tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post3489541149678830014..comments2023-11-02T05:00:36.315-04:00Comments on Democratic Convention Watch: Welcome backMatthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02126730290750804530noreply@blogger.comBlogger128125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-66320258862088079732008-06-01T17:58:00.000-04:002008-06-01T17:58:00.000-04:00Why has nothing happened about the fired prosecuto...<I>Why has nothing happened about the fired prosecutors?</I><BR/><BR/>Things happened. Meiers and Rove have been subpoenaed. They've refused to show up on grounds of executive privilege. The question is in the courts. It takes a while.<BR/><BR/>Also, harping on these few (though important) issues doesn't take into account the many day-to-day issues that have gone well. Plus the House finally stood up to the White House on telecom immunity. People may have complaints, but a person's job evaluation should hinge on the totality of the work, not on a few things we might (rightly) disagree with.<BR/><BR/><I>Madeleine Albright is a dreadful example because she can't legally be president.</I><BR/><BR/>But that's not the point. I never asserted that she should be president; I used her as an example of a woman who held high office successfully. If she can do that job well, surely there are others who could be good presidents.<BR/><BR/>Moreover, the question was whether she should not be considered for the job because she's a woman. The fact that she can't hold the job because she's not a "natural born" citizen isn't relevant to that issue.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-27270503104117157932008-06-01T17:12:00.000-04:002008-06-01T17:12:00.000-04:00DSimon...i agree with you, of course.but, in my be...DSimon...<BR/><BR/>i agree with you, of course.<BR/><BR/>but, in my best Bush impersonation, i must question your naivete here. i'm just not sure you know what you're up against in being so rational.<BR/><BR/>having said as much, i would still vote for Mrs. Clinton if, with Mr. Ickes supprot, she somehow managed to hijack the nomination.Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04113337779311427045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-11544730870041515992008-06-01T15:21:00.000-04:002008-06-01T15:21:00.000-04:00Impeachment proceedings can only harm the party in...<I>Impeachment proceedings can only harm the party in November.</I><BR/><BR/>That <I>might</I> be true. What would absolutely help the Dems, though, would be active investigations. Why has nothing happened about the fired prosecutors? Why has nothing happened about... There are so many scandals that I can't even remember them. We don't have to be actuvely pursuing impeachment to be investigating the <I>criminal</I> activity of this administration. Once the evidence is in, then a decision can be made as to whether impeachment should be an option or not, and if the evidence is strong enough, the American people would absolutely support impeachment. Taking impeachment off the table without investigating is the same as saying that Bush did nothing wrong. <BR/><BR/>Madeleine Albright is a dreadful example because she can't legally be president. If the best example you can come up with to support your argument is someone who can't legally hold the job, it's a pretty dreadful example.MaxBotshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01800423038807169686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-62338843324080760662008-06-01T15:14:00.000-04:002008-06-01T15:14:00.000-04:00ray: trust me on this one. or don't and suffer the...ray: <I>trust me on this one. or don't and suffer the consequences yourself one day.</I><BR/><BR/>Well, I don't know if Madeline Albright would have made a good president (had she been eligible), but I'm pretty sure she would have been better than Bush. If you would have voted for Bush anyway in that match-up, or for Bush against someone else like Albright, I suppose you'd be glad to accept responsibility for the consequences.<BR/><BR/>That there was one woman candidate you didn't like is hardly a reason for disqualifying half the population. Merkel seems to be doing OK in Germany. Golda Meir apparently did a good job in Israel. The more we evaluate people as individuals rather than members of groups, the better off we'll all be.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-84681406473065335312008-06-01T15:07:00.000-04:002008-06-01T15:07:00.000-04:00By all accounts? You didn't do much research, did ...<I>By all accounts? You didn't do much research, did you? Pelosi has done a dreadful job as Speaker. She's blocked the Democratic congress from doing any meaningful investigations of the Bush administration, and has unequivocally taken impeachment off the table.</I><BR/><BR/>You're right, I overstated. By most accounts, she's done a good job.<BR/><BR/>The two items you mention will not help Democrats get elected. Impeachment proceedings can only harm the party in November. There will be time to investigate and repair the damage after this administration is gone. But impeaching Bush and Cheney would give us President Pelosi--an outcome that would have little support in the nation and harm Democratic chances to regain the White House.<BR/><BR/>My understanding is that Democrats in Congress, and even some Republicans, have been satisfied with her job performance. Trying to keep the House on the move probably makes herding cats look orderly.