Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

FixCam Week in Preview ... and Theme Song Finals

Note: Please upgrade your Flash plug-in to view our enhanced content.

Three things to watch this week:

1. Mississippi Primary: Given the Magnolia State's 36 percent black population, Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) has to be favored in tomorrow's primary. He has dominated southern states so far in the nomination fight thanks in large part to overwhelming support from the African American community -- carrying this voting bloc at an eight- or even nine-to-one clip over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.). Obama's wins in Georgia (28.5 percent black), Alabama (25.9 percent) and South Carolina (29.4 percent) should provide a blueprint for a win in Mississippi. The lone question is how big Obama's margin will be over Clinton and how many more delegates that yields him.

2. The Media and Mr. Obama: The last two weeks have been terrible for Obama. First, the trial of Tony Rezko began, then came Austan Goolsbee and Samantha Power. Obama's campaign has sought to change the subject by calling on the media to look into the continued delay in the release of Clinton's tax returns. Will it work? A third straight week of bad press for Obama will continue to add fuel to the storyline that Clinton is on the ascent. And remember, the uncommitted superdelegates seem content to sit on the sidelines for now. How the media narrative plays out over the next six weeks will certainly influence how they make up their minds.

3. Michigan and Florida: What to do about the delegates of these two states dominated the Sunday shows this weekend. All sides -- Clinton, Obama, state parties and the Democratic National Committee -- seem open to the idea of a re-vote. The rub? Money. The DNC isn't willing to fund do-over primaries since they warned Michigan and Florida of the peril of moving their primary dates forward in the nominating calendar. Neither state party at the moment has the millions required to fund the re-votes on their own. Watch for the proposal put forward by Govs. Ed Rendell (Pa.) and Jon Corzine (N.J.) -- both Clinton supporters -- to raise $15 million for the revotes to get a lot of attention this week.

Also, the first vote on The Fix official theme song produced a deadlock between "The Fix Is In" by OK GO and "November Rain" by Guns N Roses. So, we enter sudden death. Vote between the two below:

By Chris Cillizza  |  March 10, 2008; 8:45 AM ET
Categories:  FixCam  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: House Dems Score Special Election Upset
Next: Putting The Hastert Seat Loss in Context

Comments

Chris- Godzilla was brilliant suggestion--here are some new lyrics to Cillzilla, the bane of campaign operatives and spinners. As for November Rain, the song is sacred and should not be desecrated.

**Cillzilla, Lyrics by Merganser

With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound

He pulls the politicians' high spin down

Helpless campaign operatives on the campaign plane

Scream bug-eyed as he turns their inane rhetoric back on them

He picks up a poll and he throws it back down

As he wades through the demographic data of every hamlet and town

Oh no, they tell the Post he's got to go

Go go Cillzilla, yeah

Oh no, there goes our talking points exposed as so-so

Go go Cillzilla, yeah

[Japanese gibberish omitted--I'm not that good!]

Oh no, they tell the Post he's got to go

Go go Cillzilla, yeah

Oh no, there goes our talking points exposed as so-so

Go go Cillzilla, yeah

History shows again and again

How the politicians try to exploit the folly of men

Cillzilla!

Posted by: merganser | March 10, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

From the Ben Stein letter, here's the paragraph I like:

"To put it even more starkly, the government -- which is us -- needs the money to keep old people alive, to pay for their dialysis, to build fighter jets and to pay our troops and pay interest on the debt. We can get it by indenturing our children, selling ourselves into peonage to foreigners, making ourselves a colony again, generating inflation -- or we can have some integrity and levy taxes equal to what we spend."

LEVY TAXES EQUAL TO WHAT WE SPEND. What a novel concept...

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

THESE CLINTON FOLKS ARE STILL SMOKING THAT PIPE, THEY ARE SO OUT OF TOUCH, ITS BECOMING CYNICAL & DELUSIONAL

Hillary Clinton is the Most Divisive Politician ever, Very Polarizing and Manipulative. This game should be over based on the Math, but no that won't happen because its all about the Clintons.

My oh My....How can you loss 12 straight contest and still be in the race

She can't win farely, so she wants to burn the whole ship. Democrats are so dumb, they'll loss again in November

Why isn't the Goal Post North Carolina? Why mUst the goal post be Clinton Country? It Baffles me!!!!!!!!! Hillary has tamed all of you in the press, you guys are scared of her

THE RACE IS OVER KAPISH, CHRIS, ITS TIME FOR OBAMA VS McCSAME

Posted by: jsu4193k | March 10, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

...a well-reasoned, thoughtful letter -- thank you for the link bsimon.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

drindl:
The 'open letter' from Ben Stein to McCain:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/business/09every.html?em&ex=1205294400&en=7d16c07d81de1ad8&ei=5087%0A

"[T]he Republican Party (my party and yours) has for the last 30 years or so been operating under a demonstrably false and misleading premise: that tax cuts pay for themselves by generating so much economic growth that they replace the sums lost by tax cutting.

This would be a lovely thing if true, and the best of all ideas, the "something for nothing" idea. In fact, tax cuts lower federal revenue and generate federal deficits."

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

drindl:
The 'open letter' from Ben Stein to McCain:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/business/09every.html?em&ex=1205294400&en=7d16c07d81de1ad8&ei=5087%0A

"[T]he Republican Party (my party and yours) has for the last 30 years or so been operating under a demonstrably false and misleading premise: that tax cuts pay for themselves by generating so much economic growth that they replace the sums lost by tax cutting.

This would be a lovely thing if true, and the best of all ideas, the "something for nothing" idea. In fact, tax cuts lower federal revenue and generate federal deficits."

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

I know that the media is doing very well $ wise with the way the Primary season is going. I think that it is being unfair to Sen. Barack Obama and heres why. If Sen. Hillary Clinton had won as many Primary and
Caucus as Sen. Obama had done before the Texas and Ohio Primary, the talk would of been not if Sen. Obama could make a comeback, but why will he not step down for the good of the party. HOW DO YOU MAKE A COMEBACK AFTER 12 BEATDOWNS, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT SHE GOT NOT JUST BY % EITHER. UNLESS YOU COME BACK WITH 13. 3 IS NOT A COMEBACK OR ANYTHING CLOSE. IN SPORTS ITS OBAMA 13 HILLARY 3 3RD QUARTER.

Posted by: deeleanderross | March 10, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I know the the media is doing very well $ with the way the Primary season is going. I think that it is being unfair to Sen. Barack Obama and heres why. If Sen. Hillary Clinton had won as many Primary and
Caucus as Sen. Obama had done before the Texas and Ohio Primary the talk would of been Not if Sen. Obama could make a comeback, when will he step down. HOW DO YOU MAKE A COMEBACK AFTER 12 BEATDOWNS, BECAUSE THAT WHAT SHE GOT. UNLESS YOU COME BACK WITH 13.

Posted by: deeleanderross | March 10, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

'Ben Stein, in yesterday's NYT, advises McCain to raise taxes on the rich to fix this fiscal train wreck. I suspect the GOP will ask him for his card back; he exposes all sorts of unhelpful truths - pointing out, for instance, that supply-side economics doesn't work.'

Got a link for that b? Ben Stein said that? My god, he's a republican. They'll kill him for telling the truth... it just isn't done.

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

I see that advanced degree is really paying off for you.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 03:05 PM
--------------------
Boy is that funny. Go back to copy and paste, it works better for you. Even though they are not original thoughts at least they are thoughts.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

AdrickHenry writes
"True Conservatives, of the William Buckley or Barry Goldwater type, would never have countenanced BORROWING FROM CHINA to finance the HUGE DEFICITS that Bush has run up with his invasion and occupation of Iraq."

Ben Stein, in yesterday's NYT, advises McCain to raise taxes on the rich to fix this fiscal train wreck. I suspect the GOP will ask him for his card back; he exposes all sorts of unhelpful truths - pointing out, for instance, that supply-side economics doesn't work.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Boko: Nice! Too bad CC's last name isn't "Cizzilla" like I originally thought; the song would work better that way.

