This blog is amazing. It’s filled with real reporting and real stuff that one would think would be on blogs. This is non-mainstream stuff, not the stupid mainstream stuff just cherry picked and posted on the innertubes.

Thanks for being here.

1) In order to beat Hillary, McCain also has to beat Bill. Given (as donnas mentions below) the economic boom of the 90s and our current dip into the red, I don’t think that will be a simple matter.

2) Hillary might actually pick Obama as her running mate. If so, McCain has to beat all three of them.

3) Obama will get swiftboated with (true or not) various ties to muzlimizms, terror networks, or just ‘accidental’ plays on his name. It will work. We saw Chickenhawk Shrub beat two Viet Nam vets in a row. All it takes is repeating the lies over and over.

4) Hillary actually has some plans in place and a political machine to fight back. Obama will have to build one. It will take time, and given that this crap won’t be over until June (yes, JUNE, not March 4th or whatver-the-hell), McCain/Romney/Huckster/Rove will be months ahead with plans to beat the crap out of Obama.

5) Her healthcare plan covers more people than his does and only costs a little more money (scaling economics). If you don’t like the fact that it’s mandatory, you may still prefer Obama’s.

6) Rezko/Auchi/Alsammarae (the latter being one I hadn’t heard of previously. Iraqi electricity minister who was convicted of fraud and then ‘rescued’ from Iraq by everyone’s favorite security contractor). Regardless of how close he is/was to these people, whether he actually helped them or not, it will instill doubt, causing some people to vote McCain.

7) Hillary and Bill have been through this before and know how to fight back.

Obama’s top campaign attorney tried to make the ‘progressive case’ for pardoning Scooter Libby. I think it’s a crock. Though the campaign says the attorney did it on his own, I cannot see how that could possibly happen in the midst of his primary campaign being in full swing.

9) Claims that Hillary will be attacked are true. The problem is, so will Obama no matter how much GOP butt he kisses. If they bring up Monica Lewinsky, well, McCain had his own indiscretions. Evened out on that. I will say, though, she has the big lie to overcome: people dislike her just because they’ve heard so many other people say they dislike her. Ask them for an actual reason and they stare like deer in the headlights and sputter something about Bill. None of that will compare with alleged ties to terrorists (again, even if they aren’t ttrue, BillyJoeBob will not take any chances).

No one cares.

He essentially said the area would never be stable, always subject to the wars we see now.

I should research more, I wonder if he had any solution.

Just one of the smartest prescient men, ever, a model, in my head, anyway, of how one should approach the world, peace, but with strength, and intellect.

I can never be, obviously, but if I could choose, I would emulate him. He was wrong, sometimes, but he learned from his mistakes, and applied that knowledge.

Kennedy, a wealthy man’s son, fought bravely in world war two, understood the horror, and learned empathy toward those with less.

Can we please stick to the weightier aspects of his comparison to/contrast with HRC?

He didn’t DO anything, though, Obama, in fact in examining his record, he seems to have carved out a very careful definitive course, just so he could run for president, in this way.

How I would love to go back in time, and listen to his advisers, as if we could break, or decode, another’s memory, and replay it, like an unalterable holographic record..

And that’s what I thought John’s post was referring to, I took it as metaphor, accurate metaphor.

Can we please stick to the weightier aspects of his comparison to/contrast with HRC?

He didn’t DO anything, though, Obama, in fact in examining his record, he seems to have carved out a very careful definitive course, just so he could run for president, in this way.

How I would love to go back in time, and listen to his advisers, as if we could break, or decode, an other’s memory, and replay it, like an unalterable holographic record…

And that’s what I thought John’s post was referring to, I took it as metaphor, accurate metaphor.

What was the Harriet Tubmann quote?
She prefaced her remarks about Tubman by saying that she is “one of my favorite heroines”…

…in her autobiography, Living History, Clinton refers to Tubman as an “inspiration to Americans of all races”

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704260001

See my post here: Obama and Kennedy: Gut vs. Experience,” in which I draw on a particularly well-written, sharp article by an eminent historian written for the Washington Monthly. (I also dug around and found a lot of GREAT old photos of Kennedy and proof of his intellectual prowess.)

