Exposing the lack of compassion by conservatives and
debunking right wing hypocrisy at every opportunity.
First it was Chris Bowers, formerly of MyDD where Jerome Armstrong is all but predicting (and seems to like) an Edwards win in Iowa. Then it was his Open Left Co-Founder Matt Stoller. Skippy's almost there, and the Agonist and Big Tent Democrat have weighed in on Edwards side.
And now, joining the eleventh hour throng of Edwards endorsers, the patron saint of the "Primaries Bore Me" crowd, Atrios will vote for Edwards.
For what it's worth, Obama trashes not only his current rivals in a campaign that is sounding more desperate and tone deaf, but also dismisses past Democratic Party standard bearers. He's tried to explain away his movement from hand-holding to attack machine, but as Craig Crawford is saying,"If you’re explaining, you’re losing."
Interestingly enough, a guy who ran against both Kerry and Gore, Ralph Nader, is on board the Edwards bus too. (Oh, and pay no attention to that Des Moines Register Poll. It's a flawed outlier.)
12/31/07
| [+/-] |
The Fense Sitters Get Off The Dime |
| [+/-] |
Remembering 2007: the Day I Didn’t Punch Bill Kristol in the Throat |
by shep
I am not a violent man.
Yes, I’ve fought for sport - light contact only (sort of). And I like football (the American kind) as long as no one is seriously hurt.
And I think that strictly measured violence is sometimes justified if necessary to protect the weak or defenseless. For example, I thought that the Clinton Administration’s campaign to stop the Serbs’ genocide was justified even though possible war crimes were committed.
But violence out of any base emotion (greed, pride, anger, envy, etc.), with the possible exception of pure fear, disgusts me and demonstrates a throwback mentality in any post-19th Century human being. So my wife was quite surprised when I told her that I had started having these invading thoughts about accidentally running into Bill Kristol and, without hesitation, punching his lights out.
Now most people haven’t much of a clue the role Kristol has played as an agitator and cheerleader for the most reckless and traitorous policies of the Bush Administration, they just know him as the smug, arrogant and consistently wrong bloviator employed by “news organizations” such as Fox and Time Magazine and now, The New York Times. As smintheus put it:
” You would be hard pressed to find another private citizen who has had a more pernicious influence on American foreign policy than William Kristol.”
So that’s how I justified these uncharacteristic flights of violent fantasy, as a sense of implementing some rough justice. The plot thickened when I read Digby’s suggestion to attend this at just about the time my wife was going to be in DC on business. I was honestly curious to see the-nothing-conservative-about-him Kristol defend the conservative movement he had just helped manage to destroy.
So I signed up, got to town, went down to the Press Club, got my pass, staked out my seat and stepped up to the buffet table. Where, what to my wondering eyes appeared right in front of me on the other side of the ham salad but Mr. Bill Kristol. As he stood there, engaging in obviously uncomfortable small talk with the guy next to me, our eyes met and for one second I thought of reaching for the knot of his necktie and clearing the table with his smarmy, pasty face.
Just as quickly, I felt a wave of disgust and pity wash over me and it was over. I got my lunch, wrote my question (something like” “if the conservative movement was valid enough to win in the marketplace of ideas, why did it have to create conservative-only, billionaire funded think tanks and alternative “news” outlets to sell its case?”) and watched Robert Kuttner make mincemeat out of Bill Kristol. As it turned out, that and the crowd reactions were more than satisfying (and since it was free, a lot less expensive that a battery charge and civil suit).
Postscript: on my way out we held the elevator as (debate moderator) Karen Tumulty jogged in and joked that she was just happy that no one had thrown any food. I pointed out that ham salad makes a lousy projectile and we all chuckled a bit at the imagery.
Here’s to a (more) peaceful New Year.
[Cross-posted at E Pluribus Unum]
| [+/-] |
Our Very Serious Liberal Blogosphere |
Critiques John Edwards' campaign decisions.
I know that there’s some boys handbook in campaigns that says you can’t look manly and wear a coat, but you look a little ridiculous not, frankly. Go get yourself one of those nice tailored cashmere overcoats (or one in black and another in camel, if you insist on matching), they’re soft, you’ll look dashing and you won’t look like some high school kid who won’t wear a coat because he doesn’t want to look uncool.Yes, Megan at Wonkette really gets to the heart of the matter, but she's not done...
Also, then, we really have to talk about your shoes. ...Thankfully, she leaves the hair analysis to the feedback circle-jerk that makes all blogs so kewl, the comment section.
That's it, my New Years resolution! From now on, I'm going to tell the truth, no more Mr. Nice Blogger ... Yes Hillary, that dress makes your ass look HUGE.
| [+/-] |
Explain This To Me |
How on earth does a neocon warmonger like Bill Kristol work for editors who write this and maintain any sense integrity?
Out of panic and ideology, President Bush squandered America’s position of moral and political leadership, swept aside international institutions and treaties, sullied America’s global image, and trampled on the constitutional pillars that have supported our democracy through the most terrifying and challenging times. These policies have fed the world’s anger and alienation and have not made any of us safer.
In the years since 9/11, we have seen American soldiers abuse, sexually humiliate, torment and murder prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. A few have been punished, but their leaders have never been called to account. We have seen mercenaries gun down Iraqi civilians with no fear of prosecution. We have seen the president, sworn to defend the Constitution, turn his powers on his own citizens, authorizing the intelligence agencies to spy on Americans, wiretapping phones and intercepting international e-mail messages without a warrant.
We have read accounts of how the government’s top lawyers huddled in secret after the attacks in New York and Washington and plotted ways to circumvent the Geneva Conventions — and both American and international law — to hold anyone the president chose indefinitely without charges or judicial review.
Those same lawyers then twisted other laws beyond recognition to allow Mr. Bush to turn intelligence agents into torturers, to force doctors to abdicate their professional oaths and responsibilities to prepare prisoners for abuse, and then to monitor the torment to make sure it didn’t go just a bit too far and actually kill them.
The White House used the fear of terrorism and the sense of national unity to ram laws through Congress that gave law-enforcement agencies far more power than they truly needed to respond to the threat — and at the same time fulfilled the imperial fantasies of Vice President Dick Cheney and others determined to use the tragedy of 9/11 to arrogate as much power as they could.
Oh yeah, this was actually snark. You could tell by the way I used the word "integrity" in the same sentence as Bill Kristol. Funny, huh?
(H.T. Tristero)
| [+/-] |
Bad Anti-War Blogger, Shame On Me |
War and Occupation doesn't take a holiday, even though I did. Over the last ten days we lost 7 US Soldiers, 334 Iraqi were killed, 386 more were wounded and 57 were kidnapped.
Sunday: 1 US soldier, 13 Iraqis Killed; 8 Iraqis Wounded; 13 Iraqis KidnappedThere are no accurate figures for U.S. wounded. We just don't talk about that. We talk about how splendid the "surge" is going despite this last year being the deadliest for US Soldiers since we started this fiasco and by any measure, 2007 has been the worst year yet in Iraq.
Saturday: 37 Iraqis Killed, 20 Wounded
Friday: 1 US Soldier, 31 Iraqis Killed; 69 Iraqis Wounded
Thursday: 29 Iraqis Killed, 22 Injured, 22 Kidnapped
Wednesday: 3 US Soldiers, 36 Iraqis Killed; 17 Iraqis Wounded
Tuesday: 66 Iraqis Killed, 105 Wounded
Monday: 15 Iraqis Killed, 22 Wounded, 22 Kidnapped
Sunday: 26 Iraqis Killed, 21 Wounded
Saturday: 1 US soldier, 14 Iraqis Killed; 22 Iraqis Wounded
Friday: 14 Iraqis Killed, 10 Wounded
Thursday: 1 US Soldier, 53 Iraqis Killed; 51 Iraqis Wounded
In what is the world's fastest growing refugee crisis, of Iraq's 25 million people, "there are over 2.3 million internally displaced persons within Iraq, and over 2.3 million Iraqis who have fled the country." And of the less than 50 thousand who have returned, many from Syria which has put new restrictions on harboring fleeing Iraqis, over 80% are going back to the country because they have to, not because they want to.
