Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:00:03 -0400
Here's one matching your x's from the Kelly's:
Contribution Details
Date: April 27, 2008 9:25 PM EDT
Contact: "Herself" Kelly
Amount: $xx.xx
I'm maxed out, and when I just asked Herself if she wanted to make another contribution, she said yes, but asked me to not post her name. "OK," says I, "even though I've no doubt that Mr. Cheney, et. al. already knows it." ;)
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
Look at this video - 30 seconds into it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqCHm1APy8Q
He's wearing a "USMC" t-shirt.
Macho, eh?
I can already see this shot of O in that t-shirt in a 527 ad for Captain John McCain, USN (ret), right after the shot of Michael Dukakis sitting in that tank.
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
But he's cool. He's tough. He's just not a Marine or anything else along those lines. Jeez-who is dressing this guy?
The T-shirt is bigger than a flag pin. The guy can't win on that one. Meanwhile, now you see how they get so many young people to caucus and push out the regular older voters showing up to vote. It's about a chance to play basketball with a superstar. I'm glad for those kids that he kept his promise to play with them. Now if he could just get them all to do something about world hunger. For the amount of money his campaign has sucked up around the country, that could have bought tons of food for people all over the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul23d_J-35U
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
Tom Henry, the guy introducing Hillary is reading from traits that sound to me like those expected of all good scouts:
"Obedient" gets a great reaction. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXFwFubrZBA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhISxECkJiI
Great enthusiasm!
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
with the rising cost of everything. There's a good article in the WAPO about the global food crisis, but this story brings it closer to home talking about the situation in L.A.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus27apr27,0,7568900.column
With some of that money coming to "stimulate" the economy, we'd better donate to food banks as well as stocking our own pantries.
In an Eddie Murphy movie made in 2001:
In the distant future, Hillary Clinton is featured as the President on the $10,000 bill.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZFJDfMPL-g
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
The Obama campaign has turned itself into a one-note wonder - If you don't vote for me, you are a stupid white racist. No more Hope and Change. No more Unity Ponies for everyone. Just a direct, crude, defamatory accusation at millions of loyal Democrats.
The problem is not, as Big Tent Democrat would have it, that Obama supporters are making stupid arguments that are hurting their candidate. This is the deliberate strategy of his campaign since at least New Hampshire, not something some "surrogate" thought up on his own. This fish is rotting from the head.
~ snip ~
In short, Obama, taken here as an exemplar of the liberal elite, is simple wrong in his estimation of the core Democratic constituency. They did not want what he was offering because they did not see themselves as the ones who needed to be changed, and they have consistently given their votes to the person who has focused on their explicit economic needs and their desire to be safe in an unsettled world while being respectful of them as people.
The political problem, the way in which a fault line is turning into a fissure, is in Obama's response to not getting these votes. When Hillary did not win their votes, as in Wisconsin, she did not turn around and revile them as "Archie Bunkers" or as "bitter". I have never heard a word from her or her campaign calling AA voters racists for giving their votes to Obama. She simply does not denigrate the voters. The Obama campaign response to losing New Hampshire was to instantly accuse working class residents of being closet racists and this toxic and grievously insulting charge continues to this day. The more his campaign trumpets this accusation, the greater the resistance to his campaign, which then pumps up its rhetoric, which offends more people, etc.
Where is this going to go? First off, should Obama be the nominee, he can kiss the general election goodbye. I'm sorry, BTD, but you are wrong about Obama's electability. You simply do not understand the voting habits of the Midwest and border states. Next, the Democratic Party leadership itself is going to be paying for its whole-hearted embrace of reductionist class politics. Some voters will defect to the Republicans, though I think that is going to be limited. Those with true sympathies for the Right have already moved over. Instead, I think you see a significant section of the working class simply turn away from participation, depressing turn out and costing the party electoral success. They will stay away until the party offers them candidates who talk to their material interests instead of to the leadership's fantasy of being modern day Solons.
~ snip ~
The problem in this election is the tunnel vision of the party elite who insist on demonizing wide swaths of Democratic Party voters based on biases that simply do not reflect demographic or political reality. There will be a long-term political price to pay for insisting that working class voters don't have concrete interests, but are only voting out of bigotry. Obama will pay his part of that price soon, whether in the primaries or in the general. The party will be paying for years.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
"The Obama campaign has turned itself into a one-note wonder - If you don't vote for me, you are a stupid white racist. No more Hope and Change. No more Unity Ponies for everyone. Just a direct, crude, defamatory accusation at millions of loyal Democrats."