<BR/><BR/>And I don't see why Madeline Albright is a dreadful example. I was just pointing out women who were good at their jobs in high office. The fact that she's barred from the presidency on a technicality doesn't bear on the argument that she shouldn't be barred from high office because she's a woman. (I don't know if she'd be a good president, but she certainly was a good Secretary of State.)dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-24198768272233641192008-06-01T14:36:00.000-04:002008-06-01T14:36:00.000-04:00DSimon: "Yes, that's one woman candidate. I've hea...DSimon: <I>"Yes, that's one woman candidate. I've heard Madeline Albright speak too. She's brilliant. Or should she be disqualified from high office because she's a woman?</I><BR/><BR/>No, but she should be disqualified because she's legally ineligible to be the President since she wasn't born a US citizen. Other than that minor nitpicky irritation, she would be an excellent President.<BR/><BR/><I>By all accounts, Pelosi is doing a good job too (she's third in line for the to job, by the way).</I><BR/><BR/>By <I>all</I> accounts? You didn't do much research, did you? Pelosi has done a dreadful job as Speaker. She's blocked the Democratic congress from doing any meaningful investigations of the Bush administration, and has unequivocally taken impeachment off the table. By all accounts? Certainly not by my account. <BR/><BR/>There certainly are women who I would vote for for President. Unfortunately, you just chose two pretty dreadful examples.MaxBotshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01800423038807169686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-54659962597674087552008-06-01T11:25:00.000-04:002008-06-01T11:25:00.000-04:00DSimon...Ickes isn't a woman? wow.fighting fire w...DSimon...<BR/><BR/>Ickes isn't a woman? wow.<BR/><BR/>fighting fire with fire. it's not logical, but sometimes necessary, especially with women. <BR/><BR/>trust me on this one. or don't and suffer the consequences yourself one day.Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04113337779311427045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-14913546841059207332008-06-01T10:45:00.000-04:002008-06-01T10:45:00.000-04:00dsimon - "DNC rules require it to ask whether the ...dsimon - "DNC rules require it to ask whether the state party did what it could to stay within the rules. They concluded that the party had not."<BR/><BR/>I'm sure <A HREF="http://youtube.com/watch?v=r25wUeMAwdE" REL="nofollow">this</A> didn't help Florida's argumentIndependent Voterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891665063532900974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-50575514233213921922008-06-01T09:43:00.000-04:002008-06-01T09:43:00.000-04:00modarate steve: I cannot imagine punishing Florida...modarate steve: <I>I cannot imagine punishing Florida for something the Republicans did and I applaud Michigan for standing up to the status quo.</I><BR/><BR/>Just because Republicans controlled the date in Florida doesn't mean Democrats opposed it. The a spokesperson for the FL Democratic party said they were "all for" the early date. Legislators didn't offer any serious opposition. DNC rules require it to ask whether the state party did what it could to stay within the rules. They concluded that the party had not.<BR/><BR/>As for fighting the status quo, I agree that some changes should be made. But those changes should be handled within the party. If there are no sanctions for breaking the rules, how is chaos to be avoided next time?<BR/><BR/>Oh, and I don't see how Iowa and New Hampshire qualify as "liberal white states." White, yes; but liberal? I don't think so.<BR/><BR/>Iowa and NH go early because they are small states where candidates without huge amounts of money can engage in retail politics and have a chance to compete. I think other states could play this role (Delaware, Rhode Island). But I don't see it as having anything to do with the political leanings of Democrats in those states.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-40617327987101329252008-06-01T09:36:00.000-04:002008-06-01T09:36:00.000-04:00ray: Harold Ickes is one of those eccentric suppor...ray: <I>Harold Ickes is one of those eccentric supporters. And he apparently "speaks on behalf" of Hillary.</I><BR/><BR/>He's got a job to do. I see no way this is going all the way to Denver. I think it's posturing to keep Clinton's base happy until the Michigan numbers become irrelevant. And Ickes is not a woman.<BR/><BR/><I>And I have also heard that "monster" speak herself.</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, that's one woman candidate. I've heard Madeline Albright speak too. She's brilliant. Or should she be disqualified from high office because she's a woman? By all accounts, Pelosi is doing a good job too (she's third in line for the to job, by the way).<BR/><BR/><I>The anger that women, especially Hillary, have displayed in this matter reminds me of the disgraceful, divisive and unnecessarily hurtful behavior of African Americans during the OJ trial and the final, awful, unjust verdict in that case.</I><BR/><BR/>And lots of women support Obama. Should that disqualify his candidacy?<BR/><BR/>Again, I think it's a mistake to take the views of the most passionate supporters and campaign insiders for one candidate, and the candidate himself or herself, and generalize those qualities to an entire category of people.