Posted by: Blarg | March 10, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

If he was a republican the hooker would be male and smoke chrystal meth.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 03:02 PM

I see that advanced degree is really paying off for you.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Eliot Spitzer has told senior advisers that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, The New York Times reported Monday, citing an anonymous top administration official.


clearly a clinton supporter.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 02:58 PM
-----------------------
If he was a republican the hooker would be male and smoke chrystal meth.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

With a kindly squint and a Georgetown shirt
He spends all day on political dirt

He picks up a phone
And he puts it back down
And writes of the plans
Of other folks in the to-own...

Go, go, legislators come and go
But not Cillizza! (Woo-oo-oo-oo)
Go, go, riding the Metro
Go, Chris Cillizza! (Woo-oo-oo-oo)

Oh No!
There goes Karl Rove
Go, Go Cillizza! (Yeaah)

On No!
Posting seven days in a row
Go, Go Cillizza! (Yeaah)

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Eliot Spitzer has told senior advisers that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, The New York Times reported Monday, citing an anonymous top administration official.


clearly a clinton supporter.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Boko, where have you been? Touring with your band? Glad to have you back.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 10, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

So you know...

kingofzouk IS proudtobeGOP

and Soylent Green IS people ! ! !


Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 02:39 PM
--------------------
Now that makes sense. I didn't think there could be two people so stupid.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 02:42 PM

now you have just qualified for a Liberal PhD in jounalism. Maybe you can have drindl's job at the NYTimes, she isn't using it. your level of acumen and analysis is astounding. Is there a single issue you can talk intelligently about or have you just peaked out?

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

You think Obama people care what the media says. If we did, Hillary would have clinched it already.

The media is still telling us Obama lost Texas. We just seem to notice, Obama has more delegates.

Excuse me, I'm not as smart as the great media. But isn't this a race for delegates.

Posted by: kenswann | March 10, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Blarg, Judge Crater, what do you think?

(the live version)

"I think I hear something big coming this way now...
Is it Kurtz? (No!)
Is it Froomkin? (No!)
How about George Will, the turtle? (Noooo!!!)

Well then, who is it? (Cillizza!!!)

(cue heavy guitar riff)

With a kindly squint and a Georgetown shirt
He spends all day on political dirt

He picks up a phone
And he puts it back down
And writes of the plans
Of other folks in the to-own...

Go, go, legislators come and go
But not Cillizza! (Woo-oo-oo-oo)
Go, go, riding the Metro
Go, Chris Cillizza! (Woo-oo-oo-oo)

(Japanese muttering)"

does anyone remember the "Black + Blue" tour?

Posted by: bokonon13 | March 10, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

So you know...

kingofzouk IS proudtobeGOP

and Soylent Green IS people ! ! !


Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 02:39 PM
--------------------
Now that makes sense. I didn't think there could be two people so stupid.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

So you know...

kingofzouk IS proudtobeGOP

and Soylent Green IS people ! ! !

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

One more interesting fact - clinton never broke the 50% mark in either election. If it hadn't been for Perot, he would have lost. Carter won by a scant two points after a pardon, a nasty recession and leading by 25 points at the convention.

Most of the Repub wins were landslide margins with Dems taking one or two states.

yet according to Libs, Republican rule is an abberation. More like, without substantial third party participation Libs can't win. If they do, prepare for ruin, losses overseas, economic shambles, military weakness, or you can just call it malaise.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

I think I saw that episode, bondjedi. That was a good one.

If I may, just one correction: it is completely inaccurate to call the Bush Administration "conservative". He is, without a doubt, one of the most Fiscally Irresponsible President we've ever had. The facts are irrefutable.

True Conservatives, of the William Buckley or Barry Goldwater type, would never have countenanced BORROWING FROM CHINA to finance the HUGE DEFICITS that Bush has run up with his invasion and occupation of Iraq.

$400,000,000 a day

$12,000,000,000 a month

...is pouring into Iraq. Where is it all going?

And the flow of US treasure continues -- and John McCain promises to keep the spigot open...

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

"aberration that is the conservative establishment"

Let us review:
Bush2
Bush2
clinton1 - ran as conservative, passed NAFTA, Welfare reform
clinton1
bush1
reagan
reagan
carter (aka Obama1) - worst president ever, an actual liberal
ford
nixon
nixon
johnson - not elected, biggest government ever
kennedy - hardly a liberal
eisenhower
eisenhower

Now we have gone back over 60 years. We found one elected liberal (carter/Obama1) who was the worst president of all time. hardly what one could call anything but a conservative establishment.

but you Libs seem to love losing. you forced a loss in vietnam, you lose very presidency, you desire to lose in Iraq, even if we are winning. What is it about losing you love so much?

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

"with some experience, he will learn to hide these things better, just like the clintons did"

He could learn a lot from them, that's for sure. Like how to hide dirty money from the likes of Rezko or Hsu; the liberal money trough is so interesting.

Federal prosecutors have accused Rezko and an associate (who turned state's evidence) of operating a "pay to play" scheme: investment firms allegedly had to pay kickbacks or make political contributions to get money from the Illinois teachers' pension fund.

In a court filing, prosecutors described how $10,000 of alleged finder's fee money was subsequently contributed to the campaign of an unnamed "political candidate" for whom Rezko was a fund-raiser.

Chicago media have reported that the money went to Obama's 2004 Senate campaign.

So, Obama ran his campaign of a 'new kind of politics' on dirty money that Rezko extorted from the Teacher's union, a corrupt institution that is routinely invloved in fleecing the taxpayers. OMG, the irony is just too perfect.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Patrick, Your comprehension of facts seems somewhat limited, so I'll type real s l o w so you can understand.

The Senate Ethics Committee found McCain and Glenn to be guilty of nothing more than "poor judgment," and declared their actions were "not improper nor attended with gross negligence." The others were prosecuted but not Glenn or McCain.

In other words, Sen Glenn (D) and Sen McCain were fully exonerated. But if you want to continue ranting about banking finance and ethics, at least include Sen Glenn in your lies, because he was found innocent as well and you wouldn't want to be seen as being a partisan hack, now would you?

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 01:54 PM
--------------------
You are too funny. Try going back and reading my posts you idiot. I wrote that he 'escaped' with a slap on the wrist, despite what his friends in the Senate commitee, from both sides of the isle, voted. As far as I'm concerned they all should have been thrown out of office, there were more dems involved than GOP.

As is seen with Jefferson in LA and Mayor Kilpatrick of Detroit, the Democrats have their own sleeze, the GOP just seems to be better at it.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

I see you moonbats are avoiding all issues at all costs. Like you have a choice.

that is very creative though. I can see how that must have thoroughly taxed your puny liberal brain. But I do suggest you not try a paying stint as a comedy writer. drindl can inform you of the pains associated with relying on no talent when trying to pay bills writing.

Of course you can continue to post here all day. your financial reward will be commesurate with your skill and knowledge. but you liberals have so little understanding of markets, perhaps I should spell it out. We will pay you what you are worth. Send your address to CC to get your check.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

david_dames:

The trouble with the strategy you mention is that we've seen it before during this campaign. Don't you remember Bill Shaheen and "We won't bring up Obama's cocaine abuse, but the Republicans will"? How could the Obama campaign criticize tactics like that and then turn around and use them a couple of months later?

Posted by: tjmaness | March 10, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Pat Sajak: Spin the wheel, Zouk.

(Wheel spins)

PS: $1,000.00!

Zouk: Yay! I'd like to buy a vowel ... an "x" please.

PS: Dude, x isn't a vowel.

Z: Sorry. I'd like to solve.

(Puzzle reads "OB_M_ WILL STOMP JOHN MCC_IN IN NOVEMBER"

Z: Uh, "You are a liberal!"

PS: Oh, so sorry. It actually spells the end of the aberration that is the conservative establishment of the last 8 years. Thanks for playing, though!

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

I can offer one good story about political judgment for you:

A local politician is running for Senate and then immediately after for President. he is offered a sweetheart deal on a house with a nice lot attached. He can't afford the house on his own, but with some creative paperwork, the house and later the lot are all his. Only one problem, the partner is under indictment at the time for fraud, money laundering, etc.

now that is what you can call good judgment, for a Lib. dirty land deals are a rite of passage. Even if this is not found to be technically illegal, it still smells bad for someone with hope and a new way. cozying up to a crook in the cradle of your career. with some experience, he will learn to hide these things better, just like the clintons did.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Here's some more recent history for you folks to worry about, if you want to discuss poor jusgment. I think it's pretty poor judgement to take huge sums of campaign cash from Tony Rezko.

