Daniela wrote "Unfortunately we have now had to listen to the Reverend Jeremiah Wright spew his racist hatred and inflammatory remarks for days on end."

What did he say?  Do you know? 

FOX's Rape of Rev. Wright -- The Full Chickens Sermon
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkfra...


video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeo...

E. J. Dionne wrote in the Washington Post a brilliant dissection of the ironic condemnations of Jeremiah Wright and the invocations of Martin Luther King by hopelessly ill-informed, hypocritical white conservatives, among others; the whole point of Obama's widely misunderstood address.  Here's some excerpts:

"Yes, black people say things about our country and its injustices to each other that they don't say to those of us who are white. Whites also say things about blacks privately that they don't say in front of their black friends and associates.

"One black leader who was capable of getting very angry indeed is the one now being invoked against Wright. His name was Martin Luther King Jr.

" . . . .

"Listen to what King said about the Vietnam War at his own Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on Feb. 4, 1968: 'God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. . . . And we are criminals in that war. We've committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place.' King then predicted this response from the Almighty: 'And if you don't stop your reckless course, I'll rise up and break the backbone of your power.'

"If today's technology had existed then, I would imagine the media playing quotations of that sort over and over. Right-wing commentators would use the material to argue that King was anti-American and to discredit his call for racial and class justice. King certainly angered a lot of people at the time.

"I cite King not to justify Wright's damnation of America or his lunatic and pernicious theories but to suggest that Obama's pastor and his church are not as far outside the African American mainstream as many would suggest. I would also ask my conservative friends who praise King so lavishly to search their consciences and wonder if they would have stood up for him in 1968."

Boy oh boy, Hill's supporters just find it hard NOT to go low. Disgusting!

And BTW, a little bird told me that Howard was first. . . .


woot?

(New Book) The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power (May '08)

http://jeffsharlet.blogspot.com/2008/02/...

"Just when we thought the Christian right was crumbling, Jeff Sharlet delivers a rude shock: One of its most powerful and cult-like core groups, the "Family," has been thriving and even drawing in Democrats like Hillary Clinton. Sharlet's book is one of the most compelling and brilliantly researched exposes you'll ever read-- just don't read it alone at night!"

--Barbara Ehrenreich, author of Nickel and Dimed, Bait and Switch, and Dancing in the Streets

---

Hillary's Nasty Pastorate
Barbara Ehrenreich

There's a reason Hillary Clinton has remained relatively silent during the flap over intemperate remarks by Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, she's a lot more vulnerable than Obama.

You can find all about it in a widely under-read article in the September 2007 issue of Mother Jones, in which Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet reported that "through all of her years in Washington, Clinton has been an active participant in conservative Bible study and prayer circles that are part of a secretive Capitol Hill group known as "The "Fellowship," also known as The Family. But it won't be a secret much longer. Jeff Sharlet's shocking exposé The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power will be published in May.

Sean Hannity has called Obama's church a "cult," but that term applies far more aptly to Clinton's "Family," which is organized into "cells"--their term--and operates sex-segregated group homes for young people in northern Virginia. In 2002, Sharlet joined The Family's home for young men, forswearing sex, drugs and alcohol, and participating in endless discussions of Jesus and power. He wasn't undercover; he used his own name and admitted to being a writer. But he wasn't completely out of danger either. When he went outdoors one night to make a cell phone call, he was followed. He still gets calls from Family associates asking him to meet them in diners--alone. ...full article: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/eh...

Where the Money Leads

Media Transparency follows the money fueling the right-wing movement, to show how conservative philanthropies, through their tax-exempt funding strategies, shape public discourse.

The big givers include Milwaukee's Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation, and the Scaife, Koch, Coors, and Walton family foundations. They alone have poured $28 million into the American Enterprise Institute. That kind of money buys a lot of "experts."

With coordinated giving on a grand scale, they've led the way in funding a movement to radically alter the social, legal, educational, media, political and religious landscapes of the United States, building a supply-side machinery for implementing a hard-right agenda.

Media Transparency follows their money and what it buys with a unique database -- 50,000 grants to 9,000 recipients for $3.5 billion -- and 60 to 70 original articles per year that connect the dots between the money and the movement's radical public policy goals. .... http://www.mediatransparency.org/whereth...

I communicate with friends across the USA and we will NOT support Obama Clinton, we prefer to vote for a Patriot.

