Arkansas Blog

Boy, I really like Keith Olbermann. He has always struck me as a journalist of extraordinary intelligence and integrity.

I highly recommend two clips of him today on America Blog at http://www.americablog.com/, dissecting Hilary's repeated claim that she and McCain have expertise to run the country, while Obama doesn't.

As Olbermann says, Hillary sounds more and more like a Lieberman Democrat.

And this blog reminds me every day of how many of those Lieberman Democrats still reside in Arkansas. Eviscerate the Democratic platform of all progressive tenets, and you can call yourself a Democrat all you want, but you're still just a Republican in a Democrat's clothes.

I suppose when it's your own rights that aren't being trampled on, it's fine to talk about justice deferred--and deferred and deferred. Obama may well turn out to be an SOB, but the more I listen to those who play HIlary against him, the happier I am that Hilary is not carrying the day. More Lieberman Democrats we do not need.

please pardon the shameless self-promotion

but it seems, to me, that David Brook's "Playing by the Clinton Rules" in today's NYTimes hath been channelling the muleboy (name/link) "GOP BHO JAP"

time will tell, but Brooks and I have come to believe that if Obama can effectively refuse to play "by the Clinton Rules", or "the politics of the past" (a.k.a. "fighting in the gutter") he will do himself (and the country) an enormous benefit.

i b off to SXSW in Austin, mo later, keep up the good fight.

We don't need BITCH SPEECH at this point coming from either camp! This sounded like it was conjured up by that republican BITCH SPEAKER what's her name -- OH! now I remember ANN COULTER?

A perfect example of the Neo-left that supports Obama. Their accension to power will prove just as disasterous as the Neo-Conservatives of the Republician party.

I watched Keith last night and usually watch him every night. He's entertaining and his O'Reilly stuff is LOL funny. Last night, however, he spent the first thirty minutes on 'bad Hillary' and nary a critical word about Obama...and it's not the first time he's been so dramatically skewed. It's this extreme bias for Obama and against Hillary that makes many of us, well, irritated. NO politician is that saintly and NO ONE is as evil as Hillary is often portrayed.

I think Hillary has the best chance of defeating McCain...and, as far as I'm concerned that is the only goal. And, I'm sure I'm not going to like some of the stuff she does as president...'cause I haven't liked many of her Senate choices. But the idea of a McCain presidency's impact on the War, healthcare and the Supreme Court makes Hillary look like Kucinich (my real choice).

Obama's people are young and inexperienced, now, also a little frustrated and probably pretty exhausted. Who thinks Hillary's attack mode is attractive? meaningful? desperate? To claim this makes Obama less Obama is a little desperate itself.

Hillary's negatives will always make her the candidate to hate. She will justify McCain's attacks with her own while an Obama McCain race will have to be pretty high minded.

Brooks' article is worth the read, although he doesn't break any new ground. (link at my name) Notice in the middle though where he refers to "upper-middle-class goo-goo's." Would someone like to define that?

Or maybe not a link at my name... Here it is:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/opinion/07brooks.html?hp

Interesting that not one of the pro-Hilary responses thus far engages Olbermann's primary point: that in constantly stating that McCain has far more experience than Obama, she is actually placing herself on McCain's side vs. Obama.

How does that serve the interests of the Democratic party in any shape, form, or fashion in the coming elections? Vote for me because I'm more like a Republican than Obama is?!

Muleboy, I am confused by your post. The Brooks column in the Times this morning is entitled "Obama's Theory is Tested." And the conclusion he reaches is the exact opposite of what you posit above. To quote Brooks:
"Besides, the real softness of the campaign is not that Obama is a wimp. It's that he has never explained how this new politics would actually produce bread-and-butter benefits to people in places like Youngstown and Altoona.
If he can't explain that, he's going to lose at some point anyway."

Those are Brooks closing remarks to a piece that illuminates the conundrum of the Obama campaign begun as "an inspirational, grass-roots movement with a new kind of leadership" and now moving into attack mode by which they attempt to "be tough and keep their virginity." I don't know about your support of him, but that change is going to be a major letdown in expectations for many of his followers.

I have maintained all along that part of my decision making regarding the Democratic nominee is that Obama is not electable, not in the real United States of 2008. This current dilemma of his which relates to that electability is summed up for me in another quote from Brooks' column: "Every day that he [Obama] looks conventional is a bad day for him."

Zelda,

You and I are in complete agreement ... the candidate who best exemplified my issues was Kucinich. That said, I have long believed that the person who has shown the most political tenacity over the decades is Hillary. She is the one who will fight to correct the wrongs in this country...and with the mess that GWB has foisted on us, we will need a leader who can fight with the best of them.

"...She will justify McCain's attacks with her own while an Obama McCain race will have to be pretty high minded."--fletch

Anyone who thinks Obama's camp isn't already guilty of some soiled politics and/or that an Obama/McCain race will be high minded is naive or forgetful of decades of presidential runs. And, isn't it special and revealing that the 'bitch' is the bad one amongst the three...that she's the one taking poor Obama/McCain down into her gutter...that without her the race will be 'high minded.' Just one more Eve in their saintly midst.

Guess I disagree, fletch.

I wonder how your say "Lecherous Husband of Monster" in Chinese?

"Interesting that not one of the pro-Hilary responses thus far engages Olbermann's primary point: that in constantly stating that McCain has far more experience than Obama, she is actually placing herself on McCain's side vs. Obama." by: MuddlingThrough

I don't believe Hillary was doing anything but stating the obvious.
Didn't she phrase the statement as McCain himself would tout his experience?
I guess you hear what you want 'eh?

I think it's ironic that Olberman attacks FOX NEWS, but then works for MSNBC.

Every politician, across the spectrum, promises to "fight" for this or "fight" for that.

Why not a fresh idea: Promises to "work hard" for issues.

Damn straight Earl! It's fight, fight, fight for everything under the sun, an eternal battle to be waged. The thing that turned me off with Edwards was that he was constantly going to fight, fight for this, that and the other. Work seems a more productive thing for a politician to advocate, work might even get something done for a change.

David Brooks says, "Besides, the real softness of the campaign is not that Obama is a wimp. It's that he has never explained how this new politics would actually produce bread-and-butter benefits to people in places like Youngstown and Altoona. If he can't explain that, he's going to lose at some point anyway."

