Tool 4 The Man

Write First, Think Later: Live Blogging the Debate

2008-10-07T18:09:00.000-07:00

On my hotel room flat screen it looks like McCain and Obama are both wearing the same black suit and white shirt. Must have been a really good sale.... Obama's now apparently afraid to appear in public without his flag pin.

Opening question as expected from John Q Public what can you do for me to help me out of the economic crisis?

Both candidates launch into predictable and tired stump speech talking points we heard in the last debate

6:08
Moderator Tom Brokaw breaks from agreed rules and asks his own question and it's a good one: who would you name as treasury secretary?

McCain goes first and gives a bit of a deer in headlights then suggests eBay CEO Meg Whitman who recently said McCain isn't qualified to run a major corporation.

Obama says Warren Buffet.

Round one to Obama

6:15
I'm wondering who these voters are.... I mean anyone who hasn't decided who to vote for by now doesn't strike me as a bunch of people who are paying attention.

Brokaw: Is the economy going to get worse before it gets better?

We all know that's probably the case, but do we want to here that from the next president? Apparently neither of them think so because they are ducking the question

6:18
How can we trust you with our money when both parties got us into the crisis?

Obama deftly compares the austerity now implemented in many American households to the reckless spending in the Washington, then reminds us that W squander the
deficit.

McCain channels his inner Slick Willy and feels the voter's pain.

"Senator Obama has never taken on the leaders of his party on a single issue"

True enough.

Who designed these chairs the candidates are sitting on? Impossible not to look awkward on the 3/4 size director's chair....

Not sure how we got here, but now McCain's talking about offshore oil drilling....

Brokaw: Health Care, energy, Social Security/Medicare entitlements, what's your top priority if the three?

McCain says all three. Me, too declares Obama.

6:26
Wishing Sarah Palin was here. Entertainment value is lacking and I have learned nothing I didn't already know.

!st internet question: Depression era voter wants to know what sacrifices they would ask us to make.

RIGHT ON Grandma!

McCain says cut the fat in the federal budget (I recall Reagan promising the same thing before he was elected and exploded the deficit). Now he's talking about earmarks.

McCain recommends spending freeze bit not for the bulk of federal spending like
defense and social security.

6:30
Obama invokes 9/11 and our collective willingness to pull together. Talks about wiser use of energy. McCain's on his feet. He';s getting a whiff of FDR and that makes him Herbert Hoover so it's time to pounce, Rezko? Rev Wright? "He doens;t understand?"

6:33
Brokaw: how do we get spending in line?

Obama says we have to gee spending in line but apparently that won't affect his health care plan or any of hte other promises he's made.

Tax the rich. OK, as long as I don't make the cut. In the democratic debates, I recall Obama saying anyone who made 115,000 or more was "upper class" Sounds like a lot of money until you try to get but a house in California.

McCain invokes Hoover himself, saying he has something in common with Obama, as they both raised taxes in a recession.

6:38

Brokaw: can you guarantee (the answer to any question that begins that way is no) that you will deal with social security and medicare in the first two years of your administration?

Obama says no, but want to address it in the first term. Good luck. Now he;s pivoting into his tax plan. Glad I'm writing down the qyuestions because by the time they finish talking its hard to remember what the questionwas inte first place.
Now he says he can lower taxes on 95 % of us and that will save social secuity.

McCain reminds us Reagan helped bal out social sewcurity but doesn;t acknowledge it came at the expense of a tax hike.

6:43
Climate change and green jobs?

McCain has street cred on this one. Telling us that we need to go nuclear, not what a lot of us want to hear, but probably what we need to hear.

Hafway point and so far Obama hasn't made a misstep so conventional wisdom would have to say he's winning because McCain needs to make the voters afraid of electing him.

Brokaw: Manhatan project vs Silicon valley garage model for energy research?

McCain: Casual nod to acknowleging the question and now he's bashing Obama for a vote laden with pork on energy.

Should have made "my friends" one of the drinking game cues.....

6:50

Should health care be a commodity? Not sure what the hell that means. Neither does Obama, but it's an opportunity to draw a clear distinction between his own flawed plan and McCain ridiculous excuse for more free market as a solution

6:54

McCain says we need more choice. We just can't support "gold plaited" policies. I remember hearing still President Bush describe good health care that way. Way to show you understand the struggle of people who need some medical attention. Anything that will actually pay ofr real treatment is a luxury.

Obama reminds us about how his mother died of cancer in her 50's and spent the last months of her life arguing with insurance companies who didn;t want to pay for her treatment. Feel my pain! Feel it now. Write me a gold plaited script for vicadin

6:59
Who will recent events affect our ability to be a peace maker?

McCain opens with obvious platitutes-- we need a strong economy to have a strong mility. Now he's telling us we need to use sound jedgement on using military power.

SAY WHAT?

Time for Obama open a can of Iraq war whoop-ass.....

Obama, thanks for teeing that one up for me John. Now he's beating McCain over teh head on judgement of going to war and what it's costing. I had almost forgotten about the Iraqi surplus but Obama is remoinding me how angry I am about that. Makes me want to invade tham and take the oil and... oh, right.....

7:05
Whats the Obama doctrine for the use of force?

Moral issues count. The Holocost, Rwanda... says we have to work with our allies. Maybe we might get some back after W isn;t president anymore.

McCain says Obama is a panty waist quitter. Didn;t support the surge. Obama wants defeat. McCain wants victory. Obama's a fraidy cat. Invoking Reagan again.

7:08

Should we respect Pakistan's border's and not use military force without permission?

Obama reminds us how W let Bin Laden get away.

Witching from PBS to CNN which has live people meter response graphics to tell me how others are responding to what's being said. Saves the effort of forming my own opinions. Thanks CNN!

McCain: Invokes Teddy Roosevelet. CNN People meter says:ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

blah blah blah waseristan blah blah blah Talk softly but carry a big stick blah blah blah

Obama: I did not call for the invason of Pakistan damnit! I want to get the terrorists! People meter says, uh-huh.

7:15

McCain: "Pants on fire, Senator Whipper Snapper!" CNN people meter has gone to th

kitchen to get a beer.....

6:18

McCain's scolding Obama again for failing to hail his brillinat strategic leadership on the surge, especially now that McCain schooled Obama in ht last debate on the difference between tactics and strategy. Take that Merriam-Webster!
CNN People meter is wondering what's on cartoon network....

Q: what should we do about Russia?

Mccain says get tough, won't get swept off his feet like W. CNN people meter, which differnetiatates male and female responses, shows men likely the tough talk, women less so, but it still gets them a little hot....

About Russia, Obama says, oh hell I wasn't paying attention but CNN people meter says women liked it beter than men.

At least Mccain is looking at Obama this time as opposed to last time. If only we could harness the hatred McCain has for Obama and suse it to fuel our cars....

questions from a military man: would we go to war for Israel?

Mccain says Iran is a threat, can;t get nukes. CNN people meter puts down the potato chips and starts to listen.

Obama says no to nukes for Iran. People meter will go along with that. People meter likes this talk of using dipolomacy. Sounds cheaper than Iraq. Let the French pay for a change....

7:30 overtime because of long winded answers
Last question: what don;t you know and how will you learn it?

Obama doesn;t know what that means so he talks about how his grandma and mother scrimped and saved to make him a success..

McCain says, well, not sure, beause I zoned out.

Now it's time for the pundits to tell me what I think. Time to switch from CNN back to PBS.... My guess is they'll say Obama won by not losing.

Caribou Barbie & Miss Teen USA: Seperated at Birth?

2008-09-27T10:38:00.001-07:00

Deja Vu all over again watching Katie Couric's interview with Alaska Governor and Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

Here's one of the more revealing segments...

Who does this remind you of? Could it be Caitlin Upton, the now infamous Miss Teen USA contestant?

McCain's VP Choice:The Wrong Stuff?

2008-08-29T11:52:00.001-07:00

This smacks of desperation, just like the Gerry Ferraro choice in 1984.

You have to wonder what McCain is thinking. Kind of runs counter to his "experience counts" message. But then, Biden does the same for Obama's central theme of change.

But on the most important question, is the VP ready to be President, it's no contest. If Joe Biden has to take over, he gives me a sense of reassureance that he won't require adult supervision. Not so much with Governor Palin. A few years ago she was Mayor of Mayberry RFD. Now she's a heartbeat away from the most difficult job in the world?

Alas, thorough review of the internet yields no bikini shots of the former Miss Alaska contestent.

The Bush Tax: What W Has Cost You

2008-04-06T17:03:00.001-07:00

George W. Bush has financed all his colossal blunders with borrowed money. Not that he has to pay the bill. You do.

Now for the fun part--- adding up the bill. Better mix yourself a stiff drink. You're going to need it. If you don't do adult beverages, may I recommend something in a Schedule 1 Felony narcotic?

Since we're not running the Federal Reserve, we'll work in rough, but so far as I can tell, accurate back of the envelope calculations.

By the time President Bush leaves office, the national debt will have increased by about $4 trillion, according to figures cited by the Washington Post.

There's a lot of smoke in mirrors in the administration's budget projections, like making no allowances for realistic costs for the war, or for fixing the alternative minimum tax problem looming over the middle class and what are likely to be overly optimistic estimates about economic growth. Let's assume the numbers are even worse, but for the sake of finishing our math assignment, we'll use the information we have on hand.

Next we add $3 trillion for the cost of the war, according to the more conservative figure in the estimate ranging from $3 trillion to $5 trillion by Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz..

There are about 100 million people who pay taxes in the United States.

Divide $7 trillion by 100 miliion and you find that it adds up to $70,000 per U.S. taxpayer.

Maybe it's time to freshen up that drink now.

For giggles, let's also assume we try to pay the bill over the same time frame we racked up the debt, in eight years.

Putting aside the fact that the debt continues to increase because of the interest due even assuming we balance the budget as soon as the next president takes office, that works out to $8750 per taxpayer per year.

If I were Obama or Clinton, I'd start talking about the epic fiscal mismanagement of the current administration, put a price tag on it and label it the Bush Tax.

"Sorry about that my fellow Americans, but we need to put our house in order and every one of us has got to pay for the mistakes of the last eight years. Unlike some of your other tax dollars which actually yield some benefit, this money has been wasted, but there's nothing we can do about it now but pay up and move on."

Remember Bill Clinton and the budget surplus and how we were giddy trying to figure out how to spend the money before we even paid off the accumulated debt of the Reagan and first Bush?

Fuggedaboutit. $70 thousand dollars per taxpayer? Not going to happen. Not anytime soon.

Anyone old enough to vote is likely to be paying for President Bush's mistakes for the better part of the rest of their life.

There's an evil genius behind the Bush Cheney strategy that relies on sinister fiscal duplicity, without which much of their treachery would not have been possible.

The lives lost resulting from this administration's mistakes are an abstract concept for the vast majority of Americans who have no relatives or close friends in the armed forces or who live in Iraq. If Americans had been forced to endure the presidency of George W. Bush on a pay as you go basis, it would have triggered a massive popular revolt that would have changed the course of recent history.

Hillary: The Check's in the mail. Honest.

2008-03-31T12:35:00.000-07:00

Pressure from supporters of Barack Obama on Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race may be having an effect. Unless she implodes and loses in Pennsylvania and Indiana, Clinton appears to be committed to dragging out the process at least until early June when the primaries and caucuses are over. But the more Obama Nation can make her look like a spoiler, the harder it will be for her to keep a steady infusion of the lifeblood of politics: money.

Case in point-- Politico reports that Hillary Clinton's campaign didn't pay health insurance bills.

Aides are downplaying the revelation as you might expect, but it hints at larger problems that may be coming in terms of the massive expenditures required to keep the Clinton political machine running.

It's embarrassing on several levels.

Clinton has made health care a central feature of her campaign and even though aides say the actual coverage of campaign staff and their families have not been affected, it suggests attending to health care for the people who work for her isn't a top priority.

The unpaid bills also undermine her "Ready on Day 1" argument. Running a campaign is a lot easier than running he country and if you can't make sure the bills are paid on time the same way anyone running a small business has to do, it raises questions about your management skills.

Nothing seems likely to stop Barack Obama's endless supply of campaign donations, but if Clinton's money starts drying up, it could accelerate the process toward the all but inevitable conclusion of this race-- that she loses.

We are Clinton. Resistance is Futile.

2008-03-27T09:40:00.000-07:00

Just when you wonder what will help fill this vast seven week void between primaries leading up to Pennsylvania on April 22, the internet comes to the rescue again.

Hillary's campaign operated with ruthless cyborg efficiency (at least until anyone got a chance to vote) so it was inevtiable that the Clinton poilitical machine was compared with the Borg, a race of technogicallly enhanced human machine hyrbids with a decidely Clintonian mantra: "We are borg. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. You will service us."

Enough from me. Watch the video. The joke at the end won't make sense unless you've seen the Sarah Silverman, Matt Damon and Jimmy Kimmel video.

Warning, there's adult language in these.

Shooting Blanks: Hillary Under Fire

2008-03-25T14:26:00.000-07:00

I've had a gun pointed at me on two occasions by people I thought might actually pull the trigger. I can tell you exactly when and where it happened because the circumstances are crystal clear in my memory, unlike a vast majority of other events.

Fortunately, I've never been shot at by snipers, but I suspect I would remember the details precisely if it had happened. Unlike Roger Clemens testimony to Congress about use of performance enhancing chemicals, this type of event would seem unlikely to be "misremembered."

Apparently that's not the case for the truth-challenged Senator from New York.

Hillary Clinton told a story at a recent campaign stop that seemed designed to demonstrate her toughness and foreign policy experience.

"I remember landing under sniper fire," Clinton said, recalling a March 1996 visit to the Tuzla airport, in Bosnia. "There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base,"

A gripping tale. Too bad it isn't true. A CBS News Video shows what really happened. Accompanied by daughter Chelsea, she is greeted by a little girl and walks casually across the tarmac.

Clinton aides say she "misspoke." In a world where everything is videotaped and posted on the internet you'd think that someone who's trying to persuade us she has the judgement to answer that 3 a.m. phone call would realize that you can't play fast and loose with the facts.

Do you really think the Secret Service would allow the First Lady and her daughter to run from a helicopter while they were under fire from snipers? I have dealt with the Secret Service when covering the President and Vice President on many occasions, I can tell that type of scenario is just not going to happen.

Even if it did, what mother would deliberately put her teenage daughter in life threatening danger? Does that show presidential caliber judgement?

"So I made a mistake," she said. "That happens. It proves I'm human, which you know, for some people, is a revelation."

Perhaps this incident is a revelation, just not the kind she's trying to spin it into.

The Circular Firing Squad

2008-03-21T14:45:00.000-07:00

The new Democratic Party slogan might as well be: “We never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”

Barring some apocalyptic implosion by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton has only one chance to win the nomination: If the predominantly white super delegates decide to take it away from the first black candidate with a chance to become president.