During his 12 years in politics, Sen. Barack Obama has received nearly three times more campaign cash from indicted businessman Tony Rezko and his associates than he has publicly acknowledged.

Seems like Obama's not quite honest about his relationship with Tony. Obama has collected at least $168,308 from Rezko and his circle.

Sources close to both Rezko and Obama, however, said Rezko raised money often for Obama.

Burton said Friday the campaign was sticking by its original estimate that Rezko raised no more than $60,000.

The cocktail party Rezko hosted in 2003 came at a critical time for Obama. He and Rezko timed it to help Obama show he had enough money to compete in the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate against millionaire Blair Hull and state Comptroller Dan Hynes.

"This was discussed a lot. They wanted to have a good showing," said a source familiar with the fund-raiser, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"Tony was one of the biggest fund-raisers."

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

The Strategy--"The following are the attacks that we're not going to make"

Staying positive might not work for Obama. Or, if it does, Obama will enter the general election very, very bloodied. The meme being spread around is that some superdelegates are looking for a fighter--they want Obama to prove that he's "tough." Hammering Clinton on tax returns and her tactics (arguments that have so far been made awkwardly and with far too little use of lighting a guy in an Uncle Sam suit on fire at Clinton press conferences, or whatever Wolfson did to Lazio) is not enough. You can't fight personal and absurd attacks with completely reasonable ethical arguments. It's not an even playing field. The solution, as I see it, is to turn the Jonathan Chait article into a strategy. This won't even need to employ any dishonesty or mention specific dirtiness, it just needs to gently ease the nation out of its collective amnesia about the Clintons--a lapse that McCain would quickly wake us up from in the general election anyway if Hillary were the nominee (or even the VP nominee). Obama can keep the high ground, prove both his toughness and his campaign skill, and further exemplify what "change" means by having surrogates employ this strategy.

Essentially, someone needs to go on Meet the Press, and every other show, and say:

There are a number of things about Senator Clinton that we have not brought up, that we could have, because some of them have been used by Republicans to attack her in the past, and many Democrats have tough memories from that. But it is silly to think that the Republicans would not use these things to attack her--probably successfully--in the general election if she were the nominee. There are also very recent things related to the Clinton presidency and directly related to Senator Clinton's campaign that we have not brought up because many Democrats feel a personal stake in President Clinton's legacy and reflexively think of anything that might tarnish that as an unfair attack, regardless of truthfulness.

Host: Such as?

Surrogate: I didn't want to have to say this, but Sandy Berger

And as far as experience, we have not begrudged Senator Clinton citing her experience as First Lady, however now that she exaggerates her role there, it is hard for us to actually parse that experience and show what she did and did not do to the voters, and do it in a way that they will not take as being a gender-based attack, which is why we have not mentioned that as much as we should have and have expected the press to do its job as far as examining those claims.

So, although we have declined to make these attacks during the primaries, while Senator Clinton's campaign has repeatedly played on the level of racial and sexual politics, you can be sure to hear these attacks a lot if Senator Clinton is nominated. This means that if you want to have a general election that is about the same old fights from the 1990's, that distract from real issues and solutions, then please nominate Senator Clinton. But if you want to have a general election that is about the future, and how to really solve our problems, then you know what to do.

[Then sit and watch Clinton's campaign implode with paranoia.]

Also, it might help the most if Oprah could say this.


All I'm really saying is that, in response to the Clinton's, "Hey, can you remember the 1990's?," someone has to say, "Yes, yes we can."

www.podger.net

Posted by: david_dames | March 10, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

All the same, could someone explain which day exactly the Clinton camp plans for Obama to cross this threshold?

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 02:01 PM

how about right after he holds his FIRST comittee meeting? Or maybe he is just too busy to do his job. ambition is tough, leaves little time for actual accomplishment.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

McCain has a new, totally ethical supporter -- Ollie North.

'One of the key figures in the Iran-contra scandal is now endorsing Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

This morning the McCain campaign helpfully circulated a column Oliver North had penned in the Washington Times, extolling the senator's virtues, under the heading "In Case You Missed It: Oliver North on John McCain."

That prompted The Trail to ponder a simple question: Is McCain pleased to receive North's endorsement, given the fact that the failed GOP senatorial candidate was convicted in 1989 of shredding documents, accepting an illegal gratuity and aiding and abetting in the obstruction of Congress?

John McCain was also a bit player in Ollie's 1994 Senate race. In June, just after Ollie was nominated by a Republican convention to take on Chuck Robb, many Republicans balked and refused to support North. Bob Dole and John McCain were both interviewed on CBS's "Face the Nation" on June 5. Dole said he wouldn't support North and would instead meet with J. Marshall Coleman, a former Republican attorney general running as an independent. McCain said he would support North.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

"HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!"

We've always been at war with Eastasia!

Posted by: ewelsh | March 10, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

personally I want 2 thoughtful leaders Clinton and Biden(vp) to be on the ticket.

Posted by: leichtman | March 10, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

especially when it looks like this:

'In the spring of 1987, McCain was just beginning his first term in the Senate. Charles Keating was a friend, a campaign contributor, and owner of Lincoln Savings and Loan. At the time, Lincoln was under investigation by federal regulators. As McCain recounted the story in an NPR interview two years later, Keating came to his office and offered to do certain things for him, as McCain put it, in return for McCain's interceding with regulators.

...

McCain had received some $112,000 in contributions from Keating, his relatives and employees for the House and Senate campaigns. But he told the Senate Ethics Committee in 1991 that the money was not a factor.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

For Clinton fans too busy dueling with Zouk to receive your marching orders, here is Wolfson's latest talking point:

"Howard Wolfson, Clinton's chief spokesman, said during a conference call with reporters that Clinton would not pick a running mate who has not met the "national security threshold" -- as Clinton's military advisers and Wolfson put it on the call -- but that it is possible Obama could meet that threshold by this summer's Democratic convention."

I know that these moronic remarks are backtracking on the ill-conceived attempt to steal African-American votes in MS by the number-two offering the VP slot to the number one, so I don't take them too seriously. All the same, could someone explain which day exactly the Clinton camp plans for Obama to cross this threshold?

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

I honestly believe Al gore actually won the election, that Kerry is a war hero, despite the slander, that the clintons are honest, that Obama is experienced and can unite all of us under the liberal flag, that surrender leads to victory, that taxes stimulate an economy, that profligate spending leads to thrift, that doing nothing about social security will fix it, that government can deliver good health care, that propping up the teachers union will improve education, that the coldest winter in decades proves warming, that Dean knows how to organize and win, that Democrats practice Democracy.

I beleive all these things and more because I am a devoted Liberal. Logic and fact need not enter into my religion.

AdrickHenry
PatrickNYC1
leichtman
drindl
bondjedi

aka - the pack of braying jackels.

I dare you to deny one fact from above.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

See what I mean?

You tell 'em Zoukie!

And don't forget, it was that Liberal Democratic Congress that cut off funding to the South Vietnam Government and practically gift-wrapped that country for the Communist North.

And also tell 'em about that Commie FDR and how HE is the one that started this whole Social Security debacle. Bleeding Heart, Roosevelt.

And don't let 'em off the hook so easily, Zouk: remind them of Woodrow Wilson, another Liberal Dem, who signed into law so many, "regulatory" bills preventing CHILD LABOR (those damn kids should be carrying their weight, right, Zouk?!), and insisiting on inspecting meat and foods. All these damn regulations. If we wanna eat rat hair the government should not try to stop us, right, Zouk?!

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse


'The Senate Ethics Committee found McCain and Glenn to be guilty of nothing more than "poor judgment," '

Poor judgement is a damning quality in a President.

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Patrick, Your comprehension of facts seems somewhat limited, so I'll type real s l o w so you can understand.

