President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez directed in a radio address this weekend.... "Mr. Defense Minister, move 10 battalions to the border with Colombia for me, immediately--- tank battalions, deploy the air force.... we don't want war, but we aren't going to permit the U.S. empire, which is the master [of Colombia].... to come to divide us." (WashingtonPost)
As the military from leftist Ecuador and Venezuela deploy on their borders with Columbia, a U. S. ally, the tense crisis threatens to erupt into war.
The reason.... a raid by Colombia into Ecuador which killed a leader of the rebel leftist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) which has fought to overthrow the Colombian government for 40 years.
Colombia said its police and air force shot back at targets in Ecuador only after its forces came under fire from FARC rebels about a mile inside Ecuador.
Chavez warned "This is something very serious. This could be the start of a war in South America" and threatened to retaliate with Sukhois.... recently purchased Russian warplanes.
And... in the Middle East, Iranian's President Ahmadinejad is visiting Baghdad today and telling the U.S. to get out of Iraq and the region. (WashingtonPost)
During his two-day trip, Iran and Iraq will sign seven agreements on customs, transportation links, improving cooperation in industrial development, highlighting the new, closer relations between the former foes.
Since the U.S. overthrow of Saddam and the installation of a new U.S.-backed government, both Iraq and Iran are now run by Shiite majorities.
Meanwhile, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) decried our lack of focus on Afghanistan and nuclear-armed Pakistan. (NYTimes)
"Afghanistan is slipping toward failure. The Taliban is back, violence is up, drug production is booming and the Afghans are losing faith in their government"... Biden warned.
"If we should have had a surge anywhere, it is Afghanistan.... Afghanistan's fate is directly tied to Pakistan's future and America's security. When President Musharraf of Pakistan concluded that we were not serious about finishing the job in Afghanistan, he began to cut deals with extremists in his own country.
"As a result, the border area remains a freeway of fundamentalism: the Taliban and Al Qaeda find sanctuary in Pakistan, while Pakistani suicide bombers wreak havoc in Afghanistan."
The fruits of the Bush administration's Iraq-obsessed foreign policy.... deep unrest with the specter of war in our backyard, and an obscenely costly war in Iraq that has played into Iran's ambitions in that country while emboldening fundamentalism in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Heck of a job, Georgie.
Showing posts with label Biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Biden. Show all posts
Monday, March 03, 2008
Friday, January 04, 2008
Iowa... In With The New!
Our favored candidate, Sen. Joe Biden, has withdrawn from the presidential race after a poor showing in the Iowa caucuses yesterday. But, he isn't going away.
Biden promises to be the administration's worst nightmare when it comes to their misshapen foreign policies, and to look after the well being of our troops, in the field and after they return.
For the Democratic party, it's a new dawning. You can hear the over-prognosticated apple cart wheels coming off as Barack Obama pulls off a stunning win, defeating the second-place John Edwards and derailing the Des Moines Register-anointed coronation of Hillary Clinton by nine percentage points, proving....
Parading Bill about isn't enough, it just reminds us we're all getting older, and wiser to them.
People want change.... out with the old, in with the new..... an Iowa twist on "throw the bums out."
Hillary doesn't own the women's vote.... Obama garnered 35 percent of the womens' vote, Hillary 30 percent.
Young people can be energized, they will come out and vote when someone speaks to them.
And, demographically very white Iowa will support a black candidate.
Turnout was historic, 239,000 for the Democrats... almost double in size from the 2004 caucuses.... and, the Democratic turnout doubled that of the GOP. This should give the Republican party worrisome pause as Iowa is considered a "red" swing state.
The GOP also went for change, giving former Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee the nod over Mitt Romney, while the rest of the pack trailed in the low teens or worse. Sixty percent of the GOP turnout according to polls were Christian conservative voters who overwhelmingly supported Huckabee.
While that probably won't give Huckabee an edge in New Hampshire, it might hold up in South Carolina where John McCain was tripped up by the Christian conservative voters in his 2000 race against The Decider.
The rumblings for change in Iowa were in the air long before last night. In the Democratic contest for governor in 2006, the candidate supported by retiring "establishment" governor Tom Vilsack didn't secure the Democratic nomination.
Evidently heedless of this warning, Clinton nonetheless drug along Vilsack and his wife, Christie, to many a campaign event, evidently thinking to ride on his perceived Democratic-turnout-machine coattails.
So, it is with a great dollop of irony that it was reported that Vilsack and Christie didn't show at their Des Moines precinct last night to vote, and in that caucus Obama carried the day over Clinton by.... you guessed it.... two votes.
Isn't Democracy great!
Biden promises to be the administration's worst nightmare when it comes to their misshapen foreign policies, and to look after the well being of our troops, in the field and after they return.
For the Democratic party, it's a new dawning. You can hear the over-prognosticated apple cart wheels coming off as Barack Obama pulls off a stunning win, defeating the second-place John Edwards and derailing the Des Moines Register-anointed coronation of Hillary Clinton by nine percentage points, proving....
Parading Bill about isn't enough, it just reminds us we're all getting older, and wiser to them.
People want change.... out with the old, in with the new..... an Iowa twist on "throw the bums out."
Hillary doesn't own the women's vote.... Obama garnered 35 percent of the womens' vote, Hillary 30 percent.
Young people can be energized, they will come out and vote when someone speaks to them.
And, demographically very white Iowa will support a black candidate.
Turnout was historic, 239,000 for the Democrats... almost double in size from the 2004 caucuses.... and, the Democratic turnout doubled that of the GOP. This should give the Republican party worrisome pause as Iowa is considered a "red" swing state.
The GOP also went for change, giving former Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee the nod over Mitt Romney, while the rest of the pack trailed in the low teens or worse. Sixty percent of the GOP turnout according to polls were Christian conservative voters who overwhelmingly supported Huckabee.
While that probably won't give Huckabee an edge in New Hampshire, it might hold up in South Carolina where John McCain was tripped up by the Christian conservative voters in his 2000 race against The Decider.
The rumblings for change in Iowa were in the air long before last night. In the Democratic contest for governor in 2006, the candidate supported by retiring "establishment" governor Tom Vilsack didn't secure the Democratic nomination.
Evidently heedless of this warning, Clinton nonetheless drug along Vilsack and his wife, Christie, to many a campaign event, evidently thinking to ride on his perceived Democratic-turnout-machine coattails.
So, it is with a great dollop of irony that it was reported that Vilsack and Christie didn't show at their Des Moines precinct last night to vote, and in that caucus Obama carried the day over Clinton by.... you guessed it.... two votes.
Isn't Democracy great!
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Biden Supporters Rally
Surrounded by an overflow crowd of enthusiastic supporters, members of his family and well-organized campaign workers, Sen.Joe Biden delivered an inspiring and sober message today in Des Moines, two days before the Iowa caucuses.
It is hard to estimate now many attended, well into the hundreds, as it was SRO throughout the venue. And, it was obvious these were not only supporters, but caucus goers, since they braved subfreezing temperatures on New Year's day to deliver their message.... they want Joe Biden to be our next president.
Biden's closing thought was simple.... who would you want sitting in the Oval Office if nuclear-armed Pakistan exploded; or to settle the Iraq war while making sure that our 140,000 troops are protected now, and their needs are met when they return home; or to deal with a plutocratically trending Putin in Russia; or to manage the unraveling relations with an increasingly powerful China?
The answer was resounding.... Biden.
As he pointed out, progress on the domestic front is almost impossible until we address these threatening and economy-busting foreign policy issues.
As evidenced by his experience (30-year member and currently Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), and legislative and diplomatic initiatives (currently the bill with his federalization plan for Iraq has the support of 75 percent of the Senate body of both parties and is on The Decider's desk awaiting his signature).... what sets Biden apart from the other candidates is that he has, and will, take action.
Iowans.... caucus on January 3. It matters!
(Photo at top: Biden signing autographs after his speech with his brother prominent in background. Photo at bottom: Truth Hunter and Biden with his son prominent in background.)
Take the Biden Path....
This from today's Des Moines Register Editorial Page Editor, Carol Hunter, about her impression of Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden when she attended his campaign rally in Newton, Iowa:
"He conveyed his detailed grasp of issues. He was passionate and inspiring, telling the audience he wanted to restore Americans' belief 'in the goodness of their government.' You left feeling this guy could make a good president."
Now that's an endorsement. The Register six-member endorsement board took the path of least resistance when they named Hillary Clinton as their choice.
Don't take the path of least resistance. Caucus for Biden. It matters!
"He conveyed his detailed grasp of issues. He was passionate and inspiring, telling the audience he wanted to restore Americans' belief 'in the goodness of their government.' You left feeling this guy could make a good president."
Now that's an endorsement. The Register six-member endorsement board took the path of least resistance when they named Hillary Clinton as their choice.
Don't take the path of least resistance. Caucus for Biden. It matters!
Friday, December 28, 2007
Biden Walks the Walk
Brent Budowsky at The Huffington Post tells it the way it is regarding the Pakistan crisis:
"It was Joe Biden and Joe Biden alone among the presidential candidates in both parties who warned, and warned again about the dangers of Pakistan, who offered constructive proposals to get out of Iraq, and opposed the Iran hysteria of Lieberman-Kyle."
Come lately to the party, Chris Dodd, is now claiming he warned. Rudy Giuliani is saying his post 9/11 moves make him a Middle East expert.... but, as Biden so aptly pointed out, Rudy's campaign rhetoric boils down to three words, "a noun, a verb and 9/11."
The other candidates offer pithy platitudes.... the sound and the fury, signifying nothing.
Anyone paying the least bit of attention knows the one candidate who isn't just campaign hot air on foreign policy is Biden, the current Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Iowans, remember this on January 3.
"It was Joe Biden and Joe Biden alone among the presidential candidates in both parties who warned, and warned again about the dangers of Pakistan, who offered constructive proposals to get out of Iraq, and opposed the Iran hysteria of Lieberman-Kyle."
Come lately to the party, Chris Dodd, is now claiming he warned. Rudy Giuliani is saying his post 9/11 moves make him a Middle East expert.... but, as Biden so aptly pointed out, Rudy's campaign rhetoric boils down to three words, "a noun, a verb and 9/11."
The other candidates offer pithy platitudes.... the sound and the fury, signifying nothing.
Anyone paying the least bit of attention knows the one candidate who isn't just campaign hot air on foreign policy is Biden, the current Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Iowans, remember this on January 3.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Biden Takes Aim
Truth telling. That is Sen. Joe Biden's (D-DE) way to campaign for the presidency.