Do-over votes in Michigan and Florida aren’t likely to happen, thanks in part to the influence of Obama supporters. Even if Clinton were to achieve a crushing 60-40 margin of victory in every remaining state, she’d still wind up behind Obama in delegates, number of election victories and number of votes.

Not that that scenario is even remotely probable, despite the damage inflicted by the endless loop of the video of Obama’s minister Jeremiah Wright over the past week. He’s still expected to win in North Carolina and Hillary has only won by 60 percent or more in
New York, Rhode Island and Arkansas so far.

Despite the lofty talk of exercising judgment (according to Clinton supporters) or following the will of the voters (from Obama backers) Democratic elected officials who make up most of the super delegates will do what politicians always do—whatever is in their own best interests. Risking widespread boycott of black voters, their most loyal supporters, would not seem to fit the agenda of self preservation.

So we come back to Hillary’s last and now apparently only hope, that between now and convention time a problem that makes Obama look unelectable crops up and as the only alternative, Clinton wins a last minute upset.

In the meantime, John McCain has the opportunity to look presidential. Napoleon once said “Never interrupt the enemy when he’s making a mistake.” McCain has been conspicuously absent in the recent furor over race in the democratic race.

Just when they thought they had an election that was a gimme, the democrats are now tripping over each other to see how they can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Unhappy Birthday: The Iraq War Turns 5

2008-03-19T20:34:00.000-07:00

Be angry. Be very angry.

Nearly four thousand American troops dead. At least 90,000 Iraqi civilians killed, perhaps many, many more than that, since estimates vary widely.

When you consider them as statistics, it's just numbers. Every time you read, see or hear the story of the toll the war has taken on individual lives and you muliply that pain and suffering by gthe number of people affected, it's almost impossible to wrap your mind around the truly horrendous consequnces of George W. Bush's war of choice.

And for what? The argument to justify the war has changed many times since we disocuvered the first justification, the assumption that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and would use them to attack us, turned out to be a false.

Anyone who tries to make the case that we're safer now as a result of the war really needs to prove their point because the opposite appears to be the reality of the situation. Turns out most people don't a superpower that starts wars without any provocation. That anger helps fuel the religious fanatacism that leads people to become suicide bombers.

I don't feel safer. Do you?

Then there's the money.

Three trillion dollars, according to Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz's estimate of what the war will cost when you add it all up.

Why does the Bush administration say it's only $500 billion? Stiglitz counts expenses that the White House conceals.

A professor at Columbia University, Stiglitz was the chief economist for the World Bank and, before that, the chief of President Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers. His estimates are in a new book, "The Three Trillion Dollar War."

He says his figures are conservative. Among the most startling:

$600 billion that Congress has appropriated so far
$520 billion to bring home troops and equipment
$590 billion in medical and disability payments to veterans
$280 billion to restore a depleted military
$615 billion in interest for a war financed entirely by borrowing
$370 billion as the war's impact on individuals including the loss of lifetime earnings by disabled veterans, interruptions in careers for reservists and their families.

When the war began, then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld scoffed when Lawrence Lindsey, and advisor to President Bush, estimated the cost of the war at $200 billion. The Secretary of Defense called the estimate “baloney.“ Rummy’s deputy Paul Wolfowitz said Iraqi oil money could pay for reconstruction after the war.

Stiglitz’s figures assume American troops will leave Iraq in a few years. Imagine the cost of John McCain is right and the meter keeps running for another 100 years.

Toward A More Perfect Union: Yes We Can, But We Probably Won't

2008-03-18T16:06:00.000-07:00

The difference between a leader and a politician often becomes clear in how they handle serious problems.

For Barack Obama, the crucible of his campaign to become president came this week and he proved that he is more than equal to the challenge.

In politics, when you use a word like “bold” to describe strategy or tactics, what you usually mean is “dangerous.”

Obama’s speech on race in this country was nothing if not bold.

I’ve never been optimistic that I would see meaningful change in race relations the United States in my lifetime, but now there seems to be a glimmer of hope.

In what may well be remembered as the most important speech since Martin Luther King's "I have a dream," Barack Obama moved the national conversation on race one giant leap forward today.

Will it put the controversy caused by the comments of his minister Jeremiah Wright behind him? Not completely, but it helps clarify the relationship between Obama and Wright.

"As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me.” Obama said referring to the man who has been his spiritual advisor for 20 years. "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.”

"These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love."

I suspect a lot of us have grandmothers like that. I had two. The difference is that you can’t choose your family. Your religious leader is another matter. If I was a church-going type of guy, I’d look for another house of worship if the message from the pulpit was a toxic manifesto against people from different ethnic backgrounds than the preacher and against the country as a whole.

Since he began running for president, Obama has tried to rise above racial issues, but was ultimately forced to confront them head on, which is probably beneficial of the country.

"Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable,” Obama said, “I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias. "But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.
“The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through – a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American."

For many white people, it is probably a revelation to be given a glimpse of the conversations that take place when they're not around. Obama did not try to defend the statements made by Wright, but he did explain why the minister and many like him are so angry.

"For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings and occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews.

“The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright's sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning.

"That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races."

Obama also focused on the roots of frustration among whites who often cannot understand why they are blamed for discrimination in which they played no part.

“In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor.

“They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time. ”

Hopefully YouTube will get as many views of the speech as of the clips of Jeremiah Wright's sermons, but I wouldn't bet on it.

With Friends Like These....

2008-03-16T21:20:00.000-07:00

When the history of campaign 2008 is written, we may look back at this moment and deem it was the beginning of the end of Barack Obama’s hope of becoming president.

Bill Clinton’s comments in South Carolina notwithstanding, until now Obama managed to transcend race for the most part, which may be the true “third rail” of American politics.

That part of the campaign is now only visible in the rear view mirror. Cable news and YouTube are in the midst of a feeding frenzy with video clips of Obama’s minister Jeremiah Wright making some extremely disturbing statements in his sermons.

After the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001:

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

In a 2003 sermon, he said blacks should condemn the United States:

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

Promoting Obama's candidacy in a sermon last December:

"Barack knows what it means to be a black man to be living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a nigger."

Obama tried to put some distance between himself and his pastor, but you have to admire him for not dumping his longtime friend like a wet rag, which is what most politicians would have done.

"I have to confess that those are not statements I ever heard when I was sitting in the pews at this church,” Obama said. “These are a series of incendiary statements that I can't object to strongly enough. Had I heard those in the church, I would have told Reverend that I profoundly disagreed with them. They didn't reflect my values and they didn't reflect my ideals."

Political calculations may have played a role in addition to loyalty. The massive turnout and support Obama is getting from African American votes might be affected if he were to renounce the man as well as the message.

Wright has been a friend and spiritual advisor to Obama for at least 20 years, so it’s a bit difficult to believe that Obama never heard any of these types of very disturbing pronouncements from the pulpit.

A lot of white people who take some pride in voting for a black man who has a real shot at becoming president may start having second thoughts if these are the views of someone who clearly has a lot of influence with Obama.

Obama offers the promise of moving beyond the old racial divisions but Wright’s rhetoric threatens to embroil us all in the same old angry polemics that does little to address the problems of race in the United States in a meaningful way.

Citizens of Obama Nation have a dream, but Jeremiah Wright now threatens to turn it into a nightmare.

It’s the Economy (Again) Stupid

2008-03-16T21:08:00.000-07:00

For people who are worried about whether defaulting on their mortgage or getting laid off, it must be infuriating when the political debate is focused on whose supporter made what controversial statement or what politician is cheating on his wife.

Barack Obama needs to start playing offense again in this campaign and stop the recent cycle where he has been relegated to responding to the controversy of the day that are of endless interest to the commentariat (myself included) but not the issues that will directly address the concerns of voters.

Every day brings a new revelation about the serious nature of economic problems in the U.S. economy. Costs for health care, college tuition, and energy are rising and threaten to trigger an increase in overall inflation. At the same time, wages have been at best stagnant for many working people.

Obama might benefit from borrowing part of John Edwards’s strategy. Edwards made more money as a lawyer than most sane people could spend in a single life time. Yet his genuine personal story of growing up in poverty, how it shaped his world view and political priorities forged a connection with voters who often feel people asking for their vote only see the real world problems of people struggling economically as an abstract policy debate.

Obama’s made some money, but like Edwards, he earned it. No one handed him his own major league baseball team, which is how George W. Bush made most of his personal fortune. Hillary Clinton wasn't born with a silver spoon in her mouth, but her father was a successful businessman and her path through life was, at least to the casual observer, probably a lot easier than Obama's. Obama could get some mileage out of drawing the contrast and using it to help showcase his economic plans.

In the meantime, John McCain has the luxury of talking about real issues, although they tend to focus on national security so he’s still missing the mark on dealing with front-burner issues for voters.

The next contest is in Pennsylvania, which shares some of the same economic challenges as Ohio and Michigan.

In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, Obama is losing 49 to 37 percent among voters who makes less than $50,000 a year, which is most people.

It’s a long slog between now and April 22, when Pennsylvania voters go to the polls.

Hillary Clinton has started to empathize with the plight of struggling people in rust belt states, making the case that she would be able to deliver meaningful change that would help improve the financial outlook for people who aren’t rich. Obama needs to offer a convincing case why he can do the same.

Governor Spitzer's Career Gets Heave-Ho

2008-03-12T16:29:00.001-07:00

Before he was a talk show host Jerry Springer was a politician and while he was Mayor of Cincinnati he engaged the services of a prostitute and paid her with a check that bounced.

Elliot Spitzer could have learned something from Springer that any philandering traveling salesman knows all to well: when you hire a call girl, pay cash.

I had a difficult time working my way into caring about Spitzer except for the pure Schadenfreude of the whole sordid affair. Seems like if his wife can forgive him, it’s none of anyone’s else's business. After all, Louisiana Senator David Vitter still has a job despite a prostitute’s claim that they had an affair.

Now I’ve changed my mind on Spitzer, but not because of morality. Spitzer deserved to go because he’s a dumb ass. Not that he’s not intelligent, but Spitzer has obviously demonstrated behavior that is exasperatingly stupid.

You might think that the Governor of New York was caught as a by-product of an investigation of the high-priced prostitution enterprise called Emperor's Club VIP, but no, it was actually the other way around.

Spitzer was caught as a result of routine examination of financial transactions, large and small, conducted by computer programs that pass suspicious activity along to the IRS for further review. As a Governor, Spitzer was designated as a PEP or “politically exposed person” and therefore subject to additional scrutiny.

When he was New York’s Attorney General, Spitzer was partially responsible for the implementation of these systems because he used them to gather data on Wall Street investments firms.

Across town, his friend from Emperor’s Club has been outed by the New York Times (that's her photo above):

“I just don’t want to be thought of as a monster,” the woman said as she told the tiniest tidbits of her story.

“Born Ashley Youmans but now known as Ashley Alexandra Dupré, she spoke softly and with good humor as she added with significant understatement: ‘This has been a very difficult time. It is complicated.’”

I wonder if her rates have gone up.

The Great White Hope

2008-03-11T16:04:00.000-07:00

Some of the most poignant words of the last century came from the unlikely source of Rodney King, the black man beaten on video by white cops which triggered race riots in the 1990‘s: "Can't we all just get along?"

Throughout history, the answer to that question has clearly been no. No how, no way.

Not that a lot of people don't want that to change. And they're not all black. Not by a long shot. If you could harness liberal white guilt as a power source, we could afford to tell the Middle East what they can do with their $100 a barrel oil.

Barack Obama is without question a very able and skilled politician. He's run an extremely effective campaign against the leading brand name political machine in the democratic party and he's winning. He's also a first term senator with two years of national political experience.

Why is saying suggesting that race has something to do with his success a racist statement? Could it not rather be an expression of our collective desire to take a giant step forward in trying to put our nation's tortured race problems behind us?

Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman to run as her the democratic party's candidate for Vice President made it clear what she thinks.

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," Ferraro told the Daily Breeze of Torrance, California, "and if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

The rise of Jack Kennedy with a similar background suggests that the nation is willing to swoon over young, good looking, articulate politicians with scant experience regardless of race. (How much experience Hillary Clinton really has is another legitimate question.)

The notion (to use a word Obama is fond of) that part of the reason so many people of all ethnic backgrounds support Obama is partially that electing a black guy president would represent such a monumental departure from our history and that's one reason why he's done so well perhaps should not be so quickly dismissed without further consideration.

Hillary Clinton said inm response to Ferraro‘s statements, "I do not agree with that, it's regrettable that any of our supporters — on both sides, because we both have this experience — say things that kind of veer off into the personal. We ought to keep this on the issues. there are differences between us" on approaches to health care, energy, experience.”

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod said Ferraro should be removed from her position with the Clinton campaign because of her comments.

"The bottom line is this, when you wink and nod at offensive statements, you're really sending a signal to your supporters that anything goes. There's no other way to send a serious signal that you want to police the tone of this campaign, and if you don't do those things then you are simply adding to the growing compendium of evidence that you really are encouraging that."

In the video clip below, Ferraro, a Fox News commentator, stood by her comments on the network today.

Alas, the more she talks, the less sense she makes, but she raises an interesting point. If we are going begin to move beyond seeing racial dynamics everywhere, we shouldn't be afraid to discuss the issue in a candid manner.

Elliot Mess: NY Governor Spitzer Caught With Pants Down

2008-03-10T15:18:00.000-07:00

Being a politician's wife takes a special brand of moxie, especially when their husband gets nabbed in a sex scandal and the are forced to do the walk of shame and follow them out standing dutifully by their side as they face the cameras.

Silda Spitzer is the latest in a long series of women forced to endure this public humiliation as her husband, New York Governor Elliot Spitzer made a cryptic announcement following the New York Time article that linked him to a prsotitution ring.

“I have acted in a way that violates my obligation to my family and violates my or any sense of right or wrong,” said Spitzer, “I apologize first and most importantly to my family. I apologize to the public to whom I promised better.”

You'd think the whole inident is bad enough without rubbing it in by making her drink deep the ordeal live on cable news and in front of mroe than 100 reporters in person. The conventional wisdom seems to be, if his wife can put up with it, so should the rest of us, but I'd have more respect for anyone in this position if they let the Mrs skip the news conference.

Not Ready on Day 1, but Ready to be Number 2?

2008-03-09T17:36:00.000-07:00

Since when does the person in second place offer the chance to the front winner to run for Vice President? You’re winning, so why not take second place? That’s what Hillary and Bill Clinton have been suggesting over the last couple of days.

It’s a message that’s at odds with another of Billary’s recent campaign tactics, that Obama isn’t ready to be President, not ready to take that 3 a.m. phone call if there’s another terrorist attack or some other crisis. Hard to have it both ways, either he’s qualified to be President and therefore a heartbeat away, or he’s not.

