Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Saturday, February 16, 2008
I Think I am Going to Be Sick
If you had any doubt that Fox is a crooked evil right wing talking point generator watch the following:
F*ck You Fox!
Follow up by the voice of reason Keith Olbermann
F*ck You Fox!
Follow up by the voice of reason Keith Olbermann
Friday, February 15, 2008
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Walking on Fire
I have been following this storyline throughout the primaries and was wondering when somebody(anybody) would finally start pointing this out. I think it could be a major issue and might have some minor effect on a few voters at least.
Clinton's past is not through haunting her by Roger Simon
One of Hillary Clinton’s last lines of defense against the onslaught that is Barack Obama is the notion that she has been “vetted” and he has not.
All the bad stuff that can be thrown at her already has been, she argues, and that gives her an advantage over Obama.
As Clinton said this week in a televised Politico/WJLA interview: “One thing you know about me is that I have been vetted. I’ve been through this. I understand exactly what is coming at me, and there isn’t any new information. I mean, it’s just more of the same. It’s been recycled over and over again. I don’t think we can say that about my opponent.”
And, indeed, on Monday, Mark Penn, her chief strategist, released a memo saying that Clinton’s having “withstood the full brunt” of the Republican attack machine is “one of the key arguments for Hillary’s candidacy.”
I think that may be wishful thinking.
First, even if one assumes all the old accusations about Clinton have been put to rest — a dubious point — she keeps raising new questions about herself.
Take the matter of her tax returns. Obama has released his, and Clinton won’t release hers, she says, until after she is the Democratic nominee.
Why? She gives no reason. She says she files an ethics statement with the Senate, which is true, but so does Obama, and yet he also has released his tax returns. Clinton refuses to do so until after the Democratic convention.
Does this make sense to anybody? If she is going to do it eventually, why not do it now, while Democrats are still voting on her?
Keeping the returns secret just raises doubts and suspicions and kicks a hole in the case that she has been fully vetted.
But Obama also suffers from a little wishful thinking in believing that everything in his past has been fully explored and responded to.
“Look, I have been written about, I have been scrubbed, I have been vetted over the last year,” Obama said on “Meet the Press” in December.
But he really hasn’t. Nobody has. And that is because, in presidential politics, you never get “scrubbed.”
Your past is dug up, reshaped and used against you.
Just in case the name no longer rings a bell, Willie Horton was a convicted murderer who was granted 10 weekend furloughs from prison in Massachusetts under the administration of Gov. Michael Dukakis.
The 10th time, Horton fled to Maryland, broke into a home, repeatedly slashed a man with a knife and beat and raped the man’s fiancée. Horton was caught and sentenced to two consecutive life terms plus 85 years.
By the time Dukakis ran for president, he had already been “vetted” and “scrubbed” on the matter of Willie Horton and was sure it could not be used against him. The Lawrence, Mass., Eagle-Tribune had done more than 200 stories about it in 1987. And when Al Gore raised the issue in a New York primary debate against Dukakis, the Democratic crowd booed Gore and applauded Dukakis.
The issue never came up again in the primaries. But it sure came up in the general election, with a new spin. “The Horton case is one of those gut issues that are value issues, particularly in the South,” Lee Atwater, who was George H.W. Bush’s campaign manager, told me at the time. “And if we hammer at these over and over, we are going to win.”
Similarly, John Kerry’s Vietnam War service on a Swift boat had been raised against him for decades, and nobody gave it any credence. But it resurfaced in a new and virulent way when he ran for president.
The point I am making is that in a general election, no candidates get a pass on the past. They only think they do.
If John McCain gets the nomination, we are going to hear that he was turned into a “Manchurian candidate” when he was a prisoner of war. If Obama wins the nomination, we are going to hear a lot more about Tony Rezko and the Exelon Corp. And if Clinton is the nominee, get ready for a reprise of Whitewater and her cattle future trading, to name just two.
In presidential politics, the past is not just prologue. It’s ammunition.
Clinton's past is not through haunting her by Roger Simon
One of Hillary Clinton’s last lines of defense against the onslaught that is Barack Obama is the notion that she has been “vetted” and he has not.
All the bad stuff that can be thrown at her already has been, she argues, and that gives her an advantage over Obama.