So Hilary is shilling for McCain, and David Brooks (David Brooks!) is shilling for Hilary . . . .Interesting.

Interesting that Arkansas Democrats supporting Hilary are now finding themselves in bed with the likes of David Brooks. And are suddenly cozying up to Texas, of all places.

If Obama frightens the likes of Brooks--and he clearly does--but Hilary doesn't, then I'm more and more convinced that Obama is the person I'd want to represent my party in the coming elections. Not Hilary. The more I listen to her supporters--especially in my home state--the less I like her.

As my Arkansas-born and Arkansas-bred mother constantly drilled into me when she was raising me, we are judged by the company we keep. Look at people's friends, and you get a good idea of the person himself or herself.

As a gay Arkansan, I found the outpouring of bile against Obama when he issued that open letter to the gay community particularly revolting--bile poured out by my fellow Arkansas Democrats. I haven't seen a single reference on these threads to Obama's courage in taking on the homophobia of the African-American community as unChristian in Beaumont recently.

If all of you are right and attacking homophobia is going to lose Obama points, especially among Southern (i.e., Lieberman) Democrats, then Obama is a man of rare courage, in speaking out in that way, and not calculating the cost.

Inexperienced he may be, but I'll take my chances on an inexperienced candidate who at least has the courage of his convictions and whose friends don't grin and talk to me about human rights and progress, while sticking their foot against the door when I try to step through it.

If elected, I have no doubt that Obama will disappoint me. But when I start tallying up the disappointments prior to the election and notice the difference in the Hilary-Obama columns already--especially after that outpouring of bile vs. Obama's attempt to address gay rights--then I'm clear about which candidate I'll take a chance on, even knowing that politicians are never saints.

Correction to my last posting (final paragraph): "If HE is elected..."

Ms. I. Cook and Ms. M. Hamilton, who taught me to write English better than that in 9th and 12th grade, are rolling in their graves at the misplaced modifier I actually wrote, just as they would be if I wrote "whom" as the subject of a clause that is itself the object of a preposition.

Here is an aside that has little to do with the Democratic nomination, which I believe the capable Sen. Obama has all but secured, or media bias. This sidebar has to do with the 16 year old daughter I'll too soon launch into the life she'll build for herself.

I know politics is hyperbole. I have no illusions about what Sen. Clinton's advisors have likely called Barak, "off the record." Nevertheless, I had hoped a Hillary Clinton nomination/presidency would hasten the day when folks (especially those like this bright, articulate *female* campaign worker) don't label women differently based on conduct that is accepted, even expected, from men.

Does anybody think that if Sen. Obama were running against Bill Clinton, and every word out of Hillary's mouth had instead come from Bill, someone besides right wing nuts would be calling *him* a "monster?" I expect Sen. McCain to fight in a much more hardball fashion; I'll be watching to see if this young lady believes he, too, is a "monster." Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Hitler--I have heard these men called monsters in a reasoned discussion such as an interview. Apparently the monster threshold is much less when we are gauging women. (Oh well, maybe I am being too sensitive. Dads are like that, sometimes.)

Whatever one thinks of Hillary, I am concerned as I wonder whether the *next* woman that comes along will find that the very things required to rise to the top will cause her to be perceived -- even by other women -- as some kind of soulless creature.

End of the aside.

KO has not always been fair in re Hillary, imo. But last night aside from the amount of time he dedicated to Hillary who deserved it considering how much outrageous material she and her campaign have laid out in a very short time was extremely telling in many ways..

We saw the true neo republican loving Clinton who dropped her triangle for a moment.. Her complimenting McCain was in a manner which complimented everything republican from Nixon to Reagan and both Bushies...which is what the DLC Clintons have always done if you pay any attention to the results of their actions.. They constantly sell out anyone to the left of them and build up anyone to the right. COnsidering what those to the right of them are doing these days...be it Pryor and or Lieberman to almost every Republican, I would think folks would finally wake up and feel the knife in their back.

Praising McCain as potential commander in chief meant one thing most of all to me... She wants the same war/occupation/foreign policy and the same mannerisms that McCain and Cheney want...and she is more then willing to sell out the D party in order to get her chance or assure that McCain does...above all else.

Hillary did what the "kid" in Fayetteville did recently (supported a candidate in another party) and she must be defeated if she is only in this for herself.

I have not been a fan of many things Obama... but Bill appearing on Rush Limbaugh while Rush had a vote Clinton banner on his web page..which turned back to a graphic depicting Hillary as a witch the next day..is unacceptable.. If the Clintons are going to sell their soul to the devil incarnate then they will definitely sell the D party and the country out as well and Hillary praising McCain while putting down Obama and the D party proves it, yet again.

Hillary will continue illegal wars and illegal occupations... love for McCain should be enough for even the less informed voter to "get it".

Her love for anti choice Pryor should be enough for women to "get it".

Hillary cannot accomplish good things for the economy if we continue down our empirical war path.. which has been a dismal failure since at least Viet Nam.

And Hillary, ready to be a war criminal on day one, will be the least chance of us ever seeing accountability on the neo con republican criminal cabal. Under McCain.. the republic would at least be very suspicios and congress might grow a spine and fight him every step of the way.. Hillary and D congress will result in neo foreign policy running unfettered again for at least another 4 years.. which must not happen!

She is as dangerous as Bush and Cheney because people are fooling themselves into believing she is a Dem and a Dem who will do things differently.. against all evidence to the contrary.

So I sent a contribution to my fourth D presidential candidate Kucinich Dodd Edwards and now Obama last night and I wrote a letter to all super delegates telling them why.. If Hillary takes the nomination I will either vote Nader or McCain, whichever has the best chance of ridding our country of the DLC and their minions.

Enough!

Hillary Clinton tells Americans that John McCain will keep them safer than Obama can. Somebody with a connection to the Obama campaign refers to Hillary as a monster to a Scottish newspaper and quickly apologizes.

Which one is Max outraged about? Right. This is sheer hackery.

See, I can appreciate Eureka Springs's principled critique of Hillary's record and resulting distaste for her.

But "Hillary is a monster?" I know. Words. Just words. Just words.

But words, we've been told -- and I accept -- *mean* something, especially when they encapsulate or reflect broadly held ideas, noble or ignoble. My comment is not about fairness, media bias or poor Hillary whining. That which troubles me is bigger than Hillary.

MuddlingThrough @ 9:52 - Thank you for saying what you sad so well.

