That Dean is a bad mother.  I'm talking about Dean!  He's first.

Petroleum Feeds Patriarchy By Shankar Vedantam

Climate change. Pollution. Financial expense.
This Story

Our gas-guzzling ways have long been associated with a variety of problems, but disturbing evidence now points to a new dimension of our love affair with petroleum: Oil consumption and high oil prices hurt the political, social and economic development of millions of women in oil-producing nations.

You read that right. The more gas you pump and the higher oil prices get, the more likely you are to harm women's empowerment.

The surprising finding, based on more than four decades of data from 169 countries, provides a novel explanation of why women in Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates still do not have the right to vote. Oil wealth, not Islam, is the primary reason that these nations have regressive gender policies, said political scientist Michael Ross at the University of California at Los Angeles. ...

...Reducing economic opportunities for women in oil-producing nations has far-reaching consequences -- for one thing, a lack of jobs is associated with increased support for religious fundamentalism. In one analysis of 18 Muslim nations, political scientists Lisa Blaydes and Drew Linzer found that women who lacked financial independence and job opportunities were systematically more likely to support religious movements that hearkened back to an imagined golden age.

"Women who don't have good job opportunities create economic security for themselves by becoming better marriage-market candidates," said Blaydes, who works at Stanford University. "They try to show how pious they are because there is value for piety on the marriage market. When there is a large gap between men's and women's wages, you see higher support for fundamentalism cross-nationally." ...full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...

Putz is setting up the 100 year war for McC to prosecute.  He will be hard to beat by either BO or HC.  He'd be much harder to beat if the people who claim they won't vote for either dem ,throw away their votes and help usher in 100 years of an Inquisition type Supreme Court. 

To not vote for the dem nominee, is to vote for Putz 2, actually 3. 

San Joaquin Valley, CA

Farmers may take big risk backing away from settlement

If agreement collapses, judge could take even more of their river water.

The departure of a single water district from the historic San Joaquin River water settlement is not likely, all by itself, to derail the entire process. But it is a disappointing and potentially disturbing development.

The Madera Irrigation District has signalled its intention to back out of the agreement. It's the first water district to do so, though doubts have arisen among many of the farmers who originally joined the settlement covering the restoration of water flows to the river.

There's a 30-day cooling-off period before the Madera district's action becomes official. So there's a chance that during that time, after meeting with other water districts, environmentalists and the federal government, the district could reverse its field and join the settlement again.

The farmers and the water districts that serve them were never enthusiastic about the settlement. They would lose as much as 20% of the water they've been getting under terms negotiated with environmental groups that sued over the diversion of the river's natural flow to serve farms on the east side of the Valley. In addition to restoring water flows nearer the historic norm, the environmentalists also hope to re-introduce two ancient salmon runs to the San Joaquin River.

The settlement requires legislation from Congress, which is where the matter now rests. There are difficult issues to resolve there, such as how to replace at least some of the water farmers would lose, and how to pay for that. The area's delegation is divided: Reps. Jim Costa, D-Fresno, and George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, are supporters of the process; Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, has emerged as the principal congressional foe of the settlement. ...full article: http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/4...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7...

US troops clash with Iraq militia

.....Correspondents say the levels of Tuesday's violence were reminiscent of the worst days of the anti-US insurgency and sectarian killings in 2006 and 2007.

However, US military spokespeople have said recent violence should not be taken as evidence of a trend.

--------

I guess the dramatic increase in violence could be, maybe, attributed to it being a presidential election year in the US. There's no doubt the candidacy of one individual is tied to Iraq. On the other hand, the Dems are pushing for a withdrawal from the foreign policy disaster.

This is an old article but a good one  IMO.

George W. Bush Is Going To Bomb Iran
| December 29, 2006 - 7:03pm


George W. Bush is going to bomb Iran. This is the purpose of the "surge". No amount of troops is going to fix Iraq; they couldn't if they tried. If Bush wanted to fix Iraq, he'd give them jobs. People who are employed in decent jobs can figure out how to live with their neighbors. More American troops in the Persian Gulf are not going to quell violence in Iraq any more than the ones already there are.