For instance, Biden defends the role of the CIA in the administration's decisions on Iran, especially their recent reports about Iran's nuclear weapons capability.... "It's not been so much that we've gotten bad intelligence, but that what we've gotten is manipulation of that intelligence by the president."
Ba-ba boom!
Further, Biden explains, the CIA is "tired of being manipulated by a president who in fact uses the information they produce to do things that do not justify what the report says."
He continues to remind us that while Iran may be a problem in the future, it is Pakistan that is "bristling with nuclear weapons."
How refreshing.... a hard-hitting opinion. About a real problem. Not religious pandering or interest group targeting.
Because of his grasp of the issues, his breadth of experience and his straight-forward commitment to resolve our thorniest issues .... Biden would be a sound choice for thoughtful Iowa caucus goers on January 3.
For instance, Biden defends the role of the CIA in the administration's decisions on Iran, especially their recent reports about Iran's nuclear weapons capability.... "It's not been so much that we've gotten bad intelligence, but that what we've gotten is manipulation of that intelligence by the president."
Ba-ba boom!
Further, Biden explains, the CIA is "tired of being manipulated by a president who in fact uses the information they produce to do things that do not justify what the report says."
He continues to remind us that while Iran may be a problem in the future, it is Pakistan that is "bristling with nuclear weapons."
How refreshing.... a hard-hitting opinion. About a real problem. Not religious pandering or interest group targeting.
Because of his grasp of the issues, his breadth of experience and his straight-forward commitment to resolve our thorniest issues .... Biden would be a sound choice for thoughtful Iowa caucus goers on January 3.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Biden: "Tapegate" Special Counsel
During his confirmation hearings before Congress, Attorney General Michael Mukasey refused to describe waterboarding as torture. We now know why.
The videotaped interrogations of two suspected terrorists were purposely and cynically destroyed by the CIA.... and in our heart of hearts we know why.... undoubtedly they showed our government using torture, almost certainly waterboarding, on these suspects.
Presidential candidate Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) has called for a special counsel to investigate this perversion of justice so "everyone will know what the truth is;" and, candidate Senator John McCain (R-AZ) regrets that the destruction of the videotapes "harms the credibility and the moral standing of America in the world again."
However, applying the Bush administration manipulative standards of justice, Mukasey's Justice Department and the CIA announced that they will conduct the joint inquiry into the matter.... the "fox guarding the hen house" analogy was never more apt.
While we endured the White House's corrupting "the ends justify the means" decadent policies, we did see a ray of hope.... now dashed by "tapegate".... that our new attorney general would uphold the rule of law and start to restore our national honor.
It's now clear, until we can install leaders with a political moral compass.... not a Trojan horse administration blathering religious platitudes that are disconnected from their power-grabbing agenda.... nothing will change.
Take this lesson to your caucus or primary next year. Real moral political leadership.... not religious political rhetoric cloaking the condoning of torture and the destruction of evidence.... matters. We must not be fooled again.
The videotaped interrogations of two suspected terrorists were purposely and cynically destroyed by the CIA.... and in our heart of hearts we know why.... undoubtedly they showed our government using torture, almost certainly waterboarding, on these suspects.
Presidential candidate Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) has called for a special counsel to investigate this perversion of justice so "everyone will know what the truth is;" and, candidate Senator John McCain (R-AZ) regrets that the destruction of the videotapes "harms the credibility and the moral standing of America in the world again."
However, applying the Bush administration manipulative standards of justice, Mukasey's Justice Department and the CIA announced that they will conduct the joint inquiry into the matter.... the "fox guarding the hen house" analogy was never more apt.
While we endured the White House's corrupting "the ends justify the means" decadent policies, we did see a ray of hope.... now dashed by "tapegate".... that our new attorney general would uphold the rule of law and start to restore our national honor.
It's now clear, until we can install leaders with a political moral compass.... not a Trojan horse administration blathering religious platitudes that are disconnected from their power-grabbing agenda.... nothing will change.
Take this lesson to your caucus or primary next year. Real moral political leadership.... not religious political rhetoric cloaking the condoning of torture and the destruction of evidence.... matters. We must not be fooled again.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Polls... Reflecting or Affecting?
Here's the problem with, "For Democrats, Iowa Still Up for Grabs" based on a recent Washington Post/ABC News Poll calling it close for the three top contenders, Barack Obama (30%), Hillary Clinton (26%), and John Edwards (22%)..... only 500 likely caucus voters were polled, and no one owning just a cell phone was polled, i.e., a large group of voters under 40 were ignored!
In a word.... can one trust these polls?
Will cell-phoners support Clinton or Obama? Seems like that edge would go to the younger Obama supporters.
Is illegal immigration the third-rail this election, or of little importance as the liberal-sponsored poll suggests. Many reports say it's a wedge issue, at least in Iowa. Just ask Obama who was skewered on this issue at a recent campaign stop. Or, any candidate taking unscripted questions from Iowans railing against illegal immigration.... emphasis on "illegal."
Is 4th place Bill Richardson actually polling better than Joe Biden? Especially on Iraq, an issue on which even the other candidates defer to Biden who shows up in 5th place.... and, especially since Iraq is the number one issue with the voters, according to the "polls." Doesn't add up.
It's an old trick, using polls to try to shape public opinion.... no use supporting such and such a candidate, he doesn't have a chance.... no one thinks such and such an issue matters, no use deciding based on that issue. Mind games.
Even naming the top three candidates the year before the caucuses.... who decided that? Big media, big money... and "polls."
Forget the polls. Forget front runner and second tier slotting. Support the best candidate for the job.... the one whose values and policies best reflect you. Otherwise, the pollsters and kingmakers decide.
In a word.... can one trust these polls?
Will cell-phoners support Clinton or Obama? Seems like that edge would go to the younger Obama supporters.
Is illegal immigration the third-rail this election, or of little importance as the liberal-sponsored poll suggests. Many reports say it's a wedge issue, at least in Iowa. Just ask Obama who was skewered on this issue at a recent campaign stop. Or, any candidate taking unscripted questions from Iowans railing against illegal immigration.... emphasis on "illegal."
Is 4th place Bill Richardson actually polling better than Joe Biden? Especially on Iraq, an issue on which even the other candidates defer to Biden who shows up in 5th place.... and, especially since Iraq is the number one issue with the voters, according to the "polls." Doesn't add up.
It's an old trick, using polls to try to shape public opinion.... no use supporting such and such a candidate, he doesn't have a chance.... no one thinks such and such an issue matters, no use deciding based on that issue. Mind games.
Even naming the top three candidates the year before the caucuses.... who decided that? Big media, big money... and "polls."
Forget the polls. Forget front runner and second tier slotting. Support the best candidate for the job.... the one whose values and policies best reflect you. Otherwise, the pollsters and kingmakers decide.
Friday, November 16, 2007
What Happens in Vegas....
Most post-debate political commentators focused on the fireworks last night between presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama during the start of the CNN Democratic fracas in Las Vegas, but the real "gotcha" moment came near the end of the debate.
Clinton: I do not want to fix the problems of Social Security on the backs of middle class families and seniors. If you lift the cap completely, that is a $1 trillion tax increase. I don't think we need to do that.
Obama: Hillary, I've heard you say this is a trillion dollar tax on the middle class by adjusting the cap. Understand that only 6 percent of Americans make more than $97,000 -- so 6 percent is not the middle class-- it's the upper class.
And you know, this is the kind of thing that I would expect from Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani-- where we start playing with the numbers..... No, no, no, no, no. This is too important.
Hillary, looking like a deer caught in the headlights, was rescued by a favorable audience who hooted, even booed, any of her opponents who dared catch the Queen in parse, or fudging mode.
And, that was the biggest problem with this debate. It was conducted like a high school football game complete with cheers and unruly fans, and Clinton was the home team. The visiting team was Obama, while John Edwards, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd were the sidelined second-stringers, and Dennis Kucinich the ignored water boy.
Referee Wolf Blitzer lost control of the debate at the git-go when Clinton and Obama scrapped like cats in a bag, ignoring Blitzer's attempts to redirect the action. It set the tone for a rowdy night. When cornered on her record, like her vote recently to support Bush on his Iran policy, or Edwards' accusation that she is a corporate Democrat, Clinton stiff-armed with accusations of "mud slinging."
Biden gave his usual strong performance on foreign policy.... instead of giving Bush the Clintonian wink-and-a-nod on his Iran ambitions, he revealed that he told The Decider privately that if he went to war against Iran he would move to impeach him. Kucinich unsuccessfully tried an impeachment maneuver in the House last week.... but, such a threat from a no-nonsense Biden is a different matter.
Biden also scored on the issue of Supreme Court appointments, and Roe vs. Wade as settled law, saying that he would "not appoint anyone who did not understand that Section 5 of the 14th Amendment and the Liberty Clause of the 14th Amendment provided a right to privacy."
It's difficult to watch Richardson debate. He seems to have some difficulty expressing himself, so he tries to make up for this with continuous expansive gestures as he tries to articulate. It seemed at any moment he would take flight.
While Hillary won the "supporters in the audience" edge, she lost the "sartorial splendor" award. Hillary.... ditch that "asbestos" Tinky-Winky-designed pantsuit. Truly, what was worn in Vegas should stay in Vegas.
Clinton: I do not want to fix the problems of Social Security on the backs of middle class families and seniors. If you lift the cap completely, that is a $1 trillion tax increase. I don't think we need to do that.
Obama: Hillary, I've heard you say this is a trillion dollar tax on the middle class by adjusting the cap. Understand that only 6 percent of Americans make more than $97,000 -- so 6 percent is not the middle class-- it's the upper class.
And you know, this is the kind of thing that I would expect from Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani-- where we start playing with the numbers..... No, no, no, no, no. This is too important.
Hillary, looking like a deer caught in the headlights, was rescued by a favorable audience who hooted, even booed, any of her opponents who dared catch the Queen in parse, or fudging mode.
And, that was the biggest problem with this debate. It was conducted like a high school football game complete with cheers and unruly fans, and Clinton was the home team. The visiting team was Obama, while John Edwards, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd were the sidelined second-stringers, and Dennis Kucinich the ignored water boy.
Referee Wolf Blitzer lost control of the debate at the git-go when Clinton and Obama scrapped like cats in a bag, ignoring Blitzer's attempts to redirect the action. It set the tone for a rowdy night. When cornered on her record, like her vote recently to support Bush on his Iran policy, or Edwards' accusation that she is a corporate Democrat, Clinton stiff-armed with accusations of "mud slinging."
Biden gave his usual strong performance on foreign policy.... instead of giving Bush the Clintonian wink-and-a-nod on his Iran ambitions, he revealed that he told The Decider privately that if he went to war against Iran he would move to impeach him. Kucinich unsuccessfully tried an impeachment maneuver in the House last week.... but, such a threat from a no-nonsense Biden is a different matter.