I think back a couple of weeks to watching the D candidates campaign in Beaumont Texas (a well known bastion of bigotry)..

Bill Clinton pled for the bigots help..said his wives fate was in their hands.

Barack Obama told them much the same, but also told them the bigotry would have to go.

Eureka Springs, AR, I agree with you 100%. Hillary is sounding more like she would like to be McCain's VP. That's bad for the D party. Just a few months ago, when Obama mentioned Reagan's name he is vilified.

Wed. a diary at dkos went up with something every Fan of Clinton (FOC) needs to read (at my name)

Has Hillary Clinton really been "vetted" as she so often claims?

stories such as:

* Norman Hsu and his bundling of money for her campaign?

* How "dishwashers, waiters and others" poured "$1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury?"

* Bill's trip to Kazakhstan with Canadian magnate, Frank Giustra, that netted Giustra $3 billion and Bill's foundation a $131 million contribution from Giustra?

* How powerful foreign donors to Bill's presidential library, such as the Saudis, may pose a serious conflict of interest to Hillary's foreign policy actions as president?

* How Bill's tangled ties to an investment concern of Clinton friend, Ron Burkle, and it's dealings with Dubai may yet, again, threaten to compromise Hillary Clinton's execution of foreign policy as president?

* The fact that with all of these questionable financial dealings, the Clintons have been unwilling to release their tax returns, especially in light of Hillary Clinton claiming that the $5 million she lent the campaign was "her own money?"

* And, finally, though we, as Democrats, don't care who Bill schtupps (and, no, none of us believe he has kept his fly zipped the last seven years), you can be damn sure the Republicans will be digging hard (no pun intended) to see just what Bill has been up to since leaving office.

If you want another Republican president, vote for Hillary. You'll get one whether she wins or loses. Her ass-kissing of McCain, her solid membership in the D.C. good old boys club, her love for the politics of division and conflict -- how do my fellow Democrats rationalize these things in their minds? Do you really think that electing a woman for the sake of electing a woman is magically going to make something good happen for the country?

For those who think that continuing the Democratic primaries 30 to 60 days longer will damage their chances in November, I think that the damage has already been done. The snide exchanges on this rather docile blog and the more vicious ones on other blogs show that the divisiveness is already etched deeply into the ranks of the party activists. About the only way to prevent half of the Democrats from staying home in November is to have both of them on the ticket.

They should use the next couple of months toughening each other up, learning how to respond to the inevitable Republican mean machine. If you think that further primary fighting will give Republicans ammunition for the general election, you don't know a damned thing about politics. Neither Obama nor Clinton can come up with any new attack on each other that the Republicans haven't already researched, refined, and planned to use already.

A wild, bare-fisted brawl is what the Democrats need. Just watching it may give McCain a coronary, especially when he realizes that the Democrats, uncharacteristically, might actually fight in order to win the Presidency.

"Barack Obama told them much the same, but also told them the bigotry would have to go."

Well-put, Eureka. You're right, Beaumont is a very conservative community. And the audience Obama was addressing was largely African American. And they clearly did not welcome his inclusion of gay Americans among those who experience discrimination.

He could simply have remained silent. He chose not to do so. For that, I give him high marks.

Call me a one-issue voter if you wish (not you, Eureka, you understand, but others on the blog), but this is about MY life, and not just my political preferences or ideology.

And it's far more than about one issue. In my view, when Clinton caved in on don't ask, don't tell, and when he signed DOMA, he gave the right-wing Republicans a signal that he'd cave and cave some more. It was not a surprise to see the sell-out of Joycelyn Elders and then Lana Guinier. And the economic policies of the Clinton administration were horrendous, on the whole. I was not surprised to read the other day that Hilary takes in more donations than any other candidate from the top officials of Wal-Mart, and served on their board for many years.

I want my party to stop selling out--on all human rights, including the rights of workers. I want us to have vision and courage again. I want a president who mirrors some core values I was taught as a child--core Arkansas values--like being loyal to your friends in a pinch, when it costs.

Obama may bring nothing of that, if he's president. But when it's a case of the devil I know rather than the one I don't know, prudence inclines me to choose the one I don't yet know.

And either is such a stark alternative to what we've had for so long now, which McCain represents, that I will vote for either one, though with a heavy heart if Hilary is the candidate my party chooses. But, then, I remember well campaigning for Eugene McCarthy in my small Arkansas town way back when, knowing full well that what I saw in the Democratic party was surely not what most of my fellow citizens--who had long since begun voting Republican, anyway, because of the race card--saw in the Democratic party.

Can you define "snide" for us, Mr. Lendall?

I'm not implying you don't know the meaning of the word--just asking what in this discussion fits that definition.

Eureka Springs is right on target.
I am a life long Democrat (69) I will do one of three things if Hillary gets the nomination.
1. Vote for Nader
2. Vote for McCain
3. Stay home

Hillary as the old sayer goes is "anybody's dog that will hunt with her" She is no better than Leiberman or Pryor.

She will say anything, do anything, or step on anyone to get where she wants to be .Her campaign tactics show that.

I am white, female, way over 50, and have seen more elections than some of you put together.

I want change!!

As I was checking out at Kroger, I noticed one of the tabloids had a cover story about a man claiming to have been a sexual partner of Obamas. Is this story another plant of the Clintons?

On a side note, I hope you environmentalist whacko libs are going to support your buddies at www.cruisecarinc.com and buy yourself a nice electric car/go kart. With all of the liberals in Hillcrest, I'm shocked that I don't see more of these cars when we have a local dealer in downtown Little Rock. Just keep the damn go karts out of the fast lane.

How many of you who say Hillary in effect is touting McCain have heard the phrase "wet behind the ears" -- a favorite of my daddy's? My take on her comment? She is simply pointing out that Barack Obama has virtually no experience which will help him run this country in what promises to be horrendously difficult years.
He served eight mostly undistinguished years in the Illinois legislature until a Chicago kingmaker began pushing him as United States Senate material. He was in the United States Senate barely two years before he announced his candidacy for president.
So how much does he owe his kingmaker? Is that a favor we want to repay? As someone who has heard from family members about Chicago politics all my life, I know I don't. Nothing is free in that arena. Nothing is done without future gain in mind. Any help you get will be followed by a hefty bill, and probably sooner rather than later.
On the other hand, John McCain does have lengthy government service experience, including 20-plus years as a United States senator, in his favor. This is a mere statement of fact. It doesn't mean that I support him for president any more than Hillary does. Far too many of his views are almost diametrically opposed to mine.
Of course, as a twice elected senator, Hillary's formal government service is relatively thin. However, eight years as a practical and politically attentive first lady substitutes in part for actual political longevity. Then there is the likelihood of Bill Clinton serving as a de facto advisor. It might not be an easy arrangement for either of them, but I suspect Hillary Clinton has enough sense to weigh advice from all sources before making difficult decisions.
I continue to support Hillary and hope she can pull it out. If she can't, I will support Barack Obama. I will worry about his capabilities but I will vote for him -- and try to convince my husband that Obama will be a better president than John McCain. I just wish I could be sure of that.

