Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Morning Fix: 42 and 44 Make Peace



Former president Bill Clinton and President Obama have put past differences behind them. Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

President Obama will address the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative next week, the latest in a series of public -- and private -- signs that he and former president Bill Clinton have made peace after a very rocky relationship during the 2008 campaign.

Obama will speak at the gathering -- a yearly get-together of those intimately involved in policy and public life -- on Tuesday in New York City, according to White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki.

In the past several weeks, the two men -- the 42nd and 44th president of the United States -- have been at each others' side repeatedly: attending the memorial services for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy as well as for legendary anchorman Walter Cronkite and dining out in New York City on Monday during Obama's visit to the Big Apple to deliver a speech on regulatory reform.

And, according to one White House aide, the relationship between the duo has grown warmer privately as well. "He has been a total team player," said the source. "He has been careful and respectful and has done a lot of behind the scene political stuff for us when we need [it]."

A Clinton confidante echoed that sentiment and added that the idea of a daggers-drawn relationship between the two men had long ago become nothing more than a media-driven fantasy.

"I think the detente was long-ago realized and accepted by everyone but the political press, who desperately need and want them to not get along," said the source.

That analysis overlooks, of course, the fact that there were real tensions between the two men for much of 2007 and 2008 as Obama battled then New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic nomination.

As recounted in "The Battle for America" -- the terrific diary of the 2008 campaign penned by Dan Balz and Haynes Johnson -- Bill Clinton was the lead attack dog (much to his detriment) during the early primary season and was arguing for a far more aggressive attack on Obama's credential behind the scenes.

The past history between the two men makes their budding friendship all the more fascinating. Reasons for the relationship are myriad -- from Clinton's desire/need to be near the political power center to Obama's recognition that Clinton's smarts and political skills are an asset to be utilized not ignored -- but the one most commonly given by those who know the two men best is that they are part of a very exclusive club of men who know what it's like to hold the most powerful job in the world (aside of course from being the author of The Fix).

A Clinton source called that shared experience a "big deal" in understanding the relationship between the two men, adding that the job is one "that literally only a handful of people on planet earth really understand." A White House aide describes the relationship as one of "genuine respect."

Regardless of the reasoning, the detente between the two most powerful and recognizable Democrats is a very good thing for the party. While Obama is clearly the head of the Demoratic party now, there remains a significant number of people -- voters, activists, operatives and donors -- who still take their marching orders from Bill Clinton.

With the political environment heading south in a hurry for Democrats, they will need all of their best players on the field in 2010 and especially 2012 if they want to make Obama only the third Democratic president to get re-elected in the post World War II era.

Tuesday Fix Picks: Big game for CUA field hockey today.

1. Race matters.
2. President Obama pulls the "full Ginsburg" this weekend.
3. Mass. Senate special defined by who's not running.
4. Will Carly reach into her wallet?
5. Swayze: RIP.

Rudy a No-Go on Senate: Contrary to a report in the New York Post on Monday, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani has no interest in challenging Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D) in 2010, according to his closest political associate. "He has said time and again that the Senate is not a job for him," said Tony Carbonetti. "He is a chief executive, and a damn good one." Giuliani is still considering a run for governor in 2010 and is expected to make a decision on that race later this fall. Giuliani will have company in the governor's primary if he decides to run as former Rep. Rick Lazio is planning to announce his candidacy next week. The Democratic race, meanwhile, remains frozen until state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo makes a decision on whether to challenge Gov. David Paterson.

Brown Lands High Profile Consulting Team: State Sen. Scott Brown, the odds-on Republican nominee in the Senate special election to replace the late Ted Kennedy has hired on the Shawmut Group to provide consulting advice for his candidacy. The firm is comprised of top advisers to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney including Beth Myers, Eric Ferhnstrom and Peter Flaherty. Shawmut is also signed on to do communications consulting for former ambassador Tom Foley's (R) run for Senate in Connecticut.

Click It!: Ever wonder who is worth what in Congress? Us too. Roll Call -- the Fix alma mater -- is out with their latest version of the 50 richest members of Congress. And, they even have a handy-dandy chart laying out all the facts and figures!

A Third GOPer in N.H.?: Sean Mahoney, a businessman from Portsmouth and a Republican National Committeeman, is seriously weighing a run for New Hampshire's open Senate seat, according to the Manchester Union-Leader's John Distaso. Mahoney said he has been consulting with Dave Carney, a New Hampshire-based operative who is also advising Texas Gov. Rick Perry in his primary battle against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. Should he get into the race, Mahoney clearly will run to the ideological right -- as evidenced by several op-eds he has penned over the past few months critical of President Obama's handling of the economy and health care. A Mahoney candidacy would likely help former state attorney general Kelly Ayotte as it would likely split the conservative base between Mahoney and Ovide Lamontagne, the party's 1996 nominee for governor. Democrats have cleared the field for Rep. Paul Hodes.

Specter Benefits from Obama $$$: President Obama will travel to Philadelphia today to help raise money for party-switching Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) in advance of what looks to be a tough primary and general election fight for the incumbent next year. The event, which will be held at the Philadelphia Convention Center, is expected to bring in $2.5 million for Specter and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Specter has already proven himself to be among the most aggressive -- and effective -- fundraisers in the Senate, ending June with $7.5 million on hand. Specter will face Rep. Joe Sestak in next year's Democratic primary for the right to take on former representative Pat Toomey, whom he defeated in a 2004 Republican primary, in the general election. Of the fundraiser with the president, Specter campaign manager Chris Nicholas said: "This event clearly demonstrates the depth and breadth of support Senator Specter has in the Democratic Party." Sestak was less sanguine about the event, putting out a release criticizing Specter (and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid) for holding up business in the Senate, which will hold no votes Tuesday afternoon to accommodate the event.

A Vulnerable Lincoln: A new poll conducted for the liberal Daily Kos blog by Research 2000 shows Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) running well below 50 percent against a group of unknown Republican challengers. Against state Sen. Gilbert Baker, the establishment favorite in the primary, Lincoln leads 44 percent to 37 percent despite the fact that nearly three-quarters of Arkansas voters don't know enough about the Republican to offer an opinion on him. Lincoln's unfavorable rating (49 percent) outstrips her favorable rating (43 percent) in another bad sign for the Democratic incumbent. President Obama could be a major drag on Lincoln, according to the poll data, as just 41 percent of Arkansas voters have a favorable opinion of him as compared to 55 percent who have an unfavorable opinion.