Has DFA gone completely nuts allowing such tripe on BFA?

This article is straight out of FOX...the Rev Wright network. Just because some misguided person posts to a DFAlink Blog, is no reason to post it to the main page.

Whats up there? 

Daniela, you might try listening to Obama's speech from Tuesday. As Jon Stewart said, he spoke to us like we were grownups. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbL...

Daniella....

You seem to be willing to forget about the blue dress, NAFTA, voting for Iraq war and a future Iran war.

There will be plenty of trash regardless of whether it's Hillary, Obama or Jesus.

And if the trash doesn't work, they'll start another war. We seem to scare easily.

We just need to get more voters to the polls than they do.

Actually I'm rather intrigued with Hillary losing, showing up at the Convention and then walking out with her DLCers. I'd call that mission accomplished. It could even win us the election.

Polls suggest Obama rebounding from pastor flap

Why do we get so many spam posts now? Yuck.

ON that note I'd like to wish everyone who celebrates - Buona Pasqua.

Nite. Buona Notte.

Has DFA gone completely nuts allowing such tripe on BFA?

That's what I always liked about BFA. Very minimal censorship.
I think that is the essence of DFA: To hear as many voices as possible.

Of course following that principle is hard for people who have an agenda, an ideology,
because those people don't listen
they just want to propagate their opinions.

My stance is that I like to share my opion as a FYI not as a recipe for anyone to follow.

In my opinion Obama is not wounded. Only in the imagination of the Clintons. Like wishful thinking.
It's a fact that Clinton has no mathematical chance to win the nomination.

So, with this talk about Obama being wounded the Clinton campaign is trying  to create visions of her being above the fray, invincible, not wounded.

Well, it has been argued that declaring: I will not vote for Clinton if she is the nominee because she is failing my purity test to carefully reconsider that opinion.
Let's be clear, she is failing my purity test.

Should Hillary get the nomination against all mathematical odds I will consider to doubt the value of mathematics.

Daniela wrote: "I communicate with friends across the USA and we will NOT support Obama, we prefer to vote for a Patriot."


You have Friends???!! The Beverly Hills addy says a lot.

I pray that Reverend Wright gets to give the invocation on inauguration day.

I see Daniela joined DFA the day she wrote this post - just so she could spread more fear and hate, right here on the good ole blog.  it's such a shame to see that some of Hillary's supporters are jumping right down into that Bill/Hill/Carville/Penn gutter.   the DLC & Co are getting desperate, so I am sutre there is worse to come. 

yet I can't fully blame Daniela - the complicit press has not yet show the reverend's entire speech, or even the few extra seconds that would put those clips they keep playing over and over again into context.  to address this hate and fear an honest media would step forward and tell the true tale of his speeches - I'm not holding my breath.  that said, there is really no excuse - Daniela knows how to use the 'net' so she should be able to learn the truth if she cares - or if she dares.

HAPPY EASTER DAY

to any who observe this day.  peace and blessings upon our world.

it's 4:41 am edt and my typos are showing - off to get java!

here's a link for anyone wanting to send Daniela a message:

http://www.dfalink.com/send_message.php?mid=275697

to be fair, a correction, re:

it's such a shame to see that some of Hillary's supporters are jumping right down into that Bill/Hill/Carville/Penn gutter.

should be:

it's such a shame to see that some of Hillary's and John's supporters are jumping right down into that Bill/Hill/Carville/Penn/Bush/Rove/Cheney gutter.

what 3 questions would you ask the candidates... from Tomas Young, the courageous fellow documented in 'Body of War' by Phil Donahue and Ellen Spiro:

http://youtube.com/bodyofwar

Body of War:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YvGEoZ9vMSg

Good morning, everybody

This post is snark, right?  It made me chuckle.  

BTW, I've archived Rev. Wright's letter to the New York Times on Hannah.  His ire is entirely understandable.  He got suckered by the reporter.  Now he knows that evil seeks to destroy the good it cannot corrupt.

I've been preparing yesterday's diary on KOS as an email to my link group and the peacenik email list.  Getting the Air Force out of Iraq is key to getting the U.S. out of Iraq.  

p.s.  If the post is serious, it still makes me chuckle.  "Vote for a Patriot"  Indeed! That's one of those little missiles that keeps missing, right?  If I remember correctly, in Gulf One they actually took out a couple of friendlies.  During the 2003 invasion they missed everything they aimed at.

