6.30.2008

Olbermann Special Comment To Barack Obama on F.I.S.A.!

From Countdown w/ Keith Olbermann (via VOTERSTHINKdotORG):

A Special Comment on FISA and the Junior Senator from Illinois:

"The Democratic leadership in the Senate, Republican knuckle-dragging in the same chamber, and the mediocre skills of whoever wrote the final version of the FISA bill, have combined to give Senator Barack Obama… a second chance to make a first impression.

"And he damned well better take it."

read more | digg story

Keith Olbermann asks, "Can McCain Be Trusted? "

Evidently not.

From Countdown:

June 30: John McCain made claims that the 2008 election “is about trust and trusting people’s word,” but can the American people trust someone who has flip flopped on so many issues? Countdown’s Keith Olbermann discusses.



digg it

VIDEO: Meet the Neo-Cons!

I'm pretty sure I've posted this before but who care? It's hysterical.

From Blimptv:

National Lampoon does it again. See them all on this video spoof you just might want to buy but simply can't. Empty Soul, Major Phoney's Holy Roller Band and many more.....



read more | digg story

Obama snubs the DLC

The DLC is dead. Long live the Democratic Party.

From Politico:

Here's a striking mark of the distance between Obama and the centrist/Clintonite Democratic Leadership Council: The DLC kicked off their "National Conversation" over the weekend in Chicago, a block from Obama's campaign headquarters.

Obama, who had time to get a haircut and shoot some hoops on what passes for a down weekend on the campaign trail, didn't make it by.

The DLC has "officially lost its mojo," Taegan Goddard concludes.

read more | digg story

Barack Obama: Speech on Patriotism

This is Barack Obama's speech an what Patriotism means to him (and really, to most of us if we could only get the corp. media out of the fucking way).

Barack Obama is what patriotism looks like. I'm so proud he is going to be the next President of the United States. What an improvement over the idiot -in-chief now in office.

From BarackObamadotcom:




read more | digg story
Here's the full text from BarackObama.com:

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama

The America We Love

as prepared for delivery

Monday, June 30th, 2008

Independence, Missouri

On a spring morning in April of 1775, a simple band of colonists – farmers and merchants, blacksmiths and printers, men and boys – left their homes and families in Lexington and Concord to take up arms against the tyranny of an Empire. The odds against them were long and the risks enormous – for even if they survived the battle, any ultimate failure would bring charges of treason, and death by hanging.

And yet they took that chance. They did so not on behalf of a particular tribe or lineage, but on behalf of a larger idea. The idea of liberty. The idea of God-given, inalienable rights. And with the first shot of that fateful day – a shot heard round the world – the American Revolution, and America's experiment with democracy, began.

Those men of Lexington and Concord were among our first patriots. And at the beginning of a week when we celebrate the birth of our nation, I think it is fitting to pause for a moment and reflect on the meaning of patriotism – theirs, and ours. We do so in part because we are in the midst of war – more than one and a half million of our finest young men and women have now fought in Iraq and Afghanistan; over 60,000 have been wounded, and over 4,600 have been laid to rest. The costs of war have been great, and the debate surrounding our mission in Iraq has been fierce. It is natural, in light of such sacrifice by so many, to think more deeply about the commitments that bind us to our nation, and to each other.

We reflect on these questions as well because we are in the midst of a presidential election, perhaps the most consequential in generations; a contest that will determine the course of this nation for years, perhaps decades, to come. Not only is it a debate about big issues – health care, jobs, energy, education, and retirement security – but it is also a debate about values. How do we keep ourselves safe and secure while preserving our liberties? How do we restore trust in a government that seems increasingly removed from its people and dominated by special interests? How do we ensure that in an increasingly global economy, the winners maintain allegiance to the less fortunate? And how do we resolve our differences at a time of increasing diversity?

Finally, it is worth considering the meaning of patriotism because the question of who is – or is not – a patriot all too often poisons our political debates, in ways that divide us rather than bringing us together. I have come to know this from my own experience on the campaign trail. Throughout my life, I have always taken my deep and abiding love for this country as a given. It was how I was raised; it is what propelled me into public service; it is why I am running for President. And yet, at certain times over the last sixteen months, I have found, for the first time, my patriotism challenged – at times as a result of my own carelessness, more often as a result of the desire by some to score political points and raise fears about who I am and what I stand for.

So let me say at this at outset of my remarks. I will never question the patriotism of others in this campaign. And I will not stand idly by when I hear others question mine.

My concerns here aren't simply personal, however. After all, throughout our history, men and women of far greater stature and significance than me have had their patriotism questioned in the midst of momentous debates. Thomas Jefferson was accused by the Federalists of selling out to the French. The anti-Federalists were just as convinced that John Adams was in cahoots with the British and intent on restoring monarchal rule. Likewise, even our wisest Presidents have sought to justify questionable policies on the basis of patriotism. Adams' Alien and Sedition Act, Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, Roosevelt's internment of Japanese Americans – all were defended as expressions of patriotism, and those who disagreed with their policies were sometimes labeled as unpatriotic.

In other words, the use of patriotism as a political sword or a political shield is as old as the Republic. Still, what is striking about today's patriotism debate is the degree to which it remains rooted in the culture wars of the 1960s – in arguments that go back forty years or more. In the early years of the civil rights movement and opposition to the Vietnam War, defenders of the status quo often accused anybody who questioned the wisdom of government policies of being unpatriotic. Meanwhile, some of those in the so-called counter-culture of the Sixties reacted not merely by criticizing particular government policies, but by attacking the symbols, and in extreme cases, the very idea, of America itself – by burning flags; by blaming America for all that was wrong with the world; and perhaps most tragically, by failing to honor those veterans coming home from Vietnam, something that remains a national shame to this day.

Most Americans never bought into these simplistic world-views – these caricatures of left and right. Most Americans understood that dissent does not make one unpatriotic, and that there is nothing smart or sophisticated about a cynical disregard for America's traditions and institutions. And yet the anger and turmoil of that period never entirely drained away. All too often our politics still seems trapped in these old, threadbare arguments – a fact most evident during our recent debates about the war in Iraq, when those who opposed administration policy were tagged by some as unpatriotic, and a general providing his best counsel on how to move forward in Iraq was accused of betrayal.

Given the enormous challenges that lie before us, we can no longer afford these sorts of divisions. None of us expect that arguments about patriotism will, or should, vanish entirely; after all, when we argue about patriotism, we are arguing about who we are as a country, and more importantly, who we should be. But surely we can agree that no party or political philosophy has a monopoly on patriotism. And surely we can arrive at a definition of patriotism that, however rough and imperfect, captures the best of America's common spirit.

What would such a definition look like? For me, as for most Americans, patriotism starts as a gut instinct, a loyalty and love for country rooted in my earliest memories. I'm not just talking about the recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance or the Thanksgiving pageants at school or the fireworks on the Fourth of July, as wonderful as those things may be. Rather, I'm referring to the way the American ideal wove its way throughout the lessons my family taught me as a child.

