I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
I think they fear them all, since aWol is unelectable
That would really swing with the right beat. Hey, not the KKK, corpse of LBJ. . .
not the corpse of LBJ
not the f***ing KKK
not the DLC, not the DNC
I do not like green eggs and ham...
Good pont about giving power away! As if the opponents could manipulate the democratic primaries to get whom they want.
...and any one of them can beat Bush, elimiting the stupid, "I just don't see ________ winning in November," line from anywhere.
and of course, quit the fuck ---dancing to the RNC tune--.
Ya know, ya don't hafta answer every fuckin spurious charge, tell 'em to fuck off....it worked like a charm for arnold. I do not lie......STUDY his campaign, it worked...
quit those stupid debates, NOBODY cares,
GET A FRIGGIN CLUE
-
Sadly, I fear that Bush will win no matter who the nominee is. Sure, a few of them will have lesser degrees of blowout, with Clark probably being the closest just because of his credentials. Clark/Edwards might be a strong ticket. There's a chance they might win, too
Dean is either/or. If, and only if everything goes right will he win. However, he needs to correct his many flaws first if he is to have any chance. Otherwise, he's Mondale II.
Kerry and Gephardt. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Lieberman. ZZzzzzzZZZzzzzz.
I agree! They don't have god-like powers and they don't have a preference of the Dem canidate. What they have is a playbook and a machine that'll do negative research on any and every candidate challenger. Plus the means to get their message to the 'fair and balanced' media.
Things are only getting started and saying your guy in the most feared is just hoopla...
Wait till we have a candidate and then get behind him, otherwise tune out the media and vote your preference in the primaries...
My position from the start has been that since (1) Republicans don't understand Democrats, (2) any given Republican is just as likely, if not more so, to be attempting to manipulate Democrats than to actually say what s/he is thinking, and (3) most of 'em are dumb as posts, any way . . .
Then why listen to a Republican about our nomination? When they start talking about that, hit the mute button (the mental one if necessary, but smile and nod a lot if it's your spouse).
Right on. Now get the Dems to stop saying "I'm the only one who can beat George Bush." That's horseshit. (A) Not true, and (B) Cowardly. My vote goes to the first Dem to wise up and say "I'm the only one who will win by a landslide." Because that matters.
It's the crucible now.
If you find yourself worrying about democrats and republicans, go and listen to some Mozart.
No matter who the Democratic nominee is, the whore media will do its best to undermine him. One wonders what goes through their whore minds as they leave their whore homes or their whore apartments in the morning. Do they try to concoct the most ludicrous lies imaginable on the way to their whore jobs, in anticipation of the appreciate whorish laughter they will receive from their whore compatriots? There must be a whore award for the most outlandish whore lie of the day. It's the only answer that makes sense.
I don't think the Republicans fear any of them that much. Whoever the Dem. candidate is, even if they get the overwhelming majority of votes, I get the feeling that the voting machines will still show Bush as the winner. Yes, I am that jaded...
OT: Margaret Cho's site has an update on the hate-email incident.
http://tinyurl.com/2ll4o
Apparently, the wingnuts have been crying like little girls, and their email addresses have been removed.
I hate to admit it but I think Dean was wounded badly by Sharpton's race baiting. That debate was the precise moment when Kerry and Edwards started to surge.
The more I listen to Dean, the more I think that the one area he's comfortable talking about is the health insurance issue. When he talks about health insurance, he's articualate and confident. When he talks about race or religion, he seems inarticulate, reading from a script.
When he talks about foreign policy or about the war, he seems like somebody who intuitively gets it, gets how extreme and destructive Bush is, but he doesn't come across as an expert or somebody with a well-thought-out agenda.
ELIOT SPITZER SHOULD BE THE V.P. RUNNING MATE!!!!
COME ON! How come I'm the only one that sees this. What better way to put the focus on those bastard corporations and get the working class whites.
Geez!!!
It's good to see that some have apologized for their remarks to Margaret. Guess it's proof that some class does exist.
Atrios, was the rest of that last sentence supposed to read...
"...and Matt Fudge wants David Brock to examine his?"
Just asking.
Call me paranoid/foil hatted/whatever...
I think Skull & Bones is going to work extra hard for an alumni face-off.
Just saying.
What they want is for us to run around like chickens with their heads cut off and that is precisely what we are giving them.
You know what I say? Fuck Karl Rove! We're going to run the guy WE want!
I think they fear them all, since aWol is unelectable
So good, it bears repeating. I wonder if we can bumperstickerize that, actually...
REPUBLICANS
who are not mere drooling morons
WANT
BLAKE ASHBY
as
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE
for
*PRESIDENT*
Heh... I think I'd vote for Blake Ashby over some of the Democratic candidates.
and then we have mark kleiman, a kennedy school grad, who doesn't want to learn about his face, wes clark.
so, you can study his less than bona fides, here.
www.tenc.com
a rendering of balkan history that some folks want to ignore.
i am prompted to promote this because tonite i aired MANUFACTURING CONSENT. a doc about noam chomsky. of interest was how the WORLD PRESS avoided the usa-inspired indonesian invasion of east timor.
i wonder where all these demothugs were when those crimes against humanity were taking place.
is there a difference between demothugs and rethugs?
prove it.
"They're as clueless as the rest of us."
Yeah, right. As far as I'm concerned, even that gives Rove, Bush, and the east Texas banana republic boys way, way too much credit. You can't fall upward forever.
i wonder where all these demothugs were when those crimes against human--
ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Adam,
I'm not just jumping on this because I'm a Deaniac, though I am. Why should Dean have to correct his "flaws?" Why are we looking for the perfect candidate, one with absolutely no skeletons or weaknesses of any kind?
The Republicans are going to do their thing with ANYBODY we nominate. The only thing the candidate can control is how he responds.
That's where I think Dean fell down a little, responding to every attack, looking reactive for the first time. If he'd just continued to blow off the criticism, I think he'd be in better shape right now.
But bottom line, our candidate shouldn't have to correct his flaws. He should be harping on Bush's. "You wanna talk about gaffes, Paula? Let's watch this little State of the Union video again, and then maybe our president could tell me where the WMDs are. Soldiers died for this gaffe."
A.
atrios -
I really enjoy the site, it's really just absolutely indispensable, probably one of the 5 best things on the internet...
But enough with the non-linked open letters? Please?
"Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me!"
Atrios is right. All that cleverness gets us exactly nowhere.
Athenae. I mean policy flaws like his position on repealing all of the tax cuts, including those to the middle class. Plus, he needs to prove that he'll be strong on defense. I, myself, think he's got the right idea, he just needs to communicate better.
And yeah, I think he speaks before he thinks way too often. He needs to learn to be more politic.
They are all feared.
There is no chance for a 2nd term.
ABB.
Do they say?:
Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one, and they all stink.
That's what I took from it...
Sorry, but the corpse of LBJ probably does know. But he's not talking.
Who will win the war against lungs, wombs, and anuses?