Biden also scored on the issue of Supreme Court appointments, and Roe vs. Wade as settled law, saying that he would "not appoint anyone who did not understand that Section 5 of the 14th Amendment and the Liberty Clause of the 14th Amendment provided a right to privacy."
It's difficult to watch Richardson debate. He seems to have some difficulty expressing himself, so he tries to make up for this with continuous expansive gestures as he tries to articulate. It seemed at any moment he would take flight.
While Hillary won the "supporters in the audience" edge, she lost the "sartorial splendor" award. Hillary.... ditch that "asbestos" Tinky-Winky-designed pantsuit. Truly, what was worn in Vegas should stay in Vegas.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Hillary's Fright Night
Sen. Hillary Clinton (NY) got a scare on Halloween eve.... the Democratic presidential debate last night at Drexel University in Philadelphia jarred her inevitability mask as the seven candidates mixed it up, and at times tripped her up.
The bogeymen asking the questions, NBC's Brian Williams and a relentless Tim Russert, delivered one of the liveliest debate forums to date.
Clinton was reduced to sputtering while trying to have it both ways on Russert's question about Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer's proposal to give illegal immigrants a drivers license, and her statement in Nashua, New Hampshire that it makes a lot of sense.
Clinton defended her statement saying, "Well, what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform."
Sen. Chris Dodd (CT) disagreed, "This is a privilege... a license is a privilege, and that ought not to be extended, in my view."
Clinton quickly jumped in, "I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it. And we have failed---"
Dodd didn't let that pass, "Wait a minute. No, no, no. You said yes, you thought it made sense to do it."
Clinton responded, "No, I didn't Chris. But the point is, what are we going to do with all these illegal immigrants who are----"
As Clinton's nose grew, Russert tried to get a straight answer from Clinton... "I just want to make sure what I heard. Do you, the New York Senator Hillary Clinton, support the New York governor's plan to give immigrants a driver's license? You told the Nashua, New Hampshire, paper it made a lot of sense..... Do you support his plan?"
Now in full defensive crouch, Clinton responded, "You know, Tim, this is where everybody plays gotcha. It makes a lot of sense.... Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But I do understand the real sense of desperation.... "
Former senator of North Carolina John Edwards also didn't give Clinton a pass.... "Unless I missed something, Senator Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes just a few minutes ago and I think this is a real issue for the country.
"I mean, America is looking for a president who will say the same thing, who will be consistent, who will be straight with them. Because what we've had for seven years is double-talk from Bush and from Cheney, and I think America deserves us to be straight."
Sen. Barack Obama (IL) pronounced his confusion at Clinton's answer, "I can't tell whether she was for it or against it, and I do think that is important. You know, one of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges that we face."
But, in the end, Obama agreed with Spitzer's plan leaving Dodd with his most shining moment as the only candidate willing to voice his opposition for Spitzer's dangerous proposal... which opens the floodgates for massive voter fraud by illegal aliens registering to vote using their drivers license for identification. An obvious boon for the Democratic party.
Dodd had other barbs for Clinton. When asked about his statement to an NBC station alluding to problems with Clinton's national electability he didn't dodge. "Well, first of all, I think electability is a very critical issue. Look at the end of this process here, we need to have a Democrat in the White House come January 20th, 2009.... the fact of the matter is.... there are 50 percent of the American public that say they're not going to vote for her."
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson refused to join the haunting of Clinton... "I'm hearing this holier-than-thou attitude toward Senator Clinton.... Yes, we need to point out our differences, and I have big differences with her. Over the war. I would get all our troops out. Over No Child Left Behind. I'd get rid of it.
"I also have differences over Iran. I think that was the wrong vote for her to cast, because I think it was saber-rattling. But I think it's important that we save the ammunition for the Republicans."
Richardson was ready when he was finally asked about one of his best issues, education. He said without equivocation.... "I'd get rid of No Child Left Behind." He would also have 100,000 new science and math teachers and a minimum wage for teachers of $40,000 per year
This is the issue on which Richardson is most passionate, but it's seldom he rises to the occasion on other issues which makes his overall performance unmemorable and reinforces the notion that he is really running for Clinton's Vice President.
While Richardson and Dodd had their moments, Sen. Joe Biden (DE) delivered a strong overall performance, especially on the issues of Iraq and Iran.... of overweening concern to the electorate.
Biden on Iran and the bomb: "The fact of the matter is the Iranians may get 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium; the Pakistanis have hundreds, thousands of kilograms of highly enriched uranium.
"If by attacking Iran to stop them from getting 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium, the government in Pakistan falls, who has missiles already deployed, with nuclear weapons on them, that can already reach Israel, already reach India, then that's a bad bargain."
Biden didn't pull his punches with the opposition either.... "Rudy Giuliani, probably the most underqualified man since George Bush to seek the presidency.... I mean, think about it, Rudy Giuliani. There's only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun and a verb and 9/11."
Sis-boom! The most memorable line of the evening.
Responding to Richardson's oft made assertion that he's the only one on the stage with negotiating experience, Biden set the record straight.... "I led a delegation of 19 senators negotiating the START agreement with Brezhnev, I was deeply involved in Bosnia.... I'm running to be the leader of this country, to put it back on track..."
On the recent Kyl-Lieberman resolution.... which basically says Iran is a danger to our war in Iraq and the The Decider has enhanced power to act.... Clinton, the only one on the stage who voted for it, said it was because she wanted to "maximize the pressure on Iran."
Edwards response was scathing.... "So the way to do that is to vote yes on a resolution that looks like it was written literally by the neocons? I mean, has anyone read this thing? I mean, it literally gave Bush and Cheney exactly what they wanted.
"It didn't just give them what they wanted; they acted on it. a few weeks later, they declared the Iranian Revolutionary guards a terrorist organization and-- this is going to sound very familiar; remember from Iraq, the prelude to Iraq?--proliferators of weapons of mass destruction. The way you put pressure on this administration is you stand up - you say no."
When Biden was asked if he agreed with Sen. Webb that this resolution was de facto a declaration of war.... "I think it can be used as a fact - a declaration" And, that there are other "consequences for what we do -- and it's not even about going to war."
"Let's look at what happened from the moment that vote took place.
"Oil prices went up to $90 a barrel.... Secondly, we have emboldened Bush at a minimum. His talk of World War III, totally irresponsible talk. We've emboldened him....
"Thirdly, this has incredible consequences for Afghanistan and Pakistan.... we have now driven underground every moderate in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. This literally -- literally -- puts Karzai, as well as Musharraf, in jeopardy.
"The notion here is it plays into this whole urban legend that America is on a crusade against Islam. This was bad policy -- Big nations can't bluff."
When Clinton was pressured about releasing her papers as first lady from the National Archives now, and not as President Clinton requested until 2012, Clinton had the vapours.... why Bill made that decision, these things just take time.
Obama didn't let that go unremarked upon, admonishing her, "We have just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history, and not releasing... these records at the same time, Hillary, as you're making the claim that this is the basis for your experience, I think is a problem.
Obama also hit at the reason the GOP candidates are targeting Clinton, because "It's a fight they're comfortable having. One they've been having since the 90s."
Edwards put a different light on the subject... "I mean, another perspective on why the Republicans keep talking about Senator Clinton is -- they may actually want to run against you, and that's the reason they keep bringing you up....
".... I think that voters have to ask themselves, do you believe that the candidate who's raised the most money from Washington lobbyists, Democrat or Republican; the candidate who's raised the most money from the health industry -- drug companies, health insurance companies; the candidate who's raised the most money from the defense industry, Republican or Democrat; -- and the answer to all those questions is, that's Senator Clinton -- will she be the person who brings about change in this country?"
"You know, I believe in Santa Claus, I believe in the Tooth Fairy, but I don't think that's going to happen. I really don't. And I think that if people want the status quo, Senator Clinton's your candidate."
Yes, Clinton's "turn the page" rhetoric was left in tatters. So Williams thought he would lighten things up a bit. He asked Biden if, with the Holiday season nearly here, he would advise Americans against buying imported toys from China in light of the health and safety problems.
Biden took the question head on.... "If I were president, I'd shut down, flat shut down any imports from China, period, in terms of toys -- flat shut it down, number one.
Number two.... they [China] have a mortgage on our house because Bush mortgaged us to a trillion dollars to them. He is responsible for this. This is outrageous."
Obviously, not a subject Biden takes lightly.
But, we did have the impish Rep. Dennis Kucinich (OH) to bring a smile. He handled well the mild ridicule aimed at him by Russert about his allegation he had seen a UFO.... "I did.... it was an unidentified flying object, okay.... I'm also going to move my campaign office to Roswell."
Ending the debate on a spooky note, Williams asked Obama what he will be for Halloween.... "I am thinking about wearing a Mitt Romney mask, which I think.... has two sides to it."
The bogeymen asking the questions, NBC's Brian Williams and a relentless Tim Russert, delivered one of the liveliest debate forums to date.
Clinton was reduced to sputtering while trying to have it both ways on Russert's question about Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer's proposal to give illegal immigrants a drivers license, and her statement in Nashua, New Hampshire that it makes a lot of sense.
Clinton defended her statement saying, "Well, what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform."
Sen. Chris Dodd (CT) disagreed, "This is a privilege... a license is a privilege, and that ought not to be extended, in my view."
Clinton quickly jumped in, "I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it. And we have failed---"
Dodd didn't let that pass, "Wait a minute. No, no, no. You said yes, you thought it made sense to do it."
Clinton responded, "No, I didn't Chris. But the point is, what are we going to do with all these illegal immigrants who are----"
As Clinton's nose grew, Russert tried to get a straight answer from Clinton... "I just want to make sure what I heard. Do you, the New York Senator Hillary Clinton, support the New York governor's plan to give immigrants a driver's license? You told the Nashua, New Hampshire, paper it made a lot of sense..... Do you support his plan?"
Now in full defensive crouch, Clinton responded, "You know, Tim, this is where everybody plays gotcha. It makes a lot of sense.... Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But I do understand the real sense of desperation.... "
Former senator of North Carolina John Edwards also didn't give Clinton a pass.... "Unless I missed something, Senator Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes just a few minutes ago and I think this is a real issue for the country.
"I mean, America is looking for a president who will say the same thing, who will be consistent, who will be straight with them. Because what we've had for seven years is double-talk from Bush and from Cheney, and I think America deserves us to be straight."
Sen. Barack Obama (IL) pronounced his confusion at Clinton's answer, "I can't tell whether she was for it or against it, and I do think that is important. You know, one of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges that we face."
