It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

Hello, everyone! I've been toying with the idea of this topic for quite some time, more so every time I was enraged about a variety of topics in world current events such as the Iraq War, US politics, mistreatment of the environment (which at some points was weekly). I wanted a place to discuss things about the news, politics, and general world events and interests with my regular board friends (and lurkers) in more detail than the usual discussion on the Odds and Ends board I usually hang out on. I hope to get a lot of input from those outside of the US as well. I'll periodically post news I think may be of interest from all over the world. While it may navigate toward it, I don't want it to necessarily be a US-centric topic. I'd like to learn about others thoughts about politics and culture in their countries as well as other countries opinions about us (odd as it may seem ;-)), such as comparing and contrasting health care systems in various countries compared to the US. This place is for spririted discussion. Don't be shy. Welcome and hope to see you around! To begin the festivities, here's something I hope you find as amusing as I have, in a good natured way. http://youtube.com/watch?v=tw3ccbuCEEE

Bloody hell! Ran out to vote and thought I could come back here and post that I was first. But Letterman's Top 10 was a hoot.

Love the title, Dorine. I guess this is where all the "We love Berlusconi" comments should be. ;-D Loved the top 10, too.

I think that was Karen's title suggestion. I was looking to New World Disorder.

(Karen) Letterman's Top 10 was a hoot. Poor Barney. :-( Cleaning the glasses on the Letterman PA...LOL!

Loved the Letterman Top 10 but also felt acute embarrassment that *this* person is our president.

(Kathryn) but also felt acute embarrassment that *this* person is our president. Longest case of embarrassment I've ever had.

"The stare" had me ROTHLMAO...I could see the little wheels spinning and getting nowhere.

(Kathryn) felt acute embarrassment that *this* person is our president. That skit really does send the message right on home, doesn't it. Well, after tonight, I pray that my Congress will stop embarrassing me as well (and both parties have been to blame for that, but of course only one had all the power).

Finally a woman Speaker of the House! I have faith that VA will tip the Senate too after the recount. What matters most is that Webb is ahead.

Moon, I was thinking about you watching those VA returns late last night, and I have a bone to pick: what is it with you and living in states where the elections are always controversial!? ;-) Finally a woman Speaker of the House! I like her. But why has she been vilified in the conservative press and talk radio? Disagreeing with her views is one thing; that's their right. But, my goodness, some of the sewage I've heard spewed on the airwaves is beyond the pale. You'd have thought she was the shoe bomber or something.

(Mari), what is it with you and living in states where the elections are always controversial!? ;-) LOL! And let's not forget Italy's last election too. A total sham. There's proof that the people checking the ballots (in Italy it's still done on paper!!!), had hidden in their nails small pencil lead and they crossed out Berlusconi's name and checked Prodi's. I like her. But why has she been vilified in the conservative press and talk radio? Disagreeing with her views is one thing; that's their right. But, my goodness, some of the sewage I've heard spewed on the airwaves is beyond the pale. That's what I want to know too. Pelosi has giant potential and they just want to squash her with the usul tactics of lies and more lies. Just think of that insane idiot she's replacing. I hear she will lead the fight to get rid of Rumsfeld, not a minute too soon! And what of Mrs. Dole's comment about people who vote for the democrats didn't want to win the war in Iraq? There is not one ounce of sanity in that Republican group.

(Moon) And what of Mrs. Dole's comment about people who vote for the democrats didn't want to win the war in Iraq? Another typical Republican voice heard from along the same lines of "If one questions the actions of one's leaders, one is automatically acting in an un-American manner".

Wow, MSNBC has breaking AP news that states Rumsfeld to step down. I won't be able to follow it up til late tonight most likely.

(Moon) Just think of that insane idiot she's replacing. You referring to the idiot from my state, whose voters continue to reelect morons, crooks (unless they've been sent to prison) and handpicked, unqualified sons of stroke victims? ;-) I'm thrilled about Pelosi and disgusted by the way she's been discussed by some of the media.

I feel for you, Karen, but right now it's time to celebrate because that conceited smug power hungry idiot, Rumsfeld is OUT! From the AP: WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, architect of an unpopular war in Iraq, intends to resign after six stormy years at the Pentagon, Republican officials said Wednesday. Officials said Robert Gates, former head of the CIA under the first President Bush, would replace Rumsfeld. NBC News� Tim Russert confirmed Rumsfeld�s resignation and the replacement pick. Jon Stewart is mandatory watch tonight.

(Moon) Rumsfeld is OUT! And Rumsfeld used to be the congressman from the area where I grew up.

sorry to butt in in "internal affairs row", but i just saw yesterday's colbert and... well.... LLLLOOOOLLLL! so, i have to agree with you moon: (moon) "Jon Stewart is mandatory watch tonight" will catch it tomorrow on the web (eventhough they're not on youtube aymore, damn!) btw, interesting GWB video where he announces rumsfeld's quitting at the latimes site

(Sophie) sorry to butt in in "internal affairs row", Please don't apologize!! It's exactly one of the things I wanted on this topic, "external" input and opinions as well about anything discussed here. :-D

Jon Stewart is mandatory watch tonight. Ha! I thought this was from the AP blurb, too, LOL!

OMG, I didn't realize Dems took the House *AND* the Senate! Yay!! *runs to store for champagne*

(Dorine) I didn't realize Dems took the House *AND* the Senate Haven't checked the news in the last hour, but the last I knew Virginia was still an undecided state. The Dems need that one for the majority. Otherwise, it's 50/50, and Cheney's vote would always go to the Rep. side.

Webb had done a victory speech, but they just called it in the last 20-30 mins.

World welcomes shift in U.S. politics By PAUL HAVEN, Associated Press Writer 17 minutes ago MADRID, Spain - The electoral rebuke for President Bush and the resignation of his defense secretary, both deeply unpopular away from American shores over the Iraq war, was celebrated throughout Europe, the Middle East and Asia. Still, there was concern Wednesday that a Washington power split and a severely weakened Bush might mean uncertainty in crucial areas like global trade talks. On Iraq, some worried that Democrats will force a too-rapid retreat, leaving the country and the region in chaos. Others said they doubted the congressional turnover would have a dramatic impact on Iraq policy any time soon, largely because the Democrats have yet to define the course they want to take. But from Paris to Pakistan, politicians, analysts and ordinary citizens said Wednesday they hoped the Democratic takeover of both Houses of Congress would force Bush to adopt a more conciliatory approach to global crises, and teach a president many see as a "cowboy" a lesson in humility. In an extraordinary joint statement, more than 200 Socialist members of the European Parliament hailed the American election results as "the beginning of the end of a six-year nightmare for the world." Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who has consistently railed against the Bush administration, called the election "a reprisal vote." In Paris, American expatriates and French citizens alike packed the city's main American haunts to watch results overnight and early Wednesday, with some standing to cheer or boo as vote tabulations came in. One Frenchman, 53-year-old teacher Jean-Pierre Charpemtrat, said it was about time U.S. voters figured out what much of the rest of the world already knew. "Americans are realizing that you can't found the politics of a country on patriotic passion and reflexes," he said. "You can't fool everybody all the time � and I think that's what Bush and his administration are learning today." Bush is deeply unpopular in many countries, with particularly intense opposition to the war in Iraq, the U.S. terror holding facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and allegations of Washington-sanctioned interrogation methods that some equate with torture. Many said they thought the big gains by Democrats signaled the beginning of the end of Bush's tenure. In Copenhagen, Denmark, Jens Langfeldt, 35, said he didn't know much about the midterm elections but was opposed to Bush, referring to the president as "that cowboy." In Sri Lanka, some said they hoped the rebuke would force Bush to abandon a unilateral approach to global issues. "The Americans have made it clear that current American policy should change in dealing with the world, from a confrontational approach, to a more consensus-based and bridge-building approach," said Jehan Perera, a political analyst. The Democratic win means "there will be more control and restraint" over U.S. foreign policy. Passions were even higher in Pakistan, where Bush is deeply unpopular despite billions in aid and support for President Gen. Pervez Musharraf. One opposition lawmaker, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, said he welcomed the election result, but was hoping for more. Bush "deserves to be removed, put on trial and given a Saddam-like death sentence," he said. But while the result clearly produced more jubilation than jitters, there were also some deep concerns. In Denmark, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen told broadcaster TV2 he hoped the president and the new Congress would find "common ground on questions about Iraq and Afghanistan." "The world needs a vigorous U.S.A.," Fogh Rasmussen said. There was also some concern that Democrats, who have a reputation for being more protective of U.S. jobs going overseas, will make it harder to achieve a global free trade accord. And in China, some feared the resurgence of the Democrats would increase tension over human rights and trade and labor issues. China's surging economy has a massive trade surplus with the United States. "The Democratic Party ... will protect the interests of small and medium American enterprises and labor and that could produce an impact on China-U.S. trade relations," Zhang Guoqing of the state-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences said in a report on Sina.com, one of China's most popular Internet portals. The prospect of a sudden change in American foreign policy could also be troubling to U.S. allies such as Britain, Japan and Australia, which have thrown their support behind the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Asked whether the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld signaled a new direction in the war that has claimed the lives of more than 2,800 U.S. troops, Bush said, "Well, there's certainly going to be new leadership at the Pentagon." "The problem for Arabs now is, an American withdrawal (from Iraq) could be a security disaster for the entire region," said Mustafa Alani, an Iraqi analyst for the Gulf Research Center in Dubai. He said the Middle East could be left to cope with a disintegrating Iraq mired in civil war, with refugees fleeing a failed state that could become an incubator for terrorism. It was unclear, however, whether the American election would bring a major shift in Iraq, in part because the Democrats have not come ahead with a clear action plan, said Michael McKinley, a political science professor at the Australian National University. "There would have been some concern in policy making circles here if the Democrats had said, 'We are definitely going to withdraw by Christmas,'" McKinley said. "But they're not able to say that." ___ AP reporters around the world contributed to this report. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061109/ap_on_el_ge/eln_elections_world_view_4

In Italy they are discussing dividing Iraq in three. It makes perfect sense to me. Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites. I hope the US gives the plan due consideration. Of course, the Isreali/Palistenian problem will also have to be agressively addressed.

Wasn't Iraq in 3 parts until the British moved in? Or was it Saddam who tied it all together with his iron fisted rule?

I always love me my Mr. Rich of the NYT. He's always "Frank" and to the point. If you can't access this link and want to read it, I'll post it all or email it to whoever wants it. http://select.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/opinion/12rich.html?em&ex=1163480400&en=1d78cd6cc81d5649&ei=5087%0A

As Dorine suggested, continuing some comments here about to help or not to help, that is the question. :-) I think living in a huge city or being alone on the street make differences in one's behavior. There are good sections and bad sections in any town or city, and I wouldn't suggest smiling at people in dangerous areas. On the whole, though, where I live it is more the rule to smile at people as you walk along rather than scowling. However, I certainly behave very carefully when I've been in LA, London, NYC, or any large city on my own. Even so, that doesn't mean one still can't show curtesies to others, like giving up one's seat for an elderly person, helping pick up dropped items, that sort of thing. Of course, common sense has to be used, as well. I'm not condoning acting foolishly to earn a merit badge. ;-)

(Kathryn) I wouldn't suggest smiling at people in dangerous areas. Of course that should be avoided, but I don't go to dangerous areas or good areas at dangerous times as a rule. In fact, I pretty much have a rule about riding the subway after 11 at the latest. I simply ride the subway on my regular travels or to normal areas. Or walk down any regular street to shop or whatever. Or walk in the Park. They ride the subway to go the same places as everyone else. Sometimes they just do nothing but ride. You can always tell at a glance what subway car *not* to ride in as it zooms past you into the station (they come in fast here usually). If you see a car that has *no* people on it (or maybe one or 2), most people will automatically know to head for another car as most likely there's a homeless person in it who is 1)unstable or 2) awake or asleep, most likely laying down on the bench(seats) and smells rather pungent. Or 3) both. I'm sure these issues are much more prevalent in highly populated urban areas vs. ones less populated or even suburban or more rural areas. Even so, that doesn't mean one still can't show curtesies to others, like giving up one's seat for an elderly person, helping pick up dropped items, that sort of thing Oh, absolutely! There was an "editorial" in one of our little morning daily papers about giving up seats for the elderly and how it seems so many don't do it. There were some interesting letters in reply. Quite a few people said that many decline (which at least some ask) and many figure that if they wanted a seat, they'd ask. I'm not condoning acting foolishly to earn a merit badge. ;-) No, but sometimes the most innocuous things will set people off. I had one guy once talk at me and virtually yell at me the whole few stops I was on a subway once and all I did was sit down. I was even a ways down the car. Quite frankly, at first, I didn't realize he was directing his comments at me. I've gotten off cars to avoid people like that, too, but it sometimes has to be done right, or they'll get off with you, intentionally or not.

I'm moving this over, too... (Mari) Yes, the mentally ill comprises a large portion of our homeless here. The numbers of them on the street really jumped when the laws were changed making it much more diffcult to have someone committed to a mental hospital, due to past abuses of that ability. Not the only cause, the use of drugs is a big part too. The homeless here tend not to be the little girl and her pregnant mum. How is it in the UK And in many instances, the drug and alcohol use is for self-medication because they can't stand taking the medications due to significant side effects, such as weight gain, or can't get the drugs at all. I, too, am curious about the mentally ill are treated in the UK, meaning how are services covered? Under NHS? I was at a party last night with mostly Brits and got into a conversation with one about the NHS, but it was related to more musculoskeletal and medical issues and diagnoses vs. mental health treatment. Can someone in the UK shed some general light on that? Is that one of the covered services? Is it comprehensive? In any event, people's fear of getting involved is often justifed, as those commentators noted. Is that (legitimate, IMO) fear addressed or acknowledged in the show? I figured answers for this might be applicable here, too.

(Dorine) sometimes the most innocuous things will set people off. Agreed, and I would imagine, if one went through an experience such as you did, one would be leery of doing anything to provaoke any kind of reaction. I do not live in a big city, but, if I did, I'm sure my attitudes would become more self-protective out of necessity. (Dorine) (offering seats to the elderly)Quite a few people said that many decline (which at least some ask) I wonder what "elderly" is to some people? Anyone with gray hair? If so, I'd quality. ;-) Every elderly person to whom I've offered my seat has gratefully accepted. (Dorine) and many figure that if they wanted a seat, they'd ask. This is making excuses for shoddy behavior and putting the responsibity on the wrong shoulders, IMO. Many elderly people are easily intimidated and might be afraid of a confrontation developing, as you've mentioned before over something so simple. The younger, healthier people have the responsiblity to be polite and *make* the offer.

Every elderly person to whom I've offered my seat has gratefully accepted Again, different worlds. I've asked plenty and they don't often enough (the ones that appear pretty healthy and fit). Sometimes it's just because they're only going a stop or 2. But I think it may be a pride thing that they're still quite able or they just feel good and don't want to sit. I don't know. Ha, matter of fact, occasionally one will ask me if I want to sit. I don't remember if it's because I may have my briefcase or some other stuff with me or they just ask because I'm a woman (the men of course). Speaking of helping people, this one not an elderly person, but yesterday I'm waiting to get on the bus because this seemingly very young (early 20's at the oldest) person in front of me had her ~8-12 month old (I'm bad guessing that age group) in the stroller and was having a hard time getting the kid out, holding him? and trying to fold the stroller. I held the stroller with my foot initially, but then she had such a hard time trying to unlock it to fold it while holding her baby (who was *sound* asleep) that I ended up folding it for her *and* carrying it up the bus steps (it was a tad heavy) while holding my briefcase in the other hand. Now, to be perfectly honest, I wasn't being 100% altruistic. I had a train at Penn Station to catch and I needed to get going. At the rate she was going, we'd have been there another hour (exaggerated of course, but time was a bit of the essence at that point). The poor thing had such a hard time getting settled on the bus trying to hold him and get the big stroller under a seat. Amazingly the bus was quite empty, which is unusual. Funny thing is, she walks over to me 2 rows back and asks if I'll hold the baby until she gets her stuff settled. Can you imagine?! Very trusting of her. He was kind of heavy, too, but after 3 or 4 mins she gets him and we were off. She had a bit of a time getting off the bus, too, but it was easier. She basically dropped the stroller down the stairs. She needed a much lighter, slightly less bulky stroller.

Ah, you did your Donovan Quick help-with-the stroller audition. :-) This is the kind of thing that should be happening all the time, but it's amazing how many people suddenly become oblivious. Tsk on them. I think it's perfectly acceptable to do something good for someone else that also benefits the person helping. A win-win situation. Have you seen the commercial (can't remember if it's for a bank or investment firm) where a man retrives a doll that's fallen from a baby's stroller, a bystander sees this and later helps someone, who helps someone else....a chain reaction of people being helpful and kind to others. I wish that's how it were in RL. A true gentleman should always offer his seat to a lady....although I'm sure the rules change during commuting time on mass transit in big cities. ;-)

(Kathryn) a man retrives a doll that's fallen from a baby's stroller, a bystander sees this and later helps someone, who helps someone else....a chain reaction of people being helpful and kind to others. Isn't there a movie not dissimilar to this?

(Dorine) Isn't there a movie not dissimilar to this? I hope this isn't a trick question because my mind's a complete blank. :-)

Not to completely change the subject, but been wanting to ask this for a while....is anyone following that story about the former Russian spy being killed in London? WHAT a story! Right out of John Le Carre, James Bond or somebody like that. You know the negotiations about movie rights are being planned now.

LOL, no trick questions. Just sounds like it's something that would've been a movie. Maybe a feelgood Lifetime movie. :-)

The Dec. 11th issue of Newsweek has an article about this and other highly suspicious deaths of people who've criticized the Kremlin. I haven't had a chance to read it yet.

The "pass on the good deeds" movie you're thinking of is Pay it Forward. Kevin Spacey, Helen Hunt, Haley Joel Osment. I liked it, but was one of the few.;-)

Thank you, yes!

Moving from News.... (Janet) I find the coldness of Londoners rather strange. On the tube, people will not make eye contact, Not surprisingly, pretty much exactly like NYC. Funny thing now that I think of it, when I was watching Sliding Doors a couple of weeks ago, the scene where GP and John Hannah meet on the tube and he keeps talking to her even though she obviously is uncomfortable and doesn't want to be bothered, bothered me. I even said to my friend that it was rather freaky behavior and he would be thought at the very least annoying if not seriously crazy here. By the same token, occasionally some people "connect" across a train car because someone is acting odd or in some other amusing way and occasionally you catch a glance at someone else looking back at you and you're both sort of smiling. Or if someone is very irritating and we are all annoyed and surreptitiously acknowledging that fact with glances. Fascinating dynamics actually.

(Kathryn) I think living in a huge city or being alone on the street make differences in one's behavior. It's not the place; it's whether a person has commonsense or not. There are idiotic people everywhere. But there are homeless types hanging out all over the place. Some you get used to seeing. There's a guy who opens the door for everyone at the post office I go to (right smack dab in the middle of city university) and tries to sell you a Streetwise. He's there every day. Or the guys who stand on my off ramps from the expressway... (Kathryn) Even so, that doesn't mean one still can't show curtesies to others, like giving up one's seat for an elderly person... (Dorine) There was an "editorial" in one of our little morning daily papers about giving up seats for the elderly and how it seems so many don't do it. No kidding! It's disgusting IMO. Who raised these people? Not only will I give up my seat for the elderly but I'll also give it up for a pregnant woman. Moreover, I'll pop up even faster if there's an able-bodied man/boy sitting next to me. I love to shame them. Did it a few weeks ago for a grey-haired woman (very able BTW) and the kid next to then offerred to give up his. I told her that was my plan. ;-) Quite a few people said that many decline (which at least some ask) and many figure that if they wanted a seat, they'd ask. What a crock! I'm telling you, they were raised by animals. BTW, these same people will ignore a single line at a bank or post office, thinking that all the people must be waiting for Godot or something and walk right up to a clerk or behind the person at the window, starting a new line. Animals, I'm telling ya. (Dorine) occasionally one will ask me if I want to sit. I don't remember if it's because I may have my briefcase or some other stuff with me or they just ask because I'm a woman (the men of course). I never see men giving up their seats anymore. They bury their heads in a newspaper.

(Janet) I find the coldness of Londoners rather strange. On the tube, people will not make eye contact My DH is a daily commuter into London, he won't make either eye contact or spark up a conversation with a stranger on a train or the tube, mostly from an aspect of safety. However, I think that if he saw a woman in genuine distress, but whom was on her own, that he would help. Of course he is London street savvy and would first weigh up the situation at the time. In fact it wasn't all that long ago that I remember reading about a fatal and shocking stabbing which occured on a crowded Glasgow to Paignton train. It was a crowded carriage. The full story can be read at the link below and Ive posted relevent excerpts from the article here. So it would seem that its advisable to be cautious whereever one is travelling. (on the platform) "He did nothing more than just a look, it cost him his life. The defendant objected to that look and said words to the effect, 'what the f*** are you looking at? I will stab you in a minute'. (on the train) Witnesses told the court how Wood stabbed the student after storming up and down the 10.10 Virgin train from Glasgow to Paignton "looking for trouble and looking for eye contact". http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/10/utrain110.xml

Oppss, my first time over at Dorine's topic and Ive stuffed up. I also meant to add this quote in my above post for the relevency of Dorine's comment to my post. (Dorine)Or if someone is very irritating and we are all annoyed and surreptitiously acknowledging that fact with glances.

Oh gawd,Ive stuffed up again, I am sorry Dorine, *tapping my wrists* ;-) I should also have made it clear that I was bringing Janet's quote over from the CF news topic. Not sure if I should have posted over there to make mention that I have moved her quote over to here though? Think I will quit whilst I am still ahead, "Not" ;-)

There was/is an ABC Primetime show being advertised for this week. Don't know if it has aired or if it's on tonight. It's called Basic Instincts, and from the looks of the commercials it's all about what people do in public situations. They show people walking by children that are being hit, figths, etc. The premise of the segment is that we will be shocked over our own basic reactions.

(Lindak) It's called Basic Instincts It is tonight a 10e/9c http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/

As Sue wrote, you always have to size up the situation and determine whether you could put yourself in danger. If the person looks out of control, yes, you'd walk past, but you might look around to see if there's a cop around or call one if necessary. One thing I've learned is never get between a parent and child. Even when you're attempting to be helpful, they consider you out of line.

(Janet) I find the coldness of Londoners rather strange. On the tube, people will not make eye contact, (Dorine) Not surprisingly, pretty much exactly like NYC. Living in the land of big cars, I can only use public transport on vacation. Some of my favorite recent travel moments have come from from talking to people on the Tube or buses in London, vaporetto in Venice, trams in Austria. Maybe people are just nice to tourists- I found that every time we pulled out a map on the bus in Edinburgh, some little old man would pop up and offer to help us find our way;-) I used to be embarrassed when my grandmother or father would strike up a conversation with total strangers. Now I often find myself doing that very thing. (Karen) Who raised these people? Not only will I give up my seat for the elderly but I'll also give it up for a pregnant woman. Moreover, I'll pop up even faster if there's an able-bodied man/boy sitting next to me. I don't know who raised these people, either. I do know that schools nationwide are now adding 'character education' to their curricula, because the students are coming to school without apparent knowledge of manners, respect for others, and ethics (cheating is rampant). They are not learning these things at home or church:-( Love your 'kick them in the cajones' attitude! (Karen) One thing I've learned is never get between a parent and child. Even when you're attempting to be helpful, they consider you out of line I'm surprised Dorine's help was so accepted by the mom on the bus. I have offered help at times and been treated like a potential kidnapper. They won't stop me though from holding open the door for moms with strollers and/or toddlers.

Drat, my pseudonym isn't cooperating!

(Karen)Even when you're attempting to be helpful, they consider you out of line. I know it. I've given, what I consider, killer glares to people that seem to be a bit out of control with their children. Granted, a two-year-old's melt down in a mall can sound like someone is killing the child, but when I see a parent hitting a child, it makes my stomach flip. Thanks, for the TV info. Peg

(Peg) They won't stop me though from holding open the door for moms with strollers and/or toddlers. Same here. Takes a few seconds and I'm not in *that* big a hurry.

I went to the Mumia thing on Sat night. Walking up to the church I noticed a crowd outside. Two groups, one on the stairs, another just at the edge of the sidewalk in the street in front of them. Both side shouting at one another. The group at the sidewalk had a couple of very large American flags (one the old fashioned kind with the 13 stars in a circle and '76 in the middle) and a good sized banner that said Lynne Stewart, something something, traitor at heart...or something to that effect. She was speaking at the gathering. For those who don't know who Lynne Stewart is, she was the lawyer for Sheik Abdel Rahman (the convicted and jailed plotter of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing). She was herself just last year convicted of aiding and abetting terrorism by passing messages to his followers outside the country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Stewart I walked through the 2 groups while trying to figure out where I could stand to watch this spectacle and look for anyone else of interest. For all I know ME or someone could've been inside already as it was about 10 of 7 when I got there. There were quite a number of people milling back and forth by the doorway inside. I saw some people standing and staring at all this at the edge of the park across the street and decided that would be safest. Not much of an obvious police presence at first, except for the trailer about 20 yards at the corner where quite a few were just hanging out. People kept asking this kid next to me what was going on, which he got tired of answering after a while. Ironically, he had no idea who Lynne Stewart is, so I told him. He said he was 5 at the time of the bombing. The thing that really struck me about it all as really quite comical was as time went how they all sounded like 5 year olds yelling back and forth at one another. "You're a Nazi! You're a Nazi!", and various other things back and forth. I can't tell you how many times I heard the word Nazi that night. One woman who seemed to be a rather obvious Mumia supporter just by looking at her, came out later and got into a yelling match with them and just kept yelling "punk" at them. I'm telling ya, it was pretty ridiculous. And I'm not mentioning the half of it. Occasionally, someone on the street with the sidewalk group would take pics. Finally the police did intervene a bit at times, but it was only one guy. I kinda felt sorry for him. Don't know where the others got to. There were about 7-10 people max for each side standing out there at any given time. The people on the steps rotated as some I guess got tired of yelling and went in and others came out. I got there around 10 to 7, left at 7:15 and got the next train home at 7:30.

Very funny bit from Colbert. "You Americans" should be ashamed. ;-) http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/12/16/colbert-agrees-with-delay/

What a day...begins with the execution of one world leader and ends with the memorial procession of another.

Thanks, Dorine and Karen, for this topic. Sorry for my tardiness, but I was a little distracted last month, to say the least. ;-) It's been a very odd weekend. I've had my fill of dead guys and the talking heads serving as history revisionists. In any event, I know I've shown this letter to some DDs, but I've often wondered why the Dems didn't use this in 2004 as proof that the powers that be were planning to invade Iraq long before 9/11 happened: http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

In the Odd News of the Day Dept: Bra Slows Bullet Fired Into Air in Florida ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (Jan. 5) - A woman watching New Year's Eve fireworks from a picnic table found out that her bra can do more than lift and support: It also slowed a falling bullet. The .45-caliber bullet struck Debbie Bingham, 46, after someone fired a gun into the air about 20 minutes before midnight. She still needed stitches, but the wound might have been much worse except for the bra strap, police spokesman George Kajtsa said. Bingham, who was in town from Atlanta, said she is thankful for the undergarment, which she said was "very cheap." "I'd love to have a couple more of those bras," she said. Bingham said she was listening to music and enjoying the fireworks with her daughter and son when she felt a sharp pain in her shoulder. Then Solanda Bingham, 30, noticed blood seeping through her mother's white shirt, and they found the bullet lodged halfway into the gold-colored bra. The other half was barely breaking the skin, Bingham told WTSP-TV. Kajtsa described the wound as a "big scratch with bruising." St. Petersburg police were searching for the shooter to determine if the shooting was intentional, Kajtsa said. 01/05/07 17:01 EST

Oh and Lisa, thanks for posting that link. I could've used that a couple of months ago when having a debate with a friend of mine when she threw every administration/FOX talking point at me while we were having a lively discussion of the war, WMD (or lack thereof), the administration, etc. You know those talking points: *We needed to strike them before they got us first *No WMD were found because it was sent to (insert rogue country of your choice here) *Iraq/Saddam was involved with 9/11 *Things are better there than is being reported When I respond with the following, I get at least one of 2 responses every time: *Why didn't we attack North Korea instead? We've known they had nuclear technology for certain for a long time. They also have a psycho ruler. *The President said that Iraq/Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 (after heavily implying they did before the war). *Point out the Downing Street Memos information, including cherry picking intelligence reports for info to fit their policy of going to Iraq *Iraq was being bombed by US and British planes for almost a year up to the start of the "war" to goad Saddam into attacking back and providing justification for the war. But he didn't bite. *Conditions in Iraq, especially violence/attacks is underreported *Weapons inspectors were kicked out of the country just before the impending attack even though they weren't finding anything after close to 5 months of looking (which means, how could an attack be imminent if nothing could be found?) *.....and so much more I subsequently sent significant amounts of documentation I've found on the web to back all that up as well as recommend a couple of books I've either read or are reading. The responses I get are usually one or both of the following: 1. A blank stare 2. "But Clinton didn't....(or did)" do something (insert random action here such as, kill Osama Bin Laden, have intern sex, etc ) I pride myself on surrounding myself with intelligent, sensible people. I'm flabbergasted to find that I know someone who *still* believes the tripe (talking points) I mentioned above, in the face of facts to the contrary from reliable sources. (though one of the 2 people I had this conversation with in the past 3 months doesn't necessarily apply to this as she was a co-worker and not someone who's a friend or who I would hang out with).

just before the impending attack even though they weren't finding anything after close to 5 months of looking (which means, how could an attack be imminent if nothing could be found?) To clarify, the first impending attack is from the coalition, the second refers to Iraq against us.

I saw this on the web, and thought it was funny and sad at the same time.

Oooh, how James Bond or John Le Carre.... Updated:2007-01-11 10:04:13 Defense Contractors Warned About Spy Coins By TED BRIDIS AP WASHINGTON (Jan. 11) - Money talks, but can it also follow your movements? Mysterious Coins CIA, AP This device, fashioned to look like a silver dollar, can hold transmitters to track movements of people holding the spy coins. More Coin News: � State Quarter Program May Include D.C., Territories Talk About It: Post Thoughts In a U.S. government warning high on the creepiness scale, the Defense Department cautioned its American contractors over what it described as a new espionage threat: Canadian coins with tiny radio frequency transmitters hidden inside. The government said the mysterious coins were found planted on U.S. contractors with classified security clearances on at least three separate occasions between October 2005 and January 2006 as the contractors traveled through Canada. Intelligence and technology experts said such transmitters, if they exist, could be used to surreptitiously track the movements of people carrying the spy coins. The U.S. report doesn't suggest who might be tracking American defense contractors or why. It also doesn't describe how the Pentagon discovered the ruse, how the transmitters might function or even which Canadian currency contained them. Further details were secret, according to the U.S. Defense Security Service, which issued the warning to the Pentagon's classified contractors. The government insists the incidents happened, and the risk was genuine. http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/defense-contractors-warned-about-spy/20070111063409990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

In light of the President's speech last night, and his passive turn of phrase (about the war) "mistakes have been made", I thought this bit of Gail Sheehy's article about George Bush's obesession with winning to be very telling: _______________________________ When Barbara Bush took her 13-year-old son and his best friend, Doug Hannah, to play golf at her Houston club, George would start cursing if he didn't tee off well. His mother would tell him to quit it. By the third or fourth hole he would be yelling "Fuck this" until he had ensured that his mother would send him to the car. "It fit his needs," says Hannah. "He couldn't lose." Once, after his mother banished him from the golf course, she turned to Hannah and declared, "That boy is going to have optical rectosis." What did that mean? "She said, �A shitty outlook on life.'" Even if he loses, his friends say, he doesn't lose. He'll just change the score, or change the rules, or make his opponent play until he can beat him. "If you were playing basketball and you were playing to 11 and he was down, you went to 15," says Hannah, now a Dallas insurance executive. "If he wasn't winning, he would quit. He would just walk off.... It's what we called Bush Effort: If I don't like the game, I take my ball and go home. Very few people can get away with that." So why could George get away with it? "He was just too easygoing and too pleasant." Another fast friend, Roland Betts, acknowledges that it is the same in tennis. In November 1992, Bush and Betts were in Santa Fe to host a dinner party, but they had just enough time for one set of doubles. The former Yale classmates were on opposite sides of the net. "There was only one problem�my side won the first set," recalls Betts. "O.K., then we're going two out of three," Bush decreed. Bush's side takes the next set. But Betts's side is winning the third set when it starts to snow. Hard, fat flakes. The catering truck pulls up. But Bush won't let anybody quit. "He's pissed. George runs his mouth constantly," says Betts indulgently. "He's making fun of your last shot, mocking you, needling you, goading you�he never shuts up!" They continued to play tennis through a driving snowstorm. "George would say, 'Play that one over,' or 'I wasn't quite ready,'" says Bush-family friend Bo Polk Jr. It is something of an in-joke with Bush's friends and family. "In reality we all know who won, but George wants to go further to see what happens," says an old family friend, venture capitalist and former MGM chairman Louis "Bo" Polk Jr. "George would say, �Play that one over,' or �I wasn't quite ready.' The overtimes are what's fun, so you make your own. When you go that extra mile or that extra point ... you go to a whole new level." _______________________________________________ The entire article can be found here: http://gailsheehy.com/Politics/polimain_bush3.html This was first published in Vanity Fair in 2000, and the above excerpt appeared in the latest issue of VF.

So why could George get away with it? "He was just too easygoing and too pleasant." Ha! I don't think this bit was included in the republished excerpt. Seems a bit incongruous now. ;-)

Now he just mostly comes off petulant.

Mali film puts West's blueprint for Africa on trial By Nick Tattersall1 hour, 42 minutes ago Africa's poorest are even worse off than they were a quarter of a century ago and despite years of debt relief, humanitarian aid and the goodwill of fund-raising rock stars, the West is to blame. So say the witnesses who line up to testify against Western financial institutions in "Bamako," a scathing film by Mauritanian-born director Abderrahmane Sissako, due to be released in Britain and the United States next month. The plot is simple. Mostly poor Africans who have had no say in how their economies are run plead their case against the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, accusing them of imposing rules that have kept their nations mired in misery. Set in the dusty courtyard of his father's family compound in Mali's capital Bamako, Sissako's fantasy trial gives a voice to the voiceless, those who have felt the effects of measures imposed by Western economists but have had no easy way to reply. "It's not so much about identifying who is guilty as denouncing the fact that the fate of hundreds of millions of people has been sealed by policies decided outside their universe," Sissako says on the Website www.bamako-film.com. It would be easy to dismiss this as a theatrical gesture by an intellectual blaming his continent's ills on outsiders. But what makes Sissako's film compelling is that his roll-call of witnesses are not actors but real local people, including a would-be illegal migrant, an elderly villager and a former minister. One of the first, Madou Keita, is among thousands of young Africans who have undertaken epic journeys across desert and sea to try to get into "fortress Europe" and find work. Keita's bid failed when he was shot at by Algerian guards in the Sahara. Former Malian culture minister Aminata Traore also takes the stand, a local hero in Bamako after she employed Malian craftsmen to renovate one of the sprawling city's dirt-strewn neighborhoods in a bid to demonstrate Africa could help itself. "The world is certainly open to whites but it is not open to blacks," she says in her impassioned, unscripted testimony. WHO'S TO BLAME? The film, which opened in West Africa this month after premiering at the 2006 Cannes film festival, takes its broadest swipe at the "structural adjustment programmes" championed by the World Bank and IMF during the world recession of the late 1970s and early 1980s. The programmes set conditions such as cutting social expenditure and privatising state-owned enterprises in return for more loans. Critics say such measures cost badly needed jobs, profited only Western companies and left education and public health sorely underfunded. It may only be a fictional trial, but the arguments highlight a fatalistic sense felt by many Africans that the continent is a perpetual victim, once of the slave trade and colonisation, then of the Cold War and now globalisation. It is a debate which arouses strong emotions. Robert Calderisi, a development expert who spent much of his 30-year career at the World Bank and professes a passion for Africa, argues that a "spiral of pride, anger, poverty and self pity" has kept it behind the rest of the world. "Africa has been making its own history since independence and has been largely free of foreign domination since the end of the Cold War," he wrote in his 2006 book, "The Trouble With Africa: Why Foreign Aid Isn't Working." "Adjustment did not fail in Africa; it was never given a fighting chance. Africa was bleeding to death, but instead of worrying about the haemorrhaging, African leaders complained about the pain from the tourniquet," Calderisi wrote. DIALOGUE OF THE DEAF "Bamako" steers clear of self pity and its criticism is often good-humoured. The trial is punctuated by wry snippets of Malian daily life: at one point a French lawyer defending the West is ripped off as he buys a pair of fake Gucci sunglasses from a street vendor. In another scene, the family sits around the TV in their compound to watch the evening film. It is a Western and one of the most ruthless cowboys is black, an attempt to show that "the West alone is not responsible for Africa's ills," Sissako says. The IMF has taken the criticism on the chin, inviting some of those involved in the film to a recent reception in Bamako when its deputy head, John Lipsky, was in town. "The movie does give us a strong appreciation of the communication challenges the IMF faces," spokeswoman Gita Bhatt said, adding the Fund was now backing programmes in many African nations designed around their own poverty-reduction strategies. "We've listened to what donors and NGOs have said. And above all we've listened to what the governments and populations of our low-income member countries have said," IMF managing director Rodrigo Rato said in a visit to Gabon this month. The film's collaborators do not expect "Bamako" to bring about immediate change. But they hope audiences will realize the world's poor are not blind to what they see as the malign hand the West has dealt them. "At least they will know we know," one of the witnesses told Sissako during filming. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070112/film_nm/africa_west_film_dc

I was reading through this thinking what an interesting concept it is for the film when I realized I'd seen it at the NYFF. It was interesting, though a bit slow, too. It was interesting to see this trial in someone's yard, like a community gathering.

Also, I saw an ad somewhere for a show on Monday with the footage that George and Nick Clooney filmed when they were in Darfur. I don't know if it's on CNN or some other channel, nor do I know what time it's on.

Hee hee. 01 16 2007 Bob Hope Sadly Too Dead to Headline WCHA Dinner After a White House Correspondents Dinner marred by a speech that was actually, tragically funny, the WHCA has taken steps to ensure that never again will the C-SPAN-watching public accidentally crack a smile. This year�s dinner guest of honor: Rich Little. Yeah, the impressionist known for his humorous takes on Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Johnny Carson, and hopefully some people who aren�t dead. C-SPAN�s Steve Scully, president of the White House Correspondents� Association, said that this year, he wanted to pick someone who hadn�t previously headlined the event. The possibility of selecting Little dawned on him in November when watching Little do impersonations on �The Late Show with David Letterman.� We�ve embedded that Letterman appearance after the jump, so you can skip the dinner. If you remember the �70s, you can skip this post. Little to Head WHCA Big Night [Examiner] (The You Tube Letterman appearance is at the link.) http://wonkette.com/politics/rich-little/bob-hope-sadly-too-dead-to-headline-wcha-dinner-228966.php

You know, I was trying to keep quiet with the SOTU speech this week (way to go Webb with the Dem response!). But I read the transcript of the Cheney interview yesterday this blog post refers to and even I had to look twice at what he said. These people really don't care about the people who are their bosses (Us!!) and either really and truly think we're *that* stupid...(I'm on the fence about that sometimes myself)....or they truly are delusional. I'll put the transcript link at the bottom. It's a long interview, but stick with it. Interesting answers from Cheney. Nice snark from the blogger. Dick Cheney On Iraq by BarbinMD Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 06:00:55 AM PST When talking about the war in Iraq, there are at least three things that you can state with absolute certainty: -That the current situation is dire because of the unending sectarian violence. -That the biggest threat comes from the militias and death squads, many that operate within the Iraqi government and security forces. -That the lack of sufficient troop levels from the outset and nonexistent post-war planning led directly to the violence we see today. That is of course, unless you are Dick Cheney. Appearing on CNN with Wolf Blitzer yesterday, Cheney had a different point of view. When Blitzer said that there was a "terrible situation" in Iraq today, Cheney replied: No, there is not. There is not. There's problems, ongoing problems, but we have, in fact, accomplished our objectives of getting rid of the old regime, and there is a new regime in place that's been there for less than a year, far too soon for you guys to write them off. They have got a democratically written constitution, first ever in that part of the world. They've had three national elections. So there's been a lot of success. So there you have it. Never mind that 62 U.S. troops and nearly 1400 Iraqis have been killed this month alone, because they had elections last year. When the violence gets to be too much, just remember those waving purple fingers and be assured that we've accomplished our objectives. And what about the greatest threat we face in Iraq today? But the biggest problem we face right now is the danger that the United States will validate the terrorist strategy, that, in fact, what will happen here with all of the debate over whether or not we ought to stay in Iraq, with the pressures from some quarters to get out of Iraq, if we were to do that, we would simply validate the terrorists' strategy that says the Americans will not stay to complete the task -- -- that we don't have the stomach for the fight. That's the biggest threat right now. Who knew? So the next time you blame administration tactics, or the militias and death squads for the never ending violence in Iraq, stop, take a moment and blame yourself. Stop enabling the enemy by looking at the facts! [Ed. Note - Silly wabbits! ;-)] And what was the biggest mistake made in this war (besides starting it)? Ignoring the advice of military commanders that at least 500,000 troops would be necessary for success? Again, against the advice of the military, disbanding Saddam Hussein's army? Not providing proper security for both vital infrastructure and the Iraqi people in the immediate aftermath of the invasion? Nope: Oh, I think in terms of mistakes, I think we underestimated the extent to which 30 years of Saddam's rule had really hammered the population, especially the Shia population, into submissiveness. Damn those Iraqis! If only they had greeted us with flowers instead of being so submissive, why, the mission would have been accomplished years ago But the bottom-line is: We still have more work to do to get a handle on the security situation, but the President has put a plan in place to do that. Yes, they have a plan for victory in Iraq that is going to work this time. Or as the deputy director of national intelligence told the Senate Intelligence Committee yesterday: Security is an impediment...Gains in stability could open a window for gains in reconciliation among and between sectarian groups and could open the possibilities for a moderate coalition that could permit better government," How could we ever doubt the "new way forward"? http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/25/9055/25868 Transcript of CNN interview: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/24/AR2007012401567.html

Hmm, the formatting didn't come out like I envisioned or hoped. Oh well.

we have, in fact, accomplished our objectives of getting rid of the old regime Gee, and here I thought our objective was to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction. :-( It's so arragant--the same type of arrogance that precluded them from listening to their own military . . . on matters of military strategy. (Dorine)These people really don't care about the people who are their bosses (Us!!) It's the arrogance, again . . . and either really and truly think we're *that* stupid...( Every time I hear about Bush's abysmal approval ratings, I say to myself, wait a minute. That means a third of the country is still with him. Hard to believe.

Gee, and here I thought our objective was to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction. :-( Wait....I thought it was to bring democracy to them. :-/

(Cheney) there is a new regime in place that's been there for less than a year, far too soon for you guys to write them off. They have got a democratically written constitution And I just read yesterday that apparently a significant portion of their Parliament doesn't show up to work (ha, I guess even our Congress is guilty of that, though we're a bit more established ;-)) , and even live in other countries, so they can't really conduct any business.

I saw the Daily Show. Jon Stewart's take on Cheney's interview was better than the State of the Union. Man, oh man! What a jerk. Loved the part about how Cheney and his family are exempt. (Dorine) these people really don't care about the people who are their bosses (Us!!) Er, that's not really accurate. We're not their bosses. They don't serve at our pleasure. He's elected and that's that. We don't have a democracy. We have a representative democracy. (Mari) Every time I hear about Bush's abysmal approval ratings, I say to myself, wait a minute. That means a third of the country is still with him. Hard to believe. What's harder to believe is how quickly the idiots who voted him back in office turned. Wasn't his four-year demo of ineptitude and embarrassment enough? Weren't their financial losses enough?

(Karen) We have a representative democracy. According to the definition I got from Wikipedia....."The representatives act in the people's interest"....I'm not sure we have this either at this point. Not in the last 6 years. Perhaps a fraction of the people's interest...the top 1% and corporations. Because they're sure not representing the poor and middle class. And I stand corrected on the correct type of democracy. Thank you. And I find this part of the Wiki definition interesting.... (the italics merely represent what was a highlighted link in the text) "A representative democracy that also protects liberties is called a liberal democracy. One that does not is an illiberal democracy. There is no necessity that individual liberties are respected in a representative democracy. For example, "the United States relies on representative democracy, but [its] system of government is much more complex than that. [It is] not a simple representative democracy, but a constitutional republic in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law."[1]" It seems many rights have been at the very least squeezed since 9/11. Patriot Act, anyone? What's harder to believe is how quickly the idiots who voted him back in office turned. While I know a couple of people who think the war has been botched, not one of them blame the Commander in Chief (only Rumsfeld or military people) or think it was the wrong thing to do in the first place. I haven't met any of those who turned yet to my knowledge.

(Karen) We have a representative democracy. According to the definition I got from Wikipedia....."The representatives act in the people's interest"....I'm not sure we have this either at this point. Not in the last 6 years. Perhaps a fraction of the people's interest...the top 1% and corporations. Because they're sure not representing the poor and middle class. And I stand corrected on the correct type of democracy. Thank you. And I find this part of the Wiki definition interesting.... (the italics merely represent what was a highlighted link in the text) "A representative democracy that also protects liberties is called a liberal democracy. One that does not is an illiberal democracy. There is no necessity that individual liberties are respected in a representative democracy. For example, "the United States relies on representative democracy, but [its] system of government is much more complex than that. [It is] not a simple representative democracy, but a constitutional republic in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law."[1]" It seems many rights have been at the very least squeezed since 9/11. What's harder to believe is how quickly the idiots who voted him back in office turned. While I know a couple of people who think the war has been botched, not one of them blame the Commander in Chief (only Rumsfeld or military people) or think it was the wrong thing to do in the first place. I haven't met any of those who turned yet to my knowledge.

I'm going to bet virtually no one here but me is following the Scooter Libby trial. Two bloggers were allowed into the media room to report on it with the rest of the MSM (Mainstream Media) and have been liveblogging an unofficial and not exactly word for word transcript. It's comprehensive and I can't follow it all because it's time consuming, but what I've read from jury selection to the first few days of testimony have been mostly interesting. I find it of such interest since I have followed the Joe Wilson editorial/Valerie Plame CIA outing story since JW wrote his piece in the WSJ that the justification used in the 2003 State of the Union address for going into Iraq was untrue and based on false documents. I remember reading that Op-Ed and realizing that we were lied to. It was especially disheartening since while I wasn't a proponent of going into Iraq and didn't really see any connection to them and 9/11, I took it on a bit of faith and gave the President/Congress the benefit of the doubt that maybe Saddam really was actively working on WMD programs. (Now who's the Silly Wabbit? ;-)) Fitzgerald (I and others think oddly) didn't actually indict anyone for actually leaking the information, though Libby was for lying about it. What's becoming so fascinating in the first couple days of testimony is how involved the OVP (Office of the Vice Pres) and specifically Cheney himself was involved in trying to discredit Joe Wilson and throwing around the information that his wife was a covert CIA officer (she worked on uncovering WMD acquistion and distribution to and from Iran. Now, conveniently, she got kicked out of the way and the war drums are beating for Iran because of their unclear nuclear program). There was a good article in the WaPo yesterday summarizing the testimony of one of Cheney's aides and her description of the inner workings of what was going on initially. I'll put it in the next post since this has gone on longer than I planned or imagined. Look for the movie (TV-HBO or Film) within 2 years of the current administration leaving. It's probably half written now. ;-) I think it would be completely fascinating. It is now. Also, I'm going to make a guess that Fitzgerald felt he couldn't find a statute to charge any of the leakers under or he didn't feel it was prudent to accuse the VP of anything, at least while he's in office, the least of which would be directing or overseeing this whole smear campaign personally and trying to hide that the CIA info used in the SOTU as justification for the war was a lie. The word Watergate keeps coming to mind more frequently now. That started out small and look what happened.

I'm putting the whole article simply because I think you have to register to read stuff there. Or you used to. Though I don't know how many people read this topic, so maybe the few that do already are registered. In Ex-Aide's Testimony, A Spin Through VP's PR By Dana Milbank Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, January 26, 2007; Page A01 Memo to Tim Russert: Dick Cheney thinks he controls you. This delicious morsel about the "Meet the Press" host and the vice president was part of the extensive dish Cathie Martin served up yesterday when the former Cheney communications director took the stand in the perjury trial of former Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Flashed on the courtroom computer screens were her notes from 2004 about how Cheney could respond to allegations that the Bush administration had played fast and loose with evidence of Iraq's nuclear ambitions. Option 1: "MTP-VP," she wrote, then listed the pros and cons of a vice presidential appearance on the Sunday show. Under "pro," she wrote: "control message." "I suggested we put the vice president on 'Meet the Press,' which was a tactic we often used," Martin testified. "It's our best format." It is unclear whether the first week of the trial will help or hurt Libby or the administration. But the trial has already pulled back the curtain on the White House's PR techniques and confirmed some of the darkest suspicions of the reporters upon whom they are used. Relatively junior White House aides run roughshod over members of the president's Cabinet. Bush aides charged with speaking to the public and the media are kept out of the loop on some of the most important issues. And bad news is dumped before the weekend for the sole purpose of burying it. With a candor that is frowned upon at the White House, Martin explained the use of late-Friday statements. "Fewer people pay attention to it late on Friday," she said. "Fewer people pay attention when it's reported on Saturday." Martin, perhaps unaware of the suspicion such machinations caused in the press corps, lamented that her statements at the time were not regarded as credible. She testified that, as the controversy swelled in 2004, reporters ignored her denials and continued to report that it was Cheney's office that sent former ambassador Joseph Wilson to Niger to investigate allegations of Iraq's nuclear acquisitions. "They're not taking my word for it," Martin recalled telling a colleague. Martin, who now works on the president's communications staff, said she was frustrated that reporters wouldn't call for comment about the controversy. She said she had to ask the CIA spokesman, Bill Harlow, which reporters were working on the story. "Often, reporters would stop calling us," she testified. This prompted quiet chuckles among the two dozen reporters sitting in court to cover the trial. Whispered one: "When was the last time you called the vice president's office and got anything other than a 'no comment'?" At length, Martin explained how she, Libby and deputy national security adviser Steve Hadley worked late into the night writing a statement to be issued by George Tenet in 2004 in which the CIA boss would take blame for the bogus claim in Bush's State of the Union address that Iraq was seeking nuclear material in Africa. After "delicate" talks, Tenet agreed to say the CIA "approved" the claim and "I am responsible" -- but even that disappointed Martin, who had wanted Tenet to say that "we did not express any doubt about Niger." During her testimony, Martin, a Harvard Law School graduate married to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and a close pal of Bush counselor Dan Bartlett, seemed uncomfortable, shifting in her chair, squinting at her interrogators, stealing quick glances at the jury, and repeatedly touching her cheek, ear, nose, lips and scalp. Martin shed light on the mystery of why White House press secretary Scott McClellan promised, falsely, that Libby was not involved in outing CIA operative Valerie Plame, Wilson's wife. After McClellan had vouched for Bush strategist Karl Rove's innocence, Libby asked Martin, "Why don't they say something about me?" "You need to talk to Scott," Martin advised. On jurors' monitors were images of Martin's talking points, some labeled "on the record" and others "deep background." She walked the jurors through how the White House coddles friendly writers and freezes out others. To deal with the Wilson controversy, she hastily arranged a Cheney lunch with conservative commentators. And when New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof first wrote about the Niger affair, she explained, "we didn't see any urgency to get to Kristof" because "he frankly attacked the administration fairly regularly." Questioned by prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, Martin described how Hadley tried to shield White House spokesmen from the Niger controversy. "Everybody was sort of in the dark," she explained. "There had been a decision not to have the communicators involved." But Martin, encouraged by Libby, secretly advised Libby and Cheney on how to respond. She put "Meet the Press" at the top of her list of "Options" but noted that it might appear "too defensive." Next, she proposed "leak to Sanger-Pincus-newsmags. Sit down and give to him." This meant that the "no-leak" White House would give the story to the New York Times' David Sanger, The Washington Post's Walter Pincus, or Time or Newsweek. Option 3: "Press conference -- Condi/Rumsfeld." Option 4: "Op-ed." Martin was embarrassed about the "leak" option; the case, after all, is about a leak. "It's a term of art," she said. "If you give it to one reporter, they're likelier to write the story." For all the elaborate press management, things didn't always go according to plan. Martin described how Time wound up with an exclusive one weekend because she didn't have a phone number for anybody at Newsweek. "You didn't have a lot of hands-on experience dealing with the press?" defense attorney Theodore Wells asked. "Correct," Martin replied. After further questions, she added: "Few of us in the White House had had hands-on experience with any crisis like this." Staff writer Carol D. Leonnig contributed to this report http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/25/AR2007012501951.html

Here's the NYT article that talks about what I mentioned here: (Cheney) there is a new regime in place that's been there for less than a year, far too soon for you guys to write them off. They have got a democratically written constitution (Me) And I just read yesterday that apparently a significant portion of their Parliament doesn't show up to work (ha, I guess even our Congress is guilty of that, though we're a bit more established ;-)) , and even live in other countries, so they can't really conduct any business. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/24/world/middleeast/24noshow.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Yay for the Appeals Court. This has one of the stupidest (and in a way scariest) arguments (in bold below) I've heard for allowing pollution. And *this* from the *EPA* of all agencies. There are some people (and politicians) that are nuisances also. Should they be eradicated also? Updated:2007-01-27 10:00:51 Judge Rules Against Bush EPA Policy By LARRY NEUMEISTER AP NEW YORK (Jan. 26) - The Environmental Protection Agency must force power plants to protect fish and other aquatic life even if it's expensive, a federal appeals court said in a ruling favoring states and environmental groups. The decision late Thursday by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that it was improper for the EPA to let power plants circumvent environmental laws - for instance, restocking polluted water with new fish instead of paying to upgrade their technology. It said the EPA's decisions must "be driven by technology, not cost," unless two technologies produce essentially the same benefits but have much different costs. "EPA's goal is to protect fish and the ecosystem while meeting the nation's need for reliable energy sources," said Benjamin H. Grumbles, the agency's assistant administrator for water. The agency was reviewing the decision, he said. The ruling drew praise from environmental groups and six states that had sued. "This decision is a strong and stinging rebuke of the Bush administration's underhanded practice of issuing rule changes to undercut environmental laws," Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said in a statement Friday. The other states involved are Rhode Island, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. They sued after the EPA published regulations in July 2004 describing how power plants must protect aquatic life when they use water from bays, rivers, lakes, oceans and other waterways for cooling. Scientists say fish, larvae and eggs are killed in the water-cooling process, which is used heavily in states with many older, mostly fossil-fuel plants. The appeals court previously rejected arguments that some species are nuisances and require eradication. The court had also dismissed the claim that other species respond to population losses by increasing their reproduction. Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/judge-rules-against-bush-epa-policy/20070126192509990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

Ironically funny and sad. They do this thread every week as a wrap up of the week and all the Sunday shows. Someone in there is a big George Clooney fan, so there's usually a few pics of him put in as a side topic. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/27/215313/641

Since this moves into the political world, I'm going to post this tidbit about CIC here. Some conspiracists think ABC did a job on this series precisely because it showed a strong (nonmacho) woman president and would be free advertising for Hillary.

Wow, that's one thing I never read.

I have to wonder, why offer it up and then smash it to bits?? How unfortunate:-(

(Colleen) I have to wonder, why offer it up and then smash it to bits?? How unfortunate:-( If I were a conspiracist, the explanation would be ABC only destroyed the series after pressure was put on it by others.

And you might not be incorrect.

I don't know where that NJ Politics is now and I'm not going to bother looking since this topic is here, but Linda!... I see your hated billionaire, Democratic govenor is giving you a break on those property taxes you were so unhappy with (assuming he signs it). How 'bout that? N.J. TAKES AX TO PROPERTY TAX AP February 7, 2007 -- TRENTON, N.J. - The state Senate yesterday approved sweeping property-tax relief that would give most homeowners a 20 percent cut beginning this summer, helping reduce the nation's highest property taxes. The legislation, which also would limit future property-tax increases to 4 percent annually, goes to Gov. Jon Corzine for final approval. Corzine didn't say when he would sign the bill, but he hailed its passage. "Relief is on its way to overburdened property taxpayers in New Jersey, and I think we have reached a turning point with regard to reform," Corzine said. Senate Republicans joined Democrats yesterday afternoon to break a stalemate and approve the measure, which has been billed by Democrats as the largest property-tax cut for working families in state history. [Ed note: Perhaps a dubious claim at best. ;-)] "The people won," said Senate President and former Gov. Richard Codey. The legislation had stalled in the Senate on Monday as dissatisfied Republicans withheld votes and three Democrats voted against it. The relief is to take the form of a credit on property-tax bills this summer, but the state will send checks if a credit system cannot be created on time. http://www.nypost.com/seven/02072007/news/regionalnews/n_j__takes_ax_to_property_tax_regionalnews_.htm

I put this over here as I'm not sure where the conversation would go, if anywhere..this topic isn't necessarily just for politics, but any kind of news or interesting stories that aren't artsy. (Evelyn) she was trying to be mumsy, wifey and prez at the same time. (Karen) And that wouldn't reflect reality IYO? I'm putting this article in here not espousing any particular viewpoint about the above exchange, but just to show the irony of that being a topic of interest IRL in light of the news about that Married with Kids female astronaut going after that other female astronaut over a man. The article is discussing the effects of a woman having a high stress career and how well it is or isn't balanced. There's no lamp throwing, but there are reports of plate throwing for Evelyn. ;-) Updated:2007-02-08 08:08:37 Friend Points Out Astronaut's 'Mental Anguish' By RASHA MADKOUR and DAVID CRARY AP CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (Feb. 8) - Lisa Nowak chose a juggling act of dauntingly high difficulty: to be an astronaut and a mother of three. Her background - high school valedictorian, Naval Academy graduate, test pilot - seemed to equip her for the challenge. Yet as she and some of her acquaintances acknowledged, the stresses on her and her family were extraordinarily intense. An Astronaut's Fall On Wednesday, transformed from space hero to criminal suspect, Nowak returned to Houston for a medical assessment, a day after she was charged in Florida with attempted murder and attempted kidnapping in what police depicted as a love triangle involving a fellow astronaut. The woman viewed as a role model by the schoolchildren she often addressed was met on the tarmac by police and escorted into a waiting squad car after her release on bail. Her head was covered by a jacket. She faced a medical exam at Johnson Space Center. NASA, at a loss to explain what went wrong, said it would revamp its psychological screening process in light of Nowak's arrest. The review will look at how astronauts are screened for psychological problems and whether Nowak's dealings with co-workers signaled complications. Nowak's children were with her husband, Richard, who works for a NASA contractor. She was being replaced as a ground communicator for the next space shuttle mission in March, a job in which she would talk to the astronauts from Houston during their flight. Some part of any breakdown may defy rational explanation, but those who know Nowak and NASA could sense the stress she was under. Dr. Jon Clark, a former NASA flight surgeon who lost his wife, astronaut Laurel Clark, in the 2003 Columbia disaster, said Nowak provided invaluable support to his family then, at the cost of losing time with her own family. "She was the epitome of managing a very hectic career, making sacrifices to accommodate her family," Clark said in a telephone interview. "All those stresses can conspire to be overwhelming. ... Clearly she suffered a lot of mental anguish. "There is a lot of marital stress in the astronaut corps in general - a huge amount," Clark said. "It's not unheard of for things to change into relationships that are beyond professional." Clark also said there can be extra pressure on NASA's female astronauts - and the men, like himself, who marry them. "They made more sacrifices than the 'Right Stuff' guys," he said, comparing women astronauts to the original all-male astronaut corps. "They have to balance two careers - to be a mom and wife and an astronaut. ... You don't come home at night, like most of the male astronauts, and have everything ready for you." Clark expressed empathy with Richard Nowak, who separated from his wife a few weeks ago after 19 years of marriage. "He was a real low-key, go-with-the flow, unobtrusive person," Clark said. "You almost have to be to survive in the realm. ... It was hard on our marriage to have my wife gone all the time, and eventually have her career surpass mine." Lisa Nowak grew up in Rockville, Md., where she was co-valedictorian and member of the track team in high school. After graduating from the Naval Academy, she received a master's degree in aeronautical engineering, flew as a test pilot in the mid-1990s while caring for an infant son, and became a full-fledged astronaut in 1998. "It's definitely a challenge to do the flying and take care of even one child and do all the other things you have to do. But I learned that you can do it," she said in a recent interview with Ladies Home Journal. Last July, in the climax of her career, she flew on the space shuttle Discovery, helping operate its robotic arm and winning praise for her performance. However, there were signs of turmoil in her life as she tried to balance her career with raising a teenage son and 5-year-old twin girls. In November, a neighbor reported hearing the sounds of dishes being thrown inside Nowak's Houston home. And she had begun to form a relationship with William Oefelein, a fellow astronaut and father of two whose own marriage ended in divorce in 2005. Nowak told police Monday that the relationship was "more than a working relationship but less than a romantic relationship." Charlene Davis, the mother of Oefelein's ex-wife, Michaella, said Wednesday that Nowak - although friends with Oefelein for years - had nothing to do with his marriage breakup. "I think there were a lot of bad choices being made, and Lisa just made a horrible one," Davis said in a telephone interview. "And I just feel sorry for her. What the hell was she thinking?" The final unraveling came this week when police arrested Nowak for allegedly trying to kidnap Colleen Shipman, an Air Force captain from Florida whom she believed was her rival for Oefelein's affections. Police charged Nowak with attempting to murder Shipman based on weapons and other items found with Nowak or in her car: pepper spray, a BB-gun, a new steel mallet, knife and rubber tubing. Those who know Nowak away from the high-pressure atmosphere of NASA were stunned. "I was very surprised... She always seemed very normal to me," said Candis Silva, who lives three houses down from the Nowaks. "She was a good role model for our daughters." Thomas Nagy, a Palo Alto, Calif., psychologist who has studied the stresses facing dual-career couples, hesitated to offer any specific diagnosis of Nowak, but said such seemingly desperate acts could result from a chronic personality disorder or from a period of high stress that clouds one's judgment. "When people are in that role of trying to do everything to the Nth degree, they don't get enough sleep, they don't do enough activities that are fun, they don't get enough exercise," he said. "If we ignore those because we're trying to do it all, we pay a price - more anxiety, more depression." Jon Clark expressed hope that Americans would empathize with Nowak, rather than condemning her. "Obviously, she had some things that didn't go well," he said. "Any of us could be there. All of us have a dark side." Rasha Madkour reported from Houston and David Crary from Austin, Texas. Associated Press writer Joe Stinebaker in Houston also contributed to this report. http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/friend-points-out-astronauts-mental/20070207182009990002

(Dorine)The article is discussing the effects of a woman having a high stress career and how well it is or isn't balanced. My heart goes out to this woman. Who knows what caused her breakdown but having the type of job she had, with the time demands, risk, and stress, combined with raising young children, could not have been easy. Men in her position have always had support systems--i.e., WIVES--who kept the house running, made sure the homework got done, shepherded the kids to all the after-school stuff and doctor's check-ups, enabling the men to work the long hours, do the business travel, do the schmoozing, etc. Two careers can be very rewarding, but it ain't easy; I used to always say to Paul, especially when our son was little, that what we really needed as a family . . . was a wife. She sounds like the quintessential "good girl"--always did everything right, always did everyone proud--and one day she snaps. Poor thing. She needs a good lawyer to make sure that the ridiculous laundry list of alleged crimes gets cuts down to something that means no jail time. Sounds like some DA is trying to make a name for himself or herself on this woman's misfortune. I can only hope she has someone in her life to take care of her at this time.

what we really needed as a family . . . was a wife Otherwise known as a nanny. ;-) She needs a good lawyer to make sure that the ridiculous laundry list of alleged crimes gets cuts down to something that means no jail time. While I too, thought that some of those charges may not stick and may even be excessive, I wonder if it's really possible to get charges reduced that far. You have to admit, it was a bizarre laundry list of items she had with her. And did spray the woman with pepper spray. And the costumy items. God knows what that love letter they found in her car said, too. All the jokes are way too much though. I was reading an article today, I think about NASA changing or increasing their psych profiling of astronauts, where someone was talking about how she had compartmentalized her life into the different areas of overacheivement, but that it obviously broke down somewhere. Men in her position have always had support systems--i.e., WIVES--who kept the house running, made sure the homework got done, shepherded the kids to all the after-school stuff and doctor's check-ups, enabling the men to work the long hours, do the business travel, do the schmoozing, etc. And comments I read somewhere today made note that if this story were about a man, it might be considered quite macho, but for a woman it's considered something to make light of and make jokes about.

This is pretty fascinating. An ethnic Miao man walks inside a huge cave at a remote Miao village in Ziyun county, southwest China's Guizhou province February 12, 2007. The village of Zhongdong, which literally means "middle cave", is build in a huge, aircraft hanger-sized natural cave, carved out of a mountain over thousands of years by wind, water and seismic shifts. REUTERS/Jason Lee China's "last cave dwellers" refuse to leave Reuters Thursday February 15, 01:53 AM ZHONGDONG, China (Reuters) - For Wang Fengguan, a man's cave is his castle. He lives in a huge one -- and he has no intention of leaving. Neither do any of the other 20 families in his village. "Where else would we go?" said Wang, sitting in his house, built in the cave where his family has lived for more than half a century, deep in the poor, remote southwestern Chinese province of Guizhou. "This is our home. We are used to it," he added, in uncertain sounding Mandarin. Wang's village of Zhongdong -- which literally means "middle cave" -- is built in a huge, aircraft hanger-sized natural cave, carved inside a mountain over thousands of years by wind, water and seismic shifts. In other parts of China people live in houses tunnelled out of hillsides, but Zhongdong is, the local government believes, the last place in the country where people live year-round in a naturally occurring cave. The villagers are all ethnic Miao people, supposedly related to Southeast Asia's Hmong, and one of several minority groups who live in Guizhou. Getting to the cave is extremely difficult. It takes some four hours to drive there from provincial capital Guiyang, the last hour on a dirt road which clings precariously to the side of a mountain valley, high above a river. But the final way up to Zhongdong is to walk for more than an hour up a steep, rough stone path hewn out of rocks. Everything must come up the path -- food, concrete and even washing machines. The government has built houses for the villagers in a valley below the cave, but they don't want to go, saying the houses are "not up to standard" and leak during the heavy rains which characterise Guizhou's damp climate. "We thought about moving, but we don't want to go," said Wang Houzhong, sitting on the floor splitting bamboo to make mats. "We are China's last cave dwellers," he added, axe in hand. "Life is very bitter for us." ROOM FOR OPTIMISM To be sure, life in the village is tough. Villagers say they are lucky to make even 1,000 yuan ($129) per family a year. Women give birth at home, in houses with dirt floors and wood-fired hearths. The nearest hospital is a five-hour walk away. But in the last few years life has improved considerably, they say, somewhat optimistically. Electricity has arrived via wires strung over the mountains, and there is a primary school, which like almost every other building in Zhongdong has no roof. It does not need one as the buildings are deep inside the cave. Four houses now have televisions, some with DVD players, and some have washing machines. Satellite dishes are perched on outcrops at the cave's entrance and there is even mobile phone reception. The school has revolutionised life, villagers say. The children happily chat away in clear, unaccented Mandarin, unlike their parents and grandparents who still struggle with China's official language or don't speak it at all. "When I was younger, we used to have to walk three hours to school, and then three hours to get back home," said Wang Fengguan. "The new school is great." Adult literacy classes are also held. Progress is marked on the household registration forms pinned outside homes, with the Chinese characters for "has escaped illiteracy" placed next to the names of adults who have attended class. Daily necessities are still a struggle though. Villagers make the five-hour trek to the county town once a week to buy the things they cannot make or grow, like toothpaste and soap, and to sell their cattle. Water supplies are limited in the dry season. Buckets are set up around the cave to catch drips. Residents are building wells into the cave's floor, and are busy concreting them -- a measure, perhaps, of their commitment to stay in their remote home. ECONOMIC THREAT Exactly when their ancestors moved into the cave, and why, is a subject of debate. Some villagers say they have been there for generations. Others say they only moved in following the chaos that followed the 1949 Communist revolution, to escape bandits. There is a lower cave, too damp for habitation, and an upper cave that also has no residents. But ultimately it may be economics that kills Zhongdong. Already many villagers have left to work in richer parts of the country. Luo Yaomei's three children have all gone, leaving her to bring up their children -- her grandchildren -- in her thatched house blackened by smoke at the cave's entrance. "None of them want to live here," she said. "Of course the outside world is better," Luo added, sadly. (Additional reporting by Kitty Bu) http://uk.news.yahoo.com/15022007/325/china-s-cave-dwellers-refuse-leave.html

So McCain decided to announce his run for President on Letterman's show taped for tonight. While I would in the future if I thought they were worthy and have in the past voted for Republican Presidential candidates.....*GASP*, shocking to some of you I know!..... and I did used to favor McCain at one time, you'd have to pay me BIG $$$$ to vote for him now and even that might not be enough.

LOL, Dorine! As for McCain, time to dig out those flipflops!;-)

Ha! Too right, Lisa.

I told you it would be easy to find material for The Lives of Others remake, at least here. This stuff going on isn't sounding much different than the Stasi of the 80's or even Russia. Impeaching this guy first is a start, I suppose. Unfortunately time is running out and it's probably the only real one there's even a remote possibility of seeing, but I won't hold my breath. I think I'll just be happy at the moment that Henry Waxman will continue keeping the heat on the issue of the outing of CIA agent, Valerie Plame, with a congressional hearing next week with testimony from the Wilson's and hopefully one of my new heroes, Patrick Fitzgerald (FITZ!!) . [I can here the scoffing from the Bush supporters from here. ;-) But, yes, she was a *covert* (NOC) agent working on nuclear proliferation in Iraq and Iran, who's cover (including the front company) was blown all because her husband had the guts to call out Cheney and the administration on the lies they told to get us to war. I'll be happy to hear some evidence to the contrary.] I've been less fond of the NYT over the past several years, but this is spot on IMO. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/opinion/11sun1.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin March 11, 2007 Editorial The Failed Attorney General During the hearing on his nomination as attorney general, Alberto Gonzales said he understood the difference between the job he held � President Bush�s in-house lawyer � and the job he wanted, which was to represent all Americans as their chief law enforcement officer and a key defender of the Constitution. Two years later, it is obvious Mr. Gonzales does not have a clue about the difference. He has never stopped being consigliere to Mr. Bush�s imperial presidency. If anyone, outside Mr. Bush�s rapidly shrinking circle of enablers, still had doubts about that, the events of last week should have erased them. First, there was Mr. Gonzales�s lame op-ed article in USA Today trying to defend the obviously politically motivated firing of eight United States attorneys, which he dismissed as an �overblown personnel matter.� Then his inspector general exposed the way the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been abusing yet another unnecessary new power that Mr. Gonzales helped wring out of the Republican-dominated Congress in the name of fighting terrorism. The F.B.I. has been using powers it obtained under the Patriot Act to get financial, business and telephone records of Americans by issuing tens of thousands of �national security letters,� a euphemism for warrants that are issued without any judicial review or avenue of appeal. The administration said that, as with many powers it has arrogated since the 9/11 attacks, this radical change was essential to fast and nimble antiterrorism efforts, and it promised to police the use of the letters carefully. But like so many of the administration�s promises, this one evaporated before the ink on those letters could dry. The F.B.I. director, Robert Mueller, admitted Friday that his agency had used the new powers improperly. Mr. Gonzales does not directly run the F.B.I., but it is part of his department and has clearly gotten the message that promises (and civil rights) are meant to be broken. It was Mr. Gonzales, after all, who repeatedly defended Mr. Bush�s decision to authorize warrantless eavesdropping on Americans� international calls and e-mail. He was an eager public champion of the absurd notion that as commander in chief during a time of war, Mr. Bush can ignore laws that he thinks get in his way. Mr. Gonzales was disdainful of any attempt by Congress to examine the spying program, let alone control it. The attorney general helped formulate and later defended the policies that repudiated the Geneva Conventions in the war against terror, and that sanctioned the use of kidnapping, secret detentions, abuse and torture. He has been central to the administration�s assault on the courts, which he recently said had no right to judge national security policies, and on the constitutional separation of powers. His Justice Department has abandoned its duties as guardian of election integrity and voting rights. It approved a Georgia photo-ID law that a federal judge later likened to a poll tax, a case in which Mr. Gonzales�s political team overrode the objections of the department�s professional staff. The Justice Department has been shamefully indifferent to complaints of voter suppression aimed at minority voters. But it has managed to find the time to sue a group of black political leaders in Mississippi for discriminating against white voters. We opposed Mr. Gonzales�s nomination as attorney general. His r�sum� was weak, centered around producing legal briefs for Mr. Bush that assured him that the law said what he wanted it to say. More than anyone in the administration, except perhaps Vice President Dick Cheney, Mr. Gonzales symbolizes Mr. Bush�s disdain for the separation of powers, civil liberties and the rule of law. On Thursday, Senator Arlen Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, hinted very obliquely that perhaps Mr. Gonzales�s time was up. We�re not going to be oblique. Mr. Bush should dismiss Mr. Gonzales and finally appoint an attorney general who will use the job to enforce the law and defend the Constitution.

(Me) This stuff going on isn't sounding much different than the Stasi of the 80's or even Russia. Except maybe the informants. But then again, who knows. ;-)

I have no idea who this guy is and it doesn't really matter, but he gives good snark.... March 07, 2007 Re-Mixed Washington Post Editorials: The Subtextening [original editorial here, various take-downs here] No way! THE Mr. Washington Post?!? THE CONVICTION of I. Lewis Libby on charges of perjury, making false statements and obstruction of justice was grounded in strong evidence and what appeared to be careful deliberation by a jury. But I, the Washington Post, a faceless but omniscient entity hovering over the proceedings, know better. The former chief of staff to Vice President Cheney told the FBI and a grand jury that he had not leaked the identity of CIA employee Valerie Plame to journalists but rather had learned it from them. But abundant testimony at his trial showed that he had found out about Ms. Plame from official sources and was dedicated to discrediting her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. It involved no missing white girls, no consensual oral sex, or claims about the book Love Story. So, in the word of Rick from The Young Ones: "Boh-weeeen!" The fall of this skilled and long-respected public servant, a true giant of a man whose appetite for gin and tonics at the fancy parties we both used to attend, is particularly sobering because it arose from a Washington scandal remarkable for its lack of substance. Certainly, it's not the kind of substance we look for in numerous articles by John Solomon about campaign finance scandals, loosely defined, or by the careful description of tiara jewels in our society pages. Mr. Wilson was embraced by many because he was early in publicly charging that the Bush administration had "twisted," if not invented, facts in making the case for war against Iraq. We, of course, roundly ignored this patchouli-smelling twat in favor of careful stenography from Pentagon press releases. A bipartisan investigation by the Senate intelligence committee subsequently established that the war was perfectly justified, that Wilson had helped to squirrel away Iraq's WMD to Syria, and had subsequently fomented sectarian strife. The partisan furor over this allegation led to the appointment of special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald, a troubled foot fetishist who suffered from the tertiary stages of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Yet after two years of investigation, card-carrying Communist Mr. Fitzgerald charged no one with a crime for leaking Ms. Plame's name, or her choice of evening wear or remarkable resemblance to Virginia Madsen. It would have been sensible for Mr. Fitzgerald to end his investigation after learning about Mr. Armitage. Instead, like many Washington special prosecutors before him, he pressed on... but not in a good way in hoping to write a 600-page report about blowjobs like Kenneth Starr before him. Instead, he got all hot and bothered that his investigation was repeatedly lied to in an amateurish cover-up attempt. What a small, petty man. Mr. Wilson's case has besmirched nearly everyone it touched, even living saints like Vice President Cheney and even, amazingly enough, the infallible President who has fruitless, unproductive wars to conduct. Mr. Fitzgerald was, at least, right about one thing: The Wilson-Plame case, and Mr. Libby's conviction, tell us nothing about the war in Iraq. Then again, neither do we until the President sinks below 40% in his approval rating. http://norbizness.com/archives/002087.html

I don't get this reasoning at all. Some twisted logic. He's soooooo cute!! Some pics to run through (17).... http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/0,5538,PB64-SUQ9MjAxOTUmbnI9MQ_3_3,00.html And a video (in German)...there's 20 secs of a man introducing the segment. Knut is ridiculously adorable and amusingly clumsy. Very cute bit at the end with his keeper. And he doesn't like his bottle taken away when he's hungry! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ35C7BD5eI&mode=related&search= Cuddly polar bear cub better off dead, activist says POSTED: 1828 GMT (0228 HKT), March 19, 2007 Story Highlights � Cub was ignored by mother, so zookeepers raised him themselves � Activist: "Feeding by hand is ... gross violation of animal protection laws" � Bear's story sparks controversy among politicians, animal activists BERLIN, Germany (AP) -- Berlin Zoo's abandoned polar bear cub Knut looks cute, cuddly and has become a front-page media darling, but an animal rights activist insisted Monday he would have been better off dead than raised by humans. "Feeding by hand is not species-appropriate but a gross violation of animal protection laws," animal rights activist Frank Albrecht was quoted as saying by the mass-circulation Bild daily, which has featured regular photo spreads tracking fuzzy Knut's frolicking. "The zoo must kill the bear." When Knut -- or "Cute Knut," as the 8.7 kilogram (19 pound) bear has become known -- was born last December, his mother ignored him and his brother, who later died. Zoo officials intervened, choosing to raise the cub themselves. The story prompted quick condemnations from the zoo, politicians and other animal rights groups. "The killing of an animal has nothing to do with animal protection," said Wolfgang Apel, head of the German Federation for the Protection of Animals. Politicians weigh in on bear Greens politician Undine Kurth called the suggestion "fully unacceptable." Petra Pau of the opposition Left Party invoked the widely-reported case of an Italian bear dubbed "Bruno" who wandered last year into southern Germany, only to be killed by hunters at the behest of local authorities worried about residents and livestock. "Berlin is not Bavaria, therefore it will be better for Knut than Bruno," Pau said. Albrecht told The Associated Press his beliefs were more nuanced than reported by Bild, though he applauded the debate the article had started. He explained that though he thought it was wrong of the zoo to have saved the cub's life, now that the bear can live on his own, it would be equally wrong to kill him. "If a polar bear mother rejected the baby, then I believe the zoo must follow the instincts of nature," Albrecht said. "In the wild, it would have been left to die." The German animal rights organization "Four Paws" argued along similar lines, saying it would not be right to punish the cub for a bad decision made by the zoo. Other activists have also argued that current treatment of the cub is inhumane and could lead to future difficulties interacting with fellow polar bears. "They cannot domesticate a wild animal," Ruediger Schmiedel, head of the Foundation for Bears, told Der Spiegel weekly in its Monday edition. Albrecht cited a similar case of a baby sloth bear that was abandoned by its mother last December in the Leipzig city zoo and killed by lethal injection, rather than being kept alive by humans. But Knut belongs to the Berlin Zoo, and their veterinarian Andre Schuele, charged with caring for him, disagrees. "These criticisms make me angry, but you can't take them so seriously," Andre Schuele said. "Polar bears live alone in the wild; I see no logical reason why this bear should be killed." Schuele also argued that given the increased rarity of polar bears in the wild, it makes sense to keep them alive in captivity so that they can be bred. "Polar bears are under threat of extinction, and if we feed the bear with a bottle, it has a good chance of growing up and perhaps becoming attractive as a stud for other zoos," Schuele said. Knut, who recently posed for a photo shoot with star-photographer Annie Leibovitz for an environmental protection campaign, is scheduled to make his public debut at the zoo later this week or early next week, according to Schuele. Until then, Germans can follow the bear's progress in a vast photo spread and videos of Knut drinking from his bottle, bathing and playing with teddy bears and soccer balls, all available on the zoo's Web site. http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/03/19/polar.bear.ap/index.html

Ah! That You Tube video above is taken from Knut's video podcast. They're in 1 - 4 min segments. The first 2 are too adorable (3 and 4 min ones). I think they have to be downloaded to watch unfortunately, but I don't mind keeping them. http://www.rbb-online.de/_/fernsehen/index_jsp/activeid=3609.html He's so cute learning to play in water. He didn't seem to like being thrown in a little pool at first. He played with a water hose that was turned on like some dogs I've seen.

While it's great that everyone is so indignant over the crappy conditions at the VA hospitals, mostly Walter Reed so far, this is nothing new. And it's not like no one could've known. I've been in VA hospitals and I've known people who worked in them (including a brand new one) and there were always complaints of lack of budget for equipment, even to replace equipment well used and in the older ones, not so great conditions. They've been making many of those hospitals operate on a shoestring for a long time. Unfortunately, now the need for them is so exponentially greater than in the fairly recent past. AP: Mold, Leaky Roofs Beset VA Clinics By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - The Veterans Affairs' vast network of 1,400 health clinics and hospitals is beset by maintenance problems such as mold, leaking roofs and even a colony of bats, an internal review says. The investigation, ordered two weeks ago by VA Secretary Jim Nicholson, is the first major review of the facilities conducted since the disclosure of squalid conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. A copy of the report was provided to The Associated Press. Democrats newly in charge of Congress called the report the latest evidence of an outdated system unable to handle a coming influx of veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. Investigators earlier this month found that the VA's system for handling disability claims was strained to its limit. "Who's been minding the store?" said Sen. Patty Murray (news, bio, voting record), D-Wash., a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. "They keep putting Band-Aids on problems, when what the agency needs is major triage." The review was conducted by directors of individual VA facilities around the country and compiled in a 94-page report to Nicholson. It found that 90 percent of the 1,100 problems cited were deemed to be of a more routine nature: worn-out carpet, peeling paint, mice sightings and dead bugs at VA centers. The other 10 percent were considered serious and included mold spreading in patient care areas. Eight cases were so troubling they required immediate attention and follow-up action. Some of the more striking problems were found at a VA clinic in White City, Ore. There, officials reported roof leaks throughout the facility, requiring them to "continuously repair the leaks upon occurrence, clean up any mold presence if any exists, spray or remove ceiling tiles." In addition, large colonies of bats resided outside the facility and sometimes flew into the attics and interior parts of the building. "Eradication has been discussed but the uniqueness of the situation (the number of colonies) makes it challenging to accomplish," according to the report, which said the bats were being tested for diseases. "Also, the bats keep the insect pollution to a minimum which is beneficial." In other findings: _In Oklahoma City, secondhand smoke from an outside smoking shelter sometimes infiltrated the building through the women's restroom. _Deteriorating walls and hallways were common, requiring repair, patch and paint in 30 percent of patient areas in Little Rock, Ark. _Numerous unspecified "environmental conditions" affected the quality of the building in New York's Hudson Valley, with the private landlord repeatedly refusing to fix problems. The VA is taking steps to relocate to another facility. _Roof leaks or mold at facilities such as Hudson Valley; North Chicago, Ill.; Indianapolis; Puget Sound, Wash.; Portland, Ore; and Fayetteville, Ark. Veterans groups said they were concerned about the findings but also appreciated the VA's aggressive efforts to identify problems. "We now expect these problems to be corrected immediately and not shelved due to insufficient funding or because the proper care and treatment of our wounded veterans is no longer in the national spotlight," said Joe Davis, spokesman of Veterans of Foreign Wars. John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents 150,000 VA workers, added: "Clearly the problems facing the VA require increased funding as well as better oversight." In response, Nicholson this week ordered "immediate corrective action" to fix problems, with full accounting provided to the VA. He noted that an overwhelming majority of the issues were normal "wear and tear" items. In many cases where there were roof leaks or mold, officials had begun action to order patches or repairs, the department said. In some instances, they were moving to new facilities. "The level of detail in the reports and the corrective actions enumerated demonstrate your responsiveness to my request," Nicholson wrote in an order Monday to VA medical center directors. In interviews, VA officials said they were somewhat reassured by the report, which they said indicated no red flags rising to the level of problems at outpatient facilities at Walter Reed in Washington, D.C., one of the premier facilities for treating those wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. Walter Reed is a military hospital run by the Defense Department. Critics long have said problems of military care extend to the VA's vast network, which provides supplemental health care and rehabilitation to 5.8 million veterans. But VA officials noted that despite some problems, the VA health system consistently outperforms private-sector hospitals in customer satisfaction. "There was no imminent threat of harm to patients," said Louise Van Diepen, chief of staff to VA's acting undersecretary for health, Michael Kussman. "We have no indication to lead us to believe there is a smoking gun." "Could it happen? Yes. But we're doing everything we can prospectively to monitor the situation," she said. Three high-level Pentagon officials have been forced to step down after the disclosures last month at Walter Reed. The controversy also has led to investigations by congressional committees, a presidential task force and the Pentagon. A separate review of the VA system for handling disability claims is under way to determine how to cut through bureaucratic delays, confusing paperwork and long appeals process as thousands of veterans return home from Iraq and Afghanistan. ___ On the Net: Department of Veterans Affairs: http://www.va.gov/ http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070322/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/veterans_care_10

Knut's story is somewhat similar to something that was on PBS a few months ago about a polar bear in Japan. In the later case, the custodian even brought the bear home when it was a cub to be its sole care. The man even had to teach the cub about water and swimming until instinct took over. I don't understand why there should be any doubt about the zoo raising the cub...and I fault the zoo for allowing the brother to die. Obviously, the mother was in a breeding program, and the zoo is responsible for protecting the cubs. It's not like cubs bred in captivity are going to be released in the wild. Re V.A. hospitals: Images from "Coming Home" spring to mind. I don't doubt that there are serious problems with many VA hospitals, especially with the numbers of Iraqi casualities, but I must say that the VA hospital in my area and the one my brother goes to in San Diego are excellent.

Oops, that obviously should be " U.S. casualties from the Iraqi war".

Sorry for triple post, but I forgot to thank Dorine for the links to the photos and videos of Knut. They are fascinating and wonderful. I've passed the link on to my husband, who loves bears, especially polar bears. So double thanks, Dorine. :-)

I'd like to know what "support our troops" means. Certain conservatives have bastardized this phrase into some sort of litmus test for patriotism, instead of focusing on the needs of the troops and their families. What I think they really mean is "support our president's policies," and meanwhile our poor boys and girls in uniform are suffering . . . from lack of equipment, lack of planning and foresight at the top, and now lack of adequate medical care at home. It makes my blood boil. Bob Woodruff, the ABC news anchor who was injured so badly last year while covering the war, had an excellent show on a couple of weeks ago, detailing how he came back from his injuries. He stressed the outstanding care he received, and the excellent care being provided in the Army field hospitals and in some flagship facilities stateside. BUT . . . he pointed out how once these poor kids get back to their hometowns, very few VA facilities are equipped to deal with the type and severity of these head injuries and loss of limbs, and the soldiers wind up back-sliding. It makes me furious. "Support our troops" indeed.

Thanks,Dorine, for posting Knut's story Awwwe, I saw dear little Knut became a star in his own right on BBC News yesterday ;-) What a sweetie. Whilst I can understand the arguement, that in the wild, nature would take it's natural course........ in Knut's (and others like him) case, he was born in captivity so would have contact with humans anyway. I don't see the Animal Rights Activists reasoning on this one. I am sure there been other cases where animals whom have been hand rared and successfully intergrated back with their fellow species. LOL, Mari, I like the "Teddy" species of Bear too ;-)

(Mari) What I think they really mean is "support our president's policies," and meanwhile our poor boys and girls in uniform are suffering . . . from lack of equipment, lack of planning and foresight at the top, and now lack of adequate medical care at home. It makes my blood boil. Exactly! These poor soldiers are not even receiving the equipment that they need to do the job that they are being asked to do (tour of duty after tour of duty, after.... in many cases) so it is hardly surprising that the medical treatment they receive at home is substandard in many areas. It really is sickening. I saw the Bob Woodruff show, too & agree that it was quite enlightening. I may be off base, but I do wonder, though, if part of the reason that he received such good care & treatment - back here in the States - was because of who he is and the fact that his situation was so high-profile. The average "Joe" definitely doesn't fare as well.

I'm so sorry I missed the Bob Woodruff special. I never saw when it was on exactly, but kept seeing references to it in news stories. Maybe I can find it on the web somewhere. He was at the Lincoln Center Barnes and Noble a couple of weeks ago with his book, but it was a night I had somewhere else to be. I really wanted to go.

Sad news about John Edwards' wife today. Said they went to have tests after she had pain lifting a chest and then she broke a rib when he hugged her. :-(

I'm glad you liked the video podcasts of Knut, Kathryn. I hope your husband likes them, too. I wish I could understand German to know what those people say about him or what the keeper says to Knut. He's just so adorable it makes me want to cry. I read the comments after some article about him online....some British paper's site I think, that the activist's comments were taken out of context and blown out of proportion by the German tabloid, Bild. The poster explained briefly what he said and how it happened, including a link to the article, which I can't read because it's in German.

I don't know if a solution to this will actually come to pass soon, but here's hoping this is the start to getting those soldiers home and safe. Ladies, Start Your Engines By: Jane Hamsher Looks like Pelosi did it: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/03/22/98746.aspx ************************* "Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her allies in the House now appear to have the Democratic votes necessary to pass the measure that requires American combat troops to be out of Iraq by Fall 2008 at the latest. Three House liberal leaders have just announced that they are "letting go" of their nominal underlings in the Progressive and Out of Iraq caucuses, meaning that they will not pressure them to vote "nay" on the grounds that the bill continues funding the war � notwithstanding the withdrawal date. Also, liberal Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) has also announced that he will go along with Pelosi and vote "yea." That might be just enough to put Pelosi over the top with the 218 votes she needs for passage. For weeks, she has struggled to round up votes from progressives on the left and "Blue Dogs" on the right who don't like the idea of a timeline. This is easily the biggest test to date of her leadership." *************************** [Ed. note - Below per Jane Hamsher, not me] While it's hard to justify giving Bush another penny for his illegal and immoral war, I'm surprised at the glee I feel knowing that Nancy Pelosi got the votes to finally beat George Bush on an Iraq vote at a time when the abuse of power makes the most paranoid amongst us look rational. Let's hope this is a first step toward restoring some kind of sanity. [Ed. note - Amen.] http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/03/22/ladies-start-your-engines/#comments

(Maureen) I do wonder, though, if part of the reason that he received such good care & treatment - back here in the States - was because of who he is and the fact that his situation was so high-profile. The average "Joe" definitely doesn't fare as well. That's exactly what I'd thought as well. Same thing for Time Magazine's Michael Weisskopf who had his hand blown off in Iraq. He wrote a book too, Blood Brothers, about his and several other soldiers' recoveries from injuries. I don't doubt he had some more special treatment as well vs. the average "Joe".

(Maureen) I do wonder, though, if part of the reason that he received such good care & treatment - back here in the States - was because of who he is and the fact that his situation was so high-profile. Absolutely, and Bob Woodruff said as much in the report. He was very upfront about that, I thought.

(Me) While it's great that everyone is so indignant over the crappy conditions at the VA hospitals, mostly Walter Reed so far, this is nothing new. And it's not like no one could've known. I just realized this maybe sounds like I think the general public would know. I was actually referring to all these people in the govt and the military that seem caught so unawares.

(Dorine)Sad news about John Edwards' wife today. My heart goes out to them. What a gutsy, forthright and upbeat person she is. My goodness, what they have gone through as a family--their son's death, her first cancer diagnosis and now this. Whatever comes their way, they soldier on, with intelligence, courage, and honesty.

I must be on a kick about amusing animals this week. I'm not searching for them, but they find me. ;-) Cold lambs get raincoats Last Updated: Friday March 23 2007 09:24 GMT Lambs wearing raincoats Little lambs are jumping for joy after their farmer came up with a new idea for keeping them warm. Farmer John Garnett wanted to move his lambs from their crowded indoor pens to the fields in the Yorkshire Dales. But he was worried that some would die as some nights the temperature has dropped below freezing. So he's fitted the lambs with stylish blue plastic raincoats to protect them from the bad weather as they run around the fields near Skipton. Mr Garnett said: "Well, the lambs seem to like them and the sheep don't seem to be bothered. "The farm buildings are filling up with sheep and lambs so we needed to get some out into the fields." As well as protecting the lambs from the weather, the jackets have an extra advantage - foxes seem to be confused by the coats and stay away. http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_6480000/newsid_6483200/6483293.stm

near Skipton. Near Skipton?! This might need to be posted on the CF topic, as that's where "Father" is set. LOL! (and at the lambs in their raincoats - so cute!!)

Knut makes his debut at the Berlin Zoo.... Knut faces a battery of photographers Photograph: Wolfgang Kumm/EPA Keeper Thomas Doerflein presents the cub at its first public appearance in Berlin zoo Photograph: Franka Bruns/AP He's so handsome.. Knut takes his first walk under the gaze of the public Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty Images The bear licks his handler's face Photograph: Axel Schmidt/AFP The polar bear seems unfazed by the crowds Photograph: Wolfgang Kumm/EPA More pictures here... http://www.guardian.co.uk/gallery/2007/mar/23/internationalnews?picture=329755943 There's an audio interview (about 2-3 mins) with Kate Connelly (a reporter it seems) about Knut as he's coming out... http://download.guardian.co.uk/sys-audio/Guardian/news/2007/03/23/0323Connollyaudio.mp3 Sounds fun. I'd like to find some video of his coming out. I didn't realize Knut's mom is a retired circus bear. :-(

Here's a picture gallery and video at Spiegel Online. Lots of great pics here... http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/0,5538,20321,00.html Video here. If you click on the little magnifying glass, a bigger window opens. The third video is the best. Just a minute or 2. The others are 20 sec blurbs at the 30 sec mark, except the last one is a short blurb at the beginning. http://www.spiegel.de/multimediauebersicht/ There's a short Anderson Cooper video at CNN.com talking about the activist's comments. Left hand side under his pic. http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/03/23/polar.bear.ap/

Upthread Mari mentioned about the apparently confusing or even twisted definitions of "patriotism" and "supporting the troops" in today's climate. Here's a You Tube clip of Bill Maher during his usual "rant" segment which is at the end of the show from last night's show that I only caught the last sentence of. He wasn't ranting though and it wasn't as funny as he usually makes them. He seemed quite serious. One of the blogs I regularly read pointed this out. It wasn't about the army soldiers, but a "troop" of a different kind who was trying to keep us safe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sS45gTnLiI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efiredoglake%2Ecom%2F

Yep, it's true....another animal story! I'm sure at least some people here have heard of Koko the gorilla who speaks with sign language...and apparently has a rather large vocabulary of understood spoken words, which I didn't know. This beautiful story is from the artist, Richard Stone, about his meetings with Koko to have her sit for him. I found it so fascinating. It's a long article so I'll post just the link. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=444337&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true#StartComments

Coward. Questions on firings shorten Gonzales news conference By Jeff Coen Tribune staff reporter Published March 27, 2007, 2:43 PM CDT Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales today cut short a press conference about Internet safety, leaving the room at the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse in Chicago when reporters questioned him about the firings of U.S. attorneys. The questioning was to have lasted about 15 minutes, but it ended after less than three. Gonzales and Fitzgerald (Tribune photo by Kuni Takahashi) Gonzales defended his handling of the matter before quickly leaving the podium. He was asked about the revelation that he was present for a meeting on the firings, after he had initially said he had had no part in them. "I've already discussed my involvement in the meeting," Gonzales said. "And my comments at the March 13 press conference. These are all things I have disclosed or discussed yesterday. "It's all there in the record," he said. "But let me just say this, that certainly even before the disclosure of the memo, what was public out there was the fact that there was this review process." Gonzales said he made the decision on the firings, and that he looks forward to working with Congress on the matter, and that he had directed the release of documents on the matter. He said he also directed Justice Department employees to testify about the situation. He was then asked about the decision by a top aide to invoke her 5th Amendment protection. "I'm not going to comment on the decision by an employee of the department to exercise her constitutional rights," he said. After saying he had made the decision on the firings in the fall, he left without taking further questions. That included any question about U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald receiving a mediocre rating in an internal review by the Justice Department. Gonzales was in Chicago as part of his efforts to tout the "Project Safe Childhood" campaign. At a discussion earlier in the day, Gonzales said children in particular need to know how to protect themselves on the Internet. And he said parents need to better understand how the Internet works and what sites their children are visiting. Copyright � 2007, Chicago Tribune http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070327gonzales,1,2575444.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

This is for anyone whose cat(s) may be eating this particular Science Diet brand prescription food. Mine eat the Prescription Feline c/d rather than the m/d thank God...so far. FDA says pet food poison may be in dry food, too - and didn't rule out human food by ChristieKeith Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 08:53:54 AM PDT I'm a contributing editor for Universal Press Syndicate's Pet Connection, a syndicated pet column appearing in around 70 newspapers nationwide. We've been covering the pet food recall story on our blog as well as our column. I just got out of an FDA press conference, where a reporter asked the agency's Dr. Stephen Sundlof if people could be feeding unsafe food to their pets right now, because the FDA won�t reveal the name of another company - one that makes dry or "kibbled" food as well as "wet" pet food - that received wheat gluten from the same source Menu did. * ChristieKeith's diary :: :: * The response? "It is possible, but I think we�ve been following every lead that we can. My sense is that we have gotten most of it under control." As soon as we have any information, he assured us this morning, we�ll notify the public. Except for the name of the company, it seems. How about the numbers? asked another attendee. You�re still saying only 15 confirmed deaths, but some reports are in the thousands. How do you explain the discrepancy? Dr. Sundlof said FDA can�t confirm any cases beyond those first few in Menu�s test labs, even though they have received over 8800 additional reports, because "we have not had the luxury of confirming these reports." They�ll work on that, he said, after they "make sure all the product is off the shelves." He pointed out that in human medicine, the job of defining what constitutes a confirmed case would fall to the Centers for Disease Control, not the FDA... and there is no CDC for animals. Karen Roebuck of the Pittsburg Tribune-Review, who broke the story earlier this morning that melamine, not aminopterin (a rat poison), had been found in the tested foods, asked if any of the wheat gluten had found its way into the human food supply. The response: "At this point we are not aware that any of that went into human food." They do know the company that supplied the contaminated wheat gluten, and are tracking its shipments, but they aren�t disclosing the name of the company. They are, however, doing "100 percent review and sampling of all wheat gluten from China." We'll update at PetConnection.com with more reports from the FDA conference throughout the day. UPDATE LATE ON FRIDAY, MARCH 30: From Hills Pet Nutrition, Inc.: "In accordance with its over-riding commitment to pet health and well-being, Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc. is voluntarily recalling Prescription Diet m/d Feline dry food from the market. Hill's is taking this precautionary action because during a two-month period in early 2007, wheat gluten for this product was provided by a company that also supplied wheat gluten to Menu Foods. U.S. Food and Drug Administration tests of wheat gluten samples from this period show the presence of a small amount of melamine. Prescription Diet m/d Feline Dry represents less than one half of one percent of all Hill's products." Tags: pets, FDA, recall, Recommended, Menu Foods (all tags) http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/30/114249/411

No one need question why I'm still single after reading this. ;-DD I'd rather be. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/garden/29breakers.html?em&ex=1175400000&en=f54e859fce0273ea&ei=5087%0A

If only they'd show backbone in other areas...Truly amazing though. From the NYT: April 2, 2007 Justices Rule Against Bush Administration on Emissions By DAVID STOUT WASHINGTON, April 2 � The Supreme Court ruled today, in what amounts to a rebuke of the Bush administration, that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide from automobile emissions, and that it has shirked its duty in not doing so. In a 5-to-4 decision, the court found that the Clean Air Act expressly authorizes the E.P.A. to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, contrary to the E.P.A.�s contention, and that if the agency still insists that it does not want to regulate those emissions, it must give better reasons than the �laundry list� of invalid considerations it has offered so far. Today�s decision is surely not the last word in the continuing debate over the effects of global warming and what can, or should, be done about it. But it was still highly significant in at least two respects. First, the majority brushed aside the Bush administration�s assertion that the Clean Air Act does not treat carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases as �pollutants,� and thus does not give the E.P.A. the authority to regulate them. Secondly, the five justices declared that contrary to the administration, Massachusetts and the 11 other states and various other plaintiffs that sued the E.P.A. do indeed have legal standing to pursue their suit. In order to establish standing, a federal court plaintiff must show that there is an injury that can be traced to the defendant�s behavior, and that the injury will be relieved by the action the lawsuit seeks. �E.P.A.�s steadfast refusal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions presents a risk of harm to Massachusetts that is both �actual� and �imminent,� � Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority, citing two standards linked to standing. �E.P.A. identifies nothing suggesting that Congress meant to curtail E.P.A.�s power to treat greenhouse gases as air pollutants,� Justice Stevens wrote. Instead, the agency resorted to �impermissible considerations� in rejecting the plaintiffs� request to regulate those admissions, the justice wrote. �Its action was therefore �arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise not in accordance with law,� � Justice Stevens went on. Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer joined his decision. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. dissented, along with Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. The chief justice said his dissent �involves no judgment on whether global warming exists, what causes it, or the extent of the problem.� Rather, he wrote, the kind of dispute in this case is better resolved by Congress and the executive branch rather than the courts. Contrary to what the majority held, the plaintiffs failed to show a cause-and-effect relationship between global warming and actual injury, the chief justice wrote. For instance, he dismissed as �pure conjecture� a plaintiffs� assertion that Massachusetts is gradually losing its coastal territory to higher sea levels generated by global warming. The majority did not declare that the E.P.A. must find that greenhouse gases are a danger because they contribute to global warming. But the justices said the agency can escape its regulatory duties �only if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change, or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do.� The tone of the majority opinion seemed to suggest that the E.P.A. would face a high barrier in arguing that greenhouse gases are not harmful. Justice Stevens alluded extensively to scientific findings in recent years attesting to the dangers of the gases, and he noted that the plaintiffs� affidavits detailing those dangers were not contested. The majority dismissed the E.P.A.�s argument that even if it did have authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, it could exercise its judgment in declining to do so. �Put another way, the use of the word �judgment� is not a roving license to ignore the statutory text,� the decision stated. Nor was the majority persuaded by the defendants� arguments that even if carbon dioxide emissions do contribute to global warming, they are but a small part of the worldwide problem. �Agencies, like legislatures, do not generally resolve massive problems in one fell swoop, but instead whittle away over time, refining their approach as circumstances change and they develop a more nuanced understanding of how best to proceed,� the majority wrote. In a friend-of-the-court brief of behalf of 18 scientists who specialize in climate issues, Robert B. McKinstry Jr. of Philadelphia and several other lawyers asserted that the E.P.A. had tried to create the impression that there is more uncertainty about global warming than really exists among scientists. �It is virtually certain that what has been observed so far is only the beginning,� the brief said. A White House spokeswoman said she could not comment at length on today�s ruling. �We haven�t had a chance to review the opinion in full,� said Dana Perino. �People at E.P.A. and across the government are going to have to do that. I can�t speak to the broader implications of the bill.� The court rejected the E.P.A. argument that it was constrained from regulating carbon dioxide emissions because doing so would require it to tighten mileage standards, a consideration that belongs to the Department of Transportation. �That D.O.T. sets mileage standards in no way licenses E.P.A. to shirk its environmental responsibilities,� the ruling said. Final word or not, today�s decision pleased environmentalist groups. �The Supreme Court has reaffirmed what we have been saying all along: the Clean Air Act gives E.P.A. authority to fight global warming,� said Howard Fox, a lawyer for Earthjustice, who argued the case before a federal appeals court. Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said; �It�s an historic moment when the Supreme Court has to step in to protect the environment from the Bush administration.� Besides Massachusetts, the plaintiff-states were California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Other plaintiffs included the District of Columbia, Baltimore, New York City and a dozen environmental groups. Several automobile trade groups sided with the E.P.A., as did the states of Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas and Utah.

In actuality, we now have two branches of government against the third. ;-) I think the justices now need to take on the FDA.

Bush administration�s assertion that the Clean Air Act does not treat carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases as �pollutants,� You know, I mean....really. How freakin' idiotic. Who believes this shit and the people who spout this crap? Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. dissented, along with Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr Can we call them the Axis of Evil 2? ;-) �It�s an historic moment when the Supreme Court has to step in to protect the environment from the Bush administration.� And quite sad, too, that it's necessary. You know, I don't get it...I mean who doesn't want clean air?

Bugger!!

And to continue the slap down by the courts of poor environmental policy by the Bush administration..... Federal Court Blocks Attempt to Eliminate Wildlife Standards for National Forests Bush administration rule changes rejected March 30, 2007 San Francisco, CA -- A federal judge today rejected the Bush administration's effort to remove key environmental protections from the rules governing the 191-million-acre National Forest System. The ruling, by U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton, invalidates regulations issued by the Bush administration in 2005 that sought to overhaul the land-management planning process for National Forests by eliminating mandatory protections for wildlife and clean water and removing public participation in the process. Among the measures discarded by the Bush administration was a key regulatory guarantee of wildlife viability in the National Forests that had been in place since the Reagan administration. "The national forest planning rules are like the Constitution for our National Forests, and the Bush administration tried to throw out the Bill of Rights," said Trent Orr of Earthjustice who argued the case before Judge Hamilton. "The Bush rule changes made any wildlife provisions in forest management plans purely aspirational, but the nation's wildlife deserve more than a 'hope and a prayer' planning system." Today's ruling found that Bush administration officials had bypassed legally required environmental reviews and endangered species protections in creating a new management system for the National Forests that eliminated enforceable environmental protections from the forest planning process. Judge Hamilton also ruled that the administration had sprung its final forest planning rules on the public without sufficient notice of the "paradigm shift" that the rules accomplished. The judge's ruling prohibits the Bush administration from "implementation and utilization" of the new forest planning rules. The National Forest Management Act requires the Forest Service to protect wildlife on the national forests and allow citizens to participate in management decisions. The Bush rules invalidated the 1982 standards for national forest management that protected species and required public comment on national forest timber plans. Earthjustice, representing Defenders of Wildlife, The Wilderness Society, the Sierra Club and Vermont Natural Resources Council, filed a legal challenge to the Bush administration rule changes in October 2004. Pete Frost from the Western Environmental Law Center represented Citizens for Better Forestry in a similar case that was also decided in today's ruling. The State of California also filed a lawsuit against the rule changes.

The link for above... http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-forest31mar31,1,2361940.story?coll=la-news-a_section Another take on it... Judge tosses out Bush's national forest rules Regulations were not subjected to environmental reviews or public comment, she rules. By Janet Wilson, Times Staff Writer March 31, 2007 A federal judge on Friday overturned Bush administration regulations for national forests that critics said expedited logging and energy exploration, weakened wildlife protection, and shut the public out of forest planning. U.S. Northern District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton, based in San Francisco, found that because U.S. Forest Service officials had not conducted required environmental impact reviews of their new policies, nor allowed public comment on "clearly controversial" changes, they should be invalidated. If the Forest Service wants to implement the regulations, it must first conduct such reviews, the judge ruled. She declined to say which past regulations should govern forest planning until then. Forestry officials in 2005 invalidated 1982 standards adopted under President Reagan that protected more than 400 wildlife species and required comprehensive environmental review and public comment on forest management plans. In 2001, Bush appointees refused to implement revised forest management rules drawn up under President Clinton. Forest Service spokesman Joseph Walsh on Friday declined to answer questions, including whether the decision would be appealed. Reading a statement, he said, "The federal government is carefully reviewing today's decision." He noted that "presented with similar circumstances," two other federal judges in the last month had agreed with Forest Service officials on how endangered species and environmental planning should be handled. But Tim Preso of Earthjustice, one of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit decided Friday, said the other two decisions involved different rules in specific forests, not policies governing the nation's entire 192-million-acre forest system. Environmentalists said they were thrilled by the ruling, although they expressed some concern that forest policy was being left in limbo. "I think it's a tremendous decision that vindicates the public's right to participate in national forest management," Preso said. When they made the changes in 2005, Forest Service officials said they were streamlining wasteful and time-consuming paperwork and gaining the ability to respond quickly to evolving forest conditions and scientific research. But Sierra Club forest policy specialist Sean Cosgrove said grizzly bears, salmon, spotted owls and other imperiled wildlife populations would have lost key protections if the new rules had been upheld. The Sierra Club and numerous other environmental groups filed lawsuits to undo the rules, and the judge decided them jointly. "The Bush administration's rules would have undone 20 years of protections for wildlife and clean water," Cosgrove said. "This ruling is a huge victory for all Americans who hunt, fish and enjoy our national forests." janet.wilson@latimes.com http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-forest31mar31,1,2361940.story?coll=la-news-a_section

(Dorine) You know, I don't get it...I mean who doesn't want clean air? I'm sure you meant that as a rhetorical qustion. ;-)

Of course. ;-) And wow, how's this for supporting our troops... The Army is ordering injured troops to go to Iraq At Fort Benning, soldiers who were classified as medically unfit to fight are now being sent to war. Is this an isolated incident or a trend? By Mark Benjamin Pages 1 2 (Photo) George W. Bush greets troops and their families on the tarmac before his departure from Fort Benning, Ga., on Jan. 11, 2007. March 11, 2007 | COLUMBUS, Ga. -- "This is not right," said Master Sgt. Ronald Jenkins, who has been ordered to Iraq even though he has a spine problem that doctors say would be damaged further by heavy Army protective gear. "This whole thing is about taking care of soldiers," he said angrily. "If you are fit to fight you are fit to fight. If you are not fit to fight, then you are not fit to fight." As the military scrambles to pour more soldiers into Iraq, a unit of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Ga., is deploying troops with serious injuries and other medical problems, including GIs who doctors have said are medically unfit for battle. Some are too injured to wear their body armor, according to medical records. On Feb. 15, Master Sgt. Jenkins and 74 other soldiers with medical conditions from the 3rd Division's 3rd Brigade were summoned to a meeting with the division surgeon and brigade surgeon. These are the men responsible for handling each soldier's "physical profile," an Army document that lists for commanders an injured soldier's physical limitations because of medical problems -- from being unable to fire a weapon to the inability to move and dive in three-to-five-second increments to avoid enemy fire. Jenkins and other soldiers claim that the division and brigade surgeons summarily downgraded soldiers' profiles, without even a medical exam, in order to deploy them to Iraq. It is a claim division officials deny. The 3,900-strong 3rd Brigade is now leaving for Iraq for a third time in a steady stream. In fact, some of the troops with medical conditions interviewed by Salon last week are already gone. Others are slated to fly out within a week, but are fighting against their chain of command, holding out hope that because of their ills they will ultimately not be forced to go. Jenkins, who is still in Georgia, thinks doctors are helping to send hurt soldiers like him to Iraq to make units going there appear to be at full strength. "This is about the numbers," he said flatly. That is what worries Steve Robinson, director of veterans affairs at Veterans for America, who has long been concerned that the military was pressing injured troops into Iraq. "Did they send anybody down range that cannot wear a helmet, that cannot wear body armor?" Robinson asked rhetorically. "Well that is wrong. It is a war zone." Robinson thinks that the possibility that physical profiles may have been altered improperly has the makings of a scandal. "My concerns are that this needs serious investigation. You cannot just look at somebody and tell that they were fit," he said. "It smacks of an overstretched military that is in crisis mode to get people onto the battlefield." Eight soldiers who were at the Feb. 15 meeting say they were summoned to the troop medical clinic at 6:30 in the morning and lined up to meet with division surgeon Lt. Col. George Appenzeller, who had arrived from Fort Stewart, Ga., and Capt. Aaron K. Starbuck, brigade surgeon at Fort Benning. The soldiers described having a cursory discussion of their profiles, with no physical exam or extensive review of medical files. They say Appenzeller and Starbuck seemed focused on downplaying their physical problems. "This guy was changing people's profiles left and right," said a captain who injured his back during his last tour in Iraq and was ordered to Iraq after the Feb. 15 review. Appenzeller said the review of 75 soldiers with profiles was an effort to make sure they were as accurate as possible prior to deployment. "As the division surgeon and the senior medical officer in the division, I wanted to ensure that all the patients with profiles were fully evaluated with clear limitations that commanders could use to make the decision whether they could deploy, and if they did deploy, what their limitations would be while there," he said in a telephone interview from Fort Stewart. He said he changed less than one-third of those profiles -- even making some more restrictive -- in order to "bring them into accordance with regulations." In direct contradiction to the account given by the soldiers, Appenzeller said physical examinations were conducted and that he had a robust medical team there working with him, which is how they managed to complete 75 reviews in one day. Appenzeller denied that the plan was to find more warm bodies for the surge into Baghdad, as did Col. Wayne W. Grigsby Jr., the brigade commander. Grigsby said he is under "no pressure" to find soldiers, regardless of health, to make his unit look fit. The health and welfare of his soldiers are a top priority, said Grigsby, because [the soldiers] are "our most important resource, perhaps the most important resource we have in this country." Grigsby said he does not know how many injured soldiers are in his ranks. But he insisted that it is not unusual to deploy troops with physical limitations so long as he can place them in safe jobs when they get there. "They can be productive and safe in Iraq," Grigsby said. The injured soldiers interviewed by Salon, however, expressed considerable worry about going to Iraq with physical deficits because it could endanger them or their fellow soldiers. Some were injured on previous combat tours. Some of their ills are painful conditions from training accidents or, among relatively older troops, degenerative problems like back injuries or blown-out knees. Some of the soldiers have been in the Army for decades. And while Grigsby, the brigade commander, says he is under no pressure to find troops, it is hard to imagine there is not some desperation behind the decision to deploy some of the sick soldiers. Master Sgt. Jenkins, 42, has a degenerative spine problem and a long scar down the back of his neck where three of his vertebrae were fused during surgery. He takes a cornucopia of potent pain pills. His medical records say he is "at significantly increased risk of re-injury during deployment where he will be wearing Kevlar, body armor and traveling through rough terrain." Late last year, those medical records show, a doctor recommended that Jenkins be referred to an Army board that handles retirements when injuries are permanent and severe. A copy of Jenkins' profile written after that Feb. 15 meeting and signed by Capt. Starbuck, the brigade surgeon, shows a healthier soldier than the profile of Jenkins written by another doctor just late last year, though Jenkins says his condition is unchanged. Other soldiers' documents show the same pattern. One female soldier with psychiatric issues and a spine problem has been in the Army for nearly 20 years. "My [health] is deteriorating," she said over dinner at a restaurant near Fort Benning. "My spine is separating. I can't carry gear." Her medical records include the note "unable to deploy overseas." Her status was also reviewed on Feb. 15. And she has been ordered to Iraq this week. The captain interviewed by Salon also requested anonymity because he fears retribution. He suffered a back injury during a previous deployment to Iraq as an infantry platoon leader. A Humvee accident "corkscrewed my spine," he explained. Like the female soldier, he is unable to wear his protective gear, and like her he too was ordered to Iraq after his meeting with the division surgeon and brigade surgeon on Feb. 15. He is still at Fort Benning and is fighting the decision to send him to Baghdad. "It is a numbers issue with this whole troop surge," he claimed. "They are just trying to get those numbers." Another soldier contacted Salon by telephone last week expressed considerable anxiety, in a frightened tone, about deploying to Iraq in her current condition. (She also wanted to remain anonymous, fearing retribution.) An incident during training several years ago injured her back, forcing doctors to remove part of her fractured coccyx. She suffers from degenerative disk disease and has two ruptured disks and a bulging disk in her back. While she said she loves the Army and would like to deploy after back surgery, her current injuries would limit her ability to wear her full protective gear. She deployed to Iraq last week, the day after calling Salon. Her husband, who has served three combat tours in the infantry in Afghanistan and Iraq, said he is worried sick because his wife's protective vest alone exceeds the maximum amount she is allowed to lift. "I have been over there three times. I know what it is like," he told me during lunch at a restaurant here. He predicted that by deploying people like his wife, the brigade leaders are "going to get somebody killed over there." He said there is "no way" Grigsby is going to keep all of the injured soldiers in safe jobs. "All of these people that deploy with these profiles, they are scared," he said. He railed at the command: "They are saying they don't care about your health. This is pathetic. It is bad." His wife's physical profile was among those reevaluated on Feb. 15. A copy of her profile from late last year showed her health problems were so severe they "prevent deployment" and recommended she be medically retired from the Army. Her profile at that time showed she was unable to wear a protective mask and chemical defense equipment, and had limitations on doing pushups, walking, biking and swimming. It said she can only carry 15 pounds. Though she says that her condition has not changed since then, almost all of those findings were reversed in a copy of her physical profile dated Feb. 15. The new profile says nothing about a medical retirement, but suggests that she limit wearing a helmet to "one hour at a time." Spc. Lincoln Smith, meanwhile, developed sleep apnea after he returned from his first deployment to Iraq. The condition is so severe that he now suffers from narcolepsy because of a lack of sleep. He almost nodded off mid-conversation while talking to Salon as he sat in a T-shirt on a sofa in his girlfriend's apartment near Fort Benning. Smith is trained by the Army to be a truck driver. But since he is in constant danger of falling asleep, military doctors have listed "No driving of military vehicles" on his physical profile. Smith was supposed to fly to Iraq March 9. But he told me on March 8 that he won't go. Nobody has retrained Smith to do anything else besides drive trucks. Plus, because of his condition he was unable to train properly with the unit when the brigade rehearsed for Iraq in January, so he does not feel ready. Smith needs to sleep with a CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) machine pumping air into his mouth and nose. "Otherwise," he says, "I could die." But based on his last tour, he is not convinced he will be able to be in places with constant electricity or will be able to fix or replace his CPAP machine should it fail. He told me last week he would refuse to deploy to Iraq, unsure of what he will be asked to do there and afraid that he will not be taken care of. Since he won't be a truck driver, "I would be going basically as a number," says Smith, who is 32. "They don't have enough people," he says. But he is not going to be one of those numbers until they train him to do something else. "I'm going to go to the airport, and I'm going to tell them I'm not going to go. They are going to give me a weapon. I am going to say, 'It is not a good idea for you to give me a weapon right now.'" The Pentagon was notified of the reclassification of the Fort Benning soldiers as soon as it happened, according to Master Sgt. Jenkins. He showed Salon an e-mail describing the situation that he says he sent to Army Surgeon General Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley. Jenkins agreed to speak to Salon because he hopes public attention will help other soldiers, particularly younger ones in a similar predicament. "I can't sit back and let this happen to me or other soldiers in my position." But he expects reprisals from the Army. Other soldiers slated to leave for Iraq with injuries said they wonder whether the same thing is happening in other units in the Army. "You have to ask where else this might be happening and who is dictating it," one female soldier told me. "How high does it go?" http://www.salon.com/news/2007/03/11/fort_benning/?source=whitelist

I was thisclose to crying on the train home while reading this Newsweek interview with Elizabeth Edwards in the magazine today. In the magazine it states Jonathan Alter is in remission from cancer (mantle cell lymphoma) diagnosed 4 years ago. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17889146/site/newsweek/

Oh yeah, this made me about cry the other day, too. This little boy's face and sounds were heartbreaking. I don't watch network news, but maybe some of you caught it. It was on several channels it seems. I picked the MSNBC one over the NBC one because NBC used the most manipulative music in the background to tweak emotions. Really annoying. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVcH4oqrgsk&mode=related&search= I have an ex who was in the Army Reserves when I lived in NC 20 years ago. He would go to Ft. Benning 2 wks every summer to be a drill sgt, along with his weekend stint every month. I hope to God he got out of that before this war started and he didn't feel a duty to go back when the war started. Since they have been recruiting to upwards of 42 I think, he would still be just old enough to go on that criteria, if I recall his age correctly.