Neither Obama, the Obama campaign, nor the vast majority of Obama's supporters have EVER said that. Get that garbage off Clark's blog! It' bullshit and you know it.
Stop stinking this place up with that filth!
then stay the hell off this blog. You're the one that's stinking up the place. Find some new big kids to pester.
We're electing the President of the United States, not some g.d. prom king.
I will continue to support WesPac, General Clark, and Democrats running for the House and Senate Clark is supporting, but I will not blog here until such time as the nominee has been selected and that kind of bullshit about our nominee gets voted DOWN.
And some of the Clinton supporters here accuse the Obama campaign of lies? Look in the mirror at some of the lies you post.
See you all later.
More from the Tom in Paine article I linked downthread:
...
The unfortunate thing is that, like most people who think principles get in the way, Obama doesn't understand that by doing the right thing, you always benefit more in the long run than doing the wrong thing. What would be the reaction if Obama stood up now and called for those delegations to be seated? If he in fact was the one to resolve the issue since he is the one who would be disadvantaged (actually, he would be losing an unfair advantage), and to be what he claims to be, a uniter not a divider? He has had the power to do it. And if he did how many voters would see him in a new light, as being genuine and exactly what he claims to be? How many more votes would he actually get for such a gesture instead of fighting as hard as he can to keep those other votes from counting? He might make up for the votes he didn't get in Florida and Michigan.
But a decision like this takes exceptional judgment, magnanimity, seeing things on a higher level, a plane where principle comes first and personal advantage comes second. This is not what we have seen from Obama in his campaign. After he's suffered landslide losses in the country's biggest states (13 times out 14) he has tried to claim that losing didn't matter because he could win those states in a general election. What he chooses to completley dismiss is that it matters to the people in those states because they clearly said they dont want him to the be one to take those states in a general election they want Clinton to take them and thats why they voted the way they did. Those are the voices Obama doesnt want to hear and those are the voices he wants to silence in Florida and Michgian.
In order for Obama to resolve this conflict which he could easily do, he would have to be all the things he actually claims to be, putting principle above his own political fortunes and the fact that he doesn't and wont, says more about who he really is and the hypocrisy of his campaign than anything anyone can say.
Its simply a fact that when you do the right thing for the right reasons good things come to you and if Obama resolved this conflict himself by doing what was right, the benefits he would get would far outweigh the short term losses he is so worried about. But I dont think he will. I dont think it's who he is. Or what he is. And that says all that needs to be said about Obama and what matters to him....
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
"It is simply a fact that when you do the right thing for the right reasons good things come to you."
And I would add, "and you can live with yourself."
It's what the Bible teaches.
with the media that love her IGNORE the States SHE'S lost either thru primaries or caucuses (Bill loved these when he ran) by LANDSLIDES ---- those are somehow different?
If you want to HEAR voices, wait till Hillary STEALS this election using her POLITICAL CLOUT and promises owed her behind close doors (even tho SHE HERSELF said this is about Delegates and SHE HERSELF signed onto the rules of Mich and Florida).
You'll hear voices alright -- buy your headache meds now.
Coonsey's View
http://www.freewebs.com/coonsey/
The voters of those states will get delegates according to how they voted, sort of. How are they being ignored?
The DNC has a choice. Be fair to the voters or be fair to the candidates. Which do YOU think is more important?
If Obama were half the DEMOCRAT he claims to be, he would WANT to count the votes in every state. That's one of the things that the DEMOCRATIC Party is supposed to stand for (see, that's why we call it DEMOCRATIC).
Otherwise General Clark would have been embraced when he ran. The DLC is the perfect example.
As for Mr. O's remarks about working across the aisle (dropping Reagan's name, etc. today), I want accountability meted out to the criminals who have brought my country to this point. I don't want kumbaya. This is not in conflict with my pacifist beliefs because I'm not asking for revenge. I am asking that bad behavior not be rewarded. Inaction when there should be action is a reward.
Simple child-rearing method to follow too.
Sarah on Corrente has been writing a series of blog posts about the current FLDS case in Texas and more broadly about FLDS in the US and Canada. bringiton has been adding invaluable supporting material in the comments.
This is a must read series. I don't know how Sarah manages to remain as level headed as she does, considering what she is writing. This is brutal cult dedicated to pedophilia and incest, as the systematic rape of teenage girls by their close male relatives for the purpose of breeding more young girls to rape appears to be its only reason to exist.