Good morning, BFA on a fine, lazy morning in which some are celebrating Easter.

The weather here has been interesting to say the least. Snow Friday, sun yesterday that melted the snow; snow again this am when I rose a few hours back; now that's gone and the sun is shining through again.

At least, we do not have the flooding problems the US is having. My heart goes out to those.

****************

The thread post is, IMO, a lot of misplaced anxiety (or snark, as Monica says). And that is my most benign take on it. My more cynical side think a lot more unprintable things.

I am one who thinks, for example, that making a fuss over Rev. Wright and trying to tar Obama with it is just as silly as trying to tar Hillary for Bill's actions with Monica. In fact, sillier.

Let us remember that not all those who say that they *support* Hillary really do, especially when they demonstrate that *support* with screeds like this.

In any event, the principal purpose of such seems to be to keep us all at each other's throats so that we will be angry no matter who is chosen. Right now, it is more probable than not that Obama will be the nominee.

Tom Bearse nailed things in his fine thread comment a few threads back. Dems must win this election, no matter how much we may not find the ultimate nominee perfect or our particular choice. Neither one of those remaining was the one I had hoped for (not even among the top four), but I will support either and gladly so. Do not kid yourselves; anything else is supporting the continuation of putzCo under another name. And that's the truth. I am a realist.

Howard Dean is who brought me here and he and Jim Dean are why I stay. I post nowhere else. This is not the Obama blog; this is not the Hillary blog; this is not even the Gore blog. This is the original Howard Dean blog.

We could all ask ourselves *WWHD* ("What would Howard do?") Howard would not support a screed like this on behalf of either candidate. And Howard asks us to support whoever is the nominee. If we really cannot bring ourselves to do that, then how is it that we think we are helping Howard Dean?

Willima Monroe, The system has been automated.  Posts get promoted, if nobody objects to have them removed for violating the conditions, such as 'no commercial spam.' 

I actually find it rather amusing that BFA has suddenly been discovered by the Clintons.  They're really scraping the bottom of the barrel, from their perspective, in trying to recoup influence where they once rejected it.

Daniela's contribution is rather interesting in its reliance on guilt by association.  Especially since it's increasingly obvious that the Clinton gang is associated by guilt with the crooked Bushes.  Hillary Rodham Clinton had an opportunity to distance herself from the whitebread mafia but has chosen not to.  Instead, Hill is still trying to pull Bill's chestnuts out of the fire.  In this case, the chestnuts are the debacle in Iraq and his presidential legacy.  The problem isn't just that the Bush Two horror show built on the Clinton foundation.  It's that the Clinton presidency is being revealed as a continuation of Bush One.  What's also being revealed is that whatever Hillary Rodham's contribution was to the Clinton administration, the country would have done better without it.  Bill lies to cover his ass; Hill lies because deception gives her pleasure.  (Sorry, there's just no other explanation for the lies in her St. Patrick's Day speech at George Washington University). 

The Clinton supporters are stooping pretty low.

The truth is a post like this will move the Super Delegates Obama's way. 

I find this headline a bit hyperbolic, even if there are similarities. What we might want to remember most is that, whatever their disagreements in Chicago in 1968 ... and there were divisions, indeed, chasms, then ... the Dems did unite in the end so that Hubert Humphrey nearly won the election in spit of the divisions.

If only he had.

It is that unity that we must seek again this year once the dust has settled. The stakes now are much higher than they were then. They are higher now than they ever will be because this year is literally the turning point. We can choose to take our country back, or we can choose to lose it altogether.

Whoever is the candidate, Rove, putz, prick & all their criminal minions will do everything they can to tear the candidate down. For them, prison is in the future unless their puppet ('Cain) wins. We *ain't seen nuthin yet.*

=====================
Echoes of 1968 return to haunt the divided DemocratsThe Democrats head for their convention beset by splits and overshadowed by a war, just as they did 40 years ago when Chicago became the focus for extraordinary anti-Vietnam riots. As two films recall those tumultuous events, veterans are reflecting on the similarities with the conflicts of 2008
Paul Harris
The Observer, Sunday March 23 2008

Forty years ago, John Froines was a Sixties radical leading anti-war hippie protests to the Chicago Democratic Convention. After the 1968 convention descended into riots and more than 25,000 troops and police were deployed on the streets, Froines became one of the famed 'Chicago Eight'. He was put on trial for inciting the disturbances in one of the most controversial cases in American history.