I think some people in higher authority have *way* too much time on their hands. School Renames Easter Bunny 'Peter Rabbit' ABC News (April 7) -- A Rhode Island public school has decided the Easter bunny is too Christian and renamed him Peter Rabbit, and a state legislator is so hopping mad he has introduced an "Easter Bunny Act" to save the bunny's good name. 'Political Correctness Gone Wild' "Like many Rhode Islanders I'm quite frustrated � by people trying to change traditions that we've held in this country for 150 years, like the Easter bunny," Rhode Island State Rep. Richard Singleton told "Good Morning America Weekend Edition." The Easter bunny was scheduled to make an appearance at a craft fair on Saturday at Tiverton Middle School in Tiverton, R.I. But the district's schools Superintendent William Rearick told event organizers to change the bunny's name to Peter Rabbit in "an attempt to be conscious of other people's backgrounds and traditions." Singleton struck back this week by proposing a bill, nicknamed the "Easter Bunny Act," to stop all local municipalities from changing the name of popular religious and secular symbols like the Easter bunny. "The underlying theme here is serious," he said. "I don't think a superintendent of schools should have the authority to change something we've held so deeply for 150 years." 'Not a Religious Symbol' Not everyone in Rhode Island, however, believes the Easter bunny is worth fighting for. "As a Christian symbol, I would say [the Easter bunny] is not one of those that I would go to the barricades to defend," Rev. Bernard Healy, the Catholic Diocese of Providence, R.I., said in a statement. Singleton, however, said the perceived religious symbolism versus its actual religious significance is why it shouldn't be banned. "The Easter bunny is not a religious symbol," he said. "Why it's being banned doesn't make sense." The American Civil Liberties Union has also spoken out the issue. "Public schools should not be promoting Easter celebrations, and to the extent that the school districts try to avoid that problem they are to be commended," Steve Brown, the executive director of the ACLU Rhode Island affiliate, said in a statement. Singleton, however, dismissed the ACLU's comments. "I don't pay a lot of attention to what the ACLU says quite frankly," he said. This is "political correctness gone wild. 'It's crazy." Singleton said the bill is meant to protect all traditional and religious symbols for example, if someone wanted to change "the name of the menorah to the candelabra." The politician isn't positive that Peter Rabbit would have been the right replacement anyway. "By the way, Peter Rabbit stole cabbages and that's not a good role model for our kids," he joked. http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/school-renames-easter-bunny-peter-rabbit/20070407201309990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001

Singleton said the bill is meant to protect all traditional and religious symbols for example, if someone wanted to change "the name of the menorah to the candelabra." Except that a menorah IS a religious symbol. He can't have it both ways. I say rename the Easter Bunny Mortie. ;-)

This article sounds like it came from The Onion.

Another way to tell a war story Frustrated by the public's disconnect, CBS' Allen Pizzey turns to blogging about Iraq. By Matea Gold, Times Staff Writer April 7, 2007 NEW YORK � Allen Pizzey, a 60-year-old veteran war correspondent who considers himself a bit of a Luddite, never imagined that he would embrace blogging. But the CBS newsman found himself turning to the Web during a recent stint in Baghdad after he noticed the numerous pieces on the network evening newscasts devoted to the pet food recall in the U.S. "There seems to be an inordinate amount of time spent on what started out as 12 dead pets," said Pizzey, who can catch the American newscasts every morning on the Baghdad bureau's grimy television monitors, beamed in via satellite like day-old dispatches from another world. Don't get him wrong: Pizzey is an animal lover. (He and his family have four cats, two dogs and a terrapin at their home in Rome.) But he was disheartened by the disconnect between the horrors of the war and the preoccupations of American viewers. Rather than stew quietly, he vented his concerns in an online reporter's notebook, posted March 22 on CBSNews.com. "What is depressingly clear is that what seems important here is far removed from what viewers in the U.S. seem to be concerned about," he wrote, adding: "How 12 dead animals in a country the size of the U.S. rates with the sliding scale of mayhem here is what I'm finding hard to gauge. When only 12 human bodies are found on any given morning in Baghdad with marks of the kind of torture the ASPCA would quite rightly have a pet owner in court for, it is judged as 'progress' for the security plan." After covering conflicts around the globe for three decades, Pizzey has joined the ranks of television correspondents who have turned to the Internet to convey the messy realities of war that can't be encapsulated in two-minute reports. "It's nice to be able to have that outlet," he said in an interview this week from Rome, back home after a five-week rotation in Iraq. "One of the things that blogs provide is an opportunity for people who are interested in the news to understand a little bit about what it feels like. I don't think I should personalize everything I do. But if you're sitting in the middle of the kind of horror that is Iraq today, you sort of wonder, 'How do I make these people understand?' " NBC's Richard Engel, ABC's Terry McCarthy and other network war correspondents also supplement their on-air pieces with extensive online reports. But Pizzey's dispatches are often notable for their frank, personal assessments. They share a common theme: a deep-set frustration that the real story of the war is not getting through. Mike Sims, director of news and operations for CBSNews.com, said he believes stories on the website can strike a more opinionated tone than those that air on television, as long as they're clearly labeled. "Allen has been there so many times; he's earned the right to give his observations," Sims said. "We think if we clearly let people know what they're getting, that we can do more on the Web than just report the Joe Friday facts." Last week, in an essay labeled "Opinion," Pizzey took Republican Sen. John McCain to task for asserting that some neighborhoods in Baghdad were safe enough to stroll through. "For Senator McCain to claim there are places here where all is well is to woefully minimize the dangers faced by the troops he otherwise so admirably supports," he wrote. " � Any time Senator McCain wants to walk the streets of Baghdad, unarmed and without a serious security detail, we'd be glad to lend him a camera so he can record his experience." Pizzey said he felt compelled to write the piece because McCain "was talking utter rubbish." (In a piece airing Sunday on "60 Minutes," McCain said he misspoke.) He was also motivated by a belief that the media were not skeptical enough in the run-up to the war � a mistake he does not want to repeat. "We the media gave the Bush administration a free ride for this war," he said. "We did not question sufficiently the statements made by politicians. I'm as guilty as anybody else. We climbed on board, and that's not what we should do." A former newspaper reporter in Africa who joined CBS in 1980, Pizzey is part of the network's core group of correspondents who rotate through Iraq regularly. He said many of his colleagues in the U.S. reporting corps there share a frustration that the war does not get more air time. "I think that more coverage could and should be given to it," he said. "But I'm not the guy who has to answer to the executives about the ratings. "The people who run the newscast perhaps think people aren't interested," Pizzey added. "Our job isn't to tell people the news they want to hear, but the news that is. We can't make people care, but we can tell them what's out there." matea.gold@latimes.com http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/business/la-et-pizzey7apr07,1,3219749.story?coll=la-headlines-business-enter&ctrack=1&cset=true

I guess trains don't take pets either in the cabin? I don't know. Well, it's an adventure for all. :-) NYC couple hail cab for 2,400-mile ride Sun Apr 8, 12:14 PM ET NEW YORK - Betty and Bob Matas have retired and are moving to Arizona, but like many New Yorkers they don't drive, and they don't want their cats to travel all that way in an airliner cargo hold. ADVERTISEMENT Their solution: "Hey, cabbie." They met taxi driver Douglas Guldeniz when they hailed his cab after a shopping trip several weeks ago. They got to talking about their upcoming move, and "we said 'Do you want to come?'" said Bob Matas, 72, a former audio and video engineer for advertising agencies. "And he said 'Sure.'" It was initially a gag, Matas said, but as they talked over the ensuing weeks it became reality. They plan to leave Tuesday on the 2,400-mile trip to Sedona, Ariz., with Guldeniz driving his yellow SUV cab 10 hours a day for a flat fee of $3,000, plus gas, meals and lodging. They're getting a break. The standard, metered fare would be about $5,000 � each way, according to David Pollack, executive director of the Committee for Taxi Safety, a drivers' group. But city Taxi and Limousine Commission rules direct drivers and passengers to negotiate a flat fare for trips outside the city and a few suburban areas. It's also a good deal for Guldeniz. "This job is not easy, and I want to do something different," said Guldeniz, 45, who has been driving a taxi for two years. "I want to have some good memories." The Matases will ride in relaxed comfort in Guldeniz's sport utility vehicle while their cats ride in the back in their travel cases. A mover will haul their belongings. "It's a little unusual, but it will be fun," said Betty Matas, 71, a retired executive administrative assistant. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070408/ap_on_fe_st/odd_taxi_move;_ylt=Aqv7_oR_.ccppYiEk03Jun.s0NUE

I post this simply because it involves Michael Smerconish, who has come up in conversation regarding the Mumia doc and history. http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/10/smerconish-on-imus-i-dont-interpret-it-as-a-racist-statement-per-se/

Oh, poor thing!! Berlin Zoo's polar bear Knut is sick 34 minutes ago BERLIN - The Berlin Zoo's popular polar bear cub, Knut, is not feeling well and had his daily public appearance in front of thousands of visitors cut short Monday after only 30 minutes. The zoo's veterinarian, Andre Schuele, put the 4 1/2-month old cub on antibiotics and said the Knut is "off stage to get some rest while we watch him closely." There was no specific diagnosis "but he is still a young animal and therefore susceptible to infections," Schuele said. "At the moment he is resting on his blanket and sleeping," Schuele said, adding that despite his lethargy Knut did eat his regular meal in the morning. Thousands of people line up each day to see the cub, and his button-eyed face has been a fixture for newspapers, television and the Internet. Born at the zoo on Dec. 5, Knut � who was rejected by his mother and hand-raised by zookeepers � rose to fame last month thanks to television and newspaper pictures. So potent is his appeal that zoo attendance has roughly doubled to 15,000 on average daily since his debut, officials said. He has his own blog and TV show and appeared on the cover of Vanity Fair. Veterinarian Schuele did not know if Knut would be strong enough for public appearances in the next days. "We don't know yet � the little one is not a machine," he said. On the Net: Berlin Zoo: http://www.zoo-berlin.de http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070416/ap_on_re_eu/germany_polar_bear;_ylt=AmLxlejGOhpC0ijUZndBpO_MWM0F

LOL!! This is too funny! Stray shopping carts! Click on the word "link" at the end of the post from Dada and there's a bit more to the article he/she posted from bookseller.com http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2007/4/15/173613/916#10

I'm tellin' ya, the stuff you find in the comments section on political blogs (usually open threads). LOL!! This is so cute! Turn off your volume if annoying music with videos gets to you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0E-0ntoNWo&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eboomantribune%2Ecom%2Fstory%2F2007%2F4%2F15%2F173613%2F916

From the Telegraph: School row over Al Gore film By Liz Lightfoot, Education Editor Last Updated: 6:34am BST 17/04/2007 Parents who claim that an award-winning film on climate change is inaccurate and politically motivated are threatening a legal challenge over the Government's decision to send it to every secondary school. The film by Al Gore, the former US vice-president, won an Oscar for the best documentary this year and Alan Johnson, the Education Secretary, says he wants teachers to use it to stimulate children into discussing climate change and global warming. But a group of parents in the New Forest say the circulation of the film by the Government amounts to political indoctrination and is in breach of the Education Act 2002. Derek Tipp, their spokesman, has urged Mr Johnson to stop the film being sent out. He said: "The film goes well beyond the consensus view and is not therefore suitable material to present to children who need to be given clear and balanced, factually accurate information." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/17/nuni117.xml

I think this is amazing. How wonderful for him. Hawking flies weightless aboard jet By MIKE SCHNEIDER, Associated Press Writer 28 minutes ago CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - Free of his wheelchair and tethered only to heart rate and blood pressure monitors, astrophysicist Stephen Hawking on Thursday fulfilled a dream of floating weightless on a zero-gravity jet, a step he hopes leads to further space adventures. The modified jet carrying Hawking, a handful of his physicians and nurses, and dozens of others first flew up to 24,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean off Florida. Nurses lifted Hawking and carried him to the front of the jet, where they placed him on his back atop a special foam pillow. The jet then climbed to around 32,000 feet and made a parabolic dive back to 24,000 feet, allowing Hawking and the other passengers to experience weightlessness for about 25 seconds. Hawking, a mathematics professor at the University of Cambridge who has done groundbreaking work on black holes and the origins of the universe, has the paralyzing disease ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease. The 65-year-old was the first person with a disability to experience the flight by Zero Gravity Corp., which has flown about 2,700 people out of Florida since late 2004 and began offering the flights in Las Vegas this week. "As you can imagine, I'm very excited," Hawking told reporters before the flight. "I have been wheelchair bound for almost four decades. The chance to float free in zero-g will be wonderful." Unable to talk or move his hands and legs, Hawking can only make tiny facial expressions using the muscles around his eyes, eyebrows, cheek and mouth. He uses a computer attached to his wheelchair to talk for him in a synthesized voice by choosing words on a computer screen through an infrared sensor on a headpiece that detects motion in his cheek. He raises an eyebrow to signal "yes" and tenses his mouth to the side to indicate "no." "I want to demonstrate to the public that anybody can participate in this type of weightless experience," Hawking said Thursday. Hawking's personal physicians were on hand to make sure nothing went wrong. The physicist was attached to heart, blood pressure and oxygen-measuring monitors during the flight. Medical equipment sufficient for a mini-intensive care unit also was on board, said Dr. Edwin Chilvers, Hawking's personal physician. "I'm anticipating everything to nothing," Chilvers said before the flight. Others on the flight included financial backers of Zero Gravity and passengers who bid a total of $150,000 toward charities to go on the flight. The jet's interior is padded to protect the weightless fliers and equipped with cameras to record their adventure. Normally, the plane conducts 10 to 15 plunges for its passengers, who pay $3,750 for the ride, although that fee was waived for Hawking. On Hawking's flight, the jet made eight parabolic dives. "We had a wonderful time. It was incredible, far beyond our expectations," said Peter H. Diamandis, the chairman and CEO of Zero Gravity, after he exited the jet with Hawking at his side. As a further safety precaution, Zero Gravity founders Peter H. Diamandis and Byron Lichtenberg, who has flown on the space shuttle, were on either side of Hawking so they could lower him to the ground gently at the end of the parabola. Hawking also took a motion sickness pill as a precaution. The astrophysicist hopes the zero-gravity flight is a step toward going on a suborbital flight, which may be offered by private space companies by the end of the decade. "It's a test to see how well he can handle the g-forces that would be necessary in order to leave the atmosphere," said Sam Blackburn, Hawking's assistant. "That is very much one of the major purposes of this flight." On the Net: Stephen Hawking: http://www.hawking.org.uk/ Zero Gravity Corp.: http://www.gozerog.com

Because Disney World is too tame and passe anymore... "Women's town" to put men in their place Thu Apr 26, 9:04 AM ET BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese tourism authorities are seeking investment to build a novel concept attraction -- the world's first "women's town," where men get punished for disobedience, an official said Thursday. The 2.3-square-km Longshuihu village in the Shuangqiao district of Chongqing municipality, also known as "women's town," was based on the local traditional concept of "women rule and men obey," a tourism official told Reuters. "Traditional women dominate and men have to be obedient in the areas of Sichuan province and Chongqing, and now we are using it as an idea to attract tourists and boost tourism," the official, surname Li, said by telephone. The tourism bureau planned to invest between 200 million yuan ($26 million) and 300 million yuan in infrastructure, roads and buildings, Li said. "We welcome investors from overseas and nationwide to invest in our project," he added. The motto of the new town would be "women never make mistakes, and men can never refuse women's requests," Chinese media have reported. When tour groups enter the town, female tourists would play the dominant role when shopping or choosing a place to stay, and a disobedient man would be punished by "kneeling on an uneven board" or washing dishes in restaurant, media reports said. The project, begun in the end of 2005, was expected to take three to five years to finish. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070426/od_nm/china_womentown_odd_dc;_ylt=Ag0SClsR7k4jV8yMJU_rv7ms0NUE

I saw a clip today on MSNBC of Stephen Hawking in space. He is an amazing man on so many levels. Did any one catch the return of Bill Moyers Journal to PBS last night? The episode focused on how the press basically rolled over on the story leading up to the Iraq war. The show featured the likes of Howard Kurz, Bob Simon, Tim Russert, and Dan Rather. What amazed me the most was how the guys from Knight Ridder got the story right, but no one seemed to care, as it was considered too risky to go out on a limb against the supposed intel. I highly recommend watching it if you get a chance. I thought the show was riveting. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html

Oh! I'll have to search for a clip of SH in space. I'd love to see that. Re the Bill Moyers show, today I was reading a post on one the political blogs I read on an almost daily basis about that (http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/26/timmehs-tool-time-redux/#comments). It also had the link and I was planning to check it out when I could take a chunk of time to watch it. I found out about it too late to watch it on TV. The post was mostly focusing on Tim Russert's place in the scheme of things.

Yikes, Dorine, about Tim Russert. So much for being just a blue collar guy from Buffalo, and quoting his grade school teacher (a nun) about telling the truth. :-(

More chipping away at the old nuance and character of Manhattan. :-(( There's a bridal path in the park near my house, too, and if I'm jogging on them when horses come near I make sure to stop and get off to the side so as not to bother or potentially spook them if they're in a mood. They may be very docile, but don't want to take chances. There is frequently children on them. I do like to jog on the bridle paths in Central Park, too, but they're much wider and easier to avoid the horses. Last Manhattan riding stable shuts after 115 years By Carol Bishopric Sat Apr 28, 4:44 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - Yet another unique New York institution is set to disappear when the last riding stable in Manhattan closes its doors during the weekend. Claremont Riding Academy, said to be the oldest continuously operated stable in the United States, will shut its stable doors at 5 p.m. on Sunday. The stable has been a fixture on the upper west side of Manhattan since it opened as a livery stable in 1892, six years before the automobile began to negotiate city streets. It has operated as a riding academy since the 1920s, giving lessons and renting horses for rides in Central Park. Claremont owner Paul Novograd said he was not at liberty to say whether the building, which is located two blocks west of Central Park on West 89th Street, had been sold. But New York City Parks and Recreation Commissioner Adrian Benepe said it was widely known that the building was being sold to developers and he understood that it is going to be made into condominiums. The building is a landmark, so it won't be torn down, he added. Several dozen people turned out on Saturday to protest against the stable's closing, but the demonstration was not expected to affect the outcome. On Friday, trainer Karen Feldgus, who has worked at Claremont for more than 18 years, was giving her last lesson at the stable to a group of 10 people who were riding to music. Feldgus began to cry as the music began playing. "These (horses) are all my best friends. I've ridden all of them," she said. Novograd said the horses would go to good homes. Most will be moved to the Potomac Horse Center in Maryland, owned by Novograd. Some are being sold to their riders, and some are being donated to the equestrian program at Yale University. Claremont has a small indoor riding facility and stalls for the 38 horses. Instruction included jumping, dressage and stable management. Horses also could be rented for a ride on the bridle path in Central Park. CHILDREN BIG USERS Novograd estimated that about 60 percent of the stable's riding business involved children. Among reasons for closing the stable, Novograd said, were costs incurred restoring the building and problems with the Central Park bridle path. Benepe said there are no issues with the condition of the path or people using it for other purposes. If anything, he said, the bridle path has been improved over recent years by the Central Park Conservancy, a not-for-profit organization that manages Central Park under a contract with the city. Novograd said bridle paths were being used for running, dog walking and pushing baby strollers, making it difficult for riders. The closing of Claremont does not mean the end of horseback riding in parks in New York City, Benepe said, pointing out that there are riding facilities in the city's other boroughs. And he said the city is exploring the possibility of one or more of its stable operators setting up an operation under which horses could be brought to Central Park by trailer. "We're obviously not interested in seeing horseback riding leave the park after 150 years," Benepe said. Losing Claremont is a blow not only to those who ride there, but to those who believe such changes erode New York's character. Manhattan's Times Square area, once a seedy enclave known for pornographic movies, has been transformed in the last decade or so and now booms with retail stores, restaurants and other attractions that lure throngs of tourists. While the neighborhood is safer and cleaner, detractors say the changes have diluted its character by filling it with stores and chain restaurants that can be found at shopping malls across the United States. Further downtown, famed music clubs like CBGB, a legendary forum for punk and "new wave" bands like the Ramones, Blondie and Talking Heads, have closed. And once-gritty areas like the "meat-packing district," named for its history as a center for slaughterhouses and meat plants, have seen influxes of pricey shops and restaurants. Losing Claremont is another thing "gradually whittling away at the character of New York," said Daniel Goldberg, who lives near the stable. "It's what gives New York its flavor." http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070428/us_nm/newyork_stable_dc;_ylt=As3DD_gz6iGQVWNeBDYlxHrMWM0F

Yay for World Peace....or not. April 28, 2007 Terror attacks up, Rice considered hiding the data Posted 1:20 pm In 2004, the State Department�s report on global terrorism showed a decline in international attacks, a result which was hailed by administration officials as proof of the efficacy of the president�s strategy. Soon after, we learned that the State Department cooked the books and undercounted � by half � the number of people killed in terrorist attacks. In 2005, the State Department decided it didn�t want to publish the report on global terrorism anymore. The good news is, due to an outcry, the document is back. The bad news is, well, all of the news is bad. A State Department report on terrorism due out next week will show a nearly 30 percent increase in terrorist attacks worldwide in 2006 to more than 14,000, almost all of the boost due to growing violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. officials said Friday�. Based on data compiled by the U.S. intelligence community�s National Counterterrorism Center, the report says there were 14,338 terrorist attacks last year, up 29 percent from 11,111 attacks in 2005. Forty-five percent of the attacks were in Iraq. Worldwide, there were about 5,800 terrorist attacks that resulted in at least one fatality, also up from 2005. The figures for Iraq and elsewhere are limited to attacks on noncombatants and don�t include strikes against U.S. troops. If, in 2004, an initial report showing a decline in attacks was proof that Bush�s strategy was working, doesn�t an increase in attacks a few years later necessarily show that Bush�s strategy is failing? As for the politics, Condoleezza Rice reportedly considering hiding the bad news. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her top aides earlier this week had considered postponing or downplaying the release of this year�s edition of the terrorism report, officials in several agencies and on Capitol Hill said. Ultimately, they decided to issue the report on or near the congressionally mandated deadline of Monday, the officials said. Yes, how wonderfully gracious of them. Rice �decided� to follow the law after considering a plan not to. I guess we�re supposed to be grateful? As Kevin Drum put it, �They considered postponing a congressionally mandated report because it might be inconvenient for the president�s war policy? Is there some kind of �political sensitivities� exemption in the law?� Maybe it was in one of the signing statements. Of course, the deadline for producing the document was Monday, but Rice instead chose late on a Friday afternoon, beating the deadline by a few days. I can�t imagine why, can you? [Ed. note: Can you say "Friday document dump'? I knew you could. :-) ] http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10651.html#more-10651

Hmmm. I thought I closed the tag.

I won't go into how I ran across this, but these are some beautiful and interesting pictures of the Libyan desert this guy took. Click on the slideshow to see them all easiest. http://www.flickr.com/photos/15295652@N00/184404127/in/set-72157594191206777/

The level of my disgust is staggering... From WaPo via Firedoglake.com: http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/29/in-the-news/#more-8758 (Other interesting news points highlighted at this post also). *********************** As the winds and water of Hurricane Katrina were receding, presidential confidante Karen Hughes sent a cable from her State Department office to U.S. ambassadors worldwide. Titled "Echo-Chamber Message" � a public relations term for talking points designed to be repeated again and again � the Sept. 7, 2005, directive was unmistakable: Assure the scores of countries that had pledged or donated aid at the height of the disaster that their largesse had provided Americans "practical help and moral support" and "highlight the concrete benefits hurricane victims are receiving." Many of the U.S. diplomats who received the message, however, were beginning to witness a more embarrassing reality. They knew the U.S. government was turning down many allies' offers of manpower, supplies and expertise worth untold millions of dollars. Eventually the United States also would fail to collect most of the unprecedented outpouring of international cash assistance for Katrina's victims�. More than 10,000 pages of cables, telegraphs and e-mails from U.S. diplomats around the globe � released piecemeal since last fall under the Freedom of Information Act � provide a fuller account of problems that, at times, mystified generous allies and left U.S. representatives at a loss for an explanation. The documents were obtained by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a public interest group, which provided them to The Washington Post. In one exchange, State Department officials anguished over whether to tell Italy that its shipments of medicine, gauze and other medical supplies spoiled in the elements for weeks after Katrina's landfall on Aug. 29, 2005, and were destroyed. "Tell them we blew it," one disgusted official wrote. But she hedged: "The flip side is just to dispose of it and not come clean. I could be persuaded." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/28/AR2007042801113.html?hpid=topnews

My grandmother and mother used to horseback ride in Central Park occasionally (most of their riding was done in NJ, though). Any city has to evolve, but it is sad when certain institutions have to disappear. Is there anything left for which this administration ought to be ashamed? When I think there's nothing more it can do to embarrass this country, something else arises. :-(

I thought this topic would better suit the whole G*D D**N fuel frenzy, so that's why I'm posting here. NO GAS...On May 15th 2007!! I've received so many e-mails regarding this, I have to wonder if something might actually go down. It made my stomach turn yesterday when I forked out $45 for my tank of gas that wasn't even completely filled! I don't drive a behemoth, but, on the other hand, I don't drive a YUGO either ;-) Somewhere in the middle. Maybe we all can make something happen...(what's the symbol for shrugging shoulders and an "I don't think so" face?

Other than going once a month or six weeks to another state, I almost never need to drive anymore since I've been taking mass transit to work for the past year or so. I only need gas when I go on my trips to PA as noted above. And when I do need gas, I usually make sure to get it in NJ where it's anywhere from 15-20 cents per gallon cheaper than either NY or PA. I get some in NJ for the trip out (which takes about half a tank) and I fill up just before I cross the bridge to NY on the way back.

I'm trying to ride my bike as much as possible around South Austin and downtown, which is a relatively bike friendly town.

They are trying to encourage more bike riding here also, especially now as it's Bike NYC month, but even as they add more bike lanes, they become mostly blocked by doubleparkers...and cabs picking up/letting off fares. I will say I've never noticed so many people riding bikes as I did this evening around 5th/6th Ave near the Union Square area (14th-19th Sts). I had to keep a more headsup approach whenever I went to cross the avenues or they would've hit me. I didn't notice if they followed the lights or would ride through red lights.

There was a report on the Canadian national news last night that Vancouver has the highest gas prices in North America, approximately US$4.32 per US gallon. No wonder we cross the border into Washington state for "cheap" gas!

I find this so interesting. What's even more fascinating is the three different colors of tiger cubs. Dog nurses tiger triplets at Chinese zoo Thu May 17, 3:00 AM ET BEIJING - It's a dog's life for three newborn tiger triplets in eastern China. The cubs, whom officials at the Jinan Paomaling Wild Animal World in Shandong province are so far just calling "One," "Two" and "Three," have been nursed by a dog since they were rejected by their tiger mother shortly after birth, said Paomaling manager Chen Yucai. The trio's adoptive mother, a mixed breed farm dog called "Huani," is expected to nurse them for about a month or until their appetites outpace her supply, Chen said. Chen said it is common for Chinese zoos to use surrogate dog mothers to nurse rejected tiger cubs and that Huani has nursed tigers before. In the past, Paomaling put dog urine on their rejected cub's fur to make the surrogate think she was nursing one of her own puppies but the zoo didn't bother with Huani because she seemed not to mind nursing the tigers, he said. "The family is getting along well and seems to enjoy each other," Chen said. **************************** And I just ran across this. How adorable, a cute family portrait. Ok, not to Mari anyway. ;-D

So pretty... Here's the link to the slideshow I've been looking at. Hope the link works. I got up to about 50. There's another dog in there, a French bulldog (ugly thing) who's another surrogate for another tiger. None of the tigers in Asian zoos seem to like their offspring it seems (she says in a broad generalization ;-)). http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/lf/031802zooanimals&curPhoto=1 Lots of interesting animals, including some with offspring. Never knew what a spring hare was, but it's adorable. There's also some funky monkey creature called a loris that apparently is an offshoot in the evolutionary chain from apes. The one picture shows what look to be virtually human looking hands on it.

I CANNOT applaud these people or give them kudos enough. Did people hear of the protests from UMass students, faculty, etc over the plan to have Andrew Card, former Bush Chief of Staff, receive an honorary degree in public policy at their commencement ceremony next week. When the protests came up, he apparently contacted a couple of unhappy faculty members and this is their editorial about it. Not only do I agree with the sentiment, it's so well-written and without true malice. http://no2card.umassgss.org/2007/05/16/editorial-from-faculty-members-after-phone-call-from-card/ No Degree for Andy Card! Because War Criminals Don�t Deserve Honorary Degrees Editorial from Faculty Members after Phone Call from Card Card hasn�t earned UMass honor BY PAULA CHAKRAVARTTY AND STEPHANIE LUCE Hampshire Gazette Everything you read in the news about President Bush�s former White House Chief of Staff Andrew (Andy) Card emphasizes the fact that he�s a �nice guy.� But is a reputation for congeniality enough for an honorary doctorate in public policy from UMass Amherst? Card is scheduled to receive this honorary degree at the university�s graduate school commencement exercises on Friday, May 25. We recently had a chance to discuss this with Andy Card himself; he called us after hearing that many people at UMass Amherst are outraged at his honorary degree. Card�s main concern was that he had been unfairly �personally attacked� as �intellectually dishonest.� While acknowledging that we might have differences of political opinion, he asserted repeatedly that he was a man of great personal integrity. �Do you even know me?� he asked incredulously. �How would you feel if someone said that about you?� Taken aback by this line of reasoning, we responded by saying that our charge of intellectual dishonesty was based not on his personal attributes but rather on his very public role in misleading the world about the justification for the devastating war in Iraq. Card suggested we should have called him first to ask him about his �side of the story� before dragging his name through the mud. We appreciated his willingness to talk to a couple of UMass professors, but this is the same man who is currently refusing to testify in front of the Congressional House Government and Oversight Committee about his knowledge of the leak in the Valerie Plame case. This is also the same man who played a central role in an administration that has acknowledged violating domestic and international law and fundamentally misrepresenting the truth for political gain. It takes astonishing rhetorical magic to transform the very definition of a political act - falsifying evidence to �market� an ideologically driven war deemed illegal by the international community - into a personal matter. Honoring a public servant most recognized for his role in misleading the public about the war in Iraq is a deeply political decision and, unfortunately for Mr. Card, the UMass community is not buying his magic marketing tricks this time. The protests at UMass are not about �freedom of expression�; there had been few objections to his right to give a talk on campus earlier in the semester, even though many faculty and students disagreed with what Mr. Card had to say. Granting this degree normalizes Card and his role in the Bush administration, rewarding him as if he were just any other public servant from Massachusetts. It reduces falsification and exaggeration, suppression of documents and the coercion of less powerful nations into alternatives along a reasonable spectrum of actions. War and torture become matters of �personal opinion.� Lying is just �part of the job.� Card seemed genuinely shocked that there would be opposition to this honor, given his commitment to the commonwealth and his humble roots. He told us that he wasn�t just a White House chief of staff, but had held many �regular� jobs in his life, from newspaper delivery boy to McDonald�s employee. We insisted that the growing opposition at UMass had nothing to do with his personal life trajectory, just as recent efforts to revoke an honorary degree given to Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe was not a reflection of his personal shortcomings. Within one week, over 1,200 students, faculty, staff and alumni from the UMass community have signed a petition against Mr. Card�s degree on the basis that he does not meet the �high ethical standards� that �exemplify the ideals of the University of Massachusetts.� The undergraduate and graduate student senates, as well as graduate employees and faculty unions, have passed resolutions against Card�s degree. This week, the faculty senate will vote on a similar resolution. On Thursday, graduate students, at whose graduation Mr. Card would be receiving his degree, held a large peaceful rally demanding that the administration revoke the degree. The protests will continue. In our phone conversation last Thursday, we pleaded with Mr. Card to listen to the UMass community and reconsider coming to Amherst on May 25, so that graduate students can celebrate their achievements with their families, faculty and the community. Mr. Card replied by saying that �I have been invited to receive this great honor, and I am not rude.� We ask Mr. Card again to consider if as a �nice man� it might be worth it for him to risk the perception of �rudeness� to a few UMass administrators who have invited him, as opposed to ignoring the outrage of thousands of UMass students, faculty, staff and community who are unequivocally opposed to his receiving this honor for his role in the ultimate act of rudeness: starting an unnecessary war that has led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Paula Chakravartty is an assistant professor in the UMass Department of Communication. Stephanie Luce is an associate professor of labor studies at UMass. Daily Hampshire Gazette � 2007

What adjective(s) is infinitely stronger than appalled and disgusted? Whatever it/they are is what I am. These feelings extend to our do-nothing, capitulating, wimpy-assed Congress (**esp the Democrats**) and their passing of the Iraq War funding bill today. AP: Marines fail to get gear to troops By RICHARD LARDNER 10 minutes ago WASHINGTON - The system for delivering badly needed gear to Marines in Iraq has failed to meet many urgent requests for equipment from troops in the field, according to an internal document obtained by The Associated Press. Of more than 100 requests from deployed Marine units between February 2006 and February 2007, less than 10 percent have been fulfilled, the document says. It blamed the bureaucracy and a "risk-averse" approach by acquisition officials. Among the items held up were a mine resistant vehicle and a hand-held laser system. "Process worship cripples operating forces," according to the document. "Civilian middle management lacks technical and operational currency." The 32-page document � labeled "For Official Use Only" � was prepared by the staff of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force after they returned from Iraq in February. The document was to be presented in March to senior officials in the Pentagon's defense research and engineering office. The presentation was canceled by Marine Corps leaders because its contents were deemed too contentious, according to a defense official familiar with the document. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss it publicly. The document's claims run counter to the public description of a process intended to cut through the layers of red tape that frequently slow the military's procurement process. The Marine Corps had no immediate comment on the document. In a briefing Wednesday, Marine Corps officials hailed their "Urgent Universal Need Statement" system as a way to give Marines in combat a greater say in weapons-buying decisions. "What we all liked about (the urgent requests) is they came from the operators out on the ground and there was always a perceived better way of doing things," said Maj. Gen. Dennis Hejlik, who was a commander in Iraq from June 2004 to February 2005. The document lists 24 examples of equipment urgently needed by Marines in Iraq's Anbar province. One, the mine resistant ambush protected vehicle, has received attention as a promising way to protect troops from roadside blasts, the leading killer of U.S. forces in Iraq. After receiving a February 2005 urgent request approved by Hejlik for nearly 1,200 of the vehicles, the Marine Corps instead purchased improved versions of the ubiquitous Humvee. The industrial capacity did not exist to quickly build the new mine resistant vehicles and the more heavily armored Humvees were viewed as a suitable solution, Marine Corps officials said. That proved not to be the case as insurgent elements in Iraq developed more powerful bombs that could penetrate the Humvees. The mine resistant vehicles are now a top priority for all the military branches, which plan to buy 7,774 of the carriers at a cost of $8.4 billion. Brig. Gen. Robert Milstead, chief of Marine Corps public affairs, said cost was not a factor in choosing the Humvee. "This was not a budgetary decision," Milstead said Wednesday. "You can take that to the bank." The internal document, however, states that the cost of building new vehicles was a primary reason the request was denied by the Marine Corps Combat Development Command in Quantico, Va. Needs of the deployed troops are "competed against funded programs," the document states. "Resistance costs time," it adds. "Unnecessary delays cause U.S. friendly and innocent Iraqi deaths and injuries." A second example cited is the compact high power laser dazzler, an inexpensive, nonlethal tool for steering unwelcome vehicles away from U.S. checkpoints in Iraq. The dazzler emits a powerful stream of green light that stops or redirects oncoming traffic by temporarily impairing the driver's vision. In June 2005, Marines stationed in western Iraq filed an urgent request for several hundred of the dazzlers, which are built by LE Systems, a small company in Hartford, Conn. The request was repeated nearly a year later. "Timely purchase and employment of all systems bureaucratically stymied," the document states. Separate documents indicate the deployed Marines became so frustrated at the delays they bypassed normal acquisition procedures and used money from their own budget to buy 28 of the dazzlers directly from LE Systems. But because the lasers had not passed a safety review process, stateside authorities barred the Marines from using them. In January, nearly 18 months after the first request, the Marines received a less powerful laser built by a different company. Titus Casazza, president of LE Systems, criticized the Marine Corps' acquisition process. "The bureaucrats and lab rats sitting behind a desk stateside are making decisions on what will be given to our soldiers even if contrary to the specific requests of these soldiers and their commanding generals," he said. There are successful examples listed in the briefing document. A December request for an airborne surveillance system � Angel Fire � is expected to be filled this summer. The system provides constant overhead surveillance of large urban areas, such as Ramadi or Fallujah, and is able to track the movement of people and vehicles. Len Blasiol, a civilian official with the Combat Development Command, said the speed with which requests can be met is largely dependent on how much research and development work needs to be done. "The first question is, 'Is this something we can go out right now today and buy? Is it sitting on a shelf somewhere waiting for us to buy?' And if it is, then we figure out how to buy it," Blasiol said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070525/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/marines_critical_gear;_ylt=AuvtSgfYPf8LWpF4bjV3lbys0NUE

nothing wrong with appalled and disgusted but adding just of few others: offended, nauseated, repelled, repulsed, revolted, sickened, mortified, outraged

(Dorine)These feelings extend to our do-nothing, capitulating, wimpy-assed Congress (**esp the Democrats**) and their passing of the Iraq War funding bill today. Dorine, I understand your feelings, but PLEASE don't lump the Dems in with the architects of this war. Joe Biden explains in the article below why he voted for the bill. He has a point. Unfortunately, in the current sound-bite climate, there is little room for nuanced discusssion about why you could be against the war, yet vote to fund it (a reason might be to avoid the atrocious situations referenced in your article). Just look at the predictably callous platitudes that McCain and Romney have voiced: Obama, Clinton side with anti-war Democrats By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent AP Sens. Barack Obama Hillary Rodham Clinton earned praise from anti-war activists but criticism from Republicans on Friday for voting against a measure to pay for the Iraq war that sets no timetables for withdrawing U.S. troops. The two leading 2008 Democratic presidential contenders had been under heavy pressure from the party's influential anti-war wing and from other Democratic candidates to oppose the emergency funding bill sought by President George W. Bush. Unlike an earlier funding bill that Bush vetoed on May 1, the bill comfortably passed late on Thursday by both the Senate and House of Representatives was not tied to deadlines for troop withdrawals. Obama and Clinton had refused for days to say how they would vote, but ultimately sided with opponents of the increasingly unpopular war. Liberal advocacy groups like MoveOn.org had warned Democrats who backed the measure of possible political consequences. Republican presidential contenders John McCain and Mitt Romney blasted Obama and Clinton for not supporting U.S. troops -- a criticism certain to linger into next year's general election campaign and the November 2008 vote for the White House. "I was very disappointed to see Senator Obama and Senator Clinton embrace the policy of surrender," said McCain, an Arizona senator who backed the bill. "This vote may win favor with MoveOn and liberal primary voters, but it's the equivalent of waving a white flag to al Qaeda," he said. Two other Democratic senators running for president split their votes on the bill, with Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd voting against it and Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden for it. The votes against the bill, which passed 280-142 in the House and 80-14 in the Senate and is now set for Bush's signature, pleased anti-war groups. Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org, said no member of Congress who voted for the bill could pretend to be an opponent of the war. "Senators Obama, Clinton and Dodd stood up and did the right thing -- voting down the president's war policy," he said. "They're showing real leadership toward ending the war, and MoveOn's members are grateful. This bold stand ... won't soon be forgotten." Other Democratic contenders like John Edwards, a former senator, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson had urged Congress and their rivals to reject the measure. Clinton has angered some anti-war Democrats with her refusal to apologize or repudiate her 2002 vote to authorize the war in Iraq. Obama has stressed his early opposition to the war. While initially reluctant to back withdrawal timetables, both Clinton and Obama supported the earlier bill that included them. Analysts said opposing the bill was the safe choice for Democrats in a country that has turned against the war. But the delay in making a decision by Obama and Clinton could make them appear calculating, said Cal Jillson, a political analyst at Southern Methodist University in Texas. "Neither Hillary nor Obama have been beacons of courage," he said. "People are saying 'Do you guys have the sense of self and the confidence to state a position and then defend it?' And both of them have been hiding in the bushes." Clinton, of New York, said she supported the troops but ultimately opposed the bill because "it fails to compel the president to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq." Obama said U.S. troops deserved more. "This vote is a choice between validating the same failed policy in Iraq that has cost us so many lives and demanding a new one. And I am demanding a new one," said Obama, a senator from Illinois. Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and proponent of a plan to partition Iraq into three regions, said Democrats did not have the votes yet to overcome Bush's veto and should face the political reality that troops needed to be funded. "The president may be prepared to play a game of political chicken with the well-being of our troops. I am not. I will not," Biden said.

I have a great deal more to say on this, but for now.... So what you're saying is that it's ok for them to say essentially, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?" I'm all for compromise, but what in this scenario did the White House give up?

While I don't live there like some here, I've driven in NJ enough to know how true these are. ;-D How To Drive In New Jersey Posted On: 5/25/07 at 12:26 PM 1. You must first learn to pronounce the city name; it is New-erk not New-ark. 2. The morning rush hour is from 5:00 a.m. to noon. The evening rush hour is from noon to 7:00 p.m. Friday's rush hour starts on Thursday morning. 3. The minimum acceptable speed on the turnpike is 85 mph. On the parkway it's 105 or 110. Anything less is considered "Wussy." 4. Forget the traffic rules you learned elsewhere. Jersey has its own version of traffic rules. For example, cars/trucks with the loudest muffler go first at a four-way stop; the trucks with the biggest tires go second. However, in Monmouth county, SUV-driving, cellphone-talking moms ALWAYS have the right of way. 5. If you actually stop at a yellow light, you will be rear ended, cussed out, and possibly shot. 6. Never honk at anyone. Ever. Seriously. It's another offense that can get you shot. 7. Road construction is permanent and continuous in all of Jersey. Detour barrels are moved around for your entertainment pleasure during the middle of the night to make the next day's driving a bit more exciting. 8. Watch carefully for road hazards such as drunks, skunks, dogs, cats, barrels, cones, celebs, rubber-neckers, shredded tires, cell-phoners, deer and other road kill, and the homeless feeding on any of these items. 9. Mapquest does not work here -- none of the roads are where they say they are or go where they say they do and all the Turnpike EZpass lanes are moved each night once again to make your ride more exciting. 10. If someone actually has their turn signal on, wave them to the shoulder immediately to let them know it has been "accidentally activated." 11. If you are in the left lane and only driving 70 in a 55-65mph zone, you are considered a road hazard and will be "flipped off" accordingly. If you return the flip, you'll be shot. 12. Do not try to estimate travel time -- just leave Monday afternoon for Tuesday appointments, by noon Thursday for Friday and right after church on Sunday for anything on Monday morning.

Over the years I've been embarrassed by events which have taken place in my adopted home of Cincinnati: The Larry Flynt and Robert Mapplethorp obscenity trials; Marge Schott's racist comments; the stampede at the Who concert; Jerry Springer's stint as mayor, etc. But the new creation museum truly takes the ignorance cake. :-( I'm still reeling from the fact that at the most recent debate, three Republican Presidential hopefuls raised their hands when asked if the believed in creation over evolution. :-( from Salon: Inside the Creation Museum May 31, 2007 | PETERSBURG, Ky -- The Creation Museum swung open its stegosaurus-guarded gates to the public Monday, and I have to say it's out of this world. For those of us raised in natural history Meccas like the American Museum in New York, the Smithsonian in Washington, or the Field in Chicago, the beautifully designed museum induces an eerie vertigo. All the familiar characters are here: T. rex, giant skeletons of triceratops and apatosaurus, a pterosaur spreading its wings above the crowd, live exhibits of birds, amphibians and reptiles, and the dripping, hooting and chirping soundtrack of the primeval forest. There are also a couple of unfamiliar faces, for a natural history museum, in the tan and finely muscled bodies of Adam and Eve. At the ribbon cutting, Ken Ham, the rugged-faced CEO and president of Answers in Genesis, the nonprofit ministry that built the museum, tells an enthusiastic crowd that the Creation Museum will undo the damage done 82 years ago when Clarence Darrow put William Jennings Bryan on the stand in the famous Scopes trial in Dayton, Tenn. "It was the first time the Bible was ridiculed by the media in America, and that was a downward turning point for Christendom," Ham says. "We are going to undo all of that here at the Creation Museum. We are going to answer the questions Bryan wasn't prepared to, and show that belief in every word of the Bible can be defended by modern science." The Book of Genesis, that famous first chapter of the Bible, which Ham's group has interpreted to claim that the universe was created in six 24-hour days a mere 6,000 years ago, serves as the blueprint for the museum. Astronomy, geology and evolution, as they are commonly understood in mainstream science, have no place here. As Ham later tells me, the conclusions of modern science are not to be trusted, as they are biased by the fickle reasoning of man and a modern antagonism toward faith. On the other hand, he says, the Book of Genesis is true "from the first word to the last." Read the entire article here: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/05/31/creation_museum/index.html

(Ham) The Book of Genesis, that famous first chapter of the Bible, which Ham's group has interpreted to claim that the universe was created in six 24-hour days a mere 6,000 years ago......the Book of Genesis is true "from the first word to the last." Oh...my....god! (figuratively and literally) The entire stance of these people is pitiful.

so upset I forgot to close tags

I'm glad you posted about that Lisa. I was going to a week or so ago, but got too busy. There was a great editorial or story about it in the LA Times that I wanted to post. I'll go back to find it when I get a chance. (Lisa) I'm still reeling from the fact that at the most recent debate, three Republican Presidential hopefuls raised their hands when asked if the believed in creation over evolution. :-( Talk about really pitiful.

I find these Everest and other similar pioneers amazing. Now it's done with such sophisticated equipment, though still dangerous, but think about the challenges 60 odd years ago. And how great to own a chalet with a view of Mont Blanc. *sigh* Updated:2007-06-09 12:08:26 Climber Who Helped Blaze Everest Trail Dies By ERICA BULMAN AP GENEVA (June 8) - Ernest Hofstetter, part of the Swiss team that first traced the route to "The Roof of the World" used by Sir Edmund Hillary to conquer Mount Everest, has died, his son said Friday. He was 95. Hofstetter, who died June 1 at his French chalet with a view of Mont Blanc, was a member of the Swiss expedition that had to turn back just short of the peak in 1952 but is credited with forging the path that Hillary and Tenzing Norgay used in their successful assault a year later. The path is still used today in climbs to the 29,035-foot peak. Acknowledging the Swiss contribution, Hillary's team sent them a telegram after peaking: "To you goes half the glory." "He was kind, but he could also be hard. But it's not a softy who climbs Mount Everest," his son, Michel Hofstetter, told The Associated Press. The Swiss expedition remains one of the most charming and astonishing feats in mountaineering history: During a weekly get-togethers in a Geneva square, a bunch of climbing buddies hatched the plan to scale Everest. Unexpectedly, the Swiss received from the Nepalese government the permit for 1952, taking it away from the British who had monopolized it the previous 21 years. Hofstetter and his friends surpassed all expectations, although they had a big asset: like Hillary, they also had Norgay, the legendary Sherpa. They conquered the Khumbu Icefall - one of the most dangerous stages of the expedition, which has claimed many lives due to collapsing towers of ice and large crevasses that open without warning. Reaching the broad glacial basin called the Western Cwm, they scaled the huge Lhotse face at 23,620 feet to reach the desolate, wind-swept South Col. While Tenzing and Raymond Lambert forged on, Hofstetter remained with another group at 26,250 feet, ready to try if the pair failed. The story of the climb is full of astounding details. Lambert and Tenzing, for instance, camped at 27,560 feet, despite having forgotten their sleeping bags. The group was also essentially climbing without oxygen because their Swiss-designed sets failed. In the thin air at 26,250 feet, many climbers experience hallucinations and poor judgment. Lambert and Tenzing reached 28,380 feet but were forced back down because of fatigue and bad weather. They came within 650 feet of the summit on May 26, 1952. Presuming George Mallory and Andrew Irvine failed to reach the summit in 1924, the Swiss had climbed higher than anyone before. Hofstetter, who ran a sporting goods store in Geneva, had to persuade his wife to let him go. "My mother had three children and a business to run," said Michel, who was 8 when his father made the climb. "Still, she let him go. It was a great act of love." "Nowadays, they've got sophisticated instruments and a meteorologist tells climbers whether it's safe to advance," Michel said. "In those days, you simply looked out the tent to see if there were clouds coming in. Hillary's team was more organized than the Swiss. It also had working oxygen equipment, although it weighed significantly more. Hofstetter's expedition was led by Edouard Wyss-Dunant. Others included Rene Dittert, head mountain guide; Gabriel Chevalley, the team's doctor; Rene Aubert; Leon Flory; Lambert; Andre Roch; and Jean-Jacques Asper, now the sole surviving member. A geologist, a botanist and an anthropologist from the Geneva University also participated. All were members of Geneva's local "L'Androsace" Alpine club. "They were very lucky," Michel said. "They didn't have any accidents or frostbite. But it could have easily ended a lot differently." Besides Michel, Hofstetter is survived by his other children, Gerard and Catherine, and granddaughter Yasmine. There will be no memorial service. Relatives will scatter the ashes of him and his late wife, Jeanne, together in the mountains of southeastern Switzerland. http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/climber-who-helped-blaze-everest-trail/20070608205809990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

I know there must be a couple of poeple here who remember the old Philly Wanamakers! I vaguely remember being in it once when I was 12 or 13 while visiting my aunt, but never went in it in the whole 4 years I lived in Philly 10 years later. I think it was a Lord and Taylor's then. I'd love to hear that organ. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/09/arts/music/09orga.html?em&ex=1181620800&en=54443d8e9cdc3ca1&ei=5087%0A

Just something silly I found funny. A "Skim milk cow." What will they find or think of next? Updated:2007-06-04 15:52:10 Researchers Find 'Skim Milk Cows' By ANDREA THOMPSON A genetic trait causes certain cows to produce skim milk. (May 29, 2007) -- In a few years, skim milk may come straight from the cow, it was reported this week. Skim milk is usually produced by taking all of the fat out of regular milk, but in 2001, researchers found a cow that skipped that step. While screening a herd of cows, they found one with a natural gene mutation that makes her produce lower-fat milk than a normal cow. Marge, as researchers later named her, makes milk that has 1 percent fat (as compared to 3.5 percent in whole milk) and is high in omega-3 fatty acids. And remarkably, Marge�s low-fat milk still has the same delicious taste as conventionally produced low-fat milk, according to the report in Chemistry & Industry magazine. The low saturated fat content of Marge�s milk also means that butter made from it is spreadable right out of the fridge, while most butter has to come to room temperature before it can be spread on toast. After researchers found that Marge�s daughters also produced low-fat milk, they surmised that the genetic trait was dominant and planned to breed herds of skim milk-producing cows. (Marge and her offspring live in New Zealand.) ViaLactia, the company that owns Marge, expects the first commercial herd of cows supplying natural low-fat milk and spreadable butter for the market by 2011. But because cows are normally selected for breeding because they give a high milk yield, this new selection criteria could mean the skim milk cows would produce less milk, said Ed Komorowski, technical director at Dairy UK and who is not affiliated with the research�so more cows could be needed to produce the same amount of milk. And "normal" cows wouldn�t disappear, he told LiveScience, as their milk would still be needed to make fattier products such as cream. The Associated Press contributed to this report. http://reference.aol.com/article/_a/researchers-find-skim-milk-cows/20070530155709990002

I'd post the article's text but the graphics are v. necessary: Check this out: http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/15-07/st_infoporn

This seems rather on topic given how several of us have been checking one person's twitter periodically: Clive Thompson on How Twitter Creates a Social Sixth Sense Clive Thompson 06.26.07 | 2:00 AM Twitter is the app that everyone loves to hate. Odds are you've noticed people — probably much younger than you — manically using Twitter, a tool that lets you post brief updates about your everyday thoughts and activities to the Web via browser, cell phone, or IM. The messages are limited to 140 characters, so they lean toward pithy, haiku-like utterances. When I dropped by the main Twitter page, people had posted notes like "Doing lunch and picking up father-in-law from senior center." Or "Checking out Ghost Whisperer" or simply "Thinking I'm old." (Most users are between 18 and 27.) It might seem like blogging taken to a supremely banal extreme. Productivity guru Tim Ferriss calls Twitter "pointless email on steroids." One Silicon Valley businessman I met complained that his staff had become Twitter-obsessed. "You can't say anything in such a short message," he said, baffled. "So why do it at all?" They're precisely right: Individually, most Twitter messages are stupefyingly trivial. But the true value of Twitter — and the similarly mundane Dodgeball, a tool for reporting your real-time location to friends — is cumulative. The power is in the surprising effects that come from receiving thousands of pings from your posse. And this, as it turns out, suggests where the Web is heading. When I see that my friend Misha is "waiting at Genius Bar to send my MacBook to the shop," that's not much information. But when I get such granular updates every day for a month, I know a lot more about her. And when my four closest friends and worldmates send me dozens of updates a week for five months, I begin to develop an almost telepathic awareness of the people most important to me. It's like proprioception, your body's ability to know where your limbs are. That subliminal sense of orientation is crucial for coordination: It keeps you from accidentally bumping into objects, and it makes possible amazing feats of balance and dexterity. Twitter and other constant-contact media create social proprioception. They give a group of people a sense of itself, making possible weird, fascinating feats of coordination. For example, when I meet Misha for lunch after not having seen her for a month, I already know the wireframe outline of her life: She was nervous about last week's big presentation, got stuck in a rare spring snowstorm, and became addicted to salt bagels. With Dodgeball, I never actually race out to meet a friend when they report their nearby location; I just note it as something to talk about the next time we meet. It's almost like ESP, which can be incredibly useful when applied to your work life. You know who's overloaded — better not bug Amanda today — and who's on a roll. A buddy list isn't just a vehicle to chat with friends but a way to sense their presence. Are they available to talk? Have they been away? This awareness is crucial when colleagues are spread around the office, the country, or the world. Twitter substitutes for the glances and conversations we had before we became a nation of satellite employees. So why has Twitter been so misunderstood? Because it's experiential. Scrolling through random Twitter messages can't explain the appeal. You have to do it — and, more important, do it with friends. (Monitoring the lives of total strangers is fun but doesn't have the same addictive effect.) Critics sneer at Twitter and Dodgeball as hipster narcissism, but the real appeal of Twitter is almost the inverse of narcissism. It's practically collectivist — you're creating a shared understanding larger than yourself. Mind you, quick-ping media can be a massive time-suck. You also may not want more information pecking at your frayed attention span. And who knows? Twitter's rabid fans (their numbers are doubling every three weeks) may well abandon it for a shinier new toy. It happened to Friendster. But here's my bet: The animating genius behind Twitter will live on in future apps. That tactile sense of your community is simply too much fun, too useful — and it makes the group more than the sum of its parts. http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/magazine/15-07/st_thompson

Unfuckingbelievable!! Or not so unbelievable really. It's really true. There is to be absolutely no justice for any of these administration criminals. And Libby is a *convicted* criminal. Not just a presumed or so-called one like the rest of them. He got thrown under the bus to protect Cheney, and they returned the favor and gave him his Get Out Of Jail card before he even needed it. The irony is I found this news out on CNN in the train station having just come from seeing a play, Frost/Nixon, about another criminal president.

And another irony was pointed out as I read across the web, Paris Hilton served more time than Libby did. And she wasn't instrumental in outing a covert CIA spy. How did this country get to this point?

And this kinda sums it up for me quite nicely... http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/07/02/late-late-nite-fdl-no-more-words/

What is an "excessive sentence" to me is the black teenager sentenced to something like 10 years for having consensual sex with another teenager. Where is the presidential commutation/pardon when it's really needed.

Oh! I didn't realize that kid was black.

(Dorine) Paris Hilton served more time than Libby did. And she wasn't instrumental in outing a covert CIA spy. How did this country get to this point? *shaking head* Naturally it was done at what would normally be considered a slow news time. The late night pundits are on vacation (reruns). Must check if Stewart and Colbert are working this week or similarly on vacation. But what's going on (in its totality) is criminal. Then I get madder and madder thinking about the ethanol/corn situation/price of milk business. Anything to keep the automakers in business with their internal combustion engine, when the completely electric car was the way to go!! Then milk wouldn't be like $3/gallon.

(Dorine) Paris Hilton served more time than Libby did. And she wasn't instrumental in outing a covert CIA spy. How did this country get to this point? Dorine, I'm furious as well. My blood pressure goes up every time I think about it. And don't even get me started with the recent Supreme Court decisions. :-( These are dark days. I truly believe our government is broken. I just hope it isn't beyond repair.

(Karen) Anything to keep the automakers in business with their internal combustion engine, when the completely electric car was the way to go!! Interesting you brought that up. I was going to mention at some point that I finally saw (most of) "Who Killed the Electric Car?" the other night. I still need to finish the last little bit, but it's a great documentary. Sad, really. Maybe GM would be doing a lot better if they had put a fraction of the effort to market the electric car that they do for regular ones rather than continue in cahoots with the oil industry. Look where that's gotten them. The oil companies are swimming in more $$$ than you can shake a stick at and GM's losing $$$ hand over fist. Serves them right.

Again, having seen Frost/Nixon last night, the concept of a President covering up crimes is very fresh in my mind. Especially from the final scene where Nixon finally admits to Frost that he was involved in the Watergate coverup after Frost confronted him with "new" evidence during the interview. This tidbit is pointed out in a blog and I will have to read the whole transcript of the interview, or find it on You Tube later.... 1) CNN's Anderson Cooper interviewed Joe Wilson tonight. (Read the transcript). One line struck me: "[B]y commuting the sentence, I think the president raises the very real suspicion that he's party to the obstruction of justice or the cover-up of the original crime." [Ed. note- Their bold highlights, not mine.] But then again, it's most likely another Cheney scheme directed from behind the scenes. Did anyone read that 4 part Washington Post series on Cheney's tentacled, yet subtle and behind the scenes, efforts to direct foreign and domestic policy? Riveting. I mean, I still find myself amazed that my jaw can still drop and my head still shake in disbelief. People make jokes about the shadow presidency of Cheney, well read this, and it won't be such a joke. I'll find the link later.

Yeah, let us know the link.

(Dorine) but it's a great documentary. I agree. Shows you that we're still going down the wrong path, supposedly pursuing alternative solutions (ethanol and the ultra expensive hydrogen) that make no economic sense, except to certain vested interests. People make jokes about the shadow presidency of Cheney From Day One, everything about the Bush presidency has reminded me of a very old series of books written by Allan Drury, the Advise and Consent series. It doesn't exactly foreshadow the Bush Admin, but it certainly demonstrates the idea has been around for a long time. Drury wrote in the 1950s and early 1960s, as I recall.

Well, bless the Washington Post for putting the four-part Cheney series on a nice organized page. That's new since I read it. I didn't see any sidebars before either, though they seem interesting also, the little bit I skimmed over them. They aren't super long, but they aren't real short either. I'll be curious to hear other opinions. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cheney/?hpid=moreheadlines

Hee. Kind of an out of the mouths of babes type statement that kind of says it all from their point of view. (Scott Stanzel is deputy White House press secretary) Pointed out by Daily Kos, among others (the rest of this entry is interesting, too): From today's White House press briefing (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070705.html), truer words were never spoken: Q Scott, is Scooter Libby getting more than equal justice under the law? Is he getting special treatment? MR. STANZEL: Well, I guess I don't know what you mean by "equal justice under the law."

Some good choices, I think, though I thought Stonehenge was a no-brainer. 7 new wonders of the world chosen By BARRY HATTON, Associated Press Writer 39 minutes ago LISBON, Portugal - The Great Wall of China, Rome's Colosseum, India's Taj Mahal and three architectural marvels from Latin America were among the new seven wonders of the world chosen in a global poll released on Saturday. Jordan's Petra was the seventh winner. Peru's Machu Picchu, Brazil's Statue of Christ Redeemer and Mexico's Chichen Itza pyramid also made the cut. About 100 million votes were cast by the Internet and cellphone text messages, said New7Wonders, the nonprofit organization that conducted the poll. The seven beat out 14 other nominated landmarks, including the Eiffel Tower, Easter Island in the Pacific, the Statue of Liberty, the Acropolis, Russia's Kremlin and Australia's Sydney Opera House. The pyramids of Giza, the only surviving structures from the original seven wonders of the ancient world, were assured of retaining their status in addition to the new seven after indignant Egyptian officials said it was a disgrace they had to compete. The campaign to name new wonders was launched in 1999 by the Swiss adventurer Bernard Weber. Almost 200 nominations came in, and the list was narrowed to the 21 most-voted by the start of 2006. Organizers admit there was no foolproof way to prevent people from voting more than once for their favorite. A Peruvian in national costume held up Macchu Picchu's award to the sky and bowed to the crowd with his hands clasped, eliciting one of the biggest cheers from the audience of 50,000 people at a soccer stadium in Portugal's capital, Lisbon. Many jeered when the Statue of Liberty was announced as one of the candidates. Portugal was widely opposed to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Another Swiss adventurer, Bertrand Piccard, pilot of the first hot-air balloon to fly nonstop around the world, announced one of the winners � then launched into an appeal for people to combat climate change and stand up for human rights before being ushered off the stage. The Colosseum, the Great Wall, Machu Picchu, the Taj Mahal and Petra had been among the leading candidates since January, while the Statue of Christ Redeemer received a surge in votes more recently. The Statue of Liberty and Australia's Sydney Opera House were near the bottom of the list from the start. Also among the losing candidates were Cambodia's Angkor, Spain's Alhambra, Turkey's Hagia Sophia, Japan's Kiyomizu Temple, Russia's Kremlin and St. Basil's Cathedral, Germany's Neuschwanstein Castle, Britain's Stonehenge and Mali's Timbuktu. Weber's Switzerland-based foundation aims to promote cultural diversity by supporting, preserving and restoring monuments. It relies on private donations and revenue from selling broadcasting rights. The U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, or UNESCO, keeps a list of World Heritage Sites, which now totals 851 monuments. But the agency was not involved in Weber's project. The traditional seven wonders were concentrated in the Mediterranean and Middle East. That list was derived from lists of marvels compiled by ancient Greek observers, the best known being Antipater of Sidon, a writer in the 2nd century B.C. The Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Statue of Zeus at Olympia, the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, the Colossus of Rhodes and the Pharos lighthouse off Alexandria have all vanished. On the Net: http://www.new7wonders.com http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070708/ap_on_re_eu/new_seven_wonders;_ylt=Aksm8uJWCxBhppGl3e5od5Cs0NUE

Was reading a Reuters article entitled, "Americans tired of Iraq war, split on withdrawal" (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070712/ts_nm/iraq_usa_people_dc;_ylt=ApyEacCqfWaUehtgNvMbeELMWM0F) and came across this statement in the middle... Americans were divided over the president's stand..... "I think he's doing a wonderful job. These people are out to get us and if we back off they'll come after us here," said Kessler, a Cincinnati Republican who voted for Bush." The depths of my repugnance for the unadulterated ignorance this woman displays at this point knows no bounds.

Grr. I was distracted by my irritation at her (and others like her...the 26 percenters, I imagine).

Sorry, I read further and found another one... But security officer Roshad Lyons, a Democrat, said Iran will take over in Iraq if U.S. troops pull out. "I don't see any reason to go there and not complete the job. The priority should be getting the (Iraqi) military up and running. It's almost done," said Lyons. On what planet or bizarro world is he living on where getting the Iraqi military up and running is almost done?! Obviously reading the news isn't a big priority for him. At the very least, they are part of the problems.

Since the subject of hybrid cars came up a couple of weeks ago... Hybrid lovers: The Honeymoon May Be Over As the reality of fuel efficiency sinks in, fewer new car buyers are considering a hybrid, according to J.D. Power By CNNMONEY.COM NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The percentage of car shoppers considering hybrid vehicles has declined in the past year, according to a survey released Tuesday by J.D. Power and Associates. Fifty percent of new vehicle shoppers surveyed said they are considering a gasoline/hybrid electric vehicle. That's down from 57 percent last year. "In the 2006 study, we found consumers often overestimated the fuel efficiency of hybrid-electric vehicles, and the decrease in consideration of hybrids in 2007 may be a result of their more realistic understanding of the actual fuel economy capabilities," said Mike Marshall, director of automotive emerging technologies at J.D. Power. Interest in hybrid vehicles declined the most among younger shoppers. Last year, 73 percent of car shoppers between ages 16 and 25 said they were interested in a hybrid vehicle. This year, 60 percent were. Car shoppers also said they were willing to pay an extra $2,396 for a hybrid powertrain while expecting a fuel economy improvement of 18.5 miles per gallon. Meanwhile, consideration for diesel-powered vehicles stands at 23 percent. Last year, only 12 percent of car shoppers considered purchasing one. New clean-diesel models, which have much cleaner exhaust than older versions, have just begun appearing on the market this year along with the low-sulfur diesel fuel needed to run them. Shoppers expected to pay $1,491 extra for a diesel powertrain. They also expected to get about 15 mpg better fuel economy. "As the automotive industry steadily offers more alternative powertrain/fuel options to consumers, buyer preferences will continue to shift the market in the coming years," said Marshall. " The consumer research company also released an Automotive Environmental Index which ranks auto companies and specific models according to their fuel economy and emissions as determined by data from the Environmental Protection Agency and vehicle owners. Toyota was the highest-ranking car brand in J.D. Power's Automotive Environmental Index, followed by Volkswagen and Honda. This is the second year J.D. Power has released that Index and Toyota has moved up six rank positions since last year. The index is based on a car's emissions as reported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its fuel economy as reported by the EPA and by drivers responding to a separate survey by J.D. Power. Of the top 30 vehicles in the J.D. Power index, 10 were hybrids from Ford (Charts, Fortune 500), General Motors (Charts, Fortune 500) and Toyota. Toyota, including its Lexus luxury brand, had more vehicles in the list than any other manufacturer. http://autos.aol.com/article/general/v2/_a/hybrid-lovers-the-honeymoon-may-be-over/20070719145609990001?ncid=AOLCOMMautoDYNLsec000

How much havoc can Cheney wreak while he's *officially* President for a few hours? ;-) Bush's Exam Will Leave Cheney in Charge AP Posted: 2007-07-20 16:34:21 Filed Under: Politics WASHINGTON (July 20) - President Bush will have a routine colonoscopy Saturday and temporarily hand presidential powers to Vice President Dick Cheney, the White House said. Press secretary Tony Snow told reporters Friday that Bush will have the procedure at his Camp David, Md., mountaintop retreat. He last had such a colorectal cancer check on June 29, 2002. "As reported at the time and in subsequent physical exams, absent any symptoms, the president's doctor recommended repeat surveillance in approximately five years," Snow said. "The president has had no symptoms." Two polyps were discovered during examinations in 1998 and 1999, while Bush was governor of Texas. That made Bush a prime candidate for regular examinations. For the general population, a colonoscopy to screen for colon cancer is recommended every 10 years. But for people at higher risk or if a colonoscopy detects precancerous polyps, follow-up colonoscopies often are scheduled in three- to five-year intervals. "Although no polyps were noted in the exam in 2002, age and history would suggest that there's a reasonable chance that polyps will be noted this time," Snow said. "If so, they'll be removed and evaluated microscopically." Bush is 61. Snow said results would be available after 48 hours to 72 hours, if not sooner. The procedure will be supervised by Dr. Richard Tubb, the president's doctor. It will be done by a team from the National Naval Medical Center at Bethesda, Md. Because the president will be under the effects of anesthesia, Bush has elected to implement Section 3 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, making Cheney acting president until Bush indicates he is prepared to reassume his authority. In 2002, Bush transferred presidential powers to Cheney for more than two hours. During Saturday's transfer of power, the vice president will be at his home on the Chesapeake Bay in St. Michaels, Md., about 30 miles east of Washington, Snow said. The 2002 transfer was only the second time that the Constitution's presidential disability clause was invoked. President Reagan was the first to invoke the Constitution's 25th Amendment since its adoption in 1967 as a means of dealing with presidential disability and succession. The earlier colonoscopy for Bush also was done at the medical facility at Camp David near Thurmont, Md. Bush felt well enough afterward to play with his dogs and take a 4 1/2-mile walk with first lady Laura Bush and then-White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Card's wife. Bush then went to the gym for a light workout. The 2002 procedure began at 7:09 a.m and ended at 7:29 a.m. Bush woke up two minutes later but did not resume his presidential office until 9:24 a.m., after Tubb conducted an overall examination. Tubb said he recommended the additional time to make sure the sedative had no aftereffects. AP Medical Writer Lauran Neergaard contributed to this report.

I thought that Hillary article I mentioned on O&E was in the NYT, but couldn't swear to it. What I do find fascinating is that there are *women* who can't seem to handle the idea of a woman president for mere fact of that candidate being a woman rather than being competent. Women Supportive but Skeptical of Clinton, Poll Says By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE and DALIA SUSSMAN Published: July 20, 2007 Women view Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton more favorably than men do, but she still faces skepticism among some women, especially those who are older and those who are married, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. Women hold more positive views than men of all the leading Democratic candidates. But winning the support of women, who made up 54 percent of voters in the last presidential election, is especially important to Mrs. Clinton, who has sought to rally them behind her quest to become the nation�s first female president. The poll found that over all, women tend to agree with her on the issues and see her as a strong leader and as a positive role model. All of those polled � both women and men � said they thought Mrs. Clinton would be an effective commander in chief, suggesting she has made headway in diminishing concerns that her sex would impede her from leading the nation in wartime. A majority of those polled also said they thought she would win the White House if she captured the Democratic nomination. But the poll also held some warning signs for Mrs. Clinton, 59, the junior senator from New York. Forty percent of voters view her unfavorably, more than for any of the other major candidates for president (although they are not as well known). Neither men nor women fully trust that she is saying what she really believes, the poll found. Mrs. Clinton�s choices as a woman and a political figure have been intensely scrutinized during her 15 years on the national stage, and as she runs for president, the debate about her remains polarizing, politically and culturally. Her role as the first woman to contend so seriously for the White House has also raised questions about how much to trust polling about her. Some polls in other elections have overstated the strength of minority candidates, perhaps because respondents were not being honest about their feelings or changed their minds in the privacy of the voting booth. It is unclear whether a similar phenomenon may occur in the case of a woman. A third of Americans in the poll say most people they know will be �less likely� to vote for Mrs. Clinton because she is a woman � more than twice the number who say her being a woman will make people more likely to vote for her. Still, half of those polled said her sex would not matter. The vast majority of all voters � more than 80 percent � think it very likely or somewhat likely that Mrs. Clinton will win the Democratic nomination. More than 60 percent think she is likely to win the presidency. The poll was conducted by telephone across the country from July 9 to July 17 among 1,554 adults. Of those, 1,068 were women, a deliberate oversampling designed to examine the views of different groups of women. The margin of sampling error for all adults and for women is plus or minus three percentage points. Among all registered voters, 46 percent of women have a favorable view of Mrs. Clinton, while 33 percent have an unfavorable view. The rest are undecided. The numbers are opposite for men, with 34 percent having a positive view of her and 47 percent holding a negative one. The support for Mrs. Clinton is most pronounced among unmarried and less affluent Democratic women. More than 8 in 10 working women say she understands their problems. The older the woman, the more negatively she views Mrs. Clinton: 27 percent of those under age 45 view her negatively; 33 percent of those 45 to 64 view her negatively; and 40 percent of those 64 and older view her negatively. �I like her strength, and I like that she�s been behind the scenes in the White House and knows the process and has the Senate experience,� Karla Whitt, 32, a small-business owner in Charlotte, N.C., said in a follow-up interview. �I do like that she is a woman,� Ms. Whitt added, �but that�s not the main thing.� Marilyn Bielstein, 69, a retired nurse in Gig Harbor, Wash., said flatly, �I don�t like her politics, and I don�t admire her as a woman.� Ms. Bielstein added, �I�ve followed her history back to her college days, and I just don�t trust her. I think she�s a socialist, and I think that�s exactly where she wants to take us.� A majority of single women view Mrs. Clinton favorably, while married women are split. Thirty-nine percent of married women like Mrs. Clinton � about as many as like her two closest Democratic rivals, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina. But 39 percent also view her negatively � significantly more than have a negative view of Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards, who are not as well known. Linda Carroll, 59, who lives in Crystal Springs, Miss., and works at an assembly plant, said she supported Bill Clinton and admired Mrs. Clinton for standing by her husband through their marital problems. But Ms. Carroll said she was �not ready for a lady president.� �I�m not for this women�s lib stuff,� she said. The poll shows that Mrs. Clinton might find additional supporters among certain groups. A third of politically independent women say they have not made up their minds about her. Similarly, liberal women make up one of her most reliable bases of support (66 percent of them have a favorable view) although one-fourth of them are still undecided. But she faces skeptical voters like Mona Hughes, 64, an independent who lives in Orlando, Fla. �There are certain things she has voted on since she has been in Congress that seem to me to lean more toward the Republican view of things, which doesn�t make me too happy,� said Ms. Hughes, a retired newspaper columnist. �I want her to be strong and express strong feelings, not just fit her feelings to that audience at that moment,� she said. Those who like Mrs. Clinton offered adjectives like forceful, courageous and strong to describe her. Thirty percent of women used those words, compared with 24 percent of men. The second-most-offered reason was that she is smart and well spoken, the view of 19 percent of women and 12 percent of men. Among those who do not like her, women and men equally (2 in 10) said that they did not trust her. They also said equally (12 percent) that they disagreed with her views and values. A similar percentage said they saw her as �too much of a politician� and �a phony.� But her favorable ratings have inched up in the past few months, and her unfavorable ratings have ebbed to where they are now even. Mrs. Clinton entered the nation�s consciousness in 1992 as her husband sought the Democratic presidential nomination. Since then, The New York Times and CBS News have been tracking her favorability ratings. She started out in March 1992 with 31 percent of registered voters viewing her favorably, 17 percent unfavorably and the rest undecided or not knowing enough about her. As time went on, public opinion was generally divided about her. Shortly after she announced her presidential candidacy in January, the balance of opinion was beginning to turn negative. But opinion is now evenly divided with 40 percent of registered voters having a favorable opinion and 40 percent unfavorable. (Among all respondents to the poll, 41 percent viewed her favorably and 38 percent unfavorably.) Sonya McMahon, 57, who lives in San Diego and works in health care administration, said she had long viewed Mrs. Clinton as �harsh and cold.� Although still undecided, Ms. McMahon said she was now finding Mrs. Clinton more appealing. �Watching bits of her actual comments, I think some of that softening is coming through,� said Mrs. McMahon, who was not part of the poll but who was contacted after her daughter, who did participate, discussed her views with a reporter. �I say to myself, �That�s not so bad.� I�ve warmed up to her.� http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/us/politics/20poll.html?pagewanted=2&ref=politics

(Dorine)reticence isn't all about a woman, it's that particular woman. .....about Hillary exactly mirrored mine about her. (Karen) An excuse. So because I'd have any objections at all about her...or perhaps a woman, they're reduced to "an excuse"? Or am I misunderstanding something? I would apply those concerns to any male candidate equally and have.

(Dorine) How much havoc can Cheney wreak while he's *officially* President for a few hours? ;-) I don't know why they're making such a big deal over it. He's been president for the past 6-1/2 years. ;-) What I do find fascinating is that there are *women* who can't seem to handle the idea of a woman president for mere fact of that candidate being a woman rather than being competent. Personally, I find it sickening that women think that way, with many acting like they're their husbands' chattal while voting as their husbands do. Women are more than 50% of the population and can't seem to understand their own political power. One one woman on the Supreme Court! A bunch of men making decisions over what women can and cannot do! Women are truly to blame for this situation and I've been saying this for decades. Ms. Bielstein added, �I�ve followed her history back to her college days, and I just don�t trust her. I think she�s a socialist, and I think that�s exactly where she wants to take us.� A socialist! Gimme a break! I want to see Ms. Bielstein's tax return. ;-) Linda Carroll, 59, who lives in Crystal Springs, Miss., and works at an assembly plant, said she supported Bill Clinton and admired Mrs. Clinton for standing by her husband through their marital problems. But Ms. Carroll said she was �not ready for a lady president.� �I�m not for this women�s lib stuff,� she said. Gimme this woman's phone number! Doesn't she see how ludicrous her statement is? An assembly plant worker who isn't for equality? Does she like it if a man standing next to her on the line makes more? �There are certain things she has voted on since she has been in Congress that seem to me to lean more toward the Republican view of things, which doesn�t make me too happy,� said Ms. Hughes, a retired newspaper columnist. �I want her to be strong and express strong feelings, not just fit her feelings to that audience at that moment,� she said. OK, I'll buy this. Valid criticism.

not just fit her feelings to that audience at that moment, Yes, bingo! Her war stance over the last year is greatly disturbing to me also.

(Dorine) So because I'd have any objections at all about her...or perhaps a woman, they're reduced to "an excuse"? Not you, personally, but how women are generalizing about her. I think the article you posted backs it up. Excuses and lame ones at that.

(article) said Ms. Hughes, a retired newspaper columnist. �I want her to be strong and express strong feelings, not just fit her feelings to that audience at that moment,� she said. Which is exactly what every politician, male or female, does in order to please the particular audience in front of him/her.

(Kathryn) Which is exactly what every politician, male or female, does in order to please the particular audience in front of him/her. And yet only Hillary is being held to this standard.

That was my exact initial reaction, too, when I read that passage, but there's emphasizing aspects of your views to tailor to a certain audience then there's blatant pandering where one tends to show some contradiction what they say from one day or audience to the next. It's called talking out of both sides of your mouth and not all of them do it. Hillary has done it since the first time she ran for Senate here. And I may express some reservations about her, but I have still voted for her twice. And if she is the nominee, I will vote for her again (unless Gore gets into the race beforehand ;-))), because there isn't a single current Republican candidate I would even remotely consider for President. And as I repeat yet again, I will vote Republican if I feel that's the better person for the job as I have in one or 2 national elections in the past and in local elections as well. It's what you stand for, not what party you're in is what interests me. I just read a poll today or yesterday that a large number of Republicans aren't happy with their candidates either and a high percentage chose "would consider other candidate" out of all the choices. Not a ringing endorsement for the GOP.

I will say it "out loud" though, I'll be happy if she wins to get Bill that much closer back to the WH. I think he'd be a fabulous Sec of State and could probably get the world back to a much more peaceful state. I wonder if that actually would be allowed, a former President in a cabinet position. Hmmmm....

And I can tell ya, you couldn't pay me enough to vote for any idiot who would pose with people as obviously stupid as that one and with a sign like that (or transport their dog on the roof of their car in a carrier). I didn't realize Chelsea had a Museum of Modern Art. http://www.tmz.com/2007/07/21/mitt-catches-s-t-over-hillary-bashing-sign/

Ms. Carroll said she was �not ready for a lady president.� �I�m not for this women�s lib stuff,� she said. Obviously, this person has had a frontal lobotomy and is not fit to vote anyway.

(Mari) Obviously, this person has had a frontal lobotomy and is not fit to vote anyway. But will, which is the sad thing.

Too bad he didn't find it cruddy enough to not take the job. Cheney once considered vice presidency "cruddy job" By Steve Holland Mon Jul 23, 8:21 AM ET WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Dick Cheney once considered the vice presidency a "cruddy job" but got over his misgivings and went on to be arguably the most powerful No. 2 in U.S. politics, and one of the most heavily criticized. The 66-year-old Cheney's stoic, no-nonsense demeanor and influence in many White House decisions are in stark contrast to his youthful days when he was caught twice for drunk driving in Wyoming and dropped out of Yale University for bad grades. Cheney's life has been chronicled in a fairly sympathetic biography by Stephen Hayes, a writer for The Weekly Standard conservative magazine. He spent nearly 30 hours in one-on-one interviews with the normally reticent Cheney for the book. In his research Hayes found that Cheney in 1996 called the vice presidency a "cruddy job," which his political mentor, President Gerald Ford, had hated. But by 2000 Cheney was persuaded to accept when George W. Bush offered the position. Cheney's role as a behind-the-scenes adviser has fed a left-wing stereotype that he is Bush's dark, brooding puppetmaster and advocate of war and torture, an image the media-averse Cheney has done little to change. "He is pathologically (but purposefully) secretive, treacherous toward colleagues; coldly manipulative of the callow, lazy, and ignorant president he serves," Hendrik Hertzberg, a former speechwriter for Democratic President Jimmy Carter, wrote in The New Yorker. Cheney's insistence that his office did not fall under Bush's executive branch as a way to avoid providing records to a government oversight agency also has drawn fire. Satirical cartoonist Garry Trudeau featured Cheney in his Doonesbury comic strip as in charge of a secretive "black branch" of the U.S. government. "My shirt size is classified," the Cheney character says in the strip. The vice president's office shrugs off the criticism. The White House said Cheney remains a close Bush adviser. "Always has been and will remain so," spokeswoman Dana Perino said. After such attacks and his role in pushing the unpopular Iraq war, Cheney's job approval is at a lackluster 30 percent, a recent Gallup poll said. HATRED Former Wyoming Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, a longtime Cheney friend, said the attacks are emblematic of an ugly period in U.S. politics. "There's so many people that hate the guy, people that hate Dick Cheney just like people who hate George Bush or hate (Democratic presidential candidate) Hillary Clinton. It's a really ugly thing out in the land, not disgust or irritation, but hatred, and it's a whole new ballgame in my time," he said. Driving some of the criticism has been a series in The Washington Post describing the backdoor way Cheney persuaded Bush, particularly on approving harsh interrogation methods for captured suspects in the war on terrorism. According to The Post, a foreshadowing of how Cheney would operate came when former Vice President Dan Quayle congratulated him on his new job in early 2001. Quayle advised Cheney he should expect to attend a lot of funerals, a traditional duty of U.S. vice presidents. "I have a different understanding with the president," Cheney told Quayle with a small smile. Presidential historians say Cheney is by far the most powerful vice president in modern U.S. history -- "He has more power by a factor of maybe 5 or 10," says historian Richard Jensen. Cheney might not have gotten as far without Donald Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld was Ford's chief of staff in 1974 and hired Cheney as a deputy despite eyebrows raised over the two drunk driving arrests in the early 1960s. Cheney and Rumsfeld maintain a close bond, and Hayes reported Cheney "absolutely" disagreed with Bush's decision to dump Rumsfeld as defense secretary in November after Republicans lost control of the U.S. Congress. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070723/pl_nm/usa_cheney_dc;_ylt=AmLc0Axxb0nvdKaE9d9OLDvMWM0F

(Dorine)I wonder if that actually would be allowed, a former President in a cabinet position. Hmmmm.... Well, if Cheney can be in both the Executive & Legislative branches of government (depending upon what "top secret" information he's being asked to cough up on any given day) I really don't see why not ;-)

I don't remember when Dorine's comment was made, but absolutely nothing Constitutionally speaking prevents a president from holding another position, especially an appointed one.

Well, if Cheney can be in both the Executive & Legislative branches of government *snicker*

I vaguely read about the fashion comments from Robin Givhan about Hillary after that debate last week. I didn't read her piece, but it was seems to be quite insulting to comment on her clothing in such a fashion. How come she didn't deconstruct the men's outfits and looks. And again, from a *woman* no less. :-( Ellen Goodman Political fashionbabble By Ellen Goodman, Globe Columnist | July 27, 2007 AMONG the endless reasons I will never run for public office is a deep-seated fear of having my wardrobe subject to the fashion police. Excuse me, the fashion shrinks -- those media monitors who seek deep meaning in every shoe, sexual clues in every hemline, and psychological insights in every shirt collar. Just imagine the casual summer wardrobe that I am modeling so stylishly at this moment. What would the fashionbabblers have to say about my well-worn khaki capris? That they display a certain comfort-first sensibility? Or does that flash of calf reveal a senior citizen insouciance? What of the green polo shirt? Does it symbolize my bond with the Land's End sisterhood? Or my rebellion from the designer-label sophisticate? And what to make of my lime-colored Crocs with their peek-a-boo holes? Do they express a certain post-feminist funkiness? Or do they expose a feminine (if chipped) pedicure? This self-couture-analysis comes in response to the latest piece on Hillary Clinton's attire by The Washington Post's resident fashionista. Robin Givhan's cultural critique began with a holy-moly observation: "There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-Span2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton." Givhan's 750-word plunge into the shirt of the presidential candidate had women throwing up their hands (among other things) all over the blogosphere. Cleavage! Omigod! As one blogger responded, the senator has breasts. Two of them. Details at 11. Only in Washington would a fashion reporter get tips watching C-Span2. But the Post piece managed to make a media mountain out of a half-inch valley. As one of the thousands who have scrutinized the black V-neck top on the Internet, I can attest that it barely (in both senses of the word) fits Wikipedia's definition of cleavage, as in: "The cleft created by the partial exposure of a woman's breasts, especially when exposed by low-cut clothing." Nevertheless, Givhan fashionbabbled the heck out of the V-neck. Clinton's cleavage, she wrote, was a "small acknowledgment of sexuality and femininity." It was "like catching a man with his fly unzipped." It was also a "teasing display." And to wrap things up, she explained: "To display cleavage in a setting that does not involve cocktails and hors d'oeuvres is a provocation. It requires that a woman be utterly at ease in her skin, coolly confident about her appearance, unflinching about her sense of style." Not even Nora Ephron, who wrote a book called "I Feel Bad About My Neck," could have spent more energy deconstructing a neckline. Isn't there, somewhere, a booby prize for covering pulchritude instead of policy? Hillary is not the only female pol to have made more news with what she wore than what she said. Just a few weeks ago, a camera from on high focused down on the chest of Jacqui Smith, the British home secretary, and created what some Brits called the Tempest in a D-Cup. The failed female candidate for president of France, S�gol�ne Royal, was captured in a bikini looking like an ad for "French Women Don't Get Fat." Meanwhile, Condi Rice has had her high-heeled boots put on the couture couch and Nancy Pelosi has had her suits power-rated. Candidates' wives too -- as Hillary well knows -- have long been subject to scrutiny. Joe Scarborough wins the prize for trash-talking Jeri Thompson, second wife of Fred Thompson. In his best Don Imus voice, Scarborough asked, "Do you think she works the pole?" He did not mean Gallup. Yes, men in politics are also subject to fashionbabbling about masculinity. Al Gore was famously mocked for wearing earth tones. Barack Obama was dubbed the pinup in the 2008 swimsuit competition. John Edwards was YouTubed for styling his hair. Even John McCain's V-neck sweater was labeled, at least, "metrosexual." But this is nothing like what happens to women. I do not say this in a lofty, superior voice. Do I notice what a woman wears? You bet. At the CNN/YouTube debate, Hillary was coral in a sea of gray. Watching her campaign, I'm glad she's finally gotten it right -- right colors, right style, right fit. I'd give her clothes the female presidential seal of approval. But is there one? In the end, the question is not whether a candidate can show a hint of breast but whether you can have breasts and be president. It's not a matter of cleavage in fashion but cleavage in the voting population. Does anyone remember what Hillary was talking about on C-Span2? Education. Need I say more? Fashionbabblers of the world, let me remind you of the quote attributed to Sigmund Freud: Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes a V-neck is just a V-neck. Ellen Goodman's e-mail address is ellengoodman@globe.com. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/07/27/political_fashionbabble/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

Here's a story about one of those oh so incompetent, useless blogs and how the mainstream media is the only legitimate news source. I check into to this blog fairly often myself. http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/how_talkingpointsmemo_beat_the.php?page=1

A related story is on Newsweek's cover this week. Gore: Polluters manipulate climate info By GILLIAN WONG, Associated Press Writer Tue Aug 7, 2:00 PM ET SINGAPORE - Former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday that some of the world's largest energy companies, including Exxon Mobil Corp., are funding research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming as part of a campaign to mislead the public. ADVERTISEMENT ExxonMobil, the world's largest publicly traded oil company, rejected the allegation. "There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community" about global warming, Gore said at a forum in Singapore. "In actuality, there is very little disagreement." "This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science," Gore said. "We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion." Gore likened the campaign to that of the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of uncertainty and debate within the scientific community on the harmful effects of smoking cigarettes. "Some of the tobacco companies spent millions of dollars to create the appearance that there was disagreement on the science. And some of the large coal and utility companies and the largest oil company, ExxonMobil, have been involved in doing that exact same thing for the last several years," Gore said. After the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made up of the world's top climate scientists, released a report in February that warned the cause of global warming is "very likely" man-made, "the deniers offered a bounty of $10,000 for each article disputing the consensus that people could crank out and get published somewhere," Gore said. "They're trying to manipulate opinion and they are taking us for fools," he said. Last year, British and American science advocacy groups accused ExxonMobil of funding groups that undermine the scientific consensus on climate change. The company said the scientists' reports were just attempts to smear ExxonMobil's name and confuse the debate. ExxonMobil spokesman Gantt Walton said Tuesday that the company's financial support for scientific reports did not mean it influenced the outcome of those studies. ExxonMobil believes the risk that greenhouse gas emissions are contributing to climate change warrants taking action to limit them, he said. "The recycling of this type of discredited conspiracy theory diverts attention from the real challenge at hand: how to provide the energy needed to improve global living standards while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions," he said. Gore said that with growing awareness of climate change, the world will see an acceleration in efforts to fight the problem, and urged businesses to recognize that reducing carbon emissions is in their long-term interest. But while Washington should lead by example, he said developing nations also have to play a part. "Countries like China, just to give an example, which will next year be the largest emitter in the world, can't be excluded just because it's technically a developing country," Gore said. "When you look at the absolute amount of CO2 each year and going forward, China will soon surpass the U.S." As its economy expands, China faces an increased risk from the effects of climate change and must find ways to leapfrog old, polluting technologies in ways that can maintain growth, Gore said. In June, the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency said China overtook the United States in carbon dioxide emissions by about 7.5 percent in 2006. China was 2 percent below the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions in 2005, the agency said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070807/ap_on_re_as/gore_climate_change;_ylt=AiJwr1xYeh.5Yb8oc7KofUqs0NUE

LOL!!! Short and sweet. Edwards Statement on the Resignation of Karl Rove Aug 13, 2007 2:36 PM Chapel Hill, North Carolina � John Edwards today released the following statement in reaction to President Bush�s announcement that his senior advisor, Karl Rove, will resign at the end of the month: "Goodbye, good riddance." http://johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20070813-karl-rove/

Wonder what happens if the dog doesn't spend it all before she dies? Boy, I'd sure like to be the administrator of that trust. ;-) Helmsley's Dog Gets $12 Million in Will Wednesday August 29, 12:45 pm ET Helmsley Dog Gets $12 Million, but Real Estate Billionaire Leaves Nothing to 2 Grandchildren NEW YORK (AP) -- Leona Helmsley's dog will continue to live an opulent life, and then be buried alongside her in a mausoleum. But two of Helmsley's grandchildren got nothing from the late luxury hotelier and real estate billionaire's estate. Helmsley left her beloved white Maltese, named Trouble, a $12 million trust fund, according to her will, which was made public Tuesday in surrogate court. She also left millions for her brother, Alvin Rosenthal, who was named to care for Trouble in her absence, as well as two of four grandchildren from her late son Jay Panzirer -- so long as they visit their father's grave site once each calendar year. Otherwise, she wrote, neither will get a penny of the $5 million she left for each. Helmsley left nothing to two of Jay Panzirer's other children -- Craig and Meegan Panzirer -- for "reasons that are known to them," she wrote. But no one made out better than Trouble, who once appeared in ads for the Helmsley Hotels, and lived up to her name by biting a housekeeper. "I direct that when my dog, Trouble, dies, her remains shall be buried next to my remains in the Helmsley mausoleum," Helmsley wrote in her will. The mausoleum, she ordered, must be "washed or steam-cleaned at least once a year." She left behind $3 million for the upkeep of her final resting place in Westchester County, where she is buried with her husband, Harry Helmsley. She also left her chauffeur, Nicholas Celea, $100,000. She ordered that cash from sales of the Helmsley's residences and belongings, reported to be worth billions, be sold and that the money be given to the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. Her longtime spokesman, Howard Rubenstein, had no comment. Helmsley died earlier this month at her Connecticut home. She became known as a symbol of 1980s greed and earned the nickname "the Queen of Mean" after her 1988 indictment and subsequent conviction for tax evasion. One employee had quoted her as snarling, "Only the little people pay taxes." http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070829/helmsley_s_pooch.html?.v=1

I saw that yesterday. I and some others were wondering yesterday if the brother gets the dog's money when it's gone. Maybe it goes to the foundation also. And the poor chauffeur gets a whole 100K.

In the Too Stupid for Words Dept: Airline tells woman her outfit won't fly 20 minutes ago SAN DIEGO - A 23-year-old woman who boarded a Southwest Airlines plane in a short skirt for a flight to Arizona says she was led off the plane for wearing an outfit that was considered too skimpy. Kyla Ebbert said a Southwest employee asked her to leave her seat while the plane was preparing to leave San Diego's Lindbergh Field on July 3. Ebbert, a student who was headed to Tucson for a doctor's appointment, said Friday on NBC's "Today" show that the employee told her she would have to catch a later flight. "You're dressed inappropriately. This is a family airline. You're too provocative to fly on this plane," she quoted the employee as saying. "I said, 'What part is it? The shirt? The skirt? Which part?' And he said the whole thing." Ebbert was eventually allowed back on the plane after offering to adjust her sweater but said she was humiliated and embarrassed. "I felt like everybody was staring at me. They had all heard him lecturing me," she told "Today" show host Matt Lauer. She appeared on the show in the same short white skirt, white shirt and green sweater that she said she wore on the flight. Chris Mainz, a spokesman for the Dallas-based airline, said a customer service supervisor asked Ebbert to leave the plane and addressed her in the walkway leading back to the terminal, "away from the other customers." The employee felt the outfit "revealed too much" but was placated after Ebbert made adjustments that included covering her stomach, Mainz said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070908/ap_on_fe_st/odd_skirt_squabble;_ylt=Am9Vqh3rqegkSxZMuwsP3QouQE4F

I found this story so sad, yet fascinating. I'd be very interested in seeing that book. Perhaps it will end up in a museum one day. I've been to Dachau, but was strangely not as moved as I thought I would be. The grounds are very spare (or were 16 yrs ago), so it was hard for me to really feel what went on there. Sort of like with the WTC site now. It's simply a construction hole in the ground like any other to simply look at, the difference being I still have the memory of seeing the pile of rubble up close not long after....and the smell. Woman pursues mystery of Dachau album By ARTHUR MAX 49 minutes ago BAD AROLSEN, Germany - Deep in Shari Klages' memory is an image of herself as a girl in New Jersey, going into her parents' bedroom, pulling a thick leather-bound album from the top shelf of a closet and sitting down on the bed to leaf through it. What she saw was page after page of ink-and-watercolor drawings that convey, with simple lines yet telling detail, the brutality of Dachau, the Nazi concentration camp where her father spent the last weeks of World War II. Arrival, enslavement, torture, death � the 30 pictures expose the worsening nightmare through the artist's eye for the essential, and add graphic texture to the body of testimony by Holocaust survivors. "I have a sense of being quite horrified, of feeling my stomach in my throat," Klages says. Just by looking at the book, she felt she was doing something wrong and was afraid of being caught. Now, she finally wants to make the album public. Scholars who have seen it call it historically unique and an artistic treasure. But who drew the pictures? Only Klages' father could know. It was he who brought the album back from Dachau when he immigrated to America on a ship with more than 60 Holocaust orphans � and he had committed suicide in 1972 in his garage in Parsippany, New Jersey. The sole clue was a signature at the bottom of several drawings: Porulski. Klages, 47, has begun a quest to discover who Porulski was, and how her family came to be the custodian of his remarkable artistic legacy. The Associated Press has helped to fill in some of the blanks. What unfolds is a story of Holocaust survival compressed into two tragic lives, a tale with threads stretching from Warsaw to Auschwitz and Dachau, from Australia to suburban England, and finally to a bedroom in Florida where a fatherless girl makes a traumatic discovery. It shows how today, as the survivors dwindle in number, their children and grandchildren struggle to comprehend the Nazi genocide that indelibly scarred their families, and in the process run into mysteries that may never be solved. This is Shari Klages' mystery: How did Arnold Unger, her Polish Jewish father, a 15-year-old newcomer to Dachau, end up in possession of the artwork of a Polish Catholic more than twice his age, who had been in the concentration camps through most of World War II? None of the records Klages found confirm that the two men knew each other, though they lived in adjacent blocks in Dachau. All that is certain is that Unger overlapped with Porulski during the three weeks the boy spent among nearly 30,000 inmates of Dachau's main camp. "He never talked about his experiences in the war," said Klages. "I don't recall specifically ever being told about the album, or actually learning that I was the child of a Holocaust survivor. It was just something I always knew." As adults, she and her three siblings took turns keeping the album and Unger's other wartime memorabilia. The album begins with an image of four prisoners in winter coats carrying suitcases and marching toward Dachau's watchtower under the rifles of SS guards. It is followed by a scene of two inmates being stripped for a humiliating examination by a kapo, a prisoner working for the Nazis. One image portrays two prisoners pausing in their work to doff their caps to a soldier escorting a prostitute � intimated by the seam on her stocking. Another shows a leashed dog lunging at a terrified inmate. The drawings grow more and more debasing. Three prisoners hang by their arms tied behind their backs; a captured escapee is paraded wearing a sign: "Hurray, I am back again"; an inmate is hanged from a scaffold; and, in the final image, a man lies on the ground, shot dead next to the barbed-wire fence under the looming watchtower. The album also has 258 photographs. Some are copies of well-known, haunting images of piles of victims' bodies taken by the U.S. army that liberated the camp. Others are photographs, apparently taken for Nazi propaganda, portraying Dachau as an idyllic summer camp. Still others are personal snapshots of Unger with Polish refugees or with American soldiers who befriended him. Barbara Distel, the director of the Dachau Concentration Camp Memorial Site, said Porulski probably drew the pictures shortly after the camp's liberation in April 1945. He used identical sheets of paper, ink and watercolors for all 30 pictures, she said, and he "would never have dared" to draw such horrors while he was still under Nazi gaze. "It's amazing after so many years that these kinds of documents still turn up," Distel told the AP. "It's a unique artifact," and clearly drawn by someone with an intimate knowledge of the camp's reality, she said. Holocaust artwork has turned up before, but Distel and Holocaust scholar Michael Berenbaum, who is with the American Jewish University in Los Angeles, say they are unaware of any sequential narrative of camp life comparable to Porulski's. "I've seen two or three or four, but never 30," said Berenbaum. In Coral Springs, Florida, where she now lives, Klages showed the book in 2005 to a neighbor, Avi Hoffman, executive director of the National Center for Jewish Cultural Arts. Hoffman immediately saw its quality and significance. The two became determined to uncover its background and find out if the artist had created an undiscovered body of work. In August, Klages, Hoffman and Berenbaum went to Germany to begin their hunt. They hired a crew to document it, hoping a film would help finance a foundation to exhibit the book. They began chipping away at the album's secrets at the Dachau memorial, outside Munich, where they found an arrival record for Michal Porulski, which listed his profession as artist, in 1941. They learned that Unger hid the fact that he was Jewish when he reached Dachau three weeks before the war ended. "That probably saved his life," Hoffman said. They also discovered a strong likelihood that the album's binding was fashioned from the recycled leather of an SS officer's uniform. Unger, an engaging youngster, became an office boy and translator for U.S. occupation authorities at Dachau, which was turned into a displaced persons camp, and obtained a U.S. visa in 1947. Research by Klages' group and the AP has begun to pull together the scattered threads of Porulski's life from long forgotten records at the Warsaw Academy of Fine Arts, a tiny museum in Warsaw, Auschwitz and Dachau, the International Tracing Service of the Red Cross, Australian immigration records and data from England. Porulski enrolled in the Warsaw arts academy in 1934 after completing two years of army service. Attached to his neatly written application is a photograph of a good looking young man with light hair and dreamy eyes. It says he was a farmer's son, born June 20, 1910, in the central town of Rychwal, although in later records Porulski said he was born five years later. Chronically poor, he left the academy after failing to secure a loan for his tuition but was later reinstated. After Germany invaded in 1939, he made some money painting watercolor postcards of Nazi-occupied Poland, two of which have survived and are now in the Warsaw Museum of Caricature. In June 1940, he was arrested in a Nazi roundup "without any reason," he wrote many years later in an appeal for help from the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. Two months later, he and 1,500 others were the first Poles to be shipped from Warsaw to Auschwitz. He spent eight months there, then was sent to the Neuengamme camp and finally to Dachau, near Munich, in May 1941. In Dachau, according to a brief reference in a Polish book on wartime art, he painted portraits, flowers, folk dance scenes and decoration for a clandestine theater. In 1949 he sailed to Australia and tried to work as a painter and decorator but mostly lived off friends. Relatives say he was robbed of his money and passport. He returned to Europe in 1963 and lived in England. He visited Poland in the early 1970s for about three weeks, and stayed with his sister, Janina Krol, in Gdynia on the Baltic coast, and another relative outside Warsaw, Wanda Wojcikowska. He brought his sister paintings of Dachau, his niece, Danuta Ostrowska, now 75, recalls. But her mother threw them away, saying "I can't look at them." The family still owns nine of his mostly prewar paintings. Poland's communist authorities wanted Porulski out of the country, Wojcikowska's daughter, Malgorzata Stozek, recalls. "My mother even found a woman willing to marry him, to help him stay in Poland," but he had already left, Stozek says. His letters from England said he found work maintaining bridges, Stozek said. "He wrote that the moment he finished painting a bridge over some river, he had to start again." It could have been a metaphor for a life going nowhere. "One day I came to see my mother and she was crying because he wrote to her that he had no money, he was hungry and was sleeping on park benches. He lived in terrible poverty," Stozek told the AP. He was so lonely, she said, that he had considered suicide. In 1978 he sent a request for war compensation to the International Tracing Service in the central German town of Bad Arolsen, which houses the world's largest archive of concentration camp records and lists of Holocaust victims. "I have no occupation of any sort. I was unable to resume my studies after all those years in the camps," he wrote. "I am just by myself, and I live from day to day." The ITS replied that it had no authority to give grants, but was sending confirmation of his incarceration to the U.N. refugee agency to support his earlier reparations claim. Unger also shows up in the Tracing Service, in a 1955 two-page letter he wrote recounting his ordeal that began when he was 9. Unger's father had a prosperous furniture business near Krakow. "Then the infamous horde of Nazis overran our town, disrupted our life, murdered my parents and little sister, and robbed us of all we had." He was the only survivor of 50 members of the Unger family. Christian friends hid him for a while, but he ended up imprisoned inside the Krakow ghetto, then was moved to a series of concentration camps. His daughter says that after he immigrated to America, he told a cousin with whom he lived in New Jersey that his job at Dachau had been to tend the ovens. The Nazis commonly used inmates for such purposes � it was one of the few ways of surviving. Newly arrived in America, Unger spoke to Newark newspapers of his years of torment, saying he escaped three times during marches between camps but was always recaptured. At one point, he told the Newark Evening News that he was herded into a gas chamber at Natzweiler camp with 50 other prisoners, but they were spared at the last minute because some of them were electricians the Nazis needed for their war effort. The two lives, briefly intertwined by the Holocaust and an album of photos and paintings, ended 17 years apart � Unger by hanging himself in 1972, Porulski in 1989 in St. Mary's Hospital near Hereford, England, of pneumonia and tuberculosis. The death certificate gives his age as 74 and his profession as "painter (retired)." Shari Klages was 12 when her father died. He had just been laid off from his 18-year job in the aeronautics industry, and his wife had been diagnosed with brain cancer. His suicide is given added poignancy by the image of the hanged inmate in the album, and Klages believes it was his Holocaust experience that weighed most heavily on him. "I have no doubt it was the most significant contributor to his death," she said. ___ Associated Press investigative researcher Randy Herschaft in New York contributed to this report. Arthur Max reported from Bad Arolsen, Germany, and Monika Scislowska from Warsaw, Poland. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070916/ap_on_re_eu/drawings_from_dachau;_ylt=AgaydLk_UeCE2jT2ARycfbCs0NUE ___ On the Net: National Center for Jewish Cultural Arts: http://www.2jewish.org/ Dachau: http://www.kz-gedenkstaette-dachau.de/englisch/content/index.htm International Tracing Service: http://www.its-arolsen.org

I am outraged that the senate wants to pass a resolution to get rid of MoveOn.org. They want to stop the truth, they want to intimidate the knowlegeable public. I called my senators this morning and told them too. Why doesn't Obama give an opinion. Giulianni has already said that Hilary has ties with MoveOn.

Ridiculous to waste time on this and still defeat a motion to vote on a bill that would give troops 1:1 time at home after deployment. Here's Chris Dodd's website with his comment on the MoveOn.org vote. http://chrisdodd.com/blog/dodd-moveon-ad-votes-senate

Time Mag weighs in; too funny. I'll tell ya--Giuliani is surprising me, and not in a good way. I thought he was too much of a no-bullshit guy for this. Wednesday, Sep. 19, 2007 How Dare You! By Michael Kinsley Goodness gracious. oh, my paws and whiskers. Some of the meanest, most ornery hombres around are suddenly feeling faint. Notorious tough guys are swooning with the vapors. The biggest beasts in the barnyard are all aflutter over something they read in the New York Times. It's that ad from MoveOn.org � the one that calls General David Petraeus, the head of U.S. forces in Iraq, general betray us. All across the radio spectrum, right-wing shock jocks are themselves shocked. How could anybody say such a thing? It's horrifying. It's outrageous. It's disgraceful. It's just beyond the pale ... It's ... oh, my heavens ... say, is it a bit stuffy in here? ... I think I'm going to ... Could I have a glass of ... oh, dear [thud]. Welcome to the wonderful world of umbrage, the new language of American politics. You would not have thought that the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly would be so sensitive. Sticks and stones and so on. Yet they all seem to have taken one look at that ad and fainted dead away. And when they came round, they demanded � as if with one voice (or at least as if with one list of talking points) � that every Democratic presidential candidate must "condemn" this shocking, shocking document. The ad is pretty tough, and the pun on the general's name is pretty witless. You could argue that since the verb betray and the noun traitor have the same root, the ad is accusing the head of American forces in Iraq of treason. The ad can also be interpreted � more plausibly if you consider the rest of the text � merely as questioning the general's honesty, not his patriotism. But whatever your interpretation of the ad, all the gasping for air and waving of scented handkerchiefs among the war's most enthusiastic supporters is pretty comical. It's all phony, of course. The war's backers are obviously delighted to have this ad from which they can make an issue. They wouldn't trade it for a week in Anbar province (a formerly troubled area of Iraq that is now, thanks to us, an Eden of peace and tranquillity where barely a car bomb disturbs the perfumed silence � or so they say). These days, mock outrage is used by every side of every dispute. It's fair enough to criticize something your opponent said while secretly thanking your lucky stars that he said it. The fuss over this MoveOn.org ad is something else: it is the result of a desperate scavenging for umbrage material. When so many people are clamoring for a chance to swoon that they each have to take a number and when the landscape is so littered with folks lying prostrate and pretending to be dead that it starts to look like the end of a Civil War battle re-enactment, this isn't spontaneous mass outrage. This is choreography. The constant calls for political candidates to prove their bona fides by condemning or denouncing something somebody else said or to renounce a person's support or to return her tainted money are a tiresome new tic in American politics. They're turning politics into a game of "Mother, May I?" Did you say "Here is my plan for health-care reform"? Uh-oh, you were supposed to say "I condemn MoveOn.org's comments on General Petraeus, and here is my plan for health-care reform." All this drawing of uncrossable lines and issuing of fatuous fatwas is supposed to be a bad habit of the left. When right-wingers are attacking this habit rather than practicing it, they call it political correctness. The problem with political correctness is that it turns discussions of substance into arguments over etiquette. The last thing that supporters of the war want to talk about at this point is the war. They'd far rather talk about this insult to General Petraeus. It just isn't done in polite society, it seems, to criticize a general in the middle of a war. (Although, when else?) The Republican front runner, Rudy Giuliani, is another tough guy who has seized the opportunity to reveal his easily bruised soft side. He is running TV commercials saying Hillary Clinton "stood by silently" while MoveOn.org ran its despicable ad. Another way of saying this would be that she had nothing to do with the ad. But Rudy accuses her of "joining with" MoveOn.org and "attacking" General Petraeus, although the only evidence he can muster for this accusation is a clip from Clinton telling the general at a hearing that his reports of progress in the war "really require the willing suspension of disbelief." For this, Giuliani demands an "apology," not just to the general but to all American troops in Iraq. He accuses her of "turning her back" on America's brave soldiers "just when our troops need all our support to finish the job." When we try to untangle this web of accusation and innuendo, Giuliani appears to be suggesting that it is unacceptable for a Senator to express skepticism about anything said by a general in uniform. If he believes that, he does not understand democracy. I am shocked by this. In fact, if Giuliani doesn't apologize, and if the other Republican candidates don't condemn this commercial, I think I'm going to faint. Click to Print Find this article at: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1663424,00.html

all the gasping for air and waving of scented handkerchiefs among the war's most enthusiastic supporters is pretty comical. Daily Kos has been making fun of all their "angst" all week. denouncing something somebody else said or to renounce a person's support or to return her tainted money I was thinking after the Clinton/Hsu thing that every candidate should be allowed one questionable donation/donor, so every one's on a level playing field and no one can claim some kind of ridiculous financial moral superiority over the others. Now more than one.....;-) But Rudy accuses her of "joining with" MoveOn.org and "attacking" General Petraeus, although the only evidence he can muster for this accusation is a clip from Clinton telling the general at a hearing that his reports of progress in the war "really require the willing suspension of disbelief." I listened to the hearings while cruising up the CA coast on vacation and Hillary pointedly prefaced her quote above with saying how much she respected the General (and the troops) and his service over the years. And believe me, she wasn't the only one who expressed deep skepticism. Wish I could remember name of the last committee member who interviewed Petreus and Crocker, but while she also expressed her respect and support for Petreus and his duties, she went on to very pointedly express disbelief at and ask for an explanation of the lack of accountability for all the money that's been spent (she gave details) on reconstruction and "supporting the troops" with little to show for it. Her career had been as an auditor prior to govt service. Thanks, Mari.

Thanks, Mari. I am starting to hate Giuliani. I enjoyed reading the Criss dodd blog, thanks, Dorine. This all makes me sick to my stomach, and if Feinstein from CA voted against MoveOn, what can come next? Why don't people protest en-masse? I've been to the anti-war rally in DC and it was a joke, there should be millions out there marching. What makes this youth so apathetic?

I have to say, that I have been continually surprised at the good will for Guiliani outside of NY, but then again I shouldn't be. Now I say that having voted for him once....I think he was mayor already when I moved here. But while I found that he had his significant faults, he was a good mayor for NYC. But knowing his governing style, I knew he was not President material when this talk was thrown around years ago, even while they talked about him running for Senate or Governor. You might call him another "Decider". Finesse and diplomacy are not his middle names. He's closer to Bush's style. He's completely full of sh*t.

I used to like him. Giulianni turned NYC around for the better. The only thing he has said that makes sense is that there are too many mosques in the US and something should be done. I will add that no one in EU is doing anything about the many mosques there and it is a problem. My solution, for every mosque in the western world there should be a church in the muslim world. That would nip it in the bud. I am happy that Obama was a no-show at the Senater vote against MoveOn.org yesterday. I am beginning to like him more and more.

LOL!! Obviously someone has nothing better to do. 'God' apparently responds to lawsuit By NATE JENKINS, Associated Press Writer Thu Sep 20, 11:18 PM ET LINCOLN, Neb. - A legislator who filed a lawsuit against God has gotten something he might not have expected: a response. One of two court filings from "God" came Wednesday under otherworldly circumstances, according to John Friend, clerk of the Douglas County District Court in Omaha. "This one miraculously appeared on the counter. It just all of a sudden was here � poof!" Friend said. State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha sued God last week, seeking a permanent injunction against the Almighty for making terroristic threats, inspiring fear and causing "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants." Chambers, a self-proclaimed agnostic who often criticizes Christians, said his filing was triggered by a federal lawsuit he considers frivolous. He said he's trying to makes the point that anybody can sue anybody. Not so, says "God." His response argues that the defendant is immune from some earthly laws and the court lacks jurisdiction. It adds that blaming God for human oppression and suffering misses an important point. "I created man and woman with free will and next to the promise of immortal life, free will is my greatest gift to you," according to the response, as read by Friend. There was no contact information on the filing, although St. Michael the Archangel is listed as a witness, Friend said. A second response from "God" disputing Chambers' allegations lists a phone number for a Corpus Christi law office. A message left for that office was not immediately returned Thursday. Attempts to reach Chambers by phone and at his Capitol office Thursday were unsuccessful. ___ Associated Press Writer Anna Jo Bratton in Omaha contributed to this report.

Apparently there's nothing that can't be outsourced to India. :-/ World outsources pregnancies to India By SAM DOLNICK, Associated Press Writer ANAND, India - Every night in this quiet western Indian city, 15 pregnant women prepare for sleep in the spacious house they share, ascending the stairs in a procession of ballooned bellies, to bedrooms that become a landscape of soft hills. A team of maids, cooks and doctors looks after the women, whose pregnancies would be unusual anywhere else but are common here. The young mothers of Anand, a place famous for its milk, are pregnant with the children of infertile couples from around the world. The small clinic at Kaival Hospital matches infertile couples with local women, cares for the women during pregnancy and delivery, and counsels them afterward. Anand's surrogate mothers, pioneers in the growing field of outsourced pregnancies, have given birth to roughly 40 babies. More than 50 women in this city are now pregnant with the children of couples from the United States, Taiwan, Britain and beyond. The women earn more than many would make in 15 years. But the program raises a host of uncomfortable questions that touch on morals and modern science, exploitation and globalization, and that most natural of desires: to have a family. Dr. Nayna Patel, the woman behind Anand's baby boom, defends her work as meaningful for everyone involved. "There is this one woman who desperately needs a baby and cannot have her own child without the help of a surrogate. And at the other end there is this woman who badly wants to help her (own) family," Patel said. "If this female wants to help the other one ... why not allow that? ... It's not for any bad cause. They're helping one another to have a new life in this world." Experts say commercial surrogacy � or what has been called "wombs for rent" � is growing in India. While no reliable numbers track such pregnancies nationwide, doctors work with surrogates in virtually every major city. The women are impregnated in-vitro with the egg and sperm of couples unable to conceive on their own. Commercial surrogacy has been legal in India since 2002, as it is in many other countries, including the United States. But India is the leader in making it a viable industry rather than a rare fertility treatment. Experts say it could take off for the same reasons outsourcing in other industries has been successful: a wide labor pool working for relatively low rates. Critics say the couples are exploiting poor women in India � a country with an alarmingly high maternal death rate � by hiring them at a cut-rate cost to undergo the hardship, pain and risks of labor. "It raises the factor of baby farms in developing countries," said Dr. John Lantos of the Center for Practical Bioethics in Kansas City, Mo. "It comes down to questions of voluntariness and risk." Patel's surrogates are aware of the risks because they've watched others go through them. Many of the mothers know one another, or are even related. Three sisters have all borne strangers' children, and their sister-in-law is pregnant with a second surrogate baby. Nearly half the babies have been born to foreign couples while the rest have gone to Indians. Ritu Sodhi, a furniture importer from Los Angeles who was born in India, spent $200,000 trying to get pregnant through in-vitro fertilization, and was considering spending another $80,000 to hire a surrogate mother in the United States. "We were so desperate," she said. "It was emotionally and financially exhausting." Then, on the Internet, Sodhi found Patel's clinic. After spending about $20,000 � more than many couples because it took the surrogate mother several cycles to conceive � Sodhi and her husband are now back home with their 4-month-old baby, Neel. They plan to return to Anand for a second child. "Even if it cost $1 million, the joy that they had delivered to me is so much more than any money that I have given them," said Sodhi. "They're godsends to deliver something so special." Patel's center is believed to be unique in offering one-stop service. Other clinics may request that the couple bring in their own surrogate, often a family member or friend, and some place classified ads. But in Anand the couple just provides the egg and sperm and the clinic does the rest, drawing from a waiting list of tested and ready surrogates. Young women are flocking to the clinic to sign up for the list. Suman Dodia, a pregnant, baby-faced 26-year-old, said she will buy a house with the $4,500 she receives from the British couple whose child she's carrying. It would have taken her 15 years to earn that on her maid's monthly salary of $25. Dodia's own three children were delivered at home and she said she never visited a doctor during those pregnancies. "It's very different with medicine," Dodia said, resting her hands on her hugely pregnant belly. "I'm being more careful now than I was with my own pregnancy." Patel said she carefully chooses which couples to help and which women to hire as surrogates. She only accepts couples with serious fertility issues, like survivors of uterine cancer. The surrogate mothers have to be between 18 and 45, have at least one child of their own, and be in good medical shape. Like some fertility reality show, a rotating cast of surrogate mothers live together in a home rented by the clinic and overseen by a former surrogate mother. They receive their children and husbands as visitors during the day, when they're not busy with English or computer classes. "They feel like my family," said Rubina Mandul, 32, the surrogate house's den mother. "The first 10 days are hard, but then they don't want to go home." Mandul, who has two sons of her own, gave birth to a child for an American couple in February. She said she misses the baby, but she stays in touch with the parents over the Internet. A photo of the American couple with the child hangs over the sofa. "They need a baby more than me," she said. The surrogate mothers and the parents sign a contract that promises the couple will cover all medical expenses in addition to the woman's payment, and the surrogate mother will hand over the baby after birth. The couples fly to Anand for the in-vitro fertilization and again for the birth. Most couples end up paying the clinic less than $10,000 for the entire procedure, including fertilization, the fee to the mother and medical expenses. Counseling is a major part of the process and Patel tells the women to think of the pregnancy as "someone's child comes to stay at your place for nine months." Kailas Gheewala, 25, said she doesn't think of the pregnancy as her own. "The fetus is theirs, so I'm not sad to give it back," said Gheewala, who plans to save the $6,250 she's earning for her two daughters' education. "The child will go to the U.S. and lead a better life and I'll be happy." Patel said none of the surrogate mothers has had especially difficult births or serious medical problems, but risks are inescapable. "We have to be very careful," she said. "We overdo all the health investigations. We do not take any chances." Health experts expect to see more Indian commercial surrogacy programs in coming years. Dr. Indira Hinduja, a prominent fertility specialist who was behind India's first test-tube baby two decades ago, receives several surrogacy inquiries a month from couples overseas. "People are accepting it," said Hinduja. "Earlier they used to be ashamed but now they are becoming more broadminded." But if commercial surrogacy keeps growing, some fear it could change from a medical necessity for infertile women to a convenience for the rich. "You can picture the wealthy couples of the West deciding that pregnancy is just not worth the trouble anymore and the whole industry will be farmed out," said Lantos. Or, Lantos said, competition among clinics could lead to compromised safety measures and "the clinic across the street offers it for 20 percent less and one in Bangladesh undercuts that and pretty soon conditions get bad." The industry is not regulated by the government. Health officials have issued nonbinding ethical guidelines and called for legislation to protect the surrogates and the children. For now, the surrogate mothers in Anand seem as pleased with the arrangement as the new parents. "I know this isn't mine," said Jagrudi Sharma, 34, pointing to her belly. "But I'm giving happiness to another couple. And it's great for me." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071230/ap_on_re_as/india_wombs_for_rent;_ylt=AuneZmOsRsqDpOMaqDtuxTys0NUE

From yesterday's (pre NH) NY Times: Women Are Never Front-Runners By GLORIA STEINEM THE woman in question became a lawyer after some years as a community organizer, married a corporate lawyer and is the mother of two little girls, ages 9 and 6. Herself the daughter of a white American mother and a black African father � in this race-conscious country, she is considered black � she served as a state legislator for eight years, and became an inspirational voice for national unity. Be honest: Do you think this is the biography of someone who could be elected to the United States Senate? After less than one term there, do you believe she could be a viable candidate to head the most powerful nation on earth? If you answered no to either question, you�re not alone. Gender is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House. This country is way down the list of countries electing women and, according to one study, it polarizes gender roles more than the average democracy. That�s why the Iowa primary was following our historical pattern of making change. Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot, and generally have ascended to positions of power, from the military to the boardroom, before any women (with the possible exception of obedient family members in the latter). If the lawyer described above had been just as charismatic but named, say, Achola Obama instead of Barack Obama, her goose would have been cooked long ago. Indeed, neither she nor Hillary Clinton could have used Mr. Obama�s public style � or Bill Clinton�s either � without being considered too emotional by Washington pundits. So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects �only� the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more �masculine� for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren�t too many of them); and because there is still no �right� way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what. I�m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That�s why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that. I�m supporting Senator Clinton because like Senator Obama she has community organizing experience, but she also has more years in the Senate, an unprecedented eight years of on-the-job training in the White House, no masculinity to prove, the potential to tap a huge reservoir of this country�s talent by her example, and now even the courage to break the no-tears rule. I�m not opposing Mr. Obama; if he�s the nominee, I�ll volunteer. Indeed, if you look at votes during their two-year overlap in the Senate, they were the same more than 90 percent of the time. Besides, to clean up the mess left by President Bush, we may need two terms of President Clinton and two of President Obama. But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex. What worries me is that she is accused of �playing the gender card� when citing the old boys� club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations. What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didn�t. What worries me is that reporters ignore Mr. Obama�s dependence on the old � for instance, the frequent campaign comparisons to John F. Kennedy � while not challenging the slander that her progressive policies are part of the Washington status quo. What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age. This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. It�s time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers. We have to be able to say: �I�m supporting her because she�ll be a great president and because she�s a woman.� Gloria Steinem is a co-founder of the Women�s Media Center.

Mari, I'm so glad you posted this here. Kudos to Ms. Steinem, who has always been a hero of mine.

Is anyone watching the Democratic debate tonight? Yeow! Quite lively! Gloves half off. But it's the Obama and Clinton show. Poor Edwards is getting shoved to the side.

