Home » Blog » Paul Rogat Loeb: Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie?
Blog for America
Paul Rogat Loeb: Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie?
Linked to groups: Blog For America
Paul Rogat Loeb is a regular contributor to the blog for America. Here’s Dr. Loeb's latest piece analyzing what happened during the Ohio primary with the “NAFTAgate” scandal allegations that were key in that election and why. Note: Canadian sources, including a powerful Canadian Broadcasting Company report, suggest that this story was based overwhelmingly on lies. Yet, other than Keith Olbermann, the US media has been terrible in their reporting on this, (as with so many other issues).
Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie?
By Paul Rogat Loeb
Suppose someone in the North Korean government released a false story that shifted a key American election. If Bush were negatively affected, we might be bombing Pyongyang by now. But this just happened with what Hillary Clinton called "NAFTAgate" Without it, she might never have won Ohio, or her margin would have been minuscule. But as a Canadian Broadcasting Company story reveals, practically the entire story was a lie, one that played so central a role in Clinton's Ohio victory as to thoroughly taint any claim she raises about a swing state mandate.
As the Ohio primary approached, Obama was steadily closing what a month earlier had been a 20-point lead in the polls. He pointed out that the NAFTA trade agreement was a centerpiece of Bill Clinton's term and that it cost massive numbers of industrial jobs. Instead of creating a trade-fueled boom, NAFTA helped hollow out America's industrial base, with over 200,000 manufacturing jobs disappearing in Ohio alone since the 2000 election. Even Republicans I talked with while calling the state just before the primary made clear that they thought it was a disaster.
Given these sentiments, Hillary chose not to defend her husband's actions, but instead claimed Obama was distorting her position because she'd privately opposed the agreement at the time, had "long been a critic" and now similarly supported stronger labor and environmental standards. Echoing her history with the Iraq War, these claims required some pretty complicated contortions. As David Sirota points out, she'd praised NAFTA repeatedly in public settings from the time of its inception, even praising corporations for mounting "a very effective business effort" on behalf of its passage. And as Obama highlighted their contrasting positions and approaches on this and other issues, he was gaining in the polls.
(Click Read more for completed article)
Then, on Feb 27, the Canadian network CTV reported that even as Obama was publicly attacking Bill Clinton's role in NAFTA, and arguing for a drastic overhaul, he'd had a top staffer call the Canadian ambassador and arrange a meeting to reassure the Canadians that this was all just "political positioning," pandering for campaign trail. The likely source of the anonymous Valerie Plame-style leak was Ian Brodie, Chief of Staff to key Bush ally, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and the US media jumped all over it as proof of Obama's hypocrisy. The Canadian embassy denied the story and Obama and his campaign spokespeople also said it was false. On Feb 29, CTV then reported that a NAFTA conversation may have occurred earlier in Chicago with University of Chicago economics professor and senior economic advisor Austin Goolsbee. A follow-up March 3d leak then sent a supposed memo summarizing the meeting to the major US media outlets, quoting Goolsbee as saying Obama's statements were more "political positioning than the clear articulation of policy plans." Clinton made the controversy a centerpiece of her home stretch speeches and ads, saying "You come to Ohio and you both give speeches that are very critical of NAFTA and you send out misleading and false information about my position regarding NAFTA and then we find out that your chief economic advisor has gone to a foreign government and basically done the old wink wink, don't pay any attention this is just political rhetoric." She even ran a radio ad that misleadingly presenting itself as a news story, which concluded, "As Senator Obama was telling one story to Ohio, his campaign was telling a very different story to Canada."
John McCain similarly attacked Obama for the presumed contradiction in his stand, saying "I don't think it's appropriate to go to Ohio and tell people one thing while your aide is calling the Canadian Ambassador and telling him something else. I certainly don't think that's straight talk." The week before, key Clinton ally, Machinist's Union head Tom Buffenbarger used recycled language from ads the right-wing Club For Growth ran against Howard Dean by dismissing Obama supporters as "latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust fund babies." He now attacked Obama again by saying, "Working families cannot trust a candidate who telegraphs his real position to a foreign government and then dissembles in a nationally televised debate."
These attacks unquestionably made a difference. They flipped voter perceptions on an issue where Obama should have had a key advantage. In 1994, union, environmental, and social justice activists were so angry at Clinton's staking all his political chips to pass NAFTA that many sat out that critical election, helping lead to Gingrich's win. Now Clinton ended up getting a majority the 55 percent of Ohio voters who expressed a sense "that trade takes jobs away," a majority of those worried about their family's economic situation, and a majority of union members, whom Obama won in his recent victories. She won a 10 percent plurality in a state where Ohioans overwhelmingly picked the economy as the top issue. And she won overwhelmingly with late-breaking voters, the opposite of practically all of Obama's other campaigns. Most important, by casting doubt on Obama's integrity, the cornerstone of his campaign, they made him seem like just another hack politician who'd say anything to win. This gave the supposed scandal a probable impact in Texas and Rhode Island as well, even though NAFTA was less of a central issue there.