The Senate Ethics Committee found McCain and Glenn to be guilty of nothing more than "poor judgment," and declared their actions were "not improper nor attended with gross negligence." The others were prosecuted but not Glenn or McCain.

In other words, Sen Glenn (D) and Sen McCain were fully exonerated. But if you want to continue ranting about banking finance and ethics, at least include Sen Glenn in your lies, because he was found innocent as well and you wouldn't want to be seen as being a partisan hack, now would you?

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Last I checked, the President had the right to hire and fire attorneys on a whim. I guess if you want to conceal your agenda, you should simply fire them all - like bj did.

but remember the Lib agenda:

taxation
investigation
regulation
capitulation
no legislation

And they have lived up to it. But look at what has happend since they came in - The Pelosi recession.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

I honestly believe Zouk is actually a Liberal, posting these straw-man arguments, easy to shoot down, and just making right wing conservatives look bad, in general.

So, don't pick on Zouk. Just consider it: "Mission Accomplished".

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

If we stay in Iraq long enough, maybe we'll see $200 a barrel oil.

No, $200 a barrel would take another invasion. Hmmmm, who else could we possibly invade in that region? What oil-producing country could we dupe the American People into believing is a threat to us?

"Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran"

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

silly Libs, politics is NOT for kids.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 01:38 PM
-----------------------------
Either are blogs, isn't it tiime for your nap?

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

king don't you get it yet. You are a troll and absolutely no one here is in the least bit interested in your garbage. Go back and climb under a rock.

Posted by: leichtman | March 10, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

No improper acts. Get it through your head, ok? Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 01:29 PM
--------------------------
Federal Home Loan Bank Board former chief Edwin J.Gray testified that several U.S. senators had approached him and requested that he ease off on the Lincoln investigation. It came out that these senators had been beneficiaries of $300,000 (collective total) in campaign contributions from Keating. Lincoln Savings and Loan's collapse is said to have cost taxpayers $3.4 billion.
---------------------------
Dosn't sound proper to me.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

"Oil hit a record high of $107 a barrel on Monday"

Can't you just picture Bush and Cheney and McCain in a chorus-line, arms locked at the elbow, legs kicking high in unison, and gleefully singing to the Beach Boy tune of Barbara Ann:

"Surge-Surge-Surge, Surge-Surge Away..."

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

why has Kerry still refused to release his military records?

Lib answer - because bush.......

At least you venomous Libs are equally hateful to all.

but it is getting so tired, so 90's, so clinton, so last election. make that two or more elections ago, you know, when the clintons were still the most beloved pols in the world and Liebermann was the VP nominee. you know, before the big liberal meltdown. before the return of Jimmy carter 2.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON -- The House of Representatives filed a federal lawsuit Monday to compel former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten to testify on the 2006 firing of nine U.S. attorneys.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had the House general counsel file the suit against the Bush administration.

"Congress, on behalf of the American people, is clearly entitled to the information that is being sought -- it involves the politicization of the Justice Department and law enforcement, not national security information nor communications with the president. The president has no grounds to assert executive privilege," Pelosi said in a statement.


Our tax dollars hard at work. Looks like we can forget about them doing anything about the FISA or AMT, zouk. They have now decreed that hearing Harriet Myers testify will be better for the American public than national security or the looming burden of AMT on the middle class.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Jack, Republicans at least here in Texas have crossed over for both candidates. There is nothing intrinsictly wrong with that except for those who cross over to either side just to mettle, and believe me I personally know plenty who have done that here in Texas, those who have no intent of voting Dem in Nov, and that is dispicable. And that is why there should be party registration before the primary vote, Dem, Rep, or independent. I don't want true blue Repubs selecting either candidate for me but it is going on on both sides which is nothing new.

Posted by: leichtman | March 10, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is.

silly Libs, politics is NOT for kids.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 01:32 PM

anotrher of drindl's braying jackels arrives for the hatefest.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

" do you think screwing around on your first wife is a proper act, or improper?"

Only if the actual screwing is done in the Oval office is it ok with the libs, apparently.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Again, anyone know if Rick renzi has stepped down from Mccai's campaign, now that he's been indicted?

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

bonjedi's response to my reasonable request to please tone their language and agree that BOTH candidates are Honorable Patriots, is h*** no, they will continue to use expletives and insults demeaning the credibility of their candidate. Truly sad.

Posted by: leichtman | March 10, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Breaking News!!! Major Political Scandal!!!

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And because they feel that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket would be unbeatable.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama's. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is.

The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. I suggest a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket now! All democrats need to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton. So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.

Fortunately the Clinton's have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton's. Only the Clinton's are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.

You should be angry America. "This is not a game" (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith...

Posted by: JackSmith1 | March 10, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

"No improper acts. Get it through your head, ok? "

I see that Mr. Campaign Finance Reform has in the last few weeks keynoting $1,000 a plate fundraisers. Of course, that is easy to square in the dittohead mind.

And do you think screwing around on your first wife is a proper act, or improper?

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz., allegedly defrauded dozens of pro-life organizations for hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund his first congressional bid, according to an analysis of the recent indictment against him, a state insurance claim and an interview with an insurance lawyer involved in the case.'

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4408794&page=1

this guy is quite the scumbag. is he still McCain's campaign co-chair?

"This is Sen. John McCain. I'm calling to urge you to support my friend Rep. Rick Renzi for Congress. Rick has represented the first district of Arizona with tenacity, honesty and integrity beyond reproach.

I work with Rick every day and can report to you his total dedication to the people of Arizona and the United States. Please join me in supporting rural Arizona's workhorse congressman on Nov. 7. [Paid for and authorized by Rick Renzi for Congress]."

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

"I can understand why you wouldn't want all those ideas revealed. but it is far from "swiftboating. why has Kerry still refused to release his military records? you are probably one of those 'gore won' idealogues who still think the blue dress was a VRWC. And we all now know the clintons never lie, do they?"

You don't need his military records to know that Kerry was freakin' Rambo compared to Bush. When Kerry was out wasting commies, Bush was being spanked in the Skull 'n' Bones basement or sniffing his fraternity letters off a mirror while wearing his cheerleader uniform.

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

"As I wrote earlier, for me, leadership & integrity are far more important than specific policy positions said bsimon," which is exactly where the divide is between the 2.
I have attended local Clinton speeches and to try and understand the Obama attraction for Nov.(which I really don't understand) started listening on POTUS xm radio to Obama's speeches including a Miss rally speech a few minutes ago. What I came away with is that Obama gave his usual personality driven speech laced with a few good humored jokes and what I am starting to feel as boring homolies like aren't you tired of the Washington politics as usual and are you ready for hope and change. It left me empty wanting more.

There WILL BE CHANGE on January 21, 2009 whoever the nominee is. I have read in detail the 2 healthcare plans and listened to Clinton's speeches which are filled with more policy differences and substative differences. In my mind that summarizes the differences of the 2 candidates. I choose substance and policy positions which will effect my life, my family's and community's vs the leadership bar you site for Sen Obama. The New York Times sunday edition had a story addressing Sen Obama's leadership role in the U.S. Senate and concluded it was lacing and/or non existant. I am sure that you will attack the New York Times but other neutral analysit have concluded the same, both both are honorable patriots in my mind and I won't see it any other way.

Posted by: leichtman | March 10, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Patrick, John McCain didn't "escape" anything. He was exonerated and completely cleared of any wrongdoing by a bipartisan Senate Ethics investigation. They ruled that McCain and Sen Glenn had committed "no improper acts" in regards the banking finance investigation.

No improper acts. Get it through your head, ok?

John McCain has led the way for ethics reform, angering many in his own party year after year as he took a pricipled stand. He has disagreed and srgued against the rampant spending of his fellow Rs and now the broken promises of the Dem Congress as well. His record is clear as a champion of ethics reform and as a fiscal hawk.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

"We will not let Obama br swift-boated by Hillary"

you mean there is a secret list a mile long of his actual accomplishments we haven't seen? that he actually can be expected to talk the entire world into following him into liberal utopia? that taxing in a recession is a good idea? that spending more and more in a deficit is a grand scheme? that surrendering and retreating is a splendid approach to victory?