There may be increasing pressure on the loser in the race, whether it’s Clinton or Obama, to accept the VP spot. Clinton-Obama makes a lot more sense than Obama-Clinton, but I stand by my earlier prediction that it won’t happen. Hillary might hope to pick up some of the legions of young people, blacks and other voters who are now enthusiastic about the election and likely to be disafected if Hillary somehow manages to win.

Why won’t they be running mates? If you’re Obama, what’s your better bet if you lose? Say Hillary wins, then you sign on to accept all the baggage that’s likely to build up during a second Clinton White House and with Bill around, you’re not going to get much experience to enhance your already thin resume. A better bet would running for Governor of Illinois and hoping she loses a re-election bid.

If Obama wins, which still seems more likely, how can you argue that you would “turn the page” offering “new politics” if you’re running mate is the same person you spent the last few months linking to the bitter partisanship of the last 16 years?

About half of the people in this country say they wouldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances. She wouldn’t be an asset to Obama. If she wins the nomination, you might see some perfunctory posturing to indicate that he’s being considered, but it seems unlikely that he would accept or that she would really want him to.

How much change is the country ready for right now? I suspect both of them will want a nice solid white guy as a running mate to temper the anxiety among some voters who might want to make history, but not quite as much as having both of them on the same ticket.

Illinois Super Saturday: The First Domino to Fall?

2008-03-09T17:08:00.000-07:00

We got a hint of the avalanche headed toward the Republicans in November in Illinois where Democrat Bill Foster beat Republican Jim Oberweis to succeed former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert.

The district has been reliably Republican. Hastert has won by large margins for more than 20 years but perhaps more importantly, George W. Bush won the 14th Congressional District with 55 percent of the vote in 2004 and 54 percent in 2000.

Illinois is considered to be a fairly reliable state to vote for the democratic candidate in the general election, but this race is widely seen as an indication of the huge level of frustration with the current administration and the overall status quo on a wide variety of issues.

Barack Obama campaigned for Foster. Now Obama picks up another super delegate.

“Yes We Can” vs. “Solution Not Slogans”: A Defining Moment for Obama

2008-03-07T16:04:00.000-08:00

"I really almost feel sorry for Senator Clinton. She's trying to conduct a job interview and Obama's on a date."
Richard Land, Southern Baptist Convention

Barack Obama's first few dates went so well, he was hoping to get lucky, but now events have taken a turn for the worse.

Obama often says the election should be about judgment. We’re about to find out about his.

One way to view the recent election results that in Ohio and Texas (and yes Rhode Island) is to focus on campaign tactics and voter demographics. Hillary went negative and her voting groups of Latinos, working class, less educated and older lined up in the ways they had before Obama went 11-0 in February.

Another way to interpret the results is that voters actually considered the issues and a majority thought Clinton would do a better job delivering results. When you’re hopeless, you need more than hope; you need a job and some health care.

According to exit polls, Clinton beat Obama by 12 points among the voters who said the economy as the most important issue and by 16 points among those who cited health care.

People who can pay their bills can afford the luxury of getting swept up in a historical movement. The one’s whose unemployment checks have run out want more than lofty rhetoric.

If Obama accepts the first argument, he’ll start playing by the Clinton Rules of Engagement. Instead of telling us more about what he can do for us, he’ll start raising questions about her. The first volley came in the form of a new call for more financial disclosures from Clinton on who she and Bill owe for their newfound wealth.

Raising question about the other candidate, like is Obama qualified to handle a crisis or why Hillary won’t release the records of what she did as First Lady are legitimate, but if they suck all the oxygen out of the room and leave no space for more positive debate, that’s a problem for Obama.

The more he gets drawn into a charge and counter charge exchange with her, the more he looks like an ordinary pol and the less he appears to be the inspirational agent of change.

If Hillary drags him down to this level, and she has nothing to lose because she never laid claim to the high ground, she’s likely to take the party down with her even if she manages to win the nomination. The legions of young voters and other previously disaffected voters who have been drawn into the political process by Obama will likely be so disenchanted that they’ll go back to sitting out elections in the future.

Quite a legacy for the Clintons, so desperate to reclaim their lost power that they’ll poison the well if they can’t drink from it.

Dialing for $$$ for Michigan/Florida Do Over Primaries

2008-03-07T14:58:00.000-08:00

Call Daddy Warbucks. That was the message from DNC chairman Howard Dean to Florida and Michigan, who held their primaries before Super Tuesday in defiance of party rules that said their delegates would be excluded from the nomination process if they cut in line in front of the states who abided by the regulations.

The cleanest way to deal with this mess would be to have another vote in each state, but that would cost as much as $25 million.

No one wanted Obama to win Texas and Ohio more than Dean so it would resolve his dilemma about what to do with Michigan and Florida. If only they had waited their turn, they would have even more focus on their issues (lagging economy and lost manufacturing jobs for Michigan and federal hurricane insurance for Florida).

Clinton won in both states so she wants them included in the nominating process, while Obama says the states broke the rules and should be punished.

Plenty of lame plans have been floated, but the one that makes the most sense is what has come to be known as the Do-Over.

Dean says the party won’t pay for it. I hear they don’t have a ton of money anyway since Hillary and Obama are scarfing up every political contribution dollar in the known universe for themselves right now. The states don’t want to pay for it either. So here we sit.

Now Dean is reminding state party officials that while campaign finance regualtions preclude the national party from raising soft money, under which there are limits on individual contributions, for bank rolling another round of primaries, the state parties are under no such restriction.

Anyone know Geore Soros’ cell phone number?

Hurry Up & Wait

2008-03-06T21:19:00.000-08:00

It may seem like years, but it’s been 63 days since the Iowa caucuses on January 3

Think about all that’s happened in the race since then and then consider this: the next significant development in the democratic race isn’t until the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. That’s 47 days from now. That’s a long time for two candidates who agree on a vast majority of the issues to try to find ways to convince people to vote for them for more likely to vote against the other one.

So what can we expect between now and then?

-More negative campaigning. The “kitchen sink” strategy employed by the Hillary Clinton campaign of throwing every available charge at Obama was apparently successful. It was a legitimate question to raise, given Obama’s thin resume. Don’t be surprised if Obama is the Democratic nominee that you might well see McCain play the exact same ad. Even if you like Obama, that image of a huge problem with no time to consult advisors is cause for concern. If you are able to casually dismiss this, for Obama or Clinton or McCain, watch the scene in Fahrenheit 911 where President Bush continues to read along with “My Pet Goat” in a children's classroom for seven agonizing minutes after he's been told about the attacks on the World Trade Center.

-Hillary as the victim. “Golden Boy” Obama is getting a pass from the media. It looked a little pathetic to me when she invoked Saturday Night Live in the last debate, but it worked. There were a series of more invasive stories on Obama after that, which was a big plus for Clinton to co-opt the media as her partner. Maybe she’ll cry again. Whining doesn’t seem very presidential, but if it’s effective, don’t be surprised if it continues.

-Paralyzed super delegates. Georgia Congressman John Lewis switched his allegiance before the last round of voting under heavy pressure from African Americans since his district voted for Obama (not hat he thought Obama was coasting to victory). Now that it’s still a race, the supes are likely to sit on the sidelines waiting to see how this plays out, hoping their choice will be clear, which seems unlikely at this point.

-Rezko, Rezko, Rezko. Businessman Tony Reckon is going on trial. He’s a friend and contributor to Barack Obama. Obama has not been implicated in the case. In case you missed that, Obama has NOT been implicated in the case. Obama has distanced himself from Rezko, but a trial at this time between now and the Pennsylvania primary is the gift the keeps giving for Clinton. Accused of using his influence with politicians to generate illegal profit, Hillary just has to drop the name and it ramps up doubts about the politics of hope.

For political junkies it may seem to defy belief that some people actually haven’t made up their minds about who to vote for yet, but there’s still a lot of campaigning left.

Great theatre for those of us who enjoy it, but most likely a big benefit for John McCain, who can sit back and watch Hillary and Barack damage each other while he sends W out to raise money from the 30 percent of America that does not have a firm grasp of the obvious and realize what a mess the current president has made of the country.

McCain’s luck defies belief this year. Written off last summer, he’s now the nominee. If this continues, he may confound conventional wisdom and be the next president. If he’s campaigning near you, be sure to ask him for his favorite lotto numbers.

Not So Fast Hillary

2008-03-06T20:33:00.000-08:00

They’re still counting Texas caucus results and it looks like when the dust settles, it appears as if Obama will walk away with three more delegates than Hillary Clinton. Delegates are what you need to win the nomination, but it’ hard to beat that TV image of a picture of Hillary’s smiling face with a bigger number of votes a checkmark and the word “winner” next to it.

They’ve stopped counting after about 40 % . Under the bizarre rules established by the Democratic party, it won’t be until late March when we know for sure, sort of , because then the delegates go to the state convention and can apparently change their minds. At that point, when we combine the primary votes and the caucus votes, Obama will probably be the winner.

How much you want to bet he would gladly trade those three delegates for the headlines of being a winner on primary night few weeks earlier?

Democrats' Strategy: Make McCain W’s Siamese Twin

2008-03-05T16:22:00.000-08:00

After some Republican activists started making an issue of using Barack Obama’s middle name Hussein, Democrats came up with signature middle initial for John McCain.

Could it be…. W?

Expect the democrats to beat this to death: the Bush/McCain War, the Bush/McCain recession, Bush/McCain airline flight delays, Bush/McCain traffic jam, Bush/McCain burned your dinner and so on. Every time you hear McCain, they’ll remind you he was also W’s yes-man.

After capturing the needed delegates for the Republican nomination by making a clean sweep of Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont, John McCain launched his general election campaign with a lofty promise.

“Our campaign must be and will be more than another tired debate of false promises, empty sound bites or useless arguments from the past that address not a single of America’s concerns for their family’s security”

Let’s hold him to that. Hopefully it will mean no more fanning the flames on fringe wedge issues. Sorry, I know it gins up righteous rage among some of my fellow Americans, but I think establishing universal health care, ending the colossal strategic blunder of the Iraq war and balancing the federal budget trumps whether a couple of guys burn a flag at their wedding.

McCain should be applauded for staking claim to an elevated level of debate. We’ll see if that extends to resorting to George W. Bush’s lexicon to defend the war. Next time you see him teeing off on the democrats on Iraq, ask yourself what defines “victory” and how many times President Bush has moved the goal posts on what our objectives are in this war that seems to have no end.

McCain dared the democrats to spell out how they will end the war without the withdrawal of American troops triggering an escalation of sectarian violence. On that front, he’s probably right. I suspect whoever the next president is, he or she will face limited options when it comes to President Bush’s war. We’ve now seen McCain back away from his statement that he’s fine with American troops staying for 100 years, so perhaps the democrats may have an impact even if they lose the election.

Obama to Canada: Wink, Wink, Nod, Nod on NAFTA

2008-03-04T14:39:00.000-08:00

In what could be another in a series of what’s likely to be a series of disappointing revelation to citizens of Obama Nation, their fearless leader showed that he may indeed be capable of behaving like a politician.

At issue is the North American Free Trade Agreement or NAFTA, which is a contentious issue in the struggling rust belt economy of Ohio, where they’ve lost more than 200,000 jobs since George W. Bush became president. Many people there apparently blame NAFTA, so Clinton and Obama, although they both seem to have similar plans and a modestly pro-free trade policy are battling over who is filled with more righteous anger over the agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

Canadian television network CTV reports that an Obama sent a back channel message to the Canadian government that what Obama said on the campaign trail on NAFTA should not be taken literally, that if elected, Obama would not pull out of the trade agreement.

Obama's aides denied any meeting had taken place until the Associated Press published a memo written by an employee of the Canadian consulate. According to the memo, Obama adviser Austan Goolsbee, met with officials at the Canadian consulate in Chicago.

The critical part of the memo: "Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S. economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign. He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

Goolsbee’s response: "I certainly did not use that phrase in any way."

Obama now recognizes that he can’t leave this up to his aides. In Texas he said:

“When I gave you that information, that was the information that I had at the time.
It turned out that the Canadian consulate in Chicago contacted one of my advisers, Austan Goolsbee, on their own initiative, invited him down to meet with them. He went down there as a courtesy.

“And at some point, they started talking about trade and NAFTA. And the Canadian embassy has confirmed that he said exactly what I've been saying on the campaign trail, which is that I believe in trade, but that it is important for us to have labor standards and environmental standards that are enforceable and that I intend to obtain modifications and amendments to NAFTA that will make them enforceable.”

Ultimately, it’s probably in our best interests overall to keep the current treaty in place. A lot of oil Canada might prefer to sell to China than the U.S. and plenty of American exports to Canada are at stake. It’s an acknowledgement of those economic and political realities that Obama would hint that some campaign promises are made to be broken.

It’s also a reminder that Barack Obama was not born in a manger. An Obama presidency might well restore some much needed hope not only among Americans but other people around the world who are affected by what U.S. government policy, but it’s a lot more likely to look like an administration run by a politician than the utopian fantasyland envisioned by Obama’s legion of unquestioning followers

Think I’m over-stating the cult of personality? Watch the video below.

It’s 3 a.m. Do you know where your President is?

2008-02-29T15:47:00.001-08:00

The Hillary Clinton campaign has a new attack ad designed to scare the hell out of anyone considering voting for Barack Obama.

(You can view related videos below)

"It's 3 am and your children are safely asleep, but there’s a phone in the White House that’s ringing. Soemthing’s happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call. Who do you want answering the phone?"

We see that Hillary is still in her pants suit and "I'm burning the midnight oil" reading glasses at her desk at three in the morning to take the call. God knows where Obama would be.

The message is clear: Vote for Obama and the terrorists win.

Obama responded in a speech today.

"We've had a red phone moment. It was the decision to invade Iraq. And Senator Clinton gave the wrong answer. George Bush gave the wrong answer. John McCain gave the wrong answer."

The same theme was echoed in an Obama campaign ad responding to the Clinton 3 a.m. phone call spot.

If this sounds familiar, you have a good memory. Walter Mondale used a similar ad against Gary Hart in 1984.

Forget hope. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

A few days ago Clinton criticized Obama mimicking Karl Rove, the man George W. Bush called the architect of his winning election campaigns.

“Enough with the speeches and the big rallies and then using tactics that are right out of Karl Rove's playbook. This is wrong and every Democrat should be outraged."

Who’s using tactics from the Rove playbook now?

If it’s News, It’s News to the President

2008-02-28T20:18:00.000-08:00

Remember when we found out that the first President Bush had no idea how much a gallon of milk cost?

After all he got his for free, courtesy of us the taxpayers so why should he give a damn.