But as the CBC report and others makes clear, the core of the story turned out to be false. The Canadian government contacted Goolsbee to clarify Obama's position on trade, not the reverse. Although Goolsbee did meet with Canada's Chicago consul general George Rioux (not, as was reported in the original leak, Ambassador Michael Wilson), there's no evidence that he ever described Obama's position as mere political posturing. Instead, they met February 8, before NAFTA began to dominate the campaign, and discussion of the trade agreement took up just two to three minutes of the hour-long meeting. Goolsbee responded to Canadian questions by clarifying that Obama wasn't pushing to scrap NAFTA entirely, but that the agreement needed labor and environmental safeguards—basically what Obama had been saying in public. The memo was simply inaccurate, as even the Harper government now acknowledges after a firestorm of criticism by opposition parliament members who've accused Harper's staffers of trying to help their Republican allies across the border by attacking the likely and stronger of the Democratic candidates. In response, Harper called the leak "blatantly unfair," pledged to get to the bottom of it, and said "there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA."
Ironically, the day before the story hit American TV, Brodie, told reporters questioning him on trade that "someone from (Hillary) Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. . .That someone called us and told us not to worry." But that never made the headlines and no one raised it in the campaign. The Harper government has since denied any such approach, but this leaves open the question of why Brodie mentioned it to begin with.
As Matt Wallace writes in the Daily Kos, "this scandal was manufactured out of whole cloth. Goolsbee said something consistent with Obama's official position--that he wanted protections added, but it wasn't going to be a fundamental change or revocation of NAFTA, and that Obama was not a protectionist. This was morphed somewhat going into the memo, and now the embassy admits they "may have misrepresented the Obama advisor." Even after the memo misrepresented Obama, the Harper government took it a step further and then leaked a completely fantastic version of the story to the press, in order to maximize the bloodletting."
Although the Harper government has now apologized, the damage is done, and except for Keith Olbermann, the mainstream media continues to accept Clinton's framing. Clinton's victory also benefited from some pretty questionable attack politics. Her 3:00 AM ad echoed the worst of Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and Rudy Giuliani, evoking a manipulative politics of fear that suggested that if voters elected Obama their children might die. When asked if she'd "take Senator Obama on his word that he's not a Muslim," Clinton left the door open to the right wing lies by saying "there's nothing to base that on. As far as I know." She also pretty much handed McCain his campaign script by saying, "I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."
Taken together with a week of media framing that the respected Project for Excellence in Journalism described as overwhelmingly critical of Obama, and initial twenty five-point margins based on name familiarity and insider connections, these attacks also contributed strongly to her Ohio victory. Back-to-back sympathetic Saturday Night Live shows helped as well (with the one claiming the media was biased against Hillary being written by right wing comedy writer Jim Downey—who also wrote the sketch portraying Al Gore as a buffoon in the 2000 debates). Support from popular governor Ted Strickland and former Senator John Glenn also helped.
So did the exhortations of Rush Limbaugh and Fox commentators for their listeners and viewers to cross over and vote for her to keep the Democrats bloodying each other up. As the Wall Street Journal's Susan Davis reported, Republican votes that had gone to Obama 72 to 28 in Wisconsin and 72 to 23. In Virginia, now broke 53 to 46 in Texas. The earlier votes, from all reports as well as my own conversations and correspondence, were based on Republicans who genuinely preferred Obama as a candidate. But those in Texas and Ohio included a significant number consciously trying to create political mischief. Davis also interviewed a precinct worker who'd witnessed dozens of Limbaugh listeners bragging about their Democratic votes, and I've gotten emails testifying to similar occurrences in Ohio.
But "NAFTAgate" was key. Without it Clinton victory would have been non-existent or minimal. The nine delegates Clinton netted from Ohio can't be changed, but the salience of this lie casts into doubt everything she says about the lessons of this victory.
---
Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association. His previous books include Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time.
Great Susan. Everything the Clintons are doing seem to be based on nothing but lies and distortions.
There are even more questions about what happened to the 60 precincts in Harlem where the vote for Obama came up 0!!! The only one that has changed there went from 0 to Clinton 164 - Obama 162. What about the other 59 precincts?
I note the Clintons and their supporters decided not to revote MI when the latest Rasmussen poll had Clinton and Obama dead even there while BO hadn't even campaigned there at all yet.
Howard Dean is first.
My take on this is that there's a very deliberate media strategy at work here. What it boils down to is that the Clinton campaign takes one of its positions or initiatives, assumes that the Obama campaign has had a similar endeavor or experience and then leakes a suggestion to the press that the Obama activities be explored.