But, in the end, Obama agreed with Spitzer's plan leaving Dodd with his most shining moment as the only candidate willing to voice his opposition for Spitzer's dangerous proposal... which opens the floodgates for massive voter fraud by illegal aliens registering to vote using their drivers license for identification. An obvious boon for the Democratic party.
Dodd had other barbs for Clinton. When asked about his statement to an NBC station alluding to problems with Clinton's national electability he didn't dodge. "Well, first of all, I think electability is a very critical issue. Look at the end of this process here, we need to have a Democrat in the White House come January 20th, 2009.... the fact of the matter is.... there are 50 percent of the American public that say they're not going to vote for her."
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson refused to join the haunting of Clinton... "I'm hearing this holier-than-thou attitude toward Senator Clinton.... Yes, we need to point out our differences, and I have big differences with her. Over the war. I would get all our troops out. Over No Child Left Behind. I'd get rid of it.
"I also have differences over Iran. I think that was the wrong vote for her to cast, because I think it was saber-rattling. But I think it's important that we save the ammunition for the Republicans."
Richardson was ready when he was finally asked about one of his best issues, education. He said without equivocation.... "I'd get rid of No Child Left Behind." He would also have 100,000 new science and math teachers and a minimum wage for teachers of $40,000 per year
This is the issue on which Richardson is most passionate, but it's seldom he rises to the occasion on other issues which makes his overall performance unmemorable and reinforces the notion that he is really running for Clinton's Vice President.
While Richardson and Dodd had their moments, Sen. Joe Biden (DE) delivered a strong overall performance, especially on the issues of Iraq and Iran.... of overweening concern to the electorate.
Biden on Iran and the bomb: "The fact of the matter is the Iranians may get 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium; the Pakistanis have hundreds, thousands of kilograms of highly enriched uranium.
"If by attacking Iran to stop them from getting 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium, the government in Pakistan falls, who has missiles already deployed, with nuclear weapons on them, that can already reach Israel, already reach India, then that's a bad bargain."
Biden didn't pull his punches with the opposition either.... "Rudy Giuliani, probably the most underqualified man since George Bush to seek the presidency.... I mean, think about it, Rudy Giuliani. There's only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun and a verb and 9/11."
Sis-boom! The most memorable line of the evening.
Responding to Richardson's oft made assertion that he's the only one on the stage with negotiating experience, Biden set the record straight.... "I led a delegation of 19 senators negotiating the START agreement with Brezhnev, I was deeply involved in Bosnia.... I'm running to be the leader of this country, to put it back on track..."
On the recent Kyl-Lieberman resolution.... which basically says Iran is a danger to our war in Iraq and the The Decider has enhanced power to act.... Clinton, the only one on the stage who voted for it, said it was because she wanted to "maximize the pressure on Iran."
Edwards response was scathing.... "So the way to do that is to vote yes on a resolution that looks like it was written literally by the neocons? I mean, has anyone read this thing? I mean, it literally gave Bush and Cheney exactly what they wanted.
"It didn't just give them what they wanted; they acted on it. a few weeks later, they declared the Iranian Revolutionary guards a terrorist organization and-- this is going to sound very familiar; remember from Iraq, the prelude to Iraq?--proliferators of weapons of mass destruction. The way you put pressure on this administration is you stand up - you say no."
When Biden was asked if he agreed with Sen. Webb that this resolution was de facto a declaration of war.... "I think it can be used as a fact - a declaration" And, that there are other "consequences for what we do -- and it's not even about going to war."
"Let's look at what happened from the moment that vote took place.
"Oil prices went up to $90 a barrel.... Secondly, we have emboldened Bush at a minimum. His talk of World War III, totally irresponsible talk. We've emboldened him....
"Thirdly, this has incredible consequences for Afghanistan and Pakistan.... we have now driven underground every moderate in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. This literally -- literally -- puts Karzai, as well as Musharraf, in jeopardy.
"The notion here is it plays into this whole urban legend that America is on a crusade against Islam. This was bad policy -- Big nations can't bluff."
When Clinton was pressured about releasing her papers as first lady from the National Archives now, and not as President Clinton requested until 2012, Clinton had the vapours.... why Bill made that decision, these things just take time.
Obama didn't let that go unremarked upon, admonishing her, "We have just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history, and not releasing... these records at the same time, Hillary, as you're making the claim that this is the basis for your experience, I think is a problem.
Obama also hit at the reason the GOP candidates are targeting Clinton, because "It's a fight they're comfortable having. One they've been having since the 90s."
Edwards put a different light on the subject... "I mean, another perspective on why the Republicans keep talking about Senator Clinton is -- they may actually want to run against you, and that's the reason they keep bringing you up....
".... I think that voters have to ask themselves, do you believe that the candidate who's raised the most money from Washington lobbyists, Democrat or Republican; the candidate who's raised the most money from the health industry -- drug companies, health insurance companies; the candidate who's raised the most money from the defense industry, Republican or Democrat; -- and the answer to all those questions is, that's Senator Clinton -- will she be the person who brings about change in this country?"
"You know, I believe in Santa Claus, I believe in the Tooth Fairy, but I don't think that's going to happen. I really don't. And I think that if people want the status quo, Senator Clinton's your candidate."
Yes, Clinton's "turn the page" rhetoric was left in tatters. So Williams thought he would lighten things up a bit. He asked Biden if, with the Holiday season nearly here, he would advise Americans against buying imported toys from China in light of the health and safety problems.
Biden took the question head on.... "If I were president, I'd shut down, flat shut down any imports from China, period, in terms of toys -- flat shut it down, number one.
Number two.... they [China] have a mortgage on our house because Bush mortgaged us to a trillion dollars to them. He is responsible for this. This is outrageous."
Obviously, not a subject Biden takes lightly.
But, we did have the impish Rep. Dennis Kucinich (OH) to bring a smile. He handled well the mild ridicule aimed at him by Russert about his allegation he had seen a UFO.... "I did.... it was an unidentified flying object, okay.... I'm also going to move my campaign office to Roswell."
Ending the debate on a spooky note, Williams asked Obama what he will be for Halloween.... "I am thinking about wearing a Mitt Romney mask, which I think.... has two sides to it."
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Where They $tand
Follow the money.... and you may get an idea of what's behind the candidates carefully crafted images and sound-bite personas. Here's a peek at the nominee-making money trail ranked by receipts for the third quarter (Federal Election Commission 3rd Quarter 2007):
1 - HILLARY CLINTON (D-Senator NY): She's rolling in the stuff and must be happily humming in the shower Donald Trump's "Money, Money, Money, Money".... she has more money in the bank for her presidential primary campaign than any of her rivals of either party.
Clinton's numbers may be more interesting because of what she gave back.... $800,000 to about 250 people.... thanks to her association with shady fund-raiser "Ponzi" Hsu, plus $23,000 he raised for her in past years; and, $9,200 from a Virginia couple after the wife told the Wall Street Journal that the donations were reimbursed by her husband's boss. Still, the odor from these cheesy deals didn't clip her wings.... she raised more, $27.89 million, than she spent, $22.6 million, and has cash on hand of $50.5 million. Of that amount she's allowed to spend $35 million on the primaries.
2 - BARACK OBAMA (D-Senator IL): While Obama is making a race of it, he still spent more, $21.5 million, than he raised, $21.3 million, and has less cash on hand than Clinton, $36.1 million, of which he can spend about $32 million on the nomination battle. He spent more than any other Democrat on television ads, airing more than 4,000 spots in Iowa alone, compared to Clinton's 1,600.
3 - MITT ROMNEY (R-former governor MA): This is a little tricky.... Romney is third in "receipts" in the third quarter, $18.4 million, but, of that amount he made a personal loan of $8.5 million, bringing the amount he has put into his campaign from his personal wealth $17.5 million so far. He actually "raised" about $10 million. And, he spent $21.3 million.... more than twice what his campaign "raised"..... leaving him with cash on hand of $9.2 million.
Romney mounted a television ad campaign in an effort to increase his name recognition.... nearly 11,000 spots in four states through October 10.... with more ads in Iowa and New Hampshire than all the other GOP candidates combined.
4 - FRED THOMPSON (R-former TN Senator): Late entry Thompson raised $12.8 million since last June, spent $5.7 million and has cash on hand of $7.1 million. He claims 80,000 donors, with 22,000 from the Internet, although more than a fifth of his contributions have come from his home state of Tennessee, obviously already tapping his core support for cash. His national poll numbers are high even though he ran only 13 ads on cable television, depending in the early months more on the impact of his "Friends of Fred" Internet site.
5 - RUDY GIULIANI (R-former Mayor of NY City): While still having a healthy bank balance, $16.6 million, Giuliani spent more, $13.3 million, than he raised, $11.6 million, in the third quarter. Instead of focusing solely on the four early states, he invested thousands of dollars opening campaign offices in places such as Fargo,ND and Columbia, MO and other February 5 mega-primary states.
Giuliani spent almost nothing on television advertising although he did pay his consulting firm $132,000 for expenses related to his bodyguards and other private security. His spending was elevated at least partly because he traveled in style, using luxury hotels, private jets from corporate sponsors, and also spent $800,000 on charter jet travel. An interesting "six pack" donor was NASCAR, kicking $17,900 to his coffers.
6 - JOHN EDWARDS (D-former NC Senator): Thanks to hefty support from fellow lawyers, Edwards raised $7.2 million, but spent more, $8.3 million, with cash on hand of $12.4 million. Not an impressive showing, just half of his first quarter showing of $14 million. Regardless of the reasons he gave, this slide undoubtedly played a large role in his decision to accept matching funds.
7 - JOHN McCAIN (R-AZ Senator): The spin is that McCain's campaign is reborn, picking up speed.... so how to explain that he raised just $5.7 million in the third quarter, after a showing of $11.6 million in the second quarter and $13.1 million in the first quarter. He spent almost as much as he raised, $5.5 million, and has just $3.5 million on hand. But, with debts of $1.7 million and $1.8 million he can use only if he becomes the nominee, he is actually $94,000 in the red.
8 - BILL RICHARDSON (R-Governor of NM): Richardson raised almost as much as McCain, $5.4 million, but spent more, $6.7 million and has $5.9 million cash on hand. There seems to be no wind under his wings.
9 - RON PAUL (R-TX Representative): The always MSM ignored Paul raised a respectable $5.3 million, spent $2.2 million and has $5.4 million cash on hand. His campaign has no debts, just a loyal and active following. Despite this showing, Paul gets no respect from the GOP or the media kingmakers.
10 - JOSEPH BIDEN (D-DE Senator): Still not gaining real traction, Biden raised $1.8 million, spent $2.6 million, and has cash on hand of $1.9 million.