One of my earliest memories is of sitting on my grandfather's shoulders and watching the astronauts come to shore in Hawaii. I remember the cheers and small flags that people waved, and my grandfather explaining how we Americans could do anything we set our minds to do. That's my idea of America.

I remember listening to my grandmother telling stories about her work on a bomber assembly-line during World War II. I remember my grandfather handing me his dog-tags from his time in Patton's Army, and understanding that his defense of this country marked one of his greatest sources of pride. That's my idea of America.

I remember, when living for four years in Indonesia as a child, listening to my mother reading me the first lines of the Declaration of Independence – "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." I remember her explaining how this declaration applied to every American, black and white and brown alike; how those words, and words of the United States Constitution, protected us from the injustices that we witnessed other people suffering during those years abroad. That's my idea of America.

As I got older, that gut instinct – that America is the greatest country on earth – would survive my growing awareness of our nation's imperfections: it's ongoing racial strife; the perversion of our political system laid bare during the Watergate hearings; the wrenching poverty of the Mississippi Delta and the hills of Appalachia. Not only because, in my mind, the joys of American life and culture, its vitality, its variety and its freedom, always outweighed its imperfections, but because I learned that what makes America great has never been its perfection but the belief that it can be made better. I came to understand that our revolution was waged for the sake of that belief – that we could be governed by laws, not men; that we could be equal in the eyes of those laws; that we could be free to say what we want and assemble with whomever we want and worship as we please; that we could have the right to pursue our individual dreams but the obligation to help our fellow citizens pursue theirs.

For a young man of mixed race, without firm anchor in any particular community, without even a father's steadying hand, it is this essential American idea – that we are not constrained by the accident of birth but can make of our lives what we will – that has defined my life, just as it has defined the life of so many other Americans.

That is why, for me, patriotism is always more than just loyalty to a place on a map or a certain kind of people. Instead, it is also loyalty to America's ideals – ideals for which anyone can sacrifice, or defend, or give their last full measure of devotion. I believe it is this loyalty that allows a country teeming with different races and ethnicities, religions and customs, to come together as one. It is the application of these ideals that separate us from Zimbabwe, where the opposition party and their supporters have been silently hunted, tortured or killed; or Burma, where tens of thousands continue to struggle for basic food and shelter in the wake of a monstrous storm because a military junta fears opening up the country to outsiders; or Iraq, where despite the heroic efforts of our military, and the courage of many ordinary Iraqis, even limited cooperation between various factions remains far too elusive.

I believe those who attack America's flaws without acknowledging the singular greatness of our ideals, and their proven capacity to inspire a better world, do not truly understand America.

Of course, precisely because America isn't perfect, precisely because our ideals constantly demand more from us, patriotism can never be defined as loyalty to any particular leader or government or policy. As Mark Twain, that greatest of American satirists and proud son of Missouri, once wrote, "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." We may hope that our leaders and our government stand up for our ideals, and there are many times in our history when that's occurred. But when our laws, our leaders or our government are out of alignment with our ideals, then the dissent of ordinary Americans may prove to be one of the truest expression of patriotism.

The young preacher from Georgia, Martin Luther King, Jr., who led a movement to help America confront our tragic history of racial injustice and live up to the meaning of our creed – he was a patriot. The young soldier who first spoke about the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib – he is a patriot. Recognizing a wrong being committed in this country's name; insisting that we deliver on the promise of our Constitution – these are the acts of patriots, men and women who are defending that which is best in America. And we should never forget that – especially when we disagree with them; especially when they make us uncomfortable with their words.

Beyond a loyalty to America's ideals, beyond a willingness to dissent on behalf of those ideals, I also believe that patriotism must, if it is to mean anything, involve the willingness to sacrifice – to give up something we value on behalf of a larger cause. For those who have fought under the flag of this nation – for the young veterans I meet when I visit Walter Reed; for those like John McCain who have endured physical torment in service to our country – no further proof of such sacrifice is necessary. And let me also add that no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters on both sides.

We must always express our profound gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform. Period. Indeed, one of the good things to emerge from the current conflict in Iraq has been the widespread recognition that whether you support this war or oppose it, the sacrifice of our troops is always worthy of honor.

For the rest of us – for those of us not in uniform or without loved ones in the military – the call to sacrifice for the country's greater good remains an imperative of citizenship. Sadly, in recent years, in the midst of war on two fronts, this call to service never came. After 9/11, we were asked to shop. The wealthiest among us saw their tax obligations decline, even as the costs of war continued to mount. Rather than work together to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and thereby lessen our vulnerability to a volatile region, our energy policy remained unchanged, and our oil dependence only grew.

In spite of this absence of leadership from Washington, I have seen a new generation of Americans begin to take up the call. I meet them everywhere I go, young people involved in the project of American renewal; not only those who have signed up to fight for our country in distant lands, but those who are fighting for a better America here at home, by teaching in underserved schools, or caring for the sick in understaffed hospitals, or promoting more sustainable energy policies in their local communities.

I believe one of the tasks of the next Administration is to ensure that this movement towards service grows and sustains itself in the years to come. We should expand AmeriCorps and grow the Peace Corps. We should encourage national service by making it part of the requirement for a new college assistance program, even as we strengthen the benefits for those whose sense of duty has already led them to serve in our military.

We must remember, though, that true patriotism cannot be forced or legislated with a mere set of government programs. Instead, it must reside in the hearts of our people, and cultivated in the heart of our culture, and nurtured in the hearts of our children.

As we begin our fourth century as a nation, it is easy to take the extraordinary nature of America for granted. But it is our responsibility as Americans and as parents to instill that history in our children, both at home and at school. The loss of quality civic education from so many of our classrooms has left too many young Americans without the most basic knowledge of who our forefathers are, or what they did, or the significance of the founding documents that bear their names. Too many children are ignorant of the sheer effort, the risks and sacrifices made by previous generations, to ensure that this country survived war and depression; through the great struggles for civil, and social, and worker's rights.

It is up to us, then, to teach them. It is up to us to teach them that even though we have faced great challenges and made our share of mistakes, we have always been able to come together and make this nation stronger, and more prosperous, and more united, and more just. It is up to us to teach them that America has been a force for good in the world, and that other nations and other people have looked to us as the last, best hope of Earth. It is up to us to teach them that it is good to give back to one's community; that it is honorable to serve in the military; that it is vital to participate in our democracy and make our voices heard.

And it is up to us to teach our children a lesson that those of us in politics too often forget: that patriotism involves not only defending this country against external threat, but also working constantly to make America a better place for future generations.

When we pile up mountains of debt for the next generation to absorb, or put off changes to our energy policies, knowing full well the potential consequences of inaction, we are placing our short-term interests ahead of the nation's long-term well-being. When we fail to educate effectively millions of our children so that they might compete in a global economy, or we fail to invest in the basic scientific research that has driven innovation in this country, we risk leaving behind an America that has fallen in the ranks of the world. Just as patriotism involves each of us making a commitment to this nation that extends beyond our own immediate self-interest, so must that commitment extends beyond our own time here on earth.