If the press turns up nothing, the subject just gets dropped. No fault attaches to the Clintons because they can claim to have been misinformed. What seems to have happened with the NAFTA story is that the press turned up a peripherally relevant event--a meeting by someone with someone from Canada--and the Clintons ran with it, embelishing it with details of their own event.
What we need to keep in mind is that since the object is to get media attention (remember all those incidents from New Hampshire and Iowa where people said things for which they then had to apologize?), they don't give a fig about accuracy or being caught out in a falsehood. Besides, that's one of the main benefits in talking about the "opposition"--any inaccuracy can be explained away as a simple mistake or, even, the opposition hiding things.
There's no point in trying to refute the falsehood. Lies have to be called out as strongly as possible and then dropped, in order to deny them the media attention they are after.
98% reported
Obama 60%
Clinton 38%
Tonite I heard on the NewsHour Hillary still chiding that Obama is secretly giving Canadians assurances on NAFTA today.
3983
You know all Obama has to do is beat her..That's all. Then it'd be all over.. He knocks her down, she gets back up. He knocks her down, she gets back up..All he has to do is beat her then it's over... So far she's been getting back up & fighting back & you know, I'd do the same thing if I were in her shoes. She wants to win the nomination just like he does.. I don't fault her for fighting for it. women have had to fight for anything they wanted since the beginning of time. I remember what it was like for women. You had to be tougher than the men to get anywhere..She is trying to do something no woman has ever done, just as he is trying to do something that no man of color has ever done. I don't fault either one.
Somebody who has the tech capability, please put the video of Olberman and Howard Fineman from Countdown tonight up on the internet for those without cable. Crooks? Liars?
It is excellent coverage of Clinton's new apparently, blatantly racist strategy for Pa.
The Lamestream media will never make a correction on this story because is shows they were lazy, punked, or in someone's pocket when initially reporting on it.
lazy, punked, or in someone's pocket refers to the main page post on Nafta/Ohio/Liar-Liar-gate.
9.
jao Wight
Wed, 03/12/08
==============
Obama doesn't knock her down, the voters do. She tolerated a permiscuous husband for reasons of political ambition.
African-Americans have had to fight rich white women that lied about them, causing them to get lynched, but Obama has more integrity than to respond in kind.
The irony is that if she had dumped Bill and all his baggage, and played fair, she would probably be doing better.
Her reliance on his male patronage and dirty tricks politics has set the women's movement backwards - not forward.
Obama doesn't knock her down, the voters do. She tolerated a permiscuous husband for reasons of political ambition.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, Fred, you can characterize it that way, the voters do, based on their belief of him as a candidate.. But the second sentence, that's an opinion of yours, you don't have any way to know that is the reason she stayed with him. I accept your opinion, but IMO, I don't believe it's correct.
One more article before I hit the sack. I've been scouring the nets and found this by Richard Wolffe. Funny thing - he posted it before the votes were counted. He says Obama won MS 54-44. Not even close, Richard. Chuckles.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/121444
jao Wight
Wed, 03/12/08
Yes, Fred, you can characterize it that way, the voters do, based on their belief of him as a candidate.. But the second sentence, that's an opinion of yours,...
===================
You are absolutely right. It is not a fact, and cannot be proven (or disproven) but it is an apprehension that never appealed to me until I saw her initiate the offensive in this campaign.
Whine about the travails of women all you want. It's trivial. For centuries they lived like queens while African-American men died early from hard labor or lynchings.
Lily Belle,
your hair is golden brown
I've seen your black man
comin' round
Swear by God
I'm gonna cut him down!
I heard screamin'
and bullwhips cracking
How long? How long?
-Neil Young
jao,
I certainly think anyone has a right to fight back, but not use lies and distortions to do it.
She has set women back a couple of centuries IMHO.
Good morning, BFA!
**********
jao ♥
Myself, I've moved beyond the Obama-Clinton posts. I will vote for whoever is the nominee.
I have no other choice.
Because 'Cain is abbsolutely unthinkable (actively or passively). 'Cain = putz Third Term.
No, the politicking right now is not pretty, but when has it ever been?
Sorry about the misspelling ... an extra b slipped in.
************
And impeachment is STILL off the table?
============
Playing Constitutional Chicken
By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Tuesday, March 11, 2008; 12:25 PM
Trying to avoid setting a new precedent for legislative toothlessness, the House yesterday filed a civil suit against the Bush White House, requesting that a federal judge enforce subpoenas seeking information about the controversial firings of U.S. attorneys.
In the latest chapter of what has turned into a fairly momentous Constitutional standoff, it will be up to the judicial branch to determine whether the legislative branch can exercise any meaningful oversight over the White House -- or whether the White House can simply opt out at will.
Historically, such clashes between the legislative and executive branches often have been resolved through negotiation and accomodation. But not with this White House. President Bush a year ago made one, conspicuously absurd, offer to make his aides available for interviews: Proposing that they talk to a small number of Congressional investigators in a one-shot, closed-door session without transcript or oath. Since then, he hasn't budged.