Forget about the thugs and the whores. The Dems will vote for the Dem and the Greens will vote for whoever promises to pardon Tommy Chong.
Find the man who will attract the undecideds and the independants.
With Diebold on my side ready to win/rig the election I wouldn't be afraid of nobody.
The entire election will depend on how the Dem candidate handles Bush in the nationally televised debates.
If they can force the f**king idiot president to act to form and show what a loser he really is then the election is won.
Can the Dem's pull a 'Few Good Men' routine and push Colonel Jessup aka Prez. Bush to show his spoiled rich boy arrogance in front of the country?
Can they get him to lose his cool and resort to his trademark smirk?
It will depend on which of these remaining male candidates have the balls to go for it.
MYOB'
.
So Atrios, whom do you think the Republicans fear the most?
So Atrios, whom do you think the Republicans fear the most?
Us.
You lunatics--and that includes me--they fear US.
Not any Democratic candidate in particular. They fear us uniting around a single candidate, and formulating a clear message of the sort "Bush must go."
The main thrust of their strategy so far is not to "present an optimistic forward vision." Take the immigration boondoggle. The point is not to win Democratic votes. The point is to not give the Dems a rallying point.
It's not the candidates. It's us. Let's not forget that.
another funny thing, the book, THE PRICE OF LOYALTY. from all the heat that i have read concerning this book, having read this book, it is clear that most of the commentators haven't read it.
needs to be read. it is really a very soft skewering of the turkey presnit.
did he really get a cert of completion from the harvard business school? how?
cause if he got one, any janitor at harvard could get one if he/she could get admitted.
anyone want to dispute that? that's what i thought. no one disagrees. so, awol has singlehandedly destroyed the myth of the excellence of the harvard business school.
if awol could be admitted and graduate, then the hbs is just another katherine gibbs secretarial school.
hell, katy gibbs grads are probably smarter.
Good post. Beth, good reference. And exactly to the point; it may be annoying to hear them babble on, but when the National Review says "please nominate this man" why should we listen to them? or not listen to them? Why people think Rove is a genius with infinitely more insight than anyone else I've never figured out.
Unless, of course, his pact with Satan is in fact a literal one, which is always an outside possibility.
It's not the candidates. It's us. Let's not forget that
Yes! That is so true.
And I should be asleep, because I have to get up in the morning to canvass for [my candidate of choice].
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSS! FINALLY SOME SANITY! Now what we need next is a scoring system with criteria, like an almanac of individual political record. And secure internet voting a'la australia.
Brooks actually has a thoughtful article in today's Times. Wow. It's been a while since that happened.
503
Let me repeat that:
Five Hundred and Three
"i wonder where all these demothugs were when those crimes against humanity were taking place.
is there a difference between demothugs and rethugs?
prove it."
albert champion
albert- you have tapped into my deepest fear. God I hope sombody can prove you wrong- I know I can't.
We have so degraded ourselves that peace is almost universally equated with weakness. Jesus help us 503.
If the latest news is correct the UN seems to be siding with the US against Sistani and elections-leaving the Shiites with nowhere to turn.
The Iraq mission may not be "Desert Challenger" but it is almost certainly looking like "Desert Columbia"
The Bush campaign fear only one candidate, Mr. Jackson Kirk Grimes, because he repesents the average conservative voter. Once Bush's base realizes this, he's a goner.
Is there a bigger wimp than Josh Marshall? First he lets Perle bat him around; now he is sort of defending the lying fudge-drudge on his bogus reporting of Dem candidates.
It seems to me that wimpy-ass liberals must get over trying to understand the wingers. Bottom line, the Muthafuckas are all evil.
I will never know whether Brooks or Kristof have a decent column. Why should I wade thru 20 columns of swill for one pearl of wisdom?
Yeah, I'm not going to worry about who can beat Bush. Let Rove worry about that. Some of you fret about every little pronouncement or supposed gaffe by Dean. You're like the emperor's attendants in the movie, The Last Emperor, examining each of the emperor's turds trying to predict the future. Get off it, will ya?
>"Is there a bigger wimp than Josh Marshall?"
Hey, I like Josh Marshall. We need a hard working journalist like him, and GOP bastards fear him.
anyway, yes, I agree, don't act like the GOP has all the power.
However, they have tons of money, they have FOX News and CNN. They have Diebold. And, if none of that works, they have Scalia.
Today's article from Brooks is worth a miss. He should keep to lifestyle reporting - there, at least, he's funny.
Kristof's article, Girls for Sale is worth a look.
I think that in terms of actually winning the election, whether the candidate is Dean, Kerry, Edwards or Clark matters little. If Zogby is correct and the blue and red states are as divided as his study shows, the dem nominee is going to win enough states to be competitive. Bush will take most of the same states he did in 2000 and there will be a few battlegrounds, cw says OH,FL,MO, etal. I don't see Dean winning anything Kerry won't take and visa-versa for all of them. Maybe Clark picks up AR or Edwards NC.
Please, please let it be Dean! Not only would the Midget Metrosexual receive a Mondale-Dukakis-McGovern thrashing at the hands of American voters, but his depressed and dour seething rage act is so funny to behold! He's _every_ GOPer's dream Dem candidate. Tootles.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but haven't the GOP come out and said who they would like to run against?
I remember hearing they would love to run against Dean because they know they can beat him.
On the other hand, I think that comment was meant to psyche out people into actually believing their propaganda.
They showed the video of Kerry during the singing of Puff the Magic Dragon and taking a drag off an air joint. I only saw it once on CNN.
But it was a giveme to Kerry.
Because 1. After seeing it I kind of liked kerry more than before. 2. Come on, the man was in Viet Nam, if he didn't smoke pot, something was wrong with him 3. Isn't Puff the Magic dragging about smoking pot? 4. All he has to say in response to "have you ever smoked Pot?" is: Come on, I was in Viet Nam, but if you want to talk about Drug use, let's bring up the Chimp's use of cocaine and the DUI that the media gave him a free pass on in the 2000 election.
Please, please let it be Dean! Not only would the Midget Metrosexual receive a Mondale-Dukakis-McGovern thrashing at the hands of American voters, but his depressed and dour seething rage act is so funny to behold! He's _every_ GOPer's dream Dem candidate. Tootles.
Karen Schell | Email | Homepage | 01.17.04 - 7:23 am | #
I think it's damn funny that the only person to completely miss the point about this is a Republican.
Karen, we don't care what you think. That's the point.
ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Adam 4-4-2
Lots of people love the anal vibrator.
Tracy
Dean, Kerry and Edwards admitted that they smoked pot.
Although Dean was only to claim loudly and without regret, the other two mumbled with heads hung low.
I don't see Dean winning anything Kerry won't take and visa-versa for all of them. Maybe Clark picks up AR or Edwards NC.
Kit
How wrong you can be. It is those first time voters that Dean is drawing who will make all the difference.
Being one who ONLY vote for Dean and not vote the rest, mainly because of IWR, I know there are a LOT of us out here.