His essay is a marvelous read.

Her father sold draperies as a small businessman!

Her mother was abandoned, and taken in by a family that let her stay there in return for housework and childcare.

Quiet,

I don’t know how wonderful she is (don’t care either) but I sure agree that the tactics used by her campaign staff and supporters are hurting her.

I started to feel a bit sorry for her as I watched her quoting Harriet Tubmann in a speech other the weekend. She looked sad.

You’re obviously pretty new around here. Otherwise you’d know that I have been extremely critical of Obama since I started posting here a few months back.

As everyone else here seems to already know, I am an Edwards supporter. Maybe you should read the last post on the WA state caucus so you can get informed on where I stand on the candidates and the issues. And then, maybe, read through some archived posts as well.

Because, without having the benefit of a clue, you come off like a total jackass.

Your 15 minutes analogy falls on its head because it is quite easy to point out that Clinton has actually had less time in elected office than Obama. Duh.

And by the way — though I thoroughly respect Clinton’s work with the Children’s Defense Fund, according to your time clock, she worked there for only about “15 minutes”.

And yeah — sliming Obama with code words is stupid and defeats the whole purpose of trying to pass yourself off as having a grip on issues.

I will cry Uncle

Hillary is the best candidate

Hillary is the best candidate

Hillary is the best candidate

Enough?………

Obama is lite weight, empty, etc……

Now tell me why in detailed campaign logical strategy
and not emotional non descriptive bullshit WHY she has a better chance of beating McCain that Obama and if you sell me I will put up a Hillary poster in my front yard, on my car and on my forehead and post the pictures to prove I am not lying.

So go on fire away if you will…..

I will listen to and read anything but hope I have the right to logically and fairly disagree or ask for clarifcation on points you make which I dont understand.

Rock on……

Firstly, from the top to the bottom of the media pyramid Obama has been anointed as the chosen one.
The old hands on the editorial boards see him as a goat staked out for McCain to slaughter: The digital spectrum goes up for auction in ‘09 and they want their puppet in charge.
The reporters, a generation or two younger than those on the editorial boards, are caught up in a Ghost Dance where Obama will bring the Jackie O and JFK back to life, vaporize the memory of Reagan & Vietnam, kinda like playing a country & western record backwards.

Secondly, consider the intelligence of the voting public, especially those who vote for a candidate that they “like”. More lucid thinkers than you with far wider exposure than this blog have pointed out that there is a double standard in the perceptions of Clinton and Obama. They haven’t made a dent because the population dumb enough to elect Bush twice isn’t the greatest material with which to work.
It is an interesting sidelight that those who point out the obvious double standard are both University professors while those like Rich and Dowd are career journalists.

Thirdly, there is an active and increasingly obvious strategy amongst Republican ranks to promote Obama as the Democrat candidate. The leading edge was when Schwarzenegger’s wife came out for Obama after hubby endorsed McCain. “Kennedy” or not she has hauled Arnold’s ashes on two occasions to save his Republican ass.

Yet another example was broadcast coast-to-coast on HBO Friday night. Both Jonah Goldberg (National Review flack), Matthew Dowd (Chief Strategist for Bush/Chaney 2004) were gushingly effusive in their praise for Obama. (Christalmighty, guys, get a room!)
From the shill’s pitch to the blow-off it’s something they’ve done so very well before.

http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/a-calumny-a-day-will-keep-hillary-away/?em&ex=1202878800&en=d64336718ca8a273&ei=5070

My point was that Obama has never stayed at any job long enough to make an impact. Did that really escape you?

And I suspect that your “can we stick to the weightier aspects of his comparison..” really means “can we stop criticizing Obama’s lack of preparation for the Presidency?’

No, we can’t. Because it’s an issue, whether you like it or not.