George W. Bush is going to bomb Iran. And there may be almost nothing we can do to stop it.

Iran has a single trump card - their nuclear program. I share the doubts that Bush can destroy the whole thing. There will be no repeat of Israel's surgical removal of the nuclear ambitions of Saddam Hussein. But Bush can take out enough of Iran's nuclear facilities to knock them back a few more years in the development of a feasible weapon. That is all he needs to bomb - that is, until Iran makes its move.

And that's what the surge is for. Ostensibly, it's about Iraq. Nobody thinks that Iraq needs more American soldiers. And it doesn't today. But Bush is sending them anyway, because he knows what he's about to do, and Iraq is going to need more soldiers when the Shiite forces sympathetic to Iran erupt in violence.

The first attack in this final war against Iran has already occured. You read about it, I'm sure. The White House excised a number of passages from an op-ed in the New York Times that talked about the history of this administration's secret negotiations with Iran. Any mention of Iran's critical help in forming the Afghan government now in place? Gone. Any word of Bush's constant double-dealing with the Iranians over people you may not have heard of, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and the Mujaheddin-e Khalq? Blacked out. And any mention of Iran's 2003 offer to put everything on the table, including recognition of Israel? The Times and the two authors of the piece, Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann, were threatened with criminal prosecution if they were to put words like that into print.

I know about all of this "secret" material, because none of it was secret. Leverett and Mann published their sources, all mainstream media with the exception of a report or two from Leverett's think tank, the Century Foundation. All of the things marked out of this op-ed by the White House are in the public domain. And yet the Bush Administration felt so threatened by this op-ed that they pulled out their little black markers and crossed out any hint of a peace-seeking Iran being played by a cynical America for all it could get.

Why? Because Bush is about to bomb Iran.

more

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/4267 

California lawmakers should strike down obsolete loyalty oath

Legislators in every state periodically should re-examine old laws with an eye to removing statutes that are no longer relevant. In California, a prime target should be Cold War era laws passed between 1947-1953, a time of widespread fear of communists. That era is long over; the Soviet Union and Berlin Wall fell in 1989.

But California still has laws on the books saying that the state "faces a clear and present danger" that is "great and imminent": that communists will "infiltrate and seek employment" in public jobs.

The aim of these people, say these laws, is to "establish a totalitarian dictatorship" based on Marx, Lenin and Stalin.

Even today, public workers who merely belong to a communist group can be fired, even if they take no action to commit a crime.

If you think laws like this can do no harm today, consider the case of a California State University, East Bay, math teacher and practicing Quaker who was fired in February over the state's oath of allegiance, passed by voters in 1952 to help ferret out communists. She was fired for saying she would support and defend the Constitution, but only nonviolently. ... full article: http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/4...

So this will affect our elections, won't it?

Every horror movie has that "Oh Shit!" moment, when the hero or heroes are huddled in some creepy hideout, and suddenly something happens that tells you that the monster is just around the corner, or just about to attack. In "Jurassic Park" it was the pulsing ripples in a cup of water, heralding the arrival of a T-Rex. In "Jaws" it was the deep bass music, letting you know that a monstrous shark was about to attack.

Well, we just got our "Oh Shit!" moment with the just-announced resignation of Admiral William J. Fallon, the military commander of US Middle East operations.

Adm. Fallon, 63, famously said that an attack on Iran would not happen "on my watch," and is widely believed to have already threatened, along with a number of other top generals and admirals, to quit the service if the Bush administration were to launch an air attack on Iran.

Diesel record: $4.04 a gallon

Fuel prices in the Valley climb to highest ever.

By Bethany Clough / The Fresno Bee

The average price of a gallon of diesel in Fresno hit $4 for the first time Tuesday, according to AAA of Northern California.

