The democrats are laying back, staring at the republicans across a small deep gulch. Across that gulch the republicans are making their static stand. The only argument that these neo neocons can come up with is as follows: "The democrats created this entire economic mess when they assumed power over both houses more than two years back. They (the democrats) would not recognize that there was a building problem and that something needed to be done." I have heard this argument, put forth by one conservative pundit after another, over the past few days. That the argument is total poppycock is kind of besides the point in this media age, wherein no member of the interviewing media will take a stand, do any real investigation or, and this is the real problem, confront bold-faced liars for what they are, right there on the television screen in front of everyone. But I am not unhappy over the direction of this new defense by the neocons. It is identical to the Maginot Line defense thrown up by the French before WWII. What the French learned, the republicans (who are proud not to study any history, or much else for that matter) will learn all over again. A static defense just does not work against a mobile opponent. Not one very well motivated with air and motor capability, anyway. So the democrats are, one and all, remaining silent in facing this new defensive attack. They are waiting for things to get worse. They know they will. The republicans are sitting there, fat, dumb and happy, with all that money squirreled away. Behind their Maginot Line. There exists motivation to counter their argument, one form of their static line. But why go at them that way, on their ground, and at their time. No, the democrats are going to wait until the physical assault becomes overwhelmingly called for. Then countering the verbal defenses will become academic. And that is all coming, and they know it. The republicans think that they can weather the coming storm. They see the clouds on the horizon. They have seen storms before. But they have never seen anything like this storm.
George Bush Jr. was listed as the seventh President from the bottom earlier today. By some sixty prominent historians. Seventh from last. This is humorous because of only one thing. The measurement of George Bush's presidency has only just begun. The tortures his people committed, the murders, the homicides and the breaking of our country, those revelations have only just begun. Hoover (one of the six supposedly below him) is going to look like a rock star two years from now. Harrison, another below him, who served only hours before expiring of pneumonia, will be cannonized in comparison. Six years ago I predicted that the word Bush would go from being a noun to a pronoun and then to a verb. The verb will stand for mean-spirited and willful stupidity in the face of all sound reasoning. To be Bushed, will be the same, a couple of years from now, as falling for the idiotic spiel of a snake oil salesman, or a carnie huckster.
I repeat. This economic downturn is like no other the world has ever seen. It will end in one of two ways (they are both the same but applied in different ways): Either we go after all the people who stole the money and get it back (my idea of threatening and using cruise missiles to force all offshore entities to divulge all their records and money is a great one), or we go bankrupt. As a world. All currency is cancelled. New currency must be issued. The second way is the same as the first, because it cancels the worth of all the squirreled away funds. Anybody coming forward and wanting some sort of 'conversion' to the the new currency must explain where he got all the old stuff! And, oh yes, do not forget the run lately on gold, silver and other commodities. Obama could even fix that. He could decide that the new currency was to be based on the value of, say, turquoise! I like that, as we have a small turquoise and silver mine in New Mexico! Then what do all these people hiding the money and commodities do? Punt.
You will notice that the current 'bailout' bill, and the last 'bailout' bill, and the bank 'bailout' transaction (actually the biggest one, and made by the Fed to the tune of three trillion dollars), all have something in common. They have no provision for the very people they are supposed to help. The people who are paying the tab. Every time those people are to be included in any of these mythical instruments of further theft, the provision that applies to them is scrapped at the last minute. Like the part of this current one's provision to help people keep their homes from foreclosure....and to renegotiate with the banks a to get a better deal. Just look at how hard it was just to get some help to the auto companies. Those companies are still begging and submitting ridiculous plans to rebuild and retool. The banks never submit one thing. In fact, they were instructed, as a part of the first bailout, not to divulge what they were doing with our money at all. Another bill was written later, when the media finally ran just a couple stories about this, to make them tell us what they did with all that money. It failed in committee.
There is something in this new bailout bill for the common man, however. It is jobs. Those thieves up there, and the son's and daughter's of thieves, are more than willing to give eight to fifteen dollar an hour jobs out all across the country. Jobs without any benefits. Jobs of meaningless potential and no future whatever. Just when, working class America, are you going to figure this Squire-Peasant relationship thing out and get mad. I mean really mad.
Where the hell is Krugman in all this? Come on out of your little phony economics professor corner Paul! That Pulitzer prize went to your head. Now all you spout are inane platitudes. Why are you not writing a column that broaches on the points I am making here? Because you don't have to anymore. You got the prize. You are now a made man. So much the worse for the rest of us. We only have Maureen Dowd, and she is not quite sure that she wants to run in my company, at all. Gee, I wonder why she has doubts? She has picked up the sword of Excaliber twice in the last three months. Twice only. She had brandished that sword, and called for the hunting down of these murderous financial gurus in their lairs, but then has backed off. Come on out Maureen, and play. Play hard. Play for all the chips. These are about to become survival times, and we need you. It would be okay if Paul joined you, but I don't expect him to get involved in this party.
from-the-chateau-dif.blogspot.com
http://www.themastodons.com
The Bubonic Plague was the scourge of the Dark Ages. Sweeping waves of this disease (referred to as the Black Death) swept through Europe and other parts of the world. A version of this terrible plague (which is totally curable using modern antibiotics) was called Pneumonic. The reason for that is the latin root word, which is all about breath. The black plague could be spread quickly and effectively just by people breathing on one another, or talking to one another. And hence the reason for my usage here.
I do not often take on Krugman. He is one of those idols of mine. An uncommonly logical and solid voice, well researched and well intended. Not unlike the writings of Maureen Dowd, another person I hold in very high regard. However, Krugman is spreading the Pneumonic Plague, using this phrase euphemistically. Maybe, using it analogously would be more accurate. Krugman now holds the prestigious Pulitzer. Not for mouthing off (as in the pundit he certainly is, and is only), but no, he holds it for economics. Why he accepted it under such false circumstance, well, you would have to ask him. For money. For prestige. Just because the guy normally writes really well does not mean he is not human.
Krugman is telling us what Dowd is telling us, just now. That Obama may be in trouble because of his seeming need to act in a bipartisan manner. Because Obama has had some people rejected by background information (they withdraw, as the situation requires, long before they go in front of the confirmation firing squad). And the plague continues to be spread. And nothing gets done about the expanding plague because nobody reports about it. They bob and weave, and even deny. But that elephant sitting there in the living room just sits there. Going nowhere. They are lying about it's existence and it is quite comfortable with that arrangement (the elephant, that is). I am not comfortable at all. And you will soon not be.
What is the elephant? You know in your bones what it is. You know because things are not turning any corner at all. Home values continue to head down. Unemployment continues to head up. Not real fast, but just this slow unstoppable slide and climb. The cost of hotel rooms continues to go down and the ranks of people applying for aide and assistance continue to go up. Day by day. The elephant is the great huge terminal point of this entire economy. By a very few, very quiet group of economists, it is estimated to be about two quadrillion dollars in size. Yes, that is two thousand trillion dollars!!! That is what it would take to bail out all the missing money. To bring things back to where they were a year ago. Our thieves have been just terrific capitalistic thieves. They competed and won it all. From us, the suckers who believed them and let them do it. Or, in many cases, we just refused to believe it.
Krugman and Dowd are not talking or writing about any of this. They have to know. What Obama knows. What both Houses of Congress just have to know, as well. That one trillion dollars is nothing. That eight hundred billion will disappear so fast as to be unnoticed. Just like the last eight hundred billion. Just like the three trillion the Fed gave to the banks. And the banks want three trillion more! Now! These 'baliouts' only buy us time. A month. Two months. Maybe three. And the money keeps being bled right into the pockets of the same people who took it all in the first place. Well, not all. Some of those people are long retired and those people, and their families, are just sitting out there in there multiple residences, with their private jets and limos. They have already invested in solid real gold and other commodities. Look at the street value of gold (what you have to pay if you want to buy an ounce or two of the real 24kt stuff). The 'street' price is almost twenty-five percent more than the price you see in the Wall Street Journal every day! What? That is because the Journal price is artificially fixed. They are doing the Krugman or the Dowd. They are lying too.
I am sorry that we have to go bankrupt. We cannot print a couple of quadrillion greenbacks. Oh, we could, but then our green back would be worth less than a cent. If you think that does not happen then you also do not believe that I actually own a 500 billion dollar Mark from Germany, which was issued near the end of the WWII. It is not even worth anything to a collector even today because they issued so many! If your currency becomes worthless, then the numbers printed on it are meaningless. We are headed there. The only other choice is bankruptcy. Then the cancellation of all existent currency. Then the re-issuance of a new currency backed by something (like gold and the other commodities wealthy people are buys buying up!). Yes, they have figured it out, those wealthy thieving bastards. But they can't tell you. If they tell you then you will get ready too. And then they won't have any gold or other real stuff left to buy.
Either way you look at it our currency is going to take a terminal beating here one day soon. Obama knows that. He also knows he cannot stop it. He also knows that you will still need leadership and some kind of law and order. That is his job. Providing that and making us all understand and feel better as we go through this rather painful 'adjustment.' Forgive Krugman and even Dowd. Yes, they do know better but please remember. This life is not about truth. It is about survival. We learned deception to get food. We used it to keep our species going (like for sex and such). We use it to feel good enough to keep going under the absolute worst of circumstance (by the social devices of religion and patriotism). That Krugman and Dowd are going to survive at a much higher and more comfortable level than you are? That is just part of fate. They are feeling no pain right now. And neither are any of the other people leading us. But they are afraid. They are afraid of your suffering and the results of your coming 'adjustment.' You see, you, the public do not do predictable things when you suffer. French Revolutions and American Revolutions result when you get upset. Of that they are afraid, believe me. As are all of us who know this are.
I am back from the Love is Murder convention. Can you tell? I spoke five times and had a most excellent time. My worst insult was that many people thought I sounded exactly like House on the Fox show. My best compliment is that many people thought I sounded exactly like House on the Fox show. For those of you who read me, I want you to know that I have a publisher for my second book (The Warrior) and that makes me smile. The first book comes out on April 15th, and it is called The Boy. You may not like the voice behind House but I think you will like the books. Honor. Integrity. Justice lost and found. Adventure. Travel and a lot of great mysterious stuff. I am ready to get back to writing more novels and other entertaining commentary. Thank you for missing me on this blogsite for the past few days. I am back!!
By God, but Maureen Dowd has taken them on! The Sunday Times is getting with the program, firing William Kristol and putting it's back into a deep thrust into the central heart of this still developing financial bleak hole. I refer to the 'bleak' hole, as opposed to black, simply because I foresee that we will eventually come through. Nothing, except (and allegedly) Hawking radiation, comes out of a black hole. The other day, Maureen began her tentative foray into the real causes of this nightmare. The causes that are being avoided by mainstream media, even when they are tossed right in their faces. The executives show up in private jets wtih limos and security details. They buy new jets with bailout money. They refurnish their offices because they just simply could not work in an office without a million dollars of (again bailout money) new decorations. But Maureen is hard charging in. Today's article was all about how we might consider going back and getting the money from these thieves. This is new talk coming on the scene. Only a few blogs, like mine, have approached the real truth, and then discussed the only viable solution to the problems. We must take these entities apart and examine them. We must fire all of the executives (Ralph Kramdon and Ed Norton would do better, from the old 'Honeymooners' sitcom), and bring in the money crunchers. Then we go right out there and demand that all of those people who took the money give it back. When they refuse, which they will, quite naturally, we get serious with them. And the institutions where they have the money. I don't give one hoot and holler whether executives in New York, or elsewhere, are dependent upon 'bonuses' to provide their lifestyle. Tell it to the auto workers. Tell it to the laid off people who are getting pink slips back and forth across this country. The only bonus they got was merely pronounced that way, but spelled differently: "Bone Us." I coined that expression just this minute. Maureen Dowd is on fire, and the Times is limping along behind her, but they are at least there. They are finally getting it. They will be totally gone if this country conitnues to head toward a future of financial chaos. Their survival is at stake. Our survival is at stake. So what do we do?
Since Obama did not see fit to cancel the rendition special orders of Ichabod Dunce, his predecessor, then lets use this presidential order. If Barack wants to continue to grab people left and right on the streets of the cities of the world, then I say okay. Let's 'rend' financial executives. Let's commandeer their G-5 private jets and take them on some real 'business' trips to Algiers and Syria. On into Libya and Lebanon. We have been using these countries for their ability to have no moral or legal code whatever when it comes to getting information out of people, or simply torturing them for the fun of it. These thieving executives have been killing people. And their actions and theft are going to kill a lot more. So let's rend them. They'll talk. Hell, almost all of them look and act like Dick Cheney, and everyone knows what a coward that man is. They may spill their guts right there during the lengthy plane rides.
