It Is the Electoral Votes Stupid
By Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on February 7, 2008 at 2:24 AM in Current Affairs
Let’s assume that come the general election, Hillary wins the states she has won and loses the states Obama has won. Similarly, Obama wins the states he has won so far and loses the states Hillary has won. Do the math and tell me who is the more viable candidate.
Hillary — 205 Electoral votes (FL, NH, AR, NV, MI, NY, NJ, TN MA, OK, CA, AZ)
Obama — 110 Electoral votes (IA, MO, GA, SC, ID, NM, AL, IL, AK, KS, UT, DE, ND, MN)
If you are math challenged, you are an Obama supporter.
UPDATE: How about these numbers? 8,781,090 vs 8,110,261. Hillary has almost 670,000 more than Obama in the electoral contests to date. I appreciate the points made by my buddy, Frank Naif, who points out that Hillary has baggage and gives some pause. I do not deny or ignore the baggage. But at least we know what the baggage is. No new surprises coming down the pike. Calls to mind the saying, “familiarity breeds contempt.”
However, as someone who used to live in the land of Hating Hillary, I am confident that if she is given the chance to truly introduce herself to the American people, she can defuse many of these issues and voters will be delighted to meet a woman who is very smart, very warm, and has the guts and toughness to fight back against groundless attacks. You can then understand some of the reasons Bill Clinton married her years ago. It was not a shotgun wedding.
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
Larry, I’ll take Super Delegates for 200 please?
The answer is…
Larry,
No offense man, but that’s a very silly construction.
For instance, virtually all the polling I have seen shows that between 71-73% of the primary voters for one candidate had a positive view of the opposing candidate.
Secondly, do you honestly believe that CA, NY, NJ, and MA would vote Republican in the general after 8 years of Bush?
You have any number of good arguments in support of HRC, but this isn’t one of them.
That isn’t the point, I believe….Its that HRC carried strongest in the states that will mean the most in November. Where as Obama carried states that don’t have sizable delegates. It need not mention “republicans”.
Well, since he specifically mentioned the “general election” in his post, I don’t think he was talking about the Socialist Workers Party as the opposition. Do you?
The cbs radio had a factoid that Hillary Clinton had more people vote for her than all the republicans combined on Tuesday.
Can anyone of any ideas why Barak Obama did better in the states with Caucuses? I have seen much on it.
This is one of the most inane discussion.
This is a PRIMARY and not a GENERAL ELECTION. I could make sensible analogies but it’s not worth it.
How many Obama primary voters in a General Election will vote for McCain instead of HRC? And how many primary voters for HRC will vote for McCain instead of Obama?
This is a classic case of mental you-know-what.
You think NY would go for certain without Clinton?
Look at the Obama states won. Most of them do nothing but vote for GOP in national and state races, most of them also polled well for Kerry in ‘04. Setting up someone for a fall is all those places register.
Two of his wins featured no republican votes that day so people could switch the polls, staggered races, and two others had no GOP voting at all on their caucus days so they could switch the balance his way and run against a weaker challenge.
mr. murder let me add one thing to your excellent post. the obama campaign has been actively soliciting “democrats for a day” to help inflate his numbers. i dont know about anyone else, but this old time democrat is pissed off about this strategy. obama is essentially telling anyone who will listen he will do anything to win … even disrespect the democratic party.
Holy CRAP, Larry!!!!!!!!!!!! Have you completely jumped the shark now? CA, MA and NY all going to the Repubs? Yah, sure, that makes sense….say, did Reagan rise from the dead? Seriously, did you even take a moment to think about this post? -
Wow! Very impressive.
I only made it through differential equations so I understand the math part, but am having some problems with the statistical analysis. What would be the Pearson coefficient of correlates to demonstrate any statistical association between winning a State’s primary by a specified plurality and the likelihood of winning that State in the general election?
Chuckle..and I only made it through quantum electrodynamic theory in my grad physics program (before i jumped ship to law)….I suppose there is some quantum function that predicts the the mathematical possibility of the above hypothesis.
I only made it through Solid Geometry - and with a tutor holding my hand.
English translation please?
Engrish transubstantion:
Hillary took the states that McCain took
Without Hillary heading the ticket, McCain will take NY, Mass, CA, MI, and NJ.
Obama took the states that Romney and Huckabee took.
Nader will win florida again.
Thanks CK - Now I get the comment above.
I do understand the math of the Electorial College - But when you start mentioning things like Differntial equations - my mind just goes blank.
LOVE your translation.
my my … what a wonderful question. i managed to pass three terms of stats while obtaining my degree … hardest damn thing i have ever done let me tell you …. and i have no frigging idea what you just said.
i would suggest the answer to your question would probably best be answered by studying voting history. if that doesnt work … hell start flipping quarters like the statisticans do!
bama_barrron,
I forgot Stats were considered Math. I also needed to use them. However after banging my head against the wall, this wonderful Korean graduate student showed me how to use a program called ‘Stat-Pak’.
He explained what the letters in the formulas meant - and then told me how they correlated with which keyboard button for the ‘Stat-Pak’ program.
It was magic - just put the numbers in front - push buttons in the correct order- and the answer done by the computer was right each time.
AHHH no more statistical math!
Stellaaa-
“Senator Obama talks fondly of his years as a community organizer. My assumption was that he would hold the interests of the community first and foremost. Yet, read his answer to the question below about the failure of the projects that Rezko developed.”
SunTimes
“Senator Obama basically blames the tenants and the community for the failure of the projects. This is about the most controversial aspect of his relationship. How could a community organizer, blame the community. Granted he was not one at the time, he was a State Senator and an attorney. Needles to say, the projects failed because they were not structured to have adequately funded reserves. Senator Obama as the attorney to the non profit or his law firm that was also representing Rezko, should have made sure the non profit, partner, and the project had reserves adequately funded from the developer fees. Rezko basically was not held accountable, took the money and Senator Obama blames the tenants.
If he did not care for the community in a small setting, how will he protect and pursue the democratic issues such as health care, economic reforms, environmental protection, etc.etc. I frankly based on this am scared about his competence to be put in charge of the US Government.
