Comments on: Politico Says Obama Snarfed Hillary’s Winning Platform. We Say, He Still Ain’t Hill.

By: Still4Hill

Still4Hill — Mon, 11 May 2009 01:12:42 +0000

Thank you, Ani, for this excellent analysis. It breaks my heart that the DNC got away with this.

By: avwrobel

avwrobel — Sun, 10 May 2009 14:16:16 +0000

I believe that the Republicans are holding off on the birth certificate issue until Obambi becomes politically weakened, and they gain some strength back, and then they’ll spring it in a coordinated way. I don’t see how its possible with the self-discrediting the Repubs have done to themselves over the last 15 years, but Obambi’s ineptness gives me hope (there’s that word again!).

By: SWPAnnA

SWPAnnA — Sun, 10 May 2009 00:28:24 +0000

DNC, the Dem leadership, and MoveOn.org. That’s where the money and strategy came from

and don’t leave out the D side of the Senate!

By: SWPAnnA

SWPAnnA — Sun, 10 May 2009 00:03:07 +0000

he made her SOS, what more could he have done?

She cut a bear knuckles DEAL for SOS with her 18 million votes;… as she had him by the proverbial gonads.

By: Ani

Ani — Sat, 09 May 2009 21:55:04 +0000

Yes, Fran, I agree, and as I mentioned above, Politico basically electioneered for him throughout the campaign, not only on their website, but whenever BEn Smith appeared on TV, he would do this as well. It was rather pathetic. They sacrificed much of their credibility on this.

By: b mathews

b mathews — Sat, 09 May 2009 20:16:00 +0000

that real BC was “bought” by rahm emanuel when he went to africa right after the election. i cant think of any other reason why he went there.

By: b mathews

b mathews — Sat, 09 May 2009 20:10:54 +0000

“The Wizard of Uhhhs” love it!!!

By: b mathews

b mathews — Sat, 09 May 2009 19:48:06 +0000

call me crazy, but sometimes when 0bama is doing something presidential, like signing some legislation, he has an expression on his face that says ” I cant believe i got away with this”

By: Ani

Ani — Sat, 09 May 2009 19:42:41 +0000

I for one vote candidate, issue, character and record. Not party.

I was a lifelong Dem till 2008 but that changed after their shenanigans. In future I will certainly vote for Dems again — but only those I feel have earned the slot. I will never again vote a straight party ticket — particulary if it is not deserved.

By: FLDemFem

FLDemFem — Sat, 09 May 2009 19:16:41 +0000

It’s the same company that is publishing Bush’s memoirs. This is from the Vanity Fair article about Bush’s trip to Canada to give a speech.

(Crown also published Barack Obama’s Dreams from My Father and already has a deal with the sitting president to publish his post-presidential memoir.)

By: lorac

lorac — Sat, 09 May 2009 18:06:59 +0000

“…his memoirs, for which he already has a contract”

“So, I don’t think Obummer will get the bucks he is counting on after the office.”

I don’t know a lot about the publishing business, but it strikes me as strange that he would sign a contract NOW – wouldn’t the average person think they could get a better deal AFTER their 4-8 years of “brilliance”?

Makes me wonder if your first statement has anything to do with your second statement. Maybe he has the same belief you (many of us) do – that he won’t be very marketable in the future….

By: JozefAL

JozefAL — Sat, 09 May 2009 17:29:23 +0000

So, you would punish an entire party for the ills created by a few? Really? If there’s a Democrat who represents YOUR values better than a Republican in a contest, you’d be willing to vote for the Republican (or hope that enough others would vote for the Dem to offset YOUR vote) JUST to spite the party?
Wow.
I could neither support nor vote for Obama/Biden last year (in large part due to the DNC’s shenanigans but my own feeling that Obama really wasn’t ready at THIS time; in the end I saw a 3rd party which was more in line with my own views), but that didn’t stop me from voting FOR other Democrats on the ticket. (Most notably, I voted for Vivian Figures for the US Senate seat currently held by Jeff Sessions–the GOPer who’s currently been in the news for his new position on the Senate Judiciary committee. Interestingly enugh, Sessions won MORE votes in the Senate race than did McCain–who won the Pres contest in the State–with FEWER overall votes cast in the Senate race. I even wrote in another Democrat’s name in place of Bobby Bright who eventually won the AL-2 Congressional seat; my write-in vote didn’t actually affect Bright’s win, but his win was VERY close against his GOP opponent.)

By: JozefAL

JozefAL — Sat, 09 May 2009 17:05:30 +0000

Well, I’d agree that politicians should have to take those tests, but the ones who should be tested first are those who mostly loudly proclaim how “patriotic” they are, followed very closely by those who continue to claim that this country was founded on “Christian values” or “God’s law(s)”.
But, let’s go a tad further. ANYONE who files to run for ANY elected office should have to take a basic civics test (though I would also suggest a number of various tests be available*) and a grade of less than 80% is declared a failure, barring that person from running again for at least 2 years, unless the person is willing to go before a board and pass an oral exam. Then, anyone who’s appointed to an elective office (to fill a vacancy, for instance), should be required to pass a similar test but allowed a slightly lower threshhold (perhaps as low as 70%), unless that person’s already holding an elective office (if there’s an “upgrade”–say from state to national level–then the test should only cover material applicable to that level’s needs).
Now, for the Federal Judiciary or any appointed posting (such as the Cabinet), there’s probably less chance for any type of testing since the Constitution allows for those offices to be at the President’s discretion (with the “advice and consent” of the US Senate, of course).
Of course, ANY sort of testing would require amending the US Constitution as well as most State Constitutions since virtually all of them already have their eligibility requirements for elected offices.

*Mainly to avoid having someone memorize the test answers but also to account for the specific office the person wants to run for. Obviously, someone running for a state or local office should have more detailed knowledge of their state’s constitution and civil and criminal codes or city’s charter than they would need to know details about the Electoral College or how many people are required for the US House or Senate to conduct official business while someone in Alabama who’s running for one of the state’s US Senate seats is less likely to need to know how the details and procedures of California’s I&R process affects that State’s Constitution.

By: AX10

AX10 — Sat, 09 May 2009 17:01:12 +0000

Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller are paying for it.
Their audience has shrunk. This is especially important for Ed Schultz, seeing that he was able to capture a larger group of demographics than anyone else.
I’m not listening.

By: JozefAL

JozefAL — Sat, 09 May 2009 16:41:23 +0000

I was going to respond to Ani’s comment, but I think this is a better point to do so.
There has not been a “GWB2″ yet. The FIRST President Bush was George H W Bush (note the extra initial there), while the last President Bush was simply George W Bush.
If you want to suggest that Obama is simply a repeat of George W Bush, then he would be GWB2. Ani’s use of “Bush3″ is a bit better but the the President Bush was infinitely superior to his son; Bush the Elder was, by no means, a man I supported as President but, at the same time, I genuinely believe he did NOT put corporate interests ahead of the public welfare as Bush the Lesser so blatantly did. (The Elder Bush’s most disappointing moment came in 1980 when he reversed course on the economy when he caved on “voodoo economics” in order to accept the VP slot under Reagan. His later support of the anti-abortion movement was almost as disappointing but I never sensed any deep-seated or heartfelt support in his words the way Reagan projected.)
Honestly, if someone like me who was unhappy with Bush the Elder is willing to defend HIS name from being linked to his cokehead of a son’s name, I wish others would be as careful when they attempt to paint Obama as being nothing more than Dubya Part 2. Please.
Obama = Dubya II.