Us.
You lunatics--and that includes me--they fear US.
Thersites
Right. They have done everything they wanted to do in spite of US.
Only the Democrats fear the average voter, that is why they attack Dean so much.
Karen, your keywords are from last week's memo. Get with the program.
I'm in complete agreement with Atrios.
It's like that scene in Little Big Man where Custer is trying to figure out whether to attack by determining whether Dustin Hoffman (who wishes him ill) wants him to attack, and then by trying to figure out how Hoffman's stated desire is calculated to mask his TRUE desire, etc., etc.
There are many places I'd like to go, but inside Karl Rove's head ain't one of them. Surely a better guiding light can be found.
Why would republicans suddenly change form and HONESTLY tell us who they fear most?
Honestly? I'm sure they are just as divided as to who they fear most, as we are as to who we like most. When it's all said and done, the candidate they fear most will be the one we select.
But.. but... Wesley is the Magical General who the Republicans will roll over and fall on their swords in front of!
Don't you understand, people? He doesn't need to learn how to campaign, or anything!
the repubs are gonna do a SCORCHED EARTH, no matter who our candidate is.
If a first time voter is only interested in voting Dean, that's there business. If they see no difference between the rest of the democratic field and Bush, again, there is nothing to be done about it. I assume they won't vote for Bush, so that is better than nothing.
Again, that leaves an essentially split nation, plus or minus a few points. But, if you think Dean will somehow win some red states, I'd say you've been listening too much to Deaniacs and not enough to average democratic voters.
This reminds me of the Nader thing. Vote however you want but don't whine when we have Herr Bush for another eight years.
What a silly rant, Atrios.
My response to the GOP is WHO CARES? If they want to face Gov. Howard Dean, MD 'cause they thnk he's easier to beat, then we'll bet them with Gov. Howard Dean. MD.
If they want to face Kerry, we'll bet 'em with Kerry.
In my view, having the race so tight is making Rove piss his pants with fear.
He has no control. And he doesn't know who's going to win.
It's fun watching them squirm.
Somebody should just come out and ask General Clark, "would you endorse Hillary at the convention, yes or no?"
Clark is a spoiler for the "Hillary Bomb" (my term), nothing more, nothing less.
Sew chaos during the primaries, resulting in
no clear candidate starting the convention,
In rides Hillary (ta da!) to save the day.
Clark then endorses Hillary (ta da!),
and it's deja vu all over again.
The Hillary Bomb
You know you want it.
Josh Marshall underperformed when I saw him on C-Span debating with the very fat and very evil, Richard Perle.
Perle put it right down the middle when he asked Marshall the question, "What would you have done after 9/11?" (implying justification for the Iraq war) and Marshall didn't even swing at it!!!
He could have asked how invading Iraq did anything about the fact of 9/11 or how it would prevent any future 9/11s since Al Qaeda is not headquartered in Baghdad, but instead he mumbled drivel.
"He's _every_ GOPer's dream Dem candidate. Tootles."
Karen Schell
Karen, it's "toodles" unless you actually farted on your way out.
"Ya know, ya don't hafta answer every fuckin spurious charge, tell 'em to fuck off....it worked like a charm for arnold. I do not lie......STUDY his campaign, it worked..."
The FUCK it did. Arnold only got in because the electorate can't process candidates in two months (instead of a year or six months minimum), and 17 counties used Diebold touchscreens without receipts AND ILLEGAL, UNCERTIFIED SOFTWARE.
Not only that, he lied through his teeth, and the media went along, and he's married to a Kennedy.
These are NOT repeatable circumstances, unless you live in HELL.
Find me the Dem candidate with billions of dollars in movie advertizing and the image of shooting .50 cal machine guns over the muscled arm. The comparison is RIDICULOUS.
Karen Schell, have you ever had a man slide his tongue up your anus?
I saw the same debate.
I don't think anybody could have done very well in that crowd.
Perle was trying to bait Marshall into being more aggressive. Had he taken the bait, they could have painted him as a far out, anti-semitic leftist ranter.
What was the first thing Perle said? "This is Josh Marshall. He and his friends spend every waking moment obsessing about neocons."
I think the lesson is not to go into a situation where the deck is stacked against you from the very beginning.
"Josh Marshall underperformed when I saw him on C-Span debating with the very fat and very evil, Richard Perle."
Adam 4-4-2 at 12:48 am: "Sadly, I fear that Bush will win no matter who the nominee is."
Please folks, stop buying the spin. Simple question: Do you personally know a single person who voted for Gore or Nader who is planning on voting for Bush?
Neither do I.
Now, how many of you personally know at least one person who voted for Bush who won't be doing it again? I know I do. They may not vote for the Dem nominee, but that's ok - all they have to do is stay home while the Gore/Nader voters from 2000 turn out for Bush to lose, and lose by a big margin.
The numbers are so clearly on our side, Bush's pathetic "record" so clearly favors our side, Bush had a huge pile of money in 2000 and didn't win, Bush had a pass from the media in 2000 while Gore was savaged by the press and Bush still didn't win.
One more thing: Karl Rove is not a genius; he's simply one of the most amoral men we've seen in a position of great power in this country. Don't confuse the willingness to stoop to any level with genius. True genius will trump slime any day of the week. We have to reach for true genius and wield it, work hard to turn out our voters, and Bush will be history (and not looked upon kindly by it, either).
Albert Champion,
Thanks for Manufacturing Consent. I started downloading it from suprnova an hour ago.
Nevermind who the Republicans fear, I wonder who the media whores fear. Clark's been semi-tough on Bush and K-Ro, but I wonder if he'll rip into the media.
Great, an open invite to bash Clark, Marshall and Kleinman. Don't make me link to that story about Rove at the 4th of July parade...
"Athenae. I mean policy flaws like his position on repealing all of the tax cuts, including those to the middle class."
That ain't a policy flaw, that's a 6 or 7 billion dollar deficit plus. Sure, sure, people want to vote for no taxes---duh. But Dean runs on the view that people also want to have schools and healthcare, and it ain't free. You cannot run a war and tax cuts at the same time, and Bx has saddled the country with SHIT for a decade at least (just like his Daddy, but oh so much 'better').
Dean is the candidate. After the ten or fifteen caucasians in Iowa get down from their barn lofts and get real, and the votes come in from around the country, that will be obvious. Clark is a strong potential candidate, but he is far from anything like perfect, not the least issue being his GODDAMNED PARTY AFFILIATION, which seems to be R R R just like that sonofabitch Ronald Reagan.
Don't switch and don't run until you see the whites in their eyes is not a campaign quality. And showing everyone in Americaca your soiled underwear like those GODDAMNED Senators did is not winnable either.
"We all have opinions, but as they say... "
ans.
We now know who the assholes are?
"One more thing: Karl Rove is not a genius; he's simply one of the most amoral men we've seen in a position of great power in this country."