I don’t get it why this does not outrage anyone else. I guess I know too much about community organizing and affordable housing. Only NIMBYS (not in my neighborhood) types tall like this about affordable housing. I question all his words. If he did not know, so much the worse, community organizers have to be alert.”
I guess the discussion of the actual post wasn’t quite going your way, huh?
Why is it so hard for people on this blog to understand that others can, and may, agree with your arguments—and still point out fallacies in your reasoning?
thats a bit of a sweeping comment wouldn’t you say? Shall we call that Fallacy a Hasty Generalization?
“Hasty generalization”??
Ya gotta be fucking kidding me.
First of all, I was responding to Mr. Murder’s immediate diversion from the post under discussion when he seemed unable to muster a cogent argument in support of his, and Larry’s, position.
Second, I have been reading this blog, almost since its inception, beause of the valuable insight into, and intelligent discussions of, foreign policy and security issues. Those insights and discussions have, to a large degree, been replaced by Obama bashing posts and comments. I agree with many of those concerns and am disturbed by many of the allegations/facts.
However I am also disturbed by the scorched-earth policy many seem to have regarding Obama, and the oft-stated comments by many here that they would never vote for him.
I also find it less than compelling when silly, and sometimes intellectually dishonest, arguments are presented in opposition to Obama, or in support of HRC.
This post, and a previous one regarding the speed (or lack thereof) with which complementary language regarding Edwards was posted on the respective candidate’s websites, are examples of my argument.
It’s stupid. Please try and stop it.
Oh yeah, I’m a Hillary supporter and voted for her in my state’s primary.
Obama is running for President, a position which affects your areas of interest.
Obama appears to, no, ok, let’s say DOES have serious character flaws, serious issues of corruption, issues which may be harmful to the American government, say, particularly if he is psychologically unsuited for the Presidency, or has some connection to the 9.11 financiers, through Rezko, enemies of the American government.
It may be “just business” to Cheney, or Bush, Grossman, or Hastert, but it is harmful to our future sovereignty, as also the families that have been affected, Cheney’s fellow American citizens.
Right?
Oh man…..I suppose from professonial interest, I am compelled to answer. Mr. Murder, the fiasco here is that Obama was funded by a guy who was a slumlord, not that Obama somehow failed to be accountable to the tenants as a lawyer tangentially connected to these developments. The attorneys are responsible for completing the paperwork for the deal, not serving as guardians of the public interest.
Let me explain how these deals are done (in a nutshell). Basically, a nonprofit community group will form a new entity in partnership with a for-profit company. The for-profit brings the commercial know-how (allegedly) to rehab the building. The nonprofit is the partner necessary to receive special local, state or federal grants. Obama’s law firm will represent the new entity. The lawyers draft the purchase and sale agreement, the loan documents, the lien instruments, and the various corporate resolutions. The due diligence(i.e investigation of the for-profit) is conducted by the banks funding the rehab project (or in this case, the City. Typically, banks do it and the funds are guaranteed by a gov’t agency.) The lawyers are not involved in confirming bank statements, financial statements and other than a sniff test when the client walks in the door. Attorneys are not really that well equipped to read and understand balance sheets, nor is the client paying us to do so. After the deal is done, the lawyer moves on to the next project and/or client, and is not involved in the project again. We prepare the paperwork; we do not monitor the housing project.
Finally, Obama was a litigator! In other words, he is the last type of lawyer you want working on a complex real estate transaction/financing like this one. I would be surprised if he knew how to draft a mortgage, let alone the complex type of lien instruments needed for this transaction.
Now, does that leave him in the clear? Absolutely not. His people should have vetted this guy more carefully to prevent Rezko from holdings those contribution parties. But as to damning him as you did above, you just don’t the lawyer’s role in these deals.
As for the allegation of blaming the tenants/community, please be serious. South Chicago is not a very economically prosperous place. Blight begets blight.
jacek … your description of a lawyer’s role in this type of deal is generally correct i cant quarrel much with that part of your post. i do find obama to be rather disingenous at best when he talks about being a community organizer … from what i have read and what has been reported he was at best at tangential influence on these projects. that being said, i find it more then curious that patrick fitzgerald seems to think that the relationship between barack and the slum lord runs much deeper then what is generally accepted. patrick fitzgerald is no light weight political hack of a prosecutor … i have read numerous indictments issued by his office over the years … he doesnt make claims he cant prove.
finally, as an old community organizer type myself … i am perhaps a bit of a purist when it comes to my opinions and views on what constitutes community organizing. a reverse snob i might be. i think obama’s claims of his activities are over stated … and from what i can fact check … his day to day interactions with the members of the community in chicago were extremely limited. this probably doesnt mean anything in the big picture of public perception but it does raise a big red flag for me.
Stellaaa - or SOMEONE (Larry?) needs to diary this comment. I’ve never seen the quote but Stellaaa makes a terrific point and it needs to be seen/talked about a lot more.
ALSO, could someone chase this whole notion that the Clintons have been cold and calculating in their pursuit of personal goals but the Obamas are just wonderful, nice young people? That is just BS.
The Obamas are in their mid-40’s and probably have used the Clintons as their role models…even to the point of having Barack decline lucrative (on their face) law firms for a small, community based law firm (that included Rezko as a client!) and Michelle, a Harvard trained attorney quitting her power job for public service. I mean, the trajectory is the same, but the Clintons have been dubbed “out only for themselves”.
Give me a break.
Better yet, please someone, give us a diary, or two!!
Mr. Murder
In 2003 there were problems with Chicago’s Public Transportation for Obama’s constituents in Hyde Park. According to complaints there were dilapidated stations, no bathrooms on the trains, and turnstiles and gates.
As an Illinois State Senator Obama wrote this letter in November 2003: http://www.hydepark.org/transit/obamatransitlet.htm
As you read it you will note two things:
1. He was using the canard of Racial Discrimination even way back then:
ockquote>It is discrimination that the Electric Line–one of 11 Metra Lines and the only predominantly African American one–is apparently the only line without bathrooms on the trains and the only one with gates that require passengers to pay before getting on trains. At all other Metra stations, passengers do not need to pass through pay gates.