As Clinton said this week in a televised Politico/WJLA interview: “One thing you know about me is that I have been vetted. I’ve been through this. I understand exactly what is coming at me, and there isn’t any new information. I mean, it’s just more of the same. It’s been recycled over and over again. I don’t think we can say that about my opponent.”
And, indeed, on Monday, Mark Penn, her chief strategist, released a memo saying that Clinton’s having “withstood the full brunt” of the Republican attack machine is “one of the key arguments for Hillary’s candidacy.”
I think that may be wishful thinking.
First, even if one assumes all the old accusations about Clinton have been put to rest — a dubious point — she keeps raising new questions about herself.
Take the matter of her tax returns. Obama has released his, and Clinton won’t release hers, she says, until after she is the Democratic nominee.
Why? She gives no reason. She says she files an ethics statement with the Senate, which is true, but so does Obama, and yet he also has released his tax returns. Clinton refuses to do so until after the Democratic convention.
Does this make sense to anybody? If she is going to do it eventually, why not do it now, while Democrats are still voting on her?
Keeping the returns secret just raises doubts and suspicions and kicks a hole in the case that she has been fully vetted.
But Obama also suffers from a little wishful thinking in believing that everything in his past has been fully explored and responded to.
“Look, I have been written about, I have been scrubbed, I have been vetted over the last year,” Obama said on “Meet the Press” in December.
But he really hasn’t. Nobody has. And that is because, in presidential politics, you never get “scrubbed.”
Your past is dug up, reshaped and used against you.
Just in case the name no longer rings a bell, Willie Horton was a convicted murderer who was granted 10 weekend furloughs from prison in Massachusetts under the administration of Gov. Michael Dukakis.
The 10th time, Horton fled to Maryland, broke into a home, repeatedly slashed a man with a knife and beat and raped the man’s fiancée. Horton was caught and sentenced to two consecutive life terms plus 85 years.
By the time Dukakis ran for president, he had already been “vetted” and “scrubbed” on the matter of Willie Horton and was sure it could not be used against him. The Lawrence, Mass., Eagle-Tribune had done more than 200 stories about it in 1987. And when Al Gore raised the issue in a New York primary debate against Dukakis, the Democratic crowd booed Gore and applauded Dukakis.
The issue never came up again in the primaries. But it sure came up in the general election, with a new spin. “The Horton case is one of those gut issues that are value issues, particularly in the South,” Lee Atwater, who was George H.W. Bush’s campaign manager, told me at the time. “And if we hammer at these over and over, we are going to win.”
Similarly, John Kerry’s Vietnam War service on a Swift boat had been raised against him for decades, and nobody gave it any credence. But it resurfaced in a new and virulent way when he ran for president.
The point I am making is that in a general election, no candidates get a pass on the past. They only think they do.
If John McCain gets the nomination, we are going to hear that he was turned into a “Manchurian candidate” when he was a prisoner of war. If Obama wins the nomination, we are going to hear a lot more about Tony Rezko and the Exelon Corp. And if Clinton is the nominee, get ready for a reprise of Whitewater and her cattle future trading, to name just two.
In presidential politics, the past is not just prologue. It’s ammunition.
Administration of Lies
This is from an email for Rep. Wexler's office today:
Today, in hearings on Capitol Hill, I confronted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on her role in the lies, exaggerations, and misdirection that led us into the Iraq war.
During my questioning, Secretary Rice falsely stated that she never saw intelligence casting doubt on the Bush Administration claims that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. This unbelievable statement is flatly contradicted by numerous government reports and CIA testimonials.
Secretary Rice’s responses demonstrate once and for all that we need aggressive oversight over this out of control Administration. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has ignored the constitutional right of Congress to provide such oversight.
It is time Congress took aggressive action to assert our rights on behalf of the American people.
The House of Representatives must immediately hold former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in contempt of Congress for their failure to respond to congressional subpoenas.
I have been aggressively lobbying Members of Congress to support a vote on contempt, and I am thrilled to report that Speaker Pelosi told me directly that she agrees it is well past time to vote on contempt. I am anticipating that the House will shortly vote on resolutions of both civil and criminal contempt for both Miers and Bolten.
No one should be immune from accountability and the rule of law.