I can understand why you wouldn't want all those ideas revealed. but it is far from "swiftboating. why has Kerry still refused to release his military records? you are probably one of those 'gore won' idealogues who still think the blue dress was a VRWC. And we all now know the clintons never lie, do they?

I hope you get you Carter2 candidate. even a clinton stealth victory is leading to a humiliating defeat. either way, you libs are toast.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

PatrickNYC-
McCain has been somewhat disappointing, for some of the reasons you cite. Though he is far and away a better candidate than GWB ever was, or than any of his competitors for this year's GOP nomination. We could do far worse. Lastly, regarding Keating, he received a slap on the wrist because that's all he deserved.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

For me, Sen Clinton doesn't reach the bar for leadership or integrity. Fortunately, both Obama & McCain do.

Otherwise, if you're looking for an inspiration message of hope from Obama, you should go to the source, not to blog posts.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 01:15 PM
----------------------
I usually agree with most of what you post but I think McCain lost the leadership and integrity title when he kiss butt with those who trashed him in 2000. He is running so hard to the right that he is killing the strong independant support he once had claim to. Then there is his role with the lobbists who give to his campaign and have business before him. Don't forget he was one of the few who escaped the Keating scandle with a slap on the hand.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

"Curious if others are ready to condemn this language and agree that BOTH candidates are Honorable Patriots."

We will not let Obama br swift-boated by Hillary, a candidate whose campaign has admitted unequivocally and for the record that the "kitchen-sink" strategy is her only remaining shot to win the nom. DO you so-called good Democrats have such short memories that you forget what happened to John Kerry, an honorable man who refused to stoop to the insults of the draft-dodgers who ran the Bush '04 campaign?

Hillary's not going to get away with it, and neither will her supporters who insist on mimicking Wolfson, Ickes, and Penn.

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Liberals full of hate???

I am shocked, shocked.

- Casablanca

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

judge writes "Fortunately for Obama, the electorate is not paying attention to these trivial details. Who the heck is Austan Goolsbee? "

Unfortunately for Obama, being a foreign policy neophyte and surrounding yourself with university elitists for advisors has not gone unnoticed by the electorate.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | March 10, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

leichtman asks
"Is this the inspirational message of hope that is supposed to convince me that I should get behind Obama in November."

No. Reading blog posts are an atrocious way to select a candidate. What you need to do is sit back, figure out what you think this country needs, then determine which candidate best meets those criteria.

As I wrote earlier, for me, leadership & integrity are far more important than specific policy positions, though extreme policy positions would be a deal-breaker. For me, Sen Clinton doesn't reach the bar for leadership or integrity. Fortunately, both Obama & McCain do.

Otherwise, if you're looking for an inspiration message of hope from Obama, you should go to the source, not to blog posts.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 01:09 PM

drindl pet jackel checks in. the pack is forming.

you want the reason for the bad economy and the spike in oil prices? Look no further than election day 2006. simple cause and effect.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

For three days I have literally begged some of the Obama supporters who post here, to please become more more civil and tone down their rhetoric and stated unequivocally that BOTH candidates are honorable patriots. The Obama campaign is supposedly about hope and inspiration, but yet this is the ugly language from "some" of his supporters. And this is their response. And do they wonder why the Clinton supporters have become so upset?

Do you "stupid Hillary fans" think she is pure as the driven snow? I dont care if Obama went on her ticket...I dont want that "crooked .. criminal type" in the white house.

Posted by: Webster51 | March 9, 2008 10:33 PM


Is this the inspirational message of hope that is supposed to convince me that I should get behind Obama in November.


Every time I read this kind of trash it makes me more convinced that Senator Obama is not the right candidate to become our next president. Curious if others are ready to condemn this language and agree that BOTH candidates are Honorable Patriots. posted by Leichtman

To be clear the hatefilled language is by an Obama supporter not me and accidentally his name pasted below my statement.

Posted by: leichtman | March 10, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse


mark and bsimon -- new factors are driving oil higher, apparently:

' LONDON (Reuters) - Oil hit a record high of $107 a barrel on Monday, reversing earlier losses as investors sought oil as a hedge against a depressed dollar and inflation.

A rush by financial funds into commodities and political tensions are the prime drivers of a rally that has lifted oil's average to above $95 for the year.

U.S. crude jumped $1.85 to $107 a barrel. It had sunk to $104.08 in earlier trading and by 1451 was up $1.50 at $106.65. London Brent crude was up 40 cents at $102.78.

Fears of recession, following the biggest U.S. job losses in five years and strains in the credit market, have depressed equities and the dollar while prompting many investors to seek safety in commodities including oil.

A sharp drop in U.S. crude oil inventories and OPEC's decision last week to hold supplies steady have also boosted oil prices.

OPEC President Chakib Khelil was quoted on Monday as saying that speculation and political tension would keep prices at triple digits through the year.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

For three days I have literally begged some of the Obama supporters who post here, to please become more more civil and tone down their rhetoric and stated unequivocally that BOTH candidates are honorable patriots. The Obama campaign is supposedly about hope and inspiration, but yet this is the ugly language from "some" of his supporters. And this is their response. And do they wonder why the Clinton supporters have become so upset?

Do you "stupid Hillary fans" think she is pure as the driven snow? I dont care if Obama went on her ticket...I dont want that "crooked .. criminal type" in the white house. Posted by: Webster51 | March 9, 2008 10:33 PM


Is this the inspirational message of hope that is supposed to convince me that I should get behind Obama in November.


Every time I read this kind of trash it makes me more convinced that Senator Obama is not the right candidate to become our next president. Curious if others are ready to condemn this language and agree that BOTH candidates are Honorable Patriots.

Posted by: Webster51 | March 9, 2008 10:33 PM

Posted by: leichtman | March 10, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

that last line is drindl in a nutshell.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 01:00 PM
----------------------------------
And that last word is almost you but I think nutcase is more fitting.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

"The flow of blood may be ebbing, but the flood of money into the Iraq war is steadily rising, new analyses show. In 2008, its sixth year, the war will cost approximately $12 billion a month, triple the "burn" rate of its earliest years.."

The Surge IS working ! ! !

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

dyork is right.

Obama is stronger than HRC in the red states - particularly the South - therefore, he will be more trouble for the GOP in the general election - not the reverse as Hillary is claiming.

Obama will carry California and the traditional Democratic strongholds and give McCain the fight of his political life on Republican turf.

The Repubs know this and this is why they are crossing over to vote for Hillary - they are scared of Obama.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | March 10, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

"Also PA is a Swing state that Obama needs to show real appeal in. "

The biggest lie going for the Clintons is the idea that, because Obama gets squeezed by her machine in big cities, that translates into a McCain victory in November in those states, also. It is the flimisest but best argument available to Clintonistas. I challenge one Clintonista to demonstrate the impossibility of Obama winning in Ohio over McCain.

Does this mean that Clinton can not win in Nevada, Washington, Texas, Illinois, South Carolina, Idaho, Georgia or the dozens of other states Obama has won more delegates in? By her own reasoning, is that enough to make her and her delusional surrogates on this board face the inevitable? I thank God the media is prolonging Hillary's fate, because the spin conjured up by Penn and Wolfson that is so eagerly parroted by Clinton supporters is better than anything else on TV.

It will be a pleasure watching that giant can of whoop-ass, brewed with fresh Rocky Mountain spring water, get opened up on Hillary on national TV this summer.

Posted by: bondjedi | March 10, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

It's a pity, for a solid grounding in poetry would help young people recognize demagoguery. Warren's poem "Infant Boy at Midcentury" (1956) expresses no particular event or politician but has the effect of being relevant to the current situation. Writing of his son's birth, Warren states,

You enter at the hour when the dog returns to his vomit,
And fear's moonflower spreads, white as girl-thigh, in dusk of compromise;
When posing for pictures, arms linked, the same smile in their eyes,
Good and Evil, to iron out all differences, stage their meeting at summit.

Obama's promise to meet with our enemies, anyone?