2. Tying back to this statement in Sun-Times interview Senator Obama was not otherwise aware of financial and physical problems attributable to misconduct by Mr. Rezko - Is this statement in his November 2003 Letter My office and those of South Suburban legislators have been flooded with calls from upset commuters who had called Metra to complain about the service.
Obama’s constituents call his office to complain about run down Train Stations, and the lack of bathrooms on the trains, but are silent about apartments with no heat for 5 or 6 weeks, during the winter? YEAH right!
Sure hope Larry’s keeping a list of all those commenters who would be willing to buy that Bridge in Brooklyn.
Larry, enough of this wet blanket analytical shit! Obamists want sound bites, like calling him the Pope of Hope and the (Secret) Agent of Change. All of this pragmatic electoral vote counting is so Hillary. And it will be so reported on Fox News.
Live in NY and according to our paper, voters went heavily for Clinton and they feel she will win NY election night.
I hope so too.
She has done a good job for NY.
ANd I believe she can govern from day one.
What has Obama done?
It was smart of Obama to bring back that feel good feeling, but JFK had Camelot and would have had the Civil Rights Act and Vietnam had he lived. At that time, he would not have been popular president had he lived.
It is the unfulfilled dream that Obama is riding on and we cannot afford to ride that dream today!!!
My sense is that as the likelihood of Obama prevailing increases, a sad dynamic is going to start to work against him. The Party will now have to confront in a way it has not had to before the likelihood of going with a black man against McCain. Until now, it has been theoretical. It will have to confront the fact that he would not have been so competitive without blacks voting their race. I don’t like race rearing its head at all, but I think this is a dynamic going to start working against him for the first time.
A sad but (probably) very real fact. After SC I got very worried….the election is split into three parts - Repugs; Obamaphiles; and “all other” (not to demean Clinton or Edwards or any of the other Dems).
And while it’s wonderful to have a passion for a candidate, the demographics that are solidifying for the two remaining Dems are not healthy.
I worry so much about the existence of sexism and racism still in our country, today. The result of that could be McCain as POTUS. I do, however, think that Hillary’s demographics are better IF ONLY WE WOULD STOP eating out own and get off the Hillary-hatred that is running rampant among Dems. If Obama is the candidate I will vote for him. I will not have any passion for that vote, but I will vote for him. So many of his “supporters” are not saying that if Hillary is the candidate. Dumb.
This is absurd. First of all, Florida was not contested. Second of all, no Democratic presidential candidate is going to win Alaska, Idaho, Utah, etc. And he or she certainly won’t lose New York!
I know no one in New York who voted for Hillary except my grandfather. Perhaps the fix is in?
michael … if you were with the obama campaign … you could claim the people you know were secert bigots and racists … when the curtain was pulled they voted like a klan member.
i mean wasnt this the obama meme twenty minutes after the polls closed in NH? seriously, you might want to consider the fact, the people that you talked to … told you what you wanted to hear. think about it!
Oh yes Michael, I’m sure your grandfather voted a million times. No wait- the Clinton “machine” just manufactured a win to beat back the Rising Son, Saint Barack of Obama.
After all, if only one person you know voted for Hillary, surely that means something suspicious happened.
We shall see.
Why Obama Has the Upper Hand
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2008/2/6/123818/1286
He seems to be focusing on factors of relatively little importance, as opposed to the truth.
THAT analysis seems more a case of wishful thinking, the need to project what one wants, as opposed to the truth.
If I were Obama’s people, I would stop with the happy talk, and focus on why Obama lost California.
Because he didn’t spend enough time there AND early voters who supported Edwards and Clinton.
Maybe he lost California because people can see through his BS?
Same with New York.
The more metropolitan areas seem hip to Obama’s spool, as do the working classes.
The only ones buying his gas are the little girls.
My goodness, doesn’t it seem he has turned into David Koresh?
Will we see a Waco, blogs incinerating themselves as the FBI and ATF move in?
And me?
Well, I’ll be playing George Jones, on the PA.
White Light-in, to start.
Cee any idea why race is a factor in BooMans artical? I am curious why there is a difference in the outcome of Caucus states, having never experienced such a thing.
Teak,
I don’t know why.
I am curious why there is a difference in the outcome of Caucus states
No voting machines to change the result? Obama hasn’t lost in those, correct?
You and I both know, at this point that electronic votings machines, are not reliable.
That aside, I was pondering the Human element of a caucus, as a opposed to the solitude of a voting booth…from SusanUNpc’s and others’ experience and watching them, it would make for an interesting “study”. I hear pundits say Obama does well in the caucus but not why.
Anybody with psychology backround at NQ care to take a shot?
Actually, I’m curious to know why you’re not mentioning Obama’s connection with Nadhmi Auchi, who, through his wife and a Panamanian ( it’s always Panama, isn’t it?) company named FINTRADE, (a subsidiary of Auchi’s British multinational corporation,) donated directly to Obama, according the London Times.
Auchi was Sadaam’s right hand man, a close personal friend of Rezko, an investor in the Chinese laundry trade, a fugitive from a french banking chain gang, and an all around money slut.
Speculation is Rezko’s friendship with Auchi might have influenced Obama’s position on the Iraq.
Inference is Obama helped the convicted French banking terrorist to obtain a visa, POSSIBLY, for a trip to MI.
Auchi, Saddam and Osama all shared the same bank.
Think this should be looked into, before any more Americans, and others, are murdered, in the name of the french banking industry?
I do.
So, what about it?
More gas?
Are you going to blatantly ignore these FACTS?
The internals showed he made gains in states where Republicans were not on the ticket, with voters not likely to be Republican, or in staggered states, and on the whole outside of Illinois, in caucuses.
None of which are representative of the ability to deliver the votes when it matters most.
Utah went 90% Romney on the republican side. You really think they’re going to landslide Obama instead?
Those are where his gains were made, paper tiger territory.
And Clinton did not campaign heavily in those areas, perhaps as a matter of experience she is aware that would be unproductive.
The idea happy talk spin in regard to the good news about Iraq, ahem, I mean, Obama’s losses on Super Tuesday, will affect voter perception is unrealistic. The truth would appear to be Obama did not do as well as expected in California, and the blogs are foaming, light as air.
