Arkansas Blog

"events" often have a way of changing the public's perception of the battleground and turning what was previously perceived as a detriment to the candidate, into an asset. (ala McCain during 2007)

i would expect that the Israelis will do more of what they began in Damascus the other day, during the next two weeks, in order to change the subject back to HRC's "strengths", while highlighting BHO's "weakness" (in their opinion)

Hillary's high negatives have nothing to do with Obama, McCain or the media. They are firmly entrenched, "baked in" the public mind, some dating back sixteen years.

Obama "may not find the going so easy" against McCain but he sure as hell has bucked the Clinton machine, torn back the curtain of its inadequacies and he is a better candidate for it.

It could also be that Hillary's "ability to go toe to toe with GOP attack machine" has damaged her, flawed her in ways much like Nixon was flawed and damaged by the gutter politics of his era.

Has the media ever been so much of the story about elections as it has in this contest? It seems we're getting more stories about perceptions and polls than issues and ideas; and, we get more info about the analysts than analysis of the info.
We're learning more about phenomenon than about policy. It's as if Marshall McCluhan has risen from the dead and proclaimed again that the "medium is the message." I now understand why my cats watch the TV news so intently and you would too if you just turned the sound off. It looks like a bunch of fish gulping and gawking.
I think this "meme" thing is properly named. Just put the word "me" down twice.

Call it what you want the media in large part (AR Times Exception noted) are sexist and adhere to guidelines that were written by earlier sexist pigs in caves eons ago or thereabout.

It's been a long time (can't remember when) a major media outlets has emphasized Hillary's positive instead of her negatives.

I'm madder than hell but at the American voter who time after time believe the talking heads of "FIX" news.

So what will we have John the fixing to die or a wet behind the ears political orator for on the job learning.

As I have said before just as soon as Hiliary is destroyed the media is going belly up to Obama grits.

Oh well it seems Bush will get his "America go to Hell" wish after he leaves office if not before.

"By the way", Hillary's Texas lead has shrunk to 8 percent with 8 percent undecided. Her lead has also shrunk since December in Ohio and Pennsylvania. That has been the pattern all along, in state after state, huge Clinton leads evaporating into marginal wins at best, crushing defeats at worst.

Uh, Texas is in the process of getting the word.

http://www.pollster.com/08-TX-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

Groovy trend lines. It takes a little time and campaigning to overcome universal name recognition, a presidential spouse, and establishment backing. When fervent supporters of a campaign have to start pointing at polls three weeks before an election in a state where the campaign has only just begun, you get a pretty good sense of that campaign's strength. After losing big leads in nearly every state to have voted so far, including some that Obama won in a landslide, you'd think the poll trumpeting would stop at some point in favor of a little reality.

ARK. BLOG: I said "yet."

Well who could think of a better state to decide what the Democrats should do than Texas???????

Or Ohio for that matter. One state produced the politics of George W. & the other reassured his re-election (or should I say election)

But not to burst anyone's bubble but Gaylord is right Obama has closed a 20 point gap to within 8 points in basically three days, the polls reported two days ago but conducted before the Potomac primaries showed Clinton with 20-25 point leads.

After Wisconsin who knows

I think everyone here will admit that I wouldn't be close to being President if I hadn't been married to one. All I am, I owe to Bill.

And like any princess who married into royalty, crossing me is trouble.

If you disagree with me, it's only because I'm a woman. No other reason, sexist pig.

And if I can vote to invade Iraq, you can bet your a** I'll do what I need to do to be President, moral, immoral, amoral.

HOW CAN ANY ARKANSAN SUPPORT HILLARY CLINTON AFTER SHE LITERALLY SPIT IN JERMAIN TAYLOR'S FACE YESTERDAY!!!!!!!!

By gloriously holding up Kelly Pavlik's boxing gloves all in hopes of winning a few votes in Ohio.

Oh that yankee traitor, maybe she will defile a Michigan Wolverines helmet to endear herself to those wt Buckeyes, I mean after all Michigan doesn't count.

I Orval, am officially excommunicating Hillary Clinton from Arkansas. Bill you are still welcome. But Hillary you are dead to us.

What's next a fundraiser with Tim Tebow, so she can flaunt the Heisman in McFadden's face??? Although a fundraiser with Tebow would help her lock up the GLBT vote in Florida. WHich is huge. I guess I am proud the first openly gay coach in Urban Meyer and the first openly gay player to win a Heisman in Tim Tebow have had such success.

ANYWAY HILLARY YOU SUCK!!! JT I HOPE YOU KNOCK KELLY PAVLIK OUT SATURDAY NIGHT!!\

Link and picture on my name

I agree with "Orval Eugene" (although I never would have chosen that handle): Being more popular in Texas than Obama or anyone else is not something you want to brag about.

I just read Orval's second post. My agreement with him does not necessarily extend beyond his opinion of Texas!

How can Hillary win in Texas without a head? At least that's what the man without a soul, V. Putin claims. How does Hillary know that Putin is without a soul? Maybe she knows something about working with Commies.