Doigotta,
BINGO!

From all appearances, Samantha can easily be the Anthrax Coulter for the neo-Left.

Muddled
"Can you define "snide" for us"

Here's an example of "snide:"

If you have not detected deceptive, disparaging and contemptuous remarks in this blog between the supporters of the candidates over the last several months, I admire your ability to breathe with your head buried in the sand.

WOW!!!
Ding Dong! the Democratic Party is dead...damn y'all be a fickle bunch, and you didn't even need Orval or JD's help this morning.

Looks like it's President McCranky for-sure; how sad for the country and our young soldiers.

OH YEAH, muddlingThrough, how did you square with Sen. Barack Obama's decision to tour South Carolina with gospel entertainer Donnie McClurkin, a self-proclaimed "former homosexual" who believes it is his mission to turn gays straight.

I guess we all have HOPE for CHANGE.

Doigotta - Well said for one with your views.. except you seem to be holding experience/longevity and the consistent failure of both Mccain and Clinton to be more valuable than a shorter less failed experience of a more honest forthright Dem such as Obama.

How is repeated failure so much better than someone who has not failed? How do we the USA turn our ship in any new direction with the old guard at the helm?

It's time for you pro Clinton and McCain, pro "experience" folks, to cite actual achievements when you hold up experience as a so called benefit.

I think for the most part we need to throw the experienced folks to the political trash bin. It's the result of their experience which has this country in needless genocidal occupations and a sinking economy...with dwindling liberties, no accountability of a whole lot of criminals at the top and no plan but to keep repeating our failed mistakes as our empire sinks.

I think it's pretty clear that Hillary's game plan now is to make sure that IF she doesn't win the nomination, Obama will be damaged goods in the fall. This will allow McCain to win and then she can come back and run again in 4 years.

I used to laugh at people who would say things like that, but now I'm starting to believe it myself. As it is right now all McCain has to do is just run Hillary's ads again in the fall. And then run video of Hillary talking about how much more qualified McCain is than Obama. I think Hillary knew what she was doing when she started this crap and there is a long range reason for it.

Also, I didn't notice the ArkTimes linking to the stories of the chief of staff of the Canadian Prime Minister talking about how the Clinton campaign told him to take all NAFTA talk with a grain of salt.

Oh and Hil's people can compare Obama to Rove, Bush and Ken Star and that's seems to be no problem. Not to mention if you go to Hillaryis44.org and look at all the name calling from Hillary supporters.

Personally I don't think she should have resigned. Obama shouldn't have let her. He should have told Hillary to stop whining. Besides, Hillary is a monster.

To be completely honest with you I'm ready to give Hil the nomination. So she can get swamped with negative stories that the Republicans are holding back on and lose to McCain. Then the Dems can lose the Senate (probably in 2010) and maybe the house in 2010 too. Then we can all come back here and ask Max if he's happy.

Hell, even if Hillary does win in Nov that makes it even more likely that the Repubs will take the house and Senate back in 2010.

If you're voting for McCain over Obama or Hillary, quit pretending you're a Democrat. I'm as tolerant as anyone I've known...but I have no tolerance for dems who'll vote for McCain 'cause of some pretentious indignation over a non-perfect Obama or Hillary. My god...if you say you're a Dem but can vote for a Republican after the last seven years...never mind...I don't want to test the censors.

I agree, jimlendall...this Democratic race can be a good thing; and it is a living testimony that the Democratic electorate is alive and kicking...unlike the Stepford Mothball Crew. It'll give the country months of realizing the stark differences between a McCain presidency and an Obama or a Hillary presidency.

Hey jazzy!

Zelda,

Agreed.

"...a shorter less failed experience of a more honest forthright Dem such as Obama."

by: Eureka Springs, AR

LOL...that's great Eureka, thanks for the laugh!

Hillary's campaign has put out an add with Obama with much darker skin than he has in person. I don't think monster is an unfair description of her.

In response to Severus's unrelated mention of go-karts to the discussion, here is another electric vehicle available from Electric Transportation of Arkansas. Nice looking go-kart.

http://www.etarkansas.com/uploads/Zotye.pdf

Well, since Samantha Power is getting all this attention, I might as well recommend that y'all read her books sometime. She is a very passionate and intelligent defender of human rights and has been at the forefront of a lot of important discussions about modern day genocide, Darfur, etc.

"And I'd like to acknowledge Professor Samantha Power for all her work over the past decade to draw the world's attention to the problem of genocide. Her Pulitzer Prize-winning book has changed the way we understand genocide, and I'm glad that she could join us today." - Wes Clark, Concord, New Hampshire
December 17, 2003.

Well, sorry I'm late to the party. I don't really have time to read through every comment either.

Let me say:
1. I will vote for Hillary is she wins the Democratic nomination through delegates.
2. I will NOT vote for Hillary if the superdelegates OVERRULE the delegates. Too many new people have gotten involved in politics (say, 1/6 of my campus' population) in this election to supersede their choice. Sure, many of them probably support Obama because it's the chic thing to do, but the vast majority are attuned to his politics.
3. Obama's won, so I won't have to worry about making that decision anyways.

According to the Associated Press:

"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."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080307/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_delegates_8

Good on you for posting this controversial piece on the Obama campaign, Max (and ignoring the far more often ad hominem attacks by the Clinton campaign).

Unfortunately, it still doesn't help the argument against Obama's candidacy because it rests on the presupposition that "Obamaists" base their support on "hope" or perceptions of Obama's campaign as sacrosanct. Now, I know it's easier for you to presuppose that's why Obamaists support Obama--then you can post items like these as if it disproves Obama's candidacy.

But the fact is he's simply a better candidate.