Warren, of course, diagnoses his age's growing acceptance of relativism. It would be well to revisit such poetry whose lasting power resides in its refusal to indict the particularly unpopular politics of the moment, but instead focuses on ideas, or verities, if you will. It would be well to tell college sophomores that the reference to the dog returning to his vomit comes from Proverbs, a very, very old "text" indeed. ("As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly" Proverbs 26:11).

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MaryGrabar/2008/03/10/poets_against_obamamania?page=2


that last line is drindl in a nutshell.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

dyork, you make an excellent point, but I think you misunderstand the blog. CC doesn't criticize candidates' talking points; he just repeats them.

Posted by: Blarg | March 10, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Chris, somthing seems very obvious to me but is being blatantly distorted by the Clinton campaign and their supports. Maybe you can address this becuase the media seems to be happy with the misrepresentation. Or am I wrong?

The argument continues to be put out by the Clinton campaign, most recently by the Penn. Governor on Meet the Press, that Hillary should get the super delegates and the nomination becuase she won the biggest states. This seems to imply that the Democratic party voters who gave her the wins would not vote for Obama in the general election. Do they think that we are stupid enough to believe that just because Clinton won California in the Democratic primary Obama can not win it in the general election. One win does not affect the other. If a state is heavily Democratic isn't it true that even if a candidate came in 3rd or 4th he/she would still have a solid chance of carrying the state if the nomonie? Why are we treated like morons by the press who don't question the Clinton line that because she won certain states in the primaries she is the only one that can win them in the General election.

A good future blog would be one that documents such absurd claims.

Posted by: dyork | March 10, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

http://wonkette.com/365879/mccain-is-next-sci+fi-alien-american-winston-churchill

people you must look at this new mccain ad -- it's completely surreal. i honestly beleive that whoever put it together was on some kind of really bad psychadelic drug... it's weird.

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

This week, House Democrat leaders face a choice. They can adjourn for another two week break without passing terrorist surveillance legislation critical to keeping America safe. Or they can be responsible, and approve these updates to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The Senate has passed this legislation with an overwhelming bipartisan majority.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

"And remember, the uncommitted superdelegates seem content to sit on the sidelines for now."

Obama picked up two more superdelegates on Saturday - NV State Party Vice Chairwoman Teresa Benitez-Thompson and Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia.

Also, there seems to be little to no coverage of the 4 additional delegates Obama has picked up in California, now that the certified final vote tallies have been announced. Or that Obama won more delegates out of Texas.

Anyway, back to the imaginary horserace.

Posted by: ewelsh | March 10, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

drindl - you recently promised to ignore me, much like this entire blog ignores you and your silly liberal hate. Please live up to your promises.

We really don't care for you trashing this blog every day.

Or was that just a Pelosi promise - meant to be broken at a whim?

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

the Pentagon is deceitful, you say?

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

drindl - is this now a Kos/huff mirror site? the level of hate and deceit leads me to believe it is.

that writing gig still not flying for you, is it?

where is the rest of the shreiking jackel pack today? who will repel the barbarians?

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

oh yes, those damn liberal liars over at the Pentagon..

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Oh look, Dick Cheney poisons our troops.. this is what privatization without oversight buys you:


Dozens of U.S. troops in Iraq fell sick at bases using "unmonitored and potentially unsafe" water supplied by the military and a contractor once owned by Vice President Dick Cheney's former company, the Pentagon's internal watchdog says.

A report obtained by The Associated Press said soldiers experienced skin abscesses, cellulitis, skin infections, diarrhea and other illnesses after using discolored, smelly water for personal hygiene and laundry at five U.S. military sites in Iraq.

The Defense Department's inspector general's report, which could be released as early as Monday, found water quality problems between March 2004 and February 2006 at three sites run by contractor KBR Inc., and between January 2004 and December 2006 at two military-operated locations.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Morning - drindl declares the sky is falling and cuts and pastes liberal lies all day long to back it up.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

noon. zouk clocks in for his disinformation shift..

John McCain release an ad comparing himself to Teddy Roosevelt. No hubris there...

'Roosevelt's platform in 1912 was far more progressive than the Republican Party's agenda 96 years later. Here are a few excerpts from the 1912 document:

We pledge ourselves to work unceasingly in State and Nation for:...

Minimum wage standards for working women, to provide a "living wage" in all industrial occupations;

The protection of home life against the hazards of sickness, irregular employment and old age through the adoption of a system of social insurance adapted to American use;

We favor the organization of the workers, men and women, as a means of protecting their interests and of promoting their progress...

We believe in a graduated inheritance tax as a National means of equalizing the obligations of holders of property to Government...'

---The movement that John McCain now leads, of course, opposes a meaningful minimum wage (much less a living wage), works to dismantle social insurance programs like Social Security, fights against workers' right to organize, and seeks to repeal taxes on the well-off.

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 10:29 AM


I agree wholeheartedly. There is nothing that the Clintons have done over the past 16+ years that gives me any reason to trust them. To me, that is the key issue, rather than a set of detailed policy positions that have little bearing on what Congress will (or will not) enact.

For this Independent: McCain/Clinton, I vote for McCain. McCain/Obama, I'm still undecided but in general would be okay with either.

I haven't decided whether to vote in the Dem primary in NC. I prefer to just do the non-partisan races, to avoid getting all the mail from the parties. In 2004 I voted in the GOP primary and in 2006 I got all sorts of mail from a truly hateful GOP congressional candidate. I'm not sure I want to repeat the experience.

On the other hand, if I think it might be useful I may decide to do my part to pad Obama's margin in NC on 6 May.

Posted by: jim.scarlett | March 10, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

yes, bsimon, it is Levin and Warner--accusing the Iraqi government of hiding its oil revenue in foreign banks. Because the original Provisional government banned the US from monitoring the Iraqi oil revenues [for whatever nefarious reason I can only imagine] we don't know where it's going... but they seem to have evidence that there's massive thievery and government chicanery.

I see all the rad rightwingers are picking VPs for McCain -- here's kriistol's picks and what you've got to look forward to:

'Perhaps the most obvious way McCain could upend the normal dynamics of this year's election would be a bold vice presidential choice. He could pick a hawkish and principled Democrat like Joe Lieberman. He could persuade the most impressive conservative in American public life, Clarence Thomas, to join the ticket.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

"especially young people, who feel their needs and their dreams are being crushed and forgotten "

And the government should step up and do its job of fulfilling ALL the needs and dreams of every citizen.

amazing.

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

BEFORE voting a Democratic Congress:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.

SINCE voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we're seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) the cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6)1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
The 1st Session 110th Congress is one of the worst do-nothing sessions in a long time!

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Posted by: kingofzouk | March 10, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

mul writes
"Ok some of the people need geography lessons. PA is much much bigger in population than Mississippi and WY. WY is the smallest state with just 30,000 dems. 1/4 went to the polls on Saturday."

What does geography have to do with it? WY & MS send delegates to the Dem Convention, just like PA. PA certainly sends more delegates, but (s)he with the most delegates wins. Sen Clinton's problem has been her decision to focus only on the large states - Obama has kept the race close in those states, while kicking her posterior in the small states. How those states vote in the general is irrelevant. Or is Sen Clinton arguing that she doesn't care about dems - or anyone, for that matter - in the states that she couldn't carry in a general election? Chalk it up as another reason she's the wrong person for the job.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

With a victory in WY, & a likely victory in MS, shouldn't the media be covering Obama's new winning streak, particularly since he's again widening the delegate counts? It seems the media is more inclined to 'wait for PA'.
Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 09:34 AM
---------------------------
But that would not keep the story going, which is what the media wants, to hell with the truth, give us dirty money.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 09:58 AM

Ok some of the people need geography lessons. PA is much much bigger in population than Mississippi and WY. WY is the smallest state with just 30,000 dems. 1/4 went to the polls on Saturday.

Also PA is a Swing state that Obama needs to show real appeal in.

WY and Mississippi are not states the Dems are going to win. MS is an open primary with will in this case help Hillary (guess why). That should keep the popular vote close going into PA. Then comes MI and FL and perhaps Victory!!!!!!!!!!!

I smell fear!!