[...]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
that's a dangerous thing - not to care who or what you leave in your path - anything to win. yes, she hurts the advancement of women and demeans the hard road so many other women have taken - the high road.
mary vb and some others have valiantly been trying to raise this resignation to people's consciousness.
Is an invasion of Iran going to happen this summer? Or was he simply forced out?
Why *credibility* would be an issue would only be if there was serious ... and insane ... planning for an attack.
================
US Middle East commander quits
Dan Glaister in Los Angeles and Julian Borger in Tehran
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday March 11 2008
The top US military commander in the Middle East is stepping down days after a magazine profile reported he was trying to block US military action against Iran.
Admiral William Fallon, the head of US Central Command, was described in an Esquire article published last week as a lone voice within the administration arguing for restraint.
The article's author, Thomas Barnett, had predicted that if Admiral Fallon was pushed out of his job "it may well mean that the president and vice-president intend to take military action against Iran before the end of this year and don't want a commander standing in their way".
The article and resignation together put US military action against Iran back on the agenda at a time when it had been generally assumed around the world that is was no longer a serious option before the end of George Bush's presidency next January.
[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar...
Keeping my fingers crossed ... this *plausible deniability* crap is just that.
================
Egypt tries to broker Gaza ceasefire· Intelligence chief in talks with Hamas and Israel
· Cairo's discreet role allows both sides to deny contact
Ian Black, Toni O'Loughlin in Jerusalem
The Guardian, Wednesday March 12 2008
Egypt is working behind the scenes to try to broker a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, with Arab sources reporting that Israel has asked for a 30-day "trial period" of quiet, after which it would accept Egyptian calls for a ceasefire or hudna.
Israel continues to deny any contact, direct or indirect, with its Palestinian Islamist enemy but diplomats say the key figure is Omar Suleiman, President Hosni Mubarak's intelligence chief, who has met separately with Hamas and Israeli officials since the recent Israeli operation to end rocket fire from Gaza. A total of 120 Palestinians and three Israelis were killed. Eight other Israelis were gunned down in a Jerusalem seminary last Thursday.
[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar...
An interesting retrospective ...
================
Drawing defiance
Twenty years after the Palestinian cartoonist Naji al-Ali was shot dead in London, Ian Black visits a poignant retrospective of his work
Ian Black
guardian.co.uk
Monday March 10 2008
It is now almost 21 years since a middle-aged man was shot and fatally wounded in broad daylight by unknown attackers in a London street. But the memory of Naji al-Ali, one of the most talented cartoonists the Arab world has ever known, lives on.
Al-Ali's work, currently being exhibited at a central London gallery, was based in large part on his experience as a Palestinian refugee. And at a time when his people are again making headlines - and in the run-up to the 60th anniversary of the creation of Israel and what Palestinians call their nakba ("catastrophe") - it has a poignant relevance.
At the moment of his murder, in Chelsea in July 1987, al-Ali - then 49 - was working for the Kuwait newspaper al-Qabas. He was the most famous (and best paid) cartoonist in the Middle East - an extraordinary achievement for a man who as a 10 year-old was forced to flee his Galilee village in the 1948 war and grew up in a squalid refugee camp in south Lebanon.
[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar...
Ån attack against Iran seems plausible especially since the Cole and others are lining up. Are they back-up for the Hormuz Straits? What's cheney REALLY doing there?
Hi Judy! And now to bed and my good book...which means I'll find something to post first. -)
Remember a few years back when Mark Thatcher (the Iron Lady's son) was named as part of this wild coup, literally the stuff of thrillers?
Well, more is coming out about it.
===================
An African adventure: Inside story of the wonga coup
In an Equatorial Guinea jail, Simon Mann has finally given his version of the hare-brained plot he led to overthrow the country's leader. And the manacled Old Etonian has named those people – and nations – that he claims backed his dogs of war. By Kim Sengupta
[...]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...
Well, this headline is a bit misleading. Martina now has dual nationality.
Yes, the fact that we *elected* putz will leave an everlasting blot on the history of our nation.
It will be compounded if there is a putz Third Term (which is what 'Cain represents). No less.
=================
Disillusioned with the US, Navratilova defects again
By James Macintyre
Wednesday, 12 March 2008
Martina Navratilova has regained Czech nationality more than 30 years after fleeing a Communist regime she now compares favourably to that of her adopted country America under President George Bush.
The nine-time Wimbledon champion and one of the world's greatest ever tennis players, Ms Navratilova was born in Prague. She fled in 1975 at the height of the Cold War after being denied the right to compete in professional tennis in the US, where most major tournaments were then played and to where she later moved.
After angering the Communist authorities and living in America for six years, she became a US citizen.
Yesterday, however, she told a press conference in Tokyo that she now has her home citizenship back. "I lost it at the time I defected. I got it back on 9 January," she said.