They look kinda of stupid.
Perhaps they were manipulated?
Who knew they would foam in the way of Rove, when suffering a defeat?
Is this denial, a weak attempt at psychological control?
So now we know their behavior is predictable, choosing to use a TEMPLATED, RECURRENT manipulatable method of spin, or THOUGHT, GROUP THOUGHT, as it is, as opposed to encouraging and confronting hard truthful analysis. Whether misguided or not, facing truth is not an option for them, and this is an important fact to know about your opponent.
Well, you say, it’s only for the public?
Ah, but it’s not, the need to hide the truth is a secret, now, and indicative of failure, denial, fear, and shame, the principal needing to deny the truth from himself.
Is it such a shame to lose California?
Of course not.
So, the principal now has a secret, is ASHAMED of loss, and this knowledge can be used against him, asymmetrically, to further game him, if someone were so inclined. Are you losing, Obama, of course not, you’re doing the right thing? Obama doesn’t know what to think, say, on one hand believing the spin, on the other knowing it’s false, setting up an internal conflict he cannot resolve, or his organization, can’t.
And the real problem remains unsolved.
Generally, with individuals that stupid, I have read you only need give them enough rope, they hang themselves, eventually collapsing from the internal chaos of a dysfunctional intellect and psyche, the kind of person who would torture, or bomb non threatening entities.
So say, next week, Obama wins LA, and again, they will foam, further reinforcing incorrect perceptions.
Generally, with individuals stupid enough to try to quantify thought into a PR system, say, I have read you only need give them enough rope, they hang themselves, eventually collapsing from the internal chaos of a dysfunctional intellect and psyche, the kind of person who would torture, or bomb non threatening entities, say, the type of individual who would underestimate the intellect of his audience.
The truth is the hardest to fight, even when it doesn’t go your way, it’s still the best weapon.
I apologize, editing is just not in the cards today.
Sorry.
If troll A, say throws out statistics in an attempt to obfuscate, predictably, to action B, I know if I can get player B to initiate action B, troll A will post statistics.
And with some, it is that easy, a level one, a level two, and a level three.
And then it gets scary for them, and they attack.
But it’s predictable, and can be prepared for, if not even conditioned.
But see, no civil liberties need be repressed, at all.
give them enough rope…
This maybe true, but time is also part of this.
Depends when the egg timer quits.
Yes, so true. And just caught Obama’s website as he asks for donations and a “generous donor” will match any donation up to $2300 and double the donation. And oh yes, send you a personal thankyou. Imagine this is Oprah.. Obama is grinding it out and while I agree with your analysis of voting patterns, it will all come down to super delegates who are comprised of both fickle and Obama disposed governors and elders like teddy/Kerry and co. This worries me.
If this happens Obama will get the nomination by default. We haven’t even contemplated the Michigan/Florida mess.
Help? I need it.
I was also struck by the Electoral College angle, more so because Charlie Cook said that his data indicated that she could pick up Texas and Ohio as well. If she can pick up Pennsylvania as well (and why not, it’s distant from the Chicago Machine) it —to one versed in electoral history— CA, TX, FL, OH, NY & PA should be a lock.
But people with money aren’t behaving that way:
She is having problems getting money at a time when Kerry’s campaign spending went up asymptotically. This is reflected in the lousy odds she’s currently getting overseas.
We may be facing yet another Mondale Moment.
Absurd statement on the face of it, isn’t it? Yet these idiots managed to elect Bush twice.
Exactly and nearly verbatim the point I heard Bill Clinton make just before the Iowa Caucuses.
Anyone with a brain can see an almost cult likeness with Obama supporters! One needs to take a wonder at why the media is behaving the way it is also during this campaign season!
No one looks at the facts in the Obama relaity, just the self proclaimed myths!
Obama states he will get it right on day one! This from the guy who said he made a bonehead mistake involving Rezko in his home purchase! He hasn’t got it right before day one why would he on day 1?
Obama states continually he voted against the war! How could he have? He wasn’t in the US Senate when the voting took place, he was just a corrupt Illinois politician then!
Then there is the Tim Russert statement about voting on the war and Obama stating he “doesn’t know how he’d vote if in the Senate”! Which he continually ignores responding to when asked and his supporters still blindly follow him!
Why hasn’t the press reported on Obama’s Auchi link? It is obvious the press wants to Republicans to stay in and to keep the tax credits for the rich! So keep the people unaware till the GE then Swiftboat him!
Why hasn’t the press pressed Obama on his ties to the Luo party in Kenya that is slaughtering people there? See above!
Why was the Rezko trial postponed when Rezko wanted it moved up? Political interfearing to keep Obama out of the press on it until the next 9 primaries are done with?
Why is no one confronting Obama about his real record, with his ignoring slum tenant complaints?
Why is no one confronting Obama about his ties to all the dirty money?
Why is no one confronting Obama over Maytag and his lack of involvement, yet his involvement in taking money from a board memeber of Maytag?
Why is no one confronting Obama over the fact that Obama got to the US Senate on the back of dirty money and everyone tends to let this go!
This is a person running for the office that puts his finger alone on the button of the deadliest weapons on earth, the largest economy on earth and the largest army on earth and people are trusting him like they did in Jonestown and PTL Club and every other cult known to man! How blind is America? How ignorant is America? How intellectually deprived is America?
How can people who listen to stumps and ignore who is making the stumps expect anything to come true from the stumpster? He has continually lied and yet everyone swallows it with pride! Sen Obama I tip my hat to you, you have proven just how gullible a vast amount of the population in America really is!
Great list of questions Mel - In summary why are the Obamacons refusing to VET him?
Why was the Rezko trial postponed when Rezko wanted it moved up?
Did this delay come a schedule issue of the court or did Fitzgerald file a motion?
If Fitzgerald filed for a continuance does this imply he has other leads to nail down or his case is weak?
To suggest that Fitzgerald would delay a trial for anyone would be a first. For someone who can pick off a crooked pol at 200 yards, blindfolded, he has to have a reason.
We must be able to figure out a way to pool all of our found knowledge of Obama’s scuzzy cunning tactics in the political cesspool od Chicago Daly politicos.