2000 attacks on occupation forces a month is actually a reduction in violence. (Yay Progress!) Child malnutrition rates are now at 28%, but only at 19% during the time Saddam was stealing the Food for Oil program blind. Scores of bodies are dumped on the streets of Baghdad daily, many no doubt victims of the wave of kidnappings that plague the countryside.
This is your neocon disaster capitalist dystopia. We are paying militants $300 a month not to fight -- sorta like how we pay farmers not to plant, but a little more disturbing. Yet unemployment still ranges above 60%. No wonder "98 percent of Sunnis and 84 percent of Shia in Iraq want all U.S. forces out of the country."
12/30/07
| [+/-] |
The Pre-Primary Buzz? All Edwards |
Gotta love it when a plan comes together. The conventional wisdom is gearing up to swing exactly where those of us who've been on the John Edwards bandwagon all along knew it would -- at just the right time.
Economy is not working: Edwards
Dem hopeful: Corporations, special interests have too much control.
Hitting the canvass for John Edwards
The populist crusader's blue-collar base appears solid after door-knocking in a depressed Iowa town.
Quote of the Day
"You can’t nice these people to death. You’d better send somebody into that arena who’s ready." -- John Edwards, quoted by the New York Times, referring how Sen. Barack Obama would deal with insurance companies and drug companies.
John Edwards: Street Fighter
...two referencing Edwards fighting theme. Hope 'n Hell ...
MESSAGE TO IOWA / Edwards IS TRUE VOICE OF CHANGE
John Edwards carries the least baggage and the most credibility in his quest to be the next president of the United States ~ he is also the biggest threat to the corporate and special interests who have found their home in the ...
caucus? they don't even know us!
...as john Edwards' sudden surge into a three-way w/hillary & barack.
Could Obama and Edwards Team Up in the Caucuses?
...Obama and Edwards are competing with each other, but the caucuses in Iowa, Nevada, and Washington State give the two campaigns a chance to also coordinate to maximize the delegates they gain. Edwards and Dennis Kucinich actually did this in 2004 in Iowa and it played a real role in Edwards’s Iowa unexpected Iowa success. At this point he and Oba...
Edwards Tries to Appeal to Independents and Republicans
ABC News' Raelyn Johnson reports: In his final plea to voters, John Edwards wants his message of fighting entrenched interests to reach beyond the Democratic Party. “I want to be absolutely clear that corporate greed is destroying the middle class...
A serious question for Obama supporters
...and John Edwards voted against the $87 billion supplemental funding bill (the vote was 88-12--that was way before the majority of Americans turned against the war). Then Obama got elected and voted several times to keep funding the war. This spring, Chris Dodd led the opposition to the latest supplemental funding bill within the Senate, but Obam...
AP Interview: Edwards on populist theme (AP)
...candidate John Edwards on Sunday defended his relentless assault on corporations and special interests, dismissing criticism that his pointed populist message is too divisive.
Edwards Fights to the Finish - Dan Balz, Washington Post
Hitting the canvass for John Edwards
The populist crusader's blue-collar base appears solid after door-knocking in a depressed Iowa town.
New Hampshire Race Tightens as Edwards Surges
...and John Edwards at 21%. The poll has a margin of error of 4 points. Key finding: Clinton has dropped 7 points in two weeks while Edwards has gained 6 points and Obama has gained 3 points. Undeclared voters provide positive playback for Edwards based on his television advertising running in New Hampshire and this is reflected in the ballot resu...
New Year's resolutions: Win Iowa, NH (AP)
AP - A bit of bubbly, a few verses of Auld Lang Syne and candidates, candidates and more candidates. It's New Year's Eve in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Will Edwards Really Win Iowa?
...the John Edwards campaign, is brightly encouraged by the tentative sunlight. Yesterday her volunteer canvass teams knocked on a thousand local doors. Today she hopes for the same. "It's really, really important that you stress to the undecided that John Edwards is the most electable Democrat," she says to about 25 volunteers gathered in a stee...
Weekend News Digest
...Democrat John Edwards, by law, can tap his fortune for no more than $50,000. What a difference public financing makes. Romney has chosen to bypass the taxpayer-financed presidential campaign fund, a move that lets him use his wealth without limitation. If he has put more of his money in during the past three months, his campaign isn't saying. Th...
Crooks and Liars: This Week: Edwards Scares The Punditocracy…
Latest Conventional Wisdom: Edwards is Headed Toward a Strong Finish in Iowa 12/31
New Hampshire Race Tightens as Edwards Surges
...and John Edwards at 21%. The poll has a margin of error of 4 points. Key finding: Clinton has dropped 7 points in two weeks while Edwards has gained 6 points and Obama has gained 3 points. Undeclared voters provide positive playback for Edwards based on his television advertising running in New Hampshire and this is reflected in the ballot resu...
Negotiating With Ourselves
My man Edwards at least understands that negotiation isn't an option, but his plan doesn't say "Look, the hell with it, they're not going to compromise, sign everybody up for Medicare." It tries to sneak that under the door, but the conservative movement really isn't being sneaky, and they're not likely to get duped. They'll lie and call somet...
Edwards Says "Fight" 39 Times During Iowa Townhall
Emphasizing his theme as a fighter for the common American, Edwards used some variation of the word "fight" nearly 40 times at a town hall at the Giggling Goat Cafe here this afternoon. In his stump speech, he uttered the words "fight," "fighting" or "fought" 31 times; in the Q&A session and his closing, he used t...
caucus? they don't even know us!
...as john Edwards' sudden surge into a three-way w/hillary & barack.
Edwards: Bill Clinton Has A Place In My White House
John Edwards said Sunday that he would like Bill Clinton to play a role in his administration, and called it a "complete fantasy" that the former president would not play a part in his wife's administration if she were to win. Edwards is battling Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
John Edwards - my guy in the news
Danny Glover was stumping for my presidential candidate in Las Vegas this weekend! LVRJ
Edwards: An 'epic fight'
...John Edwards, once the sunny populist, continued to cast himself as a combative fighter ready for what he called the "epic fight" against corporate influence. Four days before Thursday's caucuses, Edwards is appealing to Iowans fed up with "corporate greed." On a sunny Sunday, he rode his bus caravan through western Iowa...
Edwards Fights to the Finish - Dan Balz, Washington Post
This Week: Edwards Scares The Punditocracy…
...that John Edwards made a phone call. GS: (The Bhutto assassination) was a major event, at least for a day, on the campaign trail. It seemed to freeze the campaigns. Who handled it well; who didn’t? GW: Opinions differ. I would love to have been a fly on the wall of President Musharraf’s office when the aide came in. The country’s in flam...
Agonizing Over the Candidates and Who They Really Are
... Edwards, and nearly all of the candidates -- except perhaps Biden and Christopher Dodd and the non-candidate Chuck Hagel -- went silent during the Annapolis Peace Summit which drew together most of the Arab world, the P-5 nations, Israel, and many European and Southeast Asian nations in an effort to restart negotiations between Israel and Palest...
Iowa Countdown - 5 Days
...Obama and Edwards flow into one another, and the rest of the field flows to Clinton. Combining the results of polls and realignment as a mental exercise, you see some interesting things take place. I expected a Poll this morning (Sunday) before the Thursday caucus night, but the local Register didn't come out with one - which is surprising ...
Edwards has Pakistan on the brain (Josephine Hearn/The Politico)
... Edwards has Pakistan on the brain — MUSCATINE, Iowa — The pig driver in the audience here at the Holiday Inn hadn't asked about Pakistan; he'd asked about a Department of Peace as proposed by Rep. Dennis Kucinich. But John Edwards, flush with praise for his swift response to the Pakistan crisis … Source: The Politico Author: Jo...
Edwards paints himself as a fighter
... Edwards used some variation of the word "fight" nearly 40 times at a town hall at the Giggling Goat Cafe here this afternoon. In his stump speech, he uttered the words "fight," "fighting" or "fought" 31 times; in the Q&A session and his closing, he used them an additional eight times. In contrast, Edwards said &...
Tightening up in New Hampshire
... Edwards has momentum in Iowa, and it looks like he's catching on in New Hampshire too, via ARG. The last time that Edwards was within 10% of the lead in New Hampshire in any poll, was back in June: Democrats Clinton 31 Obama 27 Edwards 21 Republicans McCain 30 Romney 30 Huckabe...