Meanwhile, however, we get set up to punish that Illinois Governor all the more. What did he do? We don't really know. He pissed off that federal prosecutor. We certainly know that. Fitzgerald. Look for him to be governor one day soon. Yes, that is exactly the way it happens. But I don't know about Blago, that governor. He does not seem to have a lot of quit in him and maybe he takes punishment well. Or at least, in ways we do not forsee.
Years ago I sold life insurance. I was working for the Western White House in San Clemente, California, as a Beach Patrol Officer. It sounded like a neat job, but in reality it was boring as hell. So I started selling life insurance on the side. I had all these partners who had to work long shifts with me, and they were making okay money and had families. So I presented my products during those long night and early morning hour shifts. I only quit my horrid presentations when they bought a life insurance package for their family from me. They all bought. I made a lot of money. So much money that I left the presidential service (it also helped that Nixon was getting the axe about that time!) to sell life insurance full time. I sold several policies a week for a year (which is a lot) until I had a dry spell. It was the end of the week one Saturday when my boss, Chuck, called me to his house for a sit-down. I hadn't sold anything. He reviewed my week and figured out that everything I had written in my sales logs was a lie. I'd spent the week playing pinball in coffee shops and simply screwing around. In his rage he told me that I was going to go out that very morning and knock on doors. I was to make cold calls to people in their homes, as my punishment. Knocking on doors and making cold calls is the lowest form of outside sales. Nobody, and I mean nobody, wants to ever do that. Chuck knew that, of course, and he also knew that I was frightened to death about every having to do such a thing. But, if I did not do it, and provide signed pieces of papers from the residents of the homes I called upon to prove it by four o'clock in the afternoon of that Saturday, I was fired. To quote him, and I still remember through all this time: "You get out there and start your tour through purgatory. Punishment is all that is going to save you from Hell." Chuck was Catholic, as you might have guessed.
I stepped outside of his lovely three bedroom home on the golf course. I looked around, in my misery, briefcase (filled with phony prospecting reports) in hand. I sat down on his front steps and thought about life, and the universe, and my obscure place in it. I heard a nearby sound. I turned my head to look at Chuck's next door neighbor's house. A woman was on the stoop picking up the newspaper, wearing a robe, her hair a mess. She instantly slipped back inside once she had secured the paper. An idea swept over me. I went over and knocked on her door. The rest of the morning I spent going up and down the street where Chuck lived. I discovered immediately that the 'golf course' people all belonged to the club. The golf club. They were automatic members because of the placement of their homes. They only knew Chuck and his wife from the club and incidental contacts at school and church. They had no idea about either Chuck's or Curck's wife's sexual proclivities, affairs, drinking, drugs, or monetary problems. I knew all that. A life insurance office is hotbed of rumor and investigation. It is filled with agents who do not want to go to the field, so they hang about and collect information. By the time I finished the morning I easily had twenty signatures on the forms which Chuck had provided me. I even sold a fifty thousand dollar policy to an off duty Laguna Beach cop. I dropped the forms and the life application off at chucks and went home to celebrate my successful day. Chuck was never the same. He and his wife eventually divorced and sold the house. It took Chuck quite awhile to figure out just how effective his punishment was. My conscious was clear. After all, I believed that sales was a function of quality selection and management (it was Chuck's job to find good agents and them take responsibility for them), and that if I was not selling enough, then it was ultimately Churck's fault anyway. He had selected me.
Illinois selected Governor Blago. And there will certainly be a very painful and prolonged period of punishment. But the punishment they envision down there may, indeed, take on an entirely different form from that which they currently conceive.
http://from-the-chateau-dif.blogspot.com
Down and dirty. Our lovable lady scounderal is finally back from wherever the hell she went. A couple of real thinly written columns, some wishy-washy stuff about utter nonsense...hell, maybe she was afraid to be in the same issue as that horrid article about the 'Black Heart.' You know, the medal this idiot (sanctioned by the governing idiots of the New York Times) columnist put forward, in place of the Purple Heart for sufferers of post traumatic stress disorder, was labeled the Black Heart. I still have trouble getting past that slight against all veterans who have ever been in combat. How could the Times 'dis' us like that? I don't know, but I am not done with them over it either. Today, at the North Chicago Naval complex I brought the article to the attention of the commanding Admiral of the base. He was outraged too. He is going to bring it to the attention of the Pentagon. Whatever the hell that means. Still, it is better than nothing, or simply blogging away into the twilight of late inattentive reading times. Some tattered and tough Marine needs to be ordered to present himself in full uniform at the offices of The New York Times and call them out. That's right. The senior editor of the New York Times needs to have his ass kicked for that one (hell, I hope the editor is a guy, or there could be trouble there).
Maureen, bless her lovely soul, is going down on these bastards that have stolen all the money, and keep stealing all the money, as it is continuously forked over in one bailout after another. Maureen, to her great credit, attacked these bastards this morning. She demanded some sort of violent retribution against them. And, make no mistake, as Nixon would say, this is not the kind of retribution wherein the thieving cretins get to simply be fired and escape with their forty to fifty million dollar parachutes. No, when Maureen goes down, she goes down all the way. To their slimy little hidey-holes (normal people would refer to those as chateaus). To their well-stocked, well furnished but poorly disguised lairs. As I have been saying out here, for quite some time, the addresses of these people are available online. They never thought to hide. They never thought the money would all be stolen and that there would be nothing left. And if they did think about that, they thought that nobody would do anything to them about it. Well, readers out there, have a go at Maureen's column. She is not quite as over the edge about this as I am, but she is getting closer. And don't be fooled by the fact that some of these murderous crooks are catching on, and deeding their multi-million dollar chateaus over to their wives and children. They are still going to be living there. When you have lost your home, some of you. When you have lost your job, some more of your. When you have lost any shred of an ability to house and feed your family....do not commit suicide. No, that would be a waste of your abilities and allow those creeps to be victorious. Get on the internet. Find out where those people live and then put your thumb out. If anybody stops to pick you up, in this day and age, then tell them about your mission. I am willing to bet that, almost to a single person, your ride will drive you all the way to the door of your intended target. If you don't have any 'mission equipment' then just ask around, again telling your story and intent. America is armed to the gills. You will likely find arsenals of 'mission equipment' dropped at your feet.
I am not losing my home. My income has not suffered because of this coming nightmare, and it is not likely to. And I wonder about that. Here I sit, relatively immune. But I am at least pitching in where I can. And i don't mean by writing this blog. I have helped save two homes from foreclosure (it is wondrous, the power of a retained attorney to get the attention of mortgage bankers who think that they are dealing with people on their last legs, or taking their last financial gasp!). I have taken in a few people and placed them into situations where they can still have a decent income and a roof over their heads. I visit prisoners when I can get into those places (it is hard to visit prisoners today, if you have not tried. Our cold uncaring corrections officers do not want the prisoners to have visitors). I experience collect calls from people inside in the order of over a hundred bucks a month. Yes, I believe in second, third and fourth chances. But that is me. And here I am, about as unlikely a package as you might want to run across; not believing in Christ but trying to be 'Christ-like,' angry with systems that are unfair and torturous, but trying to work within those same system rules to relieve unfairness and torture, in search of a redemption that I have not one hope of ever coming close to accomplishing, and finally, never believing that I am doing nearly enough. What about you? What are you doing? What are you thinking?
Thank you Maureen Dowd. I love you. I know you are probably some effete snob, back there in New York society, but I will continue to try to minimize that in my mind. You write hugely, and have a tremendous voice out here, compared to most of us on the fringes of the publishing world. You are in 'the show,' so to speak, and your meaning and understanding reaches greats swaths of humanity. I encourage you to continue. Take from wherever you must (including here!) to maintain the momentum of this last column. Now, start writing it every day. I do, and I don't have your talent. But I do share your mission. You have many more people behind you than you know. Most just read, then move on, like at this site. Very few comment. But they are there and they are thinking...and loving you too.
I love Maureen Dowd. Another great article by her in the New York Times today. There was only one bad paragraph. She wrote a few words about Obama being the 'Convener,' in that he is possibly too accepting of the foibles of others, especially when it comes to the appointment of staff. In particular she commented upon the appointment of Geithner, who I have discussed in some detail in earlier blogs. Maureen seems to feel that Obama breezed over the fact that Geithner, in not paying the correct taxes for a couple of years, is somehow a determinant character flaw in the man, and that ought to be held against him to the point of not being selected Treasury Secretary. She alleges that this 'flaw' is being overlooked by Obama because Geithner is one of those high profile aristocratic blue bloods from the existing portfolio of the same. That 'portfolio' being the same silver-spooned little life-experienced group Maureen herself stems from! Is not life strange in the columnist's world? The only thing that the 'G-man' has done to demonstrate any life experience at all, not paying his taxes properly out of either ignorance or determination, is the one thing she wants held against him. We are back to the basic problem with mass media. Mass media creates this phenomenal information world which is not real at all. It is a world the way we want it to be. It is an irrational world. In that phenomenal world, of which Maureen is one of the creators and perpetrators, people should, and can, have no failures in their background. None whatever. They should have no financial, credit, criminal or even civil convictions. But it gets worse. They also must have no allegations of such past occurrence or commission. In the media world, any mistake is considered fatal. In the real world it is the mistakes people make that allow them to succeed. It is the mistakes that teach. It is the solution of problems which leads to strength. The foundation of honor is hard and bitter life experience, not the innocence of newborn ignorance.
There was a review of the movie "The Wrestler" in the same Sunday issue of that paper. The reviewer took a slant which bounced the opinion of French movie critics off our own. The review is a celebration of ignorance and tortured self-destructive behavior. The reviewer contemplates that the star of that film (Mikey Rourke) is somehow indicative of the American Experience. That his performance is emblematic of our culture.
Have you ever seen Mickey Rourke interviewed or on a talk show? He is about as emblematic of American culture as Rove is of American integrity. The man's very success in this culture is a slap in the face of good taste, social understanding, and demonstrated intellect. Rourke is self-destructively stupid. That fact just comes thrusting forth from the screen (with respect to the talk shows, not the movie). But there we have it. Some people like that sort of thing. George Bush really did serve eight years, and he was tolerated. He was even adored by many. He still is. And anyone, or everyone, who has ever seen the Letterman tapes of his speech vignettes knows it. The celebration of drool. No harm is done if that kind of thinking, and misplaced adoration, is relegated to the spending of time in a movie theater to watch such drivel. But it is very destructive when it comes out of that theater, then finds it's way into society. We end up without stem cell research. We end up without acceptable education in the sciences. We end up with a pitiful regression into the really stupid labyrinth of creationism. We end up, when everything has failed around us from the lack of intelligent care or innovation, with a platitude like this; "Let Go and Let God." God did not even infer that, much less say it, in the Bible. If you believe the Bible at all. No, he stated firmly, through the writings of the apostles about his teachings, that you must do just the opposite. You must do to get into heaven. God is here. God will help. God does care and love. But God expects you to live this life, and to live it to the fullest extent, and to use all of the talents He gave you.
I breakfasted with some interesting people this morning. Very interesting people of some intellect and good humor. We talked of the current economic mess, and the people involved with the running of our financial institutions. I ran on about how all the bank executives should be fired for being thieves and liars. One of the people at this breakfast, a noted attorney, no less, objected. It seems that he had owned a string of downtown Chicago restaurants at one time. He said that his whole string of restaurants did not go down because of theft. They had a lot of theft. But the thieves never caused anything like the collapse of the business. No, it was the incompetence of the management he installed. That gave me pause. No, the restaurant business is not exactly like the financial services industry. There is a hell of a lot more of the business that can be stolen in the financial sector. But still. I am thinking. The allegation, unspoken, and left upon the table at that Fontana restaurant was this: would it not be better to keep the thieves on, if they are not incompetent, rather than bring in incompetent idiots imbued with complete integrity? I am not done puzzling over the potential wisdom of this attorney's presentation.
One other gentleman at the this breakfast mentioned something else, much more humorous and not political at all. He was talking of the days when he sold cars. In downtown Chicago many years ago. He talked about things I had long forgotten. For example, he was called once and told by the caller that a new Cadillac was needed, and that it had to be in a non-ethnic color. I frowned at his comment. I asked what the hell an ethnic color might be. When he answered, I remembered all the way back. White. White was an 'ethnic' color way back in the fifties. What it denoted, I will not go into here. But it was fun to recall. And the phrase 'deuce-and-a-half." i recall that phrase from my time in the Marine Corps. A Deuce and a Half was what we called big ten wheeled supply trucks in the Vietnam era. They carried two and a half ton payloads, and hence the name. They were also called 'Six-Bys' but I do not remember why. Anyway, the 'deuce-and-a-half' this man was referring to was a Buick. The 225 Electra. Ergo, the moniker. Funny stuff, now only recalled by old-timers, such as myself, and this other throwback.
What is my point, throwing in that last paragraph? We need to recall history, in all of it's detail, in order to have a solid foundation. We need intellect to do that. We need the celebration and reward of applied intellect to do that. We need the recognition that failure is a magnificent tool at bringing about the application of that needed intellect. Let's stop being quite so phenomenally demanding, and start being more tolerant and forgiving.