I would submit that there is a perfectly good explanation why Hillary's "meta-narrative" is that "she'll do anything to win; she can't be trusted; she's ethically challenged; she's manipulative, calculating, and programmed." The explanation:

(1) Hillary will do anything to win.
(2) Hillary can't be trusted.
(3) Hillary is ethically challenged.
(4) Hillary is manipulative, calculating, and programmed.

It's not really so tough to understand.

What we got going on here is complicated, so that leaves out the great minds who get their news from People Magazine or 30 second clips on TV. There is clearly a double standard going on and when it comes to the Clintons, it's been going on for 16 years.

Bill Clinton, after he left office said the reason the Republicans hated him so much is that he used their own medicine on them and it burned their skin like acid. It was the Republicans own fault for inventing this idea that Bill Clinton was some kind of wild-eyed far left liberal, when in fact with the giant slide to the right this country had taken, Clinton would have been a far right wingnut if he had been running 20 years earlier. But enough about Billy.

I think the first thing unfairly working in Obama's favor is being the new kid on the block. America has had 16 years of the Clintons. That doesn't make them bad, but on top of 16 years in the news, add to that days and weeks and months of hourly Clinton discussion on our TVs during the Ken Starr Witch Hunt. Nutcases are still trotting out Hillary's good fortune in cattle futures in the 80s, they're still implying the Clinton's killed Vince Foster. They're still saying the Clinton's stole the furniture out of the White House and shit in the floor as they were leaving. Until 2004, no one outside of Chicago had ever heard that strange name, Barack Obama. In the public perception, the Clintons are old lumbering Buicks while Obama is a Prius hybrid. Either gets you down the road, ya know.

The second thing to note is that in 2008 it is apparently OK to bash women, but not OK to make disparaging remarks about black people. To me either are equally offensive. But if you look back at our broadcast history, you'll find lots of people like Jimmy the Greek and Howard Cosell who disappeared from view after making or appearing to make racial remarks. Remember the ESPN gal who got suspended for saying new golfers would have to lynch Tiger Woods in order to beat him on the golf course. We got to witness that woman ask McCain, "How do we beat the Bitch" 2000 times. If she had asked, "How do we beat that nigger?", it would have never played once. Double standard.

And lastly, hardly a day goes by without someone bringing up Bill Clinton getting a blowjob from Monica Lewinsky. According to the testimony at the time, Bill got him some oral sex 3 to 5 times. Oh the humanity! Millions of sperm died! A. What a fool Hillary was for staying in that terrible marriage! B. What a fool Hillary was for not knowing her man was getting a blowjob! C. I'm a Christian full of Family Values, what God has joined together, let no man put asunder, but what a fool Hillary is for not divorcing his sorry ass!

At the same time, right now as I type....Barack Obama is the new John F. Kennedy! Barack is the best thing since JFK. Obama is sooooo Kennedy-esk! The only good thing that has happened to this nation since JFK! Obama talks just like JFK. Barack Obama inspires this nation in ways not seen since the days of John F. Kennedy! BHO = JFK!!!

In all the history of the United States of America....from what can be proved today, no President has ever spent more time in and out of the White House with his naughty bits shoved into more women who were not his wife than John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Head of State takes on an entirely new meaning when you're talking bout JFK. Since I don't personally believe sexual fidelity or infidelity have anything to do with Good Government, I don't give a rat's patootie what any President does with his penis on his own time. But can no one else see the blaring double standard that excuses JFK and hammers Bill and Hillary Clinton? Is the message from the MSN that it's OK to be a serial adulterer, but it's terrible to get a couple of blowjobs and walk away?

Do we remember Jackie O as the biggest fool to ever sleep too soundly at night in the White House? No..it's Hillary! Did that far traveling bullet in Dallas that took away the life of John Kennedy, also take away his sins of sexual debauchery? Have we ever had a cheatin First Lady? Will we ever learn what Jeff Gannon/Guckert was doing those 235 nights he attended some kind of sleep-over at the White House? And twat do we know about the Obama penis? More importantly, what does Karl Rove know bout the Obama penis???

I will gladly vote for Barack Obama this November if he is the nominee. Outside of giving the criminal Republicans too many compliments last month, I think he's a peach. But all my life I have cheered for fairness and level playing fields....something we don't have today in this 4 year long Presidential campaign. Level it! Clinton/Obama '08!

The U.S. will have a big loser in November...but it won't be Hillary Clinton!

Orval,
Who the HELL is JERMAIN TAYLOR ;-)

Keep up the great work 'O'bi fans you're my only hope, you must see this droid safely delivered to Alderaan.

If making 100K off of a 1K investment due to your political freinds and connections is OK, then tell that to the rest of the hard working folks in the US. Eveyone knows that it smells to high heaven.