If he was paying for it himself, the household staff would deal with it. Even if it was $100 a gallon, no problem, he’s rich.

Alas, the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree in the Bush clan.

During his press conference today, the president seemed startled that some industry analysts say it’s possible we could soon be paying $4 a gallon for gas.

QUESTION: What's your advice to the average American who is hurting now — facing the prospect of $4 a gallon gasoline, a lot of people facing...

BUSH: Wait a minute. What did you just say? You're predicting $4 a gallon gas?

QUESTION: A number of analysts are predicting $4 a gallon gasoline this spring when they reformulate.

BUSH: That's interesting. I hadn't heard that.

I just did a google news search for “$4 gas.” 3040 news stories, and yet the President had no clue.

Now that he knows, what advice does he have for struggling consumers?

A. Make tax cuts for billionaires permanent

B. Keep tax brakes worth $18 billion for oil companies making record profits

C. Drill for oil in ANWAR

D. All of the Above

E. There is no E

OK, he did talk about renewable sources of energy after a while, but he still lives in a bubble.

Many President suffer from this disconnect from the reality that dominates the lives of most people.

Hopefully the person who takes over from the George W. Bush will remember all the sad stories they’ve heard from people while they are campaigning do a better job of paying attention to everyday issues like how much it costs to live if you don’t have all your expenses paid as a fringe benefit of your job.

Dodd Hops on Obama Band Wagon: “Can I be Treasury Secretary Please?

2008-02-27T15:41:00.000-08:00

Politicians with a firm grasp of the obvious, including those with long standing ties to the Clinton, are deserting Billary hoping to score some Brownie points with Barack Obama.

"He's ready to be president and I am ready to support him in this campaign" said Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd at a joint news conference with Obama.

Dodd called off his campaign after getting crushed in the Iowa caucuses, despite the fact that he and his family had moved to the state.

Clinton and Obama have both tried to gain the support of the other democratic candidates who have dropped out of the race.

Dodd had a thinly veiled reference that Clinton’s flailing before she goes under for the last time threatens to take the Democratic party down with her.

"I don't want a campaign that is divisive here, and there's a danger in that,” Dodd said. “Now is the hour to come together.”

In cold political terms, it’s a tough call figuring out when to bust a move. Depending on what happens on March 4 in Texas or Ohio, does your limited clout increase in value or is it rendered worthless? Chris Dodd clearly thinks earlier is better. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see some others who would like high profile jobs in an Obama administration to follow suit.

Maybe Dodd’s endorsement it came with a copy of Doris Kearns Goodwin’s “Team of Rivals,” a book about how Abraham Lincoln signed up his former political opponents to work for him.

Debates: 20 Down, None to Go?

2008-02-27T14:56:00.000-08:00

Will they or won’t they? Fight, that is. That’s what many of us were wondering about the Clinton Obama debate last night in Cleveland. After last debate’s love-fest turned into a decidedly mean spirited week of campaign charges and counter charges, you might have expected that the plot would thicken when they were actually in the same room.

Not so much.

Admittedly, it’s more difficult to bash someone when they’re sitting two feet from you at the same table, but since there’s not much to debate on the issues (who hates NAFTA more? Me! No, Me! My health care plan’s mandate is more comprehensive than yours! and so on) maybe we get some entertainment value out of than slapping each other around a little bit.

Mostly, Hillary just managed to beat herself up. Just before she tried to sell us on the fact that she’s “a fighter” who’s tough enough to tackle special interests to deliver health care for all, she complained that she’s being treated unfairly by the media, who she accused of genuflecting before His Hopefulness.

“Can I just point out that in the last several debates,” Clinton said, channeling her inner Jan Brady. “I seem to get the first question all the time. And I don't mind. I -- you know, I'll be happy to field them, but I do find it curious, and if anybody saw "Saturday Night Live," you know, maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow.”

(Video of this and the Saturday Night Live skit she referenced are below.)

After she stood by her earlier accusations that Obama had misrepresented her positions in campaign literature, he essentially reminded her of the harsh and enduring reality embodied by the famous Finley Peter Dunne quip that “politics ain’t beanbag.” Then Obama ratched it up a notch and used the W-word.

“We haven't whined about it because I understand that's the nature of these campaigns, but to suggest somehow that our mailing is somehow different from the kinds of approaches that Senator Clinton has taken throughout this campaign I think is simply not accurate.”

Increasingly desperate as the evening progressed, Hillary pounced after Obama tried to confront the issues raised by the unwanted endorsement he recently received from Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who, among other claims to fame, has made anti-Semitic comments.

Obama said he has denounced Farrakhan, but that wasn’t good enough for Clinton.
Napoleon once said “never interrupt your enemy when he’s making a mistake,” which is what Hillary should have done as Obama squirmed with his rather tepid attempt to distance himself from Farrakhan, continuously referring to him as “Minister Farrakhan,” as Nation of Islam members do. At that moment, there were probably more than a few guys in Texas picturing Obama in a bow tie and one of those angry black man hats, but she just couldn’t stop herself.

“I'm just saying that you asked specifically if he would reject it,” she said, “and there's a difference between denouncing and rejecting.”
She’s accused Obama of being all talk and no action, offering words, not solutions. He turned this around her quickly showing how skillful use of words can deflate a sanctimonious attack.

“I have to say I don't see a difference between denouncing and rejecting,” Obama said. “There's no formal offer of help from Minister Farrakhan that would involve me rejecting it. But if the word "reject" Senator Clinton feels is stronger than the word "denounce," then I'm happy to concede the point, and I would reject and denounce.

I call your verb and raise you two.

Hillary also blew her chance to dismiss the controversy over the picture supposedly sent to the Drudge report by her campaign staff of Obama in local African clothing when he visited Kenya. The whole affair threw her campaign off balance off a whole day and this was her opportunity to rise above it.

She should have said something like “I think he looks good in that picture” and moved on. Instead, she let herself get dragged into a discussion of campaign tactics and tacitly accepting the premise that anything that would link Obama to being foreign or God forbid a Muslim (he’s not) is only a negative if you’re a bigot.

Nothing Hillary Clinton is doing is working. Before anyone actually voted, her campaign ran like a Swiss watch. Now it appears perilously close to spinning out of control. Last night’s debate performance was solid, but probably didn’t give anyone a reason to change their minds.

Help Wanted: Senator Larry “Wide Stance” Craig Looking for Interns

2008-02-26T14:07:00.000-08:00

Now is your chance to spend quality time with the politician who made the Minneapolis airport men’s room a tourist destination.

If some parents will let their kids have a sleep over at Michael Jackson’s house, I suppose anything is possible, but it’s tough to imagine that there’s a lot of competition for this gig, unless you’re hoping to cash one of Larry Flint’s checks for exposing sexual escapades of famous people.

http://www.larryflynt.com/mycms/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=77&cntnt01returnid=15

Amazing that Senator Craig is still with us. Seemed like everyone in the Republican party would rather cash a campaign donation from Ossama bin Laden than be in the same time zone with the senator from Idaho.

Of course, this could be like flying on an airline that just had a plane crash. No one is going to be more concerned with safety than someone who just had a big problem. Craig probably isn’t allowed to go anywhere without adult supervision these days.

Here's the press release from his office:

Craig Accepting Applications for Summer Interns
Deadline Quickly Approaching

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Idaho Senator Larry Craig is currently seeking intern applications for the summer term, which runs from May to August.

The application deadline is March 15, however if more time is needed for the application process, please contact Senator Craig's office for an extension. Craig offers paid internships within the Washington, D.C., office.

Preference is given to Idaho applicants attending Idaho schools who are in their junior or senior years of college (including graduating seniors).

'"Interns have the chance to be an essential part of a working congressional office," said Craig. "They participate in the legislative process as well as ensure that constituent services run smoothly. For those interested in politics, it is an incredible opportunity to get a behind-the-scenes look at how our government functions while serving the people of Idaho."

Interns are paired with staff members based on experience and interests, in order to best utilize their talents. They are also expected to fulfill some administrative duties such as answering phones, sorting mail and greeting constituents.

Applications and more information about the internship program are available on Craig's website at http://craig.senate.gov/internships.cfm or at any of Craig's six regional offices in Coeur d'Alene, Lewiston, Boise, Twin Falls, Pocatello and Idaho Falls.
It is recommended that applications be delivered personally to the regional offices or sent via fax to (202) 224-2573.

Applications can also be mailed, but delays are likely due to heightened security measures for Senate mail. Mailed applications should be directed to:

Office of Senator Larry Craig
ATTN: Internship Program
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510-1203
(202) 224-2752
[30]

What the Senator Meant to Say was...

2008-02-26T12:25:00.001-08:00

John McCain’s Straight Talk Express made a detour on the campaign trail when he made a classic Washington mistake. He told the truth.

In Ohio today, McCain said to win the general election in November, he must convince voters U.S. policy in Iraq is succeeding. If he can't do that he said, "then, I lose. I lose.”

The words were barely out of his mouth before he starting backing up so fast he should have been making a loud beeping noise.

“Let me not put it that stark,” he said. "Let me just put it this way: Americans will judge my candidacy first and foremost on how they believe I can lead the country both from our economy and for national security. Obviously, Iraq will play a role in their judgment of my ability to handle national security.”

Later in the day, he tried again.

“I quickly retracted that. I was not allowed to retract it obviously,” he joked. “I don’t mean that I’ll lose. It’s not often that I retract a comment. I retracted the finality of that statement, I think that the issue of the war in Iraq is important to the American people and it will be a major factor in their determining who they are going to support in the election in November.”

Maybe he was right the first time.

The Ego Has Landed: Nader Runs Again

2008-02-26T11:52:00.000-08:00

If you thought George W. Bush was disconnected from reality, tune in to Ralph Nader, now making his third run for the presidency and a leading contender for the most politically tone deaf person in the known universe.

“When you see the paralysis of the government,” he told NBC’s Tim Russert on Meet the Press, “when you see Washington, D.C., be corporate-occupied territory, every department agency controlled by overwhelming presence of corporate lobbyists, corporate executives in high government positions, turning the government against its own people, one feels an obligation, to try to open the doorways.”

I edited his rambling statement because he couldn’t get to the damn point if his life depended on it, but if you must convince yourself watch the video below and drink deep the confusing oratory that is Ralph Nader.

I covered one of his campaign stops in 2000. He showed up even later than is typical in Political Standard Time (candidates are always at least 30 minutes behind schedule unless it’s first thing in the morning). With no time left before deadline I anxiously waited as he started speaking. A good candidate would have come right out with a couple of good quotes that summed up what message he wanted voters to take away from the event. Instead, he spent 13 excruciating minutes talking about legalizing hemp.

Anyone with a firm grasp of the obvious realizes that if you want to persuade people to share your point of view you need to make sense and cut to the chase. I listen to Ralph Nader and I often can’t tell what he’s talking about, except I know he’s angry and corporate greed heads are conspiring against us all.

Nader still seems to think he’s relevant, but does anyone else care? Nader only won 2.7% of the vote in 2000. In 2004 he dropped off the map with just 0.3%. If both of his remaining supporters get to the polls this year, it will be an accomplishment. The only people likely to vote for him this time are probably as far off in the fringes as he is and likely wouldn’t show up to cast a ballot unless there was some other long shot gadfly running.

After that you have to wonder why he bothers with yet another futile effort. Although he makes lofty claims about spotlighting important issues like single payer health care in the candidates’ debate, he does not have the popular support or money to force the mainstream candidates to address his agenda.

I suspect his actual motivation is captured perfectly by line of Prom Dresses for high school girls: All About Me. Despite the good work he did as a consumer advocate, this is his sad legacy now and if he doesn’t continue to beat a dead horse, no one pays any attention to him. Nader just can’t stand that.

Savor the moment Mr. Nader, it’s all downhill from here.

Hillary to Obama: “Quit it! You’re hurting me! I’m telling!”

2008-02-25T15:56:00.000-08:00

Hillary went so far over the edge on her Scoldy Locks rant in Ohio this weekend that she may have engendered more sympathy for Obama than herself.

At issue were a couple of campaign flyers mailed to Ohio voters by the Obama campaign that Clinton says misrepresented her stand on health care and trade.

"Shame on you, Barack Obama," she said "It is time you ran a campaign consistent with your messages and public. That's what I expect from you. Meet me in Ohio. Let's have a debate about your tactics and your behavior on this campaign."

Words on a page can’t quite convey the venom, so watch the video and see if it makes you feel like you’d rather be someplace else, like when you end up having dinner with a couple in the middle of a major argument. I half expected her to start wagging ehr finger at me and say "I did not have politcal relations with that man, Mr Obama!"

So much for going gently into the night for Hillary Clinton.

Trouble is, she’s playing rough herself and calling foul at the same time.

FactCheck.org says both campaigns use commonplace political tactics of misleading voters about the other candidate:

“We said the mailer "lacks context" and stretches the facts, but we can't agree that it is "false" as Clinton says.

“We find that a mailer criticizing her position on trade is indeed misleading. One that attacks her health care plan we have previously described as straining the facts, though not exactly "false."
• Trade: A mailer showing a locked plant gate quotes Clinton as saying she believed NAFTA was "a boon" to the economy. Those are not her words and Obama was wrong to put quote marks around them. In fact, she's been described by a biographer as privately opposing NAFTA in the White House.
• Health Care: A second mailer said Clinton's health care plan "forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can't afford it." We have previously said that mailer "lacks context" and strains the facts. But both Obama and Clinton have been exaggerating their differences on this issue.
“We've also previously criticized Clinton for sending a mailer that twisted Obama's words and gave a false picture of his proposals on Social Security, home foreclosures and energy.

“Clinton is no innocent on sending out misleading mailers. We reported on Feb. 6 that a mailing by her campaign contained a "big distortion" of Obama's position on Social Security taxes and falsely implied that he had "no plan" to address mortgage foreclosures. It also attacked him for voting for a "Dick Cheney" energy bill that gave "huge tax breaks to oil companies," when in fact the bill gave a net tax increase to oil companies.”

The next debate probably won’t be nearly as civil as the last one. Try taking a drink every time one of the talking heads in debate analysis invokes some version of the phrase “the gloves come off” and see how long you last.

It’s Not Plagiarism, It’s an Homage, Part 2: Hillary Rips off Bill Clinton & John Edwards

2008-02-23T14:35:00.001-08:00

“Hello Kettle? It’s Pot. You’re black.”

In the Texas debate, minutes after she condemned Barack Obama for copying part of a speech made originally by his friend and supporter, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, Hillary Clinton borrowed lines from her husband and former rival candidate John Edwards to make her closing statement.

"If your candidacy is going to be about words, then they should be your own words,” she said.

But her campaign is about solutions, not words, so apparently it’s cool if she appropriates good words from other people.

Hillary Clinton, February 21, 2008: “The hits I’ve taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on every single day in the lives of people across our country.”