Comstock Brings in the Heavy Hitters: Barbara Comstock (R), a candidate for state delegate in Virginia, will bring in former White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove for a fundraising event today and will follow that up with an appearance by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney later in the week. Comstock, who served as an adviser to Romney's 2008 presidential campaign, is facing off against state Del. Margi Vanderhye (D) in November.

Say What?: "We, your colleagues in the House, stand beside you." -- Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) in a letter he is circulating supportive of Rep. Joe "You lie" Wilson (R-S.C.).

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 15, 2009; 5:50 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Almanac Arrives!
Next: MA-Senate: Khazei is Running

Comments

This "going South in a hurry' cr*p is surely a crack pipe dream by Republicans. Nothing could be farther from the truth. This White House will have major accomplishments to brag about by 2010 and even more so by 2012. Right now, people are impatient and want to see things get done! They do not always understand that it will take time in the House and Senate to overcome all the republican roadblocks. However, the day will come when they run out of objections to everything and good things will happen. My guess is that in 2010 the republicans will lose even more seats, especially in the Senate.

Posted by: Opa2 | September 16, 2009 1:54 AM | Report abuse

"I watched Keith for a while last year, but he got too wound up about everything. Tired me out."

Yeah; the left just can't support the deep bench of screeching polemicists that the right can. Maybe it's a flaw in us, but I think that eventually we get bored of merely scoring points and want to move on to real issues of governance and policy.

Posted by: nodebris | September 15, 2009 10:36 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

You know that $10B of stimulus money that went to the NIH? That was Specter -- the price for his vote. The doubling of the NIH budget in the '90s? That was Specter and Harkin, as they switched off being chairman and ranking member of the Labor/HHS/Ed. Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee. The NIH has no stronger advocates in the Senate than Specter and Harkin, though Specter doesn't (and won't) have the same amount of sway over appropriations since he lost his seniority by becoming a D.

Posted by: mnteng | September 15, 2009 7:27 PM | Report abuse

yes, mike, exactly. Obama gets this.

The Overton scale looks something like:

Unthinkable > Radical > Acceptable > Sensible > Popular > Policy

In the current debate, Obama would have labeled national health care as "Unthinkable", single-payer as "Radical", and public option as "Acceptable." What actually becomes policy will be a mix of the popular (insurance reforms) and the sensible (expanded coverage).

Genius indeed.

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Yes, there is a reason that was the high point of his career, that was what I was insinuating, too sly I guess. And yes, he seemed just fine back doing sports, but I agree (again), it was pretty strange.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

I watched Keith for a while last year, but he got too wound up about everything. Tired me out.

Heard his voice on NBC football last weekend--freaked me out. He should have stayed a sportscaster.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"However, as one who feeds from the NIH trough, I'm leery of losing a powerful advocate for biomedical research funding (Specter), especially with some nominal paylines for FY10 at the 6th percentile. Either D would be preferable to Toomey to me though.

Posted by: mnteng"

I didn't know that Specter was that big of an advocate. That's pretty big to me as well since I'm currently feeding out of that trough as well.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

"The high point of Kieth Olberman's career was perhaps his send up of HRC's staying on because hey, RFK got assassinated late in the race, I'm just sayin'."

I hated his response. I agree that she shouldn't have said what she said, but I hardly think it warranted a fifteen minute rant.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps I was a bit too quick in my analysis. In fact:

I HOPE:

I keep my house
I keep my job
I keep my health insurance
I end up with a retirement plan
my energy bills don't skyrocket
The CIA is still in business in a few years
The IRS doesn't take all my money
the military can win some battles, old school
The UN doesn't take over our justice system
to get a job as a czar one day
that israel survives
that we don't get bombed
that my kids learn something useful in school

Used to be you could sort of count on this stuff not happening, despite government meddling. Now you can be pretty sure that the government is going to mess it up, as usual. not exactly the CHANGE we were expecting.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

The high point of Kieth Olberman's career was perhaps his send up of HRC's staying on because hey, RFK got assassinated late in the race, I'm just sayin'.

Then there was her remark in WVa I think it was about ..."hard working, you know, White Americans...", whose support she was counting on.

Atrocious race baiting.

And then there was Andrew Young, Bills good friend who, before Reverend Wright, was trying to make the Clintons' point that Obama was not a real black person. He quipped Bill Clinton had bedded more black women than had Barak Obama. To be fair to Bill at least, it was the Clinton spokesflaks who were doing most of the racial trash talk.

Even out on the blogs, who can forget the uberTroll svreader, he said stuff nearly identical to what we are getting from the right to this day, all in support of Hillary.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

As a matter of politics, I like Sestak the best of the three. He has the hardest row to hoe, fighting a well-funded, establishment-backed incumbent, then a well-funded establishment-backed R. But, if he wins the primary, he'll get the support of the D establishment.

However, as one who feeds from the NIH trough, I'm leery of losing a powerful advocate for biomedical research funding (Specter), especially with some nominal paylines for FY10 at the 6th percentile. Either D would be preferable to Toomey to me though.

Posted by: mnteng | September 15, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Even with those enormous ears, he still can't hear:

A Zogby International/O’Leary Report poll of 4,200 likely voters has some startling results concerning attitudes toward health-care reform: Asked if they agree or disagree that the federal government should require all Americans to purchase health insurance or face a fine — a provision favored by Democrats — 70.2 percent said they disagree, and only 18.5 percent agree. The rest are not sure. A resounding 75 percent of respondents said that taxes should not be raised

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 3:38 PM | Report abuse

"fairytale"

Obamna hates it when his lies are called out. his entire career is based on speeches and hollywood type cult of personality. so far, no legislation, no hope, no change, just empty promises and lies.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 3:35 PM | Report abuse

@NYClefty: there is no way to pardon HRC's assassination remark. It was idiotic, she knew better, the words should never have passed her lips.

I have no quibble with the rest of your post but the assassination remark was inexcusable.