The increase means filling a single rig's tank can cost trucking companies $800 or more. And they're expected to pass on the pain. ...full report and photo: http://www.fresnobee.com/business/story/...

---

Elderly Hispanics face disparity in health care

Their hospitals give lower-quality care, study finds.

By Tracy Correa / The Fresno

Most elderly Hispanic patients are treated at hospitals that provide lower-quality health care for common medical conditions, according to a new study by Harvard School of Public Medicine.

The study looked at hospitals in 30 regions throughout the country, including Fresno.

Published today in the March/April 2008 issue of Health Affairs, it reinforces a racial and ethnic divide demonstrated in a June 2007 Harvard study on elderly black patients, researchers said.

"These studies demonstrate a high degree of segregation in the U.S. health care system," said Ashish K. Jha, lead researcher on both studies. Jha is assistant professor of health policy and management at Harvard School of Public Health. ...full article and link to study: http://www.fresnobee.com/business/story/...

I hear this clip.  She didn't hesitate.  Fair is fair, people, no matter how much you hate her.

Less than one second. That's how long it took Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to answer, "Of course not," to Steve Kroft's question on 60 Minutes about whether she thought Sen. Barack Obama was a Muslim. You can time it yourself by watching the clip at YouTube.

Still, that didn't stop MSNBC's Chris Matthews from complaining on-air last week that it took Clinton "the longest time" to answer Kroft's question.

Lots of eager, tsk-tsking pundits and reporters agreed. They said Clinton was guilty of "hemming and hawing" in response to Kroft's peculiar, repeated insistence that she make some sort of declarative statement about her opponents religious beliefs. And then when she did, Kroft asked that she do it again. That's when Clinton, looking befuddled by the multiple requests, added some qualifiers to her response, including "as far as I know." What stood out in the exchange was not Clinton's responses, but Kroft's weird persistence in asking a question that Clinton addressed unequivocally the first time, as though he was trying to draw out something she was not saying.

Does anyone have any links to this subject in which our cands are addressing this?  I'd like specifics, please, not just platitudes.

I have no sympathy for New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the hot-shot prosecutor of call-girl operations who was hoist on his own petard, as it were. I mean, what a jerk! And aside from the hypocrisy, what a fine message he was sending to his three teenage daughters about the role of women.

Having said that, Spitzer's bust should give pause to those in Congress who are ready to hand President Bush a free pass to continue his six-year campaign of warrantless spying on Americans.

We now know from yesterday's Wall Street Journal article that the spying Bush has been doing through the National Security Agency since early 2001 has included vast computer sweeps of not just internet and phone activity, but also bank and credit card transactions. These are sweeps of ordinary everyday people, with computers looking for odd transactions, or for codewords, or for transactions involving specific targeted organizations or addresses.

Trustees review Johnson-Klein and Vivas cases
By Doug Hoagland / The Fresno Bee

LONG BEACH -- Trustees of the California State University System on Tuesday discussed in closed session the Stacy Johnson-Klein and Lindy Vivas gender discrimination lawsuits.

CSU attorneys briefed the trustees on the cases, said CSU Chairwoman Roberta Achtenberg of San Francisco. Trustees were holding their regularly-scheduled meeting at CSU headquarters in Long Beach.

Achtenberg said that the briefing was routine, and that state law allows closed discussions of ongoing lawsuits.

"It is the policy of the board of trustees and the desire of the trustees to settle the cases as quickly as possible to the benefit of all," Achtenberg said in an interview.

Asked whether any trustees were pushing the board to settle the cases, Achtenberg said, "I'm not going to comment on anything other than to allow our actions to stand for themselves."

Pete Mehas, a CSU trustee from Fresno, declined to comment about Tuesday's closed-door discussion, citing advice from CSU attorneys.

CSU and Fresno State are appealing the judge-reduced award of $4.52 million that was accepted by Vivas, former volleyball coach at Fresno State. The jury had originally awarded Vivas $5.85 million. ...full article: http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/45812...