"I did not have sex with that women" as all of the women in his cabinet looked on in the rose garden that warm sunny day. Madeline Albright just grinned and looked up to her darling Billy that day, only to have him acknowledge a few weeks later that was lying throgh his teeth. He made a mockery of all of the women in his cabinet by parading them out to make his lying pronouncement. That's the Clinton's that American knows. He made a mockery to Hillary. You want to talk about a Fairy Tale, the Clintons are nothing but a Fairy Tale.

Are you serious about the Jermain Taylor thing? Or are you the typo police? Because I actually spelled Jermain Taylor correctly.

I assume you are joking but for everyone else

He is the Little Rock native who also happened to be the Middle Weight Boxing Champion of the World until he lost a brutal fight to Kelly Pavlik, HRC's new best friend. A fight where early on Jermain had Pavlik hurt, knocked down and almost knocked out only to see Pavlik storm back and TKO Taylor in a later round.

And they have a re-match this Saturday Night. Beejus I am sure it conflicts with Start Trek reruns so I know you might miss it.

But I am sure Hillary will be there cheering for Kelly Pavlik, because now she needs Ohio and everyone knows Hillary has no hometown or home state loyalties she just meanders across the country adopting anyone who embraces her or she thinks might vote for her.

"Are you serious about the Jermain Taylor thing?" by: Orval Eugene

sarcasm... why bother

He lost so NO one knows his name...get it ;-(

Obameda...live by die by

Max, I think free speech is overrated

Can we get Billary banned? I mean he is clearly a Richard Mellon Scaife protege who thinks its okay for America to spend $50 million investigating some one's personal sex life BUT not okay to investigate an energy bill drafted by Enron, a Presidential advisor blowing the cover of a CIA agent, privatizing the US military to unaccountable agents like Blackwater and Halliburton, starting unjust wars that permanently weaken our military and our foreign policy, having $8 billion go missing, woefully inadequacy and incompetence in response to Hurricane Katrina, etc. etc. etc.

Billary its just sex... relax. I would love to see what would happen to you if we spent millions of dollars investigating your sex life? The crime was Republicans who could not find anything wrong with Bill's politics or policy proposals (or at least could not beat him at that) Decided to try and destroy someone's life by digging up their personal life

That is what is disgusting (in my book blowjobs are good; war is bad)

So get over it already you right wing nut

And with that said, I can't believe we still have to talk about this shit

Sorry but that's why I want to put this crap behind us and allow Bill to return to his brilliant post Presidency

We need a fresh start; We need Obama!!!

Oh yeah...you 'cut deep' the Star Wars fans!!

http://americanresearchgroup.com/

Whoops. Someone told Texas.

Clinton may win Texas and lose it - Rick Casey - Houston Chronicle

HOUSTON CHRONICLE

Rick Casey

Feb. 14, 2008, 10:58PM
COMMENTARY
Clinton may win Texas and lose it

By RICK CASEY
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle

Sometimes life isn't fair.

Now that Obama has taken over the delegate lead in the Democratic
presidential race, Clinton is counting on her potential support among
Hispanics in the March 4 Texas primary to help her catch up.

But for reasons that actually make sense if you dig deep enough, in Texas
the Hispanic votes don't count as much as the black votes Obama can count on
receiving in overwhelming numbers.

So, it's possible Hillary could whip Barack by eight to 10 points and yet
split about even on Texas delegates.

Texas Democrats could even give Clinton more votes but give Obama more
delegates.

Of the 228 delegates Texas will send to the national convention in Denver
next August, the March 4 primary will determine 126.

This is not a winner-take-all election. The delegates will be divided as
close as possible to the portions of the votes each candidate receives.

Not created equal

But here's the important part: The division will not be statewide. It will
be done in each of the 31 state senatorial districts.

And not all districts are created equal.

In what can only be considered a historical irony, the state's two heavily
African-American districts get at least 50 percent more delegates than the
average senatorial district.

These are people who were counted as three-fifths of a person in the
nation's original representational scheme.

The Houston senatorial district represented by state Sen. Rodney Ellis will
send seven delegates to Denver.

By contrast, the district represented by Houston Sen. Mario Gallegos will
send three. The same is true for Brownsville Sen. Eddie Lucio.

Why the disparity? While senatorial districts are required to be drawn to
have roughly the same populations, most don't have even close to the same
numbers of Democrats and Republicans.

Blame Kinky, Kerry and 'W'

When it comes time to draw the lines at least once a decade, the last thing
the party in control wants is districts that are evenly divided. So they try
to pack as many members of the opposing party into as few districts as
possible.

Should a senatorial district that is three-quarters Democrat get the same
number of delegates as a district that is only one-quarter Democrat? Party
rules quite reasonably say no. That would make each primary vote in the
heavily Democratic district worth only a third as much as a vote in a
heavily Republican district.

So, the number of delegates awarded to each district is determined by the
number of votes cast in that district for governor in 2006 and president in
2004.

Simply put, Hispanics, who historically vote in smaller percentages than
African-Americans, did not turn out for either John Kerry in 2004 or Chris
Bell in 2006.