In spite of my writing yesterday, in which I went into some detail about arrogance and the potential of it's strong presence in my life, I cannot but help to pursue a certain feeling of 'superior to inferior' when I read my early morning op-eds. Harvey actually went out there in the fresh snow with me to get those papers. It is well past Christmas, and the effect of my magnanimous tip to the delivery person (whom I still have not ever seen) appears to be wearing thin...as the papers drift ever farther down the driveway, day by day. Harvey meowed and trilled as we went through the white puffery, the stuff so damn cold that it was more like icy ash than the snow we knew it to be. I walked back, after retrieving the plastic covered items, and waited patiently at the door, trying to get rid of the snow which had somehow gotten up and over the edges of my Ugg slippers. This is always a ticklish time. If Harv does not come back, after one of these 'step and fetch it' routines, then I am forced to get dressed and get out into the weather with him. But today was a good day, and, after one brief downward scamper, in order to force me fully awake, he flipped around and raced back inside. Life is good, except for the fact that this new Apple keyboard (the flat one with slightly raised keys) has made it easier for Harvey to get his opinion expressed herein. I don't like it, but what can I do? Push him away? Yell at him? I don't think so. Too early and, anyway, he carefully avoids my half-emptied coffee cup as a sort of return gesture. Yes, we are both strange.
The papers were lousy. Friedman was acting the idiot I have discovered him to be. His piece was about the Middle East. He is done with the 'flat earth' endorsement stupidity so he has switched from being a would-be economist to a political scientist. His first sally in that direction had to do with how the Middle East is going to be dominated in the future; by Saudi Arabia, by Egypt or by Iran. There is supposedly only one nuclear power in the Middle East (I personally think Iran has the bomb, which is why even Cheney will not aim his shotgun in that direction), and that is Israel. Even without the nukes, will you just look at that wild bunch of Sabra Jews over there? They have some great equipment, having invented and built some hot stuff of their own, as well as stealing anybody else's left lying about! Nobody in the Middle East is a match for them. Not even all together. You might think that the Saudi's would give them a run, what with all the state-of-the-art stuff we have sold them. But the problem there is, well, the Saudis. They are a bunch of creepy Arab dabblers. Light weights. Newly rich kids who are certainly not going to go off and fight a war, much less against those rabid crazy Israeli vets. Think George Bush Jr. So, Friedman is at it again. The rest of the article is just as silly. Friedman needs a cooking show. He and Emeril would do great.
And then there was Garrison Keiller. Usually I just love Garrison. Right behind Maureen Dowd. Garrison decided this day, however, that he would write sonnets about some guy he saw peeing into a bush while he himself was reflecting, and listening to music in the park, or some such. Friedman is contagious today. Poor Garrison fell down with that same flu. Slobering Dopiness. I know, I know, I am sounding just a tad arrogant. What can I do? Maureen Dowd was better. She wrote all about Caroline and why Caroline is better than a leper, or some right wing whacko, or even, and she said this without saying it, that sweet and sour dill pickle named Cuomo. I don't think Maureen likes him. So i don't either. Maureen Dowd is good enough for me. And I like Caroline, even when i am not writing the most complimentary things about her. Sort of how I run on about the Jews. I like Israel. I like the Jews. What a gutsy bunch of people who take care of their own, and refuse to be poked and prodded by anyone. I just don't like to see them killing all those people. Eventually they will feel bad about that. I do not wish post traumatic stress on anyone, especially not those tough bright people. And I pity those poor Palestinians without much of anything at all.
I am not over my arrogance confrontation. The confrontation I am having with myself. A woman of quite some intellect and personality (who no longer speaks to me, by the way, thereby showing a modicum of wisdom, as well) said to me once, in my coffee shop, right after I had skewered her with respect to a mispronunciation she had blurted out earlier; "you can be right.....and you can be alone." That did not stop me at the time. I made believe I had not heard her (maybe one of the reasons she does not have any truck with me anymore!), but I filed the expression away. Damn straight. She was right on. Her expression goes right to the heart of what I am tossing and turning over. I do not want to be alone. Does anyone? Not anyone that I want to know. Hmmmm...that is kind of an oxymoronic thing to say, as well. But is it arrogant?
So I am reflecting again, about all of this, as my coffee cools, Harvey slides one paw down to punch the 'Q' key (and I have to erase, once I decide that, although Q is an excellent letter and name...recall the character on Star Trek...it does not fit into what I am writing), and I lean back to give this whole thing a very cursory edit. This damn new key board (take note Mr. Steve, super-thin, I-do-not-have-cancer, Jobs!)keeps making little 'i's' when I want big one's. I don't always catch those. My readers are so few, and so laconic, that they do not seem to ever comment about such things, however. Or maybe my readers are just too arrogant to even bother.
I am fully awake, as I got the papers from under another layer of deep snow. And I found the envelope from the newspaper wraith. What do I put in it? No check because it is addressed to "Delivery Service." I feel like I am getting my papers directly from Langley (CIA) Headquarters. A twenty? Is that too little? Maybe a fifty. I don't have a fifty (this is Southern Outback Wisconsin and they don't know what a fifty is out here, unless is refers to a clothing size) so I would have to put in two twenties and a ten. But that wad seems excessive. But it is Christmas. But it is a tough financial time for all of us. But I am afraid of the Newspaper Delivery Service. I was once a very decisive person, but look at me now. I am still three presents 'short of a full deck' and it is Christmas Eve, and snowing to beat all get out. What do I do? Where do I go? Lake Geneva has a bunch of stores, each about the size of an airport kiosk. Will they even open in the middle of this, the most aggressive winter attack of recorded history out here? I don't know. The aging dinosaur of a Rover sits patiently in the garage, crying softly to be decked out in the chains that even Professor Machado, the smartest man any of us have ever known, can't fathom the directions to install. But they are back there, all shiny on the floor behind the front seats. And 'Bertram' my old wonderful troll of a beaten-up four-wheel-drive is ready for anything.
Oliver Morton. He wrote a column for the New York Times this morning. He slipped through, like Thomas L. Friedman. The editorial board of the Times must be on Christmas furlough. Both of the columns were pretty extraordinary, bright as they were accurate. Morton wrote of the earth, its condition and prospects, while Friedman wrote about the silly and destructive celebration of stupidity that has taken over this country and caused much of what we are experiencing now. Yes, Thomas stole some of my stuff, then wrote it better. Usually, I only celebrate Maureen Dowd's assumption of my blog material (I can't call it stealing as her fan club gets all upset, and besides, its not. We don't own this stuff out here anymore. What we bloggers write is like air. You just breathe it in and then it gets re-breathed again). So Thomas, you may have my stuff and I doff my non-existent hat at the elegant manner in which you chose to use it. But back to Morton's column. He writes about the earth as George Carlin used to describe it. If the earth ever figures out we (homo sapiens) are here, and causing trouble, then we are screwed. We have almost no power over this blue and white ball of water and ice. Even our limp-wristed influence over base temperature is a mere nothing to this planet. And the only one's to actually suffer from our excess are likely to be, well, us. The Earth turns and moves on inexorably and it is unaffected, really, in the scale of things, by even such events as large astroid strikes. That stuff merely impacts on the ecosystem. Life goes up and down and around stuff like that all the time. Way to go Morton. A scientist. A brain. No more of that Bush stuff. Okay, okay, I am not going there. I will even give that low-life scum bag of a drooling president a break today. It is Christmas Eve. And life is cold, snow-buried, but good. Christmas music plays, I have the wood for a fire to burn through this day, on into my own personal Eve, and I have a prime rib for the oven. Harvey is ever loyal and only mildly condescending. Cat bliss.
Now, I shall get cleaned up and go out there into the whiteness of day. It is Christmas Eve and there just have to be more people God wants to put in my way. Merry Christmas!
The fire has burned down to hot cinders. I love the open fire in that stone fireplace, but I also much enjoy the pile of super-heated embers that lays there when the actual fire has died out. The radiation of heat seems all the greater, and maybe it is for, all I know. It is late here, as the snow falls and we all prepare for one of those deep white days tomorrow. The harsh weather gives one pause for thought, and also the time and proclivity to watch a few old movies. Lawrence of Arabia was on a few hours back. "We don't leave our wounded for the Turks," says the Arabian ruler, "we kill those too injured to move. The Turks torture the wounded because they regard them as rebels and therefore not accorded the rights of the Geneva Convention." How very timely. Alec Guiness, no less, playing the ruler. Why have none of us listened since WWII? As countries, I mean. What is it about torturing people that we, all of our existent cultures, can seem to get away from? Here we are, still 'stealing' people off the streets of any city in the world and then throwing them into prisons without charges or anything else. Oh, and then torturing them. The Soviets were terrible about such. We even pointed that out to the world. Then we started doing it ourselves. He, Alec, also says: "Lawrence gives mercy because of passion, while I do it our of good manners. You decide which of those things is more dependable." Wow! There really are movies out there that give one pause to think. Which of those two things would you want to depend upon?
At the Thanksgiving feast I ran into a four year old named Peter. A jewel of a young man. Sharp as a tack and straight as an arrow. Another youngster was running around working over some new game which uses rolling things that spring open when they cross magnetized cards on a board. I have no idea how the magnetic balls work (except it is really cool to watch) and I also do not understand the rules of the game. A seven year old tried to explain the rules to me. I got the hyper-speed super-compressed version of the rules, one after another with no commas and no periods. Then I got that look! Like, "do you get it?" I didn't look back correctly, because the ten year old sighed deeply, then moved me back away from the board. The four year old gentleman came over to console me. I asked Peter if he understood the game. He said: "No, I am only four. I am not very smart. But next year I will be five." He beamed and then ran off. I thought about what he had said. God, but I had to smile. Next year he will be five and the earth and all of its unknown treasures are going to open before him. He just knows this to be a fact. Why can't I be that way, anymore?
Harvey, my cat (pint-sized predator) was out there earlier, when it was light and the snow was only about one inch deep. I didn't know where he was and he had been out there for awhile. As usual, I became concerned. It is not like he has one of those 'gay' cat coats, or booties for his paws, or anything. He is tough and a road warrior, but there are limits. Anyway, I started calling him. Even though nobody lives in this neighborhood, except me, during the winter, I am always embarrassed to be out there screaming "Haaarrrrveeey" at the top of my voice. And to no seeming avail. So I went back into the house. Then into the library, from which I can see out towards the woods, and sat to wait. A horse came across my yard! It shocked me. A big black horse against the white of the snow, walking with a woman and a very small child mounted ahead of her on the pommmel. A horse in my yard. Right near the window. I have no fences and neither do any of my neighbors so nothing is to stop anyone from riding around, but nobody has for the two years I have been here. The woman saw me through the window and waved. I waved back, self-conscious in my blue robe, so I stepped back out of view, but not before I saw this small gray shape creeping along behind the horse. Yes, it was Harvey. i went straight to the front door and cracked it open. I hissed as deeply and quietly as i could "you leave that horse alone and get in here." Harvey heard, called off his Safari, and scurried through the door opening. He then joined me in the library, sitting on the cloth chair (which I hate for him to sit on as he gets it dirty, but what can I do?) and staring after the horse. What is in that cat's mind? I know he was stalking it. Has he ever had horse meat, do you suppose, or was he merely letting that horse know that he was inside another predator's area. I explained to Harv that the horse was a herbivore and therefore not a competitor. harvey licked himself strategically, in order to let me know what he thought, then closed his eyes in feigned sleep. I went back to the fire in the other room, giving out the same resigned and measured sigh that the ten year old had given me over my inability to understand the game.
Somebody from the Maureen Dowd fan club wrote me an email, requesting whatever it was that caused me to state that Maureen Dowd had purloined some of my work and made it her own. I am not going back through all those blogs to find it. And why would I? I can't imagine that such information (which that person can certainly find if he or she tries hard enough) would be gathered for any good purpose. I love Maureen Dowd and I make many comments about her here on my blog. But I mean her no ill will at all. If she wants to use some of my ridiculous notions and stories then she is welcome to them. If, on the other hand, somebody is mad at me and does not believe me, then what that person was really emailing about was arcane indeed. I may be insulting or lying about somebody the fan club adores. I apologize. I don't know what, for but politicians do it all the time. A blanket apology. I think Dowd is a saint, but then are not saints the most fun to poke fun at, upon occasion? It is the Catholic in me. Rotten Catholic as I am.
I will sleep well tonight, dream that I am going to be five tomorrow, and that all the wonderful secrets of this world will be revealed to me.
“Confessions of a Phone Solicitor” is the title of Gail Collins’ column in today’s New York Times. Here are some excerpts.
[A] telemarketer named Ted Zoromski quit his job this week over John McCain’s message. Zoromski was prepared to interrupt people during their dinner hours to encourage them to vote Republican. But when he got the script saying “you need to know that Barack Obama has worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge’s home and killed Americans,” he packed it in.“Even though I was paid to do it, I didn’t feel comfortable,” Zoromski told WKOW-TV.