Now, as a distinguished chemistry professor in California, Froines sees a country again mired in a seemingly endless foreign war. Once more the Democrats are headed for a bitterly divided political convention. Yet Froines thinks the world is now in even worse shape than it was in 1968. 'We are in a much more serious time,' he told The Observer. 'Our problems are much more intractable.'

Perhaps that is why the 40th anniversary of the Chicago convention, the riots that surrounded it and the resulting trial are being examined as never before. Not only were the events of 1968 pivotal, but they have never seemed more relevant to the shape of American politics. If you substitute Vietnam for Iraq and Chicago 1968 for Denver 2008, the parallels can become eerie.

[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar...

Monica & Phil ... I am not so convinced that the person is truly a Clinton supporter.

Cui bono?

Is Bill, Hillary's evil twin or is it visa versa? whatever, the Clinton campaign is bringing out the worst in people

not that we at BFA know whether or no Karl Rove sent Daniela

The Chinese strategy right now appears to be, *Blame the victim* as violence escalates in Tibet. Unfortunately, some of us Westerners, most probably with the best of intentions, are keeping the pot aboil.

What a shame all round!

=======================
Inside the court of the Tibetan god-kingRandeep Ramesh travels to McLeod Ganj and finds that the Dalai Lama's commitment to peace is being tested - both by China and by Tibetans who want decisive action in the face of escalating violence
Randeep Ramesh in McLeod Ganj
The Observer, Sunday March 23 2008

When the Dalai Lama sat down yesterday with Richard Gere and Robert Thurman, father of actor Uma and US professor of Buddhism, it was supposed to be for a few hours contemplating sacred art and silent meditation.

But with Chinese troops smothering the protests in Tibet with brutal ease, the 14th Dalai Lama, an incarnation of Avalokitesvara, the Buddha of Compassion, found himself pondering not celestial peace but bloody violence.

Like almost everything the 72-year-old does, who he meets and what he says in his lopsided English are picked over and pulled apart. Gere and Thurman founded Tibet House, in New York's hip Upper West Side, which serves as a cultural mission for the 'occupied' nation of Tibet. Their headline-grabbing appearance will no doubt deepen suspicions in Beijing that yesterday's event at the Delhi Foundation for Universal Responsibility was politics masquerading as religion.

[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar...

sunlight, let's be clear that polls measure public opinion.  If public opinion shifts with the media story, that is not something that can be credited to individual candidates.  Do let's try to keep our assignment of agency straight.  Just as Barack Obama is not responsible for what the Rev. Wright preaches, he is not responsible for the public perception of him.  The voting public is expected to make a decision on November 8th.  After that, the electoral college will take a vote.  Before that the delegates to a number of national conventions will take a vote.  To put the spot light on the candidate when there are all those other actors whose decisions actually matter is to overlook the important stuff.  Do we really want to repeat that mistake?

It's important for the candidates to present themselves in the remaining venues where delegates are still to be chosen.  Beyond that, it's up to us, the voters, to get to work.  There's a whole House and a third of the Senate to be vetted. 

U.C.C. is doing an Easter special on my station and after watching the Wright clips and now rhis I am tempted to leave my staid Lutheran home and join them. they seem to get the joy enherent in the gospel

the second group of cows will have to wait for feed til it is finished

You get it, Phil. As usual.

************
putzCo are no doubt pissed by this news.

Trot Condi out again; or prick ... they're both so effective. {That WAS snark.)

===============
Pakistan to meet militantsUS fears as new coalition government plans to negotiate with its 'own people' - the extremists
Jason Burke
The Observer, Sunday March 23 2008

Pakistan's newly elected government will seek to negotiate with Islamic militants and demilitarise the campaign against them to end the violence racking the country, leaders of the major coalition parties who will take power next week have said.

The explicit declaration of a desire to talk to extremists and to reduce the role of the army marks a major change for the strategically crucial country and will confirm fears among American policymakers that the heavy defeat of President Pervez Musharraf at recent elections will lead to Pakistan scaling back its support for the US-led 'war on terror' in the region. Pakistan's rugged western frontier is seen as a haven not just for Pakistani militants but also for al-Qaeda and the Taliban and has been the site of fierce combat for several years.