Edwards: A Black and White Perspective
...See John Edwards in person and it's not hard to tell what has fueled his recent surge in Iowa. Unlike most politicians who seem habitually concerned with (and constrained by) presenting the gray area in every...
ARG Poll Shows Two Tight Races In New Hampshire
New polling from American Research Group shows that the Democratic race has narrowed considerably in New Hampshire, since their last poll ten days ago. Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani has declined significantly on the Republican side, and is in danger of slipping into fifth place, behind Ron Paul: Democrats:Clinton 31% (-7)Obama 27% (+3) Edwards 21% (+6)R...
Wealthy candidates face money questions (AP)
...Democrat John Edwards, by law, can tap his fortune for no more than $50,000.
One Person Who Won't Be Serving In An Edwards Administration
is one of the architects of his sharper populism, Joe Trippi. Edwards says that anyone who's ever served as a lobbyist for a foreign country or agent would be forbidden from serving as a political appointee in his administration. Trippi worked for a guy who was paid $200,000 by then Nigerian vice president Atiku Abubakar for help creating a telep...
Edwards in New Hampshire
...which has Edwards up to 21%, taking the points from Hillary: Edwards now le
It's no Woodbine Twiner...
...which endorsed Edwards today, is close second for the best-named Iowa newspaper.
McClatchy: Edwards, Romney Lead in Iowa
...t think Edwards' one-point lead in this poll means much. But that the race is tight is obvious enough. And, it is likely that the finding of no increased concern about international affairs or terrorism is solid. If so, that does help Edwards. Also, the article argues that Edwards' numbers have shown an upward trend, and that he could benefi...
Another New Iowa Poll: McClatchy - MSNBC
... Edwards: 24% Hillary: 23% Obama: 22% Richardson: 12% Biden: 8% Dodd: 2% Only 20% say they might change their mind. On second choices, Edwards is way ahead of Obama and Clinton. Taking the supporters of Richardson, Biden, Dodd and Kucinich collectively, and adding them to the numbers of those already voting for the big three, it looks like this:...
| [+/-] |
Here's An Election Headline Surprise |
McCain Now #1 In National Polls
Yeah, he's only at 17%, which says more about how disenchanted the Republican Party electorate is about their choices than how good the McMentum is.
But it does do my heart good to see Romney the Phoney and Rudy the War Monger dropping.
| [+/-] |
I like This Post Title |
It says it all.
I Don't Know If Mike Huckabee Was ‘Born’ an Flaming Dickwad …Mike Huckabee's predictable inability to relate to "those people" is red meat to the conservative base. Think Progress covers the preference such conservative thinking gives to staying in the closet:
On NBC's Meet The Press this morning, host Tim Russert asked former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee if he believed “people are born gay or choose to be gay?" “I don't know whether people are born that way,” responded Huckabee, “but one thing I know, that the behavior one practices is a choice.”Whatever Mike. Out of sight, out of mind I guess. Now if you could only keep your constant bible thumping in the closet we might get somewhere.
12/29/07
| [+/-] |
Interesting Times |
This little tidbit caught my eye, and it seems like the first economic news that came down the pike in a while that seems positive -- something that might beat back the recession drumbeat the housing/credit/subprime mess Atrios calls The Big Shitpile indicates is on the horizon.
China, it turns out, isn't a $10-trillion economy on the brink of catching up with the United States. It is a $6-trillion economy, less than half our size. For the foreseeable future, China will have far less money to spend on its military and will face much deeper social and economic problems at home than experts previously believed.At least, it could be mostly good news for us, not so good for China. But seeing as the economy really just boils down to perception as much as anything, a belief in the full faith and credit of the US -- which is really all that paper with pictures of presidents is. This is a perception that bodes well.
The political consequences will be felt far and wide. To begin with, the U.S. will remain the world's largest economy well into the future. Given that fact, fears that China will challenge the U.S. for global political leadership seem overblown. Under the old figures, China was predicted to pass the United States as the world's largest economy in 2012. That isn't going to happen.I'm not saying I'm bullish on the American economy, but it looks like we'll weather the coming storm in the long term. In the short term, buy a good mattress and stuff it with all your spare greenbacks, cuz there's really nowhere to put your money as far as I can see. My eternal fallback, investing in real estate, is the worst place to put your money for at least a year or two.
12/28/07
| [+/-] |
Predicting The New Year Will Be The Last Year, Ever |
A fittingly appropriate Google Bomb for Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism via CorrenteWire. Please click and spread with a moist towelette. If you don't, I'll drown a puppy.
In a completely unrelated note, except for the possible fashion statement that Jonah G. would find Fffa...ablulous!
"We think Hello Kitty is accepted by young men as a design statement in fashion."While some may rightfully take this as portents of the coming Four Horsemen, nothing could more surly foretell this next year as the beginning of the end of western civilization than this horrible scene foisted on the intertubez by Sisyphus in the book found not in a religious specialty story, but Barnes and Nobles.
Notwithstanding the fact that when I grew up, it was well known that God's Little Princess was Jewish and therefore had no use whatsoever for the second half of this book (and might damage her nails with such mundane tasks as turning pages); commercialization of Christmas is one thing, designer Bibles modified to fit your particular demographic niche is evil genius (which is quite anathema to the message of the Good Book last I heard).
Then again, the Bible had a thing or two to say about what to do when money comes in conflict with faith, rendering unto Ceasar and such, or to quote my favorite Designer Bible:
"Ceesarz" tehy sayz. So he's like, "geev Ceesar hiz kittytreat n geev Ceiling Cat hiz kittytreat 2 k?"Something like that. Naturally, all this commingling of cats, Bible verse and bad fashion (magic underwear?) can only mean the End Of Times: ending badly for some, worse for others -- and unimaginably horrible for those who missed out on the last shoe sale, ever, at Bloomingdales.
12/27/07
| [+/-] |
What's Wrong With The Kansas GOP? |
It's almost 2008, and they still don't have a blog.
But I think the Chair of the Kansas State Republican Party admitting to voter caging might be an even bigger problem.
12/26/07
| [+/-] |
Quote For The Old YEar |
Today, every moment—every conversation, every quip, every striking vista—is being recorded. Everyone has a camera pointed at everyone else. It’s like the last scene from Reservoir Dogs, but with photographers.
Slate, via FirePuppies on the Ron Paultards.
12/22/07
| [+/-] |
What's Not To Love About Primary Season |
My old roommate was a sports fanatic. A non-gambler, but simply obsessed with all things that involved his teams putting balls or pucks through, across or into something while a bunch of other people were trying to keep that from happening.
Now every year, there is a lull in the sports world, or so I thought. After Superbowl Sunday, sports didn't hold much for me until August or so, when Football season would start to gear up again. Basketball and hockey never held much appeal as a TV sport -- you just have to be there to get into the game, at least I do. Baseball bored me, which was a sin in my family since my great grandfather was a world series pitcher. I didn't get into the game until I was older, probably because it wasn't talked about in my house 24/7 once I moved out on my own.
Football was different. I never missed one of my high school or college home games, and got season tickets to the Browns' Dawg Pound when I moved to Cleveland in '85. Other sports just didn't have the same appeal. But I'd watch the games on TV every time the Brownies were away, and then watch the game after that, and Monday Night Football and every playoff game, no matter who played.
So after the Big Game, it was kind of a let down -- boring, cold, wet -- you know, winter in Northern Ohio. So the day in February my roommate said (while flipping between ESPN's Sports Center and two other sports news programs), "I love this time of year," I was confused.
Even Sports Illustrated knows nothing is going on in the wild, wild world of sports between the Superbowl and March Madness. They put out the swimsuit issue then for a reason. But my roommate knew better. He knew something was in the air, that out of chaos, form would take shape, a story would emerge from the ether, and out of the ... nothing ... magic would happen, records broken, history made.
Right then college basketball teams were jockeying for position to get picked for the field of 64 -- and the pro season was well under way. Hockey could be played outside, but the real games were indoors where they sold cheap beer at confiscatory prices. Deals were being made with mutli-millionaire, steroid infested baseball players who would be reporting to spring training in a matter of weeks. And ahh ... the football draft. The pros would be examining in exquisite detail every college prospect and how they would fit into the new program every coach swore would win it all next year, when their new meat got up to speed.