I don't care how many years McCain spent in the Senate, that he's a Viet Nam vet/former POW/decorated war hero. He's got the endorsement of George W. Bush and he intends to keep this country at war. He is very weak economically. He would be the oldest person ever elected president. He wants to bomb Iran. And, unbelievably, he supports torture. How could anyone even begin to reconcile that last one?

Thank you JuneOf44! After admiring Power's writings on genocide, I now have to recognise her unique perspective on Hillary that none of us here have had the opportunity to experience. "Monster" must be a fitting description.

Thanks for your response to my question, Mr. Lendall. But its Muddling, not Muddled--unless you also post as chasv?

Now that question is a snide one, because it contains a barb hidden in what appears to be a simple question. Or it would be snide had I responded to Severus by saying, "Oh, of course, the tabloids at the Hillcrest checkout counter are where I get all my news, too. Such reliable sources."

You define snide as deceptive, disparaging, and contemptuous. I may well have been aware of some such remarks by folks on both sides for some time. Not sure I'd always call them snide. Childish is more often a word that leaps to mind. I'm especially unhappy, I think, with those who just won't let Hilary go now that she appears to have lost--and who are (in my view) undermining our chances in the election.

As I've said repeatedly on these threads, I'd be a lot happier had we had some of these progressive vs. status quo conversations in the Democratic party lo these many years, and not in the midst of the campaign. But those we have put in office on the Democratic side and their media spokespeople have not been keen on having them. So we're only left with now for the forum.

And as for your comment, bejeesus, I have posted on these threads--twice, I believe--a letter I sent Newsweek when Obama took McClurkin to SC with him. You have only to google to find a copy.

I'm very interested that hope and change are suddenly now bad words in my party. We've loved so long without hearing them, perhaps some of us have gotten unused to their sound. Or maybe that's not what we really want, after all?

I don't blame all of you Obamaists for continuing your calls for Hillary to turn tail and withdraw from the race, because you are deathly frightened that she is still capable of pulling off a victory.

I don't doubt that I'd be saying the same things if things were just the opposite...that is, with Hillary ahead and being dogged to the bitter end by Obama.

However, dream on. There is absolutely no way that anyone, though, ought to give up a fight while there is still the opportunity to win out there. You and I all know that this contest is still very much up in the air.

I want my candidate to keep on fighting for victory. Why give up while there is still a chance to win the nomination and the presidency?

Go Hillary!

Gaylord, you missed the point: Powers apologized immediately and regretted for her actions. Her writings proves she's not just some professional hack.

Clinton, on the other hand, essentially says that McCain is a better candidate for President. She hasn't apologize. And correctly so, June pointed out that Max wasn't outraged about that. (Nor was he outraged about the Clinton campaign darkening the skin of Obama in ads, nor them saying Obama worked with terrorists, nor...)

A few things from someone who voted for Edwards:

First, Samantha Power was wrong to call Hillary Clinton a monster. On the other hand, the Clinton adviser who compared Obama to Kenneth Starr didn't have to resign. I'd rather be called a monster than compared to Kenneth Starr. Wouldn't you?

Second, I'm becoming more convinced that woman-hating is at the base of a lot of anti-Hillary sentiment. I also am convinced that it slops over more generally. For an example, see thirty-odd comments above where BWC said, "We don't need BITCH SPEECH at this point coming from either camp!" Am I really the only commentator that finds that wrong in reference to Hillary Clinton or Samantha Power? (Ann Coulter? I think of her as a dripping syphilitic prick--she's contagious.)

Third, consider in this light, rather than the context of Clinton vs. Obama, the fact that Samantha Power got a lot more heat than the male Clinton adviser (Wolfson, I think) who compared Obama to Kenneth Starr.

Fourth, Samantha Power's book _A Problem from Hell_ is a solid achievement that got her a Pulitzer Prize. I don't agree with much of what she says in it, but she's not just some aide, and she deserves better than to be someone's cheescake photo.

Fifth, did I mention sexism? Oh, sorry--I said woman-hating. My bad.

Oh, not me.... Mud, I have been too busy to look here lately.

What it tis tis that OBama who's a muslim, muslims treats women as dogs, and Hillery, who's a liberal as liberal can be, are fighting each other for the same goal. It that what you call an oxymoron?

Nither will be president unless it is God's will.

"OBama who's a muslim"--that's a lie.

LOL...that's great Eureka, thanks for the laugh!

Posted by: bejeeus

I LOL'd as I typed it too..)

Zelda.. Hillary and McCain are just alike when it comes time to make a decision on war and foreign policy.. I will vote against Hillary because she is not honest enough to admit it like McCain. I would rather the D party remain D than embrace neo liberal/con ways.

Thank you for letting me know that Mr. Lendall is not channeling you in deliberately altering my username, chasv. For a minute there, he almost did sound like you, though.

"And as for your comment, bejeesus, I have posted on these threads--twice, I believe--a letter I sent Newsweek when Obama took McClurkin to SC with him. You have only to google to find a copy.

I'm very interested that hope and change are suddenly now bad words in my party."
by: MuddlingThrough

I missed your post 'Muddling Through' I will google 'em thanks.
HOPE and CHANGE bad words?!?!?
Na just vapid.

Oh look. Powers is wearing those F*** Me pumps.
.

Maybe she meant "monster" in a good way, like Cookie Monster.

Chasv,

You're breaking the 8th commandment -- "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" Obama is no more a Muslim than you are.

It compounds the false witness when the lie is told over and over to more people who are encouraged to pass along the lie.

It compounds it ever more when the lie involves accusing someone of denying Christ. I don't He would have a lot of patience with people who say they love Him -- but act in accord with Satan's will of dividing us and spreading evil.

Truly, everyone who has forwarded that email or told this lie will have to answer for it no less than if they were a thief in the night or a defiler of their body.

Thanks for your reply, bejeesus. I think the two copies I posted should show up in any google search. To my knowledge, Newsweek did not choose to print the letter.

Vapid: lacking liveliness, animation, or interest? Or lacking taste, zest, or flavor; flat? Both are definitions I find in the American Heritage dictionary.

Hope and change are words that don't seem to lack animation or zest for me. A lot depends, of course, on how much we're forced to hope, and how much change will truly alter our lives.