This story … struck me because I once worked as a telemarketer, and it is an occupation so soul-numbing that it is hard to imagine that anything could make it worse. I woke up people on the overnight shift who had just managed to fall asleep for the first time in six days. Sometimes, when there was clearly nobody at home, I would just let the phone ring and ring in order to avoid having to call anybody else. …
So truly, if you can come up with something that would send a telemarketer over the edge, you have really overachieved on the offensiveness front.
She then goes on to give a vivid description of all the vile mud-slinging being done by McCain, Palin, et al. My issue is with the first part of the article. Here is the comment I posted.
Once again Collins has missed the mark. Telemarketers make nuisance calls. That's what advertising is all about. It is not unethical for them to do their work. No one told Collins to let the phone keep ringing when she was a phone solicitor. Ted Zoromski quit his job because he was asked to deliver a dishonest and hateful message. Now that Collins is a Times columnist, after having been a Times editor, she feels free to trash those in her earlier line of work. This is true elitism.
Collins plays fast and loose with the facts and often fails to reason properly. This is a lot more harmful than disturbing people at dinner. The Times has a Doctor Jekyll-Mr. Hyde combo (Dowd-Collins). Maureen's brilliance is matched by Gail's dalliance. Too bad more of your readers don't catch on to this. Perhaps it is because Collins’ column causes so much ringing in their ears.
Getting back to the main point of her article, here is the front page and an inside page of a recent RNC mailer.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/obama_funds.htm
Beyond that, the text is riddled with errors and falsehoods. I found no record of anyone in the Obama campaign stating that the average individual contribution amounts to between $10 and $25 (in fact, the stated average is around $100). Nor have there been any public revelations (apart from the unsupported allegations in this anonymous email) to the effect that "security people" (whoever they might be) have raised alarms about contributions flowing into the campaign from overseas. Obama's website states that no donations are accepted from foreign nationals, and all online contributors are required to certify that they are U.S. citizens.
This is in line with federal laws stipulating that foreigners may not contribute to U.S. political campaigns and prohibiting finance committees from "knowingly soliciting, accepting or receiving" such funds.
Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
Where to begin? For starters, the average Obama contribution has been around $100, not $15. The campaign, by law, must disclose all donors who have given over $200. And, most obviously, a review of the paper of record shows that Dowd's column on June 29 was not on Obama fundraising but rather Hillary Clinton supporters.
Dowd herself found the email an exercise in absurdity, not to mention -- quite possibly -- the first time she's been indirectly involved in a smear campaign.
"The line about it being the 'most shocking revelation,' I don't think I've ever said those words, except in a satire. Also, it is about money, which I never write about," she told the Huffington Post. "Sometime you try and protest things you hear about, but sometimes it's just not worth it... It is hard to track down and control these things, and anyone who reads my column knows that this wasn't me. I got to the second line and I knew it wasn't me."
The Obama campaign, as is now its practice, addressed the fake Dowd column in a post today on its website, Fight the Smears. But sometimes it's worth noting just how outrageous and offensive -- both to Obama and the public's intelligence -- these attacks can be.
Well, we're sure you were moved greatly by the speeches at the GOP convention. So was I. I can see clearly the appeal. After the last 8 years, even other Republican's look good. These ones have served their country, or have children who have or will, and I honor that. They would bring unique life experiences to the White House, including Mrs. McCain.
REALITY: Obama Has Passed Several Important Laws In The Senate, Including Legislation To Prevent Terrorists From Obtaining WMDs, Increasing U.S. Investment In Alternative Energy, And Improving Services For Our Troops And Veterans
Obama Was A Key Player In Assembling And Passing The 2007 Ethics Reform Law, Which Curbed The Influence Of Lobbyists And Was Described As The "Most Sweeping Since Watergate." In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a "Gold Standard" ethics package. Many of the Obama/Feingold bill's most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travel on corporate jets; full disclosure of who's sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn't all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they "bundle" - that is, collect or arrange - for members of Congress, candidates, and party committees. The Washington Post wrote in an editorial that "...Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package." In September 2007, the AP reported, "President Bush signed a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades...Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundling provisions..." [S. 230, 110th Congress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07; Washington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07]
Obama Passed A Bill Creating A "Google-like" Database For The Public To Search Details About Federal Funding Awards. In 2006, Obama was an original cosponsor of a bill to create a "Google-like" database of information on federal spending. The bill requires the OMB by January 1, 2008, to make available to the public a searchable, free website that includes the (1) amount; (2) transaction type; (3) funding agency; (4) North American Industry Classification System code or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number; (5) program source; (6) an award title descriptive of the purpose of each funding action; (7) the name and location of the recipient and the primary location of performance; and (8) a unique identifier of the recipient and any parent entity. The site must allow users to conduct separate searches that distinguish between awards that are grants, sub-grants, loans, cooperative agreements, and other forms of financial assistance and awards that are contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders. [S. 2590, Passed by Unanimous Consent, 9/7/06; Became PL 109-282, 9/26/06] SEE THE DATABASE HERE
Obama Passed Into Law Legislation Requiring Lobbyists To Disclose Their Bundling Activity, Making Him Unpopular Even Among Other Democrats. Obama sponsored an amendment to require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, or political parties for whom they collect or arrange contributions, and the aggregate amount of the contributions collected or arranged. The amendment was passed by unanimous consent and attached to the Senate ethics bill, which was signed into law on September 15, 2007. The New York Times wrote, "The disclosure idea's lead sponsor, Senator Barack Obama... 'has not been the most popular person in our caucus in the last couple of weeks,' said a Democratic aide involved in deliberations over the bill." [S. Amdt. 41 to S. 1, S. Amdt. 3, Submitted 1/11/07, Agreed to By Unanimous Consent, 1/18/07; S. 1, Signed into Law 9/14/07; New York Times, 1/20/07; CQ, 9/15/07]
FOREIGN POLICY
Obama Passed Law Requiring Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction Strategy To Secure Weapons And Usable Nuclear Material. "Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) and Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) announced that a provision authored by Obama and Senator Hagel (R-NE) in the Senate and advanced by Schiff in the House requiring a comprehensive nuclear threat reduction plan passed as part of the omnibus appropriations bill. This provision requires the President to submit to Congress a comprehensive plan for ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 from the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose. The Senate passed the omnibus appropriations bill last night and the House approved the same bill today. It will now be sent to the President to be signed into law…The Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction provision requires the President to develop a strategy that will: ensure that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 against the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose; ensure adequate accounting and security for such materials on an ongoing basis thereafter; include a plan for expanding the financial support and other assistance provided by other countries, particularly Russia, the European Union and its member states, China and Japan, for the purposes of securing nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material worldwide; and outline the progress in and impediments to securing an agreement from all countries that possess nuclear weapons or weapons-usable material on a set of global nuclear security standards, consistent with their obligation to comply with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540." [Obama Press Release, 12/20/07]
Obama Passed Legislation To Keep Weapons Of Mass Destruction Out Of The Hands Of Terrorists. In 2006, Obama was an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand U.S. cooperation to destroy conventional weapons. It also expands the State Department's ability to detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction. The legislation was included in an appropriations bill that was later signed into law by the president. [Congress, S. 2566, Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 456, 5/25/06; Provisions included in H.R. 6060/P.L. 109-706]
Obama Passed Law to Promote Relief, Security, and Democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In 2005, Obama sponsored the Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006. The bill would set forth specified U.S. political, social, civil, and economic policy objectives (policy objectives) with respect to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and obligated a specified minimum amount of foreign assistance funding for FY2006-FY2007. [S.2125, 12/16/05, Become Public Law No: 109-456, 12/22/06]
HEALTH CARE
Obama Passed An Amendment Into Law That Pressured The EPA to Comply With New Lead-Paint Regulations After Seven Years of Delay. In 2005, Obama passed an amendment, which became law, to the FY 2006 Department of Interior Appropriations Act prohibiting the use of funds in the bill to delay or contravene implementation of an existing but unmet statutory requirement passed by Congress in 1992 that the EPA rewrite regulations on dispersal of lead paint by home remodeling contractors by October 1996. As of July 2005, the regulations still had not been written. Weeks after Obama’s amendment passed the Senate, Obama received commitments in writing and during a Senate hearing that the EPA would comply with the law. According to an Obama press release, "In 1992, Congress required the EPA to write regulations relating to the dispersal of lead paint by contractors during home remodeling by October, 1996. As of July 2005, these regulations still have not been written. In April, Administrator Johnson stated that to address the problem of lead paint poisoning, the EPA ‘will determine what additional steps may be necessary, including regulation’ despite the fact that the 1992 law does not say the regulations are optional." [SA 1061 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent, 6/28/05, Obama Press Release, 7/25/05; H.R. 2361, Became Public Law No: 109-54, 8/2/05]
EPA Finally Published Nine-Years-Overdue Proposal For Lead Paint Regulations Four Months After Obama Passed Legislation And Held Up EPA Nominations. Building Products wrote, "The EPA recently published long-overdue proposed regulations that affect contractors working on older houses that contain lead-based paints. The regulations, if adopted, would require that contractors be trained in lead-safe work practices and be certified by the EPA. The rules also would impose protective standards for those working on houses with lead paint. In 1992, Congress directed the EPA to write regulations that would limit lead paint pollution during home remodeling by October 1996. By last summer, with no sign of the new regulations, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-III., introduced more legislation designed to encourage the EPA to publish the rules. When that didn't work, Obama announced in the fall that he would block the appointment of every nominee to top EPA jobs until the agency produced the new rules. The EPA finally announced the proposed regulations Dec. 29, 2005." [Building Products, March-April, 2006]
Obama Passed A Law Requiring The Defense Secretary To Report On The Pentagon's Efforts To Prepare For Military And Civilian Personnel For A Possible Influenza Outbreak. In 2006, Obama sponsored an amendment to the FY 2006 Defense Authorization Act that required the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on the Pentagon's efforts to prepare for pandemic influenza, including pandemic avian influenza, including status on the procurement of vaccines, public health containment measures that could be implemented on military bases and other facilities; surge capacity for the provision of medical care during pandemics; surveillance efforts domestically and internationally and how such efforts are integrated with other ongoing surveillance systems; the integration of pandemic and response planning with those of other Federal departments; collaboration (as appropriate) with international entities engaged in pandemic preparedness and response. [SA 1453 as modified agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent, 11/18/05; S. 1042/H.R. 1815, Became Public Law No: 109-163]
Obama Passed Legislation Providing $25 Million In Funding For Avian Flu Research And Containment Efforts By U.S. Agencies In South East Asia. "The amendment calls for greater investment in our preparedness efforts by providing more than $3 billion to build a stockpile of antiviral drugs and necessary medical supplies...Obama first introduced legislation in April requiring the United States to stockpile antiviral drugs...In May, Obama worked with a bipartisan group of Senators to appropriate the $25 million called for in the Foreign Assistance Act authorization bill. This money is currently being used by U.S. agencies in South East Asia to combat and contain possible outbreaks of avian flu." [Obama Press Release, 1/12/07]
ENERGY
Obama Passed Legislation Creating A Tax Credit For The Installation Of E-85 Fuel Pumps. In 2005, Obama introduced legislation that provided a tax credit for up to 50% of the cost of installing an E-85 pump. Obama passed the tax credit as an amendment to the 2005 transportation bill. The amendment was not included in the final version of the bill but was signed into law as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The AP reported, "Under the provision, gas stations would get a tax credit to install equipment accommodating E-85 - an ethanol-based fuel alternative that its promoters say is up to 50 cents cheaper per gallon than unleaded gasoline. The credit would cover 30 percent of the installation costs at a given station up to $30,000...Freshman Sen. Barack Obama introduced the tax-credit measure in the Senate in the spring, and it was co-sponsored by Illinois' other Democratic senator, Dick Durbin. Obama also worked for the credit's inclusion in the energy bill as one of the conferees preparing the Senate-House conference committee report..." [AP, 7/27/05; H.R. 6, Became Public Law No: 109-58; S. 918, 109th Congress; SA 670 agreed to, 5/12/05; H.R. 6, Became Public Law No: 109-58; S. 918, Referred to the Committee On Environment and Public Works]