Nope, it's undeniable he is a genius. He is helped in that by 1) a whole raft of right-wing thinktanks, 2) a whore press, 3) whatever CIA software has been developed to model political realities and events (and you KNOW there's plenty), and 4) Skull-n-bones methods (deep sociopathy).
That don't make him God, in fact it makes him something closer to a hyperintelligent babboon. He's a hairy shit-tosser, with a bright red ass.
Like his 'boss.'
What does the GOP fear? Lot's of things:
True freedom of expression
True journalism
Real elections
People whose skin is anything slightly different that white
Religions other than Christianity
Protesters in full view
News outlets other than Fox and Drudge
Having our government (which we all pay for) assist those who are less fortunate.
The powerbrokers of the Religious Right, who tell the GOP what to do.
Real debates
Real press conferences
(i'm getting tired)
"One more thing: Karl Rove is not a genius; he's simply one of the most amoral men we've seen in a position of great power in this country."
Yes, "amoral" is the perfect word. In fact, it's the perfect word for this administration and all the neocons.
MYOB, Jennifer, Paul, yer all talkin' good sense.
A.
Re: Dean'sdepressed and dour seething rage act
Shorter Karen Schell:
"I prefer an ignorant and immature frat-boy trying to act like a leader."
I thought the Shorter Karen Schell went more like this:
"More Kool-Aid, please!"
Amen Jennifer. And how many people who voted for Nader last time would vote for shrub?
My guess is that Rove and his minions are doing ALL they can right now to encourage a run by Nader - because theyknow that no matter who the Dem nom. is - he's certainly got a plurality of the vote again.
Signing off with my usual mantra...Fuck Bush and his fat whore mother
And one more thing, Athenae, since my ride is late for Saturday surfing (last week, saw a gray whale and about 15 dolphin, 1 sea lion, and a LOT of surf):
We are going to beat the SHIT out of Bxco. But we have to get off this 'election' bullshit right away. The way to beat Bxco is BEFORE the election, NOW, NOW, NOW. Don't wait, PROTEST!
Why do we protest (they say)? (we don't get on camera, they say). No! We protest to 1) express outrage, which keeps the pipes clear so the truth can still flow; and 2) to water the grassroots, and this is THE LARGEST LAWN IN US HISTORY.
It amazes me that people believe in opinion polls, right in the middle of the worst whore press in world history (given technology)! That shit ain't believable. There are 290 MILLION of us, and that ain't hay. If just 5% vote who didn't vote in 2000, we have this puppy made. Bxco, on the other hand, is scraping the bottom of the bucket on votes, as his (failed) Mars & 'Migrants thrashing around proves. They are in deep shit, and with any luck, they are going to get bloody noses real soon, from any of a number of severe pressure drops.
Fight on, and organize. Bringing out the real vote this country is capable is the REAL DEAL, and Dean brings out votes like a good pussy and pie.
Please, if I gave a damn about polls, TV and who other people, especially republicans, think about the candidates, I probably wouldn't be a Kucinich supporter.
But, I'll go the other way and posit that the one candidate the repubs aren't afraid of is Wesley Clark.
Sorry, but speculation + debate are what primary season is all about.
MYOB, Jennifer, Paul, yer all talkin' good sense.
This is good sense?
Clark is a strong potential candidate, but he is far from anything like perfect, not the least issue being his GODDAMNED PARTY AFFILIATION, which seems to be R R R just like that sonofabitch Ronald Reagan.
For the millionth time, Clark voted Dem in the last three elections (Clinton, Clinton, Gore) and was registered as an independent, not a Republican. At least Clark voted for Gore in '00, unlike a lot of you who helped hand the election to Bush by voting for Nader.
Plus, even if we did know who the Republicans want to face, who's to say they're right in thinking he'll be beatable?
Remember, these are the same geniuses who thought Bush could take California last time, so they sent him there instead of Florida on the last weekend before the election.
Caveat. I am just the jester.
>I think Mr. Bush is a nice man. But those nasty people advising him (read: Jews) are not so good. I wish he would get rid of them and let that nice Mr. Powell (read: even though he's a colored, he looks almost white) do his job. The Democrats are really very weak aren't they. By the way, who is this Rove person?<
This is a slightly ironic distillation of what I hear all the time from people who actually vote.
ed, among others, nails it.
unlike a lot of you who helped hand the election to Bush by voting for Nader.
Kevin K.
Explain just how a nader vote caused the SCOTUS decision? Or how the Nader vote caused Gore to lose his homw state?
Or how that Nader vote caused the purging of black voters from the Fla rolls?
You are just full of shit and looking for a convenient excuse.
BlakNo1
Did you see Michael Moore dissed Dennis?
Wonder why?
"For the millionth time, Clark voted Dem in the last three elections (Clinton, Clinton, Gore) and was registered as an independent, not a Republican."
An independent who voted for a LOT of assholes.
"At least Clark voted for Gore in '00, unlike a lot of you who helped hand the election to Bush by voting for Nader.--Kevin K."
Nader? What makes you think you are among Naderites?
Clark has spent a lot more of the last three years UP BXCO'S ASS, and I for one don't forgive him for that, just like I'm not real big on the Janitors.
But Clark isn't necessarily bad; he ought to take the second spot, if he can get it any more, and then we'd have a killer ticket. But I meet people all day long in the streets who share my view that the last thing we want is a general, after the military has simulatneously been hyped and shattered.
A return to real civilian gov't, please.
I can't emphasize enough how bogus this left / middle / right is. It is only perception. Period. We had Bush's record in TX, and Cheney's extremism, but no one but Ivins bothered to look at / report it. (Three years too late, the NYT points out that the TX Miracle was a fraud. Thanks.)
I'm a Dean supporter, 'cause the only chance the US has is with a candidate / campaign that recognizes that this election will be a referendum on Bush. But I realize that Dean may not be shaping up as the best candidate. His tax proposal is "bad" politics, and, most importantly, the media hates him. I thought that maybe the Deaniac phenomenon would overcome the media, but they can't even beat Hair Kerry the Corpse in IA.
Right now, I think our best (but not only) chance is Clark / Dean, with Clark being strong and smart, Dean attacking *Cheney* relentlessly, and Edwards as AG attacking Ashcroft tirelessly (and a full shadow cabinet working hard around the country).
The country already agrees on the issues. But we keep getting trounced. Perceptions.
The FUCK it did. Arnold only got in because the electorate can't process candidates in two months (instead of a year or six months minimum), and 17 counties used Diebold touchscreens without receipts AND ILLEGAL, UNCERTIFIED SOFTWARE.
Not only that, he lied through his teeth, and the media went along, and he's married to a Kennedy.
These are NOT repeatable circumstances, unless you live in HELL.
Find me the Dem candidate with billions of dollars in movie advertizing and the image of shooting .50 cal machine guns over the muscled arm. The comparison is RIDICULOUS.
Paul
That is bullshit. Arnold won because the Dems were weak. Nothing more.
Face facts since Bush has taken office Democrats have either supported him or lost on every meaningfull issue.
Time to start blaming themselves instead of everything but.