What the hell does this have to do with politics? The moral is, for those that pay attention, the stuff everybody watches later is born right now. This is the time something truly tangible is created out of the mist.
It's that season. It's the same feeling, that time when everything is in flux all at once. Chaos that will coalesce into a new President of the United States being elected right after the World Series, just before Ohio State beats Michigan. Again. As usual. Go Bucks!
George Bush has less than 400 days left. No more. And the field of people who want his job will be getting smaller and smaller as the weeks go by.
There are folks dropping out, a few dropping in to the race, and rumors of deals persist of a new third party. It's just like the time when there are no games being played in sports, right now, in politics, no votes are being taken yet -- but with so many possibilities, so many dreams to crush, the speculation couldn't be greater.
But soon, very soon, it will be all about the battle, not the dream; and the "what if's" will no longer be something that can believed and still be taken seriously.
Anticipation is sweet. You can spout projections now that no one will ever remember, or that you can easily weasel out of if some pedantic goofball wants to hold you to predictions that are as much wishful projection as any real political prescience. And if you end up being right, you got bragging rights for a decade.
This is the time when the air is choking with anticipation. After Iowa, we'll know some things, but not everything, just like we know half the teams won't go undefeated after opening day. We'll know that some folks won't be going on with their presidential ambitions before they vote in New Hampshire, and the field will thin again after Florida, Michigan. Nevada and South Carolina. Bam! Bam! Just like that, they'll drop like flies, one after another.
Some stubborn ones with no sense of respect will go through the motions, but everyone will know they're toast and will make jokes that barely register. Kucinich stayed on until the bitter end last time, and will not make anyone believe he should be taken seriously when he does it again.
After SuperDuper Tuesday, we'll all know who will be running against whom in November, or at the very least have narrowed it down to no more than two on each side; one clear frontrunner for the Dems and GOP, and maybe a close second place candidate or two who is looking for a miracle and the endorsement of all the other losers who dropped out, just to keep it interesting.
They'll be plenty of games within games, smears, rumors, fact-checking, outrages, lies, spins, promises and pandering between now and then. People will vote and the scores will be tallied -- and the excitement will ebb and flow.
But right now, savor the moment my political junkie friends. There won't be this many candidates, this many possibilities, this many futures again for a long, long time.
Granted, most of those futures look downright ugly; and the consequences could be far worse than your arch rival winning the championship. But for the real politics fan, life is good and the air smells electric.
12/21/07
| [+/-] |
Liberal Media Decries Republican Obstructionism |
by shep
You can choose your lie there.
One, that you’ve heard the news that Republicans have broken the record for the use of filibusters (actually the threat thereof since Democrats are too spineless and stupid to make them actually filibuster) in a congressional term, in only half of one congressional term. Let me say that again: Republicans have broken the record for filibustering in half.
Now some people might think that our pathologically shallow, pampered poodles of The Village Press, who treat politics and public policy as a sporting game, would love to talk about a dramatically shattered record of partisan gamesmanship, especially since Republicans appear to be winning.
Ah, but there’s the rub. Republicans are only winning because the partisan denizens of the craft that once deserved to be called “journalism,” haven’t deigned to tell the rabble about it because then the jig would be up. Voters would know exactly why the peoples’ business was not being accomplished, disrupting the Republican plan to blame it on the Democrats. (They won’t even call it a filibuster when Republicans do it).
Which brings us to the second lie: that there is or ever has been anything resembling a liberal media. Any real liberal knows that there are very few liberal voices in the mainstream press (probably a good part of the reason for the rise of the netroots), and none with the exposure and radical extremism to counterbalance the likes of people such as Bill Kristol, Pat Buchanan, Bill O’Reilly or Lou Dobbs. Mild mannered, seldom seen commentators such as E. J. Dionne, Eugene Robinson, Bill Moyers and even Paul Krugman simple don’t compare. Keith Obermann can be fairly described as a liberal firebrand but that’s just one hour of cable (on MSNBC fer gawd’s sake) drowning in a sea of centrist to radical-right political rhetoric.
(I’m not counting what is the mostly liberal perspective of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert since they seldom offer a liberal viewpoint beyond making fun of conservatives and they freely advertise themselves as comedy shows).
Meanwhile, so-called liberal commentators with big megaphones, such as Joe Klein and Maureen Dowd propagate anti-Democratic, Republican propaganda with impunity and millionaire fatheads such as Brian Williams and Tim Russert, the ever-present bastions of Serious unbiased news, get to mug Democratic frontrunners while pretending to moderate a debate. And they conspicuously ignore, marginalize and, if necessary, ridicule progressive voices in politics, such as John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul, even though they may be popular or even competitive with other candidates whom they treat with great Seriousness.
One more point: democratic liberalism – the belief in individual liberty rights and government in service of the common good through transparency, checks against abuse of power and clean and fair elections (rather than government in service of a greedy, war-mongering, power-grabbing class oligarchy) – is as mainstream as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, all the way up to the vast majority of Americans today. That may explain why the mainstream press has even lower approval than either President Bush or the Congress. That’s something else the illiberal media won’t tell you. Go figure.
[Cross-posted at E Pluribus Unum]
12/19/07
| [+/-] |
News Bits: VP Fire Sale Edition |
Tuesday: 57 Iraqis Killed, 66 Wounded
Monday: 2 US Soldiers, 47 Iraqis Killed; 59 Iraqis Wounded
Sunday: 1 US Soldier, 90 Iraqis Killed; 30 Iraqis Wounded
If you didn't at least get a tingle at the back of your neck when you first heard the news that Dick Cheney's office was on fire, wondering why the old fart didn't just use a shredder like previous crooks who worked in the White House, then I'm surprised you have enough curiosity to read blogs. Thoreau has the scoop: Warning: Do not leave paper shredder unattended when on “high” setting.
Creationism Institute Seeks to Offer Science Degree -- Foxnews
The Institute for Creation Research, which advocates a Biblical approach to science, is seeking to offer an online master's degree in science education, according to a report in the Houston Chronicle on Wednesday.Lemme wrap my head around this. * * *
Uh . . . Nope. I got nothing, and am now dumber for trying.
With Tancredo joining Brownback and leaving the GOP Presidential free-for-all, the world is now safer with the extremists bowing out. We just have to worry about the rest of the lunatics and that whack-job with the blimp.
My Karma is still intact, despite the bubble bursting schadenfreude of those who are sick and tired of my incessant cheerleading for John Edwards -- because Ad Nags sees the light, and doesn't even mention John's hair.
TIME Magazine fires dickheads Charles Krauthammer and William Kristol, and hires an ass with a less well known profile for douchebaggery, National Review editor Ramesh Ponnuru who published The Party of Death: The Democrats, the Media, the Courts, and the Disregard for Human Life. Taking a pass on Brittany, Paris and Al Gore, they also named Vladimir Putin as Man of the Year. If I had a subscription, I'd cancel it.
The greatest cinematic accomplishment of all time was Peter Jackson's Lord Of The Rings trilogy. At least that's the way I see it. He's at it again, starting a two-movie Hobbit project.
Schwarzenegger set to remind Bush that conservatives are all abut "States' Rights." Arnold plans to sue E.P.A. for striking down California's tough emission standards.
Finally, since it's nap time, I learned why A.J. Rossmiller at Americablog likes Ron Paul supporters, but have zero clue why Dean Esmay wants them to Did, Die, Die. I'll just assume the drunken lout is in the midst of one of his belligerent, paranoid fits. You know, like when he's awake.
12/18/07
| [+/-] |
Buchucka-Upchuck |
Watching the punditocracy try and fit this into their preconceived notions will be fun to watch.
That alone is enough reason to root for the underdogs. It's already started. Sometime over the weekend, Pat Buchanan saw his credibility wearing thin. He's always been about the money race, especially on the GOP side, insisting that Huckabee didn't have a chance going into Florida and the February 5th Mega-State primaries. He's said the same thing about John Edwards right along.
This morning on MSNBC, I saw him completely change his tune, laying out exactly how momentum alone can carry HuckABEE through to the nomination.