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-63441407463229018652008-06-01T08:49:00.000-04:002008-06-01T08:49:00.000-04:00Shame shame shame on the rules committee. In movi...Shame shame shame on the rules committee. In moving primaries many states were saying we are sick and tired of the liberal white states going first every time and we aren't going to wait another decade to fix this. In their rulings 'Not to punish New Hampshire' and 'to punish florida and Michigan' the ultra liberal rules committee have said loud and clear we have your party in a strangle hold and we are not going to let go. Since the Republican party cannot get control from thier very active conservative side and this last ditch effort to pry the liberals fingers off the Democratic party moderates like myself see no other solution but to try to peel off the moderates from both parties and try to form a new centrist party. I cannot imagine punishing Florida for something the Republicans did and I applaud Michigan for standing up to the status quo. I end as I started shame shame shame on the rules committee.Moderate Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06678910900908178557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-36325520731259360672008-06-01T06:15:00.000-04:002008-06-01T06:15:00.000-04:00"DSimon - don't confuse the candidates with some o..."DSimon - don't confuse the candidates with some of their more eccentric supporters."<BR/><BR/>Harold Ickes is one of those eccentric supporters. And he apparently "speaks on behalf" of Hillary. And I have also heard that "monster" speak herself.<BR/><BR/>The anger that women, especially Hillary, have displayed in this matter reminds me of the disgraceful, divisive and unnecessarily hurtful behavior of African Americans during the OJ trial and the final, awful, unjust verdict in that case.<BR/><BR/>Get a grip people. We WILL hate "your kind" if it matters so much to you that you pour unmittigated hatred our way. We WILL defend ourselves by hating back.<BR/><BR/>My new American Bumper sticker: "White American males. We really aren't all that bad. Honest."Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04113337779311427045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-36588714279943492622008-05-31T23:48:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:48:00.000-04:00As a former republican who switched over to an ind...As a former republican who switched over to an independant two years ago, and someone who nows supports Obama for president, I've got to say that the democratic party, and especially the Hillary Clinton side of it is seriously just beyond pathetic. She's done nothing but play tawdry political games the whole time. She is constantly disingenuous and fake. She's a HUGE hypocrite, and she and her idiotic supporters have proven that they would rather look like ignorant douchebags than meet the other side halfway, even when it is their arguments that are completely illogical. The fact that everyone knows that they know they are full of BS, but don't care as long as they can get their candidate selected just shows immense disrespect to close to 20 million voters, and the rest of the rational thinking world. This has been Clinton's whole game: try to paint as many BS negative political points against him as possible, then go back to superdelegates saying, 'see, he's gonna have a hard time in November because he has too much baggage'. When superdelegates obviously knew those assertions and games were ridiculous, and continued shifting to him, her new game was to start encouraging her supporters to basically try and blackmail the party with a completely assnine and flat out immature strategy that only a bunch of sore losers would do, by trying to pressure superdelegates into supporting her, or else they were going to switch over and vote for McCain? Seriously? No, seriously, that's the level that these people are playing at? Threatening to vote for McCain? Next, the whole Michigan/Florida debacle is the worst, most in-your-face disingenuous, playing dumb strategy game that they have tried to play. So it's completely fair to greatly punish Obama, and effectively steal the election from him by fully seating Florida and Michigan? These people seriously believe that a fair solution would be to give Hillary Clinton 73 delegates in Michigan to zero for Obama? Even though he took his name off AFTER the party stripped the state of their delegates, and Hillary Clinton herself agreed to it. Too funny. I'd love to see any Clinton supporter address this, because they conveniently won't even try to address how illogical their whole argument is. Again, they insult everyone else by even trying to argue for this solution. That wouldn't disenfranchise over 17 million Obama voters? If somehow Michigan and Florida both counted fully, and Obama was awarded zero delegates in Michigan, and somehow she was able to squeak it out, it would be far more damaging and disenfranchising to voters, especially black voters, than Florida being stolen by the republicans was. Their whole story is that they blatantly and openly DO NOT CARE about anything other than their candidate "winning". There's more. That's just the beginning. He whole existance and support is based on these two factors: racial prejudice toward him being a black guy, and a feminist movement that is backing her for no other reason than them