Obama Passed An Amendment Into Law To Fund Research For Hybrid/Flex Fuel Vehicles. In 2005, Obama sponsored an amendment, which was signed into law, to the Energy Policy Act that established an applied research program to improve technologies for the commercialization of a combination hybrid/flexible fuel vehicle; or a plug-in hybrid/flexible fuel vehicle. The program would provide grants with preference to proposals that achieve the greatest reduction in miles per gallon of petroleum fuel consumption, achieve not less than 250 miles per gallon of petroleum fuel consumption and have the greatest potential of commercialization to the general public within 5 years. [SA 851 to HR 6, Passed by Unanimous Consent, 6/23/05; H.R. 6, Became Public Law No: 109-58]
EDUCATION
Obama Passed Legislation Into Law Making Black Colleges Eligible For $15 Million In Federal Funding. In 2007, Obama introduced legislation that would make a predominantly black institution eligible for federal grant money. The legislation was written into the "The bill would define a PBI as a college of at least 1,000 undergraduates in which Blacks represent 40 percent or more of the student body. At least half of all undergraduates also must be low-income or first-generation students. The legislation would provide a minimum grant of $250,000. Jackson, another NAFEO board member, says Medgar Evers could find immediate uses for the funding." [S. 1513, Referred to HELP Committee, 5/24/07; H.R. 2669, Became Public Law, 9/7/07; Diverse Issues In Higher Education, 6/29/07]
Obama Passed Into Law An Amendment Establishing A Grant Program To Support Summer Curricula That Emphasize Math And Problem Solving. In 2007, Obama sponsored an amendment, which became law, to the America Competes Act that established a competitive state grant program to support summer learning opportunities with curricula that emphasize mathematics and problem solving. [S.Amdts. 924, Agreed to by unanimous consent, 4/25/07; S. 761, Incorporated into H.R. 2272, which became P.L. 110-289, 8/9/07]
MILITARY ISSUES/VETERANS
Obama Passed An Amendment, Which Became Law, Preventing The VA From Conducting A Review Of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Cases Aimed At Reducing Benefits. In 2005, Obama was an original cosponsor of an amendment that became law preventing the VA from conducting a review of cases, without first providing Congress with a complete report regarding the implementation of such review. In November 2005, the VA announced that it was abandoning its planned review. "Obama had several generations of veterans in mind, he suggested, when he joined fellow Democrats Richard Durbin (Ill.), Patty Murray (Wash.) and Daniel Akaka (Hawai'i) Sept. 22 on a successful amendment to block the Department of Veterans Affairs from reviewing case files of 72,000 veterans rated 100-percent disabled by post-traumatic stress disorder…VA officials believe some PTSD claims have been decided for veterans without proper documentation. They announced their massive review only after the VA inspector general studied 2,100 randomly selected cases of PTSD disability awards and found that 25 percent lacked documents to verify that a traumatic, service-connected incident occurred…But the Senate's amendment would bar the VA from conducting its case review until it justifies the program to Congress." [SA 1864 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote, 9/22/05; Became Public Law No: 109-114; Military Update, 10/3/05]
Obama Passed Legislation, Which Became Law, Improving And Increasing Services For Homeless Veterans. In 2006, Congress passed a Veterans Affairs Committee bill which included several provisions originating in Obama's SAVE Act (S. 1180) and Homes for Heroes Act (S. 3475). "The legislation...includes a number of proposals from legislation Senator Obama had previously introduced (S.1180, the SAVE Act and S.3475 the Homes for Heroes Act) to expand and improve services for homeless veterans. The bill permanently authorizes and increases funding to $130 million per year for a competitive grant program to provide homeless services to veterans. It greatly increases a successful program to provide rental vouchers to homeless veterans. The legislation extends programs to providing treatment for veterans with mental illnesses and other special needs. And it permanently extends VA's ability to transfer property it owns to homeless shelters." [S. 3421/P.L. 109-461; S. 1180, 109th Congress; S. 3475, 109th Congress; Obama Press Release, 6/26/06]
Obama Passed Legislation Extending Tax Credits For Military Families By Allowing Service Members Deployed In War Zones To Apply Non-Taxable Combat Pay To The EITC. In 2006, Congress passed legislation based on a proposal sponsored by Obama, Kerry, and Pryor that extended tax credits for military families by allowing service members deployed to war zones to apply their non-taxable combat pay toward the Earned Income Tax Credit. The amendment was introduced during debate on the Senate’s 2006 tax reconciliation bill, ruled out of order, but later included in the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act, which passed both chambers and became law on December 22, 2005. [H.R. 4440, Became P.L. 109-135, 12/22/05; SA 2616, 109th Congress]
Obama Passed An Amendment, Which Became Law, To Require The VA To Conduct A Campaign To Inform Disabled Vets Of Disparities In Compensation And Explaining Their Rights To Seek Review. In 2005, Obama was an original cosponsor on an amendment requiring the VA to conduct a campaign to inform veterans in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Connecticut, Ohio and New Jersey about their right to seek a review of their past claims. Specifically, the legislation required the VA to send letters to all veterans currently receiving disability who live in six states with a past history of below-average disability compensation, informing them of the past disparity, and explaining how to request a review of past claims and ratings and how to submit new claims. The VA was also required to inform all other veterans whose past claims may have been properly denied of this disparity by other means such as broadcast of print advertising. States whose average annual disability compensation payment was less than $7,300 qualified as below average. In 2003, Illinois veterans received an average of $6,802. The amendment became law on November 30, 2005. [S. Amdt. 1865, Passed by Voice Vote, 9/22/05, to H.R.2528, Signed by the President and Became Public Law No: 109-114 on 11/30/05]
HOMELAND SECURITY/DISASTER RESPONSE
Obama Passed A Law Initiating A Long Overdue Investigation Into FEMA Failures And Response To Trailers Contaminated By Formaldehyde. “U.S. Senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and Barack Obama (D-IL) lauded Congress’ passage of their proposal to launch an investigation into reports that housing trailers contaminated with formaldehyde were provided to Hurricane Katrina victims. This provision, which is contained in the Omnibus Appropriations package soon to be signed into law, will initiate a long overdue investigation into why the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) failed to prevent the contamination or investigate the allegations.” [Obama Press Release, 12/21/07; H.R. 2764, Became Public Law No: 110-161]
Obama Passed Legislation Prohibiting DHS From Entering Into Open-Ended, No-Bid Contracts For Emergency Response Activities. "Legislation authored by U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) that will stop the abuse of no-bid contracting in the aftermath of a disaster was included in the final Department of Homeland Security funding bill likely to pass the Senate today. After Senate passage, the bill will go to the President's desk to be signed into law...After Hurricane Katrina, the Federal Emergency Management Agency used emergency authority to enter into open-ended, no-bid contracts. What was meant to be temporary stop-gap authority ballooned into wasteful contracts that lasted many months and wasted significant federal resources. Obama and Coburn legislation will stop this practice by restricting the use of emergency contracting authority only to urgent needs in the immediate response to emergencies...On three separate occasions, Obama and Coburn have passed legislation in the Senate that would end no-bid contracting with Gulf Coast reconstruction funds. Legislation that would have specifically prohibited no-bid contracts with Gulf Coast reconstruction was stripped from a previously passed funding bill." [Obama Press Release, 9/29/06]
Obama Passed An Amendment Into Law Creating A National Family Locator System. In 2006, Obama passed an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations Act that required the Department of Homeland Security to create a centralized family locator system through which family members can contact their lost loved ones during disasters. The amendment, which was signed into law as part of the final version of the bill, was based on legislation Obama introduced immediately after Hurricane Katrina. [SA 4573 as modified agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent, 7/13/06; H.R. 5441, Became Public Law No: 109-295; S. 1630, 109th Congress, Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs]
WORKING FAMILIES
Obama And Hatch Passed Legislation To Protect Individuals' Rights To Continue Donating To Charities And Religious Organizations During Bankruptcy. In 2006, Obama was an original cosponsor of a bill that protected individuals' rights to continue donating to charities and religious organizations during bankruptcy proceedings. The Hatch-Obama bill responded to a court ruling that above-medium income debtors in Chapter 13 bankruptcy could not deduct charitable contributions, including religious contributions, from their payment plans. The ruling was based on an interpretation of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA). Hatch and Obama authored S. 4044 to ensure that all individuals in bankruptcy, no matter their income, would be able to continue giving to charity and their church. The bill passed the senate by unanimous consent and was signed by the president. [S. 4044, Signed 12/20/06, Became Public Law No. 109-439]
REALITY: BAMA "STEPPED FORWARD" AND STRENGTHENED THE CASE FOR HIS PRESIDENCY BY LEADING ON ETHICS REFORM
Washington Post: Obama Deserved Credit For Assembling And Passing "Strongest Ethics Legislation To Emerge From Congress Yet." The Washington Post wrote in an editorial, "The final package is the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet...Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D--Wis.) and Barack Obama (D--Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package." [Washington Post, Editorial, 1/20/07]
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: Obama Stepped Forward, Did a Wonderful Job. "And finally, Senator Obama. I chose personally Senator Obama last year to work on ethics and lobbying reform, and he's done a wonderful job. He's stepped forward. He's been a leader with Senator Feingold...And I admire and respect his stalwartness in moving forward on this." [Press Conference Transcript, Federal News Service, 1/18/07]
Madison Capital Times: Obama's Work On Ethics Legislation Strengthens Case For Presidency Candidacy. In an editorial, the Madison Capital Times wrote of Obama and Feingold, "The two senators are sponsoring groundbreaking ethics legislation that they say will improve upon Senate Bill 2349, the lobbying disclosure and ethics measure that the Senate passed in March 2006. 'Our goal,' say Feingold and Obama, 'is to restore the public's faith that Congress places its interest ahead of special interests.' The bottom line is that this is a real reform. No one will be surprised that Feingold's name is associated with this effort. But the fact that Obama is so willing to be a part of it will only strengthen the case for consideration of his potential presidential candidacy." [Madison Capital Times, 1/12/07]
Dayton Daily News: Obama Ethics Amendments Got Reform Bill "Watered Up." The Dayton Daily News wrote in an editorial, "Indeed, the bill goes further than Democrats even promised during the campaign. This was one of those rare occasions when a reform bill is introduced, then, rather than get watered down, gets watered up. This fact has been widely attributed to the work of Sens. Barack Obama, D--Ill., and Russ Feingold, D--Wis. They proposed reforms that the other senators -- while reportedly not happy about -- decided they couldn't oppose in the current political environment." [Dayton Daily News, Editorial, 1/24/07]
Obama Was Named Democrats' Point Person on Ethics. Under the headline "Obama is Democrats' point man on ethics," the Chicago Tribune wrote, "As Democrats attempt to capitalize on the perceived ethical shortcomings of Republican congressmen and staffers, party leaders have tapped Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) to be their point man to carry the message of ethics reform during the midterm election year. Obama begins his assignment Wednesday when he joins Democrats at the Library of Congress to unveil proposals intended to limit the influence of Washington lobbyists on politics and policy. The task is the most visible--and potentially partisan--role Obama has taken as he begins his second year in office." [Chicago Tribune, 1/18/06]
REALITY: OBAMA ALSO PASSED SWEEPING ETHICS LEGISLATION IN ILLINOIS
Obama Passed Illinois State Gift Ban Act "Heralded As the Most Sweeping Good--Government Legislation in Decades." In 1998, Obama passed the Illinois Gift Ban, which prohibited legislators, state officers and employees, and judges from soliciting or receiving gifts from a person or entity with interests affected by government. The Chicago Tribune called it wrote, "an ethics and campaign finance package heralded as the most sweeping good--government legislation in decades." The law also required greater campaign finance disclosure and limited the uses for which raised money could be spent. [HB672, 3R P 52--4--1, 5/22/98; PA 90--0737, 8/12/98; Chicago Tribune, 8/13/98; Chicago Independent Bulletin, 6/4/98]
Illinois Campaign for Political Reform: Sponsors Of Ethics Legislation "To Be Strongly Commended" For "Bipartisan," "Landmark Legislation." The leaders of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform wrote, "The Illinois Campaign for Political Reform applauds the Illinois legislature for passing the bipartisan campaign finance and ethics package...the bill's sponsors, state Sens. Kirk Dillard (R--Hinsdale) and Barack Obama (D--Chicago), and state Reps. Gary Hannig (D--Litchfield) and Jack Kubik (R--La Grange Park), made campaign finance reform in Illinois a reality by forging areas of common ground. With the support of legislative leaders, both parties and houses moved beyond their differences to pass this landmark legislation. All are to be strongly commended." [Chicago Tribune, 6/20/98]
Ethics Reforms Championed By Obama "Revolutionized" Illinois Politics. The New York Times reported, "The disclosure requirement 'revolutionized Illinois's system,' said Cindi Canary, executive director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. By giving journalists immediate access to a database of expenditures and contributions, it transformed political reporting. It also, she said, 'put Senator Obama on a launching pad and put the mantle of ethics legislator on his crown.'" [New York Times, 7/30/07]
