Clinton - Obama debate in Pennsylvania

What a terrible job the media did last night on the debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I sat for 50 minutes listening to a rehash of flag pins, Rev. Wright, and trivial things that have dominated the media in past weeks. I thought I was going to hear about policies and platforms - stupid me!

It wasn't Clinton and Obama's fault. As a matter of fact Obama made points because he talked to the fact that the media keeps blowing gaffes and misspeaks out of proportion. Well I turned the debate off after the 50 minutes and turned on "Criminal Minds." Of course I found out later there were some substantive questions and answers in the 2nd hour.

But how dare the media make me sit through the rehash when I wanted to know about the Iraq War, national health care, etc. Greg Mitchell of the Huffington Post called it a travesty.

Here is a quote from the Mitchell article:

More time was spent on all of this than segments on getting out of Iraq and keeping people from losing their homes and -- you name it. Gibson only got excited complaining that someone might raise his capital gains tax. Yet neither candidate had the courage to ask the moderators to turn to those far more important issues. Talking heads on other networks followed up by not pressing that point either. The crowd booed Gibson near the end. Why didn't every other responsible journalist on TV?

theteach

I'm sorry I can't let this go...


Pam Spaulding writes the following at Pam's House Blend about Hillary's big Bosnian Lie:

What is wrong with Hillary Clinton and her advisers? In an effort to promote her foreign policy experience -- and thus draw a contrast between the NY senator and Barack Obama, she boldly claimed on March 17 that she went on a harrowing, brave trip to Bosnia in 1996 as First Lady.

"I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia... we came in in an evasive maneuver... I remember landing under sniper fire... there was no greeting ceremony... we ran with our heads down, we basically were told to run to our cars... there was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, we basically were told to run to our cars, that is what happened."

Now as First Lady, she and her crack team of high-paid consultants should have known that there were not only reporters on the trip (and video) to blow away this account. But no, they stuck to their story, and the end result is that the video evidence has surfaced, making her look like a prevaricating resume padder.

And the Washington Post has a blow-by-blow account of the fibbing and the facts, including her 1996 traveling companion on that trip, the comedian Sinbad, who has no idea where Clinton's account came from.

---

Clinton herself when called on it said "Well, I guess I made a mistake. Just proves I'm human which might be a surprise to some people around here." She said it off-handedly as if to say "So what!" What? Has she and Cheney come to an agreement as to how to answer reporters questions that put them on the spot and embarrass them?

Yeah, I know all politicians are liars but Hillary should have known how easy it would be to call her on it. Is it that she doesn't give a damn? Maybe!

theteach

What's he thinking?

Vote for your favorite caption...

1. 'Why did I marry her? Why didn't I just put a loaded gun in my mouth? Why God, Why?'

2. 'Holy crap, look at that ass. Somewhere, a semi-truck is missing its 'Oversized Load' sign.

3. 'Somewhere, there's two fat girls naked in a hot tub and I'm stuck here listening to her jabber on about health care.

4. 'Sheesh, Rush is soo right - She does sound like Nurse Ratchett!'

5. 'Wow!! I could'a had a V8

theteach

Bill Moyers on MLK and Johnson

Via Crooks and Liars:

Bill Moyers, who was Lyndon Johnson’s press secretary from 1965-1967, gives his perspective on the “tempest in a teapot” of the Hillary vs. Obama media brawl over LBJ and MLK:

As the pressure intensified on each side, Johnson wanted King to wait a little longer and give him a chance to bring Congress around by hook or crook. But Martin Luther King said his people had already waited too long. He talked about the murders and lynchings, the churches set on fire, children brutalized, the law defied, men and women humiliated, their lives exhausted, their hearts broken. LBJ listened, as intently as I ever saw him listen. He listened, and then he put his hand on Martin Luther King’s shoulder, and said, in effect: “OK. You go out there Dr. King and keep doing what you’re doing, and make it possible for me to do the right thing.” Lyndon Johnson was no racist but he had not been a civil rights hero, either. Now, as president, he came down on the side of civil disobedience, believing it might quicken America’s conscience until the cry for justice became irresistible, enabling him to turn Congress. So King marched and Johnson maneuvered and Congress folded.