Buchanan's a believer now, and ignores Ron Paul's money bombs. This was quite out of character. When a veteran of the Nixon, Ford and Reagan White House can't figure out what's going on as the GOP coalition disintegrates any better than someone throwing chicken entrails against a wall as he backtracks on every bit of "wisdom" he's spouted about campaigning for president -- something's up.
Did he have some kind of epiphany? Did Karl Rove call him and share "The Math?" Or does he see his own failed attempt to buck the tide in 1996 as something akin to Huckamentum?
My guess, it's the latter. He most certainly has read New York Magazine's Huckabuchanan piece, and let his vanity overwhelm his pomposity.
It occurs to me that Pat's constant mantra that it's impossible to take anyone serious on either side unless they've got $50 million bucks to burn stems from his bitter experience at being a loser when he tried to grab the golden ring himself.
Huckabee’s brand of populism isn’t nearly as strident (read lunatic) as Buchanan’s. But to describe it as watery doesn’t do it justice. Huckabee’s posture on matters of taxing, trading, and even faith represent something shrewder: Buchananism minus the bombast, the paranoia, the out-front efforts to court the clenched-fist-and-camouflage crowd. And in this regard, the message and the messenger are the same—which could well make them more formidable, and no less disconcerting, than Buchanan and his gospel were in 1996.See, it's not that Buchanan is nuttier than a fist full of cashews, at least according to Pat. He, like so many who attend the Court functions at Versailles on the Potomac refuses to ever question his world-view or competence. It's that he was outspent, not out campaigned or out thought by his competitors. He was robbed! And now he has a hero of his own to vindicate his trials and tribulations.
That's how he gets through the day, believing that his jingoistic xenophobia still resonates with more than a fraction of the general public and not just the wackos inhabiting the GOP base. Or worse, that it really is the best way for American to act. Mark my words, Buchanan will eventually take credit for any and all of Huckabee's success in the next six to eight weeks, having paved the way for the preacher from Hope, Arkansas.
And if Huckabee doesn't go all the way, it will (again) be all about the Benjamins.
| [+/-] |
Timing? Peaking Perfectly? Edwards Polls 1st In Iowa! |
Can ya gimme a WØØT!
At considerable risk of unjustified derision and rolling of eyeballs, my uncanny powers of political observation verge on the psychic -- cuz this is what I've been saying right along. The second choice matters a lot in the quirky Iowa caucus, especially where the "second tier" candidates are so strong, yet not quite viable. Edwards always was going to get the lion's share of them.
His structural advantage of having a loyal following who caucused for him last time upon which to build, while everyone else had to create an Iowa base was (IMO) underrated as well. Mind you, by that logic if Bill hadn't skipped Iowa back in the 90's, Hillary could have tapped that base and be absolutely untouchable. Bill's the reason she even has a shot, and the reason she's struggling -- again and again. Irony's a bitter pill.
The race among the three top Democrats is extremely close, with the potential for any of them to finish first – or third.Hat Tip Political Wire.Edwards leads with 30 percent in a poll of Democratic voters who said they intend to participate in the Jan. 3 presidential caucuses, followed by Clinton with 26 percent and Obama with 24 percent. When the sample was narrowed to the most likely caucus-goers, based on several questions, Obama leads Edwards by less than a percentage point with 27 percent, with Clinton in third place at 24 percent.
Edwards holds a significant advantage, however, among a group who could be key to the first contest of the presidential year: those who say their first choice is someone other than the top three. Under Iowa Democratic Party rules, candidates who poll less than 15 percent in the first vote at each caucus around the state are eliminated, and their supporters get a second chance to vote for another candidate.
Under both screens, Edwards leads as the second choice of these voters, with Clinton trailing Obama.
“If Edwards is the second choice at this stage of those who intend to vote for other Democrats, then it would not be surprising if he produced a bit of a shock in Iowa,” said InsiderAdvantage CEO Matt Towery.
Towery said the firm employed the same methodology with regard to asking the second choice of those who were voting for candidates other than those in the top tier, and obtained an accurate picture of John Kerry’s lead.
The poll of 977 Democrats who said they will go to the caucuses, conducted Sunday and Monday has a error margin of plus-or-minus 3 percent. The tighter screen of 633 voters has an error margin of plus-or-minus 4 percent.
By my math, there's between 22% and 30% of Iowa caucusers either undecided or backing someone who most likely won't get above the 15% viability threshold. That's a huge built-in margin of error the horse race Villagers never seem to understand.
Huck looks good on the other side, and even if he comes in a close second, the breathlessness of the Village Press about the popular "insurgency" of Huck and a "surprise upset victory" by Edwards will be more powerful than a $50 million ad buy.
Speaking of which, besides buying a blimp, just what is Ron Paul doing with all that cash he raised? I've only see one poll where Paul is doing well, and that poll's methodology is, shall we say, suspect? But so is buying a frickin' blimp.
Actually, I don't know which is more absurd, polling at 120% or the blimp thingy. You probably need 120% to win an election by and for the vote stealing Republican Party.
UPDATE: Todd Beeton points me inside the numbers.
Interestingly enough, being a political science major, I let others do the math. Make that between 22% and 20%, not 30% as I previously said.
Doh!
What's weirder when you look inside, is that as they screened out the likely caucusers from the highly likely caucusers, there were more folks who were undecided than in the broader sample.
| Highly Likely Voters | Likely Voters | |
| Obama | 26.6 | 24.3 |
| Edwards | 26.0 | 29.8 |
| Clinton | 23.8 | 26.4 |
| Other | 14 | 12.1 |
| Undecided | 9.5 | 7.4 |
I just don't see anyone actually trudging out in the cold who hasn't got a horse in the race. I know Iowans are a peculiar people who take this stuff very seriously and I guess there are a certain number who feel duty bound to show up even if they have no f-ing clue who they'll cast their lot with. I know it's statistically insignificant, but a weird trend.
But if you absolutely know you'll be going to the local meeting hall in a couple of weeks, don't you think you'd be paying a bit more attention and picked sides?
| [+/-] |
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Endless Corporate Profits |
For a sampling of what John Edwards means when he talks about corporate greed, take a peek at this recommended KOS Diary by nyceve.
This should leave you no doubt that the health insurance companies, pharmaceuticals and HMOs are not in the business of providing health care, but in the business of providing obscene profits.
12/17/07
| [+/-] |
Do It Yourself Government |
Interesting transposition today in the WaPost.
You've got Condi Rice and Richard Lugar writing in praise of privatizing reconstruction of war-torn nations and developmental aid to emerging nations. Mercenaries for the disaster capitalists.
Then there's regular investigative reporter, Walter Pincus, telling us about what the real costs of privatizing the intel community has cost according to a report by National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell -- about twice as expensive as hiring a full-time government employee who costs the government on average $126,500 with benefits figured in, while it cost us a quarter million per contractor to do the same job.
I think there's a very simple problem here and that the administration's default position to consistently push to privatize absolutely everything is exactly the wrong approach.
But hey, I was a political science and communications major. YOU do the math.
| [+/-] |
Take Your Medicine |
You don't have to be a Nobel Prize winning economist to understand the devastating effect the Bush/Cheney administration has had, and will continue to have on this country, but such laurals help to get your take published in Vanity Fair.
In four pages, Joseph E. Stiglitz succinctly catalogs what Shep and I (and most of liberal blogtopia) have been bitching about for the last four years. Bush will not only put Hoover's memory as a destroyer of the American Dream to shame, but it will take a generation to recover from the mess.
But what's worse, the tragic consequences of the reign of irresponsibility stands in contrast to what could have been, the opportunities squandered. Clinton handed Bush a booming economy with a budget surplus. The country united behind Bush in the days and weeks after 9/11 like few leaders have ever experience anywhere at any time. Instead of galvanizing in common cause, Bush told us to go shopping, and we did, on credit, just like the US Treasury.
God, what could have been...