I remember TeresainPennsylvania once posted here, but now has a hobby hammering Obama at myDD.  Talk about going from the penthouse to the outhouse.  Here's a recent sample of her handiwork:

"Obama is gaming the system, asking people in PA to change their party affiliation to game the system in PA.

"I plan to spread this all over the PA blogs so that all democrats know how little he values our party and PA's right to hold a closed  primary where democrats get to decide on their own nominee.  

"Follow me over the fold to witness for yourself how underhanded the Obama campaign is. Not only is he encouraging republicans to change registration, but he is encouraging out of state students to vote here too.  I wonder how many of them already voted for him in other states?

" . . . .

"Oh the delicious irony.  Remember the 'Democrat for a day campaign?'  I thought this type of sleaziness was isolated to MI and FL."

If you can make even the slightest sense out of this diary, please submit your guess here for further discussion.

Headlined on 3/11/08:
Spitzer's Sting, Stolen Elections and the DOJ


http://www.opednews.com
            
In an email last week, I sought to connect the dots between the politicized Department of Justice, the theft of American elections and the railroading of a former Democrat Governor of Alabama who was too tough for the Republicans so they stole his election and locked him away.

~

Please go back and watch this YouTube video of Siegelman describing the stolen election if you haven't already- it's chilling:  Siegelman describes the theft of 2002 election.

 

That email was entitled, First They Came, for obvious reasons just made perhaps more poignant. One can't say for sure, but certainly something to think about as this unfolds. It's hard, given what passes for journalism, to think that there may be more going on than what is being reported.  But, hey, why do any investigative journalism when the public interest has lost all meaning to the media and besides, you have prostitution for your headlines. (see Salacious Sex Raises TV Ratings: Are We Being HOOKERed?)  

You can frame a guy like Don Siegelman when you control the reigns of power-- just about all the power. Were they really made so suspicious by Eliot Spitzer's moving a few thousand dollars around (how much money could we be talking about that would have set off alarms?).  Or is Spitzer seen as a threat to those in control of our lawless post-911 KGBesque investigatory apparatus? Go back and pay attention to Siegleman and watch how the US Attorneys scandal unfolds- which was always about controlling our elections.  

Scott Horton has been connecting the dots, covering Siegelman and now Spitzer and the US Attorneys scandal.  Eliminating your political opposition is bad enough. But seizing ultimate lock down control by taking over the process by which we are supposed to elect that opposition raises the stakes to a new level.  

This is not about whether you liked our NY Governor or think he deserved what he got: It's not really about him.  It's about us. Indeed one might surmise that he was doing something right if he turns out to be a target for political reasons. 

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_andi_nov_080311_spitzer_s_sting_2c_sto.htm 

Theresa lives in PA.  Maybe she knows something the CM or this blog doesn't. 

This Hillary can do only wrong and BO can never do any wrong is politcally naive. 

Howard said the whole system is corrupt and the two dems are in the system.   It's not rocket science.

Caution:  the myDD website is for entertainment purposes only.  I only hazard a visit there these days for one reason, namely, to see exactly how bad a blog can be.  Here is my personal favorite among the comments on Teresa's diary from a poster called drabgod1:

"Yes Obama is a black racist, yes he took a bribe from Tesko, yes he will lose the general election, yes Roe V wade will be overturned, yes Obama’s campaigns new image is a coat hanger.Yes we can all tell our daughters that no you can't be president not if their is even one unqualified man running. Yes we can't yes we can't yes we can't."

seashell wrote "Theresa lives in PA.  Maybe she knows something the CM or this blog doesn't."

I was actually hoping a Clinton supporter would chime in with their view, but thanks for your insight. 

Theresa has done me a service because I was too d*mn lazy to google whether or not PA had an open primary. I don't have a problem asking voters to become registered Democrats before they get to have a say in deciding the Democratic Party nominee. That is how we do it in Iowa. Wisconsin and others do it different and it gives a sense of how a candidate would do ijn the general election. I am warming to the wisdom of the rules, the calendar, and the mix being about right.  