Our greatest leaders have always understood this. They've defined patriotism with an eye toward posterity. George Washington is rightly revered for his leadership of the Continental Army, but one of his greatest acts of patriotism was his insistence on stepping down after two terms, thereby setting a pattern for those that would follow, reminding future presidents that this is a government of and by and for the people.

Abraham Lincoln did not simply win a war or hold the Union together. In his unwillingness to demonize those against whom he fought; in his refusal to succumb to either the hatred or self-righteousness that war can unleash; in his ultimate insistence that in the aftermath of war the nation would no longer remain half slave and half free; and his trust in the better angels of our nature – he displayed the wisdom and courage that sets a standard for patriotism.

And it was the most famous son of Independence, Harry S Truman, who sat in the White House during his final days in office and said in his Farewell Address: "When Franklin Roosevelt died, I felt there must be a million men better qualified than I, to take up the Presidential task…But through all of it, through all the years I have worked here in this room, I have been well aware than I did not really work alone – that you were working with me. No President could ever hope to lead our country, or to sustain the burdens of this office, save the people helped with their support."

In the end, it may be this quality that best describes patriotism in my mind – not just a love of America in the abstract, but a very particular love for, and faith in, the American people. That is why our heart swells with pride at the sight of our flag; why we shed a tear as the lonely notes of Taps sound. For we know that the greatness of this country – its victories in war, its enormous wealth, its scientific and cultural achievements – all result from the energy and imagination of the American people; their toil, drive, struggle, restlessness, humor and quiet heroism.

That is the liberty we defend – the liberty of each of us to pursue our own dreams. That is the equality we seek – not an equality of results, but the chance of every single one of us to make it if we try. That is the community we strive to build – one in which we trust in this sometimes messy democracy of ours, one in which we continue to insist that there is nothing we cannot do when we put our mind to it, one in which we see ourselves as part of a larger story, our own fates wrapped up in the fates of those who share allegiance to America's happy and singular creed.

Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.

Memo to Obama: Moving to the Middle is for Losers

From Arianna Huffington:

...I can unequivocally say: the Obama campaign is making a very serious mistake. Tacking to the center is a losing strategy. And don't let the latest head-to-head poll numbers lull you the way they lulled Clinton in December.

Running to the middle in an attempt to attract undecided swing voters didn't work for Al Gore in 2000. It didn't work for John Kerry in 2004. And it didn't work when Mark Penn (obsessed with his "microtrends" and missing the megatrend) convinced Hillary Clinton to do it in 2008.

[snip]

Throughout the primary, Obama referred to himself as an "unlikely candidate." Which he certainly was -- and still is. And one of the things that turned him from "unlikely" upstart to presidential frontrunner is his ability to expand the electorate by convincing unlikely voters -- some of the 83 million eligible voters who didn't turn out in 2004 -- to engage in the system.

So why start playing to the political fence sitters -- staking out newly nuanced positions on FISA, gun control laws, expansion of the death penalty, and NAFTA?

read more | digg story

McCain Sticks It To Organized Labor: Visits Company That Ref

What universe is this guy from? Grandpa remembers back in his day, when they didn't give Unions the right to organize or even have a minimum wage...

read more | digg story

McCain Launches "Truth Squad" With Swift Boat Vet

From the Huffington Post:



McCain publicly deplored the Swift Boat ads back in 2004, saying they were reminiscent of the smear campaigns launched against him during his initial White House run in 2000.

read more | digg story

What Wesley Clark Really Said About John McCain

Not that it should matter either way...What Clark said was true and it had nothing to do with attacking John McCain's 'patriotism.' IT was about his (lack of) qualifications.

From the Jed Report:

People twisted Clark's comment into being a slam on John McCain, but as I showed on this video, he was merely rejecting an attack on Barack Obama leveled by Bob Schieffer. Still, that hasn't stopped the media from pumping up the controversy.



read more | digg story

Obama on Patriotism-A Faith in Simple Dreams-Time Magazine

Since Obama is going to be talking about this today...

From Time Magazine via BarackObama.com:

We are a nation of strong and varied convictions and beliefs. We argue and debate our differences vigorously and often. But when all is said and done, we still come together as one people and pledge our allegiance not just to a place on a map or a certain leader but to the words my mother read to me years ago: "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

That is the true genius of America — a faith in simple dreams, an insistence on small miracles. It's the idea that we can tuck in our children at night and know that they are fed and clothed and safe from harm; that we can say what we think, write what we think, without hearing a sudden knock on the door; that we can have an idea and start our own business without paying a bribe; that we can participate in the political process without fear of retribution; and that our votes will be counted.

For me, it is the love and defense of these ideals that constitutes the true meaning of patriotism. They are ideals that do not belong to any particular party or group of people but call each of us to service and sacrifice for the sake of our common good.

I write this knowing that if previous generations had not taken up this call, I would not be where I am today. As a young man of mixed race, without a firm anchor in any community, without even a father's steadying hand, this essential American ideal — that our destinies are not written before we are born — has defined my life. And it is the source of my profound love for this country: because with a mother from Kansas and a father from Kenya, I know that stories like mine could only happen in America.

read more | digg story

NYT: Diversion of resources to Iraq contributed to al Qaeda resurgence in Pakistan.

Rethugs are the ones who are strong on "national security?" Yeah, right. Think Progress find this little tidbit in today's NY Times story on our failure to take Al Qaeda out when we had the chance...well, at least that's how the times should have framed the entire piece about Al Qaeda being just as strong as they were in Sept. 2001. This nugget sort gets to that point.

From Think Progress:

In a front page story this morning, the New York Times reports on the story of how Al Qaeda “gained a new haven” in Pakistan’s tribal areas across the border from Afghanistan. According to the Times, “it is also a story of how the White House shifted its sights, beginning in 2002, from counterterrorism efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan to preparations for the war in Iraq“:

Current and former military and intelligence officials said that the war in Iraq consistently diverted resources and high-level attention from the tribal areas. When American military and intelligence officials requested additional Predator drones to survey the tribal areas, they were told no drones were available because they had been sent to Iraq.

[…]

One reason for this, according to two former intelligence officials directly involved in the Qaeda hunt, was that by 2006 the Iraq war had drained away most of the C.I.A. officers with field experience in the Islamic world. “You had a very finite number” of experienced officers, said one former senior intelligence official. “Those people all went to Iraq. We were all hurting because of Iraq.”

read more | digg story

6.29.2008

Obama's patriotism

From the Daily News' Stanley Crouch:

Barack Obama's realistic view of history brings truth to the party

The most interesting, even thrilling and inspiring thing about what Barack Obama has done to American political discourse is to redefine patriotism. He has taken the definition beyond the familiar body of platitudes that the phoniest of our conservative broadcast journalists and talk show hosts have made their stock in trade. As an extremely sophisticated man and law school graduate, Obama has mastered the basic skill of those in his profession. That is, the ability to create an easily comprehended narrative with compelling facts whenever possible.