You know, after 7 years, you'd think the guy could say NU-Clee-er correctly. What a f'ng a*hole. Good riddance...in a year.

(Dorine)What a f'ng a*hole. Good riddance...in a year. That shoe seems to fit... I just can't seem to make myself watch him - he's appalling. Did you happen to catch Bill Maher the other night? He made the comment that there's only one year left & he just hopes that Bush doesn't have one more major "F**K-up in him." Scary thought, indeed.

Oh thanks, you reminded me I didn't go back to watch his show last week. I missed it.

John Edwards is quitting the race. I like John; he's a good man. In a less crowded year . . . http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hoAvkYTooNMqpzn8fF_3B76ko8eAD8UG9L300

Texas looks like it's Hillary's last chance, and she's 2 points behind in the polls. Anyone catch that SNL skit with Obama and Hillary?

I missed the SNL skit. But I was working at Hillary's Headquarters last night and one of the big wigs came to tell us that they are obtimistic by the info they are receiving from Texas and Ohio. I personally spoke to many voters in Spanish last night and they do seem to be supporting Hillary. The odd thing is that in Texas they have the primary vote during the day and voters must come out again at 6:30 PM to vote in the caucus. The primary vote determines 60 percent of the delegates and the caucus 40. So how many old women who voted absentee will be out at night for the caucus vote?:-( Dorine, I applaud the women in Anand India.

Did any UK Ladies feel the earthquake last night? It occurred around 1am. I can't believe I sat here at 1am working on a gif (bad case of insomnia) and didn't even notice any difference apart from the TV stand rattling and creaking, which I was a little spooked by, Crikey!

I'd just gone to bed, and the bed started shaking and the widows rattled. My DH, who was still downstairs, didn't notice anything!

Thanks, Bethan. it put's my mind at rest that your DH was downstairs and didn't notice anything because I was also downstairs and apart from the TV stand rattling I really didn't notice anything. Ant was upstairs and was awoken by the bed shaking. Not enough for him to fully wake though. I guess the ground floor is more stable than a first floor. We have friends whom live in Hull. Their wardrobes rattled so much they thought they would land on them. My Mum told me a story of a lady whose pet parrot was shaken off it's perch and now the bird won't get back on it's perch, awwweee.

Anyone catch that SNL skit with Obama and Hillary? You mean the one that satirized the shameful free ride that the media has given to Obama, while being inordinately tough on Hillary? No, didn't see it.;-) But here's Tina Fey's endorsement of Hill: http://tv.popcrunch.com/did-tina-fey-endorse-hillary-clinton-on-saturday-night-live-video/

Thanks, Mari, I needed that. I keep telling them to Ying it. We need Ying in the Whitehouse. :-) Glad to hear the earthquake was not a bad one. I still remember a few from when I lived in LA, phew!

Check this out! It would put me off flying for sure. And kudos to the pilot. (You'll have to sit through an ad) Hope it plays ok. http://news.aol.com/story/_a/pilots-move-averts-possible-plane-crash/20080303094209990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

(Moon) But I was working at Hillary's Headquarters...in Texas they have the primary vote during the day and voters must come out again at 6:30 PM to vote in the caucus Wish I'd been more involved, now:-( I just came back from voting and running errands. On my way I passed 7 polling places and my precinct was the only one with a live Democratic presence on the perimeter. They were Obama supporters. Didn't see any Hillary signs at all and Obama signs at only 2 precincts. Now,mind you, I live in a very, very republican area and there are 10 Republican candidates running for the nomination for Congressional district 22 seat which is now held by a Democrat for the first time since I moved here 23 years ago! I has been interesting to watch these people clamor over each other trying to establish who is more Christian and/or more conservative. The caucuses start at 7:15 or after all of the voters are through. No one seems to know how long they will go and what to expect. I'll report on that later. Last night's local news had a story about voters being told to show up at 6:30, yet the polls don't close 'til 7 p.m. Some election officials were worried about chaos and overcrowding. I was really disappointed to see that Obama was first and Hillary was last on the ballot in my county with 4 other candidates in between them. I don't know how the order is decided, but the candidates are listed in a different order in other counties. (SueH) I guess the ground floor is more stable than a first floor. We have friends whom live in Hull. Their wardrobes rattled so much they thought they would land on them. Right,the higher you are in a quake the more movement there is. (I've lived with a physicist, lo, these many years;-)) My old auntie did have her china cabniet topple during a big one near San Jose and I once watched waves splash from my pool when I lived near San Francisco. I am glad that there weren't many injuries.

Good luck with that Texas two-step, Peggy! What a cesspool some of these election processes are. And don't even get me started on superdelegates. Or the Electoral College, for that matter--we never did fix that, after the 2000 fiasco. The entire process needs an overhall, IMO. Jack Nicholson's very clever endorsement of Hillary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mOa3sXjqE4&eurl=http://movies.aol.com/news/main

Saw Ari Fleischer (former press secretary to the prez) on CNN last night. He says Republicans would much rather face Obama in the fall because "the guy is a blank slate." He went on to say that "there are many more things that will come out about him between now and November, if he's the nominee."

Gad! I've been saying that for weeks. Lots of R have been voting for O in the primaries for that same reason. :-( Many Dems will not voter for O either come Nov. I would love to see Hillary president and give O Sect. of State and have him try to make something out of the middle East mess. He can even wear his turban. ;-))) Keeping fingers crossed for to night. Go Hillary!!! Jack could have done it earlier, but better late than never.

I am just back from my caucus and it was a chaotic. There were 2 precincts sharing my polling place , ergo, 4 caucuses- 2 Rep., 2 Dem. Generally only a handful attend these and sometimes only the Pct. Chairman shows up! Tonight there were hundreds and the vast majority had no idea what to do. No one was available to organize the lines through the parking lot. There was doubt that there would be enough forms for everyone to sign but someone rounded up extras. The precinct chair even had to leave to take the election results to the county. Results- my Pct. went 2 to 1 for Obama but there is a predominantly black neighborhood in the precinct boundaries. The other Pct. which is the remainder of my subdivision voted for Hillary 60% to 40% Obama. For the two precincts 10 delegates for Hillary and 11 delegates for Obama will go to the county caucus. The county caucus will be at the end of the month and there the delegates for the state convention will be chosen. Right now the local news is showing this to be a very tight race at 49% each.

Woo-hoo! I usually vote absentee, but today I voted in person, and also cast my vote for Hillary! I'm thrilled she picked up three states! Go Hillary! A lot of things were screwed up in Ohio again. A neighboring county wasn't supplied with enough Democrat ballots and people were asked to come back! Sheesh! :-( My precinct is also largely well-healed Republicans, but I know they are fed up with Bush. BTW, I just started reading The Bush Tragedy and it's a fascinating look at what makes W tick. I saw the author on C-Span, and was hooked. Peggy, that Texas Two Step is really odd...but then again so is this whole super delegate business.

I checked into CNN around 10 which was calling TX for Obama who was up by around 10 pts at that time. Didn't notice how much of the vote was counted then though. Switched off to watch something else, fell asleep. Then saw the headline this morning at the newsstand at my bus stop that Hil won TX. Amazing! I still haven't read any details yet. I hate when the news calls races so early, as I'm presuming CNN did again last night.

Looking at Peggy's post especially, and with Mari, my bafflement and dissatisfaction witht the Electoral College, with systems like those, it's a wonder anyone gets elected in this country.

(Moon) Lots of R have been voting for O in the primaries for that same reason. :-( Many Dems will not voter for O either come Nov. I was just reading a political blog from one of the newspapers in Cleveland (I think), where it was talking about the number of R's crossing over to vote D, partially because of local politics, but quite a number said they voted for Hillary since she's perceived weaker against McCain and they'll switch back to R for the national election to vote for him.

With the Machiavellian twists and turns to voting and politics, I am always amazed that people don't become totally jaded by it all. I respect volunteers who are so passionate about their candidate (whoever it is) and work tirelessly for them.

(Kathryn) am always amazed that people don't become totally jaded by it all The irony is that there are more voters than in a long time across many demographics taking part in the process.

talking about the number of R's crossing over to vote D, partially because of local politics, but quite a number said they voted for Hillary since she's perceived weaker against McCain and they'll switch back to R for the national election to vote for him. And I love those dumb R. Keep voting for Hillary! She's the one that can beat McCain. Peggy that two-step in Texas is enough to prompt a law suit, IMO. I sopke to many Hillary supporters that voted absentee because they are unable to get out to their precints to vote in person, be they elderly, or sick, or they don't go out afte3r a certain time. All that plays in O favor because of his supposed younger voters. Lisa, thank you big time! Hillary needed Ohio and her speech was perfect. :-)

(Moon) Peggy that two-step in Texas is enough to prompt a law suit, IMO Two-step is a messed up mis-step. The system does need to be changed. It would be much better to have the caucuses after the popular vote is counted and choose the delegates accordingly. The Democratic party made the plans and ordered the materials for this election months ago and at the time had no idea that the turnout would be so huge. Of course when participation is 200 times that of any previous election there are bound to be problems for either side. I could go on ad infinitum about what was wrong with just my Pct. caucus. It was hardly and orderly meeting, and I felt like my friend and I were the only ones there who had any knowledge of Robert's Rules. It didn't do much good after a vocal, bossy lady wes elected to run the meeting, then she just stood there without a clue what to do! I don't think anyone was guilty of fraud, just ineptitude. Here are some links to local stories. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5593307.html http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5593307.html Also, I must say that Barack mounted a phenominal telephone campaign. I recieved a recorded message from him and Michele every day this last week. Go Hillary- On to Pennsylvania!!! On a different 'Mad World' subject, I found this story to be remarkable. Buster has a beer and cigarette for his halfway refreshment! http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4385601&page=1

Peggy, in Texas lots of voters were disenfranchised because they were not able to go back for the Caucus that night. Lots of older voters, or handicapped voters, etc. Just curious, did you receive any calls for Hillary? Our phone bank from HQ are live people not recorded messages. Mari, we need your help in PA, I hope you have lots of friends you can gather as well. As we speak, field offices are being set up all over PA.

In NY they were recorded messages. I got several.

PA is on the case, Moon! Hill's Philly HQ opened yesterday: BTW, I've been using their computer-based calling system and it works pretty well. This way, you can make calls from home or wherever. Anyone can sign up to make calls anywhere; you just specify the area. (Those poor people in Texas last weekend kept asking me to "talk slower!") LOL!

Dems can't win without superdelegates By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 54 minutes ago WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton won't catch Barack Obama in the race for Democratic delegates chosen in primaries and caucuses, even if she wins every remaining contest. But Obama cannot win the nomination with just his pledged primary and caucus delegates either, according to an analysis by The Associated Press. That sets the stage for a pitched battle for support among "superdelegates," the party and elected officials who automatically attend the convention and can support whomever they choose. Two months into the voting, Obama can claim the most delegates chosen by voters. Clinton can claim victories in most of the big states. What should a superdelegate do? Unsurprisingly, the two campaigns have different takes on that question. "It is very difficult to see any scenario that Hillary Clinton would get the nomination in a way that doesn't rip the party apart," said Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, an Obama supporter. "I think that it would be a terrible mistake for the Democrats to not accept the will of the people who have turned out in primaries and caucuses." Clinton spokesman Doug Hattaway said Obama's lead in pledged delegates is "hardly a mandate." "Some superdelegates will go with (the) pledged delegate count, but many will go with the candidate they think can win," Hattaway said. "We have a very compelling case to make on that front, given that we're winning general election swing states, must-win states and must-win constituencies." Clinton won three out of four primaries this week, giving her campaign a much-needed boost after a month of defeats. But she picked up only 12 more delegates than Obama, leaving him with a 140-delegate lead among those won in primaries and caucuses. There are only 614 delegates available in the remaining contests, meaning Clinton would have to win about 62 percent of the them to overtake Obama, according to the AP analysis. That's nearly impossible, given the way Democrats award delegates proportionally. Consider this: Clinton posted a big win in the Ohio primary Tuesday, beating Obama by about 10 percentage points. Her take: nine more delegates than him in the Buckeye State. In the Texas primary, Clinton's margin of victory was smaller, about 3 percentage points, and her net gain was smaller, too: four more delegates than Obama. Obama could wipe out most or all of that advantage if early returns showing him winning in the Texas caucuses hold up. Final results won't be available until the party's county conventions at the end of month. The message to be taken from Clinton's victories, again, depends on which campaign is doing the spinning. "In order to have a plausible path to the nomination, they needed to score huge delegate victories and cut into our lead," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said in an e-mail to supporters. "They failed." Clinton's campaign pointed to her earlier victories in states like New Jersey, New York and California, and they questioned why Obama couldn't win in Texas and Ohio on Tuesday. "We think she can bring Ohio in a general election," said Harold Ickes, a chief strategist for Clinton. "We are not sure (Obama) can do that." The biggest remaining primary is in Pennsylvania, which will have 158 delegates at stake on April 22. Clinton's team is optimistic about her chances there. She'll be campaigning hard in the state, as will Ed Rendell, Pennsylvania's popular governor, who is an enthusiastic supporter. Obama is expected to win the Wyoming caucuses Saturday and the Mississippi primary next Tuesday, but Clinton is competing in both states to hold down his delegate accumulation. Her advisers acknowledge their past system of focusing on certain states and largely ignoring others � particularly those holding caucuses � was a mistake and helped Obama build a significant lead among pledged delegates. Obama has won nominating contests in 27 states and territories, giving him the lead in pledged delegates, 1,360 to 1,220. Even if he wins every remaining pledged delegate � including 33 that haven't been awarded from previous races � he will fall short of the 2,025 needed to secure the Democratic nomination. That's where the superdelegates come in, the nearly 800 party and elected officials who will decide the nomination if both candidates stay in the race. Clinton leads in endorsements from superdelegates, 242 to 209. But that lead has shrunk in the past month. Since an AP survey the week of Super Tuesday, Obama has added 53 superdelegates, while Clinton has had a net loss of one. In the overall race for the nomination, Obama has 1,569 delegates, to 1,462 for Clinton, according to the latest AP tally. The lobbying of superdelegates has been fierce, with at least six Clinton superdelegates switching to Obama. So far, none of Obama's superdelegates has strayed, at least not publicly. David Parker, an undecided superdelegate from North Carolina, said he has been pressured by both sides to endorse. He offered some insight on how the outcome of the primaries and caucuses would influence his vote. "In a fairly tight race � 35-50 votes � I think superdelegates have got a green light to vote how they want," Parker said. "If Obama's out there at 150, that's a red light, and I don't think the superdelegates have much business subverting the will of voters." But, he added, "Every once in a while some people run red lights." ___ Associated Press writers Beth Fouhy in Washington, Scott Bauer in Madison, Wis., and Mike Baker in Raleigh, N.C., contributed to this report. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080307/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_delegates;_ylt=AuPZe8ER3G.BsFPlH.hucIGs0NUE

Donna Brazil was on Hillary's camp when I met her at the DNC meeting in No. VA, now she's on CNN as an Obama supporter even though, she claims to be impartial. :-( Hillary seems to be able to carry the swing states and hold on to the big Dem. ones, she's the one the super delegates should be backing if they want a Dem in the Whitehouse. The red states that O got will vote R. If O gets the Dem nomination, McCain will be the next President.

(Moon) Peggy, in Texas lots of voters were disenfranchised because they were not able to go back for the Caucus that night. Lots of older voters, or handicapped voters, etc. Just curious, did you receive any calls for Hillary? I understand about the disenfranchisement. Even my son couldn't caucus due to a rehearsal and there were some who showed up but were unable to stay because it was taking too long. I think it is unreasonable that it takes the better part of one's day to vote. I don't remember getting any call from Hillary's campaign. I was getting at least 10 calls a day, most were pre-recorded messages. Barack's campaign did make live calls to university students and recent grads (registered here) asking for them by name. I confirmed this with the two other neighbors who showed up. I just checked the results for my precinct 285 votes cast in the Dem. primary. Actual votes Obama- 45.80% Clinton- 53.85% Caucus delegates Obama- 6 Clinton-3

From today's Wash Post: Downside of Obama Strategy Losses in Big States Spur General-Election Fears Read the article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030703318.html?hpid=topnews

This is a translation from yesterday's Corriere della Sera, Italy's #1 newspaper. I have always admired Magdi Allam, a very intelligent unbiased journalist. I did not know he was under a fatwa. He has just converted to Catholism so now his risk is higher. Magdi Allam Recounts His Path to Conversion Benedict XVI Baptized the Journalist at Easter Vigil VATICAN CITY, MARCH 23, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of Magdi Allam�s account of his conversion to Catholicism. The Muslim journalist was baptized by Benedict XVI at Saturday's Easter Vigil Mass in St. Peter's Basilica. An abbreviated form of this account appeared as a letter to Paolo Mieli, the director of the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. Allam is the paper�s deputy director. The Italian version of the complete text is available at magdiallam.it. * * * Dear Friends, I am particularly happy to share with you my immense joy for this Easter of Resurrection that has brought me the gift of the Christian faith. I gladly propose the letter that I sent to the director of the Corriere della Sera, Paolo Mieli, in which I tell the story of the interior journey that brought me to the choice of conversion to Catholicism. This is the complete version of the letter, which was published by the Corriere della Sera only in part. * * * Dear Director, That which I am about to relate to you concerns my choice of religious faith and personal life in which I do not wish to involve in any way the Corriere della Sera, which it has been an honor to be a part of as deputy director �ad personam� since 2003. I write you thus as protagonist of the event, as private citizen. Yesterday evening I converted to the Christian Catholic religion, renouncing my previous Islamic faith. Thus, I finally saw the light, by divine grace -- the healthy fruit of a long, matured gestation, lived in suffering and joy, together with intimate reflection and conscious and manifest expression. I am especially grateful to his holiness Pope Benedict XVI, who imparted the sacraments of Christian initiation to me, baptism, confirmation and Eucharist, in the Basilica of St. Peter�s during the course of the solemn celebration of the Easter Vigil. And I took the simplest and most explicit Christian name: �Cristiano.� Since yesterday evening therefore my name is Magdi Crisitano Allam. For me it is the most beautiful day of [my] life. To acquire the gift of the Christian faith during the commemoration of Christ�s resurrection by the hand of the Holy Father is, for a believer, an incomparable and inestimable privilege. At almost 56 [�], it is a historical, exceptional and unforgettable event, which marks a radical and definitive turn with respect to the past. The miracle of Christ�s resurrection reverberated through my soul, liberating it from the darkness in which the preaching of hatred and intolerance in the face of the �different,� uncritically condemned as �enemy,� were privileged over love and respect of �neighbor,� who is always, an in every case, �person�; thus, as my mind was freed from the obscurantism of an ideology that legitimates lies and deception, violent death that leads to murder and suicide, the blind submission to tyranny, I was able to adhere to the authentic religion of truth, of life and of freedom. On my first Easter as a Christian I not only discovered Jesus, I discovered for the first time the face of the true and only God, who is the God of faith and reason. My conversion to Catholicism is the touching down of a gradual and profound interior meditation from which I could not pull myself away, given that for five years I have been confined to a life under guard, with permanent surveillance at home and a police escort for my every movement, because of death threats and death sentences from Islamic extremists and terrorists, both those in and outside of Italy. I had to ask myself about the attitude of those who publicly declared fatwas, Islamic juridical verdicts, against me -- I who was a Muslim -- as an �enemy of Islam,� �hypocrite because he is a Coptic Christian who pretends to be a Muslim to do damage to Islam,� �liar and vilifier of Islam,� legitimating my death sentence in this way. I asked myself how it was possible that those who, like me, sincerely and boldly called for a �moderate Islam,� assuming the responsibility of exposing themselves in the first person in denouncing Islamic extremism and terrorism, ended up being sentenced to death in the name of Islam on the basis of the Quran. I was forced to see that, beyond the contingency of the phenomenon of Islamic extremism and terrorism that has appeared on a global level, the root of evil is inherent in an Islam that is physiologically violent and historically conflictive. At the same time providence brought me to meet practicing Catholics of good will who, in virtue of their witness and friendship, gradually became a point of reference in regard to the certainty of truth and the solidity of values. To begin with, among so many friends from Communion and Liberation, I will mention Father Juli�n Carr�n; and then there were simple religious such as Father Gabriele Mangiarotti, Sister Maria Gloria Riva, Father Carlo Maurizi and Father Yohannis Lahzi Gaid; there was rediscovery of the Salesians thanks to Father Angelo Tengattini and Father Maurizio Verlezza, which culminated in a renewed friendship with major rector Father Pascual Chavez Villanueva; there was the embrace of top prelates of great humanity like Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Monsignor Luigi Negri, Giancarlo Vecerrica, Gino Romanazzi and, above all, Monsignor Rino Fisichella, who personally accompanied me in the journey of spiritual acceptance of the Christian faith. But undoubtedly the most extraordinary and important encounter in my decision to convert was that with Pope Benedict XVI, whom I admired and defended as a Muslim for his mastery in setting down the indissoluble link between faith and reason as a basis for authentic religion and human civilization, and to whom I fully adhere as a Christian to inspire me with new light in the fulfillment of the mission God has reserved for me. Mine was a journey that began when at four years old, my mother Safeya -- a believing and practicing Muslim -- in the first in the series of �fortuitous events� that would prove to be not at all the product of chance but rather an integral part of a divine destiny to which all of us have been assigned -- entrusted me to the loving care of Sister Lavinia of the Comboni Missionary Sisters, convinced of the goodness of the education that would be imparted by the Catholic and Italian religious, who had come to Cairo, the city of my birth, to witness to their Christian faith through a work aimed at the common good. I thus began an experience of life in boarding school, followed by the Salesians of the Institute of Don Bosco in junior high and high school, which transmitted to me not only the science of knowledge but above all the awareness of values. It is thanks to members of Catholic religious orders that I acquired a profoundly and essentially an ethical conception of life, in which the person created in the image and likeness of God is called to undertake a mission that inserts itself in the framework of a universal and eternal design directed toward the interior resurrection of individuals on this earth and the whole of humanity on the day of judgment, which is founded on faith in God and the primacy of values, which is based on the sense of individual responsibility and on the sense of duty toward the collective. It is in virtue of a Christian education and of the sharing of the experience of life with Catholic religious that I cultivated a profound faith in the transcendent dimension and also sought the certainty of truth in absolute and universal values. There was a time when my mother�s loving presence and religious zeal brought me closer to Islam, which I occasionally practiced at a cultural level and in which I believed at a spiritual level according to an interpretation that at the time -- it was the 1970s -- summarily corresponded to a faith respectful of persons and tolerant toward the neighbor, in a context -- that of the Nasser regime -- in which the secular principle of the separation of the religious sphere and the secular sphere prevailed. My father Muhammad was completely secular and agreed with the opinion of the majority of Egyptians who took the West as a model in regard to individual freedom, social customs and cultural and artistic fashions, even if the political totalitarianism of Nasser and the bellicose ideology of Pan-Arabism that aimed at the physical elimination of Israel unfortunately led to disaster for Egypt and opened the way to the resumption of Pan-Islamism, to the ascent of Islamic extremists to power and the explosion of globalized Islamic terrorism. The long years at school allowed me to know Catholicism well and up close and the women and men who dedicated their life to serve God in the womb of the Church. Already then I read the Bible and the Gospels and I was especially fascinated by the human and divine figure of Jesus. I had a way to attend Holy Mass and it also happened, only once, that I went to the altar to receive communion. It was a gesture that evidently signaled my attraction to Christianity and my desire to feel a part of the Catholic religious community. Then, on my arrival in Italy at the beginning of the 1970s between the rivers of student revolts and the difficulties of integration, I went through a period of atheism understood as a faith, which nevertheless was also founded on absolute and universal values. I was never indifferent to the presence of God even if only now I feel that the God of love, of faith and reason reconciles himself completely with the patrimony of values that are rooted in me. Dear Director, you asked me whether I fear for my life, in the awareness that conversion to Christianity will certainly procure for me yet another, and much more grave, death sentence for apostasy. You are perfectly right. I know what I am headed for but I face my destiny with my head held high, standing upright and with the interior solidity of one who has the certainty of his faith. And I will be more so after the courageous and historical gesture of the Pope, who, as soon has he knew of my desire, immediately agreed to personally impart the Christian sacraments of initiation to me. His Holiness has sent an explicit and revolutionary message to a Church that until now has been too prudent in the conversion of Muslims, abstaining from proselytizing in majority Muslim countries and keeping quiet about the reality of converts in Christian countries. Out of fear. The fear of not being able to protect converts in the face of their being condemned to death for apostasy and fear of reprisals against Christian living in Islamic countries. Well, today Benedict XVI, with his witness, tells us that we must overcome fear and not be afraid to affirm the truth of Jesus even with Muslims. For my part, I say that it is time to put an end to the abuse and the violence of Muslims who do not respect the freedom of religious choice. In Italy there are thousands of converts to Islam who live their new faith in peace. But there are also thousands of Muslim converts to Christianity who are forced to hide their faith out of fear of being assassinated by Islamic extremists who lurk among us. By one of those �fortuitous events� that evoke the discreet hand of the Lord, the first article that I wrote for the Corriere on Sept. 3, 2003 was entitled �The new Catacombs of Islamic Converts.� It was an investigation of recent Muslim converts to Christianity in Italy who decry their profound spiritual and human solitude in the face of absconding state institutions that do not protect them and the silence of the Church itself. Well, I hope that the Pope�s historical gesture and my testimony will lead to the conviction that the moment has come to leave the darkness of the catacombs and to publicly declare their esire to be fully themselves. If in Italy, in our home, the cradle of Catholicism, we are not prepared to guarantee complete religious freedom to everyone, how can we ever be credible when we denounce the violation of this freedom elsewhere in the world? I pray to God that on this special Easter he give the gift of the resurrection of the spirit to all the faithful in Christ who have until now been subjugated by fear. Happy Easter to everyone. Dear friends, let us go forward on the way of truth, of life and of freedom with my best wishes for every success and good thing. Magdi Allam Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-22151?l=english

Lots of good zingers from them both! McCain, Letterman spar on 'late Show' Wed Apr 2, 6:49 AM ET Republican presidential candidate John McCain good-naturedly sparred with David Letterman on Tuesday night's "Late Show." During his monologue, Letterman joked that the Arizona senator reminded him of "the guy at the hardware store who makes the keys" and "the guy who can't stop talking about how well his tomatoes are doing." After Letterman added that McCain looked like "the guy who points out the spots they missed at the car wash," the senator appeared on stage. "You think that stuff's pretty funny, don't you?" McCain asked, then added: "Well, you look like a guy whose laptop would be seized by the authorities." McCain also said the host resembled the guy caught smuggling reptiles in his pants, to which Letterman replied, "Don't knock it if you haven't tried it." The candidate also likened Letterman to the manager of a creepy motel, the guy who enjoys watching his swim trunks inflate in a hot tub and the guy about whom neighbors later say, "He mostly kept to himself." Later in the show, the two discussed more serious issues, including the national credit crisis, Iraqi casualties, the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Bear Stearns and accusations that McCain's not a true conservative Republican. "I think maybe some people think that you ought to have exactly the same position they have on every issue," McCain said. The two Democratic candidates have also appeared on the CBS show this year � Hillary Rodham Clinton in February, and Barack Obama in January.

Not thrilled he used the VA as a good example as they had/still have issues with quality care despite, or perhaps because of, their financial system. I knew people who worked at VA's during the Clinton years who complained about budget cuts that made it more difficult to get good equipment to treat patients. Granted they opened a new hospital in our area, but then kept cutting. Op-Ed Columnist Voodoo Health Economics By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: April 4, 2008 Elizabeth Edwards has cancer. John McCain has had cancer in the past. Last weekend, Mrs. Edwards bluntly pointed out that neither of them would be able to get insurance under Mr. McCain�s health care plan. It�s about time someone said that and, more generally, made the case that Mr. McCain�s approach to health care is based on voodoo economics � not the supply-side voodoo that claims that cutting taxes increases revenues (though Mr. McCain says that, too), but the equally foolish claim, refuted by all available evidence, that the magic of the marketplace can produce cheap health care for everyone. As Mrs. Edwards pointed out, the McCain health plan would do nothing to prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to those, like her and Mr. McCain, who have pre-existing medical conditions. The McCain campaign�s response was condescending and dismissive � a statement that Mrs. Edwards doesn�t understand the comprehensive nature of the senator�s approach, which would harness �the power of competition to produce greater coverage for Americans,� reducing costs so that even people with pre-existing conditions could afford care. This is nonsense on multiple levels. For one thing, even if you buy the premise that competition would reduce health care costs, the idea that it could cut costs enough to make insurance affordable for Americans with a history of cancer or other major diseases is sheer fantasy. Beyond that, there�s no reason to believe in these alleged cost reductions. Insurance companies do try to hold down �medical losses� � the industry�s term for what happens when an insurer actually ends up having to honor its promises by paying a client�s medical bills. But they don�t do this by promoting cost-effective medical care. Instead, they hold down costs by only covering healthy people, screening out those who need coverage the most � which was exactly the point Mrs. Edwards was making. They also deny as many claims as possible, forcing doctors and hospitals to spend large sums fighting to get paid. And the international evidence on health care costs is overwhelming: the United States has the most privatized system, with the most market competition � and it also has by far the highest health care costs in the world. Yet the McCain health plan � actually a set of bullet points on the campaign�s Web site � is entirely based on blind faith that competition among private insurers will solve all problems. I�d like to single out one of these bullet points in particular � the first substantive proposal Mr. McCain offers (the preceding entries are nothing but feel-good boilerplate). As I�ve mentioned in past columns, the Veterans Health Administration is one of the few clear American success stories in the struggle to contain health care costs. Since it was reformed during the Clinton years, the V.A. has used the fact that it�s an integrated system � a system that takes long-term responsibility for its clients� health � to deliver an impressive combination of high-quality care and low costs. It has also taken the lead in the use of information technology, which has both saved money and reduced medical errors. Sure enough, Mr. McCain wants to privatize and, in effect, dismantle the V.A. Naturally, this destructive agenda comes wrapped in the flag: �America�s veterans have fought for our freedom,� says the McCain Web site. �We should give them freedom to choose to carry their V.A. dollars to a provider that gives them the timely care at high quality and in the best location.� That�s a recipe for having healthy veterans drop out of the system, undermining its integrated nature and draining away resources. Mr. McCain, then, is offering a completely wrongheaded approach to health care. But the way the campaign for the Democratic nomination has unfolded raises questions about how effective his eventual opponent will be in making that point. Indeed, while Mrs. Edwards focused her criticism on Mr. McCain, she also made it clear that she prefers Hillary Clinton�s approach � �Sen. Clinton�s plan is a great plan� � to Barack Obama�s. The Clinton plan closely resembles the plan for universal coverage that John Edwards laid out more than a year ago. By contrast, Mr. Obama offers a watered-down plan that falls short of universality, and it would have higher costs per person covered. Worse yet, Mr. Obama attacked his Democratic rivals� health plans using conservative talking points about choice and the evil of having the government tell you what to do. That�s going to make it hard � if he is the nominee � to refute Mr. McCain when he makes similar arguments on behalf of such things as privatizing veterans� care. Still, health care ought to be a major issue in this campaign. I wonder if we�ll have time to discuss it after we deal with more important subjects, like bowling and basketball. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/04/opinion/04krugman.html?em&ex=1207540800&en=f01f4dbf8080b294&ei=5087%0A

I know there are some Hillary volunteers here. Opinions? http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/7/10533/63574/492/487686

Opinions? About? Calling a halt "for the good of the party?" We are perfectly content to let the American Idol season roll on for about 20 weeks. But when it comes to choosing a president, we all of a sudden have ADD?!

Hee hee. Shia/Sunni, Italians/Asians and Hispanics...why pay attention to who's who and where they are. I'll have to admit though, I didn't realize South Philly had or was divesting itself of the Italian majority. Seems it's the same as our Little Italy, with the Asians taking over. Little Italy here is now really one street of a block or 2. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/09/mccains-gaffe-on-south-philly/

ROTFL! Wow, that's one superstitious Red Sox fan. NY Yankees remove buried Red Sox jersey By KAREN MATTHEWS Associated Press Writer 9 minutes ago NEW YORK - A construction worker's bid to curse the New York Yankees by planting a Boston Red Sox jersey in their new stadium was foiled Sunday when the home team removed the offending shirt from its burial spot. After locating the shirt in a service corridor behind what will be a restaurant in the new Yankee Stadium, construction workers jackhammered through the concrete Sunday and pulled it out. The team said it learned that a Sox-rooting construction worker had buried a shirt in the new Bronx stadium, which will open next year across the street from the current ballpark, from a report in the New York Post on Friday. Yankees President Randy Levine said team officials at first considered leaving the shirt where it was. "The first thought was, you know, it's never a good thing to be buried in cement when you're in New York," Levine said. "But then we decided, why reward somebody who had really bad motives and was trying to do a really bad thing?" On Saturday, construction workers who remembered the employee, Gino Castignoli, phoned in tips about the shirt's location. "We had anonymous people come tell us where it was, and we were able to find it," said Frank Gramarossa, a project executive with Turner Construction, the general contractor on the site. It took about five hours of drilling Saturday to locate the shirt under 2 feet of concrete, he said. On Sunday, Levine and Yankees CEO Lonn Trost watched as Gramarossa and foreman Rich Corrado finished the job and pulled the shirt from the rubble. In shreds from the jackhammers, the shirt still bore the letters "Red Sox" on the front. It was a David Ortiz jersey, No. 34. Trost said the Yankees had discussed possible criminal charges against Castignoli with the district attorney's office. "We will take appropriate action since fortunately we do know the name of the individual," he said. A woman who answered the phone at Castignoli's home in the Bronx on Sunday said he was not there. A spokesman for Bronx District Attorney Robert Johnson said Sunday he did not know whether any criminal charges might apply. Levine said the shirt would be cleaned up and sent to the Jimmy Fund, a charity affiliated with Boston's Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. "Hopefully the Jimmy Fund will auction it off and we'll take the act that was a very, very bad act and turn it into something beautiful," he said.

"...you know, it's never a good thing to be buried in cement when you're in New York..." Good line! LOL! ~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm amazed (not really) by how little play this received here: Clinton supporter Elton John laments U.S. misogyny Thu Apr 10, 2008 12:44pm EDT NEW YORK (Reuters) - British pop star Elton John, playing a fund-raiser for Hillary Clinton in New York on Wednesday, said he was amazed at the misogyny of some in America and he hoped that wouldn't stop her being president. At the fund-raiser which Clinton's campaign manager said raised $2.5 million, John said there was no one more qualified to lead the United States into the next era. "Having said that, I never cease to be amazed at the misogynistic attitude of some people in this country. And I say to hell with them," he said, drawing cheers from the crowd at Radio City Music Hall in Manhattan. "The reason I'm here tonight is to play music, but more importantly as someone who comes from abroad, and is in America quite a lot of the time (and) is extremely interested in the political process because it effects the whole world." "I've always been a Hillary supporter," he said. Introducing him, Clinton recalled that the entertainer had played at the White House at a state dinner when her husband Bill Clinton was president. The New York senator, who is trailing Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, vowed to take her battle for the Democratic nomination to the end of the primary process, saying all the states should have their say. Clinton said she couldn't sing but "What I want you to know is 'I'm still standing,'" -- echoing the title of an Elton John song. John opened his set with the track "Your Song," dwelling on the line "How wonderful life is when you're in the world." Other hits he sang included "Daniel" and "Rocket Man."

(Karen)I'm amazed (not really) by how little play this received here You mean by our misogynistic press?:-( I saw that. Love Elton, always have.

I did wonder too. If it had been for Obama, it would have been all over. I'm sick of it.

Oh, no. Just received this from the Wash Post site: Source: U.S. Strike on Iran Nearing By: Jim Meyers Contrary to some claims that the Bush administration will allow diplomacy to handle Iran�s nuclear weapons program, a leading member of America�s Jewish community tells Newsmax that a military strike is not only on the table � but likely. �Israel is preparing for heavy casualties,� the source said, suggesting that although Israel will not take part in the strike, it is expecting to be the target of Iranian retribution. �Look at Dick Cheney�s recent trip through the Middle East as preparation for the U.S. attack,� the source said. Cheney�s hastily arranged 9-day visit to the region, which began on March 16, included stops in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, Turkey, and the Palestinian territories. Tensions in the region have been rising. While Israel was conducting the largest homefront military exercises in its history last week, Israel�s National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer warned Tehran about expected attacks on the Jewish state. �An Iranian attack will prompt a severe reaction from Israel, which will destroy the Iranian nation,� he said. He predicted that in a future war, �hundreds of missiles will rain on Israel,� but added that Iran �is definitely aware of our strength.� In addition to long-range missiles Iran has been developing to strike Israel, Israel�s military strategists see the Iranians using terror groups they back like Hamas operating from Palestine and Hezbollah from Lebanon to launch attacks. Iran has supplied Hezbollah with an arsenal that now contains �tens of thousands of missiles,� according to the Washington Post. Israel�s recent war exercises, including preparations for chemical and biological weapons attacks, drew a sharp response from Syria which held its own military drills. The Syrian government accused Israel of preparing for a war which Damascus predicted would be begin anytime between May 1 and the end of June. Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently told foreign journalists that Israel needs to confront the threat posed by Iran. Privately he has been telling associates his number one priority is have the Israeli military strike Iran if the U.S. is unwilling. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz disclosed that Israel is concerned that North Korea has transferred technology and nuclear materials to Iran to aid Tehran�s secret nuclear weapons program. Iran remains intransigent to international pressure that it offer full transparency relating to its nuclear program. On Sunday the head of Iran�s nuclear program �abruptly canceled a meeting with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, dealing a blow to the U.N. monitor's efforts to investigate allegations that Iran tried to make nuclear arms, an agency official said,� according to an AP report. �But a senior diplomat had told the AP that IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] head Mohamed ElBaradei likely planned to use the meeting with Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's nuclear program, to renew a request for more information on allegations Tehran had tried to make atomic arms.� A number of signs indicate that, contrary to the belief President Bush is a lame duck who will not act before he leaves office, the U.S. is poised to strike before Iran can acquire nuclear weapons and carry out the threat of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to �wipe Israel off the map�: According to intelligence sources, the administration now rejects the National Intelligence Estimate report issued in December that asserted Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in late 2003. The French daily Le Monde reported in March that newly surfaced documents show that Iran has continued developing nuclear weapons. In late 2006, U.S. intelligence reportedly intercepted a phone conversation in Iran�s Defense Ministry in which the nuclear weapons program was discussed. The commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, Admiral William Fallon, resigned in March amid media reports that he broke with President Bush�s strategy on Iran and did not want to be in the chain of command when the order comes down from the President to launch a strike on the Islamic Republic. Democrats suggested he had been forced out because of his candor in opposing Bush�s Iran plans, and Esquire magazine contended that Fallon�s departure signaled that the U.S. is preparing to attack Iran. According to a Tehran-based Iranian news network, Press TV, Saudi Arabia is taking emergency steps in preparing to counter any �radioactive hazards� that may result from an American attack on Iran�s nuclear facilities. The Saudi newspaper Okaz disclosed that the Saudi government has approved nuclear fallout preparations, and the Iranian network reported that the approval came a day after Cheney met with the kingdom�s high-ranking officials, further stating that the U.S. �is now informing its Arab allies of a potential war.� The American commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, has stepped up criticism of Iran, telling Congress last week that Iranian support for Shiite militias posed the most serious threat to Iraq�s stability. He told senators : �Iran has fueled the violence in a particularly damaging way.� Last week, the U.S. said Iran was providing insurgents with missiles that were killing Americans and hitting targets within the U.S. occupied Green Zone in Baghdad. MSNBC Commentator Pat Buchanan said Petraeus� remarks to Congress lay the groundwork for a U.S. attack on Iran. President Bush said in a speech at the White House on April 10 that Iran, along with al-Qaida, are �two of the greatest threats to America.� He said Iran �can live in peace with its neighbors,� or �continue to arm and train and fund illegal militant groups which are terrorizing the Iraqi people � If Iran makes the wrong choice, America will act to protect our interests and our troops and our Iraqi partners.� He later told ABC News that if Iran continues to help militants in Iraq, �then we�ll deal with them.� Members of Congress are said to have been briefed by the administration about the rising Iran threat. Iran did little to cool tensions when it announced that it had begun installing 6,000 new centrifuges at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz. Centrifuges can enrich uranium to a low level to produce nuclear fuel or a high level for use in weapons. The announcement of the new centrifuges by President Ahmadinejad came on April 8, Iran�s National Day of Nuclear Technology, which marked the second anniversary of Iran�s first enrichment of uranium. Iran already has about 3,000 centrifuges operating in Natanz, and the new announcement was widely seen as a show of defiance to international demands to halt a nuclear program that the U.S. and its allies insist is aimed at building nuclear weapons. � 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Contrary to some claims that the Bush administration will allow diplomacy to handle Iran�s nuclear weapons program, a leading member of America�s Jewish community tells Newsmax that a military strike is not only on the table � but likely. Same thing Seymour Hersh first reported in the New Yorker 2 (I think) years ago. I think there was a great deal of internal mutiny by the armed forces, and probably among others, that may have put it off then if it was so.

Again, Karen Heller gets it right. I do agree with Obama that people are bitter; I know I am. WIP's snickers at Clinton underscore gender gap By Karen Heller Philadelphia Inquirer Columnist Oh, the guys were going at her. The other morning on sports radio, the station that calls grown women "girls," they were talking about Hillary Clinton. Specifically, how she didn't turn them on and, graphically, how a certain body part flatlined in response. She's a United States senator. She's the first viable female presidential candidate. And the boys are talking about whether she's hot. As if they would find any 60-year-old woman hot. Or take a female politician seriously. When Don Imus slimed the Rutgers basketball team racially and sexually, he lost his job - well, for eight months. When WIP's morning team denigrates Clinton sexually, no one notices. Understandably, she didn't go on WIP's morning show, which Barack Obama has visited twice, resulting in the staff's major mancrush. Clinton spoke instead with afternoon jock Howard Eskin. Hillary Clinton is right. She's been bashed harder. And some members of the media have been merciless. Her figure has been ridiculed. Her clothing has been criticized for being too dark and serious - as if her male counterparts are partial to pastel frippery. Her voice is deemed too shrill. It can "grate on some men when they listen to it," Chris Matthews once said, like "fingernails on a blackboard." She's been charged with having no sense of humor, which is absurd. If she cries, she's too weak. If she attacks, she's a shrew. What's the male counterpart of shrew? Leader. Clinton has plenty of experience, as a family and children's advocate before becoming first lady and as a senator afterward. But people would rather discuss her hair than her health-care plan, which calls for universal coverage at a cost that is far less than her rival's proposal. It's also true that Barack Obama has been a better campaigner. He's a master orator. He's fresh, a break from the weight of the past. He didn't vote for the Iraq debacle. And his presence in the White House would send a vital message to countries that don't like America these days. They're both serious, qualified candidates. You can like one without maligning the other. Still, people speak about Clinton in a way they never would about Obama. When voters say "not this woman," you have to wonder "well, then, which one?" Pennsylvania is dreadful when it comes to electing women. Allyson Schwartz is the lone woman of 19 representatives in Washington. Despite an electorate that is 57 percent female, according to Franklin & Marshall's G. Terry Madonna, the commonwealth hasn't come close to electing a woman senator or governor. "When I arrived in the state senate in 1991, we doubled the number of women - to four," Schwartz said. Then, Pennsylvania ranked 46th in the nation in electing women to the legislature. Today, it's advanced all the way to 43d. There are nine female senators out of 50. Schwartz is none too happy with how Clinton has been treated. "There's been this willingness to blow up her comments while discounting those made by her male counterparts," said Schwartz, a Clinton supporter. "You hear people say her opponent is a brilliant lawyer who could have done anything. The same can be said for her. They keep pointing to his community service while discounting all her work for families and kids, which diminishes its importance." To paraphrase Obama's speech in Philadelphia, gender is an issue that this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American. Again, I'm just paraphrasing, but it makes you think. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact staff writer Karen Heller at 215-854-2586 or kheller@phillynews.com. Post a comment on her blog, The Populist, at http://go.philly.com/populist.

Still, people speak about Clinton in a way they never would about Obama. When voters say "not this woman," you have to wonder "well, then, which one?" Amen Despite an electorate that is 57 percent female These kind of numbers kill me. They really show how pathetic women are in supporting their own. Do they just like having men dictate to them ALL the time on ALL issues. Disgusting!!

Here's the url for the original article: http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/17799164.html I wanted to read the comments. Of course, it didn't surprise me to find one comment from a women, who "considers herself" to be a "strong feminist" who thinks HC has no qualifications. She's the won using the PA voter alias. Here's a good article about how they're finally focusing on gender. They have to. http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/04/08/clinton_women_0408.html

I don't understand it from women either. I get men tell me that they would never vote for a woman, and I remind them that their mother was a woman. I also get women tell me that they won't vote for her because they don't like Bill, and I remind them how unfair it would be if they were judged by the things their husbands did. Those super delegates must take into consideration the Hillary has carried the big democratic states, and some swing states. O has carried the traditional R states that will go to McCain in Nov. If the Dems are serious about taking the White House, they must back Hillary.

(Moon) I remind them how unfair it would be if they were judged by the things their husbands did. And these are the women who ask their husbands' permission to do anything or spend anything? And they're probably the same ones who ask their husbands who they should vote for, right? But I do like your arguments, Moon. Must be a first. ;-) (Moon) Those super delegates must take into consideration the Hillary has carried the big democratic states I know. I just don't understand this "step-aside" mentality. She's won all the big (read: populated) states. No offense to anyone, but who cares who wins Wyoming. Not only doesn't it have hardly any human population, what it does have pretty much votes Republican anyway. Now, does that mean that Hillary would get those states in the general election vs a Republican white male? Who knows?

(Karen), Now, does that mean that Hillary would get those states in the general election vs a Republican white male? Who knows? Oh, but it would be a change, and maybe, just maybe, Hillary might get those females. But I do like your arguments, Moon. Must be a first. ;-) LOL! You relate to my feminist side? ;-) You won't believe this but one woman in Texas told me it was in the bible not to vote for a woman.

"Hey, Obama boys: Back off already!" Young women are growing increasingly frustrated with the fanatical support of Barack and gleeful bashing of Hillary. By Rebecca Traister http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/04/14/obama_supporters/index.html I also followed the link and read Robin Morgan's endorsement of Hillary (which I hadn't read before) and saw a lot of truth there, too.

When I read in the previous article about how the younger women don't see the need to vote for Hillary because they're sure (hah!) they'll see a woman president in their lifetimes, all I can say is selfish bitches!! What about all of us, who really suffered at the hands of a male-dominated workplace? From the Salon article: these cool young customers have embodied their elders' worst nightmare of a generation that takes feminism's victories for granted by throwing over Hillary Clinton for her challenger faster than you can say "I've got a crush on Obama." These young women are way over feminism, we're told, and perceive gender bias to be an antiquated notion. Exactly. I've been railing against this idiotic mentality for years. These women are deluding themselves. [...] Bruch said. "People talk about him as a secular messiah who will bring us political salvation. There's no sense of what is plausible." Or factual. Bruch points to healthcare as an area in which "Hillary's policy is the more politically progressive one, but this has somehow been ignored, and Obama was projected upon as the progressive redeemer. It's a political fantasy." [...] Valenti continued, "I pinpoint sexism for a living. You'd think I'd be able to find an example. And I hate to rely on this hokey notion that there's some woman's way of knowing, and that I just fucking know. But I do. I just know." When it comes to feminism, she continued, so much proof is required to convince someone that sexism exists, "even when it's explicit and outrageous. So when it's subdued or subtle, you don't want to talk about it." "When the election started, I felt very postfeminist," said Wiegand. "I felt like, I'm a woman and I'd love to have a woman president, but I also have many other issues I care about and the Iraq war is a big one, and I'm not going to make my decision just because I'm a woman." But over the course of the campaign, Wiegand said, "there has been a lot of anger toward Hillary that's felt really intense and misogynistic. The gloating after Iowa was something to behold. And it's made me realize we are still dealing with the gender issue. I don't think we know what to make of women in power, or make of Hillary. I don't think the world is as postfeminist as I was feeling that it was." Finally, someone who woke up. Unfortunately, it also says she's an Obama supporter. Pathetic. :-(

(Moon) You won't believe this but one woman in Texas told me it was in the bible not to vote for a woman. Believe it? LOL I live in the big fat middle of it! Am forever 'rabble-rousing' my friends who feel guilty when they go away to visit children and grandchildren. Hubby doesn't want to go and makes her feel guilty for leaving him alone! Then there is the group in the area who believe that Eckhardt Tolle's New Earth is blasphemous and are burning up the internet telling everyone- I do wonder if any of them have actually read it. I have given up on trying to talk some sense into them. Might as well try to convince those women of the polygamy sect that 'oui' are not devil-people and that it is NOT proper to marry off 14 year olds to some elder with a sicko libido.

Obama superdelegates find their 'sisterhood' questioned By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 20 minutes ago WASHINGTON - Some female superdelegates backing Sen. Barack Obama are having their "sisterhood" questioned, just as some black Democrats have been challenged for their endorsement of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. No one has actually accused Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., of betraying her gender in supporting Obama over Clinton in the race for the party's nomination, but they've let her know they're disappointed. The reason some give: If Clinton does not win the White House this year, no woman will reach that goal in their lifetimes. Klobuchar gets it; her mother, 80, is one of these women. The senator's 12-year-old daughter, meanwhile, supports Obama. Mother's Day, when the three will next spend time together, could be a bit uncomfortable. "Early on, I had a few people call and say, 'Please don't do this. We don't think it is a good idea for you.' They tended to be donors," Klobuchar recalled. "No one actually yelled at me to my face." Superdelegates are members of Congress, elected officials and other party leaders who can back any candidate regardless of the vote in their state or district. For those voters who feel betrayed by their superdelegates, the question isn't so much why they endorsed one Democratic candidate, it's why they rejected the other. Sometimes, the query is coupled with a veiled threat: Don't take your own success for granted. "There's no question that some of our members are very angry," said Ellen R. Malcolm, president and founder of the EMILY's List political action committee, which gives money to female candidates who favor abortion rights. "They feel that they elect the women and they've gone to bat for the women and they want every single woman to go to bat for every woman candidate," she added. Asked whether Klobuchar and fellow freshman Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, another Obama superdelegate, risk losing their seats over these endorsements, Malcolm said, "We'll just have to wait and see." The issue is so sensitive some superdelegates are remaining neutral until a clear winner emerges. Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick of Michigan, who is black and a woman, remains uncommitted. Sen. Barbara Boxer of California is avowedly neutral but intimately aware of the conflict. "My family is divided," she said. Exacerbating the situation is the reality that a woman or a black man is poised to capture the party's nomination to an office that's been the province of white men for two centuries. Each candidate represents major constituencies in the party. In the absence of major differences in their policy positions, race and gender loyalty becomes a factor. Among black superdelegates, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., asked Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri, a Clinton supporter, earlier this year: "If it comes down to the last day and you're the only superdelegate ... do you want to go down in history as the one to prevent a black from winning the White House?" A veteran of the 1960s civil rights struggles, Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, switched from Clinton to Obama in mid-race. Older women particularly feel that Clinton is their only hope of seeing a woman occupy the Oval Office, McCaskill said. One refused to talk with her during a Democratic fundraiser in early April, she said. And some feel simply that it's Clinton's turn, something she's owed. "I don't know, really, where that comes from, the 'her turn' stuff," McCaskill, a former prosecutor and state auditor, said in a recent interview. "I just don't think we can ever get into the trap of deciding elections based on who's 'turn' it is. "Nobody ever considered it my turn," she added. "I had to go out and fight for it." Former lawmaker Pat Schroeder said the media's focus on Clinton's difficulties � from the pitch of her laugh to Bill Clinton's affect on her candidacy � "have become kind of female legend." "There's a feeling, you know, of sisterhood," explains Schroeder, a Clinton supporter who flirted with a presidential bid in 1988. "There's really a general consensus that (Clinton's) gotten the short end of the stick when it came to media, and you have women knowing all along that women have had a tough go in politics," Schroeder added. EMILY's List has spent nearly a quarter-century working to elect women who favor abortion rights to public office, and the majority of female House Democrats have endorsed Clinton. In the Senate, six of the female members have endorsed Clinton, two Obama and two are uncommitted. The group has helped the Obama supporters, too. But Clinton by far is the brightest name on its marquee. "It is sort of a man bites dog story when the women senators or congresswomen support Senator Obama," said Malcolm. Klobuchar tried to explain. Starting on Feb. 5 when her state chose Obama over Clinton 2-to-1, she made perhaps dozens of telephone calls to supporters and Clinton herself, "so no one would be surprised." "There was no doubt where I was going after that," Klobuchar recalls. Clinton, she said, "understood, given what happened in my state." McCaskill says she is more than willing to explain her personal connection to Obama and her belief that he would make the better president � as well as her willingness to support Clinton, should she instead win the nomination. But as McCaskill can attest, not everyone wants to hear her side. Recalling the woman who avoided her: "She was very upset with me and didn't want to talk to me. And that was hard. I just hope that time will help heal that." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080417/ap_on_el_pr/women_superdelegates_3;_ylt=AsoQqE7s7KFtPFtFnuZMJWNh24cA

The senator's 12-year-old daughter, meanwhile, supports Obama. Let's all take our cue from 12-year-olds. "They feel that they elect the women and they've gone to bat for the women and they want every single woman to go to bat for every woman candidate," she added. Another annoying trait. Women are not noted for their loyalty to other women. The mentality is "I made it on my own." As you can see with the following statement: "Nobody ever considered it my turn," she added. "I had to go out and fight for it." These women are stupidly than shit. Men play by these rules. They always have. They just don't get it and are playing into the Obama camp's hand. Fools!

Ongoing nomination fight hurting Clinton more than Obama http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-gains;_ylt=AoSbe9KvQ6psk8I5nhgeIxus0NUE

For the record, this weekend in a 12 hour period, my aunt got 3 candidate calls....2 Clinton, 1 Obama, all recorded.

I almost thought this was a joke. Lynchings in Congo as penis theft panic hits capital By Joe Bavier Tue Apr 22, 1:24 PM ET KINSHASA (Reuters) - Police in Congo have arrested 13 suspected sorcerers accused of using black magic to steal or shrink men's penises after a wave of panic and attempted lynchings triggered by the alleged witchcraft. Reports of so-called penis snatching are not uncommon in West Africa, where belief in traditional religions and witchcraft remains widespread, and where ritual killings to obtain blood or body parts still occur. Rumours of penis theft began circulating last week in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo's sprawling capital of some 8 million inhabitants. They quickly dominated radio call-in shows, with listeners advised to beware of fellow passengers in communal taxis wearing gold rings. Purported victims, 14 of whom were also detained by police, claimed that sorcerers simply touched them to make their genitals shrink or disappear, in what some residents said was an attempt to extort cash with the promise of a cure. "You just have to be accused of that, and people come after you. We've had a number of attempted lynchings. ... You see them covered in marks after being beaten," Kinshasa's police chief, Jean-Dieudonne Oleko, told Reuters on Tuesday. Police arrested the accused sorcerers and their victims in an effort to avoid the sort of bloodshed seen in Ghana a decade ago, when 12 suspected penis snatchers were beaten to death by angry mobs. The 27 men have since been released. "I'm tempted to say it's one huge joke," Oleko said. "But when you try to tell the victims that their penises are still there, they tell you that it's become tiny or that they've become impotent. To that I tell them, 'How do you know if you haven't gone home and tried it'," he said. Some Kinshasa residents accuse a separatist sect from nearby Bas-Congo province of being behind the witchcraft in revenge for a recent government crackdown on its members. "It's real. Just yesterday here, there was a man who was a victim. We saw. What was left was tiny," said 29-year-old Alain Kalala, who sells phone credits near a Kinshasa police station. (For full Reuters Africa coverage and to have your say on the top issues, visit: http://africa.reuters.com/ ) (Editing by Nick Tattersall and Mary Gabriel) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080422/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_congo_democratic_witchcraft;_ylt=AiHn8CDsbS9Z__8zueJcuxus0NUE

Being true to my word, I'm bringing the political comments over here: By Kathryn Jean Lopez But what about the president? Why should he perform for the press? I cringed Saturday night, far beyond his Dick Cheney peephole sex joke. Even while he conducted the Marine band I had this nagging feeling he was the butt of a joke to a majority of the room, viewing the president of the United States as a goofball. A goofball is mild. He's been the butt of jokes for nearly 8 painful years. Does this woman not turn on late night television? The president said: �I love the mixed crowds here.� I prefer mixed crowds on the Hill, when they actually get something worthwhile done. Like put the economy into the crapper? (my next post) (There were moments Saturday night I worried they weren�t laughing with him but at him, taking joy in the press-mandated abasement of the president.) Op. cit.

Just picked one of the articles from this topic, which has been rankling me. What about the skyrocketing food costs here? Bush calls for approval of $770 million in food aid WASHINGTON (AP) � President Bush called on Congress Thursday to approve $770 million to help alleviate dramatically escalating food prices that threaten widespread hunger and increasing social unrest around the world. In a surprise mid-afternoon appearance at the White House, Bush announced he is asking lawmakers to approve the additional funds for global food aid and development programs. The money is being included in a broader $70 billion Iraq war funding measure for 2009 that the White House sent to Capitol Hill on Thursday. "In some of the world's poorest nations, rising prices can mean the difference between getting a daily meal and going without food," Bush said. "The American people are generous people and they're a compassionate people. We believe in the timeless truth `to whom much is given, much is expected.'" The new money comes on top of $200 million Bush ordered released two weeks ago for emergency food aid. Even so, Bush called it "just the beginning" of the U.S. effort to help. He said the United States would spend a total of $5 billion this year and next on food aid and related programs. "America's in the lead, we'll stay in the lead and we expect others to participate along with us," he said. The new funds are aimed at meeting immediate needs with direct shipments of food aid, and the White House said the amount would allow for millions more people to get help, But the funds also have long-term aims, boosting U.S. programs to help farmers in developing countries increase productivity and making cash payments to purchase local crops, so communities are less in need of emergency help in the first place. The issue has become more urgent recently because of food shortages and rising prices that, combined with high gas costs and rising home foreclosures, are putting a huge squeeze on families at home and abroad. What has been termed the first global food crisis since World War II has resulted in cries for help from United Nations officials and raised questions about how Bush will respond. Some have blamed the food crisis in part on Bush-backed policies that push food-based biofuels such as ethanol as alternative energy sources. Bush says diverting corn and soybeans into fuel is still a smart approach, though he favors increasing funding for research into eventually using waste byproducts of those commodities rather than the edible portion. The United States is the world's largest provider of food aid, delivering more than $2.1 billion to 78 developing countries last year.

Even while he conducted the Marine band I had this nagging feeling he was the butt of a joke to a majority of the room, viewing the president of the United States as a goofball. (Karen) A goofball is mild. He's been the butt of jokes for nearly 8 painful years. Does this woman not turn on late night television? I thought she was trying to be ironically understated....er, something. I prefer mixed crowds on the Hill, when they actually get something worthwhile done. (Karen) Like put the economy into the crapper? (my next post) I chuckled thinking she was being sarcastic, or ironic....er, something...again. "In some of the world's poorest nations, rising prices can mean the difference between getting a daily meal and going without food," Bush said. "The American people are generous people and they're a compassionate people. We believe in the timeless truth `to whom much is given, much is expected.'" I do love this....trying to guilt Congress (and the American people) into supporting his war funding by throwing in some "compassion" for starving people...and not in his own country, as Karen points out, in with this bill. And the one thing that's gotten my goat over the past week, and is yet another in a series of things that has seriously given me pause over Hillary, is her support for that absurd proposal from McCain to give a gas tax moratorium for the summer. I mean if she's going to jump onto a bandwagon on that ridiculousness, I have to seriously, *seriously* question her judgement.

Thanks for the articles, Dorine and Karen. I LOL at the penis one. Isn't Obama's uncle from Congo? ;-) My call to IN this week were balanced. I didn't know there were so many hicks in IN, really! At this point, we must go with the popular vote and allow FL and Mich, Hillary's got those. I'll be at HQ for a final push on Monday. It would be so great if she took IN and NC.

Sad news re: Sen, Edward Kennedy and his diagnosis of a malignant brain tumor.

Donkey jailed in Mexico for biting, kicking people THE ASSOCIATED PRESS TUXTLA GUTIERREZ, Mexico - A donkey is doing time in southern Mexico for assault and battery. Police say the animal was locked up at a local jail that normally holds people for public drunkenness and other disturbances after it bit and kicked two men near a ranch in Chiapas state. Officer Sinar Gomez says the donkey will remain behind bars until its owner agrees to pay the men's medical bills. http://www.mytelus.com/ncp_news/article.en.do?pn=oddities&articleID=2924009 ********************************************************************* Considering there have been at least 4 murders of Canadian tourists in Mexico that remain unsolved, it's reassuring to know that the local police are not entirely inept. ;-)

If you want the democrats to win in Nov. I urge everyone to call their local senators and super delegates and tell them to support Hillary Clinton. It is amazing the type of pressure the O people are putting on them. This makes it so obvious who the candidate to win is...the one who relatively easily wins electoral college: Clinton map: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/May23.html Obama map: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May23.html Good article from Philadelphia Inquirer: In most inclusive count, Clinton has the numbers Lost in the excitement of Barack Obama's coronation this week was an inconvenient fact of Tuesday's results: Hillary Clinton netted approximately 150,000 votes and is now poised to finish the primary season as the popular-vote leader. In some quaint circles, presumably, these things still matter. Real Clear Politics keeps track of six versions of the popular-vote total. They are, in ascending order of inclusivity: (1) the popular vote of sanctioned contests; (2) the total of sanctioned contests, plus estimated votes from the Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington caucuses; (3) the popular vote plus Florida; (4) popular vote plus Florida and the caucuses; (5) the popular vote plus Florida and Michigan; (6) popular vote plus Florida, Michigan, and the caucus estimates. After Tuesday, Clinton now leads in two of these six counts. If you believe that the most important precept in democratic politics is to "count every vote," then the sixth category is the most inclusive, and here Clinton leads Obama by 71,301 votes. Of course, this includes the Michigan result, where Sen. Obama had removed his name from the ballot. So while it may be the most inclusive, it may not be the most fair. The third and fourth counts - the ones which include Florida - seem more fair. Here, Obama is clinging to a slight lead of 146,786 votes (257,008, with the caucus estimates). However, with Puerto Rico, Montana, and South Dakota remaining, he will almost certainly finish behind her in these counts, likely by a few hundred thousand votes. But could Clinton take over the lead in all of the popular-vote tabulations? Quite possibly. In Puerto Rico's last major election, two million people voted. Let's assume that turnout for this historic vote - Puerto Rico has never had a presidential primary before - will be equal to or greater than that turnout. If Clinton were to win Puerto Rico by 20 points she would pick up at least a 400,000-vote margin. This would allow her to swamp Obama in the popular-vote counts, which include Florida, making her the leader in four of the six permutations of the popular vote. At that point, Obama would be left clinging to the least-inclusive count, which he now leads by 441,558 votes (551,780, including caucuses). To understand how razor-thin this majority is, consider that if the Puerto Rico turnout is slightly larger than we have imagined - or Clinton's margin is slightly greater - then Clinton would finish the primary process leading in every conceivable vote count. With two million voters, a 28 percent victory would put Clinton over the top even in the count, which excludes Florida and Michigan and includes estimates for Obama's caucus victories. It is this looming prospect which explains the tremendous pressure Obama partisans and the media are putting on Clinton to drop out of the race. They want her gone now because they understand that she has an excellent chance of finishing as the undisputed people's choice. Would it matter if Clinton were the undisputed (or even disputed) popular-vote winner? That's hard to say. The question is, matter to whom? The superdelegates will determine the nominee and there's no telling what will sway them. They have no objective criteria from which to make their decisions. But if they were to deny the popular-vote champ the nomination, there is a real question of whether Democratic voters would reconcile themselves to the decision. As it is, much of the talk about Democratic defections in November has been overstated. Partisan voters almost always come home after their candidate loses. The problem arises when a candidate's supporters believe that their guy (or gal) didn't lose. Expect the chorus calling for Clinton's withdrawal to grow louder over the next week, with people insisting that she has no "path to victory." Clinton's path is both obvious and simple: Win the popular vote and force Barack Obama and his cheerleaders to explain why that doesn't matter. E-mail Jonathan Last at jlast@phillynews.com.

From a British correspondant, a validating article: http://www.newstatesman.com/north-america/2008/05/obama-clinton-vote-usa-media

LOL, Sandy. Priorities. ;-) I think it's in Mexico that some police officials and officers have been killed as well. Thanks, Moon. I still have to get to the British article you posted. And in the You Can't Write This dept: Pilots run out of fuel, pray, land near Jesus sign Wed May 21, 7:50 PM ET WELLINGTON, New Zealand - It seemed like an almost literal answer to their prayers. When two New Zealand pilots ran out of fuel in a microlight airplane they offered prayers and were able to make an emergency landing in a field � coming to rest right next to a sign reading, "Jesus is Lord." Grant Stubbs and Owen Wilson, both from the town of Blenheim on the country's South Island, were flying up the sloping valley of Pelorus Sound when the engine spluttered, coughed and died. "My friend and I are both Christians so our immediate reaction in a life-threatening situation was to ask for God's help," Stubbs told The Associated Press on Wednesday. He said he prayed during the ill-fated flight Sunday that the tiny craft would get over the top of a ridge and that they would find a landing site that was not too steep � or in the nearby sea. Wilson said that the pair would have been in deep trouble if the fuel had run out five minutes earlier. "If it had to run out, that was the place to be," he said. "There was an instantaneous answer to prayer as we crossed the ridge and there was an airfield � I didn't know it existed till then." After Wilson glided the powerless craft to a landing on the grassy strip, the pair noticed they were beside a 20-foot-tall sign that read, "Jesus is Lord � The Bible." "When we saw that, we started laughing," Stubbs said. Nearby residents provided them with gas to fly the home-built plane back to base.

Found this story around the time Sandy posted her animal story and thought this was a nice companion piece, then forgot to post it. I had a cockatiel I tried to teach to talk, but she never really did. And truthfully, I didn't try real hard. Lost parrot tells veterinarian his address Thu May 22, 11:36 AM ET TOKYO - When Yosuke the parrot flew out of his cage and got lost, he did exactly what he had been taught � recite his name and address to a stranger willing to help. Police rescued the African grey parrot two weeks ago from a neighbor's roof in the city of Nagareyama, near Tokyo. After spending a night at the station, he was transferred to a nearby veterinary hospital while police searched for clues, local policeman Shinjiro Uemura said. He kept mum with the cops, but began chatting after a few days with the vet. "I'm Mr. Yosuke Nakamura," the bird told the veterinarian, according to Uemura. The parrot also provided his full home address, down to the street number, and even entertained the hospital staff by singing songs. "We checked the address, and what do you know, a Nakamura family really lived there. So we told them we've found Yosuke," Uemura said. The Nakamura family told police they had been teaching the bird its name and address for about two years. But Yosuke apparently wasn't keen on opening up to police officials. "I tried to be friendly and talked to him, but he completely ignored me," Uemura said.

Anti-Hillary Message Says 'Women Go Home' Run Date: 05/27/08 By Caryl Rivers WeNews commentator http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm?aid=3614 Hillary Clinton's strong presidential bid has broken barriers. But Caryl Rivers cautions that a retro cloud is also following her campaign. College admissions, court rulings, congressional votes, media narratives are all telling women to stay home. -The presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton has some disturbing messages for uppity women in the United States. The reality that a woman is so close to the top political post in the country--perhaps even the world--has stirred up old ideas about the danger of female power and about woman's proper place in society. The backlash is sending a retro cloud across a number of fronts. I'd been hearing from female friends--some of whom do not support Hillary--that the backlash surprised them. Apparently, they missed the Wall Street Journal story on April 9 by Jonathan Kaufman and Carol Hymowitz, who wrote about the slurs and inflammatory language that many women encountered when the topic of the campaign came up at work, and which they thought had been banished from public discourse. "Some women worry that regardless of how the election turns out," they wrote, "the resistance to Senator Clinton may embolden some men to resist women's efforts to share power with them in business, politics and elsewhere." If Hillary were male, and had garnered so many votes, no one would be calling for a pullout. Worrying Signs Are we heading into a new era of resistance to female gains? There are worrying signs to suggest that the answer is yes. They are not only found in the dust of Hillary's campaign trail, but also in the college admission practices, votes in Congress, Supreme Court decisions. Elite schools are quietly instituting affirmative action policies for white men, so top-scoring women may not be getting into their colleges of choice. U.S. News and World Report, using undergraduate admissions rate data collected from more than 1,400 four-year colleges and universities that participate in the magazine's rankings, found last year that over the previous 10 years many schools are maintaining their gender balance by admitting more men with lower scores than women. "The fat acceptance envelope is simply more elusive for today's accomplished young women," Jennifer Delahunty, the dean of admissions at Kenyon College, wrote in a New York Times op-ed last year. Most disturbing, Delahunty told Time magazine, "was the reaction of young women. By and large they just assumed this is just how things work. Why aren't they marching in the streets? It isn't fair and women should be saying something about it not being fair." What's the Message? What message are girls--and boys--being given? That men and boys will always be allowed to step ahead of women, no matter how accomplished the latter? The U.S. Congress could not even summon enough votes in April for a bill that would allow a woman to sue for sex discrimination at the time she discovered it was happening. Pressures, meanwhile, are intensifying for women to work longer and longer hours as family-friendly policies stall. An ongoing media narrative says that women in good jobs are deserting the workplace because of a traditional pull toward home and family. In a time when affirmative action programs for blacks and other minorities are under attack--limited by the Supreme Court and challenged by new activist groups--special privileges for white males are on the rise. Parents are seeing their high-scoring, talented girls losing out to less able boys, and this comes not just from a few isolated anecdotes. At the same time, the political powers-that-be are sending out a message that discrimination against women in the workplace is no big deal. When an Alabama woman sued Goodyear because she had been paid less than men doing the same work for two decades, the Supreme Court (just after the departure of Sandra Day O'Connor) ruled that she had waited too long to sue. The court said she should have brought her case within six months after her first unequal paycheck--that is, 20 years before she discovered it. You'd think the Congress, which pays lip service to equal pay for equal work, would come racing to remedy this injustice. What happened? The House countered the high court ruling by passing a bill that would permit lawsuits by victims of discrimination when they discover discrimination, not when the discrimination occurred. But it couldn't make it through the Senate. George Bush threatened to veto such a bill if it passed, and John McCain said he opposed it. Media Embraces a Narrative Meanwhile, a media narrative persists that the best and the brightest women are simply going home. They are "opting out" and becoming more traditional, feeling the pull of kids, hearth and home, their "natural" place. Signs hoisted by hecklers at Clinton rallies --"Stop running for president and make me a sandwich," "Iron my shirt"--show the ugly underside of that sentimental version. What's really happening, says New York University sociologist Kathleen Gerson, is that full-time paid work has come to mean 50 hours or more. That overload is what working mothers are rejecting. Women, overall, aren't "opting out" of full-time work, but are getting pushed out by an increasingly inflexible workplace. That story is not being told. Just ask Joan C. Williams. In a report in the American Prospect in March she found the vast majority--more than 70 percent--of the newspaper stories she and others analyzed emphasized pulls rather than pushes. Women were following the pull toward home, "with little mention of how the workplace pushes them out." This is true even though a 2004 study by researchers Pamela Stone and Meg Lovejoy found that 86 percent of highly qualified women surveyed said work-related reasons, including workplace inflexibility, were key considerations in their decisions to quit. Only 6 percent of newspaper articles that Williams reviewed identified workplace pushes as key reasons why women left work. Put these disparate items together and you see the clear message: Women have gone too far, and they shouldn't be running for president. They belong at home, and in fact are choosing to stay home. So why shouldn't males get the college spots, and who cares about workplace discrimination? As president Hillary Clinton could change at least some of this. That's why it's so hard to listen to the delegate-counters say her prospects are fading. Some women are fighting back. On May 20, the Women's Media Center launched a "Sexism Sells, But We're Not Buying It" campaign against the pervasive sexism in the media's election coverage. The group's Web site offers a petition for you to sign, chiding media outlets for their performance. "Sexism isn't a partisan issue," it says. "We're not going to let anyone hit the snooze button on this important issue!" To which I say, "Amen!" Boston University journalism professor Caryl Rivers is the author of "Selling Anxiety: How the News Media Scare Women."

In Britain, Rape Cases Seldom Result in a Conviction By Mary Jordan Washington Post Foreign Service Thursday, May 29, 2008; Page A01 LONDON -- After Linda Davies reported to police that her 15-year-old daughter had been raped, it took three months -- plus two dozen phone calls and a threat of legal action -- before police questioned the suspect, a 28-year-old neighbor. "I gave police his name, address, mobile phone number, car registration -- everything but his passport," said Davies, 44, a strong-minded mother of two daughters. "I was basically begging them. He lived five minutes away from us." The suspect was finally arrested but acquitted at a trial in which the judge told the jury that he was "in a way a man of good character" because his previous criminal convictions, for possession of stolen goods and marijuana, did not involve violence. Davies was furious at the judge, who also instructed the jurors to ignore the victim's young age, and at police, who lost cellphone records that contradicted the defendant's account. "This has shattered us," Davies said. "We felt like the whole system was against us." Davies said she was stunned to learn that her daughter's case was the rule, not the exception. According to government statistics, only 5.7 percent of rapes officially recorded by police in England and Wales end in a conviction. "What are they saying?" Davies asked. "That 95 percent of women that come forward are telling lies?" In Britain, a nation whose justice system has been used as a model around the globe, government officials and women's rights activists agree that rape goes largely unpunished. Solicitor General Vera Baird, who oversees criminal prosecutions in England, estimated that 10 to 20 percent of rapes are brought to authorities' attention. According to government figures, 14,000 cases a year are reported and 19 out of 20 defendants walk free. "There will never be proper female equality and appropriate dignity afforded to one-half of the population if it's possible to rape somebody and get away with it," said Baird, one of the highest-ranking women in the British government. Thousands of victims each year once chose not to go to police because of shame, women's advocates say. Now, the advocates say, the bigger reason is that rape victims feel the system is stacked against them. A 2005 report commissioned by the police found a "culture of skepticism" in the justice system when it came to rape cases, and recommended shifting the focus from seeking reasons not to believe the accuser to gathering evidence to support the charge. Lisa Longstaff, spokeswoman for the London-based group Women Against Rape, said rape cases are "not a priority" for busy police and prosecutors and, as a result, "so few rapists get locked up that those who do feel unlucky rather than guilty." This Story In Britain, Rape Cases Seldom Result in a Conviction Women Criticize Britain's Low Rape Conviction Rate Even some cases that do end in a guilty verdict stir outrage. Last year, a judge sentenced a 24-year-old man to two years in prison for having sex with a 10-year-old after concluding that the girl had "dressed provocatively." Patricia Scotland, England's first female attorney general since the job was created in the 15th century, appealed that sentence. It was increased to four years. Longstaff and others said that despite advances toward equality, sex crimes run up against a persistent societal bias -- pronounced in the male-dominated police and judicial system -- that women have only themselves to blame. Julie Bindel, a feminist activist and writer, said there has been a huge cultural shift since the 1950s and 1960s toward acceptance that unmarried women can have casual sex. But, she said, "women are allowed that bit more freedom as long as men behave. When men choose not to, it comes right back at women: 'What did you do to stop him? What was it about you that he chose you to rape?' " A Claim of Mixed Signals In a TV ad paid for by the police of Manchester, England, that began airing this month, a young man and woman are enjoying a pleasant evening, at first. But after they drink alcohol, dance and kiss, the man leads the woman out of the nightclub, yanks her pants down and forces her to have sex against a wall as she cries, "No. No. . . . Get off of me." In the ad, the man is locked up. In real life, according to dozens of interviews with victims and experts, this is exactly the kind of case that ends in an acquittal, if it goes to court at all. Acquittals are often won on the "mucky sex" defense -- that the man got mixed signals from the woman and what resulted really wasn't rape. Danielle West, 30, who reported to police that she was raped after a boozy office Christmas party in December 2006, said police seemed uninterested in her case once she said she had been drinking heavily. West, an American who manages a team of Web analysts in London, turned visibly upset as she recounted her story in a quiet corner of a coffee shop. She said police, rather than giving her the benefit of the doubt, seemed "hostile" and intent on trying to "trip me up." "I was constantly fighting to get someone to believe me," said West, who has a young daughter. She said a female officer flatly told her that she believed no crime had been committed and that West had simply gotten "drunk and had a shag," a British term for sex. This Story In Britain, Rape Cases Seldom Result in a Conviction Women Criticize Britain's Low Rape Conviction Rate "I couldn't believe it," West said. "If you had told me this was modern-day Kabul, okay. But London?" She has since hired a lawyer to file a formal complaint against the police. A police spokesman said it was "inappropriate" to comment on West's case because an investigation into her complaint was ongoing. Debaleena Dasgupta, a lawyer who represents West, said another client filed a complaint against an officer who allowed a man accused of rape to go on vacation before police took his statement. In yet another case, a 38-year-old woman from Cornwall said police interviewed, weeks apart, two men whom she accused of raping her one night, giving them time to coordinate their stories. Improving Investigations "We have got to do better," said John Yates, assistant commissioner of the London Metropolitan Police. He described the rape conviction rate as "appalling" and said police had "to build better cases." Rape cases are particularly challenging, he said, because women often delay reporting, there are no eyewitnesses and alcohol blurs the victim's recollection of details. "Every crime requires good first steps," he said, such as interviewing witnesses immediately and grabbing footage off the millions of closed-circuit security cameras in Britain. "If you get the first steps wrong, it's hard to re-create it." About 25 percent of reports of assault and 75 percent of homicides lead to someone being found guilty. In the 1970s, the rape conviction rate ran at more than 30 percent. The difference now is that there are far more "date rape" cases -- like the one depicted in the Manchester police ad. Kerim Fuad, a barrister who has defended more than 100 men accused of rape, including the defendant in the Davies case, said most of the time the defendant and the accuser know each other and the jury must decide whom to believe. A woman always has a right to say no, he said, but when she goes into a man's bedroom late at night after they have both been drinking, juries may have a hard time voting to send a man to prison. Fuad declined to speak about specific cases, but he said he has been surprised by some "not guilty" verdicts. He said jurors have been shown compelling evidence -- such as blood at the scene or internal injury to the woman -- and still not returned a guilty verdict. It is illegal in Britain to interview jurors -- even after a verdict. But public opinion polls show that a sizable proportion -- a quarter to a third -- of Britons say a rape victim is responsible for the attack if she is drunk or wearing "sexy" clothes. "As many as one in two young men believe there are some circumstances when it's okay to force a woman to have sex," said Conservative Party leader David Cameron, citing studies. This Story In Britain, Rape Cases Seldom Result in a Conviction Women Criticize Britain's Low Rape Conviction Rate "In my mind," he said, "this is an example of moral collapse." 'Let Down by the System' Around the world, rapists are rarely punished. In the United States, 13 percent of rape reports end in a conviction. In many developing and Muslim countries, women's activists say many victims don't even report gang or stranger rapes because it is so difficult to win convictions. Reporting has even led to victims being charged with adultery or sentenced to public lashings for "mingling" with men. In wealthier Western countries, women are told that this crime shouldn't be hidden and are counseled to take a stand against men who force them into unwanted sex. "But what is the point," asked Davies, when in the end the prosecutor often has a poorly put-together case, the defense contends that the sex was consensual -- at least mostly -- and the jury is told to be sure beyond a reasonable doubt? "When we do report it, we are completely let down by the system," she said. Governments collect crime statistics differently and international comparisons are difficult, but England's conviction rate stands out as particularly low. That has led to calls to reform a tradition-bound judicial system where judges and attorneys in criminal courtrooms still wear white wigs. Police, prosecutors and judges are increasingly being trained specifically to deal with sex crimes. Judges are being urged to allow wider use of expert testimony so that, for example, a rape trauma expert could explain why a victim might delay reporting. Now, the defense often uses that delay to attack a victim's credibility. Until a few months ago, prosecutors were barred from interviewing victims and met them only on the day of the trial. Ken McDonald, the head of the Crown Prosecution Service, called this restriction "mad." He said it dated back centuries to the days when witnesses stuck straw in their shoes outside courtrooms to indicate their testimony could be bought. 'I Was Happy Before' Linda Davies's daughter, who asked that her first name not be used, said her courtroom experience two years ago still keeps her awake at night, crying. The 5-foot-2, brown-haired student met the prosecutor minutes before the trial. She had no warning that the defense would insinuate that she had a tarnished reputation and agreed to the sex for pocket cash -- and that the prosecutor wouldn't object. She was floored when Judge Jonathan Van Der Werff, as recorded in a transcript, told the jury that the defendant was "in a way a man of good character" and that it should disregard her age, "in case it's worrying you." Now retired, Van Der Werff declined an interview request. The defendant, who is unemployed, never took the stand. The teenager said he had told her he was 19; police later told her he was 28. This Story In Britain, Rape Cases Seldom Result in a Conviction Women Criticize Britain's Low Rape Conviction Rate The girl said in an interview that the man invited her to his apartment. "He told me he wanted to get his dog to take on a walk," she said, covering her face. She had initially thought he was nice and kissed him. But then, she said, "he told me he would do something really bad to me" if she refused sex. "I couldn't push him off and I was trying really hard," said the girl, who weighs 90 pounds. She said she wished police had interviewed someone at the local supermarket where she stood sobbing after the attack, or had asked to see the store's video surveillance tapes. "This has made me a different person," she said, her voice fading and her brown eyes looking into the distance. "I was happy before. Now I am angry. "I feel I didn't get justice. If I ever have kids and this happened to them, I wouldn't tell them to report it."

This is just about a perfect editorial. And it ends by saying: The race is a long shot but it is not over! May 30, 2008 http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080530/VOICES01/805300306/1161/CUSTOMER06 Editorial: Clinton is top candidate for Dems Editorial Board Argus Leader For the first time in memory, every state will play a role in choosing a nominee for the nation's highest office. Some of those parts are small, but not ours: as one of the last two primary elections, South Dakota Democrats suddenly and improbably find themselves in a starring role. That's an unlikely turn of events, as our state has improbably become a battleground in the long, hard race between two Senators seeking a spot at the top of the Democratic ticket: Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Clinton of New York. The process feels similar at times, but the goal of a primary election is different from the race voters will decide in November. Our endorsement also is different. We will judge the candidates in this fall's general election when that time comes. Obama could certainly become one of those candidates in the days ahead - at the time of this writing, his mathematical advantage is considerable. His appeal also is clear, and his campaign has been strong. But Clinton is the strongest Democratic candidate for South Dakota. Her mastery of complex policy detail is broad and deep, and her experience as a senator and former first lady matches that. Measured against her opponent, Clinton is philosophically more moderate. That is likely a good thing for South Dakota. Clinton's energy policy is forward thinking and wise. She advocates a broad federal research initiative to help solve our looming oil crisis. It's a plan that would join university researchers, private industry and individual inventors behind a common goal. Is ethanol part of the answer? Clinton believes it is but not necessarily corn ethanol. That is not precisely the answer South Dakota wants to hear. Corn-based ethanol has been a boon for farmers here. But the simple fact is that she probably is correct. Advances in cellulosic ethanol technologies could render corn ethanol obsolete and wasteful. Happily, South Dakota is poised to be a major player in the push to experiment with other kinds of ethanol. Clinton has demonstrated a real commitment to Native American issues and will have visited several South Dakota reservations before the race is over. Clinton is precisely correct when she says that people outside the region have a poor understanding of the troubling trends on our reservations. Federal attention could help. That includes but is not limited to higher-ranking posts in the federal bureaucracy. Her truly universal health care plan would be welcomed by thousands of South Dakotans. Even on reservations, where health care is nominally universal already, such a plan would be welcome. The federal government would never be allowed to subject everyday Americans to the kind of care Native Americans living on reservations routinely receive. Obama is justifiably credited as a powerful speaker, but Clinton holds her own easily. As those who have attended her South Dakota rallies can attest, she is quick on her feet and energetic. She frames her ideas clearly in speeches and answers questions with genuine directness. Her resilience and determination never should be questioned. She has met or overcome every challenge or roadblock in her way, and there have been many. Her determination to carry the nomination process through to its real conclusion has perhaps earned her a grudging respect from those who would never support her. Clinton might not win this race. In fact, it's a long shot. But whatever some might say, the race is not over, and her name is on the ballot. Win or lose, she's also the best Democratic candidate for South Dakota.

LOL!! Mari, did you see this in your Philly paper? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080606/ap_on_hi_te/philadelphia_newspapers_fake_ads;_ylt=AhobvdJ7UqQpkRLWhkwyv.lk24cA

I attended Hillary's event yesterday in DC, it was great to see Bill and Chelsea too. Needless to say she suspended her campaign, she did NOT concede. Karen, there is a huge investigation going on in Chicago on BO. Keep the faith ladies, this ain't over, till Denver. Right now, she's doing what she needs to do. In the words of the honorable Ms. Maya Angelou: "This is not the first time you have seen Hillary Clinton seemingly at her wits' end, but she has always risen, always risen, don't forget she has always risen, much to the dismay of her adversaries and the delight of her friends........ .....Don't give up on Hillary. In fact, if you help her to rise, you will rise with her and help her make this country the wonderful, wonderful place where every man and every woman can live freely without sanctimonious piety and without crippling fear. Rise, Hillary, Rise. Clinton's lead is from 34.5 million voters (97%) in Primaries. Obama's lead is from 1.1 million voters (3%) in caucuses. This is pretty alarming: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/6/2/12307/61275

A Letter from Rosa Park's Granddaughter, Carole A. Parks, Chicago IL. My main regret is that Hillary probably felt compelled to congratulate Barack on the victory he has won, as opposed to the honor he was granted. Other than that, despite the circumstances, I felt buoyed by the speech. I was glad she reminded people of the number and wide diversity of her supporters, the issues she'll continue fighting for, the precedents to these historical campaigns, the bias she ran into, and that of the last 10 presidential elections Bill won two of the three Democratic victories. Most of all, I was glad she left the door open. We made tremendous progress during the under a Democratic president, with a flourishing economy and our leadership for peace and security respected around the world. Just think how much more progress we could have made over the past 40 years if we'd had a Democratic president. Think about the lost opportunities of these past seven years on the environment and the economy, on health care and civil rights, on education, foreign policy and the Supreme Court. Hillary compared the party to a family unified around shared ideals, values and destination which would mean I must identify with a leadership who facilitate favoritism, foul play and public savaging of its own members. Who reward Republicanesque chicanery and marketing over democratic principles and substance. Who would rather protect their own territory than elect a president who could help us all. Hillary also urged us not to dwell on what might have been which is exactly what we must do in the person of Howard Dean. The man is incompetent, a saboteur or both. Retaining him spits in the face of over half those who voted in the primaries. It erodes confidence the DNC will reflect our standards. It conveys contempt for us on the part of the candidate we are called upon to support. It suggests winning the White House is not a DNC priority. Unity is a two-way street. So far, I have seen nothing to indicate the Hillary camp counts any more than it has all along. Replacing Dean with someone amenable to Hillary would be a start. Perhaps I'll see other evidence at the convention. Until then I cannot in good conscience get in the spirit Hillary urged. Others have made it too hollow. She will be blamed for that anyway, no matter what she does, so I might as well remain faithful to the vision that has sustained me so far: Hillary Clinton in the White House.

For all the info you may need: http://www.justsaynodeal.com/

BTW, the letter is from Rosa Parks God daughter, my typo.

LOL, too many rumors: http://news.aol.com/elections/story/_a/obama-launches-site-to-debunk-rumors/20080612154409990001?icid=100214839x1203913544x1200156562 Read the comments to this article: http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/06/12/camille-paglia-s-dirty-talk-about-clinton/

Good God, it's like the witch hunts of the Clinton's all over again.

I know, Dorine. I did not know so many people hated them. :-( How about O moving the DNC offices to Chicago? And how unbiased is a website you start and control to debunk rumors that might hurt you? LOL! He really wants to take over the world. Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington's "Ten Most Wanted" Corrupt Politicians for 2007: 8. Senator BARACK OBAMA (D-IL): A Dishonorable Mention last year, Senator Obama moves onto the "ten most wanted" list in 2007. In 2006, it was discovered that Obama was involved in a suspicious real estate deal with an indicted political fundraiser, Antoin Rezko. In 2007, more reports surfaced of deeper and suspicious business and political connections. It was reported that just two months after he joined the Senate, Obama purchased $50,000 worth of stock in speculative companies whose major investors were his biggest campaign contributors. One of the companies was a biotech concern that benefited from legislation Obama pushed just two weeks after the senator purchased $5,000 of the company's shares. Obama was also nabbed conducting campaign business in his Senate office, a VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW. http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrup

I don't blame him for the de-bunking website. John Kerry was waaaaaay too slow to fight back against the smears leveled at him, and they dogged his campaign. Just heard that Tim Russert died. He was a terrific jouralist and a good guy. Only 58.

indicted political fundraiser, Antoin Rezko He was just convicted. Rezko bought the lot next door to Obama's mansion at a highly inflated price compared to what Obama paid. It is widely known here that Rezko's purchase included most of the FMV of Obama's. BTW, I just saw that R Kelly was acquited. WTF!!

(Moon) I did not know so many people hated them. :-( Not sure if that was clear....the witch hunt is onto Barack and Michelle as it was with the Clinton's when they were in office. I thought it was pretty smart to have that website actually. Judicial Watch took their 10 Most Wanted down. Was curious who else they put on it and why. I'd assume Abramoff might've been in one of the top 2 or 3 spots.

OH! I missed that R. Kelly verdict. Just wow. That's F'd.

No kidding! You have someone testify that she was in a threesome with him and the minor girl and that doesn't seem to be enough? Will have to see what the local news has to say.

I'm beginning to think the jury system might need some tweaking, but then again, I wasn't too impressed by the judge-only proceedings with our Sean Bell/cops shooting unarmed men case either. Ok, well not just beginning. Those thoughts really started with O.J.

(me) the witch hunt is onto Barack and Michelle And John McCain is his own worst enemy.

Surprised at R Kelly? It's good to be black.

This is a very long article, so I just posted the first few paragraphs... Media Charged With Sexism in Clinton Coverage By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE and JULIE BOSMAN Published: June 13, 2008 Angered by what they consider sexist news coverage of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton�s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, many women and erstwhile Clinton supporters are proposing boycotts of the cable networks, putting up videos on a �Media Hall of Shame,� starting a national conversation about sexism and pushing Mrs. Clinton�s rival, Senator Barack Obama, to address the matter. But many in the news media � with a few exceptions, including Katie Couric, the anchor of the �CBS Evening News� � see little need for reconsidering their coverage or changing their approach going forward. Rather, they say, as the Clinton campaign fell behind, it exploited a few glaring examples of sexist coverage to whip up a backlash and to try to create momentum for Mrs. Clinton. Phil Griffin, senior vice president of NBC News and the executive in charge of MSNBC, a particular target of criticism, said that although a few mistakes had been made, that they had been corrected quickly and that the network�s overall coverage was fair. �I get it, that in this 24-hour media world, you�ve got to be on your game and there�s very little room for mistakes,� Mr. Griffin said. �But the Clinton campaign saw an opportunity to use it for their advantage. They were trying to rally a certain demographic, and women were behind it.� His views were echoed by other news media figures. �She got some tough coverage at times, but she brought that on herself, whether it was the Bosnian snipers or not conceding on the night of the final primaries,� said Rem Rieder, editor of American Journalism Review. �She had a long track record in public life as a serious person and a tough politician, and she was covered that way.� Nicholas Lemann, dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University, said: �I have not had a lot of regretful conversations with high-ranking media types and political reporters about how unfair their coverage of the Hillary Clinton campaign was.� Among journalists, he added, the coverage �does not register as a mistake that must not be allowed to happen again.� [....] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/us/politics/13women.html?em&ex=1213588800&en=9908612b6e0dd0b2&ei=5087%0A

Well, who'd a thunk this would happen? ;-) Am biting my virtual tongue. FRIDAY, June 13, 2008, 3:08 p.m. By Craig Gilbert Clinton delegate to vote for McCain As an avid supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries, Debra Bartoshevich is not alone in her frustration over Clinton's defeat. She's not alone in refusing to support Barack Obama. And she's not entirely alone in saying she'll vote this fall for Republican John McCain instead. But what makes her unusual is that she holds these views as an elected delegate to the Democratic National Convention in Denver this summer. "I'm sure people are going to be upset with me. I don't want to lose my national delegate status," says Bartoshevich, a 41-year-old emergency room nurse who is a convention delegate, pledged to Clinton, from Waterford in Racine County. Joe Wineke, the chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, reacted with disbelief when first told Friday afternoon that one of his state party delegates is now a McCain supporter. "Not a delegate? To the national convention?" asked Wineke, who was getting ready for the start of the state party convention Friday in Stevens Point. "We have a Clinton national (convention) delegate who says she's voting for John McCain?" Wineke repeated, for clarification. "I've never heard of such a thing." Wineke said "almost everybody I know who was for Hillary" is solidly behind Obama now. As for Bartoshevich, he said, "my suspicion is she doesn't know what she's getting into" because "the delegates to this convention will be very upset." Asked if publicly supporting the other party's presidential nominee could affect a delegate's convention status, Wineke said, "I never thought I'd ever get a question like this." After some preliminary checking, the state party chair said he assumed she would remain a delegate. The McCain campaign said that, nationally, it was not aware at this point of any other delegates to the Democratic convention (it may know of an alternate, it said) who have come out for the Republican candidate. In an interview, Bartoshevich expressed lingering unhappiness over the Democratic nominating process, said Clinton was treated unfairly by the party, and said she has deep reservations about Obama's lack of experience and his judgment. "I'm kind of disenfranchised," she said. She said she planned to vote for Clinton at the convention, but in an Obama-McCain match-up in November, "I will not be voting for Obama. I will cast my vote for John McCain. Said Bartoshevich: "I just feel you need to have somebody who has experience with foreign matters." She said a series of controversial Obama "associations," including but not limited to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Chicago developer Tony Rezko, reflected poorly on his judgment. And she echoed the complaints of many of Clinton's most ardent supporters that Clinton was treated unfairly in the nominating process and by the party. "No self-respecting woman should wish or work for the success of a party that ignores her - that's by Susan B. Anthony," said Bartoshevich, referring to the famous suffragist. Bartoshevich called herself a "devoted Democrat" who, she said, had never voted for a Republican for president. "I'm on a lot of the (pro-Clinton) blogs, and so many people, male and female, feel the same way as I do," said Bartoshevich, who was listed as a Racine County co-chair for the Clinton campaign and who traveled outside Wisconsin to volunteer for Clinton. "The Democrats jumped on this wagon of Barack Obama and nobody really knows him." Hoping to tap into discontent among Clinton supporters, the McCain campaign is reaching out to them in a variety of ways, including a telephone "town hall" meeting Saturday targeted to non-Republican voters. Encouraged by her sister, who has served in Iraq, Bartoshevich signed up as a supporter with "Citizens for McCain," an arm of the campaign targeting Democrats and independents. She said she then got a call from the McCain campaign, which in turn provided her name to a reporter. Polls suggest that Democrats are largely rallying around Obama after a divisive nominating fight, a phenomenon that has occurred in past intra-party fights, say scholars. But it remains to be seen whether Obama is hurt in the fall by any softness among from Clinton's core constituencies, especially white women, and older and lower-income whites. Clinton has not formally "released" her pledged delegates, and it would not be unusual, given recent history, for most of them to cast their votes for Clinton at the convention. But she has urged her delegates to help Obama defeat McCain. Professor Byron Shafer, a University of Wisconsin-Madison scholar who is an expert on conventions, said it's the fact that Bartoshevich is a convention delegate, subject to the partisan tendencies and pressures common to party activists, that makes her public support for McCain so unusual. "The competitive partisan dynamic is usually strong enough that even the people not willing to line up at the convention on record for the nominee, are still unlikely to be willing to line up publicly for the other party's nominee," said Shafer. "It's a pretty far-out move." Asked what kind of reception he would expect Bartoshevich to get from her fellow delegates, he said: "I would guess a lot of people will be very rude and very unpleasant." http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=1&date=6/13/2008&id=41516

His views were echoed by other news media figures. �She got some tough coverage at times, but she brought that on herself, whether it was the Bosnian snipers or not conceding on the night of the final primaries,� said Rem Rieder, editor of American Journalism Review. Am horrified! Is that not the "she asked for" line used in rape allegations?

I agree, Karen! I am a Clinton Delegate from VA and will not be voting for O. I attended our Natrional Democratic Convention in VA and was disgusted by all the O love. I have not sen any reaching to Hillary voters. At the Convention I met a Nat'l Delegate who has received multiple death threats. She's a Univ. prof. at GW in DC. This is going to Denver. Lots is supposed to come out on O soon. He's horrid. Here's another one: http://www.politickermd.com/kevinagnese/2566/boergers-won-t-commit-voting-obama-november-says-clinton-s-name-must-be-put-nominat

Let's start getting the truth out: June 13, 2008 Surrogates of Senator Hillary Clinton suggested last month that her Democratic rival faced a possible doomsday scenario before the general election, calling it an "October Surprise". Naturally, everyone assumed she herself would be instigating Armageddon, and not in October but May. That assumption, however, turned out to be off base. Paula Revere (as Clinton sometimes refers to herself) was more likely dropping a hint, praying there was someone left in the national press corps who could recognize an undressed emperor when he saw one. After all, there was that fraud trial going on in Chicago. Is the U.S. Attorney's office now sitting on a felony indictment against Obama, just waiting for him to lock up the nomination? And what about the two Iraqi agents associated with Tony Rezko? How did those reconstruction funds wind up in the presidential candidate's campaign coffers? And does he really prefer to bank with pimps, as the Chicago Tribune suggested in an article, one that for some inexplicable reason was not picked up by NBC News? While the answers to these intriguing questions may be getting short shrift from the media, you can bet Republican opposition researchers are already versed in the particulars. Moreover, if the G.O.P. is setting a trap, then maybe elected Democratic officials (a.k.a. superdelegates) should be boning up on the Chicago underworld, not lining up at the Bank of Obama ATM machine. For one thing, it's not necessarily written in stone that the presumptive G.O.P. nominee will get voted in at the convention next September. Anyone who assumes McCain is the guy to beat really doesn't appreciate Karl Rove's ability to turn a presidential election on its head. Remember, America's favorite dirty trickster is still out on the lam, probably whistling the old Grateful Dead tune Friend of the Devil as he forages around the Fox News Channel studios each weekday afternoon. In short, there are plenty of good reasons to fret about the future. Surprises, then and now... The term October Surprise dates back to 1980, the year President Jimmy Carter ran for re-election against Ronald Reagan and the first George Bush. By most accounts, he lost as a result of the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and many suspected the Reagan campaign intervened in international affairs to set that ordeal into motion. In fact, many of the names, events and places from yesteryear seem to be popping up again today. Carter, Bush, the spike in oil prices, transitioning Middle East government, a U.S. presidential election... And just like 1980, this year's election cycle began with the assassination of a Bhutto. The daughter of Pakistan's first prime minister was gunned down on December 27, 2007. In 1979, Benazir's father was hanged after a military coup. At the time of the first execution, the CIA was busy in Pakistan outfitting Osama bin Laden and his Islamic jihad to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. However, most Americans were focussed on Iran in those days. The U.S. backed Shah Reza Pahlavi was overthrown in 1979 after a popular uprising, and in the aftermath, an ayatollah named Khomeini flew in from Paris and tried to take advantage of the situation. Shortly after that, President Carter got a call from Henry Kissinger, asking him to let the deposed shah into the United States for cancer treatment. The embassy staff in Tehran warned Carter that it was no time to play Make a Wish, but Carter did let him in anyway. The Iranians reacted with angry demonstrations (believing the U.S. intended to reinstall Pahlavi) and a group of students stormed the embassy, taking 52 Americans hostage. Although the Pentagon disputes it, two former embassy captives insist that the country's current civilian president, Ahmadinejad, was in charge of that operation. Like a perfectly synchronized Swiss clock, 444 days later and about 20 minutes after Reagan delivered his inaugural speech, the hostages were released. By then, Khomeini and his "supreme council" of fellow mullahs had rammed through an Islamic constitution and began purging the country of all those moderate, secular folks responsible for overthrowing the shah in the first place. (Remnants of that group, known as the MEK-NCRI, are holed up in Europe and even maintain a base in Iraq, although the United States and the U.K. bombed them in 2003.) At any rate, Reagan's campaign manager William Casey started selling missiles to the Islamic dictatorship as soon as he was appointed CIA director. In Washington, people wondered. Did the Reagan campaign cut a deal with Khomeini to make sure he wouldn't free the hostages before the November election - hence Carter's October Surprise? Congress held hearings on the subject. Chaired by Indiana Democrat Lee Hamilton, the House committee eventually ruled there was no conspiracy. (Twenty years later, this same congressman would be tapped by President Bush to co-chair the bipartisan 9/11 Commission.) Now fast forward to this election cycle. The G.O.P. knew four years ago that winning the White House after George W. Bush's reign of error would be an uphill climb. Especially with another Clinton coming down the pike. They needed to get creative. And in a little known state senator from the midwest they found reason to hope. As luck would have it, Barack Obama had compiled a lot of dirt under his finger nails from 17 years of Chicago machine politics. His principle benefactor, Tony Rezko, was a Syrian slumlord under investigation by the federal government for fraud and influence peddling. Now this seemed promising. By using Obama as their trojan horse to get inside and sieze the apparatus of the Democratic Party, Republicans saw their odds for November improving dramatically. It didn't matter that the Illinois legislator was little more than a smug, petulant, unaccomplished hack from Chicago. He was African American, which meant that his Democratic opponents couldn't criticize him without alienating a key party demographic. And once Obama was nominated, the G.O.P. could make its case to the electorate along these lines: "Jeez, would you look at this guy's proximity group. He's got convicts, foreign agents and tainted campaign contributions coming out of the woodwork. And if he can't even obtain an F.B.I. clearance as a border patrol agent, do you really think we should be handing him the nuclear launch codes?" Here are a few other Republican tactics that might come to fruition next fall: An indictment from the U.S. Attorney: It turns out the federal prosecutor in the trial of Chicago political fixer Tony Rezko was Patrick Fitzgerald, the special counsel who handled the Valerie Plame C.I.A. leak case. No one knows for sure, but the Justice Department could conceivably indict Obama on corruption charges in the wake of the recent Rezko verdict. To date, the senator has been identified as a participant in crafting legislation to reduce the number of members on the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board from 15 to 9, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. The prosecution alleges that as a result, in 2003, the board was stacked by Rezko in order to steer big government contracts his way. Obama had previously helped Rezko and his partner Allison Davis acquire at least 11 housing redevelopment projects in his senate district, in addition to representing the landlord (as his attorney) when the City of Chicago sued over slumlike conditions and unheated apartments. The government's principle witness, tuart Levine, has acknowledged in sworn testimony that Davis (Obama's former boss at a law firm) acted as go-between in the shakedown scheme of a Hollywood financier. Whether there is a crime here involving the candidate remains to be seen. On another front, the New York Times has reported that Rezko's role in the purchase of Obama's South Chicago estate in 2005 may have been an attempt to shield assets from creditors in several lawsuits pending at the time. How much Obama himself knew about Rezko's finances is unknown. We do know that Rezko did a walk-through of the home prior to the sale, even though his wife would be listed as the new owner of the empty lot next door. Links to Iraqi money men exposed: Shortly before the Obama property deal, Rezko received a $3.5 million loan from an Iraqi exile, Nadhmi Auchi. The Pentagon has identified Auchi as a former bagman for Saddam Hussein. This London-based financier is one of the world's richest men, convicted of fraud in 2003 over the notorious European Elf affair, the largest scandal in post-war Europe. Needless to say, the suggestion that it was Saddam's banker who made Obama's dream home possible will probably not play well among Independents and Reagan Democrats in November. Another longtime Rezko chum, Aiham Alsammarae, was appointed Iraq's former Minister of Electricity in 2003. (Rezko, Alsammarae and Auchi all went to college in Illinois.) In 2005, Alsammarae was charged with stealing $650 million in Iraqi reconstruction funds. Wanted by Interpol, Alsammarae posted more than $2.7 million in property as collateral last April to help spring Rezko from jail. While Bush Administration officials won't tell anyone what the warrant is for, his arrest is not imminent. The minister fled Iraq in 2006. Newsweek has reported that Alsammarae'a son sent several faxes to Obama's office in Washington prior while he was incarcerated in a Baghdad jail in December. Obama said this was a routine constituent request that was forwarded to a U.S. consulate. Thereafter, with the aid of Blackwater security guards, Alsammarae escaped. The fugitive now resides comfortably in his private compound outside of Chicago, where he donated online to the candidate in January, February and March. A presidential campaign that banks with crime figures: According to an article in the Chicago Tribune, in 2006 Obama endorsed and appeared in campaign commercials for Alex Giannoulias, a banker who ran for Illinois state treasurer. Obama backed Giannoulias despite reports that his family-owned Broadway Bank made loans to bookmakers, prostitution rings and other criminal operations. "Records show Giannoulias and his family had given more than $10,000 to Obama's campaign, which banked at Broadway," the story read. Martial Law declaration: Were the majority of Americans to become disenchanted with or remain uninspired by either candidates McCain or Obama, President Bush could potentially pull off a coup de tat without a lot of grumbling from voters. After all, the Democratic Party has already managed to do pretty much exactly that with their Barack is the Nominee declaration in June. Perhaps savoring the prospect of a third term, President Bush signed National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51, an executive order that allows him to suspend the constitution without prior congressional approval. In other words, he declares a state of emergency in the event of a major terrorist attack or other �decapitating� incident against the United States, then cancels the election. According to the directive, the attack need not even take place inside the country. Well, isn't that convenient... For source links on the information reported above, plus an analysis of how Karl Rove and the neocons have manipulated the Democratic nominating process for fun and profit, see Bamboozling the American electorate again. For more on the CIA in Pakistan and Iran, see our foreign affairs section. - Rosemary Regello editor@thecityedition.com Copyright 2008 TheCityEdition.com

While personally, I'm more concerned about his current spiritual leaders, the reality is that this will be yet another thing about Obama that freaks people out. Republicans are sure to focus on this and again, it's not all the things individually, it's the big picture that includes all these things. Yet another indicator of why we need Senator Clinton as our nominee as Obama will have a very hard time winning this election. Subject: Malik Obama confirms his half-brother Barack grew up a Muslim http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12918.htm

I received this email, which might be of interest to many: Million Woman March CALL TO ACTION! We are organizing a Million Women March in Denver to support Senator Clinton and Women's Rights worldwide, with concurrent actions in every state at the same time as the Denver action, and we need everyone's help to make this a reality! Right now, we are in the process of getting Denver permits, and putting State Organizers on the ground in EVERY state. Please visit our webpage for information http://www.millionwomenmarch.blogspot.com or email us directly and get into the movement at risehillaryrise@gmail.com. Please join us in making this a HUGE success... the only thing that can stop us now is ourselves-- if people don't step up and take action to make this a reality!!

More mobster mentality... http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2008/06/obama-wont-like.html This is very sweet: http://clintondems.com/2008/06/enough/

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/771896/princess-obama-derangement-syndrome.thtml For what it's worth, I'm not a conspiracy buff in general, but even I am disturbed about Obama's many ties to criminals, former terrorists and groups like NOI. I can't imagine either Hillary or John McCain getting away with any of it for even a second.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmikfM4TqAM It's all explained, what a betrayal by the DNC.

Not sure if anyone watched the Al Gore endorsement the other night. I couldn't bring myself to it. Lou Dobbs was talking about the fact that Obama's supporters booed when Jennifer Granholm mentioned Hillary's name. Dobbs was talking about how unbelievable it was that people booed and that unity seems so far away at this point. He was talking about the divisive nature of Obama picking Solis-Doyle to be the VP candidate's chief of staff...thus effectively taking any control away from the new VP and putting it into the hands of Solis-Doyle. Lou Dobbs felt that this was a clear cut at HRC and that it was BHO's way of letting HRC know where she stood. Dobbs was really appalled at the lack of concern BHO has for HRC's supporters. I was thinking, "Amen". New video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9vHcZLVLSU

Interesting analysis. Obama could win vote, lose election Harry Siegel Wed Jun 18, 9:35 PM ET Until 2000, it hadn�t happened in more than 100 years, but plugged-in observers from both parties see a distinct possibility of Barack Obama winning the popular vote but losing the Electoral College � and with it the presidency � to John McCain. ADVERTISEMENT Here�s the scenario: Obama racks up huge margins among the increasingly affluent, highly educated and liberal coastal states, while a significant increase in turnout among black voters allows him to compete � but not to win � in the South. Meanwhile, McCain wins solidly Republican states such as Texas and Georgia by significantly smaller margins than Bush�s in 2004 and ekes out narrow victories in places such as North Carolina, which Bush won by 12 points but Rasmussen presently shows as a tossup, and Indiana, which Bush won by 21 points but McCain presently leads by just 11. One possible result: Even as the national mood moves left, the 2004 map largely holds. Obama�s 32 new electoral votes from Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado and Virginia are offset by 21 new electoral votes for McCain in Michigan and New Hampshire � and despite a 2- or 3-point popular vote victory for Obama, America wakes up on Jan. 20 to a President McCain. According to Tad Devine, who served as the chief political consultant for Al Gore in 2000 and as a senior adviser to John F. Kerry in 2004, �it certainly is a possibility. Not a likelihood, but it is a real possibility.� Some observers, such as Joseph Mercurio, a political consultant and pollster who worked on Sen. Joe Biden�s Democratic primary bid, see this as unlikely given the dramatic increase in Democratic Party enrollment and President Bush�s near record-low approval rating. Also skeptical is Nate Silver, a political cult-favorite blogger whose statistical model � which factors in population change since electoral votes were last allocated in the 2000 census � shows McCain as more likely than Obama to lose the Electoral College while winning the popular vote. But others, pointing to the competitiveness of the past two elections, predict that this will be another such tight race. If they�re proven correct, this would be the fourth in the past five elections, making for the most closely contested run of presidential contests since those spanning the popular vote-Electoral College splits of 1876 and 1888. Hank Sheinkopf, president of Sheinkopf Communications and an adviser to Bill Clinton in 1996, warns that such a split �is anything but impossible.� While he gives Obama a slight edge in the general election �because he doesn�t have George Bush riding with him,� he predicts that �Obama�s going to get big votes for a Democrat in the Southern states but not enough to win any new electoral votes. So it�s a distinct possibility that he could lose the entire South, split the Midwest� and end up not as president but rather as the second coming of Al Gore. When asked the odds of this playing out, he offers �50-50.� Devine points out that Bush�s strategy in 2004 �was predicated on massive base turnout� that pushed up margins in safe states. He doesn�t �expect the McCain campaign to be directed the same way � using issues like gay marriage on the ballot to get the base to the polls � so McCain won�t have the same forces at play to drive out the popular vote.� Recalling the impact of Ralph Nader�s third-party run in 2000, Devine also wonders if Bob Barr�s Libertarian run might play out differently, costing McCain popular � but not electoral � votes, while producing another popular-electoral split. Lloyd M. Green, who served as research counsel to George Bush in 1988, also rates Obama a slight favorite and predicts that, if the Democrat does win, he�ll do so with �even larger margins in New York and California than in the last several elections [in 2004, Kerry won the two states by a combined margin of a little more than 2.5 million votes], and yet with all that margin run-up in safe states, this will end up a tight general election.� In a sentiment also expressed by Sheinkopf and Green, Devine sees little chance of this happening if Obama wins the popular vote by more than 4 points. �But if he gets it by 2 or 3 points, it is plausible," he said. "Absolutely.� Green, who sees �about a 20 percent chance� of Obama winning the popular vote while losing the Electoral College, doesn�t expect anything resembling a blowout: �Given that the only clear and clean majorities [since 1992] were in 1996 and 2004, ... this election will have the ferocity of all recent elections.� It�s a tough trend to buck, he argued, noting that �Americans traditionally change their religious affiliations more often than their party affiliations.� www.politico.com http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080619/pl_politico/11182;_ylt=AkYgTRf924H6IV97LDcHViWs0NUE

NY Times Op-Ed Columnist The Two Obamas By DAVID BROOKS Published: June 20, 2008 God, Republicans are saps. They think that they�re running against some academic liberal who wouldn�t wear flag pins on his lapel, whose wife isn�t proud of America and who went to some liberationist church where the pastor damned his own country. They think they�re running against some na�ve university-town dreamer, the second coming of Adlai Stevenson. But as recent weeks have made clear, Barack Obama is the most split-personality politician in the country today. On the one hand, there is Dr. Barack, the high-minded, Niebuhr-quoting speechifier who spent this past winter thrilling the Scarlett Johansson set and feeling the fierce urgency of now. But then on the other side, there�s Fast Eddie Obama, the promise-breaking, tough-minded Chicago pol who�d throw you under the truck for votes. This guy is the whole Chicago package: an idealistic, lakefront liberal fronting a sharp-elbowed machine operator. He�s the only politician of our lifetime who is underestimated because he�s too intelligent. He speaks so calmly and polysyllabically that people fail to appreciate the Machiavellian ambition inside. But he�s been giving us an education, for anybody who cares to pay attention. Just try to imagine Mister Rogers playing the agent Ari in �Entourage� and it all falls into place. Back when he was in the Illinois State Senate, Dr. Barack could have taken positions on politically uncomfortable issues. But Fast Eddie Obama voted �present� nearly 130 times. From time to time, he threw his voting power under the truck. Dr. Barack said he could no more disown the Rev. Jeremiah Wright than disown his own grandmother. Then the political costs of Rev. Wright escalated and Fast Eddie Obama threw Wright under the truck. Dr. Barack could have been a workhorse senator. But primary candidates don�t do tough votes, so Fast Eddie Obama threw the workhorse duties under the truck. Dr. Barack could have changed the way presidential campaigning works. John McCain offered to have a series of extended town-hall meetings around the country. But favored candidates don�t go in for unscripted free-range conversations. Fast Eddie Obama threw the new-politics mantra under the truck. And then on Thursday, Fast Eddie Obama had his finest hour. Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue. He aspires to be to political reform what Bono is to fighting disease in Africa. He�s spent much of his career talking about how much he believes in public financing. In January 2007, he told Larry King that the public-financing system works. In February 2007, he challenged Republicans to limit their spending and vowed to do so along with them if he were the nominee. In February 2008, he said he would aggressively pursue spending limits. He answered a Midwest Democracy Network questionnaire by reminding everyone that he has been a longtime advocate of the public-financing system. But Thursday, at the first breath of political inconvenience, Fast Eddie Obama threw public financing under the truck. In so doing, he probably dealt a death-blow to the cause of campaign-finance reform. And the only thing that changed between Thursday and when he lauded the system is that Obama�s got more money now. And Fast Eddie Obama didn�t just sell out the primary cause of his life. He did it with style. He did it with a video so risibly insincere that somewhere down in the shadow world, Lee Atwater is gaping and applauding. Obama blamed the (so far marginal) Republican 527s. He claimed that private donations are really public financing. He made a cut-throat political calculation seem like Mother Teresa�s final steps to sainthood. The media and the activists won�t care (they were only interested in campaign-finance reform only when the Republicans had more money). Meanwhile, Obama�s money is forever. He�s got an army of small donors and a phalanx of big money bundlers, including, according to The Washington Post, Kenneth Griffin of the Citadel Investment Group; Kirk Wager, a Florida trial lawyer; James Crown, a director of General Dynamics; and Neil Bluhm, a hotel, office and casino developer. I have to admit, I�m ambivalent watching all this. On the one hand, Obama did sell out the primary cause of his professional life, all for a tiny political advantage. If he�ll sell that out, what won�t he sell out? On the other hand, global affairs ain�t beanbag. If we�re going to have a president who is going to go toe to toe with the likes of Vladimir Putin, maybe it is better that he should have a ruthlessly opportunist Fast Eddie Obama lurking inside. All I know for sure is that this guy is no liberal goo-goo. Republicans keep calling him na�ve. But na�ve is the last word I�d use to describe Barack Obama. He�s the most effectively political creature we�ve seen in decades. Even Bill Clinton wasn�t smart enough to succeed in politics by pretending to renounce politics.

Fine, but all of this makes McCain a better choice....how?

I cringe of the thought of McCain as the better choice, but he is, IMO. It's the devil you know. I don't trust Obama. He's a crook from Chicago who has caught a free ride from the media. Looking back at this primary and seeing the treatment women have received from the DNC and Obama because they chose to ignore the media outrage at Hillary Clinton and her female supporters, has been an eye opener, and I will not forget in Nov. Obama was selected not elected. McCain is a moderate Republican, he reaches out to Democrats and they know it. He has helped pass more Democratic resolutions in Congress than any other Republican. He is also reaching out to Hillary voters, something Obama has taken for granted, he expects Hillary to deliver them on a silver platter, won't he be surprised when we don't fall in line. Please take a look at this and tell me how you feel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-IrhRSwF9U&feature=related

I'll check out the YouTube later. (Moon) McCain is a moderate Republican, he reaches out to Democrats and they know it. He has helped pass more Democratic resolutions in Congress than any other Republican. He is also reaching out to Hillary voters So he's reaching out and expecting support from the people he seems not to support when it come the issues I'd presume is in their self-interest? And frankly, with the Democrats apparently a bunch of spineless do-almost-nothings, I'd thank McCain very much not to help them out. While I really know little of Obama's position on some issues, I do know that in some things he and Hillary were ideologically joined at the hip for the most part. I'll assume that one of the reasons people supported Hillary was because she is a woman and it's assumed she would've watched our backs on issues important and pertaining specifically to us (women as a whole, not here per se). I've read much recently of McCain having an abominable voting record on women's issues. I've excerpted from just one place I've run across items about it. I'd check out the actual article at the link to get access to links to original articles/posts about some of the issues the writer brings up (including the NARAL website page about McCain and an item about Lily Ledbetter. If you don't know who she is or what her case was, I'd click on her name in blue to find out. I was appalled when the ruling came out). Of course if one is pro-life and pro-abstinence education, etc., I guess McCain's for you. Also, Karen, check out the last line before the comments. ;-) http://firedoglake.com/2008/06/09/mccain-is-wooing-the-wimmins/ John McCain has received a ZERO rating on women's issues every single year from NARAL from 2001 to 2007. A zero. He's against emergency contraception and funding for teen pregnancy prevention programs. He thinks Roe should be overturned. He voted against having health insurers cover birth control. And, as Joe Conason points out, he's not exactly Mr. Candor, including about sex education and contraception use to prevent the spread of AIDS. A reporter followed up by inquiring whether McCain supports sex education that candidly discusses contraception and preventing the spread of AIDS and other disease, or whether he backs President Bush's abstinence-only education program. After a long pause, he said, "I think I support the president's policy." Does he believe that contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV? After another long pause, he replied, "You've stumped me." The words blithering, pandering moh-ron leap to mind here. Equal pay? McCain opposed it, saying Congress shouldn't pass any laws that hold corporations accountable for screwing their female employees. Hell, he didn't even bother to show up for the last vote on this issue. I guess Lily Ledbetter had it coming, eh, Maverick? I've got news for you, pal: it's going to take a helluva lot more than "education and training" to make it okay to keep paying women less than men for doing the same damn job. And I'll make my own decisions about what's best for my body with my own doctor, thank you. But if McCain gets elected? Kiss your independent choices goodbye, ladies: He has repeatedly voted to deny low-income women access to abortion care except in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother's life (although McCain is now wavering on trying to put these exceptions into the party platform).... What's more, McCain has made it very clear that if he becomes president he will appoint judges in the Scalia, Roberts, Alito mold. His big make it clear that, if given the chance, he'd replace 88-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens with an anti-choice Justice who would tip the scales against Roe v Wade. Throw in an additional anti-choice replacement for the 75-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and you can kiss the right to choose good-bye for a long, long time.