Someone named Longtooth comments:

HILLARY CLINTON: “Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the president before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done.”

Lest We Forget: Hillary Clinton supported Barry Goldwater in 1964.

theteach

New Hampshire Primary

Via Foxnews.com:

The New Hampshire Primary is Tuesday. Here’s a breakdown of need to know facts:

POLL TIMES

- Voting begins at midnight Tuesday in the town of Dixville Notch, a small outpost near the Canadian border. While its population of 74 steals the spotlight by being able to put its results out first, it doesn’t tend to predict the winner by the time the counts are finished Tuesday night.

- Poll opening times around the rest of the state will be staggered starting at 6 a.m. ET with all open by 11 a.m.

- Most polls will close at 7 p.m., and the remaining will close at 8 p.m.

WHAT’S AT STAKE

- Momentum: As the first primary and second presidential nominating contest following the Iowa caucuses, New Hampshire’s contest Tuesday will provide candidates a chance either to put distance between themselves and their rivals,or at least regain some stature after a poor showing in The Hawkeye State. Their fortunes here could shed light on how the candidates will do in an array of elections in the coming month.

- Delegates: New Hampshire’s heft in the nominating schedule doesn’t match its heft at the national party conventions this summer. The number of Republican delegates representing the state is 12, reduced as a penalty for holding the primary earlier than allowed by the Republican National Committee. On the Democratic side, 22 delegates are up for grabs on Tuesday.

At this year’s conventions, 2,380 delegates will be seated by the Republicans and 4,050 delegates will choose the Democratic nominee.

CANDIDATES TO WATCH

- The Democrats: Barack Obama, now showing a lead in polls over Hillary Clinton... But don’t ignore Edwards, who likely won’t give up even with a third place showing. Edwards and Obama are vying for the same slice of the electorate, those who are voting for “change” over “experience.”

- The Republicans: Iowa caucuses winner Mike Huckabee isn’t expected to take New Hampshire, which has a well-known libertarian, lean-government streak. John McCain is ahead in the polls, and both he and Huckabee are hoping to take a pound of flesh out of Mitt Romney. Rudy Giuliani also wants to do well here, but has his eyes on contests later in nominating contests January and February.

Obama is 10 points ahead of Hillary in the polls. I predict Obama will win the primary hands down!

theteach

Hillary makes an unpopular suggestion...

Via New York Times Opinionator:

October 1, 2007, 5:38 pm

A Modest Proposal

By Tobin Harshaw

Oh, baby: “Sixty percent of America’s likely voters oppose giving every child born in the United States a $5,000 savings bond, or ‘baby bond,’ ” according to a national telephone survey by Rasmussen Reports, which also “found that just 27 percent support the concept suggested on Friday by Senator Hillary Clinton.”

While the numbers speak for themselves, Rasmussen decided to get the ubiquitous political scientist Larry Sabato to gild the lily in its press release: ” ‘The baby bonds proposal is one of the few mistakes Hillary Clinton has made in her campaign,’ according to University of Virginia Professor Larry Sabato. ‘Should Clinton become the Democratic nominee, she may have handed a powerful issue to the Republican candidate.’ ”

Support for the Baby Bond proposal declines with age. It is favored by 50% of voters under 30 but only 12% of voters over 65.