The widely respected star had previously spoken of her disdain of the government of her adopted nation. "The thing is that we elected Bush," she told the Czech newspaper Lidove Noviny. "That is worse. Against that, nobody chose a Communist government in Czechoslovakia."
[...]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...
Well, are my posts actually landing in the right spot, or are later posts being pushed up?
That is the question.
The answer is probably the latter.
This is an extraordinary article about how a new prez can help bring about a lasting peace in I/P. A very good read.
".....
GETTING FROM HERE TO THERE
A. Israel will have to end its Occupation and return to its pre-1967 borders. It will have to abandon its settlements in the West Bank/Gaza so that the requisite geographically-contiguous state of Palestine can be made viable. Maintaining the Occupation of Palestinian lands is bleeding Israel of treasure and, more importantly, of its moral sense of itself.
::::B. The various branches of the Palestine liberation movement will have to recognize Israel's right to exist within secure borders, probably based on the pre-1967 map.
C. Even if the above were to occur, there likely would be occasional acts of violence and terrorism emanating from both sides. Ultra-Orthodox, fundamentalist Jews (some inside the government), believing that the Torah supports them in their Greater Israel territorial claims, may well try to derail any peace negotiations, and the requisite concessions, by attacking Palestinian targets. Likewise, ultra-nationalist or militant Islamist groups in Palestine and beyond, believing history and/or their faith give them justifications for their policies, may keep up the rocket attacks on Israel and suicide bombings inside Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and elsewhere.
Both negotiating sides will have to agree that they will not permit the movement toward a peaceful solution to be vetoed by those who would try to stop that progress through violence. Right now, anytime there is some hope for the peace process and an incursion or bombing or rocket attack takes place, the violence veto is allowed to trump the hard work of the solution-minded diplomats and political leaders. That must stop, and can be stopped, in effect, by ignoring the terrorism. If the two viable states are talking to each other and reach significant agreements, that terrorism eventually will diminish.
D. If (and it's a very big if) the two sides can recognize that The Other is not going to disappear, no matter how much violence is employed, and sign a peace treaty, then a wide variety of other vexing issues can be brought to the forefront and solutions found. Issues such as: how to deal with the Palestinians' claimed "right of return" to their ancient lands inside Israel, who will rule Jerusalem, who will control the water rights in that parched region, how thousands of Palestinians can move back and forth easily between Gaza and the West Bank and to their daily jobs inside Israel, etc. etc.
SOME POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS "
http://www.opednews.com/articles/3/opedne_bernard__080312_peace_may_be_possibl.htm
Bad as our primaries may be, at least we haven't quite reached the level things have in Pakistan.
Perhaps that's the best thing that can be said about them
====================
Blasts hit Lahore
AP Photo/K.M. Chaudary
Rescue workers remove a body from the site of the bombing at the Federal Investigation Agency in Lahore
ABy Mubasher Bukhari, Reuters
Tuesday, 11 March 2008
Two suicide car bombers struck in the Pakistani city of Lahore today, killing 24 people and wounding dozens, most of them in an attack on a government security office, police and officials said.
More than 500 people have been killed in Pakistan this year in militant-related violence, including a campaign of suicide bombings.
[...]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...
Al Gore was here yesterday ... and quietly continues making a difference in the world.
If for some reason the link doesn't work, go to www.tdg.ch then to the English corner tab. Right now, it's showing as the featured story there.
=================
Gore and LODH seal green deal
| 08h13 Nobel Peace prize winner Al Gore signs an agreement with a Geneva private bank for a sustainable investment fund.
Climate change campaigner and former US Vice President Al Gore and Geneva-based private bankers Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch are strengthening a partnership they concluded last year. During a visit to Geneva yesterday, Gore announced that his Generation investment fund and LODH will share ideas on accelerating funding for 'green' technology and business. Hundreds of investment funds offer a sustainable approach. Many only invest in companies that provide environmentally-friendly products or services. Each claims to be a novelty in some way. But this one is spearheaded by Al Gore, arguably the world’s most prominent climate change campaigner, and a joint Nobel Peace prize winner.
“More money is allocated around the world by markets in one hour than by governments in one year,” Gore said at a news conference at Geneva airport with LODH. Generation’s managers announced that they were on the brink of reaching a self-imposed limit of five billion dollars in assets under management in the second quarter of this year. The Generation investment fund was set up by Gore and banker David Blood in 2004, aiming to take a long-term approach to investment. Part of its ethos is that ethical, environmental or social issues are an integral part of the business choices that affect a company’s commercial future. The companies in its portfolio are vetted. Equally, choices are based on a firm’s ability not only to clean up its own act, but also by turning risks like climate change into a commercial opportunity, according to Generation.
[...]
http://www.tdg.ch/pages/home/tribune_de_...(contenu)/204541
Yes, it's amazing just how many issues are NOT discussed.
h/t to Common Dreams
And this is the last ... hae good ones.