And by the way, gender demographics don't dictate electorals.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 15, 2009 3:31 PM | Report abuse

I love how one-sided the tension between the Clintons and Obama is presented- it was Obamas people who put it out there that "fairytale" was a racist word, who misrepresented Hillary's statement about King/LBJ both so they could galvanize the AA population in SC and have a larger win so that losses in Florida (where Barack's campaign ran ads as part of a national media buy) and Nevada so that there was no momentum change before super Tuesday. The same people accused her of hoping for his assasination from the RFK statements. A whole fiction, counterfactual to their entire lives of service was set up regarding the Clintons as racists with implicit support of those surrounding the Obama campaign. Nobody called Barack out on statements that could have been labeled mysogynist against the first female candidate (remember women make up 52% of population) to ever have a chance in the primaries.

All I am saying is that it was not a one-sided problem- as generally problems are more complex. It is time that we looked at this without diefying one side and villainizing the other.

Posted by: NYClefty | September 15, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

The Overton scale looks something like:

Unthinkable > Radical > Acceptable > Sensible > Popular > Policy

In the current debate, Obama would have labeled national health care as "Unthinkable", single-payer as "Radical", and public option as "Acceptable." What actually becomes policy will be a mix of the popular (insurance reforms) and the sensible (expanded coverage).

Genius indeed.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Wow Cc. you entire blog is populated with a loony left liberal mutual admiration society. not one thinking breathing independent or Repub all day.

also notice not one bit of interesting writing, mostly gossip about others, vapid opinions about right wing evil, massive ignorance of fact and policy - in short, a quick link to huff post, moveon, Kos and the DNC.

CC - only the view from the extreme fringe of the loony left party could picture you as a right wing apparatchik. all the value of your blog has been bled dry by the extremism and total ignorance of the posters here. I dare you to cite one piece of information that is informative or non-partisan. go ahead and try.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 3:20 PM | Report abuse

"Oops...I meant Sestak."

Dang! I thought we had finally sighted the fabled "sane conservative."

Posted by: nodebris | September 15, 2009 3:15 PM | Report abuse

drindl,

Agreed on the rhetoric. I was arguing with G&T a couple weeks ago because he thought of the 1960's as a safer, more civil period. But since then, or at least since the end of the Vietnam War and Watergate, politics has not been this nasty.

(And oops again. Ford of course doesn't count since he was never elected even to VP>)

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

"DDAWD writes:
"Any PA people here with thoughts on the Senate race? I am rooting for Toomey, but I am having trouble seeing this play out if Obama is actively fundraising for Specter."

Well, knock me over with a feather. I could have sworn you were a D or at least left of center."

Oops...

I meant Sestak.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Well, we hope shrink.

yes, mike-- about the rhetoric. They keep moving the goalposts to the right, so that stuff that once was considered 'extreme' becomes 'normal.' Like carrying loaded assault weapons to presidential rallies, for instance.

During most of my llfetime, that was considered extreme. Or ministers praying for the president's death.

Now, apparently it's not. Like with the MSM. Before, the ugly sentiments voiced, or on many of the signs at the wingnut rally in DC would have been decried as hateful and repellent, which they are. But coverage of the event seldom even mentioned any of it, and made out for the most part that this orgy of racism was just another event.

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Contrast with GOP record: two re-election wins (Reagan, Bush 43), two losses (Ford, Bush 41) and one win-dirty-and-resign (Nixon).

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Oops. Sorry, DDAWD. You're saying it's one win (Clinton) and one loss (Carter). Obama would be the second win. Got it.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Last week I was commenting the Obama genius may involve the Overton Window. He sets himself up to be accused of so many things, then, when he acts, actually does something, people don't mind how different it actually is.

He will get a universal coverage/health care industry stimulus package passed, all the time being accused of having lost control of the debate, sold out the public option, being a communist and so on and on.

If he stood up and said I want universal health care coverage and it is going to cost a ton of money, there is no way it would have passed. now of course, it hasn't yet, but it will, just watch. The whole time he will be declaimed by the Left and afterward, the Right will declare victory, as they always do.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

"Of course, only one post WWII Democratic President who achieved the office through election and was still alive for re-election lost."

OK that was Carter. Are you forgetting Clinton? (See pic above.)

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

drindl,

I've always thought of the Overton Window as applying to policy. I.e., expanding the window of "sensible" policy by proposing "extreme" solutions that will be rejected, but make the other proposals seem more reasonable. For example, pushing for National health care so as to make portable insurance seem like a no-brainer.

Not sure if you are applying this to the heated rhetoric of the right? Do you think they are screaming "Kenyan" in order to make a charge like "socialist" stick?

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD writes:
"Any PA people here with thoughts on the Senate race? I am rooting for Toomey, but I am having trouble seeing this play out if Obama is actively fundraising for Specter."

Well, knock me over with a feather. I could have sworn you were a D or at least left of center.

In terms of the Sestak/Specter race, Specter was always going to have more money than Sestak for the primary, so I don't really think that is a surprise. Sestak will have to run a more grass roots campaign, though he has something like $5 million in his coffers right now. It will matter how well Sestak can pin Specter to GWB and "political opportunism". If that works, then Sestak wins. Also, I think Sestak will get more union endorsements than Specter, particularly after the EFCA flap back when Specter was an R. In any case, either Sestak or Specter have to be heavily favored against Toomey in the general. No matter how much Toomey tries to pretend otherwise, you don't get to be president of the Club for Growth by being a moderate.

Posted by: mnteng | September 15, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

"Actually, if Obama wins in 2012, he would only be the second Democrat to be re-elected in the post-World War II era, not the third. Or, if you count a president's re-election based soley on being the incumbent, no necessarily on having been elected the first time around, then Obama would be the fourth in this group, still not the third.

Just a heads-up on the fuzzy math

Posted by: brent79 "

Of course, only one post WWII Democratic President who achieved the office through election and was still alive for re-election lost.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

G&T, that's what I always say. Think Europe and Japan are communist? Government is the problem, never the solution? Fine. The freest market on earth, with the least government interference, is Somalia. Take your pick, Paris or Mogadishu.

Of course, most wingnuts think Somalia is a food-borne disease.

Posted by: nodebris | September 15, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

of course, margaret, but how can they keep up the pretense of 'caring' about Israel and the Jews if they jack them off?

it is stupid, shrink. but what can you expect from me this increasingly unhinged group. should be lots of loony rhetoric coming out of it -- they keep pushing the crazy button harder and harder.