In 2004, President Bush, who showed none of the hostility to Mexican
immigrants that has since become part of the Republican rhetoric, converted
many formerly Democratic Hispanic votes. And in 2006, Carole Keeton
Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman also siphoned off some.

Clinton has been doing well among Hispanics, having received about 65
percent of the Hispanic vote in several important states on Super Tuesday.

But Obama has been doing even better among black voters. He not only has won
80 percent and more of their vote but also has significantly increased their
turnout.

The result is that Obama is likely to carry the two districts represented by
black senators (Ellis and Royce West of Dallas) by larger margins than
Clinton will carry Hispanic senatorial districts.

Add to that the strong support and increased turnout Obama is garnering from
voters under the age of 30. The only senatorial district to get more
delegates than Ellis' is Austin, with eight.

42 delegates picked later

Obama turned out 20,000 for a rally there last February when the campaign
hadn't even heated up, and precincts that include the University of Texas
have registered thousands of new voters in the past few months.

Consider this: The two districts represented by black senators plus Austin
will send a total of 21 delegates to Denver. The six Democratic districts
with Hispanic senators will send 22.

Even if you add the heavily Hispanic El Paso district represented by Sen.
Eliot Shapleigh, the total is only 25.

How does Clinton cut significantly into Obama's delegate lead with that
dynamic?

It gets even worse. An additional 42 Texas delegates to the national
convention will be chosen through a process beginning at caucuses at the
closing of the polls March 4.

Obama, probably because he generates more passion among his supporters, has
won every caucus state but Nevada - several of them by margins of 3-to-1 and
even 4-to-1.

With that dynamic at play, it is not hard to imagine Clinton winning the
popular vote in a tough Texas election, but actually losing ground in the
delegate count.

You can write to Rick Casey at P.O. Box 4260, Houston, TX 77210, or e-mail
him at rick.casey@chron.com.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/casey/5543965.html

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

Houston, Harris County, Texas

If you don't know who and what you're fighting for, you will be, I think,
utterly ineffective in the world, and especially in the world of politics..
-- E. J. Dionne, Jr.

Beejus,

I love Joseph Campbell more than the next guy, but Star Wars is tired

Its no There Will Be Blood

I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE! I DRINK IT UP!!

Star Wars/There Will Be Blood

The dilemma...
Sail Barge or faith healer...

Much of the Irony and responsibility in re the media treatment of the Clintons today.. is much of Bills own making (another failure). The Fairness Doctrine fell on his watch..and things got worse. As well as the irony of being beaten to pulp by the right wing nuts.. yet both Clintons have always led by coddling a capitulating with them at nearly every turn. As we know now... the Clintons are still taking money from Murdoch and trying get Dem debates aired on FOX. What's smart about that? It's like abused spouse syndrome, at best. Which makes it so very difficult to defend the Clintons who are in fact constantly failing to stand up for themselves, fair media, or the Dem party..at every turn.

Hillary is not the champion of beating the right wing machine..so many try to say she is.. SHe beat Giulianni for chris sakes.. woooo freaking hoo! He dropped out... he had cancer... he was not popular at all in NYC.. in fact he was despised. Anyone who has been watching him the last few months knows he is less than a lazy BIG ZERO. I mean, Huckabee left him in the dust a long time ago.

SO Hillary stood up and whooped a BIG ZERO in NY, Giulianni. Wow! I am sure ALL right-wingers are shaking in their boots now.

Personality is as flawed with the Clintons as the results of their non leadership.. They only successfully led the D party off the right wing ledge of the DLC triangle a long time ago.. they are flopping in the water now... yelling, come on in the water is nice and cold and sharks won't bite! Just walk the triangular-plank with us one more time, pretty please.

If you like Joe Lieberman, Mark Pryor, Evan Bayh, Mike Ross, Harold Ford, Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, or Rahm Emmanuel.. well then.. vote DLC and defend DLC Blue Dog positions. Otherwise, wake up.

I'm thinking that much of Obama's "popularity" is driven by the right wingers crossing over to our primaries. He uses to many right wing talking points and memes. Makes me very suspicious.

Here's an article that has some interesting information.
http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

Here are the first two paragraphs:
"Evidence of a covert campaign to undermine the presidential primaries is rife, so it's curious that the Democractic Party and even some within the G.O.P. have ignored the actual elephant in the room this year. That would be Karl Rove. After rigging two previous presidential elections, this master of deceit would have us believe that he's gone off to sit in a corner and write op-eds.

Not so. According to an article in Time Magazine, Republican party activists have been organized to throw their weight behind Barack Obama, the democratic rival of frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Early in Obama's campaign, major G.O.P. fundraisers and several recently indicted figures in Chicago flushed his coffers with cash. This was something the deep pockets hadn't done for any candidate in their own party. (McCain ran mainly on his own fumes until February.) With receipts topping $100 million in 2007, the first-term Illinois senator broke the record for contributions. Quite a feat for someone few Americans had even heard of only the year before."