=================
Published on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 by Inter Press Service
We Don’t Do Torture - Especially in Debates
by William Fisher
WASHINGTON - Media critics, foreign policy experts and human rights advocates are charging that questions asked by the moderators of the televised debates among U.S. presidential hopefuls have frequently been trivial and designed to produce conflict to boost ratings, while ignoring many of the most pressing issues facing the United States.
[...]
While important subjects were discussed in the debates — health care, world trade, the economy, education, terrorism — a wide range of other areas were largely ignored. The questions never or rarely raised by primary contest debate moderators include such issues as presidential signing statements, the limits of presidential authority, separation of powers, the role of the courts, warrantless wiretapping, rendition, the Guantanamo detention centre and military commissions, secret CIA prisons, and many other civil liberties and human rights issues.
“It seems as if that there is almost an agreement among all the parties not to deal with these subjects,” Michael Ratner, a law professor at Columbia University and president of the Centre for Constitutional Rights, which is defending a number of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, told IPS.
[...]
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008...
From Iowa with (brotherly) Love -- the unified dem response:
http://www.wcfcourier.com/articles/2008/03/12/news/politics/doc47d6c0d75d4aa295349253.txt
Rep. Deborah Berry
DES MOINES — Democrats in the Iowa Legislature lambasted a comment made by U.S. Rep. Steve King that radical Islamists would dance in the streets if Democrat Barack Obama were elected president.
Rep. Deborah Berry, D-Waterloo, called the comment “demeaning” and said it could incite fear and hate.
“As an Iowan, I’m quite offended by that and quite appalled by the thought that one of our very own congressmen would even make such a comment about a person who’s running for any seat, for that matter,” Berry said. Her Democratic colleagues in the Iowa House stood up and applauded after she finished speaking.
...
Good morning, everybody
For the record, the Clintons didn't win in Ohio. Slightly more delegates carrying the Clinton colors were selected, but that's about it. Were the voters influenced by the lies that were spread in the media by team Clinton? Possibly. On the other hand, given that the Clinton name has been prominent for over fifteen years and the Obama brand is brand new, familiarity alone would account for the popular response. Though perhaps not as much as does the name 'Bush.'
Have you ever wondered to what extent the fact that Busch is the name of a popular brewer of beer accounts for the success of the name at the ballot box? Have you ever wondered why a former alcoholic who's supposedly recovering from an addiction was promoted as a fellow "you'd like to have a beer with" to people whose religious convictions frown on the consumption of alcohol? Have you considered that, in addition to the familiar name, that line was efficacious because it addressed the voters' interests?
IMHO, the Clinton campaign is making a huge mistake telling lies about Obama. The swiftboat veterans were effective because, like the Club for Growth, they were careful to keep several degrees of separation between them and the Bush campaign.
The lesson we should take from recent history is that the lying is not new and that however repugnant Republican behavior and goals were during the Clinton years, the pattern of deception didn't start with Bush. At least not Bush Two. The extent to which Clinton is the spawn of Bush One is not yet known. We do know they were trained in the same stable.
Re: What the press doesn't cover. Guilt is a funny thing. It prompts some people to desist from whatever behavior caused it. Others it leads to repeat the behaviors, as if to erased the guilt by forming a habit, automatic behavior which occurs without reflection. Still others are prompted to over-ride guilt, an emotion, with rationalizations that deny the validity of the emotion.
With the Clintons, prevarication seems to be as easy as breathing. Perhaps they've been doing it so long, they no longer notice. Or perhaps they just exist in an alternate reality in which the feed-back loop between expectation and experience has been broken--another way of saying that the intent and the act have melded into one and the same.
What one intends is as good as done.
Car bombs in Pakistan are bad. But, let's not forget that 500 people are killed every week in car crashes in the U.S. and the effect on the bodies in those crashes is much the same. The car is a very effective instrument of death, regardless of the level of intent. One really has to question the level of intent of individuals who are either minimally attentive or inebriated when they operate a vehicle. It's appropriate to charge people with a crime if a car crash doesn't actually kill them, but, too often, any injuries they suffer are presumed to be punishment enough and collateral damage has to be assumed by the community-at-large.
I'm going to have to find the interview with the economist I heard on NHPR yesterday. He compared the sluffing of liability by the finance sector via their new "investment products" to the shifting of costs to externalities by industrial enterprise.
"sluffing off liabilities" that's a good phrase.