Bill Clinton, 1992: “The hits that I took in this election are nothing compared to the hits the people of this state and this country have been taking for a long time.”

Hillary Clinton, February 21, 2008: “Whatever happens, we’re going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we’ll be able to say the same thing about the American people, and that’s what this election should be about.”

John Edwards, October 30, 2007, Democratic candidates’ debate: "As a matter of fact, it's not about any of us. The truth is, when this election is over, I'm going to be fine. Senator Clinton is going to be fine. Senator Obama's going to be fine. Will America be fine? "-

Maybe Obama can Xerox a quip to call attention to that renewable resource that seems inexorably intertwined with politics—hypocrisy.

You can just imagine John Edwards, if he can stand to watch one of these debates at this point, saying, “Great! First she rips off my health care reform plan, now she’s giving my stump speech.”

Perhaps all the good rhetoric has already been written so we’re condemned to listening to the same speeches and talking points for the rest of eternity. Maybe when a primary aspect of your daily routine is to blather endlessly and associate with others who do likewise, you just absorb speech patterns by osmosis.

She was standing right next to John Edwards when he delivered the lines she later commandeered. She was probably nearby when Bill Clinton said the words that were the other part of her moment of eloquence the other night.

If it were a spontaneous statement, then it might be more forgivable, but it was quite clearly a prepared monologue. Odd that what has now been revealed to be plagiarized was seemingly her most genuine moment. Part of Hillary’s problem has been that she usually can’t manage to fake sincerity as effortlessly as more natural politicians like her husband. She finally manages to pull it off and she gets caught cheating.

If you’re going to steal, why not go for grand theft. Why steal purses when you can embezzle millions? Forget Bill Clinton and John Edwards. How about a rehash of one of FDR’s Fireside chats? What the hell, why not recite the Gettysburg address?

Obama called the scandlette of borrowed words “silly.” Indeed. As Alice in Wonderland might have said, “Sillier and sillier.”

Incidentally, I stole my lead sentence from an episode of “Friends.” If people who want to be President of the United States can’t be bothered to write original material, why the hell should I?

Debates of Debatable Value

2008-02-22T13:43:00.000-08:00

Having watched 18 of the 19 democratic debates I am now officially fed up with the entire exercise. They seem to offer an ever diminishing return on the time we invest in watching them. And this from a guy who Tivo’s C-SPAN.

The rules of last night’s edition were an improvement over some previous events. No strict time limits allowed for more substantive responses, but it would be even more informative and certainly provide superior entertainment value if they were allowed to pose questions to each other.

I suspect if you listened on the radio rather than watching on TV you might have had a different sense of what happened. Like Nixon vs. Kennedy in 1960, radio listeners would focus on what was said. TV viewers mix that with their more subtle impression of facial expression and body language. Unfortunately for Hillary, she’s playing the role of Tricky Dick this time and almost everyone watches on TV.

On the merits of the arguments, particularly on health care, Clinton offered a compelling contrast to Obama. She managed to cut through some of the confusing policy wonk fog on her plan’s (and John Edward’s) mandate that everyone buy health insurance and Obama’s decision to make his proposal voluntary. Finally she offered a clever analogy to help illustrate why allowing relatively healthy people to game the system is extremely problematic.

"We would not have a social compact with Social Security and Medicare if everyone did not have to participate," Clinton said. “I want a universal health care plan."

Insurance only works with shared risk. When you’re healthy you pay more into the system than you take out. When you’re sick it’s the other way around.

Obama had his standard answer to this question.

"Senator Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it, and my belief is the reason that people don't have it is not because they don't want it, but because they can't afford it. And so I emphasize reducing costs. Now, there are legitimate arguments for why Senator Clinton and others have called for a mandate, and I'm happy to have that debate. But the notion that I am leaving 15 million people out somehow implies that we are different in our goals of providing coverage to all Americans, and that is simply not true."

Granted the President’s proposal is only the starting point of the debate and the final plan would likely take a different form, this is a critical difference that often gets lost because the distinction can seem esoteric. It’s not and Clinton finally found a way to make the point.

Obama scored some points on the judgment issue again reminding us that he opposed the Iraq war from the beginning and Hillary voted for it.

Obama has steadily improved his performance in these exercises. A dozen debates or so ago, he seemed to be afraid of Hillary (I would be too). Now he looks more presidential, perhaps leading you to have more confidence that if he actually met with some of those world leaders from hostile governments that they wouldn’t kick his ass and take his lunch money.

Aside from health care reform, that difficult area of foreign policy seemed like the only other area where the two have a significant divergence in their plans.

Clinton pounced on Obama in the first YouTube debate when he accepted the idea of meeting leaders of countries like Iran and North Korea without preconditions. It seemed like a rookie mistake at the time, but he never backed away from it and the issue flared up again in Austin last night when it was posed in reference to post-Castro Cuba.

"A presidential visit should not be offered,” Clinton said, ”and given without some evidence that it will demonstrate the kind of progress that is in our interest and in the interests of the Cuban people."

Obama said the next President needs to take some risks to restore our battered image overseas.

"I would meet without preconditions,” he said. ”Although Senator Clinton is right that there has to be preparation. It is very important for us to make sure that there was an agenda, and on that agenda was human rights, releasing of political prisoners, opening up the press."

The most likely repeated sound bite fell flat with the people in the live audience. On the recent controversy of Obama using the same lines in a speech as Massachusetts Govern Deval Patrick, Hillary was ready when she got the chance to rub his nose in it.

"If your candidacy is going to be about words, then they should be your own words. That I think is a very simple proposition," Clinton said. "Lifting whole passages from someone else's speeches is not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox."

And your little dog too!

Having heard this from her speeches lately, Obama was also prepared and managed to deflate the argument.

"The notion that I had plagiarized from somebody who was one of my national co-chairs, who gave me the line and suggested that I use it, I think is silly," Obama said. "And you know, this is where we start getting into silly season in politics, and I think people start getting discouraged about it."

Clinton’s best moment and perhaps Obama’s weakest came at the end when CNN’s Campbell Brown posed a philosophical question.

“You’ve both spent a lot of time talking about leadership, about who’s ready and who has the right judgment to lead if elected president. A leader’s judgment is most tested at times of crisis. I’m wondering if both of you will describe what was the moment that tested you the most, that moment of crisis.”

Admittedly, it’s hard to go fist, but Obama had little to say that, like a fortune cookie or horoscope, would not apply to almost anyone who’s a reasonable responsible adult.

“I wouldn’t point to a single moment,” he said. “But what I look at is the trajectory of my life because, you know, I was raised by a single mom. My father left when I was two, and I was raised by my mother and my grandparents.

“There were rocky periods during my youth, when I made mistakes and was off course. And what was most important, in my life, was learning to take responsibility for my own actions, learning to take responsibility for not only my own actions but how I can bring people together to actually have an impact on the world.”

Clinton, with a deft but understated reference to difficulty posed by her very public marital problems, quickly pivoted and put her own life and ambition in a greater context.

“People often ask me, ‘How do you do it?’” she said. “’How do you keep going?’ And I just have to shake my head in wonderment, because with all of the challenges that I’ve had, they are nothing compared to what I see happening in the lives of Americans every single day.”

She went on with a lengthy tribute to wounded soldiers and the struggles of many people who have it much worse than a millionaire senator with a philandering husband.
Then came the moment that seemed like an acknowledgment of what appears to be an all but doomed campaign.

“No matter what happens in this contest,” she said, “I am honored, I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored. Whatever happens, we’re going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we’ll be able to say the same thing about the American people, and that’s what this election should be about.”

Today she’s been forced to say that this was not meant to be a farewell address, but prepared zinger lines notwithstanding, for the most part Clinton looked like she knows that she’s already lost and has opted to do so relatively gracefully.

Tactically, she and her campaign brain trust seem to have rightly concluded that negative attacks aren’t working against the Kevlar coated Obama. No, she’s not angling for Vice President, that’s not going to happen and she’s probably not interested anyway.

Maybe in the end she’s decided to retain that one intangible commodity that politicians often sacrifice in the desperate struggle that precedes the end of a long but losing campaign. Dignity.

A Tough Day at the Office For John McCain

2008-02-21T17:35:00.000-08:00

When you’ve spent five and a half years as a prisoner of war, it probably puts a lot of life’s trials and tribulations into perspective. Nevertheless, this had to be a difficult day for John McCain.

The New York Times published a story today questioning McCain’s relationship with lobbyist Vicki Iseman.

“Early in Senator John McCain’s first run for the White House eight years ago, waves of anxiety swept through his small circle of advisers.

“A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, visiting his offices and accompanying him on a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.”

Full story is here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

The response from the McCain campaign:

“It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.

“Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.”

If there was no hint of sex, this probably wouldn’t be a story. Having done pieces like this myself over the years, I would say it’s likely there’s a whole lot more to the story that the Times didn’t have enough confirmation to print. No matter what this story might make you think of the Times, there’s an enormous level of apprehension at work before you go to press with a story that’s a major hit piece against a front runner presidential candidate in the midst of a campaign.

Just ask Dan Rather what happened to his career for a sense of the consequences of getting it wrong, even if you think you have solid evidence.

Most of the Times report is insider intrigue, behind the scenes from the campaign about which aide said what to whom and whether the Senator know about it all.

What seems to be the real issue is whether McCain used his influence for the lobbyist and her clients, whether he had a romantic relationship with her or not.

That part of the story is buried at the end and is, at best, convoluted. It does evoke some painful memories of McCain's role in the 1980's as a member of the infamous Keating Five, tied to the multi-billion dollar savings and loan scandal which was ultimately paid for by taxpayers. Since then, McCain has been a crusader against special interest money in politics, but this issue tends to undermine his credibility on that front.

On the up side for McCain, he finally has something in common with Rush Limbaugh and the conservative talk show crowd- an antipathy toward the New York Times. The very same conservatives that had been relentlessly bashing McCain for weeks saying he would ruin the Republican party have now come to his defense and a welcome opportunity to bash a news organization perceived as hostile to their issues and beliefs.

The McCain campaign denial seems ill considered, especially since they had a long time to craft it as the Times had been in touch with them for weeks prior to the story’s publication.

“He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists.”

Never, never, never say “never” in a denial. It just sets the bar way to high when you can have widely varying differences of opinion on what defines favors or violation of the public trust.

If other news organizations have more salacious details about McCain and Vicki Iseman, this story may continue. If not, it may fade away and we can get back to talking about McCain’s lack of a real plan on health care, his support for continuing tax cuts for billionaires and his strategy of long term military involvement in Iraq.

But as Bill Clinton, Gary Hart and many others can attest, we’d much rather obsess about a tawdry affair than issues that actually affect our own lives.

McCain Takes Aim at the Kevlar Candidate

2008-02-20T16:11:00.000-08:00

Pundits used to refer to Ronald Reagan as the Teflon President because nothing seemed to stick to him. Enter the 21st century Gipper: The Kevlar Candidate.

So far, Barack Obama has proven practically bullet proof against whatever Hillary Clinton has launched in his direction. Some of the shots from her husband have even ricocheted back and wounded Hillary.

But she’s not the only one searching for something in their arsenal that can put the hurt on Barack.

In his victory speech last night after winning the Wisconsin primary, John McCain had fond words for pesky but now practically irrelevant opponent Mike Huckabee and saved his hollow points rhetoric for Obama.

“Will we heed the appeals for change that ignore the lessons of history and lack confidence in the intelligence and ideals of free people?” McCain said. “I will fight every moment of every day in this campaign to make sure Americans are not deceived by an eloquent but empty call for change.”

Translation: voting for Obama means the terrorists win.

“Will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally Pakistan stand and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons?”

My, my, my. If these two ever get back on the Senate floor it’s going to be a chilly reunion. Maybe there’s a not so hidden agenda at work here. McCain would likely prefer Clinton rather than Obama as the democratic nominee. “Hillary” and “Clinton” are fighting words for a lot of hard-core Republicans and McCain desperately needs something to gin up some enthusiasm. If it’s not for him, then against her still works.

If and when the rhetoric fueled euphoria fades in Obama Nation, perhaps these issues may gain some traction. It may also be a preview of the rest of the campaign.

Danger Will Robinson! McCain raises legitimate questions about judgment, but the underlying strategy seems uncomfortably similar to the tactics our current president used to win the last election.

In the grand tradition of Joe Biden and Barack Obama, allow me to borrow from Gordon Gekko: Fear clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of what drives voters to make a decision. Fear is good. Fear works.

Obama Echoes Patrick: It's Not Plagiarism, It's an Homage

2008-02-19T15:37:00.000-08:00

Maybe it’s a mini-controversy/scandal that’s only making news because there are few developments to feed the news beast at the moment or maybe it’s an example of some lack of judgment that might just be important for a potential president.

At issue, the remarkable similarity between some recent Barack Obama speeches and those made by Massachusetts Governor and Obama supporter Deval Patrick

Watch the videos below and judge for yourself.

No big deal?

Just don't try to tell that to Joe Biden, who had to drop his first bid to become president in 1987 after it was discovered that he had copied lines from a speech made by British politician Neil Kinnock.

Clinton Campaign Strategy Version 4.5: New AND Improved?

2008-02-19T11:23:00.000-08:00

Expect Hillary Clinton’s campaign in search of a strategy to crank the compare and contrast ads from slow simmer to full boil if she wins in Wisconsin today, or loses by a small margin (5 points or less).

The ads are tame so far by modern political standards, but the pressure has been slowly increasing. There’s none of the usual harsh black and white images or ominous music and voice over of the typical attack ad, but Clinton has been trying to draw more clear contrasts between herself and Obama on core democratic issues like health care and the mortgage foreclosure crisis.

Also, he’s a scaredy-cat because he wouldn’t debate her in Wisconsin.

“Maybe he’d prefer to give speeches than have to answer questions,” the ad charges.

So far the ads Clinton is running in Texas and Ohio are more about why you should vote for her rather than why you should vote against him. Reminiscent of John Edwards’ impassioned populist message, Clinton promises real solutions to difficult problems faced by ordinary voters. She feels our pain and promises to help.

Conventional wisdom in the commentariat (at least those who are well paid to pontificate) seems to be that this is a risky tactic. I have heard and read many of political analysts say that this paints Hillary into a pessimistic corner, her equivalent of Eeyore’s Gloomy Place. It often appears that American voters want cheerful bromides and simple solutions to complex problems. Remember “Morning in America?”

Maybe so. Difficult to go wrong underestimating the level of intellectual engagement among voters on big issues. After all, a huge majority of us bought the Reagan promise that we could cut taxes, increase spending and balance the budget, than shrugged off huge deficits under the heading of “two out of three isn’t bad.”