Anglachel
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
Krugman makes Foreign Policy/Prospect list of Top 100 public intellectuals
Submitted by lambert @ Corrent
Bien sur. Along with Nouriel Roubini.
Hey, Hey, Krugman has blog. Who knew?
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
...when the voodoo language surround tax issues clogs it up. I'd love to have him for a prof.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/mccain-the-destroyer/
One of George W. Bush’s lesser but still important talents is his uncanny ability to destroy peoples’ reputations: from John DiIulio to Michael Mukasey, well-regarded figures have entered the Bush administration’s doors, only to reemerge soiled and diminished.
Early signs indicate that John McCain may have the same talent.
There’s an extraordinary exchange on the web site of the Tax Policy Center blog between Len Burman and Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the well-respected former CBO head now advising McCain.
/snip/
This is sophistry — and Holtz-Eakin knows it. Proposing to extend past unaffordable tax cuts has the same effect on the budget as proposing new unaffordable tax cuts. The bottom line is that the combination of the Bush tax cuts and McCain’s extensions and revisions would leave the federal government without sufficient revenue to do its job; no amount of bobbing and weaving can change that fact. And it’s really sad to see Holtz-Eakin lending his reputation to this sort of thing.
Posted on April 27, 2008 by riverdaughter
This message is for the Clinton Campaign and women of Indiana. I hope it’s just redundant and you guys are already on this.
Indiana has one of the most restrictive voter fraud ID laws in the country. There is currently a case pending before the Supreme Court on it. You can find links to it at this old chestnut post: Ladies, Update Your Records.
Now, normally, Indiana wouldn’t even be on our radar map during a primary season but this year is different and suddenly they’ve become a big player, which makes it all the more crucial to pay attention to this law. If Indiana is like the rest of the country, there is going to be a high turnout of women for the primary election. And unfortunately, due to custom and tradition, women are most likely to have mismatches in their ID documentation. Through marriage, divorce, remarriage, a woman’s name can change several times during her lifetime. Sometimes, we are not always pro-active about updating all of our records with the social security office, the IRS, driver’s licenses, utiliy bills,etc, etc.
Now, if I were Barack Obama’s campaign or a Rove operative, I’d be damn sure to challenge as many female voters as I possibly can at the polling places. What better way of closing the margin?
So, ladies, get your paperwork in order. You don’t have much time. Find out what you need to get and have it ready when you go to the polls. Call your local board of elections and get straight with them now. Don’t wait.
Pass it around.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TxMa4RLKR0
I realize this video isn't positive - but neither is it hyped with images or linguistic spin. It's actually pretty tame compared to a lot of the videos at YouTube, and it does cover some actual questions that are increasingly on many voters' minds. Sen. Obama has got to find an effective way to deal with these questions now, because he will surely have to deal with them if he is our nominee.
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
in this poll of the Top 100 Public Intellectuals.
I cannot believe that he was listed on the original list of 100 and Wes Clark was not.
I wrote him in as well, Nick.
non-sober intellectuals though, or possibly not - come to think of it, I alone probably have 100 such friends who could both out-think and out-drink the sad old imitation of his once brilliant self.
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
too uninformed to participate in this. I can write in Wes, but I don't know hardly any of those listed.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
I thought I'd drop you a note to say I am with you on this. I sincerely think the General would be SHOCKED with what he would read on his own blog about a fellow Democrat.
It's too bad he's too busy to monitor it.
Coonsey's View
http://www.freewebs.com/coonsey/
were for Bill Bradley for VP. What are you doing here?
We're electing the President of the United States, not some g.d. prom king.
HOW OBAMA SHOULD RESOLVE FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN AND WHAT IT SAYS ABOUT HIM THAT HE WONT.
There is only thing standing in the way of resolving the issues of Florida and Michigan: Barack Obama. Obama and his supporters in and out of the press seem to be ready, willing and able to do what they accuse Clinton of doing - win at any cost by denying both Florida and Michgian their right to be heard.
Part of the reason is, they refuse to acknowledge that what they thought was in the bag never really was, and deluded themselves into believing the media hype surrounding Obama's campaign. Especially the mainstream media who are responsible for creating the hype in the first place -- the hype of inevitability. And instead of acknowledging it, they do what psychiatrists call projection, projecting onto Clinton and her campaign what is actually true for them but to which they are in denial as the recent imbecilic editorial from the New York Times demonstrated.