Another on McCain on women's issues I just ran across reading something else. Be sure to read the rest. Feminists for McCain? Not So Much By Katha Pollitt June 19, 2008 This article appeared in the July 7, 2008 edition of The Nation Are there feminist Hillary supporters who hate Obama so much they'll vote for McCain just to show the Democratic Party how ticked off they are? Yes, and I get e-mails from all five of them. Seriously, I'm sure there are female Hillary Clinton voters who will go for John McCain in the general election, but I don't think too many of them will be feminists. Because to vote for McCain, a feminist would have to be insane. Let me rephrase that: she would have to believe that the chief--indeed the only--goal of the women's movement is to elect Clinton, not to promote women's rights. A vote for McCain would be the ultimate face-spiting nose-cutoff. Take that, women's equality! [.....cont'd] http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080707/pollitt

NARAL no longer means anything to me since they endorced O early. Another slap in the face to women, IMO. The men who have ruled in the Congress and the Senate have not passed the "Equal Rights Amendment" to me that comes before Roe vs Wade. Also, if McCain wins he will only be in office for 4 years, he will have a hard time passing anything with the Democrats in the majority. Hillary 2012! And, at least McCain has some voting record instead of Mr.Obama "present" voting record even Edwards brought that up in a debate. Also, McCain's family is directly affected by his decisions about the war in Iraq, considering that he's the only person in the Senate with a child serving in Iraq, I'd be inclined to say that he has an even greater vested interest in bringing the troops home safely. From Politico: The board viewed Obama�s backtrack on public financing �as an important issue and also as a test of whether he would put principles he said were important to him above political calculation. And he didn�t. That tells us something. It doesn�t tell us everything.� The Washington Post opined that Obama�s �effort to cloak his broken promise in the smug mantle of selfless dedication to the public good is a little hard to take.� The New York Times� editorial board, which endorsed Clinton after allegedly leaning toward Obama, wrote that �Obama has come up short� of �his evocative vows to depart from self-interested politics.� And USA Today, which also did not endorse any candidates, said Obama put �expediency over principle,� was �disingenuous about his reasons for opting out of public financing� and proved he�s not a �real reformer.� http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080621/pl_politico/11242;_ylt=AmV0dacU62VuXcs0b5ZPzeXCw5R4 The pompous ass has even created his own seal, LOL! Have you heard of PUMA: Party Unity My Ass

Also, if McCain wins he will only be in office for 4 years, , he will have a hard time passing anything with the Democrats in the majority. Pfft!!! LOL!!! Like Bush has had a hard time getting anything passed the past 2 years with a Democratic majority led by our good Democratic friends Pelosi and Reid? Ha!! Tell me another one! And that's what I thought about Bush. I mean really, who thought this guy would get another 4 years (to our detriment)? Who thought he'd get there in the first place?! Having a Democratic Congress now isn't doing us any favors at the moment. They might as well be R's for as effective they've been for what a majority was elected for. Also, McCain's family is directly affected by his decisions about the war in Iraq, considering that he's the only person in the Senate with a child serving in Iraq, I'd be inclined to say that he has an even greater vested interest in bringing the troops home safely. Moon, where have you been?! McCain said he could see keeping troops in for 100 years! Those people will likely never stop fighting us. As well they shouldn't as we shouldn't be there in the first place, though of course, I want no more of either side to be killed. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/04/mccain-100-years/ http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/14/mccain.king/ http://www.google.com/search?q=mccain+100+years+iraq&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a And your own Sen. Webb's son was a Marine in Iraq. Remember the dinner where he was snarky to Bush when asked about his son? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Webb Terse exchange with President Bush On November 28, 2006, at a White House reception for those newly elected to Congress, Webb declined to stand in the line to have his picture taken with the president, whom Webb often criticized during the campaign. The president approached Webb later and asked him, "How's your boy?", referring to Webb's son, a Marine serving in Iraq. According to Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia, aides warned the President to be "extra sensitive about talking to Webb about his son, since Webb's son had had a recent brush with death in Iraq."[28] Webb replied "I'd like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President." Bush responded, "That's not what I asked you. How's your boy?" Webb responded, "That's between me and my boy, Mr. President."

And, at least McCain has some voting record instead of Mr.Obama "present" voting record A crappy one for women's issues, but yes, some voting record. I'm not fond of Obama's lack of experience either to some degree. But longer serving doesn't always mean better. Yes, I read similar pieces to that Yahoo article you posted. And BTW, not only did Hillary vote for the (war) resolution, as opposed to Obama, and not apologize for it as Edwards did (I'll give her credit for sticking to her principles I suppose) , she hasn't been in a rush to get out troops and the problem is we're stuck there now in a quandry of our own making and no one can get them out without dire consequences IMO.

I'd like to see what our wonderful Democratic Congressional majority is going to do about issues such as this: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/41753.html

And one more thing, I am *not at all happy* at Obama regarding his statement of support a couple of days ago on the FISA compromise. Not sure where Clinton stands on this. Those f'ng cowardly Dems. Those people need to grow some...

And the campaign (against Obama) begins in earnest. First Obama attack book in the works By JONATHAN MARTIN | 6/23/08 12:25 AM EST The same publisher that distributed the 2004 best-seller that took aim at John Kerry�s Vietnam service is planning a summer release of what�s scheduled to be the first critical book on Barack Obama. [...con'td] http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11263.html

You know, Obama has had a free ride from criticism from the press. He will finally have a chance to put his "squash rumors" website to work. (Dorine), Like Bush has had a hard time getting anything passed the past 2 years with a Democratic majority led by our good Democratic friends Pelosi and Reid? Maybe we should work to make sure Pelosi is no longer the house majority leader? ;-) Hillary vote for the (war) resolution, Her husband had been President, and she knew that if Bill had presented something to the Congress like Bush did then, that there was a good reason for the belief of the existence of WoMD in Iraq. Hindsight is golden. Don't get me wrong, I think Bush was the worst thing that could have happened in this country. I worked hard in FL for Kerry/Edwards in the last election. But Obama is someone I don't trust.

Her husband had been President, and she knew that if Bill had presented something to the Congress like Bush did then, that there was a good reason for the belief of the existence of WoMD in Iraq. That's not a good enough answer. Plenty of people voted no. And with less information than she was probably privvy to. Wasn't she on the Senate Intelligence Committee? You can't tell me those people didn't know the truth behind the scenes. That's a gossipy town/culture. Some Dems didn't want to be perceived as soft on terror. It's been a fabulous boogeyman the R's have used to make the D's vote against their (and our) interests time and again. I don't know that I consider McCain the lesser of 2 evils. I guess I don't care what drugs O took or his sexual proclivities at this point in time, though severe character flaws could be an issue. Not sure what my breaking point would be.

LOL, Dorine, I have till Nov. to break you. ;-)

LOL, Moon. Maybe we should work to make sure Pelosi is no longer the house majority leader? ;-) That may not be a bad option.

http://www.18millionvoices.blogspot.com/ The Purpose of this site is to organize actions in Denver and Nationwide during the Democratic National Convention to support Senator Clinton, celebrate her historic achievement, and advocate for Women's Rights worldwide. Senator Clinton's historic achievement--being the first viable Woman Presidential Candidate--is a milestone for Women's Rights that will be an enduring part of the legacy of Women's Rights forever. As Women's Rights are Human Rights, Senator Clinton's legacy moves us all forward in a path toward human equality. We are 18 million voices dedicated to seeing Senator Clinton reach the next milestone: The White House. We are 18 million distinct and unique voices, coming together in one unified harmony, shouting "Rise Hillary Rise!!"

An excellent site from Dr. Lynette Long Why the DNC supported OBAMA: HTTP://WWW.LYNETTELONG.COM

I like the Lynnette Long website and her rationale. She really pointed out the hypocrisy. I mean, by what logic do you award Obama any Michigan delegats when he wasn't on the ballot? How do you give him the "undecided"? Then are you speaking out of both sides of your mouth and when you say the superdelegates should vote along the lines of the popular vote in their states (even though they were not created for that purpose), and then you have Kerry and Kennedy stating their support of Obama, while Mass went for Hillary? I particular like this part; I stand here to say, I am a token in the greatest country the world has even seen. I hereby declare, I WILL BE A TOKEN NO MORE. I am given one token seat on the nine member United States Supreme Court. I want to see five women on the court, my fair share. Not one less. I have sixteen seats in the one hundred seat United States Senate. I want fifty-two women in the Senate. Not one less. I have seventy-two seats in the four-hundred thirty-five seat House of Representatives. I want two-hundred twenty seats in the House. Not one less. I want my fair share. I do not want what is yours. I want what is mine. This is my pledge to you. I WILL BE A TOKEN NO MORE.

Glad you liked it, Karen. How about West VA going 60/40 for Hillary and Sen. Bird coming out for Obama? Ugh! In her site you can also see part of the Sinclair interview. Lynette was at the press conference in DC. How I wish the mainstream media investigated it as they should.

I didn't agree with that Michigan delegate bit either. A definite WTF? moment. And I did find that a bit suspicious. The half delegate stuff was rather ridiculous also. Honestly, I don't understand the concept of punishing states who want to move their primary date. I've not read a lot about that policy and most likely won't for quite a while.

But in Denver there will be a fight to seat every Delegate for FL and MI the way it should. Keeping fingers crossed that everything will turn out as it should. In typical Obama fashion, he bails on his new brilliant idea after one use because people respond negatively to it. The seal is arrogant. The fact that Obama is bailing on it only shows that he is the same old politics...says what people want to hear and that's it. Check out the comments after the article. Despite the fact that HRC isn't in this any more, the comments are still full of people trashing her. It's classic. Unity, hmm... They are making this easier and easier on us. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/23/obama%E2%80%99s-presidential-seal-gone-after-one-use/

This is pretty scary considering that the media is going out of their way to not just protect Obama, but correct him before others see what he's said: http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/06/abc-news-washington-post-reports-alter.html Interesting: http://politicalcenter.newsvine.com/_news/2008/06/17/1519881-obamas-unprecedented-attack-on-free-speech-mechanisms-and-results-supplemented

Hey moon. Hilary and Obama have kissed and made up? Now, who will Obama pick for a running mate. Hillary almost seems inevitable in some ways as the running mate?

Not that anyone will read this now especially with all the excitement going on, but we have surplus people. Should the government euthanize them too? It would help stabilize the price and supply of corn since demand would decrease. Government considering euthanizing wild horses By SANDRA CHEREB and SCOTT SONNER, Associated Press Writer 47 minutes ago RENO, Nev. - Federal officials are considering euthanizing wild horses to deal with the growing population on the range and in holding facilities, authorities said Monday. Wild horses have overpopulated public lands and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management can't afford to care for the number of mustangs that have been rounded up, said Henri Bisson, the agency's deputy director. Also, fewer people are adopting the horses, he said. Monday's announcement marks the first time the agency publicly has discussed the possibility of putting surplus animals to death. The agency is also considering whether to stop roundups of wild horses to save money, a move that would be criticized by and from sheep and cattle ranchers who see the mustangs as competition for feed on the open range. "Our goal is supposed to be about healthy horses on healthy ranges. But we are at the point we need to have a conversation with people about pragmatically what can we do given the financial constraints of our program to meet the goals we have," Bisson said. There are an estimated 33,000 wild horses on the range in 10 Western states, Bisson told the organization's National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board. About half of those are in Nevada. The agency has set a target "appropriate management level" of horses at 27,000. About another 30,000 horses are in holding facilities, where most are made available for adoption. But those deemed too old or otherwise unadoptable are sent to long-term holding facilities to live out their lives � some for 15 to 20 years. The board will consider the alternatives at its next meeting in September. Last year about $22 million of the entire horse program's $39 million budget was spent on holding horses in agency pens. Next year the costs are projected to grow to $26 million with an overall budget that is being trimmed to $37 million, Bisson said. "We have a responsibility to balance the budget, so we are going to have to make some tough choices," Bisson said. Bonnie Matton, president of the Wild Horse Preservation League, said she wasn't surprised by the agency's predicament. "They really do have a can of worms," she said. ___ On the Net: U.S. Bureau of Land Management: http://www.blm.gov

This is a great site: http://contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/ It will all come to a head in Denver. HRC must be on the roll call not just on the ballot for it to count. Of course, O and Pellosi and Co. are trying for Hillary to be only on the ballot. They make me sick. Do they even know the meaning of the word: Democracy?

Senator Barack Obama is only the *presumptive* nominee due to the Super Delegates. He does not have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination. Super Delegates, while supposedly committed to Obama, can switch their support at anytime leading up to a roll call vote at the convention. So it is not locked-down for Obama, which is why he is fighting so hard to avoid a roll call vote at the convention. Here is an interesting website put up by former Obama supporters who are disturbed at how he's has changed his positions on several important issues. http://formerobamasupporters.com/ This is where I found this video on Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hP-YoB5mnZs (very disturbing)

Charles Krauthammer nails it: The Audacity of Vanity: Americans are beginning to notice Obama�s elevated opinion of himself. There�s nothing new about narcissism in politics. Every senator looks in the mirror and sees a president. Nonetheless, has there ever been a presidential nominee with a wider gap between his estimation of himself and the sum total of his lifetime achievements? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/17/AR2008071701839.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Sad, but truthful video...from his own mouth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRXwPqaR4OM&eurl=http://formerobamasupporters.com/2008/07/18/why-we-launched-formerobamasupporterscom/

I figure this isn't Colin news, though related...re: Abu Jamal Mumia requesting a new trial. Jailed Black Panther demands retrial 2 hours, 48 minutes ago WASHINGTON (AFP) - Black Panther-turned human rights campaigner Mumia Abu-Jamal has requested a retrial on his conviction of murdering a police officer, after his death sentence was overturned in March, his lawyer said Sunday. ADVERTISEMENT A three-member Philadelphia appeals court on March 27 voted two-to-one to overturn the former radio journalist's death sentence, while upholding his conviction for the 1981 murder of Daniel Faulkner. The court said Abu-Jamal, 54, should face a new sentencing hearing or have his sentence commuted to life in jail. Abu-Jamal, 54, has always claimed his innocence while on death row for 25 years. While in jail, he became a leading campaigner against the death penalty. In his request for a retrial, Abu-Jamal's lawyer Robert Bryan asked for a decision by a full panel of 12 judges, not a three-member court like Philadelphia's. "Even though the federal court granted a new trial on the question of the death penalty, we want a complete reversal of the conviction," he said. "If unsuccessful, we will proceed to the United States Supreme Court," Bryan added. Abu-Jamal has argued that he was denied a fair trial in 1982 because the prosecution barred 10 qualified African-Americans from sitting on the jury, which in the end consisted of 10 whites and two blacks. The Philadelphia appeals court had rejected his arguments on lack of evidence of any racist intent on the part of the prosecution. Mumia Abu-Jamal's death sentence in March was automatically commuted to life in jail, which could be overturned if he is granted a new trial. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080721/pl_afp/usjusticerights;_ylt=Am3h_jFuVf_TJlSpcTmYu2is0NUE

In his request for a retrial, Abu-Jamal's lawyer Robert Bryan asked for a decision by a full panel of 12 judges, not a three-member court like Philadelphia's. So, the rest of the country's citizens go by the established legal procedures concerning a three-judge appeal, but that shouldn't apply to him? What gall. "If unsuccessful, we will proceed to the United States Supreme Court," Bryan added. Anyone can apply to the Supremes, but it doesn't mean they'll hear the case. And I doubt they will. You have to have grounds.

Abu-Jamal has argued that he was denied a fair trial in 1982 because the prosecution barred 10 qualified African-Americans from sitting on the jury, which in the end consisted of 10 whites and two blacks. The sitting jury was actually made up of 8 whites and 4 blacks, but one was later kicked off because he/she did something and the other had been threatened in court by MAJ and a prudent person wouldn't have wanted that person to remain during deliberations. Unfortunately, the two alternates were white. Isn't that right, my experts? ;-) "If unsuccessful, we will proceed to the United States Supreme Court," Bryan added. (Mari) Anyone can apply to the Supremes, but it doesn't mean they'll hear the case. Let 'em. Like this Supreme Court is going to lean his way. That'll end it fast enough. ;-)

I don't have any faith in the Supreme Court. They gave us Bush, they also recently overturned a child rape case in favor of the rapist. I think they will take on the Mumia decision.

That's why this election is so critical. One of many reasons.

This guy could very well be the next President of the United States, but can't get an op-ed published in the NYT because it's not pro-Obama? WTF? I think we're seeing how easily communist thinking can evolve-it doesn't have to be ill intended at first, it can just come about as the result of blind adoration. It's pretty scary-we should be very concerned (as if we didn't already know that...): http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/07/21/ny-times-refuses-to-print-mccains-op-ed-while-analysts-downgrade-them/

Moon, you keep saying or implying that Obama isn't trustworthy, so you'd rather have McCain of the 2. I'm not sure where you're thinking that McCain's got a leg up on that front, or has his act together at all. And remember, I was a McCain fan 8-10 yrs ago. http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/28/165138/698/993/558351 You can click on the orange links to see source material for each item.

I have never been a fan of McCain, but I know him. Obama is a pompous self-serving man with no track record, and I don't trust him. I'm still hanging in for Hillary at the Denver convention.

What is wrong with BO: http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/07/26/what-is-wrong-with-barack-obama/

And McCain has, by reports a nasty temper, poor command of the issues at hand and a questionable track record on many issues.

I don't actually disagree that he comes off as pompous at times and narcissistic. I think anyone who runs for president or the leader of any country has a narcissitic streak or even a disorder if you will. Frankly, Clinton had it in spades. The current Bush didn't though IMO. It's not about altruism for the most part. I read about this story in the Enquirer and that no one in the mainstream press was touching it several days ago. Just wow. Apparently these people don't realize condoms are made in the 21st century. :-((( I'd like to think it's not true, but ...... http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/07/29/john-edwards-and-the-scandal-nobody-wanted/

That article makes it even more clear to me that Hillary is the one to bet on. From today's Wash Post: President Obama Continues Hectic Victory Tour By Dana Milbank Wednesday, July 30, 2008 Barack Obama has long been his party's presumptive nominee. Now he's becoming its presumptuous nominee. Fresh from his presidential-style world tour, during which foreign leaders and American generals lined up to show him affection, Obama settled down to some presidential-style business in Washington yesterday. He ordered up a teleconference with the (current president's) Treasury secretary, granted an audience to the Pakistani prime minister and had his staff arrange for the chairman of the Federal Reserve to give him a briefing. Then, he went up to Capitol Hill to be adored by House Democrats in a presidential-style pep rally. Along the way, he traveled in a bubble more insulating than the actual president's. Traffic was shut down for him as he zoomed about town in a long, presidential-style motorcade, while the public and most of the press were kept in the dark about his activities, which included a fundraiser at the Mayflower where donors paid $10,000 or more to have photos taken with him. His schedule for the day, announced Monday night, would have made Dick Cheney envious: 11:00 a.m.: En route TBA. 12:05 p.m.: En route TBA. 1:45 p.m.: En route TBA. 2:55 p.m.: En route TBA. 5:20 p.m.: En route TBA The 5:20 TBA turned out to be his adoration session with lawmakers in the Cannon Caucus Room, where even committee chairmen arrived early, as if for the State of the Union. Capitol Police cleared the halls -- just as they do for the actual president. The Secret Service hustled him in through a side door -- just as they do for the actual president. Inside, according to a witness, he told the House members, "This is the moment . . . that the world is waiting for," adding: "I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions." As he marches toward Inauguration Day (Election Day is but a milestone on that path), Obama's biggest challenger may not be Republican John McCain but rather his own hubris. Some say the supremely confident Obama -- nearly 100 days from the election, he pronounces that "the odds of us winning are very good" -- has become a president-in-waiting. But in truth, he doesn't need to wait: He has already amassed the trappings of the office, without those pesky decisions. The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder reported last week that Obama has directed his staff to begin planning for his transition to the White House, causing Republicans to howl about premature drape measuring. Obama was even feeling confident enough to give British Prime Minister Gordon Brown some management advice over the weekend. "If what you're trying to do is micromanage and solve everything, then you end up being a dilettante," he advised the prime minister, portraying his relative inexperience much as President Bush did in 2000. On his presidential-style visit to the Western Wall in Jerusalem last week, Obama left a written prayer, intercepted by an Israeli newspaper, asking God to "help me guard against pride and despair." He seems to have the despair part under control, but the pride could be a problem. One source of the confidence is the polling, which shows him with a big lead over McCain. But polls are fickle allies: A USA Today-Gallup poll released Monday found McCain leading Obama by four percentage points among likely voters. Another reason for Obama's confidence -- the press -- is also an unfaithful partner. The Project for Excellence in Journalism reported yesterday that Obama dominated the news media's attention for a seventh straight week. But there are signs that the Obama campaign's arrogance has begun to anger reporters. In the latest issue of the New Republic, Gabriel Sherman found reporters complaining that Obama's campaign was "acting like the Prom Queen" and being more secretive than Bush. The magazine quoted the New York Times' Adam Nagourney's reaction to the Obama campaign's memo attacking one of his stories: "I've never had an experience like this, with this campaign or others." Then came Obama's overseas trip and the campaign's selection of which news organizations could come aboard. Among those excluded: the New Yorker magazine, which had just published a satirical cover about Obama that offended the campaign. Even Bush hasn't tried that. But then again, Obama has been outdoing the president in ruffles and flourishes lately. As Bush held quiet signing ceremonies in the White House yesterday morning, Obama was involved in a more visible display of executive authority a block away, when he met with Pakistani Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani at the Willard. A full block of F Street was shut down for the prime minister and the would-be president, and some 40 security and motorcade vehicles filled the street. Later, Obama's aides issued an official-sounding statement, borrowing the language of White House communiques: "I had a productive and wide-ranging discussion. . . . I look forward to working with the democratically elected government of Pakistan." It had been a long day of acting presidential, but Obama wasn't done. After a few hours huddling with advisers over his vice presidential choice, Obama made his way to the pep rally on the Hill. Moments after he entered the meeting with lawmakers, there was an extended cheer, followed by another, and another. "I think this can be an incredible election," Obama said later. "I look forward to collaborating with everybody here to win the election." Win the election? Didn't he do that already?

She may be the one to bet on, but what's the realistic chance that she will/could become "the one"? It would make for a much more interesting convention, that's for sure!

Moon. It's over.

LOL, Mari, thanks A LOT! ;-D Honestly, it ain't over till Denver. This is a great site to read the latest blogs...book mark it so you can check it out daily :) It updates every day. http://readerarticles.realclearpolitics.com/?period=main

Check out the Doonesbury cartoon strip today: It's a keeper.

ROTFL!!

Good one, Moon!

Excellent! Some people get it; some people obviously don't. Anyway, I got this in the mail today from a cousin: Dear Abby, I am a crack dealer in Beaumont, Texas, who has recently been diagnosed as a carrier of HIV virus. My parents live in Fort Worth. One of my sisters lives in Pflugerville and is married to a transvestite. My father and mother have recently been arrested for growing and selling marijuana. They are financially dependent on my other two sisters, who are prostitutes in Dallas. I have two brothers: one is currently serving a life sentence at Huntsville for the murder of a teenage boy in 1994. My other brother is currently in jail awaiting charges of sexual misconduct with his three children. I have recently become engaged to marry a former prostitute who lives in Longview. She is a part time 'working girl'. All things considered, my problem is this. I love my fianc� and look forward to bringing her into the family. I certainly want to be totally open and honest with her. Should I tell her about my cousin who supports Barack Obama for President?

LOL, Karen!! Well, Moon, it seems it really is over.... Hillary Clinton asks not to be nominated at Democratic National Convention By MICHAEL SAUL and THOMAS M. DeFRANK DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS Updated Friday, August 1st 2008, 9:59 AM Petitions abound, but Hillary Clinton won't put in for a nomination, insiders say. Sakuma/AP Petitions abound, but Hillary Clinton won't put in for a nomination, insiders say. Hillary Clinton has decided against being nominated for President at the Democrats' Denver convention, but many of her more die-hard partisans may vote for her anyway. A source close to the New York senator confirmed she won't file a formal request to the convention asking to be nominated along with Barack Obama, who eked out the victory in their fierce primary slugfest. "She is not going to submit the signed request," the insider told the Daily News. "People are still circulating petitions on her behalf, but this is a done deal." Party rules stipulate that Clinton must ask in writing to be nominated herself and also submit a petition signed by 300 to 600 delegates. Without her signed request, petitions of support are meaningless. Her nomination would be window dressing because Obama's nomination is assured. But many of Clinton's most ardent boosters believe it's symbolically important to certify her glass ceiling-shattering candidacy with a formal nomination. Nevertheless, delegates can vote for whomever they want during the roll call of the states. Personally and through surrogates, Clinton has counseled her 1,886 delegates to vote for Obama. A source familiar with discussions inside the Clinton camp told The News she may release those delegates when she speaks to the convention on Aug. 26. "Depending on the dynamics, hundreds of delegates might decide to demonstrate their support and affection," a Clinton source speculated. If so, that could be read as a dis to Obama from female Democrats still bruised by Clinton's defeat and resisting her pleas for party unity. Other Clinton backers, however, worry that she could be embarrassed by a roll call because many of her delegates already have switched to Obama. "Hillary Clinton is 100% committed to helping Barack Obama become the next President of the United States and realizes there are passionate feelings that remain among many of her supporters," said Clinton spokeswoman Kathleen Strand. "No decisions have been made at this time. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/07/31/2008-07-31_hillary_clinton_asks_not_to_be_nominated.html

Hillary Plots, Eyes 2012 Bid Friday, August 1, 2008 11:40 AM By: Rick Pedraza With hopes of being chosen as Barack Obama�s vice-presidential running mate dashed, Hillary Clinton has begun the process of carving out her political future. The New York Post reports Clinton met earlier this week at a secret ladies-only dinner in Washington to discuss where she can go from here. After learning she would address the Democratic National Convention on its second night � traditionally not the night the vice presidential nominee would speak � Clinton reportedly gathered her female posse together to discuss a possible White House run in 2012. The get-together included some of the top women in Democratic politics, like California Sen. Dianne Feinstein; founder of Emily's List Ellen Malcolm; California Rep. and chair of the New Democrat Coalition Ellen Tauscher; and former Recording Industry Association of America CEO Hilary Rosen, who's now political director of the Huffington Post. "You could say Hillary met with her homegirls,� one insider tells The Post. �They're all very powerful and important women. It's highly unlikely they were plotting anything around the VP spot because Hillary knows Barack Obama isn't going to pick her. They were probably planning her future." Jay Carson, a spokesman for Clinton, did no respond to calls or e-mails from the media, however a representative for Feinstein said, "It was a personal dinner. They had a couple of glasses of California wine, but the content of the meeting is going to remain between them." � 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

So she'll win against McCain in 2012.

I'm in the middle of reading a very interesting article/deconstruction of Hillary's campaign in the June or July Vanity Fair (sorry, it's not in front of me and I got them both and are reading both simultaneously). It's written by Gail Sheehy. Very interesting and she made some observations about issues in her campaign that I stated, if not here, to some people as some of the reasons I began to have doubts about her, one in particular. Check it out. Not sure if they put articles on their website.

I'm no fan of Maureen Dowd usually, but I was amused at the comparison and must've been written for you especially, Moon. Mr. Darcy Comes Courting By MAUREEN DOWD Published: August 3, 2008 It is a truth universally acknowledged that Barack Obama must continue to grovel to Hillary Clinton�s dead-enders, some of whom mutter darkly that they will not only not vote for him, they will never vote for a man again. Obama met for an hour Tuesday with three dozen top Hillaryites at a hotel here, seeking their endorsement and beguiling their begrudging. He opened the session by saying that he knew there had been frustration about what they saw as sexism during the primary. The Los Angeles Times reported that Hillary die-hards want to enshrine a whine in the Democratic platform about how the primaries �exposed pervasive gender bias in the media� and call on party leaders to take �immediate and public steps� to denounce any perceived bias in the future. That is one nutty idea. Perhaps it is because feminists are still so busy cataloging past slights to Hillary that they have failed to mount a vivid defense of Michelle Obama, who has taken over from Hillary as the one conservatives like to paint as a harridan. Before the Obama campaign even had a chance to denounce Ludacris, one of the rappers on the senator�s iPod, Hillary Inc. started to mobilize. Susie Tompkins Buell, a former Clinton bundler, told The New York Observer that Obama had to distance himself, given Ludacris�s new song rooting for Obama to �paint the White House black� and calling Hillary the b-word. Despite Obama�s wooing, some women aren�t warming. As Carol Marin wrote in The Chicago Sun-Times, The Lanky One is like an Alice Waters organic chicken � �sleek, elegant, beautifully prepared. Too cool� � when what many working-class women are craving is mac and cheese. In The Wall Street Journal, Amy Chozick wrote that Hillary supporters � who loved their heroine�s admission that she was on Weight Watchers � were put off by Obama�s svelte, zero-body-fat figure. �He needs to put some meat on his bones,� said Diana Koenig, a 42-year-old Texas housewife. Another Clinton voter sniffed on a Yahoo message board: �I won�t vote for any beanpole guy.� The odd thing is that Obama bears a distinct resemblance to the most cherished hero in chick-lit history. The senator is a modern incarnation of the clever, haughty, reserved and fastidious Mr. Darcy. Like the leading man of Jane Austen and Bridget Jones, Obama can, as Austen wrote, draw �the attention of the room by his fine, tall person, handsome features, noble mien. ...he was looked at with great admiration for about half the evening, till his manners gave a disgust which turned the tide of his popularity; for he was discovered to be proud, to be above his company, and above being pleased.� The master of Pemberley �had yet to learn to be laught at,� and this sometimes caused �a deeper shade of hauteur� to �overspread his features.� The New Hampshire debate incident in which Obama condescendingly said, �You�re likable enough, Hillary,� was reminiscent of that early scene in �Pride and Prejudice� when Darcy coldly refuses to dance with Elizabeth Bennet, noting, �She is tolerable; but not handsome enough to tempt me.� Indeed, when Obama left a prayer to the Lord at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, a note that was snatched out and published, part of his plea was to �help me guard against pride.� If Obama is Mr. Darcy, with �his pride, his abominable pride,� then America is Elizabeth Bennet, spirited, playful, democratic, financially strained, and caught up in certain prejudices. (McCain must be cast as Wickham, the rival for Elizabeth�s affections, the engaging military scamp who casts false aspersions on Darcy�s character.) In this political version of �Pride and Prejudice,� the prejudice is racial, with only 31 percent of white voters telling The New York Times in a survey that they had a favorable opinion of Obama, compared with 83 percent of blacks. And the prejudice is visceral: many Americans, especially blue collar, still feel uneasy about the Senate�s exotic shooting star, and he is surrounded by a miasma of ill-founded and mistaken premises. So the novelistic tension of the 2008 race is this: Can Obama overcome his pride and Hyde Park hauteur and win America over? Can America overcome its prejudice to elect the first black president? And can it move past its biases to figure out if Obama�s supposed conceit is really just the protective shield and defense mechanism of someone who grew up half white and half black, a perpetual outsider whose father deserted him and whose mother, while loving, sometimes did so as well? Can Miss Bennet teach Mr. Darcy to let down his guard, be more sportive, and laugh at himself? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/opinion/03dowd.html?em

ROTF, Dorine! How dare she cast Mr Darcy black? ;-) Have you seen Obama in a suit? He is so out of place. Any man who can't wear a suit well, can't aspire to the ultimate gentleman. Ms. Dowd got it wrong. Also, McCain is not casting false aspersions on Obama's character. This is a Presidential election. She should stop drinking the koolaid and stop giving Obama a free pass to the White House, if all he has to do is be more sportive and laugh at himself.

I forgot to post that I have spoken with people close to Hillary and they denied that Hillary will ask not to placed in nomination at Denver. That's what the Obama people want. In any case we are almost at the Denver Convention next month.

Hillary Plots, Eyes 2012 Bid Absolutely nothing in that article to support that article title. People make up the the most outrageous things. Here is the Vanity Fair article, which is v. good: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/08/clinton200808 Patti Solis Doyle told colleagues she believes firmly that Hillary�s showing her vulnerability in New Hampshire brought out the women who saved her there. But Penn insisted she button up. Any further exposure of her human feelings would cost them white male voters. A damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Lose lose. :-( (VF, page 6) But no matter how impressive her victories in swing states like West Virginia, the super-delegates were not breaking her way. The new Democratic establishment, led by D.N.C. chairman Howard Dean and the increasingly respected Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, just didn�t want the Clinton circus back in town. I think that pretty much sums up the whys and wherefores. Despite Obama�s wooing, some women aren�t warming. As Carol Marin wrote in The Chicago Sun-Times, The Lanky One is like an Alice Waters organic chicken � �sleek, elegant, beautifully prepared. Too cool� � when what many working-class women are craving is mac and cheese. I've always like Carol Marin, a woman with conviction. She resigned the local anchor slot on our NBC affiliate because of ethical reasons. Mgt wanted them to cover more fluff than real news. Interestingly, her co-anchor eventually got another job as an anchor on the ABC affiliate, but she has bounced around.

I can't understand why Dean and Pelosi wouldn't want the Clintons back in the White House, but they sure came out against them. A documentary is coming out which shows the blatant cheating that went on in Texas with their caucus. There are two documentaries being done. This is the second one being sponsored by a couple of the PUMA groups.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8t4PKGc2Fw Now they want a full vote in Michigan and Florida; where were they then?: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080803/ap_on_el_pr/obama_delegates Mame Reilly, a Clinton Super delegate said this to me at the RBC meeting in DC: that the full delegation would be seated at the convention...just not when it would help Hillary to have the majority of the primary delegates (which she would have had if they'd seated them in full). The RBC didn't want their decision to give Hillary the majority of the delegates. Sounds so much like the Supreme Court's decision to stop the recount.

Also of note, I received an email from Maggie Williams(HRC campaign manager) today, I won't post it all just a relevant part: And although the campaign for the White House is over, there is still work to be done. We need your help calling people across the country to redesignate their 2008 general election contribution to Hillary's 2012 re-election campaign. This effort is important because it will allow Hillary to focus on the issues that matter, electing Barack Obama president and putting her energy towards building stronger majorities in November.

Hillary was here yesterday to thank her supporters and urge them to open their hearts and pocketbooks to Obama. Rumor du jour: Obama will choose Evan Bayh as his running mate. A rumor, at this point.

She was a busy bee yesterday. Bloomberg threw her a party at Gracie Mansion last night, too (not a debt fundraiser they say!). I saw that about Bayh. I have no opinion of Bayh him as I know virtually nothing of him other than his name.

Evan Bayh? How would that balance the ticket geographically? He's from Indiana, next door.

I haven't read any of this yet, but is this some of the big explosive expose you were waiting for, Moon? http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27865&s=rcme I read a few comments at this place that linked from AOL.com that alerted me to the article, kinda *interesting* people and comments. http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/08/04/exclusive-the-case-against-barack-obama-interview/?icid=100214839x1207151029x1200352715

Thanks, Dorine! Slowly but surely more exposes will be coming out. And if the Democrats won't see the light by the time Denver comes around, the Republicans will use it to their advantage. Hillary is the electable one. As for O's VP, the better ones have declined. Even Pelosi is making suggestions, LOL!

Obama rejects talk of trouble from Clinton backers By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer 41 minutes ago CHICAGO - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Thursday dismissed suggestions that the nominating convention could be marred by tensions between his supporters and the die-hard backers of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Obama told reporters that their staffs were working out mutually agreeable convention logistics. At the same time, Clinton was assuring her supporters in an online chat that she and Obama were "working together to make sure it's a big success." Neither directly answered questions about whether Clinton's name should be placed in nomination so that her backers could record their votes. Obama clinched the nomination after a sometimes bitter primary contest with Clinton. Amid reports that some Clinton backers hope to raise her profile at the convention or even continue to push her candidacy, Clinton and Obama were publicly trying to ease the strained relations that exist between some of their supporters. Flying home to Chicago, Obama told reporters on his campaign plane that he talked separately this week to Clinton and her husband, the former president, and that they were enthusiastic about having a smooth convention at the end of the month in Denver. "As is true in all conventions, we're still working out the mechanics, the coordination," Obama said. One such issue is whether there will be a convention roll call on Clinton's nomination, he said. "I'm letting our respective teams work out details," he said. Asked if that meant he wouldn't object to her name being placed in nomination and a vote taken, Obama said: "I didn't say that. I said that they're working it out." Clinton has not said whether she will seek a formal vote on her bid for the nomination. For the online chat on her Web site, she wrote that she and Obama will ensure Democrats are "fully unified." Clinton was expected to deliver a prime-time address to delegates on Aug. 26, the second night of the convention. With the delegate roll call planned for the next evening, Obama was set to accept the nomination with a speech on its fourth and final night. "We will ensure that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected and our party is fully unified heading into the November election," Clinton wrote. "While no decisions have been made yet, I will make sure that we keep you up to date and involved with all of the convention activity." Obama was asked whether allowing Clinton's name to be placed in nomination might lead to a catharsis for the party, an emotional coming together that relieves pent-up stress. "I don't think we're looking for catharsis. I think what we're looking for is energy and excitement," he said. In the Web chat, one person asked Clinton directly: "Are you truly supporting Sen. Obama and encouraging your supporters to do the same or are you just saying what you have to?" Clinton insisted she was sincerely behind Obama. Another questioner wanted to know if there was "any possibility" her name would be placed in nomination, arguing that doing so "would at least give your supporters a voice in the choice for the party's nominee." She was noncommittal. As to those avid Clinton supporters who still haven't warmed up to him and may even resent him, Obama said, "We're not talking to those people, we're talking directly to the Clinton campaign people and staff." Another participant in the Clinton chat posted a note saying he hopes Clinton becomes Obama's running mate. In her response, Clinton repeated that she will do whatever Obama asks her to do but it is his decision "and I am going to respect the privacy of that process by not discussing it." The Clintons' stance toward Obama's candidacy is being closely scrutinized as the convention nears � particularly after remarks Bill Clinton made earlier this week during a trip to Africa. Asked whether Obama was prepared to become president, the former president replied, "You can argue that nobody is ready to be president," and said he himself learned a lot in his first year on the job. The remark was widely viewed as tepid and unenthusiastic, particularly in light of Republican candidate John McCain's frequent criticism that Obama is not ready to be president. ___ Associated Press writer Devlin Barrett in Washington contributed to this report. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080807/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_obama;_ylt=ArQZV4TF7G3bbzhLaWQbMQus0NUE

I'm letting our respective teams work out details," he said. Asked if that meant he wouldn't object to her name being placed in nomination and a vote taken, Obama said: "I didn't say that. I said that they're working it out." He knows what would happen and he's not going to let it happen. He will allow Hillary to be on the ballot, but not up for roll call. It takes the roll call to make the delegates' vote count. As to those avid Clinton supporters who still haven't warmed up to him and may even resent him, Obama said, "We're not talking to those people, No you ain't. The Obama/McCain polling is not going the way it should. The DNC should be taking HRC seriously.

I was hoping you weren't away yet to see your opinion of that. :-)

I just wanted to let you know what I found out today. I talked to a friend who is good friends with one of HRC's close friends. Apparently, the DNC (Dean, Brazile) have been putting an enormous amount of pressure on HRC to let go of the roll call situation. I guess that yesterday in particular, they met with her and basically told her that she needs to let go of having her name on the ballot or essentially, they will "make sure" her career in politics is over-they will "ruin" her. I guess various officials have been telling the media things to imply that the Clintons are demanding things when in fact, all HRC wanted was her name on the ballot. These officials have been spinning this to the media in an effort to make her look bad. Lastly, my friend said that HRC is really upset about the whole situation and if she was mad before, she's furious now. However, she is essentially being strong armed and that is rendering her powerless. We can say that she should just give the party the finger and walk, bu the reality is that this is politics and it doesn't work like that. If party officials want to destroy her, they will. They already managed to take the nomination from her despite the fact that she has the popular vote, so the idea that the will of the people would prevail if they attempted to ruin her is naive and idealistic. I want HRC to stay in politics and I want her to do whatever she has to do in order to do so. That does not, however, mean that I have to follow suit or frankly, that she even wants me to (that I can't confirm or deny). Regardless, I just wanted to you to know what I was told... Proof of how against the wall they have HRC-today on POTUS 08, they were talking about how "bad" the Clintons are and that they better start campaigning for Obama instead of whining and complaining and that in the end, if they didn't get on board, the people would punish them for it. "They just need to realize that this party isn't theirs anymore, it's Obama's." They guy went on for another minute about how rotten it was for the Clinton's to not be out helping Obama and that if they waited until the end to help and he lost, people would never forgive them for it and blah, blah, blah. I wanted to call the guy and ask him how he could say all that when at the very minute that he was making the comments, HRC was in Nevada campaigning for Obama. It's so frustrating--so very infuriating. Even though she's done everything she's "supposed to do", they still manage to fault her. See the big picture before you jump on the bandwagon that she on any level, wants to be in this situation. Imagine how much they wo ld be tearing her limb from limb if she were doing anything less than what she's done thus far. Be mad, but don't be upset with her.

See the big picture before you jump on the bandwagon that she on any level, wants to be in this situation. Imagine how much they would be tearing her limb from limb if she were doing anything less than what she's done thus far. Be mad, but don't be upset with her. I'm unclear who here expressed being upset with her over any such thing. Or was that a general plea to the Democratic universe not to be upset with her and not directed at anyone here? Proof of how against the wall they have HRC-today on POTUS 08, they were talking about how "bad" the Clintons are and that they better start campaigning for Obama instead of whining and complaining and that in the end, if they didn't get on board, the people would punish them for it I don't know what POTUS O8 is, though I do know what the acronym stands for. Was all this talk before or after the news today, or was it last night?, that Bill is speaking at the convention and Hillary is campaigning for Obama while he essentially takes a break? Seems the Dems finally learned something from the Republicans about dealings in their own party. And looks like that Edwards story I posted about a week and a half ago turned out to be true, with the part about the baby pending tests. Moon, you were a big supporter of Edwards last election as I recall. He was more or less my pick this time. I can't feel worse for Elizabeth.

This is for Moon when she's back. Click on the orange highlighted "said that" to read the whole piece about McCain's comments. Guess you can't fault him for being honest. He's only human. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/9/44713/79788/254/565216

Wasn't it GM who had an electric car before and then recalled and destroyed them? It was in the film, Who Killed the Electric Car, whatever brand it was. Good film. Over 33,000 buyers signed up for GM electric car By Kevin Krolicki Tue Aug 12, 6:03 PM ET DETROIT (Reuters) - In a bid to show the demand for the upcoming all-electric Chevrolet Volt, a proponent of the car has released details of an unofficial waiting list for the vehicle with over 33,000 prospective buyers. Lyle Dennis, a New York neurologist who has emerged as a prominent enthusiast for the battery-powered car from General Motors Corp (GM.N), has been assembling a list of prospective Volt buyers for over a year through his Web site GM-Volt.com. On Tuesday, Dennis released details gleaned from the list showing that 33,411 people had signed up to show their intent to buy a Volt when the rechargeable car is released in 2010. The list shows the highest number of potential Volt buyers in California, Texas, Florida and Michigan. It also includes potential buyers from 46 countries outside the United States. The average price buyers were willing to pay for the car was $31,261 -- substantially less than the $40,000 GM has said it will cost to build the first-generation of the car equipped with a massive lithium-ion battery pack. GM has been racing to finish development of the Volt in time for the planned launch as the centerpiece of its effort to break a costly association with gas-guzzling vehicles at a time when truck sales are tumbling and gas prices remain high. Like most automakers, GM typically keeps its vehicle development programs under tight wraps and shuns publicity. But with the Volt, GM has taken the opposite approach, actively consulting enthusiasts like Dennis and featuring the concept version of the Volt in high-profile advertising, including a television spot broadcast during the Olympics. Dennis, who organized a meeting between enthusiasts called the "Volt Nation" and GM executives at the New York Auto Show earlier this year, said he was motivated by a desire to show the Detroit-based automaker that the Volt would have a wide base of buyers from the start. "If everyone who wanted a Volt could get one, that would be the dream," said Dennis. GM, which does not expect to make money on the first-generation of the Volt, has said it will ramp up output slowly when production of the plug-in hybrid starts at a Hamtramck, Michigan plant. A GM spokesman said that the automaker expected an initial shortage for the Volt, similar to the shortages for other hot-selling recent models. "I don't know if there is any other vehicle or any other technology that has generated this kind of interest because of the state of the market and gas prices," said GM spokesman Dave Darovitz. "We know the demand is going to be there." Darovitz declined to discuss pricing for the Volt GM showed off a concept version of the Volt in January 2007 but has retooled the look of the vehicle significantly since then, in part in order to improve its aerodynamics, representatives of the automaker have said. GM is designing the Volt to run for 40 miles on a lithium-ion battery pack that can be recharged at a standard outlet. The Volt will also capture energy from braking, like a traditional hybrid, and feature an on-board engine that will be used to send power to the battery on longer trips. GM is racing Toyota Motor Corp (7203.T) to bring the first mass-market, plug-in car to the marketplace. (Editing by Phil Berlowitz) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080812/tc_nm/volt_list_dc;_ylt=An2paGa7sH0TUbSJ37zh2M.s0NUE

Well, Moon, you got what you wanted at the convention....a roll call for Hillary. Now what?

Isn't it lovely that Obama and his people have agreed to let her name be placed in nomination? When did he become the de facto head of the DNC? Why is there a need then to even have the convention?

I'd be curious on your thoughts especially on this, Moon. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/opinion/17rich.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin And I heard on the radio today that Hillary will pledge her delegates to Obama. After the roll call I presume? Doesn't that kind of just slap her diligent supporters in the face? I understand the point for unity and all, but I think I might be offended a bit at that if I was one of them.

Barack's mentor is retiring: http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/1113884,emailweb081808.article?plckCurrentPage=0&sid=sitelife.suntimes.com The comments are hysterical. Illinois politics at their best in the, for example, the Middle Ages, when one expected the oldest son to inherit the family rank. At this point, I'd want to slap our Gov for even suggesting that this guy's son take over as Senate president.

Didn't the same thing kind of happen in Alaska politics? Didn't a daughter take the place of her father when he retired, was indicted, something? I'd have to look it up. Well, no need for these now. Perhaps one could say, "Mission Accomplished!" They helped anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080819/ap_on_re_us/election_junk;_ylt=Asa4mykRtZlW4eA3dp.6Nsms0NUE

As I have stated before, Obama did not earn those delegates, he cheated and was able to convince the DNC to select him. He was selected not elected. CAUCUS FRAUD - a similar story over and over in different precincts and states: Jeff in Iowa: I live in Davenport, Iowa - Precinct 23. I was the Precinct Captain for Hillary Clinton and began my work for her in Sept. 2007. At that time, I met with the many folks in this precinct, every registered Democratic voter. During that time, I was most fortunate to gain supporters and lose a few . . .mainly to Sen. Edwards. I developed a Team Hillary in this precinct that went door to door from 12/3/07 to caucus night. On caucus night, I was informed that I could not bring authorized Hillary stickers, food, etc into the site. I regrettably complied. From 6-6:30 pm, it appeared as I had expected. Young, old, males, females, hispanics, whites, gay and lesbian friends arriving. Very heavily for Ms. Clinton, a fair amount for Edwards and some stragglers for Obama. During my walks thru the neighborhoods (a very densely populated precinct), I discovered that indeed this was the make-up of my precinct. My mind began to feel victory for my lady. My hard work had paid off! I even overcame the fact that every volunteer at the entrance tables was wearing an Obama sticker. They had NO precinct captain and my friend, the Edwards captain and I were discussing the fact that Obama out of state staff had arrived to pass out stickers and signs to folks. Next, they began to sit at the entrance tables. Hmm. We were barred from doing that! "Oh well", we thought. THEN: at 6:50 pm, over 75 people of African American descent came walking in, past the tables and sat in the Obama section. I knew one of them from my canvassing. I knew another one who did not live in this precinct! And aside from the 4 or 5 families that live on Hillandale Road, there are no other black people in this unusually white precinct. (And one of those black couples were in my Hillary section). The results were Obama 3, Clinton, 2, Edwards 1! It was impossible for me to argue since the precinct chair was an Obama supporter from another precinct. A very large bus was seen in the parking lot afterwards carrying these folks back. That momentum gave Obama future victories and I am sure his mastery of the caucus cheat along with his October 2007 meetings with Karl Rove, taught him how to steal this nomination! I think America is worth more than that which is why this lifelong Democrat and exuberant Hillary Clinton supporter will mark "MCCAIN" in november! To read more visit this site: CaucusAnalysis Data, Analysis, Articles, Testimonials & Videos INTRODUCTION In two weeks the Democratic Party will formally nominate Barack Obama as its candidate for President of the United States. It's the triumph of fraud. I've spent the past two months immersed in data from the 2008 Democratic caucuses. After studying the procedures and results from all fourteen caucus states, interviewing dozens of witnesses, and reviewing hundreds of personal stories, my conclusion is that the Obama campaign willfully and intentionally defrauded the American public by systematically undermining the caucus process. This site represents the fruits of my research. It's a work in progress, obviously, and also a central repository for a vast array of data: articles and blog posts from around the web, personal emails to me, interviews with witnesses, affidavits and testimonials, campaign communications, and videos of the caucuses themselves. I have elected to make this information public. I hope that it sheds light on the caucus process and inspires reform or total elimination of the caucuses. I also hope it gives pause to those Democrats who believe that Barack Obama is the rightful nominee and that Hillary supporters should just "get over it." I have been a Democrat my entire life, but I will not support the Democratic Party at the cost of democracy. Lynette Long August 2008 http://www.lynettelong.com/CAUCUSFRAUD/

I'm sure by now you've already heard that Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones passed away. This woman was an amazing inspiration and loyal friend to Hillary Clinton. I'd met her at Hillary's HQ and really enjoyed our conversations. Her loss is enormous.

(Dorine) Didn't the same thing kind of happen in Alaska politics? Didn't a daughter take the place of her father when he retired, was indicted, something? But it is a way of life here and isn't merely for a basic seat. We're talking handing down the presidency of an entity. Yesterday's headline in the Sun-Times caught my eye in huge letters: NEPOTITIS and was an article written by Carol Marin, who I think has been posted here before. This is the article: http://www.suntimes.com/news/marin/1116348,CST-EDT-carol20.article It explains what happened with the president of Cook County board, who had a stroke before the primaries, yet won. Then handed his seat over to his son, as well as the presidency. People are furious about that one. Now, we have the president of the Ill Senate about to do the same. Read how qualified the son is. Actually, Emil wasn't qualified either. Someone mentioned to me the other day how pitiful it is that, despite having a single party in control of the state, absolutely nothing gets done. Now we, in Cook County, have the highest sales tax in the country and all the politicians are giving themselves huge raises.

Moon would like this quote from the article: At the very same moment Barack Obama, an alumnus of the Illinois State Senate and a mentee of President Jones, is campaigning across America in behalf of change we can believe in and a new kind of politics. Here on the homefront we have his mentor playing the same old, cynical game that treats public office like a family entitlement. And the public payroll like a bequest.

What is your sales tax, Karen? Do you have county and state sales tax? And does Chicago have a city sales tax?

Oh and are there clothing exemptions like Vermont and PA and here (under ~$100) or just the usual food exemptions? I have no clue what other people pay for stuff like that.

Can I just say, I'm sick to death of the incessant mystery over Obama's VP pick. Just pick already! That goes for both of them.

10.25% Usual exemptions? Are you kidding? Food and drugs are taxed at a lower rate: 2% And fast food/beverage and restaurants in general are subject to an additional 1% on top of the 10.25%. That's been in effect for quite a long time. Soft drinks (in any form)--thank goodness I don't drink them--are taxed at 13.25%. Evidently ours is considered one of the most complex in the country as well. It starts at 6.25% for the state (and includes a state, county and city component) and then more gets heaped on it.

10.25%?!! Holy cow! I think our state is 4.25% or something, then city is 4.25% or close. Works out to 8.50% or so. Things are a hair cheaper on Long Island as they don't have the other 4% on top of the state. But there is the no tax on clothing under $100, or $110, now. We used to have tax holidays for clothes in February and I think a week in the summer, but they made it permanent.

All of this and the city just announced that it is facing a $400 million budget deficit and has pledged not to raise property taxes this year. There is such waste and bloat in city/county government here. If only it weren't so...

And, let's not forget, overall corruption. :-(

We've got the MTA with yet another budget gap after raising fares in March and they want to do it again next year after promising no more increases for a while. And they want to raise it every 2 years after for a time. Plus they'd been doling out multiple EZ Passes to people (past and present) on the board and they aren't allowed compensation of any sort. Thank God for the Daily News exposing that. The MTA was forced by public opinion to take them back and boy were those board members unhappy about that. Poor babies. We had some sort of property tax refund the last year or 2, but they may recind it. My coworker is complaining they just raised the taxes on the new house she just moved into 6 months ago. The city's tax income has been drastically reduced due to the financial sector's crisis here. And our govenor just called a special legislative session to cut $1 billion out of our state budget, of which NYC seems to not get enough of, especially for the MTA. NY and Chicago seem quite similar, but I think your corruption is so much worse.

Our transit fares were increased this year again, as well. The state can't fund its pension obligations and, yet, as the article pointed out has given its own people even higher pensions and then double-dip (having both a state and a county office, plus who knows how much in bribe money). The TV news people do expose after expose and nothing changes. (Dorine) but I think your corruption is so much worse. Yeah! Some distinction. How many of your governors have or are serving prison terms? ;-) I had a lady who worked for me whose husband was a judge, serving time in Duluth.

The TV news people do expose after expose and nothing changes. That is depressing. I guess it's not much different here. Speaking of depressing, when the new MTA head came, he said they were going to increase services on some bus and subway lines since they had a surplus, then they raise fares and all of a sudden there's a deficit and they can't implement most of the changes and say they need to raise fares again. Then the Daily News (again!) found out he got a big incremental raise that was built into his contract with one or 2 more due. People didn't take to him getting a raise when they're crying poverty.

On top of everything, we have some reverend telling parents/kids to boycott the first day of school (Chicago Public School System) and to register at a suburban one. They've targeted one for the Wilmette/Winnetka, Glencoe area, which would have an excellent academic record and would be a prime example of the inequity of school systems funded by local property taxes. That isn't entirely accurate, as my property taxes go to fund schools in southern Illinois too. Anyway, the Urban League is now suing the state of Illinois. I'd love for our property tax-based education system to be replaced by one on income taxes (now 3% in Illinois) but have a nagging feeling that my property taxes won't go down by much despite that change. It'll be another smoke and mirrors game like money from the state lottery that was supposed to add to the education coffers, but instead allowed the state to divert its funds to waste and cronies, while using the lottery money as its sole source.

FYI, in the "My Daughter Michelle Obama" video, the photo of the "apartment" they lived in sure looked like a house to me. Granted, I'm not from the south side, but that same style exists on the north side and most people call them houses. ;-) If a building like that were subdivided into apartments, it would most likely be against the law.

Really? Houses being subdivided are against the law there? Basement apts are illegal here, but that's it. I had it on but didn't watch the video. Or watch her or her brother speak, but I did listen....mostly. Was multitasking. She's an impressive speaker. Those kids were cute. Watched Teddy's though. And the speech. Looks like his hair didn't grow back for the most part where they most likely shaved it for surgery. It was full on one side and mostly long thin strands on the left. I was thinking as I watched him walk on and off the stage, being mildly held by the arm at times, that I'd bet it took almost literally every ounce of his strength to get up there and speak, because he obviously wasn't overly steady. And even just get there. Then, in reading some blog threads about it, several mentioned that apparently no one was sure until almost the last minute if he was going out there. The Boston Globe had a breaking news alert not long before that he was actually going to go on himself. Apparently his MD's were concerned about him being around so many people with his immune system depressed. I'm sure he was buoyed by the energy of the crowd and his desire to give what I'll imagine will be his last hurrah. I'd honestly be shocked if he made it to the inauguration. Maybe even Xmas. Unfortunately. He has a strong will, though it's a wicked type of tumor he has. And I don't remember at all that he can't raise his arms really more than shoulder level. Was he always like that? I never noticed I guess. McCain's the same way IIRC. And what is all that stupid mess with the Clinton delegates....starting a roll call, then stopping it partway through and giving them to Obama?....blah, blah, blah. What a mess. Are they stopping it because they're afraid Obama won't end up with enough delegates after all? Or really, just some kind of appeasement to Clinton's supporters, though I'd be annoyed if it was stopped before my vote was counted if I was there as her supporter. I'm sick of it. Just get on with it one way or the other.

Houses being subdivided are against the law there? More like against code. Houses are zoned for usage. That looked to me like a typical single-family home. For it to be subdivided would require a zoning change, which I would imagine is doubtful. Are they stopping it because they're afraid Obama won't end up with enough delegates after all? No, I would imagine it is because the numbers won't show UNITY! ;-) The Dems want him to be perceived as the overwhelming favorite, which the actual committed delegate numbers wouldn't show. He squeaked out a victory over her, which I still maintain was suspect (engineered by the Republicans and their dirty tricks). I was watching PBS' coverage earlier, when the Kennedy tribute was live, and there were a couple of talking heads (names?) discussing Obama's claim about having Republican support, referring to them as Obamacans, which one would surmise from the crossover vote. Right? Both the talking heads said that he had minimal appeal for Republicans, whereas it was more likely that Democrats would vote Republican.

(engineered by the Republicans and their dirty tricks). And how funny, Moon blames the Democrats. Jim Lehrer...on PBS? And Republicans were voting with her in the primaries so they could vote against her in the general election. What a convoluted mess. Why oh why couldn't Al Gore run? :-( If Obama wins, bet Gore will be Energy Sect'y. Actually, he'll still probably get more accomplished in the private sector even then.

(Dorine) Jim Lehrer...on PBS? He wasn't one of the talking head experts on public opinion polling. Some woman was moderating at the time. I suppose I might find some hints if I go to their website and investigate. And Republicans were voting with her in the primaries so they could vote against her in the general election. Never heard that one. The Republican strategy would've been to have Rs cross-over and vote for O, so that he would be the Dem candidate, the data showing that O couldn't beat McCain. It wouldn't make sense to promote Clinton support to wreak havoc. If Rs crossed over, it would've been the disenfranchised older female sector that has been Hill's base and doesn't want to wait until Michelle Obama's daughters are of electable age to see a woman in the WH. :-( And it made me seethe to hear everyone (esp Teddy & clan) proclaiming how Obama was going to make health care available to everyone. I seem to recall that was Hill's issue. Talk about banking on people's short memories. Sickening! Anyway, this came up about our incredibly (but acceptable) sexist society: http://www.livescience.com/culture/080825-women-politics.html Click on some of the other links under the article too.

(Karen)I seem to recall that was Hill's issue. Talk about banking on people's short memories. Sickening! It was her (and Bill's) issue going all the way back to the early days of his first term. Remember, he put her in charge of figuring out a way to do universal health coverage? She and he were crucified for it. I wonder if this is an idea whose time has come, even though every other industrialized nation in the world except us already has it. Have you seen the Republican ads that are playing on women's disappointment over Hillary not getting the nom, trying to drive a wedge and get women to vote Republican? Are they kidding? The R party has never spoken to me about anything I care about as a woman and now they want to talk to me? This is the party whose platforms and policies have fought tooth and nail over abortion rights, reproductive rights, stem cell research, family medical leave, etc.--and they want me to come over to their side? What are they giving me? What am I missing?

And Republicans were voting with her in the primaries so they could vote against her in the general election. I think Moon and I were discussing that a while ago. If it isn't upthread then we were discussing it in email. At the time of the Ohio primary, that's what many people were commenting on one of the websites for the city newspapers were saying they were going to do. I think it was the Cleveland Plain Dealer. I didn't see anyone anywhere say they were crossing over to vote for Obama for that reason. Heh, I saw the headline to that article yesterday, but hadn't read it yet.

The R party has never spoken to me about anything I care about as a woman and now they want to talk to me? This is the party whose platforms and policies have fought tooth and nail over abortion rights, reproductive rights, stem cell research, family medical leave, etc.--and they want me to come over to their side? Hello!! Thank you!

Hello right back, Do, lol. Actually, they *have* given me something: crippling debt that my grandchildren's children will labor to re-pay.:-( So how are you all feeling about Joe Biden? Living in what's known as the Delaware Valley, I've been seeing him up close for years, and I think he's terrific.

Actually, they *have* given me something: crippling debt that my grandchildren's children will labor to re-pay.:-( *snort* I'm ambivalent about Biden. He talks a mean game, but doesn't always follow through and at times turns around and votes against my best interests.

(Karen), The Republican strategy would've been to have Rs cross-over and vote for O, so that he would be the Dem candidate, the data showing that O couldn't beat McCain. That is what I said and experienced first hand in VA. Hillary has always been way ahead of McCain in the polls. The Republicans have a chance to beat Obama. The health care issue has always been Hillary thing. Obama is an upstart taking everyone ideas under the Change poster. I'm not a sucker, and I'm not voting for him. It will be my first time voting Republican, and you can blame the undemocratic ways of Howard Dean and Pelosi. What has changed since the House and Senate went to the Democrats? Even Pelosi dropped her Bush impeachment promise. Have they spoken to you, Mari or you Dorine? I also feel it was very wrong of Obama to tell Pres. Clinton what he should speak about, that's unprecedented.

What has changed since the House and Senate went to the Democrats? Even Pelosi dropped her Bush impeachment promise. Have they spoken to you, Mari or you Dorine? No, I'll grant you that and I've complained a great deal about it. But they also didn't have a solid majority, it's very slim. I'm still not happy with them. But the party itself still stands for ideals and ideas I ascribe to. Not all of them necessary, but as a whole. I didn't know Clinton was being told what to say....or not say. Wonder if they'll play him off the stage like they do at the Oscars, since he tends to be long winded. I have to go out tonight and must remember to set the recorder for Hillary tonight. I hope there's a more pinpointed schedule out now of at least what general time she'll speak.

(Dorine)But the party itself still stands for ideals and ideas I ascribe to. Not all of them necessary, but as a whole. That's pretty much how I feel. I can't bite off my nose to spite my face.

(Mari) It was her (and Bill's) issue going all the way back to the early days of his first term. Remember, he put her in charge of figuring out a way to do universal health coverage? Yes, I remember, which is why I said it was *her* issue. From what I've heard though she worked well with Teddy at that time (despite the crucifixtion). Wonder when the rift started? (Dorine) I didn't know Clinton was being told what to say....or not say. That was in the news a couple of days ago. He wanted to talk about the economy and how Bush has destroyed what he had built, but the DNC has said he could only talk about UNITY and OBAMA. I guess they don't want people to remember how good the American economy was during a Clinton administration.

August 26, 2008 Clinton's Thankless Job By Marie Cocco WASHINGTON -- If there is a political job more fraught with peril than running to become the next commander in chief, surely it is being cast as cheerleader in chief. Hillary Clinton will be damned if she looks too methodically perfect, too much the purveyor of practiced routine and not enough the cheery personification of enthusiasm. She'll also be damned if she's too exuberant, too obviously raising her voice in unbridled exhortation for the team. She will either be deemed too cool or all-too-cagily warm. Clinton can't win Tuesday evening. But then, she knows that. She is set to address the Democratic National Convention in Denver to give the valedictory address of her 2008 campaign -- a race in which she went further than any woman in American history toward the elusive goal of electing a woman to the White House. But this is a speech that is also meant to soothe her bruised supporters and get them to support Barack Obama, a man who -- for not a few of them -- has brazenly overtaken the more-qualified woman to grab the prize and in so doing has writ large the story of their own lives. Clinton is a woman who knows how to lose -- to lose any shred of privacy, to lose face, to lose any expectation of being treated with a modicum of respect by the talking heads in the media and now, to lose a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination that she expected to win. As if to heap insult upon injury, the Obama campaign let it be known that it did not for a minute seriously consider Clinton as a running mate, notwithstanding the 18 million votes she earned during the primaries and her demonstrated ability to win over white, working-class voters who remain cool to Obama and are necessary for victory in the fall. Those 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling that the Obama forces conceded could gain a reference in the party's platform are, apparently, just words. In her 2003 memoir "Living History," this is how Clinton described her reaction to her earliest political loss, during her senior year in high school: "I ran for student government president against several boys and lost, which did not surprise me but still hurt, especially because one of my opponents told me I was 'really stupid if I thought a girl could be elected president.' As soon as the election was over, the winner asked me to head the Organizations Committee which, as far as I could tell was expected to do most of the work. I agreed." The work of the next phase of Clinton's career has been going on doggedly, and often with little notice, since she suspended her campaign on June 7. She's been a campaign emissary for Obama to the Sheet Metal Workers union, to Hispanics and others in New Mexico and Nevada; to older women in South Florida who still haven't quite accepted the loss of what may be for some of them their last chance to see a woman elected president. The June speech Clinton made in departing from the race was, among Democratic activists, "probably the most seen, talked about, buzzed about speech of the campaign," says Mike Lux, a consultant for Democratic interest groups and an Obama supporter. It went over well, even among Obama loyalists. That tends to be how Clinton does things. The public Clinton doesn't usually show hints of the private pain that burns inside. The same cannot be said of some of her supporters, who can be expected to stage at least a few demonstrations of their fury at the outcome of the race, and at what they perceive as repeated displays of disrespect Obama has shown their hero. It is not lost on them that in selecting Joe Biden to be the vice presidential nominee, Obama has chosen a Washington insider who voted in favor of the Iraq War -- two of the sustained attacks on Clinton that Obama used to devastating effect during the primaries. The television cameras will linger on angry and tearful Clinton delegates in the convention crowd. The commentators will no doubt take this as a demonstration of disunity -- and not a few will, of course, blame Clinton. But it is usually the job of the party nominee to build unity once a vanquished rival has conceded and made the right gestures. Unless the loser happens to be a woman. Then it's just like high school, and she must do the work. mariecocco@washpost.com Copyright 2008, Washington Post Writers Group

Gigi Gaston's new film on voter fraud in the 2008 election is an important part of the Democratic Party's debates this week. Was the election won through dirty tricks and fraud? It's a must see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGZFgMNM-UU

Interesting blogs: http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/08/emil-jones-to-clinton-supporter.html http://savagepolitics.com/?p=1588

I just received this email from A Hillary Delegate in Denver: Just left the Women Count luncheon which featured Hillary and Chelsea here in Denver. Hillary looked fabulous and sounded strong, and Chlesea stood at her side smiling. There were at least 500 people there and many notables. The message was clear --- the sexism in the media and in the Democratic party needs to be addressed and the Women Count PAC WILL be a watchdog for any repeats of the horrendous treatment Hillary received at the hands of the media, the Obama campaign, and the Democratic Party leadership for our future women candidates. And she urged everyone to support the Women Count PAC because it was as necessary as the suffrage groups of the last century. Many nodded and applauded at that. www.womencount.com A nice tribute was made to Stephanie Tubbs Jones, who was to be a featured speaker at this event. Some words somber, some said with humor about this gracious and and dynamic woman. I always thought that she should have been the campaign's chief spokesperson -- she did a fabulous job for Hillary on the national media. God bless her. I keep hearing about the poor treatment of Hillary delegates and supporters as they walk around town. There appears to be no toleration for anything other than Obama, which is sad to see in the Democratic Party. In all the conventions which I have attended, as a delegate or a volunteer worker, I have never seen nor heard of such in tolerance and disrespect of one candidate's supporters by another candidate. I have been warned twice not to wear any Hillary paraphernelia by colleagues because of the abuse being helped upon us. Sad commentary -- this now becoming "a change I can't believe in...."

Important to see this proof of the fraud. The documentary, We Will Not Be Silenced, is up on the film website: http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm The information in the film is especially jarring for those who were not in caucus states, but it is information that our party must face. There is a reason why half of all Hillary voters are not currently willing to vote for Obama, and this is a big part of it. Unless our party faces the fact that Hillary voters have grievances that go far, far beyond normal bruised feelings, we will be hamstrung, incapable of taking the White House, and will blow down-ticket races with the negative coattails of a candidate who lacks legitimacy. It would be unfair to delegates, both pledged and super, to withhold this otherwise untold story prior to their votes in Denver. This is, oddly, also an opportunity for unity; if the Obama campaign stated forcefully that they played rough in a caucus system that must be abolished, it would heal a lot of wounds. Hillary voters deserve that much.

Mike Smerconish is on the MSNBC panel at the moment (6:25p EST).

But it is usually the job of the party nominee to build unity once a vanquished rival has conceded and made the right gestures. Unless the loser happens to be a woman. Then it's just like high school, and she must do the work. Great article!

Interesting. HRC is just starting to speak now, but there's an AP article saying she spoke already and what she said. Yes, I know they get the text beforehand, but it's still strange to report on something that hasn't happened yet.

And you know, like with Ted Kennedy and Al Gore, she may end up being as successful if not more and more influential outside of the presidency, at least as far as guiding health care policy. She has the gravitas of being a Senator now rather than just a First Lady.

Moon, if Hillary is imploring you not to vote for McCain, why would you just to be spiteful? And she's giving very good reasons not to.

She gave a brilliant speech. I loved the emotion and the way she ended it with the famous Harriet Tubman words. Totally caught you at every level. And the part about women's rights. OMG! That couldn't have been any better. Now, I'm listening to the heads regurgitating her speech, and how is that they're (and I'm including the infamous anti-Hillariest Chris Matthews) now saying how valid women's concerns have been and that Obama had better stand behind her. Brian Williams just said that they can't ignore the 18 million cracks in the ceiling. Could someone please playback their commentary of a couple of months ago?

It was a fabulous speech. This is an interesting panel with Nora O'Donnell, Pat Buchanan, Rachel Madow and another man I don't know. I'm sick of all the screaming people behind all the various commentators on MSNBC. It interrupts them and it's distracting to them and me.

Moon, are you a PUMA member? Does one become a member or just sort of vaguely follow them?

Yes, I am a Puma. Here is the email I received today from Ricki: ELECTABILITY WATCH (EW) Rasmussen: Obama 44%, McCain 44% McCain gets Bounce during Obama Convention Gallup: Obama 44%, McCain 46% No Bounce for Obama in Post-Biden Tracking This is the first time since Obama clinched the nomination in early June that McCain has held any kind of advantage over Obama in Gallup Poll Daily tracking. All, As we come into the "home stretch", please look at the polling, post-Biden. As a mentor of mine used to say, "Don't get seduced by your own propaganda". For all the glitter and hoopla in Denver, Obama still is not "sealing the deal" with the American voters. IF, and there are lots of ifs. IF the 18 million Hillary voters are accurately represented in Denver (haven't been replaced, threatened or flipped) and vote representing the people who sent them to Denver, and IF the Super Delegates vote for ELECTABIITY, their only job, THEN... IF this could not happen, why are BO and the DNC so afraid of a full open roll call, consistent with proud Democratic tradition? Pledged Delegates and Super Delegates, please think about it. Hillary supporters - in the coming hours, please help them think about it as well. GO GO GO! Ricki I have yet to figure out why sticking to one's beliefs and values should be characterized as "die-hard"... 1. DELEGATE HAPPENINGS � NEW YORK: CHARLES G. STURCKEN, a campaign worker writes, "To my greatest shock and dismay I have learned that Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney will not be voting for Hillary on the first ballot! She should be ashamed that she is voting contrary to the will of her Democratic constituents. The height of her folly is that she is on a book tour peddling her book, "Rumors of Our Progress", about the struggle of women over the past decades !! For shame that she would end up a turncoat ! Shame Shame Shame! I urge all fellow New Yorkers to call her campaign office at 212 - 987 - 5516. OR email her at info@carolynmaloney.com. � CALIFORNIA: Chris Stampolis DNC member from Calif." I signed the official Hillary nomination petition tonite at the Arena. Lots of high profile signers. I expect a roll-call." � KENTUCKY: Olivia Anne Fuchs reporting that "Team Hillary Kentucky & Hillary's Delegates in Denver stand tall for our girl!" � TEXAS: John Grothues: This evening the organizers were making sure that people could sign petitions to nominate Hillary and Obama and for vp Biden. I saw no one discouraging anyone from signing the petition of his or her choice. In fact Obama people were passing the petition to Hillary people and vice versa. It seriously looks like we will get the chance to vote for Hillary. � ALABAMA: Sarah writes: "Due to the terrible way that she was treated in this election, by the press, Obama people, NOT counting Fla. and Michigan votes and etc., I myself feel as Bill Clinton, "This is like a fairytale"!! No matter how this turns out, watch out, HILLARY WILL come back even stronger than ever, BECAUSE NOW SHE KNOWS WHO HER SUPPORTERS ARE". � OHIO: Delegates report consensus that Clinton can not be asked to solve Obama's problem. They say it is up to Obama to make the case for his economic policies and respond to persistent questions about his experience, values, toughness and vision, that no speech from Clinton or anyone else can do for Obama what he most needs to do for himself and has failed miserably, to date. 2. CAUCUS FRAUD: 3% of the total primary voters produced 15% of the total delegates. One person, one vote? Totally distorted totals compounded by rampant fraud? Is this how the Democratic Party chooses a candidate? Apparently. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGZFgMNM-UU THE PROCESS OF FLIPPING DELEGATES: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nROKBU_KlZw&feature=related 3. Judgement?: Matt Hicks writes, "Early in the campaign and throughout, Senator Obama has made the statements that this election is not about having the experience but the right "Judgment." Not that I am against Joe Biden as V.P., but that Barack never did consider Senator Clinton as his V.P. choice nor even vetted her. Hillary won the popular vote and is the most qualified candidate to be President let alone V.P. This is one more example of Obama's lack of serious judgment and his tacit acknowledgement of his own lack of experience." 4. WHY? Tony Parente writes: Last couple of days have made me question even more why I should remain a democrat and not become an independent. For example, why is Obama talking so much about McCain's 7 houses instead of accepting McCain's invitation for town halls to talk about issues the American people care about like jobs and healthcare. The Kennedy's own one or ten houses. Who cares how many houses McCain has. And why is Obama sending out text messages about his VP selection at 3am and then saying it had nothing to do with Hillary's 3am ad? How immature is this? And how has this self proclaimed man of unity going to unite the party and sit across from dictators when he can't even reach across the democratic aisle and select the strongest option for VP, Hillary. And lastly, why is it OK for Dean and Pelosi to let Michigan and Florida break the rules now but such a big deal when Hillary won the states and had the momentum? 5. An UWSider drinks the kool aide with a case of the bitters: H: Ricki: Give it up. It's over. You risk being viewed as disloyal, petulant and unrealistic. Not a great way of being perceived for someone whose intelligence, commitment and leadership have been important community assests.(sic) RRL: By whom (will I be so viewed)? H: Those who remember the McCarthy dead-enders who sabotaged Hubert Humphrey and gave us Richard Nixon. And the 2002 Naderites who aided George Bush. Other examples of Democratic circular firing squad abound. RRL: Wow. That's hardly specific. None of us likes to be chatted about behind our back - I would rather know who specifically is offended so we can have a reasonable discussion. Actually - what an extraordinary response, that you would characterize as McCarthyism, my discussions of a potential nominee representing the Democratic Party with values such as having sat in Rev Wright's church for 20 years, associated with and took money from Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko, stood silent with a smirk on his face at the sexist vicious media, asserted falsely he was consistently against the Irag war, rigged the caucuses to fraudulently gain delegates, etc etc. Let me be clear - this is not the party I have valued and worked for, and Obama is certainly not the nominee who represents the values, judgment and experience I believe Democrats should be proud of. If this is your definition of being disloyal, petulant and unrealistic - well, it takes my breathe away. 6. SECOND-PLACE CITIZENS SUSAN FALUDI MUCH has been made of the timing of Hillary Clinton's speech before the Democratic National Convention tonight, coming as it does on the 88th anniversary of women's suffrage. Convention organizers are taking advantage of this coincidence of the calendar �the 19th Amendment was certified on Aug. 26, 1920�to pay homage to the women's vote in particular and women's progress in general. By such tributes, they are slathering some sweet icing on a bitter cake. But many of Mrs. Clinton's supporters are unlikely to be partaking. They regard their candidate's cameo as a consolation prize. And they are not consoled. "I see this nation differently than I did 10 months ago," reads a typical posting... "That this travesty was committed by the Democratic Party has forever changed my approach to politics." In scores of Internet forums and the conclaves of protest groups, those sentiments are echoed, as Clinton supporters speak over and over of feeling heartbroken and disillusioned, of being cheated and betrayed... The despondency of Mrs. Clinton's supporters�or their "vitriolic" and "rabid" wrath, as the punditry prefers to put it � has been the subject of perplexed and often irritable news media speculation. Why don't these dead-enders get over it already and exit stage right? Shouldn't they be celebrating, not protesting? After all, Hillary Clinton's campaign made unprecedented strides. She garnered 18 million-plus votes, and proved by her solid showing that a woman could indeed be a viable candidate for the nation's highest office. She didn't get the gold, but in this case isn't a silver a significant triumph? Many Clinton supporters say no, and to understand their gloom, one has to take into account the legacy of American women's political struggle, in which long yearned for transformational change always gives way before a chorus of "not now" and "wait your turn," and in which every victory turns out to be partial or pyrrhic. 7. Clinton's Thankless Job Marie Cocco I posted that article here yesterday. 8. Obama's woes in microcosm Dick Pollman Macomb County, lower right. DENVER - Stan Greenberg is in town for the convention, and he's talking about Macomb County again. For Democrats who are a tad anxious about Barack Obama, that's not a welcome development. Greenberg, a veteran Democratic pollster who has been tracking that bellwether blue-collar/middle-class Michigan county since 1985, would surely not be sounding the alarm about Macomb if Obama was polling well there. But since Obama is not polling particularly well there, and since Macomb is a crucial piece of the puzzle in Michigan, a state that is shaping up to be a major battleground this autumn, Greenberg is now back to talking about Macomb. And what's most striking is how Obama's current woes in Macomb parallel his challenges nationwide... "They want to vote for change. But they haven't yet figured out a way to do it." And that's because they're not (yet?) comfortable with Obama. ...if you want to track blue-collar white sentiment between now and November, particularly in a pivotal state such as Michigan, keep an eye on Macomb. 9. SANDRA CHRISTIE SPEAKS FOR MANY: My hope is that there is some sanity in the Democratic party and that people understand that women like myself are not "upset" that Hillary lost --we are legitimately appalled by the underhanded tactics of the democratic party in nominating the far-less qualified and far less electable candidate which will effectively saddle us with 4 more years of a Republican president. The media's insistence that our response is emotional is so demeaning. I care about my country and I wanted a Democrat to win. 10. FREE SPEECH? RESPECT? INTEGRITY? Huffington reports that Howard Dean is putting a 5 Second Delay on President Clinton's speech tomorrow evening. AND FINALLY, Janice Dorr reminds us: It was on this day in 1920 that the 19th Amendment was formally incorporated into the U.S. Constitution. It proclaimed, "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex." It ended more than 70 years of struggle by the suffragist movement. It had passed through the House and Senate. At first, it looked like the amendment was not going to make it. And then, a 24-year-old legislator from Tennessee, Harry Burn, decided to vote for the amendment at the last minute because his mother wanted him to. And Tennessee became the 36th state to approve suffrage for women. They sent the certified record of the Tennessee vote to Washington, D.C., and it arrived on August 26, 1920. Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby signed the proclamation that morning at 8 a.m. at his home. There was no ceremony of any kind, and no photographers were there to capture the moment. And none of the leaders of the woman suffrage movement were present to see him do it. Colby just finished his cup of coffee and signed the document with a regular, steel pen. Then he said, "I turn to the women of America and say: 'You may now fire when you are ready. You have been enfranchised.'

I must say it hurt to watch Hillary last night, so presidential. Those stupid Obama supporters don't know what they threw away. She was fantastic! Did you know that the Obama people are going for a five second delay tonight with Bill's speech? Dorine, I resent the fact that DNC selected the candidate. Have you seen the fraud that was perpetuated by the Obama people in the caucuses? Look at the documentary link I posted above. His delegate numbers are a fraud. I can't trust them, they don't speak for me and they ignored the will of the people. Michelle Obama looked as if she were sitting on a firecraker while Hillary was speaking. She smiles only when she or her husband are mentioned. I bet she hated the ovation Hill received last night.

Did you know that the Obama people are going for a five second delay tonight with Bill's speech? They have NO ability to make this happen. They can ask (although I can't imagine they would even try) but it is the networks that do this. Personally, I wouldn't even approach a network to make that request because of how it will look. Michelle Obama looked as if she were sitting on a firecraker while Hillary was speaking. She smiles only when she or her husband are mentioned. I bet she hated the ovation Hill received last night. She did what she was told to do. Her smile was fixed, so plastic. I like to compare MO's mention of the anniversary of women's right to vote vs Hillary's. So much more impact and emotion. When MO mentioned it, I thought it was something she was told to include. Meaningless to her and to her message. Couple that with the part about her daughters' future world. Ugh! Are Americans (principally American women) so stupid and so provincial (or under their husband's thumbs) that they don't realize how pathetic our country is compared to the rest of the world, where women have been heads of state for, what, nearly 30 years? Don't they know that? What is their problem? We're over half the population and don't have anywhere near the representation we should have in government!

So true, Karen! And also ask why the Us still has not passed the Equal Rights Amendment? I care for that more than I care for Roe vs Wade. MO is all about MO it's the Obama theme. :-( I don't believe a word she says, she's not personable. Cindy McCain is in Georgia trying to help that country's people. Here is a comment from and Aol blogger, I happen to agree with: Bridie 7:43AM Aug 27th 2008 Hillary was fantastic, as we all should have expected. You can't blame her for not convincing me to vote for obama. Obama made a huge strategic mistake. He once again demonstrated his arrogance and showed off his inexperience by refusing to bring both President Clinton and Senator Clinton onto his team. More importantly, he is an idiot for believing his own self created mythology. This may be the first time a convention does not create the expected bump in Polls. A truly historic event! His approach so far has been disastrous and the Dems have no one to fault but themselves. The myth that this guy can bring people together is finally seeing the light of day. He doesn't even try when it's hard. This is a guy who has been dependent upon the easy low hanging fruit where he can do nothing and take credit for everything. Pelosi, Reid, Daschle and Dean and all due respect Ted Kennedy, placed a big bet on an unknown, unproven, inexperienced and self fascinated B.S.ing guy with the shallowest resume I have ever see in a presidential candidate.

And another thing, Hillary's mention that BO would sign into law a health care that would cover every American made me cringe. That's her baby, that's her right. BO has copied Hillary's plans since the beginning because he has none. He is as ambitious as they come and will stop at nothing to become President. Is that who you want as a President?

he is an idiot for believing his own self created mythology And a mythology it is. He hasn't done sh*t for anyone, even here in Illinois during his short state legislative term. BTW, I do hope the rumors circulating yesterday aren't true about how the roll call would end with the NY delegation and Hillary turning over her state's votes. How humiliating would that be? She wins all the big states (except IL) and then has to turn them over. The DNC honchos should've just shorn her hair, ripped her clothes and branded her with a red C (for competency) and then put her in a hairshirt. She doesn't deserve this.

(Moon)That's her baby, that's her right. So, Obama can't introduce any improvement because it was already somebody else's idea? Sorry, I don't understand that thinking. You know I was and remain 100% for Hillary, but it's over for now. She will get a high ranking cabinet spot, or if BO bombs in November, she will run again in 2012. Nothing else can be done for now, and nothing is to be gained by spiteful support of McCain. Read the Democratic and Republican platforms and tell me where you think the country's interests are better served. The R platform is diametrcailly opposed to much of what Hillary has spent her career working for. Why would I undermine her work. Yeah, I'm pissed, I really am. I couldn't even watch her speech all the way through becuase I began to cry and get myself upset. But I have to move on.

Mari don't misunderstand, it is not about spite. I don't trust Obama, he's a crook, please read up on his Chicago dealings, watch the documentary. I don't want to be part of his hidden agenda. He was selected not elected. That is not democracy. I consider myself an Independent this election. So, Obama can't introduce any improvement because it was already somebody else's idea? What improvements? Please elaborate. His plan doesn't cover every American.

Luckily, I don't have to vote for O in my state, as it will deliver with or without me. If I prefer to squander my vote on, say, a write-in, it won't help McCain. I don't trust Obama, he's a crook, please read up on his Chicago dealings I should take offense. NOT! They're all crooks. Can't get elected in Illinois without being totally corrupt. BTW, I had to laugh when David Gregory was interviewing Rahm Emmanuel and said he was part of the Chicago mafia. But he was another Clinton person (like Bill Richardson) who didn't support Hillary. No wonder Bill is still angry.

What improvements? Health care was the example you used. His plan doesn't cover every American. Which is one of the many reasons I was for Hillary. Sorry, I can't waste my vote. Imagine how different the country (and the world) might be if eight years ago a few more people in a few more precincts had voted for Gore. (And, no I am not putting BO on Gore's level.)

I haven't read all the comments and can't figure out why someone posted something about an energy issue in the middle of them. Hillary Quietly Calls Out Obama On Universal Health Care By: Ian Welsh Wednesday August 27, 2008 1:32 pm http://firedoglake.com/2008/08/27/hilary-quietly-calls-out-obama-on-universal-healthcare/

Richards: �A woman voting for John McCain would be like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders.� By: Blue Texan Wednesday August 27, 2008 9:50 am You probably didn't see it, but that line was delivered by Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood and the daughter of former governor Ann Richards. Not to state the obvious, but the cable news networks suck. I did my best to flip around during the speeches, and at one point, David Gregory and some other air talking head were babbling about the Democrats not attacking -- while on PBS (and right behind them), Kathleen Sebelius was attacking McSame. Unreal. Here's a few of the best moments that the corporate media didn't bother to cover: http://firedoglake.com/2008/08/27/richards-a-woman-voting-for-john-mccain-would-be-like-a-chicken-voting-for-colonel-sanders/

You know, maybe there's some sort of backroom deal a la Tony Blair/Gordon Brown going on we know nothing about. And maybe Hillary will finally be able to work through a health care deal and Obama will help make it happen because he...and the Dems, owe her. Well, and maybe I woke up. ;-)

This is tape delayed an hour or something. I'm reading all his speech comments before he's said them on Firedoglake.com. The time stamps are almost an hour ago. And this speech was supposed to be 10 mins? Heh, heh. I love me some Bill Clinton.

Talk about being in one's element. Damn.

Oh I get it! MSNBC is lying when it says LIVE. Just switched to PBS and it's Biden on, though even their coverage is about 10mins behind what's being liveblogged. Missed Kerry. Wow, what's up with MSNBC?

5. An UWSider drinks the kool aide with a case of the bitters: H: Ricki: Give it up. It's over. You risk being viewed as disloyal, petulant and unrealistic. Not a great way of being perceived for someone whose intelligence, commitment and leadership have been important community assests.(sic) RRL: By whom (will I be so viewed)? H: Those who remember the McCarthy dead-enders who sabotaged Hubert Humphrey and gave us Richard Nixon. And the 2002 Naderites who aided George Bush. Other examples of Democratic circular firing squad abound. RRL: Wow. That's hardly specific. None of us likes to be chatted about behind our back - I would rather know who specifically is offended so we can have a reasonable discussion. Actually - what an extraordinary response, that you would characterize as McCarthyism, my discussions of a potential nominee representing the Democratic Party with values such as having sat in Rev Wright's church for 20 years, associated with and took money from Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko, stood silent with a smirk on his face at the sexist vicious media, asserted falsely he was consistently against the Irag war, rigged the caucuses to fraudulently gain delegates, etc etc. Let me be clear - this is not the party I have valued and worked for, and Obama is certainly not the nominee who represents the values, judgment and experience I believe Democrats should be proud of. If this is your definition of being disloyal, petulant and unrealistic - well, it takes my breathe away. I find Ricki quite disingenuous here in her responses and doesn't impress me at all.

(Karen) Are Americans (principally American women) so stupid and so provincial (or under their husband's thumbs) that they don't realize how pathetic our country is compared to the rest of the world, where women have been heads of state for, what, nearly 30 years? Don't they know that? What is their problem? Were these rhetorical questions? ;-) A naturalized citizen friend of mine was basically saying this exact thing (except for the women part) to me last week. (Moon) Dorine, I resent the fact that DNC selected the candidate. I can't blame you really. Not dissimilar to my feeling over the SCOTUS election decision. Ok, I guess I've multiple posted enough for the night. ;-)

(Dorine) You know, maybe there's some sort of backroom deal a la Tony Blair/Gordon Brown going on we know nothing about. I prefered the backroom dealings when there was more vitriol on the floor. All this smiling and unity crap is giving me early onset diabetes. ;-) (Dorine) I love me some Bill Clinton. Talk about being in one's element. Damn. Yep, the man's a master. Everyone else paled in comparison yesterday, Biden included. Both he and his son were awful speakers. Oh I get it! MSNBC is lying when it says LIVE...Wow, what's up with MSNBC? Who knows? However, I can't really complained because I hardly ever watch anything in real time anymore due to Tivo. I like to be able to FF at all times and will purposely watch something else I have stored so that I can FF. If you want actual live coverage, there is always CSPAN, I think. It may have real gavel-to-gavel coverage, as in times of old.

Biden really did suck the air out of the room didn't he. I felt bad for him actually. He must've hated knowing he had to follow Bill.

Apparently a lot of lookups on son Beau and his "mysterious" ending about not being able to be there for his dad during the final campaign days. Turns out he's a captain in the reserves and is being deployed to Iraq in early October.

Yesterday's roll call was a farce. But how else would Obama let her proceed? He wants to control everything and there was no way he wasn't going to get his phony "Unity" BS out there. It's important to note that the polls are not advancing in Obama's favor as they should be and as they have traditionally done in the past. Also, did you know that when he found out that he wasn't filling that stadium, he reached out and asked Bruce Springsteen to play after his speech?

SHE DONE HIM RIGHT SEN. CLINTON DELIVERS ALL OBAMA COULD ASK Kirsten Powers NY POST WHY is Hillary Clinton not Barack Obama's running mate? That question had to be on many minds last night as Clinton delivered a rousing endorsement of Obama - a speech that moved between inspiration and attack, hitting every note perfectly. The backdrop was constant carping that Hillary hasn't done enough for the candidate she lost the primary to. Never mind that she has behaved immeasurably better than losing candidates before her who'd won far less support than she did. It's easy to get confused about this, since so many in the anti-Hillary media who hysterically demanded her exit from the race have conveniently edited out from history anything that doesn't fit into their nonsense narrative, as if her campaign invented party discord. Let's review: Hillary Clinton - amid outrage at her behavior - made her concession speech and endorsed Obama five days after the last primary. The way Obama's fans in the media tell it, you'd think she took months. Compare to 1984, when Gary Hart waited nearly a month to concede the race to Walter Mondale. Ted Kennedy, who in the ultimate act of disunity challenged an incumbent Democratic president in 1980, waited until the convention to concede to Jimmy Carter. When Kennedy finally did concede, it was barely distinguishable from a temper tantrum. CBS's Walter Cronkite reported, "Kennedy leaves the stand, sober, unsmiling. There will be no pictures in tomorrow morning's paper, and none for posterity, of Ted Kennedy holding Jimmy Carter's hand aloft." As Steve Kornacki (one of the few reporters to show an interest in accurate historical analogies this campaign season) aptly pointed out in The New York Observer, when Kennedy and Hart were running much farther back in their bids for the nomination - Kennedy was trailing by 1,000 delegates in '80; Hart by 600 in '84 - they didn't get hit by any serious pressure to drop out. Clinton, by contrast, was harassed by media to drop out even as she was winning major states and running neck-and-neck with Obama in the popular vote. When she considered taking the fight to the convention, the idea was greeted with disbelief that she'd be so selfish. Yet Hart and Kennedy both fought on at the convention; Kennedy only conceded after failing to change party rules to his favor. It's this double standard that so enrages Hillary supporters. Obama supporters and party leaders continue to insult Hillary voters - and then seem shocked when so many of them say they're going to vote Republican this year. Nancy Pelosi, underscoring why Congress under her leadership has an approval rating teetering on single digits, lectured female Hillary supporters in an interview this week - telling them to not wallow in defeat. Said the multimillionairess daughter of privilege: "I think that women, we have to get away from the politics of victim. This is about you go out there and you fight." Thanks, Nancy. I'm sure all the working-class women who supported Hillary didn't realize that the real problem is they need to get off their butts and "go out there and fight." But now they know that being disappointed that their candidate didn't win - an emotion plenty of men like, say, Ted Kennedy supporters in 1980 have experienced - is actually just being a whiny "victim." This is why John McCain stands at the ready to scoop up any disaffected Clinton supporters. Just as the Democrats' convention was beginning in Denver, the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee unleashed four TV ads geared toward Hillary voters. (Her response: "I am Hillary Clinton and I did notapprove this message.") The RNC held a press conference with four Democrats who declared their support for McCain since Clinton isn't on the ticket. Proving that truth is stranger than fiction, Hillary die-hards gathered at an RNC -sponsored "Happy Hour for Hillary" in Denver. (Clinton was invited, but demurred.) And, with last night's speech, she pulled out all the stops for Obama. She's done all she could - now the ball's in his court.

Check this out, principally the second part with Samantha Bee: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=183498&title=media-analysis-unity And this one, you're going to hate: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=179256&title=Healing-Clinton-Supporters Hillary Clinton - amid outrage at her behavior - made her concession speech and endorsed Obama five days after the last primary. The way Obama's fans in the media tell it, you'd think she took months. Compare to 1984, when Gary Hart waited nearly a month to concede the race to Walter Mondale. Ted Kennedy, who in the ultimate act of disunity challenged an incumbent Democratic president in 1980, waited until the convention to concede to Jimmy Carter. I saw Lisa Caputo toss those examples (and more) back at Chris Matthews, I think, and he kept asking her why she was laughing at him. He was asking her about what HC's speech beforehand. And, I remember, Lisa Caputo, pretty much exasperated, saying "gimme a break!" And then about all those other candidates who didn't endorse their opponents. When she considered taking the fight to the convention, the idea was greeted with disbelief that she'd be so selfish. Yet Hart and Kennedy both fought on at the convention; Kennedy only conceded after failing to change party rules to his favor. It's this double standard that so enrages Hillary supporters. Precisely. :-(

(Moon) Also, did you know that when he found out that he wasn't filling that stadium, he reached out and asked Bruce Springsteen to play after his speech? Where did you hear/read that? I did read he asked him to play, but Stevie Wonder is playing in his spot instead. And they did use that Springsteen song, "The Rising" after he came out with Biden last night. Is that supposed to be his theme, like "Don't Stop" for Bill Clinton, which I noticed they played an instrumental version of when he came out last night.

Why is Gore speaking as if he's late, he's late, for a very important date?

LOL! He had a lot of wonky talk to cram in. Why else? ;-)

I finally switched over to CSPAN because the clowns on MSNBC have nothing original to say and decided to give O's speech before he did. What is the matter with these people? (rhetorical) I've seen Jennifer Garner several times (today and yesterday). No Ben though. And today I saw Jin from Lost.

Post-convention 'bounce' averages 10 points By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer Thu Aug 28, 7:42 PM ET WASHINGTON - And now comes ... the wait for "The Bounce." One thing presidential candidates hope they'll get from their nominating conventions is a healthy "bounce" � a gain in popularity as measured by public opinion polls. Since both parties' 1964 gatherings, candidates have enjoyed an average 10 percentage point gain in their margin against their opponent, based on calculations from figures provided by The Gallup Poll. But this year could be different with the two conventions almost back-to-back. Presidential hopefuls are usually eager to dampen the bounce their rival will enjoy. It's no coincidence that Republican John McCain is expected to announce his vice presidential running mate as early as Friday, a day after Barack Obama delivers his acceptance speech and the Democratic National Convention ends. The post-convention boost, however, doesn't always last and is hardly predictive of election outcomes. Since 1964, there's been no real difference between the bounce enjoyed by the two parties. Democrats have averaged an 11-point gain, Republicans 9 points. There's also no significant difference in bounces by the party that doesn't hold the White House � which by tradition holds the year's first convention � and the incumbent party. The out-of-power party averages an 11-point increase, compared to a 9-point boost for the incumbent party. The biggest boost was the 30-point increase Bill Clinton gained when running for president for the first time in 1992. He never relinquished his lead. The largest for Republicans: the 14-point increases George W. Bush gained in 2000 and that Richard Nixon enjoyed in 1968, and the 13-point bounce Ronald Reagan got in 1980. Clinton and Bush won their first races for president; Nixon, who narrowly lost in 1960, won in 1968 by nearly half a million votes. The smallest bounces were the 4-point drop John Kerry saw in his margin against President Bush in 2004, and the 3-point reduction George McGovern endured in 1972 against President Nixon. Both Democrats lost. These quick popularity boosts don't always mean much. In 1964, President Johnson and Republican Barry Goldwater saw convention bounces of about the same size, while in 1984 Democrat Walter Mondale's 16-point boost was double President Reagan's. Johnson and Reagan won landslides. In 2004 Bush got the smallest GOP bounce measured yet � 2 points � and was re-elected. Obama's bounce this year could be limited not only by McCain's expected selection of a running mate, but by the Republican convention itself, which begins four days after the Democrats' ends. But McCain's bounce could also be stifled. Gustav, a storm in the Caribbean, was nearing hurricane strength Thursday and could hit the Gulf Coast early next week, potentially a major distraction. And McCain's acceptance speech next Thursday night will have to compete with the nationally televised opening game of the NFL season, featuring the Super Bowl champion New York Giants.

Ben is there, Karen. I saw Jen with I think it was Jessica Alba last night.

I don�t believe that Sen. McCain doesn�t care what�s going on in the lives of Americans. I just think he doesn�t know. Why else would he define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year? How else could he propose hundreds of billions in tax breaks for big corporations and oil companies but not one penny of tax relief to more than one hundred million Americans? How else could he offer a health care plan that would actually tax people�s benefits, or an education plan that would do nothing to help families pay for college, or a plan that would privatize Social Security and gamble your retirement? It�s not because John McCain doesn�t care. It�s because John McCain doesn�t get it. As the young'uns say....Word.

One thing I'll say about that speech outside of the content, I can't say I heard a lot of emotion behind it, unlike say, Bill Clinton's speech. I marvelled at that and really felt it, but can't say that about Obama's. But outside of that, it was a very well delivered speech. He's not dull, to me. I await John McCain's speech and all of the Republican Convention. I don't think I've ever watched so much of any convention, Dem or Republican, before.

I think it's a riot the way the cable commentators are reading tea leaves on the R's VP choice. "If a plane leaves Alaska and heads toward Ohio . . ." Is that crafty old McCain about to pull a stunner? LOL, stay tuned.

I couldn't come up with a name, but I did see Jessica Alba as well, in a shot with Jennifer. No Ben for me. Wonder if the celebs were told to stay off camera. I think they were too conspicuous four years ago, and Kerry got an image of being supported by too many Hollywood types, which was offputting to many Americans who hold "family values" above brains. ;-)

Yep, Ben was there, and J-Lo too.

Didn't see either, but I had CSPAN on for most of last night's coverage. I'm curious why no one is pointing out the blatant lie, included in most of the speeches about Obama not going to some big-time law firm following graduation and chooseing, instead, to work among the out-of-work steelworkers? He and Michelle worked for Sidley & Austin, probably the biggest in Chicago, the most connected. Yeah, he didn't go to Wall Street, but S&A ain't small potatoes, doing storefront pro bono stuff.

McCain chooses Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for V.P. By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer 4 minutes ago DENVER - John McCain tapped little-known Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his vice presidential running mate on Friday in a startling selection on the eve of the Republican National Convention. Two senior campaign officials disclosed Mccain's decision a few hours before the Republican presidential nominee-to-be and his newly-minted running mate appeared at a rally in swing-state Ohio. Palin is a self-styled hockey mom and political reformer who has been governor of her state less than two years. Palin's selection shocked numerous Republican officials. In making his pick, Mccain passed over several more prominent prospects who had figured in speculation for months � Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge among them. At 44, Palin is a generation younger that Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, who is Barack Obama's running mate on the Democratic ticket. She is three years Obama's junior, as well � and McCain has made much in recent weeks of Obama's relative lack of experience in foreign policy and defense matters. Palin flew overnight to an airport in Ohio near Dayton, and even as she awaited her formal introduction, some aides said they had believed she was at home in Alaska. She is a former mayor of Wasilla who became governor of her state in December, 2006 after ousting a governor of her own party in a primary and then dispatching a former governor in the general election. More recently, she has come under the scrutiny of an investigation by the Republican-controlled legislature into the possibility that she ordered the dismissal of Alaska's public safety commissioner because he would not fire her former brother-in-law as a state trooper.

What an odd choice for McCain. Would love to know the reasoning over some more high profile people. And I thought Nora O'Donnell and her smug self was saying *her* source indicated it was Pawlenty, but maybe I misremember. Maybe she didn't say and I assumed Pawlenty. I saw a picture of Ben (with a beard) sitting at the convention with Jen I thought about posting, but didn't. I didn't see J-Lo, but read she was there.

More recently, she has come under the scrutiny of an investigation by the Republican-controlled legislature into the possibility that she ordered the dismissal of Alaska's public safety commissioner because he would not fire her former brother-in-law as a state trooper. This only makes sense is 'fire' should've been 'hire.' Known as a political reformer? Beating an incumbent of her own party? Man, this is a brilliant move.

to work among the out-of-work steelworkers I don't understand this. How does a lawyer work among any kind of steelworker?

(karen) More recently, she has come under the scrutiny of an investigation by the Republican-controlled legislature into the possibility that she ordered the dismissal of Alaska's public safety commissioner because he would not fire her former brother-in-law as a state trooper. Oh right! I read about this situation a couple of weeks ago, but didn't pay attention to the gov's name nor make the connection now.

Until now rather.

What an odd choice for McCain. How? This is intended to balance not only his age, but outlook. She's young! And she's a she, which they're counting on attracting disenfranchised Hillary supporters. Without knowing a whole lot about her specifically, women are going to feel more comfortable with her on the ticket, thinking that their rights will be protected. Not necessarily a valid conclusion, given our history with people like Phyllis Schlaffly (sp?). :-( BTW. in the speeches last night wasn't there a mention of the next president possibly getting to appoint three Supreme Court justices in his first term? Which ones are likely to be retiring? Do you think a deal was struck for Hillary to be named, with a tacit promise to be elevated to Chief if it opens up?

How does a lawyer work among any kind of steelworker? He probably donated a bit of his time to the various outplacement centers, helped them fill out forms, etc. It isn't as though the Gary steel mills ever reopened. I had a college friend who wrote her doctoral dissertation on the leisure activities of those same blue-collar workers. We used laugh about how she was awarded a doctorate on bowling. ;-)

Palin is adamantly anti-abortion, a lifelong member of the NRA, and for aggressive drilling in the Alaska wildlife preserve. What a pandering move. Still shame on BO for not picking Hill. (Karen)This only makes sense is 'fire' should've been 'hire.' No, it's fire. He was involved in a bitter child custody dispute with her sister and she wanted him out. (Karen)Do you think a deal was struck for Hillary to be named, with a tacit promise to be elevated to Chief if it opens up? Not chief, but on the Supreme Court, or Secretary of State or Attorney General. Definitely a deal struck; that's the buzz among the Hill folks here in Joisey, for what it's worth.

Expecting John Roberts to die/retire relatively soon? Isn't he the youngest of the bunch? Ginsberg (sp?) is one of the next ones out I'd think. Atty General maybe for Hil. I'd think Bill Richardson...or even Bill Clinton for State.

While Secretary of State is a good position, she wouldn't be the first female. Attorney General? Who cares? Besides anything in his administration makes her subordinate to him. I'd go with Supreme Court and a promise to be elevated. That's the kind of ground-breaking role she'd take this dive for. Two branches of government headed by women? Yeah, that's the ticket. Merely being Sandra Day O'Connor's successor--refilling the second woman's seat--wouldn't be enough.

(Do)Expecting John Roberts to die/retire relatively soon? LOL, no, which is why I said *not* "chief." Stevens, the old liberal, is in his '80s and likely to retire, I'd think.

Besides, I think Secretary of State has been promised to Oprah. ;-)

Attorney General? Who cares? No, the Atty General's office in the past 7 years is perceived by some as helping the current administration "justify" and "legalize" torture, localize all power into the Executive Branch and override 4th Amendment protections. In general, stomping on the Constitution rather than upholding it. I'd want someone like Hillary to bring some integrity back to that office and use it to protect our citizens, not spy and spit on them.

I'm not arguing it isn't an important position and the one that would deal with the speech's phrase of "contempt for the Constitution," I'm just saying that role isn't high profile enough for her. Plus it has the image going way back of being the president's hired gun. Nope

I wouldn't want the Supreme Court in any capacity. Nobody hears about those people except at the beginning of term and at the end when their decisions are made. I wouldn't want that if I were her.

Except if you're working for a legacy. Could anyone but Chelsea Clinton be able to say that my father was president of the US and my mother was a Supreme Court justice or Chief Justice (men have been known to have unexpected, fatal heart attacks, especially at younger ages) ;-)

*snort* Palin's been compared to Quayle already. As a most unqualified VP. Except if you're working for a legacy. If that were the case, I'd rather stay in the Senate. Hard to say what her priorities are.

Hmmm...I'm not sure where she fits in here: McCain spokesman Ben Porritt offered, �McCain is going to pick a VP based on merit; a proven leader with sound judgment and well rounded experience that will give the public confidence that he/she is able to step in and govern at a moment�s notice.�

I would say her priorities had to be power (to effect change) and prestige. In the Senate, she's only one of 100. If any health care package gets through Congress, you just know it is going to be labeled the "Edward M Kennedy Memorial Health Care Bill."

Palin's been compared to Quayle already. As a most unqualified VP. Apparently that title actually goes to Spiro Agnew.

I'd say there are quite a number of Senators, past and present, esp Ted Kennedy, I'd wouldn't characterize as simply "one of 100". That might be true with the Health Care Bill, but maybe that's part of her deal. It'll be the Kennedy/Clinton Health Care Bill. I just want to get to the election.

Apparently that title actually goes to Spiro Agnew. Someone else mentioned Admiral Stockdale.

Of course Ross Perot was no fabulous Pres candidate either. ;-)

But the distinction is "major" political party.

Is there going to be a VP debate or have they chucked that too? Frankly, it will be no contest again. Tough to choose between personal tragedies/hardships. Apparently she has a son with Down's.

Bet Biden would wipe the floor with her. Though not fair for me to say I supposed as I've never heard her say anything.

Agnew first was elected governor of MD in 1966, then became VP in '68. His local and/or state experience was minimal. 1957-1961: appointment to the Baltimore County Board of Zoning Appeals 1960: lost election for Judge of the Circuit Court 1962: elected Baltimore County Executive (must be like our county president position) 1966: elected governor

From a Tribune article: The statement also said Palin has challenged the influence of the big oil companies while fighting for the development of new energy sources. "She leads a state that matters to every one of us - Alaska has significant energy resources and she has been a leader in the fight to make America energy independent," he said. As governor, she has raised taxes on the oil industry, pushed ethics legislation amidst corruption investigation of Alaska lawmakers and limited requests for congressional earmarks after Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" made the state a national laughingstock. ~~~~~~~~ Someone needs to take to a big city hair salon. She needs a makeover badly. ;-)

Could there be a happier Moon? I am thrilled! McCain gets it alright, WORD! I have heard her speak and she does it well. I don't think there will be a problem with Biden. He couldn't touch the age or experience issue with her because of rookie Obama. Frankly, I wasn't impressed with Biden at the comvention. (Karen), I'd go with Supreme Court and a promise to be elevated. I agree. Although, I think Hillary might wish to run against McCain in 2012.

(Mari) No, it's fire. He was involved in a bitter child custody dispute with her sister and she wanted him out. BTW, it will be viewed as a positive, a plus, by many women voters. ;-)

Especially since the jerk left/abandoned his spouse.

(Moon)Frankly, I wasn't impressed with Biden at the comvention. If you'd have seen him close up in action as a prenmier legislator for 30+ years, as I have, you'd be impressed.:-) Can't wait for the VP debate, and yes there will be one, in Missouri I think. I want to listen to this woman and learn more about her. I have to be honest though; I'd find it awfully hard to pull the lever for anyone who is anti Roe v. Wade. IMO, it's a woman's fundamental right.

(Mari) I'd find it awfully hard to pull the lever for anyone who is anti Roe v. Wade. IMO, it's a woman's fundamental right. Quite. However, you'd be amazed by all the holier-than-thous out there who simply cannot allow other women to have the choice. I was positively shocked many years to find a friend, who was rabidly anti-abortion (which I attributed to her being Catholic), admit to having had two herself! Hypocrites! (and she suffered no physical ill effects from her own experience and had two daughters when she finally married the jerk)

Equal Rights Amemndment is more important than Roe vs Wade, IMO. And I think this country should establish a Pro-Adoption stance instead of Pro-Abortion. There are too many ignorant young girls out there getting abortions, that's not right. There are plenty of Americans that would happily adopt those babies.

(Mari) I want to listen to this woman and learn more about her. I do as well. I don't think anyone adopts a "pro-abortion" stance, except simply to have it as an option. There are too many ignorant young girls out there getting abortions, that's not right. Perhaps if the administration had spent more effort and money on promoting safe sex rather than promoting abstinence (and trying to push religion into it through the faith based programs), which was shown to be a failure, there might be less of this problem. That's funny. I don't think there's a lack of American babies to adopt, but many, including several I know, choose to adopt internationally.

(Karen)I was positively shocked many years to find a friend, who was rabidly anti-abortion (which I attributed to her being Catholic) You may be surprised at how many Catholics are pro-choice. Last poll I saw, it was the (slim) majority. (Moon)Equal Rights Amemndment is more important than Roe vs Wade, IMO. The ERA is in the states' hands--the states that failed to ratify in order for there to be the necesasary number for it to become the law of the entire land. And you live in one of those states that didn't ratify--get going, Moon!;-) And good luck getting McCain-Palin to lead the charge on the federal level. *snort* There are too many ignorant young girls out there getting abortions, that's not right. So who gets to decide who "deserves" the right to get an abortion (presumably only those who not "ignorant or young"?;-) It must remain safe and legal. My mother used to tell me stories of a close friend of hers who died while having an abortion; this was in the early '50s when it was illegal. Her husband was abusive and she was leaving him and had no means to support another child (she had one young son already). Tragic. I've known women who have had abortions. Not one of them took it lightly. The government needs to keep its nose out of people's personal business, and focus on the huge problems we as a society face.

(Mari) You may be surprised at how many Catholics are pro-choice. I might, but the experience I shared here happened a long time ago but epitomized the hypocrisy of her position. Not one of them took it lightly. Absolutely. It isn't anything to take lightly for many reasons. But it should be no one's decision but the woman's herself. In the area of health care, boy, do we need a woman at the top! Besides the ability to choose, you better believe there would be a blood test for breast cancer (like in prostate cancer) and hot flashes would be a thing of the past! ;-)

Some conservative media reaction. Note the comments highlighted are out of context. I haven't read them all completely yet. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/125530/561/942/578766

I thought this was an interesting analysis/commentary on Palin and that women's issues will be brought to the front more in this election. It�s Palin By: Jane Hamsher Friday August 29, 2008 8:15 am 13 diggs digg it The desire to cause complete chaos in the Democratic party by nominating Joe Lieberman was overcome, and Sarah Palin is going to be John McCain's running mate. I don't personally think that it was Joe's "pro-choice" stance that killed him, he would've sold that out in a heartbeat. It's been obvious that the GOP has been making a play for the female vote ever since Obama won the nomination and it became apparent that he would rather gnaw off his right arm than choose her as a running mate. With the last Rasmussen poll showing that 28% of her voters still won't vote for Obama, there's certainly a lot of opportunity there. I have to say that as a woman, there is something intuitively appealing about her selection, even though I politically disagree with everything she believes in and would never in a million years vote for her. And we're hearing a lot about Obama's support for equal pay and Joe Biden's championing of domestic violence legislation because a large part of the female voting block is in play. I'm still not quite sure why Obama didn't try and lock that vote down by overlooking the personal animosity he and Clinton shared and picking her as his running mate, but he didn't. The chemistry between Obama and Biden is good, and watching them together last night I thought they made an appealing combination. But it also carries risks that McCain decided to exploit. The good news is that women's issues are going to become front and center for this campaign. I haven't seen enough of Palin to know how well she could do against Biden in a debate, but I'm not sure it matters. If she doesn't make some horrible gaffe, what she stands for symbolically will be more important than anything she says. I'd just recommend that if anyone is thinking of going on teevee and tearing her down by saying she doesn't care about the victims of Hurricane Katrina but only cries about her looks, they might want to reconsider. http://firedoglake.com/2008/08/29/its-palin/

Am I reading this correctly? Moon, are you going to switch from supporting Hillary to supporting McCain, just because he chose a woman as his running mate?? Don't you care that this woman is anti-choice, anti-environment, pro-death penalty, pro-gun and (if my sources are to be believed) nuttier than a Xmas fruitcake??

I think she was going to support McCain even before that, but this appears to help.

Did I hear David Gergen correctly last night on CNN when he said Palin was a "skeptic" on global warming and is in favor of teaching creationism in the public schools? Tell me I didn't hear that. :-(

You heard correctly.

I heard the global warming comment by either Chris Matthews or Keith Olberman. Not the other. :-( (BTW, have you noticed that Keith Olberman and Lester Holt have identical voices?) Another noticeable change seems to be in those MSN talking heads. I think NBC/Universal Legal has taken the reports of media bias seriously and come down hard. Chris Matthews was falling all over himself to appear PC. Maybe they all had to go to anti-sexism workshop. ;-)

(Sarah) are you going to switch from supporting Hillary to supporting McCain, just because he chose a woman as his running mate? Ever heard: Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned? ;-)

Dailykos.com has a ton on Sarah Palin and her record in Alaska (as well as the wonderful video where she questions what a VP really does...*that's* a video I took time to watch ;-)). It's too much for me to go through and post, I'm already behind schedule today. If you go to dailykos.com and scroll down the main few pages from the past couple of days, you'll find all kinds of commentary and links about her.

Also, thanks for joining in Jane! I wish more people chimed in.

You know, I'll apologize in advance for offending anyone, but as I said to my aunt (who's a Catholic nun), if a person's main concern or issue in aligning themselves with a Pres/VP candidate is that they're pro-life, then apparently life is very good for them considering the state of this country and the world. Evangelicals energized by McCain-Palin ticket By ERIC GORSKI, AP Religion Writer 2 hours, 1 minute ago Sarah Palin already has energized conservative religious leaders who had fretted that John McCain would pick an abortion rights supporter as his running mate. The Alaska governor was raised in a Pentecostal church and has called herself "as pro-life as any candidate can be." To Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religion Liberties Commission, Palin is "straight out of veep central casting." Land said he had urged the McCain camp to consider the political unknown. Gary Bauer, one of McCain's most enthusiastic evangelical supporters, said the Arizona senator had hit a "grand slam home run" and that adding Palin to the GOP ticket is "guaranteed to energize values voters." The 44-year-old mother of five, who led her high school chapter of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, was baptized as a teenager at the Wasilla Assembly of God Church, where she and her family were very active, according to her then-pastor, Paul Riley. She now sometimes worships at the Juneau Christian Center, which is also part of the Pentecostal Assemblies of God, said Brad Kesler, business administrator of the denomination's Alaska District. But her home church is The Church on the Rock, an independent congregation, Riley said. "The church was kind of a foundation for her," said Riley, who said he gave the invocation at Palin's inauguration and had her address students at the church last month. Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for the McCain-Palin campaign, said Palin attends different churches and does not consider herself Pentecostal. As a politician, Palin has sided with the majority evangelical view in opposing gay marriage and expressing a desire to see creationism discussed alongside evolution in schools. During a 2006 debate, she said she was a proponent of teaching both evolution and creationism in schools. She later clarified her stance in an interview with the Anchorage Daily News, saying that she doesn't think creationism needed to be part of the curriculum and that she would not push the state Board of Education to add such alternatives to the state's required curriculum. Not only does Palin oppose abortion as a matter of policy, but she chose to give birth to her youngest child, a son, after a prenatal exam indicated Down syndrome. Studies show that about nine in 10 pregnant women who are given a Down syndrome diagnosis have chosen to have an abortion. "That will resonate in a big way," said Quin Monson, a Brigham Young University professor who studies religion and politics. Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, who initially said he could not vote for McCain but has since opened the door to an endorsement, called Palin "an outstanding choice that should be extremely reassuring to the conservative base" of the GOP. Dobson added that the ticket "gives us confidence he will keep his pledges to voters regarding the kinds of justices he would nominate to the Supreme Court." "It's an absolutely brilliant choice," said Mathew Staver, dean of Liberty University School of Law. "This will absolutely energize McCain's campaign and energize conservatives." Staver called Palin a "a woman of faith who has a strong position on life, a consistent opinion on judges. ... She's the complete package." A Pew poll last week showed McCain leading Democrat Barack Obama 68 percent to 24 percent among white evangelical Protestants. But there was little enthusiasm: Only 28 percent of white evangelicals call themselves "strong" supporters of McCain, far short of President Bush's numbers four years ago. Many evangelical leaders said McCain helped himself with a solid performance at Pastor Rick Warren's Saddleback Church, where McCain proclaimed, "I will be a pro-life president." Mark Silk, who specializes in religion and politics at Trinity College in Hartford, Conn., cautioned that while evangelical leaders are praising the Palin pick, it might not necessarily trickle down. "The question is how this will be received by a lot of rank-and-file evangelicals who are just Americans struggling along, going to their megachurches, and care about values," Silk said. Some question whether old-guard traditional leaders, like Dobson, hold as much influence as in the past. The evangelical establishment never warmed to former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's candidacy, but grass-roots evangelicals contributed to his big win in the Iowa primaries. Evangelical leaders got worried when McCain floated the possibility of a vice presidential candidate who supports abortion rights, including Sen. Joe Lieberman or former Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge. By choosing Palin, "McCain is saying to social and religious conservatives, 'I'm taking your views incredibly seriously,'" said Michael Cromartie, director of the evangelical studies program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington. ___ On the Net: Juneau Christian Center: http://jccalaska.com/ Alaska Assemblies of God: http://www.alaskaag.org/ Church on the Rock: http://churchontherockak.org/

Forgot to mention that the State of Illinois isn't the only one infected with nepotitis. Saw Luke Russert reporting from the convention floor, giving the truly lame "young" people's perspective. :-( Does they realize how embarrassing it is to stand in front of a camera and admit that young people think everything is honky dory for women, while behind him the speakers from the podium are pledging to finally get equal pay for equal work for women?? Talk about juxtaposition. Might as well have had a clown dancing behind him.