Any of you know about the Overton Window?

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

drindl, considering how few Jews probably belong to the Family Research Council, I figure the conventioneers are just counting on easier seating at DC's restaurants this weekend. Christian families are the only ones that count, not Jewish families or heathen families.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 15, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

drindl, it is disrespect AND political stupidity.

As much as groups like AIPAC might fret about Obama making nice to the Arabs and bugging Israel about the settlement/land grab, they'd have a lot more to worry about with what is left of the Republican leaders

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Actually, if Obama wins in 2012, he would only be the second Democrat to be re-elected in the post-World War II era, not the third. Or, if you count a president's re-election based soley on being the incumbent, no necessarily on having been elected the first time around, then Obama would be the fourth in this group, still not the third.

Just a heads-up on the fuzzy math

Posted by: brent79 | September 15, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Our passionate advocates of the free market should move to Somalia, where there is a vibrant economy exhibiting all the glories of a market entirely free of government distortions.

See how supply and demand have reached perfect equillibrium there?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 15, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

ruraledcomm,

Yes and gee, those Somali pirates we heard so much about? It is a lot quieter out there there these days. It is not that the Somali pirates all went out and got jobs after Obama ordered the executions of three of their number. But they sure aren't out in the numbers they used to be.

I get so annoyed by people worrying whether counterattacking these people might just make their supporters mad. I say (what I've always said, as if it mattered), no boots on the ground war will defeat terrorism. Justice will, but that is a looong way off.

Meanwhile, local intel and local efforts are the sad reality of what has to happen. There is no way to share the world with these people. I feel sorry for the aid workers who go to these places thinking they won't get beheaded because they are trying to be nice.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 2:03 PM | Report abuse

GOP family values = f... anything that moves, then brag about it on a live microphone...

Posted by: ruraledcomm | September 15, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

It's just common courtesy, a subject wngers have little experience with. Jews don't hold major political conferences on Christmas.

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

TO: dirndl who wrote:
“..How would you explain the wingers holding their annual summit during the Jewish High Holidays?”
_______________

We’re not all Jewish. So, what are doing for Christmas?

+++++++++++++++

I couldn't be more thrilled that the 2 Presidents are getting along.

Both were the best Presidents of our time.

Posted by: lindalovejones | September 15, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

kingofzouk/snobama -- now there's a case for you. somene who spends every day of their life, every minute of every day, posting frantic gibberish on blogs, even though he knows everyone else on the blogs thnks he is a moron.

What sort of disorder is that? Some sort of schizophrenia? Mania? There doesn't seem to be a down stage though, it's all maniac behavior.

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

thanks, shrink. How would you explain the wingers holding their annual summit during the Jewish High Holidays?

Disrespect? Stupidity? Selfishness? Arrogance?

'This weekend, thousands of "values voters" will convene in Washington for their annual summit sponsored by the Family Research Council (motto: "Defending faith, family and freedom"). All of the conservative luminaries will be there: Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and maybe even Sarah Palin. (South Carolina Mark Sanford was, sadly, disinvited over the summer.) One group of voters won't be too well represented, however. Event organizers have conveniently scheduled their big DC summit for Rosh Hashanah, meaning that most Jews will be elsewhere, celebrating their biggest holiday of the year just as Bill O'Reilly kicks off the summit's Friday evening plenary session.'

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Why is anyone even commenting on zouk/snowbama? This is a potty-mouth loser posting from a PC in a mental institution. All he does is copy paste from right-wing online journals and pound his chest about his "debate" skills. Vomit on the sidewalk. Ignore.

The real question is why snowbama and JakeD are allowed to post their filth while others get banned far calling a racist a racist.

Want a vibrant community here? Get rid of the two trolls. And wean off the GOP feeding tube, this is getting disgusting.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 15, 2009 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Yes, margaret, amazing how much of a hurry the Fix is in to bury the Dems, isn't it? He doesn't even make a pretense of being even-handed anymore.

==

During the campaign this column had the best reporting around. Since the inauguration, TheFix isn't even worth reading. I was subscribing on my Kindle, then TheFix became the first subscription I ever cancelled on it.

Anyone who checks out the polls CC reports can see he's cherry-picking to try to make the GOP look good. TRY to. It's not possible to make this miserable collapse of a party look good.

Mitch Daniels!! Haley Barbour!! Mitt Romney!! Palin!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 15, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

"duck Liberals -- facts ahead. you may want to trot out the insults and personal attacks about now."

Posted by: snowbama

*** Excuse me but I don't think the right in this country would know a "fact" if it slapped them in the face! You and your "real America", Hitler involking dodo - you can't even take responsibility for having elected the most dangerous, ineffective president who for 8 years thought of nothing but revenging his dear ole' dad, lowering taxes on the rich with no plan as to how to replace that money in the budget. Fighting a unecessary war without putting those funds in the budget. Do you take responsibility for that? How about the economy? Any responsibility for that? No! Nope, none! Not you people, not the "real Americans" who would take advantage of 9/12 for your craziness - the MSM won't say it but I will - CRAZINESS.

You should be rallying around the president during these times of crisis but no - you try to further divide our country. You will loose because you are a minority and I'm sick of your "freedom to speak" - lead, follow or get the hell out of the way!


no wonder then that Obimbo can only pass the stimulus bill (which spent a lot of money and did nothing - the coming legacy of Obama) and no others. because the Dems are such effective leaders????

********** Prove the stimulus "did nothing" - we have police, firemen and teachers (as an example - not the entirity) that cities, states etc would not have had without the stimulus. You know nothing except negative because that is what you CHOOSE to know.

Tell me, is it the color of the mans skin that you really have a problem with? Gotta be something because what you and your looney friends say simply does not hold water.

Posted by: Kathy5 | September 15, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Love the way that Navy seals took out the wanted terrorist in Somalia, under the direction of POTUS, Barack Obama..Don't you love the way Democrats protect the security of the nation..Find the target, take them out and no civilian casualties..That is the way Barack Obama is gonna take out OBL..OBL must be quivering in his cave..instead of the bluster of W and co, he now faces a President who knows how to get things done..

Posted by: ruraledcomm | September 15, 2009 1:25 PM | Report abuse

I admire dfc's fire!