________________________________________________________________

My question is why are people jumping all over this? Vicki Livingston comments on the article this way:

What a lot of fuss over an idea first introduced by former Treasury Secretary Snow. He proposed to add to the first $5,000 another $1,000 every birthday to 18. The magic of compound interest and time was supposed turn the original amounts into a very large retirement fund—a vastly cheaper way of funding Social Security. He said people could borrow their college loans from it and the plan could be modified to pre-fund Medicare as well. I can’t vouch for the numbers but the idea of enlisting time to meet these expensive obligations at a tiny fraction of their present costs is very appealing. Senator Clinton narrowed the focus to college ex[p]enses,forgetting apparently a larger importance: the profits accrued by commercial loans that leave graduates up to their eyeballs in debt.

theteach

Obama edges out Clinton in Iowa

Via Bloomberg.com:

Obama, Romney Lead Nomination Race in Iowa, Newsweek Poll Finds

By Nadine Elsibai

Sept. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Senator Barack Obama holds an edge over his competitors among likely Democratic caucus-goers in Iowa and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney leads among Republicans, a Newsweek magazine poll showed.

Obama, of Illinois, was backed by 28 percent of those surveyed followed by New York Senator Hillary Clinton with 24 percent, former North Carolina Senator John Edwards at 22 percent and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson with 10 percent, according to the poll. The survey of Democrats who were classified as likely to attend party nominating caucuses has a margin of error of plus or minus 7 percentage points.

______________________________________________________

The margin of error suggests Obama, Clinton, and Edwards are virtually in a dead heat. Can you tell whom I am leaning toward?

theteach

Thanks to Electronic Village for the idea for the post :)

Suspending Disbelief

When Hillary Clinton and Charlie Rose on Yahoo's Democratic Mashup don't understand the usage of the phrase "to suspend disbelief" then you know our country and the media are in trouble.

Wikipedia describes "suspension of disbelief" as "an aesthetic theory intended to characterize people's relationships (sic) to art. It was coined by the poet and aesthetic philosopher Samuel Taylor Coleridge in 1817 to refer to what he called "dramatic truth". It refers to the alleged willingness of a reader or viewer to accept as true the premises of a work of fiction, even if they are fantastic, impossible, or otherwise contradictory to "reality".

Mediacollege.com gives an even clearer definition of the concept.

When asked by Rose what she meant by "suspending disbelief" with regard to Bush's/Petraeus's veracity she answered:

"No, what I said was meant to convey my very strong feeling that no matter how flat the pancake, there's always two sides. The problem is that what the administration's report intended to do was was to take anecdotal evidence and actually gild the lily once again, making it seem as though there had been much more progress than I think you can actually justify."

Huh?

Then Rose asked Senator Biden what he thought of Hillary's "suspending belief" with regard to Bush's truthfulness. Biden didn't blink an eye and went on to answer.

You know a lot of people have trouble with the phrase and I should know because I teach literature and my students make the exact same mistake that Rose did.

Maybe you think this isn't important in the face of the Iraq War and troop reductions and what Democrats want versus what Bush wants, but it's these little things that stick in my craw and make me think "How the hell can you solve life's BIG problems when you can't understand the small things like syntax and grammar and basic philosophical concepts?"

Last word:

Superman has always required a willing "suspension of disbelief." Ordinarily it would be difficult to believe that just putting on a pair of horn-rimmed glasses keeps Lois Lane and Jimmie Olsen from recognizing Clark Kent as Superman. So audiences willingly suspend that disbelief to enjoy the story of the superhero.

theteach

Hillary's (and Obama's) Running Mate

So c'mon what do you think? Who do you think would be the best running mate for Hillary? And because I'm certainly not ready to rule out other candidates, i.e. Barack Obama, who could be Obama's running mate for 2008?

Stanley Fish over at the NYTimes believes Hillary's got the primary won, so he sets forth some rules for Hillary's choice of running mate (Mind you, I don't necessarily agree with his points):

First of all, her running mate can’t be a woman. But, on the other hand, he does have to be white, or at least kind of white. The pundits keep wondering whether the country is ready for a woman president or a black president; it sure isn’t ready for a woman and a black on the same ticket. Nor is it ready for a woman and a Jew, which rules out Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania. On the age question, there is more flexibility. She is neither young nor old, so her running mate could be either as long as the age difference wasn’t egregious.