[snip]

Instead of bridling at the question, Obama has remade patriotism with the proof that remains in high profile and is easily accessible to those who would like to know or to challenge it. He embraces all of the tragic elements of American history instead of pretending that they are either exaggerated or no more than radical distortions. Obama steps up to them with examples of tough-minded goodwill, courageous action and optimistic foresight that are right there on the historical record.

Yes, we had slavery, but we also had the abolition movement, Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War. Yes, we had the terrible treatment of blue-collar workers by fat cats who were not above hiring ruffians and killers to either assault or murder the men who complained about working conditions and bad pay. Yes, the right to unionize and use collective bargaining also emerged, as did women getting the vote, the defeat of European fascism during World War II and the destruction of unconstitutional law.

read more | digg story

Clark goes after McCain on Face the Nation

Not only is Wesley Clark right in saying this, Democrats should be screaming this from rooftops. John McCain's military record doesn't mean he's more prepared to be President. In fact, if McCain thinks it does and since he mentions it at every turn, I'd say it's fair game. I's also say it really does quite the opposite.

If you look at it honestly, his time as a POW, FIVE YEARS, makes him UNFIT to have his finger on the proverbial nuclear trigger. He's mentally unstable, as even the AZ GOP is saying out loud.

From Muhajabah.com:

Here is video from Face the Nation of retired General Wesley Clark slamming McCain for running on a platform of foreign policy experience.



Here's how the Caucus Blog at New York Times reported on it:

Retired General Wesley Clark, who had been an ardent supporter of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and a former Democratic presidential candidate himself, said on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” that Mr. McCain “hasn’t held executive responsibility” and had not commanded troops in wartime.

Mr. McCain’s experience in Vietnam, where he was a war prisoner for five years, and his senatorial work on the Armed Services Committee, has seemed to grant him a degree of invulnerability in security debates. But on Sunday he was assailed by a fellow military man, a highly decorated one who was once the NATO supreme allied commander, and that made the remarks all the more stinging.

Senator McCain frequently points out that he led “the largest squadron in the U.S. Navy,” but Mr. Clark said that that was not enough to stake a claim to the presidency.

“He hasn’t been there and ordered the bombs to fall” as a wartime commander, the general said. Mr. Clark is sometimes mentioned as a possible Obama running mate.

When CBS’ Bob Schieffer noted to Mr. Clark that the Republican senator had been shot down over Hanoi, the former general replied plainly, “I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.”

read more | digg story

Wesley Clark Hammers McCain's Experience

From Politicususa:

Wesley Clark was on Face the Nation today, and he took aim at the idea that McCain's Vietnam War experience makes him more qualified to be president. “I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.” With one swoop, Clark attacked the entire basis for the McCain presidential campaign.

[snip]

Of course, Clark is correct. The whole idea that McCain would make a better president because he was a P.O.W. is stupid. Clark was not challenging McCain’s military record, what he was challenging is the phony idea that McCain’s military record makes him a more qualified candidate than Obama. McCain’s experience in Vietnam probably shaped his ideology, so isn’t it fair to ask if this ideology is the correct one to lead the nation forward at this time.

I am glad that somebody finally had the guts to stand up and challenge the Republican Party and their faux patriotism. For too long Democrats have cowered at the prospect of being labeled un-American, so it was refreshing to see Wesley Clark finally step up and challenge these GOP myths. Now I am left to wonder if Clark just elevated himself on Obama’s VP short list.

You can watch the interview here.

read more | digg story

Fox News Finds Its Rivals Closing In

From the (near) obituary page over at the NY Times:

Fox has seen its once formidable advantage over CNN erode in this presidential election year, as both CNN and MSNBC have added viewers at far more dramatic rates.

[snip]

CNN has added 170,000 viewers a night, on average, when compared with the last presidential year, while Fox has shed about 90,000, according to Nielsen. (MSNBC, which added 181,000 viewers in that audience, much of it courtesy of gains by “Countdown With Keith Olbermann,” still lagged in third place, with 303,000.)

“I don’t think it’s that Fox has slipped,” said Scott Reed, a Republican strategist who managed Bob Dole’s presidential campaign in 1996. “I just think MSNBC and CNN have risen to the occasion in a far more creative way, with better guests, cooler maps and more interactive shows.”

[snip]

While Fox News remains the most-watched cable news channel over all — it has been attracting an average of nearly 2 million viewers each weeknight this year, compared to 1.3 million for CNN and 805,000 for MSNBC — its momentum has effectively stalled, at least when measured over years past. The overall prime-time audiences watching CNN and MSNBC, by contrast, have each grown by more than 50 percent this year, when measured against the same period last year, while Fox’s has increased by 10 percent, according to Nielsen. (The New York Times and NBC News, the parent of MSNBC, share some resources in covering political news.)

read more | digg story

Continuing Decay of the Jindal Brand

An update from Crashing Vor on the mess that is Bobby Jindal, McSame's possible running mate:

After diarying the rapid decline of Gov. Bobby Jindal's popularity over his refusal to veto a legislative pay raise and calling attention to the recall petition circulating against the Boy Governor, I'd have thought there was no more to say on the subject.

But the sun has risen on another bright, blessed, schadenfreudelicious day in Louisiana, the Times-Picayune has hit New Orleans porches, chock full of fresh dissing for John McCain's second-or-third-favorite running mate.

read more | digg story
Keep in mind this so-quickly-corrupted and an evidently serial crackpot who:
Authorized Chemical Castration Of Sex Offenders...
Called Intelligent Design "The Very Best Science"...
Experience As A Exorcist...
Jindal's second-highest paid campaign staffer turned out to be an energy lobbyist
Failed to accurately report over $118,000 worth of in-kind contributions from the state GOP.

Also see: Who Is Bobby Jindal? The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly

McCain vs. McCain: Immigration Reform

Love these here series of tubes they call the Internets. He still doesn't seem to understand this is the 21st century and we've got video of everything.

From
DemRapidResponse:

Once again the Youtube on these here Internets is John McSame's worst enemy. This time it's McCain vs. McSame on Immigration Reform.



read more | digg story

AZ GOP: "McCain is mentally unstable and out of control."

Forget trying to make Barack Obama into some secret Muslim bent on turning America into an Islamic nation ruled by Sharia law, John McSame is the REAL Manchurian Candidate.

From Bo Jangles:

This November, for the first time, McCain's name will appear on a national ballot. While Arizona residents know a lot about McCain's political history, the nation, as a whole, knows relatively little. His national image is largely a fantasy created by his public relations machine. It is time now that the nation learns the facts about McCain. What better place to begin than in his home state with his fellow Republicans?

[snip]

Bob Haney, the Republican state committee chairman in Arizona's 11th District, has described the situation to Max Blumenthal this way:

"People would be calling in to [state committee] headquarters every week, absolutely enraged, threatening to leave the party because of some comments McCain made," Haney told me. "The guy has no core, his only principle is winning the presidency. He likes to call his campaign the 'straight talk express.' Well, down here we call it the 'forked tongue express.'"

read more | digg story
Ouch. and Bo Jangles'' article only gets better.