11 - CHRISTOPHER DODD (D-CT Senator): Lagging Biden in fundraising the third quarter, Dodd raised $1.5 million.... many of the big contributors coming from the financial world reflecting his chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee.... spent $4 million, and has $3.8 million cash on hand.
12 - MIKE HUCKABEE (R-former AR Governor): By coming in at round $1 million raised, spending $819 thousand, with $651 thousand cash on hand, it seems Huckabee's strong showing in the Iowa Straw Poll in August didn't breathe $$$ oxygen into his campaign.
1 - HILLARY CLINTON (D-Senator NY): She's rolling in the stuff and must be happily humming in the shower Donald Trump's "Money, Money, Money, Money".... she has more money in the bank for her presidential primary campaign than any of her rivals of either party.
Clinton's numbers may be more interesting because of what she gave back.... $800,000 to about 250 people.... thanks to her association with shady fund-raiser "Ponzi" Hsu, plus $23,000 he raised for her in past years; and, $9,200 from a Virginia couple after the wife told the Wall Street Journal that the donations were reimbursed by her husband's boss. Still, the odor from these cheesy deals didn't clip her wings.... she raised more, $27.89 million, than she spent, $22.6 million, and has cash on hand of $50.5 million. Of that amount she's allowed to spend $35 million on the primaries.
2 - BARACK OBAMA (D-Senator IL): While Obama is making a race of it, he still spent more, $21.5 million, than he raised, $21.3 million, and has less cash on hand than Clinton, $36.1 million, of which he can spend about $32 million on the nomination battle. He spent more than any other Democrat on television ads, airing more than 4,000 spots in Iowa alone, compared to Clinton's 1,600.
3 - MITT ROMNEY (R-former governor MA): This is a little tricky.... Romney is third in "receipts" in the third quarter, $18.4 million, but, of that amount he made a personal loan of $8.5 million, bringing the amount he has put into his campaign from his personal wealth $17.5 million so far. He actually "raised" about $10 million. And, he spent $21.3 million.... more than twice what his campaign "raised"..... leaving him with cash on hand of $9.2 million.
Romney mounted a television ad campaign in an effort to increase his name recognition.... nearly 11,000 spots in four states through October 10.... with more ads in Iowa and New Hampshire than all the other GOP candidates combined.
4 - FRED THOMPSON (R-former TN Senator): Late entry Thompson raised $12.8 million since last June, spent $5.7 million and has cash on hand of $7.1 million. He claims 80,000 donors, with 22,000 from the Internet, although more than a fifth of his contributions have come from his home state of Tennessee, obviously already tapping his core support for cash. His national poll numbers are high even though he ran only 13 ads on cable television, depending in the early months more on the impact of his "Friends of Fred" Internet site.
5 - RUDY GIULIANI (R-former Mayor of NY City): While still having a healthy bank balance, $16.6 million, Giuliani spent more, $13.3 million, than he raised, $11.6 million, in the third quarter. Instead of focusing solely on the four early states, he invested thousands of dollars opening campaign offices in places such as Fargo,ND and Columbia, MO and other February 5 mega-primary states.
Giuliani spent almost nothing on television advertising although he did pay his consulting firm $132,000 for expenses related to his bodyguards and other private security. His spending was elevated at least partly because he traveled in style, using luxury hotels, private jets from corporate sponsors, and also spent $800,000 on charter jet travel. An interesting "six pack" donor was NASCAR, kicking $17,900 to his coffers.
6 - JOHN EDWARDS (D-former NC Senator): Thanks to hefty support from fellow lawyers, Edwards raised $7.2 million, but spent more, $8.3 million, with cash on hand of $12.4 million. Not an impressive showing, just half of his first quarter showing of $14 million. Regardless of the reasons he gave, this slide undoubtedly played a large role in his decision to accept matching funds.
7 - JOHN McCAIN (R-AZ Senator): The spin is that McCain's campaign is reborn, picking up speed.... so how to explain that he raised just $5.7 million in the third quarter, after a showing of $11.6 million in the second quarter and $13.1 million in the first quarter. He spent almost as much as he raised, $5.5 million, and has just $3.5 million on hand. But, with debts of $1.7 million and $1.8 million he can use only if he becomes the nominee, he is actually $94,000 in the red.
8 - BILL RICHARDSON (R-Governor of NM): Richardson raised almost as much as McCain, $5.4 million, but spent more, $6.7 million and has $5.9 million cash on hand. There seems to be no wind under his wings.
9 - RON PAUL (R-TX Representative): The always MSM ignored Paul raised a respectable $5.3 million, spent $2.2 million and has $5.4 million cash on hand. His campaign has no debts, just a loyal and active following. Despite this showing, Paul gets no respect from the GOP or the media kingmakers.
10 - JOSEPH BIDEN (D-DE Senator): Still not gaining real traction, Biden raised $1.8 million, spent $2.6 million, and has cash on hand of $1.9 million.
11 - CHRISTOPHER DODD (D-CT Senator): Lagging Biden in fundraising the third quarter, Dodd raised $1.5 million.... many of the big contributors coming from the financial world reflecting his chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee.... spent $4 million, and has $3.8 million cash on hand.
12 - MIKE HUCKABEE (R-former AR Governor): By coming in at round $1 million raised, spending $819 thousand, with $651 thousand cash on hand, it seems Huckabee's strong showing in the Iowa Straw Poll in August didn't breathe $$$ oxygen into his campaign.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Is Hillary Really Inevitable?
Throwing red meat to his GOP base, Rudy Giuliani unleashed a new battle cry.... "I'm not Hillary."
While dissing Hillary Clinton, Giuliani, as a member of the white-males-only GOP presidential candidate club, ironically told a national convention of Republican women devoted to getting women elected, "We have a record that's very, very proud and very long of making certain that women participate on a full and complete and equal basis with men."
Just not when aspiring to the highest office.
Today's New York Times also fired at Hillary.... Frank Rich aimed his powerful pen at the similarities between Hillary's perfectly oiled "inevitability" campaign and that of the losing Al Gore in 2000.... or even that of slick New York Republican Thomas Dewey running against the unslick but earnest incumbent Harry Truman in 1948. Dewey sloganeered... "It's time for a change." NOT!
Rich wonders if with a presidential candidate from New York known for her experience, competence and above-the-fray demeanor.... Hillary.... the Democrats could lose the White House in 2008.
In a effort to divert attention from this robotic campaign performance, Hillary has resorted to a loud giggle-laugh.... it's about as humanizing, and authentic, as Rudy Giuliani's smooching I'm-a-loving-husband cellphone calls from his third wife in the middle of campaign speeches.
The public senses authenticity.... and Hillary's make-no-mistakes defensive debate crouch punctuated with a laugh sure to be labeled a "Shrillary" is a campaign three dollar bill.
Next thing we know, Hillary will plant on her frisky Bill a full lip lock a' la Al and Tipper's convention stopper. But, what Hillary really needs to do is stop giving safe answers when voters are looking for Truman truthiness. Rich grumbled, "What I saw on television last Sunday was the incipient second coming of the can't-miss 2000 campaign of Al Gore."
Tying together both the Giuliani take on Hillary with the cautionary tale of Rich, Maureen Dowd today unleashed her piece "The Nepotism Tango" in defining the Democratic frontrunner.
Dowd muses that, "Without nepotism, Hillary would be running for the president of Vassar. But then, without nepotism, W. would be pumping gas in Midland -- and not out of the ground."
As Joe Biden pointed out at last Sunday's debate, all of the "old stuff" might get in the way of passing legislation. "The special interests, with regard to Hillary, they feed on this, you know, this Clinton-Bush thing." That "thing" is dynasty.
Perhaps this seeming dynastic inevitability is the reason for Hillary's un-Mona Lisa guffaw.... tickled pink by the thought of her entitled Democratic coronation.
Or, is it as Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor of the very conservative The New Republic, sees Hillary (listen up "equal" GOP women), "She's like some hellish housewife who has seen something that she really, really wants and won't stop nagging you about it until finally you say, fine, take it, be the damn president, just leave me alone."
Hillary seems locked into her disciplined campaign march, daily becoming less, not more, likable.... just like the hapless wooden Gore, despite his wardrobe changes and wife wuzzies. As the saying goes, at this point it's still Hillary's to lose.
Which might not be a bad turn of events for the Democratic party and the country. We can do better than the dynastic choke-hold of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton.
While dissing Hillary Clinton, Giuliani, as a member of the white-males-only GOP presidential candidate club, ironically told a national convention of Republican women devoted to getting women elected, "We have a record that's very, very proud and very long of making certain that women participate on a full and complete and equal basis with men."
Just not when aspiring to the highest office.
Today's New York Times also fired at Hillary.... Frank Rich aimed his powerful pen at the similarities between Hillary's perfectly oiled "inevitability" campaign and that of the losing Al Gore in 2000.... or even that of slick New York Republican Thomas Dewey running against the unslick but earnest incumbent Harry Truman in 1948. Dewey sloganeered... "It's time for a change." NOT!
Rich wonders if with a presidential candidate from New York known for her experience, competence and above-the-fray demeanor.... Hillary.... the Democrats could lose the White House in 2008.
In a effort to divert attention from this robotic campaign performance, Hillary has resorted to a loud giggle-laugh.... it's about as humanizing, and authentic, as Rudy Giuliani's smooching I'm-a-loving-husband cellphone calls from his third wife in the middle of campaign speeches.
The public senses authenticity.... and Hillary's make-no-mistakes defensive debate crouch punctuated with a laugh sure to be labeled a "Shrillary" is a campaign three dollar bill.
Next thing we know, Hillary will plant on her frisky Bill a full lip lock a' la Al and Tipper's convention stopper. But, what Hillary really needs to do is stop giving safe answers when voters are looking for Truman truthiness. Rich grumbled, "What I saw on television last Sunday was the incipient second coming of the can't-miss 2000 campaign of Al Gore."
Tying together both the Giuliani take on Hillary with the cautionary tale of Rich, Maureen Dowd today unleashed her piece "The Nepotism Tango" in defining the Democratic frontrunner.
Dowd muses that, "Without nepotism, Hillary would be running for the president of Vassar. But then, without nepotism, W. would be pumping gas in Midland -- and not out of the ground."
As Joe Biden pointed out at last Sunday's debate, all of the "old stuff" might get in the way of passing legislation. "The special interests, with regard to Hillary, they feed on this, you know, this Clinton-Bush thing." That "thing" is dynasty.
Perhaps this seeming dynastic inevitability is the reason for Hillary's un-Mona Lisa guffaw.... tickled pink by the thought of her entitled Democratic coronation.