I've read Luke Russert seems to be out of his element. I just had almost this exact conversation with someone this morning.... 6 things the Palin pick says about McCain Jim VandeHei, John F. Harris 2 hours, 30 minutes ago The selection of a running mate is among the most consequential, most defining decisions a presidential nominee can make. John McCain�s pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says a lot about his decison-making � and some of it is downright breathtaking. We knew McCain is a politician who relishes improvisation, and likes to go with his gut. But it is remarkable that someone who has repeatedly emphasized experience in this campaign named an inexperienced governor he barely knew to be his No. 2. Whatever you think of the pick, here are six things it tells us about McCain: 1. He�s desperate. Let�s stop pretending this race is as close as national polling suggests. The truth is McCain is essentially tied or trailing in every swing state that matters � and too close for comfort in several states like Indiana and Montana the GOP usually wins pretty easily in presidential races. On top of that, voters seem very inclined to elect Democrats in general this election � and very sick of the Bush years. McCain could easily lose in an electoral landslide. That is the private view of Democrats and Republicans alike. McCain�s pick shows he is not pretending. Politicians, even �mavericks� like McCain, play it safe when they think they are winning � or see an easy path to winning. They roll the dice only when they know that the risks of conventionality are greater than the risks of boldness. The Republican brand is a mess. McCain is reasonably concluding that it won�t work to replicate George W. Bush and Karl Rove�s electoral formula, based around national security and a big advantage among Y chromosomes, from 2004. �She�s a fresh new face in a party that�s dying for one � the antidote to boring white men,� a campaign official said. Palin, the logic goes, will prompt voters to give him a second look � especially women who have watched Democrats reject Hillary Rodham Clinton for Barack Obama. The risks of a backlash from choosing someone so unknown and so untested are obvious. In one swift stroke, McCain demolished what had been one of his main arguments against Obama. �I think we�re going to have to examine our tag line, �dangerously inexperienced,�� a top McCain official said wryly. 2. He�s willing to gamble � bigtime. Let�s face it: This is not the pick of a self-confident candidate. It is the political equivalent of a trick play or, as some Democrats called it, a Hail Mary pass in football. McCain talks incessantly about experience, and then goes and selects a woman he hardly knows, who hardly knows foreign policy and who can hardly be seen as instantly ready for the presidency. He is smart enough to know it could work, at least politically. Many Republicans see this pick as a brilliant stroke because it will be difficult for Democrats to run hard against a woman in the wake of the Hillary Clinton drama. Will this push those disgruntled Hillary voters McCain�s way? Perhaps. But this is hardly aimed at them: It is directed at the huge bloc of independent women � especially those who do not see abortion as a make-or-break issue � who could decide this election. McCain has a history of taking dares. Palin represents his biggest one yet. 3. He�s worried about the political implications of his age. Like a driver overcorrecting out of a swerve, he chooses someone who is two years younger than the youthful Obama, and 28 years young than he is. (He turned 72 Friday.) The father-daughter comparison was inevitable when they appeared next to each other. 4. He�s not worried about the actuarial implications of the age issue. He thinks he�s in fine fettle, and Palin wouldn�t be performing the only constitutional duty of a vice president, which is standing by in case a president dies or becomes incapacitated. If he was really concerned about an inexperienced person sitting in the Oval Office we would be writing about vice presidential nominee Mitt Romney or Tom Ridge or Condoleezza Rice. There is no plausible way that McCain could say that he picked Palin, who was only elected governor in 2006 and whose most extended public service was as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska (population 8,471), because she was ready to be president on Day One. Nor can McCain argue that he was looking for someone he could trust as a close adviser. Most people know the staff at the local Starbucks better than McCain knows Palin. They met for the first time last February at a National Governors Association meeting in Washington. Then, they spoke again � by phone � on Sunday while she was at the Alaska state fair and he was at home in Arizona. McCain has made a mockery out of his campaign's longtime contention that Barack Obama is too dangerously inexperienced to be commander in chief. Now, the Democratic ticket boasts 40 years of national experience (four years for Obama and 36 years for Joseph Biden of Delaware), while the Republican ticket has 26 (McCain�s four yeasr in the House and 22 in the Senate.) The McCain campaign has made a calculation that most voters don�t really care about the national experience or credentials of a vice president, and that Palin�s ebullient personality and reputation as a refomer who took on cesspool politics in Alasksa matters more. 5. He�s worried about his conservative base. If he had room to maneuver, there were lots of people McCain could have selected who would have represented a break from Washington politics as usual. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman comes to mind (and it certainly came to McCain�s throughout the process). He had no such room. GOP stalwarts were furious over trial balloons about the possibility of choosing a supporter of abortion rights, including the possibility that he would reach out to his friend. Palin is an ardent opponent of abortion who was previously scheduled to keynote the Republican National Coalition for Life's "Life of the Party" event in the Twin Cities this week. �She�s really a perfect selection,� said Darla St. Martin, the Co-Director of the National Right to Life Committee. It is no secret McCain wanted to shake things up in this race � and he realized he was limited to a shake-up conservatives could stomach. 6. At the end of the day, McCain is still McCain. People may find him a refreshing maverick, or an erratic egotist. In either event, he marches to his own beat. On the upside, his team did manage to play to the media�s love of drama, fanning speculation about his possible choices and maximizing coverage of the decision. On the potential downside, the drama was evidently entirely genuine. The fact that McCain only spoke with Palin about the vice presidency for the first time on Sunday, and that he was seriously considering Lieberman until days ago, suggests just how hectic and improvisational his process was. In the end, this selection gives him a chance to reclaim the mantle of a different kind of politician intent on changing Washington. He once had a legitimate claim to this: after all, he took on his own party over campaign finance reform and immigration. He jeopardized this claim in recent months by embracing ideas he once opposed (Bush tax cuts) and ideas that appeared politically motivated (gas tax holiday). Spontaneity, with a touch of impulsiveness, is one of the traits that attract some of McCain�s admirers. Whether it�s a good calling card for a potential president will depend on the reaction in coming days to what looks for the moment like the most daring vice presidential selection in generations. Mike Allen contributed to this report. http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/12997;_ylt=ArQAAJmfafqwjCSNnIIJTPys0NUE

It's shaping up to be a fascinating election. Can't wait for the debates.

I'm looking forward to the debates too. I've heard Palin speak and she does it well. No ums, ahhs, ughs. also, she is not anti-enviornment. She wants Alaska with all its natural resources to be the alternative fuel state to supply the country. I am also not a Darwinist, and I don't believe that Man evolved from a ape. There is room for all teachings in schools. Why must everyone believe in the Big Bang Theory? IMO, passing the Equal Rights Amendment will take care of Roe vs Wade. Women will finally be in charge. But we must get women into high offices. The DNC selected Obama over Hillary. Obama ignored Hillary eventhough having her as his VP would have, IMO, guaranteed a win. I will not fall in line, never have in my life, as my mother knows and suffers, LOL. A Pro-Adoption program or legislature should be passed nationally. Teenage girls are getting too many abortions, many of them don't even realize they are pregnant until their second trimester, the horror! Contrary to what you believe Dorine, there are not many newborns up for adoption in the US. Sarah, I'm already thinking Hillary 2012. In the meantime: Gov. Sarah Palin A Tenacious Reformer's Swift Rise http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/29/AR2008082903593.html If I do volunteer for McCain at his HQ, I will be wearing my Hillary pin. I know at least two other Hillary VA delegates that will be there.

From today's Washington Post: In Israel, A Clash Over Who Is a Jew Ultra-Orthodox Contest Conversions By Griff Witte ASHDOD, Israel -- Yael converted to Judaism in 1992, and for the next 15 years she lived in Israel, celebrating the major holidays and teaching her children about the Jewish faith. But when she and her husband sought a divorce last year, she said, the ultra-Orthodox rabbis in charge of the process had some questions. Among them: Did Yael observe the Sabbath? Did she obey the prohibition on sex during and after menstruation? Dissatisfied with the answers, the rabbis nullified her conversion. Yael did not need a divorce, they ruled, because she had never been married. She had never been married because she had never been Jewish. And because she had never been Jewish, her children were not, either. "I was in shock. I couldn't believe it," said Yael, 43, who would allow only her Hebrew name to be published out of privacy concerns. Blond, blue-eyed and athletic-looking, Yael is baffled by the ordeal. "My kids grew up Jewish," she said. "They don't know anything else." Yael's personal trauma has become a cause for Israeli soul-searching over what it means to be Jewish, a term that carries both religious and ethnic dimensions. The case has set off a roiling debate between those who see themselves as saving Judaism and those whose first priority is to safeguard the Jewish state. On one side are ultra-Orthodox leaders who are using their long-standing dominance of Israel's rabbinical court system -- which has authority over marriages, divorces and conversions -- to tighten restrictions governing who can become Jewish. They see themselves as defending the religious purity of a people who, according to their interpretation of Jewish law, need to live apart from other groups. Those on the other side are much more concerned with demographics: They believe that at a time when the number of Arabs living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is poised to surpass the number of Jews, Israel needs all the converts it can get. This group includes secular Jews, but it is led by the religious Zionists, who form the core of the settlement movement in the occupied territories and who feel it is their duty to populate the biblical land of Israel. The stakes have escalated since Yael's conversion was tossed out: When she appealed to the High Rabbinical Court of Israel, it not only upheld the original decision but also threw into doubt the legality of thousands of other conversions. "There is a cultural war going on between various segments of Jewish society," said Benjamin Ish-Shalom, chairman of the Joint Institute for Jewish Studies. A trim man with a philosophical bearing who relishes any discussion of Judaism, he helps administer a government-funded education program for Israelis who need help getting through the rigorous process of conversion. Over the past two decades, Israel has admitted hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the former Soviet Union, over the objections of ultra-Orthodox leaders who spoke out against allowing non-Jews to enter the country. Many of the immigrants lacked the paperwork to prove their Jewish ancestry. Others had fathers or grandparents who were Jewish, but did not qualify as Jewish themselves because Judaism is passed down through mothers. Until now, ultra-Orthodox leaders have not acted as forcefully to invalidate immigrant conversions. To Ish-Shalom, facilitating conversion has been good for the converts, good for Judaism and good for the state. "Israel needs people. It needs loyal people," he said. At the moment, there is rough parity between the Palestinian and Jewish populations in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, according to Eliyahu Ben-Moshe, a demographer and former deputy director of Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics. Because of a high Arab birth rate, Ben-Moshe said, they are expected to establish a clear majority in the coming decades -- a terrifying prospect for Israeli policymakers as the well of diaspora Jews who are willing to immigrate to Israel dries up. The ultra-Orthodox, Ish-Shalom argues, are damaging that effort by requiring converts to heed strict standards. Ultra-Orthodox leaders don't disagree. They believe that God originally expelled the Jews from the land of Israel because of their lack of religious devotion and that the secular nature of the modern Israeli nation is unacceptable. As a result, many are anti-Zionist. "There's something more important than the state of Israel and Zionism," said Moshe Gafni, a member of Israel's parliament who represents the ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism party. Wearing the customary ultra-Orthodox uniform of black pants and white shirt, Gafni speaks forcefully and with deep conviction: "Unlike Christians, we Jews are not missionaries. If someone really wants to join the Jewish people, we're going to make it difficult for them." Gafni's view is rooted in his interpretation of Jewish law. To him, there are two kinds of Jews: those who were born of Jewish mothers into the faith, and those who can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are willing to abide by Jewish law and accept the hundreds of mitzvoth, or commandments, that govern an observant Jew's daily life. To admit others, he said, would be to destroy the integrity of a community that, according to God's will, needs to stay distinct. While the ultra-Orthodox are only about 11 percent of Israel's Jewish population -- approximately the same share as the religious Zionists -- they have wielded increasing power in recent years as high birth rates swell their numbers. Ben-Moshe said he expects them to double their share of the Jewish population within the next 20 years. Israel's notoriously unstable political system, too, has helped raise their influence: Mainstream Israeli politicians usually need ultra-Orthodox parties in their governments to build a majority coalition. Over time, the ultra-Orthodox have grown bolder in challenging the Israeli government's efforts to convert non-Jewish immigrants. Unwittingly, Yael became a part of that campaign when her husband filed for divorce. A Protestant by birth who grew up in Denmark, she moved to Israel in 1988 to be with her Jewish boyfriend. Because there is no civil marriage in Israel, she needed to convert to marry him here. The process took a year of intense study of Jewish prayers, holidays and traditions. "Ordinary Israelis don't know half of what I learned," she said while sitting at her kitchen table in this city by the Mediterranean. Like most ordinary Israeli Jews, her level of observance was not up to the standards of the ultra-Orthodox. Still, she had no idea that her conversion could be nullified -- especially 15 years after the fact. In their 51-page decision, the rabbis in Ashdod who heard the divorce petition wrote that "most of the converts lie to the rabbis when they promise to keep the mitzvoth after the conversion. . . . How can one bury one's head in the sand and continue letting into the vineyard of the Jewish people these total non-Jews?" Yoseph Sheinin, chief rabbi of Ashdod, did not take part in the ruling, but he praised it as a means of correcting the government's mistakes. "The idea of Zionism was to bring Jews here. The moment they brought Gentiles here, they bankrupted the movement," he said. When Yael appealed to the High Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem, she was again subjected to tough questioning -- most of it focused on prohibitions relating to sex. "It was all about our private life -- our very private life," she said. "It was simply terrible." In a lengthy ruling, the Jerusalem judges attacked Rabbi Chaim Drukman, a religious Zionist who oversaw Yael's conversion along with thousands of others as part of an aggressive government effort to increase the Jewish population of Israel. Every one of those conversions, the court ruled, should be called into question. Drukman said the decision strikes at the heart of the Zionist project. "We feel a responsibility for the people of Israel," he said, his bookshelves lined with copies of the Talmud. "They don't. They only care about their small circle." Indeed, the backlash against the ruling has prompted proposals for alternative courts that would take a more lenient view of Jewish law, or the institution of civil marriage. Susan Weiss, a lawyer whose Center for Women's Justice is handling Yael's appeal to Israel's Supreme Court, said she is hoping that the case helps to "change the system from its roots." Until then, however, the government and the rabbinical courts continue to work at cross-purposes -- with the government spending millions of shekels annually to bring people into the fold of Judaism, and the courts trying to keep them out. Former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, a major advocate for easing the conversion process, used to "pound on the table and say, 'If I had to convert, I would not pass,' " said Avigdor Leviatan, head of Israel's conversion office. "The problem lies with the rabbinical courts. There the system collapses."

(Moon) No ums, ahhs, ughs. Colin could never run for public office then. ;-D

So we move from politics to abortion to religion, Moon? All the taboo subjects? ;-)

Apparently the press in Palin's own backyard aren't that thrilled. Even Locals Are Blasting Palin Pick Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:00:18 AM PDT http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/1296/05455/509/580216

She apparently thinks Hillary Clinton was a whiner. In regards to what, I don't know. http://www.newsweek.com/id/156190/output/print

The whining comment was picked up by the media immediately. Heard it yesterday. You might want to click on the video at this link to see her tapdance around the question of unfair media. She actually says "perceived whining." Perceived by whom? I suppose the media. But the answer is pathetic IMO. Women have been working harder to overcome this for longer than she's been alive. http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0808/Palin_on_Clinton.html

Listening to it again, her answer reminded me of the advice given to Victorian women to lay on their backs and think of England. ;-)

Essentially she was telling Hillary to "man-up", which incidentally was essentially Mark Penn's advice to her, per the Vanity Fair article anyway. It will be curious to see if she gets similar treatment, though she's not running for the big job and is along for the ride to some degree.

Essentially she was telling Hillary to "man-up", And how dare she tell Hillary to "work harder!" In other words, shut up and don't complain. Perceived whining indeed. She's not fit to shine Hill's shoes. Outrageous. (Moon)I will not fall in line And neither will I. If McCain thinks that most woman are going to fall in line and vote against their own self-interests because he put a woman on the ticket, he has another thing coming to him.

Dorine asked how the Daily Show was covering the convention and I said they were on a one-day lag. That was true, with the exception of Friday's show because they were able to get in the Sarah Palin announcement. My Tivo also included a couple of minutes of the Colbert Report, which started out with Palin as well. Wish I'd recorded that. (Mari) If McCain thinks that most woman are going to fall in line and vote against their own self-interests because he put a woman on the ticket, he has another thing coming to him. You might want to view this: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=183521&title=John-McCain-Chooses-a-Running-Mate

Moon, I am sorry to hear that you are cutting off your nose to spite your face. If you were truly a supporter of the issues that Hillary Clinton stands for, you certainly wouldn't be voting for McCain/Palin. I think it's a shame. And voting against your own self interests doesn't help anyone. If you feel so strongly about Clinton getting shafted by her own party - why not vote for a third party candidate whose platform at least mirrors some of the things Clinton stands for?? That's certainly not going to help the Dems, and at least you're not voting against your own self-interests. As for teaching Creationism in schools, I think it's fine if it's part of a Religious Studies or Philosophy class. It doesn't belong in Science class - it's not a scientific theory or belief in any way. And I'm very much opposed to turning the US into (even more of) a Theocracy. Separation of Church and State is basic to our country's foundations. The founding fathers would be spinning in their graves at some of the things the Republican party does.

On another note, I will say that the US is suffering a decline in its political prospects because of the "two party" (practically ONE party now) system. The only way to achieve real progress in the US in politics is, imo, to introduce some kind of "preferential voting" system, which allows people to vote for the candidate which they believe represents their interests, without having their vote flushed down the toilet and/or benefit a candidate/party they loathe. Australia has a pretty good (not perfect) form of preferential voting which ensures that there are always more than two parties, and in fact, quite often allows third party and independent candidates to weild a great deal of power under certain circumstances. The Australian Greens Party always has at least a couple of Senators at the federal level, which makes for some interesting debates, I can assure you. (Not to mention that our venerable Greens Senator, Bob Brown stood up and gave GW a serve while he was here over keeping people detained indef nitely without trial in Gitmo! I got to shake Dr. Brown's hand and tell him he was my hero for doing that!) Bob Brown is often the only man in Australia to point out the Emporer's lack of clothes, and I think it's great.

(Mari) If McCain thinks that most woman are going to fall in line and vote against their own self-interests because he put a woman on the ticket, he has another thing coming to him. But then again, if their self-interests include being pro-life, anti-environment, against gun control and a belief in creationism vs. evolution, then McCain/she are their candidates. What doesn't jive obviously is that if they were also Hillary supporters, because she has the opposite ideology. Then the question becomes why support Hillary because technically she was against those self-intersts. A word comes to mind I won't mention. Jane, is the political system there ruled by money and special interests as it is here? 3rd party candidates don't have a chance here really as long as those influences are in our system IMO. Except to exist as potential spoilers.

I will say that the US is suffering a decline in its political prospects because of the "two party" (practically ONE party now) system. I agree. It is shame that people who voted from Nader took votes away from Kerry in the last election, etc. I also have a problem with our court system. I believe there should be a panel of judges to judge criminals not citizens, ie: O.J. results. As for teaching Creationism in schools, do not fear, it will not happen. My problem comes with the teachings of theories in Science class: Evolution and Big Bang are just that, theories, I think it's fair to add Creationism to it. I fear it not. Here is blog from a woman(45), I met at Hillary's HQ, a feminist who after graduating from U.C. San Diego adopted two black toddlers, they were brothers and she wanted to keep them together. It is worth reading: http://www.thesisterhoodofthetravelingpantsuit.blogspot.com/

I will not be pushing McCain/Palin on anybody here, so I'll probably not interrupt the Obama fest anymore. I consider myself an Independent now. Yesterday, I was in the car all day. I listened to POTUS 08 and was able to hear several interviews with people who know Palin. I found one of the interviews to be incredibly interesting. They interviewed an old "friend" of hers (more like a mentor)--an independent candidate who ran for governor in 2002. The following is what he had to say about Palin: Apparently, Palin was an active Mom who, after college, worked as a commercial fisher (and union member, which I just can't get over....that this woman said, in a room full of Ohio Republicans--"My husband is a proud member of the United Steel Workers Union."). After she had her kids, she became actively involved in PTA. In 1992, she was elected to the city council, where she served for several years before running for Mayor. She served as Mayor for several years before deciding to run for Lt. Governor in 2002. This guy telling the story ran for Governor in 2002, but lost to the sitting Republican Governor, who was a total crook. Anyway, she lost the race for Lt. Governor, but was immediately appointed to head The Oil and Gas Energy Commission (or something like that). Apparently, the head of the Republican National Committee in Alaska also wanted to be on that commission and had promised that if he was appointed to do so, he would stop working as the head of the state party (the commission was suppo ed to be non-partisan, as AK is 51% independent voters). Anyway, he was ultimately appointed as well, but continued working as the party leader. Palin complained and he said that he would only do so after hours. At some point, Palin discovered that he was still working as the Party leader on state time. She confronted him and told him that he needed to stop. He blew her off. She confront the Governor of AK (Republican--long time Governor) and he blew her off. When no one would take a stand, she resigned her position and filed an ethics complaint with the Attorney General's office (as run by Republicans). About two weeks later, she received notice from the Attorney General that she was being investigated And that they were going to fine her and potentially prosecute her (for something unrelated, but obviously as a threat considering that she was going after the head of the Party for ethics violation). She contacted her friend, the guy telling this story, and he generated a letter and sent it to the Attorney General. The letter basically said that they expe ted an investigation to be conducted of the Governor and the RNC head, and that it needed to be done within ten days. The days later, they received notice that an investigation had been filed. Ultimately, Palin pushed the issue forward until the Attorney General and the head of the RNC were forced to resign. She then ran for Governor in 2006 and kicked the sitting governor's ass, as she ran on a ticket of reform--to get the corrupt Republican politicians out of Alaska. She told Republican Senator Stevens to take his ear marks (potentially corrupt---he has been charged with crimes and I have no doubt that we can thank Palin for helping in that investigation), as she was not interested in his "bridge to nowhere". She also took on the big oil companies and imposed the highest wind fall profit tax on them that has ever been recorded in AK history. She took the money that she received back from the oil companies and returned it to residents of AK in the form of rebate checks. She also suspended the gas tax. She worked with Democrats to get a natural gas pipeline bill passed and negotiated with an energy company OUTSIDE of AK (which is unheard of, apparently) to get the contract. Her first day in office, she put the Governor's plan on ebay and sold it. She felt it was excessive and not what the people wanted their taxpayer dollars to go toward. She got rid of her chauffeur (but found him a job somewhere else) and said that she would drive around the state on her own. Since then, she's attended all functions and appointments in her VW Jetta (yes, a non-American car company...and she's a Republican who was a member of the United Steel Workers Union). She also got rid of her domestic staff (but again, found them all jobs), as she said that she had four kids and "how could they learn how to work" if they had someone else taking care of the house. "We ate macaroni and cheese before, and we'll eat it after." While she is a social conservative, according to several people who were interviewed, she hasn't governed that way, per se. She is pro-life (I am pro-choice, up to the first trimester) and like HRC and Obama, believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. However, when the state attempted to pass legislation banning domestic benefits to same sex partners, she issued her only veto thus far. So while, she does seem to have issues that she stands for, she seems more concerned in what the people want, versus what she wants personally. She seems a lot like McCain in that respect. She's obviously not afraid of her party considering that she's spent the first two years in the Governor's office fighting them. She's pro-labor, which is about as blue collar Democrat as it gets. It's not just that she's pro-labor, she actually cited her husband as a "proud member of the USWO" (the only time during the speech yesterday when they're were no cheers in the audience). I get the feeling from what people were saying that she's more concerned with reaching compromise and making sure corruption stays out of political office than anything else. She is being pursued right now for allegedly committing some type of "ethics violation" regarding her former brother in law and his being suspended from the state police. Thus far, there hasn't been any evidence to prove that she had anything to do with it, but of course, "someone" is paying $100,000 to have an investigation done on her. Something tells me that, considering all the enemies she's made in the Republican Party over the last two years, there are a few people out there who would like to see her go down. Ironically, all of them are Republicans, including her state Senator Stevens, who is currently facing criminal prosecutions. Democrats should be jumping up and down at this (and apparently they are in AK), but ironically, they aren't. Yesterday, a Democratic female congress person was interviewed on CNN. She obviously didn't know anything about Palin, as she said that Palin was part of the "old Republican corruption in Alaska", and that "she's just part of the same old politics." It really pissed me off, to be honest, as there is absolutely nothing about this woman that seems "normal" in politics. I might not agree with her on all the issues, but more importantly, I respect her and from everything I've heard, it appears that she is trustworthy. Yes, I'd preferred to vote for HRC in 2008, but I'm happy to vote for McCain/Palin so that I may vote for HRC in 2012.

My friend who adopted the boys is white, forgot to mention it. I want to leave with a bang: http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/08/30/saturday-truth-and-consequences/

G'Day there Just tuned in...and have been skimming... Forgive me...I may be ignorant to US politics...but am I right in assuming there are politians who are against abortion, but in favour of the death penalty?? whaaat? That doesnt compute. I do wonder what actually goes on in these politicians heads...do they actually believe in this stuff, or is it just a game they all play to get elected...a game they all play that screws with peoples' lives... As I get older, I get more cynical....it sems no matter what side of the fence you sit polically, we are all just pawns in their games...and ambitions... Perhaps they all go into this with stars in their eye..but once they get a glimpse of that pension fund...it all goes out the window... Anyway...enough with the gloom and doom...what I really wanted to say to the anti-choice brigade was, HANDS OFF MY CHOICE TO MAKE MY OWN DECISIONS!!! There...sorry if I offended anyone...but had to get that off my chest... Those anti abortionists...anti choice peopel make me want to scream!! ave a good weekend...!! xx

(Moon) so I'll probably not interrupt the Obama fest anymore. Wot Obamafest? I know I don't moderate this conference but it would appear that, rather than discuss an issue, the person stating a position was attacked. Not the way it should be done. If you don't agree, state why objectively. (LindaMc).but am I right in assuming there are politians who are against abortion, but in favour of the death penalty?? whaaat? That doesnt compute. Of course. Hypocrisy runs rampant. However, it is possible to hold seemingly conflicting views simultaneously if one sees abortion as the killing of an innocent, while the death penalty is for someone far from innocent. Me own view is entirely consistent and can't be faulted as hypocritical in any way. ;-)

I guess, Moon, that you must believe that Gravity doesn't really exist and that it shouldn't be taught in Science class either, since it, as ALL Scientific principals are, is titled "the THEORY of Gravity". Please do not allow the fundamentalist's silly and trite argument that "Evolution is a theory" confuse you. Evolution is a scientific theory supported by a shiteload of factual evidence. As is gravity. Evolution and gravity are both real. You may choose to believe that human beings have not evolved from ape-like creatures but the DNA evidence proves that belief to be entirely wrong. We ARE ape-like creatures. Our closest relative on the planet is the bonobo, with whom we share 98.4% of our DNA - that is, 98.4% of our DNA is IDENTICAL to that of the bonobo. That's not a heckuva lot of difference. We're obviously related. Regardless of what you want to believe. Although I think you have every right to believe in whatever mythology you wish to, I do not believe you (or anyone) should be allowed to teach this mythology in schools as FACT or SCIENCE. It isn't either of those things, and I do not want America's children being lied to by their teachers as part of the curriculum. Palin is being investigated, according to Wikipedia and other sources, for firing the AK Public Safety Commissioner for not firing her ex-brother-in-law. While the firing of her ex-bil seems to have justification, there does seem to be some question as to whether she should have fired his boss. She has a history of firing people who don't "play along" with her. In fact, as Mayor of Wasilla, she fired the Chief of Police for supporting an opposing candidate. He sued, but his suit was dismissed when the judge ruled that Palin had the right under state law to fire city employees, even for political reasons. So - she fired him for political reasons. Seems to me to be the same ol', same ol' from another Republican. They do what they do for political reasons, and not for the good of their constituency. All that said, she does seem to have done some good in AK. But her experience in governing is very minimal and I truly fear for the country if McCain were to get into power and kick the bucket. It really does send a shiver of fear down my spine. I'm not a big fan of Obama - I would have preferred to see Clinton nominated/elected. Given that hasn't happened, however, I am utterly opposed to a moment longer of Republican rule. The rest of the world is watching, and if another Republican were to get into office, I think they might all close the borders to Americans.... ;-) (Just kidding, but really, the integrity of the US is very much in question these days!) Dorine, any political system anywhere in the world is influenced by money and special interests. It is the nature of the beast. But at least with preferential voting, third party and independent candidates can run and get elected because voting for one of them doesn't give advantage to a party/candidate whom you do not wish to vote for. Please read about preferential voting to understand further: Preferential voting

had the right under state law to fire city employees, even for political reasons Isn't that against a Federal Law of some sort? Ok, I must admit, I must look up what a bonobo is. ;-)

Sorry - guess I hang out with too many nerds. *lol* Bonobos are also known as "pygmy chimps" (though they are not a subspecies of common chimps, but a separate species in their own right). They are the closest biological/genetic relative to humans currently living on the planet.

GOP cites Palin's skill, but how relevant is it? By TED ANTHONY, AP National Writer Sun Aug 31, 4:56 PM ET ST. PAUL, Minn. - Wait, now, say the Republicans. You think that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin lacks experience? You think that at 44, with less than two years running the nation's northernmost state, she doesn't have what it takes yet to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? Pshaw. What about the fact that she stood up to embattled Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens? What about her oversight of her state's National Guard contingent? Her experience as a mother? And, hey � what about the fact that she runs a state that happens to be very close to Russia? Each of these characteristics has been cited by a Republican since Friday as an ingredient in John McCain's conclusion that Palin is qualified to become vice president of the United States. "She has experience not only in politics but in life," former Republican Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee said Sunday on CNN. None of this suggests that Sarah Palin is not a skilled, competent, multitalented public servant. But it means that, in the face of fierce Democratic assertions that she is too green to be elevated to vice president, the GOP is looking for whatever it can to show that's not the case and to bolster her credentials, particularly in national security. And in some cases, the responses from Republicans who showed up on the Sunday morning talk-show circuit to promote Palin's qualifications are unexpected, to say the least. Thompson: "She's a mother of five children. ... And she has more experience than Barack Obama." Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina: "Governor Palin took on Ted Stevens. If she can take him on, she can take on the Russians." Stevens, a Republican senator, is facing corruption charges and running for re-election. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty: "Palin is commander-in-chief of the Alaskan National Guard." The state's Guard has about 4,000 members. From McCain's wife, Cindy, came a geographic assessment of qualification: "Alaska is the closest part of our continent to Russia. So, it's not as if she doesn't understand what's at stake here." What these traits say about Palin's ability to serve as vice president or, in an emergency, as president is not entirely clear. But the flurry of comments by leading Republicans hint at a flood-the-zone strategy when it comes to Palin, whose gender, Christian faith and conservative chops infused a lively crackle into John McCain's campaign during the weekend between the two national conventions. The GOP has also implied that Democratic reactions to Palin's selection are sexist, particularly since, they contend, her time as Alaska's governor gives her the edge over Barack Obama in executive experience. Obama, 47, has spent almost 12 years in office, all of it as a lawmaker � eight years as an Illinois state senator and nearly four as a U.S. senator. Palin's total is 12 � she spent 10 as a city council member and mayor, and nearly two as governor. "If they want to go down that route, in all candor, she has far more experience than Senator Obama does," McCain said Sunday in St. Louis. Democrats insist sexism isn't at play. "It's not the woman issue at all," former Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota said Sunday on CNN. "There are a lot of other Republican women who could have filled this role if that is what he was looking for" � such as Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," saw a kindred spirit in Palin's experience as mayor, despite the fact that her town, Wasilla, has about 7,000 people and his had nearly 8 million when 9/11 happened. "Maybe it's my own background as a mayor and United States attorney, but this whole idea of executive experience to me would really qualify her," Giuliani said. He dismissed questions about the size of the town she ran. "You know why? She had to make decisions. All Sen. Obama has had to do is talk. That's all he does." Some of the comments seemed a bit non-sequitur. Russia, for example. Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard, considers Palin "extremely responsive and smart" and says she is in charge when it comes to in-state services, such as emergencies and natural disasters where the National Guard is the first responder. But, in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday, he said he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations. Stephen C. Donehoo, managing director of Kissinger McLarty Associates in Washington, and former military intelligence officer specializing in Latin America: "No doubt the campaign staff have her hooked up to a fire hose on foreign policy issues," said Stephen C. Donehoo, managing director of Kissinger McLarty Associates in Washington and a former military intelligence officer. "No doubt they fear a debate with Joe Biden that touches foreign affairs," Donehoo said. "My guess is Graham and (Joe) Lieberman are doing a lot of tutoring." Republican Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota appears to have no such worries, given what he considers to be Obama's lack of experience. "The president sets the tone," Coleman said. "The experience issue is on the other side. The No. 1 guy there is the guy without the experience." ___ Contributing to this report were AP writers Tom Raum, Jim Kuhnhenn, Glen Johnson and Nestor Ikeda in St. Paul and Anne Sutton in Juneau, Alaska. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080831/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_palin_grasping_at_straws;_ylt=AtpVkym6dQviIdp9N1d21kqs0NUE

I read about this the other day, with more specifics into what was edited, how and when, but I can't remember exactly where I read it. Sarah Palin Wikipedia edits--fast and furious By Natalie Weinstein, CNET Sat Aug 30, 11:13 PM ET Sarah Palin's life has been abuzz since she was officially selected as John McCain's running mate on Friday. Her Wikipedia page has, likewise, been awash with activity. After well over a thousand edits were made to her page that day, the Wikipedia editors raised the page's protection level to restrict who can make changes, according to the San Jose Mercury News. Meanwhile, The Washington Post reported evidence via Cyveillance that in the days and hours before Friday's announcement, Palin's page was being edited more frequently than those of other potential vice presidential candidates. A clue, perhaps? Her page was specifically garnering the attention of someone identified as "Young Trigg," who made numerous edits deemed favorable by a Wikipedia editor. There has already been much speculation as to who "Young Trigg" may be, especially considering Palin's youngest child is named Trig. Wikipedia does have specific rules regarding conflict of interest. However, all it will take to solve the mystery is for someone to track down the identity of "Young Trigg." On a related note, Palin is trending No. 3 and No. 4 on Twitter at the moment. http://news.yahoo.com/s/cnet/20080831/tc_cnet/83011357831002959838;_ylt=AqPTVrmCWSnSDg6nT0d6Fk2s0NUE

(Moon) so I'll probably not interrupt the Obama fest anymore It's only a perceived "Obamafest" since there seems to be only one person with a significantly different viewpoint willing to post opinions. I applaud you for it. I have to admit I've learned an quite a lot of new things about you in the last week. I, myself, welcome all viewpoints, to be discussed in a rational, adult manner. In fact, I'm intrigued by varying viewpoints. I think it's a shame that people with opposing views don't seem comfortable with posting, though I do know some of their opinions and views privately. The way I look at it, if these views are something you feel strongly about and are personally comfortable with those opinions, it shouldn't be a problem to support your positions publicly as well. Having the courage of your convictions in essence. To each his own I suppose.

Having the courage of your convictions in essence While being open minded of course. :-) Good day, ladies! I'm off to the US Open again. The shots from LA of the hurricane coming ashore are frightening. Can't believe all these reporters, including Anderson Cooper, are standing out in the middle of all that. A camera showing what's going on out a window would work fine for me. I don't need the commentary.

It's what every Darwinist loves to profess. Turn on the television, read the magazines, and you will be bombarded with "scientific information" regarding the similarities between apes (i.e. monkeys, baboons, etc.) and human beings. Many scientists have, in fact, devoted decades of their lives to studying the behavior of these animals, all with the idea that, yes, these are indeed grandma and grandpa. The notable stories of Jane Goodall and Dianne Fossey living with chimps and gorillas fascinate the public, sparking our minds to believe that the thoughts, behaviors, and communications of these animals are not all that far from our own. Genetic developments in the scientific community have helped reinforce these ideas, or so it seems. What is, however, the truth of the matter? Are we really so similar to our furry friends? "We also share about 50% of our DNA with bananas and that doesn't make us half bananas, either from the waist up or the waist down." [1] Steve Jones Scientist, Evolutionist An exceptional quote to begin with, revealing that specific, pinpointed similarities between two separate species can mean very little. Baboons, according to research, share 90% of their DNA with human beings. Does this, therefore, make them 90% human? The answer, in light of this quote, is absolutely not. Dr. Barney Maddox, a leading genetic genome researcher, also noted concerning man/monkey genetic differences: "Now the genetic difference between human and his nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6%. That doesn't sound like much, but calculated out, that is a gap of at least 48,000,000 nucleotides, and a change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal; there is no possibility of change." Human Genome Project, Quantitative A Disproof of Evolution, CEM facts sheet. Cited in Doubts about Evolution? And as a writer for the Smithsonian concedes: "just a few percentage points can translate into vast, unbridgeable gaps between species." [2] Simply stated, if we were to take this idea of similarities to determine which animal is most like us, we would come up with dire results. Take, for instance, our number of chromosomes (46). Two of our closest ancestors would be the tobacco plant (48) and the bat (44). Furthermore, because the chromosomes in living matter are one of the most complex bits of matter in the known universe, it would seem logical to assume that organisms with the least number of chromosomes are the end result of millions of years of evolution experimenting to increase complexity in living organisms. Therefore, this would reveal that we started from penicillium with only 2 chromosomes, and slowly evolved into fruit flies (8), and after many more millions of years we became tomatoes (12), and so on, until we reached the human stage of 46 chromosomes. Millions of years from now, if we're fortunate, we may become the ultimate life form, a fern, with a total of 480 chromosomes. Or, again, we could examine the human eye. Anatomically, it is most similar to that of an octopus'. Of course, the theory that the human eye evolved was directly commented by Charles Darwin himself when he said, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [3] Another argument in relation to man/monkey similarity has to do with language. A chimpanzee named Washoe and a bonobo named Kanzi "have become famous for their ability to respond to human language in surprisingly complex ways." [4] In contrast, however, Robert Seyfarth, one of the most dedicated primate researchers in the world, says, "You can teach a bear to ride a bicycle in the circus, but it doesn't tell you much about what bears learn to do in the wild." And lastly, "even in the laboratory, no animal has attained anything like true language." [4] Regarding Seyfarth, he and his wife, who have performed many notable experiments with vervet monkeys and baboons, came to the conclusion after their latest work that the limitations on intelligence and communication in monkeys are severe.[4] For example, foraging baboons from a troop who have separated themselves so that they're on opposite sides of a forest are known to make barking calls, which have long been thought to be calls of contact to one another. Experiments have revealed, however, that the monkeys are only mourning because they're lost. "...monkeys don't actually recognize that other monkeys have minds," say Seyfarth and his wife.[4] Humans can convey their thoughts and emotions to one another, so that one can sympathize with another who is hurting. Monkeys cannot. While chimps can grieve and certainly show emotions, they do not appear to sympathize with other chimps who are grieved. Conclusion Look into the matter yourself. You are your own scientist, and can, with proper study, come to scientific truths firsthand. Don't take their word for something, and don't take our word for something. Truth is truth, fact is fact, and patiently lies waiting, like a fossil, to be discovered. NOTABLE QUOTES: "Modern apes, for instance, seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin of modern humans - of upright, naked, tool-making, big-brained beings - is, if we are to be honest with ourselves, an equally mysterious matter." Dr. Lyall Watson, Anthropologist 'The water people'. Science Digest, vol. 90, May 1982, p. 44. "Amid the bewildering array of early fossil hominoids, is there one whose morphology marks it as man's hominid ancestor? If the factor of genetic variablitity is considered, the answer appears to be no." Robert B. Eckhardt, Ph.D. Professor of Anthropology, Penn State University 'Population genetics and human origins'. Scientific American, vol 226(1), January 1972, p. 94. "As I have implied, students of fossil primates have not been distinguished for caution when working within the logical constraints of their subject. The record is so astonishing that it is legitmate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all." Lord Solly Zuckerman, M.A., M.D., D.Sc. Beyond the Ivory Tower, Taplinger Pub.Co., New York, 1970, p.64.

You Can't Make a Monkey Out of Us http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2003/03/57892

I don't live my life in Absolutes. I am Pro-Choice up to the first trimester. After that, I am Pro-Adoption. LOL, I feel like I should be running for office now. I do have plenty of opinions on the Economy and Foreign Affairs. I would start by paying more attention to South and Central America and less attention to Africa. Meow.

And don't get me started on Islam.

And don't get me started on Islam. Believe me, Moon, I know better. ;-) "We also share about 50% of our DNA with bananas and that doesn't make us half bananas, either from the waist up or the waist down." [1] I'm sorry, Moon, but.....LOL!! That's a new one on me. I'd bet some men (or their parts ;-)) have been compared to bananas, but not sure if that's good or bad. ;-D

(Moon) There are too many ignorant young girls out there... (Me) Perhaps if the administration had spent more effort and money on promoting safe sex rather than promoting abstinence (and trying to push religion into it through the faith based programs), which was shown to be a failure, there might be less of this problem. You know a friend keeps telling me Palin is the gift that keeps on giving......I'm starting to agree: So much for abstinence-only education Mon Sep 01, 2008 at 10:35:23 AM PDT http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/1/13540/20367/584/582167 And in all fairness, the highlighted passage above about teenage girls being ignorant, I mean it in the sense of the word that they are lacking knowledge, not being mean and calling them stupid. Proper education about sex goes a long way, or better than "praying" or encouraging they won't and don't do anything at all. I'd call the people espousing that viewpoint ignorant, in the not so nice way.

I think she wrote this for some people here. Really looking forward to the debate. I'm certain they're tutoring her 24 hrs a day and I do believe she's no dummy. The Lazio Fallacy by MissLaura Mon Sep 01, 2008 at 07:45:23 AM PDT One piece of "common wisdom" that's emerged quickly since John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate is that Joe Biden had better be careful not to look like he's beating up on a pretty girl by, you know, knowing more than she does and showing it. Rick Lazio's name is inevitably mentioned, because obviously if Biden knows more than Palin, it will be equivalent to physically getting up in her face. At the same time I'm outraged that the groundwork is being laid for the notion that a woman shouldn't be expected to hold her own in what is, effectively, a job interview, I don't doubt that the danger of this is real for Biden. Why? Because the traditional media has decided it's a landmine for him. That means that, come the vice-presidential debate, this is what they'll be conveying: Sarah Palin has not one shred of a clue about foreign policy, agricultural policy, urban policy? Everyone knew that. But did you check out how Biden was rude enough to make that obvious even to people who know less than Palin? Damn, what a sexist pig that guy is. We saw in the first days of reporting on the DNC exactly how pervasive a media narrative can be even in the face of contradictory facts. If you can't find meaningful division among Democrats, ignore the fact that the people claiming to be PUMAs are actually Republicans. So it would go with Biden debating Palin. So here's my problem with this. How fucking insulting to women and to the nation is this line of thinking? The view of women the pundits and reporters are taking here is that we will rise up en masse in outrage that a man who actually knows more than a woman dares to demonstrate it? Not, mind you, that we'll be faced with a woman who actually knows her stuff and can't get a man to acknowledge her expertise -- no one thinks that's going to happen -- but that we'll be offended on behalf of our gender to have one individual woman's ignorance pointed out. At the same time as the traditional media story will have women as a gender supporting Palin out of their disappointment that Hillary Clinton is not the Democratic nominee, that same story will have women as a gender ignoring the fact that Hillary did pretty damn well in debates against not one but several men, including the aforementioned Joe Biden. This is how dumb they (the women among them included) think we are, that we won't be able to see the massive logical fallacy they're creating out of whole cloth and attributing to us. A few women will fall for that line of bull. But proportionally, fewer women than major media reporters will do so. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/1/10451/48394/398/581344

Well, Moon, if you refuse to acknowledge scientific facts, there really isn't anything I'm going to say that's going to convince you that you are closely related to apes. The fact remains that we are. All you need to do is to look at a gorilla or a bonobo to see that human beings are indeed, very closely related to them. But people who refuse to acknowledge the truth of this, and who hold onto their mythological beliefs that human beings are "special", or that we (humans) co-existed with dinosaurs will persist in those beliefs. And that's fine, but I don't want those superstitions taught as "science" or "facts" in our schools. If we start teaching Christian beliefs in our schools, we certainly don't have any basis for preventing the teaching of Islamic beliefs in our schools, either. That's just how that cookies crumbles. Personally, I don't want either one taught outside of religion or mythology classes. Your mileage may vary. As for Palin, I think she may be turning out to be just a bit more than the Republican Party bargained for. *lol* There's a rumour going around that "her" four-month-old Down Syndrome child is actually her daughter's. I don't know enough about the whole thing to guess if that's true, but that rumour is what forced her to come out with the story that her (17-year-old, unmarried) daughter is now pregnant.

I read about that other rumor last night. It seemed so far fetched, but if even parts of the story are true, many questions are begged. From what I've been reading, they vetted her in the barest of terms it seems. McCain only spoke to her once, maybe twice, for an extremely short period beforehand. Scary. If we start teaching Christian beliefs in our schools In our public schools. I went to private Catholic school through high school, so I don't have a problem with that. But then I'm also not a creationist. Hell, I'm not even a believer of organized religion at this point.

I'd like to ask the pro-lifers/pro-adoption advocates to consider this scenario and let me know what you think (even though I know I'll get one response if I'm lucky). A 30 year old woman with a 10 year history of significant psychiatric issues (including deep depression), on psych meds, becomes pregnant. During the pregnancy, she has to be taken off her meds, but in order to manage her depression, must undergo ECT (electroshock therapy). Up until the pregnancy, she was living at what was essentially a group home for those with psychiatric issues. She was kicked out of the home when she became pregnant, ending up in a shelter, where she returned to with the baby when she was discharged from the hospital. A visiting nurse was requested for both upon discharge. She has no medical insurance, but applies for Medicaid to cover medical services outside of the hospital after the baby is born, a time consuming process requiring the gathering of quite a number of supporting documents to determine eligibility with no guarantees that she will be accepted to the program. There was obviously no abortion and the baby was not given up for adoption, both for unknown reasons. My questions are: 1. The mother did not abort the baby, considered the (morally) correct course of action by some. How does going through and having the baby benefit the baby and/or the mother? Or even society? 2. The mother did not give the child up for adoption, a valid alternative to aborting or keeping the baby. How does this benefit the baby and/or the mother? Or even society? 3. What options do you think she and the baby have? Should have? What if her Medicaid is not approved? Discuss. :-)

Oh and I forgot to say, she expressed that she did not want to have a baby, but obviously didn't practice abstinence or safe sex.

And in all fairness, the highlighted passage above about teenage girls being ignorant, I mean it in the sense of the word that they are lacking knowledge, not being mean and calling them stupid. Even though I didn't make the comment in the first place. ;-)

Yes, thanks for clarifying Dorine: I am speaking only of public schools, of course. I myself went to Catholic school for seven years, and received religious education in school, which I had/have no problem with, since it was a private, religious school. If you want your children to be taught religion in school, please feel free to enroll them in a private school. I do not wish to have religious beliefs taught as science, however, in public schools. Even in private school, it's really inappropriate to teach children that biblical representations of the "creation of human beings" is anything resembling science. But really, if you pay someone to teach your child that in a private school, I guess that's your problem (and your poor child's, who is receiving a second-class education if they are taught that). I'll tell you: the "Creation Museum" that was opened in Kentucky last year makes the US the laughingstock of the world. You should see what my friends here in Australia have said about this place. What a joke. Truly, Moon, the so-called "science" of creationism is basically non-existent.

As I've said I don't live my life by Absolutes. Fossils have been found of yew trees with dinosaur fossils dating back millions of years. It turns out that the Yew tree has not evolved, it is precisely as it is today. It was born perfect? With no need to evolve? Trees are living organisms. I've also never stated that the Theory of Creation should be taught in schools, I do consider it a Theory and many theories are taught in science class, it would just be one more. Islam is not a theory it is a fallacy (waving to Dorine). I also went to Catholic school and was a rebel there as well with my constant controversial questions. I drove one particular priest to almost want to strangle me, LOL! Never fear Jane, things don't change that quickly. Creationism won't be added to the school curriculum. Roe vs Wade will not be overturned either. From Nature Mag: "Gravitational Theory" is our explanation of the phenomenon we know as 'gravity'. It is a law of gravity that if you drop an object here, it will fall to the ground, but it is Gravitational Theory that explains how and why this occurs. Gravity is a law, but we understand and explain it through a theory. It is both ; ) Laws are NOT theories. A law is a statement or principle that 'describes' a phenomenon, Theories are coherent, well-substantiated explanations.

Dorine, that example of a deranged troubled woman is disturbing. The woman was basically abandoned. She should have been helped and counseled into giving her baby up for adoption.

http://partisanreport.com/blog/2008/09/01/loony-leftist-on-the-attack-against-palin-and-its-personal/ On Sarah's pregnancy, some very funny comments.

Hey! Posting pics can be fun! :-)

LOL!!

To change from politics for a while, I thought this was an interesting article regarding women in the workplace from the NYT: Girl Power at School, but Not at the Office By HANNAH SELIGSON Published: August 30, 2008 I WAS born in 1982 � about 20 years after the women�s rights movement began. Growing up in what many have called a post-feminist culture, I did not really experience institutional gender bias. �Girl power� was celebrated, and I felt that all doors were open to me. When I was in college, the female students excelled academically, sometimes running laps around their male counterparts. Women easily ascended to school leadership positions and prestigious internships. In my graduating class (more than half of which was female) there was a feeling of camaraderie, a sense that we were helping each other succeed. Then I left the egalitarianism of the classroom for the cubicle, and everything changed. The realization that the knowledge and skills acquired in school don�t always translate at the office is something that all college graduates, men and women, must face. But for women, I have found, the adjustment tends to be much harder. It was certainly hard for me � I lasted only nine months in my first job out of college. Inspired by my own rocky entrance into the work world, I decided to interview other young women and discovered that many of them, like me, were facing a steep workplace learning curve. What was it, I wondered, that was making our first career steps so wobbly when we had been so accomplished and self-assured in school? Every workplace is different, but certain patterns began to emerge. I experienced and heard of instances when some women, instead of helping a new female colleague, tried to undermine her. Rather than giving �the new girl� the tools to succeed, they might try to sabotage her advancement. I saw some men, raised in a different era, who refused to take young women seriously, focused on their appearance and gave them the least desirable assignments. Even in this day and age, I saw women becoming �assistant-ized�� saddled with all the coffee runs and photocopying. Some workplaces are more sexist than others. A woman should never accept a job offer without first finding out whether the odds are already stacked against her. This background check will assess how a potential employer treats its female employees, how many women are in leadership positions and whether there is a history of pay discrimination or sexual harassment. But outside forces are only part of the story. I have also seen young women � myself included � getting in the way of their own success. I have found that we need to build a new arsenal of skills to mitigate some of our more �feminine� tendencies. Having lived in a cocoon of equality in college, we may have neglected these vital, real-world skills. In my own case, I realized that I needed to develop a thick skin, feel comfortable promoting myself, learn how to negotiate, stop being a perfectionist and create a professional network � abilities that men are just more likely to have already. The more traditionally �feminine� trait of sensitivity, while often appreciated, is not always an asset in the work world. I have spent too much time being rattled by terse e-mail from editors, agents who have told me that I�d never get a book deal, and bosses who have berated me as not being �detail-oriented.� I think that in order to break through any kind of glass ceiling, or simply to get through the day, you have to become impervious to the daily gruffness that�s a part of any job. I used to think that perfection was the pathway to success. Not so, according to women I have interviewed who have reached the apex of their professions. Rather, it can lead to paralysis. Women, I have found, can let perfectionism stop them from speaking up or taking risks. For men, especially if they are thick-skinned, the thought of someone telling them �no� tends not to be viewed as earth-shattering. One tactic I�ve found useful in getting over the perfectionist tendency is a shock therapy called soliciting feedback. Not only does it demystify what your boss thinks about you, but it also gives you the data to become a more valuable employee. The other dose of shock therapy I�ve undergone is reprogramming my brain to think that, yes, girls do brag. I�ve indoctrinated myself with the idea that my job is a two-part process. One part is actually doing the work and the second part is talking about it, preferably in bottom-line terms. The old-boys� club proves that men have long known that a professional network is imperative to success. Women don�t have as much of a tradition of business networking (�Do you want to go grab a beer?� doesn�t quite roll off our tongues) and, understandably, they may feel awkward or clueless about how to do it. I can tell you that it doesn�t work to go up to someone and say, �Will you be my mentor?� That�s the workplace equivalent of �Will you be my boyfriend?� A more organic approach � saying something like, �Can I pick your brain about some ways to transition out of my entry-level position in the next year?� � has been much more effective for me. Young women also need to learn how to speak salary, a language that many men already seem to know. Coming into the work force, I thought that, just as my professor had given me the grade I deserved on my political science midterm, my company would pay me what I �deserved.� RECENTLY I had a conversation with a male friend, a reporter in his mid-20s, about how hard it is to ask for money and negotiate for raises. He looked puzzled that I�d have an aversion to something that he does with ease, telling me: �When I want a raise, I just ask for it. And even if they say no, I�ll keep asking for it.� The American Association of University Women found that men who are a year out of college make 20 percent more in weekly pay than their female co-workers do. Why? Because my friend and scores of other young men understand the central tenet of a bigger paycheck: ask and you shall receive. The pay disparity speaks to a larger issue that women, coming directly out of the colleges that nurtured and rewarded them and gave them every advantage, may have trouble grasping. For me, it was crystallized in a comment made to me by Myra Hart, a retired senior faculty member at Harvard Business School who studies women as entrepreneurs: �By and large women believe that the workplace is a meritocracy, and it isn�t.� Hannah Seligson, a freelance journalist, is the author of �New Girl on the Job: Advice From the Trenches� (Citadel Press).

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/jobs/31pre.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&em

�Do you want to go grab a beer?� doesn�t quite roll off our tongues Speak for yourself, Hannah! Some of us know how to offer a guy a beer! ;-)

Here's a really interesting article about the possible financial implications for Americans of the upcoming election: Economic View

Thanks, Jane. I read that several days ago. Matter of fact, your posting it reminds me I wanted to send it to someone I know who has a degree in Economics and was curious what he thought of it, but I forgot to do it.

Dunno if you guys have heard about this, but apparently a couple of the Republican "talking heads" got caught on open mics they didn't realise were open... video clip from MSNBC (link pops up in new window)

And here's a rather droll, tongue-in-cheek commentary on the selection of Palin: John McCain, Hero

Here's the video with a transcript beneath it, which I was thankful for. I'm not in a noisefree environment and couldn't hear much of what was said clearly. http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/palin_means_its_over_peggy_noo.html

Oh. My. Goodness.

Just curious. I am watching coverage of the RNC on tv, and during Palin's acceptance speech, they keep showing this blonde woman next to Todd Palin. Who is that woman? Sorry to be so clueless, but I didn't hear her introduced, and I've not seen any graphics identifying her, but the tv crew seems to think she's quite important, as they keep showing shots of her reaction to the speech.

i actually didn't notice her. i was switching between that and the Williams sisters match.

but even when I did watch, i noticed the kids and dad...and boyfriend, but not her. Maybe Palin's sister?

Are you referring to Cindy McCain?

I started to post her then deleted because I didn't notice in shots of her she was near Todd. Just Guiliani.

Ah, just saw a clip. Yes, it was Cindy McCain.

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer 44 minutes ago ST. PAUL, Minn. - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters held back little Wednesday as they issued dismissive attacks on Barack Obama and flattering praise on her credentials to be vice president. In some cases, the reproach and the praise stretched the truth. [Ed note - Don't they all on both sides stretch the truth.] Some examples: PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere." THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere." PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform � not even in the state senate." THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation. PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars." THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded. Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families. He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise. MCCAIN: "She's been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America's energy supply ... She's responsible for 20 percent of the nation's energy supply. I'm entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson. THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state � by population. MCCAIN: "She's the commander of the Alaska National Guard. ... She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC. THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations. FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States." THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor's election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries. FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "We need change, all right � change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington � throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin." THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check;_ylt=AjQBP62xpuD7MnlCEKzQthSs0NUE

I started reading this Alaskan blogger a few days ago. He's quite amusing. Starts out with Guiliani's speech and on to Palin. http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/here-we-go-rnc-watch-open-thread/

From an AP report, Peggy Noonan trying to "CYA" over her "It's over" remark off camera on the live mic. UPDATE: Noonan tries to explain her remarks, and says that what's "over" isn't, she meant, McCain's campaign, but that what's over is the truth to the belief that "whatever the base of the Republican party thinks is what America thinks."

Just ran across her whole explanation of what she said: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122044753790594947.html?mod=todays_columnists

I thought she spoke very well last night. I am looking forward to the debates. From the Wall Street Journal: Focus Turns to Palin Record Governor Pushed Conservative Agenda, but Showed Flexibility http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122048513733097089.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news

If we start teaching Christian beliefs in our schools In our public schools. Unfortunately, the Chicago Board of Education has been taking over parochial schools that the Archdiocese was about to close and turning them into "charter" schools. A masquerade. Public funding of faith-based schools. http://www.substancenews.net/issues/2007/november2007/articles/charter_news/november2007_chicago_news_cics_security.html An outrage to say the least. For me, it was crystallized in a comment made to me by Myra Hart, a retired senior faculty member at Harvard Business School who studies women as entrepreneurs: �By and large women believe that the workplace is a meritocracy, and it isn�t.� Truer words were never spoken. Nothing has changed. Now getting on the more pressing discussion (I watched Sarah Palin's speech this morning, as I wasn't home last night) (Sarah) during Palin's acceptance speech, they keep showing this blonde woman next to Todd Palin. My favorite images were of Cindy holding Sarah's baby during Rudy's speech. LOL! Maybe she should've pretended to be breast-feeding him. ;-) Regardless, Sarah Palin gave a really good speech last night. I'd heard she was articulate and she does know how to deliver her lines to utmost effect.

I, too, am looking forward to the debates. She is articulate, yes. I had to LOL at Todd shoveling the baby into one of the little one's arms so he could take his bow. the Chicago Board of Education has been taking over parochial schools that the Archdiocese was about to close and turning them into "charter" schools. A masquerade. Public funding of faith-based schools. So they're keeping the same curriculum, which in a parochial school usually includes some sort of religious classes? What exactly is a "charter" school? Is that like a magnet school?

(Dorine) So they're keeping the same curriculum, which in a parochial school usually includes some sort of religious classes? My understanding is that religious classes are held "before" or "after" official days. Whether they are mandatory I couldn't tell you. What exactly is a "charter" school? Is that like a magnet school? Big difference is that they are not part of the Chicago public school system, like a magnet school. Like parochial schools, their teachers are not union. Are their teachers nuns? I don't know.

BTW, charter schools exist in many other states and were proposed and endorsed by the AFT. They are regarded as alternative schools and have an accountability for results to the state. However, the difference is how the chartering authority is being used by the State of Illinois, with the mixture of public funding for what are, in essence, nothing more than parochial schools.

Last night's Daily Show had to be one of the best I've seen. The opening, which was from the Minneapolis airport/men's room through the contradictory statements (with video) by a number of people was a scream. Then there was the cartoon characterization of Fred Thompson as Foghorn Leghorn and Joe Lieberman as Droopy Dog (?)...really funny stuff. Definitely watch. All the vids are available below. You can stop with Newt. http://www.thedailyshow.com/

I thought last night's Daily Show was great, too, Karen, though I didn't catch the very beginning. I'll have to go and watch that vid - thanks for the link. Loved the cartoon comparisons, they were spot on and hilarious!

Palin in her speech last night: I said thanks, but no thanks to that bridge to nowhere. Well, after she was elected, and found that it was no longer politically expedient, anyway. :-/

BTW, charter schools exist in many other states and were proposed and endorsed by the AFT. They are regarded as alternative schools and have an accountability for results to the state. However, the difference is how the chartering authority is being used by the State of Illinois, with the mixture of public funding for what are, in essence, nothing more than parochial schools. Riiiight. I think these are the schools that Jeb Bush was trying to push in Florida using vouchers for kids in poorly rated public schools to go to private schools, or something like that. Or maybe not the same thing at all. I'd have to look it up. It's been too long that I've lived there and paid much attention to what goes on. I've watched a couple of the Daily Show videos. The one with the video bits on Palin and Newt. Very telling that interview with Newt IMO. Also, did anyone see the cuts to him on Sarah during her speech last night? I'd seen all those bits Jon used the comparisons on Palin. Onblogs that pointed them all out already. But more fun when put all together. I need to go back and watch the airport men's room bit and cartoon comparisons.

(Sarah) Well, after she was elected, and found that it was no longer politically expedient, anyway. :-/ But kept $27 million for it to build the road to nowhere. It ends where the bridge was to begin.

Why does Jane come up on the front page where the posted topic list is, but it's Sarah at the actual post? Which is it? Who are you? ;-)

I'm actually Sarah, but for some unknown reason, the darned message board software keeps insisting that I'm Jane!! Sorry about the confusion. Another background bit about Sarah Palin. She is in favour of "hunting" wolves and bears from helicopters in Alaska. Pretty disgusting practice. Here's a link, but please be warned - the video is really distressing if you love animals.

More background on Sarah Palin from a Wasilla resident who has known her since 1992 here

I'm actually Sarah, but for some unknown reason, the darned message board software keeps insisting that I'm Jane!! Sorry about the confusion. Two ways to fix that. Your name in any conference is first controlled by what' on your overall Preference page: http://www.spring.net/yapp-bin/restricted/userinfo Easy to fix; just make the change and hit the button. Don't worry if you get a strange result. It will have gone through. Way 2 is via the main page on an individual conference: http://www.spring.net/yapp-bin/restricted/browse/news/all/new Right there, toward the top, it says: "Your full name in this conference is" Whatever is in the box is how you will be shown. Change it there and hit the button on the right that says Change It. A person can post under different names in conferences.

Yeah, won't be watching that hunting video, but I heard about tha I actually just read that letter a couple of hours ago, but I couldn't verify the veracity of the person, so I didn't post about it myself. I try to vet potentially inflammatory and false information such as that letter (with apparently more effort than the McCain team! ;-)), or try to at least post it with a healthy dose of skepticism myself if I can't get much more info. There's no telling if that person is real or not. But some Alaska newspapers and a blog or two have been quite helpful with info.

Thanks for the advice, Karen. I'd already changed it in the first place (userinfo), but changing it through the second link appears to have done the trick. Dorine, that link I posted was from Anne Kilkenny, a woman who lives in Wasilla. As it says in her letter, you can verify that she is who she says she is by googling her name + Alaska. I did so. The letter appears to be 100% genuine. Here's another article which mentions Anne Kilkenny (though her name is misspelled - sloppy journalism, if you ask me!)

The second link overrides the first, but that is where it all starts.

Yeah, I knew who she was, though when I read it, I was thinking she could say she was anyone. And some of what she said wasn't news to me as I'd read it either at Alaskan news sites or elsewhere, but she did have some significant detail I hadn't seen yet. I'll admit I didn't read through the entire thing (it was long and I was trying to make dinner at the same time!). I'll finish it and check out your other article tomorrow. From what I've seen/read, Sarah Palin isn't the "innocent" hockey mom-of-a-special-needs-kid reformer she's been made out to be so far by some. Just like Obama isn't the pristine agent for change he's made out to be either. And it seems John McCain isn't the "maverick" he used to be either when I used to be a supporter of him years ago. And Joe Biden....no surprises there.

18 Million Silenced In Denver http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do;jsessionid=66F18E6004051BFAA7328A6F2FCEA993?diaryId=917 ARKANSAS: "I was so angry at the sham of a roll call that I just wanted it to be over... " "the last time I felt such unbearable group pressure was on a jury" " Obama representatives yelling, you'll be sorry" to "hold outs". It was brutal." An alternate kept calling out that the state voted 70% for Hillary yet recorded its 47 delegate votes for Obama - "how could that be?" CALIFORNIA: Chris Stampolis reports "I cast my signed vote for Hillary this morning. It will be added to the roll call count for California". Except, we may never know how California voted... Delegate Ray Panko reports that, "The California vote was about 230+ for Obama to 160+ for Clinton which did not reflect the state vote. The process was completely controlled by the DNC and the Obama campaign. They had us all vote at breakfast. They took our votes and tallied them. They did this to see how close the numbers would be between Obama and Clinton. The aim was to prevent the public from seeing the closeness of the race. California passed because the Obama/Dean,Nancy Church(DNC) told it to pass. It was a sham, show, farce, gimmick. Overall, the process was reprehensible. Each delegation was told a different story. No one was told the actual rules of the DNC which say delegates are required, in good conscience, to vote on the first ballot a vote that reflects the will of the voters who sent them to the convention. Gloria Allred was prevented from speaking to the California Hillary delegates to inform them of this rule and that it applies regardless of whether or not the candidate releases us or not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... People understood that pledged delegates would do what they came to Denver to do - vote for one of the nominees to reflect the votes of those who sent them. We expected there to be respect for the 18 million votes and Hillary's historic candidacy. We even thought that Super Delegates would be allowed to do their job - to select the electable Democrat. But that was not to be. Instead, the roll call turned into one chaotic caucus rigged to be sure that the final vote would never be known, without any sublety or reverance for the sanctity of the vote or individual obligations." A Super Delegate reported that "CA "passed" without ever recording its votes because the Hillary delegation stood firm and had the vote been given accurately, Hillary would have been temporarily ahead in the roll call". Clinton delegate and LA attorney Gloria Allred grabbed a napkin from the tables at the California delegation breakfast and wore it as a gag to protest not being allowed to speak at the breakfast. "I was not elected to be a potted plant," Allred said through her gag, holding up DNC rules that say delegates must vote as they are elected. Californnia had 204 delegates pledged to Hillary Clinton, versus 166 for Obama." CONNECTICUT: "I felt blindsided, bullied, mugged. I saw delegates being verbaly arm twisted with threats of loss of positions." "One Obama delegate was bright red, yelling right up in my face". FLORIDA: Barbara Bassett to Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz: "Do not be party to the DNC and its efforts to further disenfranchise the voters of our state. Had our votes counted on Jan 29, 2008, we would be looking at the nomination of Senator Clinton. Again if our votes counted on May 31, 2008 we would be looking at the nomination of Senator Clinton... Stand up and say, 'We the People of the great state of Florida vote for Hillary Clinton'. I want to be heard, once during this election. I want to be heard. ONE person, ONE vote. I count, I matter. We voted, we spoke and we look to you to honor the integrity of our vote".

Clinton aides: Palin treatment sexist: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13129.html

The idea of a convention, with the relevancy of its origins, has passed. Doris Godwin Kearns was talking about how they were not fait accomplis. That it could take 100 or more ballots in the past to select a candidate. This being the case, why even have a convention, except for the free television time, i.e., free advertising? Think how much money would be saved if there weren't primaries either, given that the delegate votes they generate aren't used. A spokeswoman for the National Organization for Women, noting Palin�s opposition to abortion rights and support of other parts of the social conservative agenda, told Politico, �She's more a conservative man than she is a woman on women's issues. Very disappointing." What her choice cements is the Republican party's emphasis on the ridiculous issue of family values, which is something the federal government shouldn't have anything to do with, by definition, rather than the big issues, like the economy!

I totally agree with you, Karen, on all points. :-)

Another article on Sarah Palin

(Karen) That it could take 100 or more ballots in the past to select a candidate. Like picking the Pope. Moon, you're confusing me, esp when you agree with Karen on all points yet support that ticket. So if people are calling coverage of Palin treatment, should we tell them to stop whining (for her), "man up" and make sure she works harder? ;-) Anyone notice that in younger pictures of Palin, she resembles Britney Spears quite a bit?

Oops, missed a word, plus a typo... So if people are calling coverage of Palin's treatment sexist, should we tell them to stop whining (for her), "man up" and make sure she works harder? ;-)

Interesting reasoning on both sides. Most Clinton backers say Palin's too far a stretch By JOCELYN NOVECK, AP National Writer 2 hours, 48 minutes ago Sandy Goodman was deeply disappointed when Hillary Rodham Clinton didn't get the Democratic nomination, then again when she was bypassed for the VP spot. So Goodman, a longtime Florida Democrat, flirted with thoughts of shunning Barack Obama, and perhaps even voting Republican. Then John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate, and suddenly things became clear to Goodman: The Republicans had no place for her. "Boy, you are sure not talking to ME!" Goodman, 61, says she thought when she heard Palin's views on issues like abortion rights. Now, Goodman is volunteering for Obama. But then there's Chrissie Peters. The 37-year-old librarian from Bristol, Tenn. has always voted Democratic and supported Clinton. She assumed she'd vote for Obama � until she saw Palin speak. Now she's voting Republican. "She was so down-to-earth, a regular person," says Peters. "She hasn't been in politics her whole life, so she isn't jaded or tainted. And I love that she's a mom. Yes, I disagree with some of her positions, but that's what this country is about." One of the most intriguing questions about the Alaska governor's sudden arrival on the national scene has been what impact it'll have on women voters � especially those who supported Clinton. Palin made an overture to those voters in her first speech after being chosen by McCain. Will the pitch work? Evidence so far shows that Palin is not drawing a lot of support from voters outside the Republican base. An ABC News poll released Friday found the selection of Palin makes people likelier to vote for McCain by just 6 percentage points � half the 12-point margin by which Sen. Joe Biden makes them more likely to support Obama. And as for Clinton supporters, eight in 10 said they'd vote for Obama in November, according to a Gallup Poll conducted last weekend after McCain announced his selection of Palin. Diane Mantouvalos, for one, thinks the numbers are behind the tide. "We've always been a few weeks ahead of the polls," says the founder of the JustSayNoDeal Web site, a clearinghouse for groups of disaffected Clinton supporters seeking to punish the Democratic Party and Obama for what they see as inexcusable treatment of Clinton. Mantouvalos hasn't decided whom she'll support in November. But she believes many former Clinton supporters will end up voting for McCain. And she thinks Palin will help make that happen. "I was there," Mantouvalos says of Palin's convention speech. "I was blown away. She seemed so confident in her own skin." And what about all the issues on which Palin differs so sharply from Clinton? "Principle trumps issues for this group," she says of her and others like her. To Gloria Steinem, the nation's most recognizable feminist, that logic is mystifying. "Selecting Sarah Palin ... is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters," Steinem wrote this week in the Los Angeles Times, arguing that McCain's running mate is seriously underqualified. "Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton." In an e-mail to The Associated Press, Steinem added: "I have yet to meet one single human being who was for Hillary and is now for McCain, with or without Palin, but some must exist somewhere." Historically, women vote on the issues, not by the gender of the candidate, and since 1980 they've trended Democratic for that reason, says Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. "I wouldn't expect that the McCain-Palin ticket will pull in Clinton supporters," says Walsh. "They were supporting her on the issues. Her gender just added to the appeal." Whatever appeal gender has for female voters, Obama's campaign is not about to let McCain corner the market. Clinton herself, along with Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, all are scheduled to campaign for Obama in the coming weeks, particularly where they can vouch for Obama to large female audiences The Washington group EMILY's List, which backs female candidates who support abortion rights, says its own polling shows that a majority of Clinton supporters � 55 percent � say Palin's presence on the ticket makes them even less likely to vote McCain. Only 9 percent say it makes that more likely. "There really couldn't be more of a distance between Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton on the issues and the agenda that Clinton fought so passionately for," the group's executive director, Ellen Moran, said in an interview. "The more (Clinton supporters) are learning about Palin, the more they are coming to the Obama-Biden ticket." That's not the case for self-described "Clinton die-hard" Amy Goldman. The consultant from Edgewater, N.J. says she'd been leaning toward McCain for a while, but his pick of Palin sealed the deal. "His pick goes outside the box," said Goldman, 52, who like Mantouvalos is involved in the Internet-based efforts to challenge the Democratic party. "I'm not being bitter by voting this way. I really think they're a great ticket." Liz Hunter won't go that far. The 25-year-old Clinton fan is deeply conflicted. She's not ready to support Obama, but doesn't think she could seriously vote Republican. She read Palin's speech online, so she could pay attention to the details. "Sometimes on TV, you get caught up with all the applause," she says. "I really respect the fact that she has five children and a career, and keeps her family strong," said Hunter. But at the same time, "I just don't think I could go over to that side." The debates will decide it, she says. For Goodman, the Florida voter who's shifted to Obama, there will be no such indecision. She'll work to convince fellow Clintonites that they shouldn't be swayed by the woman on the Republican ticket. "I was insulted when she referred to Hillary and the 18 million cracks in the ceiling," Goodman says, referring to Clinton's line that her primary votes put that many cracks in the glass ceiling that has held women back. "I don't believe Hillary was making those 18 million cracks for Sarah Palin." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080905/ap_on_el_pr/from_clinton_to_palin;_ylt=An_X1CzwrQ9xNWRGsN4SgfLCw5R4

(Dorine) Moon, you're confusing me, esp when you agree with Karen on all points yet support that ticket. Why is that confusing? I was merely analyzing the history of events. What happened. I don't think it would have an impact on how one votes. And what about all the issues on which Palin differs so sharply from Clinton? "Principle trumps issues for this group," she says of her and others like her. Like I said, the hell hath no fury defense. Historically, women vote on the issues, not by the gender of the candidate, and since 1980 they've trended Democratic for that reason A pitiful lack of data to support such a claim! When it comes to judicial retention, for years, I would only vote Retain for women's names. LOL! At least I had a system. ;-) But I'd say not enough data relative to important positions. No way! Maybe they also needed to ask how many of those women voted the way their husbands did, which would also account for no gender preference. eh? huh?

I didn't really get that whole stopping the roll call thing unlike as I said, it wouldn't have tallied up to enough. Esp since some could've changed their votes to Hillary, correct? There was no point to having the delegates there if they couldn't all represent. You know I don't know what I was reading into the stuff that I didn't understand Moon's comment (I did get why she agreed with you on the convention stuff). My headache's back and it's not important.

I totally agree with you, Karen, on all points. :-) Sheesh, Dorine, just to make sure. ;-) I agree with Karen (post 620), that: 1)The idea of a convention, with the relevancy of its origins, has passed. 2)Think how much money would be saved if there weren't primaries either, given that the delegate votes they generate aren't used. 3)...issue of family values, which is something the federal government shouldn't have anything to do with, by definition, rather than the big issues, like the economy!

Someone in an email said to me that Palin doesn't have a problem being questioned by anything. Perhaps, perhaps not. She (and her lawyer) are also using stall tactics in the Troopergate investigation. You'd think she'd want to get it done and over with if there is nothing wrong. http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/06/carney/index.html Reading the blue hypertext throughtout the article can be helpful as it's read. If for background on the references if nothing else. And can someone tell me, how does one become mayor of a town with 7000 people that has no debt and leave it with approx $20 million in debt? And that plane mentioned in the speech that was sold on eBay? Ah, nope. It didn't sell there. They ended up hiring a broker to sell it.... at a loss to the state of 500K. Guess I gotta give her credit for trying to get rid of it.

http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/516641.html

(Dorine) And that plane mentioned in the speech that was sold on eBay? Ah, nope. It didn't sell there. They ended up hiring a broker to sell it.... at a loss to the state of 500K. Guess I gotta give her credit for trying to get rid of it. I knew about the plane sale before her acceptance speech and noted that she only said that "I put it on eBay" which doesn't mean it actually was sold there. In fact, it was listed three times before they had to turn it over to broker. (Dorine) Esp since some could've changed their votes to Hillary, correct? Not on the first ballot. Not having a balloting process ensured several things. First and foremost, it created a public perception that there was overwhelming party unity for BO, when the actual numbers cast would not have shown that. Second, even after delegates were released from their pledged support, there's no way to know how people would vote. Wheeling and dealing and who knows what else could've turned things upside down. The DNC didn't want Hillary to win. Pure and simple. As in days of yore, a convention (and its backrooms) decided on things. Here, the backroom decided things before the convention, which is why I said having a convention is a waste of money.

Karen you have the facts. That is exactly what happened. And, as a Hillary delegate from VA who got to appoint the VA Hillary delegates who attended the convention, I can tell you that they were determine to vote for Hillary on the roll call, of course, they did not get that chance. I also attended in DC the meeting for counting the MI and FL votes. One HRC superdelegate from VA who was part of the commission told me that the Hillary Supers had to make the deal they made because of threats that the DNC would take all of them away from Hillary. If the DNC had acknowledge the votes to Hillary, she would have won the delegate count because of how well she did with the rest of the primaries. I have been very involved from the start and I just can't fall in line. Nobama! LA Times, September 4 2008 The "unity" convention in Denver is over. But some Hillary Rodham Clinton delegates are back home in California stewing over what they describe as pressure from Barack Obama allies to create a false image of overwhelming support for the Democratic presidential nominee. The complete article can be viewed at: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-trailunity2008sep04,0,5635151.story

noted that she only said that "I put it on eBay" Yes, I did see that after, though she was heavily implying she sold it there. McCain himself seems to be playing it up though (perhaps by mistake?) as he said while campaigning in the past couple of days that it was "sold on eBay, for a profit." I don't know how stopping a roll call in the middle shows party unity. Just the opposite to me. there's no way to know how people would vote. Didn't I basically say that before? That they'd stop it to prevent Hillary from ending up with more? I was thinking about the whole primary election process last night in the shower (such relaxing subjects I think about ;-)). I don't understand why the primaries have to be so dragged out. Just have a primary on one day and have a runoff of the candidates that get over a certain percentage. If only one does, then that's the nominee. Or just use the one who wins flat out. I understand why delegates were necessary in the days before, say the phone, or even the telegraph, but it should be based on people's votes and that's it at this point. And even if they did still have them, there should be a uniform method of distribution....and NO caucuses. Either have every state give all delegates to the winner, or all states divide the delegates proportionally based on the percentage of votes as some already do. And I never did understand that ridiculousness of punishing 2 states for moving their dates. So what? (that's a rhetorical question) That shouldn't even be an option. What's the point of having people vote if the delegates don't count in the current system, esp if the delegates are considered so important. And esp if only one of the main candidates participates. They shouldn't have a choice not to. And if only one of the main ones participate, the votes shouldn't count anyway as it's not fair nor a true representation of what the other candidates might have had in competition. It's all too ridiculous. Well, I don't contribute and I'm not getting any of that money if they didn't use it, so if they want to waste it on a convention, whatever.

(Moon) Nobama! Then don't vote, Moon (can't believe I said that). I'd rather see people not happy with Obama not vote for him and not give McCain any extra voting help to maintain the status quo in the country/our place in the world. Or godferbid, make matters worse, if that's possible.

I need to suport a woman on the ticket, Dorine. As you know, I don't care for Bush, never did. I have been a Dem all my life. An independant thinker who grew up in a conservative Republican household. Fear not, McCain is not Bush. By voting for McCain/Palin, I am voting in protest of the DNC, and I am voting for Hillary in 2012. Nobama!

I can't believe you're determined to vote for McCain just because Palin has a vagina, Moon. Why not just write in Hillary Clinton's name instead? Clinton herself wouldn't want you to vote for McCain/Palin. You are cutting off your nose to spite your face. There are plenty of ways to both vote for a woman and not give your vote to Obama which do not included voting against your own interests.

Even though McCain told Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation this morning that she'd go on his show, seems there's a different plan that apparently Glenn Greenwald of Salon pegged yesterday... When they decide in a couple of weeks that Palin is ready to do so, she'll go and sit down with Brit Hume or Larry King or Charlie Gibson or some other pleasant, accommodating person who plays a journalist on TV and have a nice, amiable, entertaining chat about topics that are easily anticipated. Having been preceded by all sorts of campaign drama about her first interview and the excitement that she's not up to the task, her TV appearance will be widely touted, score big ratings, and will be nice entertainment for the network that presents it. and his update today: It's not prescience when you simply describe the bleeding obvious. If I were a McCain adviser and wanted to have Palin sit with someone who is perceived as a "journalist" while knowing that no damage could possibly occur, I'd pick Charlie Gibson, too. There are many, many other equally good alternatives, but when it comes to wretched passivity and sycophantic establishment worship, the former "Good Morning America" host -- whose career was built on oozing amiability and inoffensiveness -- is as good as it gets.

Sarah, the only way to guarantee Hillary runs in 2012 is to vote for McCain/Palin, I can wait 4 years. I further explained my need to vote for them on my other post. I am a rebel with a cause. Let's leave it at that. I look forward to the debates. Let the Circus begin.

NYT - Op-Ed Columnist A Heartbeat Away By WILLIAM KRISTOL Published: September 7, 2008 Should voters be alarmed by a relatively young or inexperienced vice-presidential candidate? No. Since 1900, five vice presidents have succeeded to the presidency during their term in office: Teddy Roosevelt in 1901, Calvin Coolidge in 1923, Harry Truman in 1945, Lyndon Johnson in 1963, and Gerald Ford in 1974. Teddy Roosevelt took over at age 42, becoming our youngest president, and he�s generally thought to have proved up to the job. Truman was V.P. for less than three months and had been kept in the dark by Franklin Roosevelt about such matters as the atom bomb � and he�s generally thought to have risen to the occasion. Character, judgment and the ability to learn seem to matter more to success as president than the number of years one�s been in Washington. Did McCain think Palin his very best possible successor? Perhaps not. Did Barack Obama think Biden the absolute cream of the Democratic crop? Perhaps not. They undoubtedly thought highly enough of their running mates to have confidence in their ability to take over their administration in case of incapacity or death. I think most voters will accept that basic judgment. But � shocking to say! � both Obama and McCain also took political considerations into account in making their selections. One thing McCain undoubtedly had in mind was Obama�s failure to pick Hillary Clinton. As The Times�s Patrick Healy reported Friday, �If the election remains close, the next president could very well be picked by what Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist, calls �Wal-Mart Moms� � white working women with children living in the exurbs and in rural parts of battleground states. ...� McCain didn�t just pick a politician who could appeal to Wal-Mart Moms. He picked a Wal-Mart Mom. Indeed, he picked someone who, in 1999, as Wasilla mayor, presided over a wedding of two Wal-Mart associates at the local Wal-Mart. �It was so sweet,� said Palin, according to The Anchorage Daily News. �It was so Wasilla.� A Wasilla Wal-Mart Mom a heartbeat away? I suspect most voters will say, No problem. And some � perhaps a decisive number � will say, It�s about time. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/opinion/08kristol.html?_r=1&ei=5070&emc=eta1&oref=slogin

The Dem convention really was his last hurrah it seems. :-(( They may plan a return, but I'd be shocked to see it, though more power to him if he does. Kennedy Plans January Return To Senate By Kathleen Hunter, CQ Staff Mon Sep 8, 11:44 AM ET Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who made a brief return to the national stage during last month's Democratic convention, will not return to the Senate this year as he battles a brain tumor, his office has announced. Some of Kennedy's friends and supporters privately had expressed hope that Kennedy, D-Mass., could resume his legislative duties this week , as Congress returns from a five-week summer recess that included the two parties' national conventions. Kennedy, 76, made a dramatic on-stage appearance at the Democratic convention in Denver, where he was honored with a video tribute. "As Senator Kennedy said two weeks ago in Denver, he intends to be on the floor of the United States Senate next January when we begin to write the next great chapter of American progress," said Kennedy spokesman Anthony Coley. "Sen. Kennedy's doctors are pleased with his progress so far and have recommended that he continue to work from home through the fall." Kennedy "will be in touch with his staff, colleagues, and others via video conferencing from his home in Hyannis Port." Coley added. Kennedy has been recuperating from June brain surgery and undergoing chemotherapy and radiation to treat a malignant brain tumor that doctors diagnosed May 20, three days after he suffered a seizure at his family compound on Cape Cod. He has returned to the Senate just once since his diagnosis - on July 9 -- to cast a vote that ensured Democratic victory on a bill blocking a cut in Medicare payments to physicians (PL 110-275). An early supporter of Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., Kennedy, chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, would play an important role in any Obama effort to dramatically expand health insurance coverage -- a career-long legislative goal of the Massachusetts senator. During his absence, Kennedy has deputized senior members of his committee to act as chief on-site negotiators on a few pieces of major legislation. http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20080908/pl_cq_politics/politics2945041;_ylt=AtPc7yIHdn0Re8OULvOAGAus0NUE

I'm making no statement in posting this and have no idea what ideological bent this writer has, if any, as I know of her, but couldn't tell you if I've read anything of hers. I just ran across it reading something else and thought it would be of interest since we've talked about sexism during the campaign(s). What's Fair Game With Sarah Palin? By Anne E. Kornblut Sunday, September 7, 2008; B01 Watching Gov. Sarah Palin explode onto the national scene over the last week got me thinking back to a cold evening earlier this year, just before the New Hampshire primary. I was half-listening to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton speak at an auditorium when a strange noise interrupted the event: two young men shouting, in muffled voices, "Iron my shirt!" At first, Clinton seemed as taken aback as the rest of the audience, unsure of what was going on. Then she saw the yellow "Iron My Shirt!" sign one of the young men held, figured out what was being shouted and brushed the interruption aside. "Ah, the remnants of sexism, alive and well," she said, then continued with her remarks. When security officers removed the young men from the audience, I joined several other reporters in following them outside to find out who the hecklers were and what had motivated them to make such a spectacle. Little did we know that the bizarre incident was a precursor of what was to come -- of the debate over sexism, feminism and the role of women in public life that would emerge as one of the defining aspects of the 2008 campaign. My fellow reporters and I never really did resolve the mystery of the "iron my shirt" episode; the two young men refused to give us their names and offered strangely vague reasons for being there. But we were put on notice that night: Gender politics was going to be a part of this race in ways that no one could foresee. After following Clinton on the campaign trail for more than two years, I have been watching the Palin story with some wariness -- especially the conservative charges that the treatment she's received has been overwhelmingly sexist. With each new development, I keep wondering: What if? What if, back in the 1990s, Clinton had announced the pregnancy of an unmarried, teenaged daughter? Would the Republicans have declared it an off-limits family matter and declined to judge her, or would it have turned into a national scandal that hurt her chances as she decided to pursue her own career in elected office? What if, instead of the GOP's new vice presidential candidate, Clinton had been the one to run for national office without any international experience to speak of? (After all, Clinton's rivals diminished the relevance of her eight years as first lady, saying they counted for little on her r�sum�.) And what if Clinton had rejected questions about her record by calling such lines of questioning sexist? What if she had refused to name any national security decisions she had made, as a spokesman for Sen. John McCain did on Palin's behalf last week, on the grounds that the question was unfair? What if, simply, the roles had been reversed? Howard Wolfson, Clinton's former communications director, said he is confident that the Republicans "would have attempted to destroy her" if she were in Palin's shoes -- as, in fact, some Republicans tried to do to Clinton throughout the 1990s, and were preparing to do again if she had won the Democratic nomination this year. At the same time, Wolfson said, Republican attempts "to defend Palin from sexism lost a fair amount of credibility when Carly Fiorina refused to acknowledge that her party had ever been sexist toward Hillary Clinton." (Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard chief turned McCain economic adviser, told a "hear-me-roar" press conference with other Republican women Wednesday that Republicans were not responsible for any mistreatment of Clinton.) I have had my share of major disagreements with Wolfson over the last few years, but on this one, he is probably right. It may seem a pretty pointless exercise -- envisioning the "would haves" if Clinton and Palin had somehow swapped roles, parties and lives. But it is a useful tool as a reporter, a way of contemplating what is fair game now by comparing it with what was fair game then. Even the issue of "Would you ask a man the same question" (raised so indignantly last week by senior McCain adviser Steve Schmidt and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani) falls slightly short, simply because there are so few templates for female candidates running for higher office -- and the ones who have, including Clinton, Palin and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have tried to use their roles as mothers and women as part of the overall package in ways that men do not. That is not to say that every awkward detail of Palin's personal life is an acceptable target -- or that Democrats, reporters and bloggers ought to pursue Palin in all of the aggressive ways that Clinton has been grilled for most of her political life. It is also not to suggest that Clinton always openly answered questions about her own record or did not manipulate her femininity to her advantage when it suited her political needs. And the sort of media-bashing that thrilled the GOP faithful last week may not play as well with the independents McCain hopes to win over. In an overnight ABC News poll taken before McCain's speech Thursday, 50 percent of respondents said that the media has treated Palin fairly, while 40 percent said it had not -- and among those who faulted the coverage, more saw political bias as the root cause than blamed sexism. Still, in her first week on the national stage, Palin and her surrogates have brandished the sexism charge more unabashedly than Clinton has over the course of two very public decades. And Palin has not yet even faced serious questioning in person, in an interview or in a one-on-one debate. If Clinton's message was that she was a survivor -- that she had been vetted and tested, her viewpoints scrutinized, with all of her personal problems known to the country -- Palin's has so far been that she has, by virtue of being nominated, already passed every test that Clinton took. Palin's mantra, it seems, is that women no longer need to surpass men in their achievements and qualifications in order to win; they simply need to object when the question of their preparedness is raised. And that makes me wonder: What would Clinton say to that? Clinton has been surprisingly quiet in the days since Palin was nominated. She issued a bland statement the day McCain announced his surprise pick: "We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin's historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate." Last Thursday, Clinton put out just her second statement about Palin, saying she wanted to "slightly amend" one of her best zingers in Denver: "No way, no how, no McCain-Palin." And while Clinton is scheduled to stump in central Florida Monday on Sen. Barack Obama's behalf, the trip is not, according to people in both Democrats' camps, designed as a direct response to the debut of the second female vice presidential nominee in U.S. history. It doesn't exactly add up to a resounding attack, especially during the heat of the campaign. Former Clinton advisers offer various explanations: She would only energize the Republican base if she criticized Palin; she doesn't want to diminish her own stature by attacking McCain's rookie understudy rather than McCain himself; she is not on the ticket, so why should she intervene? Still, the result is a strange silence from the woman who, until just two weeks ago, had arguably the most powerful female voice in American politics. Palin, on the other hand, has invoked Clinton several times, welcoming the senator's voters to her own effort to shatter the glass ceiling that Clinton "put 18 million cracks in." And yet America's two most famous female politicians were not always so simpatico. As recently as the primary season, Palin said that she was sorry she could not vote for Clinton (presumably because she was a registered Republican) but added that she regretted Clinton's "whining" about sexist treatment toward the end of her 2008 bid. "When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism, or maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, 'Man, that doesn't do us any good, women in politics, or women in general, trying to progress in this country,' " Palin said. "I think that's reality, and I think it's a given, I think people can just accept that she is going to be under that sharper microscope," Palin went on. "So be it. I mean, work harder, prove yourself to an even greater degree that you're capable, that you're going to be the best candidate. . . ." One senior Clinton adviser I talked to this past week called it understandable that the Alaska governor felt that way -- until she got into the white-hot glare herself. Another said that it is probably easier for Palin to take on the role of vice presidential nominee, and to push back against the questions that truly are offensive, because the path has been paved for the last several years by Clinton. In some respects, the Clinton loyalists are sympathetic toward Palin and about the hardships she will face in largely uncharted territory as a woman running for national office. They lived through the excruciating moments of unfairness that Clinton endured during the campaign -- MSNBC's Chris Matthews's saying that Clinton won her Senate seat only because of her husband's infidelity is one particular favorite -- and some are still smarting from Obama's decision to tap Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate. That may very well not have been a sexist choice, but from a certain angle, it could be seen to have carried a tinge of old-boy networking -- the kind that Palin said in her acceptance speech she had busted up in Alaska. Which is why so many Clinton loyalists believe -- and I believe they really believe it -- that Palin could help McCain draw some voters from the Clinton base. The GOP may have its work cut out for it here: According to the ABC poll, 47 percent of women view Palin favorably. (She does better among men, who are more apt to be Republicans; 54 percent of men viewed her positively.) Still, the fact that a spokesman for Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid used the word "shrill" to describe Palin's speech on Wednesday night only made Clinton's camp more convinced that the hockey mom from Wasilla really could win some women over. And that is why Palin's emergence has given the increasingly tight 2008 campaign a kind of symmetry that the "Iron My Shirt" boys, whoever they were, could never have imagined. kornbluta@washpost.com Anne E. Kornblut covers politics for The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/05/AR2008090502656.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

This is almost becoming like shooting fish in a barrel. But I guess the joke will be on me (and many of the rest of us) if they win. I actually wasn't going to post it, but I rethought that after thinking that it's not just her out there, but McCain standing right by her side (I saw it on the news!) endorsing inaccurate information, if by no other manner than standing there proud as can be and not correcting her. I'm sure their people will make sure that information mistake isn't repeated. The other thing that disturbs me about it, is I'd bet virtually no one in that audience knew enough about those institutions to know she was not correct. http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-who-are-they-asks-palin/ [As a side note, watching a Daily Show repeat from the Thursday Barack gave his speech. Doing a satirical Barack Obama story and starts out with a Lion King parody. It's hysterical!]

Biden Finally Admits Hillary Would Be Better VP. It so pisses me off that suddenly everyone is so kind to HRC--now that they need our votes. Where were these jerks six months ago? Yeah, she is qualified--more qualified than either Biden or Obama! http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do;jsessionid=69E3F54AB045175500550C7BB3A0D214?diaryId=985

Fresh blood for the vampire A beady-eyed McCain gets a boost from the charismatic Sarah Palin, a powerful new feminist -- yes, feminist! -- force. Plus: Obama must embrace his dull side. By Camille Paglia http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/09/10/palin/

And yet... many, many women see Sarah Palin very clearly for what she is... Women Against Sarah Palin

So I guess Palin's interview is being spread all over. Some was on ABC News tonight I read..?? and the rest here: Watch Charles Gibson's exclusive interviews with Gov. Sarah Palin tonight on "Nightline." Tune in Friday for more on "Good Morning America " at 7 a.m. ET. See more on "World News" and "20/20," which will broadcast a one-hour special edition at 10 p.m. ET/9 p.m. CT. I guess the first part is online already around the web.

This explains it all so very well, it is a must read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/will-bower/my-history-of-puma-from-i_b_125878.html

(Sarah) And yet... many, many women see Sarah Palin very clearly for what she is... Of course they/we do. And your point? (Dorine) So I guess Palin's interview is being spread all over. Totally confusing. Guess it is being done for ratings purposes. I only saw the first excerpts of Gibson's interview on Nightline a couple of nights ago, but have recorded last night's 20/20. Guess I'll have to resign myself to not seeing all of it, as I can't be bothered to figure which parts are airing and when. Good PUMA piece, Moon. I've been reading the comments as well. These political sites generate huge commentary. 300+ comments!

I taped the Nightline, which I need to watch and watched most of the 20/20. I didn't see the others. Interesting article. I do agree about getting rid of Pelosi. She's useless for many reasons. I have no particular opinion on Brazile and Dean, so they can go to for all I care. Interesting reading about voter disenfranchisement in Texas. Sounds just like Florida in 2000 in the general. And who knew that FL and MI would actually end up mattering? If Hillary had come out stronger on Super Tuesday as she expected, frankly the whole issue about FL and MI delegates would've been moot. And she probably would've been the nominee, despite any backroom machinations by the DNC. Personally, I think they should've left the FL and MI delegates not count. Or at least MI, since Obama wasn't even on the ballot. That's stupid to guess that Obama would've had a certain amount. I don't remember who was or wasn't on the ballot in FL. As I said here before (or maybe in an email to someone instead), I think all states should have uniform voting and delegate distribution procedures and get rid of caucuses altogether. Maybe just have the nominating vote on one day (with a subsequent runoff if necessary), then get on with campaigning for the general.

I happened to start reading this a couple of days ago and only got to the second page so far. Very interesting insight into strategy. Shows copies of a few memos/emails. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200809/hillary-clinton-campaign

Dorine, Obama sued to have his name taken of the ballot in MI, all the others had their names on the ballot. The DNC had the nerve to give Obama some of Hillary's MI votes. Obama's name was on the FL ballot which Hillary won by a nice margin, the DNC gave her only half her FL votes. I was at the meeting in DC, it was a a low day for Democrats. Deals done behind close doors, threats made... Re: Super Tuesday, there was so much fraud going on with Obama's people. I keep telling you that he's not the real nominee. Hillary even won the popular vote. It's all a fraud perpetuated by the DNC and I will not fall in line. As I've said before, I'm too close to it. All Obama has ever wanted was to be President, he's been working at it since the beginning, how many times has he changed his opinions on issues just to be popular? He has a hidden agenda and I pray that he does not win in Nov.

How could they have really picked this guy over Hillary? Another must read: http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/26/fighting-back-against-obamas-thugs/

(Moon) Obama sued to have his name taken of the ballot in MI, all the others had their names on the ballot. John Edwards had his name taken off as well. Both removed their names because the DNC told everyone to do so. Frankly I don't quite understand why those states had primaries before Iowa's caucases or why the DNC would even make up such a rule, when it had no power over the states' election boards which set the dates. The DNC's rule IMO was an absurdity. But the issue is quite moot.

Veteran's Affairs Chief Crumbles Under Pressure From Congress It seems that Veterans Affairs Secretary Peake can't hold his own against Congressional Democrats. They put so "much pressure" on him that he reversed his own decision and will now let groups like ACORN and MoveOn.org invade the VA facilities with voter registrants. Who do you think is behind this? Obama of course. You know the guy who pays ACORN to commit voter fraud and pays front companies for their work on get-out-the- vote work. It isn't bad enough he used ACORN to cheat with the civilian vote, now he is going to use groups to cheat with the veteran vote. And of course, the asshat has this to say: Obama issued a statement saying, "I commend Secretary Peake's decision today. The key will be implementation. We must ensure that the VA's doors are open to non-partisan groups, as well as state and local government agencies, to enable veterans to register to vote in a timely fashion, complete absentee ballots, and receive rides to the polls." I have to use the VA for medical services since I am a 100% totally, permanently disabled female Navy veteran. In my opinion, this is a violation of my right to privacy. I don't want to be bombarded by voter registrants while I am sitting in a facility I feel is already hostile towards me. I have been waiting nearly ten years to get my hands fixed which are getting progressively worse, and the VA won't fix them. Nope I was told nada, no way but I have to put up with non-partisan groups trying to sign me up to vote because Peake is a coward! Non-partisan groups�.you mean ACORN, which claims to be non-partisan but generally will run screaming from the sight of a Republican. We know they have not been non-partisan this year as they have worked almost exclusively for Obama from February 2008 to May 2008. I even called my Congressman, Todd Tiahrt, his office hung up on me in Washington, DC, not interested. Senator Brownback's office in DC, said "we will tell the Senator." and I got the brush off from Senator Pat Robert's office in DC too. I did get one of Roberts constituent representatives in Wichita, KS to give a damn! She asked me to write a letter that will be sent to the Senator in DC. The short and long of this is Obama should not be allowed to bring his "non-partisan groups" (ACORN) into a facility that is meant for veterans especially since we have to receive out medical treatment there. And we want to receive it in PEACE! By NancyA Email: susanunpc@gmail.com On September 12, 2008 at 12:59 AM in Acorn, Barack Obama, Current Affairs, Veterans Administration, Voter Fraud

(Karen), John Edwards had his name taken off as well. Both removed their names because the DNC told everyone to do so. Yes it did tell them too. But in MI the ballot went out with all their names on it except Obama because he sued to have his removed. Edwards's votes were given to Obama at the DNC meeting. It is quite moot now, but that doesn't mean I don't remember what went on. How our democratic votes were taken away by the DNC.

(Moon) It is quite moot now How the MI delegates got apportioned is certainly moot, but my reference was to the lack of logic between a state setting a date for a primary and a party organization telling people they couldn't run in those primaries. There was an automatic disenfranchisement of those states' delegates, one that the delegates and candidates had no opportunity to control. When a state decides to hold its primary election is that state's right. It would seem to me that the DNC has to follow what the states do in setting their own calendar. This is an example of the tail wagging the dog. Not recognizing those states' delegates doesn't seem like an option to me and it isn't as though the DNC was going to pay to hold a primary in those states out of its own pocket. That's the moot point to which I referred.

I don't say often that I won't consider what a media person on either side may say, but sorry, I won't pay attention to Michelle Malkin. I don't think MI should have counted as it was or should've had a do-over. And being the state's choice when to have their primary (or apparently not), how could the DNC's wishes supersede that? And why did the state listen?

What's also moot IMO, is that if the race hadn't been so close and had ended up in Hillary's favor by a large margin, it's likely it wouldn't have mattered what happened with FL and MI anyway and most likely this discussion wouldn't be on the table.

(Moon) He has a hidden agenda Which would be? You've alluded to things before, but are there specifics that I've missed somewhere? I'll be willing to listen, but I don't take esoteric allusions very seriously without some backup.

I found this an interesting article on Sarah Palin. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp

And I found this interesting because I posited the same questions this columnist did within the first 4 paragraphs in an email to a few people yesterday after reading about one of Palin's stump speeches earlier that day where people chanted, "Drill, baby, drill". http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/opinion/14friedman.html?em

�I�m still proud of Sarah,� she added, �but she scares the bejeebers out of me.� The Wasilla High School yearbook archive now doubles as a veritable directory of state government. Two great lines! Really, what's the big deal? She replaced the good old boy network with the good old girl network. And...??? Another confidante of Ms. Palin�s is Ms. Frye, 27. She worked as a receptionist for State Senator Lyda Green before she joined Ms. Palin�s campaign for governor. Now Ms. Frye earns $68,664 as a special assistant to the governor. Her frequent interactions with Ms. Palin�s children have prompted some lawmakers to refer to her as �the babysitter,� a title that Ms. Frye disavows. Wonder what that works out to be per hour? ;-) Great op-ed piece, Dorine! With a perfect last line: There is no strong leader without a strong country. And posing as one, to use the current vernacular, is nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig. This culture-war strategy (i.e., one without any real substance) is killing us. :-(

(Dorine),I don't think MI should have counted as it was or should've had a do-over. Both MI and FL had come up with independent means to redo the vote, and guess who was against it? Obama of course, how democratic of him. Dorine, we will all find out whay his hidden agenda is if he gets to be President. He ain't no Mr. Deeds. There are so many reasons why this article is interesting. The social dynamics of history have a way of repeating themselves. Not to mention, the article examines the kinds of qualities one might expect from Biden's leadership. Unlike HRC, his stances on important issues appear to be rooted in fear versus conviction or doing the right thing: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/23/biden-and-anita-hill-revisited/?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss Wow: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8

Dorine, we will all find out whay his hidden agenda is if he gets to be President. He ain't no Mr. Deeds. No, I bet he's not, but in other words, you don't know, you're just throwing stuff out there?

LOL, Dorine, moi? From all that I have experienced in this corrupt campaign run by the DNC, I have become a seer. :-D Believe it or not, BO has a hidden agenda. Call me agent 0069. ;-)

Woo! I'm looking at aerial footage of Hammond, IN, where the Little Calumet River has overflowed. A church was underwater!

*snort* http://iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=135972 That is awful about all the other damage outside of TX, too. Amazing. And sorry, Peggy! I forgot you where you live! Glad to hear you had some precautions in place and can get by ok. Can't believe the unbelievable devastation in Galveston. Was watching on the Today Show today. Looks like when Andrew went through South Florida. Or a tornado. I was also amazed last night or this morning to hear that rescue crews were brought supplies by the public since they had none themselves.

Since this is the Pile It on Palin topic... �Sarah knows how to field-dress a moose. I know how to castrate a calf. Neither of those things has anything at all to do with this election. But since we know so much about Sarah�s special skills, I wanted to make sure you knew about mine too,� she said. �When I saw her get up and talk about all these earmarks, I said �Wait a minute, what�s going on here? Did I wake up in a parallel universe?� *snort snort* BTW, I've actually been in Indianola. What galls me about the earmarks (and technically a removed earmark but nonreturned Federal dollars) is the money went into a general infrastructure fund and they built a Road to Nowhere, when our bridges and roads are falling apart. Talk about government waste. Shame shame! Is this because she now believes it should be handled by the HR people? ;-) Palin won't meet with 'Troopergate' investigator By GENE JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 22 minutes ago ANCHORAGE, Alaska - A campaign spokesman says Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin won't speak with an investigator hired by lawmakers to look into the firing of her public safety commissioner. McCain campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan told a news conference Monday that the governor, the Republican nominee for vice president, will not cooperate as long as the investigation "remains tainted." He said he doesn't know whether Palin's husband would challenge a subpoena issued to compel his cooperation. The campaign insists the investigation has been hijacked by Democrats. It says it can prove Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan was fired because of insubordination on budget issues � not because he refused to fire a state trooper who had divorced Palin's sister. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/palin_troopergate

But she professed to being so open to assisting them previously (B.V.P - Before nomination for VP). ;-) The campaign insists the investigation has been hijacked by Democrats. Funny how one of the people on the commission voting to issue the subpoenas was a Republican (granted the other 2 were democrats and the 2 opposing were R's).

Wow, they really don't want it to continue. What's the problem if there's nothing wrong? Got to give credit to Stevens, at least he asked for a fast trial date to get his mess done and over with quickly before the election, esp as he couldn't seem stop it. But then his position isn't quite so important. Lawmakers sue to stop 'Troopergate' probe of Palin By STEVE QUINN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 37 minutes ago JUNEAU, Alaska - Five state Republican lawmakers want a judge to stop an investigation into Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of a public safety commissioner. A bipartisan oversight committee had unanimously approved an inquiry into whether Palin, now the Republican vice presidential nominee, dismissed the commissioner because he wouldn't fire her ex-brother-in-law, a state trooper. In Anchorage Superior Court on Tuesday, three state representatives and two state senators sued to stop the investigation. Palin had said months ago that she welcomed the inquiry. The lawsuit called the investigation "unlawful, biased, partial and partisan."

Going to court has worked for them before. :-(

My bank looks like it's the next to go and looks likely to be bought out. Moved my $$ yesterday to another bank just in case they sink without help. With finance crisis, hands-off era over More oversight lies ahead, no matter who's in the Oval Office. By Peter Grier | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor from the September 17, 2008 edition Reporter Peter Grier tells why Congress has been so quiet lately about any plans to tighten oversight of Wall Street. [Audio link at link below] Washington - The great financial shakeout of 2008 � one of the most dire US fiscal crises of modern times � is likely to change permanently the relationship between Wall Street and Washington. Already Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has overshadowed New York's titans of finance with his decisions as to which institutions will get government aid and which will not. If things don't get worse, history may credit Mr. Paulson with helping to pull the economy back from the brink, as financier J.P. Morgan did in the Bankers' Panic of 1907. Beyond that, a long period of Washington laissez faire toward financial markets may well be at an end. The details of regulation could be different, depending on which candidate wins the White House this fall. But more US oversight seems inevitable. "We need to restructure the system to reduce the chance of having another crisis," says Douglas Elmendorf, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. Financial regulators may win access to more internal information from financial institutions, allowing them to better judge the risks they are running. They may also look for ways to control derivatives, financial instruments backed by mortgages or other types of assets, which have become complex "to the point of absurdity," in Mr. Elmendorf's words. There's a sense that Washington needs to modernize a system of financial oversight rooted in government entities founded after the Great Depression. "We have an archaic financial regulatory system ... it really needs to be rebuilt," Paulson told reporters at the White House on Sept. 15. The US needs a balance between regulation and market discipline, added Paulson, who last spring proposed a package of tougher regulations for investment banks, including giving more oversight powers to the Federal Reserve. The crisis management of the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve appeared to have stabilized markets, at least for the short term. Though the Dow Jones Index fell over 500 points on Sept. 15, the sell-off was orderly and could have been worse, according to analysts. But major Asian and European bourses also suffered sell-offs and the fate of the insurance giant American International Group remains in question, following the Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy and the sale of Merrill Lynch to the Bank of America. By declining to use government funds to help Lehman, Washington ensured the financial crisis would enter a new and perhaps decisive phase. But it was the right step to take, said some analysts. While Bear Stearns collapsed quickly, Lehman's problems have developed over time. Any firm that stands to lose money due to interrconnections with Lehman may have only itself to blame. Or, such firms may have been counting on a government bailout. "To the extent that there were any major players in the market not prepared for Lehman Brothers' demise, that would be the clearest signal that moral hazard had begun to sink into the market. So it was the right decision to not step in with financial guarantees for Lehman," says Benn Steil, senior fellow and director of international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. Looking forward, Washington may need to set up a temporary new agency capable of buying and selling the toxic mortgage-backed assets that are dragging down Wall Street firms, said former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker in a Sept. 15 speech. Such an agency would be similar to the Resolution Trust Corporation, the US-backed clearinghouse that helped move the nation through the savings-and-loan crisis of the 1980s. But others say Washington shares some blame for the current crisis. Under longtime head Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve stood by while the housing market overheated, charges University of Maryland economic historian David Sicilia. Nor did the Fed talk about regulating derivatives or hedge funds until it was too late, in Sicilia's view. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0917/p01s02-usec.html

(Karen) Going to court has worked for them before. :-( *sigh* Yes. This certainly is speaking to that. And as pointed out here, apparently D's don't learn from past mistakes. :-( http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/16/233624/270/872/601202

They're too afraid to come off as the bad guys, bringing legal muscle. The Rs don't seem to care and it has been successful. Do you let the system work or work the system? The answer seems obvious.

Never fear this time. Obama knows how to work the system. Great article: A Feminist's Argument for McCain's VP By Tammy Bruce In the shadow of the blatant and truly stunning sexism launched against the Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, and as a pro-choice feminist, I wasn't the only one thrilled to hear Republican John McCain announce Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. For the GOP, she bridges for conservatives and independents what I term "the enthusiasm gap" for the ticket. For Democrats, she offers something even more compelling - a chance to vote for a someone who is her own woman, and who represents a party that, while we don't agree on all the issues, at least respects women enough to take them seriously. Whether we have a D, R or an "i for independent" after our names, women share a different life experience from men, and we bring that difference to the choices we make and the decisions we come to. Having a woman in the White House, and not as The Spouse, is a change whose time has come, despite the fact that some Democratic Party leaders have decided otherwise. But with the Palin nomination, maybe they'll realize it's not up to them any longer. Clinton voters, in particular, have received a political wake-up call they never expected. Having watched their candidate and their principles betrayed by the very people who are supposed to be the flame-holders for equal rights and fairness, they now look across the aisle and see a woman who represents everything the feminist movement claimed it stood for. Women can have a family and a career. We can be whatever we choose, on our own terms. For some, that might mean shooting a moose. For others, perhaps it's about shooting a movie or shooting for a career as a teacher. However diverse our passions, we will vote for a system that allows us to make the choices that best suit us. It's that simple. The rank bullying of the Clinton candidacy during the primary season has the distinction of simply being the first revelation of how misogynistic the party has become. The media led the assault, then the Obama campaign continued it. Trailblazer Geraldine Ferraro, who was the first Democratic vice presidential candidate, was so taken aback by the attacks that she publicly decried nominee Barack Obama as "terribly sexist" and openly criticized party chairman Howard Dean for his remarkable silence on the obvious sexism. Concerned feminists noted, among other thinly veiled sexist remarks during the campaign, Obama quipping, "I understand that Sen. Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal," and Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen in a television interview comparing Clinton to a spurned lover-turned-stalker in the film, "Fatal Attraction," noting, "Glenn Close should have stayed in that tub, and Sen. Clinton has had a remarkable career...". These attitudes, and more, define the tenor of the party leadership, and sent a message to the grassroots and media that it was "Bros Before Hoes," to quote a popular Obama-supporter T-shirt. The campaign's chauvinistic attitude was reflected in the even more condescending Democratic National Convention. There, the Obama camp made it clear it thought a Super Special Women's Night would be enough to quell the fervent support of the woman who had virtually tied him with votes and was on his heels with pledged delegates. There was a lot of pandering and lip service to women's rights, and evenings filled with anecdotes of how so many have been kept from achieving their dreams, or failed to be promoted, simply because they were women. Clinton's "18 million cracks in the glass ceiling" were mentioned a heck of a lot. More people began to wonder, though, how many cracks does it take to break the thing? Ironically, all this at an event that was negotiated and twisted at every turn in an astounding effort not to promote a woman. Virtually moments after the GOP announcement of Palin for vice president, pundits on both sides of the aisle began to wonder if Clinton supporters - pro-choice women and gays to be specific - would be attracted to the McCain-Palin ticket. The answer is, of course. There is a point where all of our issues, including abortion rights, are made safer not only if the people we vote for agree with us - but when those people and our society embrace a respect for women and promote policies that increase our personal wealth, power and political influence. Make no mistake - the Democratic Party and its nominee have created the powerhouse that is Sarah Palin, and the party's increased attacks on her (and even on her daughter) reflect that panic. The party has moved from taking the female vote for granted to outright contempt for women. That's why Palin represents the most serious conservative threat ever to the modern liberal claim on issues of cultural and social superiority. Why? Because men and women who never before would have considered voting for a Republican have either decided, or are seriously considering, doing so. They are deciding women's rights must be more than a slogan and actually belong to every woman, not just the sort approved of by left-wing special interest groups. Palin's candidacy brings both figurative and literal feminist change. The simple act of thinking outside the liberal box, which has insisted for generations that only liberals and Democrats can be trusted on issues of import to women, is the political equivalent of a nuclear explosion. The idea of feminists willing to look to the right changes not only electoral politics, but will put more women in power at lightning speed as we move from being taken for granted to being pursued, nominated and appointed and ultimately, sworn in. It should be no surprise that the Democratic response to the McCain-Palin ticket was to immediately attack by playing the liberal trump card that keeps Democrats in line - the abortion card - where the party daily tells restless feminists the other side is going to police their wombs. The power of that accusation is interesting, coming from the Democrats - a group that just told the world that if you have ovaries, then you don't count. Yes, both McCain and Palin identify as anti-abortion, but neither has led a political life with that belief, or their other religious principles, as their signature issue. Politicians act on their passions - the passion of McCain and Palin is reform. In her time in office, Palin's focus has not been to kick the gays and make abortion illegal; it has been to kick the corrupt and make wasteful spending illegal. The Republicans are now making direct appeals to Clinton supporters, knowingly crafting a political base that would include pro-choice voters. On the day McCain announced her selection as his running mate, Palin thanked Clinton and Ferraro for blazing her trail. A day later, Ferraro noted her shock at Palin's comment. You see, none of her peers, no one, had ever publicly thanked her in the 24 years since her historic run for the White House. Ferraro has since refused to divulge for whom she's voting. Many more now are realizing that it does indeed take a woman - who happens to be a Republican named Sarah Palin. Tammy Bruce is the author of "The New American Revolution" (HarperCollins, 2005) and a Fox News political contributor. She is a former president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women. A registered Democrat her entire adult life until February, she now is registered as a decline-to-state voter. This article first appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle. Page Printed from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/a_feminists_argument_for_mccai.html at September 17, 2008

Tammy Bruce is no feminist - she's a Republican shill - she's the equivalent of a "log cabin Republican". She describes herself as a "life-long Democrat", but she's voted for Reagan and Bush I, and she has recently stated in her blog that she is registered as "Decline-to-State" (in other words, she's a closet Republican). She sold out to Fox and the Republican party, imo. Sorry - not buying, Moon. You can drink the koolaid if you choose, but I know the lesser of two evils when I see it, and in this case, it's BHO.

It kind of boogles the mind that a feminist could vote for Reagan dnd the Bushies. :-( Was owning a gun that important? From an LA Times blog: Joe Biden calls it 'patriotic' for the wealthy to pay more taxes Democrats have been loudly complaining about John McCain, Sarah Palin and other Republicans routinely misrepresenting Barack Obama's tax plan by asserting the Democrat would raise the levies that Americans hate to pay across the board. In a true shocker, even a Fox News anchor gave a McCain aide flack on the matter earlier this week. Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, today sought -- in his inimitable way -- to stress that the Democratic platform calls for increasing income taxes only for those making more than $250,000 a year. But in the process, he delivered a line sure to be mocked far and wide by the GOP. "You got it," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America" when his interviewer noted that Obama was targeting the affluent. "It's time (for the well-off) to be patriotic." (See the clip below.) Already, the Republican National Committee has sent off an e-mail flagging the quote. And we're betting it shows up quickly as a laugh line in McCain and Palin stump speeches. [UPDATE: Right on cue, Palin scoffed at Biden's comment as she and McCain stumped late this morning in Iowa. Telling her typically adoring crowd what the Delaware senator had said, she parried that raising taxes isn't about patriotism, it's "about killing jobs and hurting small businesses and making things worse."] [UPDATE II: McCain, taking the stage after Palin, said of raising taxes in tough times: "It's not a badge of honor. It's just plain dumb."] -- Don Frederick

First a commission to study things, then this. Yeah, that would really fix the problem. Clueless... McCain says would fire SEC chairman Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:34pm EDT CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (Reuters) - Republican White House hopeful John McCain said on Thursday he would, as president, fire U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox for failing in his oversight of Wall Street. The Arizona senator also called for a new Mortgage and Financial Institutions (MFI) trust to work with regulators and the private sector to strengthen financial institutions that are weak before they become insolvent. "For troubled institutions this will provide an orderly process through which to identify bad loans and eventually sell them," McCain said at a rally in Iowa.

Sarah, the koolaid will not be drunk by me, LOL. The Obama Dems are drunk on it. Please pick another drink. Tang? ;-) The mysgery deepens. This is something else they were discussing on POTUS 08. Journalists were shocked that this wasn't being discussed by main stream media, though they admitted that the MSM is so far in Obama's pocket, it would be unlikely to receive much coverage. http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obama-and-the-annenberg-files-the-mystery-deepens/

(Moon) The Obama Dems Always been a plain ole Dem myself. One that voted Repub in a presidential race....once. I remember I asked what POTUS 08 was, but don't remember if and what you may have answered. Is that a radio show? Obama was the head of a business that failed? Well no wonder he appears unqualified. Bush was the head of 3 failed businesses (right?) and look where he ended up. Obama needs to go get some more of that experience to be more qualified for President. ;-D

POTUS=President Of The United States

Thank you, but I know what it stands for. I just want to know what this POTUS O8 she listens to is.

Potus 08: http://www.xmradio.com/onxm/channelpage.xmc?ch=130

The music is a little dorky, but the video really is interesting. It's amazing this guy was chosen over HRC. Absolutely incredible. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/when_obama_bragged_about_the_c.html

This is too funny: Barack Obama, the lead Presidential Democratic Party candidate, is for banning all guns in America . He is considered by those who have dealt with him as a bit more than just a little self-righteous. At a recent rural elementary school assembly in East Texas , he asked the audience for total quiet. Then, in the silence, he started to slowly clap his hands once every few seconds, holding the audience in total silence. Then he said into the microphone, 'Children, every time I clap my hands together, a child in America dies from gun violence.' Then, little Richard Earl, with a proud East Texas drawl, pierced the quiet and said: ''Well, dumb-ass, stop clapping!'

Sounds like a joke, Moon, not something that actually happened.

I know that, Karen. Did I say it actually happened? LOL! I thought this was the thrashing Palin topic. ;-))))) It made me laugh and I thought I would share.

Okie doke. I wasn't sure. Saw this morning that Todd has refused to obey his subpoena. I would hope that people understand what it shows about the candidate, i.e., that she (and her family and friends) think they are above the law.

Well at least the media doesn't think they are above the law like Obama. Lehman Brothers: Obama's Rezko-Auchi conflict of interest By Andrew Walden Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama was quick to blame the bankruptcy of Wall Street giant Lehman Brothers on Republicans' "failed philosophy". Obama's September 15 comments were repeated throughout the media�yet reporters have not noted Obama's glaring conflict of interest�the Lehman debt owed to a bank owned by the financier who loaned millions of dollars to Tony Rezko. Jockeying among the other debtors seeking repayment under Chapter 11 bankruptcy rules is BNP Paribas, a large French bank whose largest single private shareholder is Nadhmi Auchi's General Mediterranean Holdings (GMH). BNP Paribas is owed $250 million by Lehman. Nadhmi Auchi is an Iraqi whose Baathist ties go back to 1959. A formerly high-ranking official in Iraq's Oil Ministry, Auchi left Iraq at the end of the 1970s. His wealth then grew exponentially as a procurer of arms for Saddam Hussein's government during the Iran�Iraq war. He is now one of the richest men in Britain. Saddam Hussein in 1995 selected BNP, which later merged with Paribas, as the sole conduit bank handling Oil-for-Food transactions. This Clinton-era arrangement was changed in 2001 by the incoming Bush administration. Auchi was also a key financial backer for Chicago political fixer and dual US-Syrian citizen Tony Rezko. This writer explained the complex web of relationships in an August 24 article titled, "Iraqi Billionaire Threatens Reporters Investigating Rezko Affair": A secret $3.5 million loan from an Auchi company to key early-money Barack Obama fundraiser Antoin Rezko was exposed while Rezko was awaiting trial on fraud and money-laundering charges earlier this year. Rezko's bail was revoked and police showed up banging on the doors of his Wilmette Chicago mansion to drag him off to jail early in the morning of January 28th. Auchi's loan to Rezko had come on May 23, 2005 but had not been disclosed to the Court as required in his bail agreement. Three weeks later, on June 15, 2005, Rezko's wife assisted the Obamas in the purchase of their South Chicago mansion by purchasing a next-door undeveloped lot being sold with the house. According to the Times of London, "Mr. Rezko's lawyer said his client had 'longstanding indebtedness' to Mr. Auchi's General Mediterranean Holding (GMH). By June 2007 he owed it $27.9 million. Under a Loan Forgiveness Agreement described in court, M. Auchi lent Mr. Rezko $3.5 million in April 2005 and $11 million in September 2005, as well as $3.5 million transferred in April 2007. That agreement provided for the outstanding loans to be 'forgiven' in return for a stake in the 62-acre Riverside Park development." Rezko's relationship with Barack Obama goes back to at least 1990, when Obama's law firm did work relating to thousands of now-decaying Rezko apartment units in South Chicago. Rezko was a key early-money fundraiser in Obama's state Senate campaigns and his failed run at the U.S. Congress. According to The Times of London, "Mr. Auchi first met Mr. Rezko after the 2003 Iraq war and they have a business relationship." At the time Auchi was facing the possibility of extradition to France. The Times of London explains: "Mr Auchi was convicted of corruption, given a suspended sentence and fined �1.4 million in France in 2003 for his part in the Elf affair, described as the biggest political and corporate scandal in post-war Europe. He, in a statement from his media lawyers, claims he is appealing against the sentence." In 2003, Nick Cohen of the UK Guardian wrote: Allow me to introduce you to Nadhmi Auchi. He was charged in the 1950s with being an accomplice of Saddam Hussein, when the future tyrant was acquiring his taste for blood. He was investigated in the 1980s for his part in alleged bribes to the fabulously corrupt leaders of post-war Italy. In the 1990s, the Belgium Ambassador to Luxembourg claimed that Auchi's bank held money Saddam and Colonel Gadaffi had stolen from their luckless peoples. In 2002, officers from the Serious Fraud Squad raided the offices of one of Auchi's drug companies as part of an investigation of what is alleged to be the biggest swindle ever of the (British National Health Service). With allegations, albeit unproven, like these hanging over him, wouldn't you think that British MPs would have the sense to stay away? One might think Obama would also stay away, but in truth it is only the US media who are ducking this story. While ideological bias and a predisposition towards inanity might explain some of the media ignorance, the August 24 article cites another cause: Working for Auchi� attorneys from London law firm Carter-Ruck have for several months been flooding American and British newspapers and websites with letters demanding removal of material they deem "defamatory" to their client. In its June 28 edition, British satirical magazine Private Eye explains: "Until Carter-Ruck and Partners and England's stifling libel laws got to work, the few American journalists not caught up in Obama-mania were turning to the archives of the British press to answer an intriguing question: who is Nadhmi Auchi?" What is so "stifling" about English libel law? In the U.K., as Carter-Ruck explains on its own website, "A libel claimant does not have to prove that the words are false or to prove that he has in fact suffered any loss. Damage is presumed." The Obama campaign recently issued a non-denial denial in response to claims that Obama met with Auchi?contained in Jerome Corsi's bestseller, The Obama Nation. They cited only two references. One is, "Mr. Auchi's lawyer" who told the February 27, 2008 London Evening Standard, "As far as he can remember he has had no direct contact with Mr. Obama." Another is, "A lawyer for Auchi, Alasdair Pepper" who says, according to the April 16, 2008 Washington Post, "Auchi Had 'No Recollection' Of Meeting Obama or Michelle." Alasdair Pepper is the attorney whose name appears on the Carter-Ruck demand letters. Here are some questions reporters should be asking Barack Obama: Senator Obama: Lehman Brothers owes over $250 million to a bank owned in part by Nadhmi Auchi's holding company. Auchi was a key financial backer of Tony Rezko. Sources indicate you met Auchi twice when he visited Chicago in 2004. If elected, how will your relationship with Rezko and Auchi affect your policy towards Lehman Brothers?