If Terrorists Rock the Vote in 2008

More great insight from the NY Times' Frank Rich on the GOP's fear-mongering and hops of a terrorist attack to sawy the election. Just one thing...they might not like how it sways:

...Since 2002, it’s been a Beltway axiom akin to E=mc2 that Bomb in American City=G.O.P. Landslide.

That equation was the creation of Karl Rove. Among the only durable legacies of the Bush presidency are the twin fears that Mr. Rove relentlessly pushed on his client’s behalf: fear of terrorism and fear of gays. But these pillars are disintegrating too. They’re propped up mainly by political operatives like Mr. Black and their journalistic camp followers — the last Washington insiders who are still in Mr. Rove’s sway and are still refighting the last political war.
On the "conventional wisdom" an attack benefits the GOP:
...If a terrorist bomb did detonate in an American city before Election Day, would that automatically be to the Republican ticket’s benefit?

Not necessarily. Some might instead ask why the Bush White House didn’t replace Michael Chertoff as secretary of homeland security after a House report condemned his bungling of Katrina. The man didn’t know what was happening in the New Orleans Convention Center even when it was broadcast on national television.

Next, voters might take a hard look at the antiterrorism warriors of the McCain campaign (and of a potential McCain administration). This is the band of advisers and surrogates that surfaced to attack Mr. Obama two weeks ago for being “naïve” and “delusional” and guilty of a “Sept. 10th mind-set” after he had the gall to agree with the Supreme Court decision on Gitmo detainees. The McCain team’s track record is hardly sterling. It might make America more vulnerable to terrorist attack, not less, were it in power.

His conclusion (before gong onto other failed tactics of Rove's & the GOP):

Should there be no new terrorist attack, the McCain camp’s efforts to play the old Rove 9/11 fear card may quickly become as laughable as the Giuliani presidential campaign. These days Americans are more frightened of losing their jobs, homes and savings.

But you can’t blame the McCain campaign for clinging to terrorism as a political crutch. The other Rove fear card is even more tattered. In the wake of Larry Craig and Mark Foley, it’s a double-edged sword for the G.O.P. to trot out gay blades cavorting in pride parades in homosexual-panic ads.

read more | digg story

McCain's ad misrepresents Obama's positions on Energy

Does McSame believe people with fall for this when Obama has been talking about renewable energy for the past 16 months through out the primary campaign? Especially when it's so easy to prove as false?

From FactCheck.org:

The ad portrays Obama as saying "no" to energy innovation and to the electric car. In fact, Obama proposed a $150 billion program of research into clean-energy technologies last year. The ad also has Obama saying "no" to "clean, safe nuclear energy." In fact, Obama said, "I have not ruled out nuclear... but only would support it if clean & safe.

read more | digg story

Why Can't The Networks Read Polls?

Many of us are asking the same questions that DemFromCT is:

If you were getting your political information last week from the nightly network news, or the cable networks, for example, you'd know that Obama has an insignificant lead on McCain but Obama's in trouble despite Bush's unpopularity and the state of the economy because he (a) did not get much of a bounce after Hillary Clinton withdrew, and (b) is having trouble consolidating Latinos, women, white Catholics and independents.

[snip]

On the other hand, if you got your news from the internet, you'd know that Obama has a small but sustained lead in the horse race, and is in strong position because he has wide leads with women, Latinos, the electoral college, and enthusiasm of supporters. In addition, his strength elsewhere is masked by relative McCain strength in the South, McCain women supporters are vulnerable to rejecting him on the choice issue, and there are more Democrats and less Republicans this year. Because of all of that, most people think he's going to win (especially women).

read more of this very interesting take on polling | digg story
I've just stopped watching cable news, for now. I'll start back up around the Democratic convention.

6.28.2008

McCain Defaulted on Home Taxes for the Past Four Years

What's with the supposed leaders running for president against Obama who are so damn ready to be president on day one, having already passed that presidential threshold of course? Neither can handle their fucking finances!? Unfuckingbelievable! Well, not really after Hillary and her financial disaster of a campaign.

From Newsweek:

When you're poor, it can be hard to pay the bills. When you're rich, it's hard to keep track of all the bills that need paying. It's a lesson Cindy McCain learned the hard way when NEWSWEEK raised questions about an overdue property-tax bill on a La Jolla, Calif., property owned by a trust that she oversees. Mrs. McCain is a beer heiress with an estimated $100 million fortune and, along with her husband, she owns at least seven properties, including condos in California and Arizona.

San Diego County officials, it turns out, have been sending out tax notices on the La Jolla property, an oceanfront condo, for four years without receiving a response. County records show the bills, which were mailed to a Phoenix address associated with Mrs. McCain's trust, were returned by the post office. According to a McCain campaign aide, who requested anonymity when discussing a private matter, an elderly aunt of Mrs. McCain's lives in the condo, and the bank that manages the trust has not been receiving tax bills on the property. Shortly after NEWSWEEK inquired about the matter, the McCain aide e-mailed a receipt dated Friday, June 27, confirming payment by the trust to San Diego County in the amount of $6,744.42. County officials say the trust still owes an additional $1,742 for this year, an amount that is overdue and will go into default July 1. Told of the outstanding $1,742, the aide said: "The trust has paid all bills shown owing as of today and will pay all other bills due."

read more | digg story

I’m So Old, (Insert Punch Line)

Ouch (& damn straight).

From Charles Blow at the NY Times:

John McCain, when I was born, you were nearly six years older than my mother. Now, seven years into her retirement, you want a new job: the hardest job in the world. Wow!

Obviously, my mother isn’t running for president, but her age gives me a context for considering yours. And within that context, your age gives me pause.

Apparently, I’m not alone. In a Quinnipiac University poll of swing states (Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania) published last week, nearly a quarter of respondents said that your age made it less likely that they would vote for you. It wasn’t just the young who had an issue with it either. More than 20 percent of those 55 and older agreed. And, while one would expect a partisan divide, independents leaned more toward the Democratic point of view. That should give you pause.

read more | digg story

Laptop Searches in Airports Draw Fire at Senate Hearing

This is the 21st century people! Searching someone's bags is NOT the same as searching their computer. Our computers are our office, our home, our diaries, our phone calls, our letters. Stay the fuck out of it.

From the NY Times:

Advocacy groups and some legal experts told Congress on Wednesday that it was unreasonable for federal officials to search the laptops of United States citizens when they re-enter the country from traveling abroad.

[snip]

The federal government says the searches are necessary for national security and for legal action against people who bring illegal material into the country.

“If you asked most Americans whether the government has the right to look through their luggage for contraband when they are returning from an overseas trip, they would tell you ‘yes, the government has that right,’ ” Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said Wednesday at the hearing of a Senate Judiciary subcommittee.