It is natural to wonder, What would this money have bought if we had spent it on other things? U.S. aid to all of Africa has been hovering around $5 billion a year, the equivalent of less than two weeks of direct Iraq-war expenditures. The president made a big deal out of the financial problems facing Social Security, but the system could have been repaired for a century with what we have bled into the sands of Iraq. Had even a fraction of that $2 trillion been spent on investments in education and technology, or improving our infrastructure, the country would be in a far better position economically to meet the challenges it faces in the future, including threats from abroad. For a sliver of that $2 trillion we could have provided guaranteed access to higher education for all qualified Americans.He points out that the economic transformation from the 90's to now is the biggest swing in fiscal policy and consequences since we went from the Depression to World War II -- but I would note that we're going in the reverse direction.
Stiglitz lays it all out so well, so completely, a mere excerpt cannot possibly do the article justice. It's a devastating synopsis to everything wrong with everything Bushenomics has wrought. I understand that economic talk makes a lot of folks eyes glaze over. Well that's just Tuff! Read It! All of it, especially if you ever contemplated giving Bush the benefit of the doubt.
Read it, it's good for you. Adult beverages are recommended, but not required. Doom is in the air, since the aptly named "Shitpile" (all that bad debt coming due that was sold as assets and not the crap it was) is about to make the biggest, smelliest "Splat!" ever. Knowing why we're about to go "thud!" won't stop the "hard landing" of the US economy as it absorbs record foreclosures and Bankruptcies next year. But it might keep our eye on the ball, fixing the problem instead of blaming (and arguing about) the wrong parties. This is and will always be Bush's fault, but it's all of our problem.
Despite the collective wisdom of Digby, Atrios and the usual suspects that the chattering Villagers may make a game of it and try to blame the next POTUS, it won't stick. Bush's miserable failings are so apparent, so obviously detrimental to the fabric of our society nobody who changes course from the current stupidity will be blamed for at least trying to fix things, even though we're undoubtedly in for some pain.
What's a shame is that any administration that is serious about fixing things, and not preoccupied with the Villagers or the sad fact that Every Year is an Election Year, they are probably doomed to be a one-termer -- because Digby is right in this (what a surprise). The Villagers will make the next President's job absolute hell, especially if he or she actually tries to do their job.
12/16/07
| [+/-] |
Zip-It Bubba |
by shep
When Rose said that all this seemed to add up to Clinton hinting that people would be "rolling the dice" if they picked Obama, the former president replied: "It's less predictable, isn't it?"
You say that like it’s a bad thing. Many of us predicted the train wreck that would occur if idiot-boy Bush were made president (if only that was less predictable). And many people are predicting more corporatist neoconservatism if your wife gets elected.
Hillary voted to give King George and his black-hearted mentor the keys to use the US military to launch a tragic, pre-meditated, war of aggression in Iraq. She also voted with Joe Lieberman, a turncoat traitor to America and the Democratic Party, to name Iran’s military as a terrorist organization, giving the Zionists another excuse to launch World War III.
She voted to strip bankruptcy protection for average American citizens to benefit her fat-cat contributors in the banking industry and she voted for the Patriot Act twice. There’s nothing in her record that would predict that she would make a better president than Barak Obama.
I know that the nightmares over Obama’s rise in the polls must be interrupting your wet dreams about getting your old room back at the White House (if she decides to let you sleep there) but you need to drop the “not enough experience” canard.
Hillary might make a decent president – certainly in sharp contrast to any Republican – but no one in their right mind could look at the world of business and government and conclude that experience is the same thing as wisdom. And Obama has shown leagues more wisdom on one of the most monumental decisions of all time – Iraq. His political wisdom appears none too shabby either since, unlike your wife, he has committed himself to fight against amnesty for telecommunications companies that colluded with the government to illegally spy on American citizens.
If experience automatically led to better judgment, we wouldn’t have had to endure what Republican miscreants were able to do with “your experience” on an intern’s blue dress (who could have predicted that?). By all accounts, at the time you had considerable experience in such matters.
[Cross-posted at E Pluribus Unum]
| [+/-] |
Nice Work If You Can Get It |
Majikthise alerts us to this little scam where a company suspected of corruption can get out of trouble by paying "monitors" to watch their future dealings in an new animal called "Deferred Prosecution."
At first, I thought it was a Freudian slip and they really meant deferred compensation. But no, a shady corporation suspected of kickbacks and payola can keep out of court by paying an outside firm to watch them, in this case John Ashcroft's firm received the bargain fee of up to $52 Million to watch Zimmer Holdings in a deal set up by Ashcroft's former employee at Justice.
The Project on Government Oversite -- POGO Blog -- has more:
Ashcroft’s consulting firm, the Ashcroft Group LLC, will earn between $29 million and $52 million (paid by Zimmer Holdings) to serve as a corporate watchdog for 18 months. It will oversee Zimmer Holdings, making sure it does not engage in misconduct and helping it adopt corporate reforms. As head of the Department of Justice, Ashcroft was Christie’s boss from 2002 to 2005. Christie also served on an advisory panel that consulted regularly with the Attorney General.
Two members of the New Jersey Congressional delegation, Reps. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D) and Frank Pallone, Jr. (D), have expressed concern over the deal and are seeking hearings on deferred prosecution agreements and the process by which corporate monitors are appointed. What particularly worries Reps. Pascrell and Pallone is the lack of transparency and oversight.
Deferred prosecution agreements (and a variant called non-prosecution agreements) are a new weapon gaining in popularity among federal prosecutors. They are starting to show up in POGO’s Federal Contractor Misconduct Database. Deferred prosecution agreements usually involve court involvement or oversight. However, the deal arranged in the Zimmer Holdings matter was crafted entirely at Christie’s discretion. The companies under investigation faced a difficult choice: either agree to Christie’s terms and pay the substantial fees charged by the monitors that he appointed, or face prosecution. Also, fee arrangements for corporate monitors are usually secret; Zimmer Holdings took the rare step of disclosing its compensation arrangement with Ashcroft in an SEC filing.
Christie said he had nothing to do with arranging Ashcroft’s fee, which he justified as a “real bargain” for taxpayers. However, Christie used the hefty monitoring fees the companies agreed to pay as an excuse not to impose any criminal fines. Is it really a “bargain” if, instead of paying back the government, companies who cheat the public are instead forced to enrich the lucky few who have connections to a U.S. Attorney?
It sure pays to know low people in high places.
12/15/07
| [+/-] |
How Many Would It Take |
If we were losing about 49 U.S. troops a day in Iraq, how soon would the war be over? Yesterday?
We lose that many people to treatable, preventable medical problems because they don't have adequate health insurance.
49 people every day.
Day after day.
| [+/-] |
War on Corporate Greed vs. War on Terror |
Memeorandum had a couple of links to Fox News Contributor Nina Easton's essay for Fortune on CNNMoney.com that demystifies the leading Democratic Presidential Candidates approach to corporate excess, singling out John Edwards as the only real threat to business as usual.
While there is some fine ammunition to counter the money-cons inevitable slurs that Obama or Clinton are some kind of socialists, the verbiage she uses to describe Edwards' populist economic message betrays either a deliberate misunderstanding of the issue or she's too wrapped up in her Wall Street mindset to appreciate what the world is like beyond her particular Village.
It was an easy-to-miss distinction between Clinton and her opponents. Because otherwise, all the candidates were in agreement: Corporate America, and its global reach, is bad for America. Listening to this 90-minute "debate" - it felt more like a sharing of familiar talking points, just like the Republican version Wednesday - you would think that Big Business posed a greater threat to American citizens than Al Qaeda (which, by the way, killed 34 people at the United Nations and government offices in Algeria this week.)Search the debate transcript for the word "terrorist" and you'll come up empty-handed. Search for terms related to "corporate greed" and you'll hit a gold mine.
"We're having trouble growing and strengthening the middle class because corporate power and greed have literally taken over the government, and we need a president who's willing to take these powers on," declared former North Carolina Senator John Edwards.
With the exception of Edwards, it's unlikely that the leading Democratic candidates would govern with that level of frothing animosity toward business leaders.
Other than the fact that the debate questions did not concern any terrorist threats and was centered on economic issues and how to pay for the candidates' various policy proposals, it's clear that Easton has bought the faulty framing of the War on Terror hook line and sinker.
First, some perspective.Census figures show more than one in seven Americans were uninsured in 2005. Studies show the uninsured are often unable to receive the primary and preventive care that they need. The Institute of Medicine estimates approximately 18,000 people die each year from diseases that would have been treatable or preventable if they had health coverage.For those of you keeping score, that's six 9/11's per year, every year, directly attributable to greedy corporate interests who have done everything in their power to prevent universal health care.