[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar...

I am one who think that Rev. Wright happens to preach the truth, however unpalatable we may find it to be. It is unpalatable, after all.

*********
One of my neighbors in MD is Taiwanese; her husband is Maryland-born & bred, of European ancestry, whose Chinese is so good that he makes his living as a translator. They travel to Taiwan to visit her family every year. The children are completely bilingual. They are a lovely family ... and just one among several lovely families that we have as neighbors there.

From conversations with them, I believe that they are among those who are happy to see these election results.

============
Taiwan ballot boosts links with mainland
Jonathan Watts in Beijing
The Observer, Sunday March 23 2008

More than a decade of tension between Taiwan and mainland China looked set to ease yesterday with the victory of Nationalist party candidate Ma Ying-jeou in the island's presidential election. Despite a last-minute attempt by Frank Hsieh of the Democratic People's Party, to exploit fears over China's crackdown on Tibetan unrest, voters put priority on improved business ties with the mainland, which they hope will galvanise an economy that has lagged behind many of its Asian neighbours.

Ma has promised to boost investment and trade ties, establish regular scheduled flights across the Taiwan strait and to negotiate a peace treaty between the two sides. With more than 99 per cent of the vote counted, Ma, a former mayor of Taipei, secured 58 per cent, while Hsieh lagged far behind with 42 per cent. Turnout was about 76 per cent.

[...]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar...

Judy, I'd share your doubts about Daniela's origins except for the fact that the whole Clinton enterprise has been a disaster  from the get-go.  It's my sense that the reason she squeezed out ahead in NH was because there was still a reservoir of good will for Bill she could draw on.  That's gone now.  Bill destroyed it in South Carolina--not by dissing Obama, but by dissing Jesse Jackson with his comparison.

You see, it's my sense that if there's a dynasty in this country, in addition to the Kennedys, then it's Jesse Jackson and his talented off-spring who render service to the nation year in and year out.  Which may well be why Bill's jealous.  Because, the dismissive comparison to Jesse Jackson was really mean-spirited.

Bill's dismissal of Obama was, as they say, no skin off his nose.  Obama knew SC would vote for him because of michelle's roots in the low country.  Also, there's the problem with a humble man--it's not possible to humiliate him. 

the serbs in Kosovo know how Tibetians feel after a great power's army comes to quell protest

or maybe the Chinese seeing how America was willing to bomb a close ally of Russia into submission is going to show Taiwan through Tibet

tete a tete

Taiwan's elections have upped the ante

America has loosed a terrible monster on the world by insisting that military might is how you bring dissenters to heel, like Saddam. (like Ma?)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7310143.stm

This is worth a read ... and some serious reflection.

And now, I am off to enjoy the day with friends.

I wish you all joy in your own.

===============
Robert Fisk: How Ireland exorcised the ghost of empire
On the 92nd anniversary of the Easter Rising in Dublin, our Middle East correspondent sees numerous parallels between the bloody, intractable conflicts in Ireland and Israel – and says that the war in Iraq has shown us the true value of neutrality
Sunday, 23 March 2008

In November 1974, I was racing to Dublin from Belfast at more than 100mph when I was stopped at a police checkpoint. Sorry about the speed, I told the Garda officer who stopped me. "I'm going to be late for the Childers funeral!" The Garda looked at me – this was long before speeding became a serious crime in the Republic, and replied: "You will be as dead as Childers if you drive at that speed."


But the death of Erskine Hamilton Childers – Protestant president of Ireland, and son of the author of The Riddle of the Sands (who would be sacrificed in Ireland's very own civil war) – was not the real reason for my speed. I wanted to look at the last link with Padraig Pearse, the very last symbol of the leadership of the 1916 rebellion against British rule in Ireland, the battle that created the 20th-century blood sacrifice of Irish republicanism. And, sure enough, within an hour, I was sitting in the 12th-century Cathedral of St Patrick in Dublin, staring across the aisle at the tall, blind figure of Eamon de Valera. He stood as straight and tall as a round-tower, sightless behind his moon-size spectacles, depressed at his own great age; that, at least, is what his closest advisers later revealed, and he was to die within nine months.

[...]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/fisk/r...

Think globally act locally time for me

bbl

Daniela...and I suppose all Howard Dean ever did was scream...twinkies on sale, aisle 4, ten for ten dollars.