“But,” Mr. Feingold continued, “if you asked them whether the government has a right to open their laptops, read their documents and e-mails, look at their photographs and examine the Web sites they have visited, all without any suspicion of wrongdoing, I think those same Americans would say that the government absolutely has no right to do that.”

read more | digg story
John Aravosis from AmericaBlog had this to say about it & it was priceless (I think):
This is what happens when old men, like John McCain, frankly, try to make important decisions about new technology. They don't understand it, so they screw up. A search of a laptop computer, or a cell phone, is not a search of your luggage. It's a search of luggage that happens to contain the equivalent of a tape recording of every phone conversation you've had in the past ten years. Luggage that contains details of your sex life, including possible a recorded history of it. Luggage that includes your medical history. Nude photos of your spouse, or yourself. Your personal diary. A computer is not the same thing as an electric razor or a radio. It's an incredibly intimate look into the life of the bearer, and old men who know nothing about the brave new world of technology shouldn't be in the position of deciding how personal a computer really is (or isn't).

John McCain doesn't work weekends

From Politico, who didn't mind making excuses for him along the way:

Since effectively capturing the Republican nomination when Mitt Romney dropped out of the race on Feb. 7, John McCain has held just one public campaign event on a weekend.

Instead, after workweeks full of fundraisers, town hall meetings and interviews, McCain has been, in campaign parlance, “down” on nearly every Saturday or Sunday for 20 weeks, largely sequestered away from the news media.

[snip]

Yet aside from an April rally on the steps of the courthouse in Prescott, Ariz., McCain has done little to capture media attention on weekends for nearly five months.

And Politico wants to cover his ass of course with just a handful of justifications, on of which was McSame's buying their friendship and the other was for his donors, - both at his cabin. Yeah that was hard weekend work:

That isn't to say McCain is kicking back and relaxing every weekend.

He’s hosted reporters and donors on separate occasions at his Arizona cabin, done a guest turn on "Saturday Night Live" and visited troops in both Iraq and at Walter Reed hospital.
read more | digg story

Stop making excuse for this joke already. If the present idiot in chief has taken more vacations days than any other president in U.S. History - and we're in such great shape don't you know - imagine what Grandpa's schedule would be like: One for the bombings, two for a nap.

McCains Failed To Pay Taxes On California Home For 4 Years

What Idiots!

Breaking story form Huffington Post:

Newsweek is set to publish a highly embarrassing report on Sen. John McCain, revealing that the McCains have failed to pay taxes on their beach-front condo in La Jolla, California, for the last four years and are currently in default, The Huffington Post has learned.

Under California law, once a residential property is in default for five years, it can be sold at a tax sale to recover the unpaid taxes for the taxpayers.

The McCains own at least seven homes through a variety of trusts and corporations controlled by Cindy McCain.

read more | digg story

Political Freelancers Use Web to Join the Attack

Great write-up in today's NY Times about Robert Greenwald's "Brave New Films" and how it/he is seriously affecting John McCain's campaign.

Bravo, Robert!

From the Times:

Produced here in a cluttered former motel behind the Sony Pictures lot, it juxtaposed harsh statements about Islam made by the Rev. Rod Parsley with statements from Mr. McCain praising Mr. Parsley, a conservative evangelical leader. The montage won notice on network newscasts this spring and ultimately helped lead Mr. McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, to reject Mr. Parsley’s earlier endorsement.

In previous elections, an attack like that would have come from party operatives, campaign researchers or the professional political hit men who orbit around them.

[snip]

So it was with the Parsley video, which was the work of a 64-year-old film director, Robert Greenwald, and his small band of 20-something assistants. Once best known for films like “Xanadu” (with Olivia Newton-John) and the television movie “The Burning Bed” (with Farrah Fawcett), Mr. Greenwald shows how technology has dispersed the power to shape campaign narratives, potentially upending the way American presidential campaigns are fought.

Mr. Greenwald’s McCain videos, most of which portray the senator as contradicting himself in different settings, have been viewed more than 5 million times — more than Mr. McCain’s own campaign videos have been downloaded on YouTube.

“If you had told me we would have hit 1 million, I would have told you you were crazy,” said Mr. Greenwald, who said he had no ties to the Democratic party or Senator Barack Obama’s campaign.

read more | digg story
Check out Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films and his other incredible campaigns, Fox Attacks, The Real McCain, and his newest, Lieberman Must Go!

Is ABC really any better than FOX?

I had been watching ABC news as my "network" news source since I was a teenager. Local & National, as well as Nightline. I saw the first Nightline, which started becuase of the Iranian Hostage crisis. After Ted Koppel left, I couldn't watch that right0-wing Idiot, Terry Moran. But after that ridiculous, right-wing, blame-Bill-Clinton-for-9/11 movie, after almost 30 years, I stopped watching news completely. It's only gotten worse.

Charlie taking over at World New Tonight, and how he uses it as a platform to diminish Democrats at every turn, ensured I wouldn't return to ABC News anytime soon.

And don't even get me start on the blithering, gossip whore, Stephanopoulos.

Jed points out his observations with his usual video flare:

I thought tonight's coverage of the Clinton-Obama unity rally was a particularly good example of how ABC is negatively biased against Obama. In fact, compared to ABC, the FOX News report seemed positively glowing to me. I've posted both reports after the jump if you care to subject yourself to the torture of watching them.

read more - see the video comparison | digg story

Olbermann's World's Worst 6/27 - Hannity Flip Flops on Korea

Keith really had fun with this one.

From MaximsNewsBlast

Fox News’ Sean Hannity applauded the Bush Administrations for lifting some of the sanctions on North Korea. However, moments later when his guest, former UN Ambassador John Bolton disagreed, Hannity quickly changed mind.


read more | digg story

Andy Martin: The man who started "Obama's a secret Muslim"

Good break down of the longer WaPo piece (see post below) that tracks down the beginnings of the smear. Call it "The Smear's Origins for Dummies."

From The BBQ Chicken Madness:

The main article was actually done by the Washington Post and can be found HERE , and it does more than reveal the identity of where the rumor started. It also does an amazing job recapping how the seeds grew and took on a life of their own into the ridiculous level they are today.

Apparently an ex-political rival contemplating a Senate run, Andy Martin felt that after seeing Barack Obama's 2004 speech at the Democratic Convention, that it was up to him to "expose Obama."

[snip]

During the Senate battle, the Muslim aspect started. And then we all know where it goes from there. In fact, Martin's belief in why Obama is a secret Muslim is laid out in all it's disproven terms.

[snip]

I'm sure he will be getting fruit baskets and gift cards to Target from Republican's across the country for giving the only piece of ammunition that has stuck to Obama so far.

read more | digg story

An Attack That Came Out of the Ether: Scholar Looks for First Link in E-Mail Chain About Obama

Dr. Danielle Allen of the Institute for Advanced Studies, a genius with two doctorates; one from Harvard and one from Cambridge, went on an electronic treasure hunt who's prize wasn't some chest of gold, but a chest of answers to the biggest mysteries this campaign season: How did the Barack is a Muslim Smear" begin and who started it?