 Why do powerful men risk everything for sex?

"We'll never know exactly what New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer was thinking when he allegedly arranged a dalliance with a high-priced prostitute, risking the collapse of both his career and his family. Even he may not fully understand his own actions. But all too many powerful men can at least identify with him, because they've been there. Spitzer is simply the latest married politician caught with his pants down, a group so large that "pretty soon there will be enough of them to do a scientific study," says Texas psychologist Brian Gladue." 

Can't wait! {grin} 

seashell,
get a grip.
No one ever said Obama is perfect. He has his flaws. He is still better then Hillary.

As far as not voting for Hillary or McCain...
this is a very good possibility. In someways, McCain has more integrity then Hillary. The guy may be a warmonger but we all know it. There isn't any slicing and dicing on his desire to get a lot of folks killed because he feels robbed of a VN victory. Hillary lies from both sides of her mouth. McCain is twisting his positions all over the place inorder to please his base; who know he isn't serious.
So there we have it; two possible candidates who wouldn't know the truth if it smacked them in the foreheads. The choice between McCain and Hillary is which one is the most vile? Right now, they are running neck and neck. Today, Hillary is pulling ahead with her push to seat the Mi and Fl delegates.

Unfortunately, the surge is turning out to be the sham anyone who knows anything about 4GW knew it would. As the economy spirals downward, McCain becomes weaker and weaker.
Obama beats McCain while McCain vs Hillary is too close to call.

Elliot should have talked to Bubba to find how to avoid paying.

Don't forget --

Keith Olbermann

will have a "Special  Comment" tonight

on the Clinton Campaign!

To help find out why some married men cheat on their wives, it might be wise to get the womens' views on sex.  We come from Puritans.

I don't condone nor condemn infidelity on either side.  Sexual repression in one partner or the other can lead to great distress in a marriage... sexual counseling can help.  Reading the bible won't.  LOL  I'm sure there are many other factors.  I've heard many things over the years from men about American  sexual partners.  Many have told me they prefer Europeans, AA, or Asian lovers.  Then there's the love factor.  People fall out of love.  Sometimes a younger partner rejuvenates the soul.  But going to prostitutes is pretty icky.  Better to go to  Buenos Aires.   LOL

 I think spitz was set up...or very very dumb.  And why is his hapless wife standing next to him?  Good grief. 

dog wrote "The choice between McCain and Hillary is which one is the most vile?"

That's no riddle.  I concede that Clinton was playing her cards close on the war authorization vote for a myriad of reasons.  She had to, for example, help establish her military bona fides in anticipation of a 2008 presidential nomination run, and she must have felt pressure as the junior senator from New York to put up some kind of brave front for her constituency as a consequence of the attack on the WTC towers, such that I'm sure her vote was as much a public statement as any real endorsement. 

If your criterion is strictly who appears the most sincere in their vote, you may very well opt for McCain, since he was militating for the deposition of Saddam since Operation Dessert Storm, as part of his rogue state rollback doctrine.  Otherwise, there is no possible argument that Clinton, as Commander in Chief, would ever have led us into the invasion and occupation of Iraq.  Voting for McCain would be a direct ratification of the Bush doctrine and a vote for American military policing around the world.  It's an untenable choice for any person professing to be a Democrat, regardless of who is opponent turns out to be.

Howard said the whole system is corrupt and the two dems are in the system.   It's not rocket science.

seashell,

Howard is also in the system. I don't believe for a minute he is corrupt in any way.

The system as it is now is all we have to work with, regardless of what state it is in. We can only work hard to improve it with what we have to give in support.

"He has his flaws."

dog, please name them! 

I don't consider Howard as being in the system. He's not a critter, nor running for critterdom.  He's impartial and bucking the system with his 50 state strategy.  But I see your point.

I'm waiting to hear a BO person talk about BO's flaws.   