Is it better for the monster to be exposed or hidden?

Anyway, Judy, the strategy that's being pursued by the Clintons is that favored by monopolists--i.e. destroy the competition so the last man standing wins.  It's as if in a foot race it were possible to win by tripping all the other runners up.  While this strategy is clearly contrary to the rules, what's more damaging, both in politics and economics, is that we end up with a shoddy product.  It's just not possible to produce something good when much of your attention is focused on destroying something else.

The proponents of this strategy actually think that they are emulating the natural order where the strongest and best come out on top.  That's because they are arguing backwards from their belief that man is the best.  Regardless, the reality is that while the survival of a species defines success, individual specimens don't compete with each other and individual specimens are never the best exemplars. Humans do not achieve superiority by destroying those whom they adjudge to be inferior.  

It's sort of weird that the opponents of evolution base their opposition on their perception that they can't be superior if other organisms are defined as equal in value.  God has to have made them superior; otherwise they're not.  Which, i guess, brings me back to the hypothesis that these people are suffering from a persistent inferiority complex.   

http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/24424

re: Howard Dean is who brought me here and he and Jim Dean are why I stay. I post nowhere else. This is not the Obama blog; this is not the Hillary blog; this is not even the Gore blog. This is the original Howard Dean blog.

We could all ask ourselves *WWHD* ("What would Howard do?") Howard would not support a screed like this on behalf of either candidate. And Howard asks us to support whoever is the nominee. If we really cannot bring ourselves to do that, then how is it that we think we are helping Howard Dean?
--------

I'm sure many of us feel that way and sadly, that's probably why Hillary feels she can get away with this scrorched earth campaign - because in the end, many will vote for her anyway, rather than vote for McCain.  with no care of the damage she does along the way........

Is this post meant in a sarcastic way ?

Senator Clinton has learned well the Rovian skills of dividing and conquering that were used against she and Bill. Fortunately for America, most Clinton supporters I converse with would ( will ) be very satisfied with Barack Obama as the Democratic Presidential candidate. The remaining few appear to be a take -off on the current Presidents base - the haves and the have-mores.

Her base appears to be the "unquestioning loyalists" and the "more unquestioning loyalists".

Tant pis !

And, as always . . . . . . .

Is there not one of us who has a family member or a close friend who embarasses them when they speak ? I'll bet all of us do.

In fact, I'll bet everyone here has an ( otherwise ) friend or a family member who makes racially charged or sexually charged remarks occasionally.

Some of the remarks by Hillary Clinton's husband have contained cloaked innuendos about race.  . . . . and not very cleverly cloaked. Is he reaching out to the worst of white America - and reminding them why they should vote against Barack Obama ?

And by the way, which candidate has done a better job of carrying out Howard Dean's fifty-state strategy in their campaigning ?

http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/24425

please recc - and move this toward the front. 

It may not be apparent to some - but those of us who were with Howard when the media played snippets of his speech after the Iowa caucus, muted out the crowd noise and made the images look grainy  - these are the same people who have done the same with the Rev. Wright's remarks.

The media blah-blah about Senator Obama's speech seemed cleverly prepared also :

"Great SPEECH - perhaps the best SPEECH ever about race relations in America. Then they went on to play back snippets that they could be doubtful of.

 To my friends who have been Clinton supporters all along :

Would you deny that Senator Clinton is the more corporatist candidate of the two ?

Would you deny that Senator Clinton's donations have been high-donor heavy, compared to Senator Obama's donations ?

Can we just forget about them being the "woman" candidate and the "sorta black" candidate for a moment and think about what's best for America and for Howard's fifty-state strategy ?

hi David - yes, indeed the 50 state strategy.  anyone who has not seen this vid about Obama's early work in voter registration should check this out - this man has worked hard to be where he is and he has the kind of experience that makes a leader, not another corp-controlled Bushlite.

http://my.barackobama.com/morevoicesvideo

Hmm, Daniela, I have talked with my friends around the country and those who were once for Hillary have changed their support to Obama because the Clintons and their handlers have behaved unbelievably badly.

Short take:

Just as a person who prides her/himself on humility is not actually humble, we can never be a great nation as long as we brag on our own greatness instead of continually looking for and fixing our faults.

Anyone who cannot understand how people who were dragged here against their will and turned into a permanent underclass might be a TAD. BIT. ANGRY. should really start to limber up the imagination God gave you before your "patriotism" turns to something altogether different and dangerous.