Mendell Called Ethics Reform Obama's "First Major Legislative Accomplishment;" The Bill Did Not Sit Well With Some Of His Colleagues. In From Promise To Power, Mendell wrote, "His first major legislative accomplishment was shepherding a piece of campaign finance reform in May 1998. The measure prohibited lawmakers from soliciting campaign funds while on state property and from accepting gifts from state contractors, lobbyists or other interests...The bill was not a watershed event anywhere but Illinois. It essentially listed Illinois, a state with a deep history of illicit, pay--to--play politics, into the modern world when it came to ethics restrictions. The bill gave Obama a legislative success, but his public criticism of Springfield's old school politics did not sit well with some of his colleagues who already considered the Ivy League lawyer overly pious." [From Promise To Power, 124]
REALITY: OBAMA EXPANDED HEALTH CARE IN ILLINOIS
Obama Passed Bipartisan Legislation That Expanded Health Care Coverage To 154,000 Residents, Including 70,000 Children. As a state senator, Barack Obama sponsored and helped pass legislation that expanded and made permanent Illinois' KidCare program by raising eligibility from 185% to 200% of the federal poverty level. The legislation provided coverage for an additional 20,000 children and 65,000 more Illinois adults in the first year, and by 2007 had expanded health care to 70,000 kids and 84,000 adults. In its endorsement for his Senate race, the State Journal--Register wrote, "Obama brings similar common--sense views to improving health care in America -- for example, as a state senator he championed the successful KidCare program that assists thousands of children of the working poor." The bill was sponsored in the state House by Sandra Pihos, a Republican and passed 42--13. [93rd GA, SB 130, 3R P 42--13--2; Signed into law 6/30/03, PA 93--0063; Chicago Daily Herald, 7/2/03; Blagojevich release, 1/9/07; Blagojevich release, 4/13/07; Kaiser family report, 5/07; State Journal--Register, 10/29/04]
Obama Passed Health Care Justice Act; IL's Largest Health Care Coalition Applauded Obama's Leadership In Passing the Bill. In 2004, Obama was chief sponsor of bill creating the Health Care Justice Act, providing that the State of Illinois shall implement a health care access plan that provides uniform benefits for all Illinois residents by establishing a Bipartisan Commission that is required to submit a report to form the basis for the health care access plan to: "1) Provides access to a full range of preventive, acute and long--term health care services; 2) Maintains and improves the quality of health care services offered to IL residents; 3) Provides portability of coverage regardless of employment status; 4) Provides core benefits for all IL residents; 4) Encourages regional and local consumer participation; 5) Contains cost--containment measures." The Journal Register wrote the bill was "amended to make full access to health care a goal instead of a policy and to strongly encourage, instead of require, the state to implement a health--care access plan." The bill passed. When the bill was funded in 2005, Jim Duffett, executive director of Campaign for Better Health Care, the largest health care coalition in Illinois, said, "We applaud the leadership of Governor Blagojevich, state Rep. William Delgado and former state Sen. Barack Obama, who were the chief sponsors of this act." [93rd GA, HB 2268, 5/19/04, 3R P; 31--26--1, 6/24/04, Sent to the Governor; Lexington Herald Leader, 1/18/07; State Journal--Register (Springfield, IL), 6/15/04; Campaign for Better Health Care release, 7/31/05]
11/22/05: Obama Called for A Phased Withdrawal From Iraq, A Commitment To Having No U.S. Bases In Iraq Within a Decade. "First and foremost, after the December 15 elections and during the course of next year, we need to focus our attention on how reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw.' This course of action will help to focus our efforts on a more effective counter-insurgency strategy and take steam out of the insurgency...Second, we need not a time-table, in the sense of a precise date for U.S. troop pull-outs, but a time-frame for such a phased withdrawal. More specifically, we need to be very clear about key issues, such as bases and the level of troops in Iraq. We need to say that there will be no bases in Iraq a decade from now and the United States armed forces cannot stand-up and support an Iraqi government in perpetuity - pushing the Iraqis to take ownership over the situation and placing pressure on various factions to reach the broad based political settlement that is so essential to defeating the insurgency." [Obama Speech, 11/22/05]
12/8/05: Obama Said He Supported A Phased Withdrawal To Avoid Security Vacuum; Said War In Iraq To Blame For Terrorist Problems. Obama favors starting 'a phased withdrawal process' of troops next year. The process would be based on what happens with the elections, he said. 'What we're engaged in is a difficult balancing act here…Having gone in, how do we step back but ensure that there's not such a vacuum that either chaos occurs or jihadists take over critical areas that can make huge problems elsewhere? The irony, of course, is that there really wasn't a terrorist problem before we went in. There is now.'" [State Journal-Register, 12/8/05]
1/8/06: Obama Said It Was Important To Start Phasing Down Troops. The Sun-Times wrote, "Obama said 'if we don't see significant political progress' over the next six months or so, 'we can pour money and troops in here until the cows come home but we are not going to be successful.' It is important, Obama said, 'to start phasing down the troops' and 'to give the Iraqis more ownership.'" [Chicago Sun-Times, 1/8/06]
4/13/06: Obama Said U.S. Should Start Phasing Down U.S. Troop Presence In Iraq By The End Of The Year. At a town hall meeting, Obama said, "'If I continue to see what seems to be the case right now--an inability and unwillingness on the part of the various factions to want to live together--we can't be in a position where we're in the middle of a civil war...If we're not seeing a government that is actually committed to working together, then I don't see how our presence there can be helpful,' Obama said. Even if a new government is formed, Obama said, by the end of the year 'our job as the police and army of Iraq should be complete. We will have done our task and we should start phasing down our troops.'" [Chicago Tribune, 4/13/06]
NYT: 2007 Ethics Reform Bill "Quickly Sent A Ripple Of Fear Through K Street" And Was "Already Changing The Culture Of Washington" Before It Was Signed Into Law, Beginning With "More Dutch Treats And Fewer Steak Dinners." "The new law has quickly sent a ripple of fear through K Street...Stanley Brand, a longtime Washington defense lawyer who usually represents Democrats, said the law was a sea change. ''It should send shivers down lobbyists' spines,'' Mr. Brand said. ‘It is a minefield now...President Bush has not said whether he would sign the bill, but it is already changing the culture of Capitol Hill in myriad ways, beginning with more Dutch treats and fewer steak dinners...One lobbyist, who would speak only anonymously to avoid attracting the attention of prosecutors or rivals, said he had started sending himself date-stamped e-mail to create a record of every phone conversation he had with a lawmaker. Then he stopped making campaign contributions...For lobbyists -- who live at the nexus of contributions and favors -- it is an alarming trend. ''They might as well just pull up the paddy wagon outside the Capital Grille,'' one lobbyist said, referring to a clubby steakhouse near the Capitol that is a well-known K Street hangout. [New York Times, 8/7/07]
Good Government Groups: Ethics Reform "Shouldn't Be Belittled." The good-government groups that criticized Mrs. Clinton took issue with her comments about the ethics reform bill. While she voted for it, she has suggested that the legislation was not a landmark change and that Mr. Obama was hardly alone in championing it. Fred Wertheimer, president and chief executive of Democracy 21, which promotes campaign finance reform, said the bill contained some of ''the most important and comprehensive ethics and lobbying reforms since the Watergate era.'' Meredith McGehee, policy director of the Campaign Legal Center, said: ''I think it should be seen as the decent, credible and substantial legislation that it was. It shouldn't be belittled.'' [New York Times, 1/15/08]
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: Obama Stepped Forward, Did a Wonderful Job. Senator Reid said, "And finally, Senator Obama. I chose personally Senator Obama last year to work on ethics and lobbying reform, and he's done a wonderful job. He's stepped forward. He's been a leader with Senator Feingold...And I admire and respect his stalwartness in moving forward on this." [Press Conference Transcript, Federal News Service, 1/18/07]
Washington Post Said Obama Deserved Credit For "Strongest Ethics Legislation...Yet." The Washington Post wrote in an editorial, "The final package is the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet...Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package." [Washington Post, Editorial, 1/20/07]
Chicago Tribune: Obama and Feingold Pressured the Senate Into Adopting Tougher Ethics Reforms. "After Democratic and Republican leaders introduced their bipartisan working version of an ethics plan, pressure from Obama and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) inspired them to open the measure up for some tougher restrictions." [Chicago Tribune, 1/19/07]
Dayton Daily News: Obama Ethics Amendments Got Reform Bill Improved Instead of Watered Down. The Dayton Daily News wrote in an editorial, "Indeed, the bill goes further than Democrats even promised during the campaign. This was one of those rare occasions when a reform bill is introduced, then, rather than get watered down, gets watered up. This fact has been widely attributed to the work of Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Russ Feingold, D-Wis. They proposed reforms that the other senators - while reportedly not happy about - decided they couldn't oppose in the current political environment." [Dayton Daily News, Editorial, 1/24/07]
Providence Journal: Coburn And Obama “Deserve Credit For Fighting Doggedly For This Legislation.” “What a great idea: Create a searchable online data base of federal grants and contracts, identifying the members of Congress behind the spending, so that citizens, even on their home computers, can easily determine where, how and why the government is spending their money. A bill to do just that, sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., with the bipartisan support of such heavy hitters as Republican Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., Democratic Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and John McCain, R-Ariz., has passed the Senate and may soon become law…For a time it looked dicey. In an impressive display of the arrogance of power, two of Congress's most egregious kings of pork - Sens. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. - secretly put a hold on the legislation. After citizens groups smoked out this betrayal of the public, Byrd and Stevens backed off…That may be why liberal Democrats have joined with conservatives on the bill. It presents an opportunity to break the deathgrip of incumbency. Coburn and the co-sponsor, Sen. Barak Obama, D-Ill., deserve credit for fighting doggedly for this legislation.” [Providence Journal Editorial, 9/20/06]
The Google For Government Bill Was A “Fine Accomplishment” And “Passed Largely Because Of The Bipartisan Leadership Of Tom Coburn, R-Okla And Barack Obama, D-Ill” “The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act is a fine accomplishment. It will create an earmark database that the public can easily access on the Internet. The bill passed largely because of the bipartisan leadership of senators Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill.” [Chattanooga Times Free Press, 10/15/06]
REALITY: Falsely Implied That Obama Has Not Been Committed To Immigration Reform, And Neglected To Mention The Key Role He Played In Major Debates
Gannett: “Low-Ranking Obama Front-And-Center On Immigration.” In an article entitled, “Low Ranking Obama Front-And-Center On Immigration, Gannett News Service reported, “When the president sat down with eight senators to strategize about immigration last week, the group represented the Senate's elite on the issue. Among them were the top Democratic and Republican leaders, those from border states, two Hispanics and those with a history of involvement with immigration legislation. And then, there was Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois' junior senator, who ranks 98 out of 100 in seniority in the Senate. He is not on the Senate's Judiciary Committee where immigration legislation originated and the state he represents is closer to the Canadian border than the deserts of Mexico…Alejandro Lugo, an associate professor of anthropology at the University of Illinois who studies border issues, says Obama's recognition of a border control problem coupled with a practical solution will play well if people are paying attention.” [Gannett News Service, 5/1/06]
Kennedy And McCain, Authors Of Immigration Reform Bill, Thanked Obama As One Of Small Bipartisan Group Of Senators Who “Stood Together To Make This Legislation Possible.” McCain said, “After several weeks of extensive debate and consideration of numerous and complicated amendments, the Senate is about to move to final passage on S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act…I also commend the Senate Leadership on both sides of the aisle for their efforts to ensure that the Senate addressed this important issue and gave us more than adequate time for a thorough debate. This is a proud moment for the United States Senate, as we have conducted good work and returned to orderly traditions of the legislative process as envisioned by our founding fathers…And of course, I commend Senator Kennedy, who is perhaps the leading expert on this difficult issue…I also want to thank Senators Brownback, Lieberman, Graham, Salazar, Martinez, Obama, and Dewine for their shared commitment to this issue, and working to ensure this bill moved successfully intact through the legislative process.” In a speech on the Senate floor, Kennedy said, “I thank those of our bipartisan group who stood together to make this legislation possible--Senator Graham, Senator Salazar, Senator Martinez, Senator Hagel, Senator Durbin, Senator Lieberman, Senator Brownback, Senator Obama, and Senator DeWine.” [McCain Press Release, 5/25/06; Congressional Record, 5/26/06]
Illinois Coalition For Immigrants And Refugee Rights Praised Obama For Leadership In Moving Congress Towards New Immigration Laws. “Fred Tsao, policy director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, praised U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) for their leadership in moving toward new immigration laws on Capitol Hill. But ‘we must demand similar leadership from the president and the speaker of the House,’ he said. ‘We need real comprehensive immigration reform that will allow the undocumented to gain legal status, bring families together, respect hard work and help students realize their dreams.’” [Chicago Sun-Times, 4/24/06]
Obama Passed Amendments To The Senate’s 2006 Immigration Bill That Would Have Established An Employment Verification System And Protected American Workers From Losing Jobs To Guest Workers. In 2006, Obama passed an amendment t
Maureen Dowd of the NY Times weighs in on the Palin pick.