CLINTON SCHOOL RELEASE
Communication scholar Erica Falk will discuss her new book, "Women for President: Media Bias in Eight Campaigns," <<<

Suddenly the neo-fascists are no longer preferred speakers at Clinton School. Wonder what brought that on?
.

Let's clear a few things up before I post what's being circulated by folks like our friend on the blog, Billary.

The Fairness Doctrine was torn down on Reagan's watch, not Clinton's. NAFTA came from President George H. W. Bush and yes......Bill Clinton signed it into law. Now there is a factual mistake on Bill's part.

Orval, Jermain Taylor is a Huckabee Darling, it's been all over the news before, so perhaps Hillary isn't too excited about him and vice versa.

Billary, how do you know how Hillary made illegal money in a futures investment, clearly you weren't around at the time. Secondly, I doubt Bill leaned over and told Albright he was face FK'ing anyone and again again again...what about John Kennedy (the 1960s Obama) and his many rolls in the hay with Hollywood starlets and high priced DC whores? If you're going to dwell on private sex lives, why is Bill Clinton worse than serial adulterer John Kennedy (the 1960s Obama)? Can't have it both ways! Can't we deal in facts?

Now.....this crap below hitting email boxes all over the globe. So, even before the Billarys of the world are done sliming Hillary, they're already starting in on John F. Obama. PEOPLE....we have to be smarter and know in our bone marrow that the evil neo-cons have no plan to give up all the power they've stolen.

Who is Barack Obama ?

Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii.

When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was! 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent
two years in a Catholic school.

Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was "once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school." Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that his introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary, at best. But,in reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education. Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta.

Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran. Let us all remain alert.
Concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from "the inside out". What better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States being one of their own.

Click on my name to read about Barack Obama's connection to Arkansas

As far as slimeing Billy and Hilly, nobody has to do that, they did a nice job of doing it to themselves. But of course in thier book, it's always someone else's fault. Personal responsibility is not in their play book.

You can try to slime GW but you ass has been safe for the past 8 years from foreign attack. Remember the World Trade Center was first bombed on Clinton's watch and then bombed again 6 months after his watch was up.

I VOTED FOR OBAMA! WE DON'T NEED 4 YEARS OF CLINTON SLIME. BILLY DOESN'T HAVE A LEGACY AND HE WANTS 4 MORE YEARS TO TRY TO BUILD ONE FOR HIMSELF.

Oh DBI, you've gone and done it. Pointed out the clay feet of Saint Barack. You will now be in for all sorts of libel, breast beating and knee-jerking. You will be joined with the Clinton's who have been made responsible by silly Billary for 911, economic catastrophe, and all matter of sexual perversity. It must be nice to have someone else to blame for ones own shortcomings. Blame the Clintons - the scapegoat of contemporary fascist warriors.

Dear Billary,

I asked if the 3,000 dead from Katrina
&
the 3,000 dead from the WTC attack
&
the 3,000 soldiers killed in Iraq

If they felt safe during George W. Bush's Presidency.... THEY SAID NO

(Not to mention the 30,000 wounded or the 100,000 Iraqis)

I VOTED FOR OBAMA! WE DON'T NEED 4 YEARS OF CLINTON SLIME. BILLY DOESN'T HAVE A LEGACY AND HE WANTS 4 MORE YEARS TO TRY TO BUILD ONE FOR HIMSELF.<<

This should tell you that the Rwingnuts are 100% Bamaboys cause they sure fear facing another Clinton and Bama is about the only one they could whip in this race.

Oh my God, DBI why are you peddling this thing for the right wing? I understand you are saying its a lie but you are like the reporters who run with the news story about it you are taking a slanderous and flat out lying chain email and giving it a more widely exposed media platform.

It's all lies

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

Or click on my name

Anyway the Repubs better bring more than this and pack a lunch if they think McCain will outpace Obama in the general

DBI - Yes, It is important that we all remember the long slippery slop with the fall of the Fairness Doctrine began with Reagan. Bill bashed the events in speeches.. but triangulated and capitulated one again, with failed dismal results by supporting the telecommunications Act of 1996.. To his credit.. he does now say it was one of his worst mistakes as president.

But fail he did. Curse of the DLC I suppose. Kick fairness while it's down... and claim to be for fairness all along the way.

>>>>>>>>>>
President Clinton signs the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It is generally regarded as the most important legislation regulating media ownership in over a decade. The radio industry experiences unprecedented consolidation after the 40-station ownership cap is lifted.
<<<<<<<<<<

Booman (at my name has a very good time-line and events post of the fall of our media and Fairness Doctrine events)

And my aging memory recalls many a nightly newscasts where Clinton stumped time and again with George the elder defeated Bush for NAFTA.. He pressed a lot of Dems to fall in line with the GOPers on NAFTA... a bit more than just failing alone and signing it (which would have been horrific enough).. Again.. another curse of the DLC triangle in the Dem party.