Just my 2 cents.

-- volney

Well, the one nice thing about these turd droppers is that they don't stick around.  LOL

This seems to be largely a bombing operation.

48.

Jo*in*Vermont
Sun, 03/23/08

done

40.

Monica Smith


Thank you, Monica.

9:00 AM EDT

Well, I'm a patriot, we ALL are here, including Barack Obama.

I'm also a Christian and believe that Easter is a day to celebrate the risen Lord.

So, I will not waste this special day worrying about how low a Hillary supporter like you has sunk with your comment here.

I suspect Hillary would be ashamed of your comments about Barack.

I was prompted by the discussion of the drivers' permit issue in connection with Bill Richardson and New Mexico of Anthony Kennedy's disquisition on the rule of law.

His first point!!!!!!!! 

I suggest that the rule of law has three parts. The first is that the law is binding on the government and all of its officials. This may seem a rather self-evident matter, but it’s a proposition that most government officials in most countries do not fully understand. If an administrative agency and an administrator in that agency is charged with giving you a permit, the permit is not given to you as a matter of grace; it’s given to you because you are entitled to it and because it is his or her duty to give it to you.

A permit to operate a motor vehicle, a potentially lethal and definitely powerful machine, is predicated upon the completion of a demonstration of competence.  Once that competence, which is directly related to the operation of that machine has been demonstrated, the person is entitled to the permit.  National origin or residence or economic circumstance has no connection to performance.  Neither does the fact that some organizations might want to bundle social services or not with the possession of such a permit.  It isn't legal for the government to require it.

But remember, these limitations on the authority of a government agency do not apply to private corporations which, in the law, have the same right to refuse service or to deal with any other person.  The courts have held that private entities engaged in commerce, particularly interstate commerce, forfeit their right to discriminate, especially if their behavior can be demonstrated to be related to certain personal characteristics (race, gender, age, physical disability, national origin) that are determined to have a protected status.  I suspect that private transportation entities and carriers are going to argue that the failure to show an identification card with a current image of the bearer is a valid basis for refusing to provide service, since such behavior is not protected.

The TSA is in a tenuous position.  Somewhat like the IRS, they're relying largely on a compliant public and straddling the line between the obligations of a public agency and the rights of a private corporation.  Indeed, the TSA is exercising more power than it is entitled to, especially since there's no evidence that an identification card ensures public safety in any way.  If the program goes to court, it is likely to be ruled illegal.  Which is, indeed, the case with much of what Bush/Cheney have tried to do.  If push comes to shove, Homeland Security will be slammed down.  

Indeed, taking HS apart should be a priority in the next Congress.  Talk about a failed experiment. 

9:15 AM EDT

Jo -

Recommended your thread.

However, there's another new Front thread.

rdorgan - good!  the only reason I wrote it was to try to bump this one.

    Well, this is a bit sad; here we have a professed "Democrat" buying into Republican smear--this post is almost certainly the reaction that Fox-Elephant news wants people to have. But there are many, many problems

    Fox-Elephant news cherry-picked comments and took them out of context, yet people believe they are accurate;

    Fox-Elephant news (and the poster) seem to assume that because Obama's minister has said something, Obama must agree--IF we follow this logic, we must believe that John McCain believes that Jews are resonsible for anti-semitism and that the Catholic Church is the "Whore of Babylon" since the pastor whose endorsement McCain "is proud to have," John Hagee, has made such comments. 

      Finally, the post seems to consider any criticism of American society's record on race unpatriotic. Well, I may be as white as the next Irish American (being one) but I'd have to say that the United States' rather checkered record on race has hardly been solved. Is it possible Rev. Warren is pushing the envelop? Sure, but let's face it: the establishment considered Martin Luther King, Jr. a dangerous radical. Warren may not be another King (I would be very surprised if it turned out that way) but if no one pushes the envelope, nothing will ever change.

      I support Obama. He's not perfect. But he can restore hope. He understands--and he alone really understands--how the down-and-out and the dispossed are truly treated (yes, McCain was a POW, and no doubt treated very poorly as such, but he has no real idea how the economically and socially dispossed are treated by the worlds economic and social systems).

daniela, i don't know where to begin so i'll begin at the end.  please don't support obama, if this is your attitude.