What one intends is as good as done.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
well Monica I have a little saying "if you can't say it you can't do it";
intention is a part of the process of achieving a goal
good organizations have a "vision" statement and a "mission" statement
but it also breaks down to teaching protocol, and after I teach an employee a new skill I want them to "tell" me how they will do a job as well as "show" me
part of that little exercise is to prove that they "intend" to do it the way they are taught
you still have to do it
The Clintons do indeed seem to be baiting Obama to engage in a race war in Pennsylvania; but instead it has given the nation a chance to see just what a cool character he is, and his quiet assurance and the skill to stay above gutter politics proves his premise that he does a new style of politics and that style is part of the change he represents.
they are trying like crazy to spin his Mississippi win as race based
pretty sad stuff, and counter-productive, but they must have decided Hillary can't win in a straight up contest of ideas or character
http://harpers.org/archive/2008/02/0081908
The next bubble: Priming the markets for tomorrow's big crash TYPE Article BY Eric Janszen PUBLISHED February 2008 VIEW
PAGES
PDF A financial bubble11. I will use the familiar term “bubble” as a shorthand, but note that it confuses cause with effect. A better, if ungainly, descriptor would be “asset-price hyperinflation”—the huge spike in asset prices that results from a perverse self-reinforcing belief system, a fog that clouds the judgment of all but the most aware participants in the market. Asset hyperinflation starts at a certain stage of market development under just the right conditions. The bubble is the result of that financial madness, seen only when the fog rolls away. is a market aberration manufactured by government, finance, and industry, a shared speculative hallucination and then a crash, followed by depression. Bubbles were once very rare—one every hundred years or so was enough to motivate politicians, bearing the post-bubble ire of their newly destitute citizenry, to enact legislation that would prevent subsequent occurrences. After the dust settled from the 1720 crash of the South Sea Bubble, for instance, British Parliament passed the Bubble Act to forbid “raising or pretending to raise a transferable stock.” For a century this law did much to prevent the formation of new speculative swellings.
[...]
Back for a sec to post of couple of things ...
First, remember how the US MSM used to get in such a tizzy when the prize of oil was much lower ... and there was a Dem in the WH?
Now, it's just ho-hum ... as the handbasket continues on the way to Hell.
================
Oil steady after record, dollar weighs
Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:23am EDT
By Chua Baizhen
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Oil steadied on Wednesday after hitting a record near $110 overnight, as investors grappled with a boost to the dollar after the U.S. Federal Reserve and other central banks pumped fresh funds into the financial system.
U.S. crude for April delivery fell 10 cents to $108.65 a barrel by 3:11 a.m. EDT, coming off the record $109.72.
London Brent crude fell 10 cents to $105.15, down from an all-time high of $105.82.
The Federal Reserve and four other central banks on Tuesday teamed up to get hundreds of billions of dollars into the ailing credit markets, sending the dollar up sharply against the yen and lifting it from a record low against the euro.
[...]
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/i...
Second, just in case anyone has the slightest doubt, the culture of corruption will certainly continue apace, but it will continue most especially under 'Cain, the so-called *straight shooter.*
Wonder whether his guys arranged to receive their fees in EUR.
Most probably.
If the EADS proposal really was all as superior as many analysts say, why did they need lobbyists?
==============
March 12, 2008
McCain Advisers Lobbied for Europeans to Win Air Force Tanker Deal
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
WASHINGTON — A co-chairman of Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign and other top campaign advisers and supporters were lobbyists for the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company, part of a group that beat out Boeing for a $35 billion contract to build aerial refueling tankers for the Air Force.
Boeing, which has filed an appeal with the Government Accountability Office, is expected to focus at least in part on Mr. McCain’s role in the deal, including letters that he sent urging the Defense Department, in evaluating the tanker bids, not to consider the potential effects of a separate United States-Airbus trade dispute.
That contract was won by the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company, known as EADS, the corporate parent of Airbus, and Northrop Grumman, the military contractor based in Los Angeles.
Mr. McCain has long expressed pride at having a central part in scuttling an earlier Air Force plan to lease the tankers from Boeing. That deal collapsed in 2004 in a major corruption scandal that sent two Boeing executives to prison.
[...]
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/us/pol...
The last for now ... thanks again, putzCo.