Check out the Obambi girl in the 3:00 AM Ad. She is 17 and priceless.It is an AP story and she is making the rounds trying to get some sort of acting carrier going. I just hope someone asks what issue she believes Obama is better on than Hillary. Air head to the extreme la la la la I love Obama he is my imaginary boy friend.

Posted by: mul | March 10, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

The economy is falling apart and all we see the candidates playing "He who yells the loudest wins" with loudness trumping reality beyond a reasonable doubt. The establishment fails to realize that there are millions of people out there, especially young people, who feel their needs and their dreams are being crushed and forgotten as its just politics as usual. I wonder why no one comments on the huge turnouts this year and whether all this mudslinging is going to lead people to stay home in November.

Posted by: nclwtk | March 10, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

"You do not have to watch any of this again until June 8."

Its like a bad accident. I don't need to watch. I don't even want to watch - but can't help myself.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

"all this, despite the fact that Iraq is pumping large amounts of oil, and the government is profiting greatly, yet they refuse to pay for their own reconstruction, insisting American taxpayers do it instead."

That is an interesting angle. I trust you also read the NYT article on the subject yesterday? I forget the principals involved; is it Levin-Warner calling for the investigation into what Iraq is spending its billions on?

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

'The flow of blood may be ebbing, but the flood of money into the Iraq war is steadily rising, new analyses show. In 2008, its sixth year, the war will cost approximately $12 billion a month, triple the "burn" rate of its earliest years..'

And all this, despite the fact that Iraq is pumping large amounts of oil, and the government is profiting greatly, yet they refuse to pay for their own reconstruction, insisting American taxpayers do it instead. How long will we be the suckers?

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

bsimon - as to your earlier post on the media waiting for PA, I think the narrative going forward will include every single state because reporting on each fills some 24/7 time. So CNN, et al, spent a good deal of time on WY, they probably will report how the delegate split in TX will change, and they are doing interviews in MS. Then they will spend 5 weeks in PA, and then they will spend weeks in NC and IN, etc.

Eventually, one of the Ds, probably BHO, will have a small lead, and then they will hover over the superdelegates.

You do not have to watch any of this again until June 8.

Thank me. [grin]

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 10, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

also, rising instability in the Middle East, at least partly exacerabated by the Iraq occupation... and then, of course, there's opec...


'Oil flirts with $105 after Opec refuses to raise output'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

bsimon --

Thanks for your comments. I think that is part of my unease with her -- which has been magnified by the campaign she has run and how she has run it.

As a practical matter, you'll never agree 100% with the policy positions of the President, unless you're the President. ;)

Posted by: mnteng | March 10, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

bsimon, you wrote:
"For instance, the correlation between gas (oil) prices and the demand from developing markets for energy (India & China) is strong. Likewise the correlation between the value of the dollar and the price of oil is strongly inverse - as the dollar drops, the price of oil (and gas) goes up."
I was about to post the same observations, you beat me to them, I agree with you.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 10, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

While the correlation between gas prices & the Bush administration is amusing, the reality is far more complicated than a simplistic conspiracy theory. To explain the rising price of gas, its helpful to also examine the rising cost of gasoline inputs (i.e. petroleum) and demand for such on global markets. For instance, the correlation between gas (oil) prices and the demand from developing markets for energy (India & China) is strong. Likewise the correlation between the value of the dollar and the price of oil is strongly inverse - as the dollar drops, the price of oil (and gas) goes up. You could fairly blame the Bush admin for that problem (i.e. deficit spending), but it is not the sole cause of high gas prices.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Okay, I've just about had it with all this Florida and Michigan outrage. First of all it's entirely misdirected. Both state parties knew the rules and broke them. Therefore the people in those states that are upset should have been crying foul when their states made these decisions not now. I think the DNC needs to lay down the law here and hold firm. If they allow either Michigan or Florida back in it sets in motion a unraveling of the process going forward.

Posted by: kelly | March 10, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

i listened to a long report on NPR yesterday on why gas prices will be up to $4 a gallon by summer... and then found this chart on how gas prices have been steadily and rapidly climbing since 2000, with one downturn only, right after 9/11, something which we really hadn't seen before.

interesting when you consider how tight bush is with the saudis, and how he promised while campaigning that he would 'jawbone' the princes into pumping more. guess it never happened-- or maybe it's just that profits at exxon are mighty important to republicans-- all republicans. wonder if paying $4 at the pump will affect american's vote in november.

http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

"Someone posted on a previous thread that you'd choose BHO over McC, but McC over HRC. Is that correct? If so, can you explain it?"

The nutshell summary is that I'm less worried about policy positions than principles & leadership ability. I don't agree with Obama or McCain on all the issues, but I respect both of them & think they both have integrity that has been sorely lacking in recent Presidents. Senator Clinton really falls short in both categories. Her Senate record demonstrates zero leadership efforts, much less successes. Her political career, in my opinion, is the result of whom she married, rather than her own abilities as an effective representative of the people. On the integrity front, my perception is that Sen Clinton - even on extremely serious & important votes like the approval to use force in Iraq - takes the politically expedient route, rather than doing the right thing. That is not a characteristic I find attractive in a Presidential candidate.

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

It turns out the Rush Limbaugh inspired Republicans voting for Hillary didn't just happen in Texas. The Ohio results were also skewed.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/republican-mischief-in-ohio/

Posted by: Trumbull | March 10, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I think that senator Obama will have another bad week if the press will comment on the article about him writing his name on bill in Illinois that he did not write because he was looking for a list of accomplishments when he was running for the senate. We all know that he has not completed one full term in the senate and when on an important committee there failed to call even one meeting of the group. http://dallasobserver.com/2008-02-28/news/obama-and-me/print Let us see if the press will look into this or will they once again give Obama a free pass. They will let us know these facts after he is elected and we once again he hit by the swift boaters with this and other stuff. Thanks alot journalists! We need to know now while we are still in the voting process not afterward when we can't do anything but sit and cry how we were taken in by words and not action.

Posted by: chacha1 | March 10, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

PA will be very important, for then we can see if Hillary will win by the 20+ points she needs to, on just about every remaining primary, to have a chance at winning;

Pennsylvania Primary- Hillary vs. Barack:
The Google Factor

http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=57

Posted by: davidmwe | March 10, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

i wonder if we've all been 'profiled' yet?

'The WSJ fronts a look at how the National Security Agency plays a little-known but pivotal role in domestic surveillance programs. The NSA traditionally handles foreign surveillance, but it's now involved in analyzing huge amounts of data that it gets from several different domestic agencies to seek out suspicious patterns that could point to terrorist activity. The NSA uses powerful programs to analyze basic data from e-mail, Internet searches, airlines, telephone records, and financial information. As much as the agency can insist it's focused on foreign threats, the truth is that "it's increasingly difficult to distinguish between domestic and international communications in a digital era." The NSA doesn't need a judge's permission to gather the data and carry out the type of analysis that gives the agency the power to build a detailed profile of someone's behavior.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

this is what happens when former and future, lobbyists become the fox guarding the hen house -- public safety is compromised. this is what repubicans have done to good government--essentially, destroyed it:

'WASHINGTON -- FAA officials overseeing Southwest Airlines ignored safety violations, leaked sensitive data to the carrier and tried to intimidate two inspectors to head off investigations, according to previously undisclosed allegations by the inspectors.

The Federal Aviation Administration inspectors are scheduled to testify April 3 before the House Transportation Committee. They say others in the agency allowed Southwest to skip critical safety inspections for years. The charges are in government documents provided to USA TODAY.

The federal Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency that investigates complaints from whistle-blowers, such as the two inspectors, found a "substantial likelihood" that the allegations are true, according to the documents.

The FAA on Thursday fined Southwest $10.2 million for intentionally flying 46 jets without performing inspections for cracks in the fuselage. The agency also reassigned two FAA managers in the office that oversees Southwest, but has neither identified them nor said when the action occurred.