It's a fascinating article in the today's Washington Post, here's the set up:

Laid out before Allen, a razor-sharp, 36-year-old political theorist, was what purported to be a biographical sketch of Barack Obama that has become one of the most effective -- and baseless -- Internet attacks of the 2008 presidential season. The anonymous chain e-mail makes the false claim that Obama is concealing a radical Islamic background. By the time it reached Allen on Jan. 11, 2008, it had spread with viral efficiency for more than a year.

[snip]

As an Obama supporter -- she had met the senator while she worked as a dean at the University of Chicago -- it made her angry. And curious.

"I started thinking, 'How does one stop it?' "

Allen set her sights on dissecting the modern version of a whisper campaign, even though experts told her it would be impossible to trace the chain e-mail to its origin. Along the way, even as her hunt grew cold, she gained valuable insight into the way political information circulates, mutates and sometimes devastates in the digital age.

[snip]

Allen was ideally suited to embark on such a difficult hunt. She boasts two doctorates, one in classics from Cambridge University and the other in government from Harvard University, and won a $500,000 MacArthur "genius" award at the age of 29. Last year she joined the faculty of the institute, the only African American and one of a handful of women at the elite research center, where she works alongside groundbreaking physicists, mathematicians and social scientists. They don't have to teach, and they face no quotas on what they publish. Their only mandate is to work in the tradition of Einstein, wrestling with the most vexing problems in the universe.

[snip]

The use of "their equivalency" and the spelling of "Kuran" instead of "Koran" made the sentence her point of departure.

That search showed that the first mention of the e-mail on the Internet had come more than a year earlier. A participant on the conservative Web site FreeRepublic.com posted a copy of the e-mail on Jan. 8, 2007, and added this line at the end: "Don't know who the original author is, but this email should be sent out to family and friends."

read the entire story to find out who it leads too | digg story

6.27.2008

State Department auditing Blackwater contract

Back flips anyone? Cartwheels? Maybe, just maybe, sanity is starting to rear its beautiful head?

From Nukes & Spooks:

We were trolling about the other day in the very useful federal contracting database, known as the Federal Procurement Data System.

Lo and behold, we came upon a MOST interesting-looking contract that the State Department signed in March with Alexandria, Virginia-based Cotton & Company LLP, a leading auditing firm.

Turns out, State has asked the firm--and is paying it $264, 554--to audit Blackwater Worldwide's huge contract with State to provide personal protection services to U.S. diplomats in Iraq and elsewhere. Blackwater has earned hundreds of millions of dollars as one of three firms participating in the Worldwide Personal Protection Services contract.

read more | digg story

Grover Norquist - Obama is "John Kerry with a tan."

Wow.

From the LA Times Blog:

Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist touts Goc. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota as prime vice presidential prospects for presumptive Republican presdiential nominee John McCainJohn McCain has been trying hard of late to link Barack Obama with Jimmy Carter in the public consciousness, hoping that the "ineffectual" label that many voters affix to the former president will prove transferable.

But Grover Norquist -- the conservative activist who specializes in promoting an anti-tax agenda and, more generally, revels in the role of agent provocateur

-- is offering a different comparison.

Norquist dropped by The Times' Washington bureau today and, as part of his negative critique of Obama's liberal stances on economic issues and other matters, he termed the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee "John Kerry with a tan."

read more | digg story

Grampa McCain promises to be more anti-gay

McCain today promised the religious right that he'll be more publicly anti-gay in order to make them happy. Seriously.

read more | digg story

McCain's Eight Most Inappropriate Jokes

EyesOnObama has a list and is checking it twice.

It makes, for me, a significant point about the difference in deferential treatment McSame (or most rethuglican pigs) gets over Obama (other Dems). Just Imagine what would ensue in the corp. media had Barack Obama made ANY of jokes on the list in this article:

Everyone likes a presidential candidate with a decent sense of humor. But John McCain has a history of of making off-color jokes, ranging from the bizarre, to the inappropriate, to the downright vicious. A look at the most shocking.

If you've ever seen Ricky Gervais' BBC series, The Office (the overseas predecessor to the hit US show), you've already met David Brent. The miscreant man-in-charge is a serial joke-maker, though his workplace rubes almost always tend toward the inappropriate and insensitive.

Jump to the real-life political David Brent: John McCain. The Arizona Senator and GOP nominee has taken a number of stabs at humor on the campaign trail. Some have hit the spot. Others have missed the mark completely, garnering a gaggle of negative media attention as a result.


see the list of eight | digg story
Boys will be boys the good ole boys network would no doubt say in defense.

When Theocrats have Power

This is just disgusting.

From the Information Paradox:

An 11 year old rape victim in Romania is being urged by 20 church groups not to get an abortion. In fact, the church groups have threatened to press charges if the courts allow the child to travel to Britain to get an abortion. That's right - the church groups will press charges! As if this young lady has not been through enough!

The real kicker to this is that the Romanian Orthodox Church supports the stance that the family should be the ones to decide what is best for the child. Who knew an Orthodox church could be so liberal?? Actually, I am being sarcastic - it is nice to see the church is in full support of the family's decision.

read more | digg story

McCain Makes Awkward Wife-Beating Joke

Can you really imagine this fucker in the oval office after having the fucker we have now there for eight years?

From Huffington Post:

In an interview with the Las Vegas Sun, columnist Jon Ralston asked McCain why he didn't choose Gov. Jim Gibbons (in the middle of a messy divorce) to chair his Nevada campaign:

McCain: I appreciate his support. As you know, the lieutenant governor is our chairman.

Q: Why snub the governor?

McCain: I didn't mean to snub him. I've known the lieutenant governor for 15 years and we've been good friends....I didn't intend to snub him. There are other states where the governor is not the chairman.

Q: Maybe it's the governor's approval rating and you are running from him like you are from the president?

McCain: (Chuckling) And I stopped beating my wife just a couple of weeks ago . . .

ABC News' Jake Tapper notes that McCain's evasive joke was a poor choice given the context:

read the rest | digg story

Larry Craig, David VItter unveil marriage 'protection' bill

You can't make this shit up.

From the Carpetbagger Report:


[pic swiped from AmericaBlog - thanks John!)

Two of the principal sponsors of a constitutional amendment to "protect" marriage include one far-right Republican who hired prostitutes and another far-right Republican who was arrested for soliciting gay sex in an airport men's room.

read more | digg story
UPDATE:

AmericaBlog's take:
So there you have it. Two of the Republicans' biggest marriage hypocrites - Larry Craig, who was accused of trying to have sex with a man (who was not his wife) in a bathroom, and David Vitter who has been repeatedly accused of frequenting hookers (who also were not his wife) - want to amend the Constitution to "protect" marriage.

Perhaps you all should call Larry Craig's and David Vitter's offices and ask them the following:

Senator Larry Craig
tel: 202-224-2752
Message: Can a married guy give handjobs and blowjobs to other guys in bathrooms and still defend heterosexual marriage?