And it all happened in public and within her party. The dread Republicans she is used to hating, whom she seems to pay no psychic price for hating, and who hate her right back, are not doing this to her. Her party is doing this.

If you guys are letting Billary dictate how you vote you are really lost

Obama is the stronger general candidate. Look at every major poll that has been published.

The right wing is not even charge of its own party anymore or we would be looking at Guliani or Thompson in the general election.

Stop acting out of fear of the right wing and vote for who you like to be President

At the same time, right now as I type....Barack Obama is the new John F. Kennedy! Barack is the best thing since JFK. Obama is sooooo Kennedy-esk! The only good thing that has happened to this nation since JFK! Obama talks just like JFK.<<

Well Massachusetts didn't think so, eh. He should "talk just JFK" since they both employ the very same speech writer. But you can't fool Massachusetts with just a speech writer. However you can fool a bunch of dumbass Arkies with one. Wait! Arkies voted overwhelmingly for Hillary.

President killer总统去AWOL从国民自卫队

McCain -- 必须泄漏秘密生存几年当越南战俘 -- 你知道它& 我知道它!

表决为Obama是浪费表决 -- 我们可以鼓励Bloomberg跑作为独立？

I'm reminded that

"During a speech by Truman in, Harrisburg, Illinois attacking the Republicans during the 1948 Presidential election campaign a supporter yelled out, "Give 'em Hell, Harry!". Truman replied, "I don't give them Hell. I just tell the truth about them and they think it's Hell." Subsequently, "Give 'em Hell, Harry!" became a lifetime slogan for Truman supporters."
______

Maybe those who believe Sen. Obama stands a better chance of winning in November are right; as he closes in on the nomination, I certainly hope so. I tend to think Sen. Clinton would have been the better president, but there is nothing I could say here that would convince anyone who doesn't already believe it -- and maybe I'm wrong anyway.

But there seems little room to doubt that some characteristics for which we admire men are being held against Sen. Clinton. And it seems that even staunch supporters of Sen. Obama should (if they concede that this is so) be dismayed by that.

It would have been inspiring, and appropriate, to have been able to say, "Give em, Hell, Hillary . . . . "

Orval,

Was Katrina Bush's fault. It was the incompetent Dems in Louisiana that were the problem. You really had to reach for that one. Had they not spent the millions upon millions of federal monies they had been given over the years to fix the levees, on dumb ass other things, the situation would not have been so bad. Then they re-elected that dumb ass Ray Negan and re-elected (Money in the Freezer) William Jefferson.

FACT......
it was Clinton's insistence on UN-backed economic sanctions in contrast to just military embargos, against Iraq, during his term in office. These sanctions on civilians, a task force of leading American physicians estimated, took half a million Iraqi childrenâ?Ts lives.
During his presidency, Bill Clinton presided over the most devastating regime of economic sanctions in history that the UN estimated took the lives of as many as a million Iraqis, the vast majority of them children. In May of 1996, 60 Minutes aired an interview with Madeline Albright, who at the time was Clinton's UN Ambassador. Correspondent Leslie Stahl said to Albright, "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And-and you know, is the price worth it?"
Madeline Albright replied "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price-we think the price is worth it"

It would have been inspiring, and appropriate, to have been able to say, "Give em, Hell, Hillary . . . . "
<<<

Agreed.. If only she or Bill had ever shown a propensity for giving anyone other then centrist and left leaning Dems a little hell.

Tap, Did you see what her DLC buddies (Harold Ford) are doing to divide Democrats in Memphis? (at my name)

Sorry, but the Clintons are acting like Rove.. and should be cast away with utter disdain. they are a pox on the D party.

Remember, thanks to Clinton, Marx Pryor and Mike Ross are the happiest AR politicians today.

Orval,

Ask Rickey Ray Rector what he thinks about Bill Clinton and the politics Billy boy played with, regarding Rickey's life.

Eureka Springs, I understand that you have principled reasons -- free of gender bias and equally applicable to Bill or Hillary Clinton -- for being against her.

I just think the reasoning of *some* is neither principled nor free of gender bias.

No reflection on you.

Rovian dirty politics again? or big 'O' fans?

Loyalty vs. Voters: A Superdelegate's Dilemma

"Cleaver notes that some members of Congress who support Clinton are experiencing threats - not from fellow members but when they return home.

They have been told that they would face opposition in their next election if they do not support Obama, and Cleaver says some - such as John Lewis - have become the victims of "robo-calls." In Lewis' case, the calls said "very, very derogatory things about him."

Cleaver, too, has experienced some troubles."

[LINK] blue bejeeus this ones for you james...

"I just think the reasoning of *some* is neither principled nor free of gender bias. "

Who can be happy about that -- even if you hate Sen. Clinton on principle and delight to see her beaten?