The other side has got nothing: no program, no ideas, no opitmism, no plan, no legislation. Nothing but air over there. And a lot of scandal.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 15, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Any PA people here with thoughts on the Senate race? I am rooting for Toomey, but I am having trouble seeing this play out if Obama is actively fundraising for Specter.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 1:16 PM | Report abuse

@dfc102, ddawd, and anyone else who will listen:

Just ignore snowbama. Snowbama is not interested in discussion, only in provocation. Any comment directed at him is exactly the attention he seeks. Snowbama is simply a troll who will attempt to fill up the blog. Ignore him.

Snowbama is also a troll who repeatedly copies content from elsewhere and posts it under his name, violating the very first rule governing commentary and discussion.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 15, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

"When I think about it at all, which is ever so rarely, I wonder whether snowbama/zouk isn't actually a parody of rabid bone-headed know-nothing conservative mouth-breather. The posts are pretty seriously over-the-top. And several other sites I visit have a resident clown.

But lately it's pretty hard to tell the difference between parody and reality on the right, so who knows?

Posted by: nodebris "


I used to think so, but he really has started taking himself way too seriously for someone with such a vapid intellect.

But anyways, this is just piling on. I don't want to gang up on the guy. It's just pointless. He's not capable of defending himself.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

I've had the same thought, nodebris. But he has gotten pretty snippy when I've posted links to the articles he steals from. If he was a parody, he wouldn't care.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Chris, give me just one good reason to vote for a Republican - just one! I may be angry at the Democrats but what have the Republicans done that would pursuade me they are would be any better at governance? Nothing! Absolutely nothing!

At least the Democrats see the necessity of moving along with the times - and it is necessary - we cannot remain in the dark ages of the Reagan years that the Republicans always fall back on and still be a competitor on the world stage. I don't think Republicans get that. I mean you can't get there if you dismiss Darwin's Theory now can you?

"NO" is NOT a solution to any of our problems nor is war although it is helpful to the economy it has no other benefit - we can fix our economy in other less deadly ways. But I don't think it will be a Republican leading the charge.

Posted by: Kathy5 | September 15, 2009 1:00 PM | Report abuse

When I think about it at all, which is ever so rarely, I wonder whether snowbama/zouk isn't actually a parody of rabid bone-headed know-nothing conservative mouth-breather. The posts are pretty seriously over-the-top. And several other sites I visit have a resident clown.

But lately it's pretty hard to tell the difference between parody and reality on the right, so who knows?

Posted by: nodebris | September 15, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"ddawd, I know you prefer opinion, insult and humor to actual facts."

Get over yourself. I've responded to your nonsense many times before. Sometimes you write back to tell me I'm wrong with some "loony lib" nonsense tossed in there, but no actual points to explain WHY I'm wrong. Most of the time, you just bury it with more pages of plagiarized material. I'm not the only one you've done this with either.

If that's "debate" to you, then have at it. Sure, you'll get jaked to say how awesome you are, but do you think anyone with an ounce of intelligence thinks much of someone who isn't capable of much more than copy-and-paste and a bunch of high school insults?

And I'm sure you know that any one on here can pummel you into the ground on a factually based discussion which is why you refuse to engage in one. That's smart. Don't enter a fight that you don't have a chance of winning. However, don't pretend what you're doing is "debating." No one buys it.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

snowbama:

You say that you enjoy having a factual basis for argument. I hope you realize that you are posting opinion columns. There are some facts in them, but they have already been chosen by the *actual* author to support his/her opinion. By plagiarizing these opinion columns, you have made it that much harder for anyone here to have the same background information that you wish to debate.

If you truly wish to debate the facts, please quote from news articles, not opinions with the analysis already made for you. And please, stop quoting without attribution.

In your laundry list of "liberal lies" you state "No more...school indoctrination." I don't know if that was your thought or someone else's. Either way, I'd like to hear your understanding of how Obama's speech on Sept. 8 amounted to "indoctrination" or any defense of Reagan's highly partisan speech to students during his presidency.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 12:31 PM | Report abuse

CC et al. I apologize for posting facts, considering debate, desiring intellectual stimulation. I keep forgetting this blog is simply a veneer for liberal psyche to air its greivances in the most base way possible. I understand that you are against intelligent discussion and prefer name calling and off topic rants about decades old personalities. the new fix is back in order.
another bold prediciton - this formula will allow you to follow MSDNC, NBC, CBS, NYTImes, and WaPo down the tubes of irrelevance soon enough. the "real" people of this country are rising up and have had enough. enough PC, enough bias, enough loony leftism, enough fake science, enough faiaing socialism, enough school indoctrination, enough spending on BS. the entire liberal endevour for the last 40-50 years is being revealed for the sham and flop that it is. thanks for that Obama.
Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse
duck Liberals -- facts ahead. you may want to trot out the insults and personal attacks about now.
Posted by: snowbama

Like predicting the sun will rise.
no wonder then that Obimbo can only pass the stimulus bill (which spent a lot of money and did nothing - the coming legacy of Obama) and no others. because the Dems are such effective leaders????
Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse


Debate?

You aren’t here looking for debate.

You have your concrete ignorance and you’re here to defend it with your weak misspelled fusillades like “the "real" people of this country are rising up and have had enough. enough PC, enough bias, enough loony leftism, enough fake science, enough failing socialism, enough school indoctrination, enough spending on BS. The entire liberal endeavor for the last 40-50 years is being revealed for the sham and flop that it is. Thanks for that Obama.”

You’re whining about shams and flops? You’re both. You’re wailing about bias? You’re living it.

The right is dying from the bone-deep incapacity to look itself in the mirror. You’re here because you demand the right to stay blind.

Posted by: dfc102 | September 15, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

drindl and a shrink. could not be a more natural fit. something tells me this scenario has been played over and over.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 12:19 PM | Report abuse

ddawd, I know you prefer opinion, insult and humor to actual facts. but I actually enjoy having a basis for argument, not a loons beleif about something. In this age, there is a sea of facts out there to establish a baseline for discussion. I am not a journalist and am not privy to my own personal set of facts like most liberals are. therefore, in academic style, I begin my approach with what is known by intelligent and professional writers.

It is clear that most liberals avoid facts and figures like the plague. I understand these leave them little wriggle room to advance their mistaken ideas and lies. but nevertheless, it is always fun to pretend you have something solid there.