Does anyone have any doubt that if Florida and Michigan didnt matter everyone would be calling for them to be seated?
This is the only real issue facing Democrats and super delegates now and now is the time to resolve it. One way or the other, Florida and Michigan will define the Democratic Party for years to come and will define Obama and his supporters right now and prove one way or the other who and what he truly is.
Florida and Michigan have to be seated one way or the other because the Democrats will destroy themselves as a party and guarantee losing both the White House and the congress if they arent. Of that there is no doubt. Given what happened in 2000, it would be unconscionable if the Democrats sent out a candidate who is there only because votes werent counted in Florida. The fact that Obama and his supporters are willing for that to happen is as good a testimony as any to the hypocrisy of the Obama campaign and his most vocal supporters.Not to mention the fact that if that did happen the Democrats could kiss Florida and Michgian goodbye. And with them probably most of the remaining states that usually go Democratic.
The arguments for Florida and Michigan being seated are so obvious stating them is hardly neccessary. Except that Obama and his surrogates in the press are trying to wage an almost fascistic campaign against it. Suffice to say you dont negate the voices of 3 million people in a process to nominate a candidate for President of the United States over a scheduling conflict.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
one of the best things I've read about the unfairness of what is being done to the voters of FL and MI. I've bookmarked it.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
It says everything that needs to be said about FL and MI
"A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood of ideas in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." JFK
Michigan did not include Obama's name -- so voter counts will not have any meaning (popular vote). If you think they should then you are definitely a FOX fan (fair and balanced).
They both disobeyed the rules -- I know Hillary supporters don't like rules but you'll need to get over it....cause they won't be able to DECIDE this race.
Coonsey's View
http://www.freewebs.com/coonsey/
I linked to Tom in Paine? It would open your eyes (maybe) a tiny bit about sticking to "rules" at all costs.
Here -- I'll post a little part of it and maybe you'll take the time to read it.
...
the rules that were broken were scheduling rules, not rules that undermined the democratic process. So now its time to talk about "breaking the rules" when it comes to democracy and what is important, "the rules" or democracy?
The reason this country even exists is because a group of men reasoned that when the "rules" are unjust, when the rule are unfair, when the rules deny people their basic rights and priviliges, you ignore the rules, break them if need be and make new rules. The Declaration of Independence is about one thing -- breaking the rules and breaking them when rules are unjustly applied. And the next time Obama and his campaign wants to use "the rules are the rules" to justify why Florida and Michigan should not be seated, let him and his supporters remember that at one time in America "the rules" were African Americans had to sit in the back of the bus. "The rules" said that African Americans couldn't drink out of the same water fountains, couldn't live in the same neighborhoods, have the same jobs, make the same money, eat at the same restaurants and their children couldn't go to the same schools as whites. But in 1954 Martin Luther King came along and said the rules have to be ignored and there has to be new rules, because these rules are denying people their rights and ignoring the rules is exactly what Rosa Parks did.
When it comes to Florida and Michigan, if Barack Obama and his supporters want to apply a rationale that is closer to the beliefs of a Mississippi sheriff in 1950 than anything resembling a "breaking with the old politics of the past" then let them take responsibility for it.If Obama and his supporters were what they claim to be they would be the first ones to stand up and demand that both delegations be seated and resolve this now.
...
Obama and his supporters have a lot of nerve to talk about Hillary will do anything to win. You honestly can't see that is exactly how O! has run his entire campaign? WTFU.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
The rules should be followed to take away FL and MI delegates.
But NOT followed to take away Iowa, NH and SC delegates.
And also NOT followed if the Super-delegates decide to vote for Hillary -- that will be "stealing" the election.
In other words, you like rules that favor Obama, but you don't like rules that favor Clinton. It doesn't matter whether the rules are right or fair, only which side they favor.
Honor killings, we "liberated" Iraq so women could be killed for having an unkown cell phone number on their phone.
The children aren't doing any better, even those who have managed to get out of Iraq. The Lost Years: Iraqi Children in Jordan is from the Jordanian blog 7iber. Jordan has a population of about 5 million and now they have close to a million Iraqi refugees. The refugee children can go to school but there's a limit on what a small country can do for them.
Barry
Are you safer today than you were seven years ago?©
So many wasted years and still the US won't admit the few thousand Iraqi refugees the pledged to bring here. The hot season has begun there as well. It's amazing that everyone in Iraq hasn't been driven stark raving mad.