============
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
1 US Dollar = 1.02270 Swiss Franc
1 Swiss Franc (CHF) = 0.97780 US Dollar (USD)
Interbank rate +/- 0%
This means:
You buy 1 US Dollar : 1.02270 Swiss Franc
You sell 1 US Dollar : 1.02243 Swiss Franc
You buy 1 Swiss Franc : 0.97780 US Dollar
You sell 1 Swiss Franc : 0.97806 US Dollar
Median price = 1.02243 / 1.02270 (bid/ask)
Minimum price = 1.01474 / 1.01499
Maximum price = 1.03479 / 1.03504
************
1 US Dollar = 0.49791 British Pound
1 British Pound (GBP) = 2.00839 US Dollar (USD)
Interbank rate +/- 0%
This means:
You buy 1 US Dollar : 0.49791 British Pound
You sell 1 US Dollar : 0.49783 British Pound
You buy 1 British Pound : 2.00839 US Dollar
You sell 1 British Pound : 2.00871 US Dollar
Median price = 0.49783 / 0.49791 (bid/ask)
Minimum price = 0.49474 / 0.49480
Maximum price = 0.50010 / 0.50016
*************
1 US Dollar = 0.65099 Euro
1 Euro (EUR) = 1.53613 US Dollar (USD)
Interbank rate +/- 0%
This means:
You buy 1 US Dollar : 0.65099 Euro
You sell 1 US Dollar : 0.65095 Euro
You buy 1 Euro : 1.53613 US Dollar
You sell 1 Euro : 1.53622 US Dollar
Median price = 0.65095 / 0.65099 (bid/ask)
Minimum price = 0.64532 / 0.64536
Maximum price = 0.65430 / 0.65434
*************
1 US Dollar = 7.11507 Chinese Yuan Renminbi
1 Chinese Yuan Renminbi (CNY) = 0.14055 US Dollar (USD)
Interbank rate +/- 0%
This means:
You buy 1 US Dollar : 7.11507 Chinese Yuan Renminbi
You sell 1 US Dollar : 7.09507 Chinese Yuan Renminbi
You buy 1 Chinese Yuan Renminbi : 0.14055 US Dollar
You sell 1 Chinese Yuan Renminbi : 0.14094 US Dollar
Median price = 7.09507 / 7.11507 (bid/ask)
Minimum price = 7.09500 / 7.11500
Maximum price = 7.09970 / 7.11970
*************
1 US Dollar = 0.99442 Canadian Dollar
1 Canadian Dollar (CAD) = 1.00561 US Dollar (USD)
Interbank rate +/- 0%
This means:
You buy 1 US Dollar : 0.99442 Canadian Dollar
You sell 1 US Dollar : 0.99409 Canadian Dollar
You buy 1 Canadian Dollar : 1.00561 US Dollar
You sell 1 Canadian Dollar : 1.00595 US Dollar
Median price = 0.99409 / 0.99442 (bid/ask)
Minimum price = 0.98890 / 0.98965
Maximum price = 0.99715 / 0.99740
*************
1 US Dollar = 102.256 Japanese Yen
1 Japanese Yen (JPY) = 0.009779 US Dollar (USD)
Interbank rate +/- 0%
This means:
You buy 1 US Dollar : 102.256 Japanese Yen
You sell 1 US Dollar : 102.239 Japanese Yen
You buy 1 Japanese Yen : 0.009779 US Dollar
You sell 1 Japanese Yen : 0.009781 US Dollar
Median price = 102.239 / 102.256 (bid/ask)
Minimum price = 101.420 / 101.438
Maximum price = 103.538 / 103.554
...........
And much, much more at http://www.oanda.com/convert/classic
rdorgan
Deb Berry is one of those "get it done"; always great to work with people. and Steve King is beatable thanks to his bigotry being on full display. thanks for the story
Now that's a man of courage! That's a leader sending the nation a message, folks!
thanks, monica. how many chances do we get? after 2000 and 2004, your tape cuts to the quick. we can't wait another generation.
*******************
k.o.'s commentary about hillary's not taking charge of her campaign in light of remarks by geraldine ferraro really speaks to the spinelessness of the superdelegates. hillary is engaged in a 'slash and burn' turf war which can only help the rethugs, so superdelegates need to step in and referee this match. vulgar race-baiting remarks have no place in election campaigns.
ferraro's deliberate selection b/c she was a woman is not to be compared to obama's lead propelled by voters in the millions who act as one force--that 'concept' thing she mentioned--b/c of his race. how patently absurd! we are choosing a president of the united states, and ferraro's statements are cynical at best and racist at worst.
*******************
hang tough, howard! don't let the bastards get to you!
florida's prune-faced gov might invite venezuela's chavez to mind the state's democratic party re-do. how's that for more rethug mischief?
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
Videos of some of the 64 House Healthcare Heroes standing strong for a public health insurance option
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Congressman Lloyd Dogget
Congressman Keith Ellison
Congressman Bob Filner
Congressman Phil Hare
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Blog for America
-
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Send a message they can't miss
By Mary R on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM EST -
Will the real Democrat please stand up?
By Mary R on Nov 11, 2009 2:03 PM EST -
3 Million and Counting
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:47 PM EST -
Is Sen. Nelson listening to Nebraska?
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:31 PM EST
Recent Blog Posts
-
Sunday items
By Gerry Lykins on Nov 22, 2009 8:25 AM EST -
Dreams wow gold
By wow gold w on Nov 22, 2009 3:17 AM EST -
the Psychobiology talk about the pc wow gold game
By wow gold w on Nov 21, 2009 11:39 PM EST -
Spring Trend 2009 Abercrombie & Fitch
By Abercrombie F on Nov 21, 2009 9:44 PM EST -
Vacationing?
By Phoenix V on Nov 21, 2009 2:07 PM EST
-
By Jo*in*Vermont on Mar 10, 2008 6:42 PM EDTthanks for this, Susan! I love to read Paul - he says it so well!