Hillary’s current strategy does show some possible chances of developing traction with voters, especially down on their luck manufacturing economy workers in Wisconsin and Ohio. If Hillary can reframe the debate from hope versus business as usual to words versus action, she might break through the inspiring rhetoric that so far has enveloped Obaba in a shield that’s been virtually impervious to criticism.

“He asks “What can you do for your country?”

She asks "What can your country do for you?”

Hillary is calling Obama’s implicit message of a return to Camelot and raising him that fundamental and often more compelling issue for many voters facing a tough economy: “What’s in it for me?”

If it works, she’ll hit him hard with it on TV and in the debates before Texas and Ohio voters cast their ballots. If it doesn’t, be glad you're not part of her campaign brain trust trying to figure out how to pull the rip cord to stop the free fall of the once inevitable front runner. If they haven’t run out of ideas yet, they’re getting very close.

Campaign Finance: Obama’s First Moment of Truth?

2008-02-18T17:17:00.000-08:00

The lofty idealism of Obama Nation will face a litmus test if he becomes the Democratic nominee. He has said previously that he would accept public financing if the as then undetermined Republican opponent would do the same. That was before Obama raised $32 million this month alone and expanded his pool of campaign contributors to 650,000. Many of those people contribute online in small amounts so they can be repeatedly tapped for additional money at virtually no expense to the campaign.

John McCain upped the ante recently and said he would do just that. A strong advocate of campaign finance reform, McCain’s name (along with liberal democrat Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold) is on the most recent major campaign finance reform law. Sticking with his principles on this issue has cost McCain support within segments of his own party that view this as a restriction on First Amendment rights of free speech.

So if you’re Obama, what do you do? If he takes public financing, he agrees to restrict spending to about Candidates who accept public funding are eligible for about $85 million, which is tens of millions of dollars less than he is likely to raise privately. So far, Obama has not faced serious challenges in terms of matching his actions to his rhetoric. This issue could prove to be the first of many such ethical dilemmas and may provide some additional clues as to Obama’s priorities.

My guess is that if Obama is the democratic nominee, he’ll reject public financing, endure the hit on reversing himself and take the money. As vitally important as campaign finance reform is, it often seems as if there’s a serious disconnect on this issue with many voters. A lot of people seem to recoil at the idea that funding for a political campaign should come out of their pocket. They generally fail to see that the special interests with deep pockets that are now the lifeblood of a corrupt system cost them far more in the long run.

Perhaps Obama will surprise us, but I doubt it. He’s a good politician and in terms of balancing risks and benefits, this would be a very difficult juncture to side with ethics and reform rather than doing what it takes to win.

Will The Democrats Self Destruct Again?

2008-02-17T12:27:00.000-08:00

This is why Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean dreams of a convincing Obama sweep in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania.

Former Virginia Governor Doug Wilder today warned there will be riots in the streets if the candidate with the most delegates coming into the democratic convention in Denver were to lose the nomination because the party’s super delegates, made up of members of congress, governors and party leaders, were to award the nomination to the other candidate. The most likely scenario being Hillary Clinton snatching victory from Barack Obama.

“If the super delegates intervene and get in the way of it and say “Oh, no we’re going to determine what’s best, there will be chaos at the convention. If you think 1968 was bad, you watch 2008, it will be worse.”

In 1968, Vietnam war protesters gathered in Chicago and send a message to candidate Hubert Humphrey and the Democratic party. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley sent 12,000 police officers on the streets, and called in the Illinois National Guard. As the nation watched on TV, a bloody riot erupted. Police arrested over 500 people. Hundreds of police and demonstrators were injured.

If Hillary Clinton arrives at the convention with fewer states, fewer votes and fewer delegates, it would be very surprising if the she walks out as the nominee. If the picture is less clear, especially pending how the delegates votes in Michigan and Florida are distributed, the deciding vote of the super delegates would be more complicated.

The deck is stacked against Hillary right now. Since convention delegates are doled out on a proportional basis, even if she wins in big states like Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania, it will be difficult to look like a clear front runner again because Obama will continue to amass delegates. If Obama has more votes, more states and is close in terms of earned delegates and then he is not he nominee, his supporters are going to feel like this year is an echo of 2000 when democrats felt like George W. Bush stole the lection from Al Gore.

Even if there aren’t any riots, the level of enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton in the general election would likely be very tepid in comparison to what Obama is generating right now.
That’s one reason why you’ve heard John McCain launching assaults at Obama. Hillary as his opponent is better than an endorsement by Rush Limbaugh.

If there were ever an election teed up for the democrats to win, this is it. Then again, so was 2004. An unpopular president who began an unpopular war with nothing but fear going for him and he won in part because the democrats over thought the race and ran someone competent on paper but not very likeable and definitely not inspiring in person.

Any of that seem familiar this time around?

“Democrats. We never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”

Right On, Mia Farrow

2008-02-15T13:36:00.000-08:00

Until recently all I knew about Mia Farrow was Rosemary’s Baby and Woody Allen. Boy was I wrong.

Our story begins in Hollywood, where, generally speaking, celebrities who try to wield influence on political issues are at best annoying and at worst counter-productive trying to achieve their stated goals.

Hopefully, that will not be the case with Steven Spielberg taking a stand by quitting his role as an artistic advisor for this year’s summer Olympic Games in China because of that country’s role in the ongoing horror in the Darfur region of Sudan.

(China gets a lot of oil from Sudan and doesn’t want to put human rights above its need for energy.)

What triggered Speilberg to bail out? Enter Mia Farrow stage left. She’s spent years trying to get the rest of us to take meaningful steps to help the people in the oppressed region of Sudan where as many as 400,000 people have been slaughtered and 2.5 million people have been left homeless.

Farrow launched a full throttle campaign to persuade Spielberg to use his influence with China and its very protective attitude toward its public image relative to the Olympics. In a March 28 op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal she wrote that Spielberg ran the risk that he would "go down in history as the Leni Riefenstahl of the Beijing Games." Riefenstahl was a filmmaker who made Nazi propaganda films.

Less than a week later, Spielberg wrote to Chinese President Hu Jintao asking the Chinese government to “bring an end to human suffering” in Darfur. Shortly after that, China dispached Zhai Jun, a senior government official, to Darfur, where he toured three refugee camps.

It’s a beginning, at least. After years of shouting at the wind, Farrow’s efforts have a started to move the process that resisted years of international diplomacy. Continued pressure is needed to make sure the Chinese don’t just go through the motions and stall for time until after the Closing Ceremonies in Beijing.

I’ve heard Mia Farrow speak about the people of Darfur. It’s excruciatingly painful to listen. You can’t begin to imagine how hard it would be if that was your life. Day after day, with no hope in sight.

The only difference between the people of Darfur and you and me is where we were born. Listen to someone like Mia Farrow who knows what life is like for them and I defy you not to be appalled.

Alas, when confronted with such horror, the natural inclination is to push it out of your mind. After all, what can you do? You’re not a famous.

Turns out, your opinion might just matter. Money is the lifeblood of the Olympics and it’s sponsored by some of America’s biggest and best known corporations. They don’t want to have their customers to associate them with underwriting the “Genocide Olympics.”

You can let them know what you think, just point your browser here for more information:

http://miafarrow.org/sponsors_genocide_olympics.html

In a world where many of us feel that important problems are beyond our influence, it's truly encouraging to see that one person, fueled by boundless compassion and righteous moral outrage, can make a difference.

Let's give her the help she and the people for whom serves as a compelling champion, so richly deserve. Write a few emails. Tell them Mia sent you. That should get their attention.

Valentine’s Day Edition: America Wants to Have Obama’s Baby

2008-02-14T15:34:00.000-08:00

As we while away an hour in Study Hall, a friend passes us a note that says Barack thinks we’re cute.

Oh, be still my heart, could it be true?

And we were just writing our first name and his last name over and over again in our in the margins of our textbook.

The country’s smitten with Obama, but it’s like a Hollywood romantic comedy. It’s all about the chase, the build-up to when the couple actually gets together, hooks up or whatever euphemism you prefer. Then we roll the credits and assume they live happily ever after.

The heavy lifting of any long term relationship, whether it’s romantic or political, comes after the hormone filled swooning phase we’re in right now. That’s when you realize some of those quirks you thought were cute have devolved into annoying habits.

Barack wants to lie on the couch in his underwear watching sports all weekend instead of going antiquing with you. You catch Barack checking out your friend’s rear end. Now he wants to borrow money.

You think you’ll change him, like a little home improvement project, but he‘s happy with the way he is, so now you’re stuck with him.

After the giddy euphoria that follows the historic inauguration of the nation’s first black president, he announces that his team has determined that a hasty withdrawal from Iraq could create more problems than we have already.

“But you promised!”

The best we can get on a timetable for bringing the troops home is an eloquent version of “we’ll see.”

Interest groups stall his health care plan and its lack of mandatory insurance that will allow young healthy people to game the system and sign up only after they dislocate a shoulder playing pick-up basketball.

His ambitious jobs and green energy program have to be scaled back to a pale reflection of the original proposal because of skyrocketing budget deficits.

His first meetings with Mahmoud “I’m a Dinner Jacket” Ahmadinejad , crazy eyes Hugo Chavez, and Bond villain Kim Jong Il turn out to be humiliating public relations disasters, just like Hillary said they would be. Pundits quip he’s “over his head” and “not ready for primetime.”

It would be easier to leave him, but that’s not in the cards. So you stand by your man and try to remember why you loved him so much in the first place.

Viral Video Face Off: Preview of Obama vs McCain

2008-02-14T09:09:00.000-08:00

If a picture is worth a thousand words, then a video that spreads like a virus across the internet may be worth more than a super bowl commercial.

Case in point, the "Yes, We Can" music video version where famous people form a musical duet with Barack Obama's stump speech.

If you haven't seen it, it's the first video below. If you have, you can go directly to the next one which is the McCain version. "Like Hope, just different."

For McCain. it's a reality check for an unavoidable reality of being the poster child for failed policies from the Iraq war to tax cuts for billionaires: The truth is out there and it hurts.

Hillary’s New Campaign Ad: Obama is Scared of Me

2008-02-13T15:21:00.000-08:00

Hillary updated her facebook page today:

“In Case You Missed It: Hillary accepted an invitation to debate Sen. Obama in Wisconsin, but Sen. Obama refuses to debate Hillary in Wisconsin.”

You can view the new TV commercial below. Pretty timid by attack ad standards, but the underlying message is she’s tougher and he’s afraid to fight.

Another posting to her facebook page tries to convince us that despite what we’ve read and seen and heard,the campaign has not hit dire straights:

“As history shows, the Democratic nomination goes to the candidate who wins the most delegates – not the candidate who wins the most states.

“In 1992, Bill Clinton lost a string of primaries before clinching the nomination. He ceded Iowa, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maryland, Arizona, Washington, Utah, Colorado, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, Vermont and South Dakota.

“Similarly, in 1984, Walter Mondale also lost a series of major primaries before winning the nomination, including New Hampshire, Vermont, Florida, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Indiana, Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, Mississippi, Colorado, Ohio, and California.

“And in 1976, Jimmy Carter lost twenty-three states before winning the nomination, including: Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, West Virginia, South Carolina, Alabama, Illinois, Mississippi, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Arizona, Alaska, Hawaii, and Utah.”

So just because you’re losing, it doesn’t make you a loser.

The Day After: Is Hillary’s Campaign DOA?

2008-02-13T14:44:00.000-08:00

Imagine the morning meeting of the Hillary Clinton campaign brain trust on this the day after she was crushed in the latest of eight straight contests.

If you were one of her advisors, desperate to acquire that West Wing power broker job you believed was your destiny until the Iowa Caucuses, what’s your bright idea to turn this around? Because one thing’s for sure, stay the course won’t work.

Interesting comparison of some of the options likely being discussed behind closed doors detailed in today’s Fix:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/02/post_5.html

They could go negative. It’s not pretty and people say they hate it, but fighting dirty works. Bush used to defeat McCain. Bush used it against Kerry.

But they don’t seem to have anything left to throw at Obama. Hillary already hit him in a debate with his ties to “slum lord” Tony Rezko. Plus, Swift Boating Obama is risky because it deprives her of her victim status. We saw how sympathy helped push her over the top in New Hampshire.

There’s the economy, which seems to be spinning out of control like Iraq was last year. Trouble is, you have to get into the details and being the better policy wonk pales in comparison to Obama’s lofty, but vague Camelotesque call to action. Also, Bill Clinton is the one with the record on that front and reminding us of the positive elements of the 1990’s also brings flashbacks of the drama laden nature of a Clinton White House.

The spin from the campaign to date is that they are focused on big states with large numbers of delegates at stake, Texas and Ohio on March 4 and Pennsylvania on April 22. They’re writing off Hawaii since Obama’s childhood home is expected to give him another win.

Right now, Clinton has signaled that she is also resigned to losing Wisconsin on February 19, which would be her chance to derail the Obama juggernaut and give her a chance to regain some traction headed into the critical face-offs in Texas and Ohio. Perhaps she’s trying to downplay expectations, but last night she was in Texas and Obama was in Wisconsin. Clinton could have a good shot there so it would seem foolish not to put some serious effort into the race there. Go figure.

Does this strategy seem familiar? Remember Rudy’s plan that Florida would bail him out? Granted, unlike Giuliani’s operatic march to his own doom, Clinton has won a bunch of states, but there’s only so long you can keep losing before voters start viewing you as, well, a loser.

The remaining path to the nomination is ugly, perhaps handing John McCain a much better chance of winning in November. In this scenario, the super delegates and the tainted contests in Michigan and Florida decide the nominee. It would be the Democrats version of Bush vs. Gore 2000. If that’s the road Hillary takes to the nomination, the contagious enthusiasm that is driving record numbers of new voters to the polls is likely to disappear and independents may move to McCain.

Hillary’s not the type of politician to go gently into the night. She doesn’t have many options left and they're all bad.

See if you can find a vintage “Hail to the Thief” sign on eBay.

Potomac Primary Pounding: A Night Hillary Would Rather Forget

2008-02-12T20:50:00.000-08:00

Watching Hillary make her speech in El Paso after being crushed again by Obama in the Potomac primaries, you can appreciate what moxie it takes to put yourself through this process. Granted she’s surrounded by an adoring crowd, but still, after the night she’s had, you have to figure giving another speech wasn’t her first choice on how to spend the evening. More like a double sized adult beverage and some reruns of Sex and the City.

Predictably ignoring tonight’s election results, She’s channeling her inner John Edwards (and Bill Clinton) right now feeling our pain and promising to go to bat for us against the powerful special interests that prevent us from having health care and good jobs.

Her rhetoric is a contrast to Obama whose stump speech is long on inspiration and short on what details of how we get to his shining city on the hill. Listening to Obama, it’s hard not to be “fired up, ready to go.” We’re not exactly sure where we are headed, just that we’ll be ecstatic once we arrive.

