with a candidate --
-- ya might want to check first with the candidate him/herself, and with the respective spouses, kids, in-laws, pets, etc. first, just in case there's not enough room
Fine. I never called for anyone to drop out. I don't believe in "strategic" voting in primaries. Vote for who you believe in and who you think will accomplish reforms as President.
personally, I don't think Kuci will accomplish much and he is better suited for Congress where he could lead on some of Edwards' initiatives. But others will differ and I respect that.
john nelson
thanks for the input
we really do need a candidate to the left of John Edwards in the mix to truly represent the party as it now stands even if in single digits
the party of Hillary Clinton is inside the confines of right wing of our party except for the gender, working women wild card which I have never minimized
Obama would create a new party, (neo-transcendentalism?).
Edwards would bring back voters that left because they couldn't tell the difference between the parties but would be more recognizable as the Democratic Party of history
Edwards didn't have to bite his tongue because his message was the same as Kerry's -- even though his record was actually a little worse.
Actually, Kerry was pretty upset with Edwards for little deviations. Like changing the theme when he spoke from "help is on the way" to "hope is on the way".
When you agree to run as VP, you agree to run to elect someone else President. That is just the way it is. Don't agree to do it if you don't want to accept that.
I will agree that he has to win a state eventually, but even if he doesn't, he could be a king/queen maker in Denver
I hope the people rather than Edwards decide the nominee. But he can't keep finishing behind and expect people to keep opening their wallets and turning out for him. Not even Dean could do it.
250
Yeah but read what one of Dennis' folks said to Bev about what her role should be. It's down a bit on her blog at that link.
personally, I don't think Kuci will accomplish much and he is better suited for Congress where he could lead on some of Edwards' initiatives.
Judging by their respective records, I would expect Kucinich to at least attempt more good than Edwards would.
rae hart
Wed, 01/16/08
Rae,
My point is made to the constant attacks on Edwards that are made, mainly by Obama supporters, but who overlook the mistakes Obama has made. And we all do.
I would respect Obama if he would apologize for voting for war funding AFTER he stated he was dead set against the war. Maybe he has. Post it if you can.
I think it's naive to hope for a "uniter". We have a huge fight ahead of
-
By Stat Man on Jan 15, 2008 9:56 PM ESTModeration and Reason are First