The media hates Hillary and loves Obama. No one except for The Daily Mail in England, The Chicago Sun Times and Chicago tribune, anong with New York Times has seriously demanded vetting and looking into this very damaged candidate.
The information out there has no legs as the TV media refuses to address it We have to think creatively and get this information out and there is a LOT from Rezko, Maytag,Exelon, and more.
Mr. Teflon cannot continue to get a pass. Imagine the likes of Teddy Kennedy talking about Obama’s
“character”?
H E L P !
Whoa! These numbers are way off. NM seems to be going for Hillary.
I think Hillary puts Red states like AZ and Texas in play in a way that Obama can’t. Granted, Hillary may not with either–though AZ probably looks good–but she would definitely make Johnny Mac defend there. I also assume that Arkansas, Ohio and Florida go to Hillary (and definitely NM). That means a pretty substantial electoral college win.
Regarding Larry’s post more generally. The states where there are more people–and are generally more Democratic-are voting for Hillary. I guess this explains why Obama has been so willing to sell out Social Security and universal health care: to win “Red America”. Cause he sure as heck can’t win much in “Blue America”.
Why do you assume that those of us who are Democrats who happen to reside in “red” states share Republican politics? Even though we’re a minority, we’re often very liberal. My caucus experience seemed to indicate the liberal wing of the local Democratic Party went heavily for Obama, and the conservative, afraid of terra Democrats went for Clinton.
I resent the assumption that seems to be implied in your comment that I’m a conservative who hates Social Security and universal health because I happen to live in “Red America.”
gqmartinez:
I also assume that Arkansas, Ohio and Florida go to Hillary
What is your assumption based on? Because I don’t see those states as automatically in the bag for any Democrat.
States like California and NY are going to go Dem no matter who the nominee is. States like Utah and Idaho are going to go Rethug. in the general election. Some former red states like Colorado, New Mexico, and Missouri, are probably up for grabs.
This is not a serious analysis.
All Right Folks, Let’s Look at REAL Numbers, Shall WE?
FYI my personal bias HC, but only as of just recently
(previously Edwards, before that Dodd)
Having said that, look how polls show either Clinton or Obama competing against McCain and note how Obama often shows better
NOTE that Romney just dropped away today, so McCain is the strong GOP likelyhood going forward
ALSO NOTE we don’t yet know what if anything Pat Fitzgerald will come up with for Rezko/Obama
from:
Bottom Line: take all with a grain of salt, there’s still NINE months to go
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm
Time Poll Feb. 1-4, 2008
McCain Clinton
46 46
McCain Obama
41 48
CNN/Opinion Research Corp, Poll Feb. 1-3, 2008
McCain Clinton
47 50
McCain Obama
44 52
Cook/RT . Jan. 31-Feb. 2, 2008
McCain Clinton
45 41
McCain Obama
43 45
ABC News/WashPo Jan. 30-Feb. 1, 2008
McCain Clinton
50 45
McCain Obama
48 47
FOX News/Opinion Dyn Jan. 30-31, 2008
McCain Clinton
41 41
McCain Obama
43 44
NPR Jan. 29-31, 2008
McCain Clinton
48 45
McCain Obama
48 47
Obviously the above polls ignore the Electoral College factor, as they are just raw opinions, but on the other hand, it’s really too early to call November just yet.
Meantime, there’s real work to do.
Obama threw everything but the kitchen sink into California, and was thumped. If he is the nominee, McCain might well take the state. Similarly in Florida there was a level playing field, and he lost badly again. At least two big states might be McCain fodder if Obama is the nomineee.
What a tool you are for the corporate-imperialist candidate Hillary.
It didn’t take long for me to notice the recommendation for the Confederate-related book on your site and make it obvious why you have such a negative view of Obama. Jerk.
Yes, yes the KKK is very fond of the Clintons.
Look up your hero’s background in Illinois and do some vetting, silly.
America is about to be snookered for the third time with star quality and bullshit sentiment, as Obama followers trash common sense,experience and we will again suffer for this. A cult is born!
We’ve fallen for the patriotic corn of Geo Bush twice, and are being overhyped by the inspirational swetness of Obama who makes his followers feel at ease and know only what Obama wants them to know about him.
Obama is seriously ethically challenged and should be thoroughly vetted. NY Times story 2/2/8 about EXELON the nuclear energy power operators from Illinois [USA’s largest} have given $227,000. to Obama. EXELON’s lobbyist gave this directly to Obama who has told us he doesn’t take any money from lobbyists directly.
He lies. He has had much dealings on the record in senate with EXELON, and his lobbyist money taking along with curious votes tell us again….
Obama says one thing and does another. His besotted followers are willing to overlook this and many other patently dishonest acts that it’s stomach turning.
Remember at debate in SCarolina when he pounced on Hillary and accused her of working with WalMart and being on their Board?
GUESS WHAT?
Michelle Obama served on WalMart Board for years. Resigned when Obama was going to US Senate. When WalMart asked for explanation for resignation…
Michelle fudged it.
Michelle ws also placed on Chicago City Planning Commission by Rezko/Obama connections and guess what?
She found a great landmarked mansion in Planning records in Kenwood that cost a million six, but Obama’s needed cash. So..Rezko his new neighbor to the rescue. Helped finance and had Rita Resko buy adajacent plot for $625,000. and sold it to Obama for $104,000. They closed a few months later on same day.
There’s a whole lot more than 133 “present” votes that Obama claims he pushed “the wrong button in error 6 times”. “Present” buttons are clearly marked yellow. Obama voted “present” 133 times.
Oy, does Obama need to be vetted, and oy, is he afraid to debate Hillary! He’d have to answer some tough questions and will do anything to slither out of this. He has been cunning and devious in Illinois, so this comes as no surprise.
There should be a groundswell of complaint about this cowardly excuse to avoid exposure.
To me it’s all about Florida and Ohio.
Clinton will fare much better in Florida. Enough to win? I think so.
Ohio? Who knows?
Illinois, NY, Calif, are foregone conclusions.
As is Texas.
Pennsylvania, I don’t know for sure but think Democrats.