A New Low
Republicans disrupt Lantos memorial service by John Aravosis
Even the dead are political pawns to the Republicans (then again, we already knew that post-September 11). House Republicans, at the bidding of the Bush White House, are upset that House Democrats are voting on contempt citations for Harriet Miers and Josh Bolton today. So the House GOP members are disrupting proceedings in the House today, calling for "protest votes" and the like that eat up 15 minutes of the day at a time. Well, they just called one such protest vote in the middle of recently-deceased Democratic Congressman Tom Lantos' memorial service, which they certainly knew was taking place. This is akin to forcing people to leave a wake on purpose. The House Republicans and the White House couldn't wait for Lantos' service to be finished before forcing everyone back to the House floor to vote for something silly. They intentionally disrupted a dead man's memorial service for political gain. But as was already noted, the Republicans have been abusing the memory of 3,000 dead for seven years now, so why expect anything new and better from them now.
Even the dead are political pawns to the Republicans (then again, we already knew that post-September 11). House Republicans, at the bidding of the Bush White House, are upset that House Democrats are voting on contempt citations for Harriet Miers and Josh Bolton today. So the House GOP members are disrupting proceedings in the House today, calling for "protest votes" and the like that eat up 15 minutes of the day at a time. Well, they just called one such protest vote in the middle of recently-deceased Democratic Congressman Tom Lantos' memorial service, which they certainly knew was taking place. This is akin to forcing people to leave a wake on purpose. The House Republicans and the White House couldn't wait for Lantos' service to be finished before forcing everyone back to the House floor to vote for something silly. They intentionally disrupted a dead man's memorial service for political gain. But as was already noted, the Republicans have been abusing the memory of 3,000 dead for seven years now, so why expect anything new and better from them now.
McCain: Maverick No More
Thanks to Think Progress:
Today, the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, which contained a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) establishing one interrogation standard across the government. The bill requires the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and bans waterboarding.
Just hours ago, the Senate voted in favor of the bill, 51-45.
Earlier today, ThinkProgress noted that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), a former prisoner of war, has spoken strongly in favor of implementing the Army Field Manual standard. When confronted today with the decision of whether to stick with his conscience or cave to the right wing, McCain chose to ditch his principles and instead vote to preserve waterboarding:
Mr. McCain, a former prisoner of war, has consistently voiced opposition to waterboarding and other methods that critics say is a form torture. But the Republicans, confident of a White House veto, did not mount the challenge. Mr. McCain voted “no” on Wednesday afternoon.
The New York Times Times notes that “the White House has long said Mr. Bush will veto the bill, saying it ‘would prevent the president from taking the lawful actions necessary to protect Americans from attack in wartime.’”
After Bush vetoes the bill, McCain will again be confronted with a vote to either stand with President Bush or stand against torture. He indicated with his vote today where he will come down on that issue.
John McCain: He was against waterboarding before he was for it.
I personally lost some respect for John McCain today. I at one time fashioned myself a follower and potential voter for McCain but after caving today to right wing conservatives I have ruled that option out. I don't get how someone who opposed torture after being through it himself and speaking out on behalf of banning it...VOTES TO KEEP IT...i am disgusted.
Today, the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, which contained a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) establishing one interrogation standard across the government. The bill requires the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and bans waterboarding.
Just hours ago, the Senate voted in favor of the bill, 51-45.
Earlier today, ThinkProgress noted that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), a former prisoner of war, has spoken strongly in favor of implementing the Army Field Manual standard. When confronted today with the decision of whether to stick with his conscience or cave to the right wing, McCain chose to ditch his principles and instead vote to preserve waterboarding:
Mr. McCain, a former prisoner of war, has consistently voiced opposition to waterboarding and other methods that critics say is a form torture. But the Republicans, confident of a White House veto, did not mount the challenge. Mr. McCain voted “no” on Wednesday afternoon.
The New York Times Times notes that “the White House has long said Mr. Bush will veto the bill, saying it ‘would prevent the president from taking the lawful actions necessary to protect Americans from attack in wartime.’”
After Bush vetoes the bill, McCain will again be confronted with a vote to either stand with President Bush or stand against torture. He indicated with his vote today where he will come down on that issue.
John McCain: He was against waterboarding before he was for it.
I personally lost some respect for John McCain today. I at one time fashioned myself a follower and potential voter for McCain but after caving today to right wing conservatives I have ruled that option out. I don't get how someone who opposed torture after being through it himself and speaking out on behalf of banning it...VOTES TO KEEP IT...i am disgusted.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