For those living in situations constrained by prejudice, hope and change can be mighty powerful words. They can mean the difference between being enclosed by prison bars and walking free. I imagine hope and change had an entirely different ring to them for citizens forced to sit in the back of the bus in the 1950s, than they did for those who sat in front with an astonishing sense of entitlement and never a thought about those relegated to the back.

I imagine Dr. King's rhetoric sounded different, too, to those sitting in the back of the bus and those in the front. Insipid perhaps to those in front, making a life-death difference to those in the back.

One of the most powerful books I have ever waded through was Ernst Bloch's Principle of Hope. I admire the book because it shows that hope is the engine that drives progressive social change throughout history. I'd be sorely disappointed if we stopped talking about hope and change in our American social experiment--ardently, passionately, raucously. It would really disappoint me if our political process were driven by calculation, hard-nosed numbers crunching, or back-room deals more than by the belief that hope and change continue to be possible.

eLwood gets right down to substance: "Oh look. Powers is wearing those F*** Me pumps."

Thank you for exhibit 37b to support my contention (I'm waiting for some Butthead to chime in, "You said cont--heh heh heh") that a lot of political sentiments, including those against Hillary, are driven by how men feel about women.

Note: I don't care for Hillary, but I wouldn't like her any better if she had a penis.

note to JohnAA
F*** Me pumps.=name of song by a woman

I 'hope' I'm wrong MuddlingThrough...it's dull or tedious..."The more things change, the more they stay the same" in campaign promises.

Universal health care...no hope
Ending the Iraq War...no change

Seems that, on her way out the door, Ms. Power also winked (to the foreign press) at Sen. Obama's promise to remove troops from Iraq within 16 months (at the link).

Man, on the heels of that Canada/NAFTA thing, I hope all this means is that Barack needs to call his aides in and give them a good talking to.

It there any proof Obama isn't a muslim? So far he does not salute or hold his hand over his heart when the national anthem is playing. Does he recite the pledge of allegiance especially when it says, "under God?" He is as anti American as I have ever seen! He has no idea what America stands for.
He is a muslim.
And it is snowing in Southeast Arkansas.

It's quite possible the Canada/NAFTA thing was a ploy played by the Republican loving Canadian Prime minister.. (at my name)

Chasv - The song was the star spangled banner.. not the favorite lie passed around in emails saying it was the national anthem.. You really should learn to use teh google, chasv.

The Star Spangled Banner isn't our national anthem anymore?

Chasv, please check out about.com's urban legends page. specifically http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_barack_obama_muslim.htm Or, if you feel they're unreliable, check CNN http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/

Many people do not say the Pledge, many do not put their hands over their hearts. Some do some of the time. That's the camp he falls into. Before you start on his name, most of us are also stuck with the names our parents gave us. Trust me, if I'd had a choice in the matter, I'd never have picked a name no one spells correctly. None of that makes him "unAmerican". Considering all that someone has to go through, from the endless fundraising, the messaging, the onslaught of personal attacks, it's a wonder ANYONE runs for public office, much less our highest one.

If you read about his views and don't think he's the right person to run the country, by all means, don't vote for him. Don't vote for anyone you haven't researched. The more time and effort we put into passing gossip, the longer and longer it will take for the economy to turn around, for us to figure out what the heck to do with the utter mess we've created in Iraq, or find a healthcare solution that will work for all citizens.

I'll kick myself later for joining in this pointless exercise . . .but chasv -- is there any proof that George W. Bush is a Christian, other than the facts that he says he is and goes to church? Same "proof" we've got for Sen. Obama's faith?

Even if the McCain vs. Obama battle is high-minded and issue oriented, I'll be interested in seeing how Sen. Obama responds to this year's version of "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" -- maybe it'll be "Home Burglarly Survivors for Truth," portraying Barack's support for the D.C. home handgun ban as a secret plan for widespread confiscation of handguns. Sen. Obama's rhetorical skills will be tested as he counts on Americans to apply reason and balance to hotbutton issues.

If Jesus Himself were on the Democratic ticket, He'd find out all about Swiftboating.

Truer words never spoken, hugh mann.

Note: I don't care for Hillary, but I wouldn't like her any better if she had a penis.-Posted by: John A Arkansawyer
********
I think she's had a tight grip on the one she calls hers. She knows what'll happen if she lets go . . .

Well...I don't have any proof, but I think McCain is a communist (which makes him an atheist)...given all that time he spent hanging out with those North Vietnamese.

"Many people do not say the Pledge, many do not put their hands over their hearts. Some do some of the time. That's the camp he falls into. Before you start on his name, most of us are also stuck with the names our parents gave us. Trust me, if I'd had a choice in the matter, I'd never have picked a name no one spells correctly. None of that makes him "unAmerican". Considering all that someone has to go through, from the endless fundraising, the messaging, the onslaught of personal attacks, it's a wonder ANYONE runs for public office, much less our highest one."-EY

It was the Star Spangled Banner, not the pledge.

OH yeah...this campaign has entered the Twilight Zone when calling an opponent a monster or comparing him/her to Kenneth Starr is deserving of crucification. My god...it's a campaign for the presidency and other than attacks of the candidates' children or outright lies (like saying a war hero's medals weren't deserved...), anything goes. My gosh...I regularly use worse and more colorful adjectives/adverbs when explaining to hubby how I feel about some of the man-crap he tries to pull. So Hillary's a political monster and Obama's using Starr-like tricks to win...good for both of em.

Bad choice of words.

But Samantha Power is a Pulitzer prize winner and a leading voice on America's responsibility to stop genocide in the world. And unlike HRC, the Obama campaign acted quickly and dismissed the aide.

And Hillary is not a monster, but is a shameless human being when it comes to politics and is literally willing to do anything she can to win this race. I guess monster is not the right word but considering how low Hillary will go its not that far off

I think calling someone Kenneth Starr is way worse than calling someone a monster and I don't see Wolfson resigning anytime soon.

Good day for HRC and another non issue fills up the ether for another day

The Star Spangled Banner isn't our national anthem anymore?

Posted by: Moxiemoron

I was just yanking chav's chain.. Hopefully he is busy reading up on his "Giddy On" Bible ..)

Looks like we've got proof you aren't a Christian, chasv. Your evil works put the lie to your claim of faith. You use the name of Jesus to lord over your neighbor and spread lies about him, even after being rebuked in the error of your ways.

Get behind me, Satan. You are no more a follower of Jesus than my dog.

Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie?