Tom  22  Ahh, we agree.  LOL

"Obama Receives Endorsement of Flag Officers from Army, Navy and Air Force"

seashell wrote "I'm waiting to hear a BO person talk about BO's flaws."

He has Robert Gibbs for a communications director, he has not shown much reluctance to pursue coal technology as an energy source, he displays hesitation in embracing a full blown liberal agenda, he has ties to creepy weasels like Rezko, sometimes he votes present or doesn't show up for important votes, his tendency towards conciliation and cooperation gives him the reputation of being a other than a loyal partisan, and he has cast some votes that can be criticized in retrospect by people who aren't in his shoes.  He sometimes comes off as academic and his debate skills are in development.   

"I'm waiting to hear a BO person talk about BO's flaws."

One of his flaws is he doesn't call Hillary a *bitch*!   

Tom,
Hillary's war vote was calculated to show how tuff she is on defense. She blew it. She also blew Kyl-Liebermann. Both McCain and Hillary are flawed and to assume Hillary is the better candidate because she is a Dem is also flawed.

Comparing both platforms gives the nod to Hillary.
But that is meaningless because she lies constantly. There is a reasonable expectation that she will try to live up to the words on her web page. But she has shown she will change her story if the events suit her or use surrogates to smear the opposition to get her way. So the words out of her mouth or on her webpage mean nothing. She seems to have adopted Bubba's lack of integrety.
And what about he with the loose zipper? Does anyone think Hillary will be able to keep Mr. "I did not have sex with that women" chained up for 4 years? There are a whole new batch of interns to break in.

The bottom line is Hillary is not any more trustworthy or honest and may be less so then McCain.
I prefer to help the lower-level candidates so Pres McCain has to face a 61 seat Dem Senate. That is where my funds and energy are going.
That is why the 50 state campaign is so important and why I don't trust Hillary to keep it going if she gets the nomination. She said she would keep the 50 state campaign but so what? All her team is against it.

Thank you, Tom.  He also often has his head in the clouds, along with his feet, and has that fellow who hates russia and whose name I can't spell or even remember right now..as an advisor.   Bryzinski?   The guy has proven to be a player in administrations - an important player and one I don't like.

And we have russian planes coming in close to our mainland.   Are we headed for war with Russia now too, with Bryzinski pushing BO all the way?

Lotsa problems with both candidates.

Gimme Gore or another country.  :-) 

I question a lot of Obama's votes. I question his fawning over Rice at her confirmation hearing. I question his continuing funding for the Iraq war.
His desire to work with others is unmatched in any candidate. This doesn't mean you rollover but it does mean you listen to others. That outweighs any questionable vote he made.
Hillary doesn't listen because she is a top-down candidate where Obama is a bottom-up person. That is why Obama has such a strong nation-wide campaign. He is building at the grass-roots where Hillary picks and chooses. Hillary will lead Dems to future ruin.

In all fairness, Olbermann should discuss each candidate in successive nights.

dog wrote "Both McCain and Hillary are flawed and to assume Hillary is the better candidate because she is a Dem is also flawed. . . . The bottom line is Hillary is not any more trustworthy or honest and may be less so then McCain."

Yes they are both flawed.  All three candidates left standing are flawed.  But assuming she is the better candidate because she is a Democrat is simple logic.  Shit, even Zell Miller would be better than McCain, even if by so little, it isn't funny.  Regardless of that, Clinton is so far left of Zell Miller, she might as well be Leon Trotsky. 

Arguing that McCain is more honest than Clinton may make sense to a Democrat who recognizes what a right wing zealot he is, but falls flat as an argument to genuine conservative extremists whose acid test for idealogical purity are failed by all but the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party.  He's not as good a conservative Republican as Cheney or DeLay, for example, but how many can aspire to those deplorable standards?  Short of that, he is a plain, dyed in the wool, everday Republican conservative.  Saying you could do worse is scarcely a compliment.