Article from Savagepolitics.com

Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama was quick to blame the bankruptcy of Wall Street giant Lehman Brothers on Republicans' "failed philosophy". Obama's September 15 comments were repeated throughout the media�yet reporters have not noted Obama's glaring conflict of interest�the Lehman debt owed to a bank owned by the financier who loaned millions of dollars to Tony Rezko. This is nothing more than a "six degrees." In the world of finance, one doesn't even need six steps. Irrelevant. Points to nothing. And you know I'm no Obama-ite.

Barack Obama, the lead Presidential Democratic Party candidate, is for banning all guns in America. Sounds sensible to me.

I thought this was a bit interesting (and long) in light of some discussions about Social Security solvency plans and the financial market crisis I had recently. http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/sep2008/pi20080918_216336.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_news+%2B+analysis

What is relevant is: how will Obama's relationship with Rezko and Auchi affect his policy towards Lehman Brothers. There is nothing wrong with owning a hand gun or rifle, if one goes through with the permits. I don't like the idea of selling machine guns. Most criminals get those weapons on the black market.

There is nothing wrong with owning a hand gun or rifle, I'm sure the parents of or the actual kids (if they could) killed might disagree with you after they've shot themselves or their friends/relatives mistakenly with a (legal) gun found in a drawer or cabinet. While it is constitutionally legal, I do think that's something that should be amended. We don't have/need a militia anymore, the purpose of that amendment. Also, I think the permit process needs some serious tightening if it does end up staying on the books. Agreed about the criminals.

Oh and thanks for the POTUS 08 clarification. Didn't occur to me it could be satellite radio.

(Moon) What is relevant is: how will Obama's relationship with Rezko and Auchi affect his policy towards Lehman Brothers. Huh? There is no Lehman Brothers anymore. (Dorine) While it is constitutionally legal, I do think that's something that should be amended. We don't have/need a militia anymore, the purpose of that amendment. As I recall the Supreme Court just ruled earlier this summer that the Second Amendment guaranteed the right to bear whatever bloody arms you have, despite the fact that we don't have militias anymore. It didn't matter to them.

In order to prohibit gun ownership, a repeal of the 2nd amendment would be required. Although I believe that the majority of Americans are in favor of some type of gun control, I doubt we'd be able to get a repeal of the 2nd amendment through in my lifetime. I cannot believe that the husband of a VP candidate is getting away with ignoring a subpoena. Then again, the Bush administration have always held the Justice department in complete contempt - I guess I shouldn't expect any better from "Bush-Lite" & Co.... And lastly, I remembered this quote, and it reminded me of someone - "If Facism ever comes to the US it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross" �Sinclair Lewis 1935

(Sarah) a repeal of the 2nd amendment would be required. Although I believe that the majority of Americans are in favor of some type of gun control, I doubt we'd be able to get a repeal of the 2nd amendment through in my lifetime. Yes, it would require a repeal, in actuality a new amendment that overturns the 2nd. That requires first a two-thirds votes in the House and Senate (ain't gonna happen) and then three-fourths of the states must affirm (again, ditto). ~~~~~~~~~~ Very typical. Bail out businesses but provide no help for regular people (well, directly, at least). From the AP: Paulson resists calls for added help in bailout By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Sunday that the nation's credit markets remain frozen and Congress must move quickly to pass a $700 billion bailout package for financial firms. But key Democrats said the legislation needs changes to provide better protections for taxpayers and homeowners in danger of losing their homes. "The credit markets are still very fragile right now and frozen," Paulson said in an interview on NBC's Meet the Press. "We need to deal with this and deal with it quickly." Paulson made the rounds of the television talk shows to stress the need for speed in getting the bailout package approved. The administration spent the weekend negotiating the details of the proposal with members of Congress with the expectation that it can be passed in the next week. Paulson said that "it pains me tremendously to have the American taxpayer put in this position but it is better than the alternative." Paulson and President Bush have argued that the alternative would be credit markets that remain frozen, meaning that businesses will fail because they can't get the loans they need to operate and the economy will grind to a halt because consumers, who account for two-thirds of economic activity, won't be able to get the credit they need to keep spending. On Saturday, Bush said the White House is ready to work with Congress to quickly enact legislation to allow the government to purchase hundreds of billions of dollars worth of bad debt linked to the collapse of the housing market. The administration proposal would be the biggest government intervention since the Great Depression. It would dole out huge sums of money to financial firms to purchase their holdings of bad mortgage-backed securities so that these firms can resume normal lending operations. The bad mortgage debt has been at the heart of the current credit crisis which hit more than a year ago but erupted with special ferocity in the past two weeks forcing extraordinary government actions. Two weeks ago, the government seized control of the nation's two largest mortgage companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and then last week, it took control of the country's largest insurance company, American International Group Inc. The measure that the administration sent up to Congress on Saturday is a mere three pages in length. While Paulson emphasized the need for speed, Democrats said Sunday that they could do it quickly while also adding necessary protections for taxpayers and help for people facing the threat of mortgage foreclosures. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., appearing on ABC's "This Week," said if all of this help was being directed to Wall Street there was also a need to provide help for people on Main Street. But Paulson, also appearing on ABC, said, "We need this to be clean and to be quick." Paulson resisted suggestions being made by Democrats that the program be changed to include further relief for homeowners facing mortgage foreclosures and to include an additional $50 billion stimulus effort. Some Democrats have also suggested capping compensation of executives at firms who get the bailout help. Paulson said he was concerned that debate over adding all of those proposals would slow the economy down, delaying the rescue effort that is so urgently needed to get financial markets moving again. "The biggest help we can give the American people right now is to stabilize the financial system," Paulson said. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said that he believed there would be changes to Paulson's plan and that agreement could still be reached quickly. Schumer said that he was pushing to get a provision where the government would receive stock warrants in return for the bailout relief and for creation of a government oversight board to supervise the huge operation, which under Paulson's plan would be run out of the Treasury Department. He said Paulson seemed receptive to changes when he had discussed his ideas with him. "I have told him ... we need changes related to housing, we need to put the taxpayer first ahead of bondholders, shareholders," Schumer said on "Fox News Sunday." However, Republican lawmakers said that the Democratic efforts risks slowing down a measure that was urgently needed. "This would be the most serious financial crisis that the world has ever dealt with. It is not a time to be playing games," said House Republican Leader John Boehner. Paulson said in the interviews that he had been talking to other governments about the need for them to offer similar relief because the current financial crisis is global. He said that the nation's outdated regulatory system for financial markets must be overhauled but the first job is to get the most sweeping rescue package since the Great Depression passed by Congress in coming days. The proposal would raise the statutory limit on the national debt from $10.6 trillion to $11.3 trillion to make room for the massive rescue. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080921/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown

Yay for those *fiscal conservative* Republicans running the show over the past majority of a decade!

Yeah, but they haven't raised taxes. ;-)

*snort* Isn't it wonderful that Palin "rejected" the "Bridge to Nowhere", but so kindly kept $25 million taxpayer dollars to build the "Road to Nowhere", which apparently will be quite useful anyway.... Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein said the 3.2-mile road will be useful for road races, hunters and possibly future development. But with no bridge to serve it, that's probably about it. "I think it will be good for recreational things like a 5K and a 10K," Weinstein said. "And instead of people walking through brush, it may be used for hunting in the area." You're welcome Alaska!

Pact on Debates Will Let McCain and Obama Spar By PATRICK HEALY Published: September 20, 2008 The Obama and McCain campaigns have agreed to an unusual free-flowing format for the three televised presidential debates, which begin Friday, but the McCain camp fought for and won a much more structured approach for the questioning at the vice-presidential debate, advisers to both campaigns said Saturday. Mr. Obama, shown in Florida on Friday, won an agreement for the first debates to be about foreign policy and national security. At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates. McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive. [Ed. note (being kind) - Awwww, poor thing....} The wrangling was chiefly between the McCain-Palin camp and the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which is sponsoring the forums. Commission members wanted a relaxed format that included time for unpredictable questioning and challenges between the two vice-presidential candidates. On Wednesday, the commission unanimously rejected a proposal sought by advisers to Ms. Palin and Senator John McCain of Arizona, the Republican presidential nominee, to have the moderator ask questions and the candidates answer, with no time for unfettered exchanges. Advisers to Mr. Biden say they were comfortable with either format. Both campaigns see the four debates as pivotal moments in a presidential race that is not only extraordinarily close but also drawing intense interest from voters; roughly 40 million viewers watched the major speeches at the two parties� conventions. The upheaval in the financial markets has recast the race in recent days, moreover, which both sides believe will only heighten attention for the debates. A commission member said that the new agreement on the vice-presidential debate was reached late Saturday morning. It calls for shorter blocks of candidate statements and open discussion than at the presidential debates. McCain advisers said they were only somewhat concerned about Ms. Palin�s debating skills compared with those of Mr. Biden, who has served six terms in the Senate, or about his chances of tripping her up. Instead, they say, they wanted Ms. Palin to have opportunities to present Mr. McCain�s positions, rather than spending time talking about her experience or playing defense. While the debates between presidential nominees are traditionally the main events in the fall election season, the public interest in Ms. Palin has proved extraordinary, and a large audience is expected for her national debate debut. Indeed, both the McCain and Obama campaigns have similar concerns about the vice-presidential matchup in St. Louis: that Ms. Palin, of Alaska, as a new player in national politics, or Mr. Biden, of Delaware, as a loquacious and gaffe-prone speaker, could commit a momentum-changing misstep in their debate. The negotiations for the three 90-minute debates between the men at the top of the tickets were largely free of brinksmanship. Neither side threatened to pull out, and concerns about camera angles and stagecraft were minor. [there's more....] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us/politics/21debate.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin

Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein said the 3.2-mile road will be useful for road races, hunters and possibly future development. Yeah, I think I mentioned this total waste of money before. Criminal when the roads and infrastructure in cities across America is crumbling....literally!

Using the money for it's been mentioned before, but I didn't know exactly what they were going to do with this expensive dead end road. If that was in something previously I missed it. Speaking of crumbling infrastructure, I saw a few days ago the rebuilt bridge that collapsed in Minnesota just reopened.

Right, I didn't post about the road's use (didn't know - all I saw was a pic showing how useless it was). The fact that the earmark money (which eventually lost its earmark when it became the poster child for pork) went into Alaska's general transportion/infrastructure fund was criminal. Smoke and mirrors. No bridge but you get to keep the money too. Insanity. Yeah, saw how the Minnesota bridge reopened. We have bridges and highway overpasses in the city in worst shape than the Minnesota one.

Yikes! Actually ours probably in the best shape either, though a several have had tarps all over them for I think years, with no discernible work done. Maybe at night when I don't see it. One bridge has been worked on noticeably for years, I can only wonder when they'll finish.

You know, I may seem insulting when I post this bit and my comments, but you know what, the specifically white women referred to in this article who believe this, IMO frankly deserve to be insulted. Because they insult me as a woman and as an American. It just shows the extreme ignorance of (some) women in this country if this is the case. Or they just don't care and have some other agenda. I bolded the passages that offended me. Really, people like this shouldn't be allowed to vote. To say that you have the same ideology is one thing. To say their platform (which I consider anti-woman) says that they have a better understanding of women is ridiculous IMO. I guess if women in general feel women's rights are to be pushed back to the dark ages, then well, ok. I guess they do have a good understanding of women. http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080922/pl_politico/13714;_ylt=AuBcD4USWt5AHJ5oFUYitfqs0NUE Exclusive: McCain closes huge gap on key question for women David Paul Kuhn Mon Sep 22, 6:15 AM ET Since picking Sarah Palin as his running mate, John McCain has obliterated what had been a 34-percentage-point deficit in a poll of likely women voters on the question of which candidate has a �better understanding of women and what is important� to them. In this latest poll, conducted Sept. 11-15, age remained a key determinant in response to the question about women�s concerns. Young women, ages 18-34, chose the Obama/Biden ticket as more empathetic to their needs, while women aged 35-64 went for McCain/Palin. Unlike black and Hispanic women, White women saw McCain and Palin as most understanding of their concerns. About one in four women who supported Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the primaries now said McCain and Palin have a better grasp of women�s needs than Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden.

Executive bailout compensation? Limits on it? From my money?? I'm aghast that it would even be on the table! Democrats want pay limits, loan aid in bailout By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS and MARTIN CRUTSINGER, Associated Press Writer Senate Democrats are proposing to add government help for homeowners and limits on executive compensation to the government's $700 billion financial bailout of Wall Street. A draft of the plan obtained Monday by The Associated Press shows that Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd also wants the government to get a stake (Ed note: good move) in the companies helped by the unprecedented rescue. The measure would end the program at the end of next year, instead of creating a two-year initiative as the Bush administration has requested. It also would add layers of congressional oversight (Ed note: unnecessary, including an emergency board to keep an eye on the program with two House and Senate appointees.

You think oversight is unnecessary? I don't think there should be layers, but some rather than none would be prudent I'd think.

Mind boggling. I can't believe this number keeps going so far up and up. And that the number is getting out. China toxic milk sickens 53,000 as scare spreads http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/chinafoodsafetychild;_ylt=AlsJbAUeyu_qwXc40_PCJ2.s0NUE

(Dorine) You think oversight is unnecessary? Congressional. They're worthless. Let the Fed provide oversight. It's the only institution out there with the credentials, true fiscal integrity, and a minimal political motivations.

Or maybe give it to a specifically created, limited-purpose board made up of former Fed governors or similar.

I would tend to favor the latter.

From George Will of all people. McCain Loses His Head By George F. Will Tuesday, September 23, 2008; Page A21 "The queen had only one way of settling all difficulties, great or small. 'Off with his head!' she said without even looking around." -- "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama. Channeling his inner Queen of Hearts, John McCain furiously, and apparently without even looking around at facts, said Chris Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should be decapitated. This childish reflex provoked the Wall Street Journal to editorialize that "McCain untethered" -- disconnected from knowledge and principle -- had made a "false and deeply unfair" attack on Cox that was "unpresidential" and demonstrated that McCain "doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does." To read the Journal's details about the depths of McCain's shallowness on the subject of Cox's chairmanship, see "McCain's Scapegoat" (Sept. 19, Page A22). Then consider McCain's characteristic accusation that Cox "has betrayed the public's trust." Perhaps an old antagonism is involved in McCain's fact-free slander. His most conspicuous economic adviser is Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who previously headed the Congressional Budget Office. There he was an impediment to conservatives, including then-Rep. Cox, who, as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, persistently tried and generally failed to enlist CBO support for "dynamic scoring" that would estimate the economic growth effects of proposed tax cuts. In any case, McCain's smear -- that Cox "betrayed the public's trust" -- is a harbinger of a McCain presidency. For McCain, politics is always operatic, pitting people who agree with him against those who are "corrupt" or "betray the public's trust," two categories that seem to be exhaustive -- there are no other people. McCain's Manichaean worldview drove him to his signature legislative achievement, the McCain-Feingold law's restrictions on campaigning. Today, his campaign is creatively finding interstices in laws intended to restrict campaign giving and spending. (For details, see The Post of Sept. 17, Page A4; and the New York Times of Sept. 20, Page One.) By a Gresham's Law of political discourse, McCain's Queen of Hearts intervention in the opaque financial crisis overshadowed a solid conservative complaint from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, the RSC decried the improvised torrent of bailouts as a "dangerous and unmistakable precedent for the federal government both to be looked to and indeed relied upon to save private sector companies from the consequences of their poor economic decisions." This letter, listing just $650 billion of the perhaps more than $1 trillion in new federal exposures to risk, was sent while McCain's campaign, characteristically substituting vehemence for coherence, was airing an ad warning that Obama favors "massive government, billions in spending increases." The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of capital. So, is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism. Does McCain have qualms about this, or only quarrels? On "60 Minutes" Sunday evening, McCain, saying "this may sound a little unusual," said that he would like to replace Cox with Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York who is the son of former governor Mario Cuomo. McCain explained that Cuomo has "respect" and "prestige" and could "lend some bipartisanship." Conservatives have been warned. Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either. It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed? georgewill@washpost.com http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/22/AR2008092202583.html

Analysis: Bush holds Washington blame-free By TERENCE HUNT, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) � How did it happen, America's grave financial crisis? President Bush offered a bunch of explanations but held Washington completely blameless, painting a picture of a government standing innocently on the sidelines as the economy went off the rails. Somehow, under Bush's scenario, the country wound up at the precipice of "a long and painful recession" at a time when, apparently, the Congress, the White House, the regulators and the Fed were doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing. Now that the economy has tanked, Bush says the federal government is responding with "decisive action." Shouldn't the people in charge have been doing that before everything became such a mess? "Our entire economy is in danger," Bush said in an address to the nation Wednesday night. Nowhere in his 13-minute speech did the president suggest that the people in Washington who are supposed to keep an eye on the economy missed a step, failed to raise alarms or hesitated to intervene. The guilty parties in Bush's script were overseas lenders flush with cash, American borrowers reaching for more than they could afford, easy credit terms, a banking system eager to cooperate and too much optimism about rising home values. Bush spoke vaguely about investment banks that "found themselves saddled with" toxic assets and banks that "found themselves" with questionable balance sheets. The economic collapse � well, it happened. "The gears of the American financial system began grinding to a halt," Bush said, talking to the country as if he were an economics professor in a freshman course. But now, there's plenty of action with federal takeovers and bailouts that have reshaped America's financial industry and left the concept of free enterprise in the dust. On Capitol Hill, key Republicans and Democrats reported agreement in principle Thursday on the outlines of a bailout package and prepared to show it to Bush for his endorsement of their changes to the plan. Bush is a sharp-elbows politician, fiercely partisan and combative. The eight years of his presidency are filled with no-holds-barred, blame-game, finger-pointing attacks on Democrats. But not on Wednesday night. Not when Bush desperately needs Democratic votes to pass the $700 billion (that's with a b) plan to buy distressed assets from financial institutions to shore up the banking system and unlock the nation's severe credit crunch. He could not risk offending Democrats because so many Republicans are balking at his proposal. Bush held his tongue and spoke instead of the spirit of bipartisan cooperation between Democrats and Republicans. He invited presidential rivals John McCain and Barack Obama to an extraordinary White House meeting with congressional leaders on Thursday to find a way forward. Appearing before the nation Wednesday night, the president had a formidable challenge to persuade anxious Americans to swallow the bitter medicine of digging in their pockets to pay for a rescue package that could exceed the advertised costs and soar beyond $1 trillion. The painful truth is, no one knows how big the price tag will be. Across the country, Americans are losing their homes or watching neighbors fall into mortgage foreclosure. Small businesses can't borrow money. But the answer from Washington is to bail out the titans on Wall Street, not the people on Main Street. Americans are anxious and angry and the politicians know it. Bush's argument is that rescuing the huge financial companies will preserve America's overall economy and help consumers and businesses get the credit they need. That is a tough sell. Democrats demanded � and got � the administration's acceptance of limits on the pay of executives whose companies would be rescued. McCain has said he would fire the head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is supposed to oversee Wall Street, but the White House has shot that down. In his address, Bush said Americans "deserve clear answers" about how the whole crisis happened. But government accountability was not among them. Borrowers and lenders? They got the presidential spotlight. "Easy credit, combined with the faulty assumption that home values would continue to rise, led to excesses and bad decisions," Bush said. "Many mortgage lenders approved loans for borrowers without carefully examining their ability to pay. Many borrowers took out loans larger than they could afford, assuming that they could sell or refinance their homes at a higher price later on." But whose job is it to regulate the questionable lending? That would be the government. And Bush is in charge of it. Bush came into office eight years ago complaining that he had inherited a recession. It was brief and mild. When he delivered his speech Wednesday night, Bush had 118 days left before the next president is sworn in on Jan. 20. When Bush leaves, his successor will inherit a problem of historic proportions. EDITOR'S NOTE _ Terence Hunt has covered the White House for The Associated Press since the Reagan presidency. Hosted by Copyright � 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Bush's argument is that rescuing the huge financial companies will preserve America's overall economy and help consumers and businesses get the credit they need. Well, they failed me and my bank taking so long and handed JPM Chase a beaut of a deal on a silver platter, so I say pox on every last one of them. From what I'm reading initially, there was a run on the bank since 9/15 (including me truthfully) and liquidity became an issue so the FDIC "came to the rescue". WM people were way quiet after saying just last week they had enough $$ to go for over a year or so. Ironically I put my $$ in Chase.

Realistically, no bank has the deposits on hand to deal with a run.

Then it's fraud I'd think as they said they did. And if it's not, then it's some lame excuse for the FDIC to run in. Someone was making a point and maybe doing someone a favor at the same time perhaps. *snort* I read that on Anderson Cooper's show where a panel was talking about the bailout, etc, that one of them called Bush a "high-functioning moron". On national TV! I hope it's true and there's video somewhere.

Fraud is a bit strong. The banking system is backed by faith, just like our money. "In faith we trust," They took off the designation of a silver certificate years ago. ;-) And if it's not, then it's some lame excuse for the FDIC to run in. I'm not quite following what you're saying. However, once the FDIC comes in to cover the insured deposits, then the bank has already failed. But it is still going to take some time before you get your money from the FDIC. I read that on Anderson Cooper's show where a panel was talking about the bailout, etc, that one of them called Bush a "high-functioning moron". On national TV! I don't think that's the only time that has occurred. It's just more frequent.

I've never heard of anyone saying it, out loud, on national TV. But could be. Re the FDIC taking over, yes, that I'm aware of, but the FDIC won't have to do anything in this instance, they turned around and sold it immediately. And after Chase bid on it in April and were turned down, now they get it for a song...and clean, I believe.

This is the part that fascinates me if even remotely true, though how could they not know... But the seizure and the deal with JPMorgan came as a shock to Washington Mutual�s board, which was kept completely in the dark: the company�s new chief executive, Alan H. Fishman, was in midair, flying from New York to Seattle at the time the deal was finally brokered, according to people briefed on the situation. And of course.... Mr. Fishman, who has been on the job for less than three weeks, is eligible for $11.6 million in cash severance and will get to keep his $7.5 million signing bonus, according to an analysis by James F. Reda and Associates. WaMu was not immediately available for comment.

Ooops, from here... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/business/26wamu.html?hp

Okay, now I understand what you're talking about. I thought it was related to something you said last week... But as for fraud, that has yet to be determined. Have any official financial filings been falsified? Also, there's a difference in declaring bankruptcy and being seized or taken over by the regulators. As for its BOD being shocked? Doesn't shock me. I've yet to encounter a BOD that takes its oversight responsibilities seriously. For more than 25 years, they've successfully avoided any measure to be held accountable. Meetings are merely a way to pick up a spare $30K a pop for the good old boy network. The only part that I believe will be challenged (and probably successfully this time) is the guy's exec comp package. Washington Mutual publicly insisted that it could remain independent, but the giant thrift had quietly hired Goldman Sachs about two weeks ago to identify potential bidders. But nobody could make the numbers work and several deadlines passed without anyone submitting a bid. But as panic gripped financial markets last week after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, WaMu customers started withdrawing their deposits. It is the panic (customer withdrawals) that escalates a situation beyond what is capable of being worked out.

I think if they'd been more open and the wrangling on the bailout pkg perhaps so many people wouldn't have gotten so edgy and run. Communication goes a long way. I read also that the FDIC stepped in on a Thursday, which is unusual as they usually do takeovers on Fridays, because of media leaks that might encourage a run. If there was already a run as they say, what was another day going to matter? The ironic thing is both me and my coworker took our $$ to Chase. I don't like them, but it wouldn't have mattered anyway. They're possibly the lesser of several banking "evils" for me around here. I can't believe the deal Chase got. They are jumping up and down that they saved so much. I understand some generalities in the difference between bankruptcy and being seized. As far as the board goes, I'll presume they'll have sold all their stock and weren't *that* unaware.

I think if they'd been more open and the wrangling on the bailout pkg perhaps so many people wouldn't have gotten so edgy and run. Communication goes a long way. Doubtful. Ever seen the movie Noble House or read the book? People mistake some activity at a bank and cause a run, which eventually leads to the collapse of numerous institutions, where no problems had existed. No one sits back and does nothing where his/her money is concerned. what was another day going to matter? Panic and huge panic. I can't believe the deal Chase got. They are jumping up and down that they saved so much. As did BOA and Barclays... cents on the dollar

I did read Noble House...the whole series actually, but it's been so long I remember none of it. Ah, I see, if there was a panic, there'd not be anything good for Chase to buy.

And pfft! I'll have 3 Chase Visa cards now when they switch over my WaMu one. Just opened one last week when I moved $. I think Chase has bought every bank I've ever had a credit card with.

And interesting, just read WaMu will probably declare bankruptcy. Now this I don't understand. So the bits that are left as WaMu are what will be bankrupt?

LOL! Not exactly, but panic spreads and would infect other institutions that were relatively alright. As I said, no financial institution, no matter how sound, can withstand a run. No one has that kind of ready cash. They do maintain the required levels of reserves, but that is only a fraction of what owuld be necessary to pay off all their depositors.

Now this I don't understand. So the bits that are left as WaMu are what will be bankrupt? Yep. They sold off what they could (@ market, which ain't much) and the rest will go via the bankruptcy judge.

They do maintain the required levels of reserves, but that is only a fraction of what owuld be necessary to pay off all their depositors. As does the FDIC, though I read they were low on reserves, but between that and the great deal of liability in WaMu is why they were brokers but never really took ownership, correct? The thing that still surprises me is I could imagine the shockwaves it would cause to let a bank like this fail at this point, but it couldn't help itself anymore I guess.

As does the FDIC, though I read they were low on reserves We're talking about different things here: what the FDIC actually has as funding (its reserves) and what are called "required reserves" for commercial banks. Those are pledged assets equal to a certain percentage of certain deposit accounts. The assets are pledged, like collateral but not. but between that and the great deal of liability in WaMu is why they were brokers but never really took ownership, correct? ??? Not following again.

Oh wait, they did take ownership, but sold it right off without having to cover deposits themselves.

(Dorine)I read that on Anderson Cooper's show where a panel was talking about the bailout, etc, that one of them called Bush a "high-functioning moron". I saw it. It was Paul Begala. They were talking about Bush's address on the finanical crisis, and all of them--Paul plus the two Republicans, Gloria Borger and Ed Rollins, who is a GOP strategist--commented on how hopeless he sounded and how no one in the Congress in his own party respects him any more. Then Begala called him a high functioning moron; neither of the others disagreed. In fact, Rollins kept shaking his head as he then discussed Sarah Palin's latest performance with Katie Couric, lamenting that she was so ill prepared. You can read about Palin's interview here; I saw it and couldn't beleive what I was hearing. John McCain has chosen as his #2--Rain Man! :-( http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/us/politics/26watch.html?ref=television

Even conservatives are calling for Palin to scram. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=

I've only seen snippets of Katie Couric's interview, like the part where Sarah couldn't find the right word (mock). LOL! And there was another interesting moement, when Katie asked her for a specific instance where McCain had backed any form of regulation. Sarah said she'd have to get back to her. Holy moly! McCain can�t repudiate his choice for running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP�s unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden. The Dems wouldn't have this problem if they'd put Hill at the top of the ticket and BO as her VP. Except for his alleged ulterior motives and Islamic ties for Moon, they'd be so far ahead of McCain and anybody he choose.

Well, I strongly disagree with this conservative writer that BO "faces the same problem with Biden." Oh, please. He doesn't belong in the same sentence with Palin! C'mon. The man knows more about foreign policy that the other three put together. Of course I agree that Hill should have had the nom, but that's old news. I'm done, and I refuse to moan about it any longer which plays right into the R's gameplan. You don't think the R's wouldn't be blasting away at Hill now if she were on the Dem ticket? LOL!

They'd be blasting away, but no one would have a shot that she couldn't handle the current economic crisis. That's all I'm saying.

Nice work if you can get it... WaMu CEO could get $13.65 mln for 18 days work http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN2632102320080926

As the article indicates, Chase doesn't seem to be concerned. It is not liable for the payout. Which would leave it with the bankrupt shell entity, the BHC. Seems like he'd have to stand in line with other creditors to get paid. Good luck! But on the other hand, he isn't to blame for the problems nor did he stand a chance to turn things around once deposits started to go. I see that the AIG CEO wouldn't take his $22 million severance package.

An excellent example of how the good old boy network still functions is the deal given to WaMu former's CEO. If anyone should've been fired for cause, he should've been on the poster, front and center, but the official filing said it was for a reason "other than cause." Here's a fairly decent analysis of the severance packages: http://blog.riskmetrics.com/2008/09/will_wamu_executives_pay_get_a.html

I'm catching up here. Interesting article, Karen. Now on the economy: Senator Clinton: We need some kind of an entity like the old HOLC, the Homeowners Loan Corporation. To be prepared we should start working on the legislation now to try to get something like that up and going so we can have one place in the government to do these mortgage modifications and try to replicate the success that we had 70 years ago. It has not escaped notice that Senator Clinton is providing real leadership on the economic and housing crisis. If anyone missed it, hooray for Bill Clinton who made sure everyone knew that it is Hillary who is out front with sensible, real solutions. Had the country listened over a year ago when she called for a 90 day moratorium on foreclosures as that local financial institutions could do work outs to allow people to keep their homes, preserve their communities and pay realistic rates, we might never have reached this crisis. Some people might not have made as much money through speculation and risk taking, but we would have had a countrywide spasm of true compassion and common sense. My recollection is that BO flicked off the idea and said the wrong people would benefit. Anyway...here we are in a crisis, few people have clean hands and it looks as though the bandits are going to make out like bandits. Can anyone explain why a first step toward fiscal sanity would not be, as Senator Clinton proposed, an immediate moratorium on primary home foreclosures coupled with a requirement that for any financial institution to receive federal bailout funds, it must renegotiate loans for the express purpose of keeping people in their homes at reasonable rates and responsible transparent terms, terms which can be established by a non-partisan group of economists with a working deadline of 10 days. Big financial institutions suffering from cash flow problems? Let the executives with a salary of over x$ take a few weeks of pay deferment so that these firms do not go under, yet the people at the top feel some of the pinch and take some responsibility for the risks they took, if not personally than institutionally. Real people would benefit, localities would not face the dire consequences of vacant properties and tax loss, and the general public would understand that the priorities of the government are to help them and their communities. Consumer confidence wold be restored. No new bureaucracies would be required. Print the regulations, re-assign compliance personnel, and activate Congressional oversight. Would that be so bad or hard? At least as a first step?

I am confused about the response to McCain's decision to work at his day job until this economic crisis has been resolved. I can't understand how doing your job somehow becomes a political move. If these candidates worked at "real" jobs where they pulled a paycheck based on their actually showing up to work, this would be a non-issue. If the company was falling apart and potentially looking at chapter 11, the company officials would be expected to be at work until the crisis was resolved--not campaigning for themselves to take a new job. This is so annoying. It really is irritating that we pay for these politicians to fly around and campaign for themselves. They've been getting paychecks all along, thanks to our tax dollars. Basically, Obama has been getting paid for two years to campaign for president. He's spent his entire time in the senate, getting paid well, receiving excellent health benefits and not worrying about paying his bills. Mr. Hope and Change appears to have no guilt for taking ou tax dollars while he campaigns for a new job. Yet, when McCain wants to work for his money, Obama calls it a political move. I call it caring about the company that you work for--and wanting to keep your job. I have no doubt that if it were HRC, she would be back in Washington, too--would have been there, rather, from day one. Hillary 2012

I think my new favorite topic... Up to 10,000 staff at the New York office of the bankrupt investment bank Lehman Brothers will share a bonus pool set aside for them that is worth $2.5bn �1.4bn), Barclays Bank, which is buying the business, confirmed last night.... A spokesman for Barclays said the $2.5bn bonus pool in New York had been set aside before Lehman Brothers filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy in the United States a week ago. To which I have to respond, so what? Set aside? Give me a break. A bonus for doing what? Running a 150+ year old firm into the ground. Someone needs to amend the dictionary definition of 'bonus'. The firm is in bankruptcy and it has creditors. One would think that bonus pool could pay off quite a number of its legitimate creditors. Instead, the write-off will continue down the food chain. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/fury-at-25bn-bonus-for-lehmans-new-york-staff-937560.html http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article4795072.ece

(Moon) I can't understand how doing your job somehow becomes a political move. Please, Moon. Probably because he'd been little to none on his day job anytime recently? Certainly no more or less than BO. Was it not important enough to attend to previously? That goes for any and all politicians IMO (including Hillary!). I don't know how any of them campaign and do their "day jobs". And now conveniently, he was too busy for a debate?, which to me is a perfect time to hear what he has to say. t really is irritating that we pay for these politicians to fly around and campaign for themselves. They've been getting paychecks all along, thanks to our tax dollars. Basically, Obama has been getting paid for two years to campaign for president. McCain and HRC weren't doing the same thing during the primaries?

Yet, when McCain wants to work for his money.... I call it caring about the company that you work for--and wanting to keep your job. I apparently missed this the first time around, but I have to just LOL!!!! at that statement.

I see Palin was down in your neck of the woods, sort of, Mari and Linda. I have no problem with people being able to identify with her, but as far as being able to match those to actual policies might be a bit harder. It seems this woman is unaware that Palin cut the budget for special-needs children by 62% in Alaska in the last year. But in all fairness, perhaps they don't get a lot of special needs kids? Though makes you wonder why the budget would be so big in the first place then. "I think she can relate to the common mom," said Olsen-Liney, who has a 3-year-old son with a neurological disorder that prevents him from speaking. "I like the fact that [she's] somebody who recognizes that not enough is done for special-needs children." http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20080927_Palin_grabs_a_seat_at_the_bar.html

Time to party! http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4837644.ece

Duh!! http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/business/27sec.html?em

Sorry Dorine, but even on the campaign trail HRC went to Washington to vote on important issues. That's the first job. I don't get the joke. 9Karen), One would think that bonus pool could pay off quite a number of its legitimate creditors. Instead, the write-off will continue down the food chain. I agree. There must be some reason not available to us mere mortals as to why this is allowed to continue with this crisis? All those stupid journalist can't take away time from criticizing Sarah Palin to crank out articles on this very important subject? Or is this what Capitolism 101 is all about? :-(

BTW, Tina Fey did another stint on SNL last night as Sarah Palin being interviewed by Katie Couric. If you missed it, I would imagine they've got it on YouTube.

I wasn't making a joke. And going back to vote is one thing and something they all should've done. There's not a vote everyday, I don't think, and they weren't there everyday. My point is you kept singling out BO for campaigning instead of doing his day job, yet he did no different than anyone else. Whether any or all of them got back to vote on all they should, I don't know off the top of my head and I'm not bothering to go look up on what votes they all missed. It wasn't a situation that McCain had to "suspend his campaign" and skip the debate (which BTW, did you see all his talking points mistakenly faxed to the media by his communications person about it?). Plus when he was there, he reportedly had no significant contribution to make that couldn't be done over the phone. And it's funny he had to "suspend his campaign" and ditch Letterman, but didn't have to rush out so fast to not talk to Katie Couric at the time he was supposed to be with Letterman......and then not leave until the following morning. There are trains to DC probably every hour or so if he didn't feel like dealing with traffic. ;-)

SNL Toooooo funny! http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/couric-palin-open/704042/

All those stupid journalist can't take away time from criticizing Sarah Palin to crank out articles on this very important subject? Because focusing on a woman "Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League" (and by proxy, questioning McCain's judgement since he picked her), who could be one heartbeat away from the presidency, isn't remotely important. No, not at all. Seems to me, the journalists could do both. I'd like to think they could multitask.

Thanks Dorine for the SNL link. Way tooo funny!

My point is you kept singling out BO for campaigning instead of doing his day job, yet he did no different than anyone else. BO has been running for President for years now, considering that he is a new senator, I would say that took a lot out of his day job. I grant you that Sarah appears out of her league for now, but you know what? I have faith in her. She seems to be a quick learner, and I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, why? Maybe because I am thrilled to have a woman held in high regard by the Republican party. Is that a sign of change? Hell yes! Yes, I have faith in her as a woman to come through for me. She will learn what she needs to learn, she will work twice as hard to get it right. She is the Gov. of the biggest state in the nation. She can speak in public, she reads the monitor well, she wears skirts and heels, and she wants to lead. If I were in her position, I know what I would do, and I would come through. Have faith in your female representative. FGS, we've had Bush for 8 years!!!

Gov. Blunt Statement on Obama Campaign�s Abusive Use of Missouri Law Enforcement JEFFERSON CITY - Gov. Matt Blunt today issued the following statement on news reports that have exposed plans by U.S. Senator Barack Obama to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics. �St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign. �What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment. �This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson�s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election. �Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.� http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

I just watched the SNL clip. Wow, even Katie gets ripped. Sad state, and sad times to be a woman? ;-) Go men!

(Moon) Maybe because I am thrilled to have a woman held in high regard by the Republican party. But it's becoming increasing apparent they don't feel that way now themselves. She is the Gov. of the biggest state in the nation. In acreage maybe. Our mayor governs a comparable amount of people in just one of our boroughs, let alone probably 5 square blocks. She can speak in public, she reads the monitor well, she wears skirts and heels, and she wants to lead. *shakes head*

I wouldn't automatically back a candidate just because she was a woman. She needs to be the right woman.

Don't shake your head, think of Bush! ;-) Dorine, you are speaking of a small group of R that don't want her. IMO, it's the group that would have a problem with any woman. LOL, yes, I do know that it's in acreage only. Still it looks good on paper. ;-) But that gives her an advantage on Energy policies because of the oil, wind and natural gas resources. Energy is one of the lead issues today and Sarah does have experience there. Biden might know his foreign policies, but that can be learned. I'm looking forward to the debate. This is an excellent explanation for the current economic crisis. Watch it to the end: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

Kathryn, if all goes as planned, the right woman will run in 2012. :-)

(Kathryn) I wouldn't automatically back a candidate just because she was a woman. She needs to be the right woman I just said the same thing almost verbatim to my boss and co-worker. Citing Pelosi as well. A bad woman can do more damage than not having one at all IMO. I am thinking of Bush! ;-D (Moon) Still it looks good on paper. ;-) Hee. Biden might know his foreign policies, but that can be learned. And was learned over 29 years, not 6 weeks.

But Biden is also much older. It can be learned. Pelosi is out of control. But she's turning into an old fox. Did you hear her speech today? LOL, she touched on some R's nerves. The bill might have passed. Now back to making adjustments. Wachovia bought by Citibank? I did not see that coming. A few weeks ago I was ready to close my Citibank account and transfer all to my Wachovia account! I can't bear to look at the stocks value. :-(

I worked for Wachovia for 2 1/2 yrs in their student loan dept and MasterCard dept 23 yrs ago in Winston-Salem. I can't listen to much at work. The stock closed at 10 on Friday, down to 8.30 or so pre-market today and I think opened at 92 cents. There's going to be 4 major banks standing and that's it at the rate it's going.

Can you believe they didn't pass the bailout bill? Shoot! I should've waited another day to buy Apple. Thought I'd gotten it for a bargain last week. :-( I'm aghast! (Dorine) There's going to be 4 major banks standing and that's it at the rate it's going. But that's not a new concept. Everyone thought that would've already been the case by now. What's driven me crazy is that there were supposed to be far few "brick and mortar" establishements, as we got more and more electronic. No need to ever have to go into a bank. Yet, there are 4 banks on every single block around here and more being built. That has gone completly counter to projections. I'm still aghast about Congress. Evidently those representatives don't have any constituents with money tied to the market.

Up until the 1980s, interstate bank wasn't allowed. First it opened up regionally via state reciprocity legislation, but then went national in the mid-1990s.

From one of the AP articles about today's markets and Congressional inertia: But Wall Street found further reason for worry overseas, as the fallout from U.S. economic problems kep spreading. Three European governments agreed to inject Fortis NV with a $16.4 billion bailout. Fortis, with has headquarters in Brussels, Belgium and Utrecht, Netherlands, is Belgium's largest retail bank. The British government, meanwhile, said it is nationalizing mortgage lender Bradford & Bingley, which has a $91 billion mortgage and loan portfolio. It was the latest sign that the credit crisis has spread beyond the U.S. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/wall_street

McCain is blaming Obama for the bill's defeat, but all you have to do is look at the actual votes by party and state. It's f**king amazing! Why haven't any of the analysts written this up yet? http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/2/votes/674/ Alaska: 1 vote; 1 no Arizona: 8 votes; 8 votes no Texas: 32 votes; 23 votes no vs Illinois: 19 votes; split evenly Delaware: 1 vote; 1 vote yes McCain evidently has no cloud whatsoever with his colleagues. Must be because they view him as a maverick. The states that really stick out to be are Texas, Florida, Georgia, Arizona and California...heavy retirement areas. Makes no sense to me.

McCain has stated that he's not afraid to make enemies in Washington. Did you see the video I posted from youtube? It explains so much. I'm trying to keep calm during this disaster, but DH is furious. Can Congress plese work together? Can this partisanship end? Can someone shoot Pelosi?

McCain has stated that he's not afraid to make enemies in Washington. Yay, that's the spirit. Way to get things done! How mavericky. ;-)

Yay, that's the spirit. Way to get things done! How mavericky. ;-) Yeah, a lot of good his DC photo op did, and his "rushing back to Washington"--it was his own party that defeated this! From the NY Times: "In the end, only 65 Republicans � just one-third of those voting � backed the plan despite personal pleas from President Bush and encouragement from their presidential nominee, Senator John McCain. By contrast, 140 Democrats, or 60 percent, voted in favor, many after voicing grave misgivings. Their nominee, Senator Barack Obama, also backed the bill." " . . . lawmakers on both sides pointed to an outpouring of opposition from deeply hostile constituents just five weeks before every seat in the House was up for election as a fundamental reason that the measure was defeated. House members in potentially tough races and those seeking Senate seats fled from the plan in droves." And apparently the R's are more concerned with getting re-elected than they are about doing the right thinhg, dare I say it, the mavericky thing.;-) Go to this link for a map you can click on to see exactly how they voted by state: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/business/30cong.html?ref=politics

I try to stay away from this topic, because I am so sick of partisan politics, on both sides of the aisle. Both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for the mess our economy is in these days, and for either side to blame the other is disingenuous. For Democrats to blame Bush is the height of hypocracy. Wall Street is in the mess it is in almost entirely because of the abuses at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The abuses at Freddie and Fannie actually began because of looser lending standards and regulatory pressure on banks to make loans to iffy borrowers begun during the Clinton administration. (The looser standards were intended to help increase homeownership among all Americans.) It took 15 years to get to where we are today. During that time, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank consistently opposed efforts to tighten standards and oversight at Fannie and Freddie. Bush actually began asking for new regulatory reform of Fannie and Freddie in 2003, but Congress always defeated his proposals. In 2005, after Alan Greenspan warned of exactly what is happening today, McCain was one of three sponsors of another reform act, which was again defeated. Republicans are not blameless, by any means. Many Congressional Republicans sided with the Democrats in defeating the various bills designed to straighten out this mess years ago, before it got to where it is today. They did so because Fannie and Freddie were big campaign contributors, on both sides of the aisle. I am not a fan of John McCain (nor George Bush), but I do know something about economics and the mess we're in now. I could go into much more detail, but I think I've said enough.

Looks like there's now going to be a serious push to extend term limits so Bloomberg can run again. God knows I pray so, because I can't imagine this city in the financial shape it's in and headed for being run by anyone but a great business man. He was so great to have after 9/11.

Thanks you Peggy. That is exactly what the youtube video I posted explains. And it was unforgivable for Pelosi to present the bill with that partisan speech in a time in which bi-partisanship should rule. Dorine, I agree about Bloomberg. I am also a fan a Cuomo(son) fan. I lived in NYC during Dinkins and he was the worst mayor ever! Even walking in the Theatre District at night was dangerous then. Giuliani had so much to clean up after him and did an excellent job.

Family Upset Obama Wears Their Son�fs Bracelet NewsBusters is reporting in their article: Family Told Obama NOT To Wear Soldier Son�fs Bracelet�c Where is Media? that the family of Sergeant Ryan David Jopek whose name is on the bracelet Senator Obama wears does not want him speaking about their son in public. The father Brian Jopek stated in a radio interview that the family even asked Senator Obama to stop wearing his son�fs bracelet. Radio host Glenn Moberg of the show �gRoute 51�� asked Mr. Jopek, a man who believes in the efforts in Iraq and is not in favor of Obama�fs positions on the war, what he and his ex-wife think of Obama continually using their son�fs name on the campaign trail. Jopek began by saying that his ex-wife was taken aback, even upset, that Obama has made the death of her son a campaign issue. Jopek says his wife gave Obama the bracelet because �gshe just wanted Mr. Obama to know Ryan�fs name.�h Jopek went on to say that �gshe wasn�ft looking to turn it into a big media event�h and �gjust wanted it to be something between Barack Obama and herself.�h Apparently, they were all shocked it became such a big deal. Senator Obama�fs inability to even remember Sergeant Jopek�fs name during the debate made it appear that the bracelet was just a political prop. However, now with news that the family doesn�ft even want their son�fs bracelet worn by the Senator, and are upset that Senator Obama uses Sergeant Jopek name in public, makes this appear to be an incredibly cold callous political move. http://purplepeoplevote.com/2008/09/28/family-upset-obama-wears-their-sons-bracelet/

http://www.justsaynodeal.com/acorn.html

Possible Change of Heart. Rezko talked with prosecutors, Chicago Tribune article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-rezko-flip28sep28,0,5691387.story

This manipulation is a little too communist for me. I know that sounds extreme, but seriously, this is insane. http://www.iris.org.il/blog/archives/2887-CBS-News-Erases-Moderate-Quotes-from-Palin-Transcript.html Governor Sarah Palin has given two mainstream media interviews. In both, she made multiple statements about the importance of multilateralism in foreign policy. In both, these comments were deleted by the news organizations. After both interviews, a furor has broken out afterwards because of her hawkishness. At two points in the video (2:58 and 5:39), segments have been removed from the official transcript. Here are the missing pieces of the transcript: (2:58) Couric: What, specifically, in your view, could be done to convince the new government in Pakistan to take20a harder, tougher line against terrorists in that country? Palin: At a time when new leadership comes in, that is the opportunity to forge better, tighter, more productive relationships and that's what we'll take advantage of with new leadership in the US and in Pakistan. And I'm sure that President Zardari, too, will agree with us as we commit to the support that Pakistan needs, that other nations in the region need, in order to win this war on terrorism. (3:32) (5:39) Couric: But what lessons do you think you have learned as you've watched this unfold in terms of implementing the democracy and the challenges inherent in that goal? Palin: Well, one is that America cannot be counted on to do this solely, to be the savior of every other nation, but we need friends and we need allies and we need this nation-building effort and we need to forge new alliances, and that is what a new election will provide opportunity to do. Couric: What happened if the goal of democracy, Governor Palin, doesn't produce the desired outcome, for example in Gaza, the US pushed hard for elections and Hamas won. Palin: Especially in that region, though, we have got to protect those and support those who do seek democracy and do seek protections for the people who live there. And you know, we're seeing today, in the last couple of days here in New York, a speaker, a President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, who would come on our soil and e xpress such disdain for one of our closest allies and friends�Israel�and we're hearing the evil that he speaks. And if hearing him doesn't allow Americans to commit more solidly to protecting the friends and allies that we need, expecially there in the Mideast, then nothing will. If Americans are not waking up to understand what it is that he represents, then nothing is going to wake us up and we will be lulled into some kind of false sense of security that perhaps Americans were a part of before 9/11.(7:25) What do each of these three Palin answers have in common? They portray her as a foreign policy moderate who seeks multilateral coalitions with allies and who advocates for human rights, caring about better lives for Middle Easterners. Interestingly, ABC News also edited out the same kind of moderate, multilateralist comment in order to more effectively promote the misinformation that Palin was advocating a new, warmongering approach to Russia. Katie Couric clearly hasn't learned much from the previous CBS News scandal, Rathergate. Technical note: There may have been further editing of each of the two interviews. In both instances, we only know about the modifications because of sloppy editing. In one, the transcript is the smoking gun for the discrepancies; in the other it is the video. Here's an analytics perspective on the deletions: In the Gibson (ABC News) interview: 7 instances were deleted of "allies" 5 instances were deleted of "countries" 5 instances were deleted of "democracies" In the Couric (CBS News) interview: 4 instances were deleted of "allies" 3 instances were deleted of "democracies" 3 instances were deleted of "friends" 3 instances were deleted of "nations" (A few word variants were included.)

The current crisis can't be attributed to any one thing. I wish it were that easy. There is plenty of blame to go around. Credit was too easy. Interest rates remained artificially low for far too long, and some are now blaming Grennspan for that. I remember traveling in California a few years back and coming across a traffic pile-up in a residential neighborhood. Turns out people were lining up to put in bids to buy houses that were not yet built--bidding wars to overpay by hundreds of thousands of dollars beyond the asking price, that's how sure these people were that the value of what they were trying to buy would continue to grow by leaps and bouns, outpacing their debt. This is what happened in Florida and elsewhere, too. Remember "house flipping"? You can't lay that blame on poor folks trying to buy a house. Blame the bankers too for packaging up the bad debt into investment vehicles offering way inflated rates of return. That's how Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers got burned. No one or no "side" is blameless. So how are we going to fix it?

How will we fix it? There are 300 million Americans, the debt is 700 billion. Russell Crowe on Leno last night suggested the Governmwent pay each American a million dollars to ease the hardship and help their debts. Bloody hell, I loved it! LOL! Why not?

Why not you ask? One reason might be that 300 million times 1 million is 300 TRILLION. Stick to acting, Russell, your math sucks. One other factor in this mess that I should have mentioned is the rates of personal bankruptcies, which are fueling a lot of the mortgage foreclosures. And the number one reason for personal bankruptcies? Medical bills and lack of medical coverage! But, hey, let's rant about socialism as a reason to not offer universal coverage. Hey, I have coverage, hooray for me and the hell with everybody else! In fact, cut my taxes and I'll follow you anywhere! Don't look now, but we *all* are "everybody else."

(Moon) This manipulation is a little too communist for me. I know that sounds extreme, but seriously, this is insane. Not the first time at all and not just CBS. Quite a number of times from various places on other subjects/interviews. The White House website has made adjustments on things, too.

I can�t believe I am posting today of all days, but ... (Peg) but I do know something about economics Fortunately, so do I. ;-) Your recap of salient points however is strictly partisan, displaying the current Republican spin and time-honored tradition of attempting to �share� blame when the overwhelming evidence points it squarely at oneself. The abuses at Freddie and Fannie actually began because of looser lending standards Neither actually makes loans, but you know that. However, I�ll take it that you meant to cite Fannie and Freddie�s dubious accounting practices, which were all fueled by a desire for senior management bonuses. Who hasn�t seen that one before? Paper profits or paper capitalization (where none exists) to ensure that the big boys achieve their performance goals and therefore get their bonuses? It always boils down to corporate greed, which seems to flourish during Republican Administrations, which can be counted on to stand aside and �let the markets work.� None of that pesky regulation or oversight to interfere. (Peg) regulatory pressure on banks to make loans to iffy borrowers begun during the Clinton administration. Why not go back to the Community Reinvestment Act (a Carter initiative), where affordable home ownership started? Or maybe even back to Roosevelt�s (another Dem) programs? In my view, the goals of the CRA are fine and epitomize the social conscience of the Democratic party. Why shouldn�t banks, which have taken deposits from a given community, also be required to lend out to the same? That�s all it is attempting to achieve. How a bank actually carries it out is another issue. No one forces a bank to lend to noncreditworthy individuals. Banks are only motivated by profit. When they don�t have decent spreads in other sectors, then they take on risk. Abuses took place at the least regulated entities: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, plus the Wall Street investment banks. Not a shocker IMO. Good article here, which I think puts many of the comments into context and provides dates and names: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/09/AR2008060902626.html (Peg) Bush actually began asking for new regulatory reform of Fannie and Freddie in 2003, but Congress always defeated his proposals. In 2005, after Alan Greenspan warned of exactly what is happening today, McCain was one of three sponsors of another reform act, which was again defeated. The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 died in a Republican-controlled committee. This is your example? Sorry, but I cannot give any credence to McCain attaching his name to any reform package, when one of his chief economic advisors (term used loosely) is Phil Gramm, a major architect of the deregulated, hands-off Wall Street environment.

While I don't know if it's accurate, I read yesterday that calls into Congress yesterday from constituents averaged 300 to 1 against the bill. The Bailout Defeat: A Political Credibility Crisis By MICHAEL SCHERER / WASHINGTON 2 hours, 51 minutes ago There was a lack of trust, a loss of confidence, a popular revolt. Nearly every major political leader in the U.S. supported the $700 billion financial-bailout bill. The President. The Vice President. The Treasury Secretary. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve. The Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Democratic and Republican nominees for President. The Democratic and Republican leadership of the House and Senate. All of them said the same thing: vote yes. But a majority of those politicians anointed by the Constitution to reflect the will of the people voted no. This is a remarkable event, the culmination of a historic sense of betrayal that Americans have long felt for their representatives in Washington. The nation's credit crisis on Monday exposed a much deeper and more fundamental problem: a crisis of political credibility that now threatens to harm our nation further, should the markets freeze up and more companies begin to fail, as many experts predict. The problem has been growing for years. Roughly 28% of Americans approve of President Bush. Roughly 18% of Americans approve of Congress. Now those low numbers and majority of bad feelings have manifested themselves in the starkest of terms. Asked to take a leap of faith regarding a dizzyingly complex problem, a critical mass of voters refused to trust their leaders, turning down the medicine that was offered. And so the politicians who are most exposed to popular whims have run for cover. With an election on the horizon, 95 House Democrats and 133 House Republicans opposed the bill. Some portion voted no for clearly ideological reasons. But many more were simply doing what politicians do - responding to the will of the people. An analysis by statistician Nate Silver, who runs FiveThirtyEight.com, made this clear. Of the 38 incumbent members of Congress from both parties who are considered vulnerable in the coming election, 30 voted against the bill (eight supported it). By contrast, members of Congress from relatively safe districts were evenly divided - 197 for it to 198 against it. "What this showed more than anything else was that not even members of Congress can ignore a switchboard system of Capitol Hill that is so totally jammed," said Peter Sepp, a conservative opponent of the bill with the National Taxpayers Alliance. If the experts are right, the nation now risks great financial hardship, because there was no one to stand up and explain the situation. The Dow Jones industrial average dropped 778 points on the news. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson warned Monday afternoon that car loans and student loans were likely to tighten. Other economists have warned of the possibility of widespread corporate failures and unemployment, if the short-term credit markets freeze up. Bank failures, or mergers, are likely to continue. The taxpayer costs of federal insurance on deposits could increase. In a worst-case scenario, economic historians may find that all of Paulson's predictions come true, leaving the cost to the Federal Government far greater than the risky $700 billion investment in the private sector. If this comes to pass, the historians will find many people to blame: Paulson and President Bush for failing to explain the plan better. The House leadership for failing to whip enough votes. Even the presidential candidates for failing to use their bully pulpit to force the issue. But those historians should not forget that roots of the failure predate the vote on Monday, and even the mistakes of Wall Street. Years ago, the trust between the people and their politicians was broken. Credibility was lost. The reserve of goodwill went bankrupt. And when they needed it most, our nation's leaders found that they had squandered their ability to exert influence over the people who chose them to lead. View this article on Time.com

Mari? If 300 million people get 1 million each, it totals 300 million. I wrote this letter to Obama and have called several senators and representatives expressing this view: URGENT READ IMMEDIATELY To: Senator Obama Re: Economy Bailout There are plans for a 700 billion bailout bill. There are 300 million Americans. I suggest making two separate 2 Bills. One that will help Main Street (middle and lower middle class directly and immediately): 1. Give 300 million Americans one million dollars each with the stipulation that the money goes to pay off their mortgages, their credit cards, autos, and outstanding bills. 2. If they want to buy a home, it must be paid in cash, same for a car, home improvements, etc. 3. Pay up Retirement Funds. The other Bill should help out Wall Street, obviously, that amount should be much less than 700 billion dollars. * Taking into consideration that the 300 million amount will be less than that when one considers a big part of that number are children. It is a win/win situation. Americans will feel that their government really cares about them. And Wall Street would have its bailout.

I urge everyone here to call or fax their Senators and Representatives with my message. Americans want the bailout to include them directly, not indirectly through Wall Street. This is your chance to get involved.

I forgot to add: 4. Pay off college loans. I truly see this as a win/win situation.

(Moon) If 300 million people get 1 million each, it totals 300 million. Sorry Moon, but if 300 million people get $1 each it equals $300 million.

See that's why we need oversight. LOL, OK, I'm ready to work it down 50 thousand each household. Still, I'd rather have the bailout go mostly to the people.

Family Upset Obama Wears Their Son's Bracelet An update to that: http://www.startribune.com/29863889.html?elr=KArksDyycyUtyycyUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU Could be just damage control.

Just take out all those kids and that should help. ;-) I knew I wasn't concentrating on everything about that plan properly. ;-D Work isn't the best place for me to ponder US economic resolutions. ;-)

bugger.

I just now realized if elected, Palin would be President of the Senate with tiebreaking abilities. *shudders*

Looks like Bloomberg will make it official he wants another term. While I by no means agree with everything he's done or said, I was speaking with a friend tonight who doesn't like him because of his policies encouraging significant and in some cases, reckless, building, but agreed that it's a good idea to keep him in for one more go 'round considering our situation. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/bloomberg_third_term;_ylt=Ap02iPrzAEu4ATvsum2du4as0NUE

(Karen)It always boils down to corporate greed, which seems to flourish during Republican Administrations Of course it all boils down to greed, on the part of corporations, politicians, and even some homeowners who treated their homes like cash machines and way overextended themselves (I'm referring to people who did such things as refinance or take out home equity loans to replace their perfectly good appliances with stainless steel, or their perfectly good countertops with granite just to keep up with the latest trends), but I disagree that it flourishes only during Republican administrations. As an example of greed during a Democratic administration, look no further than Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson (both Democrats) the CEO's of Fannie Mae from 1991-98 (Johnson) and 1999-2004 (Raines). That spanned all of the Clinton administration (and parts of the Bush administrations). Both received bonuses in the millions of dollars during a time when Fannie Mae was engaging in some creative accounting practices. (Karen)In my view, the goals of the CRA are fine I agree. The problem wasn't the CRA, it was broadening of it that caused problems, which is why I don't go back to its enactment under Carter. (Karen)No one forces a bank to lend to noncreditworthy individuals. No one holds a gun to anyone's head, but the rewrite of the CRA rules in 1995 made it so that banks had quotas for the level of diversity in their loan portfolios. The quotas included quotas on income level of people receiving the loans. If a bank wanted to expand or merge, it needed a good CRA rating, so banks began making riskier loans to meet those quotas. Not all banks were interested in expanding or merging, of course, so not all banks made risky loans. You could argue, of course, that it was greed that made banks want to expand. It took years for the economy to get to where it is today, years that included both Republicans and Democrats in power, and I still say it is disingenuous for either side to blame the other. There is plenty of blame to go around, to politicians of both parties, to Wall Street, to homeowners who took out loans they knew they couldn't afford, but pointing fingers is not the way to solve the problem. If politicians (of both parties) spent as much time and energy actually trying to solve problems as they do trying to pass the blame, maybe there wouldn't be as many problems to solve.

So I was sitting here contemplating what to do with my $1 bailout money from the Crowe-Moon plan, when I came across this very good, down to earth explanation of what failure to fix this thing means in very practical terms. Op-Ed Columnist Rescue the Rescue By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN NEW YORK TIMES I was channel surfing on Monday, following the stock market�s nearly 800-point collapse, when a commentator on CNBC caught my attention. He was being asked to give advice to viewers as to what were the best positions to be in to ride out the market storm. Without missing a beat, he answered: �Cash and fetal.� I�m in both � because I know an unprecedented moment when I see one. I�ve been frightened for my country only a few times in my life: In 1962, when, even as a boy of 9, I followed the tension of the Cuban missile crisis; in 1963, with the assassination of J.F.K.; on Sept. 11, 2001; and on Monday, when the House Republicans brought down the bipartisan rescue package. But this moment is the scariest of all for me because the previous three were all driven by real or potential attacks on the U.S. system by outsiders. This time, we are doing it to ourselves. This time, it�s our own failure to regulate our own financial system and to legislate the proper remedy that is doing us in. I�ve always believed that America�s government was a unique political system � one designed by geniuses so that it could be run by idiots. I was wrong. No system can be smart enough to survive this level of incompetence and recklessness by the people charged to run it. This is dangerous. We have House members, many of whom I suspect can�t balance their own checkbooks, rejecting a complex rescue package because some voters, whom I fear also don�t understand, swamped them with phone calls. I appreciate the popular anger against Wall Street, but you can�t deal with this crisis this way. This is a credit crisis. It�s all about confidence. What you can�t see is how bank A will no longer lend to good company B or mortgage company C. Because no one is sure the other guy�s assets and collateral are worth anything, which is why the government needs to come in and put a floor under them. Otherwise, the system will be choked of credit, like a body being choked of oxygen and turning blue. Well, you say, �I don�t own any stocks � let those greedy monsters on Wall Street suffer.� You may not own any stocks, but your pension fund owned some Lehman Brothers commercial paper and your regional bank held subprime mortgage bonds, which is why you were able refinance your house two years ago. And your local airport was insured by A.I.G., and your local municipality sold municipal bonds on Wall Street to finance your street�s new sewer system, and your local car company depended on the credit markets to finance your auto loan � and now that the credit market has dried up, Wachovia bank went bust and your neighbor lost her secretarial job there. We�re all connected. As others have pointed out, you can�t save Main Street and punish Wall Street anymore than you can be in a rowboat with someone you hate and think that the leak in the bottom of the boat at his end is not going to sink you, too. The world really is flat. We�re all connected. �Decoupling� is pure fantasy. I totally understand the resentment against Wall Street titans bringing home $60 million bonuses. But when the credit system is imperiled, as it is now, you have to focus on saving the system, even if it means bailing out people who don�t deserve it. Otherwise, you�re saying: I�m going to hold my breath until that Wall Street fat cat turns blue. But he�s not going to turn blue; you are, or we all are. We have to get this right. My rabbi told this story at Rosh Hashana services on Tuesday: A frail 80-year-old mother is celebrating her birthday and her three sons each give her a present. Harry gives her a new house. Harvey gives her a new car and driver. And Bernie gives her a huge parrot that can recite the entire Torah. A week later, she calls her three sons together and says: �Harry, thanks for the nice house, but I only live in one room. Harvey, thanks for the nice car, but I can�t stand the driver. Bernie, thanks for giving your mother something she could really enjoy. That chicken was delicious.� Message to Congress: Don�t get cute. Don�t give us something we don�t need. Don�t give us something designed to solve your political problems. Yes, Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke need to accept strict oversights and the taxpayer must be guaranteed a share in the upside profits from all rescued banks. But other than that, give them the capital and the flexibility to put out this fire. I always said to myself: Our government is so broken that it can only work in response to a huge crisis. But now we�ve had a huge crisis, and the system still doesn�t seem to work. Our leaders, Republicans and Democrats, have gotten so out of practice of working together that even in the face of this system-threatening meltdown they could not agree on a rescue package, as if they lived on Mars and were just visiting us for the week, with no stake in the outcome. The story cannot end here. If it does, assume the fetal position.

I'm all for a fix, but not throwing $$ willy nilly at it...at my expense. I've paid enough.

Interesting conversations you are having over here... I know very little of your US politics... but will comment from my own domestic Ozzie situation... Not wishing to be doom and gloom, but I still think its gunna get a lot worse before it gets better...We've been building a house of cards of years... All we've heard about was the housing industry for years... How fast it was growing...the government kept giving incentives for building homes, propping up the industry...if the building industry was booming, then that was treated as their major economic GDP indicator that the economy is doing ok...But I kept screaming, no no no!! Its a bubble that will burst... I foresaw things coming unravelled 3 or 4 years ago and started putting our 'house' in order.... You could see it at the shopping centre...everyone spending...prices rising/less discounting, therefore obviously more consumer demand. From friends & complete strangers I repeatedly heard things like: "oh I only need to pay the interest on my mortgage - you DONT bother with the principle!! You're an idiot if you pay back the actual debt!!" huh?? The psyche of the general masses has changed...over generations our values have changed...certainly there's less responsibility in people than past generations, with the government having to always accept the blame and fix it.....but it's not just governments... Yes, they allowed it to happen...but it wasnt hard to figure out..or foresee... In fact I think the politicians are so disconnected from the general public they were miles behind the eight ball. Any mother who shops for her family on a weekly basis could tell the government the inflation rate certainly was NOT cruising at 2% !! So by the time the government tries to swing into action, the horse has already bolted... As echoed before, Liberal/Labour ( our Oz parites) has spent so much time, energy & money disagreeing with each other and mud slinging at each other, they have lost the ability to govern...if they ever actually had any in the first place!! Yes, they have to fix it now...yes, they need more fingers on the pulse to foresee things perhaps...but this has been happening for a lot longer than anyone cares to admit...they can put a band aid on it for the time being...but then everyone needs to undergo a huge mind-shift in the way they live their lives...or it will just keep on happenng... My other theory is: things happen for a reason....and in the world of ying vs yang...somebody out there is profiting by this...whether its money, power or religion...someone will do well out of this crisis...and I do wonder if this wasnt an accident... Getting off soapbox nooow....aaahhh....such a long way to faallll!!!

(LindaMc)You could see it at the shopping centre...everyone spending...prices rising/less discounting, therefore obviously more consumer demand. A very good thing if not done mostly or only on credit for people truly unable to afford it. Thanks, Mari. That TF column was interesting. (LindaMc) somebody out there is profiting by this...whether its money, power or religion...someone will do well out of this crisis. Just said that to someone today buying a house that's one step from foreclosure. He looked at it as he's saving someone from the final credit death knell of foreclosure while he gets a house at a really good price. A kind of twisted win-win situation, if you work real hard to accept that. ;-) Hopefully keeps away any guilt for some.

(LindaMc) yes, they need more fingers on the pulse to foresee things perhaps...but this has been happening for a lot longer than anyone cares to admit. Warren Buffett pegged all this about 5 yrs ago from what I read.

Dorine: A very good thing if not done mostly or only on credit for people truly unable to afford it. Oh heck no...all on credit!! A friend of mine told me they were over spending by $1000 per month, using credit, got another credit card to pay the first credit card...when I asked her how they would cope with this, well, she said, we have the capital in our house to back us up...!!?? and I don't think she's alone in thinking that...

The tag to this story is my friend got herself in credit card for over $50,000...then extended the mortgage to pay the cards out...BUT hasnt cut the cards up yet...and so the cycle continues!!!

Yeah, a different story, though the actual spending part is still the good part of it.

Oh, my... you betcha! ;-) LOL! I can't imagine ever becoming friends with Palin, but she did what she had to do last night. My protest vote still stands.

Damn, had a feeling I should've taken a chance on Wachovia (WB) 3 days ago when it was a buck or so. :-((((

(Moon) Oh, my... you betcha! ;-) LOL! I can't imagine ever becoming friends with Palin, but she did what she had to do last night. My protest vote still stands. LOL...Doggone it, Moon. Ya kno' I would more likely be 'Miss Winky-Dinky's' friend than vote for her or the current train wreck of the McCain campaign. She didn't make any great flubs and I'm sure she made the Joe-six-packs out there proud. However, I don't want Joe-six-pack for my president or vice president! The folksy verbage made me cringe. Does she really talk like that or does she just 'want to be my friend'- I prefer mr. Rogers;-)))

(Peggy) She didn't make any great flubs She apparently hasn't a clue what an "Achilles heel" is though. Probably thought it was one of those mainstream media gotchas! God, was I turned off by her delivery. If she winked one more time or rolled her eyes I thought I was going to barf. Biden was in the worst possible position because if he went after her or was patronizing everyone would be bitching about it today. But I think he came off as extremely knowledgable, whereas she was ulta content-lite. And back to our regularly scheduled program: (Moon) And it was unforgivable for Pelosi to present the bill with that partisan speech I can't believe how you've fallen into lockstep with the Republican spin on this, having heard Pelosi's words. According to credible members and the parts that have been shown on TV, there's absolutely nothing outrageous in what she said. It was like minus 8 on the Richter scale of rhetoric. Pelosi is being made the scapegoat and that doesn't sit well with me. (Moon) Possible Change of Heart. Rezko talked with prosecutors, Chicago Tribune article: The real target is our governor (whose name I won't even try to spell). So don't get your hopes up, Moon. They're positively salivating for the current governor to be the previous governor's cellmate in prison. (George Ryan is currently serving a sentence). That would be the third governor to serve time in my lifetime. ;-) (Karen)It always boils down to corporate greed, which seems to flourish during Republican Administrations (Peg) but I disagree that it flourishes only during Republican administrations. It has existed during other administrations, but it flourishes under Republican ones because, by definition, they�re laissez-fairing and deregulating the heck out of everything. Should the oversight and regulatory structure change with an evolving financial world? Absolutely. It must. But voluntary self-regulation by the SEC could only be a Republican invention or should I say smokescreen? The Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 (Gramm�s bill) you�ll say was signed by Clinton. True, but it was veto-proof in the Republican-controlled Congress. I guess he could�ve just left it on his desk, unsigned, for the requisite number of days... (Peg) As an example of greed during a Democratic administration, look no further than Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson (both Democrats) the CEO's of Fannie Mae from 1991-98 (Johnson) and 1999-2004 (Raines). Excellent examples. They should be drawn and quartered. (Peg) The problem wasn't the CRA, it was broadening of it that caused problems, Yes and no. The broadening in and of itself would not necessarily have landed us in this situation. There�s no way to predict that another administration (not like a Bush one) wouldn�t have nipped it in the bud before it could overwhelm the financial foundation of the country. (Peg) the rewrite of the CRA rules in 1995 made it so that banks had quotas for the level of diversity in their loan portfolios. The quotas included quotas on income level of people receiving the loans. If a bank wanted to expand or merge, it needed a good CRA rating, so banks began making riskier loans to meet those quotas. Not all banks were interested in expanding or merging, of course, so not all banks made risky loans. You could argue, of course, that it was greed that made banks want to expand. Realistically speaking, there will always be greed and abuse and bankers who think the way to do things is to falsify records or mislead people about their loans. I seem to remember being taught about the 3 or 4 Cs of lending. That must be part of an older, out-of-date curriculum. From what I can see, however, most don�t abuse the system. Responsible bankers kept close control over their credit to riskier applicants. BTW, I like stainless steel appliances. Always have. We had a stainless built-in oven and cooktop in our 1956 era house. My mother was way ahead of the trend curve. ;-)

BTW, I got rather irate when Sarah appropriated the phrase "never again" which has been the slogan for the Holocaust for as long as I can remember. But then again, she "loves" Israel. *rolling my eyes and winking*

Karen, I've had a problem with Pelosi since she sideswiped Hillary for a new kid with big ambitions and no experience. The point with Rezko and Obama does not sit well with me. Obama's free media pass does not sit well with me. He has always gotten a free ride. Who on Earth is editor of the Harvard Law Review and does not write a single article? I don't trust him, period. I preferred Sarah at the Convention. I am not a fan of "folksie" as you know by now by my previous high flung opinions. I thought the VP debate was even. And when she started with her betcha, Joe six pack, wink thing... well I hated it. My vote is still a protest vote. This is Obama's election to lose. I have never seen anything like this. Even the emails I get from MoveOn.org have exceeded in their "Big Brother" pro-Obama stance. A very scary thought. :-(

(Moon) My vote is still a protest vote. Yes, I have understood that fact. But I wouldn't be trying to justify with support of anything McCain-Palin. Not necessary. Letterman went nuts last night on McCain and Palin. Brian Williams was a guest and he characterized it as using Palin as a pi�ata. ;-) Before he came out, he had a bunch of video bits, where they restrung together words from the debates so that she would say things like "You betcha, I'm not qualified for this job." It was hysterical. Obviously, Dave is doing this because McCain bowed out at the last minute and then was found to be lying. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZsO7dZ__iw Dave made a blatently sexist comment during the Brian Williams segment. He said somethng about how she'd be worrying about her hair during a crisis and you could hear the audience's unease.

Yet another very funny SNL political sketch! This time on the Biden/Palin debate. With Queen Latifah. http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/vp-debate-open-palin-biden/727421/

An interesting tidbit from Daily Kos.... I was reminded of this gem reported by John Dickerson at Slate on August 25: The McCain campaign was working hard to drive a wedge in the Clinton coalition. Since Obama picked Joe Biden as his running mate, the McCain team has released two Hillary-themed ads. One claims Clinton was passed over for the No. 2 spot because she spoke the truth about Obama. In the second, a former Clinton supporter says she's voting for McCain. "If we get them we win; if we don't we lose," says a top McCain aide of the Clinton supporters. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And what to look forward to per WaPo: McCain Plans Fiercer Strategy Against Obama ("You're going to learn a lot" in next week's debate, Sen. John McCain promised supporters in Pueblo, Colo. [Ed. note - He says, channeling Moon ;-)] ) By Michael D. Shear Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, October 4, 2008; Page A01 Sen. John McCain and his Republican allies are readying a newly aggressive assault on Sen. Barack Obama's character, believing that to win in November they must shift the conversation back to questions about the Democrat's judgment, honesty and personal associations, several top Republicans said. With just a month to go until Election Day, McCain's team has decided that its emphasis on the senator's biography as a war hero, experienced lawmaker and straight-talking maverick is insufficient to close a growing gap with Obama. The Arizonan's campaign is also eager to move the conversation away from the economy, an issue that strongly favors Obama and has helped him to a lead in many recent polls. "We're going to get a little tougher," a senior Republican operative said, indicating that a fresh batch of television ads is coming. "We've got to question this guy's associations. Very soon. There's no question that we have to change the subject here," said the operative, who was not authorized to discuss strategy and spoke on the condition of anonymity. [Cont'd here... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/03/AR2008100303738.html?hpid=topnews ] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And a snippet of commentary from Gail Collins, NYT..... "Palin is, in many ways, a genuine heir to the women�s liberation movement of the 1970s, which tried to make sure that future generations of American women would grow up feeling they had every right to compete with men for all the best rewards and adventures the world had to offer. She never seems to have had a single doubt that she could accomplish whatever she set her mind to. When she got involved in politics, she used the time-honored male route of cultivating powerful mentors, then pushing them out of the way at the first possible opportunity. When she was governor, she did what very few female politicians do, and ignored all the subsidiary issues in order to put all her bets on one big policy payoff in the form of a new state energy policy. Then, somehow, she concluded that her success in clawing her way to the top of Alaska�s modest political heap meant she was capable of running the United States. This entire election season has been a long-running saga about the rise of women in American politics. On Thursday, it all went sour. The people boosting Palin�s triumph were not celebrating because she demonstrated that she is qualified to be president if something ever happened to John McCain. They were cheering her success in covering up her lack of knowledge about the things she would have to deal with if she wound up running the country." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/opinion/04collins.html

(Dorine) Yet another very funny SNL political sketch! This time on the Biden/Palin debate. With Queen Latifah. That was excellent, especially the talent segment. No matter what they said initially, I knew they'd be using Tina at every opportunity (save the weekend she was at the Emmys) up until the election. I even noticed they're using clips of her to promote the news show that will be in prime time, after The Office. They were cheering her success in covering up her lack of knowledge about the things she would have to deal with if she wound up running the country." Sort of like Latifah said. Unless she totally screwed up or embarassed herself, then you *must* declare the debate a tie.

Unless she totally screwed up or embarassed herself, then you *must* declare the debate a tie. Boy, talk about holding the bar low.

Exactly, expectations were so low for her. I like how Tina stated her ulterior motives for those who haven't figured them out, especially the "can I call you Joe" bit at the beginning and the Israel part.

I watched Letterman's Palin's bashing with a capital B. His remarks were repeatedly sexist. Is this all about McCain canceling and Palin not wanting to go on his show? He came off as a real AO. Making pints of her inexperience and not mentioning the junior Senator running for the #1 spot with NO experience, was so partisan, I could not believe it. I did not expect it. The SNL skit was funny. In the real debate, I wondered why Biden took the first question and was also the last to close? That is not supposed to happen. ("You're going to learn a lot" in next week's debate, Sen. John McCain promised supporters in Pueblo, Colo. [Ed. note - He says, channeling Moon ;-)] ) Dorine, too little too late? But I welcome it. (Karen), But I wouldn't be trying to justify with support of anything McCain-Palin. Not necessary. Point taken. Thank you!

This is yet another muck up by Acorn people. I've read of at least 5 other states having problems with very irregular voter registration applications. Guess they are hoping to overwhelm the system and keep it from being discovered. Lake County is the same place in IN that caused problems in the primary. Times of Northwest Indiana: County rejects large number of invalid voter registrations Lake County Republican Chairman John Curley wants a federal investigation into hundreds of voter registrations bearing fictitious signatures or the names of dead and underage people. "Fraudulent applications are the workings of ACORN groups operating from Milwaukee and Chicago who are getting out the vote for Obama. I'm Republican, but I want everyone who should vote to vote. But I want a clean election," Curley said at a Wednesday news conference. Lake County elections officials acknowledged they have found problems and had to reject a large portion of the 5,000 registration forms turned in recently by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, an activist group that conducted registration drives across the county this summer. An ACORN spokesperson couldn't be reached Wednesday for comment. Telephones to ACORN offices in Gary, Indianapolis, Chicago and Milwaukee were reported to be disconnected� http://nwi.com/articles/2008/10/02/news/lake_county/doc5399904569d23a75862574d600010e55

That's interesting. Not sure where I read it now as it was a week or so ago, but I read Rep party was sending out Get Out the Vote Registration applations to people and putting the incorrect address of the district to send it to which causes the registration to be delayed or not done at all if it's not passed on to the correct district. I don't know if that's how it works, but that's what I read.

I have to say that one thing that really rankled (sp?) me on debate night, was Sarah Palin was dragging her 5 month old out again under all those lights and noise at a late hour. Of course I should be used to it judging by all the mothers (mostly young ones) I see around town shopping til 10 or 11 at night with their real little ones in strollers.

What about parents that take their babies to loud action movies? As a lifelong Democrat, I always thought it was the Republicans who were messing with the vote count. In 2004 I worked from sunrise till the polls closed in a black precint in Miami to help out and make sure every vote counted. That precint had had a precedent in the 2000 election for turning away voters. This year I have witness things from the Democrats side that have left me in shock and has basically turned me Independent. ACORN, MoveOn.org and the DNC have overstepped democratic boundaries.

(Moon) What about parents that take their babies to loud action movies? The movies, period. The Democrats figured it worked for the Republicans.....

And why wouldn't the Democrats be corrupt, they chose Obama. They're taking after him. :-( You're right, the movies, period.

(Dorine) The Democrats figured it worked for the Republicans..... But they're nowhere near as good as Republicans at this game. I'm continually amazed at how much better their spin is and their tactics (and, yes, I do know the difference between a strategy and a tactic - LOL!)

(Karen) But they're nowhere near as good as Republicans at this game. Bingo! And then get knocked for their tactics by anyone and everyone while the other side does it and everyone buys it hook, line and sinker.

If you didn't watch all of SNL this weekend, you should watch this skit which was really good, especially the yuppie couple: http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/c-span-bailout/727521/ Also this article: Politics and Palin lure viewers to "SNL" Mon Oct 6, 2008 9:30am EDT By Paul J. Gough NEW YORK (Hollywood Reporter) - The politics-fueled ratings train of "Saturday Night Live" keeps rolling along this election season with Tina Fey's impersonations of Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin luring viewers. "SNL" averaged a 7.4 household rating/18 share in the metered market overnights, Nielsen Media Research said on Sunday afternoon. That's within a tenth of a rating point of its September 13 premiere, which itself was the highest-rated show since December 14, 2002, when Al Gore and Phish appeared. "SNL" is up 49 percent in the metered markets compared with the first four weeks of last season, as well as up 42 percent this past Saturday compared to episode No. 4 last season. As expected, Saturday's show was heavy on the politics, spoofing the recent debate between Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and Democrat Joe Biden. For the third time this season, Tina Fey portrayed Palin. Cast member Jason Sudeikis was Biden, and surprise guest Queen Latifah sat in as moderator Gwen Ifill. Once again, Fey showed that she has cornered the market on Palin impersonations, and her insistence that the GOP ticket would be all "mavericky" gained wide traction on the Web where it could be seen in numerous video postings. Another funny moment that seemed to strike a chord with audiences was Fey (as Palin) thanking "third graders of Gladys Wood Elementary, who were so helpful to me in my debate prep." While the rest of the late-night shows have struggled to find their footing following the 2007/2008 writers strike, "SNL" has been on a roll ever since it took on Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and others at the end of last season. The show's success with political satire only got bigger and better in September, when "SNL" opened early with a special appearance by Fey as Palin. "Clearly, 'Saturday Night Live' and Tina Fey's spot-on creation of Sarah Palin is now a part of this election season," said ABC News political director David Chalian. "It does show a frame through which a lot of people see these candidates." Ifill, who drew controversy before the debate with reports she was writing a book about the rise of African American politicians including Barack Obama, did not escape the satire. Twice Latifah mentioned the book and the publication date, once Inauguration Day and the other Election Day, and said that it was available for preorder. Also on the firing line were Biden and Scranton, Pa., the beleaguered northeastern Pennslyvania city that has been invoked by Biden (who grew up there). "They did equal-opportunity bashing," said CNN political analyst Gloria Borger, noting that it wasn't just Palin who was the target of humor on "SNL." Reuters/Hollywood Reporter.

Congress opens hearings on financial meltdown By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer 2 minutes ago Days from becoming the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history, Lehman Brothers steered millions to departing executives even while pleading for a federal rescue, Congress was told Monday. As well, executives who feared for their bonuses in the company's last months were told not to worry, according to documents cited at a congressional hearing. One executive said he was embarrassed when employees suggested that Lehman executives forgo bonuses, and cracked: "I'm not sure what's in the water." The first hearing into what caused the nation's financial markets to collapse last month, precipitating a $700 billion bailout, opened with finger-pointing and glimpses into internal company documents from Lehman's chaotic last hours. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the giant investment bank was "a company in which there was no accountability for failure." Lehman's collapse set off a panic that within days had President Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson asking Congress to pass the rescue plan for the financial sector. Richard S. Fuld Jr., chief executive officer of Lehman Brothers, declared to the committee "I take full responsibility for the decisions that I made and for the actions that I took." He defended his actions as "prudent and appropriate" based on information he had at the time. "I feel horrible about what happened," he said. Waxman questioned Fuld on whether it was true he took home some $480 million in compensation since 2000, and asked: "Is that fair?" Fuld took off his glasses, held them, and looked uncomfortable. He said his compensation was not quite that much. "We had a compensation committee that spent a tremendous amount of time making sure that the interests of the executives and the employees were aligned with shareholders," he said. Fuld said he took home over $300 million in those years � some $60 million in cash compensation. Waxman read excerpts from Lehman documents in which a recommendation that top management should forgo bonuses was apparently brushed aside. He also cited a Sept. 11 request to Lehman's compensation board that three executives leaving the company be given $20 million in "special payments." "In other words, even as Mr. Fuld was pleading with Secretary Paulson for a federal rescue, Lehman continued to squander millions on executive compensation," Waxman said before Fuld appeared as a witness. The government let Lehman go under Sept. 15, only to bail out insurance giant American International Group the next day, in a cascading series of financial shocks and failures that put Washington on track for the multibillion-dollar rescue starting the end of that week. Waxman described that plan as a life-support measure. "It may keep our economy from collapsing but it won't make it healthy again," he said. That sentiment echoed on Wall Street, where the Dow Jones industrials sank below 10,000 on Monday for the first time in four years. Investors fear the crisis will weigh down the global economy and the bailout won't work quickly to loosen credit markets. The rescue plan, now law, was so rushed that the usual congressional scrutiny is only coming now, after the fact. "Although it comes too late to help Lehman Brothers, the so-called bailout program will have to make wrenching choices, picking winners and losers from a shattered and fragile economic landscape," said Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia, the committee's senior Republican. Waxman said that in January, Fuld and his board were warned the company's "liquidity can disappear quite fast." Despite that warning, he said, "Mr. Fuld depleted Lehman's capital reserves by over $10 billion through year-end bonuses, stock buybacks, and dividend payments." Waxman quoted Fuld as saying in one document, "Don't worry" to the suggestion that executives go without bonuses. That suggestion came from Lehman's money management subsidiary, Neuberger Berman. Waxman quoted George H. Walker, President Bush's cousin and a Lehman executive who oversaw some Neuberger Berman employees, as responding with a dismissive tone to the idea of going without bonuses. "Sorry team," he wrote to the executive committee, according to Waxman. "I'm not sure what's in the water at 605 Third Avenue today.... I'm embarrassed and I apologize." Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said: "I wonder how he sleeps at night." Fuld said in his statement that the company did everything it could to limits its risks and save itself. "In the end, despite all our efforts, we were overwhelmed, others were overwhelmed, and still other institutions would have been overwhelmed had the government not stepped in to save them," he said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081006/ap_on_go_co/meltdown_lehman

I'm glad you posted that article, Karen. I read it and just couldn't get around to posting it. And in the meantime, at the end of last week, Lehman employees laid off were informed their severance payments and insurance were being cut off immediately.

OMG! OMG! I had to pause the debate. My mind is reeling within the first 10 minutes, as John McCain mentioned the founder of eBay in the answer to who would you appoint Sec of the Treasury. This "common person" approach has gone way too far.

In O's first answer, he mentioned the equivalent of the WPA, which not only would it put people to work but our roads and bridges really need overhauling. How better to get that done than with the unemployed?

I just got home and had to tape it. I'll have to read coverage tomorrow and watch tomorrow night.

John McCain mentioned the founder of eBay in the answer to who would you appoint Sec of the Treasury. eBay laid off 10% of its workforce yesaterday! Way to go, John, LOL. Er, my friend.;-)

my friend.;-) *throws back a swig of Chardonnay during drinking game*

No, no, no! You can only take a swig on 'maverick.' ;-) The drivel factor was in the double digits, when McCain was talking about any domestic issues. My eyes are tired after rolling around in their sockets most of the night. :-(

You can only take a swig on 'maverick.' ;-) *snort* That was the other night with Palin/Biden. My liver can only take so much of this and there's another one of these next week. ;-)

My liver can only take so much of this A shout-out to all livers!

Instead of Meg Whitman (from eBay), I'd like to throw Debbie Fields' name into the ring of possible Treasury Secretaries. ;-) But wikipedia is already updated with tonight's reference. Amazing that technology. ;-) She earned a Bachelor of Economics from Princeton University where she was a member of the student organization Business Today. She received an MBA from Harvard Business School in 1979. Career Before eBay, Ms. Whitman was with toymaker Hasbro Inc., overseeing global management and marketing of two of the world's best-known children's brands, Playskool and Mr. Potato Head. Prior to Hasbro, Meg was president and CEO of Florists Transworld Delivery (FTD), the world's largest floral products company. In previous years, she held executive positions at the Stride Rite Corporation and at the Walt Disney Company. Meg also worked for eight years at Bain & Company's San Francisco office, where she was a vice president. She began her career in 1979 at Procter & Gamble in Cincinnati, Ohio. Ms. Whitman also serves on the boards of the eBay Foundation, Procter & Gamble and DreamWorks Animation. Philanthropy Whitman has donated more than $30 million to her alma mater, Princeton University. The donation has allowed the construction of the university's sixth residential college, Whitman College, which opened in Fall 2007. Political activities Whitman has made numerous political donations to various candidates and PACs. While these have gone to both Republican and Democratic beneficiaries, the donations seem to be weighted to Republican politicians such as Orrin Hatch, Charles Pickering, and George Allen. Whitman was a supporter of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney's presidential campaign in 2008 and was on his "National Finance Team". She was also listed as Finance co-chair of Romney's campaign exploratory committee. After Romney stepped out of the race, Whitman joined John McCain's presidential campaign as a national co-chair. She has political ambitions of her own and is considering a run for Governor of California in the 2010 election. Whitman was also named as a dark horse candidate for the Vice Presidential slot in McCain's 2008 presidential bid. At the Republican National Convention (2008), Whitman gave a speech about what presumptive presidential nominee McCain would do in his first one hundred days in office if elected President of the United States.

Our tax dollars hard at work saving the economy... After Bailout, AIG Execs Head to California Resort Rescued by Taxpayers, $440,000 for Retreat Including "Pedicures, Manicures" By BRIAN ROSS and TOM SHINE October 7, 2008� Less than a week after the federal government committed $85 billion to bail out AIG, executives of the giant AIG insurance company headed for a week-long retreat at a luxury resort and spa, the St. Regis Resort in Monarch Beach, California, Congressional investigators revealed today. "Rooms at this resort can cost over $1,000 a night," Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) said this morning as his committee continued its investigation of Wall Street and its CEOs. AIG documents obtained by Waxman's investigators show the company paid more than $440,000 for the retreat, including nearly $200,000 for rooms, $150,000 for meals and $23,000 in spa charges. [cont'd] http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5973452&page=1

Yeah, effing incredible! Obama specifically mentioned that one last night.

I've been to that St. Regis resort. Right outside of Laguna Beach. Gorgeous. Those bastards. Does it bug anyone else when McCain says he knows how to get bin Laden--but apparently he hasn't shared that "knowledge" with anyone? Some of these are pretty funny: Campaign Comedy: Tuesday's late-night TV wrap-up By LYNN ELBER, AP Television Writer Political debates inform voters � and provide material for late-night TV show hosts. "Tonight's presidential debate took place in Nashville, Tenn. Which is perfect, because the economy right now is like a bad country music song: `I lost my girl, I lost the house, the dog died,'" Jay Leno said on NBC's "Tonight Show." Although "Tonight" and other shows were taped before Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama met Tuesday night � Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" labeled it a "space-time continuum problem" � the jokes wouldn't be stopped. "Tonight's presidential debate was a town hall forum," said Stephen Colbert on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report." "See, that allows the candidates to go around the media filter and lets regular Americans ask the questions that the candidates can ignore to deliver their stump speeches." Obama took one for the "Tonight" show. "It's a town hall format, which is John McCain's favorite way to speak to crowds. As opposed to Barack Obama's favorite way, a sermon on a mount," Leno quipped. McCain's age proved a subject that never gets old. "The second presidential debate is tonight, and beforehand John McCain said that the `gloves are coming off.' Then McCain said, `But don't worry, the diaper is staying on,'" quipped Conan O'Brien on NBC's "Late Night." With the debate format, "the candidates can walk around freely," noted Craig Ferguson on CBS' "The Late Late Show." "McCain prepared by putting new tennis balls on his walker." Meanwhile, Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate, was holding fast as a late-night mainstay. "In Boca Raton, Fla., yesterday, a woman who looked like Sarah Palin caused a near-riot when she walked into a diner for breakfast," Leno said. "After a minute or two, people finally realized it wasn't her when she started answering questions." "Is there anything this woman can't make sound folksy?" Stewart said of Palin. "`And let's not forget about that doggone genocide in Rwanda!'" "In a recent speech, Sarah Palin referred to Afghanistan as `our neighboring country.' Then she promised to find Osama bin Laden in the mountains of Toronto," O'Brien said. And Palin starred atop CBS "Late Show" host David Letterman's list of Top 10 Signs You Are Watching a Bad Debate: "It's 90 minutes of folksy phrases and winking." The economy and the current president didn't escape skewering. "The bad news: The Dow dropped 500 points today. The good news: I didn't know there were 500 left," said Colbert. "President Bush's response to the economic crisis was to meet with small business owners at a soda shop in San Antonio, Texas, this week. The bad news: The small business owners are now General Motors, General Electric, Century 21," offered Leno. O'Brien's take: "President Bush gave a speech today about the economy and he said that he believes that `anyone who makes bad decisions should fail.' Then Bush looked around the room and said, `Hey, why did it get so quiet in here?'"

I have been following the discussions here for a long time about the upcoming presidental election but I have stayed out of it. I am so furious right now I just can't anymore. Palin has me seeing red along with her maverick(what's his name again?) When I read about her accusations about Obama and then someone shouts "Kill him." Mrs. Betty Crocker(and IMO her lifestyles and views are just that a crock of s**t)has gone to far. This woman has no brains. Doesn't she realize that Obama has a family? There are so many crazy people out there that would think nothing of harming him or his children. Is it just me or are McCain and Palin prejudice against other races. How about last night when again McCain would not look at Obama and called him that man instead of addressing him properly. IMO these two have got to go. They must walk slowly out of this race and I'll carry the big stick to swat them both. Where will I swat them to? McCain into a nursing home for retired veterans where he can swap old war stories and Palin right back to Alaska where she can hunt,wink and give those 3rd graders extra credit. BTW I have great respect for our military both past and present and I mean no disrespect to these men and women when I talk about a nursing home for retired veterans. As I said before I am just very angry. Lastly, IMO if any woman deserves to be the first woman in the White House it is Hillary. Not that doggone Palin.

Lastly, IMO if any woman deserves to be the first woman in the White House it is Hillary. Not that doggone Palin. Amen! Every time I hear any of them speak I think of Hillary. Marlene, you can blame the DNC for selecting Obama over Hillary. It is well documented. The debate was boring and the only new thing out was McCain's plan to buy out those outstanding mortages. I think Obama will win in Nov. as I've said before, it is his to lose. But I'm still dreaming of Hillary 2012.

(Mari) Does it bug anyone else when McCain says he knows how to get bin Laden--but apparently he hasn't shared that "knowledge" with anyone? Porter Goss, former head of the CIA, said he knew where he was, but what came of that? ;-) (Marlene) Is it just me or are McCain and Palin prejudice against other races. They may not personally be, but it's used to encourage fear among other things, so people won't vote for Obama. Like Bush used Iraq and 9/11 before the 2004 election.

Marlene, join a few others in the Commiseration Corner. ;-) I know exactly what you mean about watching McCain. I found it incredibly difficult to last night. He seemed totally programmed and out of touch. Obama looked human and relaxed next to him. Watching McCain pace around, with gibberish coming out of his mouth and his few, flat attempts at humor and unconcealed lack of respect for his opponent, was painful, doggone it!

(Karen)Watching McCain pace around, with gibberish coming out of his mouth and his few, flat attempts at humor and unconcealed lack of respect for his opponent, was painful, doggone it! He reminded me of those grumpy old men who live on your block and who are always shouting at the kids, "get off my lawn!" Obama came off as the guy who would be a cool, level head in a crisis, and not just last night, but in the way he's conducted himself over the past weeks. Contrast with Grandpa Chicken Little who had to "rush back" to DC to "settle" the financial crisis.

The Daily Show was priceless tonight. Am now watching Bill Maher's new show and shouting at the tv every time his disingenuous Republican-apologist spouts off some utter bullsh*t (actually Janeane Garafolo and I are shouting in unison). OMG - Rosanne looks so thin!!

And can I say - John McCain doddering around on that stage and whispering and repeating himself, etc. made himself look like he is so old he's farting dust!! He was absolutely CREEPY - esp when he was trying to touch that poor woman in the audience - if I were her, I'd have shouted at him to get his creepy old-man hands off me. He really was creeping me out.

(Sarah) OMG - Rosanne looks so thin!! Unbelievable! She looked really great. She looks like someone's cool grandma or aunt.

AGain, lots of progress on a male issue. First you have a easy blood test for prostate cancer, then Viagra, now this. Absolutely no progress on female issues. You'd think companies would want to cash in on developing a cure for hot flashes or similar. But no, make women suffer from hormonal changes. Hair today, gone tomorrow -- and this is why Sun Oct 12, 6:56 PM ET Gene detectives on Sunday said they had netted two genetic variants that, together, boost the risk of male baldness sevenfold. The two variants are located on a stretch of DNA on Chromosome 20, according to a study carried out on 1,125 men of European descent. "These variants are present in one in seven Caucasian men and provide novel insights into the cause of this common and sometimes distressing condition," the team said. Previous research has determined that male pattern baldness -- also known as androgenic alopecia -- has a highly genetic origin. Heritability accounts for 80 percent of cases. The study, published online by the journal Nature Genetics of the British-based Nature Publishing Group, was carried out by a multinational team from Britain, Iceland, Switzerland and the Netherlands. One of the lead researchers, Tim Spector of King's College London, said the findings raised questions as to the evolutionary origins of baldness and opened up new paths for cures for hair loss. "The strong genetic basis of hair loss is odd, as any evolutionary advantage is unclear," said Spector in a press release. "Clearly, most men know if they are bald or not. But early prediction before hair loss starts may lead to some interesting therapies that are more effective than treating late-stage hair loss." (...) Given the feasibility of gene therapy in human follicles, our results may point to an intriguing new potential target for the treatment of hair loss in men and possibly women." By coincidence, a separate study also published in the same journal, reported that scientists had isolated a group of stem cells in mice that can repopulate and maintain all cell types of the hair follicle. Androgenic alopecia can have a big social impact as it affects a man's self-image. Baldness is also associated with an array of health problems, including coronary heart disease and hypertension in men and polycystic ovarian syndrome and insulin resistance in women. The reasons are unclear, but one theory is that some of the genes involved in hair loss also play a role in the molecular mechanisms for these diseases. The newly-identified variants on the p11 stretch of Chromosome 20 add to telltale genes, located in the X chromosome, that are receptors for the hormone androgen.

(Karen) But no, make women suffer from hormonal changes I agree. I was part of the hormone replacement revolution and they were great. Sadly, the real cost of those miracle drugs was not known for years. I am sick and tired of the incessant ED commercials for Viagra and Cialis. Sheesh you'd think that a huge percentage of American men have a problem. I don't believe it for a minute. Surely by now those with a problem are aware that such drugs exist.

I'd say the industry has joined forces to insure that men continue to be and look virile, whereas women should be allowed to turn into old hags, with an ever-ready crop of nubile babes available that only have one period a year. Talk about your conspiracies. ;-)

Sen. Clinton says 2nd White House run is unlikely Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton puts the chances of her running for president again at near zero � slightly higher than the chances she gives for becoming Senate majority leader or a Supreme Court justice. In an interview aired Tuesday on "Fox & Friends" on the Fox News Channel, Clinton, D-N.Y., was asked the chances, on a scale of 1 to 10, that she would be the next majority leader in the Senate. "Oh, probably zero," she said. "I'm not seeking any other position than to be the best senator from New York that I can be." Being nominated to the Supreme Court? "Zero," Clinton said. "I have no interest in doing that." Running for president again? "Probably close to zero," she said. "There's an old saying: Bloom where you're planted." The former first lady, who was elected to the Senate in 2000 and re-elected in 2006, said she looked forward to working as a senator with a Barack Obama administration

Hillary had also stated on Larry King that she would not run for president. I can't think of another woman as qualified for the job. Her fan base will help her make the right decision if McCain is elected.

Hillary supporters who go along with this really need to take a step back. If we support this behavior (support Obama), how can we complain about what was done to Hillary? It's the same thing as before, Obama's campaign sets the tone and apparently it's still acceptable to treat the female candidate in a derogatory manner. Being supportive of women's issues is more than talk--it's about actions--it's about treating female candidates with the same respect as we treat the male candidates. http://www.comcast.net/data/fan/html/popup.html?v=888620113

Forgot to add that Biden has had quite a few "Bush" moments on the campaign trail, but nobody picks up on it. Once again, unfair treatment.

Larry Summers comments are outragious and he is an BO economic advisor: Larry Summers: 3 Strikes, You're OUT! http://thenewagenda.net/2008/10/12/larry-summers-3-strikes-youre-out/

Biden has had quite a few "Bush" moments on the campaign trail, but nobody picks up on it. Once again, unfair treatment. I've seen items about them. Don't remember where, but you and I are aware, so someone must be picking them up. If you mean more mainstream media, couldn't tell ya.

Frankly, I am not surprised HC would say those things in public. Of course she can't reveal whatever promises were made. Now, I guess if she gets one of those positions people will continue to gripe that she's a liar. Totally damned if you do and damned if you don't. :-( Every night I have to check out Anderson Cooper's 10 Most Wanted: Culprits of the Collapse. He names names. The first three were fairly obvious: 10. Joe Cassano (from AIG) 9. Lehman Brothers CEO Dick Fuld 8. Chris Cox - SEC Chairman and last night was my old pick: Phil Gramm!! Dah man! You can watch the videos here: http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/category/culprits-of-the-collapse/ and this is an excellent recap of Phil's influential life: http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/07/foreclosure-phil.html

(Moon)If we support this behavior (support Obama), how can we complain about what was done to Hillary? Hoo boy, and *that* might mean getting over it and moving on and voting for the person whose ideology matches Hillary's almost exactly. Don't wanna do that, no sirree.;-) Biden has had quite a few "Bush" moments You're not specific, but if the question is, has Joe had some foot-in-mouth moments? Of course, that's what makes him Joe and people who live in my area know that about him. BUT--it it always an intelligent, informed foot. Unlike Bush, whose doozies come from . . . well, not from an informed, intelligent place. Big difference. And don't get me started on Palin and her downright ignorance on the issues. Her candidacy is an affront. Did you see her drop the puck at the Flyers opener on Saturday? She was booed off the ice. LOL, tough Philly crowd.

And don't get me started on Palin and her downright ignorance on the issues. Her candidacy is an affront. Also including both she and McCain publically encouraging hatred and ignorance in others.

I was just rereading more carefully the stuff I skimmed over.... (Moon) Being supportive of women's issues is more than talk--it's about actions Obviously you aren't talking about McCain. *Or* Palin (the irony!).

And for the record, I don't agree at all with Obama supporters with those T-shirts. Despicable. (Mari) Unlike Bush, whose doozies come from . . . well, not from an informed, intelligent place. Truer words.....

McCain apparently has his own dubious associates... http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/14/154348/28/122/630428

It's McCain's "presidential transition team", Dorine. I don't think they're ever going to actually be assembled, no less ever do any work...

hmmmm

Let's try it this way....

Sarah, don't sweat the small stuff. This election is Obama's to lose. Put your champagne bottle in the fridge. (Moon) Being supportive of women's issues is more than talk--it's about actions This election as some want to believe is not about abortion. That is not the single woman's issue at there. I'm more concerned with the blatant discrimination of women. I experienced it when I was working for Hillary and it's strong for Palin too. Here is a new Feminist site, Non-Partisan for once: http://thenewagenda.net/2008/10/12/chewing-the-fat-with-ophelia/ (Dorine), McCain apparently has his own dubious associates... And that's all that matters, right? Does anyone in BO camp give a fig about his dubious associates? :-( Mari Re: Biden, this is just one of the recent ones: Biden garbles Depression history Joe Biden's denunciation of his own campaign's ad to Katie Couric got so much attention last night that another odd note in the interview slipped by. He was speaking about the role of the White House in a financial crisis. "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed," Biden told Couric. "He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'" As Reason's Jesse Walker footnotes it: "And if you owned an experimental TV set in 1929, you would have seen him. And you would have said to yourself, 'Who is that guy? What happened to President Hoover?'"

My friend's mother is running for office in Indiana, she's there helping out with her campaign, they are all democrats. My friend is a Hillary supporter and we spent a lot of time together working for Hillary. She was called a racist for supporting Hillary by Obama supporters at a Hillary ralley we attended together. My white friend who had adopted and raised two black boys. Her vote for McCain, is also a protest vote. She sent me this email she received from one of her friend. I'm glad people are starting to ask questions. From a friend who used to be FOR Obama: About six months ago, I started thinking 'where did the money come from for Obama'. I have four daughters who went to college, and we were middle class, and money was tight. We (including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans.I started looking into Obama's life. Where has the money come from? Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California. He is very open about his two years at Occidental. He even admits that he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time. Even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies. 'Barry' (that was the name he used during his early years) had two roommates during this time, Muhammad Hassan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both Muslims from Pakistan. During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia; next to Hyderabad in India; three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family; then off to Africa to visit his father's family. Where did he get the money for this trip? Nether I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they were in college. When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York . It is at this time he asks everyone to call him Barrack - not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia? It's not cheap, to say the least. Where did he get money for tuition? Student Loans? Maybe. After Columbia, he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000 a year. Why Chicago? Why not New York? He was already living in New York By 'chance'(?) he met Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, born in Aleppo, Syria, and a real estate developer in Chicago. Rezko was convicted of fraud and bribery th s year, (nice guy?). Rezko, was named 'Entrepreneur of the Decade' by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association'. About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School. Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School? Where did he get the money for Law School? More student loans? After Law school he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with the law firm Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what? That's the firm that represented 'Rezar', which is Rezko's firm. Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago. In 2003, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with 'seed money' for his U.S. Senate race. In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in the Kenwood District of Chicago. He paid $1.65 million for the place. While paying off all those previous student loans (?) - Where did he get the money for the property? On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot. TheLondon Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama purchased this new home. Obama has met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko. Now, we have Obama running for President. Valerie Jarrett, was Michele Obama's boss. She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not make any major decisions without consulting with her first. Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz, Iran! Do we see a pattern here? Or am I just stupid? On May 10, 2008 The Times reported that Robert Malley, an advisor to Obama, was 'sacked' after the press found out he was having regular contacts with 'Hamas'. The same Hamas that controls Gaza and is connected with Iran and terrorism. Oh, and by the way, remember Obama's college roommates, the Muslims who where from Pakistan? They are now in charge of all those 'small' internet campaign contributions coming in for Obama. Where is that money coming from? The middle class in this country? Or could it be from the Middle East? And a final tidbit. On September 7, 2008, The Washington Times posted a verbal slip that Obama made on the 'This Week' TV show with George Stephanapoulos. Obama, when talking about his religion said, 'My Muslim faith'. When questioned about this, it was stated, 'he made a mistake'. Some mistake! I got all of the above information on-line. If you would like to check it Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008.Now the BIG question - If I found out all this information on my own, Why haven't all of our 'intelligent' members of the media been reporting this? A phrase keeps running through my mind - 'Beware of the enemy from within'!!!

LOL! Hmm, maybe he's thinking of high-def radio with a built-in time warp. ;-)

This election as some want to believe is not about abortion. That is not the single woman's issue at there. Nor was I insinuating or meaning that it was with my comment. Both McCain and Palin have bad policy/vote histories on a variety of women's issues. And that's all that matters, right? Does anyone in BO camp give a fig about his dubious associates? :-( I'm not sure of your point. To clarify....does anyone in BO's camp care about McCain's associations or his own (BO's) associations? McCain (Republicans) seemed to think pointing out Obama's dubious associations was the tactic du jour last week since nothing else was working. I was just pointing out that McCain seems to think dubious associations from long ago should be a deal breaker, while he has his own connections of questionable quality (who are currently involved with him). Personally, I think there are other things to worry about.

Speaking of dubious associations, what most people don't understand is the makeup of the area Obama lives in. Hyde Park is the area surrounding the U of Chicago. It is a unique enclave on the South Side, made up of U people and old-time liberals, going way, way back. Beautiful old homes there (think Leopold and Loeb). Because Ayers is involved in educational reform, it would be natural for them to have some contact. Moreover, their kids would go to the U of C's lab school.

Isn't the Washington Times the Moonie-owned, right wing publication? During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia; next to Hyderabad in India; three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family; then off to Africa to visit his father's family. Where did he get the money for this trip? Nether I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they were in college. During the summer of '91, before my final year of college/internship, I took a summer trip around Europe for 3 months on money I saved working at my parttime/occasionally fulltime on class breaks job (@6.00/hr) while going to school. I financed with a credit card with a $1500 credit line I got especially for the trip plus a few hundred dollars sent by relatives. We budgeted $25 dollars a day (sometimes went over or under) and slept in mostly hostels or cheap housing. Afterward, I went back to school for 9 months (paid for by student loans as with the rest of my education) and was only able to work 3 months in a parttime job during that time. As far as paying for something like that, when there's a will, there's a way. (Reminds me of Frozen River! ;-)) I find nothing unusual about Obama's trip. I ran into a number of Australians of my age traveling the world for a year who would get odd jobs to support their trip. And they went *everywhere*. And as far as Obama at Harvard, I would think there are financial options available for him as a minority and for all we know, he got grants, scholarships and or loans. The Times reported that Robert Malley, an advisor to Obama, was 'sacked' after the press found out he was having regular contacts with 'Hamas'. The same Hamas that controls Gaza and is connected with Iran and terrorism. And Hillary had to do the same thing for one of her advisors playing both ends against the middle on something Hillary was publically against (will admit I've forgotten the specifics).

(Dorine), Isn't the Washington Times the Moonie-owned, right wing publication? I don't know who owns it, but I'm all for equal time, and so far this election has been an Obama love fest. You do know that he's in the process of buying a half-hour same time slot on each mayor network so he can speak to all just days before the election? He has a $$$ cow. Is that fair and democratic? What EVER happened to equal time? And why am I the only one bothered by this? Karen, no one has brought up Ayers. So he's the communist that lives in the "in" chic part of town? The '60's was a time to be radical. Of course, bombing and killing was not the way to go about it. IMO.

(Dorine), I find nothing unusual about Obama's trip. Of course not. ;-) Please make another batch of koolaid.

He has a $$$ cow. Which is a problem, why? Is that fair and democratic? If he didn't opt for public financing, indeed it is. What EVER happened to equal time? Nothing? McCain is free to buy time as well.

Was there ever a better example of letting men be in charge of decisions affecting a woman? John McCain showing his cynicism when he talked about exceptions based on the "supposed" the health of the mother. Oh man!! (Moon) So he's the communist No, he's not a communist. A radical, yes. that lives in the "in" chic part of town? No, I'd never characterize Hyde Park as being the "in" or "chic" part of town. It is merely the area around the university and would have a disproportionate number of intellectuals living there of all stripes. Milton Friedman got the Nobel Prize for economics and he was from the U of C. He was the biggest advocate of free markets. Despite being a libertarian, Reagon glommed onto his work. Hyde Park would be more like Cambridge, Mass, but is only a neighborhood. The '60's was a time to be radical. Of course, bombing and killing was not the way to go about it. IMO.

I think this might sum it up for many people... My 401(k) is down $21,000 since the end of September. And John McCain thinks I should be worried about William Ayers. http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-webpitts1015.artoct15,0,3144917.story

Did anyone happen to watch the new political thriller yesterday called "The Shootout at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?" The stellar cast included a newcomer to the movie industry called Joe the Plumber. Joe's performance was so outstanding he is being sought after for exclusive interviews. Sadly, Joe can not be found as he seems to have suddenly taken a vacation to some remote island. I need to find some humor in this presidental election before severe depression sets in. It doesnt't look like DH will be retiring for awhile because our 401(k)is also down so much that even if the ecomony was to improve right now, (which we know will not happen) it will take at least 7 years to build it up to where it was before September. Right now the economy is my #1 concern. I am going to be 50 next month, and I have just watched all the capital gain we have earned over many years go right down the toilet. It's a good thing we didn't just invest in stocks. IMO, I think Obama will do more for the middle class than McCain who seems to be out of touch with reality. BTW Obama did talk about equal pay for woman last night. As the saying goes, Actions Speak Louder than Words, so if he wins it will be a wait and see situation.

(Dorine), Isn't the Washington Times the Moonie-owned, right wing publication? (Moon) I don't know who owns it, but I'm all for equal time BTW, my question was more rhetorical as I did know about them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times

When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed," Biden told Couric. LOL, Moon, that is such an insignificant gaffe. It hurts no one. But it is pretty funny.:-) Where has the money come from? I know a lot of people who did the "backbacking through Europe" thing right after college and they didn't have a pot to piss in. When you're 22, you live cheap and it doesn't bother you. (Dorine)And as far as Obama at Harvard, I would think there are financial options available for him as a minority Of course. And coupled with his intellect, probably every school in the Ivy League was after him. I wouldn't be surprised it he got a full ride. Besides, most schools come up with some sort of financial package when they offer you admission, and depending on your grades and financial situation it could be scholarships, loans, grants, or a combo of all three. (Karen)Was there ever a better example of letting men be in charge of decisions affecting a woman? John McCain showing his cynicism when he talked about exceptions based on the "supposed" the health of the mother. Oh man!! Yeah, that's it, John, women are manipulating the definition of "health" just so they can get more abortions. Here's the transcript and I find his responses very offenisive: OBAMA: We can find some common ground, because nobody's pro-abortion. I think it's always a tragic situation. We should try to reduce these circumstances. SCHIEFFER: Let's give Sen. McCain a short response... McCAIN: Just again... SCHIEFFER: ... and then... McCAIN: Just again, the example of the eloquence of Sen. Obama. He's "health for the mother." You know, that's been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything. That's the extreme pro-abortion position, quote, "health."

Is that fair and democratic? (Dorine)If he didn't opt for public financing, indeed it is. How about Obama's U-turn on public financing? LOL! His whole career is based on changing his mind when it suits him personally. I have a problem with that, when it is a very ambitious politician who does it. What EVER happened to equal time? (Dorine), Nothing? McCain is free to buy time as well. That's not the point. On Oct. 29th NBC and CBS are moving around their schedules to fit BO half-hour infomercial, as if we didn't get enough of them already!!! IMO, they should not allow his time if McCain can't buy the same. Karen, Radical chic = Communist. And, whatever views McCain might have had on women's issues, the fact that he picked a women as his VP is sending a message. This is an excellent reminder of some of the nice things the Obama's said about the Clintons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsUnw5RDYoA

LOL, Moon, that is such an insignificant gaffe. It hurts no one. But it is pretty funny.:-) I know. But Bush is bag full of insignificant gaffes and I still cringe. (Mari), I know a lot of people who did the "backbacking through Europe" thing right after college and they didn't have a pot to piss in. When you're 22, you live cheap and it doesn't bother you. Yes, Europe. But Barry went to see his mother in Indonesia; next to Hyderabad in India; three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family; then off to Africa to visit his father's family. When he returned from that trip he asked to be called Barack.

they should not allow his time if McCain can't buy the same. Again, McCain is free to do the same. Why do you keep insinuating he can't? And at one point, it appears McCain may have intended to use public financing also. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/06/how-mccains-pub.html

But Barry went to see his mother in Indonesia; next to Hyderabad in India; three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family; then off to Africa to visit his father's family. He was smart! Saved money staying with people he knew. Wish I'd been so lucky. I ran out of money and had to have a friend wire me enough money to last the last couple of days and have enough to somehow get from JFK back to Philly on my return (which I had *no* idea how I was going to do that when I walked off the plane -- I paid for some type of shuttle bus to take me about 45 min north and luckily got hold a friend at the last minute to take me the rest of the way). the fact that he picked a women as his VP is sending a message. A not very good one considering which woman he picked.

(Mari) Here's the transcript and I find his responses very offenisive Not just the words, but he made little air quotes with his fingers to demonstrate that he didn't buy it. (Moon) Karen, Radical chic = Communist. Not to me, honey. I studied history. Communism is something very specific to me. For example, all communists are socialists. But not all socialists are communists. ;-)

(Mari), I know a lot of people who did the "backbacking through Europe" thing right after college (Moon) Yes, Europe. But Barry went to see his mother in Indonesia; next to Hyderabad in India; three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family; then off to Africa to visit his father's family. When he returned from that trip he asked to be called Barack. You go where you have an interest. I studied European History, so I went to Europe. But many people I know went to Israel. Not everyone has to go to Europe. If he was going to Indonesia, then it makes sense to explore that area of the world. And, if you're going to visit mom in Indonesia and dad in Kenya and a roomie's family from Pakistan, then you might as well do a bit of India as well. Look at a map. ;-) I'm not sure what his travel planning is indicating to you, Moon, other than making the most of one's travel dollars.

(Karen), You go where you have an interest. I studied European History, so I went to Europe. But many people I know went to Israel. Not everyone has to go to Europe. Shit, I'm zipping it up. My point is NOT coming across, LOL! Or maybe the koolaid has been refreshed? ;-) Exit Barry enter Barack. (Moon) Karen, Radical chic = Communist. (Karen), Not to me, honey. Well honey, let me enlighten you on the new generation of European communist/socialists, they are radical chic or as Evelyn calls them limousine liberals. I know plenty of them in Italy and France and Spain and England. Sheesh, I didn't think I had to explain that. Karen, there's an article in today's Wash Post Style section on Hyde Park, Chicago. One man quoted said he doesn't consider himself from Chicago, he's from Hyde Park. LOL! they should not allow his time if McCain can't buy the same. Again, McCain is free to do the same. Why do you keep insinuating he can't?

they should not allow his time if McCain can't buy the same. (Dorine), Again, McCain is free to do the same. Why do you keep insinuating he can't? You're kidding, right? Have you seen the campaign funds that BO has in comparison to McCain? Not only is the media biased and totally in the tank for BO but now, CBS and NBC are accommodating their schedules to air a half-hour BO infomercial?