wanting a female president. Experienced? That's a riot. How is she so much more experienced? She was a first lady. She used that "brand recognition" to vault herself to a senatorial seat. The whole time, she has proven to be nothing more than a person who plays political games. And like the old and rural hicks aren't going to come out for McCain anyways. That's the funniest thing about the whole situation. Her support is mostly coming from prejudiced older white people that are more voting against the young black guy than for her. McCain would have easily walked with her main voting group anyways, had they met in November. Here is the breakdown of her voters: latinos that are also voting against the blacks. Women who just want a female president, period, and people going by brand recognition from Bill Clinton. Hardly indicative of the varying cultures and backgrounds of the 300 million people in this country.Aphexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12088687054468058837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-63796027830917375052008-05-31T23:44:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:44:00.000-04:00StopObamaNow,The fatal flaw with Bush wasn't his l...StopObamaNow,<BR/><BR/>The fatal flaw with Bush wasn't his lack of experience; rather, it was his lack of morality and intelligence.walt526https://www.blogger.com/profile/00497446942527295978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-63986556981448864662008-05-31T23:41:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:41:00.000-04:00I mentioned one republican, never referred to the ...I mentioned one republican, never referred to the whole, thus, no generalization possible. And YES, two more conservative justices COULD overturn a lot more than R v. W!<BR/><BR/>There are hard working white folk in 45 other states, too, so I see no purpose in listing five.Basketball mom, M.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08241268438596398115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-89560294136676882282008-05-31T23:25:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:25:00.000-04:00Leah Texas4Obama, That was both powerful and distr...Leah Texas4Obama,<BR/> That was both powerful and distressing, thank you for the link.kennickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02480910391949975047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-24732401543291074662008-05-31T23:24:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:24:00.000-04:00stopobamanow: There are several flaws in your poin...stopobamanow: There are several flaws in your point of view. First off, Bush actually had several years in office as Governor of Texas before running for president, so he was not completely inexperienced as you suggest. Secondly, inexperience does not necessarily lead to disaster. We can cite Kennedy, FDR and Lincoln as presidents viewed very favorably that had very little experience prior to taking up the office of the presidency.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-37164086906241252712008-05-31T23:15:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:15:00.000-04:00SayHillary, now that you won't be needing it anymo...SayHillary, now that you won't be needing it anymore, may I borrow Karl Rove's playbook?kennickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02480910391949975047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-47919609460188775822008-05-31T23:11:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:11:00.000-04:00ray: it has inspired me to do everything i can in ...ray: <I>it has inspired me to do everything i can in years to come to make sure that a woman is never president of the united states as long as i am alive.</I><BR/><BR/>Really? There are plenty of women who would do a good job. Clinton would probably do a good job--certainly better than McCain.<BR/><BR/>Again, don't confuse the candidates with some of their more eccentric supporters. I'm sure there's video of an Obama supporter saying equally ridiculous stuff.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-86593224027303532912008-05-31T23:07:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:07:00.000-04:00la-Thank you for your considerate response. But I ...la-<BR/><BR/>Thank you for your considerate response. But I hope you'll forgive some additional comments.<BR/><BR/>I don't think the DNC was inept at all. I think the rules called for a meeting of the Rules and Bylaws Committee on this date. If the meeting had been held earlier, they could have been accused of not giving the states enough time to correct their errors.<BR/><BR/>I just don't see the media bias that you have seen. Any candidate's supporter is more likely to pay more attention to criticism of their own candidate than of the opponent. Also, the alleged adoration of Obama has been well spoofed and publicized by the media itself.<BR/><BR/>As for the comments of some that "President Clinton wasn't that great of a President for Democrats anyway," I think the criticism is that he left no lasting Democratic structure in place, no enduring coalition that outlived his own personality while office. I think he did a very good job overall, but he did have early blunders that probably helped lose congressional majorities which forced him to (successfully) ward off Republican initiatives instead of enacting his own.<BR/><BR/><I>Why I'm not voting for Obama is my business and not for these boards. But I never said I was voting for McCain.