"Suppose someone in the North Korean government released a false story that shifted a key American election. If Bush were negatively affected, we might be bombing Pyongyang by now. But this just happened with what Hillary Clinton called "NAFTAgate" Without it, she might never have won Ohio, or her margin would have been minuscule. But as a Canadian Broadcasting Company story reveals, practically the entire story was a lie, one that played so central a role in Clinton's Ohio victory as to thoroughly taint any claim she raises about a swing state mandate."

Full Article

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-loeb/did-clinton-win-ohio-on-a_b_90254.html

Whew...what a day! I've been at Campo De No Fumar Hospital since 5 am with Ma. To make it simple she went from coma to "I'm walking out of this hospital right now if you don't give me a cigarette!", between 5 am and 5 pm, so that's progress, though irrational Ma is a new wrinkle. Old age is not for sissies!

I think if we just keep the faith everything will turn out fine with Hillary and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. Between elections we forget how combative and unpleasant fighting for the nomination always is. The object is to win and Grandpa Munster, Hillary, and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. will do everything they can to win. This is for the one giant marble that rules over all marbles. And we ain't seen ugly yet.

For reasons unknown, my 1 hero left, Keith Olbermann came out of the gate trashing Hillary, so I have no heroes left. But for the last week the worm has turned and the spotlight is getting bigger and bigger on one Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. I want a level playing field, so if Hillary bashing turns into Obama bashing I'll be equally upset. I don't think the skinny chick should have resigned for saying Hillary's a monster, that's an over-reaction and helps no one. By the time this election is over calling someone a monster will be a term of endearment.

And Muddling, maybe I'm too tired and misunderstood something you said earlier in this thread, but I crowed and cheered and applauded on this blog when I heard of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.'s letter of support for gay people. I already liked him, but that sure enough raised his stature in my eyes. Having the courage to lose a few hater votes by taking a stand on a delicate issue is one of the true ways to change America back into a country we can all be proud of once again. A little more courage of that brand and I might have to change the bumper sticker on my car.

Let them fight it out and let's hope the kiss and makeup period afterwards turns them into a team that can't be beat. I still expect Cheney will try to stop the November election. I still think there's a great danger of assassination. I don't expect the neo-cons to just walk away from the power they've stolen by all things unholy. Hillary and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. trading barbs is the least of our worries. But if we'll unite and have faith, get off the sofa and make a little noise when the going gets rough...and it will......we might wind up sitting pretty in January, 2009.

Remember to tell a friend, tell a neighbor, and telephone that Mark Pryor is a big Bush-hugging rat who needs to be retired as soon as possible!

Been mainly sitting around in front of the television today and watching the beauty of the snow falling, but I have just about had it up to here with some of the talking heads on the cable news networks.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC is one of the most obnoxious ones in the lot...he of the "I just had a tingle run up leg" fame. He's a shill for Obama and makes no qualms about it.

But, it is sort of fun to see these idiots squirm over Hillary showing Obama how to play hardball (no pun intended, Matthews). They are literally going apoplectic trying to figure out for Obama how he can respond in kind to Hillary while appearing to remain true to his mantra of being a new kind of politician, one that does not follow the rules of the old guard/doing business the same old way.

Heck, he can't do it...if he goes on the attack, he makes everything he has done and said up to now as an agent of change into a lie. If he doesn't attack, Hillary will continue to kick the s--t out of him.

God, I love it.

Isn't the art and study of politics the greatest sport on earth?

Go Hillary! Hit him again.

(Gotta change channels and watch something lighter tonight.)

I know, eLwood, but I'm a bit cranky on this issue today.

As I said, I don't care for Hillary, but I also don't care for a certain class of attacks on her, or on other women in politics, and you stepped up at just the right time.

Don Kehotay, on the other hand, got me to laugh out loud.

As to the issue of religion, I don't say the words "under god" in the Pledge of Allegiance either, and I'm not a Muslim. (No, I'm not a Christian, either. I'm an atheist.) I resent that those words we inserted during the Red Scare to make me feel an outsider in my own country, and I'm downright angry that I'm going to have to take the issue up with my daughter at some point. It's a mean-spirited trick sponsored by people Jesus called out for making a public show of their faith.

(I like Jesus. Anyone know where I can get one of those nifty "Atheists for Jesus" shirts Richard Dawkins wears?)

Dammit Moxie - killin the screamin goose with a simple fact. Note no posts for 90 min and everybodys not eatin. Which D candidate do the Wingnuts prefer seems unresolved and you must post one of those annoying factiods...while the Ark Blog becomes what? Arkies done settled who is the nominee and delegates meet while I write to select those who will represent us at Demo Jamboree.

God I love Powers' F**K Me pumps.

.

MuddlingThrough,

I too am impressed by Obama's behavior toward the LGBT community (though I hate that acronym.) What I said at the time he released that letter was that he sounds like someone who was playing to win all the marbles--not just to win the presidency, but to actually do something with it. I suspect it's an issue on which he's more likely to act well than Hillary is, though I'm pretty sure she'll at least do better than Bill did.

(Why all the weasel words like "suspect" and "pretty sure"? Because you never know till it's time to fish or cut bait. Everyone out there who thought around the end of 1992 we were going to finally see the real Bill Clinton, raise your hands. Well, didn't we?)

"Suppose someone in the North Korean government released a false story that shifted a key American election..."--JD

OK...are you imbibing, JD, or are you just tossing stuff out there for discussion's sake. Hillary wouldn't have won Ohio without benefit of a North Korean/Canadian plot?!?! Where's the love child or the three-headed alien?

A MONSTER? Here's the real deal: George Bush will veto a bill tomorrow that outlaws TOTURE, uncluding waterboarding and other criminal acts.
I would vot for a snake-handler before I'd ever vote for another Republican. Yep, I paint them all with the same brush.
How does the Republican Right, so-called Christians feel about electing the owner of the third largest beer company in the U.S. anyway? What say ye?

I need new glasses and better lighting: Including, and vote.

DBI...sorry to hear about your momma's woes...which are the woes of the entire non-millionaire American populace. (A bladder infection will make the sanest person insane.) You are a good son. I just read an article about three working/married women whose families were financially wiped out by their breast cancers. All had insurance and all said that putting their energies/efforts into fighting debt/insurance companies left them little energy to fight the disease. In this regard, I'm so ashamed of my country.

...and then we get to face old age and all it's medical/financial hells.