Recall Bush making a few arm twisty phone calls to the state and lost? before Florida fell in to the Ocean? If Mccain is the “one” the keystone state will go dem.
How about these numbers? 8,781,090 vs 8,110,261. Hillary has almost 670,000 more than Obama in the electoral contests to date. I appreciate the points made by my buddy, Frank Naif, who points out that Hillary has baggage and gives some pause.
Even with Hillary’s so-called ‘baggage’, Barack is STILL losing the popular vote to her.
Mr Unity isn’t as uniting as he thinks he is.
http://www.270towin.com/
Interactive electoral college map.
Hope someone smarter than me has at it.
Or better yet, Mr. Larry Johnson would plug his numbers in and we cold see where we stand.
None of that matters - none of the red states, none of the blue states. What matters? Florida. Florida clearly chose Hillary over Obama.
Mara,
I agree but does Florida choose Hillary over McCain?
I think so but honestly don’t know.
The New Republic
With Friends Like These … by Marin Cogan, Melanie Mason, and Barron YoungSmith
Everything you ever wanted to know about the Clintons’ shadiest donors
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e
I cancelled my subscription to The New Republic last year because every issue was another episode of Let’s Bash Hillary And Pump Up Obama, and I was sick to death of it.
BTW, TNR endorsed Joe Lieberman for President in 2004. Remind yourself of that whenever you read a TNR article on politics.
So your saying all the facts in the article are not true and TNR is just making it all up to slam Hillary?
So it is okay on this blog to trash Obama day after day but it isn’t okay for the TNR to trash Hillary?
So I am also supposed to condemn the TNR to the trash bin because they endorsed Joe Leiberman what kind of close minded logic is that?
I got off this blog for awhile because instead of any real info about any meaningful subject it has become a pro Hillary anti obama rag with daily increasingly hateful accusations and useless arguments.
If Larry and susan want it that way then thats the way it will be because it is Larry’s blog.
But what is disappointing is that when we Democrats should be fighting the Repugs we are fighting amongst our selves. This is exactly what will guarantee the Repugs retain the WH. Its called the old divide and conquer strategy. If they can keep us fighting among our selves then when the bloody battle at the convention is over there will be nothing left to to commence the real battle with McCain.
Too bad.
Is Hillary knowingly associating with a man who was Sadaam’s favorite launderer, involving himself as a main player in the french banking industry, convicted of money laundering, a reputation for illegal arms trade, with forays into Africa, perhaps even Kenya?
And if it turns out she did, you know, she’s just as guilty.
What makes Obama SO creepy, though, as compared to the rest, is he seems so closely related to this, and he lies so easily, and you just buy it without a second thought.
As opposed to this blog which has turned into a daily “let’s bash Obama and pump up Hillary” site?
OK.
No one is bashing Obama, unless that is what they’re calling truth these days.
What about the Rezko and Auchi connections?
Minor?
A lapse in judgement?
If you ignore it, it will go away?
That’s not true, now, is it?
And Hillary is, of course, squeaky clean and above reproach in every possible way.
I think she human. Has anyone spent 60 million dollars looking at Obama’s past?
[...] Johnson at NoQuarterUSA gets all math freaky in It’s the Electoral Votes Stupid. Here’s the money quote: Let’s assume that come the general election, Hillary wins the [...]
“Tired of Spin?” What a joke.
The GOP is scared that Obama will beat their candidate and doing all it can to smear him to line up a more easily beatable Hillary as McCain’s opponent.
Why anybody would read this blog of a Republican imperialistic ex-spook to get unbiased info about the Democratic candidates is beyond me.
Larry C. Johnson is anti-Obama because he is pro-Republican - not pro-Clinton.
The joke “zmaster” is that you think you have the intellectual skills to engage anyone on this site. Try formulating a cogent argument rather than engage in juvenile name calling. I don’t mind the name calling if it is done with style, wit, or venom.
You are just fucking boring.
But hey, thanks for making the case that Obama disciples are generally not too bright.
The truth about your being a GOP tool trying to slander Obama kinda gets to you a bit huh.
I’m just trying to point out what is really going on here to any random readers that come this way thinking you are somehow a democrat adding intelligent comments to the debate about the two Dem candidates.
Good luck in November.
Speaking only for myself, And that makes Larry what? Has it ever occured to you he as previously stated, as have many at NQ, that having a vetted qualified candidate / president is the bottomline?
So if it bothers you; I am a registered independant Republican, who voted for Hillary. Because Hillary Clinton, is inspite of what fralities you may assign to her, vastly more qualified Than McCain or the preacher man Obama.
There is no smear, you haven’t begun to see the truth of Rezko, and his connections.
Look outside the US, look to Nadhmi Auchi, and his relationship to Rezko.
Would you want either man NEAR the US Presidency?
Tip of the hat and tip of the iceberg. Oops sorry 313. Don’t like the broken down dirty red #7? or the GG to Coney Island? all your Obama and his office is flooded. When you finally get home and have no heat or running water but DO have a telephone and the Obama’s office people folks can only hear a pin drop?
If the community organizer Obama attends services every Sunday to confess for the gamblin and smokin during the week, I can’t hold that against him, for those are personal vises.
I can however wonder how you get your hail marys, when looking the otherway while the people who elected you are freezing and without running water.
Obama went to work as “community orginizer” after he was interview by a law firm with ties to Rezko when he was he was at Harvard. As time went on he did “5 hours” of work over 20 years and had Rezko pony up for a dream house he could not afford. The fact that along the way, Rezko and the company he keeps, embezzeled, extorted and defrauded the taxpayers and added to the misery of others, apparently does not motivate Obama to say anything but, “Yes We CAN”!
Why are we told not to look at the “man behind the curtian”? What kinda yellow brick road is this?
TeakWoodKite,
What you say is true. What kind of community organizer would tolerate Rezko, let alone take patronage and money from him for years from Illinois senate to Us Senate?
Obama’s unconscionable treatment of his own poor and deprived people by ignoring their abuse at the hands of a crook like Rezko, was tolerated and abetted as this was Obama’s ticket to success in politics as the banker was Rezko. The mover and shaker of Obama’s ambition stole from the taxpayers to ruin the apartments and lives of those he was paid to rehab and help. Obama is a great orator and like most preachers a man of intense cunning.