</I><BR/><BR/>It seems to me that a Democrat who does not vote at all is in effect helping McCain win, unless one is in a state that is without question not in play. I cannot comment on your motivation without more information, which is of course yours to divulge or withhold.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-25425887335094328182008-05-31T23:06:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:06:00.000-04:00harriet christian's explosive video was very inspi...harriet christian's explosive video was very inspiring to me, i am very glad i have seen it. <BR/><BR/>http://youtube.com/watch?v=KACQuZVAE3s<BR/><BR/>it has inspired me to do everything i can in years to come to make sure that a woman is never president of the united states as long as i am alive.<BR/><BR/>thanks, old broad. you're a true leader.Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04113337779311427045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-31246529730550988112008-05-31T23:02:00.000-04:002008-05-31T23:02:00.000-04:00I'm wondering why the anger from the Clinton campa...I'm wondering why the anger from the Clinton campaign, specifically Ickes. The whole basis for the Clinton argument was let every vote be counted, let every voice be heard. To suggest taking this to the credentials committee leaves speculation that the fight was ambitious and not for the voice of the people. It is very transparent that the "fight" is about the Clintons. Obama asked his supporters to refrain from any haneous behavior at RBC meeting today. While I understand the passion the Clinton supporters had for their candidate, I think a little more restraint should have been exercised.Crosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378440189426804312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-89975813524564804342008-05-31T22:58:00.000-04:002008-05-31T22:58:00.000-04:00Nathanael ... just wanted to make sure I wasn't as...Nathanael ... just wanted to make sure I wasn't associated with any silly notion that Bush won Florida in 2000 ... by any reliable recount/audit that has been conducted in the years since. I was a volunteer for the Gore campaign back then and was outraged by the antics of the Republican Party at the time.<BR/><BR/>The person whose quote you accidentally attributed to me was actually Philip Slama. Check the above posts again.<BR/><BR/>On a tangentially related line of discussion - some people have expressed outraged that the "will of the voters" is somehow being distorted. One thing to keep in mind however, is that in our political party's (both Democratic and Republican) primaries and in our presidential elections themselves, people's votes do not directly elect candidates. We do not live in a direct democracy. People elect delegates. People elect electors. <BR/><BR/>This is the system we have. If you don't like it - work to change our party's charter - and work to change the US Constitution to replace the Electoral College. Until then though, this is the system we've got, and this is the system we have to live with. <BR/><BR/>In our current system, having an effective strategy to win delegates/electors is what matters most. Obama's campaign understood this from day one. I think it's not a giant logical leap to assume this organization and targeted strategy will translate for Obama in the general election.Daniel Branscomehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17216125919314566515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-3293893602726790522008-05-31T22:56:00.000-04:002008-05-31T22:56:00.000-04:00i really think hillary has let herself down throug...i really think hillary has let herself down throughout the course of her campaign. In a similar sense to Obama, i think she could have a positive impact upon how your country works and its relations with the wider world. However, today is just another example of not only her unwavering stubbornness, but also a worrying unwillingness to do the bravest thing and admit that she has lost. This allowing the party to move on to the real fight. Although i am an outside observer watching from across the pond it is my belief that Clinton's blind stubbornness and determination is negatively spilling into her supporters, like that of the somewhat humorous remarks of LA. It seems to me that they are grasping at straws and getting increasingly nasty in their rhetoric. Comments that try and compare this current election season to Mugabe in Zimbabwe or the Civil Rights movement are offensive to those affected and involved in such places or issues, grow up. <BR/><BR/>p.s. don't hate the player, hate the game, politics will always be politics.....oceanwalker1234https://www.blogger.com/profile/06679150934763566167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18747118.post-45086530021357390852008-05-31T22:54:00.000-04:002008-05-31T22:54:00.000-04:00Stopobamanow:One minor problem with your analogy:A...Stopobamanow:<BR/><BR/>One minor problem with your analogy:<BR/><BR/>Abraham Lincoln = inexperienced<BR/><BR/>In no way does <BR/>Abraham Lincoln = George Bush <BR/>so why do you think Obama does? Please, give a real reason now, be honest. Stop throwing around hype that has no logical basis and is misleading.<BR/><BR/>To the rest of you, sorry for feeding the troll...<BR/><BR/>ThralenTomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16005086510293773580noreply@blogger.com