With Clinton, you get the history of DLC triangulation, and the poor judgment on foreign affairs legislation, but you would get a Democrat with traditional liberal tendencies.  I'm not supporting her and, probably like you, I don't approve of the underhanded tactics of her campaign.  But between the two, I would never vote for a Bush acolyte like McCain.  There's no comparison.

seashell "Lotsa problems with both candidates."

This is a minor quibble.  I certainly didn't agree with every stand taken by Gov. Dean, Vice President Gore, Sen. Feingold, or by any other elected official.  Given that, you don't slide on principle just because you choose a flawed candidate over another.  You can put every potential office holder on an ideological continuum and say one one is better or worse than every other alternative who appears on it.  Choosing the one that's better over the one that's worse should be an unconscious reflex.

I don't have any sympathy for Spitzer, and think Clinton the big loser this week because of the memories triggered as dog soldier lays out about Bill. Many women stay with the jerk involved and many don't. The public might take sides on that issue but don't think the better of any involved and feel for the children.

Breaking: Ferraro out of Clinton campaign. How long did this take?????

There's something unsettling about Pat Buchanan discussing race issues on Hardball. He's defending Ferraro of course.

Eliot Spitzer's prescription for CHANGE

Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors that usually significantly lower sex drive. Examples are: Celexa, Lexapro, Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft

Anti-Androgen Cyproterone acetate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyproterone...

300 grams black liquorice a day, licorice root & licorice powder(for capsules & tea)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquorice

I think we have a system that is proving itself up to the task of refereeing the fight between the DLC and the grassroots.

I'm happy to let Michigan and Florida revote because then we will win, no questions asked ("what if") when it is over.

I could see being for Clinton for three reasons, it is time for a woman, the military is being appropriately used right now,the current system is basically alright with the right interests running things, but needs better management.

believe all three of those seashell and she is your choice

vb wrote "How long did this take?????"

Ha ha.  It took her two days of opening her mouth over a six day period.  She should have taken a hint after Clinton denounced her statements instead of continuing to saw off the limb she was on. 

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.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fred, Both african-american men & women were treated horribly & there are no excuses for it & never will be.. But, believe me, I am not a whiner, never have been. And what women went through in the earlier days to try & achieve something is not "trivial". I know.. I lived it & so did many other women. I t was considered the "norm".

I respect your opinions & your knowledge on many subjects. I do not agree with some of your conclusions & opinions.

This race for the nomination is the most fascinating in my lifetime. I happen to believe both are excellent candidates. As individuals, we will have our preferences.

dog, think Supreme Court.  No camparison.  If you vote, McC., we'll be back in the 9th century.

Huge Breaking Story! Mainstream media outlet CNN is reporting that Obama's win in the caucus gives him more Texas delegates than Clinton.  Here's an excerpt:

"Illinois Sen. Barack Obama has won the Texas Democratic caucuses and will get more delegates out of the state than his rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, who won the state's primary, according to CNN estimates.

"Under the Texas Democratic Party's complex delegate selection plan, Texas voters participated in both a primary and caucuses on March 4. Two-thirds of the state's 193 delegates were at stake at the primary, while the remaining third were decided by the caucuses.

"An additional 35 superdelegates were not tied to either contest. Clinton, of New York, defeated Obama in the primary by a 51-47 percent margin. But results of the caucuses were up in the air on election night and for several days afterward, due to state party rules that did not require local caucus officials to report their results to a centralized location.

"Partial caucus results, representing 41 percent of all caucus precincts, showed Obama last week with 56 percent of the county-level delegates chosen at the caucuses to 44 percent for Clinton. The state party says it will not be able to provide a further breakdown of the caucus results from March 4.

"After a comprehensive review of these results, CNN estimates that Obama won more support from Texas caucus-goers than Clinton. Based on the state party's tally, Obama's caucus victory translates into 38 national convention delegates, compared to 29 for Clinton.

"And though Clinton won more delegates than Obama in the primary, 65 to 61, Obama's wider delegate margin in the caucuses gives him the overall statewide delegate lead, 99 to 94 — or once superdelegate endorsements are factored in, 109 to 106.