WTF is he doing?
At his speech at the NAACP, which apparently was aired on teevee, one of the statements he made was about how white kids use the left side of their brains and black kids use the right side of their brains to learn. The problem with our society is that our education is tailored to left-brain thinking.
The conversation at Talk Left about this is quite interesting. Someone said no, he was talking about cultural differences, not biological differences, but others who saw the speech said yes, he did talk about cultural differences, but also said whites are left-brained learners & blacks are right-brained learners and the schools in US are geared to left-brained learners.
Apparently, the talking heads at CNN had nothing but praise for Wright's speech and were lapping it up.
Kathy in the comments posted this:
What the heck is wrong with that man? How does this help Obama? And how did CNN folk lap this up? It's preposterous and dangerous rhetoric.
If you argue that blacks and whites have differently wired brains, then you have to accept the obverse, which is nasty, nasty stuff.
It's the sort of "science" that you can read about in the Turner Diaries and The History of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. That sort of brain differentiation crap was the basis for eugenics and forced sterilization in our not so distant past.
Oh, god, this is so dangerous. Someone please shut this man up. This is beyond party politics. This is viciously destructive.
----
In this case, I think it bears being spelled out because it is just so stupidly wrong. Notwithstanding that the whole left brain/right brain crap was disproven in the sixties. It's classic phrenology.
Further, the oral tradition has southern roots for both black and white. We were an agrarian society that relied on storytelling--on farms, in churches, in country stores--to spread history and information. Linguists have studied this for decades, and it is across the board in both black and white communities.
To give some sort of scientific credence to a biological or genetic difference between the races is extremely dangerous rhetoric. Every single instance in history where violence and genocide has been committed by one race against another, there has been some sort of "scientific" argument for why the victims deserve such treatment.
At some point, someone on the Obama side has to admit that this sort of racist crap is exactly the same sort of crap that Wright says was "taken out of context." In what context is he speaking now? This man is toxic.
The conversation goes on with lots of interesting comments. The discussion re: Rev Wright's speech start about 3/4 down.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/4/27/202518/086
--------------
So, we have the corporate cable teevee talking heads praising Rev Wright for his brilliant speech, and at the same time, the Repub Party in Mississippi is using his relationship with O! in a congressional race:
Another Republican Attack Ad Airs Against Obama
By JeralynPolitico reports on a new Republican attack ad on Obama that is airing on television in Mississippi.
A television ad from Southaven Mayor Greg Davis tells viewers that his Democratic rival, Travis Childers, a realtor and Prentiss County official, has accepted the endorsement of "liberal Barack Obama." Then, with Childers' face beside footage of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, it says, "When Obama's pastor cursed America, blaming us for 9/11, Childers said nothing."
.
Then: "When Obama ridiculed rural folks for clinging to guns and religion, Childers said nothing." "He took Obama's endorsement over our conservative values. Conservatives just can't trust Travis Childers," the ad concludes.Politico says:
The ads are a mark of how difficult, with the nomination apparently within his grasp, Obama will find it to stay above or outside the traditional, bitter partisan divisions he so often deplores. [More...]
Does Rev. Wright actually think he is benefiting Obama?
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
It seems like it's for himself, but if that were the case, why couldn't he have waited until after the nomination process is over? Or does he think it's now or never for the national spotlight? He can't actually believe he's helping Obama, can he?
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
...with this speech, albeit I haven't heard/read this in its entirety. His mission is to validate his flock ("Unashamedly Black, Unapologetically Christian"), and he'll let the chips fall way they may, i.e. he won't see that he owns any "unintended" consequences.
that prove his assertion about Lt vs Rt brain.
There are differences between men and
women, however.
I've got to step in here and state that Wright really, truly is SCIENTIFICALLY, FACTUALLY, INCORRECT!!!
Geez, this is as bad as BushCO and their anti-science "scientists"...what's next????
Faltering Economy Plays to a Clinton Strength
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/us/politics/28memo.html?hp
FORT WAYNE, Ind. — All politicians talk about jobs, but these days Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton does it with tactile, almost sensuous detail. She began a rally here on Saturday morning with memories of her father’s fabric-printing business, feeling aloud the cloth, the silk screen and the squeegee he used to create patterns that would decorate strangers’ drapes.