Care to take on the list of liberal lies I posted? Or would you rather discuss cheney? there is always ACORN, or Van Jones, or indecision or....

but I presume you will fall back on what you know.

and you better hurry before the usual afternoon pollution arrives in the form of CF8. she should be finishing up her baloney sandwich right about now.

We used to have reasoned discussion on the fix months ago before the new blood arrived and hijacked the blog.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 12:17 PM | Report abuse

MEMO TO POTUS c/o Senior WH staff:

Mr. President:

You are being dangerously over-exposed in the media, reducing the effectiveness of your message.

The accounts of your "off-the-record" comment about rapper Kanye West's MTV antics underscore the point.

Please, sir, for the sake of your agenda, consider cancelling your scheduled "full Ginsburg" round of talk show appearances this week. Surely your time can be better spent by quietly working behind the scenes in support of your policy objectives.

Think about this: There was good reason Elvis did not appear on any TV talk show after his breakout year...

***

Gov't-enabled atrocities make health care reform a cruel joke...

COVERT FED MULTI-AGENCY PROGRAM ASSAULTS U.S. CITIZENS WITH HARMFUL MICROWAVE/LASER DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS

• Community policing- based warrantless GPS-activated vigilante stalking, harassment, vandalism, financial exploitation enabled by federal and local law enforcement

• Is Team Obama naive, misinformed, or complicit?

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

OR (if link is corrupted / disabled):

http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | September 15, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

drindl,

Until recently, organized psychology made much of the distinction between neuropsychiatric disorders, such as autism and personality disorders, such as antisocial (sociopath), narcissistic, schizoid, etc.

So we would not conflate sociopathy and autism in the case of Republican leaders, such as Dick Cheney.

One implies a motive force, a mens rea, a person who knows right from and wrong and chooses to do wrong for a purpose. The other would mean he could not do the right thing even if he wanted to because could not fathom the concept of the greater good, nor the rights and feelings of others. "Could not" bespeaks not an absence of learning, but rather the absence of the neurological substrate required to do so, as we clearly see in autistic children.

Recently, however, the popularity if you will of the Asbergers autism subtype has started many of us thinking that there is no such thing as a personality disorder. After all, there are no non neural parts of your brain where your personality lives, or where your soul is, your identity, and so on. These words we use represent various neural networks, some we consider healthy, some damaged and some dangerous to others.

Point is, society and individuals do a lot of rationalizing for things they don't understand. When a criminal was asked why he stuck a fork in a guys forehead, he said, "He was looking at my dessert, anyone would have done it, this is prison baby."
Perhaps the guy is autistic and really believes what he is saying. He doesn't get it, because he can not get it.

Now, just as in the case of Dick Cheney, diagnosing people differently does not make them any less dangerous, but it would remove the medieval moral rubric from the management of dangerous individuals.


Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

"CC et al. I apologize for posting facts, considering debate, desiring intellectual stimulation."


Waaaah, why does no one think I'm smart?? I mean, look how smart I am to copy and paste from all the bestest right wing blogs!! That is what debate is, right? Cutting and pasting?

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 11:59 AM | Report abuse

CC et al. I apologize for posting facts, considering debate, desiring intellectual stimulation. I keep forgetting this blog is simply a veneer for liberal psyche to air its greivances in the most base way possible. I understand that you are against intelligent discussion and prefer name calling and off topic rants about decades old personalities. the new fix is back in order.

another bold prediciton - this formula will allow you to follow MSDNC, NBC, CBS, NYTImes, and WaPo down the tubes of irrelevance soon enough. the "real" people of this country are rising up and have had enough. enough PC, enough bias, enough loony leftism, enough fake science, enough faiaing socialism, enough school indoctrination, enough spending on BS. the entire liberal endevour for the last 40-50 years is being revealed for the sham and flop that it is. thanks for that Obama.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is holding off major decisions that could put its military forces on a firmer war footing in Afghanistan even as doubts grow about whether the United States can win there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Maybe after the decision about the new church is revealed. this stuff is hard, above my pay grade. Remember it took months just to choose a dog. Perhaps an apology and surrender tour is in order. Is anyone left to give up to? I think Honduras has been acting particularly free and independent lately.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

"Simply proclaiming something and then swallowing it whole is not a recipe for intelligent debate.

Posted by: snowbama"

Debate someone once in your life and then you can talk.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 15, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

duck Liberals -- facts ahead. you may want to trot out the insults and personal attacks about now.

Posted by: snowbama


Like predicting the sun will rise.

no wonder then that Obimbo can only pass the stimulus bill (which spent a lot of money and did nothing - the coming legacy of Obama) and no others. because the Dems are such effective leaders????

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

I thought ......
Posted by: drindl

good one. LOL.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I second dee5. This is a strange and strained political time. When I look around I see the Republicans collapsing into disarray, not the Democrats.

Which party counts Joe Wilson, Ensign, Sanford, Jim Gibbons, Abramoff, Chip Pickering, Vitter, Gingrich, et al as members?
Which party has incumbents, Senators and Governors and Congressman, unwilling to run for re-election in the last cycle and the coming cycle? they can't even get respectable people like Tom Ridge to step in, that's how bad it looks from the outside.
Which party bows and scrapes to "entertainers" like Beck and Limbaugh and lets them set the standard for what a pure Republican is and isn't?
Which party has spent the last 8 months disrupting important discourse because they would rather this country FAIL than be lead by our President?
Which party irresponsibly stokes a myriad little political extemist groups and gets them to do their work for them?

We all know which party that is. The Democrats, meanwhile, are making an earnest and honest effort to govern this country. You may not like the President's agenda, but at least he is pursuing it an orderly and productive way. The GOP looks like a party of losers, asshats and babies.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 15, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Scrolling past the plagarized propaganda and rightwing drool...
I thought this summed up the Cult today:

"Leafing through a review of a biography of Ayn Rand, I came across this:

She wrote of one of the protagonists of her stories that “he does not understand, because he has no organ for understanding, the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people”; and she meant this as praise.
It reminded me of something JK quoted in the comments:

“Those who have known him [Cheney] over the years remain astounded by what they describe as his almost autistic indifference to the thoughts and feelings of others. ‘He has the least interest in human beings of anyone I have ever met,’ says John Perry Barlow, his former supporter. Cheney’s freshman-year roommate, Steve Billings, agrees: ‘If I could ask Dick one question, I’d ask him how he could be so unempathetic.’”
It makes me wonder if this is part of why the word “empathy” was such a red flag for wingnuts during the Sotomayor confirmation. It also makes me wonder if “RULE OF LAW!” is less about respect for the law than about lack of sympathy. Likewise, with torture: it doesn’t matter if it yields results or not, what matters is that it shows a commendably conservative lack of empathy and compassion for other human beings.