This is being tolerated because no one beleives a man of such rhetorical truthspeak could be capable of this. Hope in a bottle.
I find your snarky remarks about Johnson offensive in the extreme.
This is not a Republican site, and your absurd allegations about Obama as targeted by GOP and this site, etc. is convoluted, paranoid, and devoid of any logic. Also you have no right to be on a blog of this kind that attracts many opinions, and most usually with respect and consideration.
You sound nuts.
My husband is a professor, I am a nurse, we are not exactly stupid. We have children that are part Hispanic, part Asian, part Jewish. We voted for Obama. I truly hope he wins the primary. I think we
US need him.
You are more than entitled to your views on Obama and no one questions your right to vote your choice.
I just believe you have not had an honest unvarnished look at the evidence regarding his actual political record and find if it matches what you believe he says.
And if you’d rather not, and choose to believe every word Obama tells you on faith, so be it.
I cannot believe in blind faith, and what I find about Obama’s record is a total turnoff. Faith must be earned and deeds count.
As a nurse I am curious what you think about Hillary Clintons vs Barak Obama’s health care “plan”.
PS There is a 2 year wait to get into the nursing program at one of CA best JC’s. How can we fix this as I understand it is not uncommon?
The odds makers in the delegate/voting estimation should go by the laws of probability. All great poker players know this.
It doesn’t take quantum math.
Anybody see Carl Rove on tv tonight? Was it Hannity? I don’t remember, too much channel surfin’ & multi task, anyhow ole Carl had this little black board all organized/formulatized & since he’s this big seer, is predicting Hillary will win. This guy was having way too much fun. I recall him sayin how well Obama does in the states with caucusi (made up that plural) but then went on to minimize this & sited Montana or some western state that goes about 90% Repub & made some snide gleeful comment that their Dem caucus consisted of about 17 people. He’s callin Ohio & Florida for Hillary. He’s also predicting McCain will trounce HRC. Yawn, could we expect anything less? He wants the run against to be against Clinton & lights up like a little kid knowin’ he’s gettin’ a new intendo at the thought of it.
Perhaps he knows he’ll nail Obama (rezko)without a fight and Hillary is just more of a challenge. That is what drive igits like Rove. He does not consider Obama to be his equal, where he has stated publicly that the Clintons are formidable adversaries. Ego is Ego is Ego….he has been beat by a Clinton and not many others I can recall and the ego always demands revenge, bitter or sweat.
Isn’t the whole Rezko/Auchi/? trough one big congressional feed?
Would McCain be exempt?
I’d love to see HIS financial records.
Here is a guy who might know. I would LOVE to tivo this guys life and play it back at x4.
What is the term for the accountant in the Italian?
Christopher J. Ward Treasure; CJ Ward LLC outside contractor official treasure NRCC
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8349.html
George bush is to vadville as Obama is to silent movies.
should of typed: he wants the run to be against Clinton. BTW Cee, U R very good at defense, excellent. Yer holdin’ off the posse. I’m impressed. When they get real comfortable with their game hit ‘em with a little offense. I got my pom poms ready. GO Cee!!!! GO Cee!!! GO Cee!
Stop the Dy-nas-ty! GO Cee! Stop the Dy-nas-ty!
zmaster, seeds of doubt, is that what politics is all about? Now that Larry gave you a nice version of his classic slap down R U hiding under your bed? If you strike again they’ll call YOU a troll…try it again they’ll say U wear a tin hat etc…ya hidin’ under your bed yet? Alot of health insurance stock will rise or fall…go short? go long? This is a big $$$$$$$$ game. HRC was at it again tonight, wanting a long term interest rate freeze. Get the STAGFLATION banners ready, it’s almost half time.
2 hrs ago Associated Press New Orleans “Obama Wants Clinton to Show Tax Records” story on comcast.net it’s a cool little read
Please release me, let me go….
http://www6.comcast.net/news/articles/politics/2008/02/08/Obama.Taxes/
What’s up with this rate freeze kick that Hillary is on? Some congress woman (D) was just on the boob tube supporting the idea. Maybe they all went to a Ron Paul rally & got lectured about the U.S. Constitution Article 1 Section 8 Clause 5…”Congress shall have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof…” Then maybe the Dr Paul crowd got them to watch some of those oldie but goodie UTube tapes about the History of the Federal Reserve & instead of arriving at Paul’s Gold Standard realization, Soros slipped outta the Obama camp for a night & gave them a good money massage. Why does HRC want a long term rate freeze right at this point? Hell, Japan has the lowest rates in the world, 0.? It’s where the big boys go to borrow. Something smells funny & it just might be the economy.
Justsomeone,
The rate freeze idea is pretty simple. You are not reducing the prime rate. So intrest would not be 0%, it would freeze the rate of your home loan. Greenspan was selling ARM, which was insane anyway. So, the plan is to freeze so the hugh resets that will go ineffect will be froze. Also if you already had a reset, I understand they will try to freeze it before the reset hit. I GUESS it will depend on what can actually be passed. Like I said its pretty simple to understand. I guess if you dont understand how it works, meaning the home mortgage, you shouldnt buy a house. I guess it takes all kinds, but it was really stupid to go for a ARM. Especially if you cant afford the house.
How do you go about reducing the money supply , overall, so is less money in the market?
How do you go about reducing the money supply , overall, so there is less money in the market, ie the economy?
So nice, I thought I’d write it twice.
Sorry.
There are a few different ways, one is stop printing money. It causes more inflation, and I think stagflation is whats happening. Back to getting less money, tightening of the credit. To be honest I am really suprised that the banks are so loose with the credit. Especially with how much trouble they are in. Its really crazy, but when the Republican congress deregulated this is what happens. I think one of the worse parts of the deregulation was no longer having usery laws. Which where much strigent, and didnt leave it up to the states. Of course, that is another discussion all together, and would have to look up what actually laws and when they lapsed.
The fed should be raising rates instead of lowering and that would also take money off the street. I am sure there are more, but thats just a few off the top of my head. Hope that helps you a bit.