Instead of supporting Bushco against the will of the voters, like Hillary and the IWR, Democrats should have been the party of opposition.
They were not.
They failed us so that they could swill from the corporate trough.
Not a single one of those Bush enablers will ever get mu vote.
At least Dean acts like REAL opposition and listens to his base.
The others don't give a shit, they make hollow election year promises and that is it.
No shit, Anon. Not 2 months ago he was screaming, as Michael is wont to do, about how during the primaries we have to vote our conscience and that Dennis was a good way to do that. Speculating about what changed his mind now however, without available facts, is so much tin-foil-hattery unitl we know what's up.
I am very curious though...
Atrios is wrong, wrong, wrong again! There IS a Democrat most feared by General Rove: http://www.politics1.com/
dems04....ms04.htm#vermin
MattB
I think you are wrong on Clark.
he hasn't caught fire. And he was only thrown in when the rest failed their DLC masters.
Dean needs someone who is just as independent as he is. I trust no Democrat who has been office for a while, but at least Graham had the sense to vote against the war.
So maybe Dean Graham.
But I meet people all day long in the streets who share my view that the last thing we want is a general, after the military has simulatneously been hyped and shattered.
It's the civilians in the Pentagon who have "hyped and shattered" the military.
I am very curious though...
BlakNo1
Funding, hollywood.
Looks simple to me.
He wants to make more films.
The threatened his financing or distribution.
Everything does boil down to money in the end.
We do NOT keep getting trounced. We have gotten beaten by underhanded, illegal, even treasonous manipulations, and more is coming.
Dean and IA is a non-issue. That's a handful of people and 2 electoral votes. If anyone really gives a shit, I'm surprised.
And 'the media hates him'? Are you kidding? This is a vote that is being made person-by-person, aka 'grassroots.'
And with that, I apologize for the Dean rants. We can afford to be generous. Go ahead! Give it a shot. If Clark can win the nomination, I'll vote for him. But he's a lot less crossover than Dean, and he's too much of an unknown for my taste. Still, I do believe in ABB, and I'm glad that the Janitors will be toast in no time.
It's the civilians in the Pentagon who have "hyped and shattered" the military.
Kevin K.
So Operation Northwoods was a civilian plan?
Anonymous,
Michael Moore disparaged DK because he (Michael) feels guilty about having supported Nader.
"It's the civilians in the Pentagon who have "hyped and shattered" the military.--Kevin K."
What civilians? Those are corporations, my friend.
I do believe it is Bxco that did this, not really the Pentagon, but Donald and Dick have screwed the pooch but good, and showed what real assbites the Joint Chiefs are.
Nope, real civilian leadership is not beholden to corporations, or to the corpse of Neocon foreign escapades.
We do NOT keep getting trounced. We have gotten beaten by underhanded, illegal, even treasonous manipulations, and more is coming.
Paul
Throw out some examples.
Arnold? How was that fit your criteria?
Midterms? If they were stolen where is the outrage from your own parties leaders?
Democrats have failed the people.
Dean represents the people wanting to take their government back.
That is why he can not guarantee that all his supporters will vote for another candidate.
We are disgusted with the business as usual rubberstamp Democrats.
Paul
Don't limit to Bushco.
Clinton pandered to the Arms dealers, and continually increased the defense budget.
If I recall correectly carter was doing the same thing way back when.
Michael Moore disparaged DK because he (Michael) feels guilty about having supported Nader.
Magnum
Right, and pie is a genius of Einsteinian caliber.
"Michael Moore disparaged DK because he (Michael) feels guilty about having supported Nader.--Magnum"
Not really. Moore has a high school education, and readily admits that he is a blue collar voter. DK isn't the hero of the unions, Dean is.
But Moore will vote for the general, who does speak well to that demographic.
DK is quite strident. It would be more endearing if he didn't pound his chest so much, which is silly in someone who sleeps in a matchbox.
checck it out, first of all thanks Atrios for writing this post, it's a good and oft overlooked point. the cons will use the same lingo and attacks no matter who is nominated, but I think that it's really premature to say that suddenly Clark is the most electable or feared candidate, as Michael Moore recenlty has...I think that overestimates, and sorry to use the term, the importance of the Iraq war in terms of the election. No domestic experience in policy making?? Not going to get votes, if you ask me. The attacks have been so vicious against Dean, I think for two reasons - 1) civil unions legislation and 2) he uses words like "re-regulation" and "monopoly". NOW LET ME TELL YA, those are some scary ass words to people like Tim Russert's bosses, Tucker Carlson's bosses, Brit Humes' bosses...the left is very focused on tracking journos right now, but they don't even think for themselves. They do what the people they have to report to tell them to do, and what those people are telling them to do is destroy Dean.
"Throw out some examples. Arnold? How was that fit your criteria?"
Answered above.
"Midterms? If they were stolen where is the outrage from your own parties leaders?"
We are in the process of replacing them.
"Democrats have failed the people."
Oh, hardly. We are in a two party system, and it is a BIG party. Coups are very hard circumstances...maybe you have noticed.
"Dean represents the people wanting to take their government back.
That is why he can not guarantee that all his supporters will vote for another candidate.
We are disgusted with the business as usual rubberstamp Democrats.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 01.17.04 - 10:26 am | #
Paul
Don't limit to Bushco.
Clinton pandered to the Arms dealers, and continually increased the defense budget.
If I recall correectly carter was doing the same thing way back when.
Anonymous
Sorry, f*king holoscan.
"We are disgusted with the business as usual rubberstamp Democrats."
Welcome to American politics, anon.
Carter and Clinton were both pretty weak. But blaming candidates for the failures of the country is rather absurd. Not only do you not have a name, you are apparently unaware of the real inimical forces in our society. Is it Clinton's fault that the country went apeshit over Somalia, but is (so far) letting Bxco slide on a rolling disaster?
I'm a liberal dem, lifelong, but I'm no idolizer of Clinton or Carter. When you get back from the land of perfect Presidents, let me know.
"That is bullshit. Arnold won because the Dems were weak. Nothing more."
Nonsense. Go explain to me how Plumas county, with a hardcore McClintock electorate, voted overwhelmingly for...
Mary Carey.
A-ha-ha-ha. Isn't Diebold voting fun?
There was outright voter intimidation in (Dem) Monterey county. In much of LA, there was no parking at (changed) voting places. And Kevin Shelley (Sec of State) screwed us royally-- another R in D clothing.
Given my druthers, I will be gathering thousands of signatures on recall petitions for Frankinegger and Kevin Shelley any day now.
And the CA election commission is holding a formal investigation of Diebold's contracts and actions.
Carter and Clinton were both pretty weak. But blaming candidates for the failures of the country is rather absurd. Not only do you not have a name, you are apparently unaware of the real inimical forces in our society. Is it Clinton's fault that the country went apeshit over Somalia, but is (so far) letting Bxco slide on a rolling disaster?
I'm a liberal dem, lifelong, but I'm no idolizer of Clinton or Carter. When you get back from the land of perfect Presidents, let me know.