It’s easy to see where this movie is going. It begins, of course, with a cute, cool unknown from Alaska who has never even been on “Meet the Press” triumphing over a cute, cool unknowable from Hawaii who has been on “Meet the Press” a lot. Americans, suspicious that the Obamas have benefited from affirmative action without being properly grateful, and skeptical that Michelle really likes “The Brady Bunch” and “The Dick Van Dyke Show,” reject the 47-year-old black contender as too uppity and untested. Instead, they embrace 72-year-old John McCain and 44-year-old Sarah Palin, whose average age is 58, a mere two years older than the average age of the Obama-Biden ticket. Enthusiastic Republicans don’t see the choice of Palin as affirmative action, despite her thin résumé and gaping absence of foreign policy knowledge, because they expect Republicans to put an underqualified “babe,” as Rush Limbaugh calls her, on the ticket. They have a tradition of nominating fun, bantamweight cheerleaders from the West, like the previous Miss Congeniality types Dan Quayle and W., and then letting them learn on the job. So they crash into the globe a few times while they’re learning to drive, what’s the big deal? Obama may have been president of The Harvard Law Review, but Palin graduated from the University of Idaho with a minor in poli-sci and worked briefly as a TV sports reporter. And she was tougher on the basketball court than the ethereal Obama, earning the nickname “Sarah Barracuda.” The legacy of Geraldine Ferraro was supposed to be that no one would ever go on a blind date with history again. But that crazy maverick and gambler McCain does it, and conservatives and evangelicals rally around him in admiration of his refreshingly cynical choice of Sarah, an evangelical Protestant and anti-abortion crusader who became a hero when she decided to have her baby, who has Down syndrome, and when she urged schools to debate creationism as well as that stuffy old evolution thing.
It’s easy to see where this movie is going. It begins, of course, with a cute, cool unknown from Alaska who has never even been on “Meet the Press” triumphing over a cute, cool unknowable from Hawaii who has been on “Meet the Press” a lot.
Americans, suspicious that the Obamas have benefited from affirmative action without being properly grateful, and skeptical that Michelle really likes “The Brady Bunch” and “The Dick Van Dyke Show,” reject the 47-year-old black contender as too uppity and untested.
Instead, they embrace 72-year-old John McCain and 44-year-old Sarah Palin, whose average age is 58, a mere two years older than the average age of the Obama-Biden ticket. Enthusiastic Republicans don’t see the choice of Palin as affirmative action, despite her thin résumé and gaping absence of foreign policy knowledge, because they expect Republicans to put an underqualified “babe,” as Rush Limbaugh calls her, on the ticket. They have a tradition of nominating fun, bantamweight cheerleaders from the West, like the previous Miss Congeniality types Dan Quayle and W., and then letting them learn on the job. So they crash into the globe a few times while they’re learning to drive, what’s the big deal?
Obama may have been president of The Harvard Law Review, but Palin graduated from the University of Idaho with a minor in poli-sci and worked briefly as a TV sports reporter. And she was tougher on the basketball court than the ethereal Obama, earning the nickname “Sarah Barracuda.”
The legacy of Geraldine Ferraro was supposed to be that no one would ever go on a blind date with history again. But that crazy maverick and gambler McCain does it, and conservatives and evangelicals rally around him in admiration of his refreshingly cynical choice of Sarah, an evangelical Protestant and anti-abortion crusader who became a hero when she decided to have her baby, who has Down syndrome, and when she urged schools to debate creationism as well as that stuffy old evolution thing.
Ms. Dowd today, August 14, 2008, in The New York Times, speaks truthfully of the agendas of 'The Great Vaginal Hope' and her husband Bill. What slimy creatures they both turned out to be.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/13/opinion/13dowd.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin
Also, take some time to read my June 2008 article in The Cleveland Free Times entitled:
'The Great Vaginal Hope' at the link below:
http://www.freetimes.com/stories/15/60/the-great-vaginal-hope
Adrienne Zurub
http://adriennezurub.typepad.com
I think we can anticipate and disarm any attack from the McCain camp or others who want to stop Obama. In fact, I think we, as a country, won't accept any more "Swift Boat kinds of attacks. Saying this, I am more afraid of the megalomanical Clintons, who will try to subvert our campaign. I was deeply disturbed when I read that Obama gave both Hillary and Bill a night to "strut their stuff," at our expense. )See Maureen Dowd: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/13/opinion/edowd.php )
As I've said and written from the beginning, not only can we win without the Clintons, I believe the Clintons will prove our biggest obstacle to overcome.
In closing, I'm a little surprised that Obama and his advisors still believe in the Clinton magic. The pair are as 21st Century as the SUV and McMansion.
Now is the time to jettison them, before they can further their mischief.
Hello everyone. First up, Obama has a new ad attacking McCain on energy. I could have sworn I saw this ad on TV last night. McCain has been in Washington for a little over 25 years, the ad says, but he voted against exploring alternative energy sources. He's part of the problem, not the solution.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHMbwk6CDLE&eurl=http://thepage.time.com/2008/08/05/obamas-up-with-second-negative-spot-on-energy/
Essence Magazine profiles both Barack and Michelle in the most recent issue. Here's an excerpt from Barack:
Bounding through the throng with a lanky ease, the junior senator from Illinois smiles broadly, kisses babies and basks in the praise of adoring strangers. “Everywhere we go we’ve been seeing these terrific crowds,” he exults to the lunchtime onlookers, pushing his voice past the limitations of a mild head cold. “Twenty thousand people show up in Atlanta. Twenty thousand people in Austin, Texas. We had 15,000 in Oakland. “People have asked me what accounts for all this,” he continues. “I would love to take all the credit myself and say it’s because I’m just so terrific. But I have to say it’s not about me. The reason people are coming out is they are burning with a want and a desire for change.”
And here's Michelle:
On her husband:“The authenticity you see is real, and that’s why I fell in love with him.”
The NY Times is reporting that the GOP is dropping in voter registration in many states this year.
Well before Senators Barack Obama and John McCain rose to the top of their parties, a partisan shift was under way at the local and state level. For more than three years starting in 2005, there has been a reduction in the number of voters who register with the Republican Party and a rise among voters who affiliate with Democrats and, almost as often, with no party at all.While the implications of the changing landscape for Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain are far from clear, voting experts say the registration numbers may signal the beginning of a move away from Republicans that could affect local, state and national politics over several election cycles. Already, there has been a sharp reversal for Republicans in many statehouses and governors’ mansions.In several states, including the traditional battlegrounds of Nevada and Iowa, Democrats have surprised their own party officials with significant gains in registration. In both of those states, there are now more registered Democrats than Republicans, a flip from 2004. No states have switched to the Republicans over the same period, according to data from 26 of the 29 states in which voters register by party. (Three of the states did not have complete data.)
Well before Senators Barack Obama and John McCain rose to the top of their parties, a partisan shift was under way at the local and state level. For more than three years starting in 2005, there has been a reduction in the number of voters who register with the Republican Party and a rise among voters who affiliate with Democrats and, almost as often, with no party at all.
While the implications of the changing landscape for Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain are far from clear, voting experts say the registration numbers may signal the beginning of a move away from Republicans that could affect local, state and national politics over several election cycles. Already, there has been a sharp reversal for Republicans in many statehouses and governors’ mansions.
In several states, including the traditional battlegrounds of Nevada and Iowa, Democrats have surprised their own party officials with significant gains in registration. In both of those states, there are now more registered Democrats than Republicans, a flip from 2004. No states have switched to the Republicans over the same period, according to data from 26 of the 29 states in which voters register by party. (Three of the states did not have complete data.)
Maureen Dowd has an interesting opinion piece on Obama and Hillary supporters:
Obama met for an hour Tuesday with three dozen top Hillaryites at a hotel here, seeking their endorsement and beguiling their begrudging. He opened the session by saying that he knew there had been frustration about what they saw as sexism during the primary. The Los Angeles Times reported that Hillary die-hards want to enshrine a whine in the Democratic platform about how the primaries “exposed pervasive gender bias in the media” and call on party leaders to take “immediate and public steps” to denounce any perceived bias in the future. That is one nutty idea.Perhaps it is because feminists are still so busy cataloging past slights to Hillary that they have failed to mount a vivid defense of Michelle Obama, who has taken over from Hillary as the one conservatives like to paint as a harridan.
Obama met for an hour Tuesday with three dozen top Hillaryites at a hotel here, seeking their endorsement and beguiling their begrudging. He opened the session by saying that he knew there had been frustration about what they saw as sexism during the primary.
The Los Angeles Times reported that Hillary die-hards want to enshrine a whine in the Democratic platform about how the primaries “exposed pervasive gender bias in the media” and call on party leaders to take “immediate and public steps” to denounce any perceived bias in the future. That is one nutty idea.
Perhaps it is because feminists are still so busy cataloging past slights to Hillary that they have failed to mount a vivid defense of Michelle Obama, who has taken over from Hillary as the one conservatives like to paint as a harridan.
Finally, here are some excerpts from Obama's energy town hall this morning in Youngstown, Ohio.
"And while Senator McCain’s plan won’t save you at the pump anytime soon, it sure has done a lot to raise campaign dollars. Senator McCain raised more than one million dollars from the oil industry just last month, most of which came after he announced his plan for offshore drilling to a room full of cheering oil executives."
Goodwin offers key points of post-partisanship in presidential history with no specifics for doing same in a 24/7 cable news cycle in her op-ed in 08 03 08 NYTimes. Doris Kearns Goodwin notes both major candidates embrace post-partisan governance:
Doris Kearns Goodwin "Defeat Your Opponents. Then Hire Them." ON the campaign trail, Barack Obama has applauded Abraham Lincoln’s decision to bring his three main rivals for the Republican nomination into his cabinet, suggesting that he might also invite his opponents to join his administration, if it would help create “the best possible government.” Lincoln understood, Mr. Obama said, that personal feelings mattered less than the issue of “How can we get this country through this time of crisis?” John McCain, too, has embraced the idea of moving beyond partisanship: “We belong to different parties,” he has said, “not different countries.” ...
Doris Kearns Goodwin "Defeat Your Opponents. Then Hire Them."
ON the campaign trail, Barack Obama has applauded Abraham Lincoln’s decision to bring his three main rivals for the Republican nomination into his cabinet, suggesting that he might also invite his opponents to join his administration, if it would help create “the best possible government.” Lincoln understood, Mr. Obama said, that personal feelings mattered less than the issue of “How can we get this country through this time of crisis?” John McCain, too, has embraced the idea of moving beyond partisanship: “We belong to different parties,” he has said, “not different countries.” ...
read the entire op-ed essay at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/opinion/03goodwin.html?ref=todayspaper
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/opinion/03dowd.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin
Funny!
The Last Debate
By MAUREEN DOWDMay 21, 2008
..“Hillary, you’ve been a great candidate, better than your train-wreck campaign. You’re Churchillian in your indomitable tenacity. You’ve inspired women all over the country. In fact, you’ve inspired some of them to hate me. But now it’s time for you to try to muster a gracious exit.”“Forget it, Bones. Once Harold Ickes works his dark magic on the delegate rules to count Michigan and Florida, I’ll have the popular vote. And then the superdelegates will grovel back. They know in their hearts that they don’t want to go on a blind date with a guy who’s going to be BFF with Cuba, Hamas, Iran and retired Weathermen. You can bet your white turban that I’m not raising the white flag.” “Like hell you aren’t, sister.” “Sexist!” “Racist!”..
..“Hillary, you’ve been a great candidate, better than your train-wreck campaign. You’re Churchillian in your indomitable tenacity. You’ve inspired women all over the country. In fact, you’ve inspired some of them to hate me. But now it’s time for you to try to muster a gracious exit.”
“Forget it, Bones. Once Harold Ickes works his dark magic on the delegate rules to count Michigan and Florida, I’ll have the popular vote. And then the superdelegates will grovel back. They know in their hearts that they don’t want to go on a blind date with a guy who’s going to be BFF with Cuba, Hamas, Iran and retired Weathermen. You can bet your white turban that I’m not raising the white flag.”
“Like hell you aren’t, sister.”
“Sexist!”
“Racist!”..
Maybe I'm a little angry because I just woke up. Maybe it's working 10 or 11 hour shifts at night delivering pizza until the wee hours of the morning that has made me bitter, but I don't think so. No, it's the national media.
When I read Maureen Dowd's fluffy and lackluster column just now, it made me viscerally angry.
Essentially, Dowd pieced together a catalog of mistruths, misrepresentations, and outright lies in an effort to smear Obama as "elitist." Is that all it takes to make the NYT op-ed page these days? Apparently it is, with the likes of Kristol polluting the newsprint.
So, I'm going to tear her "article" apart line by line.
Frankly, this elitism line is the biggest bunch of b.s. I've seen in this election. I was mostly willing to let it slide off my back when misrepresentation after misrepresentation was allowed to float through the airwaves and newspapers. I'm through attacking Senator Clinton and have no desire to do so, and I'm through trying to bring the light to Clinton supporters, but I can't let this travesty of journalistic opinion get by unscathed.