Maybe this is what Hillary needs. If I’m feeling sorry for her, I suspect some of her core supporters not in possession of a y chromosome really want to give her a hug and some words of encouragement.

The tears helped in New Hampshire. This year, everyone seems to thrive as the underdog, but for Hillary Clinton that’s not likely to be enough. Don’t be surprised if she comes looking for a fight next time she debates the opponent who beat her 8-0 in the last week.

Election Coverage: Thin Gruel Leaves Me Hungry

2008-02-12T20:43:00.001-08:00

It’s all well and good that Obama has increased his margin of victory by 12.3 percent among left-handed Armenian pick-up truck driving dog owners, but could we ever possibly do an exit poll or primary night post mortem about what issues are influencing the voters?

Hey, inside the beltway know it alls! I’m talking to you.

Yes, I know polls show the economy and the war and health care top Democratic voters’ list of concerns. It might be instructive to connect the dots between the issues that are important to voters important and the choices people are making when they cast their ballots.

Making broad generalizations based on demographic categories offers a convenient means for parsing the results, but people don’t walk into the voting booth and say, “I’m young and well educated so I must be for Obama, but wait, I’m also Latino, so that must mean I should vote for Hillary. What to do, what to do?” It’s more like, “I want to end the bitter partisan battles in Washington DC and I think Barack’s the guy to do it or Hillary’s health care plan would cover me and the economy was good to me in the 90’s so I’m for Clinton.”

So, chattering classes on MSNBC, CNN, NPR and yes even FOX, give us some analysis that actually links the election results with the concrete details of exactly what we’re trying to “change.”

I double dare you.

Bush’s War May Doom “Yes We Can” Bipartisan Dream

2008-02-12T15:23:00.000-08:00

Are you one of the 70 percent of Americans who would like to time warp themselves right past the remainder of the Bush administration and start fresh on inauguration day?

Not so fast.

President Bush has left an enormous mess to clean up and the process could unravel all the idyllic visions many democrats have of the future.

Case in point, today’s thought provoking op-ed piece by David Brooks the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/opinion/12brooks.html?hp

where he outlines an eerily plausible scenario on how a democratic president will likely have their lofty vision of a the future derailed in short order if they follow through with their campaign promises to bring American troops home soon after taking the oath of office.

“There would be private but powerful opposition from Arab leaders, who would fear a return to 2006 chaos. There would be irate opposition from important sections of the military, who would feel that the U.S. was squandering the gains of the previous year. A Democratic president with few military credentials would confront outraged and highly photogenic colonels screaming betrayal.

“There would be important criticism from nonpartisan military experts. In his latest report, the much-cited Anthony Cordesman describes an improving Iraqi security situation that still requires “strategic patience” and another five years to become self-sustaining.

“There would be furious opposition from Republicans and many independents. They would argue that you can’t evacuate troops just as Iraqis are about to hold national elections and tensions are at their highest. They would point out that it’s insanity to end local reconstruction and Iraqi training efforts just when they are producing results. They would accuse the new administration of reverse-Rumsfeldism, of ignoring postsurge realities and of imposing an ideological solution on a complex situation.

“All dreams of changing the tone in Washington would be gone. All of Obama’s unity hopes would evaporate. And if the situation did deteriorate after a quick withdrawal, as the National Intelligence Estimate warns, the bloodshed would be on the new president’s head.

“Because the Democratic candidates appear to agree on so much, they’ve never tested each other’s policy proposals or exposed each other’s assumptions. But governing means choosing, and reality will be unkind. The artificial unity between the Democratic center and the Democratic left would be smashed by the harsh choices of 2009.”

Remember how Bill Clinton tried to make good his promise to end the ban on gays in the military? His political capitol evaporated faster than you can get an airline clerk to reschedule you after a cancelled flight. Ending the war is more difficult by several orders of magnitude.

Thank you George W. Bush. Your legacy will live on well past January 20, 2009.

Potomac Primary Preview: Why the Delegate Count Doesn't Add Up

2008-02-12T14:34:00.000-08:00

Who's ahead? Depends on whose count you look at because they're all over the map.

A lot of media are reporting the Associate Press counts:

Clinton: 1147
Obama 1124

with 2304 remaining. You need 2025 to win the nomination.

Doing the math is harder than you might expect. New York Times doesn't count their chickens until the hatch.

Their count:

Clinton 1045
Obama 922

"Many news organizations include delegate projections in their counts that are based on nonbinding votes for candidate preference, such as the Iowa caucuses. The New York Times counts only delegates that have been officially selected and are bound by their preferences."

Today's Potomac primary looks good for Obama. Virginia's a close call, but he could well win all three on top of winning for states and the Virgin Island this weekend.

Hawaii follows, but Obama grew up there and is expected to win. After that is Wisconsin on February 19, but even if Hillary wins there will that be the tourniquet that stops the bleeding? Polling data available online doesn’t paint a clear picture in Wisconsin, but wasingtonpost.com's overview of the state's demographics might tend to favor Hillary:

(http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/primaries/states/wi/r/)

Wisconsin 2006 Census
Population: 5,556,506
Gender: 49.6 male, 50.4 female
Race: 87.5 white, 5.9 black, 2.0 asian, 0.3 indian, 0.0 pacific islander, 4.6 hispanic,
Age: 76.3% 18 years and over; 13.0% 65 years and over; Median age:
Median Household Income: $48,772
Families Below Poverty Level: 7.3%
Education: 11.1% of those over 25 have a bachelor's degree or higher

Next big stop, Ohio and Texas, where conventional wisdom seems to think Hillary will win, based on the relatively fewer affluent and educated types that tend to be in the pro-Obama demographic. But if people only vote because they're in a certain category, what happened in Massachusetts? I've been there and the place is full of six figure PhD's, so it's anybody's guess why Hillary cleaned Obama's clock there despite (or because of?) the Kennedy's anointing him the heir apparent to Camelot.

Ohio and Texas don't vote until March 4. In political terms, it's a couple of lifetimes between now and then so if Obama makes a clean sweep today, he may suck all the oxygen out of the room as the Clinton campaign tries to spin us on why she's not losing.

Ron Paul, Pimp My Blog

2008-02-11T16:46:00.000-08:00

Want to gin up some attention to your internet soapbox? Write something about Ron Paul.

Wonkette’s story on Dr. Paul’s decision to suspend his campaign

http://wonkette.com/354581/ron-paul-basically-gives-up

generated about 25 times the normal traffic last time I looked, so I figure move over, Tool 4 the Man is climbing on the band wagon.

Truth be told, I have been too consumed mocking Mitt Romney to give Dr. Paul his due. Now that he’s gone, I suspect we’ll miss him and the boundless passion of his Shoot Me Up with Thorazine Quick or My Invisible Friend Will Kill You followers or Paultards as they are not so affectionately know here in the blogosphere.

There’s something vaguely compelling about the libertarian philosophy embodied by Paul and his followers. They avoid the inherent contraction of the “fiscal conservative, social liberal” who essentially wants the government to provide a mountain of services, but doesn’t want to pay for them.

At least libertarians are consistent. Do what absolutely needs to be done and then leave me the hell alone. If we had affordable health care and some semblance of an equitable distribution of wealth in this country, I might well be a passionate Paultard myself. Alas, the deck is so heavily stacked against everyone who’s not among the mega wealthy that we need a strong government to be our advocate before we can move to safely retire to Walden Pond.

Watching the presidential debates on Tivo, I often found myself fast forwarding through the likes of Mike Gravel and Duncan Hunter, but even though I knew he had no chance of winning, I enjoyed the way Ron Paul made the other Republican candidates squirm with their mindless support of the war in Iraq.

Without Ron Paul, expect to see remaining candidates John McCain and Mike Huckabee throttle up on who’s tougher than Clinton and Obama, laced with hyperbole full of loaded terms like “surrender” and “defeat” and “Islamic fanaticists.”

We’ll also be deprived of the entertainment value of some Ron Paul followers, who give Tom Cruise a run for his money on who we suspect is likely to have his hat lined with tin foil to keep the mind control rays out.

Yes Paultards, I know a lot of you are playing with a full deck, but you're not the ones getting the attention, like your friend here on YouTube.

Obama is King Caucus, Hillary Dumps Campaign Manager like a Wet Rag

2008-02-11T16:44:00.000-08:00

Hillary Clinton is Oh and four this weekend, having lost yesterday’s Maine caucus after losing Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington the day before. Obama shows that despite his relative youth and thin political resume, he has the managerial savvy to run a national campaign that’s now running like a Swiss watch.

Winning a caucus, particularly in a state with a lot of small town, rural voters, is no cake walk. You have to log your ballot where everyone else can see. If you live in Mayberry RFD, that’s likely to mean that most of the others voters know you, since they are your neighbors, co-workers, bosses. Winning takes organization with a lot of ground troops and that takes passion and motivation. It’s the democratic version of the evangelical zeal that turned out religious conservatives for George W. Bush in the last two elections.

The Clinton campaign isn’t exactly in panic mode, but they’re defense is on the field again late in the 3rd quarter and they’re out of breath. They desperately need to win something to stop the hemorrhaging.

Step 1, defenestrate your longtime friend and campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle. Must be her fault. Can’t be the candidate shortcomings, or the opponent strengths. Solis-Doyle does have young children and since the campaign had been structured to be over now with Hillary coasting to her coronation perhaps her campaign manager did sign on for more than she bargained for, but in presidential politics it’s hard to buy the “leaving to spend more time with the family” line.

What’s next?

If they follow their usual tactics, they’ll go negative. If I was Obama that might be a dream come true. Starting to throw mud again runs the risk of backfiring in a major way. Tough to see what else they have to hit Obama with, rehashing the connect ion with indicted businessman Tony Rezko seems unlikely to gain any serious traction. Now Obama’s early disclosures of youth drug use and other errors in judgment underscore his skills as a political tactician.

The New York Times is reporting that John Edwards had a “secret” meeting with Hillary Clinton. You have to wonder what she has to offer. The odds of her offering and him accepting another shot at becoming vice president is about as high as Mike Huckabee winning the Republican nomination. Attorney General? A weekend in Cabo with Chelsea?

He won’t do it. After what he’s said about Hillary, an endorsement now, even if he goes with “she’ll fight for the little guy” would be unlikely to have that much influence on his supporters.

As we enter the end game of run for the White House 2008, Hillary Clinton is looking more like The New England Patriots than the New York Giants she invokes as she seeks a comeback.

What’s Huckabee Up To?

2008-02-11T16:36:00.000-08:00

Mike Huckabee certainly has every right to stay on the race, but why? Do the math and you see there aren’t enough delegates left to win to get him the nomination, so what does he stand to gain by staying in? It’s more that for the time at least, he has nothing to lose.

Huckabee isn’t bashing McCain or vice versa, so now with Romney gone, the former Arkansas governor continues to build up his political brand image. By his own admission, it’s probably unlikely McCain would choose him as a running mate, but the more states he wins, the higher his stock value goes as long as he doesn’t cross the line start to undermine the Republicans already limited chances of victory in the general election.

Right now, Huckabee is the lone remaining outlet for Republicans’ sense of buyer’s remorse at having wound up with McCain as the de facto nominee. Want to rub John McCain’s nose in how much he aggravates you because of immigration, stem cells, campaign finance or whatever, about the only thing you can do at the moment besides calling Rush Limbaugh is to vote Huckabee.

For now, Huckabee seems content to bask in the limelight. The worst thing that will happen is he’ll wind up with a seven figure deal doing his own talk show. If you had your choice between that and being Vice President, what would you want to do?

Don’t Cry for me Louisiana

2008-02-10T11:33:00.000-08:00

After Barry Hussein served up a double order of whoop-ass on Billary in the primaries in Kansas, Louisiana and Washington, she may be tempted tear up once again reminding voters that she actually can mimic human emotion. Probably can’t go back to the well again, but what can we expect from the Clinton campaign moving forward? They are likely to be casually dismissive of the Louisiana results because of the predominant role of black voters and say they expect to do very well in big states like Texas and Ohio later.

Momentum, which is with Obama right now, hasn’t been much of an asset so far this year, as it keeps shifting. Obama seems well positioned for the upcoming Potomac Primaries in Virginia, Maryland and Washington. D.C. That makes the subsequent primaries in March in Texas and Ohio especially important because they are home to fewer of the better educated, higher income voters that are part of Obama’s core supporters.

That’s a problem for Obama. There are a lot more poor and stupid voters than ones who are affluent and educated. Poverty and ignorance are renewable resources. Too bad we can’t use them to run our cars or heat our homes.

But If Obama can win in Texas or Ohio, the hill Clinton must climb to the nomination gets a lot steeper. Expect Obama to devote a significant portion of his campaign warchest flooding the zone with operatives and TV spots in those two states.

Don’t Smile, You’re on Candid Camera

2008-02-10T11:30:00.000-08:00

Watching Mike Huckabee on Face the Nation, and we’re looking at the smiling former Arkansas governor basking in his victories, smiling and nodding as Bob Schieffer introduces him until he gets to Kansas primary results “a very big day for you, you literally crushed [John McCain] in Kansas.” True, but if you’re running for Vice President, you don’t want to gloat, at least not when people, especially the likely nominee, are watching.

You could almost see the wheels turning as he calculated how to react to that. Kind of like trying to convey the right facial expression when your girlfriend asks you if you’re seeing her best friend on the side. Whether you are or not, you better deploy your best poker face.

Methinks Rush Doth Protest Too Much

2008-02-10T11:26:00.000-08:00

The siege warfare aimed at John McCain by Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the conservative talk show set may be more a function of economic self interest than political principles.

In the way that writers like me whose bread and butter is mocking other people loved Mitt Romney, a democratic president, especially another Clinton administration, would be the gift that keeps giving for right wing radio. Think of all the Hillary hating rants Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly would miss out on if McCain were president. If my living depended on a steady diet of partisan polemics fueled by righteous outrage, I’d be salivating at the prospect of President Hillary Clinton.

Why do they hate McCain so much? “It’s the economy stupid.”

Obama: Follow the Money

2008-02-09T09:13:00.000-08:00

When the Clintons came to Washington they didn't even own a house. At one point in his second term, a reporter asked Bill Clinton if he was broke. The president said he didn’t know, but that was probably the case.

My, how times have changed. Now Billary can take $5 million out of petty cash and loan it to their campaign. Barack Obama fired back, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest depending the source of the Clintons' new wealth. Her vague financial disclosures put the couple's net worth somewhere between $10 and $50 million.

From the Associated Press:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jvG1XWiPC5IjZQjGrvdVqEW8tRqgD8UMDRJ00

"For someone who claims to be fully vetted, hiding a campaign loan from voters until after Super Tuesday and refusing to release your tax returns until after the primary doesn't seem like the best way to prove that there are no surprises for the Republicans to find once they start digging," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Friday.