(Moon) Exit Barry enter Barack. OK, so? Many children grow into their given names. Plus you have to take into consideration where he grew up. Here, in an urban area, lots of kids have African derived names or names that come from who knows what. But Obama was raised by his grandmother in Kansas, right? I doubt you'd find the same situation there. Sheesh, I didn't think I had to explain that. You didn't. I know what all those things are and certainly know what a limousine liberal ls. However, weren't we discussing Bill Ayers and his old assocites? We're talking the radicals of the 1960s and 70s. They weren't communists, merely radicals, war protesters and more anarchists than anything. I tend to be more specific in terminology and not bandy about those labels incorrectly. One man quoted said he doesn't consider himself from Chicago, he's from Hyde Park. LOL! I can believe that and it is very much true of university towns. The academic staff identifies more with the university than the geographic area. Their view is insular and they hardly venture out. Here's the article, with a photo gallery: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/15/AR2008101503728.html Uncommon Ground Yes, Obama Lives There. But Chicago's Hyde Park Is a Place All Its Own By Peter Slevin Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, October 16, 2008; C01 CHICAGO No American president has been elected from a place quite like Hyde Park, the home of Sen. Barack Obama. Among the community's notable features are a university famous for intellectualism, a pair of 1960s Weather Underground radicals famous for being unrepentant and a bloc of voters famous for choosing Sen. John Kerry over President Bush by 19 to 1. Judging by the swift demonization, Obama might as well live at the corner of Liberal and Kumbaya. Republican strategist Karl Rove placed Hyde Park alongside Cambridge, Mass., and San Francisco in a triad of leftist tomfoolery. The Weekly Standard, recalling Obama's description of former Weatherman Bill Ayers as merely "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," asked who lives in a neighborhood like that. Hyde Park in real life is not so easily typecast. The political ethic is proudly progressive on matters of race and social justice, yet the community is anchored by the University of Chicago, an incubator for some of the nation's most influential conservatives, from Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia to Nobel Prize-winning free marketeer Milton Friedman. Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan lives within four blocks of Obama's $1.6 million home, as do former Weather Underground members Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Yet so does Richard Epstein, a prominent libertarian law professor who is quick to say he is friends with Scalia and Ayers -- and once tried to hire Dohrn. "I don't consider myself a Chicagoan," Epstein explains. "I consider myself a Hyde Parker." To be a Hyde Parker, dozens of residents say, is to choose to live in a community that considers variations of race, creed, wealth and politics to be a neighborhood selling point, like bicycle paths or broadband in a far suburb. Finishing breakfast at the Valois Cafeteria, retired utility worker Dwight Lewis points to a woman selling StreetWise, a newspaper written by homeless people. "You've got people who have nothing to people who have everything," he says. "You've got people living on the street to people who have homes worth several million dollars." For Hyde Park's most famous resident, who wants to be seen as distinctive but unthreatening, his chosen turf represents the political eclecticism and sense of post-racial possibility at the heart of his personality and campaign. Yet as Obama is learning, the narrative cuts both ways. To no one's surprise, Sen. John McCain and his supporters have pushed the idea, echoed by early surveys, that Obama is a risky choice, that he is somehow just too exotic, too erudite -- and did we mention naive? He bodysurfs in Hawaii, he orders green tea ice cream in Oregon, he writes his own books in deft prose, his name is Barack Obama. "This is not a man who sees America as you and I do, as the greatest force for good in the world," says Gov. Sarah Palin, McCain's tart-tongued running mate, who grounds her own narrative in the recently paved roads of an Alaskan town 1/500th the size of Chicago. Palin would no doubt beg to differ, but Obama friend and lifelong resident Valerie Jarrett puts it this way: "Hyde Park is the real world as it should be. If we could take Hyde Park and we could help make more Hyde Parks around our country, I think we would be a much stronger country." Blueprint of Diversity Mainstream, as mainstream is commonly defined, is not Hyde Park. The average white metropolitan resident lives in a neighborhood 80 percent white and only 7 percent black, says Northwestern University professor Mary Pattillo, who calls Hyde Park "anomalous for whites." Census tracts in the exurbs and the countryside tend to be even whiter. By contrast, the 2000 census found that 43.5 percent of the 29,000 residents in Hyde Park proper called themselves white, 37.7 percent black, 11.3 percent Asian and 4.1 percent Hispanic. Another 3.4 percent answered "other." In economic terms, there are plenty of six-figure earners, yet one in six residents lives in poverty. The median household income is about $45,000, roughly the national average. "Given all this," Pattillo says, "you can better understand the foreignness of a place like Hyde Park." Hyde Park sprang from open space along Lake Michigan in the mid-1800s as new train service attracted seaside vacationers and well-to-do residents of boomtime Chicago. In 1892, John D. Rockefeller bankrolled an upstart university and, one year later, the area hosted the World's Columbian Exposition, which helped put the Windy City on the map. By the early 1900s, Hyde Park had a growing Jewish population that expanded with the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. The area also became a rare island where middle-class black people could aspire to live. By the 1940s, fear among some whites of the growing numbers of black families produced a bitter fight over race. The University of Chicago, saying it was trying to maintain safe surroundings, backed restrictive covenants as well as white neighborhood groups intent on barring blacks. When the Supreme Court banned racial covenants in 1948, university leaders feared white flight and an influx of poor blacks from surrounding neighborhoods. They hammered home a 1950s urban renewal plan that displaced thousands. The idea, wrote historian Arnold R. Hirsch, was to generate real estate prices high enough to "regulate both the number and 'quality' of blacks remaining." This prompted the joke that Hyde Park, for all of its pride about racial integration, was a case of "black and white together, working shoulder to shoulder against the poor." Yet the strategy worked as the university had hoped, says Timuel Black, 89, a longtime political activist. Sufficient numbers of middle-class whites and blacks stayed to preserve the community's multiracial core. "When whites found out that blacks were just like them," Black recalls with a wry smile, "acceptance was very easy." As it happens, Obama is trying to lead white voters to that same conclusion. All About the Mix Hyde Park was the first place Obama alighted in 1985 when he became a $1,000-a-month community organizer. He chose a cheap apartment in the Chicago neighborhood that best reflected his own urban, multiethnic politics and lifestyle. He listened to jazz, swam in the lake and drove his clunker to the impoverished far South Side. "That's the kind of place Barack felt most at home," says Chicago Tribune writer Don Terry, who grew up in a mulitracial family in Hyde Park. In 1993, two years after his return from Harvard Law School, Obama bought a 2,200-square-foot condominium in an integrated Hyde Park complex called East View Park with his wife Michelle, raised in nearby South Shore. They lived there through his first half-dozen campaigns and much of his tenure as a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago. Their two daughters spent their early years there, Michelle soon commuting to work at a series of university outreach jobs. In 2005, the family moved to a house with six bedrooms and four fireplaces across the street from a synagogue. They live on a street of tall trees and landscaped lawns in the neighborhood of Kenwood, which extends four blocks north of Hyde Park but is commonly considered part of the greater Hyde Park community. Until his life was subsumed by the presidential campaign, Obama shopped at the local food co-op, browsed the stacks at 57th Street Books and hung out with his girls at the playground. He continues to wear a tattered Chicago White Sox cap and get his hair cut at a busy salon where his longtime barber, known by the single name Zariff, says, "You have to be yourself when you come in here." A few blocks from Obama's home, the Currency Exchange cashes paychecks only steps from an Aveda shop. A pita restaurant's bulletin board carries notes for Tri Yoga, Ken's Klean Kuts and the Temple of Mercy Association Annual International Marcus Garvey 2008 Parade. Valois Cafeteria, the anti-Starbucks, is packed at breakfast with transport workers cheek by jowl with businessmen studying their Wall Street Journals. Each Wednesday, a dozen retired black men get together to jaw. One day, hearing that Republicans are branding Obama and his home turf as elitist, they take up the question. "Most all of us in this room, we pulled ourselves up by the bootstraps," explains Sandy Roach, a chemist. "We got student loans, worked our way through college. We don't have any George Bushes, nobody born with silver spoons in our mouths." Nodding toward his friends, Charles Doty says, "You can find a rocket scientist and a fellow who can teach you how to shoot dice." Ask anyone: Hyde Park is all about the mix. "It shaped us, our careers and our personalities," says Alison P. Ranney, a white businesswoman. "In some ways, you don't realize until you leave how special it is." Ranney was 9 years old in the 1970s when her family left Hyde Park and moved to a coal-mining town in southern Illinois. At the new school, fourth-graders who had heard she was from Chicago kept asking whether she actually went to school with black children. Of course she did, and what of it? She remembers coming home from her first day of school and asking her mother, "Is there something you haven't been telling me about black people?" The 700 students at the public William H. Ray Elementary School are "diverse in every way imaginable," says principal Bernadette Butler. The variety of students at the private University of Chicago Laboratory Schools served as models for the inquisitive, multicultural 12-year-old protagonists in Blue Balliett's best-selling novel, "Chasing Vermeer." Balliett taught writing at Lab, where Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens graduated and Langston Hughes was once artist in residence. Malia and Sasha Obama are students there, and Michelle Obama sits on the board. "It's a place where you can be who you are and bring any kind of diversity to the table and be celebrated for it. Kids really can grow up in Hyde Park and never hear a negative conversation about those differences," Balliett says over lunch at Medici, a local hangout with carved-up wooden tables and a racially diverse clientele. "My son used to say, 'How come we aren't at least Jewish and Christian?' " When he was a boy, social activist Jamie Kalven lived in an apartment in a home owned by Manhattan Project chemist Harold Urey. At various times, the place was also owned by prizefighter Sonny Liston and jazz pianist Ahmad Jamal. Muhammad Ali once lived nearby and kept a pair of lions in an outdoor cage. Kalven is struck by the presence in Hyde Park of a roughly equal number of blacks and whites "for whom the fact of living together is no big deal." Which, in a sense, is the big deal. Political Blocks Hyde Park is often painted as an island by residents and outsiders. The depiction extends to politics. Democrats from Hyde Park often describe themselves as independents. In Chicago terms, that means they steer a course apart from the long-dominant, now fading, party machine. Hyde Park produced alderman Leon Despres, a corruption fighter who often found himself on the lonely end of 49-1 city council votes. It was home to Harold Washington, the anti-machine candidate elected as the city's first black mayor, and Sen. Paul H. Douglas, a social reformer and civil rights activist. Decades ago, when the machine was far stronger, young Abner Mikva, an Obama mentor who served as a congressman, federal judge and White House counsel, tried to volunteer at the 8th Ward Regular Democratic headquarters. "We don't want nobody nobody sent," the party operative told him. When Mikva said he was from the University of Chicago and was willing to work free, the man said, "We don't want nobody from the University of Chicago in this organization." The university is a central part of the narrative of Hyde Park as a highfalutin, arugula-eating slice of academic elitism. The U of C, as everyone calls it, boasts that 78 alumni or onetime faculty have won the Nobel Prize. That makes Hyde Park surely the only place in America where an academic and his wife, going through a divorce, would include a clause splitting future winnings if he scored the economics prize. He won, and sent her $500,000. As with Hyde Park itself, there is an essential element of the university that reflects Obama's way of seeing the world. It has to do with the interchange of ideas, a realm in which the cerebral, pragmatic, inherently cautious Illinois senator may be at his most comfortable. University President Robert Zimmer describes an atmosphere of ferment and says, "There's a real push for people not to be overly comfortable with their assumptions." While Zimmer talks of rigor, Chicago Public Schools Chief Arne Duncan talks of openness, idealism and accomplishment. An Obama friend and Hyde Parker to the core, Duncan says unabashedly that the Obamas "represent the best of what Hyde Park is." He considers it no coincidence that "a disproportionate number of civic leaders come out of Hyde Park." It is ironic -- or perhaps inevitable -- that a Daumier-like caricature of Hyde Park has fueled critics and mischief-makers on opposing sides. Conservative columnist David Brooks noted the idea in some Republican circles that Obama is "some naive university-town dreamer, the second coming of Adlai Stevenson." When challenged by Obama in a 2000 House race, Rep. Bobby Rush (D), a former Black Panther, jeered that Obama "went to Harvard and became an educated fool." State Sen. Donne Trotter said Obama was seen as "the white man in blackface in our community." This is Mr. Obama's neighborhood, where conservative law professor Epstein can cite a "slightly loopy side to Hyde Park politics" and still praise a history of "social toleration." It is the home turf of Ayers and Dohrn, whose fiery 1960s ambition to topple U.S. government gave way to roles as university professors and intense Little League coaches. It is a place where differences are just differences. "Hyde Park should be held up as an example of what an integrated community could be," says University of Chicago law professor M. Todd Henderson, who grew up in a white Pittsburgh suburb. "It wasn't some sort of social experiment." Henderson says his adopted community is a place where ideas matter more than pedigree and one cannot infer social status by skin color. He says the visible hardships in nearby neighborhoods and the persistent threat of crime undermine any notion that Hyde Park is, in his words, "a fantasy land." "To criticize Hyde Park as being aloof, out of touch and elitist is just poppycock," he says. "I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Republican, and there is nothing America should be ashamed about Hyde Park. On the contrary, America should be proud of Hyde Park."

(Karen), They weren't communists, merely radicals, war protesters and more anarchists than anything. I tend to be more specific in terminology and not bandy about those labels incorrectly. Once again, you're kidding right? All those radical groups loved Gramci, and Carl Marx. The radical group Briggate Rosse in Italy is one example. I tend to be more specific in terminology and not bandy about those labels incorrectly. Another BB? ;-)

Karl Marx quotation: Anyone who knows anything of history knows that great social changes are impossible without feminine upheaval. Social progress can be measured exactly by the social position of the fair sex, the ugly ones included. I always got a kick out of that one. :-D

*snort* Joe the Plumber, so worried about more taxes under Obama, owes over $1100 in back taxes. `Joe the Plumber,' Obama Tax-Plan Critic, Owes Taxes Ryan J. Donmoyer � Thu Oct 16, 6:17 pm ET (Bloomberg) -- ``Joe the plumber,'' the Toledo, Ohio, man whose complaints about Barack Obama's tax plan were highlighted by John McCain in the final presidential debate, owes the state of Ohio almost $1,200 in back income taxes. According to records on file with the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, the state filed a tax lien against Samuel J. Wurzelbacher for $1,182.98 on Jan. 26, 2007, that is still active. Wurzelbacher was thrust into the national spotlight this week when he told Obama he worried that the Illinois senator's proposals to roll back Bush administration tax breaks for Americans earning more than $250,000 would prevent him from buying a plumbing business that would earn between $250,000 and $280,000 a year. McCain, an Arizona Republican senator, pointed to the exchange during the debate last night when he turned to the camera and said, ``I will not stand for a tax increase on small- business income.'' Directly criticizing Obama, he added, ``what you want to do to `Joe the plumber' and millions more like him is have their taxes increased and not be able to realize the American dream of owning their own business.'' Today, at a rally in Downingtown, Pennsylvania, McCain said ``the real winner last night was `Joe the plumber.''' On Oct. 12, as Obama was campaigning door-to-door in suburban Toledo, Wurzelbacher confronted the Democratic presidential nominee about his tax plan. `American Dream' ``Do you believe in the American dream?'' Wurzelbacher asked before asking about the tax increase. ``I'm being taxed more and more for fulfilling the American dream.'' Wurzelbacher's home telephone number is unlisted, and efforts to reach him by calling his neighbors and family were unsuccessful. Attempts to reach Wurzelbacher at the plumbing company where he works were also unsuccessful. The address on the lien and other records for him matched the address published by the Toledo Blade, which also noted the lien. Wurzelbacher told ABC's ``Good Morning America'' program today that high earners shouldn't be ``penalized for being successful.'' The state of Ohio places a lien on real property after several steps to try to collect a tax debt, according to John Kohlstrand, a spokesman for the Ohio Department of Taxation who said he couldn't discuss any specific case. Delinquency Notice If a delinquency notice goes unheeded, the Department of Taxation issues a billing notice, Kohlstrand said. If that is ignored, a more formal assessment notice is sent. Failing to appeal an assessment or losing an appeal puts the debt into the hands of the state attorney general for collection. The attorney general typically sends a collection notice and simultaneously files a lien. ``The taxpayers may not necessarily know about the lien,'' Kohlstrand said, although they would receive other notices. In Wurzelbacher's case, the lien indicated that the notice was sent to a previous address in Toledo. Ray Ann Estep, section chief for revenue-recovery services for the Ohio attorney general, said Wurzelbacher's lien was filed six months after the Department of Taxation certified the debt for collection. ``Unfortunately, sometimes people don't resolve their debts as quickly as we would like them to,'' she said. Obama's Plan In addition to tax credits and a proposal that would allow Wurzelbacher to avoid paying capital-gains taxes if he ever sold the business he wants to acquire for a profit, Obama has proposed allowing the top two tax rates of 33 percent and 35 percent to revert to what they were during the Clinton administration, or 36 percent and 39.6 percent, respectively. In 2007, the 33 percent bracket applied to taxable income exceeding $195,851. Under Obama's proposal, Wurzelbacher would face about $900 more in taxes if he netted $280,000 of income from his new business and had to pay an extra 3 percentage points on the amount over $195,851, said Gerald Prante, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation, a Washington research group that is examining both candidates' plans. ``His average tax burden, the final bill he pays to the IRS isn't going to go up much if he's just making $280,000 a year,'' Prante said. He would face higher marginal tax costs to expand the business beyond that, he said. Not Taxable Income It's far more likely that the $280,000 Wurzelbacher told Obama he'd earn would be in the form of gross receipts and not taxable income, said Steven Bankler, a certified public accountant in San Antonio, who counts plumbers and other trade professionals as his clients. According to an analysis by Dun & Bradstreet on Wurzelbacher's employer, A. W. Newell Corp., the plumbing and heating contractor has annual sales of $510,000. If Wurzelbacher bought the company, by the time he took proper business deductions, Bankler said, he'd be left with between $150,000 and $200,000 in taxable income and wouldn't be affected by Obama's proposed increase in the top rates. Wurzelbacher might eventually have to pay more employment taxes under Obama's plan to impose a rate of between 2 percent and 4 percent on wages over $250,000, Bankler said, but Obama has said that change wouldn't take effect for a decade. Wurzelbacher doesn't have a plumber's license and isn't registered as a plumber in Ohio, the Toledo Blade reported on its Web site today. His employer has a state plumbing license, the newspaper said. Before living in Ohio, Wurzelbacher was a resident of Mesa, Arizona, in McCain's home state, according to property records. To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20081016/pl_bloomberg/ac4j3t5s_eq;_ylt=Aonxbb8NRbvs13mCa3olUFKs0NUE

Apparently Obama responds about Ayers on Smerconish's show yesterday. I haven't listened to it yet. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/10/9256/0615/320/626146

(Moon)IMO, they should not allow his time if McCain can't buy the same. Sorry, but McCain chose to take public funds for his campaign--to the tune of $84 million, that's our taxpayer money--whereas Obama figured, correctly, that he could raise more by going with private funds. They both had the same choice. Disputing this is like saying I can't buy a car unless you can afford one too, even though I earned more money and managed it better. And, whatever views McCain might have had on women's issues, the fact that he picked a women as his VP is sending a message. It has sent the message that he will do anything to try to get elected, choosing a sorely unqualified running part and potentially putting the country in great danger. But Barry went to see his mother in Indonesia; next to Hyderabad in India; three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family; then off to Africa to visit his father's family. So by staying with family, it was actually cheaper than doing Europe.:-)

When he returned from that trip he asked to be called Barack. So you're saying, what? That he became militant? That he became a Muslim? That he "pals around with terrorists? That he's *gasp* an Arab?! Here's a link to the SNL skit on the Crazy McCain Rally Lady, and there's also a link there to a clip from the actual rally and the real lady. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/snls-crazy-mccain-rally-l_n_135463.html

(Dorine)*snort* Joe the Plumber, so worried about more taxes under Obama, owes over $1100 in back taxes. It gets better: CBS News is reporting that Joe may be related to, wait for it . . . Charles Keating! LMAO! http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/17/usnews/whispers/main4527926.shtml

It's far more likely that the $280,000 Wurzelbacher told Obama he'd earn would be in the form of gross receipts and not taxable income, said Steven Bankler, a certified public accountant in San Antonio, who counts plumbers and other trade professionals as his clients. See? That's the part that people don't get. People think 'gross' and not 'after deductions.' I did like the part about how Joe the Plumber doesn't even have a plumbing license. ;-)

Speaking of SNL, I heard last night that Palin is going to make an appearance tomorrow. People are wondering if she's going to portray Tina Fey. I mean, Halloween is coming up soon. ;-)

I thought McCain opted out of public funding as well. Oooh! Didn't know the Keating connection.

I think it's disgusting to spend so much money on a campaign when there are so many people dying of hunger in the world, and Americans are suffering too. What's the total so far for Obama? IMO, there should be a cap of 75 million per candidate running for President. (Mari), So you're saying, what? That he became militant? That he became a Muslim? That he "pals around with terrorists? That he's *gasp* an Arab?! I am not going to deny Obama's Islamic past in Indonesia. I am not going to deny that he was a follower of Rev. Wright, who's mentor is Farrakahn from the Nation of Islam. I am not going to deny that he knew Ayers and received money from him. I am not going to deny his many associations with Rezko the crook, which benefited him in underhanded and illegal ways. I am not going to deny the fact that he let the Clintons be branded racists during the primaries, and that he never came to Hillary's defense when the media were blatantly sexist against her. "Bros before hoes" is only one example. I truly think Obama will be a disaster for this country. The only bright light is that he can pick up the phone and ask Hillary what she would do. ;-) No hard feelings, but I won't be posting here any longer. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind and if I want to read more Obama love, all I have to do is read my Wash Post or NYT or turn on the TV. I am happy you are all so convinced by Obama. How I wish we could all be happy together celebrating a Hillary victory. Maybe in 2012. ;-) Arrivederci!

Arriverderci, Moon, but I don't think anyone here has ever pronounced a love for Obama as opposed to being more against McCain/Palin and/or what has presented and represented himself as. Speaking for myself, I just want someone to save my country and I don't see McCain doing it. Of course, when the Democrats took the (very slim) majority in Congress, I was hoping and expecting the same thing which hasn't so much come to pass.

Evidently today both Chicago papers printed their presidential endorsements. Both were for Obama. That may not seem all that significant. However, for the Chicago Tribune, it was historic. First time ever that it came out for a Democrat. [I guess they're not overly concerned about Barry/Barack or his terrorist associates.]

However, for the Chicago Tribune, it was historic. First time ever that it came out for a Democrat. I was fascinated to read that.

As if I needed to be insulted yet again by his campaign . . . http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/19/campaign.wrap/ Asked if Gov. Sarah Palin has become a drag on his ticket, McCain said, "As a cold political calculation, I could not be more pleased. She has excited and energized our base. She is a direct counterpoint to the liberal feminist agenda for America."

Liberal feminist agenda? :-( How totally sad. Am reminded of something I heard recently about the percentage of women in government in European countries. Half of the Netherlands' ministers are women. I never cease to be amazed that Americans *think* they're so progressive when all the numbers show the opposite.

McCain said, "As a cold political calculation, I could not be more pleased. If I hadn't seen it on cnn.com, I'd have truly thought this was a joke. A piece from The Onion even.

"Actions Speak Louder Than Words" A picture of McCain after the debate in New York. He started to go the wrong way and had to turn around. Is this the man we want running our Country? Scary Thought!

I meant to put Scary Thought, IMO. I don't want to insult anyone's political views. But, IMHO if we can't have Hillary, I sure don't want McCain and Palin. Too bad Colin was not born in the old USA or he could be our 3rd presidental candidate. Just picture him on the campaign trail with Mrs. Bumble leading the way. I am so sick of this election. I can't wait until it's over.

(Marlene) Too bad Colin was not born in the old USA or he could be our 3rd presidental candidate. Then you'd really have a socialist. LOL!

Jon Stewart on Palin in his stand-up act. http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/10/jon_stewart_to_sarah_palin_exp.asp

Remember how Al-Qaeda issued a recorded message from Bin Laden right before the 2004 election? I wonder when the shoe will drop this time around. According to this, they're hoping McCain wins; keeps our image abroad more tarnished: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/22/al-qaeda-supporters-endor_n_136779.html

A quite long, but interesting article on the journey of Palin to VP nom. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer

Must be exhausting to be the Obama some think he is. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/22/12551/762/628/638050

(Dorine) Must be exhausting to be the Obama some think he is. LOl! Not to mention that the Democratic machine here must have missed that one as well. Heard on the csr radio this afternoon a confirmed item that Grant Park has been booked for his acceptance rally. I guess there isn't a ballroom big enough to hold all his supporters here. ;-)

What happens if it rains? Not much could be seen under a tent. At least for people there.

IMO, this tells me McCain expects to lose. McCain might skip his own election-night party By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer 2 hrs 26 mins ago NEW YORK � Republican John McCain is not going to make his election night remarks in the traditional style � at a podium standing in front of a sea of campaign workers jammed into a hotel ballroom. Oh, the throng of supporters will hold the usual election night party at the Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix on the evening of Nov. 4. But the Republican presidential nominee plans to address another group of supporters and a small group of reporters on the hotel lawn; his remarks will be simultaneously piped electronically to the party inside and other reporters in a media filing center, aides said. Aides said Thursday that the arrangement was the result of space limitations and that McCain might drop by the election watch party at some other point. Only a small press "pool" � mostly those who have traveled regularly with the candidate on his campaign plane, plus a few local Arizona reporters and other guests � will be physically present when McCain speaks. Thomas Patterson, a government professor at Harvard's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, called the arrangement "unusual" but said the campaign may simply be bowing to the reality that the candidate's remarks are geared toward the televised audience rather than those in the hall. "Addressing your supporters election night is one of those traditions in politics, like where you choose to launch your campaign," Patterson said. "Why wouldn't you want the energy of the crowd? And if you're going to lose, you almost need it even more." With just 12 days left in the presidential contest, most polls show the Arizona senator trailing Democrat Barack Obama nationally and in most battleground states, although a new AP-GfK poll showed the race tightening a bit in the last few days. Obama, by contrast, plans to address a giant outdoor celebration election night in Chicago's Grant Park. The event is free and open to the public, but the campaign was charging media organizations a hefty fee for close-in spots on the camera risers and platforms and for cable and wireless Internet at those spots. The Obama campaign was also charging news organizations $935 per person for a spot in its press filing center, as opposed to $695 per person at the McCain gathering. But as Obama spokesman Bill Burton pointed out, "Anyone credentialed for our filing center will also be able to watch the event live and in person, unlike the McCain event." ___

(Dorine) What happens if it rains? Don't northern cities hold outdoor rallies for their Superbowl champs? I seem to remember one of those here over 20 years ago. However, I have also heard rumors of using the United Center, which is where the Bulls play.

Don't northern cities hold outdoor rallies for their Superbowl champs? Yes. They'll continue if it snows I think, but not sure about rain.

I can't get over the number of robocalls I've been getting recently, especially just this morning, from both sides. The Palm Beach Board of Elections must have my NY number in their database for some reason (haven't voted there since 2000) since several of the calls are stating they're calling on behalf of the parties in Florida. Have had both Hillary Clinton and Biden's wife this morning.

Democrats headed toward big gains in House, Senate By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent David Espo, Ap Special Correspondent – Sat Oct 25, 7:24 am ET WASHINGTON – Democrats are on track for sizable gains in both houses of Congress on Nov. 4, according to strategists in both parties, although only improbable Southern victories can produce the 60-vote Senate majority they covet to help them pass priority legislation. A poor economy, President Bush's unpopularity, a lopsided advantage in fundraising and Barack Obama's robust organizational effort in key states are all aiding Democrats in the final days of the congressional campaign. "I don't think anybody realized it was going to be this tough" for Republicans, Sen. John Ensign, chairman of the party's senatorial campaign committee said recently. "We're dealing with an unpopular president (and) we have a financial crisis," he added. "You've got Republican incumbent members of the Congress" trying to run away from Bush's economic policies, said Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, who chairs the House Democratic campaign committee. "And they can't run fast enough. I think it will catch up with many of them." Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California predicted recently that Democrats would win at least 14 House seats in Republican hands. But numerous strategists in both parties agreed a gain of at least 20 seems likely and a dozen or more GOP-held seats are in doubt. Only a handful of Democratic House seats appear in any sort of jeopardy. They spoke only on condition of anonymity, saying they were relying on confidential polling data. In the Senate, as in the House, only the magnitude of the Democratic gains is in doubt. New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, head of the Democratic committee, said his party would have to win seats in "deeply red states" to amass a 60-seat majority, but added, "We're close." Obama's methodical voter registration efforts in the primary season and his current get-out-the-vote efforts are aiding Democratic candidates in several Southern races. They start with North Carolina, where GOP Sen. Elizabeth Dole trails in the polls, and include Georgia and Mississippi, where Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Roger Wicker respectively are in unexpectedly close races. "Overall, I think Obama will help us in the South because, first, his economic message resonates with Southerners, both white and black, and obviously there will be an increased African-American turnout," Schumer said. Also in a close race is the Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, although that is not a state where Obama has made much of an effort. Compounding Republican woes, the same economy that has soured voters on their candidates is causing some of the nation's wealthiest conservative donors to stay on the campaign sidelines. Freedom's Watch, a conservative group that once looked poised to spend tens of millions of dollars to help elect Republicans, had spent roughly $3 million as of midweek. Its largest single contributor is Sheldon Adelson, a billionaire with gambling interests in the United States and China. Democrats hold a 51-49 majority in the current Senate, counting two independents who vote with them. In the House, Democrats have 235 seats to 199 for Republicans, with one vacancy. It has long been apparent that Democrats would retain control of both houses of Congress, and in recent weeks, the party's leaders have mounted a concerted drive to push their Senate majority to 60. That's the number needed to overcome a filibuster, the technique of killing legislation by preventing a final vote. If Obama were to win the White House, it would be the Republicans' last toehold in power. In reality, Ensign noted this week that even if Democrats merely draw close to 60 seats, they will find it easier to pick up a Republican or two on individual bills and move ahead with portions of their agenda that might otherwise be stalled. Democrats are overwhelmingly favored to pick up seats in Virginia, New Mexico and Colorado where Republicans are retiring. Additionally, GOP Sens. John Sununu of New Hampshire, Norm Coleman of Minnesota and Gordon Smith of Oregon are in jeopardy. So, too, Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, whose fate may rest on the outcome of his corruption trial, now in the hands of a jury in a courthouse a few blocks from the Capitol. Even if they win all four of those races — a tall order — Democrats would be two seats shy of 60 and looking South to get them. In the House, Democrats are so flush with cash that they have spent nearly $1 million to capture a seat centered on Maryland's Eastern Shore that has been in Republican hands for two decades. It is one of 27 races where the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has spent $1 million or more — a total that the counterpart Republican group has yet to match anywhere. "We've had to hold most of our resources for the final two weeks and that's beginning to make a difference," said Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, chairman of the GOP House committee. Cole declined to make an overall prediction. "A lot depends on what happens presidentially in the next 10 days. We're very closely tied with John McCain and we got a lot of open seats and a strong financial disadvantage," he said. He predicted the party's Republican presidential candidate would mount a strong finish and help other candidates on the ballot. Still, the party's campaign committee recently pulled back from plans to advertise on behalf of incumbents in Michigan, Florida, Colorado and Minnesota who face competitive challenges. For its part, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee recently invested in a race in the Lincoln, Neb., area held by Republican Rep. Lee Terry. Obama has a dozen or more paid staff as well as volunteers there hoping to win one electoral vote. Democrats express confidence they will pick up at least two and possibly three Republican-held New York seats where incumbents decided against running again and at least one each in Illinois, Virginia, Ohio, New Mexico and Arizona. There are additional opportunities in at least a half-dozen other states. Republican incumbents in greatest jeopardy include Reps. Don Young in Alaska, Tom Feeney and Ric Keller in Florida, Joe Knollenberg and Tim Walberg in Michigan, Marilyn Musgrave in Colorado, Jon Porter in Nevada and Robin Hayes in North Carolina. Among the few Democrats in close races are Reps. Nick Lampson in Texas, who is in a solidly Republican district; Tim Mahoney in Florida, who recently admitted to having two extramarital affairs; Carol Shea-Porter in New Hampshire and Paul Kanjorski in Pennsylvania. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081025/ap_on_el_ge/congress_stakes;_ylt=AtlOLaZ9jom5DzQLC1yks1Ks0NUE

a lopsided advantage in fundraising That can easily be explained by the projected votes of the electorate. It is not a cause but an effect of all the foregoing.

Yeah, I want these people ruling my country. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/25/palin.tension/index.html

Have you seen this: http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/cc65ed650d

I apparently can't play it at work. I read a reference to it somewhere recently.

Joe the Plumber may get a record deal Move over Sanjaya and tell William Hung the news: Joe the Plumber is being pursued for a major record deal and could come out with a country album as early as Inauguration Day. "Joe" � aka Samuel Wurzelbacher, a Holland, Ohio, pipe-and-toilet man � just signed with a Nashville public relations and management firm to handle interview requests and media appearances, as well create new career opportunities, including a shift out of the plumbing trade into stage and studio performances. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/15072.html

LOL!! [Obama] Transcript: That's why he's spending these last few days calling me every name in the book. Lately, he's called me a socialist for wanting to roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans so we can finally give tax relief to the middle class. By the end of the week, he'll be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in Kindergarten.

Yeah, I saw that the other night. An even funnier interview was maybe the day before when Jon interviewed the actual Socialist Party candidate and how he gave answers about how absolutely nothing BO is putting forward constitutes real socialism. ;-)

I really should've made it more of a point to watch The Daily Show when I was home. The only time I remember is on Fridays when it's not on. I knew he'd be on a roll with the election.

Ooops! I went looking for the video on the Daily Show website and couldn't find it. Brian Moore was on Colbert. Here it is: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/189688/october-28-2008/socialist-candidate-for-president---brian-moore But here is one that speaks to one of my favorite issues: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=189749&title=John-McCain's-Air-Quotes

They were talking about, or rather demonstrating the air quotes when talking about McCain and women's issues on Bill Maher's show last week. It was one of the best shows in a while (with Tim Robbins, Matthew Dowd and Carol Leifer).

(Karen) But here is one that speaks to one of my favorite issues: Which one? The sophomoric, unpresidential use of air quotes or the belittling of women's health issues by a prick? Thanks for the link, I had missed that Daily Show but had seen McPain's air quotes several times. My first reaction being, WTF does he think he's doing, surely that won't work when dealing with world leaders nor terrorists! Spot on with the sarcasm concerning the man's "health issue" upon finding himself raped and impregnated!

Since we were talking about evolution as theory (or not ;-)) vs. creationism, I thought this view from the Catholic Church was quite an interesting way to look at it. I'm not as up on my Catholic Church doctrine as I used to be. ;-) Pope sees physicist Hawking at evolution gathering 1 hr 58 mins ago VATICAN CITY (Reuters) � Pope Benedict told a gathering of scientists including the British cosmologist Stephen Hawking on Friday that there was no contradiction between believing in God and empirical science. Benedict, who briefly met the wheelchair-bound physicist at an event hosted by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, described science as the pursuit of knowledge about God's creation. "There is no opposition between faith's understanding of creation and the evidence of the empirical sciences," the pontiff said. "Galileo saw nature as a book whose author is God." The Catholic Church found the 17th-century astronomer Galileo guilty of heresy for insisting the earth revolved around the sun. It did not rehabilitate him until 1992. Hawking is a guest at the week-long event, which will explore the theme: "Scientific Insights into the Evolution of the Universe and of Life." In an interview with Reuters last year, Hawking said he was "not religious in the normal sense." "I believe the universe is governed by the laws of science," he said. "The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws." The Catholic Church teaches "theistic evolution," which accepts evolution as scientific theory. Proponents see no reason why God could not have used an evolutionary process in forming the human species. The Pontiff admired the technology that allows Hawking to speak through a voice synthesizer. Hawking is crippled by a muscle disease and has lost the use of his natural voice. Hawking, author of the best-selling "A Brief History of Time," will speak about the origin of the universe at the closed-door event. (Writing by Phil Stewart; Editing by Catherine Bosley)

Eagleburger Blisters Palin: "Of Course" She's Not Ready October 31, 2008 12:39 AM A former Republican Secretary of State and one of John McCain's most prominent supporters offered a stunningly frank and remarkably bleak assessment of Sarah Palin's capacity to handle the presidency should such a scenario arise. Lawrence Eagleburger, who served as Secretary of State under George H.W. Bush and whose endorsement is often trumpeted by McCain, said on Thursday that the Alaska governor is not only unprepared to take over the job on a moment's notice but, even after some time in office, would only amount to an "adequate" commander in chief. "And I devoutly hope that [she] would never be tested," he added for good measure -- referring both to Palin's policy dexterity and the idea of McCain not making it through his time in office. (Listen to audio below.) The remarks took place during an interview on National Public Radio that was, ironically, billed as "making the case" for a McCain presidency. Asked by the host whether Palin could step in during a time of crisis, Eagleburger reverted to sarcasm before leveling the harsh blow. "It is a very good question," he said, pausing a few seconds, then adding with a chuckle: "I'm being facetious here. Look, of course not." Eagleburger explained: "I don't think at the moment she is prepared to take over the reins of the presidency. I can name for you any number of other vice presidents who were not particularly up to it either. So the question, I think, is can she learn and would she be tough enough under the circumstances if she were asked to become president, heaven forbid that that ever takes place? "Give her some time in the office and I think the answer would be, she will be [pause] adequate. I can't say that she would be a genius in the job. But I think she would be enough to get us through a four year... well I hope not... get us through whatever period of time was necessary. And I devoutly hope that it would never be tested." The indictment of Palin was all the more biting because both she and McCain have held Eagleburger up repeatedly during the past several weeks as evidence that the Republican ticket has firm standing and support within foreign policy circles. (In fact, McCain conferred with Eagleburger by phone just this week, on matters pertaining to national security.) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/31/eagleburger-blisters-pali_n_139524.html

Your request is being processed... Seth Colter Walls Seth Colter Walls walls@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting From DC Become a Fan Get Email Alerts from this Reporter Eagleburger Tries To Walk Back "Stupid" Palin Criticism October 31, 2008 05:42 PM Appearing on Fox News on Friday, former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger awkwardly fell on his sword, entirely taking back his previously critical assessment of Sarah Palin's readiness to serve as president, which was given to NPR on Thursday night. As the Huffington Post noted earlier, Eagleburger's endorsement of McCain is frequently cited by the Republican nominee. But clearly, the opinions of President George H.W. Bush's Secretary of State were less welcome on the subject of Palin, whom Eagleburger had said was "of course" not "prepared to take over the reins of the presidency." Later, in his NPR interview, Eagleburger said, "Give her some time in the office and I think the answer would be, she will be [pause] adequate." By Friday afternoon, however, Eagleburger was more eager to chastise himself than Palin. "You are witnessing something quite unique: a man who is about to talk to you while he has his foot in his mouth," Eagleburger said when asked if his NPR quotes had been taken out of context. "I made a serious mistake yesterday. I was quoted correctly," Eagleburger said. "I wasn't thinking when i said it -- in fact, I was discussing foreign policy, and this was in that context, and I was just plain stupid, and if I had given the flim-flam artist Barack Obama some success with this I am deeply apologetic." It was a fine performance, but the Fox News host proceeded to take Eagleburger's retraction too far, resulting in another moment in which Eagleburger belittled Palin. Host Stuart Varney asked, "You do feel that she's a quick learner and would be good as vice president given a few days?" To which Eagleburger paused and said, "A few days? No." Later, however, he did argue that Palin has "made it clear she's a quick learner," despite the fact that "she didn't know anything about foreign affairs, nor should she have on the basis of what she had done." Winding up his extended apology, Eagleburger made clear, "I have done my best and I apologized to the McCain people." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/31/eagleburger-tries-to-walk_n_139842.html

Was discussing these exact sentiments in this article at work and on facebook this week. I've lost count of the people who are contemplating moving elsewhere in the world should McCain win. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/01/us/politics/01angst.html?ex=1383278400&en=cf2b998dcbec9fba&ei=5124&partner=facebook&exprod=facebook

Great article, Dorine! It makes me feel better that I'm not the only one obsessed over this election. DH spoke to some people at work who are racist (it's hard to believe these people still exist)but anyway they say they are voting for Obama. It still makes you think though. And then we have those undecided voters. I'm getting nervious, too.

Looks like tomorrow for a little while I might be going to work a phone bank for GOTV calls for Obama. The things I have to do to returning a favor for asking to use someone's extra guest spot for the new Bond film screening. ;-)

*continues to pray for edit function* ;-)

Record number of voters expected to deluge polls By DEBORAH HASTINGS, AP National Writer � 26 mins ago AP � Voting problems surfaced in several areas early Tuesday when people turned out in droves as balloting commenced along the Eastern Seaboard and in mid-Atlantic states. Voters needed to use paper ballots because of problems with electronic voting machines in some New Jersey precincts. And in New York, Board of Elections spokeswoman Valerie Vazquez-Rivera said many people began lining up as early as 4 a.m. at some polling places to avoid long lines, leading to erroneous reports that some sites were not opening on time. Poll worker John Ritch in Chappaqua, N.Y., said: "By 7:30 this morning, we had as many as we had at noon in 2004." Gov. Ed Rendell urged voters in Pennsylvania to "hang in there" as state and country officials braced for a huge turnout. More than 160 people were lined up to vote by the time polls opened at First Presbyterian Church in Allentown. "I could stay an hour and a half at the front end or three hours at the back end," joked Ronald Marshall, a black Democrat. In several counties surrounding Virginia's capital city of Richmond, voters and elections officials reported paper jams on some machines and balky touch-screen machines in some localities had local registrars considering paper ballots. At one precinct in Richmond, hundreds of people encircled a branch library by 6 a.m., the scheduled opening of the polls. But the line grew for another 25 minutes before the poll workers opened the doors. They said the librarian who had a key to the polling place had overslept. Despite the delay under a steady drizzle, voters cheered as the doors opened at 6:25 a.m. In Chesapeake, approximately 1,000 voters stood in line to vote, and some people reported malfunctioning machines. Independent election monitors reported problems at two dozen polling places throughout the state. The State Board of Elections scheduled a briefing for midmorning. In Ohio, a state which has had voting problems in the past, Franklin County Board of Elections spokesman Ben Piscitelli said officials again were dealing with typical glitches, like jammed backup paper tapes on voting machines. "We're taking care of things like that," Piscitelli said. "But there's nothing major or systemic." Lawsuits alleging voter suppression already had surfaced in Virginia, a hotly contested state. A judge refused late Monday to extend poll hours or add voting machines to black precincts in some areas. The NAACP, in a federal lawsuit, demanded those changes, saying minority neighborhoods would experience overwhelming turnout and there weren't enough electronic machines. U.S. District Judge Richard Williams denied the motion for a preliminary injunction, but ordered election officials to publicize that people in line by 7 p.m., the polls' closing time, would be allowed to cast ballots. Republican John McCain's campaign sued the Virginia electoral board hours before polls opened, trying to force the state to count late-arriving military ballots from overseas. McCain, a former POW from the Vietnam War, asked a federal judge to order state election officials to count absentee ballots mailed from abroad that arrive as late as Nov. 14. Lawsuits have become common fodder in election battles. The 2000 recount meltdown in Florida was ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. What is uncommon about Tuesday's contest is the sheer number of voters expected to descend on more than 7,000 election jurisdictions across the country. Voter registration numbers are up 7.3 percent from the last presidential election. "We have a system that is traditionally set up for low turnout," said Tova Wang of the government watchdog group Common Cause. "We're going to have all these new voters, but not a lot of new resources. The election directors just have very little to work with." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081104/ap_on_el_pr/voting_problems

I think that article also adds to the answer to Allison. Alliteration!

World hopes for a 'less arrogant America' By WILLIAM J. KOLE and MATT MOORE, Associated Press Writers � Tue Nov 4, 7:21 am ETBERLIN � A world weary of eight years of George W. Bush was riveted Tuesday by the drama unfolding in the United States. Many were inspired by Barack Obama's focus on hope, or simply relieved that � whoever wins � the current administration is coming to an end. From Berlin's Brandenburg Gate to the small town of Obama, Japan, the world gears up to celebrate a fresh start for America. In Germany, where more than 200,000 flocked to see Obama this summer as he moved to burnish his foreign policy credentials during a trip to the Middle East and Europe, the election dominated television ticker crawls, newspaper headlines and Web sites. Hundreds of thousands prepared to party through the night to watch the outcome of an election having an impact far beyond America's shores. Among the more irreverent festivities planned in Paris: a "Goodbye George" party to bid farewell to Bush. "Like many French people, I would like Obama to win because it would really be a sign of change," said Vanessa Doubine, shopping Tuesday on the Champs-Elysees. "I deeply hope for America's image that it will be Obama." Obama-mania was evident not only across Europe, where millions geared up for all-night vigils, but even in much of the Islamic world, where Muslims expressed hope that the Democrat would seek compromise rather than confrontation. The Bush administration alienated Muslims by mistreating prisoners at its detention center for terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and inmates at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison � human rights violations also condemned worldwide. "I hope Obama wins (because) of the need of the world to see the U.S. represent a more cosmopolitan or universal political attitude," said Rais Yatim, the foreign minister of mostly Muslim Malaysia. "The new president will have an impact on the economic and political situation in my country," said Muhammad al-Thaheri, 48, a civil servant in Saudi Arabia. Like so many around the world, he was rooting for Obama "because he will change the path the U.S. is on under Bush." Nizar al-Kortas, a columnist for Kuwait's Al-Anbaa newspaper, saw an Obama victory as "a historic step to change the image of the arrogant American administration to one that is more acceptable in the world." Yet John McCain was backed by some in countries such as Israel, where he is perceived as tougher on Iran. Israeli leaders, who consider the U.S. their closest and most important ally, have not openly declared a preference. But privately, they have expressed concern about Obama, who has alarmed some by saying he would be ready to hold a dialogue with Tehran. Taking a cigarette break on a Jerusalem street corner, bank employee Leah Nizri, 53, said Obama represented potentially frightening change and voiced concern about his Muslim ancestry. "I think he'll be pleasant to Israel, but he will make changes," she said. "He's too young. I think that especially in a situation of a world recession, where things are so unclear in the world, McCain would be better than Obama." Even in Europe, McCain got some grudging respect: Germany's mass-circulation daily Bild lionized the Republican as "the War Hero" and running mate Sarah Palin as "the Beautiful Unknown." In Berlin, Republicans Abroad organized a "November Surprise Election Party" to watch live "how the Republican ticket McCain/Palin comes from behind and leaves the 'liberal elite media' in Europe and the United States puzzled." British Prime Minister Gordon Brown clung to convention by refusing to say which candidate he wants to see win. Regardless of the outcome, he told Al-Arabiya television while on a tour of the Gulf, "history has been made in this campaign." In Baghdad, a jaded Mohammed al-Tamimi said he didn't think U.S. policy on Iraq would change. Even so, "we hope that the new American president will open a new page with our country." Kenyans made their allegiance clear: Scores packed churches on Tuesday to pray for Obama, whose late father was born in the East African nation, and hailed the candidate � himself born in Hawaii � as a "son of the soil." "Tonight we are not going to sleep," said Valentine Wambi, 23, a student at the University of Nairobi. "It will be celebrations throughout." Kenyans believe an Obama victory would not change their lives much but that hasn't stopped them from splashing his picture on minibuses and selling T-shirts with his name and likeness. Kenyans were planning to gather around radios and TV sets starting Tuesday night as the results come in. "We will feast if Obama wins," said Robert Rutaro, a university president in neighboring Uganda. "We will celebrate by marching on the streets of Kampala and hold a big party later on." In the sleepy Japanese coastal town of Obama � which translates as "little beach" � images of him adorned banners along a main shopping street, and preparations for an election day victory party were in full swing. Election fever also ran high in Vietnam, where McCain was held as a prisoner of war for more than five years after being shot down in Hanoi during a 1967 bombing run. "He's patriotic," said Le Lan Anh, a Vietnamese novelist and real estate tycoon. "As a soldier, he came here to destroy my country, but I admire his dignity." ___ Kole reported from Vienna, Austria. AP correspondents worldwide contributed. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081104/ap_on_re_eu/eu_us_elections_world_view

At one precinct in Richmond, hundreds of people encircled a branch library by 6 a.m., the scheduled opening of the polls. But the line grew for another 25 minutes before the poll workers opened the doors. They said the librarian who had a key to the polling place had overslept. Allison, any more questions?;-) I voted before going to work this morning, and although crowded, there were no long lines and I was in and out in 10 minutes. I think it all depends on how well organized your polling site is and more importantly, how many voters there are assigned to each polling place. I read this morning that in PA, they recommend no more than 1,200 voters to be assigned to each site; if that were actually carried out across the country, you wouldn't see these lines. I don't get it. Are the resources not allocated properly? On a very positive note, people are keenly interested and are voting in droves.

"We have a system that is traditionally set up for low turnout," said Tova Wang of the government watchdog group Common Cause. "We're going to have all these new voters, but not a lot of new resources. The election directors just have very little to work with." Perhaps they'll seriously reassess if voter turnout remains high, though I don't see that happening honestly.

This has to be the most unusual election in my memory. It has to be the first year I haven't been inundated by mailings. I haven't received one piece of mail about ANY candidate for ANY elected office. Not a one. Only one robo-call the other day.

One more thing about differences in elections between the US and UK. When they have a General Election, are they only voting for their member in Parliament? In the US, you can be voting for tons of people/things. From soup to nuts. The ballot starts out with the Federal portion: the president and one's congressional reps (i.e., congressman and senator), then it will proceed to State positions (from governor, state treasurer, state congressional seats) onto county/municipal offices (county clerk, water district commissioners, etc.). As I said before, here in Illinois, we also elect judges, but not all states do.

We had judges as well. It has to be the first year I haven't been inundated by mailings. I haven't received one piece of mail about ANY candidate for ANY elected office. Not a one. Only one robo-call the other day. Completely the opposite for me. Though virtually all of the mail/calls were for Florida voters, where I haven't voted since absentee for the 2000 election. Guess I'm still on their rolls. For whatever reason in I hadn't registered here despite not having lived in FL for a year and a half at that point.

(Karen)When they have a General Election, are they only voting for their member in Parliament? The answer to that is usually, yes. I have seen A US ballot paper. A few years back one of my students showed me her ballot paper (she was mailing her vote) - it was huge! However we do not use machines - just paper. I wonder if the machines themselves slow the process?

My friend (who's British and not become a citizen and can't vote) has been doing a lot of work for Obama by canvassing in PA, calling all over the country just said she saw this.... I am watching MSNBC and they are showing lines in some states which are taking hours maybe will take 6 to 8 hour wait. They are saying how broken this system is.

(Allison) I wonder if the machines themselves slow the process? I was thinking in line this morning that paper might be a whole lot quicker. Part of the delays in the last election in some states were the new touchscreen machines that didn't work right, and I think people weren't trained well enough on them. Some had to be taken out of service which would increase lines.

(dorine)"I am watching MSNBC and they are showing lines in some states which are taking hours maybe will take 6 to 8 hour wait. They are saying how broken this system is." That's the part that scares the hell out of me - that not enough people will be willing stand in line that long. This is too important not to stick it out, no matter how long. My husband & I voted early this morning before work - only a couple of people ahead of us.

Just back from voting. It actually took longer because my name wasn't listed in the roll book for my precinct. It has been there for over 10 years and I voted this past primary season. Am disgusted. My vote is considered "provisional." As usual, the desks are staffed with morons, especially this young guy who was arrogance personified. They were pushing people to the paper balloting. No wait either on the touch-screen. I asked to use the touch-screen and the guys were still trying to get me to use paper, showing me how "easy" it now is. Said only a couple of people had used the touch-screen. Bizarre. However, at the end, I did experience some tech difficulty in getting to "cast" my ballot, but I called the techie girl over and she got it to the right point. The two guys there were utterly useless. The women at the desk were more concerned about doing it right, while the guys were "let's do it this way, the only way we know." No lines at my polling place.

Said only a couple of people had used the touch-screen. Maybe people were concerned with their votes getting lost and having to deal with morons, so did paper instead to make it easier.

There's a former Drooleur who teaches at George Mason Univ. Virginia by georgia10 Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 11:00:02 AM PST Florida, Ohio...Virginia? Early reports indicate that Virginia may be the state plagued by voting issues this time around. At one precinct in Richmond's north end, hundreds of people encircled a branch library by 6 a.m., the scheduled opening of the polls. But the line grew for another 25 minutes before the poll workers opened the doors. They said the librarian who had a key to the polling place had overslept. [...] In Chesapeake, approximately 1,000 voters stood in line to vote, and some people reported malfunctioning machines. Pollard said paper ballots were brought into one polling place in Henrico County, in suburban Richmond. In Petersburg, the wrong machines were delivered to a polling place. Pollard said reports of optical scanning machines not recording votes were likely the result of the wet weather. And it gets worse: At George Mason University in Fairfax, Provost Peter N. Stevens wrote in a campus e-mail that a hacker had entered a message into the university system stating the Election Day had been rescheduled. There are also reports that Virginia voters are receiving deceptive phone calls telling them to go to the wrong polling place. Meanwhile, there is already an effort underway to seek to extend voting hours in Virginia by two hours. More on that story as it develops.

Ignore The Exit Polls by DemFromCT Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 09:57:57 AM PST You haven't seen any yet. In fact, you won't see them until after 5 pm EST. The people that run them are in a hermetically sealed environment. But even after they get around and start leaking after 5 pm, ignore them. They do not tell you what you think they tell you (so saith Inigo Montoya). But even when you ignore that and want to look at them, Read This First (http://www.pollster.com/blogs/looking_for_presidential_exit.php). It's from Mark Blumenthal and explains what you will be seeing. You'll learn about how they are done, how they are handling early voters, what to make of what you see on TV... and maybe even a little bit of what exit polls are for (and they are not to call the races.) ;-P Added: Nate Silver's Top 10 reasons To Ignore The Exit Polls, also based on Mark's work.

How Long Are You Willing To Wait In Line To Vote? by BarbinMD Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 06:50:03 AM PST Yesterday, CNN's Jack Cafferty asked viewers how long they'd be willing to wait in line to vote. Here are some of my favorite answers: My whole day is devoted to this one moment in history, i never want to look back and regret that i was not involved in one of the most important moments in United States history. Considering that there are some that wait ....and sometimes fight a lifetime for the opportunity to vote, I will wait happily for as long as it takes to vote for my chosen candidate. I urge everyone to do the same! You take your pick: A few hours, or a few years. I�ll be voting tomorrow. Guaranteed. I�ve already waited 8 years. One day is nothing. Even though I�m 9 and 1/2 months pregnant and Obama will win California with or without my vote, I�ll wait in line as long as it takes. This election is too important to miss, and I don�t care how long and uncomfortable the wait is - I�m voting. It would be a lot more uncomfortable for me to sit by for the next four years knowing that I let my voice go unheard. I think if the veterns can do 3 one year tours of duty in Iraq, I can wait on line 24 hours if it will help get them home. I am prepared and willing to wait all day. I have cleared my calendar to make sure I can spend the whole day. And the time I don�t spend waiting or voting, I will spend poll watching and holding signs. This is far too important not to make a personal sacrifice to make sure my vote counts. And, as an Army wife, one day of work loss is meaningless compared to the days my husband has and will spend on deployment. To all within the sound of your voice: Get out and vote! http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/4/9502/47563/225/651666

Early reports indicate that Virginia may be the state plagued by voting issues this time around. Last time it was Florida. Is anyone else getting the feeling that the common denominator in these "problem" voting states is . . . Moon???!!! ;-)

(Mari) Is anyone else getting the feeling that the common denominator in these "problem" voting states is . . . Moon???!!! ;-) *snort* She has been rather AWOL for the past couple of days. Getting things in (dis)order?

(Karen)I asked to use the touch-screen and the guys were still trying to get me to use paper, showing me how "easy" it now is. You should report that to your local election watchdog, since the touchscreen was in fact available. (Do)I was thinking in line this morning that paper might be a whole lot quicker. Possibly quicker in voting time in problem areas, but how are they going to count all those paper ballots and ensure the integrity of the count? It's gonna be a long night . . .I may leave work early and take a nap so I can stay up. This is always a big night for me.;-) I really think it comes down to the local polling place management, and realistic allocation of polling machines based on the voter registration numbers. My process not only went smoothly but, reading upside down at check-in, I could see that they had received and already logged my son's absentee ballot. Re: lengthy ballots. Yep, in my area, we were voting for president, senator, congress-person, township council members, plus numerous local ballot issues (e.g., funding for local projects). Many areas also have state-wide issues on the ballot (like the California gay marriage thing).

(Mari) but how are they going to count all those paper ballots and ensure the integrity of the count? They get fed right into an OCR type machine and are read on the spot. What I see is probably the delay when the data are batch processed. That type is never a real-time system. We had only two local issues on which to vote: a new constitutional convention and a specific referendum to provide for statewide recall of any elected official, the latter is targeted at our governor.

Long lines greet voters as polls are deluged By DEBORAH HASTINGS, AP National Writer 23 mins ago AP � Voters line up to cast their ballots in Edmond, Okla., during the general election, Tuesday, Nov. 4, Lines stretched around buildings and crossed city blocks as people waited to cast ballots in the historic presidential race between Barack Obama and John McCain. Touchscreen voting machines malfunctioned in some precincts, yet voting Tuesday appeared to go smoothly overall. The biggest trouble was big crowds. But folks seemed to take it in stride. "People are happy and smiling," Sen. Benjamin Cardin said as he voted at a Maryland school. "People are very anxious to be voting. They really think they are part of history, and they are." In the East, electronic machine glitches forced some New Jersey voters to cast paper ballots. In New York, eager voters started lining up before dawn, prompting erroneous reports that some precincts weren't opening on time. In the West, Californians also faced long lines, but voting went smoothly. In Orange County, south of Los Angeles, about 400 people were on hand to treat problems with the county's all-electronic voting system, said Brett Rowley of the registrar's office. "We've got paper ballots as a backup," he said. Heavy rain plunged a handful of Los Angeles polling places into the dark, forcing some to move voting booths outside until electricity was restored. Voting didn't stop. Election officials predicted turnout rates as high as 80 percent in California, the country's most populous state and the highest holder of electoral votes. In Virginia, State Board of Elections executive secretary Nancy Rodrigues said she expected 75 percent of the state's registered voters to cast ballots by Tuesday night. Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell urged voters to "hang in there" as state and country officials braced for a huge turnout in that hotly contested state. More than 160 people were lined up when the polls opened at First Presbyterian Church in Allentown. "I could stay an hour and a half at the front end or three hours at the back end," joked Ronald Marshall, a black Democrat. Hundreds converged on polling precincts in Missouri, another crucial battleground state. Norma Storms, a 78-year-old resident of Raytown, said her driveway was filled with cars left by voters who couldn't get into nearby parking lots. "I have never seen anything like this in all my born days," she said. "I am just astounded." In some places the wait was longer than two hours. "Well, I think I feel somehow strong and energized to stand here even without food and water," said Alexandria, Va., resident Ahmed Bowling, facing a very long line. "What matters is to cast my vote." Some voting advocates worried that � tolerant voters or no � the nation's myriad election systems could stagger later in the day, when people getting off work hit the polls. "We have a system that wasn't ready for huge turnout," said Tova Wang of government watchdog group Common Cause. "People have to wait for hours. Some people can do that. Some people can't. This is not the way to run a democracy." Ohio, which experienced extreme voting delays in the last hours of the 2004 election, had some jammed paper problems in Franklin County. "We're taking care of things like that," said elections spokesman Ben Piscitelli. "But there's nothing major or systemic." Perhaps the most bizarre barrier to voting was a truck that hit a utility pole in St. Paul, Minn.'s Merriam Park neighborhood. The accident knocked power out for about 90 minutes to two polling locations. Joe Mansky, Ramsey County's elections manager, said voting continued at those sites. Election judges said the ballots were kept secure at one of the locations until the power was restored and the ballots could be run through an electronic machine, while a backup generator kicked in at the other site. Late Monday, McCain's campaign sued the Virginia electoral board, trying to force the state to count late-arriving military ballots from overseas. No hearing has been set. McCain, the Republican candidate and a POW during the Vietnam War, asked a federal judge to order state election officials to count absentee ballots mailed from abroad that arrive as late as Nov. 14. Lawsuits have become common fodder in election battles. The 2000 recount meltdown in Florida was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court. What is uncommon about Tuesday's contest is the sheer number of voters expected to descend on more than 7,000 election jurisdictions across the country. Voter registration numbers are up 7.3 percent from the last presidential election. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081104/ap_on_el_pr/voting_problems

Some polls are closing in minutes now in the East. Have the networks called it yet? ;-)

I'm surprised any results yet. Obama wins Vermont, McCain Kentucky [per AP]

"People are very anxious to be voting. They really think they are part of history, and they are." Statements like this drive me nuts. Perhaps if they had voted last time around, things might have been different. :-( On my way to the grocery store, I ran into a middle-aged couple frantically looking for the polling place. Evidently they've never visited the place before.

How the hell can CNN project anything with 1%?!!

Evidently they've never visited the place before. *shakes head* I did say to someone today that maybe somehow this will spur people to be more dilligent in the future about voting by virtue of how important this election has been. Then I dismissed that for a couple of reasons.

Here we go boys and girls!!......several battleground states just closed polls.

I meant to mention earlier an observation.... Someone pointed out at the phone bank yesterday something I did notice, but hadn't really put together articulately.....Obama supporters were quiet pleasant to speak to and the McCain supporters were at the most terse, at the least rude. I was hung up on a number of occasions, but overall I didn't even need to hear them say they were for McCain, I knew when they were extremely short or terse. Says a lot to me about many people who support McCain. If you don't support my candidate, that's ok, but no need to be rude. Wow, voter turnout in VA 80%? I heard it may be the same in CA. Unbelievable and unheard of.

Ok, please explain....PA, 0% in, MSNBC calling Obama. Only 2 counties shaded.

Not so sure why what John King is saying about who wins what counties in PA for example, and their site is showing something different. Hmmmmm.

Anyone see this? It was kind of odd. Funeral in Phoenix by kos Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 06:40:41 PM PST CNN reports that attendees at McCain's "victory rally" have been cut off from the news. So unless they're checking their Blackberries and iPhones, they don't know the race is over. Update by MissLaura: This was emblematic of the McCain-Palin campaign's approach to information: Dana Bash is reporting on CNN from the campaign party. The campaign party where they have turned off the news and are just listening to Hank Williams Jr. as every possible path to a McCain victory is cut off. And then, right at the end of the segment, someone must have noticed CNN was discussing this, and suddenly CNN comes on the screens at the party. Seriously, that's it in a thumbnail: Hide facts until someone catches you, then switch course like nothing's going on.

That Grant Park gathering is unfreakinbelievable. What a contrast to the McCain gathering.

January 20th can't come fast enough.

You like the view of Grant Park? David Gregory initially identified it as on the South Side. Ummm, it's downtown.

*snort* I heard him admit he was wrong about where it is.

Joe brought his mom out! How awesome! She's too adorable.

I didn't hear it, as I changed back to CNN. Was that Oprah in the crowd? The camera kept going to this blonde woman, who kind of looked familiar, who wasn't really looking in the same direction as the man next to her. Eventually, I changed my focus to the person behind and in between them and thought it looked like Oprah. There were different sections at Grant Park, one of which required a ticket of admission.

I'm surprised the city didn't set off fireworks. They do it at the drop of a hat.

So the smart money is on Rahm Emmanuel to be his Chief of Staff. That would be Josh from West Wing. ;-) I saw that Rahm won his seat again today.

Yes, Oprah and Steadman. Jesse Jackson, too. And I read Brad Pitt was there, though not sure if true. Linda's daughter on her Facebook page said "rioting" (happy rioting!) happening up at her school (she's one of my friends on Facebook...surprise Linda!). Someone else in East Village I know said lots of cheering and firecrackers in the streets. And the people in Harlem!....it's like New Year's in Times Square. Noticed David Gregory seemed nonplussed by the large cheering crowd at the White House.

That would be Josh from West Wing. ;-) Ha. I read a piece a week ago about how the last episodes of West Wing seemed to foretell the type of race that we ended up happening. Can't remember where I read it, but will post if I can find it. Almost a bit eerie how prescient it was.

I didn't notice Steadman. Saw Jesse but didn't think it necessary to mention him. ;-)

*snort* I almost didn't, but color me Patron Saint of Mentioning the Obvious. ;-)

Hey Evelyn! Your honey Bill R lost the goatee. I kinda liked it myself. Welcome back! *assumes you're lurking* ;-)

No, I don't think she does. She could go blind if she does. ;-)

Well, what an exciting day. An electric buzz all day around town.

Worldwide newpaper front pages... http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/11/5/04621/2283/311/653622

Absolutely pissed here - four sheets to the wind. Have had drinks with various and sundry in celebrations. President-elect Barach Hussein Obama - how good does that sound? This is the first time in about 8 years that I have been proud of my country-of-birth!

I was texting a bunch of people last night myself that I'm finally proud again to call myself an American.

Hello American girls!!! Kumbaya my Lord! Praise be to Allah! (Mari) Is anyone else getting the feeling that the common denominator in these "problem" voting states is . . . Moon???!!! ;-) (Karen), *snort* She has been rather AWOL for the past couple of days. Getting things in (dis)order? LOL! Hell yes! Everything is back in order. I'm into the happy vibe, I smell it in the air. I'm looking forward to all the great things to come. I trust everything will be righted with the House and Senate in tow. I'm done feeling blue about Hillary and I'm ready to be happy again. Kumbaya my Lord! When Farrakan said that Obama was the Messiah, I admit it, I was skeptical, but now? I can no longer be blind to all the love. Love is all around us today ladies, I can smell it. It's a happy feeling. And I am truly into it. Kumbaya my Lord! I look forward to peace and prosperity. :-D

Oh, Moon. ;-)

Can you believe this? From the AP: California voters approve gay-marriage ban By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer Lisa Leff, Associated Press Writer 9 mins ago LOS ANGELES � Voters put a stop to same-sex marriage in California, dealing a crushing defeat to gay-rights activists in a state they hoped would be a vanguard, and putting in doubt as many as 18,000 same-sex marriages conducted since a court ruling made them legal this year. The gay-rights movement had a rough election elsewhere as well Tuesday. Ban-gay-marriage amendments were approved in Arizona and Florida, and Arkansas voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target. But California, the nation's most populous state, had been the big prize. Spending for and against Proposition 8 reached $74 million, the most expensive social-issues campaign in U.S. history and the most expensive campaign this year outside the race for the White House. Activists on both sides of the issue saw the measure as critical to building momentum for their causes. "People believe in the institution of marriage," Frank Schubert, co-manager of the Yes on 8 campaign said after declaring victory early Wednesday. "It's one institution that crosses ethnic divides, that crosses partisan divides. ... People have stood up because they care about marriage and they care a great deal." With almost all precincts reporting, election returns showed the measure winning with 52 percent. Some provisional and absentee ballots remained to be tallied, but based on trends and the locations of the votes still outstanding, the margin of support in favor of the initiative was secure. Californians overwhelmingly passed a same-sex marriage ban in 2000, but gay-rights supporters had hoped public opinion on the issue had shifted enough for this year's measure to be rejected. "We pick ourselves up and trudge on," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "There has been enormous movement in favor of full equality in eight short years. That is the direction this is heading, and if it's not today or it's not tomorrow, it will be soon." The constitutional amendment limits marriage to heterosexual couples, nullifying the California Supreme Court decision that had made same-sex marriages legal in the state since June. Similar bans had prevailed in 27 states before Tuesday's elections, but none were in California's situation � with about 18,000 gay couples already married. The state attorney general, Jerry Brown, has said those marriages will remain valid, although legal challenges are possible. Elsewhere, voters in Colorado and South Dakota rejected measures that could have led to sweeping bans of abortion, and Washington became only the second state � after Oregon � to offer terminally ill people the option of physician-assisted suicide. A first-of-its-kind measure in Colorado, which was defeated soundly, would have defined life as beginning at conception. Its opponents said the proposal could lead to the outlawing of some types of birth control as well as abortion. The South Dakota measure would have banned abortions except in cases of rape, incest and serious health threat to the mother. A tougher version, without the rape and incest exceptions, lost in 2006. Anti-abortion activists thought the modifications would win approval, but the margin of defeat was similar, about 55 percent to 45 percent of the vote. "The lesson here is that Americans, in states across the country, clearly support women's ability to access abortion care without government interference," said Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation. In Washington, voters gave solid approval to an initiative modeled after Oregon's "Death with Dignity" law, which allows a terminally ill person to be prescribed lethal medication they can administer to themselves. Since Oregon's law took effect in 1997, more than 340 people � mostly ailing with cancer � have used it to end their lives. The marijuana reform movement won two prized victories, with Massachusetts voters decriminalizing possession of small amounts of the drug and Michigan joining 12 other states in allowing use of pot for medical purposes. Henceforth, people caught in Massachusetts with an ounce or less of pot will no longer face criminal penalties. Instead, they'll forfeit the marijuana and pay a $100 civil fine. The Michigan measure will allow severely ill patients to register with the state and legally buy, grow and use small amounts of marijuana to relieve pain, nausea, appetite loss and other symptoms. Nebraska voters, meanwhile, approved a ban on race- and gender-based affirmative action, similar to measures previously approved in California, Michigan and Washington. Returns in Colorado on a similar measure were too close to call. Ward Connerly, the California activist-businessman who has led the crusade against affirmative action, said Obama's victory proved his point. "We have overcome the scourge of race," Connerly said. Energy measures met a mixed fate. In Missouri, voters approved a measure requiring the state's three investor-owned electric utilities to get 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2021. But California voters defeated an even more ambitious measure that would have required the state's utilities to generate half their electricity from windmills, solar systems, geothermal reserves and other renewable sources by 2025. Two animal-welfare measures passed � a ban on dog racing in Massachusetts, and a proposition in California that outlaws cramped cages for egg-laying chickens. Amid deep economic uncertainty, proposals to cut state income taxes were defeated decisively in North Dakota and Massachusetts. In San Francisco, an eye-catching local measure � to bar arrests for prostitution � was soundly rejected. Police and political leaders said it would hamper the fight against sex trafficking. And in San Diego, voters decided to make permanent a ban on alcohol consumption on city beaches.

No, I actually didn't believe it. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target. As opposed to who else they'd be targeting? Californians overwhelmingly passed a same-sex marriage ban in 2000, Wonder what the margin was. The state attorney general, Jerry Brown, has said those marriages will remain valid, although legal challenges are possible. Grandfathered in?

Wow! I'm having a hard time believing it too. Good, it's done. Now if only they spent some time and money to try to legalize pot. I hate the double standards with Alcohol. Oh, no, am I taking about double standards again? LOL! Kumbaya my Lord!

Our despised governor is going to have a field day appointing successors. There's a strong rumor that he'll appoint himself or maybe even his wife to Obama's senate seat. Now he also gets to handpick one for Rahm, who must lives somewhere in the Lakeview area. Obama picks Clinton alum Emanuel chief of WH staff Associated Press Writers David Espo And Nedra Pickler, Associated Press Writers � 10 mins ago WASHINGTON � President-elect Barack Obama pivoted quickly to begin filling out his new administration on Wednesday, selecting hard-charging Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff while aides stepped up the pace of transition work that had been cloaked in pre-election secrecy. Several Democrats confirmed that Emanuel had been offered the job. While it was not clear he had accepted, a rejection would amount to an unlikely public snub of the new president-elect within hours of an electoral college landslide. With hundreds of jobs to fill and only 10 weeks until Inauguration Day, Obama and his transition team confronted a formidable task complicated by his anti-lobbyist campaign rhetoric. The official campaign Web Site said no political appointees would be permitted to work on "regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration." But almost exactly one year ago, on Nov. 3, 2007, candidate Obama went considerably further than that while campaigning in South Carolina. "I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White House," he said of lobbyists at the time. Because they often have prior experience in government or politics, lobbyists figure as potential appointees for presidents of both parties. On the morning after making history, the man elected the first black president had breakfast with his wife and two daughters at their Chicago home, went to a nearby gym and visited his downtown offices. Aides said he planned no public appearances until later in the week, when he has promised to hold a news conference. As president-elect, he begins receiving highly classified briefings from top intelligence officials Thursday. In offering the post of White House chief of staff to Emanuel, Obama turned to a fellow Chicago politician with a far different style from his own, a man known for his bluntness as well as his single-minded determination. Emanuel, he was a political and policy aide in Bill Clinton's White House. Leaving that, he turned to investment banking, then won a Chicago-area House seat six years ago. In Congress, he moved quickly into the leadership. As chairman of the Democratic campaign committee in 2006, he played an instrumental role in restoring his party to power after 12 years in the minority. Emanuel maintained neutrality during the long primary battle between Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, not surprising given his long-standing ties to the former first lady and his Illinois connections with Obama. The day after the election there already was jockeying for Cabinet appointments. Several Democrats said Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, who won a new six-year term on Tuesday, was angling for secretary of state. They spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss any private conversations. Kerry's spokeswoman, Brigid O'Rourke, disputed the reports. "It's not true. It's ridiculous," she said in an interview. Announcement of the transition team came in a written statement from the Obama camp. The group is headed by John Podesta, who served as chief of staff under former President Clinton; Pete Rouse, who has been Obama's chief of staff in the Senate, and Valerie Jarrett, a friend of the president-elect and campaign adviser. Several Democrats described a sprawling operation well under way. Officials had kept deliberations under wraps to avoid the appearance of overconfidence in the weeks leading to Tuesday's election. They said the group was stocked with longtime associates of Obama, as well as veterans of Clinton's White House. Quite apart from transition issues, Obama's status as an incumbent member of Congress presents issues unseen since 1960, when John F. Kennedy moved from the Senate to the White House. The Senate is scheduled to hold a postelection session in two weeks, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi held a news conference Wednesday to reinforce her call for quick action on a bill to stimulate the economy. That places Obama in uncharted territory � a president-elect, presumably first among equals among congressional Democrats. Yet his and their ability to enact legislation depends almost entirely until Inauguration Day on President Bush's willingness to sign it. Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, was elected to a new six-year term from Delaware on Tuesday and he must resign before he can be sworn in as vice president. Democrats are certain to hold his seat, following Jack Markell's election as governor. There has been intense speculation that Biden's son, Beau Biden, is interested in ascending to the seat. But he is serving a one-year stint in Iraq as a member of the National Guard. In the interim, outgoing Gov. Ruth Ann Minner is seen among many Democrats as a likely appointee to hold the office until an election in 2010. Obama also must resign his Senate seat before he can be sworn in as the 44th president. Democratic Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich will pick a replacement.

Our despised governor is going to have a field day appointing successors. There's a strong rumor that he'll appoint himself or maybe even his wife to Obama's senate seat. Did you hear that scenario come up on CNN last night with regards to Stevens dropping/getting kicked out on votes or by Senate and saying Palin could pick herself to replace him?

I especially enjoyed the last line. Sarah Palin, freeloader. Also. by Kagro X Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 01:30:05 PM PST Dansac has already introduced you to today's version of the story, but I feel compelled to revisit an earlier call on this in order to restate a now obvious theme: Sarah Palin is The Chiseler Supreme. What a really, truly unpleasant experience has been our exposure to the two insta-celebrities created by the McCain campaign. These two grubbers, Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin, became the perfect symbol for everything that was wrong with and ingenuine about modern Republicanism. Joe griped endlessly about taxes even as it turned out he was ducking them, and groused that Obama's "socialism" would mean there was no incentive to work hard and succeed in earning more than $250,000 a year, even as he shopped around for an agent and a Nashville recording contract. (And excuse me -- what?! A recording contract? Based on what, Mr. Hard Work?) Meanwhile, there was Sarah griping about pork and wasteful spending even as she tried to rip off the Feds for the Bridge to Nowhere, rip off the state for her per diem, and rip off the campaign for her clothes (and her husband's, and her family's). Yes, in the few short weeks we knew her, Sarah Palin turned out to have more hands in more pockets than we could keep track of. She and Joe were the perfect pair. Instantly famous but for no good reason, pushy, greedy, and all the while cheating behind the scenes, and cheating on the very issues about which each of them complained that regular Americans were getting a raw deal from the elite. Good riddance. I get enough of that crap from Reality TV as it is. It's like a whole election nearly went down the wrong pipe. Thank God the country coughed them back up. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/5/13299/2125/387/654555

(Dorine) Did you hear that scenario come up on CNN last night with regards to Stevens dropping/getting kicked out on votes or by Senate and saying Palin could pick herself to replace him? No, but she'll have to select someone. He can't serve from prison. On the news tonight, our governor said that he wasn't interested in taking Obama's seat, but they showed the names of a bunch of political hack possibilities, including the former garbage man-president of the state senate Emil Jones, who is retiring and giving his seat to his son. I swear it never stops... The funny thing about our governor is that the leader of the opposition is his father-in-law, a big-time political fixer. In some respects, the gov the right thing and now he's being crucified.

You know, I always hate it when convicted felons are re-elected. How can people actually do that? How stupid are they? Have they no respect for the law?

Gossip, gossip, gossip!! http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/11/5/194551/287/976/651932 (Karen) He can't serve from prison. David Gergen said he's got a decent case on appeal. (Maybe not go to prison?) I followed it a bit and it was botched by prosecutors to some degree. Not sure when sentencing is. Gergen I think also said Harry Reid said there's no way Stevens will be allowed to serve when Congress reconvenes should he win. Not sure how that'll work, but maybe in the end won't have to. I'm shocked it's so close as the number showed he was behind by election day. In Alaska, why should they respect the law when their leaders don't seem to?

I'm not singling out Alaskans, as this kind of thing has happened in various other parts of the country.

Oh I know. Not sure why I didn't just generalize. I was thinking about what/who I know about in such situations and the Alaska one obviously popped right into my head.

They haven't decided Minnesota's race with Al Franken yet, have they? I'd like to see him get it. Of course, I don't live in Minnesota. But if they can elect a wrestler, what's wrong with a smart political satirist?

As a diversion.... just WOW! Jogger runs mile with rabid fox locked on her arm Wed Nov 5, 7:51 pm ET PRESCOTT, Ariz. � Authorities in Arizona say a jogger attacked by a rabid fox ran a mile with the animal's jaws clamped on her arm and then drove herself to a hospital. The Yavapai County sheriff's office said the woman told deputies she was on a trail near Prescott on Monday when the fox attacked and bit her foot. She said she grabbed the fox by the neck when it went for her leg but it bit her arm. The woman wanted the animal tested for rabies so she ran a mile to her car with the fox still biting her arm, then pried it off and tossed it in her trunk and drove to the Prescott hospital. The sheriff's office says the fox later bit an animal control officer. He and the woman are both receiving rabies vaccinations.

The group is headed by John Podesta, My son was a paid intern last year at the Podesta Group Lobbying Firm. It belongs to John and his brother Tony. Dorine, you really hate Sarah Palin. After such a misogynist year in politics, I frankly can't be part of it. She's done well enough so far in Alaska and she'll probably be hitting the books and following Int'l politics now. It's time to let the anger go. He's won, feel the love. Kumbaya my Lord.

so she ran a mile to her car with the fox still biting her arm, then pried it off and tossed it in her trunk and drove to the Prescott hospital. Remember those old fox pieces they wore in the '30s and '40s, where the fox was biting its own tail? ;-) Now, that's a woman who should be running for higher office.

she'll probably be hitting the books and following Int'l politics now. I just said to a couple of people yesterday. you really hate Sarah Palin I will answer this later, but I don't hate her, just what she was put up to represent. It's time to let the anger go. I'm gathering this is you speaking in front of the mirror. ;-)

(Moon) she'll probably be hitting the books and following Int'l politics now. ((me) I just said to a couple of people yesterday. Didn't finish my thought. I was saying to them that if she would go out into the world a bit and learn some things, I could see her potentially becoming a very formidable candidate on a more national level by the next election. Depends what's going on with the country by then and how Obama's doing.

(Karen), Now, that's a woman who should be running for higher office. Hell, yes! She can out fox them all! (Dorine), I'm gathering this is you speaking in front of the mirror. ;-) No... I'm feeling the love remember? Must I cue Kumbaya again. My DH is sick of it already, LOL! So I'm alternating with "Can't you feel the love tonight"... There are no winks because it's absolutely true. :-) I too believe that we will be seeing Sarah Palin in the future. She's a good public speaker, she just needs to work on the other stuff which frankly can be learned.

Too funny, both of these... http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/6/153146/946/1019/655973 http://wonkette.com/404231/your-lengthy-guide-to-the-insane-mccain-palin-cold-war

(Karen) They haven't decided Minnesota's race with Al Franken yet, have they? I think I read that it's a likely runoff the way it was going and might not be decided til Dec. Remember those old fox pieces they wore in the '30s and '40s, where the fox was biting its own tail? ;-) I have one in storage that was my grandmother's. A bit worn looking it is. (Moon) Must I cue Kumbaya again. I'd rather you didn't. ;-) Not a big fan of Can You Feel The Love Tonight either.

That story about the rabid fox - discovered that today and sent it to my brother, because Prescott, Az is our hometown. *lol* I wonder if I know that woman?? The Minnesota Senate race is delayed because a count that close triggers an automatic recount. But the Republican candidate was leading by a few hundred votes at the end of the first count. I'd love to see Al Franken win, if only because it would cause Bill O'Reilly's head to explode the first time he had to say "Senator Franken". ;-)

(Dorine), Not a big fan of Can You Feel The Love Tonight either. Neither am I, but I can belt it in true Broadway style. ;-) I'm sure there's a nice Beach Boys song I can replace it with. :-) Franken would be fun to have around DC.

This is for the believers: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/07/AR2008110702896.html?nav=hcmoduletmv And if you want more, the front page of the Wash Post is all about ObamaNation. All yours to check out the love. Kumbaya, my Lord!

Thank you, Moon. ;-) Oh my... http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=palin

Beyond definition 1.1, I'd say they're stretching it. (v) to abandon one's principles for short term gain Shouldn't this be called "to McCain"? Read the misogynistic stuff here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hillary+clinton

Oh my, again. The first half dozen are from 3-4 years ago. What was going on then for all the hatin'?

If there is one thing I/we have learned from this election it's that in this country, it's OK to be sexist, but it's not OK to be racist. As a woman, I know that we have gone backwards. :-(

I saw Palin's interview with Matt Lauer on the Today Show this morning. I really do think she's been treated poorly by the McCain staff. Even before the campaign ended, saying they had nothing to work with, that she had no knowledge of national or international affairs, calling her a "whack job," likening her to the Beverly Hillbillies at Neiman Marcus. Now they're leaking the stuff about not knowing Africa was a continent, etc., etc. It may be all true, but would they criticize a male running mate so publicly? What back-stabbers. They're all trying to cover their asses about why they lost, scurrying to put the word out that it was her fault, not theirs (or their boss's.) They knew (or should have known) what they were getting. The blame is on whomever chose her, and that starts right at the top. And I don't think she's the only reason they lost.

Just skimmed over a transcript (note spelling of Saks): http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002985073 (Mari) I really do think she's been treated poorly by the McCain staff. Agreed, especially in the final days and aftermath, but my jaw dropped open when I read the comments about how she wanted to speak before McCain's concession speech. Maybe she's never watched election night coverage before? A VP candidate speaking? WTF is she thinking, except possibly one more chance for me to shine. Definitely CYA behavior by the party drones.

Without going back to search, did someone here call possible Sec. of State for HRC?

Yep, that was me, a couple of months ago. He owes her. Plus, she'd do a superb job. IMO, State is the highest profile appointment. Not sure if I'd want that job, these days anyway, but what a outstanding choice she'd be.

State is the highest profile appointment Exactly! It would be almost like being President, on foreign policy. I'm curious if that's the deal they made. ;-)

From the No S**t, Sherlock! Dept: AP NewsBreak: Gulf War vet health research lacking http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081114/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/gulf_war_illness;_ylt=AnSC_UhMX1yIquZQNBGEtsSs0NUE

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/us/politics/15clinton.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin I would Hill as Sect. of State, it is the most important cabinet post, IMO. I see O is also meeting with McCain, would love him as Sect. of Defense, what an improvement over that maniac Rumsfeld. There is also talk of making Howard Dean Sect. of Health (guess he'll take care of the healthcare revolution), and Donna Brazile as the DNC Chair.

Independent scientists have declared that the symptoms of veterans of the 1991 Gulf War do not constitute a single syndrome. They have pointed to pesticide, used to control insects, and pyridostigmine bromide pills, given to protect troops from nerve agents, as probable culprits for some of the varied symptoms. That's disgusting. They are used as guinea pigs. The WW2 Vets, have they suffered as much?

what an improvement over that maniac Rumsfeld. Did you miss something, Moon? I think he resigned awhile ago. ;-) the symptoms of veterans of the 1991 Gulf War do not constitute a single syndrome. They have pointed to pesticide, used to control insects, and pyridostigmine bromide pills, given to protect troops from nerve agents, as probable culprits for some of the varied symptoms. Chemical weapons, too.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War_syndrome (scroll down to Chemical Weapons section)

(Moon) The WW2 Vets, have they suffered as much? As I recall, WWI was far worse in sheer numbers of casualties and medical/psychological impact.

(Dorine), Did you miss something, Moon? I think he resigned awhile ago. ;-) I know that, and it was a happy day, but he was still a maniac, and we are still suffering for his shortcomings.

he was still a maniac, and we are still suffering for his shortcomings. Can't disagree.

Frank Rich: Election junkies in acute withdrawal need suffer no longer. Though the exciting Obama-McCain race is over, the cockfight among the losers has only just begun. The conservative crackup may be ugly, but as entertainment, it�s two thumbs up! http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/opinion/16rich.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Hillary Clinton accepts role of Secretary of State, according to the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/17/hillary-clinton-secretary-of-state

So the Guardian has the *inside* word? Hmmmm Saw a piece on TV about how difficult it will probably be to vet her and Bill for the office, especially given the foreign donations to his Global Initiative foundation. There was a specific dealing involving a Canadian mining guy and Kazakhstan that looks like it will likely cause huge problems, plus some Saudi ones. However, if the Saudi connections didn't bother anybody about the Bush administration, I don't know...

Obama can easily fill that promise to have a Republican in his administration by giving the Treasury job to Volcker.

Hey, the lady who ran with the rabid fox is going to be on Letterman next. Can't wait!

(Karen) Saw a piece on TV about how difficult it will probably be to vet her and Bill for the office, especially given the foreign donations to his Global Initiative foundation. Saw similar in the NYT this morning. For real about the fox woman?!

Vetting The Clintons by Scout Finch Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 01:50:04 PM PST Talk is heating up that Hillary Clinton may become the next Secretary of State. Since word leaked out Obama and Hillary met in Chicago, neither camp has moved to dispel the rumors. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton have kept their conversations tightly held, but that silence has only convinced some associates that the prospect is serious. �No one has called to say, �Don�t get too far on this,� � said James Carville, a longtime Clinton friend and adviser. �A silent phone�s sometimes as much of an indication as a ringing phone.� The NYT also reports Team Obama is vetting Bill Clinton. Obama advisers are discussing what Mr. Clinton would need to do to avoid a conflict of interest with the duties of his wife, who is said to be interested in the post. �That�s the first and most important hurdle,� said a senior adviser to Mr. Obama. �He does good work. No one wants it to stop, but a structure to avoid conflicts must be thought of.� Bill Clinton seems to be encouraging the idea: Speaking at an economic conference in Kuwait, Mr. Clinton openly acknowledged the possibility. �If he decided to ask her and they did it together, I think she�ll be really great as a secretary of state,� he said. �She worked very hard for his election after the primary fight with him, and so did I, and we were very glad that he won.� Hillary Clinton as SoS is a win-win. And given the fact Obama has repeatedly talked of admiring Lincoln's ability to bring even his most bitter rivals into his administration, it makes perfect sense. It gives her an important role in the Obama administration, continues to build her foreign policy cred, and will keep her out of Senate meddling and Obama's hair. As Bill Clinton notes, Hillary worked hard for Obama after the primary and would be a great Secretary of State. But, he also sneaks in a comment about how hard he worked... apparently angling for his own reward. It would seem the only thing standing between Hillary Clinton and Secretary of State is... Bill Clinton. Update with clarification: I do not believe that Bill Clinton is angling for any sort of a formal job with the administration. I do believe it is possible some symbolic gesture may be made toward him by the Obama administration. That is all. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/17/0279/4449/967/662119

Hey Karen, What was the name of the woman with the rabid fox? That's my home town (Prescott, AZ - actually, I heard it was in the Chino Valley, which is nearby), so I'm wondering if I might know her... ;-) Personally, I'd love to see Bill Clinton as Australian Ambassador, but then, I'm a bit biased. ;-) The Aussies absolutely adore him, though. Wonder if they'd consider divorce for her to get SoS? Do you think that would be enough "distance" between them?

There's a small edited version up at the Late Show site: http://lateshow.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/dave_tv/highlights/index/php/bigshowhighlight.phtml When Animals Attack! Fox attack survivor Michelle Felicetta tells her true story while Emma Thompson just fakes it. It's a shame as they cut out the blow-by-blow account of what happened, although they have included Emma Thompson's entrance later. She never mentions specifically the place, only that it was a canyon area. Prescott was mentioned at one point. Maybe when she talked about going to the hospital. Think I'll check YouTube to see if anyone has the whole thing up. Found a reference to the attack occurring at Granite Mountain.

Hillary might reject State offer Hillary Rodham Clinton isn�t certain she would accept the Secretary of State post even if Barack Obama offers it to her, several people close to the former first lady say. Press reports that portray Clinton as willing to accept the job � once the Obama transition team vets Bill Clinton�s philanthropic and business ventures � are inaccurate, one Clinton insider told Politico. �A lot of the speculation and reporting is out ahead of the facts here,� said the person, who requested anonymity. �She is still weighing this, independent of President Clinton's work.� Clinton, the person said, remains deeply �torn� between the possibility of serving in Obama�s cabinet and remaining in the Senate to �help pass health care and work on a broad range of domestic issues.� That comment jibes with what others close to Clinton have been saying since the Secretary of State chatter began last week: that Clinton is conflicted and the deal far from done, despite screaming headlines in outlets including the U.K.�s Guardian newspaper claiming the offer was made and accepted. Most of the speculation about Clinton�s frame of mind in the last few days has been off-base, sources say, because she�s played her cards close to the vest, consulting only her husband and two or three kitchen cabinet advisers. �We�ve gotten rid of all the other idiots,� joked one Clinton confidant, a reference to the Clinton campaign�s propensity for leaks. The Clinton camp�s effort to downplay her interest in the post might simply reflect her need to create an alternative storyline if the deal falls apart for other reasons, including the possibility that insurmountable problems arise during the vetting process, Democrats not connected with Clinton cautioned. Another possible motivation: Pushing back against the perception that she�s at the mercy of Obama�s team. �Everybody wants to be perceived as being in the driver�s seat,� said a top Democratic official. �She�s no different.� Obama isn�t likely to make a formal offer of the post to Clinton unless he�s given assurances that Bill Clinton�s global charitable foundation won�t create future conflicts of interest with foreign governments. The Clinton Foundation has earned praise for its efforts to eradicate AIDS, malaria and poverty in Africa. But it could prove problematic if the former president continues to arrange donations from foreign countries at the same time that his wife serves as secretary of state. Obama�s vetting team expressed similar concerns about Bill Clinton�s overseas fundraising when Hillary Clinton was briefly considered for the vice-presidency. http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081118/pl_politico/15738;_ylt=Ap7VAXmFXGtpbgamD6ysX4Ss0NUE

Obama isn�t likely to make a formal offer of the post to Clinton unless he�s given assurances that Bill Clinton�s global charitable foundation won�t create future conflicts of interest with foreign governments. LOL! He wants her... he wants her NOT. ;-) Saw Letterman last night. The fox incident was worse than I thought. Kuddos to MichelleF. Now Emma Thompsom, did you see her thighs? Very unflattering outfit. Should be discussed at O&E. ;-)

Yeah, Emma looks to have put on a few pounds. Thought I heard on news that Bill has offerred to turn over all the financial records for the foundation.

Bill has offerred to turn over all the financial records for the foundation. I was reading a comment somewhere that Bill knew she was going to run for President so one would think he'd have made sure not to have such issues.

Another FU from BushCo by mcjoan Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 01:42:05 PM PST The Bush administration has given the incoming Obama team (and the American people) yet another middle finger. First they announced--on Election Day, the day the American people decisively rejected "drill, baby, drill"--that they were putting huge swaths of Utah's most beautiful and fragile canyonlands under the auction block. Now they think they've figured out a way to make their policy of "rape the land first, don't bother with the questions ever" permanent. It's hard to come up with a word other than despicable to describe what the Washington Post reports about the outgoing Bushies: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/18/123318/49/279/662807

Karen: Found a reference to the attack occurring at Granite Mountain. Interesting! I've hiked at Granite Mountain heaps of times. (It's not a very big "mountain" - more like a butte, really. I don't ever remember hearing about rabies in any of our wild animals in the area, I hope this isn't the beginning of a trend. There are a fair few bats in that region, though, so they could have transmitted it. Glad I didn't run into any rabid wildlife when I lived there! There are mountain lions in that region, as well as bobcats, raccoons, skunks and of course, a ton of coyotes. I don't remember seeing many foxes, though. Looks like Obama's named Eric Holder for Attorney General: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7736639.stm

(Dorine) I was reading a comment somewhere that Bill knew she was going to run for President so one would think he'd have made sure not to have such issues. When you win an election, you don't have to go before the Senate and get its approval. (Sarah) I don't ever remember hearing about rabies in any of our wild animals in the area The woman mentioned that the fox kind of smelled like a skunk. Could be the fox got rabies from it. She knew something was off because animals generally steer clear of humans. As it showed in the joke animation, the fox was just standing there and, as she tried to back away, it walked up to her and bit her toe first.

Definitely unnatural behavior for a fox not to run away from a human being. Almost always an indicator of some sort of disease - glad to hear the woman was so level-headed. I used to do skunk and bat rescue (in San Diego) and had the series of five (preventative) shots for rabies - it's not that bad these days, you can get it in the arm or hip (as opposed to the stomach, as used to be required), and it's about like a tetanus shot (I actually found it to be less painful than my last tetanus).

(Karen) When you win an election, you don't have to go before the Senate and get its approval. Of course, but things of his would be dug up and used against them both at some point, to at the least distract her (as was done with Clinton/Lewinsky) and taint her as well.

I have a feeling that Hillary would have preferred to be Sect. of Health. The health care issue is so important to her. There was a chance for her to be the health tzar. Obama is playing a game with her. Kumbaya my Lord!

Actually, Moon, I wouldn't mind seeing Hillary as Sec of Health, but Sec of State gives her a much better shot at becoming POTUS later...

Hill would be a great SoS. It is the most prestigious post to be had. I just hope O makes that announcement soon. I don't think Hill will run at 68.

Clinton accepts Obama secretary of state offer: NY Times WASHINGTON (Reuters) � New York Sen. Hillary Clinton has accepted an offer from President-elect Barack Obama to become U.S. secretary of state, joining her former Democratic rival to help guide U.S. foreign policy, the New York Times said on Friday. The newspaper quoted two Clinton associates who said she came to her decision after additional discussions with Obama about the nature of her role as the top U.S. diplomat and his foreign policy plans. "She's ready," one of the sources told the newspaper, which posted the report on its website. Clinton emerged as a frontrunner for the secretary of state job late last week, transfixing a country which had seen her compete hard against Obama to win the Democratic nomination for the presidency. Obama clinched that nomination in June and then beat Republican John McCain in the November 4 election. Democratic Party sources have recently said Clinton, was on track to be nominated, with an official announcement expected after the November 27 Thanksgiving holiday. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081121/pl_nm/us_usa_obama_clinton

The NYT story: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/us/politics/22obama.html?_r=1&hp Interesting. I didn't know she was disenchanted to some degree with her role and reception in the Senate.

Considering that most/all endorsed O, I can understand her disenchantment. Reid has been condesending to her now as well. He makes me sick. This country should be happy and proud to have her as SoS.

Here's what I've heard: she wanted to lead the Senate charge on health care, and then Ted "Lazarus" Kennedy said, not so fast, I ain't dead yet, that's my baby. The other day he said he wanted her to head his "working committee" on health care. Gee, thanks a lot. Supposedly BO will announce her as SOS after Thanksgiving. They are still dotting the i's and crossing the t's on vetting Bill C's Foundation's financial arrangements with foreign donors. It will be a shame to see him have to curtail that work; his foundation has done a helluva job, especially in places like Atrica, where a $10 mosquito net makes the difference between a kid living and dying, and putting the strong arm on the U.S. drug manufacturers to donate or sell at very low cost their HIV medications. But Hillary will do a great job. She has her work cut out for her. Lots of fences to mend, and some badly-needed changes in direction to be made. And honestly, with the country just about broke and in debt up to our eyeballs, I have to wonder how much health care is going to be achieved in the next few years.

Interesting also.... "Talking Points Memo has an interesting take on the Clinton nomination. Hillary still owes $7.5 million to various vendors for her campaign.....$5.4 million of that is owed to Mark Penn for services rendered. While she has nearly cut her debt in half since June, all fundraising would have to end if she accepts the position. Obama is considering Clinton for secretary of state. As a Cabinet member Clinton would face fundraising restrictions to retire her vendor debt. A 2001 advisory opinion by the federal Office of Special Counsel said a federal employee who still had a campaign debt would be prohibited from "personally soliciting, accepting or receiving political contributions." Clinton could name an agent from her campaign committee to continue to organize and hold fundraising events to retire the debt. Clinton would be limited to attending a fundraising event and simply stating her appreciation to donors." http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/21/18312/761/285/664851

Thank you, Dorine. I hope I'm not the only one here thinking that BO still hates her. He owes her and will offer SoS, but don't you believe it would have been his first choice. They are still dotting the i's and crossing the t's on vetting Bill C's Foundation's financial arrangements with foreign donors. Double standards. Bill Clinton's organization has been doing outstanding work, as Mari said. BO has yet to release anything on his foreign contributions. He wants to put his cabinet through an ethics standard that he himself can not pass. But what the hell, he's got the power, he knows how to use it. Kumbaya and all that jazz.

(Moon) but don't you believe it would have been his first choice. May be, but really, so what? She'll get it in the end and I think she's a fabulous choice. I'm certain that was part of a deal struck way back when, when it came up here before. I don't expect them to be best buds or even like each other. Politics make strange bedfellows. As long as they're effective, they could poke each other with pins daily for all I care.

LOL, what? Take out the voodoo doll, you think? ;-) Frankly, I don't care either, just make the bloody announcement already.

Have you seen this? http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/od_afp/ushistoryeducationoffbeat You can take the quiz here: http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/resources/quiz.aspx I did pretty well. Only missed 3. A little too esoteric for me. ;-)

I saw the story, but didn't have time to take the quiz at the time.

It's multiple choice, not essay. ;-)

Interesting quiz! I missed 6. Most were questions about the economy. My brain must be on economic overload from reading too much recent news.

vg, Marlene! Well above average, that's for sure. BTW, there are a couple of reasons why I would do well on this quiz, one being I majored in History. ;-)

I'm not sure how his charitable Foundation is working, but if well, I hope these arrangements don't become detrimental to the work and those who benefit from it. Officials: Obama set to introduce Clinton Monday * Buzz Up * Send o Email o IM * Share o Digg o Facebook o Newsvine o del.icio.us o Reddit o StumbleUpon o Technorati o Yahoo! Bookmarks * Print By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer Beth Fouhy, Associated Press Writer � 17 mins ago Featured Topics: * Barack Obama * Presidential Transition Obama: 'Coming together to overcome adversity' Play Video AP � Obama: 'Coming together to overcome adversity' * Hillary Clinton Slideshow: Hillary Clinton * Obama to name Clinton secretary of state on Mon. Play Video Video: Obama to name Clinton secretary of state on Mon. AP * With Obama, will the US turn green ? Play Video Video: With Obama, will the US turn green ? AFP In this Nov. 21, 2008 file photo, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., attends AP � In this Nov. 21, 2008 file photo, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., attends a memorial ceremony for � A deal with Bill Clinton over his post-White House work helped clear the way for Hillary Rodham Clinton to join President-elect Barack Obama's national security team as secretary of state, reshaping a once-bitter rivalry into a high-profile strategic and diplomatic union. Obama was to be joined by the New York senator at a Chicago news conference Monday, Democratic officials said, where he also planned to announce that Defense Secretary Robert Gates would remain in his job for a year or more and that retired Marine General James M. Jones would serve as national security adviser. The officials requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly for the transition team. To make it possible for his wife to become the top U.S. diplomat, the officials said, former President Clinton agreed: _to disclose the names of every contributor to his foundation since its inception in 1997 and all contributors going forward. _to refuse donations from foreign governments to the Clinton Global Initiative, his annual charitable conference. _to cease holding CGI meetings overseas. _to volunteer to step away from day-to-day management of the foundation while his wife is secretary of state. _to submit his speaking schedule to review by the State Department and White House counsel. _to submit any new sources of income to a similar ethical review. Bill Clinton's business deals and global charitable endeavors had been expected to create problems for the former first lady's nomination. But in negotiations with the Obama transition team, the former president agreed to several measures designed to bring transparency to those activities. "It's a big step," said Sen. Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who said he plans to vote to confirm Clinton. The former president long had refused to disclose the identities of contributors to his foundation, saying many gave money on condition that they not be identified. Lugar said there would still be "legitimate questions" raised about the former president's extensive international involvement. "I don't know how, given all of our ethics standards now, anyone quite measures up to this who has such cosmic ties, but ... hopefully, this team of rivals will work," Lugar said. Obama's choice of Hillary Clinton was an extraordinary gesture of good will after a year in which the two rivals competed for the Democratic nomination in a long, bitter primary battle. They clashed repeatedly on foreign affairs. Obama criticized Clinton for her vote to authorize the Iraq war. Clinton said Obama lacked the experience to be president and she chided him for saying he would meet with leaders of nations such as Iran and Cuba without conditions. The bitterness began melting away in June after Clinton ended her campaign and endorsed Obama. She went on to campaign for him in his general election contest against Republican Sen. John McCain. Advisers said Obama had for several months envisioned Clinton as his top diplomat, and he invited her to Chicago to discuss the job just a week after the Nov. 4 election. The two met privately Nov. 13 in Obama's transition office in downtown Chicago. Clinton was said to be interested and then to waver, concerned about relinquishing her Senate seat and the political independence it conferred. Those concerns were largely resolved after Obama assured her she would be able to choose a staff and have direct access to him, advisers said. Remaining in the Senate also may not have been an attractive choice for Clinton. Despite her political celebrity, she is a relatively junior senator without prospects for a leadership position or committee chairmanship anytime soon. Some Democrats and government insiders have questioned whether Clinton is too independent and politically ambitious to serve Obama as secretary of state. But a senior Obama adviser has said the president-elect had been enthusiastic about naming Clinton to the position from the start, believing she would bring instant stature and credibility to U.S. diplomatic relations and the advantages to her serving far outweigh potential downsides. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the Clintons will have to tread carefully to avoid the appearance of conflicts. "The presumption will be that both Secretary of State Clinton and former President Clinton will be very judicious in what they take on, because there's a new dimension here," Reed said. Lugar and Reed both spoke on ABC's "This Week." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081130/ap_on_go_pr_wh/clinton_secretary_of_state;_ylt=Ag2vSeEUprsMExJdb7U.oeWs0NUE

Wow, talk about being half awake and poor copyediting on my part.... :-((

As I've said before, Obama has not been put through what he's doing to Bill Clinton. Kumbaya! The former president long had refused to disclose the identities of contributors to his foundation, saying many gave money on condition that they not be identified. OK, I was one of them. ;-) I want to know about Kumbaya's foreign donations, who are they, which countries are they from... double standards. But I knew that. Clinton's organization has done so much good in the world, and Kumbaya is putting a big dent in what he can do. F total power freak, but I knew that.

Footage of Hillary's SOS acceptance speech: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4640300n&tag=centerColumn;centerColumnContent

Ah, there was speculation about whether he'd give her time to say something as he hasn't for some of his other picks, but I couldn't see how he couldn't, her of all people. Yay for the official nomination.

Thank you Mari. She's so well spoken and so "presidential."

(Moon) As I've said before, Obama has not been put through what he's doing to Bill Clinton. A president doesn't have to vetted by a Senate subcommittee.

I know, Karen. But not even the Media care to put him through it. He's a smart man, right know, the best defense is offense and as long as he keeps scoring, everyone is happy. No questions asked. ;-)

Constitutionally, the Media isn't required to. ;-)

LOL, you're absolutely right. They pick and chose their battles. ;-)

Gosh, it was only yesterday that I remember sitting in a booth at Balthazar's, arguing with someone about whether we were in a recession or not. Seems it officially started last December...

*snort* Believe me, I'd already planned to point that out tomorrow....er, later. ;-D

Finally, banging on these guys' heads with a sledgehammer has paid off or the PR firm they've hired, says cynically me: Ford says CEO will work for $1 to get loans By TOM KRISHER and KIMBERLY S. JOHNSON, AP Auto Writers Tom Krisher And Kimberly S. Johnson, Ap Auto Writers 7 mins ago DETROIT � Ford Motor Co. will tell Congress that it plans to return to a pretax profit or break even in 2011 when the Detroit Three automakers' CEOs appear before lawmakers this week to request $25 billion in government loans. Ford CEO Alan Mulally said he'll work for $1 per year if the company has to take any government loan money. After grilling the CEOs at hearings last month, Congressional leaders demanded plans from the automakers by Tuesday to show that they will survive if they get federal funds. The plan Ford submitted said the company will cancel all management employees' 2009 bonuses and will not pay any merit increases for its North American salaried employees next year. The company also said it will sell its five corporate aircraft. The CEOs of all three Detroit automakers were harshly criticized during last month's hearings for flying to Washington in separate corporate jets. Mulally said in an interview with The Associated Press on Tuesday that Ford will give much more detail to Congress than it did previously, and the company will emphasize the steps it has taken to cut its labor costs with the United Auto Workers union. Mulally said Ford will seek $9 billion as its share of the loan money but may not need to use it. The Dearborn-based company has said it has enough cash to make it through next year without assistance. As part of the plan submitted to Congress, Ford said it does not anticipate a liquidity crisis in 2009, "barring a bankruptcy by one of its domestic competitors or a more severe economic downturn that would further cripple automotive sales." The loan would provide a safeguard against worsening conditions, the company said. The company said it will accelerate plans to roll out electric vehicles as part of its plan. "We are going to do that across our product line," Mulally said in the interview. The first plug-in vehicle will be a Transit Connect small van for commercial use in 2010 and a car the size of the Ford Focus compact the following year. Ford also said it will accelerate plans for hybrid gas-electric vehicles. Mulally said he will encourage automakers and parts suppliers to join forces to develop new battery technologies in the U.S. for future electric cars so the country doesn't rely on foreign batteries. "We don't want to trade oil for batteries," he said. Ford's plan calls for an investment of up to $14 billion to improve fuel efficiency over the next seven years. The company said would improve the overall efficiency of its fleet by an average of 14 percent in 2009. The CEOs of the Detroit Three are scheduled to appear before congressional committees Thursday and Friday. Chrysler LLC and General Motors Corp. have said they are perilously low on cash and need the government loans to survive the recession and the worst auto sales environment in 25 years. GM and Chrysler were to submit their plans to Congress later in the day. The CEOs were skewered on their first visit in November, when lawmakers criticized them for high labor costs and products that aren't competitive with foreign automakers. "I think we learned a lot from that experience," Mulally said in the interview, adding that the CEOs were there last time to discuss the progress of the industry, not a plan for viability. Ford's new plan is 32 pages long, plus an appendix, and it includes much detail that was lacking during the first visit. The company says its plan to achieve profitability or break even by 2011 is based on industrywide sales estimates of 12.5 million units in 2009, 14.5 million in 2010 and 15.5 million in 2011. The seasonally adjusted annual sales rate dropped to 10.6 million vehicles in October. Ford shares rose 25 cents, or 9.8 percent, to $2.80 in midday trading. Ford's plan said it will reduce its number of dealers by 606 to 3,790 by the end of the year. It will also trim the number of major sourcing suppliers it uses to 750 from 1,600. Ford reiterated its intention to offload Volvo, by either selling the Swedish automaker or spinning it off into a separate company. Since 2007, Ford has sold its Jaguar, Aston Martin and Land Rover lines. It also sold most of its stake in Madza.

See, to a certain extent PR-driven. But practically, they weren't going to get a dime if they didn't publicly make amends. From another AP article: General Motors Corp., Ford and Chrysler LLC said they would refinance their companies' debt, cut executive pay, seek concessions from workers and find other ways of reviving their staggering companies. The Big Three executives also are offering a series of mostly symbolic moves to burnish their images, badly tattered after they arrived in Washington D.C. last month on three separate private jets to plead for a federal lifeline for their struggling companies. All three companies offered separate plans for hearings that will be held Thursday and Friday. That approach the auto executives took last month led Democratic congressional leaders to declare they didn't come prepared to justify their pleas and they told them to go back home and ready a new plan. This week, the automakers are going out of their way to show deference to lawmakers and a willingness to flog themselves for past mistakes. "I think we learned a lot from that experience," Ford CEO Alan Mulally told The Associated Press in an interview. Mulally said he'd work for $1 per year if his firm had to take any government loan money. The company's plan also says it will cancel all management employees' 2009 bonuses, scrap merit increases for its North American salaried employees next year, and sell its five corporate aircraft. And for this week's appearances here, all three company chiefs will skip the lavish travel arrangements. Mulally is coming by car [Ed note: I believe they got the idea from SNL] from Detroit for this week's second round of congressional hearings on government help for the Big Three. GM Chief Rick Wagoner will drive a Chevrolet Malibu hybrid sedan for the 520-mile trek from Detroit to Capitol Hill, spokesman Tony Cervone said Tuesday. And Chrysler LLC CEO Robert Nardelli won't travel by corporate jet, but a spokeswoman declined to elaborate on his travel plans, citing security reasons. The unions were preparing to make sacrifices as well. United Auto Workers leaders summoned local union leaders from across the country to an emergency meeting Wednesday in Detroit to discuss concessions the union could make to help auto companies get government loans. U.S. automakers are struggling to stay afloat heading into 2009 under the weight of an economic meltdown, the worst auto sales in decades and a tight credit market. General Motors, Ford and Chrysler went through nearly $18 billion in cash reserves during the last quarter, and GM and Chrysler have said they could collapse in weeks. Meanwhile, the auto companies released new sales numbers that underlined the punishing business environment facing the Big Three. Ford said its November U.S. light vehicle sales tumbled 31 percent amid a continued slump in consumer spending and tight credit markets. Sales at Toyota, Japan's No. 1 automaker, fell 34 percent despite its extension of zero-percent financing on a dozen vehicles. Ford's blueprint said it would invest $14 billion over the next seven years to boost its vehicles' fuel-efficiency, and improve the overall efficiency of its fleet by an average of 14 percent next year. And Ford is calling for a new partnership among automakers, parts suppliers and the government to develop new battery technologies domestically, so the U.S. doesn't have to rely on foreign batteries � as it now does on foreign oil � to power its cars. GM will outline efforts to negotiate swapping some of the company's debt for equity stakes in the automaker, either shares or warrants for them, said two people briefed on the company's plan. With eight separate brands, GM will also discuss efforts to shed brands but it would prefer to sell them instead of shutting down Pontiac, Saturn or Saab, said one of the people briefed on the plan. Killing off brands, like GM did with Oldsmobile in 2004, would require cash the company doesn't have, the person said. The people briefed on GM's preparations didn't want to be identified because the plan hadn't been completed. Chrysler is expected to outline changes that would include a swap of debt in the company for equity stakes and reductions in some vehicle models, according to a person who was briefed on the plan. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private. GM, according to its quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, owes creditors $45 billion and it must pay more than $7.5 billion early in 2010 to a UAW-administered trust fund that will take over retiree health care payments. Ford owes more than $26 billion, with $6.3 billion due to its UAW trust fund at the end of 2009. Chrysler, a private company, does not have to open its books, but its CEO, Nardelli, has said it would be difficult for the company to make it without federal aid. All three likely are negotiating with the UAW for delays in payments to the trusts. The companies are resisting calls for bankruptcy, arguing that no one would buy a car from an automaker that may not survive the life of the vehicle. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081202/ap_on_go_co/meltdown_autos

I am disappointed that the Obamas did not chose to place their girls in public school. There is an excellent one a few blocks from the White House. My friends who have girls at Sidwell were informed that they will have to change their drop-off schedule. No one is allowed to be around when the O girls get dropped off.

What does that mean, no one around? How far is around? I'm surprised by this.... Caroline Kennedy interested in NY Senate seat By DEVLIN BARRETT and BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writers 1 hr 7 mins ago WASHINGTON � Caroline Kennedy is interested in the Senate seat that would open once Hillary Rodham Clinton becomes secretary of state, according to a close relative who says the powerful Kennedy clan is fully behind her rising to the office previously held by her uncle. "I know she's interested," Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Friday. "She spent a lot of her life balancing public service with obligations to her family. Now her children are grown, and she is ready to move onto a bigger stage." Once Clinton is confirmed to President-elect Barack Obama's cabinet, New York Gov. David Paterson will appoint someone to fill the seat for two years. The Kennedy family's connections and history cannot force Paterson to choose Caroline, who is the daughter of President John F. Kennedy. But the family's strong support could increase pressure on Paterson to choose her above lesser-known contenders. Seeking the Senate seat would also be a significant departure from the life that she has lived until now, zealously guarding her family's privacy � and her own. Robert Kennedy said the family would come out en masse for her if she does get the appointment and has to run for election in 2010. "If she runs, you will see more Kennedys than you have ever seen in your life," he said. An environmental lawyer who took himself out of consideration for the Senate seat earlier this week, Robert Kennedy said he has spoken to his cousin about the position and is one of "many, many people" urging her to seek it. He also offered a policy rationale for her in the role: education. "She's probably one of the leading advocates in the nation on public education. She feels a lot of the issues she's worked on are in danger of being shunted aside because of the economic crisis," he said. Democrats said Caroline Kennedy and Paterson have already spoken about the Senate seat, and she is interested. After two New York Democrats said Kennedy and the governor are expected to meet privately to discuss the matter Saturday, the governor's spokesman said they do not have a meeting planned. Kennedy is the niece of Edward and Robert Kennedy. Robert Kennedy held the New York seat from 1965 until his assassination in 1968. Edward Kennedy has been a senator from Massachusetts since 1963. As a prominent member of the Kennedy clan, Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg is the kind of high-profile, historic figure who could overshadow many other New York politicians hoping to be Paterson's choice. The governor has said he is in no rush to make a decision, and Clinton is not giving up the seat before she is confirmed as President-elect Barack Obama's secretary of state. "The governor has not yet reached out to any potential candidates," said Paterson's spokesman, Errol Cockfield. "He has been approached by several candidates. Any discussions related to that selection are private and the governor will not comment about speculation before a decision is made." Whoever Paterson appoints would serve for two years and then have to run in a special election in 2010, along with Paterson and New York's senior senator, Charles Schumer. The candidate would then have to run again in 2012. Kennedy has strong connections to incoming Obama administration officials � though Obama transition spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter insisted they were not involved in any way with the search for the next U.S. senator from New York. As a prominent booster of Barack Obama's presidential bid, Kennedy spent much of 2008 taking bigger steps onto the public stage. As famous as she is, she always has been viewed as almost painfully shy. She met her husband, Edwin Schlossberg, while working at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. They married in 1986 and have three children. She made a splash in early 2008 by writing an op-ed column for The New York Times declaring her support for Obama, saying he had the potential to be as inspirational to Americans as her father was in the 1960s. She also spoke at the Democratic National Convention. She then hit the campaign trail with Obama, and worked on the vice-presidential search that eventually settled on Joe Biden. Caroline Kennedy is easily the most famous contender for Clinton's Senate seat, but there are plenty of others. New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is widely known in the state. Paterson could also pick Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown or Tom Suozzi, a Long Island elected official. There are also a number of House members in the running, including Reps. Carolyn Maloney, Kirsten Gillibrand, Steve Israel, Brian Higgins, Nydia Velazquez and Jerrold Nadler. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081206/ap_on_el_se/kennedy_senate_seat

Typing Without a Clue By TIMOTHY EGAN Published: December 6, 2008 The unlicensed pipe fitter known as Joe the Plumber is out with a book this month, just as the last seconds on his 15 minutes are slipping away. I have a question for Joe: Do you want me to fix your leaky toilet? I didn�t think so. And I don�t want you writing books. Not when too many good novelists remain unpublished. Not when too many extraordinary histories remain unread. Not when too many riveting memoirs are kicked back at authors after 10 years of toil. Not when voices in Iran, North Korea or China struggle to get past a censor�s gate. Joe, a k a Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, was no good as a citizen, having failed to pay his full share of taxes, no good as a plumber, not being fully credentialed, and not even any good as a faux American icon. Who could forget poor John McCain at his most befuddled, calling out for his working-class surrogate on a day when Joe stiffed him. With a r�sum� full of failure, he now thinks he can join the profession of Mark Twain, George Orwell and Joan Didion. Next up may be Sarah Palin, who is said to be worth nearly $7 million if she can place her thoughts between covers. Publishers: with all the grim news of layoffs and staff cuts at the venerable houses of American letters, can we set some ground rules for these hard times? Anyone who abuses the English language on such a regular basis should not be paid to put words in print. Here�s Palin�s response, after Matt Lauer asked her when she knew the election was lost: �I had great faith that, you know, perhaps when that voter entered that voting booth and closed that curtain that what would kick in for them was, perhaps, a bold step that would have to be taken in casting a vote for us, but having to put a lot of faith in that commitment we tried to articulate that we were the true change agent that would progress this nation.� I have no idea what she said in that thicket of words. Most of the writers I know work every day, in obscurity and close to poverty, trying to say one thing well and true. Day in, day out, they labor to find their voice, to learn their trade, to understand nuance and pace. And then, facing a sea of rejections, they hear about something like Barbara Bush�s dog getting a book deal. Writing is hard, even for the best wordsmiths. Ernest Hemingway said the most frightening thing he ever encountered was �a blank sheet of paper.� And Winston Churchill called the act of writing a book �a horrible, exhaustive struggle, like a long bout of painful illness.� When I heard J.T.P. had a book, I thought of that Chris Farley skit from �Saturday Night Live.� He�s a motivational counselor, trying to keep some slacker youths from living in a van down by the river, just like him. One kid tells him he wants to write. �La-di-frickin�-da!� Farley says. �We got ourselves a writer here!� If Joe really wants to write, he should keep his day job and spend his evenings reading Rick Reilly�s sports columns, Peggy Noonan�s speeches, or Jess Walter�s fiction. He should open Dostoevsky or Norman Maclean � for osmosis, if nothing else. He should study Frank McCourt on teaching or Annie Dillard on writing. The idea that someone who stumbled into a sound bite can be published, and charge $24.95 for said words, makes so many real writers think the world is unfair. Our next president is a writer, which may do something to elevate standards in the book industry. The last time a true writer occupied the White House was a hundred years ago, with Teddy Roosevelt, who wrote 13 books before his 40th birthday. Barack Obama�s first book, the memoir of a mixed-race man, is terrific. Outside of a few speeches, he will probably not write anything memorable until he�s out office, but I look forward to that presidential memoir. For the others � you friends of celebrities penning cookbooks, you train wrecks just out of rehab, you politicians with an agent but no talent � stop soaking up precious advance money. I know: publishers say they print garbage so that real literature, which seldom makes any money, can find its way into print. True, to a point. But some of them print garbage so they can buy more garbage. There was a time when I wanted to be like Sting, the singer, belting out, �Roxanne ...� I guess that�s why we have karaoke, for fantasy night. If only there was such a thing for failed plumbers, politicians or celebrities who think they can write. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/07/opinion/07egan.html?em

(Dorine) I'm surprised by this.... In hindsight though it makes sense, especially when viewed through Machiabellian lenses. ;-)

Jon's automaker/Congress segment last Thursday was priceless. You may need to watch the videoclip from the entire episode, as this is missing is outcry at the very end to give them their money, which apparently is now going to happen from today's headlines: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=212876&title=Clusterf#@k-to-the-Poor-House---Bean-on-a-Plate-Edition

Iraqi Women, Fighting for a Voice Activists Confront Dual Powers of Religion, Tribalism By Sudarsan Raghavan Washington Post Sunday, December 7, 2008 IRBIL, Iraq -- Hawjin Hama Rashid, a feisty journalist in bluejeans and a frilly blouse, had come to the morgue in this Kurdish city to research tribal killings of women. "A week doesn't pass without at least 10," the morgue director said, showing Rashid pictures of corpses on his computer screen. First, a bloated, pummeled face. Next, a red, shapeless, charred body. "Raped, then burned," the director said. Then, another face, eyes half-closed, stab wounds below her neck. Rashid leaned closer to the screen. It was the bloody corpse of her best friend, Begard Hussein. Hussein had complained to police about her ex-husband, who had threatened to kill her if she refused to annul their divorce. Rashid had wanted to publish a photograph of her friend's body after she was killed in April, but officials said none existed. "They lied to me," Rashid said as she left the morgue, her sorrow fusing with anger. From the southern port city of Basra to bustling Irbil in northern Iraq, Iraqi activists are trying to counter the rising influence of religious fundamentalists and tribal chieftains who have insisted that women wear the veil, prevented girls from receiving education and sanctioned killings of women accused of besmirching their family's honor. In their quest for stability in Iraq, U.S. officials have empowered tribal and religious leaders, Sunni and Shiite, who reject the secularism that Saddam Hussein once largely maintained. These leaders have imposed strict interpretations of Islam and enforced tribal codes that female activists say limit their freedom and encourage violence against them. "Women are being strangled by religion and tribalism," said Muna Saud, a 52-year-old activist in Basra. Read it all here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/06/AR2008120602289.html I have always said that Saddam H was not perfect, but at least Iraq was secular. His cabinet members were mixed religions. Bush was mighty stupid to invade. As usual women are the top victims. :-(

Sounds like Afghanistan.

Exactly. And Iraq was not that way with SH. Bush was very stupid to lessen the US presence in Afghanistan. I feel for those women.