Or, is it as Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor of the very conservative The New Republic, sees Hillary (listen up "equal" GOP women), "She's like some hellish housewife who has seen something that she really, really wants and won't stop nagging you about it until finally you say, fine, take it, be the damn president, just leave me alone."
Hillary seems locked into her disciplined campaign march, daily becoming less, not more, likable.... just like the hapless wooden Gore, despite his wardrobe changes and wife wuzzies. As the saying goes, at this point it's still Hillary's to lose.
Which might not be a bad turn of events for the Democratic party and the country. We can do better than the dynastic choke-hold of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton.
Friday, September 07, 2007
Coming Together on Iraq Divide
It's not often that this blog is on the same page on the subject of Iraq as Washington Post's conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer.
This crafter of the "Reagan Doctrine" supported the preemptive invasion of Iraq, although he kept in mind the downside, stating on the eve of the war in 2003.... "reformation and reconstruction of an alien culture are a daunting task. Risky and, yes arrogant." Indeed. Not to mention imperialistic.
In February 2004, a worried Krauthammer cautioned on the war, "it may yet fail. But we cannot afford not to try. There is not a single, remotely plausible, alternative strategy for attacking the monster behind 9/11. It's not Osama bin Laden; it is the cauldron of political oppression, religious intolerance,and social ruin in the Arab-Islamic world--- oppression transmuted and deflected by regimes with no legitimacy into virulent, murderous anti-Americanism."
All of the buzz words here, "9/11, ".... regimes with no legitimacy,".... "anti-Americanism."
So, today, it was surprising, but welcome, to read in Krauthammer's weekly column his current thinking.... "The Partitioning of Iraq."
It is worth quoting his latest turn of mind: "A weak, partitioned Iraq is not the best outcome. We had hoped for much more. Our original objective was a democratic and unified post-Hussein Iraq. But it has turned out to be a bridge too far. We tried to give the Iraqis a republic, but their leaders turned out to be, tragically, too driven by sectarian sentiment, by an absence of national identity, and by the habits of suspicion and maneuver cultivated during decades in the underground of Saddam Hussein's totalitarian state.
"All of this was exacerbated by post-invasion U.S. strategic errors.... we now have to look for the second-best outcome."
Those who opposed the war would argue that the neocons should have known the Iraqis and their culture before our "risky" and "arrogant" invasion. But, that would be to dwell on how we got into the mess we're in, as tempting as that is, and not on a way forward.
Krauthammer credits presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) along with other "thoughtful scholars and politicians" with long calling for partition. And he hopes for success of such a solution because unlike other colonial-style partitions, "The lines today are being drawn organically by self-identified communities and tribes. Which makes the new arrangement more likely to last."
We can only hope The Decider will listen to this common sense solution offered by all sides of the political spectrum.
This crafter of the "Reagan Doctrine" supported the preemptive invasion of Iraq, although he kept in mind the downside, stating on the eve of the war in 2003.... "reformation and reconstruction of an alien culture are a daunting task. Risky and, yes arrogant." Indeed. Not to mention imperialistic.
In February 2004, a worried Krauthammer cautioned on the war, "it may yet fail. But we cannot afford not to try. There is not a single, remotely plausible, alternative strategy for attacking the monster behind 9/11. It's not Osama bin Laden; it is the cauldron of political oppression, religious intolerance,and social ruin in the Arab-Islamic world--- oppression transmuted and deflected by regimes with no legitimacy into virulent, murderous anti-Americanism."
All of the buzz words here, "9/11, ".... regimes with no legitimacy,".... "anti-Americanism."
So, today, it was surprising, but welcome, to read in Krauthammer's weekly column his current thinking.... "The Partitioning of Iraq."
It is worth quoting his latest turn of mind: "A weak, partitioned Iraq is not the best outcome. We had hoped for much more. Our original objective was a democratic and unified post-Hussein Iraq. But it has turned out to be a bridge too far. We tried to give the Iraqis a republic, but their leaders turned out to be, tragically, too driven by sectarian sentiment, by an absence of national identity, and by the habits of suspicion and maneuver cultivated during decades in the underground of Saddam Hussein's totalitarian state.
"All of this was exacerbated by post-invasion U.S. strategic errors.... we now have to look for the second-best outcome."
Those who opposed the war would argue that the neocons should have known the Iraqis and their culture before our "risky" and "arrogant" invasion. But, that would be to dwell on how we got into the mess we're in, as tempting as that is, and not on a way forward.
Krauthammer credits presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) along with other "thoughtful scholars and politicians" with long calling for partition. And he hopes for success of such a solution because unlike other colonial-style partitions, "The lines today are being drawn organically by self-identified communities and tribes. Which makes the new arrangement more likely to last."
We can only hope The Decider will listen to this common sense solution offered by all sides of the political spectrum.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Democratic Dustup in Des Moines
It was , "Yea! Rah! Rah! _______" (fill in the blank) outside the Democratic presidential debate at Drake University in Des Moines, as the Democrats easily won the candidate-support "sign off" when compared to the tepid few who showed up two weeks ago for the GOP debate.
While Hillary Clinton continued her smooth, no mistakes performance, and Barak Obama "drew fire" from his rivals but held his own, several other candidates more than rose to the occasion.
Bill Richardson rekindled his flame, and had his best debate performance thus far. A memorable line, and one that set him apart on education, was just to scrap No Child Left Behind. Others just fiddled with Bush's failed education program at the edges.
John Edwards advocated powerfully for labor, and was unequivocal that he wouldn't "negotiate with lobbyists," but just take their power away. Right on!
Obama slyly sniped at Clinton, advocating that the country needs to break out of the red and blue-state patterns of the last 20 years.... and just in case you weren't paying attention..... he added it was a problem that predates the Bush administration.
Joe Biden was convincing on Iraq, and the other candidates thought so too, often referring to "Joe's" proposed plan. When all the candidates were asked if there was a time when they didn't tell the whole truth about an issue, the once-verbose Biden self-deprecatingly said that his problem "is saying too much about what I think."
Chris Dodd's impressive angle on neglected small farms was to have a Justice Department that deals with antitrust issues because that impacts across the board.... media, corporations and conglomerates that have accumulated too much power. Let's chant: "No more Gonzo! No more Gonzo!"
An ignored Dennis Kucinich's best line in response to a question on the candidates reliance on God to solve problems was, "I've been standing here praying to God you were going to call on me."
Mike Gravel showed up to throw bombs at his fellow candidates, but instead bombed.
(Drum roll)....The trophies go to: Found "fire in the belly": Richardson. Stepford delivery: Clinton. Clinton swipes: Obama. Iraq guru: Biden. Perry Mason persuasion: Edwards. Sincerely yesteryear: Dodd. Quixotic solutions: Kucinich. Biggest waste of debate time: Gravel.
Perhaps Obama's best defense of his relative new-comer status was, "Nobody had more experience than Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney and many of the people on this stage that authorized this war." Sis-boom-bah!
While Hillary Clinton continued her smooth, no mistakes performance, and Barak Obama "drew fire" from his rivals but held his own, several other candidates more than rose to the occasion.
Bill Richardson rekindled his flame, and had his best debate performance thus far. A memorable line, and one that set him apart on education, was just to scrap No Child Left Behind. Others just fiddled with Bush's failed education program at the edges.
John Edwards advocated powerfully for labor, and was unequivocal that he wouldn't "negotiate with lobbyists," but just take their power away. Right on!
Obama slyly sniped at Clinton, advocating that the country needs to break out of the red and blue-state patterns of the last 20 years.... and just in case you weren't paying attention..... he added it was a problem that predates the Bush administration.
Joe Biden was convincing on Iraq, and the other candidates thought so too, often referring to "Joe's" proposed plan. When all the candidates were asked if there was a time when they didn't tell the whole truth about an issue, the once-verbose Biden self-deprecatingly said that his problem "is saying too much about what I think."
Chris Dodd's impressive angle on neglected small farms was to have a Justice Department that deals with antitrust issues because that impacts across the board.... media, corporations and conglomerates that have accumulated too much power. Let's chant: "No more Gonzo! No more Gonzo!"
An ignored Dennis Kucinich's best line in response to a question on the candidates reliance on God to solve problems was, "I've been standing here praying to God you were going to call on me."
Mike Gravel showed up to throw bombs at his fellow candidates, but instead bombed.
(Drum roll)....The trophies go to: Found "fire in the belly": Richardson. Stepford delivery: Clinton. Clinton swipes: Obama. Iraq guru: Biden. Perry Mason persuasion: Edwards. Sincerely yesteryear: Dodd. Quixotic solutions: Kucinich. Biggest waste of debate time: Gravel.
Perhaps Obama's best defense of his relative new-comer status was, "Nobody had more experience than Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney and many of the people on this stage that authorized this war." Sis-boom-bah!
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Chicago Showdown
Another debate, and debate they did last night.
The Democratic presidential candidates met at the home of Chicago's NFL Bears, Soldier Field. The right venue for the scrapping rivals.... "Obama and Clinton Take the Gloves Off in AFL-CIO Debate." (WaPo)
There was a lot of the verbal pushing and shoving between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama defended his earlier threat to take unilateral military action inside of Pakistan in pursuit of al-Qaeda terrorists if President Musharraf, one of our staunchest allies, didn't.
As the wiser adult, Clinton sent Obama to the woodshed for a time out, scolding, "I think it is a very big mistake to telegraph that, and to destabilize the Musharraf regime, which is fighting for its life against the Islamist extremists who are in bed with al-Qaeda and Taliban."
Sen. Chris Dodd weighed in with Clinton on Obama's hypothetical willingness to unilaterally invade a friendly nation, calling it irresponsible... and, a clearly irritated Sen. Joe Biden pointed out the debate was already settled U.S. policy.... "It's time everybody start to know the facts - the facts" he reprimanded.
While Chicago is Obama's stomping ground, Clinton scored on him time and again, and indirectly punched holes in his thin resume by pointing to her front-line experience.... "For 15 years I have stood up against the right-wing machine, and I've come out stronger. So if you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl."
There were other dustups.... a particularly nasty one was between former Sen. John Edwards and Biden. Edwards tried to paint himself as the champion of labor. Biden issued a scathing putdown, pointing out his three-decade fight for labor as opposed to Edward's running-for-president union support. Ouch.
The impish Rep. Dennis Kucinich lightened the mood, calling himself the "Seabiscuit of this campaign," pleasing the union audience with his no-holds-barred pro labor agenda of ending NAFTA and taking the U.S. out of World Trade Organizations.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson showed up.... the wallflower at the lively candidate rumble. He didn't seem to connect with the boisterous audience, although he promised to banish "union-busting" Department of Labor and OSHA attorneys.