Paul
So you don't want better politicians who represnet what is best for the majority of the people? You don't have standards?
Do you buy milk after the expiration?
If you don't trust your candidates, what is the point in voting for them?
I doubt that an apologist for Clinton is really a liberal Democrat. More like a Phil Ochs love me I'm a Liberal Democrat.
Anon - I too am disgusted with rubberstamp Democrats (aka the DLC). But if their guy wins the nomination, I'll vote for him.
Atrios is right. Regardless of who the nominee is, their tactics will be the same: smear, smear, smear through their willing accomplices in the media.
Forget the talk radio ranters - they aren't going to change anyone's mind. The people who listen to them & believe in them don't have minds.
Dean, Clark, Edwards, Kerry are *all* imminently "electable" provided they stay on message: Bush is a disaster for you and your children, and here is what I will do to reverse the damage he's done to you and your family's interests. No amount of media carping about sweaters or hairstyles or cheesesteaks or "anger" will trump that. I welcome the prospect of seeing any of them show up the media for the irrelevancy they have become.
(Note: I didn't include Gephardt in the "electable" category because I think he's too uninspiring to even win the nomination, though he obviously would be a much better president than what we've got - and I would vote for him if the earth starting spinning backwards and he won the nomination.)
Paul
If you feel that the election if Ca was stolen then where are the Democrats who support your claims?
Why aren't they just jumping all over the whole Diebold/BBV thing?
The issue is trusting the rubberstamp Democrats right?
So where are they?
Anon - I too am disgusted with rubberstamp Democrats (aka the DLC). But if their guy wins the nomination, I'll vote for him.
Jennifer
I will not vote for a candidate that follows the same policies as Bushco.
If you paint a piece of shit and call it something else, in the end it is still just a piece of shit with paint on it.
I'll vote against the one party system if Dean isn't the nominee.
At least if I vote for Dean I'm voting for something.
Clark, Edwards, Kerry are *all* imminently "electable" provided they stay on message: Bush is a disaster for you and your children, and here is what I will do to reverse the damage he's done to you and your family's interests. No amount of media carping about sweaters or hairstyles or cheesesteaks or "anger" will trump that. I welcome the prospect of seeing any of them show up the media for the irrelevancy they have become.
Jennifer
How can they be electable when they voted for Bushco policies, other than Clark,?
Don't you think someone will say, but you voted for it also?
What do you get then, Kerry Nuance?
Do you think people really want to hear the hemming and hawing about what is is all over again?
People want CLEAR cut opposition.
With Clark he seems to be the DLC go to guy when the others were failing.
Why vote for the business as usual DLC types anyway?
They attack Dean because he offers real change.
I see that that stupid dipshit Karen is here, but hasn't given me any Pioneers money yet. Like Karl says yew little turd get with the program.
trust me, those dipshits fear wes clark. the man has balls and intelligence, two things president drunk and stupid has none of.
I think Dean, Edwards, Kerry and Clark are electible, but for me, I want a candidate who REALLY can change the tone in Washington. I think Dean has the most potential to do that, with Edwards being close behind. To me, these two are by far the most sincere of the viable candidates.
I think Kerry will change it a little, but it will continue to be business as usual and we'll be sitting here bitching about the "corporate" president in another 4 years. I'm not pleased with the way Kerry rubberstamped Bush's policies for the sake of re-election.
Then there's Clark. Clark is the least likely to change the tone, in fact I think it will be even more devisive. His hiring of Chris Lehane is an indiction that he has no intentions of doing so. I use to really like Clark, but the more I watch him and the more crap Lehane puts out (Trooper wife beater, old tapes of shows, $15,000 gain on stock) the more I grow to distrust him. I think he's a pawn for the DLC and I see him as passive aggressive. He's a general for God's sake, why does he act like Mother Teresa? I just don't trust him. He might really stand for good things, but he needs to cut the crap.
Also, since Clark is viewed widely as Clinton's pawn, brace for another 4 years of scandals.
Oh, if you don't believe Lehane is behind the Rovian tactics, ask Kerry's campaign manager who was actually calling out Lehane about it on Tweedy's.
Well, I for one don't see how Dean can expect to be elected if he continues treating Maureen Dowd the way that Michaeld Douglas did.
-----
Sat Jan 17 2004 9:10:05 ET
**Exclusive Preview**
NEW YORK TIMES op-ed queen Maureen Dowd was left waiting by the phone by Democratic presidential nominee Howard Dean, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
After scheduling a phone interview with Dowd at her hotel in Des Moines, the candidate never called!
Dowd is preparing to write about the snub in her Sunday column, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
"I never got the five minutes with him!" Dowd regrets. "Which left me five minutes to think about why his candidacy was sputtering."
...
Click.
Developing...
No, seriously! That was on Fudge & not a parody site!
Ha-fuckin-ha!
just heard lynn samuels on sirius radio say maureen dowd was left waiting by her hotel phone by dean according to drudge. after that hit piece on dean's wife, i'm not surprised.
isn't it strange that a columnist would rely on a landline instead of a cell phone since it's 2004, not 1904? wouldn't a good columnist not a hack, try and hunt down dean if she really wanted to speak to him since he's all over the place?
i checked his site of course and it's there. drudge often posts these "developing" pieces before they run in the paper.
it's obvious drudge knows someone inside the nyt. who could be his source? my money is on bill keller, the moderate dem who used to write op-eds on saturday. since he replaced howell raines, i can't trust the times.
(btw, you don't need a sirius hookup to hear samuels. she's on till 1pm)
Anon and Hansel: I too have my preference for who wins the nomination.
But Anon, you're mistaken if you think that most people pay any attention to the insider baseball behind the DLC vs. Dean stuff. The majority of voters just want to get rid of Bush, and I happen to agree with them on that point. Most of them probably don't care about who was the most anti-war, as long as he's not Bush.
Like I said, I have my preference, but I'll vote for any of them.
"Josh Marshall underperformed when I saw him on C-Span debating with the very fat and very evil, Richard Perle."
Josh had the Flu, and should have been home in bed.
"Perle was trying to bait Marshall into being more aggressive. Had he taken the bait, they could have painted him as a far out, anti-semitic leftist ranter."
Well, they already think he's a far out lefty, but calling a Jew an antiSemite would be a bit stupid even for them.
"calling a Jew an antiSemite would be a bit stupid even for them."
You've obviously never been exposed to the "self-hating jew" gambit.
way back upthread folks were talking about JMM getting hammered by Perle, but according to his blog he barely made it to that debate due to being sick with the flu. he figured it would be better to be out there kicking out some opposing views than letting the paleocons have the entire format
>Sadly, I fear that Bush will win no matter who the nominee is.
Well then shut the fuck up. Loser talk is not welcomed.
I have no doubt that while Jesus would probably love most homosexuals, he would hate most Christians.