When Maureen Dowd, quite possibly the most elitist woman in America, drops the hammer on Obama from quite possibly the most elitist newspaper in America, I cannot remain silent. Let's begin.
First, Dowd begins by attempting to establish her own "working class, salt of the earth" bonafides. She states:
I grew up in a house with a gun, a strong Catholic faith, an immigrant father, brothers with anti-illegal immigrant sentiments and a passion for bowling. (My bowling trophy was one of my most cherished possessions.)
Well, Jesus Christ. I had no idea that Dowd was such a regular gal. I mean, maybe it's the 25 years that she's been churning articles for the NYT that had me thinking she was more than just another regular Joe. A bowling trophy? Does she have that on the mantle next to her Pulitzer? I feel certain that she does.
Behind closed doors in San Francisco, elitism’s epicenter, Barack Obama showed his elitism, attributing the emotional, spiritual and cultural values of working-class, "lunch pail" Pennsylvanians to economic woes.
San Francisco is not elitism's epicenter, and I'm so damn tired of reading that line. Guess what, Dowd? Washington, D.C., your hometown and the only place you've ever lived for an appreciable amount of time - D.C. is elitism's epicenter. It's where rich, out of touch white people make decisions about the rest of the country while ignoring the disparate inequality in their very own backyard. I've been to D.C. many times. I've been to San Francisco once. Which is more elite - taking a cab to Fisherman's Wharf or riding in a bulletproof, blacked-out SUV to the legislative session? Which is more elite - eating a piece of Ghirardeli chocolate at the factory or living in a mansion rowhome on Massaschusetts Avenue across the street from a foreign embassy?
I've had quite enough of these insular D.C. types trying to tell me what's elitist and what is not. I know elitism when I see it. I've stayed in the Society of the Cincinnati's Anderson House in D.C. for a couple of nights. I know elitism when I see it, thank you very much.
Obama comes across less like a candidate in Pennsylvania than an anthropologist in Borneo.His mother got her Ph.D. in anthropology, studying the culture of Indonesia.
Obama comes across less like a candidate in Pennsylvania than an anthropologist in Borneo.
His mother got her Ph.D. in anthropology, studying the culture of Indonesia.
Oh, I see. He had a smart mother. Well, shit. That should raise a massive red flag right there. A mother with a Ph.D.? Elitist, no doubt. Obama comes across as thoughtful? Now, why in the Hell would we want a thoughtful President? Why in God's name would we want any person with an ounce of brain matter making decisions about this country? Would it be better for Obama's candidacy if his mother had made a living turning tricks on Harry Hines Boulevard in Dallas, Texas?
He hasn’t pulled a John Kerry and asked for a Philly cheese steak with Swiss yet, but he has maintained a regal "What do the simple folk do to help them escape when they’re blue?" bearing, unable to even feign Main Street cred. But Hillary did when she belted down a shot of Crown Royal whiskey with gusto at Bronko’s in Crown Point, Ind.
Look, I know these beltway types have no idea what us "common folk" like to drink, so I've refrained from saying a single thing about Senator Clinton's "shot." But I'm going to comment now. I can't help it. First off, it wasn't a shot. When you sip liquor out of a shot glass, that does not mean you are doing a shot. It means you are sipping liquor out of a shotglass. Since Dowd doesn't know what a shot is, it's when one throws back a shotglass full of liquor in one swoop. If one does not drain said shotglass, one should be fully embarassed for not doing so. Senator Clinton, for all her gusto, did no such thing. Sipping Crown Royal? Oh yes, very common, very salt of the earth.
No.
Crown Royal? Oh, you mean the Canadian whisky that people that can't handle bourbon drink? Don't get me wrong, I like a little Crown every now and then. But how about some Jack Daniel's or Jim Beam? How about an American liquor that people like me drink. It's the dumbest damn thing I've ever seen. I don't care what booze my president drinks. In fact, being a bit of a boozehound myself, I'd actually prefer he or she not drink at all. I like my president to be stone cold sober when he or she is making decisions that affect the lives of every single person on the planet. Crown Royal? It comes in a purple velvet bag. Very not elitist, I assure you. A purple velvet bag, folks. I simply point to this as proof that Clinton's advisors are clueless. If she wanted to show how common yet uncommon she was, she should have ordered a Maker's and scraped the red wax off a fresh bottle with her fingernails. But again, how about not drinking at all?
Just as he couldn’t knock down the bowling pins
I've said notihng about the bowling thing. I thought the criticism was stupid. However, since I'm an avid bowler, I can no longer hold back. Obama bowled seven frames. In the seventh, he bowled an unscored spare. Here's his scorecard:
- - | 0- 4 | 47s 2 | 139 - | 227s - | 298 - | 379 / |
Assuming Obama would have knocked down at least eight pins in the eighth, his score would actually be 55 through seven frames, not 37. At the very least, he bowled a 47 through seven frames, not 37. But these assholes in the media, most of them don't even know how to score a game of bowling. They only know that 37 is a terrible score for 10 frames, so they tut tut and tsk tsk and talk down on Senator Obama like he couldn't knock down a pin. Enough already. Obama's bowling was adequate - Hell, it's a lot better than most non-bowlers would do. Enough with the bowling shit.
Even when Hillary’s campaign collapsed around her and her husband managed to revive the bullets over Bosnia, Obama has still not been able to marshal a knockout blow — or even come up with a knockout economic speech that could expand his base of support.
You know, this idea that Obama "can't score a knockout punch" is getting ridiculous, as well. Not that I would expect Dowd to get it, but the whole point of Obama's campaign is that it isn't about throwing knockout punches. It isn't about throwing punches at all. It's about coming together to solve problems. Fighting doesn't solve a damn thing. Trying to knock your opponent's teeth out might feel good in the short run, but it accomplishes nothing. Yeah, your opponent is bloodied and lying on the ground with an impending dental bill, but no problem is solved, and no person is better off than before. Dowd just doesn't get it. She doesn't understand that we want a president that will use his brains instead of his metaphorical fist. Why does Senator Clinton rub so many the wrong way? It's because she is from the "bludgeon opponents into submission" school of politics. People feel resentment when they are bludgeoned into submission. People want to be a part of the process, even if they lose. Nobody wants to get shouted down and told they are wrong. Dowd, a D.C. elitist that knows nothing of the world outside the beltway, has no idea how real people solve real problems - by talking about them, agreeing on some things while disagreeing on others - and still remaining cordial.
I can disagree with my opponent but still go to the bar with him or her to knock back a few shots of Jack - that's what real people do, Ms. Dowd.
What turns off voters is the detached egghead quality that they tend to equate with a wimpiness, wordiness and a lack of action
No, Ms. Dowd, what turns off voters is when politicians spend all of their time trying to bruise and bloody their opponent instead of working to solve the real, pressing issues that our nation faces today. It's why a huge amount of voters don't even vote. For a Beltway Pundit to presume to speak for the voters of this nation and their desires is so insulting to me that it just makes my blood boil. Could you tell? I'm trying very hard not to drop fucks and shits everywhere, even though that's what real people do when they get really, really angry.
But his exclusive Hawaiian prep school and years in the Ivy League made him a charter member of the elite, along with the academic experts he loves to have in the room.
Yeah, he's smart. Smarter than even you, Ms. Dowd. That's the real problem here. What will Dowd write to sell papers when she can't mock George W. Bush with every column? Like the "cornered raccoon" as she describes Senator Clinton, Maureen Dowd realizes that the death knell of her profession is coming. We have no time for your elitist spouting, Ms. Dowd. We have urgent issues and problems to solve in this country, and none of them have to do with what you think is or isn't important in this campaign.
People need health care. Our children need better education. Our economy is in shambles, sold off to China wholesale. Our military is breaking, if not already broken. Our infrastructure is crumbling. We're facing an energy crisis. There's just no time to pay attention to you, Ms. Dowd. Like how I used to enjoy watching the commercials during the Super Bowl, I enjoyed reading your fluff every now and again. But there's no time anymore. I'm going to spend this day off making calls into Pennsylvania, where I lived and worked for seven years. I'm going to tell people why I believe in Barack Obama and why I don't believe in you.
What will you do, Ms. Dowd? Will you put on some striking red evening gown and go drink martinis at some dinner party? Elitist? What a fairy tale. I'll take my hope, my bowling ball, and my bottle of Jack all the way to the White House with Barack Obama, thank you very much.
Hillary was so busy trying to prove she could be one of the boys — getting on the Armed Services Committee, voting to let W. go to war in Iraq, strong-arming supporters and donors, and trying to out-macho Obama — that she only belatedly realized that many Democratic and independent voters, especially women, were eager to move from hard-power locker-room tactics to a soft-power sewing circle approach.
Interesting article by Maureen Dowd of the New York Times. Strange..Hillary's emphasis is all about competence, yet as seen with her closest political advisors, she tends to value loyalty over competence (sound familiar - oh yeah, that's right. Sounds like George W.!)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/opinion/17dowd.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
GREENVILLE, S.C.
If Bill Clinton has to trash his legacy to protect his legacy, so be it. If he has to put a dagger through the heart of hope to give Hillary hope, so be it.
If he has to preside in this state as the former first black president stopping the would-be first black president, so be it.
The Clintons — or “the 2-headed monster,” as the The New York Post dubbed the tag team that clawed out wins in New Hampshire and Nevada — always go where they need to go, no matter the collateral damage. Even if the damage is to themselves and their party.
Bill’s transition from elder statesman, leader of his party and bipartisan ambassador to ward heeler and hatchet man has been seamless — and seamy.
After Bill’s success trolling the casinos on the Las Vegas Strip, Hillary handed off South Carolina and flew to California and other Super Tuesday states. The Big Dog relished playing the candidate again, wearing a Technicolor orange tie and sweeping across the state with the mute Chelsea.
He tried to convey the impression that they were running against The Man, and with classic Clintonian self-pity, grumbled that Barack Obama had all the advantages.
When he was asked yesterday if he would feel bad standing in the way of the first black president, he said no. “I’m not standing in his way,” he said. “I think Hillary would be a better president” who’s “ready to do the job on the first day.” He added: “No one has a right to be president, including Hillary. Keep in mind, in the last two primaries, we ran as an underdog.” He rewrote the facts, saying that “no one thought she could win” in New Hampshire, even though she originally had had a substantial lead.
He said of Obama: “I hope I get a chance to vote for him some day.” And that day, of course, would be after Hillary’s eight years; it’s her turn now because Bill owes her. “I think it would be just as much a change, and some people think more, to have the first woman president as to have the first African-American president,” he said.
Bad Bill had been roughing up Obama so much that Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina suggested that he might want to “chill.” On a conference call with reporters yesterday, the former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a national co-chairman of the Obama campaign, tut-tutted that the “incredible distortions” of the political beast were “not keeping with the image of a former president.”
Jonathan Alter reported in Newsweek that Senator Edward Kennedy and Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois congressman and former Clinton aide, have heatedly told Bill “that he needs to change his tone and stop attacking Senator Barack Obama.”
In the Myrtle Beach debate Monday night, Obama was fed up with being double-teamed by the Clintons. He finally used attack lines that his strategists had urged him to use against Hillary for months. “It was as though all the e-mails were backed up,” said one.
When Hillary tried once more to take Obama’s remarks about Ronald Reagan out of context, making it seem as though Obama had praised Reagan’s policies, he turned sarcastic about getting two distortionists for the price of one.
“I can’t tell who I’m running against sometimes,” he snapped at Hillary, obviously entrapped and psyched-out by the Clinton duo.
On a conference call with reporters yesterday morning, Obama did not back off from his more aggressive, if defensive, stance. The Clintons, he said “spent the last month attacking me in ways that are not accurate. At some point, it’s important for me to answer.” Recalling that Hillary had called mixing it up the “fun” part of politics, he said: “I don’t think it’s the fun part to fudge the truth.”
Bill has merged with his wife totally now, talking about “we” and “us.” “I never did anything major without discussing it with her,” he told a crowd here. “We’ve been having this conversation since we first met in 1971, and I don’t think we’ll stop now.” He suggested as First Lad that “I can help to sell the domestic program.”
It’s odd that the first woman with a shot at becoming president is so openly dependent on her husband to drag her over the finish line. She handed over South Carolina to him, knowing that her support here is largely derivative.
At the Greenville event, Bill brought up Obama’s joking reference to him in the debate, about how Obama would have to see whether Bill was a good dancer before deciding whether he was the first black president.
Bill, naturally, turned it into a competition. “I would be willing to engage in a dancing competition with him, even though he’s much younger and thinner than I am,” he said. “If I’m going to get in one of these brother contests,” he added, “at least I should be entitled to an age allowance.”
He said, “I kind of like seeing Barack and Hillary fighting.”
“How great is this?” he said. “Neither of them has to be a little wind-up doll who’s supposed to behave in a certain way. They’re real people, flesh and blood people. They have differences.”
And if he has anything to say about it, and he will, they’ll be fighting till the last dog dies.