Six 9/11's per year.
Preventable.
Treatable.
No guess-work, intelligence interpretation, or luck involved. And that's just one industry. Let's not even get into the industrial/military complex, or the environmental choking energy and transportation sectors. It's no real surprise that the Des Moines Register shied away from endorsing John Edwards, citing their "concern" that he wouldn't be able to work well with business interests. The Register is owned by Gannet Inc., the nation's largest newspaper publisher.
"Edwards was our pick for the 2004 nomination. But this is a different race, with different candidates. We too seldom saw the “positive, optimistic” campaign we found appealing in 2004. His harsh anti-corporate rhetoric would make it difficult to work with the business community to forge change."Go figure. Corporate shills. To risk sounding like an our-way-or-the-highway conservative -- if you aren't working towards a solution, you're part of the problem; and consolidation of media ownership is indeed part of the problem. That's how a one-sided, superficial analysis like from a Fox News regular like Easton's can be spread by Fox's "competitor" CNN, without being challenged, let alone noted by anyone in the corporate media.
Standing up to unelected corporate lobbyists who run our government from K-Street, regulating those corporations in the public's interests instead of ensuring their easiest path to maximum profits is not "anti-business." It's pro-America.
Easton has fallen into the trap so many conservatives to, that either/or mentality that you are either with them or against them. Nationalizing entire industries is anti-business, a socialist coup like what we see going on in Venezuela. No Democrat, not even John Edwards is proposing such drastic measures.
But the cow-towing to Wall Street's whims can no longer be tolerated. Democratic Strategist cites a study showing corporate misconduct is at "pre-Enron levels." Kissing corporate ass allowed corporate mercenaries to run loose all over Iraq, literally raping and pillaging with no legal recourse.
If 18,000 Americans were blown up in terrorists bombings over the last year, we would mobilize the entire military might of this Superpower to utterly destroy those responsible. We would draft every able-bodied citizen and put a stop to such atrocities, right here, right now.
70% to 80% of Americans have wanted universal health care in this country for a generation. Tell me exactly how playing nice has approached this goal -- something We The People, as sovereign of this fine nation can simply legislate. It's time to demand our due.
12/14/07
| [+/-] |
w00t! And More New Words! |
You might have heard that "wOOt!" (or w00t!) is Merriam-Webster's 2007 word of the year. Joining the word "blog," coined in 1999 and made WotY in 2004, it's 733t-speak for "yay!" or something like that. If you have a teenager around you'll get the lecture they've been dying to give you as payback if you ask. I prefer to spell it "wØØt!" but the "pi" symbol doesn't show up on everyone's browser.
But There's More!! WØØt!
Now there's Huckenfreude (n) [Blogtopian origin (Yes, yes, Skippy, we know, that's your word)]: Pleasure derived from the outrage of prominent conservative pundits over the rising poll numbers of Mike Huckabee. Particularly sharp when the pundits in question are partisans of Rudy Giuliani, but extends to supporters of Mitt Romney as well.
This is not to be confused with Huckengersonfreude (n) [obscure, thought to be from a lower Potomac Village or neo-Versailles dialect]: - the pleasure derived from the outrage of columnists who liked Huckabee so long as he sounded like George W. Bush on immigration, instead of like his natural constituents.
I'll try and use them appropriately in a sentence:
For many reasons, none of which include the inevitable Huckenfreude I will enjoy watching Dick Morris and Pat Buchanan choke on their own conventional wisdom in a fit of Huckengersonfreude that he with the most cash wins the race, I'm confident that Huckabee will win the GOP nomination. WØØt!
Actually, the Huckster Dude scares the hell outta me. Despite the numbers in the absolutely meaningless polls out right now on how this relatively unknown Governor does dismally against household names like Clinton, Obama or even Edwards, nobody had ever heard of that other Arkansas Governor from a town called Hope before he swept into the New Hampshire primary with the wind at his back. The fact that so many well known neocons are't particularly fond of him is an enormous plus when it comes to the average voter.
I'm claiming WingNuttyStan and PrezNitWit as my own. I really don't care if someone else thought of it too. I'll share. Don't try to steal the lower case "dick" Cheney or Ara will send the Creative Commons Cops after you -- that's his.
There are a lot of folks who use "PrezNitwit" on a regular basis, so all I can claim is that either I thought it up independently or I read it somewhere and it ate into my brain. However, a random Googling (yep, that's a word) shows that I'm the most prevalent abuser of the term "WingNuttyStan," since it appeared first on Oct. 2, 2005 in my Big Kahuna Conspiracy Theory. (Go ahead click it, it's a fun one from back in the day.) Don't be alarmed that E. Pluribus Unum, AsOhioGoes or various John Edward blogs turn up wingnuttystan in a googling. They're all mine, don't worry.
And No, I didn't just misspell "Wingnuttistan," which has many authors, dammit.
Rats. I thought I was on to something. At least I'm consistent in my lack of spelling skillz. Okay, I suck. I have no original words of my own.
I was actually hoping to coin "Blogistan" as an antonym of Skippy's Blogtopia, and I still use it that way. A barren realm of neocon dystopia, quite stark in it's anti-reality bias and different in all ways from the wonderful world of left wing Blogtopia -- an enchanted land where everybody gets along, all the ladies look like Heidi Klum and write like Digby.
Alas, there are three blogs that read my mind. Blogistan, Dispatches From Blogistan, and Radio Free Blogistan but fail to honor my definition. But the real usurper is is Suzanne Stefanac who wrote Dispatches from Blogistan: A travel guide for the modern blogger, which sadly is just a "How To" book on blogging for fun and profit.
Speaking of that silly kangaroo, Skippy found a new word and added a new definition to RJ Escow's "antipartisanship." Skippy says it means, "a cynicism borne of the betrayal of trust by either or both major political parties, resulting in the belief that all politicians and political operatives are unprincipled." and he should know.
Hey There, Skippy knows Skippy, and evidently is not amused. So he came up with a whole bunch of new ones, but really wants the adjective "Wikipperantly" to catch on, a term meaning: of dubious reality, wikipparently. But my favorite on his list is Encrapsulate (v.) To embody the principle of shit. That kinda encrapsulates this whole exercise in late Friday night, meaningless blogging when you refuse to CatBlog.
But it's not just us bloggers who get to play fast and loose with the language. Mitt Romney may have endeared himself to the NRA crowd with his new phrase, "extreme weapons." Teh Awesome! That's damn near a Bushism -- WØØt!
| [+/-] |
The Surge's Political Goal Poll (Moving) |
Our blood and our treasure was never about them.
A year after approval of President Bush's handling of the war in Iraq dipped to an all-time low, a new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds discontent toward the war easing slightly, with Republicans and independents significantly more positive about the situation than they were 12 months ago.
Baseline judgments about the war are unchanged -- six in 10 in the poll said the war is not worth fighting -- but the public is somewhat more upbeat about progress in Iraq. Optimism about the year ahead is also higher than it was a year ago.
Although a majority say the United States is not making significant gains toward restoring civil order in Iraq, the public's views are more positive than at this time last year. About four in 10 say the United States is making progress, an increase of 10 percentage points over last year.
Looking ahead to the new year, the public is somewhat more hopeful about the situation in Iraq. Forty-six percent said they are optimistic about the situation in Iraq in 2008, six points higher than in December 2006.
Okay, maybe I'm just too damn negative about all this killing in the name of peace, but I'm not alone.
Democrats remain overwhelmingly negative about the situation on the ground now and in the year ahead.A sampling of the comments to this, "news" is telling. (Remember, when the Versailles Villagers on the Potomac are bored, and up against their editor's deadline to fill space, they do a poll to reinforce their preconceived notions.)
Democrats are still largely disapproving of the decision to go to war, with 85 percent saying that, given the costs and benefits to the United States, the war is not worth fighting. More than six in 10 independents agree, whereas three-quarters of Republicans call the war worth the effort.