(I like Jesus. Anyone know where I can get one of those nifty "Atheists for Jesus" shirts Richard Dawkins wears?)<<,

No, but I can get you line on the "BUSH IS LORD" T's. Has a Bush face on the std Caucasian Jesus image, airbrushed in so it fits.

I really hate to see those Obama e-mails keep circulating and people believing that he is a Muslim , insisted on the Koran when he was sworn into the Senate, and that he refuses to say "The Pledge".
I don't know if he refuses or not but I must disagree with an earlier post
that a lot of people don't say the Pledge of Allegience.........Barak Obama is not just any one, he may be the next POTUS and I'm pretty sure the American people will expect the President to say teh pledge with hand over heart!!

Zelda,
I echo your comments about those among us who would abandon the Democratic party and vote for McCain.
McCain hunching up the Chimp just made me gag. My disgust for Bushie McCain is unprintable.
Anyone, anyone, anyone who would even consider voting for a Republican after all this country has gone through under Bush was never a true Democrat in the first place.
Clinton or Obama, preferably both on the ticket, but if not I am voting Dem for 2008 and the rest of my life.
The Republicans have fucked up this country and I'm mad as hell about it.

Not that it's Sen. Obama's fault -- the man can't follow his aides around and censor their remarks -- but I don't think I'm picking nits to say there's a difference between saying someone is "imitating Kenneth Starr" and someone else "is a monster." But that's just me. Maybe they are all just words.

I know bush has not only screwed up this country he has raped it over and over again and again.

But that is the cost of a nation that has killed millions of babies by abortions and in the womb. A nation that has let same sex marriages happen. The cost is about right for a wicked nation if God doesn't decide to completely destroy it. He said a nation that sheds innocent blood that He will destroy that nation... Don't you think that is what's going on here now?
A fool says that is no God. Well, there is a God in heaven and his name is Jesus. There is no other name under heaven where by man must be saved.

If the democrats had someone running that was halfway sane there would be no republican in office now. The democrats are their own worst enemy.
They have to change their stand on important issues for me to ever vote for them again.
People you have to vote your conscience before voting for your pocket book!

DBI, you have my sympathy with your mother. I've been there. It's not easy.

No, you didn't misunderstand me, and I remember and appreciate your response to Obama's statement about equality for all.

John A. Arkansawyer, I also appreciate your response, and agree with you about the relative merits of Obama and Hilary on this issue.

I've made no bones about the fact that Hilary is not my candidate of choice. Edwards was. I've become more energized by Obama in the intervening weeks, though I realize that no politician offers us Utopia. I will vote for either, if either is the nominee.

I do grow tired, though (and this not to either of you) of the covert gay-baiting in some of the comments about those who prefer Obama over Hilary. That's becoming a theme among Democrats who lean to the Republican end of the spectrum, with the odious insinuation that gay men naturally prefer a male president to a female one--which is total balderdash.

I just wish many of the "liberals" who have discounted what Obama said about gay Americans would frankly admit that they themselves have issues with gay rights, and that it has never been part of their vision for the Democratic party. I actually prefer the outright (but honest) hate rhetoric of a Fred Phelps to the mealy-mouthed liberalism of many of my fellow Democrats, especially in my home state.

chasv has a point, overly simplifistic as it may be, when he says, "People you have to vote your conscience before voting for your pocket book!" Fortunately, this year I can do both.

No you can't, A Lawyer! The same old democraps are still floating among the mire of the democrap lake.
Simple is always best.

I don't know, chasv. One writer, Robert Heinlein I think, said, "Simplicity is for simpletons." I think that's too harsh. I do agree, though, with Albert Einsten that "Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler." That's about right.

I love reading the blog but sometimes there is information that is put out as fact that just isn't so. On this thread already, the same old falsehood that Bill Clinton was on the Rush Limbaugh show within the last week has been perpetuated. This is simply not true. Limbaugh and Clinton happened to be dining in the same restaurant in New York and they were simply cordial with one another. Nothing more. This encounter was reported in the press. According to reports, Rush discussed it on his show. People can hate Bill and Hillary all they want, but to use excuses like this Limbaugh story are just silly and immature. At the end of the day, whether it is Hillary or Obama, Democrats need to stick together so that we can erase every finger print Bush and the Republicans have left on our nation's capitol and this country.

The best analysis I've seen so far of the Samantha Power mess (and it is a mess which should please no Democrat) is linked at my blue name.

I don't agree with that man's decription of simple things. If it's not said in the KJV of the Holy Bible I don't want to know or read about it. I know that our Father in Heaven made all things whether simple or not, he knows all things.
When a parachutist shute doesn't open he would welcome a simple hand from God to land him safely on the ground. It has happened before.

Uh chasv, you just painted yourself into an interesting corner. The KJV doesn't mention computers, blogs, cars, modern medicine, the laws of physics, central heat and air, jeans, tennis shoes, coffeemakers and a whole host of things that make life liveable for many in the US in 2007. No voting machines, either. I think God did expect that society would change past the 17th century.

Uh Chasv, are you getting help for your condition?? Say, like a shrink?

Ha ha, I do read other things but commentaries on the bible from mire men not inspired by God.
No I didn't paint myself in a corner..
Guess what EY? The bible said that every house is built by some man but everything is made by God. 10-4. That is everything.
Where in the world do you think came all this knowledge? We find things that God has put in front of our noses for centries and centries that we couldn't see 'till it becomes a necessity. Remember necessity is the mother of many inventions.
Yea, jazzy I don't need it but do you?
We spend too much time worrying about politics and who'd gonna do what if elected.
If you haven't read any of the bible it is very good reading. Read Revelation.

Alright,chasv. I guess I was taking a literal interpretation of "If it's not said in the KJV of the Holy Bible I don't want to know or read about it." and none of the things I listed are mentioned by name. I agree that the talents of the inventors (and the talents of everyone) were supplied by God. I agree that we spend a lot of time worrying about politics that could be put to better use. I also think that we spend TONS more money on it than we should. It's disgraceful that you can spend almost 100 million on a political campaign and have to drop out because you're going nowhere fast (Romney). Think of how much good that money would do at say, Children's Hospital? A few homeless shelters? Micro-loans for small businesses?
But over the past few years, I've worried that if I didn't actively and loudly support my side, I'd be forced down a narrow path that I can't stomach. Wish that weren't the case.