Lots of elbows were thrown, but Clinton made it clear the real target is the Bush administration because America needs change.... she "wants a united Democratic party that will stand against the Republicans."
Her opponents showed up for a practice scrimmage, but, Clinton took the field with steady authority. Like it or not, she's probably going to be the Democrat's girl come next November.
The Democratic presidential candidates met at the home of Chicago's NFL Bears, Soldier Field. The right venue for the scrapping rivals.... "Obama and Clinton Take the Gloves Off in AFL-CIO Debate." (WaPo)
There was a lot of the verbal pushing and shoving between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama defended his earlier threat to take unilateral military action inside of Pakistan in pursuit of al-Qaeda terrorists if President Musharraf, one of our staunchest allies, didn't.
As the wiser adult, Clinton sent Obama to the woodshed for a time out, scolding, "I think it is a very big mistake to telegraph that, and to destabilize the Musharraf regime, which is fighting for its life against the Islamist extremists who are in bed with al-Qaeda and Taliban."
Sen. Chris Dodd weighed in with Clinton on Obama's hypothetical willingness to unilaterally invade a friendly nation, calling it irresponsible... and, a clearly irritated Sen. Joe Biden pointed out the debate was already settled U.S. policy.... "It's time everybody start to know the facts - the facts" he reprimanded.
While Chicago is Obama's stomping ground, Clinton scored on him time and again, and indirectly punched holes in his thin resume by pointing to her front-line experience.... "For 15 years I have stood up against the right-wing machine, and I've come out stronger. So if you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl."
There were other dustups.... a particularly nasty one was between former Sen. John Edwards and Biden. Edwards tried to paint himself as the champion of labor. Biden issued a scathing putdown, pointing out his three-decade fight for labor as opposed to Edward's running-for-president union support. Ouch.
The impish Rep. Dennis Kucinich lightened the mood, calling himself the "Seabiscuit of this campaign," pleasing the union audience with his no-holds-barred pro labor agenda of ending NAFTA and taking the U.S. out of World Trade Organizations.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson showed up.... the wallflower at the lively candidate rumble. He didn't seem to connect with the boisterous audience, although he promised to banish "union-busting" Department of Labor and OSHA attorneys.
Lots of elbows were thrown, but Clinton made it clear the real target is the Bush administration because America needs change.... she "wants a united Democratic party that will stand against the Republicans."
Her opponents showed up for a practice scrimmage, but, Clinton took the field with steady authority. Like it or not, she's probably going to be the Democrat's girl come next November.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Iraq... All Progress is Local
If it really bothered you that the Iraqi government took the month of August off while our troops sweltered in the 103 degree heat trying to keep a lid on the violence, this latest bit of information should send you running for the Maalox.
The New York Times headline spells out the latest outrage by President Maliki's government.... "As U.S. Rebuilds, Iraq Won't Act on Finished Work."
Yes, that's right. "Iraq's national government is refusing to take possession of thousands of American-financed [U.S. taxpayer] reconstruction projects.
"Of the 2,797 completed projects costing $5.8 billion [of the total $21 billion rebuilding program], Iraq's national government had, by the spring of this year, accepted only 435 projects valued at $501 million."
Why?
Like everything in Iraq the answer is complex. Few transfers have taken place since the current Shiite-led Iraqi government, which drags its feet on American intervention, took office in 2006 along with the new finance minister, Bayan Jabr, and under his watch the "transfer process ceased to function."
Jabr isn't a good guy. In his previous post as interior minister he was accused of running Shiite death squads out of the ministry. In his current position he is slow to release budget money to Iraqi government entities which would have to run the new projects at substantial expense.
Also, the imperialist Bush administration didn't get Iraqis involved in the planning stages of the projects, so "you end up with these kinds of problems at the tail end, where people don't know much about the program and they haven't bought into it."
So, finished projects are falling into disrepair as they stand idle, or unable to function because locals don't have the money, or training, to keep them running.
In the meantime, the Maliki regime ignores the concerns of Iraq's non-Shiites. "Maliki Aide Lashes Out Over Sunni Demands." (WaPo)
The Sunni Accordance Front announced Wednesday that its six ministers in Maliki's cabinet would quit the government permanently unless the prime minister made significant progress on its list of demands.
Demands such as.... a greater role in security matters.... removal of militia members from Iraqi security forces.... and release of thousands of its members believed to be unjustly imprisoned.
Maliki's aide dismissed the demands saying the group is using threats, pressure and blackmail and leaves little doubt Maliki will not comply with their demands before Wednesday's deadline.
The answer to many of these problems seems obvious, we need to regionalize Iraq so each faction has its own land and equal standing. Stop trying to prop up a government more intent on throwing up roadblocks and increasing the Shiite grip on power than on finding ways to cooperate with the different factions and U.S. efforts at rebuilding.
A case in point where this approach is working, "U.S. Widens Push to Use Armed Iraqi Residents.... Irregulars to Patrol Own Neighborhoods." (WaPo)
"The U.S. military in Iraq is expanding its efforts to recruit and fund armed Sunni residents as local protection forces.... The initiative, which extends to all Iraqis, represents at least a temporary departure from the established U.S. policy of building formally trained security forces under the control of the Iraqi government."
Perhaps the most fruitful result of this new.... though Gen. Petraeus insists temporary.... security plan is that the Sunnis are more than willing to clear their neighborhoods of al-Qaeda forces.
Of course this plan is working.... because people are invested in their own neighborhoods.
Just as they would be in the expensive rebuilding projects in their neighborhood if they were given the training and support needed, instead of waiting on a reluctant , and nearly nonfunctioning, Maliki government to do the job.
Sen. Joseph Biden's federalization plan for Iraq seems like a no-brainer. It's a Way Forward in Iraq that will build on regional strengths, investing in all of the Iraqi people, not just the Iran-favored Shiite central government.
But then, when it comes to The Decider's seat-of-the-pants ideological and rigid political agenda, brains play no part in the equation.
The New York Times headline spells out the latest outrage by President Maliki's government.... "As U.S. Rebuilds, Iraq Won't Act on Finished Work."
Yes, that's right. "Iraq's national government is refusing to take possession of thousands of American-financed [U.S. taxpayer] reconstruction projects.
"Of the 2,797 completed projects costing $5.8 billion [of the total $21 billion rebuilding program], Iraq's national government had, by the spring of this year, accepted only 435 projects valued at $501 million."
Why?
Like everything in Iraq the answer is complex. Few transfers have taken place since the current Shiite-led Iraqi government, which drags its feet on American intervention, took office in 2006 along with the new finance minister, Bayan Jabr, and under his watch the "transfer process ceased to function."
Jabr isn't a good guy. In his previous post as interior minister he was accused of running Shiite death squads out of the ministry. In his current position he is slow to release budget money to Iraqi government entities which would have to run the new projects at substantial expense.
Also, the imperialist Bush administration didn't get Iraqis involved in the planning stages of the projects, so "you end up with these kinds of problems at the tail end, where people don't know much about the program and they haven't bought into it."
So, finished projects are falling into disrepair as they stand idle, or unable to function because locals don't have the money, or training, to keep them running.
In the meantime, the Maliki regime ignores the concerns of Iraq's non-Shiites. "Maliki Aide Lashes Out Over Sunni Demands." (WaPo)
The Sunni Accordance Front announced Wednesday that its six ministers in Maliki's cabinet would quit the government permanently unless the prime minister made significant progress on its list of demands.
Demands such as.... a greater role in security matters.... removal of militia members from Iraqi security forces.... and release of thousands of its members believed to be unjustly imprisoned.
Maliki's aide dismissed the demands saying the group is using threats, pressure and blackmail and leaves little doubt Maliki will not comply with their demands before Wednesday's deadline.
The answer to many of these problems seems obvious, we need to regionalize Iraq so each faction has its own land and equal standing. Stop trying to prop up a government more intent on throwing up roadblocks and increasing the Shiite grip on power than on finding ways to cooperate with the different factions and U.S. efforts at rebuilding.
A case in point where this approach is working, "U.S. Widens Push to Use Armed Iraqi Residents.... Irregulars to Patrol Own Neighborhoods." (WaPo)
"The U.S. military in Iraq is expanding its efforts to recruit and fund armed Sunni residents as local protection forces.... The initiative, which extends to all Iraqis, represents at least a temporary departure from the established U.S. policy of building formally trained security forces under the control of the Iraqi government."
Perhaps the most fruitful result of this new.... though Gen. Petraeus insists temporary.... security plan is that the Sunnis are more than willing to clear their neighborhoods of al-Qaeda forces.
Of course this plan is working.... because people are invested in their own neighborhoods.
Just as they would be in the expensive rebuilding projects in their neighborhood if they were given the training and support needed, instead of waiting on a reluctant , and nearly nonfunctioning, Maliki government to do the job.
Sen. Joseph Biden's federalization plan for Iraq seems like a no-brainer. It's a Way Forward in Iraq that will build on regional strengths, investing in all of the Iraqi people, not just the Iran-favored Shiite central government.
But then, when it comes to The Decider's seat-of-the-pants ideological and rigid political agenda, brains play no part in the equation.
Friday, April 27, 2007
And They're Off.....
"I see a bunch of winners," was Delaware's Sen. Joe Biden's description of his fellow Democratic presidential candidates at the end of their ninety-minute appearance on MSNBC.
But, the format.... it was disappointing. Every candidate was not asked the same question, thus taking it out of the realm of "debate" and into the realm of "show and tell." Moderator Brian Williams was so determined to get through his laundry list of queries that he even resorted to a non-informative show of hands at times.
The evening's winner in my opinion was Biden. He also gets the evening's gold star for having and intelligently articulating the most detailed strategy for Iraq. He also receives the Ipana Smile Award.... you almost expect that little ping of light when he flashes his big grin. I was impressed with his presentation and am definitely going to give him a fresh look... "Yes."
The loser in my opinion was Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico. He was missing the "fire in the belly" and didn't live up to his advance billing as a likable communicator. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I thought he left his personality at home.
And, in his rambling and panderingly-incoherent answer regarding the poor job performance of Attorney General Gonzales, he admitted he tried to cut Gonzales slack because he was a friend and Hispanic. We don't need another "friends of George" president. Richardson seemed out of shape, mentally and physically.
The award for best trophy wife definitely goes to anti-war Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. That tall red-headed beauty on the stage after the debate is his Mrs. However, he lost his verbal bomb-throwing standing to former senator Mike Gravel of Alaska.