Senator David Vitter
Phone: (202) 224-4623
Message: How many whores does a married guy have to sleep with before he's no longer defending marriage? And does the price of the whore matter?

Oh, and please do report back in the comments how your phone calls went with Craig's and Vitter's offices.

Global Warming Denier John Coleman meets up with Science

John Coleman (Weather Channel Founder) has been getting considerable airtime presenting himself as an expert on climate change, making broad statements such as global warming is "a fictional, manufactured crisis, and a total scam." In this article his junk science is reduced to junk..

read more | digg story

Terry McAuliffe Says Hillary Clinton Could Become Pope!!

Holy shit. Pun intended.

I know he was only joking, but this guy is a moron. No wonder he lost more house & senate seats under his DNC leadership then we had already lost in the DLC-laden 1990's.

From the Hill:

Former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe said Thursday night that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) could do anything she wants now that her presidential campaign has ended, including become pope.

[snip]

"This, folks, was a magnificent race," McAuliffe said, according to the pool report. "This party is on fire."

McAullife then turned to Clinton and told donors that she will have a bright future despite having to end her presidential bid "no matter what she does. If she wants to become pope, it doesn't matter," McAuliffe said.

Clinton spoke after McAuliffe and before congratulating Obama for winning the nomination had to deflate McAuliffe's pope idea.

"First, I'd have to become Catholic, and second, we don't want to go there," Clinton said.

read more | digg story
You can't make this shit up. At least she had the good sense to say something rather than let it linger out there, like her 'as far as I know" or "I'll take him at his word" bullshit.

Keith Olbermann, Glenn Greenwald Feud Over FISA

Well, Huffington Post is getting in on the family squabble now, though their more like the ugly stepsister than a true blood relative:

A war of words has broken out between two of the progressive blogosphere's most beloved figures: MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and blogger/author Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com.

In a post yesterday, Greenwald charged that Olbermann's "blind devotion to Barack Obama" had let him to excuse and defend Obama's support of the FISA 'compromise' legislation. Greenwald noted that Olbermann has previously condemned the idea of giving immunity to telecom companies that spied on Americans, calling it a "shameless, breathless, literally textbook example of Fascism" and comparing it to the actions of the Third Reich.

"But," Greenwald wrote, "[n]ow that Barack Obama supports a law that does the same thing -- and now that Obama justifies that support by claiming that this bill is necessary to keep us Safe from the Terrorists -- everything has changed."

read more | digg story
See my thought on why Keith is wrong in a couple of posts below, but now I want to add another thought as to why he is wrong that no one else has mentioned:
The worst thing we were left with from Watergate -- beside the nation understanding how corrupt & maniacle President Nixon and his administration truly were (amateurs compared to this administration, mind you) -- was the pardon.

The corp. media likes to swoon over Fords wonderful decision to put our nation's nightmare to rest, along with some historians, but the pardon didn't end the long nightmare, it passed it off to the next two generations.

Had Ford allowed the justice system (and the nation) to get the bottom of the corruption the administration was guilty of (had we all been allowed to see each and every gory detail), the cockroach-minions behind, under and on each side on Nixon would have been exposed then and saved this country a lot of heartache, not to mention blood, sweat and tears, now.

The careers of those psychopaths -- Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld for instance -- would have ended right then & there. The neo-cons in training along with these two bastards would have drowned along with them.

That is why the telecom immunity is so detrimental and why it's so NOT OK to overlook Obama's change of heart with the "hope" wrapped up in the delusion of justification that he will do x, y, or z later (criminally speaking) to get to the bottom of it.

WE CAN'T TAKE THAT RISK. NOT AGAIN.

Glenn Greenwald responds to Keith Olbermann's childish response to Glenn's original article and I add my pawltry 2 cents

Glenn Greenwald responds to Keith Olbermann's childish response to Glenn's original article pointing out Keith's own flip-flop on holding accountable those who are willing to vote to give the telecoms immunity:

In his Kos reply, Olbermann pronounces that my piece yesterday was "simplistic and childish" but then adds the standard dismissive Journalist defense: "I don't know much about Mr. Greenwald and I didn't read his full piece." He says that he refrained from criticizing Obama's support for the FISA bill in reliance on John Dean's comments, and "John Dean is the smartest person I've ever met" and "John Dean is worth 25 Glenn Greenwalds" -- so that settles that (for what it's worth, I also have a high opinion of Dean's legal acumen; hosted his appearance at FDL's Book Salon; don't disagree with him about this bill at all; have communicated with him about many issues; and he has said many complimentary things about my work in the past, so waving the flag of Dean's Unassailable Authority establishes nothing).

Olbermman then denies that he was justifying Obama's support for the FISA bill but then goes on to do exactly that:

Seriously, there is little in the polls to suggest McCain has anything to run with other than terror . . . . So why hand them a brick to hit him with -- Obama Voted Against FISA -- if voting Aye enhances his chances of getting himself his own Attorney General to prosecute FISA
How can Olbermann accuse me of distorting his commentary and deny that he's rationalizing Obama's support for the bill and then write the above -- which does nothing but justify Obama's support for the bill? That's exactly the mentality I was criticizing yesterday -- that Obama should be excused for supporting this assault on core Constitutional liberties and the rule of law because doing so is necessary to avoid appearing Weak on Terrorism. That's the behavior which Obama has repeatedly vowed to reject, and it's that precise mentality that has to be extinguished, not perpetrated.

read more | digg story

Here are my thoughts on/for Keith:
You should actually read Glenn Greenwald before you dismiss him, Keith.

If there were two people over the past 2 years that I’d say have given me hope, it’s been YOU & Glenn Greenwald. Maybe I could add Joshua Marshall from TPM to the list. I blog more of Glenn’s article and videos from your show (including you “Special Comments”) than I probably do most any other two individuals. So, I say this with affection: Read Glenn before you childishly try to dismiss him. He’s right. You’re not (in this case).

There’s no “secret plan” on Obama’s part and rationalizing it as if this the case in order to justifying not holding him to account for the flip-flop – and for justifying that flip as a way to neuter the onslaught of attacks that the right was preparing to throw at him I say this: You should have more faith in Obama by now!

And if by some chance there is a ‘secret plan to prosecute” on Obama’s part, and that’s a big IF; and an IF I’m not willing to risk while excusing the “real chance” that this was just an election year tactic in order to avoid a ‘soft on terror label.”

I had more faith in Obama’s ability to turn those inevitable attacks on their head.

You should too.

I hope you take the time to read his reply to your DK post.
digg my post

6.26.2008

McCain on tape: "No, I don't want clean national elections."

Late 2007- reporter asks McCain about Public FinacingQ: "You got clean elections in Arizona, do you want to see that on a national level?"McCain: "Ahhhh, you mean the –" Q: "Public financing? "McCain: "No, I don’t think that’s what we want to do. I think we ought to let the BCRA see how it plays out first, but I’m very worried about the 527s."

read more | digg story