It's been obvious for months now that Howard Dean is the one candidate who the GOP truly fears. Yet, they brilliantly played us off one another with the meaningless "unelectable" label repeated endlessly by their side. The biggest mistake the Dems would make this year is not having Dean's huge and motivated campaign as a part of the Democratic ticket.
Jennifer,
Yes, I'll vote for any of them too. But since I believe we have several electable candidates (Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Clark) and I'm pretty sure one of them is going to get the nomination, whether or not they are electable is not the issue.
I think a lot of voters are going the route of picking a candidate based on their electability rather than what they stand for and who they are. I don't know how many times I've heard people say, "I like Dean but xxxxx (add in your favorite talking point of why he's not electable.) I've heard it about other candidates as well. If you like a candidate and you don't think he's a complete longshot, vote for him. The rest is BS manipulated by the media talking points and our very own Rovian campaign manager, Chris Lehane.
It never ceases to amaze me how clueless some people are. I saw a guy on Luntz's focus group who said he was at first leaning toward Dean but then he went out and really researched the candidates. And what was his decision after "researching the candidates?" Kerry was in Vietnam so he should be strong on national defense. Apparently he researched by watching Fox News.
Of all of the candidates Dean is more likely, and this is only my opinion, to steer politics away from the very damaging direction in which they are headed and to bring the people back into the process. And I say this even if he doesn't win the nomination. I think he will work his ass off to be quite frank, to get Democratic congress and senate candidates elected.
The pundits are laughing because those who support him are bloggers, college students, and high school kids. I'm 50 years old, but I was a student early in the year, so I guess that counts. In another 5 years they'll be laughing out of the other side of their faces when a majority of people are bloggers and the "high school kids" are all grow'd up and ready for payback. Washington needs a change and I think it's coming. I'd like to see it happen sooner than later and in a positive direction.
I don't want to see a candidate win by employing Rovian tactics or because they pander to the talking points. I want to see them win because they stand for the people and what's best for this country. We have some candidates who are saying this is what they stand for, but are acting in contradictory ways that deeply trouble me. (Gephardt, Clark, Lieberman, and up until very recently, Kerry.)
The biggest mistake the Dems would make this year is not having Dean's huge and motivated campaign as a part of the Democratic ticket.
Yoda
I couldn't agree more. Dean has motivated the first time voters in ways that no presidential candidate ever has, including Clinton. And he is a money raising machine. I've never contributed a dime to politicians in the past, but have already contributed $325 Dean and plan to go the whole $2000 if he wins the nomination. Not only because I think he is a winner, but because he is using his efforts to motivate those who haven't voted in the past. These are the people we need.
Also, even Joe Biden knows Dean's important. Jon Stewart was trying to get Joe to say something about Dean. Joe rolled out a hardy laugh and said in a less than half joking manner something to the effect that 'I'm not going to say anything bad about Dean, he's the guy with all the money!'
If Clark or Edwards wins the nomination, they are going to need him.
"We have met the enemy... and he is us"
Where's Walt when we need him?!
frankly, the returdicans fear the candidates that will get the sheeple off their asses to vote.
What everyone neglects to mention is that an administration is a team. It doesn't matter who the 'boss' is, because he isn't the boss. He's a figurehead whose image gets the vote out.
Here's my utterly meaningless opinion:
Dean would win.
Clark would win.
Edwards would win.
Kerry would lose.
Gephardt would lose.
Lieberman would lose.
Kucinich and Sharpton would lose.
If you find yourself worrying about democrats and republicans, go and listen to some Mozart.
Yes, I agree! Do as I did and rent a video of Don Giovanni, and enjoy how a rich, pathological, amoral bastard gets his in the end. All we need is a big statue to drag aWol into hell-gee whiz, any one of the thousands of people that he has killed would do just fine! I can see it now, "Don Arbusco, come with me..."
My candidate can take your candidate.
Magnum,
I agree on everyone but Kerry. I don't particularly like Kerry, but I do think he could beat Bush. Although he has the charisma of the old Gore.
Ralph Nader says that he would help defeat Bush if he runs for president as an independent.
Why does Nader think this. Does he that Bush will self-destruct in his 2nd term?
Listen to Nader at the link above - the best part is near the end where the Republican complains because he thinks Democrats are elitist.
"Bush may not be the smartest president, but he's a good, Christian man."
You'll find barf bags in the pocket in front of you.
PROOF!
Study: Dean Most-Criticized on TV News
I may have done some silly, stupid things in my life, but voting for Nader wasn't one of them. What a self-important whackjob he is.
Hansel - You're preaching to the choir here. I'm on the same team as you are, and for the same reasons. I was only pointing out that for the majority of voters, the inside baseball stuff that we find important doesn't register with them in the slightest. Because we recognize its importance, we're backing Dean in the primaries. Because they don't, and because they get their news about "angry Dean" and "unelectable Dean" from the media, many of them are backing others. I suspect that all of us will get behind whoever wins the nomination (well, everyone but Anon, anyway.)
Jennifer - I think we are on the same page. I know the majority of voters don't pay attention and that's why I think the Dean phenomenon is such an important thing. The media has been beating up on him for months and he still hangs in there. At some point people will want find out why, just out of curiosity if nothing else.
I understand that Zogby is saying that increasingly more people are becoming less concerned about whether Dean is electable. They are waking up out of their stupor and actually starting to see through the sound bites. As they awaken, maybe, just maybe, we can add to the numbers of 'inside baseball' observers. People hate being lied to once they recogize that they are. This is what it's going to take to clean up politics. The scumbag politicians are counting on the fact that people aren't paying close attention. What happens when this changes?
I see a shift in the way the media is treating Dean. It's very subtle, but I think it's real. It's seems they have quit relying on other reporters and smear artists' sound bites and started looking at him for who he is. I would imagine the mountains of email they have received from supporters are starting to have an effect. Maybe they have figured out we aren't what they have been assuming we were and they better start showing a little respect.
I will vote for whoever gets the nomination as well. But as I stated before, I'm pretty sure it will be Dean, Edwards, Kerry or Clark so that makes my choice a little easier, although I still don't quite trust Clark and Kerry pisses me off and is a Washington spineless meme.
Anyone watch Real Time last night? Issa used the defense that will kill Kerry and Edwards if they are the candidate.
He claimed that most of congress were not voting because of the WMD's, but because it was the MORAL thing to do.
So Dean, and possibly Clark ( although he looked as unimpressive as Moby last night) is the only one NOT vulnerable on the issue.
I may have done some silly, stupid things in my life, but voting for Nader wasn't one of them. What a self-important whackjob he is.
BlakNo1
For all the good he has done this nation, this is what he gets.
Will you be removing the seat belts from your car in protest of Nader?
Why does Nader think this. Does he that Bush will self-destruct in his 2nd term?
Hansel
Bush would if he had a second term.
His own party would destroy him.
So if they don't fear Dean why the attacks on him and no one else? Of course, it may be that others would get attacked as soon as they pulled ahead, but Dean never "pulled ahead" in the sense of a mysterious shift on meaningless polls taken from a stacked population, like what would normally be wasting our time. Dean's...you know, "energizing apathetic voters who would be watching casrtoons otherwise", yadda &cet..