He also says her running mate probably shouldn't be a senator. And she should pick someone from a place other than the Northeast. So what she needs is a governor or former governor who can tip the balance in a fairly large state that could go either way, ideally someone from Ohio or Florida.

Fish goes on and on for a while offering suggestions but finally ends up with

"So there’s the list – (Mark)Warner, Bayh, Easley, Richardson, maybe Doyle. No one who sets the pulses racing, but no one, at least on the evidence so far, who would be a total mistake. The mistake would be if Senator Clinton decided to get creative and adventurous, but on the record there seems to be little danger of that.

Over at The Opinionator, Tobin Harshaw argues that Clinton may indeed choose an African-American as a running mate: Barack Obama.

Selecting Obama would help ensure strong turnout among this core Democratic constituency — which will help Democratic candidates all the way down the line. But second, if Hillary is the nominee, African American leaders are likely to be excited about the prospect that she will choose Obama. Since Hillary may be seen as the odds-on favorite, people will be eager to see her select the nation’s first black Vice
President.

Harshaw says, though, if Hillary wins the nomination "there's likely to be great disappointment among these Obama fans — perhaps enough to sour them to her candidacy. If she clinches the nomination, she may want to either accept or rule out Obama quickly, to avoid there being any hurt feelings.”

theteach

Iowa Democratic Debates

There was a lot of Obama and Hillary today in the Iowa debates. When I turned on the TV, I admit I was late turning it on, George Stephanopoulos was questioning Obama and Hillary about the old question of whether an American President should meet with foreign leaders without conditions. Boring!

Two highlights: (Newsday.com)

(1)To defend against assertions that he lacks experience, Obama quipped at one point: "To prepare for this debate I rode in the bumper cars at the state fair." Lots of laughter and applause from the audience at Drake University. Funny!


(2)Clinton, a target of criticism from outgoing Bush counselor Karl Rove, said Rove is "obsessed with me." She presented a different view of politics than Obama did, arguing that negative campaigning is inevitable no matter who is nominated.

The New York senator and former first lady said no one will escape the "Republican attack machine." She added, "I know how to beat them." Atta, girl, Hillary!

The candidates talked about nuclear weapons and the use of them, the Iraq War, And Pakistan.

Nothing new, nothing exciting, nothing that makes me want one of them more than any other...

Obama photo: Photo: Mannie Garcia/Getty Images
Clinton photo: Photo: AP Images

theteach

Maybe Hillary?

This is for Noreen and Norma:



theteach

Wanting to vote for Hillary...

I've been thinking about Hillary Clinton and feeling bad because I don't want to vote for her. And after all she is the first woman candidate for President of these United States and, of course, if elected, our first woman President. And since I'm a woman I feel that I ought to be behind her.

You might ask why I don't want to vote for her. Well, I think she's cold, humorless, too careful, less than easy-going, will say what she thinks you want to hear. Of course she's on the right side of the fence for me and she'll have the best advisor any president has had since Robert Kennedy. ;)

Do any of you out there feel the same as I do?

Well, here's what I've done to change my opinion, my feelings about her. I watched Primary Colors and kept my eye on Emma Thompson who plays Hillary in the film.

Just look at that photo above from the film and you can see what I mean. Emma looks so soft and sweet. Awww, don't get mad at me because I like soft and sweet in a woman... And in the photo below...no pants suit.

In the film when Hillary/Emma finds out that Bill/John is fooling around she breaks down and sobs inconsolably. It's a wonderful scene...she really is broken by his infidelity.

I think I needed a little bit of that from Hillary instead of that stoic, unperturbed face.

I really do think Hillary would do a good job as president, but I also like Barack Obama and think he would do a good job.

So I'm going to think of Emma in Primary Colors as we proceed toward 2008.