A day earlier, Obama had stopped short of saying Clinton should release her returns.

"I'll just say that I've released my tax returns," he told reporters on a flight to Omaha, Neb. "That's been a policy I've maintained consistently. I think the American people deserve to know where you get your income from."

The timing is noteworthy. The government's fraud case against Obama friend and campaign contributor businessman Tony Rezko continues to move forward. Despite the fact that Obama has returned all the money he got from Rezko, admitted his dealings with Rezko were a mistake, Billary has already shown they view this issue as one of the weapons in their arsenal against Obama.

I'm much more interested in who made the Clintons rich and what they would likely expect in return.

Hillary’s Letter to Me: Barack Obama is Made of $$$

2008-02-08T13:25:00.000-08:00

Because I’m a glutton for punishment, last year I gave my email address to most of the presidential candidates. Not that they abuse the privilege, like only writing when they need something. This is the latest from Billary ’08:

"Let me tell you a little bit about the challenges we still face. Starting tomorrow, we have 10 more races in the month of February. Many of these contests play to my opponent's strong suits -- including his virtually unlimited funds."

So now Barack Obama has been cast in the role of Daddy Warbucks by Hillary Clinton.

Not that the Senator from Illinois hasn’t tried to put his hand in my pocket as well, but at least he appeals to my sense of being caught up in a historical movement as he tries to get me to add to my mountain of credit card debt to sponsor his noble quest to save America:

"So many people said we would never get here. But we're proving every day that ordinary people can still accomplish extraordinary things.

Thank you,

Barack"

To his credit, John McCain’s most recent letter to me raised an issue and didn’t ask for money. Like so many of my relationships based on email, he simply forwarded a
article he thought I would be interested in, which said in part, that I shouldn’t worry that he’s going to nominate anyone to the Supreme Court that’s likely to let a couple of guys in San Francisco burn a flag after they get married:

"We believe that the nomination of John McCain is the best option to preserve the ongoing restoration of constitutional government. He is by far the most electable Republican candidate remaining in the race, and based on his record is as likely to appoint judges committed to constitutionalism."
(Wall Street Journal)

I'm worried about my other buddies from the campaign trail. Haven’t heard from Joe, Chris, Rudy, Fred or any of the others recently. Hope they’re ok.

Conservatives: How Do We Hate McCain? Let Us Count the Ways

2008-02-08T12:10:00.000-08:00

The Lazarus campaign of John McCain now sees the attack on its right flank heat up. The best part is that his continued success reveals the relative lack of power wielded by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, as evidence by their failed full court press to gin up support for Mitt Romney.

Interesting to look at how reporters from other countries are covering the race. The Euros know why the hate us and most especially our current president, but they seem to be fascinated by how much we despise each other. Case in point from the Guardian’s James Ridgeway:

“In today's GOP, libertarians who want to keep government out of bedrooms as well as boardrooms are at odds with the fundamentalist Bible-thumpers who are glad to use the power of the central government to criminalise everything they don't like, with abortions and gay sex at the top of this list.”

More and video available here:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/usa/2008/02/last_man_standing_mccains_batt.html

Conservatives talking about sitting out the general election may be blowing smoke at this point. Nothing will unite them behind their candidate like the thought of Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office.

Bill Clinton wants to be 1st Lady when he grows up

2008-02-08T10:40:00.000-08:00

Now that Hillary has put the former president’s manhood in a blind trust he’s allowed to talk to reporters again. Appearing eminently reasonable here:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/02/08/sot.bill.clinton.roll.wcsh

He predictably declines to accept responsibility for playing the race card in a desperate attempt to help his wife win the South Carolina primary.

He just seems to have realized that different rules of engagement apply to him as a former president than the rest of the 1st ladies in waiting.

Who will he wear to the inaugural balls?

You Won’t Have Mitt Romney to Kick Around Anymore

2008-02-07T17:09:00.000-08:00

"$35 million and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."

Our favorite whipping boy bows out today, finally achieving a firm gasp of the obvious, that he wasn’t going to win and the burn rate on his vast fortune wasn’t worth the visceral satisfaction of continuing to piss off Huckabee and McCain.

I was actually starting to feel sorry for Mittens, especially after McCain went after him with those cheap shots on “timetables” in Iraq in the last debate. He even managed to conjure up a somewhat likeable image in his latest version of his ongoing personality makeovers, call it Mitt 3.5.

Former Connecticut Gubernatorial candidate and Clinton White House counselor Bill Curry still has, for my money, the best quip on Mittens: “I wouldn’t believe Mitt Romney if he was telling me his blood type from an operating table."

Blast from the Past: Return of the Smoke Filled Room

2008-02-07T16:50:00.000-08:00

And you democrats, drunk with the sense of White House entitlement after the W years, thought your little vote was going to count for something.

How quaint.

Turns out about 40 percent of the delegates needed to secure the nomination are controlled by “super delegates,” elected officials like members of congress and party bigwigs. With the increasingly likely event that neither Clinton nor Obama will have the nomination locked up by convention time, these people will decide who wins.

I wonder what kind of promises you could extract in exchange? Ambassador to Italy? Want to be a federal judge? Got a lame defense project that generates a lot of jobs in your district? No problem.

Guess the masses can’t quite be trusted to decide who represents the party. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Early money would probably have bet on Billary, but with the Ted and Caroline Kennedy backing Obama, we could be looking at a low grade civil war among democrats to decide the nominee.

A Piece of the Action: Why I don’t want my check from the federal Government

2008-02-07T16:41:00.000-08:00

Who could possibly be against free money? Certainly no one in the current bipartisan love-fest in Congress. In an election year, doling out cash is the political equivalent of Viagra. The only problem is, the country’s broke and we’re borrowing the money. Personally, I’ll probably use it to help pay off some credit card debt, as many economists suspect will be the case with a lot of middle class taxpayers. So much for economic stimulus.

God forbid our elected officials would exercise some fiscal restraint, but they can’t seem to stop themselves. The Senate, not to be outdone in matters of largesse when giving away other people’s money, tried to tack on some additional spending then settled on a mere $168 billion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/washington/07cnd-fiscal.html?_r=1&ex=1360126800&en=40c85cea12b4f959&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin

We’re cash advancing the nation into economic oblivion. It’s like on the family level when you start using one credit card to pay off another. At least the federal government gets a better rate than you can get on your Visa card.

Dollars for Delegates

2008-02-06T12:31:00.000-08:00

Richie Rich apparently doesn't get much return on investment. Check out what Mittens "The Economy is in my DNA" Romney has spent in his doomed quest for the presidency.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/06/romneys_expenses_per_delegate.html

Over $1 million per delegate. I would have sold my vote to him for a lot less.

Tell Me Something I Don't Already Know

2008-02-06T11:38:00.000-08:00

"Americans get the politicians they deserve."
Adlai Stevenson

Now admittedly, Adlai is a prime example of how sour grapes have a shelf life more akin to Twinkies than sushi, but he had a knack for making a point. The same could also be said of my former profession, the news media.

One of the main marching orders in today's media landscape is to belaboring the obvious. Captured eloquently by the Onion, once again demonstrating why fake news is often more informative than what currently passes for the real thing:

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/poll_bullshit_is_most_important?utm_source=videomrss_72752

When I can look out my window and see you're lead story, you're not doing you're job. Yes, I know it's raining, but I don't need team smotherage with three reporters in different places telling me people are getting wet. Now if there's actual danger, then fine, but hyper-ventilating about routine events just shows me you're too lazy to find out what's really going on.

America gets the politicians it deserves partially as a result of the fact that we also get the media we deserve. For every article or story during this election I saw on how a presidential candidate would address a serious issue (hello health care, federal budget deficit?) I saw hundreds of granular analyses of the horse race. Don't get me wrong, I love full contact politics, but I don't give a damn about their body language during the debate or whether Hillary looks fat in that outfit.

Let me tell you as little secret about news. Content is just what they put in between the ads so they can sell them and make money. If the ratings went up when they put on a test pattern or a blank screen between the commercials, then that's what they would do.

Ever wonder why there's so much crime on local TV news?

Because it's cheap and easy to cover and has the semblance of actual news, what with the flashing lights and all. You listen to the police scanner and show up and 20 minutes later, you've got a story. Sorting through public records to find out how the government is squandering your hard earned tax dollars actually takes some heavy lifting, so the hell with that.

Demand more of your media and maybe it will improve.

"How do I do that, oh sage oracle?"

Write them. They actually do pay attention to that, believe it or not. Even better, write to their sponsors. Calling on the phone doesn't make any difference. They get some idiot unpaid intern to answer their phone who can't remember to take of his or her mittens before trying to transfer a call. Writing shows that you actually care about whatever the issue you are bitching about. The general formula is 1 letter = 100 phone calls.

I double dare you.

Or just continue to swill down the pabulum they feed you.

The Shotgun Wedding: It Ain't Gonna Happen

2008-02-06T10:56:00.000-08:00

Finally, someone states the obvious, for the record:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/04/roland.martin/index.html

Forgive my lack of political correctness, but if you're already pushing the envelope on breaking new ground, you're not going to undermine your chances of winning by upping the ante. If Obama wins, he'll likely choose an older white guy with foreign policy experience. Like Joe Biden. Hillary needs someone who actually wants the job despite the prospect of Bill lurking in the West Wing. Like Evan Bayh.

Their recent kissy face debate performance notwithstanding, let's not forget they hate each other. If Hillary wins and actually offers it to Obama, he would probably take it and who knows, I could be wrong (and often am) and maybe he helps. If he wins, NFW he puts her on the ticket.

The Biggest Election Story No One is Covering

2008-02-06T09:43:00.000-08:00

Two words: Michigan and Florida. Family feud between democrats as these two states try to cut in line and have their issues addressed (“the economy, stupid” in Michigan and hurricane insurance in Florida, to name a couple), the party says none of these votes count. Not that Florida has played an important role in deciding who will be President in recent memory, so by all means, let's go ahead and disenfranchise millions of people.

When the dust settles, it's looking increasingly like neither Billary nor Obambi will have the 2026 delegates need to win the nomination. That means those "meaningless" votes that Billary picked up in Michigan and Florida may make them "the Deciders." It also makes those 800 super delegates potential kingmakers. And what about Edwards delegates? Can anyone say "brokered convention?"

The Mitt Hits the Fan

2008-02-06T09:34:00.000-08:00

Despite garnering an amazing 100% of the comedian/political cartoonists' vote, Mittens lost in the South, in the West and in the East, but yet I'm torn over the potential loss of Mittens from the race. For the health of the country, I yearn for the body politic to drive a stake through the heart of the Romney campaign, but would suffer an overwhelming sense of loss if deprived of Mittens schadenfreude.

NPR YouTube Debate Analysis

2007-08-16T12:50:00.000-07:00

Here's my angry missive to NPR for a segment of their debate coverage:

Your analysis of the YouTube debate on Morning Edition July 24 left listeners with a very serious misunderstanding of what actually happened.

Talking to Steve Inskeep, commentator James Kotecki said he thought it was great that they had the Reverend Reggie Longcrier in the audience for a follow-up to see if Senator Edwards had actually answered the question. The Rev. Longcrier said "Not like I would have liked to have heard it."

When pressed for why the answer had been inadequate, he said he wasn't really paying attention.

HE ADMITTED HE DIDN'T HEAR THE ANSWER.

"I didn't quite get some, some people were moving around and I didn't get all of his answer."

Watch it for yourself:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=x_jpGUl7IBA

When you put a guy barely out of college in front of a national audience to analyze a presidential debate (and I understand why you did it given the format of this candidates' forum), you owe it to us to make sure he's got the facts straight. When he doesn't it's the host's job to set the record straight.

As a longtime listener I expect more of NPR.

Their response (at least they did respond) was one of those non-apology acknowledgments, "I'm sorry if you were offended..."

Thank you for contacting NPR's Morning Edition.

We regret that our programming has not met your expectations. We strive to offer the highest quality of news and information available.

Listener feedback helps us to accomplish this goal.We welcome praise, as well as criticism, and your thoughts will be taken into consideration.

Thank you for listening to Morning Edition, and for your continued support of public broadcasting. For the latest news and information, visit NPR.org.

Sincerely,
Alan
NPR Services
(in a bold move, he included his phone number, which I have edited out here)

My Tube Is You Tube

2007-08-15T15:32:00.000-07:00

Finally finished watching the YouTube democratic candidates debate. Resisted absorbing any analysis previously because I was trying to form my own opinions.

Hillary looks very solid, although I noticed she mentioned being First Lady at least twice, which I never saw her do before, just talking about being a Senator and what she did policy wise in the Clinton administration. Conventional wisdom says her strategy is based on not screwing up and projecting competence, which would be a big improvement over the current occupant of the White House. But I think after all of W's blunders, many voters also are hungry for meaningful change and in this respect she seems like a nostalgia candidate.

Electing a black guy would be an enormous change for a country that's been plagued by race for centuries but I really wonder whether John Q. Redstate is willing to vote for a brother, despite what he tells Gallup when they call. He also still seems to lack the depth of experience that I think we need now. Not that he's not smart enough to figure it out, but the presidency should not entail too much on the job training.

He's been tricked into making a tactical mistake a couple of times in the debates when he was the first to answer a loaded question. Most recently on his willingness to commit to meeting with America bashing world leaders from North Korean, Iran, Venezuela and Cuba--- He said yes, we need to talk to everyone unlike the Bush Administration which only holds meetings with lap dogs. Hillary (and later Edwards in a thinly veiled "me too") said we need to proceed more cautiously so the American president doesn't become a propaganda tool during a meeting that accomplishes nothing. The other time on how he would respond to a terrorist attack. Maureen Dowd doesn't call him Obambi for nothing.

I think Edwards could be a great president. He's one of the few candidates I've seen that actually seems to understand the life most people live and the challenges they face. And he's on the record with detailed proposals to address major issues like health care and how to restore our shattered credibility in the international community.

Unfortunately, even at this early stage he's starting to appear a bit desperate, ramping up his rhetoric to an increasingly combative level. I also bet he wishes he could take back the crack about Hillary's outfit and steal Biden'a comment that the question was "a ridiculous exercise."

Now it's time to get Gravel and Kucinich off the stage. They don't offer enough in terms of raising fringe issues or provide sufficient entertainment value to be worth wasting time we could spend hearing from the real players.

Looks like Richardson is running for VP, not charming enough to upstage the top of the ticket but he's got the great resume and represents a less threatening change than having someone black or female as a running mate. Maybe we'll get a Linconesque Team of Rivals deal with Joe Biden as Secretary of State and Dodd somewhere else in the cabinet.

Now it's safe to read what the inside the beltway know-it-alls have to say about this....