But the candidate the Rethugs most fear is clearly Georgie Walker B. Think about it-the handling, the control, the ongoing drinking, the outbursts, the possibilities...
Hansel, I wouldn't believe anything from a Zogby poll. In recent years, they've been way off base. The worst examples from Zogby was in 2000 they had Bush and Gore in a statistical dead heat. Gore won in Illinois by 11 percentage points. Then in 2002, on the Sunday before the election for governor, they had Jim Ryan ahead of Rod Blagojovich. Rod won by 7 percentage points. Zogby later admitted that people like to lie to telephone pollsters.
As for me? I got a call the other day asking who I favored in the Democrat Senate Primary. The pollster mispronounced half the names. After I gave my opinion, he asked me what state I was in. Illinois, I said. Where is that? he asked. In the Central Time Zone, the Midwest, touching the Southwest shore of Lake Michigan. Why do you ask? I said. The pollster admitted he was calling from India. At least he'll be impartial...
Abuses force America to end aid to Uzbekistan
No more boling people alive. Well, at least not on our dime.
Scalia, Cheney duck hunt while energy case is pending
Vice President Dick Cheney and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spent part of last week duck hunting together at a private camp in south Louisiana just three weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to take up the vice president’s appeal in lawsuits over his handling of the administration’s energy task force.
While Scalia and Cheney are avid hunters and longtime friends, several experts in legal ethics questioned the timing of their trip and said it raised doubts about Scalia’s ability to judge the case impartially. But Scalia rejected that concern Friday, saying “
I do not think my impartiality could reasonably be questioned.”
Arthur,
Yeah, but I think nearly all polls are biased, and Zogby has been particularly dismissive of Dean. He and I had an email exchange over his dismissive and smirky description of Dean supporters as angry, anti-war, out-of-the-mainstream liberals who hate Bush, blah, blah. I told him that he didn't describe me at all and explained how I and many other Dean supporters I know differ from that description.
Of course he came back the the snappy line "A little sensitive?...I can't list every supporter." Very condescending, but I politely wrote him back reminding him he's pollster, I'm a voter, I'm giving my opinion, don't take it personally. And then encouraged him to stop parroting media talking points and dig a little deeper.
What I'm saying is that Zogby, despite his biases, publicly accepted and admitted that an increasing number of people see Dean as electable. That's a concession considering just 2 weeks ago he was pretty much telling King on CNN that Dean's support is limited to lefty loons. He didn't need to mention it, he could have stayed with the +/- 4.5 line and left it there. Baby steps, baby steps.
If we are going to write and bitch about the media and ask them to change, we also need to recognize when they are starting to do so. However subtle the change.
I haven't been here before. After reading a hundred or so postings and trying to assimilate what I see here, it seems to me you folks should go with the Diebold voting machine thing. It holds the most promise giving you a fresh start in 2005.
Young Republicans Storm Dean Rally in IA - shout four more years as they attempt to take over the stage!
Evidence they are taking the fight where the fight is READY?
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/a...ves/
003214.html
We have footage!
My sis just called from IA and said one of ours got video of the event, but didn't see any other media but the local Fox affiliate. One gal filmed it all and another pal had to hop onstage to keep them from storming the stage as they shouted "4 More Years".
Apparently, one of them pushed Joan Jett who responded: You can push me, but don't touch my guitar. (this guitar kills fascists...)
They then got the video to HQ, where Trippi thanked them. This should be quite useful for the campaign, and I wonder if it will get any news coverage.
I immediately thought of how they trashed the Wellstone memorial event with all their "manufactured outrage", and I expect to be hearing a lot of genuine outrage about these Young Republicans' methods of political activism!
>"Explain just how a nader vote caused the SCOTUS decision? Or how the Nader vote caused Gore to lose his homw state?
Or how that Nader vote caused the purging of black voters from the Fla rolls?
You are just full of shit and looking for a convenient excuse."
Anonymous
Dude, the Nader vote caused the election to be so close that it made those other things really matter (SCOTUS, ballot dispute, purging voter rolls).
I hope that never again we have an egotist like Nader tip the election like that, with the excuse that "since the Dems are like the Repubs, we need to let things get really bad, so the Dems will shape up" (the quote is my own version of the "reasons to vote Nader" that I used to hear)
Can anyone say that if Gore was President, we would have had a foolish pre-emptive war? Because the election was tipped to Bush, a lot of young men and women, who were just in high school not so long ago, have now died in this bloody neo-con madness in Iraq. Well, I hope this is bad enough for everyone who thought Gore deserved to lose!!!
"So you don't want better politicians who represent what is best for the majority of the people? You don't have standards?"
"...I doubt that an apologist for Clinton is really a liberal Democrat. More like a Phil Ochs love me I'm a Liberal Democrat.--Anonymous"
Lovely day at the shore...and I found a fossil shark's tooth!
"So you don't want better politicians who represent what is best for the majority of the people? You don't have standards?"
Of course I have standards, and I protest every week in the long fight for OUR standards. My primary standard is NO RACISM. Every single candidate on the Dem side is a non-racist, unlike Bx and most of his henchmen, who are racists AND sociopaths.
"...I doubt that an apologist for Clinton is really a liberal Democrat. More like a Phil Ochs love me I'm a Liberal Democrat.--Anonymous"
I don't have to 'apologize' for Clinton, who presided over the greatest peace and happiness for the most people in the history of the world.
Perfect? Shit, perfect won't be here for 200 years. We have to SURVIVE until then, that's the main job. You probably don't see a lot of racists, but I am in their faces on a weekly basis. 'Love me' blah-blah-blah? That's hilarious. It's more like 'Get back in your truck you fucking racist shitpile!'
Clinton was very weak in foreign policy, as is the US itself. We need a real change in the country's WILLINGNESS to take responsible responsibility for our enormous power and for the condition of the world's peoples and habitat. Gov. Dean is the best candidate for that we have seen (and I have seen, with my own eyes) in fifty years.
"We need a real change in the country's WILLINGNESS to take responsible responsibility for our enormous power and for the condition of the world's peoples and habitat."
Quoting myself in order to emphasize that the main question for me in the primary is not who can beat Bxco, because I think that's ANY DECENT CANDIDATE, but rather, who can lead the country to a higher plane of willingness to embrace liberal values.
And that's Gov. Dean, in spades. He has proven his ability to bring out a LOT of political will in this unusual time. And he campaigns on hard issues, like saying, we have to pull back the tax cuts, we have to ensure our domestic unity, we have to respect human rights, and YOU, THE POPULACE have to do the heavy lifting, not the candidate like the country is populated by crybabies and fanatics. He is not just calling on patriotism like Clark tends to.
Dean will be an 'ask not' type of President in the JFK mold, instead of the 'ask not' type in the Nixon mold (that Bx is reforging into an even bigger historical cockup).
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