Kim, thanks for the mortgage tips however I own the house I live in & have bought & sold 2 others. If I want to gamble I’ll go to Vegas, not some Countrywide knock off. As for Greenspan “selling ARMS”, that’s a bit of a stretch. At the risk of really being redundant it was Pres Billary that pushed THE COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT!!!! & the banks & their Subs took it from there…with many states usery laws set around 36% & as Mr. Murder was aptly pointed out, bankruptcy laws eviscerated, the rest is history. Some states recognized what was happening at the predatory end of the subprime & PASSED LEGISLATION TO STOP IT, however the “banks turned to the Treasury Dept’s Office of the Comptroller of the Currency”…in “2004 the OCC issued regulations nullifying the state laws as they applied to national banks” ( author of quoted text, Nickolas Bagley has clerked for Justice John Paul Stevens.) Kinda sounds like immigration laws, states prohibited from doing s**t about them too. Youall are so fixated on Rezko, maybe you ought to worry a bit more about the fixers sitin faceless in their plush DC offices.
Obama has nuanced about the “mismanagement of the Community Reinvestment Act” however he does it as a throw away line & never really goes at Hillary in any meaningful way on the topic. I figure his buddies in the Chicago School of Economics are hip to this, so why doesn’t he go at her with it??? My hunch tells me someone in Dem Central has taken that option off the table. However, it is precisly the dove tailing of the mismanagement of the Community Reinvestment Act on the coat tails of NAFTA et al that has us in the fix we’re in. A moron could figure you can’t just outsource lots of jobs, while allowing run away illegal immigration & legal immigration at a rate of 2,000,000 a yr + family, run a massive trade deficit & then embark on an endless war without escaping disaster. Obama pulls every punch he throws. Why?? What’s going on?
Maybe the deal is already done. HRC 4 Prez, Wes Clark 4 VP (to counter McCain’s hawkish stance) & Obama gets to be AG. The punch pullin’ might just be our clue after that last luv fest disguised as a debate.
Teakwoodkite, I’m responding to your comment about what’s going on with the long waits for U.S. nursing students. I don’t have any inside info but have noticed large influxes of Asian nurses at public hospitals, nurses right off the boat, that could barely speak english. Perhaps you should address your question to flat earther Tommy Friedman at the NYT. Mr. portable, mobile workforce. One nurse I know told me the imported nurses earn less. How about a surgery junkett to India for a little hip replacement? Sound like fun? Since you appear to have bought into the evils of any nationalist soverignity movements, recall you saying something global like we’re all global citizens awhile back, surely you won’t mind having your $30+ benefits an hr gig “regularized” for the good of the globe.
G’day justsomeone.
Since you appear to have bought into the evils of any nationalist soverignity movements,
Actually, I have been keeping some of my personal views offline as they are not, at times, productive to exchanging points of view and ideas.
I have two different views; and as it relates to human rights and labor rights; “we”, as human beings, are indeed ‘global citizens’. The recent advent of global communications truly changes the equation and is, in of it self, a force to be reckoned with, from a nationalistic point of view.
I have a very intense sense of nationalism, and choose to, instead, look at the big picture. Which, for me, is the conflict between nationalism and globalism and the corrosive effect globalism it has on a given national identity.
For example, when it comes to labor, which is currently a national issue (pick a country), it is painfully obvious that corporate structures take advantage of a lack of a global “labor” structures which allow “them” to undermine union / collective barginning efforts. (ie if you don’t like my offer I will send the jobs overseas and you won’t have any;the Jack Walsh model) I am in complete agreement with the views of Senator Dorgan on this point.
You make the very valid point that H1-B visas and other similar programs are another aspect of gaming the US labor market. (insourcing) A very tragic aspect of what laws our federal government will not enforce, when it comes to the citizens and legal immagrants of the US labor market.As a union officer, I was elected by my members to look after their well being and interests, not an easy task these days.
My daughter was interested in entering the nursing profession and quite frankly, I was rudely awakened to the fact that even though the demand for nursing professionals is on the roof, she would have to get on a 2 year waiting list to even get on the carrer path of her choosing. Instead, the market is flooded with people that are escaping “the law, poverty and the army” and in doing so suppress many efforts to provide meaningful, well paying jobs to our sons and daughters. The bottomline of this reality is the dumbing down of all that was an American national identity. Labor is just one dimension of this, when viewed from a kites perspective.
Hope this helps.
The borderless world jive usta be the mantra of the far right wingnut brigade of the Libertarian party & now it’s the battle cry of the Left. Full circle, Now Everyone change partners & doe-see-doe. Next we’ll sing “We R the World, We R the children…” & then wind it all up with a little group step dance to the tune of “Bye Bye Job.” Remember keep it tight!
Obama or any other…
What difference does it make? Or if there’s another republican president?
I don’t see any socialist candidate. I don’t see elections from THE PEOPLE. One person, one vote, regardless of gender, religion, legal status or race. Do you have anything like that up there?
It’s just corpo-money (which is YOUR money) at work to stage a show. You USAmeicans are trapped in the bipartisan game, the good cop/bad cop trick. ONLY money counts: screw the poor, screw the vets, screw the non-whites. Worst of all: screw the workers, keep ‘em enslaved with mortgages and unpayable medical care and social benefits. What a pity!
Time to wake up and ask for a true revolution to use all that USAmerican potential for the benefit of mankind. Stop protecting the privileged, start protecting John Doe, get rid of corporate domination and indoctrination from status media.
Big corporations don’t get rich by fighting between themselves: they feed and feast on YOU ordinary citizens.
Start a socialist revolution if you want a government of the people for the people. Take a look at Venezuela: we’re fighting the same enemy that has transformed you USAmerican citizens into slaves… or lazy, uncommitting couch potatoes distracted from social reality by sports or gossip.
Think of social security for ALL. Think of a world with no motives to regard you as a threat. WAKE UP!
Franco, from beautiful Venezuela.
While I am a Clinton supporter, I don’t think this is a strong argument, simply because many states won by Clinton will vote for either her or Obama in a general. And conversely some that she won will go for the Repub.
The real question is on electability is who does better in traditional swing states v. McCain.
i love obama