SouthStar wrote:Is not optimism. It is RESIGNATION. ...robertsgt401 wrote:I got 1/3 thru the article. And gagged. I think I have a new understanding of being "poled"weRnotFree wrote:sounds like a drug addict or alcholic in denial...gee, this weekend i drank and didn't throw up!Mair1 wrote:I guess that, if you're not the one being shot at, it's easier to say yhat the war is 'worth the effort'.PeterPrinciple wrote:Jesus H. Christ, the Post will say ANYTHING to try to sell this turkey of a war -- and the Broderish delusion of a rebound for Commander Codpiece.irratical wrote:Iraq goes from being an unmitigated disaster to a slightly mitigated disaster, and this is the victory we were led to expect in 2003?thecrisis wrote:Why isn't this titled appropriately:
"fewer republicans hate bush than a few years ago" how does that sound?
Graham first hinted at a 90-day clock in testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee September 19. In his comments before that panel, he merely predicted the world would see progress by Baghdad in the next 90 days.
In his conversation with TIME, he held out a stick in the event that progress does not materialize. Said Graham: "We've won the day here politically, to give them the infrastructure they need to do this. It's been missing up until now. I am vocally saying it's up to [the Iraqis] to deliver. We've done our part."
Though he would not elaborate on what kind of plan he would push if the Iraqis fail to meet the deadline, Graham did say a change in strategy would be warranted. "If they can't do it by the end of the year," he said, "how do you justify a continued presence?"
So the Iraqis need to show some progress by ... Wednesday, if we hold Graham to his original statement, or New Years if we round up and give him the benefit of a Senator's sense of time.
So, how's that going Gomer?
By the way, is there any movement towards that referendum (pdf) they were supposed to have on who gets Kirkuk? Are they even going to have another "purple finger" day? Did the Carlyle group get it's Oil Law yet?
Probably not. At least not on the original timetable. But that doesn't mean there hasn't been any political movement whatsoever. At the risk of having my ACLU card canceled, here's a few pieces of optimistic news that the Villagers have said little or nothing about.
Over a week ago, the Sunnis ended their year-long boycott of the Iraqi government, a power-sharing move which promises to bring some political stability to the Northern areas of the country, and maybe that referendum will be late, but doable.
The U.N. plans to come back to Baghdad. That's a plus, but you'd never hear this as a positive development from a neocon.
Some refugees are returning, but a few thousand is a spit in the bucket and the U.N.H.C.R. is warning that the country isn't ready for a massive influx of of even a fraction of the country's 4.5 million ex-patriots.
Turkey cooled off it's threats to invade "Kurdistan" after signing a Counter-Terrorist Agreement with Iraq. Unfortunately this has as much to do with Turkey's desire to become a full-fledged member of the E.U. as any hope it might have that the Iraqi Government can live up to it's end of the bargain -- or that Turkey will put up with nonsense from the Peshmerga or the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) who don't give a hoot what anyone in Baghdad has to say.
In another sign at least the diplomatic corp of the Iraqi Government is awake, they're telling us (not the other way around) that our military commitment isn't open ended. Nice to see we're on the same page.
I have no idea why these stories are not being picked up by the Village's Town Criers, and they don't change my general attitude about the whole mess -- but they would move the opinion polls a great deal if they were more widely reported. It probably gives enough political cover to folks like Lindsay Graham to say we could afford to wait another Friedman Unit or two to see what happens. We can talk tough, keep the pressure on, but as long as nobody believes we will just up and leave, we really have little leverage on what they do or when the Iraqis can finally get their act together.
Hey, Why stop now? They keep pushing our withdrawal out long enough, no Democratic Congressman will have any credibility left whatsoever -- another "victory" for Bush.
| [+/-] |
Another Convert from the Dark Side |
No, not another reformed Republican, a new Macophile!
| [+/-] |
Why Bother Buying Radio and TV Ads |
When you can buy the nation's largest commercial network.
via Truthdig:
Mitt Romney to Buy Clear Channel CommunicationsWouldn't it be cool to be able to tell Rush, Sean and Glenn where they can stick their collective microphones?
What would it cost to buy the support of just about every nationally-syndicated neocon talk show host in America? About $19.5 Billion, which is what Mitt Romney's private equity firm, Bain Capital, and Thomas H. Lee Partners have agreed to pay in a leveraged buyout agreement with Clear Channel Communications, the largest radio station owner in the country.
Clear Channel owns over 1,100 full-power AM, FM, and shortwave radio stations, twelve radio channels on XM Satellite Radio, and more than 30 television stations in the United States. Premiere Radio Networks, which is the largest syndication company in the United States, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Clear Channel and is home to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and many others. Sean Hannity recently signed a large multi-market contract with Clear Channel, as well.
That's power!
Those of us in liberal blogtopia won't notice the subtle changes right away, but the Giuliani and McCain fans might start rethinking this media consolidation stuff pretty soon.
::sigh::
It's going to take the rest of my lifetime to straighten this country out.
12/13/07
| [+/-] |
Stupid Rhetoric Of Presidential Sloganeering |
During today's excruciatingly dull debate, where the candidates talked about boring issues like how they intend to pay for all the change the Democrats promise to bring to Washington, Hillary Clinton summed up the differences in approaches between herself, Barack Obama and John Edwards.
Some demand change (Edwards)
Some hope for change (Obama)
I will work hard for change (Hillary)
I want to break this down a bit.
Trey Ellis reminds us today that Justice Fredrick Douglass said, "Power Concedes Nothing Without Demand." Senator Edwards has been promising to fight the rich and powerful on our behalf, take it to them. I have long been of the opinion that little will change in this nation unless the true sovereign of this country, the people through their elected representatives, limit the influence of the powerful and protect those who are subject to the whims and fancy of the greed driven corporatists. To me, an essential function of a post-feudal democracy is to prevent or at least temper their ability to exploit the working class folks.
My worst fear is that if our elected representatives fail in this duty, the entire apparatus comes crashing down. We're a patient people, and easily distracted. But when push comes to shove, an enraged public can push back pretty hard.
We can and should lay down the law to the corporations and moneylenders that have bought and sold the temple that was our most hallowed democratic institutions. Simply hoping for it won't do. As the ultimate sovereign, we can and should lay down that law -- because we make the laws. They are our laws. They do not belong to K-Street or The Decider. They define who we are and we define what those laws say.
Offering a new face, a fresh and friendly approach does nothing if you con't acknowledge there are points of no return -- positions that the entrenched power brokers will not relinquish willingly under any incentive. If Obama truly believes that the hope for change he represents is enough to melt the conservative heart, he's never been turned down for a loan, or faced that "wet your pants moment" where you have to decide whether to take you chances in a trial or accept a plea bargain or settlement. Real life decisions are unnaturally academic to professor types, even those who taught law.
Working hard for change is noble, indeed required. Presidenting is hard work after all. But working towards a deal is not the same as working towards a goal. Change for change sake alone is meaningless. Hillary says, and probably believes that she will work hard for us. We need more than someone who will work hard, we need someone who will fight hard.
The exploitive energy cartels, criminal telecos, corrupt military industrialists and predatory financial institutions are who we, the people, need her to fight against. Unfortunately they are the very organizations who in large part have funded Clinton's campaign. Perhaps they know something we don't. Something we should be afraid of.
We need hope, and we need to work hard. For Hillary to imply that Obama or Edwards will not work hard was a callous rhetorical trick. And if she cannot offer us hope, why on earth should we bother to even go out and vote.
But we can, and should, demand better. We can demand better from our government just as we demand better from ourselves.
We did not negotiate with the British crown for more autonomy to create our republic. We demanded that our basic rights as free human beings be recognized and demanded our independence from a despot. Women who demanded their right to vote paved the way for Hillary to seek this high office. African Americans demanded their god-given civil rights which give us hope for a better tomorrow every day.
You do indeed demand justice, then work hard for it -- or you have no hope of getting it.
There was a palace that was a city. It was a palace! It was a palace and it can be a palace again! A palace in which there is no king or queen or dukes or earls or princes, but subjects all -- subjects beholden to each other, to make a better place to live. Is that too much to ask? Are we asking too much for this? Is it beyond our reach?! Because if it is, then we are nothing but sheep being herded to the final slaughterhouse! I will not go down that way!! I choose to fight back!!! I choose to rise, not fall! I choose to live, not die!! And I know, I know that what's within me is also within you!
Subscribe via Email