Is that, in the end, what defines modern conservativism? An almost autistic sociopathic indifference to the thoughts and feelings of others?"

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

dee5 - I guess you didn't see the column yesterday that said the more people hear about Obamacare, the less they like it.

Simply proclaiming something and then swallowing it whole is not a recipe for intelligent debate.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

C'mon Chris. Concluding that "the detente was long-ago realized and accepted by everyone but the political press" does not 'overlook' the fact that there was real tension. It acknowledges it and claims it has been resolved. By re-hashing it again, you are following the script of a "media-driven fantasy."

No Clinton-Obama feud to divide the party, no Kennedy dynasty to fuel the opposition. I guess the right-wingers will just have to make do with old conspiracy theories and boorish behavior.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

there are a lot of other lies about health care that still need to be addressed.

1) The President is working with Republicans: Obama has refused to meet with Republican leaders on health care since April.

2) Republicans haven't suggested a plan for health care: Republicans have actually submitted 35 plans.

3) The public option won't put the insurance industry out of business and lead to a government takeover of health care: Of course, it will. That's the whole purpose of putting it in the bill. Don't take my word for it, listen to Barney Frank explain it in his own words.

4) Medicare won't be cut to fund this health care bill: Actually, there are $500 billion in cuts to Medicare planned to help pay for this bill.
5) The health care plan won't add "one dime to our deficits either now or in the future." There is simply no bill that fits that description winding its way through Congress. According to the neutral Congressional Budget Office, the House bill adds $220 billion to the deficit over 10 years -- and even those numbers rely on very unlikely streams of revenue coming into the program. Moreover, the CBO only estimates numbers 10 years out. Over the long haul, all evidence points to costs skyrocketing into the stratosphere just as Social Security and Medicare have over time.

6) Preventative care will be required in these bills and it'll save money: Studies show that preventative care increases, not decreases costs. That's not only because of the cost of the tests, but because it leads to large numbers of people being treated for potential problems that would never end up coming to fruition.

7) Health care reform will help create more jobs: That's simply not true. According to the Natural Federation of Independent Businesses, this health care bill would wipe out 1.6 million jobs.

8) Abortion won't be covered under the bill: Unless the bill specifically says abortion isn't covered, it's covered by default. Abortion is not mentioned in the House bill and thus, is covered.

9) This bill won't lead to rationing of health care and people being denied life saving operations: Of course, it will. Barack Obama himself has even alluded to it with his famous, "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller" quip. In nations like Canada and Britain, long waits for surgeries and people being denied proven life saving operations for financial reasons is commonplace. How can anyone believe that we're going to copy their system and not have the same result?

10) Obama's "Plan" doesn't have these problems you're talking about: Obama hasn't submitted any sort of plan to Congress. In other words, there is no special Obama plan. His only "plan" is to sign anything that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi can push through Congress.


duck Liberals -- facts ahead. you may want to trot out the insults and personal attacks about now.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

Obama’s worst sin in the health care hard sell was playing the American people for suckers. Had he given real estimates of ObamaCare’s costs, admitted that middle class tax hikes would be necessary to pay for it, that medicare recipients would suffer, that people might not be able to keep their doctors and that some rationing would be involved—support for ObamaCare would probably be better than it is today. Instead Obama not only lied, but he lied about things that anyone who has actually had health insurance or can do simple math could see were not true. And that more than anything else torpedoed ObamaCare, because it was a failure of credibility that made Obama seem either completely incompetent or a pathological liar. For now incompetent appears to be the opinion du jour, but that can quickly change if Obama continues lying so indefensibly that even an AP fact check can’t help but after a few embarrassed coughs, determine that Obama is just wrong.

Meanwhile with the unerring instinct that fanatics have for playing Sisyphus, Obama’s supporters have responded to every setback by going on the attack. Which may be sensible behavior in the opposition, but is destructive for the dominant party in a democratic system. Each time Democrats go on the offensive, the only thing they do is stir up controversy. Each time they try to demonize their opponents, they only bring more attention to what their opponents are saying. After giving millions of dollars in free publicity for Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, Obama’s media defenders helped boost Joe Wilson’s campaign war chest and national profile.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Organizers, however, insisted that they had assembled a phenomenal 1.5 million anti-tax-and-spend demonstrators. And you had to look to publications outside the United States to find independent backup for that assessment.

London's Daily Mail reported the march as comprising "as many as one million people," adding that "The line of protesters spread across Pennsylvania Avenue for blocks, all the way to the Capitol, according to the Washington Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency."


Obama senior political adviser David Axelrod told CBS' "Face the Nation" that the massive demonstration was not "indicative of the nation's mood" and that "I don't think we ought to be distracted" by it.

What exactly do Americans have to do to get the attention of Democrats who run both political branches of power in Washington? The tea parties earlier this year didn't convince them that this country will not accept being dragged down the road to socialized medicine. Neither did the "town hells" this summer.

Now, turning out in the hundreds of thousands, even millions, on the thoroughfares of the politicians' own capital city and the message doesn't sink in there, either.

Maybe the reason they can't hear the voice of the people is because their reading of reality derives solely from the reporting of the mainstream media.

The latter's credibility is being called into question as it gets upstaged again and again by bloggers and now social media like Facebook and Twitter, which pulled this gathering together.

A new Pew Research survey shows that the public's faith in the accuracy of news stories is at a more than two-decade low. Only 29% of Americans now believe news organizations generally get their facts straight, and some 63% believe news stories often to be inaccurate.


Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 11:01 AM | Report abuse

The rantings of nutjobs on Fox News or of uneducated fools at Teabag rallies is not evidence of a Democratic collapse in the 2010 election cycle.