Ill. Gov. arrested in Obama successor probe By MIKE ROBINSON, Associated Press Writer Mike Robinson, Associated Press Writer 13 mins ago CHICAGO � Federal authorities arrested Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich Tuesday on charges that he brazenly conspired to sell or trade the U.S. Senate seat left vacant by President-elect Barack Obama to the highest bidder. Blagojevich also was charged with illegally threatening to withhold state assistance to Tribune Co., the owner of the Chicago Tribune, in the sale of Wrigley Field, according to a federal criminal complaint. In return for state assistance, Blagojevich allegedly wanted members of the paper's editorial board who had been critical of him fired. A 76-page FBI affidavit said the 51-year-old Democratic governor was intercepted on court-authorized wiretaps over the last month conspiring to sell or trade the vacant Senate seat for personal benefits for himself and his wife, Patti. Otherwise, Blagojevich considered appointing himself. The affidavit said that as late as Nov. 3, he told his deputy governor that if "they're not going to offer me anything of value I might as well take it." "I'm going to keep this Senate option for me a real possibility, you know, and therefore I can drive a hard bargain," Blagojevich allegedly said later that day, according to the affidavit, which also quoted him as saying in a remark punctuated by profanity that the seat was "a valuable thing � you just don't give it away for nothing." The affidavit said Blagojevich also discussed getting a substantial salary for himself at a nonprofit foundation or an organization affiliated with labor unions. It said Blagojevich also talked about getting his wife placed on corporate boards where she might get $150,000 a year in director's fees. He also allegedly discussed getting campaign funds for himself or possibly a post in the president's cabinet or an ambassadorship once he left the governor's office. He noted becoming a U.S. senator might remake his image for a possible presidential run in 2016, according to the affidavit. And he allegedly said a Senate seat would also provide him with corporate contacts if he needed a job and present an opportunity for his wife to work as a lobbyist. "I want to make money," the affidavit quotes him as saying in one conversation. The affidavit said Blagojevich expressed frustration at being "stuck" as governor and that he would have access to greater resources if he were indicted while in the U.S. Senate than while sitting as governor. U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald said in a statement that "the breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering." "They allege that Blagojevich put a for sale sign on the naming of a United States senator," Fitzgerald said." Among those being considered for the post include U.S. Reps. Danny Davis and Jesse Jackson Jr. Blagojevich also was charged with using his authority as governor in an attempt to squeeze out campaign contributions. His chief of staff, John Harris, also was arrested. Corruption in the Blagojevich administration has been the focus of a federal investigation involving an alleged $7 million scheme aimed at squeezing kickbacks out of companies seeking business from the state. Federal prosecutors have acknowledged they're also investigating "serious allegations of endemic hiring fraud" under Blagojevich. Political fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko who raised money for the campaigns of both Blagojevich and Obama is awaiting sentencing after being convicted of fraud and other charges. Blagojevich's chief fundraiser, Christopher G. Kelly, is due to stand trial early next year on charges of obstructing the Internal Revenue Service. According to Tuesday's complaint, Blagojevich schemed with Rezko, millionaire-fundraiser turned federal witness Stuart Levine and others to get financial benefits for himself and his campaign committee. Federal prosecutors said Blagojevich and the chairman of his campaign committee have been speeding up corrupt fundraising activities in the last month to get as much money as possible before the end of the year when a new law would curtail his ability to raise contributions from companies with state contracts worth more than $50,000. According to the affidavit, agents learned Blagojevich was seeking $2.5 million in campaign contributions by the end of the year, with a large part allegedly to come from companies and individuals who have gotten state contracts or appointments. Blagojevich took the chief executive's office in 2003 as a reformer promising to clean up former Gov. George Ryan's mess. Ryan, a Republican, is serving a 6-year prison sentence after being convicted on racketeering and fraud charges. A decade-long investigation began with the sale of driver's licenses for bribes and led to the conviction of dozens of people who worked for Ryan when he was secretary of state and governor. FBI spokesman Frank Bochte said federal agents arrested the governor and Harris simultaneously at their homes at 6:15 a.m. and took them to the Chicago FBI headquarters. Bochte said he did not know if either man was handcuffed or if the governor's family was their North Side home at the time of his arrest. He did say Blagojevich and Harris both were given time to get dressed before being taken to the headquarters. He also did not have any details about Blagojevich's arrest, only that he was cooperative with federal agents. "It was a very calm setting," he said. The governor was to appear later Tuesday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nan Nolan to answer the charges. The time was not immediately set. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/blagojevich_corruption_probe

Saw that. Wasn't he just participating at that sit-in at that factory?

U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald said in a statement that "the breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering." But one got away... with it... ;-0

Oh, Moon! ;-) Chicago politics is never dull. What's interesting to me is how the other side in this (which now has ALL) the power has gone after him. Yes, this is corruption, but you have no idea how long it took to indict George Ryan and his corruption resulted in the loss of lives.

Karen, all I can is... Al Capone! ;-) Inauguration? Follow All the Bouncing Balls: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/08/AR2008120803769.html Who doesn't love a ball?

*hee hee* As in The Untouchables movie: The Chicago Way

I thought this was a funny post about the Gov from the forum on a real estate site (of all places) I read sometimes.... It's very bipartisan in Chicago - Repub Gov in jail, now the Dem. This quote from the NYTImes article about sums it up: "For example, according to the affidavit, Mr. Blagojevich discussed whether he could strip a Chicago children�s hospital of $8 million in state money after a hospital executive declined to make a $50,000 contribution. He also discussed withholding state assistance from the financially struggling Tribune Company, which owns The Chicago Tribune, unless the newspaper dismissed unfriendly editorial writers." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/us/politics/10Illinois.html?hp I mean, wow. This is like for a caricature of a bad guy in some disney film. When he laughs, does he go "Muhahahahaha"?

t's very bipartisan in Chicago - Repub Gov in jail, now the Dem. When this one serves his time, it'll be even-Steven: two Dems and two Republicans (Dorine) When he laughs, does he go "Muhahahahaha"? No, actually, he has a very boyish voice. BTW, I just passed by the window factor, as its on Goose Island. On the radio, one of the stations was playing a Blagojevich version of the Lou Bega Mambo No 5 song. It's on YouTube...hysterical http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9eDA4rP_hA

Washington Post Sunday, December 14, 2008; Woman Blinded by Spurned Man Invokes Islamic Retribution TEHRAN -- Ameneh Bahrami once enjoyed photography and mountain vistas. Her work for a medical equipment company gave her financial independence. Several men had asked for her hand in marriage, but the hazel-eyed electrical technician had refused them all. "I wanted to get married, but only to the man I really loved," she said. Four years ago, a spurned suitor poured a bucket of sulfuric acid over her head, leaving her blind and disfigured. Late last month, an Iranian court ordered that five drops of the same chemical be placed in each of her attacker's eyes, acceding to Bahrami's demand that he be punished according to a principle in Islamic jurisprudence that allows a victim to seek retribution for a crime. The sentence has not yet been carried out. The implementation of corporal punishments allowed under Islamic law, including lashing, amputation and stoning, has often provoked controversy in Iran, where many people have decried such sentences as barbaric. This case is different. Tehran journalist Asieh Amini, who writes about human rights and opposes the sentence, said protest has been muted because people have been moved by Bahrami's story. "It's hard not to get emotional over what has happened to her," Amini said. Bahrami, 31, said she has fought long and hard to obtain what she views as justice. "At an age at which I should be putting on a wedding dress, I am asking for someone's eyes to be dripped with acid," she said in a recent interview, as rain poured against the windows of her parents' small apartment in a lower-middle-class neighborhood of Tehran. "I am doing that because I don't want this to happen to any other women." Some officials also said the punishment would be a deterrent. Full article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/13/AR2008121302147.html?nav=hcmodule

Washington Post Foreign Service Sunday, December 14, 2008; 3:04 PM Bush Defends Iraq War During a Farewell Visit Iraqi Journalist Hurls Two Shoes at Bush During Press Conference With Al-Maliki BAGHDAD, Dec. 14 -- Arriving in Baghdad today for a farewell visit, President Bush staunchly defended a war that has taken far more time, money and lives than anticipated, saying the conflict "has not been easy" but was necessary for U.S. security, Iraqi stability and "world peace." But during a press conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Bush received a taste of the immense resentment many Iraqis feel toward his policies: Just after Bush finished his remarks and said "Thank you" in Arabic, an Iraqi journalist took off his shoes and hurled them both at Bush, one after the other. The incident lent an air of chaos and farce to a trip intended to highlight improving security conditions in the war-torn country. "This is a farewell kiss!" the man, identified as Muntadar al-Zaidi, a reporter with the Cairo-based network Al Baghdadia Television, yelled as he threw the shoes. Bush had to duck out of the way, and narrowly missed being hit, according to on-scene reports. Maliki reached out his hand to shield the president. Zaidi started to yell "Dog, dog!" as he was surrounded by security agents, who tackled him to the floor and began to beat him. Zaidi was later removed from the ornate room where the press conference was taking place. Bush was not injured and joked about the incident. "All I can report is it is a size 10," he said. Zaidi was seated in the second row of seats, about 12 feet from Bush's lectern. Zaidi, colleagues said, was kidnapped by Shiite militiamen last year and was later released. Throwing a shoe at someone is considered the worst possible insult in Iraq, and is meant to show extreme disrespect and hatred towards someone Bush landed in Iraq Sunday under a veil of secrecy for his fourth and presumably final stop as president in a war zone that will be central to defining his turbulent presidency. Air Force One landed in Baghdad at around 4 p.m. local time after a 10-1/2 hour overnight flight from Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington. Bush was scheduled to meet with U.S. troops and Iraqi leaders about a recently completed security agreement, which calls for the withdrawal of U.S. forces by 2011. After meeting with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani at Salam Palace, Bush hailed the security agreement as "a reminder of our friendship and as a way forward to help the Iraqi people realize the blessings of a free society." "The work hasn't been easy, but it has been necessary for American security, Iraqi hope, and world peace," Bush said, adding: "I am just so grateful that I had a chance to come back to Iraq before my presidency ended." Bush's praise for the security agreement is particularly remarkable given that the U.S. administration spent years dismissing proposals for withdrawal timelines as dangerous admissions of defeat. The agreement came after months of hard bargaining by Iraqi leaders, who insisted on a firm date for the removal of U.S. troops. Bush and his aides characterize the agreement as a sign of improvement, and Bush said earlier this week that the fight in Iraq was nearing "a successful end." His last visit comes against a backdrop of declining violence across Iraq, which the Bush Administration attributes to a buildup of thousands of reinforcements last year. U.S. commanders have also credited the lower levels of violence to a ceasefire by anti-American Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr and to the Sunni Awakening, in which former insurgents and tribal leaders turned their weapons against Sunni extremists. Full article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/14/AR2008121401170.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR

So according to Islamic Law, Bush will now be able to throw 2 size 10 shoes at the reporter? ;-)

Throwing a shoe at someone is considered the worst possible insult in Iraq, and is meant to show extreme disrespect and hatred towards someone Interesting, never knew this. Why two? An eye-for-an-eye is the OT ratio. The Koran doubles it?

The guy threw 2 shoes at Bush so seems fair. ;-) Hysterical. Did anyone see the video? He really whipped them at him. Bush is quick, gotta give him that.

OK, I must have glossed over that section. Thought he heaved only one.

(Do)He really whipped them at him. Bush is quick, gotta give him that. He sure did duck mighty quickly. Good reflexes. And I have to give him this-- he was funny about it: "I can confirm that they were size 10." LOL! The late night comics will have a field day. And I'm sure Frank Caliendo will have a spot on impression, "What we have here is a shoe-ification.";-) I remember when the statue of Saddam fell, all those people slapping the fallen statue with their shoes.

LOL, not a country for me, with my shoe fetish. ;-) The M and their idiocies never surprise me.

The late-night shows on the shoe-throwing incident: Letterman: I don't think President Bush has dodged anything like that since, well, the Vietnam War. Leno: Looks like we finally found something President Bush is good at - dodgeball! Ferguson: The shoe-throwing incident has made Sarah Palin want to be president even more. Free shoes! You betcha! Conan: He's being hailed as a hero in Iraq... when he dies he'll be greeted in heaven by 172 podiatrists.

The man who threw the shoes is now a famous hero in Muslim countries. Poor them.

Today's Wash Post: Somalis' Choice: Join Islamists or Flee U.S.-Backed Invasion Failed to Thwart Takeover DADAAB, Kenya -- By the time Mohamed Abdi Ibrahim decided to leave Somalia, life in the southern city of Kismaayo had become, as he put it with consummate understatement, "complicated." Young men there had long shouldered AK-47 assault rifles and joined clan militias. But as an Islamist militia known as al-Shabab took control this year, it had become a place where boys were paid $50 to throw bombs, soccer fields served as militia training camps, and Islamist leaders walked into classrooms to take names of potential recruits. Ibrahim and two friends fled several months ago, just after the Shabab began beating people not attending Friday prayers and just before the group publicly stoned to death a 13-year-old girl it had convicted of adultery. The options for young men like them, it seemed, had narrowed to two: sign up or run. "For us, it was not good to join," said Ibrahim, a lanky 22-year-old who fled to this overflowing refugee camp across the Kenyan border. "Because if we join one side, the other side will hunt us and kill us." The scenario now unfolding in Somalia is the one a U.S.-backed Ethiopian invasion nearly two years ago had been intended to thwart: a takeover by radical Islamists. At the time, Ethiopian forces ousted a relatively diverse Islamic movement that had briefly gained control of the capital, Mogadishu. In its place, they installed a transitional government headed by a warlord who allowed the United States to launch counterterrorism operations in the moderate Muslim nation. But the policy backfired, inspiring a relentless insurgency of clan militias and Islamist fighters that has left Somalia's first central government since 1991 near collapse. On Sunday night, advisers and supporters of President Abdullahi Yusuf -- who has been accused of obstructing a possible political compromise to help end the insurgency -- said that he would resign Monday, although as with everything in Somalia, the situation remained fluid. The two-year insurgency has energized the most radical Islamist faction, the Shabab -- "youth" in Arabic -- which the United States has designated a terrorist organization. Rallying young men with anti-Ethiopian rhetoric and a promised ticket to paradise, the group advanced this year across much of southern Somalia, including the capital, Mogadishu. Analysts predict the Shabab will extend its control after the Ethiopians withdraw, which they have promised to do within weeks. The United States and the United Nations are now supporting a political settlement that shifts power from Yusuf and his circle to an opposition coalition that includes some of the Islamist leaders cast as extremists two years ago, as well as clan leaders who had been excluded by Yusuf's government. Backers of the Djibouti agreement hope that the Ethiopian withdrawal, along with the political deal, will rob the Shabab of its cause. But the situation on the ground -- and in swelling refugee camps such as this one -- suggests that the group is only gaining strength. Full article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/21/AR2008122102340.html You know how I feel about this situation and Islam. I am censoring myself here.

Viagra? Can it get any more insane? Those poor women! Now they even have to worry about aging War lords and their libido. I am so totally disgusted. The Wash Post today: Little Blue Pills Among the Ways CIA Wins Friends in Afghanistan The Afghan chieftain looked older than his 60-odd years, and his bearded face bore the creases of a man burdened with duties as tribal patriarch and husband to four younger women. His visitor, a CIA officer, saw an opportunity, and reached into his bag for a small gift. Four blue pills. Viagra. "Take one of these. You'll love it," the officer said. Compliments of Uncle Sam. The enticement worked. The officer, who described the encounter, returned four days later to an enthusiastic reception. The grinning chief offered up a bonanza of information about Taliban movements and supply routes -- followed by a request for more pills. For U.S. intelligence officials, this is how some crucial battles in Afghanistan are fought and won. While the CIA has a long history of buying information with cash, the growing Taliban insurgency has prompted the use of novel incentives and creative bargaining to gain support in some of the country's roughest neighborhoods, according to officials directly involved in such operations. In their efforts to win over notoriously fickle warlords and chieftains, the officials say, the agency's operatives have used a variety of personal services. These include pocketknives and tools, medicine or surgeries for ailing family members, toys and school equipment, tooth extractions, travel visas, and, occasionally, pharmaceutical enhancements for aging patriarchs with slumping libidos, the officials said. "Whatever it takes to make friends and influence people -- whether it's building a school or handing out Viagra," said one longtime agency operative and veteran of several Afghanistan tours. Like other field officers interviewed for this article, he spoke on the condition of anonymity when describing tactics and operations that are largely classified. Officials say these inducements are necessary in Afghanistan, a country where warlords and tribal leaders expect to be paid for their cooperation, and where, for some, switching sides can be as easy as changing tunics. If the Americans don't offer incentives, there are others who will, including Taliban commanders, drug dealers and even Iranian agents in the region. The usual bribes of choice -- cash and weapons -- aren't always the best options, Afghanistan veterans say. Guns too often fall into the wrong hands, they say, and showy gifts such as money, jewelry and cars tend to draw unwanted attention. "If you give an asset $1,000, he'll go out and buy the shiniest junk he can find, and it will be apparent that he has suddenly come into a lot of money from someone," said Jamie Smith, a veteran of CIA covert operations in Afghanistan and now chief executive of SCG International, a private security and intelligence company. "Even if he doesn't get killed, he becomes ineffective as an informant because everyone knows where he got it." The key, Smith said, is to find a way to meet the informant's personal needs in a way that keeps him firmly on your side but leaves little or no visible trace. "You're trying to bridge a gap between people living in the 18th century and people coming in from the 21st century," Smith said, "so you look for those common things in the form of material aid that motivate people everywhere." Among the world's intelligence agencies, there's a long tradition of using sex as a motivator. Robert Baer, a retired CIA officer and author of several books on intelligence, noted that the Soviet spy service was notorious for using attractive women as bait when seeking to turn foreign diplomats into informants. "The KGB has always used 'honey traps,' and it works," Baer said. For American officers, a more common practice was to offer medical care for potential informants and their loved ones, he said. "I remember one guy we offered an option on a heart bypass," Baer said. For some U.S. operatives in Afghanistan, Western drugs such as Viagra were just part of a long list of enticements available for use in special cases. Two veteran officers familiar with such practices said Viagra was offered rarely, and only to older tribal officials for whom the drug would hold special appeal. While such sexual performance drugs are generally unavailable in the remote areas where the agency's teams operated, they have been sold in some Kabul street markets since at least 2003 and were known by reputation elsewhere. "You didn't hand it out to younger guys, but it could be a silver bullet to make connections to the older ones," said one retired operative familiar with the drug's use in Afghanistan. Afghan tribal leaders often had four wives -- the maximum number allowed by the Koran -- and aging village patriarchs were easily sold on the utility of a pill that could "put them back in an authoritative position," the official said. Both officials who described the use of Viagra declined to discuss details such as dates and locations, citing both safety and classification concerns. The CIA declined to comment on methods used in clandestine operations. One senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the agency's work in Afghanistan said the clandestine teams were trained to be "resourceful and agile" and to use tactics "consistent with the laws of our country." "They learn the landscape, get to know the players, and adjust to the operating environment, no matter where it is," the official said. "They think out of the box, take risks, and do what's necessary to get the job done." Not everyone in Afghanistan's hinterlands had heard of the drug, leading to some awkward encounters when Americans delicately attempted to explain its effects, taking care not to offend their hosts' religious sensitivities. Such was the case with the 60-year-old chieftain who received the four pills from a U.S. operative. According to the retired operative who was there, the man was a clan leader in southern Afghanistan who had been wary of Americans -- neither supportive nor actively opposed. The man had extensive knowledge of the region and his village controlled key passages through the area. U.S. forces needed his cooperation and worked hard to win it, the retired operative said. After a long conversation through an interpreter, the retired operator began to probe for ways to win the man's loyalty. A discussion of the man's family and many wives provided inspiration. Once it was established that the man was in good health, the pills were offered and accepted. Four days later, when the Americans returned, the gift had worked its magic, the operative recalled. "He came up to us beaming," the official said. "He said, 'You are a great man.' " "And after that we could do whatever we wanted in his area."

I'm virtually speechless, yet find that fascinating.

I find it totally sexist. The CIA is proud of the fact that by offering viagra: "... we could do whatever we wanted in his area." This election has brought home the fact that being sexist is acceptable and this example by our own CIA just makes the case stronger. As I said, I am disgusted. Why don't they just give them TVs and porno DVDs? That should keep them busy enough for the CIA to do what they want in the area. ;-)

Well, Moon, the women aren't in a position of power or influence, so I can see how they would be male-centric incentives. I don't have an issue with that aspect. I had more of a problem thinking that the women might've been glad their husbands (or others) would have issues that would preclude them from sex at any time. The women could get a break maybe, but unfortunately, I'm sure it becomes more empowering to the males, single or married, to do what they want, when they want with women. I'm sure pornos and TV's are against their religion. ;-)

I'm sure pornos and TV's are against their religion. ;-) No kidding! They might not be such rabid haters/killers otherwise. And I agree with you about the women who were probably very happy that their husbands were no longer bothering them, poor them! They probably don't know what an orgasm is unless it's self induced. That action by the CIA is so despicable.

I still haven't figured out if I want to throw up a little or a lot. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/28/AR2008122800481.html?hpid=sec-politics

This article comes from the Dept of Stating the Obvious.... It continues to boggle my mind that this guy managed to get 8 years in office, let alone 4. Talk about people with blinders on and if those people are happy with how things have turned out in the end, more power to them I guess. Will look forward to this issue showing up in my mailbox. Is Vanity Fair biased against him. Yep. Is any of what was said below untrued. Very doubtful given the information already out there. Ex-Bush aides say he never recovered from Katrina Tue Dec 30, 6:59 am ET AP - WASHINGTON � Hurricane Katrina not only pulverized the Gulf Coast in 2005, it knocked the bully pulpit out from under President George W. Bush, according to two former advisers who spoke candidly about the political impact of the government's poor handling of the natural disaster. "Katrina to me was the tipping point," said Matthew Dowd, Bush's pollster and chief strategist for the 2004 presidential campaign. "The president broke his bond with the public. Once that bond was broken, he no longer had the capacity to talk to the American public. State of the Union addresses? It didn't matter. Legislative initiatives? It didn't matter. P.R.? It didn't matter. Travel? It didn't matter." Dan Bartlett, former White House communications director and later counselor to the president, said: "Politically, it was the final nail in the coffin." Their comments are a part of an oral history of the Bush White House that Vanity Fair magazine compiled for its February issue, which hits newsstands in New York and Los Angeles on Wednesday, and nationally on Jan. 6. Vanity Fair published comments by current and former government officials, foreign ministers, campaign strategists and numerous others on topics that included Iraq, the anthrax attacks, the economy and immigration. Lawrence Wilkerson, top aide and later chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell, said that as a new president, Bush was like Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee whom critics said lacked knowledge about foreign affairs. When Bush first came into office, he was surrounded by experienced advisers like Vice President Dick Cheney and Powell, who Wilkerson said ended up playing damage control for the president. "It allowed everybody to believe that this Sarah Palin-like president � because, let's face it, that's what he was � was going to be protected by this national-security elite, tested in the cauldrons of fire," Wilkerson said, adding that he considered Cheney probably the "most astute, bureaucratic entrepreneur" he'd ever met. "He became vice president well before George Bush picked him," Wilkerson said of Cheney. "And he began to manipulate things from that point on, knowing that he was going to be able to convince this guy to pick him, knowing that he was then going to be able to wade into the vacuums that existed around George Bush � personality vacuum, character vacuum, details vacuum, experience vacuum." On other topics, David Kuo, who served as deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, disputed the idea that the Bush White House was dominated by religious conservatives and catered to the needs of a religious right voting bloc. "The reality in the White House is � if you look at the most senior staff � you're seeing people who aren't personally religious and have no particular affection for people who are religious-right leaders," Kuo said. "In the political affairs shop in particular, you saw a lot of people who just rolled their eyes at ... basically every religious-right leader that was out there, because they just found them annoying and insufferable. These guys were pains in the butt who had to be accommodated." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081230/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_advisers_speak_out

From today's Wash Post: Tonight's 'Leap Second' Is Hot Tocking Point This weary/manic/glorious/tragic/bizarre year will last one second longer than you think. As 2008 circles the drain, here comes the pithy news item about the "leap second." It's exactly what it sounds like. Tonight, timekeepers will slide an extra second into the world's clock. Tick tock tick tock TICK TOCK. It will happen here, in Washington, a stroke before 7 p.m. The clock on the front lawn of the Naval Observatory will linger at 18:59:59 for two seconds instead of one. Then it will proceed, as if nothing happened, to 19:00:00. Most computer clocks and cellphones will take note of this. You will not. Perhaps you should. This minor quirk might soon vanish in a tussle of global proportions. The Brits want to keep the leap second. The United States and the world's other major powers want to dispose of it, thereby erasing the risk it poses to global telecommunications and navigation. But if we get rid of the leap second, we effectively cut our ties to the sun. "It would be a really bold cultural step to cut that link of maybe 5,000 years of history of measuring time," Royal Observatory timekeeping curator David Rooney says from London, where tonight, in the dying moments of 2008, BBC Radio will add a seventh pip (tone) to its traditional six-second countdown to the next hour, and where pennies will be removed from Big Ben's pendulum to slow it slightly in the final hour before midnight Greenwich Mean Time. Tick tock tick tock TICK TOCK. The leap second is a relic from the 1970s. Physicists whipped up this artificial hiccup to keep atomic clocks, which are reliably steady, aligned with the rotation of the Earth, which is slowing at a rate of two-thousandths of a second per day. So every now and then (1998, 2005, today) we allow the planet to catch up so that the sun remains highest at noon instead of, say, 11:59 a.m. A leap second is kind of like a leap year, in that both are attempts at dicing cosmic progression into whole numbers: years made of days and days made of seconds. An extra day is notable. An extra second is nothing. Right? It's one-86,400th of a day. It's several billionths of a 75-year lifetime. It's a blink. It's also a wedge between new and old, micro and macro, between the severity of atomic precision and the romance of looking heavenward. Tick tock tick tock TICK TOCK. Of course, it could be 700 years before atomic time and solar time diverge by as much as an hour. As author Douglas Adams once said, it will be someone else's problem. "Today, most countries change one hour between summer and winter, and this creates no problem to people," says Elisa Felicitas Arias, a marker of time at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Paris, which sets the standard for the world's atomic clocks. "In the future -- many, many hundreds of years -- perhaps man will be faced with the decision of making some change, but at the moment I think we can live without the leap second, and we can live better without the leap second." Living better. Because of a second. But an extra second is nothing, right? In a second, the Earth rotates a quarter-mile at the equator. In a billionth of a second, light travels one foot. Both of these matter when you turn on the GPS in your car. You know where you are because of a second. Don't get too familiar with it. Eventually we must redefine the length of the second or deal with the hassle of more frequent leap seconds -- maybe occurring monthly a thousand years from now -- due to the constant deceleration of the Earth's rate of rotation, according to Dennis McCarthy, retired director of time at the Naval Observatory, which controls one-third of the world's atomic clocks. "We're operating with a second that is not consistent with the way the Earth is rotating at this moment," McCarthy says. "We could change the length of a second, but then you'd be changing all sorts of things -- the meter is defined in terms of the length of a second -- and it would be a terrible thing to do. The easiest thing now is to begin to make plans for how to get along without the leap second. We owe it to future generations to start thinking of a better way." Our way, right now, is delightfully tangled in our own quest to perceive and to measure. The immutable atomic standard is married, for better or worse, to the Earth's ever-changing rate of rotation. This paradox might soon be history if the International Telecommunication Union, based in Geneva, decides to abolish the leap second at its conference in 2011. For now, though, we have a whole second more of 2008. It won't lengthen our lives but it will lengthen today, as we define a "day," and this year, as we define a "year," even though it holds us back one second, meaning we will die a smidgen earlier -- but not sooner -- than if no one had messed with the clocks. Tick tock tick tock TICK TOCK.

(Dorine) I still haven't figured out if I want to throw up a little or a lot. I know. I saw a Condie segment on the CBS Sunday Morning Show last week and she was saying those things. Amazingly, no one I've encountered will admit to having voted for him in the last election. Talk about your ghost voters!

I think it's Laura's comments that make me more ill.

Laura is a non entity. It makes me laugh that her official portrait has her sitting with a book. In the White House tour show, she proudly shows off her library and her books, all 40 or so, what a laugh! Come over to my house Laura dear and check out my library! But she certainly went around promoting that book with Jenna. I remember her mother-in-law Barbara went around the country promoting reading and literacy.

(Moon) Laura is a non entity. Totally my point. Wasn't she a librarian in a past life? While I never really heard about her causes as First Lady too much, wasn't her thing on fighting illiteracy too? Or she was so quiet maybe she wasn't promoting anything.

(Dorine) While I never really heard about her causes as First Lady too much, wasn't her thing on fighting illiteracy too? It's especially poignant when a family suffers from it first hand. ;-)

Amazingly, no one I've encountered will admit to having voted for him in the last election. Me, Me.... Me is a Republican , have voted for "W" twice and would do so again:-))))))) *You* knew that.....;-) Happy NY..and thank you in advance for the warm welcome;-)

*cough* Evelyn posted on this topic??! Wow. It is a New Year. ;-) Thank you, dear. You are welcome anytime. :-D

Seems many of the Republicans are getting out of Dodge for during the inaugural festivities. http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090102/pl_politico/16987

I think that is normal. Happens with either party.

I think it said in the article, with Clinton, they had anti-inaugural parties both times, or something like that.

Interesting concept, although it would be *another* tax as the gasoline taxes wouldn't go down or be eliminated. :-( Man, our potholes are awful now. Oregon looks at taxing mileage instead of gasoline PORTLAND, Ore. � Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of how much gas they use, even going so far as to install GPS monitoring devices in 300 vehicles. The idea first emerged nearly 10 years ago as Oregon lawmakers worried that fuel-efficient cars such as gas-electric hybrids could pose a threat to road upkeep, which is paid for largely with gasoline taxes. "I'm glad we're taking a look at it before the potholes get so big that we can't even get out of them," said Leroy Younglove, a Portland driver who participated in a recent pilot program. The proposal is not without critics, including drivers who are concerned about privacy and others who fear the tax could eliminate the financial incentive for buying efficient vehicles. But Oregon is ahead of the nation in exploring the concept, even though it will probably be years before any mileage tax is adopted. Congress is talking about it, too. A congressional commission has envisioned a system similar to the prototype Oregon tested in 2006-2007. The National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing is considering calling for higher gas taxes to keep highways, bridges and transit programs in good shape. But over the long term, commission members say, the nation should consider taxing mileage rather than gasoline as drivers use more fuel-efficient and electric vehicles. As cars burn less fuel, "the gas tax isn't going to fill the bill," said Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The next Congress "could begin to set the stage, perhaps looking at some much more robust pilot programs, to begin the research, to work with manufacturers." Gov. Ted Kulongoski has included development money for the tax in his budget proposal, and interest is growing in a number of other states. Governors in Idaho and Rhode Island have considered systems that would require drivers to report their mileage when they register vehicles. In North Carolina last month, a panel suggested charging motorists a quarter-cent for every mile as a substitute for the gas tax. James Whitty, the Oregon Department of Transportation employee in charge of the state's effort, said he's also heard talk of mileage tax proposals in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado and Minnesota. "There is kind of a coalition that's naturally forming around this," he said. Also fueling the search for alternatives is the political difficulty of raising gasoline taxes. The federal gas tax has not been raised since 1993, and nearly two dozen states have not changed their taxes since 1997, according to the American Road & Transportation Builders Association. In Oregon's pilot program, officials equipped 300 vehicles with GPS transponders that worked wirelessly with service station pumps, allowing drivers to pay their mileage tax just as they do their gas tax. Whitty said the test, which involved two gas stations in the Portland area, proved the idea could work. Though the GPS devices did not track the cars' locations in great detail, they could determine when a driver had left certain zones, such as the state of Oregon. They also kept track of the time the driving was done, so a premium could be charged for rush-hour mileage. The proposal envisions a gradual change, with manufacturers installing the technology in new vehicles because retrofitting old cars would be too expensive. Owners of older vehicles would continue to pay gasoline taxes. The difference in tax based on mileage or on gasoline would be small � "pennies per transaction at the pump," Whitty said. But the mileage tax still faces several major obstacles. For one, Oregon accounts for only a small part of auto sales, so the state can't go it alone. A multistate or national system would be needed. Another concern is that such devices could threaten privacy. Whitty said he and his task force have assured people that the program does not track detailed movement and that driving history is not stored and cannot be accessed by law enforcement agencies. "I think most people will come to realize there is really no tracking issue and will continue to buy new cars," Whitty said, noting that many cell phones now come equipped with GPS, which has not deterred customers. Others are worried that a mileage tax would undermine years of incentives to switch toward more fuel-efficient vehicles. "It doesn't seem fair," said Paul Niedergang of Portland, that a hybrid would be taxed as much as his Dodge pickup. "I just think the gas tax needs to be updated." Lynda Williams, also of Portland, was not immediately sold on the idea but said it was worth consideration. "We all have to be open-minded," she said. "Our current system just isn't working."

I think it's an interesting idea, too, but can't see how that would work in the end. I say just raise the gas taxes flat out, esp if they haven't been raised in a long time. Since our MTA is in such dire straits, they keep bringing up putting tolls on the East River bridges (59th St Bridge, Williamsburg, Manhattan, Brooklyn bridges). It most likely won't pass, but the thought of the traffic that would get backed up trying to get onto those bridges....Oy! It would back traffic up in approaching neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn significantly IMO if things worked well, but godferbid someone's EZ Pass doesn't work. Disaster. All those East River bridges are only 2 lanes each way the whole way vs. the multiple toll lanes and gates on the bridges across the Hudson that already have tolls. The mind reels.

Tolls on bridges? Why bother? Here, we sell off our money-making assets (like toll bridges) to private companies for a pittance, just so the city politicos can put another relative on the payroll. The latest and greatest asinine move was last month's sale of the city's parking meters for--get this--75 years! Meter parking is naturally going to be increased, yet the city couldn't seem to do this itself. A couple of good blog pieces on the Trib's site called Clout Street, talking about this issue. The comments made by the alderman and then the mayor are beyond belief. And it is apparent that no one understands the concept of the time value of money, discounted cash flows, etc. Loved one of the comments about how the city's economist (should be budget director) must have gone to a Chicago public school. http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2008/12/aldermen-deba-1.html#more http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2008/12/mayor-scoffs-at.html#more

Oooh! Them are some hoppin' mad people at that first link. Rightly so. Love the guy honest enough to say he doesn't read what he votes on. No different than Congress. Quite a number admitted they voted for the Patriot Act without reading it.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul is pretty much what they're doing. Plus. on the news last night, the city announced more budget problems, as transfer taxes (when real estate is sold isn't at the level projected in the budget. So you know they're going to go through this lump-sum payment even faster. When I heard on the news earlier last month, I couldn't believe it. A 75-year lease on something that generates revenue for such a paltry sum. (Dorine) Love the guy honest enough to say he doesn't read what he votes on. Then you love the governor's father-in-law. ;-)

You know, I try to understand the conflicts in this area of the world (Israel/Gaza/Lebanon) and the ideology behind it, and everytime I think I get a handle on it, more violence erupts and everyone puts in their 2 cents. I like Glenn Greenwald's stuff (and even he can be a bit more prolific in pieces that I don't get all the way through). I thought this was interesting (yet actually not a new discussion) over the public's opinions and policymakers' opinion (private vs. public). I figured Karen, if no one else, might find this interesting. I'm not sure why the people there can't just pick some land and live on it. Peacefully. (The article is in the link near the top of the page) I thought the 4th comment was interesting, though nothing new I suppose.

We're getting real hurt on the transfer taxes (or lack of them), too. They're raising our property taxes 7% now, though Bloomberg didn't want to take away the $400 rebate check we were due again this year (as in the past several years). Mine just came in the mail 2 days ago. But of course my maintenance charges for my apt are going up in February, partially to help cover the increase. :-((

Oops, I forgot the link for the Salon/Glenn Greenwald article.. http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/02/israel/view/?show=all

"The Nation" has some surprisingly interesting articles re: the above which one doesn't find anyplace else.

While I have no intention of getting into a debate about the article, I continue to find this view disturbing: This Rasmussen Reports poll -- the first to survey American public opinion specifically regarding the Israeli attack on Gaza Since when is retaliation when under attack oneself not a country's right? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123085925621747981.html?mod=googlenews_wsj I see on the news people protesting the "targeting" of civilians. Excooooooooose me! Do I see these same people protesting when a suicide bomber straps on his pack and boards an Israeli bus? (Dorine) I'm not sure why the people there can't just pick some land and live on it. Peacefully. Because they were told not to, back in 1948.

While I haven't read through any of The Nation articles on the Israel/Gaza conflict, I find this article to be too true...get him outta there. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/alterman?rel=hp_currently

After all, New York's senior senator, Charles Schumer, bears a significant responsibility for the onset of the financial crisis on Wall Street, owing to his eagerness to demand weaker and weaker regulation for the people writing the checks to fund his political ambitions. Again thanks to excellent Times reporting, we know that Schumer, as a member of the Banking and Finance Committees, took steps to "protect industry players from government oversight and tougher rules.... Over the years, he has also helped save financial institutions billions of dollars in higher taxes or fees." ... This in "The Nation"???? For a minute there I thought I was reading "The Weekly Standard";-) Actually, I think Charlie Rangel is v. entertaining. As is Blago. You gotta love these guys for their chutzpah.

I hate what is happening in Gaza. As usual, I feel for the women and children. I'm sick of the men and their stupid wars. On a different note: GOP Vows to Block Franken From U.S. Senate Republicans will filibuster any attempt to seat Minnesota Democrat Al Franken when Congress convenes next week, Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn warned his Democratic colleagues Friday. It was the latest salvo in the war of words touched off this week when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., suggested Franken was drawing near to clinching a victory � despite the fact that as many as 2,000 votes are uncounted and numerous legal challenges loom. "At this stage, it appears that Franken will be certified the winner by the State Canvassing Board,� a statement from Reid�s office declared Tuesday. �We're keeping abreast of the situation and will make a decision with regard to Senate action at the appropriate point in the process." That statement drew a sharp rebuke from GOP leaders. �The American people will see right through Harry Reid�s crass partisan power grab,� Ken Blackwell, who is a leading contender for the GOP chairmanship, told Newsmax. �He wants to manufacture a filibuster-proof majority to push through his liberal agenda.� Cornyn, the new chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, left little doubt Republicans would fight any attempt to make a Franken victory appear a foregone conclusion by seating him early. �I can assure you there will be no way that people on our side of the aisle would agree to seat any senator provisionally or otherwise unless there is a valid election certificate and all legal issues with regard to who got the most votes is finally decided,� Cornyn told reporters during a conference call Friday. Cornyn said he is confident that no Republican would cross the aisle to support seating someone whose election victory has not yet been formally certified. Doing so, he said, would cause �damage to the Senate and its reputation as an institution,� adding, �It would be a recipe for chaos.� Minnesota officials hope to complete their recount by Saturday, and will review ballot challenges on Monday. They could declare a winner Tuesday. Legal challenges are likely to drag on for weeks, however. � 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

(Evelyn) You gotta love these guys for their chutzpah. Not when you've been living with this type of thing all your life. There's nothing unique or entertaining about it from here.

(Karen)Not when you've been living with this type of thing all your life For starters :how about not voting for them .

I don't.

Let me add that the Republicans here are equally bad. I've voted for the non-"connected" candidates in pretty much all of the important primary elections. They just can't beat the "connected" guys because of the entrenched machine politics and patronage system that makes it possible for these guys to get elected. I think no one cam run/be elected or should be appointed if they have a relative, who is living off the public trough. With the people here, politics is the family business. Sickening.

(Karen)They just can't beat the "connected" guys because of the entrenched machine politics and patronage system that makes it possible for these guys to get elected. Oh dear. Makes me *queasy * when I think......

Well, the stuff about Rangel has just come to light recently. We haven't had an election where he's running yet. Just wait. Though, perhaps the people in his district don't care. I'm not in it. I was watching CNN at the gym, talking about the new developments of feet on the ground in Gaza. This is all f'ng nuts! �The American people will see right through Harry Reid�s crass partisan power grab,� Ken Blackwell, who is a leading contender for the GOP chairmanship Yeah, like a give a flying fig what this crook says, of all people. I can't believe that Coleman/Franken fight is so close. What are those people smokin' up there? ;-)

(Dorine) talking about the new developments of feet on the ground in Gaza. This is all f'ng nuts! No, it's not. It's the next logical step toward ending the senseless bombing. If you didn't put "feet on the ground," then the bombing--on both sides--would go on and on. This way, you remove the source of Hamas' reign (and rain) of terror in the form of bombs and missiles directed at Israeli civilians.

Doesn't matter, it's all nuts.

Maybe Hussein Obama will meet them in a tent in the desert and get something done? (Evelyn), Makes me *queasy * when I think...... Exactly!!!

That's what he's got Hillary for. ;-)

(me) Doesn't matter, it's all nuts. I want to clarify that I'm not taking sides, or making judgements either way, I just simply think it all needs to stop and it just all seems so crazy. Just like in boxing....go back to your corners and stay there. No one needs to come back out fighting. Live and let live. I need to do much more reading of their history to make any comprehensive comments or opinions.

IL-Sen: Reid allegedly opposed African American appointees by kos Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 01:32:41 PM PST It's not as if Illinois doesn't have a history of electing African Americans to the Senate. In fact, it has sent two. Days before Gov. Blagojevich was charged with trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder, top Senate Democrat Harry Reid made it clear who he didn�t want in the post: Jesse Jackson, Jr., Danny Davis or Emil Jones. Rather, Reid called Blagojevich to argue he appoint either state Veterans Affairs chief Tammy Duckworth or Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, sources told the Chicago Sun-Times. Sources say the Senate majority leader pushed against Jackson and Davis � both democratic congressmen from Illinois � and against Jones � the Illinois Senate president who is the political godfather of President-elect Barack Obama � because he did not believe the three men were electable. He feared losing the seat to a Republican in a future election. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/3/16123/99120/556/679835

This Iraq war has gone on too long. The military is really scraping.... :-( http://www.kcra.com/family/18398827/detail.html

Of course I don't put any credibility in blogs. But one has to wonder why they don't let the people of Illinois make that decision. To let the majority leader make that decision is mimiking Venezuela and Russia tactics.

Weelllll....because you don't read such blogs, you don't see that when they report on something, the good ones will universally include links in their piece as a citation of where they got their info, most times from a mainstream source, or wherever the main source is. As in the above link, if you read it from the Daily Kos site at my link, whatever is in orange in the body of the post, is the link to the source. For the one above, it was the Chicago Sun-Times. http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/1360191,harry-reid-blagojevich-jesse-jackson-010209.article

Obviously, when I cut and paste here, while I could include the links in the body like they do, frankly, it's too much work. I'd have to go to the Austen tutorial to figure out how. I'd rather provide the link to where I found it so people can go there and find the links themselves. Also, many mainstream newspapers such as WaPo, NYT, LA Times, Seattle PI, etc, will include such links in pieces, though I think more in editorials/columns/features, etc rather than in news pieces.

Tammy Duckworth isn't qualified. Let her start at the ground floor level, not as a senator. However, what is interesting is the spin. It is obvious that Reid wanted a woman to fill that seat by encouraging either Duckworth or Lisa Madigan (whose father is another big-time pol, Speaker of the Ill House Mike Madigan). Why emphasize that he didn't want an African-American? Again, women apparently don't count to the media, who are writing these articles. Women are more than 50 percent of the population and are grossly underrepresented in Congress. BTW, when Obama submitted names for his replacement, four of the five were women (Duckworth and Madigan were on the list) and the fifth was a white male. Duckworth gives them points in the female, veteran and disabled categories.

Didn't Duckworth run for something and lose at some point?

BTW, the aforementioned Danny Davis is technically *my* congressman. He runs unopposed. I've never seen him anywhere around here. :-( Under no circumstances should Emil Jones be named. Period. No way, Jose! And Jesse Jr...please, no.

Didn't Duckworth run for something and lose at some point? Yep, she ran in '06 to get Henry Hyde's seat and lost. That district is pretty Republican and you would've thought it was takable given how the '06 results turned out Reps across the country. She's director of Vet Affairs for the state. Haven't a clue if she's done squat but, as there's no funding for Vet Affairs, what has she presided over?

(Me) when I cut and paste here, while I could include the links in the body like they do, Also, when I post pieces by at least Daily Kos, frequently they have a portion of the source material pasted in, in a shaded box at their site. I can't format like they do to differentiate, so it looks like they're writing it all themselves when I post it here. I guess I could italicize or put quotes around it, but lots of italics are hard to read, and I think sometimes the quote marks are missed. I don't know how to do it differently. Just another reason I tend to put the link so it can be read better there.

Like I said, Karen, let the people of Illinois pick the next Senator..not Harry Reid whom I just saw on Meet the Press; if HR ever says he's your friend...watch your back. *Running to find conservative blogs*...with links to conservative newspapers of course;-)

As long as it's not Free Republic, I'll read it. ;-D I'm with you there on Harry Reid. Get rid of him and Pelosi, or at least out of their top jobs.

All of a sudden, our cost-conscious elected officials are saying that special elections cost money. Yet they think nothing of wasting tons of money on a daily basis and mortgaging the city or county's future. However, there is going to be a special election to fill Rahm's seat. I guess somebody is willing to pay for a congressional district special election but not one that is statewide. But really, when it comes down to it, why waste teh money, when the results are inevitable.

And here I step in to remind everyone that both FL and MI had come up with private funds to redo their primary vote, but BO refused because he knew that Hillary would have won both, and she would have been the nominee and our new President. BO=Chicago style politics, that's what the people want, now let's live with it. (Dorine), Get rid of him and Pelosi, or at least out of their top jobs. But since BO owes them for their early support, they will keep their jobs/power. The people have spoken. Or as a sage friend of mine from New Zealand says, the same people who put Bush over the top to win his second term voted for BO. LOL!

Holy cow about Bill Richardson dropping out!! Your honey, Evelyn... though I liked him, too.

Va. governor Timothy M. Kaine Kaine to Become DNC Chairman. He will operate in part-time capacity until 2010, when he'll take over the job full-time. That's another one that wants to be POTUS. He was in BO's pocket early in the primary. Wash Post: By Michael D. Shear New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has withdrawn his name from consideration as commerce secretary for President-elect Barack Obama, citing an ongoing investigation about business dealings in his state. Richardson, 61, who competed unsuccessfully for the Democratic presidential nomination, was secretary of energy and U.N. ambassador during Bill Clinton's presidency, and also the first high-profile Latino named to Obama's Cabinet. But a grand jury in New Mexico is currently looking into charges of "pay-to-play" in the awarding of a state contract to a company that contributed to Richardson. The importance of the inquiry was apparently dismissed when Richardson was first nominated. But it may have taken on more weight in light of the "pay-to-play" allegations involving Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. "It is with deep regret that I accept Governor Bill Richardson's decision to withdraw his name for nomination as the next Secretary of Commerce," the president-elect said in a statement released early this afternoon. "Governor Richardson is an outstanding public servant and would have brought to the job of Commerce Secretary and our economic team great insights accumulated through an extraordinary career in federal and state office. "It is a measure of his willingness to put the nation first that he has removed himself as a candidate for the Cabinet in order to avoid any delay in filling this important economic post at this critical time." Obama added that he would "move quickly to fill the void left by Governor Richardson's decision." Richardson said in a statement that: "Let me say unequivocally that I and my Administration have acted properly in all matters and that this investigation will bear out that fact. But I have concluded that the ongoing investigation also would have forced an untenable delay in the confirmation process. Given the gravity of the economic situation the nation is facing, I could not in good conscience ask the President-elect and his Administration to delay for one day the important work that needs to be done." In the statement, first obtained by MSNBC and later released by the presidential transition office, he added: "I appreciate the confidence President-elect Obama has shown in me, and value our friendship and working partnership. I told him that I am eager to serve in the future in any way he deems useful. And like all Americans, I pray for his success and the success of our beloved country." The decision is the first serious political hit for one of Obama's Cabinet nominees and comes just as confirmation hearings begin next week. Richardson said he would remain governor of New Mexico "for now." The probe in New Mexico involves questions about a California firm, CDR Financial Products, and its president, David Rubin. The grand jury in Albuquerque is looking into whether the firm was given a contract with the New Mexico Finance Authority because of pressure from Richardson. CDR made $1.48 million advising the authority on interest-rate swaps and refinancing of funds related to $1.6 billion in transportation bonds issued by the agency, state officials confirmed. The firm and Rubin together gave $100,000 to two Richardson organizations shortly before winning those contracts. The probe into the donations was said to be "highly active" around the middle of last month, according to two sources familiar with the investigation, which is being conducted by the FBI and federal prosecutors. In mid-December, Richardson spokesman Gilbert Gallegos, said the governor was "aware of questions surrounding some financial transactions at the New Mexico Finance Authority" and expected state officials to cooperate fully. Gallegos declined further comment. CDR's attorney, Richard Beckler, declined to answer questions several weeks ago. "CDR has always tried to abide by these byzantine campaign finance regulations and is cooperating fully with this investigation," Beckler said in a telephone interview with a Post reporter on December 15.

Terry McAuliffe will be running for Gov of VA. He was part of Hillary's campaign. I plan to work for him. He lives near me in No. VA and understands that the mindset that Richmond politicians offer has to change.

Holy cow about Bill Richardson dropping out!! Your honey, Evelyn... though I liked him, too. They better not delve too closely on several of newly elected/appointed cabinet officials. No one rises to the top as a "Mother Teresa" stereotype. Politics is not a clean sport. Let me set the record straight here. I did not vote for Comrade Obama, but he has been elected prez , he represents my country and I owe his office my respect. I don't want him or his cabinet investigated any further; it will only dilute their status domestically and abroad. Election-time is over. (Hear that Dorine?;-) We need leadership and if it's tainted somewhat from the past, I don't care; what they do from now on is what counts. IMO

I owe his office my respect. He has to earn it too. Every President does IMO. Or at least not disrespect you (and all of us) as a citizen during his tenure. Something that can't be said for the last one as time came to pass. I can turn on O just the same. If investigations happen prior to being confirmed, all the better and doesn't reflect as poorly as if they were already in the position IMO. I don't remember when they nom'd Richardson, but if they had an inkling this was happening, I'd like to think they wouldn't have nom'd him. Bad form and poor vetting also. (Evelyn) No one rises to the top as a "Mother Teresa" stereotype. Politics is not a clean sport. Too, too true. It's a matter of lesser evils I suppose.

(Me) Or at least not disrespect you (and all of us) as a citizen during his tenure Well, in retrospect, the govt disrespects us often, but there are limits that were well passed. Can't say I find this too impressive out of the starting gate....my question is, why nominate him then? http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/obama-team-feel.html

"Democratic leaders, however, plan to afford Burris few, if any, privileges even if he were to come to the Capitol with the proper credentials." Isn't this like pushing him "to the back of the bus"? Poor guy..all he did was say:"Yes". http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gUvQkRopntRBnfYyaz06sD89bwnQD95H0ED00 (Note: AP , not a blog;-)

Nice of the Prez to give the obamas an Air Force I. Mr Clinton didn't give him one. Pres Bush had to use a donor's corporate plane. New York Times http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/do-they-call-it-air-force-one-elect/

Moon , you aren't giving the Obamas a v. warm welcome in Washington. I saw the anti-Israel protesters in front of the Hay Adams Hotel on TV. Not v. nice manners;-)

(Evelyn) Nice of the Prez to give the obamas an Air Force I. I saw a piece on CBS Sunday Morning yesterday all about transitions and lame ducks. Evidently it is customary for the sitting president to send a military jet to pick up the pres-elect. And, as this NYT article says, it is only Air Force One if the president is onboard.

(Karen)it is only Air Force One if the president is onboard. So even though it's got the presidential seal on it, if the Pres isn't on it, it's not AF1? What is it then? Just a jumbo plane?

From the second paragraph: The Boeing 757-200 airplane bore the distinctive blue-and-white colors and the words �United States of America� of the familiar Air Force One, though any plane from the Air Force�s SAM fleet � for Special Air Mission � is Air Force One only if the president is aboard, and for 16 days that remains George W. Bush

Don't you remember the Harrison Ford movie, when he gets into the other plane, the pilot changes his call sign to AF1? ;-)

I'm sure I'm one of the few people to have not seen it. I'll put it in my Netflix cue though as I see it referenced periodically.

(Karen)Don't you remember the Harrison Ford movie, when he gets into the other plane, the pilot changes his call sign to AF1? ;-) And when he kicks the baddies off, literally, he tells them to "get off my plane!" Now we have Clint Eastwood as Walt Kowalski telling people to "get off my lawn!" LOL!

*puts Air Force One in Netflix cue to watch online*

er, queue. :-) And "Buh bye!" On to January 20th.... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/opinion/04rich.html?em

Or Mick Jagger: "Get off of my cloud" ;-) It is one of the very few action films I like

(Evelyn)he has been elected prez , he represents my country and I owe his office my respect. I agree with this attitude. You know I disliked most of Bush's policies, but I never ever rooted for him to fail. Why would I? How would that benefit me as a citizen? I always felt it was in my best interest for the prez to do well. Re: use of Air Force One and military fleets: too bad they couldn't give the O's a place to live until 1/20. "Blair House is booked." Okaaaaayyyyy . . . Ahh, am sure they're not roughing it at Hay Adams.

er, queue. :-) And "Buh bye!" On to January 20th.... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/opinion/04rich.html?em

I tried to put a comment at the above re: Congress giving a big helping hand to our problems, Dems and Repubs alike, but they were closed to new comments. \ (Mari) but I never ever rooted for him to fail. Why would I? How would that benefit me as a citizen? Of course not, me neither. I never voted for him, but I always hoped his term would work out better than I expected (and for a while, it did, for many others much better than myself). Unfortunately quite the opposite happened.

Oh dear, if you start trotting out Frank Rich ,Dorine, I shall have to dig up Newt Gingrich, Pat Buchanan ...all the ole GOP boys;-) Or do you want Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Rush... Take your pick.

I've trotted out Frank before. ;-) I don't mind Newt and Pat. I find Pat quite entertaining on MSNBC. Those chicks are another matter. ;-) Ann Coulter and (her friend) Bill Maher are doing the first in a series of interviews at Radio City. Can't remember if I posted the link before. I just noticed we don't get Gore and the others do. I'd rather than than Ariana Huffington, et al. Even at the cheapest, $50, might be a bit too much for my blood. Though the one with Carville and Rove could be interesting. I can wait for Coulter to be on Maher's show. http://www.speakerseries2009.com/

Agree 100% with Frank Rich: He is not a memorable villain so much as a sometimes affable second banana Exactly. I've always felt he was a puppet, with Cheney & Co. pulling the strings. GB doesn't have the brain matter to call any of the shots. That is why I sent most of you guys the Advise and Consent DVD, hoping it might entice you to read the series of books--as well as for the parallels with confirming a Sec of State. You start to pity him until you remember how vast the wreckage is. It stretches from the Middle East to Wall Street to Main Street and even into the heavens, which have been a safe haven for toxins under his passive stewardship. Agree, except that I've never pitied him. To my knowledge, no one held a gun to his head, forcing him to run for president. Moreover (as stated later), they guy doesn't seem to grasp the harm he's done to the country. Perhaps if I only had a couple years to live and had taken all my money out of the stock market I might feel differently. But even before the bottom fell out, who couldn't see the irreparable harm his (or someone's) policies were doing to the country. On the issue of respect, there is a certain amount that goes *with* the office, otherwise, I'd say respect has to be earned. However, from the beginning of this president's term, he did nothing to keep mine.

Evelyn, I don't need to welcome BO, he might have had some protesters, but he had a big Kumbaya crowd too. ;-) Jeb Bush has future plans to run for senate and eventually for President, so get ready. I know him and his wife. They used to be neighbors of mine in Miami before he ran for Gov. He's not stupid.

I like Leon Panetta. He's got a nice smile and good sense of humor. But "change"??? However, from the beginning of this president's term, he did nothing to keep mine. C'mon....he never had a chance on this board...in 2000 or 04. Pure and simple...he was the wrong party. At least I'm giving the little Chicago Community Organizer a fighting chance...for a few weeks anyway;-) But always the office. That's only good manners;-) So why are they storming the US Embassy and burning Bush's picture in Beirut. Jeeze , he only has days to go. Think they'll start burning Comrade Obama's after the 20th?

(Evelyn) Pure and simple...he was the wrong party. Pure and simple...he is a moron.

(Evelyn) I shall have to dig up Newt Gingrich, Pat Buchanan ...all the ole GOP boys;-) Please do. I prefer specifics, rather than generalized statements.

(Evelyn) Pure and simple...he was the wrong party. Not for me, because that doesn't matter. This is what I was trying to say before about rooting for a president who may not have been one's choice. Think they'll start burning Comrade Obama's after the 20th? Why "Comrade?" Anyway, it's starting already. Was listening to Glenn Beck this morning (I expose myself to all sides:-) and he was saying, nya, nya, I told you so to anyone who thought the problems of the Middle East would be over because the U.S. elected a president whose father was a Muslim, and he further criticized O for not "speaking out" about the Gaza situation. I think I was reacting to Beck's comments when I wrote that I believed in wishing for the prez's success regardless of one's political stripe. Some of these people can't wait for O to fail. Sick, shortsighted, and self-defeating.

(Beck) he was saying, nya, nya, I told you so to anyone who thought the problems of the Middle East would be over because the U.S. elected a president whose father was a Muslim What kind of simple-minded people would think that? he further criticized O for not "speaking out" about the Gaza situation. Uh, we only have one president at a time.

Pure and simple...he was the wrong party. Absolutely not. I'm not that shallow. I have voted Republican before and would again if I felt that was the better person.

Oh please. I *know* ...you"re a centrist. At least I admit I vote Republican I don't know Glen Beck. But let me tell you about Keith Oberman.... every side has a zealot.

(Karen)What kind of simple-minded people would think that? That's much of talk radio--everything is black or white, and over-simplified. You're for us or against as. No gray areas allowed. There were people on the IPMWL blog who said thank goodness O was elected, so he can overturn MAJ's conviction. LOL! The naivete and stupidity are stunning, so people like that do exist. Uh, we only have one president at a time. Of course. It's so slanted, let's start blaming him for "not doing anything" before he's even in a position to do something. As I said before, there are people who relish the thought of their opponents failing. Sort of like shooting yourself in the foot, IMO, but I guess they have to fill their air time for the next 4 or 8 years.

(Evelyn)I don't know Glen Beck. He has a nationally syndicated radio show. Also is on MSNBC sometimes (or used to be). Maybe he's on Fox now. But let me tell you about Keith Oberman.... every side has a zealot. I don't agree with Olbermann all the time. Do you always agree with Coulter, Rush, etc.?

Not sure I'm understanding the Leon Panetta pick, but actually haven't read anything in detail either for now.

Evelyn, you would like Glen Beck. I find him levelheaded and reasonable. Not on MSNBC, maybe Fox. he further criticized O for not "speaking out" about the Gaza situation. (Karen), Uh, we only have one president at a time. Sorry but I think BH who speaks with the "President Elect" sign in front of his podium, acting Presidential, should have made a comment. The Middle East is a serious political issue that will not go away, and many are hoping that BO will make a difference. BO is taking the easy way out on this issue today and that is wrong.

(Moon) "President Elect" sign in front of his podium, acting Presidential, should have made a comment. The sitting president already made comments. For all of you who believe in courtesy and respect, it wouldn't do for the country to speak to the world with two voices. whatever the message.

(Moon re Jeb Bush) They used to be neighbors of mine in Miami before he ran for Gov. He's not stupid. I never thought him stupid at all, but I left Florida finally for good about a year before he took office. How did you feel he did as Gov, Moon? He's supported some things I liked (work on Everglades restoration, ban offshore drilling) and some things I really disliked (Terry Schiavo issue).

The liberals say he commented loud and clear on Mumbai,and should on Gaza. Of course they are all cheering for Palestine. Figure that one out. I can't. Go to "The Nation". They're braying. George W. is getting the blame anyway, LOL, for siding with Israel..what crap. Cause I don't know why he did that either; it's not like he owes the Jewish vote and donors. Obama does. Moon, I'll search out Glen Beck, thanks. I seldom listen to talk radio. Only when I'm driving long distances. Not sure I'm understanding the Leon Panetta pick... Don't ask Diane Feinstein...she's pissed that she wasn't consulted. What a bunch of prima donnas. So he doesn't have intel experience..either does the Prez-elect...they'll learn on the job.

I'm not a big fan of Keith Olberman myself. Or at the very least I can only take him in small doses. He's gets a bit over-the-top for me. I prefer Rachel Maddow (who has Pat Buchanan on her show as a regular, I believe). I don't watch any of those shows regularly. And believe it or not, I used to watch that Fox show with Brit Hume and the panel very frequently, though not in quite a while. And I used to watch Tucker Carlson's show, too. Though really because I thought he was cute. ;-P But I believe he didn't really believe in some of that ridiculousness he spouted sometimes. It was just for a job. (Evelyn) So he doesn't have intel experience..either does the Prez-elect I wouldn't expect Obama to in that, though I expect the people he surrounds himself to. Hope LP won't be O's "Heckuva job, Brownie!" guy.

(Dorine), How did you feel he did as Gov, Moon? No complaints. Terry Schiavo should have been left to her family. I think that in some cases euthanasia is the sensible and humane way to go. Jeb's wife is Mexican, and it would be nice to have a latina as the First Lady. Evelyn, Glenn Beck has a TV show on Fox. The liberals say he commented loud and clear on Mumbai,and should on Gaza. Exactly!!! As I said before, he's taking the easy way out, and I'm not happy about it.

(Evelyn) The liberals say he commented loud and clear on Mumbai,and should on Gaza. (Moon) Exactly!!! As I said before, he's taking the easy way out, and I'm not happy about it. Not at all the same. There isn't--or wasn't--anything the US would be doing about a situation in India. Comdemning terrorism? That's what his statement was all about. It didn't interfer in another country's affairs or attempt to dictate a US policy. Totally different.

(karen)It didn't interfer in another country's affairs or attempt to dictate a US policy That's what I said in the first place. I don't know why Pres Bush had to go and back Israel. Let them duke it out on their own. What's in it for him? A lot of protests and assault on the embassy in Beirut. Jimmy Carter ,that loon, must be saying:"I told you so".

I can't figure out why our mayor had to show up there. Yes he needs the Jewish base here to help him get him the 3rd term (if that option is upheld in court), but there's a significant Arab or Arab sympathizing vote here as well. Not sure why he couldn't just stay home.

*shaking head*

at??

(karen)It didn't interfer in another country's affairs or attempt to dictate a US policy And this time is different? Since when has the US not tried? The US has always supported Israel over the Arab States. Of course now the US is a major presence in Iraq, so things are changing, but either way, the US is a major player in the Middle East. So I still think that BO should have commented. I pray Hillary will be able to do something to bring some peace to the area.

Feinstein Furious Over Panetta Pick Sen. Diane Feinstein is reportedly fuming that Barack Obama picked Leon Panetta as his new CIA Director and never consulted with her. Feinstein, the incoming chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, issued a sharp statement Monday that was a thinly veiled criticism of the pick. The statement made it clear that she had expected a career intelligence professional � unlike Panetta, who has no intelligence expertise whatsoever � to be leading the CIA. "I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director,�� Feinstein said. �I know nothing about this, other than what I've read," said Senator Feinstein, who will chair the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in the 111th Congress. "My position has consistently been that I believe the agency is best served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time." Panetta could face tough questions at his nomination hearing about his background in intelligence. A former senior CIA official who advises Obama defended the surprise choice of Panetta, whose only military and intelligence experience is a two-year stint in the mid-1960s as a U.S. Army lieutenant. The official told the Associated Press that Panetta had been a consumer of CIA intelligence when he was at the White House. The source said Panetta was selected for his administrative, management and political skills that will allow him both to control and advocate for the agency. The official added that Panetta will rely on the expertise of CIA officers to balance his lack of personal intelligence experience. Veterans of the CIA were caught off guard by the selection. "I'm at a loss," said Robert Grenier, a former director of the CIA's counterterrorism center and 27-year veteran of the agency who now is managing director of Kroll, a security consulting company. The lack of intelligence experience puts Panetta at "a tremendous disadvantage," Grenier told The Associated Press in an interview. "Intelligence, by its very nature, is an esoteric world. And right now the agency is confronted with numerous pressing challenges overseas, and to have no background is a serious deficit. I don't say that he can't succeed. It may be that he can compensate for the obvious deficit." Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., ranking member of the committee, raised the specter of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 in questioning Panetta's experience after reports surfaced that Obama had tapped the former congressman and White House chief of staff to head the CIA. �Job number one at the CIA is to track down and stop terrorists," Bond said in a statement reported by The Hill Web site. "In a post-9-11 world, intelligence experience would seem to be a prerequisite for the job of CIA Director." Bond said that he will refrain from judging Panetta immediately, but he warned Obama and Panetta that he "will be looking hard at Panetta�s intelligence expertise and qualifications.� � 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

BOb is v. astute to put his own man at the head of that agency. George W should have canned George Tenet , a Clinton appointee, when he came into office. He certainly didn't serve the president well. On the other hand, the Dems have been braying that intel has been 'politicized' under GB...so what do they call Panetta?

Diane Feinstein gets even... Burris rejected; Senate bid wins crucial support "Does the governor have the power, under law, to make the appointment? And the answer is yes," said Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Rules Committee, which judges the credentials of senators" http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090107/ap_on_go_co/senate_burris

You watch, Jeb is waiting for the right time to make a grab for the golden ring. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090107/ap_on_el_se/florida_senate_bush

Not a bad idea at all, esp when O may have a health reform plan he wants to sell. Definitely a friendly and familiar face. CNN: Gupta approached about surgeon general post By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer � Tue Jan 6, 6:25 pm ET CNN correspondent approached for surgeon general Play Video AP � CNN correspondent approached for surgeon general WASHINGTON � President-elect Barack Obama has approached CNN's chief medical correspondent, Sanjay Gupta, to be the country's next surgeon general, the cable network said Tuesday. CNN said it has kept Gupta from reporting on health care policy and other matters involving the incoming Obama administration since learning he was under consideration for the post. Two Democrats with knowledge of the discussions over the surgeon general spot said Gupta was under consideration but cautioned there was not yet a final decision on who would fill the post. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media on the matter. Obama's transition office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Gupta hosts "House Call" on CNN, contributes reports to CBS News, and writes a column for Time magazine. He is a neurosurgeon and is on the faculty at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta. During the Clinton administration, he was a White House fellow and special adviser to then-first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton. The surgeon general typically isn't heavily involved in shaping an administration's policy, but it can be a very effective bully pulpit. Past surgeons general have proved instrumental in battling tobacco and AIDS. Having such a well-known TV personality could bring the surgeon general attention not seen since C. Everett Koop help the position under President Ronald Reagan. Koop is best known for pushing to make AIDS a public health issue rather than a moral issue, and Reagan faced pressure to fire him. Koop has said Reagan never interfered. CNN said Gupta would not comment on the discussions and released a statement that said, "Since first learning that Dr. Gupta was under consideration for the surgeon general position, CNN has made sure that his on-air reporting has been on health and wellness matters and not on health care policy or any matters involving the new administration." CBS News is a unit of CBS Corp.; CNN is owned by Time Warner Inc. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090106/ap_on_go_pr_wh/surgeon_general

[W]e�re leaving [the Israeli/Palestinian situation] in a lot better shape than we found it . . . [I]n terms of changing the conversation in the Middle East about democracy and values, this Administration will be judged well . . . I think generations pretty soon are going to start to thank this President for what he�s done. This generation will. - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, two weeks ago http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/1/6/155633/2217/81/672150 (Bush Administration's Greatest Hits)

You know reading through that thread I posted the link to, I have to LOL at some of them, at their audacity. Mind boggling. A couple of my favorites so far are from Cheney (not caring what people think) and Barbara Bush. Props for brutal honesty I guess.

(Dorine)O may have a health reform plan he wants to sell. Definitely a friendly and familiar face. Not to me he ain't. I never look at CNN. Cute smile though and I'm all for diversity. No comments on Daily Kos. I won't give them my "click"

LOL!!

I'm just speechless... Joe the Plumber to become war correspondent TOLEDO, Ohio � Joe The Plumber is putting down his wrenches and picking up a reporter's notebook. The Ohio man who became a household name during the presidential campaign says he is heading to Israel as a war correspondent for the conservative Web site pjtv.com. Samuel J. Wurzelbacher (WUR'-zuhl-bah-kur) says he'll spend 10 days covering the fighting. He tells WNWO-TV in Toledo that he wants to let Israel's "'Average Joes' share their story." Wurzelbacher gained attention during the final weeks of the campaign when he asked Barack Obama about his tax plan. He later joined Republican John McCain on the campaign trail. At one stop, he agreed with a McCain supporter who asked if he believed a vote for Obama was a vote for the death of Israel. ___ Information from: WNWO-TV, http://www.nbc24.com/

I like the picture of the 5 presidents http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090107/ap_on_go_pr_wh/the_presidents__club Class. Never has been done before. Hope it sets a precedent.

I found it impressive to look at as well.

Wow. Doesn't this sound like an episode of 24 or a big budget movie? Unbelieveable. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090107/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan_india

I read about this poor skier, but hadn't seen the pictures til now. What an incredibly freak accident. (5pics) http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0106091vail1.html

Those pictures are funny, but, poor guy! A lesson to be learned for sure. "Kill them," replied the handler. Gunshots then rang out, followed by cheering that could be heard over the phone. "Inflict the maximum damage," they said. That is so sick. Why are we closing Guantanamo Bay? White man's burden is it?

LOL, love this! Why didn't I think of this... London Journal Atheists Send a Message, on 800 British Buses By SARAH LYALL Published: January 6, 2009 LONDON — The advertisement on the bus was fairly mild, just a passage from the Bible and the address of a Christian Web site. But when Ariane Sherine, a comedy writer, looked on the Web site in June, she was startled to learn that she and her nonbelieving friends were headed straight to hell, to “spend all eternity in torment. This message — except the “probably” — has been approved by Richard Dawkins, scientist and author of “The God Delusion.” That’s a bit extreme, she thought, as well as hard to prove. “If I wanted to run a bus ad saying ‘Beware — there is a giant lion from London Zoo on the loose!’ or ‘The “bits” in orange juice aren’t orange but plastic — don’t drink them or you’ll die!’ I think I might be asked to show my working and back up my claims,” Ms. Sherine wrote in a commentary on the Web site of The Guardian. And then she thought, how about putting some atheist messages on the bus, as a corrective to the religious ones? And so were planted the seeds of the Atheist Bus Campaign, an effort to disseminate a godless message to the greater public. When the organizers announced the effort in October, they said they hoped to raise a modest $8,000 or so. But something seized people’s imagination. Supported by the scientist and author Richard Dawkins, the philosopher A. C. Grayling and the British Humanist Association, among others, the campaign raised nearly $150,000 in four days. Now it has more than $200,000, and on Tuesday it unveiled its advertisements on 800 buses across Britain. “There’s probably no God,” the advertisements say. “Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” Spotting one of the buses on display at a news conference in Kensington, passers-by were struck by the unusual message. Not always positively. “I think it’s dreadful,” said Sandra Lafaire, 76, a tourist from Los Angeles, who said she believed in God and still enjoyed her life, thank you very much. “Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I don’t like it in my face.” But Sarah Hall, 28, a visitor from Australia, said she was happy to see such a robust example of freedom of speech. “Whatever floats your boat,” she said. Inspired by the London campaign, the American Humanist Association started running bus advertisements in Washington in November, with a more muted message. “Why believe in a god?” the ads read, over a picture of a man in a Santa suit. “Just be good for goodness’ sake.” Although Australian atheists were refused permission to place advertisements on buses saying, “Atheism: Sleep in on Sunday mornings,” the British effort has been striking in the lack of outrage it has generated. The Methodist Church, for instance, said it welcomed the campaign as a way to get people to talk about God. Although Queen Elizabeth is the head of the Church of England, Britain is a deeply secular country with a dwindling number of regular churchgoers, and with politicians who seem to go out of their way to play down their religious beliefs. In 2003, when an interviewer asked Tony Blair, then the prime minister, about religion, his spokesman, Alastair Campbell, interjected, snapping, “We don’t do God.” After leaving office, Mr. Blair became a Roman Catholic. More recently, Nick Clegg, a member of Parliament and the leader of the Liberal Democrats, announced that he was an atheist. (He later downgraded himself to agnostic.) David Cameron, leader of the Conservative Party, alluded to a popular radio station when he joked that his religious belief was like “the reception for Magic FM in the Chilterns: it sort of comes and goes.” Still, since Sept. 11, 2001, religion has played an ever more important role in public discussions, said Mr. Dawkins, the best-selling author of “The God Delusion,” with the government increasingly seeking religious viewpoints and Anglican bishops still having the automatic right to sit in the House of Lords. “Across Britain, we are used to being bombarded by religious interests,” he said, “not just Christians, but other religions as well, who seem to think that they have got a God-given right to propagandize.” Next week, the Atheist Bus Campaign plans to place 1,000 advertisements in the subway system, featuring enthusiastic quotations from Emily Dickinson, Albert Einstein, Douglas Adams and Katharine Hepburn. An interesting element of the bus slogan is the word “probably,” which would seem to be more suited to an Agnostic Bus Campaign than to an atheist one. Mr. Dawkins, for one, argued that the word should not be there at all. But the element of doubt was necessary to meet British advertising guidelines, said Tim Bleakley, managing director for sales and marketing at CBS Outdoor in London, which handles advertising for the bus system. For religious people, advertisements saying there is no God “would have been misleading,” Mr. Bleakley said. “So as not to fall foul of the code, you have to acknowledge that there is a gray area,” he said. He said that potential ads were rejected all the time. “We wouldn’t, for example, run an ad for an action movie where the gun was pointing toward the commuter,” he said. But Mr. Bleakley said he had no problem with the atheist bus ads. “We do have religious organizations that promote themselves,” he said. “If somebody doesn’t believe in religion, why wouldn’t we carry an ad that promotes the opposite view? To coin a phrase, it’s not for us to play God.” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/europe/07london.html?em

WTF . Who cares?

I do. It's different. You see religious sayings on signs, esp in the South and Midwest. I never see anything like that. And I agree with them.

Sarah Palin says.... http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17217.html “I did see that Tina Fey was named entertainer of the year and Katie Couric’s ratings have risen,” she said. “And I know that a lot of people are capitalizing on, oh I don’t know, perhaps some exploiting that was done via me, my family, my administration. That’s a little bit perplexing, but it also says a great deal about our society.” Um, didn't SP appear on SNL with Tina Fey to help capitalize and exploit herself as a spoof?

Was just rereading... (Evelyn) George W should have canned George Tenet , a Clinton appointee, when he came into office. He certainly didn't serve the president well. He got the Medal of Freedom. I guess the President didn't feel poorly served.

And was criticized for it. He shudda given him a gold watch. Um, didn't SP appear on SNL with Tina Fey to help capitalize and exploit herself as a spoof? Everyone else does it for altuism? Some people thought she was a good sport. I didn't see it. People 's religion or non means nothing in my life. I just don't want anyone to criticize me for mine or trash others'. Was just rereading... Oy, I wish I had that luxury;-)

From today's Wash Post, since we are on the subject: Palin Pummels the Press She's back: Sarah Palin, still smarting over coverage of her vice-presidential run, calls the media's reporting on her family "very scary" and says there may be "a class issue" that explains the more sympathetic treatment of Caroline Kennedy. The Alaska governor also took a swipe at Katie Couric over the CBS interview in which Palin stumbled badly, saying: "Katie, you're not the center of everyone's universe." Palin did her venting Monday with John Ziegler, a conservative radio talk show host turned filmmaker, who posted excerpts online to promote a forthcoming DVD titled "Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected." "I think this woman was assassinated by the media," he said yesterday. By turns aggravated and bemused, Palin complained in the video that her press office is still getting calls about rumors that she is not the mother of her infant son. She called this "quite absurd," saying she is "frustrated that I wasn't believed that Trig was really my son. "When did we start accepting as hard news sources bloggers, anonymous bloggers especially? It's a sad state of affairs in the world of the media today, mainstream media especially, that they're going to rely on bloggers, anonymous bloggers, for their hard news information." Mainstream news outlets reported the rumor in September only after John McCain's campaign revealed the pregnancy of Palin's teenage daughter Bristol, citing the chatter about Trig as the reason for the disclosure. Atlantic blogger Andrew Sullivan -- who is hardly anonymous -- has questioned why Palin would not release medical records to prove she is the boy's mother, but has also posted information supporting her account. Although her campaign brushed aside most inquiries on the subject, Palin asked: "What is the double standard here, why reporters would choose to believe lies, reporters especially not just taking one extra step to get to the facts . . . Is it sexism? What is it that drives someone to believe the worst and perpetuate the worst, in terms of gossip and lies?" Palin also objected to reports that Bristol and her fiance, Levi Johnston, are "high school dropouts and they're going to just look for government handouts to raise their child and stuff, nothing could be further from the truth. And I've asked some in the media to correct that, and they haven't corrected it, and that gets frustrating." Palin contacted People magazine, the Associated Press and the Anchorage Daily News last week. She said Johnston -- who, according to the Anchorage paper, recently quit his job as an apprentice electrician -- is taking a high school correspondence course, and that Bristol is still a student. Palin was hit by an avalanche of coverage after her surprise nomination in August, some of it critical of her Alaska record and her qualifications for the vice presidency, and some of it more personal, questioning how she could handle the job with five children. Tina Fey's "Saturday Night Live" impersonation cemented an impression of her as a bit of a ditz. Ziegler showed Palin a clip of Fey saying, "I believe marriage is meant to be a sacred institution between two unwilling teenagers." Her reaction: "Cool, fine, come attack me, but when you make a suggestion like that that attacks a kid, that kills me." Palin questioned whether Kennedy's bid for an appointment to the Senate "will be handled with kid gloves," and if so, "we will perhaps be able to prove that there is a class issue here" when contrasted with the scrutiny of her campaign. Kennedy, of course, is not running for vice president but to be one of 100 lawmakers, and has drawn critical coverage lately for a series of halting interviews. Palin criticized the McCain camp's decision to send her back for a second round with Couric, and tried to explain why she declined to name a single publication she reads. Palin said she interpreted Couric's question as "Do you read, what do you guys do up there," but conceded: "Perhaps I was just too flippant in my answer back to her." Couric made no reference to Alaska in her question, asking, "What newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this?" Asked by Ziegler how she would have fared as Barack Obama's running mate, Palin accused the press of ideological "hypocrisy," saying: "I think they would have loved me as a candidate . . . You would have seen an absolutely different and . . . much prettier profile of Sarah Palin and the Palin family and my administration." Would she do it again? "That's a darned good question," Palin said, before concluding that she would. But she doesn't want people in the "lower 48" being "sucked into believing what too many in the mainstream media want them to believe." Ziegler, whose film will be sold online next month, said Palin was "very concerned about appearing whiny" before the 50-minute sitdown at her Wasilla home. He said he found her Republican convention speech "awesome" but had wondered about the media portrayal of her as "a diva or a wack job." He now believes that "the fact that she's mocked is a travesty." On his Web site, Ziegler says that when Palin saw a picture of MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, "she literally let out a shriek and, pointing to his photograph, declared, 'THAT guy is EVIL!' " Meanwhile, as Barack Obama tries to rally support for his gazillion-dollar stimulus plan, he's got one asset in his back pocket. Most people think the coverage of the incoming president has been fair. Even half of Republicans think the coverage has been fair. (Though that probably doesn't include Palin.) From where I sit, the media's post-election take on Obama has been unusually positive. Just look at all the slobbering over his shirtless photo (as if wearing swim trunks in Hawaii is breaking news), the breathless accounts of his workout regimen and basketball prowess. There have been critical stories, sure, about the stumbles on Bill Richardson and Leon Panetta, but by and large the transition is being portrayed as a smooth and successful one. The Pew Research Center says: "The American public is more likely to say the press has been too critical of President George W. Bush in his last days in office than to say the same about coverage of President-elect Barack Obama. About three-in-ten (29%) see coverage of Bush as too critical, while just 11% see coverage of Obama that way. Still, a plurality (41%) says press coverage of Bush has been fair, while a substantial majority (61%) says the same about coverage of Obama. About one-in-four find coverage of both not critical enough." There are clear partisan divisions: 62 percent of Republicans say the press has been too critical of Bush, compared to--yes--12 percent of Democrats. And while 37 percent of GOPers say the press hasn't been critical enough of Obama, 11 percent of Democrats feel that way. article continues here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/09/AR2009010901291_3.html?hpid=topnews

(Evelyn) And was criticized for it. Rightly so. He didn't deserve it. He helped Cheney, et al, sell the Iraq War. Um, didn't SP appear on SNL with Tina Fey to help capitalize and exploit herself as a spoof? Everyone else does it for altuism? Some people thought she was a good sport. I didn't see it. Um, the point was that she was implying criticism of people exploiting her/her image (Tina Fey/Katie Couric) and she was a party to it appearing on SNL herself. I just don't want anyone to criticize me for mine or trash others'. Certainly. Anymore than I want religions and their followers telling me they're better than anyone else and that their way is the right/only way.

Tina Fey's "Saturday Night Live" impersonation cemented an impression of her as a bit of a ditz. She was doing just fine on that count by herself. She didn't need Tina Fey's help. Though I don't think she's as stupid as she looked at times. Couple that with her ambition and she's quite scary.

It is a new dawn in the govt. I'm glad to see they're working so fast to correct a most egregious decision by the Supreme Court. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090109/ap_on_go_co/pay_equity

(Wash Post)"MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, "she literally let out a shriek and, pointing to his photograph, declared, 'THAT guy is EVIL!' " Nah, *that* would be a compliment, IMO ...KO is just an asshole. (Dorine)He didn't deserve it. He helped Cheney, et al, sell the Iraq War. The et al...I'm sure you mean "the Congress".

All of them, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, that Homeland Security guy....and Congress. Sell it to us.....the people of the US/World).

He has to bend to the left... http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/world/2009/jan/08/barack-obama-gaza-hamas esp after this vote: From "the Nation" http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/395300?rel=hp_picks

Think maybe they all invested with Madaoff...???? http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/09/goodwill-hunting-for-gowns/

(The Nation) And Obama? I'll take that on tomorrow. There's good news -- and, some really bad news. (Hint: the bad news is named Dennis Ross.) I'll have to read tomorrow. I'm intrigued as I have no idea who Dennis Ross is. Those people shopping at Goodwill might want to check out Filene's Basement, too. I've gotten a couple of good party gowns there at an *extremely* reasonable cost.

(The Nation)Hint: the bad news is named Dennis Ross.) "The Nation" probably doesn't like him because at one time he was a foreign analyst for FOX NEWS, but hey, so was their honey ,David Corn and Susan Echrich. But he has been a negotiator for Bush and Clinton.Considered a conservative Mid East scholar. V. reasonable . Inpeccable creds. Which is more than one can say for "The Nation"

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1823145,00.html

Quote of the Week:Roland Burris ""There was certainly no pay-to-play involved, because I don't have no money," The inference being that if he had money....perhaps....;-) I do think Blago outfoxed them all. Love it.

Hey Mari....in the "already starting column" ...here's one from one of yours Paul Krugman ,from the NYTimes ( tanking for lack of subscribers) http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/is-obama-relying-too-much-on-tax-cuts/?scp=4&sq=paUL%20KRUGMAN&st=cse He don't like Mr Obama's Recovery Plan.

from the NYTimes ( tanking for lack of subscribers) Actually, in what's becoming (or has been) a crisis with many newspapers (and an increasing # of magazines), they are losing print subscribers to online readers, but more importantly losing beaucoup ad $$$. Just read this morning the Seattle PI is going to fold totally or go online only in 60 days if they don't get increased funds. And massive cuts of writers/reporters along merging content and operations with other publications continue to go on. And before I even read it, I know Krugman is calling for a much larger recovery plan. I'd tend to consider what he says....he did get a Nobel Prize for economics. ;-) Doesn't mean he's always right, but I'd at least listen closely.

And massive cuts of writers/reporters along merging content and operations with other publications continue to go on. I mean across the board, not just the Seattle P-I.

I have 2 things to thank Bush for... Creating several new marine sanctuaries (though not completely protected, it's a start) and this, if true... http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ISRAEL?SITE=NCASH&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

My friend just emailed this to me....more people who are "natural enemies" should learn to live so peacefully together. The cat and rat are adorable together. (this is the note that is forwarded along with it) This is a video of a homeless man in Santa Barbara and his pets. They work State Street every week for donations. The animals are pretty well fed and are mellow. They are a family. The man who owns them rigged a harness up for his cat so she wouldn't have to walk so much (like the dog and himself). At some juncture the rat came along, and as no one wanted to eat anyone else, the rat started riding with the cat and, often, on the cat! The dog, will stand all day and let you talk to him and admire him for a few chin scratches. The Mayor of Santa Barbara filmed this clip and sent it out as a holiday card. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D85yrIgA4Nk

(Dorine) he did get a Nobel Prize for economics. ;-) I wouldn't place much stock in that.

Hence my disclaimer about him being right. ;-)

(Dorine) he did get a Nobel Prize for economics. ;-) (Karen)I wouldn't place much stock in that. Pssst... Nobel Peace Prize 1994

Oooh, I didn't remember him getting one.

It's the economics prize that I (and many others) don't place in the same category.

Why is that? Is it the criteria, the selection committee.....?

I don't envy Obama at all. Where does he (and his new staff and the new Congress) really go from here? (Couldn't help posting him, Evelyn. ;-) He calls it like it is, week after week.) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/opinion/11rich.html?_r=1&em

(Couldn't help posting him, Evelyn. ;-) He calls it like it is, week after week.) Yeah, yeah..and week after week it's the same ole mierde in his column too. So much for: "Let's all get along"now. Question: what is he (and *you*;-) going to do after Jan 20th? You are both going to have to find another tema. Doesn't take a genius to see why the NY Times is in trouble, does it? Not all their readership is transferring online. They keep recycling the same ole stuff from the same *old* columnists who have run out of fresh ideas and ovservations. But if it makes you feel any better go on. Hey, we all have to get our Drool -dues worth;-D

and week after week it's the same ole mierde in his column too. Well, I don't know what to say. You (and others) may not like it or agree, but he's not making it up. He's just cataloguing what happened and where we are. And you're right, it's been a big pile of you know what. Plain and simple. ;-) I can't help it our guy and his peeps f'd up massively. (Our guy meaning he's the President for all of us, no matter who voted for him) Rich is equal opportunity, he gets on liberals' cases also. what is he (and *you*;-) going to do after Jan 20th? He will do the same, call it how it is. I will watch what Obama does and complain vociferously if I'm not happy with what I see, as I have consistently with our most recent Democrat controlled Congress. Doesn't take a genius to see why the NY Times is in trouble, does it? Not all their readership is transferring online. Ok, who do you think they are and where are they going? And why?

Getting worse... Where is the UN? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_israel_white_phosphorus

Same place they were when we used it? For "illumination" of course. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4440664.stm

Oh, no... The Time Clock Has Run Out: Israel Ready to Strike Iran Informed sources in Washington tell Newsmax that Israel indeed will launch a strike against Iran�s nuclear facilities soon � possibly in just days as President George W. Bush prepares to leave office. The reason: The time clock has begun to run out. Iran is close to acquiring a nuclear device under the control of its radical president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said in June that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in as little as six months. That six-month period has passed. Reports of Israel�s decision to imminently launch strikes, although unconfirmed, would seem to contradict the Bush stance outlined in a front-page New York Times story last week, which asserted that Bush rejected a plea from Israel last year to help it raid Iran�s main nuclear complex. The Times said Israel was rebuffed after it requested from the U.S. specialized bunker-busting bombs that it needs to attack Iran�s nuclear complex at Natanz. The U.S. also reportedly nixed permission to the Israeli warplanes to fly over Iraqi territory to reach Iran. Israel�s requests to the U.S. for military assistance came as the Jewish state was reportedly angry over a U.S. intelligence assessment in late 2007 that concluded Iran had effectively suspended its development of nuclear weapons. But an investigative report circulated by IAEA chief ElBaradei late last year disclosed that Iran was continuing to carry out uranium enrichment and had already established 6,000 centrifuges for enriching uranium, of which 3,800 were then in operation. American intelligence officials now estimate that the figure is 4,000 to 5,000 centrifuges, enough to produce about one weapon�s worth of uranium every eight months or so, according to the Times. The IAEA report estimated that Iran has obtained two tons of enriched uranium since its enrichment program was restarted at Natanz two years ago. Last year 100 Israeli jets took part in an exercise over the eastern Mediterranean that was interpreted as a dress rehearsal for a possible attack on Iran. And on Sept. 6 Israel launched an air attack against a site in Syria believed to be a nuclear-related facility containing material delivered by North Korea. Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton predicted that Israel would stage a raid against Iran's nuclear facilities if Barack Obama won the presidential election. Bolton stated that he believed the Israeli attack would take place sometime between the day after Obama's win and his inauguration on January 20. In an interview with FOX News, Bolton reasoned that Israel wouldn�t be able to hold off a strike on Iran any longer than that given Obama�s more conciliatory approach to Iran. The Israeli government �would have to make a judgment whether to [strike] during the remainder of President Bush�s term in office or wait for his successor,� Bolton added. William Perry, U.S. Secretary of Defense under President Bill Clinton, said that Obama would face a major crisis in his first few months in office over Iran�s nuclear weapons program. Perry, speaking at a foreign policy conference on Jan. 8, said that Iran is "moving inexorably toward becoming a nuclear power" and �it seems clear that Israel will not sit by idle while Iran takes the final steps toward becoming a nuclear power." And former CIA officer Robert Baer, author of the new book �The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower,� told Newsmax in October that Iran was at that time probably months, if not weeks, away from war with Israel. The repercussions of an Israeli attack are not clear. Though Arab states remain openly hostile to Israel, many who belong to the Sunni branch of Islam fear the rise of a nuclear Iran, a nation dominated by Shiite imams. Gulf states like Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have been quietly pressing the U.S. to take action against Iran � and may secretly root for an Israeli attack. But Iran, even without nuclear weapons, is a regional power. If attacked, they are likely to press proxy terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah to launch offensives against Israel and possibly the U.S. Iran has warned in the past that it would launch a �missile blitz� against Gulf states if it is attacked. And last July a senior Iranian official said the Islamic Republic would destroy Israel and 32 U.S. military bases in the Middle East if Iran is attacked over its nuclear program. �Israel and 32 U.S. military bases in the region would not be out of the reach of our missiles and would be destroyed," the semi-official Fars News Agency quoted Mojtaba Zolnour as saying in a speech. Zolnour is the deputy of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's representative in Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards. Even more ominously, Iran has reportedly carried out missile tests for what could be a plan for a nuclear strike on the U.S. � 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

I'm curious to see how much slack the press will BHO once he takes the office. I got an email from moveon.org to train me to become an BHO lobbyist. I'm to be his little private soldier on the ready to email, write, call, demonstrate: to do whatever it takes to pass the O agenda. I have never seen anything like what moveon has done in this election. Big Brother anyone? :-(

Barrack having dinner with George tonight . (not that one...annuder....)also with Larry Kudlow (one of my fave shows) who did not host his show tonight because.... http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/01/obama_dines_with_conservative.php

From SLATE ( liberal website;-)): Christopher Hitchens : On Hill and Bill.... http://www.slate.com/id/2208425/?GT1=38001

Speaking of Christopher Hitchens, that reminds me I wanted to post an article of his in Vanity Fair in one of the last 2 issues. Very amusing take on his efforts at better health/more exercise. I may not always agree with his politics (though do on religion sometimes), I enjoy his writing (and speaking). Did you, Evelyn, or anyone see it? I'll look for it later. I don't recall posting already anyway. (Moon) I'm to be his little private soldier on the ready to email, write, call, demonstrate: to do whatever it takes to pass the O agenda. I have never seen anything like what moveon has done in this election. Um, where were you the last 8-10 years when the Republicans (and Karl Rove) were masters of it. The Dems/liberal organizations just finally got their acts together and caught on.

Let 'er r ip, Mickey... http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/79536/Rourke-Bush-was-in-the-wrong-place-at-the-wrong-time *snort* Maybe I'll have to see "The Wrestler" after awl. Dorine,I don't read "Vanity Fair" , or at least buy it. (And I don't see Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins movies either;-)

But you like Christopher Hitchens, right?

I'm presuming all of Washington (and probably everywhere else) must employ undocumented workers as household help. I think this comes up with an appointee at least once an administration. They do thorough background checks. Do these people when they accept the positions think this stuff won't be found out?

Sorry Micky, this shit is not about Christians and Muslims. It's about fundamental Muslims and the world. It's about Palestinians and the Jews. It's about a phoney prophet named Mohammed and his hateful suras in the Koran. (me), I got an email from moveon.org to train me to become an BHO lobbyist. I'm to be his little private soldier on the ready to email, write, call, demonstrate: to do whatever it takes to pass the O agenda. I have never seen anything like what move.on has done in this election. Big Brother anyone? :-( (Dorine), Um, where were you the last 8-10 years when the Republicans (and Karl Rove) were masters of it. The Dems/liberal organizations just finally got their acts together and caught on. Totally different! Karl Rove who was the genius behind getting Bush elected, IMO, never sent emails to regular people asking them to do all the things move.on is doing to promote an O agenda. If he had something to do, he turned to the politicians.

Re: undocumented workers: I have always made them sign a document that states that they will report their income to the IRS. I pay them, they report it and pay their taxes directly. The ones from Central and South America in my experience are trust worthy and hard workers. Most of them are practicing Catholics and would never steal, etc.

(Dorine)They do thorough background checks. Do these people when they accept the positions think this stuff won't be found out? From what I read the Obama transition team knew about this and didn't think it would make a difference. What arrogance! And then there's that whiny, sniveling Harry Reid saying it was only a "hiccup". What an embarassment he is. Well, it's not a "hiccup". The guy will be the boss of the IRS, fergodsake. However, that being said, I *do* want him confirmed...because he's good at what he does and I want him to get on with it. So *I*can pay my taxes .

An update on the atheist bus ads in Britain. I'd like to think people use it as a platform for openmindedness and open discussion rather than taking offense. http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20090116/ts_csm/oatheist

(Evelyn) From what I read the Obama transition team knew about this and didn't think it would make a difference. What arrogance! Well, it's always made a difference before. That's stupid. Harry Reid saying it was only a "hiccup". What an embarassment he is. Can't agree more with you here.

On Jan. 6 some 800 British red "bendy" buses carried the sign: "There is probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." Hear that Muslims? ;-)

I saw that article yesterday and thought of you, but decided not to post it... knew you would The headline word I read is Unruffled which I think is Brit-speak for "Who cares";-D (Dorine) ...think people use it as a platform for openmindedness and open discussion rather than taking offense. Open discussion???From a bus banner??? *snort*You're kidding. Like: "Oh I just saw this sign on the bus that said there is no God" Jeeze, maybe I should look into this".. C'mon.

That's the spirit!! :-/

I didn't know there were acceptable and unacceptable ways of spurring on discussion. Even in middle age, I still learn something new everyday. ;-)

Linda Mc....you know who this person is? Australian singer-songwriter Emma Sophina Did you hear on your news that she was on that plane? http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/01/16/2009-01-16_australian_songwriter_emma_sophina_sings.html

I was reading in one of the plane stories that some guy from the Bronx was one of the first 911 callers after hearing a boom and seeing the plane in trouble. It just occurred to me that the planes from there sometimes take off and head south, in the opposite trajectory as illustrated, literally right over my apt bldg. Had it happened when they were flying that way, he may have been able to make JFK as it's just 5 miles south of me (I live equidistant between both airports). The Jamaica Bay is right there too, if he couldn't quite make the runway. I'm wondering if the outcome and injuries might have been much worse even if he could've landed at the airport. I was reading an article today that said something I didn't know....our Port Authority of NY/NJ, which runs/owns the airports, kill thousands of birds a year to avoid incidences such as these. Sometimes they scare them away and also put some kind of oil on eggs so they don't hatch. :-( And I did read of at least one person interviewed who was in a NY hospital with hypothermia. I'd imagine more then.

(Dorine)I didn't know there were acceptable and unacceptable ways of spurring on discussion. Even in middle age, I still learn something new everyday. ;-) Not "acceptable or unacceptable" just "realistic". And you're not middle age;-D

Closing

(Evelyn) And you're not middle age;-D Speaking of realistic....by most scales, I'm technically middle aged. ;-) And I'm ok with that. :-D

Wow. http://cbs11tv.com/national/plane.crash.hudson.2.909513.html There'a video of it landing too, but I can't get a link that will copy.

From the NYT: January 17, 2009 The Films Are Green, but Is Sundance? By MICHAEL CIEPLY PARK CITY, Utah � If it were possible to cleanse the planet by watching a movie, this would be the place to do it. In 2006 this city�s showcase event, the Sundance Film Festival, forged what promises to be an enduring link between the cinematic arts and things environmental with a debut screening of �An Inconvenient Truth,� the Al Gore documentary about global warming that went on to win an Academy Award. This time around the festival � which opened on Thursday and runs through Jan. 25 � has a schedule that�s greener than Fifth Avenue on St. Patrick�s Day. At least seven movies with strong environmental themes are set for world premieres here, culminating with the closing-night film, �Earth Days.� A documentary by the director Robert Stone, �Earth Days� is billed by festival programmers as �the history of our environmental undoing,� seen through the eyes of nine people who helped to initiate the modern eco-movement, including Stewart Udall, the former secretary of the interior, and the biologist Paul Ehrlich. Still, a stroll here this week down Main Street � where a dozen idling trucks were unloading supplies and equipment, while an oversize band bus, with trailer in tow, spewed fumes outside a soon-to-be-busy party site � framed the obvious quandary: how can you cram some 46,000 people, roughly equivalent to a fifth of Hollywood�s total work force, into a pretty little mountain town without contributing mightily to the problems your films hope to solve? The airlift alone should give pause to the likes of Mr. Udall, or to the makers of �No Impact Man,� a documentary about the effort by a New Yorker, Colin Beavan, and his family to live for a year without making a net environmental impact. �I think one of the lessons I learned in making this film is, I don�t think there is such a thing as being truly green,� Justin Schein, who directed �No Impact Man� with Laura Gabbert, said while standing outside its first Sundance screening on Friday morning. �It�s about asking the questions.� Los Angeles to Park City is about 692 miles by the old wagon route, though most visitors seem to come by air through Salt Lake City � many by private jet. According to a report last year by Flight Options, a transit firm based in Cleveland, the Sundance festival helped make Salt Lake City the nation�s No. 2 destination for fuel-guzzling private flights, behind West Palm Beach, Fla. Even freeloading journalists could take a charter flight this year: Expressjet was offering a select group of reporters free rides on a 41-seat plane from Los Angeles on Friday. If Expressjet found takers, the flight would get its passengers here in plenty of time for the Sunday evening screening of �Crude,� about the struggle between Ecuador�s indigenous people and the Chevron Corporation over toxic oil waste left behind by the makers of petroproducts like those that fly the planes, not to mention those fueling the limousines and rental cars that make the nearly 40-mile run to Park City from the Salt Lake airport. Utility officials said there was no way to determine how much extra wattage was being poured into the valley for the festival�s spotlights and the strings of colored bulbs lining Park City�s streets. �Pinpointing use for one city,� said Margaret Oler, an information officer with Pacificorp, which provides power to the area, �can be pretty difficult.� Outside the Filmmakers Lodge, a central gathering spot for Sundance participants, a sign assured festivalgoers: �Electricity used for all venues and theaters is offset by clean, renewable wind energy.� It explained that the energy for the festival�s official screenings comes through Rocky Mountain Power�s Blue Skies program, which provides wind-powered electricity. On Sunday evening, green.msn.com and Self magazine plan to join Greenhouse, a New York City nightclub using environmentally sustainable materials, in sponsoring what they called a big, �ecofriendly� party for �Crude� at the Sky Lodge in Park City. In what could be seen as a bit of excess, �Crude� is actually being celebrated by two such gatherings. The other was a Friday night tent party sponsors billed as �the biggest eco-bash in Sundance history.� Supposedly, Sting, Danny DeVito and Lindsay Lohan were among those scheduled to enjoy the �full open bar all evening,� in honor of four films: �Crude�; �The End of the Line,� about fished-out oceans; �Dirt! The Movie,� about the exhaustion of our soil; and �Big River Man,� about an endurance athlete who sets out to swim the Amazon, braving predators and toxic waste. �The Cove,� about environmental watchdogs dogging dolphin wranglers in Japan, is to get its own party on Sunday, under the sponsorship of Ben Silverman, the co-chairman of NBC Entertainment, among others. But on Wednesday, before a single party began, ecofriendly or otherwise, the dirt was already piling up here. The crew of one truck along Main Street was peeling big packing sheets off what appeared to be even bigger plasma television screens, brought in to brighten the festival proceedings. The foam packing would offset more than a few of the plastic water bottles festival sponsors hope to eliminate with a new program by the Brita and Nalgene companies, which are providing reusable bottles to be refilled at �hydration stations.� If that doesn�t work, Fiji Water was offering its conventional bottles of water at one of the many promotional boutiques on Main. A new concept car from Honda � a hydrogen-powered vehicle � sat inside the walls of a just-completed plexiglass tent at the corner of Seventh and Main Streets in the heart of downtown Park City, promoting the green pleasures of its energy conservation. Also inside, a young woman was asked how she was able to keep warm in the frigid mountain air. �We have heaters,� she said. �Big, electric heaters blowing some heat in here.� http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/17/movies/17green.html?_r=1&ref=movies

Sounds like something that Amnesty Intl needs to make a doc about: Iraqi shoe thrower to seek Swiss asylum: lawyer By FRANK JORDANS � 7 hours ago GENEVA (AP) � A Swiss lawyer working on behalf of the Iraqi journalist who threw shoes at U.S. President George W. Bush said Monday his client will seek political asylum in Switzerland. Geneva-based lawyer Mauro Poggia said Muntadhar al-Zeidi's life is in danger if he stays in Iraq. Al-Zeidi has been detained in an Iraqi jail awaiting trial since he was seized by guards after his Dec. 14 outburst at a joint news conference in Baghdad by Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. "He is in danger over there," Poggia told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Monday. "He's also in danger in other Muslim countries because people who support his action could try to make him a martyr." Al-Zeidi's gesture of anger at Bush turned the employee of a minor TV station into a national hero to many Iraqis fed up with America's six-year presence in the country. But concern has been raised about his safety after allegations that he had been severely beaten and tortured in detention. Poggia said any harm caused to al-Zeidi could trigger violent protests in Iraq. "I think it's in the interest of the current Iraqi government that nothing happens to Mr. al-Zeidi," he said. The lawyer said he was contacted earlier this month by al-Zeidi's relatives because of Switzerland's reputation as a safe, neutral country. Geneva is the seat of the Red Cross movement and the European headquarters of the United Nations. "My client needs to make his request at the Swiss embassy in Baghdad when he is released," said Poggia. "But we don't know when he will be able to do that because he still hasn't gone to trial." Al-Zeidi, 30, had been due to face a trial last month on a charge of assaulting a foreign leader, but the court date was postponed after his defense filed a motion to reduce the charges to simply insulting Bush. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iOE4dE7uVORfakOB9pl5geqqp1YgD95Q5KAG0

What a sweet ticket! He gets to leave that mess in Iraq and go live in Switzerland? LOL! He's a genius! Did anyone see the "We R One" concert yesterday? Can we feel the love? I was so happy to see black artists not rapping!!! You can do it guys, keep it up. What I got from the program was a sense that America and Americans are back, heads held high and proud. I pray to God that it is so. Kumbaya my Lord and all that jazz. ;-)

people who support his action could try to make him a martyr." That's right, kill the guy because you like something he did. I hope they give him asylum and a medal. I saw the first part of the concert, but was rather bored. When the Navy Glee Club or whatever came out, I went back to the infinitely more interesting football game.

people who support his action could try to make him a martyr." (Dorine) That's right, kill the guy because you like something he did. Yes, because martyrdom is a good thing. Ask they guys who strap on explosive vests. Oh wait... you can't. ;-)

Funnily enough, I was pondering this very thing an hour or so ago driving around in the snow. Mr. President, it's cold outside Sat Jan 17, 9:17 pm ET It's cold, maybe even freezing. Sometimes it snows. So why do we have to have a huge outdoor event to inaugurate a new president on January 20? Our first president, George Washington, was smart enough to get himself inaugurated on a more balmy April 30, 1789. What went wrong? In short, the Constiution did it. Inaugurations used to be held in March to give electors four months to cast their ballots. But the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution changed the date to Jan. 20, and Franklin D. Roosevelt's second swearing-in ceremony in 1937 was the first held on the new date. FindLaw says a report from the Senate Committee on the Judiciary offered some reasons for the change: "[W]hen our Constitution was adopted there was some reason for such a long intervention of time between the election and the actual commencement of work by the new Congress.... Under present conditions [of communication and transportation] the result of elections is known all over the country within a few hours after the polls close, and the Capital City is within a few days' travel of the remotest portions of the country.... "Another effect of the amendment would be to abolish the so-called short session of Congress.... Every other year, under our Constitution, the terms of Members of the House and one-third of the Members of the Senate expire on the 4th day of March.... Experience has shown that this brings about a very undesirable legislative condition." In other words, that's an awfully long lame-duck session, and we now have airplanes and 24-hour news and the Internet � in 2008, we knew Obama would be the next president by 11pm ET. As the 2000 election reminded us, we don't always know who's going to president by the end of election night. And in the days of yore, presidents had to physically move to the nation's capital without the help of FedEx, super highways and United hubs. Getting our president to work on time � that seems a worthwhile amendment. And not to worry: President-elect Obama says a chilly weather report won't deter him from the traditional outdoor ceremony. So if you're headed to D.C. to catch the big show for yourself, you might want to take some advice from Karin Tanabe at the Huffington Post, who has clearly been debating "what to wear?" for quite some time: "So what does one wear to be sandwiched between total strangers for hours while craning your neck to see a Jumbotron in sub-zero weather? Clothing you never want to see again. Don't mind if a reveler accidentally flamb�s your parka? Then by all means wear it. And then throw another one on top for good measure. Spent your entire month's salary on stilettos so fabulous you had them sewn to your feet? It's time to cut them off and wear the sensible shoes favored by nuns and your Aunt Mildred." Even if you're cold and not-so-comfortable, it's always a special moment watching a new leader say these famous words: "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20090117/pl_ynews/ynews_pl207

Oh, I Tivo'd it. There was no way in hell I was going to sit through cheesy Josh Grogan and some of the other stuff, including the Navy Glee Club, Fleming and a long Garth Brook set. ;-) I even FF Tom Hanks. But I did like the fast pacing. DC should have more concerts, it has a great background.

But martyring themselves isn't the same scenario. I understand it's a good thing, and I'd understand if they'd kill him in prison in the course of torturing him for it, then of course he'd be a martyr, but not getting out and just have someone kill you randomly on purpose.

(Dorine) But martyring themselves isn't the same scenario. It doesn't matter whether one does it on one's own volition or at someone else's hand. What this article shows is that this guy doesn't want to be a martyr, i.e., he's scared and is seeking refuge (again, a shoutout to certain activists Brits) but is willing to stand up and throw his shoes, shoulder to shoulder with his countrymen. Hmmmm....

Did anyone see the "We R One" concert yesterday? Me. In the background. I liked it. Esp he Glee club:-))) Nice to see the Obama family enjoying themselves. I liked Michelle's outfit, and of course, you *know* I love her hair style:-)))) Eager to see her wardrobe for tomorrow. She wears clothes well. (Karen)...he's scared and is seeking refuge Ayyyyy, pobrecito. Too late, LOL. Hey, under Saddam he would have been hung. Jail is a trip.

Uh oh...now we know Hill was an afterthought.... She won't be happy.... http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2009/01/61592900/1

You're right Evelyn. He has to be responsible for his actions, period. Be a man you asinine ninny. I liked Michelle's outfit yesterday, for once, I don't like her style. Oscar de la Renta created Hillary's gown for tomorrow night.

Please no one here doubt that Hillary was Obama's choice for anything. In 2000 Gore won and Bush took office, in 2008 Hillary won but Obama is taking office. It's pay back, period.

(Moon) Please no one here doubt that Hillary was Obama's choice for anything. My guess/assumption has been that at some point, they made a deal, like Blair and Brown. And before Biden was the VP nominee, it was said he would be a front candidate for State. I liked his answer in the New Yorker as to why he would pick the VP job, or not.

Oh, and I forgot to ask, how is the Obama/Hillary scenario payback for Gore/Bush? One set was in the same party. Who's getting paid back?

(Moon)In 2000 Gore won and Bush took office, in 2008 Hillary won but Obama is taking office. Huge diference, not the same thing at all. In 2000, Gore won the popular vote for President. Hill never got that far. Sheesh. I saw some of the concert, will catch the rest tonight, as I DVR'ed it. (Evelyn)I liked it. Esp he Glee club:-))) I liked them too. I have a soft spot for those in our military.

Oh my.... I would've been drinking *heavily* if I was on that after it continued to Charlotte. I couldn't have stood the stress of wondering what's next and when. Now it makes one wonder if the bird story was true. Passengers report scare on earlier US Airways Flight 1549 By Abbie Boudreau and Scott Zamost CNN Special Investigations Unit (CNN) -- Two days before US Airways Flight 1549 crashed into the Hudson River, passengers on the same route and same aircraft say they heard a series of loud bangs and the flight crew told them they could have to make an emergency landing, CNN has learned. Steve Jeffrey of Charlotte, North Carolina, told CNN he was flying in first class Tuesday when, about 20 minutes into the flight, "it sounded like the wing was just snapping off." "The red lights started going on. A little pandemonium was going on," Jeffrey recalled. He said the incident occurred over Newark, New Jersey, soon after the plane -- also flying as Flight 1549 -- had taken off from LaGuardia Airport in New York. "It seemed so loud, like luggage was hitting the side but times a thousand. It startled everyone on the plane," Jeffrey said. "We started looking at each other. The stewardesses started running around. They made an announcement that 'everyone heard the noise, we're going to turn around and head back to LaGuardia and check out what happened.' "I fly about 50 to 60 times per year, and I've never heard a noise so loud," he said. "It wasn't turbulence, it wasn't luggage bouncing around. It was just completely like the engine was thrown against the side of the plane. It just -- it didn't shake the plane but it shook you out of the seat when you're drifting off, it really woke you up. And when it happened again, everyone just started looking at each other and there was a quiet murmuring around the plane, and you could feel the tension rising just in looking. "I remember turning to my [business] partner and saying, 'I hope you got everything in order back home, life insurance and everything, because that didn't sound good.' " Jeffrey said he sent a text message to his wife about a "scary, scary noise on the plane. Doesn't sound right. They're flying back to LaGuardia to check it out. I'll call you when we land. I love you." He added, "About 10 minutes later when we never made the turn, we kept going, that's when the pilot came on and explained -- I wish I could remember the words -- I remember him using air, compression and lock -- I'm not sure the right order, but he made it sound like the air didn't get to the engine and it stalled the engine out, which he said doesn't happen all the time but it's not abnormal." Expert Aviation Consulting, an Indianapolis, Indiana, private consulting firm that includes commercial airline pilots on its staff, said the plane that landed in the Hudson was the same one as Flight 1549 from LaGuardia two days earlier. Photo See images from the rescue in last week's crash � "EAC confirms that US Airways ship number N106US flew on January 13, 2009, and January 15, 2009, with the same flight number of AWE 1549 from New York's LaGuardia Airport to Charlotte Douglas [International] Airport in North Carolina," Expert Aviation said in a statement to CNN. The company said it checked with contacts in the aviation industry to confirm that it was the same plane. The National Transportation Safety Board, which is investigating the crash, did not return calls regarding this matter Monday. It has released the tail number of the downed Airbus A-320, which is N106US. The Federal Aviation Administration referred CNN to US Airways. US Airways would not confirm that the Flight 1549 that took off January 13 was the same plane that splashed into the Hudson two days later. Valerie Wunder, a US Airways spokeswoman, said: "US Air is working with the National Transportation Safety Board in this investigation." She would not comment on any other details, including Tuesday's flight, though she did confirm US Airways is looking into it. Jeffrey told CNN that US Airways earlier Monday confirmed to him that the Tuesday incident occurred aboard the plane that crashed. John Hodock, another passenger on the Tuesday flight, said in an e-mail to CNN: "About 20 minutes after take-off, the plane had a series of compressor stalls on the right engine. There were several very loud bangs and fire coming out of the engine. The pilot at first told us that we were going to make an emergency landing, but after about five minutes, continued the flight to Charlotte." In an interview, Hodock said the pilot "got on the intercom and said they were going to have to make an emergency landing at the nearest airport. But then, only five to 10 minutes later, the pilot came back on and said it was a stalled compressor and they were going to continue to Charlotte." A third passenger, who did not want her named used, also said she heard a "loud banging sound" on the right side of the plane. She said she heard the pilot say the "compressor for the engine was stalled" and they needed "to turn around and go back." However, she said, the problem was fixed and the flight continued without incident. advertisement Pilots and aviation officials said that a compressor stall results from insufficient air getting into the engine and that multiple stalls could result in engine damage. However, the officials said, a momentary compressor stall may be less serious and could be corrected in flight by simply restarting the engine. A bird strike could lead to a compressor stall, the officials said. http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/19/hudson.plane.folo/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

(Dorine)Now it makes one wonder if the bird story was true. Why wouldn't it be? They'd have no reason to make that up. Possibly the earlier problem made the engine more vulnerable to failure when the birds subsequently flew in.

If it was the same plane, and perhaps it wasn't checked at all or well enough after the first incident and kept flying, and it happened again. The consequences would be expensive at the least. Not disimilar to what happened with the Alaska Airlines crash years ago. I'm not saying I believe that, I'm just saying it's not outside the realm of possibility at all.

"Mrs. Obama has an equally close relationship to her hairdresser, Rahni Flowers, a man she�s known since high school and who has styled her hair for 18 years. Transition aides confirm that Mrs. Obama will be flying in Mr. Flowers to help with her hair and makeup for the inauguration festivities. " http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/state-of-the-fi.html *Love* her hairstyle.

Cute. Obama's got a excellent sense of humor. And makes sense!!

Saw bits on TV yesterday. live performance version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xkw8ip43Vk&NR=1 animated http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HplZ_taHXLM&feature=related

(Dorine), scenario payback for Gore/Bush? One set was in the same party. Who's getting paid back? Bush POTUS, Gore Nobel Prize/ ;-)))) Not same party, no payback. (Mari), Huge diference, not the same thing at all. In 2000, Gore won the popular vote for President. Hill never got that far. Sheesh. Sheesh, says I. FL and MI. Hill finished as the primary winner, causcus went to O because of all the fraud. Please don't make me get into that again. Take my word for it. Hill was sabotaged by O and the DNC. It's behind us now. I'm over it, but I know the truth. Kumbaya. It's time to feel the love. Cue in new "America" song from Opra's show today. ;-)

Poor baby!....not. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Inauguration/wireStory?id=6684751

I'm not sure if it's something to brag about when Hillary finished as a primary winner in MI where technically she was the only major candidate on the ballot. That's not saying a lot. Your opinion on this Slate article? http://www.slate.com/id/2188985/pagenum/2 In this, and other pieces I've read, I get the impression Hillary and her peeps got too confident that they were going to win, gambled that things were going to turn out a certain way and when they didn't, weren't equipped to deal with the fallout. Contrast that to Gore, much as I hate what happened to him, ultimately his decisions in the fight after the election sealed his loss. It could've turned out differently had he done some things differently. I can't speak to the caucuses. That whole system baffles me and should be gotten rid of. All states should be on the same playing field in a federal election IMO.

(Moon)It's behind us now. I'm over it LOL, I've never seen anyone less "over" something. She lost. O ran the smarter campaign. Hill's people put all their eggs into the big state basket, while O quietly went about sweeping up elsewhere. That's why his numbers added up and hers didn't. Her people fucked up.

Hee. http://punditkitchen.com/2009/01/14/political-pictures-obama-th/ Never heard of this site, but some funny things. http://punditkitchen.com/

Poor baby!....not. Cruel. Sad, really :-(((((((((( I'm scrolling through the old stuff folks....Borrrrrrrriing. As the only Republican around, it's from now on that matters. Not 2000-2009. I love Michelle's coat and dress. Pl someone find the designer and description. The fabric looks like it has an overlay of design. Can't tell about her shoes...but kudos for wearing high heels even though she towers over everyone. Earrings , Moon? You're my jewelry girl. Liked the way the Prez took Michelle's hand as they went into the White House. V. endearing. Nice that all the commentators pay tribute to MLK and say BO wouldn't be here today but for his efforts...so true. But pl. someone should say a kind word about his grandmother who brought BO up while his mum was excavating in archeological gigs atound the world. LOL....Let's hear it for grandmothers!!

After being a subscriber for more yrs than I can count and before then I bought them at the newstand in college, I quit both "Newsweek" and "Time"this yr. The constant Bush -bashing was nauseating as was their obvious devotion to lib ideology w/o printing an opposite view. Obviously , other subscribers agree with me. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/18/AR2009011802181_pf.html (Washington Post)"The rival editors are turning out weeklies that are smaller, more serious, more opinionated and, though they are loath to admit it, more liberal. "

(Evelyn) Sad, really :-(((((((((( For all the pain he's helped cause other people around the world....not. I was being mild. He deserves no sympathy. it's from now on that matters Sounds like the views of some who wish to sweep all the misdeeds and crimes of the (soon to be) former administration under the rug with no investigation (which should've happened earlier anyway). No consequences. Why have a justice system? Or laws? Or a Constitution? Let everyone who's committed crimes go. Prisons are overcrowded anyway. Can't believe the women are wearing short skirts. And didn't realize Michelle was as tall, if not a bit taller than Bush (with heels)! Interesting to see Dustin Hoffman in the VIP section. Must have a can of hair spray in his bouffant hairdo.

A Latino (Lebanese !) rescues the NY Times with $250M....LOL "The Times Co. reported having about $46 million in cash and $1.1 billion in debt in September. A $400 million loan expires in May." http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090120/ny_times_slim.html?.v=2

Trying again

(Dorine)Sounds like the views of some who wish to sweep all the misdeeds and crimes of the (soon to be) former administration under the rug with no investigation ... So wrong...so sad. Just someone who is valiantly trying to bring us altogether. As I think the host of this topic would want to do. I could take you on and comment on each of your accusations. But it's not my style.

(Evelyn) Obviously , other subscribers agree with me. I quit them both because I can't keep up with reading them on a regular basis and read them online if at all. The NYT is close to next as I read it online 99.9% of the time. Still wondering why I decided to subscribe to Vanity Fair. Takes forever to read one (but it was $12 a year!). (I did buy my aunt a gift subscription to Time though ;-)).

I'm all for accountability. I'm not sure why that's a dirty word. I mean, my God, they spent over $70 million dollars to go after Clinton for lying about....a blowjob!!! That hurt almost no one (at least physically or economically). And of all the things that have happened over the past 8 years, that hurt so many other people in many ways, virtually nothing was addressed. Isn't that way outta wack? More time was spent on hearings on baseball players taking steroids. :-(( Clinton lied, which was very bad judgement. But had there not been a concerted effort to find anything to get him on, it wouldn't have been found out and he would've been no different than any other cheating husband (who was leader of the country ;-)). I could take you on and comment on each of your accusations. I wouldn't complain. And I have to say, I'm thrilled, yet completely surprised to see Ted Kennedy made it. Looks like he lost a bit of weight.

Michelle Obama wearing Isabel Toledo The Associated Press WASHINGTON - Michelle Obama is wearing a sparkling gold sheath dress with matching coat by Cuban-born American designer Isabel Toledo on the day her husband will be inaugurated as president. Barack Obama is wearing a red tie and white shirt with his suit Tuesday morning. Toledo, who just a few years ago unsuccessfully tried to infuse more modern style into the venerable Anne Klein label, is considered among the more avant garde U.S. designers. Michelle Obama has been noted for choosing unexpected fashion designers, including Narciso Rodriguez, Zero + Maria Cornejo and Chicago designer Maria Pinto.

Just someone who is valiantly trying to bring us altogether. As I think the host of this topic would want to do. I thought this was for discussion and debate. I have no problems bringing people together and I think we're all on the same page of looking ahead and starting a new day, but it's imperative not to forget how we (the US and other parts of the world) got where we are now, too. I am all for hearing other points of view and the reasoning behind it. That's my view anyway.

(Evelyn) As the only Republican around You're not really, just the only one willing to say anything. :-) Well, another one has been to busy to really say anything at all anywhere for quite a while. Can't believe the Supremes are out only in their robes, no coats. Hope they have long johns on. Not even scarves. :-(( Didn't really think about it, but as they just said on CNN, one of the few events all 3 branches of govt gathered in one place. The security must be astronomical.

Ant and I are watching the coverage on BBC News 24. History in the making before us and it sure gives a welcome break from watching wall to wall financial doom and gloom with the British Banks, being reported over here :-(( Congratulations Obama!

Thank you Mari...I'm noticing that she also has complimenting gloves ...(I'm a leather -coordinating -glove -gal, eh Karen?) Shoes???? I do love her hair (which I have copied:-))) Anybody see a fur coat??? LOL Lots of pretty scarves. Where are our little girls?

(Evelyn) I love Michelle's coat and dress. Pl someone find the designer and description After I think the Dem Convention, or maybe the election speech....wherever Michelle wore an outfit not many liked, I met up with a couple of (female) neighbors getting off the train and of course everyone was talking about that night. They were saying how practically appalled they were that people they worked with were talking so much about what she was wearing rather than what a momentous occasion it was. When I said that comments about her dress were about the third thing anyone in our office said about that night, they looked at me like I had two heads. I guess their heads would explode here. Wow, Bush Sr. isn't walking so good. I thought he was still jumping out of planes. He looks pretty bad actually and uncomfortable.

There're the kids. They look great. The one Bush dtr isn't a blonde anymore. Aretha has a windmill attached to her hat, but I like it strangely. Was there always so much bulletproof glass up there before?

I like Hillary's coat...color ..style, not v. flattering. Lovely welcome for the Clintons. 14 degrees...burrrrr. Spectators using feet and hand warmers. Little girls precious. Such poise.