The bomb Gravel was throwing last night was atomic, asking a too-scripted Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.... "Tell me, Barack, who do you want to nuke?" Gravel's bull-in-the-china-shop antics, while at times comic, detracted from the already squeezed time frame allotted for discussion.
Hillary wasn't Shrillary Clinton. New York's senator delivered a solid performance, showing to best effect her wonky tendencies. She remains a formidable candidate.
Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut isn't the president, but he could play one on TV. He speaks well, but on the issues he is Biden light. In the contest for the same voters, Biden wins.
That leaves just former senator John Edwards of North Carolina, the husband of the widely admired Elizabeth. He was strangely subdued. Perhaps trying to damp down his lawyer-like delivery. He didn't lose, and he didn't win. He showed up.
And there you have it, my take on last night's proceedings.
Next week we'll see ten Republicans in the same format. A "stubborn" Bush was the focus of a united front of opposition from the Democrats to his Iraq misadventure. Will the GOP rush to The Decider's defense? Or, will it be "George who?" Stay tuned....
But, the format.... it was disappointing. Every candidate was not asked the same question, thus taking it out of the realm of "debate" and into the realm of "show and tell." Moderator Brian Williams was so determined to get through his laundry list of queries that he even resorted to a non-informative show of hands at times.
The evening's winner in my opinion was Biden. He also gets the evening's gold star for having and intelligently articulating the most detailed strategy for Iraq. He also receives the Ipana Smile Award.... you almost expect that little ping of light when he flashes his big grin. I was impressed with his presentation and am definitely going to give him a fresh look... "Yes."
The loser in my opinion was Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico. He was missing the "fire in the belly" and didn't live up to his advance billing as a likable communicator. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I thought he left his personality at home.
And, in his rambling and panderingly-incoherent answer regarding the poor job performance of Attorney General Gonzales, he admitted he tried to cut Gonzales slack because he was a friend and Hispanic. We don't need another "friends of George" president. Richardson seemed out of shape, mentally and physically.
The award for best trophy wife definitely goes to anti-war Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. That tall red-headed beauty on the stage after the debate is his Mrs. However, he lost his verbal bomb-throwing standing to former senator Mike Gravel of Alaska.
The bomb Gravel was throwing last night was atomic, asking a too-scripted Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.... "Tell me, Barack, who do you want to nuke?" Gravel's bull-in-the-china-shop antics, while at times comic, detracted from the already squeezed time frame allotted for discussion.
Hillary wasn't Shrillary Clinton. New York's senator delivered a solid performance, showing to best effect her wonky tendencies. She remains a formidable candidate.
Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut isn't the president, but he could play one on TV. He speaks well, but on the issues he is Biden light. In the contest for the same voters, Biden wins.
That leaves just former senator John Edwards of North Carolina, the husband of the widely admired Elizabeth. He was strangely subdued. Perhaps trying to damp down his lawyer-like delivery. He didn't lose, and he didn't win. He showed up.
And there you have it, my take on last night's proceedings.
Next week we'll see ten Republicans in the same format. A "stubborn" Bush was the focus of a united front of opposition from the Democrats to his Iraq misadventure. Will the GOP rush to The Decider's defense? Or, will it be "George who?" Stay tuned....
Friday, February 23, 2007
Biden Hits the Brakes
Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) championed a DOA House proposal to make additional funding for the Iraq war dependent on strict troop-readiness standards, which on the surface might seem to be a good idea. But that proposal met stiff resistance.... from both sides of the aisle.... largely because it puts in place risky inflexibilities.
And, the recent "non-binding" resolutions are viewed by the public as a tiptoeingly-tepid approach.... the public wants "binding" action.... want to stop the runaway Bush/Cheney war machine.
So.... here comes the brakeman in the form of Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden (D-DE) who is seeking to repeal 2002 war authorization.... "We gave the president that power to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and, if necessary, to depose Saddam Hussein, " Biden said of the 2002 resolution in a speech last week before the Brookings Institution. "The WMD was not there. Saddam Hussein is no longer there. The 2002 authorization is no longer relevant to the situation in Iraq." (WaPo)
Biden and Armed Service Committee Chairman Carl M. Levin (D-MI) are drafting language to present to the Senate when they reconvene Tuesday that will set a goal for withdrawing combat brigades by March 31, 2008 as recommended by the Iraq Study Group.
Once the combat phase ends, troops would be restricted to assisting Iraqis with training, border security and counterterrorism. This resolution will go directly to the Senate floor for action, possibly as an amendment to a homeland security bill scheduled for debate next week.
At the same time, Murtha's ideas will no be dismissed out-of-hand. The Iraq funding bill due for vote in the House the week of March 12 would require the president to publicly reveal that he is deploying unrested, under-trained or under-equipped troops, or extending combat tours of troops already in Iraq.
Maybe it's just me, but doesn't it seem like he should already have been forced to publicly come clean about troop and equipment readiness before deployment.
Of course, that didn't happen because the previous GOP-majority Houses abdicated their oversite roles, allowing the Bush/Cheney administration to lay waste to lives, treasure and our world standing.
As Congress puts the brakes on an arrogant reckless Bush, hopefully they also vow.... "Never again."
And, the recent "non-binding" resolutions are viewed by the public as a tiptoeingly-tepid approach.... the public wants "binding" action.... want to stop the runaway Bush/Cheney war machine.
So.... here comes the brakeman in the form of Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden (D-DE) who is seeking to repeal 2002 war authorization.... "We gave the president that power to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and, if necessary, to depose Saddam Hussein, " Biden said of the 2002 resolution in a speech last week before the Brookings Institution. "The WMD was not there. Saddam Hussein is no longer there. The 2002 authorization is no longer relevant to the situation in Iraq." (WaPo)
Biden and Armed Service Committee Chairman Carl M. Levin (D-MI) are drafting language to present to the Senate when they reconvene Tuesday that will set a goal for withdrawing combat brigades by March 31, 2008 as recommended by the Iraq Study Group.
Once the combat phase ends, troops would be restricted to assisting Iraqis with training, border security and counterterrorism. This resolution will go directly to the Senate floor for action, possibly as an amendment to a homeland security bill scheduled for debate next week.
At the same time, Murtha's ideas will no be dismissed out-of-hand. The Iraq funding bill due for vote in the House the week of March 12 would require the president to publicly reveal that he is deploying unrested, under-trained or under-equipped troops, or extending combat tours of troops already in Iraq.
Maybe it's just me, but doesn't it seem like he should already have been forced to publicly come clean about troop and equipment readiness before deployment.
Of course, that didn't happen because the previous GOP-majority Houses abdicated their oversite roles, allowing the Bush/Cheney administration to lay waste to lives, treasure and our world standing.
As Congress puts the brakes on an arrogant reckless Bush, hopefully they also vow.... "Never again."
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Biden... Bye, Bye
Well Joe, looks like you never made it out of the presidential derby gate.
In an interview published in the New York Observer today, you made this comment on Sen. Barack Obama.... "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.... I mean, that's a storybook, man."
That statement is really stupid, man.
Say "goodnight" Joe.
In an interview published in the New York Observer today, you made this comment on Sen. Barack Obama.... "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.... I mean, that's a storybook, man."
That statement is really stupid, man.
Say "goodnight" Joe.
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Biden's the Man
Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is doing what the tarnished Senator McCain (R-AZ) used to do, straight talk.... "White House Postponing Loss of Iraq, Biden Says."
The forcefully-speaking Biden sees the current situation in Iraq this way.... The Decider is waiting until after the elections of 2008, and a new president, to take the historical blame for "landing helicopters inside the Green Zone, taking people off the roof," in a chaotic withdrawal reminiscent of Vietnam.
Such a postponement would insure the death of yet more brave troops, continue the Bush administration's plunge into an abyss of debt, and fuel yet more terrorism throughout the Iraq region and the world.
To what purpose?
To avoid such a scene of failure on Bush's watch.
So, The Decider irresponsibly continues his "stay the course" Iraq policy.... however he cloaks it in his upcoming speech.... unable and unwilling to face, as Biden thinks, what VP Cheney and former defense secretary Rumsfeld have already faced, the fact that Iraq was a "very, very, very, very bad bet, and it blew up in their faces."
Starting next week, Biden will hold committee hearings on every aspect of U.S. policy in Iraq. He intends to expose the Iraq policy underbelly and bring pressure to bear to influence GOP lawmakers.
In the meantime, new Democratic legislative leaders "Pelosi, Reid Urge Bush To Begin Iraq Pullout." They sent a letter to The Decider warning him that sending more U.S. troops to Iraq.... the "surge" option.... was "unacceptable" to the Democratic majorities in Congress. Instead, they want him to begin a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces in the next four to six months.
As at least the Bush advisers must know, a "surge" would not be a new strategy, but a new tactic. Shuffling generals and diplomats, increasing troop strength.... hollow maneuvers all.
Bush has been spending a lot of time in the Iraq woodshed. Is our thumb-sucking Decider incapable of a new strategy? Are we asking a spoiled boy to do a man's job?
Stayed tuned.... although the sorry answer is probably yes.
The forcefully-speaking Biden sees the current situation in Iraq this way.... The Decider is waiting until after the elections of 2008, and a new president, to take the historical blame for "landing helicopters inside the Green Zone, taking people off the roof," in a chaotic withdrawal reminiscent of Vietnam.
Such a postponement would insure the death of yet more brave troops, continue the Bush administration's plunge into an abyss of debt, and fuel yet more terrorism throughout the Iraq region and the world.
To what purpose?
To avoid such a scene of failure on Bush's watch.
So, The Decider irresponsibly continues his "stay the course" Iraq policy.... however he cloaks it in his upcoming speech.... unable and unwilling to face, as Biden thinks, what VP Cheney and former defense secretary Rumsfeld have already faced, the fact that Iraq was a "very, very, very, very bad bet, and it blew up in their faces."
Starting next week, Biden will hold committee hearings on every aspect of U.S. policy in Iraq. He intends to expose the Iraq policy underbelly and bring pressure to bear to influence GOP lawmakers.
In the meantime, new Democratic legislative leaders "Pelosi, Reid Urge Bush To Begin Iraq Pullout." They sent a letter to The Decider warning him that sending more U.S. troops to Iraq.... the "surge" option.... was "unacceptable" to the Democratic majorities in Congress. Instead, they want him to begin a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces in the next four to six months.
As at least the Bush advisers must know, a "surge" would not be a new strategy, but a new tactic. Shuffling generals and diplomats, increasing troop strength.... hollow maneuvers all.
Bush has been spending a lot of time in the Iraq woodshed. Is our thumb-sucking Decider incapable of a new strategy? Are we asking a spoiled boy to do a man's job?
Stayed tuned.... although the sorry answer is probably yes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)