"Some [Ohio] voters say sexism less offensive than racism" -- CNN (at the blue TAP)

Well duh! Sexism is much more culturally acceptable than racism. Not because people tend to be more enlightened about racism, but because sexism is a 24/7 thing and much less blatant. The lines are blurrier. Every sexist pig has a momma and various females in their young lives. Most racist have never spent any time with those they hate. But anyway it comes, whatever 'ism' it is, it's all about scared, small people trying to elevate themselves at the expense of others. It's all bad.

I'm so not surprised that billary's a rabid Republican pretending to be for Obama. Sorry...given my VAST experience with a wide range of Republicans/conservatives (sometimes they're the same, sometimes not), I will NEVER believe that one of em will vote for either Hillary or Obama. They'll stay home if they can't abide McCain. If I'm wrong...I'll be happy.

This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder if all that red-state lovey-dovey for Mr. Obama isn't going to vanish in a heartbeat once the NRA and GOP bring out the tire irons:

MILWAUKEE (AP) - Barack Obama said Friday that the country must do "whatever it takes" to eradicate gun violence following a campus shooting in his home state, but he believes in an individual's right to bear arms.
..
The senator, a former constitutional law instructor, said some scholars argue the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees gun ownerships only to militias, but he believes it grants individual gun rights.
..
"I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation" like background checks, he said during a news conference.
...
Although Obama supports gun control, while campaigning in gun-friendly Idaho earlier this month, he said he does not intend to take away people's guns.
...
At his news conference, he voiced support for the District of Columbia's ban on handguns, which is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court next month.

"The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't born out by our Constitution," Obama said.
----------------

I can see the ads now: "Obama wants every city in America to have the right to come into your home and take away YOUR guns . . . is that the One America YOU want? VOTE JOHN McCAIN"

BTW, John McCain signed the Administration's Friend-of-the-Court brief that asks the Supreme Court to strike down the D.C. ban on handguns. (Course, now, Dick Cheney took the unusaul step of signing a much stronger brief that asked the Court virtually to limit any kind of restrictions).

I hope I'm wrong, but I have a feeling Sen. Obama's red state strength is going to go "Poof!" based on issues no Democrat has been hitting him with. Maybe it won't matter.

Do ya think maybe, Tap, that there are lots of Billarys crossing over to vote for Obama in the primaries just to defeat the hated Clintons? Clearly our Billary is a rightwing nut of the worst kind. The kind that pretend to be Democrats. Hell, Billary isn't even a Mark Pryor Democrat!

Listen up! The 2008 campaign hasn't even warmed up yet and we already up to our ears in dirty tricks. Plus our national MSN has decided to treat and package this campaign like it's Monday Night Football...which totally obscures the important points and plays up on their manufactured Paris Hilton type drama. The press may yet prove to be a worse enemy than Cheney-Bush.

Love Obama, but don't be Rush Limbaugh blind about it. Hate Hillary, but have principled, documented facts as the reason for your hate. Do not fall into the Karl Rove-Billary hands. St. Obama will be up next at the guillotine as soon as the Billarys draw and quarter the Clintons. We be living in very very serious times. Without using every trick in the book, the Republicans haven't got a chance. We've got 1 shot to get the future right, at best. Don't play into the blood soaked hands of the evil ones. Unite.....don't keep dividing!

Do ya think maybe, Tap, that there are lots of Billarys crossing over to vote for Obama in the primaries just to defeat the hated Clintons?

In my opinion, "yes."

All of you seem to be playing right in Rove vote caging phase three. Karl Rove learned under Lee Atwater and CREEP. He learned first hand how to get the opponent to self-destruct.

Did any of you ever hear about Chuck Colson and the Canuck letter and what it did to the campaign of Muskie that CREEP considered a dangerous threat? Do you remember what Tim Griffin and others did around the country to ensure a low Democratic voter turnout?

It's called "caging" and Rove is the master. Did you really think he went home to retire and write punditry for the WSJ?

You chowderheads deserve what you will reap by smearing one Democratic Candidate against another and building-up emnity. That's just what that fat slug that crawled out from under his rock wants.

Remember the real problems: Bush, Cheny, Rove, Rethuglicans, Neocons, etc. etc. Don't let yourself be caged. Click on my handle for a quote from Karl Rove.

Da**n handle deleting ArtTimeBlog preview!

If you don't believe, the Rethuglican are egging you on to "cage" the election again. Then read the NPR transcript.

"". . . Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, Missouri's 5th Congressional District representative, another member of the Congressional Black Caucus . . . Cleaver notes that some members of Congress who support Clinton are experiencing threats - not from fellow members but when they return home.
They have been told that they would face opposition in their next election if they do not support Obama, and Cleaver says some - such as John Lewis - have become the victims of "robo-calls." In Lewis' case, the calls said "very, very derogatory things about him."
Cleaver, too, has experienced some troubles.
"I had a person in my district send out a newsletter, for which I know he didn't pay, distributed primarily in the African-American community, in which he suggested that I had been paid by Sen. Clinton to support her. I don't know if there's anyone who [is African American] who hasn't taken some grief for supporting Sen. Clinton."
When he endorsed Clinton in August, Cleaver thought she would win the Democratic nomination - and he believes it now, too. . . "
The point is do you really think Obama is set-up for "robo-calls?" However, we know the Rethuglicans are. Just read the book How to Rig an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative: by Allen Raymond, convicted Rethuglican operative who did time in Federal lock-up for jamming phone lines of the New Hampshire Democratic Party in 2002 to block a Democratic get-out-the-vote campaign. In addition to the phone-jamming scheme, Raymond details other Republican tactics such as the use of scripted, phony automated phone messages to try to play on white voters' racial prejudices in a 2000 New Jersey congressional race.
Does that sound familiar? How about the "Robo-calls" to John Lewis? or
"Reader A. writes in about a robocall she received late last week: It asked if I was going to vote in the VA primary (yes), if I considered myself a Republican (no), if I considered myself an independent (yes), if it would affect my vote if I knew Huckabee had the endorsement of some sort of machinists' union (no), if I considered myself pro-life (no), if it would affect my vote to know that Romney changed his position multiple times on abortion (no -- and why are they still asking about Romney?), if it would affect my vote to know that McCain supports testing on unborn babies (no -- and what?), if it would affect my vote to know that Huckabee is the strongest candidate on life (no), and then a series of similar questions on illegal immigration (first negative info on Romney, then on McCain, then positive info on Huckabee) . . ."
or
Rove's Fake Democrat Robocalls- November 6th, 2006
Rove has set up fake-Democrat robocalls, according to Democrats.com. It seems to have been going on for at least two weeks. Report this if it happens to to you! More details and ongoing coverage at: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com http://dailykos.com (mostly November 5th) Karl Rove has been bragging for weeks about his "72-hour program" to swing the elections, which predict a Democratic takeover of Congress. . . . The calls are made to Democrats and swing voters at all times of day or night to make them angry. And they pretend to be from the Democrat ("Hello, I'm calling with information about Lois Murphy"). If you hang up, they call back 7-8 times, and each time you hear the Democrat's name, to get you angry at him or her. If you stay on, you get to hear a scathing attack on the Democrat. . . .

or
Josh Marshall at Talking Points memo: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/010866.php
". . . Both parties deliver millions of robocalls during election season. You've probably gotten the calls from both parties and many outside groups. It happens every cycle. Only one party has a nationwide campaign to deliver millions of intentionally-harassing calls disguised to appear that they're from the opposite party. That party is the Republican party. And the calls are funded by the NRCC - the House GOP election committee.

It's the party of election subversion. Deal with it."

docholiday - You are right and it's coming no matter what or whom the Dems nominate, unless they are all tied up in court or impeachment hearings by summer. But the hate, be it racist or sexist will be non stop. I don't believe for a minute that GOPers are crossing the line in large numbers to vote for Obama in the primary.. We would know of fliers or mass emails with marching orders.. if there was/is a large organized effort to do so.. Somebodys kid would have ratted them out by now. On a small scale perhaps..but not across several states.. not this time.

The Tim Griffin clones of the world know their wing-nut welfare checks will run dry if they lose the Nov election (except in places like the Clinton School and Mellon Scaife projects).. so expect nothing but gritting teeth and sharp daggers.

Knowing what to expect and how to fight back is imperative, but selecting someone who doesn't use the very tactics we despise (racist lies and religious smears).. you know someone with integrity.. might be a refreshing choice for a lot of us Dems. Maybe Obama has integrity.. I don't know.. but whatever the antithesis of integrity is.. it's also Clinton.

I keep trying to understand how so many seemingly very fine folks here are so willing to ardently defend, even promote, such integrity free failures.. but I will keep listening and trying to figure it out.

Fair enough Eureka. To quote a phrase, "Accentuate the positive."

Tell everyone why Obama will be better. What are the specific policies he will put in place that will sell him? Why is his program better for the United States?

Quote specific's where Hillary's policies of steps failed and what she missed that could have gone better. And if you have specifics about Hillary's "antithesis of integrity," then state it and give specifics, but just alluding to your opinion is exactly the same thing the Swiftboat operation pulled on a veteran awarded the Silver Star.

But no matter what, be ready to support the winner after the primaries or convention, otherwise you're already wearing a McCain '08 button and I don't think you want Bush redux in Iraq for 100 years. We have a long time before November to assess the candidates and their platforms and abilities.

Supporting me is de facto supporting McCain, because he'll beat me.

Hundreds of thousands of Republicans will head to the polls not to vote for McCain but to vote against me.

I am a Republican party energizer, an activator, a stimulator, and I appreciate the support from all the Dems out there carefully taking aim at their feet.

Deathbyinches:

It's not the right wing nuts. Not even a vast right wing conspiracy! Read below:

And it all happened in public and within her party. The dread Republicans she is used to hating, whom she seems to pay no psychic price for hating, and who hate her right back, are not doing this to her. Her party is doing this.