Oh Hillary, ditch the pants suit...


theteach

Bernstein understands Hillary

From a New York Times review:

There are two new books about Hillary out there for our consideration:

In the last month and a half, three extremely well-respected journalists have come out with two books that attempt to divine who the real Hillary might be. One, Carl Bernstein’s “Woman in Charge,” is plainly sympathetic, while the other, Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr.’s “Her Way,” is more severe. (If there’s any doubt as to which is which, just consult the two book covers — Gerth and Van Natta’s shows Hillary in, quite literally, a much harsher light.)

The book covers are below:








































Both go off the rails at the moments their grand unified theories can’t quite accommodate the facts, and both practically narcotize readers when they descend into rote recapitulations of the Clinton scandals.

But it’s Bernstein who ultimately makes the sharper, more lasting impression, despite the soft-focus portrait of the junior senator from New York on his cover. While he plows some of the same emotional terrain as previous Hillary biographers — notably Gail Sheehy in “Hillary’s Choice” — his book holds together as a piece of writing, and he keeps the psychobabble to a merciful minimum.

Bernstein is best known for his coverage of Watergate with Bob Woodward six administrations ago.

But his book suggests that it isn’t his executive-scandal bona fides that make him a qualified Hillary biographer; it’s his bona fides as a lousy husband.

Like Bill Clinton, Bernstein carried on a very public affair while married to a formidable, high-profile woman and one of the perverse strengths of his book is his intuitive understanding — a sinner’s lament, really — of what happens to a proud woman when she’s intimately betrayed and publicly humiliated.

The blockbuster news item to come out of Bernstein’s book was that Hillary contemplated running for governor of Arkansas in 1989, when she discovered her husband was thinking about abandoning his post and his family for another woman.

Read the rest of the article by Jennifer Senior.

theteach

Hillary wants troops in Iraq for HOW long?

From Alternet:

This post, written by David Swanson, originally appeared on After Downing Street

On Monday, Ted Koppel offered a report / commentary on National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" which can be found online with this headline: "A Duty to Mislead: Politics and the Iraq War," and this introductory text: "Democrats are telling voters that if they are elected, all U.S. troops will be pulled out of Iraq. But as Sen. Hillary Clinton privately told a senior military adviser, she knows there will be some troops there for decades. It's an example of how in some cases, politics can force dishonesty."

Well, someone is trying to force dishonesty. I'm not sure it's politics.

Read the rest here.

theteach

P.S. Read the questions David Swanson would ask a candidate to find out if he/she is a peace candidate.

immigration bill; McSweeney's Pros and Cons; Hillary's Chances

10:48 AM:

The new immigration bill looks good BUT I don't like the merit-based provisions. Or the fees the immigrants have to pay to stay. Also some immigrants will have to go back to their country of origin and then begin the program to enter the U.S. all over again. The New York Times has a good article that explains the legislation clearly.
_____________________________________________________________________
3:58 PM:

I meant to be back sooner than this but got caught up in some things important and not so important... Take a look at McSweeney's PROS AND CONS OF THE TOP 20 DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BY JOHN MOE.

Then when you finish that try PROS AND CONS OF THE TOP 20 REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BY JOHN MOE.

Definitely worth the read and funny.
____________________________________________________________________
4:36 PM:

Oliver Willis asks:

What Is The Real Beef With The Immigration Bill?

But why does the Republican base act with so much revulsion at any sort of immigration deal short of closing America?

a) They don't like hispanics
b) They don't like all immigrants
c) They're afraid increased immigration means more Democratic voters?

I'm honestly asking.

_______________________________________________________________________

4:46 PM:

From Bartcop.com:

"A new Cook Poll shows Hillary "remains far and away the leader of the pack" with 36%, followed by Obama at 25% and Edwards at 15%." -- Political Wire, politicalwire.com

"Don't pay too much attention to the national polls just yet. Essentially, they are useful for measuring name recognition and are great for candidate hype and fundraisings." -- John Zogby, wehatehillary.com

Obama and blue-collar workers

It seems that the latimes.com thinks Barack Obama won't do well with blue-collar workers. And that doing well with blue collars, Hillary's stronghold, means the election in 2008.