/snip/
At a union hall in garbage-strewn Gary, Mrs. Clinton began her early-evening speech looking wan. But as she began talking about magnets and wheel bases, her eyes grew rounder and her small hands danced with expressive energy. She sounded as if, once she is done with the presidency business, she might like to try the steel one, joining those in the audience wearing “Women of Steel” T-shirts.
/snip/
Read it all and smile.
Not a slap, swipe and snarky comment in the whole thing. What a great article. I love the ending:
“I was going to go to Wellesley, but I was going to have to pay back so much,” a young woman told her.
Another locked eyes with the candidate and mouthed a message: You’re going to win, she said silently.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
I'm so thankful to Dennis Kucinich for requesting and paying for the recount.
Proud to be an American.
Next time you hear this flimsy Obama campaign objection to further debates:
"We have participated in 21 nationally televised debates, the most in primary history." (Insert "Wahhh!")
Remember first that the higher number is a construct of time-- reflecting the world's longest primary season-- and not of content.
But more importantly -- remember secondly that there have been only FIVE DEBATES, FIVE DEBATES only between the two Democratic contenders for the nomination. The other debates were cluttered with the other candidates.
When you have 7 to 8 people on a stage all vying for camera time to answer the questions (which we had in 16 of the infamous 21 debates) each candidate gets no more than a useless sound byte and any serious, in-depth exploration on the issues becomes impossible.
So repeat after me: FIVE DEBATES! ONLY FIVE DEBATES.
Change that old tired '21 debates' meme now!
And ask yourself and others who object to hearing our candidates publicly debate ... Is more than 5 debates between 2 Presidential candidates too much for the voters to ask before casting their ballots for the highest office in the land? Especially when you consider that half of the questions will be meaningless tabloid fodder to begin with? Is more than 5 debates excessive before handing over the keys to the country for the next 4 to 8 years? Is more than 5 debates too taxing a burden to foist upon a presidential candidate who expects us to believe that they alone have the stamina, courage, and will to endure leading the country through arguably one of its most difficult times in our history? But can't handle more than FIVE one on one debates with their opponents? Are We the Peeps not entitled to more than FIVE debates before sending them off to command our troops presently at war in two countries? Or to "fix" our Social Security and Health Care systems?
FIVE DEBATES. Don't forget! :) (insert beating dead horse emoticon...)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_presidential_debates,_2008
Lincoln and Douglas only did six debates and that was without TV. :)
Barry
Are you safer today than you were seven years ago?©
If he'd done a Black Eyed Peas music video ...
The course of history would have been changed.
I would venture a guess that the Lincoln Douglas SIX debates had more relevant content (commercial free) in them than all our 21 debates together. In fact- we've had almost NO real debating amongst our candidates. Just a bunch of answering of questions - which is not debating. Would like to see the L-D debate transcripts.
but they both reputedly had their eye on the Presidential race of 1860 and the nomination - hoping to secure it. Seems Douglas's performance and stance in these debates hurt him in that respect and vica versa Lincoln, from what I've read
I'm looking at them now-- Douglas is not in the least bit endearing-- sounds like a real creep!
But it looks like we have always had the same partisan biases in coverage. They had their own 19th century Rupert Murdochs. :)
I found this snip:
Interestingly, newspapers that supported Douglas edited his speeches to remove any errors made by the stenographers and to correct grammatical errors, while they left Lincoln's speeches in the rough form in which they had been transcribed. In the same way, Republican papers edited Lincoln's speeches, but left the Douglas texts as reported.
... and the crap that goes with it seem to be in our DNA, and that's discouraging. Like Thomas Jefferson's ugly swiftboating of John Adams.
Sigh.
Transcripts!
Lincoln Douglas debates- (they are showing SEVEN Debates, Barry!)
http://www.nps.gov/archive/liho/debate1.htm
Links to all debates at bottom of page!
Going to scan it now and see if they dealt with any more substantive questions and issues than our 21st century media have been able to formulate...
The suspense is killing me.
Ha.
I'm kinda liking this from Lincoln's Abolition Platform:
1. Resolved, That we believe this truth to be self-evident, that when parties become subversive of the ends for which they are established, or incapable of restoring the government to the true principles of the Constitution, it is the right and duty of the people to dissolve the political bands by which they may have been connected therewith, and to organize new parties upon such principles and with such views as the circumstances and exigencies of the nation may demand.