"Every procedure used to statistically model the outcome of the caucuses indicated that Obama had more support than Clinton."

Phil, I'm not even voting in the primary and I've said that.  I think Keith should also do a comment on BO.  He's lost some objectivity and he's not doing himself any favors.   

Keith should do a special comment on Obama. You're kidding, right? Good grief,

Greetings again from the end of the world, Ushuaia in Tierra del Fuego, Argentine Patagonia. This will be my last post for a day or two at least. Tomorrow I fly to El Calafate with the purpose of seeing many glaciers including the Perito Moreno I think glacier which is supposed to be spectacular. Frankly I am having a very hard time getting excited about walking on a big sheet of ice. But I have had a hard day. I am homesick. I want my dog. This morning we cruised the Beagle channel in a catamaran. The water was rough but the trip was very beautiful. It looks a lot like SF Bay with sea lion islands and such but this is ringed with snow capped peaks. We saw some albatrosses. We took a break for lunch at a beautiful place on the outskirts of Tierra del Fuego Nátional Park. Today I spurned the lamb and ate a lot of bread as my tummy has had better days. This afternoon we toured Tierra del Fuego National Park. It is wildly and incredibly beautiful. I believe this place looks a lot like Nor Cal, Oregon, Washington looked before the white man decided to populate it to death. The white man introduced the beaver here with the purpose of having the fur but the beavers have no predators such as pumas and wolves and they have multiplied and multiplied and are damaging the trees badly to build their dams. The white man also introduced rabbits and the Park has tons and tons of them. There is Queen Anns Lace, daisies, lupine, trees with yellow flowers. It is the end of their summer and approximates Santa Cruz CA in January or so. Only colder. And wetter. It may be time for me to hang up my suitcase b-c I am having a case of ´¨it looks like...¨¨ as in ¨¨it looks like SF Bay or the toilet paper is ¨¨just like Greece¨¨ b-c you cannot put it in the john. It is time to go home.

I question why some women stand beside their man after being publically humilliated by their indiscretions. I'd say me wife would fall into the Cafferty of CNN category...he said something like his wife would be standing over his bloody, lifeless body wondering "how do you reload this thing?. Mine wouldn't wonder, I taught her how to reload it...lol.

Tonight on Hardball, I missed what the magic number was for...it was either 24% of Hillary's vote in Miss. came from Repubs or 24% of Repubs voted for her...anyone know which is right?

Tom Bearse great news about the TX caucuses. Thx.

I happen to think Senator Clinton made her war vote in good faith and has stuck with it in good faith.

and Barack Obama thought it a bad idea but as a Senator is saddled with the truth that once a nation goes to war it is all in.

just because their votes are the same and the maneuvers that the military will take to withdraw might well be identical under either; in no way implies that they foresee the same role for the military going forward

Obama, by putting diplomacy forward, re-arranges the basic role and wins the respect of the world for starters but may well earn a test from an adversary or two.

Phil, I'm not even voting in the primary and I've said that.  I think Keith should also do a comment on BO.  He's lost some objectivity and he's not doing himself any favors.

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

I agree with you Seashell. I emailed his program & told him he'd lost his objectivity.

New thread.

Geez, if you want to play the downtrodden game, Fred, African-American men had the right to vote WAY sooner than white women ever did.

But as a white woman, I strongly believe the country owes more spiritual reparation to African-Americans than we do to white women. African-Americans were dragged here against their will, exploited, refused basic rights, and then cut loose and left to languish.

White women, OTOH, always the majority, made and still make daily decisions that are not in their best interests. Decisions, for one thing, like "standing by your man" and even encouraging him not to resign.

What stands between women and equality is women's hesitancy to seize upon and assert their rightful equality. What stands between African-Americans and equality are a host of factors, many of which are outside their control. So in deciding which symbolic candidate to vote for, I am happy to defer this round.

-- volney