The whistle-blowers complained repeatedly in memos written in 2007 that their concerns about Southwest were not being taken seriously. The underlying safety concern -- that the airline was unable to keep up with mandatory inspections -- had been raised as early as 2003, one charged.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

With a victory in WY, & a likely victory in MS, shouldn't the media be covering Obama's new winning streak, particularly since he's again widening the delegate counts? It seems the media is more inclined to 'wait for PA'.
Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 09:34 AM
---------------------------
But that would not keep the story going, which is what the media wants, to hell with the truth, give us dirty money.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

bsimon -

Someone posted on a previous thread that you'd choose BHO over McC, but McC over HRC. Is that correct? If so, can you explain it? I'm feeling the same way as a left-leaning Indie, but I can't really figure it out. Do we just not like HRC? Most of her policy positions are very much the same as BHO.

Normally I'm like mark_in_austin -- split the executive and legislature (it's worked pretty well in the past, except for that impeachment thing). But I think McC is turning me off a bit with the pandering to the right (e.g., Hagee).

I'd appreciate your viewpoint ... most of my friends are caught up in the virulent BHO v. HRC war that we see with many of the postings on these threads.

Posted by: mnteng | March 10, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

With a victory in WY, & a likely victory in MS, shouldn't the media be covering Obama's new winning streak, particularly since he's again widening the delegate counts? It seems the media is more inclined to 'wait for PA'.

Also, is the Clinton campaign touting Saturday Night Live skits this week? The show didn't quite skewer her this week, but came a bit closer than in the prior two - including the obvious joke that Bill wouldn't be around at 3 AM, should she be taking a call...

Posted by: bsimon | March 10, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

MoreAndBetterPolls desires to point out that the Obama Campaign, according to the "Wall Street Journal", predicted the remaining races before Super Tuesday. Every prediction has borne out save Maine, which was predicted to vote for Sen. Clinton.

Ron Brownstein recited this fact on Tuesday to support his thesis that the entire narrative of the campaign is thus a figment of the media's thirst for a story, because all is happening as expected, there are no turns in momentum, and there have been no surprises, in actual point of fact.

Novamatt has stated a "great truth".
So expect Mme. Dowd to strike at every turn and at every target, as proves convenient to her.

Posted by: MoreAndBetterPolls | March 10, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Maybe it's just me, but I'm sick to death of all the petty bickering from both the Clinton and Obama campaigns. Maybe this is what you get when there's no daylight between the candidates on the issues - what else is there to debate?

My hope is that the DNC refuses to seat the delegates from MI and FL as they stand - but will allow a re-vote if the state committees pay for it. Hopefully, this will finally push the national and state committees to work out a reasonable compromise. (Rotating regional primaries?) Holding primaries over a 6 month period only encourages this kind of sniping - a true gift for the GOP. I disagree with a lot of his positions, but I actually found it refreshing to hear McCain talk about the issues and where he differs with the Dems.

Posted by: -pamela | March 10, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

It looks more and more like there will be a re-vote in MI & FL, the only remaining factor is who is picking up the check.

McCain continues to look like a fool with his trashing the Bear study. It will be on tonights Colbert Report I'm sure. That's one thing this race is doing, giving good copy to Comedy Central and SNL. The spoof on President Obama calling Hillary for advice at 3 in the morning was funny.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 10, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

The 15 mill to be raised by the two shadiest governors in the land raises the same issues as Hill's refusal to release her tax records. Who is ponying up for the election? What do they expect in return for the funding? How will this country be screwed over again thanks to the suspect Clinton finances?

If Clinton wants history, how about the first woman on the moon?

Posted by: TheTruth | March 10, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

I think this sums up the previous thread really well..

"By itself, this would not be that big of a deal, but coupled with everything else it will just deflate the [House Republican] Conference," said an aide to one top GOP lawmaker. "And symbolically, losing Hastert's seat is like the toppling of the Saddam statue in Baghdad for Republicans.'

Democrats also point out that Hastert never took less than 64 percent in the solidly Republican district, carried handily by President Bush in both 2000 and 2004.

Even better from Democrats' perspective, the efforts on behalf of Oberweis by Hastert, House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), their presumptive 2008 presidential nominee, were not enough to stave off Oberweis' loss. All three Republican leaders had campaigned for Oberweis in recent weeks.

House Republicans already faced a daunting political landscape as Election Day grows closer. Twenty-eight House Republicans have announced their retirements or have resigned this election cycle - and nearly half of those represent highly competitive districts.'

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Maybe I'm missing something, but newsies have a pro-news bias. Clinton is out there making news by being aggressive and attacking Obama. Obama, meanwhile, aware of the numbers, is trying to avoid making news. He's happy to coast to 2025.

The question is how long Clinton being aggressive remains news. At some point, the newsies will get bored with Hillary's good cop/bad cop routine and want some fresh narrative, and the Hillary Is a Meanie narrative is plump and delicious and right there on the lowest branch at eye level. Easy pickins. All it takes is for Hillary to push her attack just a little too far one time.

Posted by: novamatt | March 10, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

It is also worth pointing out that the press has yet again been manipulated by Clinton. Why hasn't the fact that Brody reported that Clinton's campaign was the one that had assured them to take the anti-Nafta rhetortic "with a grain of salt" been covered?
Finally- Texas will like be won by Obama once caucus totals are completed. Why is the press not covering this either?

Posted by: emilystanton | March 10, 2008 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Hey Chris, Syracuse is gonna beat ya in the big east tourney, just like we did in the dome and just like we should have done at Georgetown.

Posted by: jndesant | March 10, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

judge-- well, we knew the media would be all over the Dem nominee, making sh*t up as usual, didn't we? why should this election be different than any other?

And now the entire MSM [the harpy dowd on sunday] is jumping all over the phony Austan Goolsbee 'incident', despite the fact that the Canadian goverment has issued a denial that it even happened.

The story originally came out of the Chief of Staff to Canada's conservative PM Stephen Harper, Ian Brody, who it turns out has been in touch with McCain's campaign. The fact that this has damaged Obama falsely, is taken seriously there, and one person has already been arrested.

Posted by: drindl | March 10, 2008 8:59 AM | Report abuse

The political calculations regarding FL and MI retakes are contradictory for both candidates, and for the DNC. They are straight up for the state politicians and need not be discussed.

1. The DNC must enforce its rules or set a precedent it will rue [an ez prediction, b/c lawyers have collective memories].

2. The DNC must seat FL and MI or actually risk losing enthusiasm in these key states in the Fall [I know this is in the calculation, but I do not know how realistic an assessment it is, because it involves predicting the future as if voters had collective memories].

For the candidates, the alternatives are well understood. As Chris says, they will both be open to the solution proposed by someone - anyone - else.

Usually nothing results from a situation like this. Perhaps this time we will see such enthusiasm from outside the DNC and the candidates that something will happen, but I think I would bet against it, and trust to inertia.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 10, 2008 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Obama's win in Mississippi should be big. Now I have no idea if it will be big enough to put him ahead in the polls in PA, but any positive news for him will help right now. I hope though that the 10% lead Hillary has right now will go down by ~2% a week as we approach April 22nd and Obama will win the Keystone state and put an end to this crazy contest before Michigan or Florida have a chance to revote.

Posted by: AndyR3 | March 10, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

"The Media and Mr. Obama: The last two weeks have been terrible for Obama. First, the trial of Tony Rezko began, then came Austan Goolsbee and Samantha Power."

So sayeth the chattering classes. Fortunately for Obama, the electorate is not paying attention to these trivial details. Who the heck is Austan Goolsbee? CC must be trolling some pro-HRC websites to 'Drudge' this stuff up.

"Your theme song should be "Godzilla" by Blue Oyster Cult, but with the lyrics changed to "Cillizza"."

Beauty, Blarg.

"History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of MSM. Cillizza!"

"Helpless people on a Metro train,
Scream for God as he looks in on them."

Posted by: judgeccrater | March 10, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

Chris,

ACCORDING TO DICK MORRIS, THE RACE IS OVER.

Sen. Obama has only to sit back, relax, enjoy himself immensely.

I agree.

MOVE LIKE A BUTTERFLY, STING LIKE A BEE.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/its_still_over_for_hillary.html

Posted by: rfpiktor | March 10, 2008 8:13 AM | Report abuse

Your theme song should be "Godzilla" by Blue Oyster Cult, but with the lyrics changed to "Cillizza". I'm sure someone can write a parody version for you.

Posted by: Blarg | March 10, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company