Check out this passage where he's playing up the 'Lincoln as an Elitist' angle. It seems the tone and the approach has not changed all that much over the years... They just had a better command of the language. I hear they actually read books in those days! :)
-----
Douglas: "We were both comparatively boys.... I was a school-teacher in the town of Winchester, and he a flourishing grocery-keeper in the town of Salem. (Applause and laughter.) He was more successful in his occupation than I was in mine, and hence more fortunate in this world's goods. Lincoln is one of those peculiar men who perform with admirable skill everything which they undertake. I made as good a schoolteacher as I could, and when a cabinet maker I made a good bedstead and tables, although my old boss said I succeeded better with bureaus and secretaries than with anything else; (cheers,) but I believe that Lincoln was always more successful in business than I, for his business enabled him to get into the Legislature.
Have a better command of the English language. Some of Abraham Lincoln's speeches are just beautiful.
...just by the choice and position of their words. You don't even have to see or hear them to get a feel for what they are like. (That's true right here at CCN as well :)
LOL- these guys would've been great bloggers...
Now I pass on to consider one or two more of these little follies. The Judge is woefully at fault about his early friend Lincoln being a "grocery keeper." [Laughter.] I don't know as it would be a great sin, if I had been; but he is mistaken. Lincoln never kept a grocery anywhere in the world. [Laughter.] It is true that Lincoln did work the latter part of one winter in a little still house, up at the head of a hollow. [Roars of laughter.]
it always is
During a photo op at a 1988 grocer's convention, President George Bush Sr. was "amazed" at encountering supermarket scanners for the first time. --(a really fun page- lots of good snippets but copy-protected I think so I can paste from there easily)- there are so many funny funny lines in it
Reviving an Anti-Bush Sr. Urban Legend
In Kate Zernike's otherwise-entertaining Sunday Week in Review piece, "Who Among Us Does Not Love Windsurfing?" (a reference to Kerry's infamously stilted campaign line, "Who among us does not love NASCAR?") she revives an anti-Bush Sr. urban legend, the myth that during the 1992 campaign, George H.W. Bush marveled at a grocery-store scanner as if he'd never seen one before: "Like the helmeted Michael Dukakis peeking out of the tank, or the first George Bush bewildered at the grocery scanner, the photo of Mr. Kerry windsurfing played into the negative stereotype his opponents are trying to play up--in this case, that of the out-of-touch, elitist Massachusetts liberal."
This particular urban legend (which itself first appeared in the Times) has been thoroughly debunked. But that hasn't stopped the Times from dredging it up again, now and in the past. Rick Lyman used it in the October 5, 2003 Week in Review: "During a visit to a national grocers' convention in Orlando, Fla., he appeared almost giddy about the wondrous technology of supermarket scanners, apparently unaware that they had been quite familiar to American shoppers for more than a decade."
Who among us does not love windsurfing?
--
worth noting, this is also about the same time period where they kind of mini-Dean-Screamed Biden, isn't it? He'd used the famously cribbed lines WITH ATTRIBUTION in front of reporters twice before, but missed it in the speech that was then widely distributed by the usual suspects, etc.
This fits with the discussion about "rules" for FL and MI.
I think it was the tominpaine piece jen posted that gave the examples of "breaking" the rules for the better good, using the MLK examples.
I'm looking....
The reason this country even exists is because a group of men reasoned that when the "rules" are unjust, when the rule are unfair, when the rules deny people their basic rights and priviliges, you ignore the rules, break them if need be and make new rules. The Declaration of Independence is about one thing -- breaking the rules and breaking them when rules are unjustly applied. And the next time Obama and his campaign wants to use "the rules are the rules" to justify why Florida and Michigan should not be seated, let him and his supporters remember that at one time in America "the rules" were African Americans had to sit in the back of the bus. "The rules" said that African Americans couldn't drink out of the same water fountains, couldn't live in the same neighborhoods, have the same jobs, make the same money, eat at the same restaurants and their children couldn't go to the same schools as whites. But in 1954 Martin Luther King came along and said the rules have to be ignored and there has to be new rules, because these rules are denying people their rights and ignoring the rules is exactly what Rosa Parks did.
http://tominpaine.blogspot.com/2008/04/how-florida-and-michigan-could-be.html
You and I would not be voting at all were it not for the concept of breaking the rules to adjust and succumb to the times and the will of the people.
Too strong an upbringing of respect for the law. However, I've been known to use the pen to rally for change.
Wes Clark
https://contribute.hillaryclinton.com/wesclark.html?rc=GDY...
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.