Far from it: the more the public hears from the lunatic fringe that has now taken over the Republican party, the more we are grateful to the Democrats for giving us an intelligent, well-read, compassionate, respectful, dignified and imaginative president in these difficult times. President Obama has the mental fortitude, political savvy, and emotional balance as well as the intellectual strength that the hopelessly petty Republicans can only dream about.

President Clinton and President Obama are the best of American political leadership of this generation and it is great to see them together again. Better times are indeed ahead for the nation.

Posted by: dee5 | September 15, 2009 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Yes, margaret, amazing how much of a hurry the Fix is in to bury the Dems, isn't it? He doesn't even make a pretense of being even-handed anymore.

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 10:34 AM | Report abuse

I'd say you're a little to quick to jump on the 'Democrats in Disarray -- Things Rosy for Republicans' meme that CC keeps pumping here everyday, Blade. People may not love the ecoomy now -- but if they are not morons, they remember it was republicans who ruined it -- and that they have become a crazy cult with no leaders, ideas or principles.

Posted by: drindl | September 15, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

I'd say that the Dem fortunes headed south in a hurry. Carville had it right. It's the economy, stupid.

A good reform of health care could help immeasurably. Let's take Mark and Deb. Mark has been working on some iPhone apps that have gotten a little attention and earned him some extra cash. He's ready to quit his day job as a database drone and make a go of it. Unfortunately, Mark is a little overweight and has high blood pressure. The cost of premiums would make it difficult to get the business going, so he keeps his day job and tries to find time for his hobby.

Vanessa has always loved wine and the little shop in the neighborhood strip mall is up for sale. It's gotten a little tired and one can find many of the wines at the Mega Wine Superstore a few miles away. Vanessa has some connections and wants to make this a place where you find that unique wine for your important dinner. Unfortunately, Vanessa has diabetes and can't get insurance on her own. So, she keeps working at the DMV and hosts great wine nights at home.

Who's the party of small business now?

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 15, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton understands that at the end of the day, history may remember him as a cheating louse, but he will not be in Carter territory as a total failure. His vindication is still three years off. His claim that this whole thing is an utter sham was accurate.

Acorn has it's purse strings cut. Obama's support system is disintegrating.

Posted by: snowbama | September 15, 2009 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Re Fix Pick#2: Doing 5 Sunday shows is a good thing for Obama to do. Dumping Fox and adding Univision is smart--he wants to inform the persuadable electorate, and they don't watch Fox.

Sounds like the House is going to vote to reprimand Wilson. Seems fair after the way he dissed them yesterday. I hope they do it soon and get him off the stage, rather than keep the spotlight on him much longer.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 15, 2009 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Someone pass the SPF 30. Being this close to the power that is the Fix is getting me burnt.

Posted by: optimyst | September 15, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

"With the political environment heading south in a hurry for Democrats..."

Would someone please pull the RNC feeding tube from the Fix' nose? In the meantime, I'm afraid the posters are more informative than the blogger.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 15, 2009 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Chris,

While the 2010/2012 climate will certainly be less stellar than the 2006/2008 cycles, surely you're exagerrating slightly by your 'going south in a hurry' comment, aren't you?

Very wise of Clinton & Obama to overlook past differences. No sense in allowing the Dem. party to fragment.

Also, Clinton has 'been there' and if anyone knows how to handle and out-strategise the opposition, he does.

Posted by: sverigegrabb | September 15, 2009 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Glad that post-partisan claptrap is over.
Going to Univision instead of Fox (#2)speaks volumes.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

CC, be sure and tell Axelrod that we lifetime Democrats watched Obama's campaign, particularly Clyburn in SOuth Carolina, play the race card against the great Bill Clinton, too. It's old news, as a campaign or governing tactic.

The more the race card gets played by Obama, his staff, and his supporters, the lower the respect for the Democratic Party goes.

Specifically, tell Carville. We lifetime Democrats are deeply offended watching him play that card, when we know it was already falsely played against Bill Clinton.

Nobody's listening to it anymore.

Posted by: auntmo9990 | September 15, 2009 9:02 AM | Report abuse

I can understand the reasoning behind that Politico story in the #1 link. I've lived in a rural area in the South where racism, while not talked about is still felt and sometimes expressed. I can understand the fear that comes with it because there are still people that act out violently with both fists and words. I remember how upset and worried I was when students in my school started scrawling racial slurs on the lockers. It worries me much the same when people bring guns to political rallies or they deride others with hate speech. No good can come of either thing and there's no point in it.

I don't much like the mocking claims of the right either in this regard. Instead of taking it seriously that there are still people so hung up on the color of skin they joke about how Obama failed to make this a Post-Racial America. Honestly I can't think of one person that wouldn't want to live there but we're not going to get there belittling or ignoring the problems presented by race still. But then there are also people that feel they have to belittle others regardless of race because of their ego and narcissism.

Posted by: mtcooley | September 15, 2009 8:57 AM | Report abuse

People get over the Republican Rising!
It's the hook; it is going to be this way no matter what happens in reality.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 8:39 AM | Report abuse

Couldn't agree more Mark. All the polls disagree with CC's assessment that the Dems are heading south in a hurry. That doesn't even take into account that in the Senate at least the GOP has something like twice as many vulnerable seats compared to the Dems. And also as you said its the economy stupid and as it goes so will the Democrats poll numbers.

By this time next year we will be talking about if the Democrats well win two or three seats in the senate.

Posted by: AndyR3 | September 15, 2009 8:29 AM | Report abuse

Wow, look how trim Bill Clinton has gotten. Those two make the ss guy look like he needs to hit the gym.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 15, 2009 8:08 AM | Report abuse

CC posted:

"We, your colleagues in the House, stand beside you." -- Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) in a letter he is circulating supportive of Rep. Joe "You lie" Wilson (R-S.C.).
====================
Does this mean the unnamed colleagues support Wilson's violation of House Rules of decorum, or does it mean they oppose his censure, or both, or more?
====================
CC posted:

"With the political environment heading south in a hurry for Democrats..."

My men's group last night thought the slippage was mild. We would have agreed with you that there is slippage, but it does not appear to be accellerating, and is dependent mainly on whether there is growing optimism about the economy. The main visible effect of the stimulus so far has been the salvation of state jobs and I live in a state capitol, so our men's group may not extrapolate as well as your inside-the-beltway view, but I thought it was worth noting.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 15, 2009 7:50 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company