Obama's early support is following a pattern familiar from the campaigns of other brainy liberals with cool, detached personas and messages of political reform, from Eugene McCarthy in 1968 to Gary Hart in 1984 to Bill Bradley in 2000. Like those predecessors, Obama is running strong with well-educated voters but demonstrating much less support among those without college degrees. (latimes.com)

So far at least, Hillary Clinton fits the mold of the winning candidate, the one whose “greatest strength is usually persistence, not eloquence; they don’t so much inspire as reassure,” Ronald Brownstein writes. “Think of Harry Truman in 1948, Hubert Humphrey in 1968 and, in a somewhat more diluted fashion, Walter Mondale in 1984 and John Kerry in 2004.”

There is “one twist” to this old story in the 2008 campaign, Brownstein concedes. “Obama’s African American heritage is helping him, already, to split the black vote fairly closely with Clinton in most surveys.” (Chris Suellentrop, The Opinionator, NYTimes)

theteach

Clinton and Obama: Who in 2008?

Take a look at a couple of articles, both by Tom Curry, on Hillary and Barack and their plans to run in 2008. I found them through Andrew Sullivan's blog.

"Will Obama force Clinton's early entry?" MSNBC, Nov. 30, 2006.

"Clinton versus Obama: Is there any difference?" MSNBC, Nov.29, 2006. There is a poll you can take to see how you compare to Clinton's and Obama's stances on issues.

The following article has an interesting take:

"2008: Obama or Clinton? Black Man versus White Woman" by Jo Swift, Nov. 14, 2006 (Radical Left) It asks the question is American too racist for Barack? Too sexist for Hillary?

From the Free Republic back in 2005 there's this:

"Hillary makes eyes at a perfect mate (Clinton/Obama 2008?)" by Toni Allen-Mills, Oct. 2, 2005 London Times.

And there's this:

"Democratic Presidential Primaries: Clinton 29% Obama 22%" Rasmussen Reports, Nov. 8, 2006.

Well, your guess is as good as mine.

theteach :)

Hillary for President 2008?

The Atlantic has a big sweeping profile of Hillary Clinton this week which posits her successful Senate career (she'll definitely be re-elected tomorrow) may hurt her presidential prospects in 2008.

It suggests that Clinton (as senator) has played a cautious game since her health care initiative died in 1993, taking "small steps" without much political risk. It goes on to say it is unlikely that she'll be able to defeat a popular Republican like John McCain. (from Slate magazine)

You know it bothers me that whenever anyone considers Hillary Clinton's presidential possibilities he/she always, always brings up her failed health-care bill. Why do they do that? That's not all she stands for.

It's not that I'm sure I would vote for Hillary in a Democratic primary but she IS more than just that bill.

And she may be just the Democrat to put up against John McCain because she's what they call a national security Democrat. "She is better at framing national-security issues for the current era than her husband was at a common point in his career.” (New York magazine)

Don't get me wrong she's definitely a Democrat: she's anti-abortion, she's against a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, and recently she took a lead role in crafting a Senate amendment that prods the White House to bring some troops home this year.

Here's a link called "Hillary Clinton on Civil Rights"

Can she beat Barack Obama or John Edwards? That's still a big question. But Hillary has changed or at least the perception of her has changed since she's been in the Senate and she just might be the One in 2008. the teach

Photo: Jez Coulson

You know I thought Hillary was very polite, and apparently she even joked, when she answered John Spencer's stupid personal remarks about her appearance. She probably realized that Mr. Spencer is given to this kind of ragging which certainly won't endear him to the many, many people who have absolutely no intention of voting for him in November.

Hey John have you taken a good look at yourself lately? the teach

TIME Quotes of the Day

Tuesday, Oct. 24, 2006

“I thought my high school picture was cute.”

— Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY)

After her long-shot opponent, Republican John Spencer, suggested that Clinton had undergone "millions of dollars" worth of plastic surgery, and pointed out that she used to be much less attractive.

Source: New York Daily News